• Jim Jatras: Forget Kim. It's Time For A Trump-Putin Summit…Now!

  Authored by James George Jatras via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  In the aftermath of US President Donald Trump’s cancellation of his scheduled June 12 summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, the gathering clouds of global conflict are getting thicker and darker:

  Korea: The cancellation is a triumph for Trump’s national security team, most if not all of whom were horrified at the prospect of his meeting personally with Kim. (There was no telling what the Big Man might agree to if he met Little Rocket Man face to face. What if Korea actually were denuclearized? There would be no more excuse for keeping American troops on the peninsula! Disaster!)  From the team’s perspective, scuttling the meeting altogether would be the best outcome, but derailing the date and cranking the nasty rhetoric back up will do for now. Talk of a Libyan model, even more than inclusion of B-52s in exercises with South Korea (which Trump reversed), got the job done. Now it’s imperative for the national security establishment to load Trump up with nonnegotiable demands (maybe patterned on Pompeo’s Iran provocation; see below) that Kim would have no choice but to refuse on the chance the summit gets rescheduled through the frantic efforts of South Korea’s Moon Jae-in – and maybe of Trump himself, if he still wants a shot at that Nobel Peace Prize. Pyongyang’s continued willingness to talk will register in Washington as desperation and an invitation for renewed pressure.

  Iran: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has delivered to Tehran what only can be deemed an ultimatum. It makes Austria’s 1914 demands on Serbia look mild in comparison. Ultimata are designed to be rejected, “justifying” whatever action the threatening power has already decided upon. Tehran is being told to dismantle its entire regional security presence – or else. The “or else” means initially a campaign of destabilization (assassinations, fomenting domestic unrest, and insurrections by disgruntled ethnic and religious communities; see Syria 2011) or, if that fails, direct military action (see Libya 2011 and Iraq 2003). To trigger the latter look for a false flag or contrived “Iranian attack,” such as a naval incident in the Persian Gulf (see Gulf of Tonkin 1964). Also targeted by the ultimatum are the European countries aghast at US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. In addition to smacking secondary sanctions on our satellites (officially, “allies” and “partners”), the harshness of Pompeo’s terms is designed to spook the Europeans into the vain hope they can restrain a reckless US bent on war by meeting Washington halfway (or three-quarters of the way, or nine-tenths of the way…) in helping to corner Tehran. Watch to see who will crack first: London, Paris, or Berlin?

  Syria: Despite Trump’s repeated assertion that he wants to get Americans out of Syria, there is reason to think we are digging in further. This has nothing to do with defeating ISIS. Rather, along with a planned buildup of Saudi and other foreign Sunni troops in the US- and Kurd-controlled zone, the principal target is Iran (see above). US policy in Syria is driven by Israeli and Saudi hostility to Iran, and Pompeo’s list of nonnegotiable demands includes withdrawal of Iranian (and Hezbollah) forces from that country. It is a mystery how the US, whose troop presence in Syria violates international law and probably American domestic law as well, has the right to demand the departure of forces present legally by invitation of the internationally recognized government. Punctuating US determination to confront Iran were new strikes this week against Syrian government forces, while Israel flaunted its first-ever combat use of the US F-35.

  Ukraine: The level of fighting on the Donbas line of control has intensified. Meanwhile Kiev forces show off tests of the Javelin antitank missiles they received from the Trump administration, which the Obama administration had earlier declined to provide. Ostensibly intended to deter a Russian attack – in which case they would make little difference – the Javelins could be used in an offensive against Donbas forces (perhaps in concert with an attack on the Kerch bridge connecting mainland Russia to Crimea) followed by a call for insertion of international peacekeepers. Russia considers the FIFA World Cup from June 14 to July 15 a prime time window for such an assault. A Dutch report assigning blame to – surprise! – Russia for downing MH17 comes at an opportune moment.

  Balkans: Prestigious think tanks call for “action” to intensify the same policies that have made a wreck of the Balkans for a quarter of a century. Why? To counter Russian influence, of course! The only shortcoming in US and European policy is that we haven’t been aggressive enough.      

  Sitting at the geographic and political junction of these seemingly disparate theaters of active or potential conflict is the US establishment’s entrenched hostility to Russia. Despite the accelerating unraveling of the anti-constitutional plot to dump Trump by elements of the US Deep State (in the CIA, FBI, Department of Justice, and elsewhere) together with their British counterparts (MI6 and GCHQ), the effort’s primary policy objective was achieved: President Trump has been blocked from his oft-stated desire to improve ties with Moscow. Addressing the regional issues above – any one of which could reach dangerous crisis proportion at any moment – would be far more feasible with Washington and Moscow working in cooperation instead of at cross-purposes or daggers drawn. But instead, we have a new cold war care of James Clapper, John Brennan, Christopher Steele, Peter Strzok, Stefan Halper, and their ilk – possibly even including Barack Obama.

  In some ways this second Cold War is even more dangerous than the first one. The instincts of restraint and prudence that had been built up over decades of confrontation have atrophied. While both the US and Russia still maintain massive nuclear arsenals, new military technology has continued to make rapid progress in such areas as hypersonic weapons and cyber-warfare. Also, while during the first Cold War American and Soviet planners consciously sought to avoid direct contact between their forces in Third World proxy wars, today American and Russian forces come into perilous proximity to one another. Given Washington’s relentless determination to press Moscow to the brink in every theater, the consequences of even an unintended clash are not given the gravity they demand.

  It is impossible to know from outside of Trump’s own mind to what extent he has abandoned his pledge to improve relations with Russia (or never meant it in the first place), or whether he might simply be biding his time to make his move. But it is clear what that move must be if there is any possibility of cutting the Gordian knot that binds shut the gate to rapprochement: Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin should meet in a formal and substantive summit at the earliest possible date. A productive understanding between the United States and Russia must start at the top, on the personal level or it will not happen at all.

  To that end, recently this analyst joined other activists in posting the following petition on the official White House website:

  President Donald Trump should hold early summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin

  Created by J.J. on May 21, 2018

  ‘Ronald Reagan famously said: “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. The only value in our two nations possessing nuclear weapons is to make sure they will never be used.” Unfortunately, today a new Cold War between the US and Russia again poses an existential threat to the people of both nations and to the whole world. Therefore, we urge President Trump to follow in the steps of Ronald Reagan and to start a direct dialogue with President Putin in search of solid and verified security arrangements. As President Trump said repeatedly “only haters and fools” do not understand that good US- Russia relations are also good for America. By all indications President Putin feels the same way for his country. A summit should be arranged as soon as possible.’

  The petition is open for signature until June 20. When signing, use of Gmail is recommended to facilitate registration of your vote.

  No one should imagine a White House petition can by itself change the direction of American policy. However, if there are elements on Trump’s team who are not entirely against the idea of a summit, a show of public support may serve to strengthen their case against those opposed.

  Most important is a constituency of one: Mr. Trump himself. If Trump was at all willing to hold a summit with Kim because of his handful of nukes, he can certainly do so with the leader of the one country on the planet with enough nuclear weapons to destroy the US.

  

  Obama got his Peace Prize presented to him on a platter simply for getting elected while being black. By contrast, if Trump wants his Peace Prize he’s going to have to work for it. With Kim off his dance card, he’s got plenty of time to take a spin with Putin. 

  

• Visualizing U.S. Energy Consumption In One Chart

  Every year, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a federal research facility funded by the Department of Energy and UC Berkeley, puts out a fascinating Sankey diagram that shows the fate of all energy that gets generated and consumed in the United States in a given year.

  Today’s visualization is the summary of energy consumption for 2017, but you can see previous years going all the way back to 2010 on their website.

  

  Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

  DEALING IN QUADS

  As Visual Capitalist’s Jeff Desjardins explains, the first thing you’ll notice about this Sankey is that it uses an unfamiliar unit of measurement: the quad.

  Each quad is equal to a quadrillion BTUs, and it’s roughly comparable to the following:

  • 8,007,000,000 gallons (US) of gasoline

  • 293,071,000,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh)

  • 36,000,000 tonnes of coal

  • 970,434,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas

  • 25,200,000 tonnes of oil

  • 252,000,000 tonnes of TNT

  • 13.3 tonnes of uranium-235

  Put another way, a quad is a massive unit that only is useful in measuring something like national energy consumption – and in this case, the total amount of energy used by the country was 97.7 quadrillion BTUs.

  ENERGY WASTED

  On the diagram, one thing that is immediately noticeable is that a whopping 68% of all energy is actually rejected energy, or energy that gets wasted through various inefficiencies.

  It’s quite eye-opening to look at this data sorted by sector:

  

  source: Visual Capitalist

  The transportation sector used 28.1 quads of energy in 2017, about 28.8% of the total consumption. However, it wasted 22.2 quads of that energy with its poor efficiency rate, which made for more rejected energy than the other three sectors combined.

  This wastage and inefficiency in the transportation sector provides an interesting lens from which to view the green energy revolution, and it also helps explain the vision that Elon Musk has for the future of Tesla.

  A WAYS TO GO

  The last time we posted a version of this visualization was for the 2015 edition of the diagram, and we noted that renewables had a ways to go as a factor in the whole energy mix.

  Here are how things have changed over the last two years:

  

  source: Visual Capitalist

  As you can see, solar and wind consumption are jumping considerably – but in absolute terms, our note from two years ago still remains true.

  To make the desired impact, renewable energy still has a ways to go.

  

• Is The Government Building Secret Tunnels Under America To Prepare For WW3?

  Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

  Mysterious booms and strange lights in have been reported all over the country and have recently sparked fears that the United States government is building tunnels underground in preparation for a potential nuclear third world war. Residents are convinced that they are hearing sounds and seeing the odd lights, and they are not isolated events.

  

  One man in the Cincinnati area caught the lights on his camera and was even able to capture his son’s reaction.

  Kimberly Kempke, a concerned resident from Anderson Township in Cincinnati, Ohio, is convinced the sounds she heard earlier this week were more than fireworks. 

  “The sounds were like true booms. They sounded like a powerful explosion,” said Kempke.

  “It’s unlike anything I’ve ever seen or felt before and I’ve been very up close with fireworks many times.”

  According to The Daily Star, YouTube channel secureteam10, run by Tyler Glockner, claims that the unexplainable sounds are coming from underground.

  He also revealed that just days ago a seismograph recorded something moving from the east to the west coast of the US in just 19 seconds.  And since he has uploaded it, viewers have been quick to speculate that something is secretly going on below the surface.

  Only last month, mystery “trumpet” sounds in New York left residents convinced a secret tunneling program had commenced.  And before that, we saw similar scenes in Ohio.  The odd booms have been heard in Pennsylvania too, and even triggered an FBI investigation.  Read more here.

  The booms seem to be returning en masse.  Most sound metallic in nature; almost as if a giant machine is doing something or a large piece of sheet metal is being hammered. Listen to them all yourself and see what you think.  Is the government building secret shelters underground to protect the elites in preparation for World War 3? Could it be something else?

  In the video below, the narrator speculates that it could be a massive earthquake of apocalyptic proportions coming:

  All we really know is that no government agency is clarifying what could possibly be causing these lights and booms to pop up and be heard across the country. All we have is speculation at this point. But you can prepare yourself.  Besides, if the government is really building underground bunkers and tunnels to protect themselves from an apocalyptic situation, shouldn’t you be prepared too?

  

• Here's When China Will Win The Arms Race With The US, And How BofA Is Trading It

  For all the talk of the escalating confrontation between the US and China, Bank of America’s Mike Hartnett writes that the “trade war” of 2018 should be recognized for what it really is: the first stage of a new arms race between the US & China to reach national superiority in technology over the longer-term via Quantum Computing, Artificial  Intelligence, Hypersonic Warplanes, Electronic Vehicles, Robotics, and Cyber-Security.

  This is hardly a secret, as the China strategy is laid out in its “Made in China 2025” blueprint: It aims to transform “China’s industrial base” into a “smart manufacturing” powerhouse via increase competitiveness and eroding of tech leadership of industrial trading  rivals, e.g. Germany, USA, South Korea; this is precisely what Peter Navarro has been raging against and hoping to intercept China’s ascent early on when it’s still feasible.

  At the forefront of China ambitious growth plan, Beijing’s investments in “advanced internet and communication technologies, embedded systems and intelligent machines” aim to ensure that 40% of China’s mobile phone chips, 70% of industrial robots, 75% of basic core components and 80% of renewable energy equipment are “Made in China” by 2025.

  Meanwhile, the China First strategy will be met head-on by an America First strategy.  Hence the “arms race” in tech spending which in both countries is intimately linked with defense spending. Note military spending by the US and China is forecast by the IMF to rise substantially in coming decades, but the stunner is that by 2050, China is set to overtake the US, spending $4tn on its military while the US is $1 trillion less, or $3tn.

  This means that some time around 2038, roughly two decades from now, China will surpass the US in military spending, and become the world’s dominant superpower not only in population and economic growth – China is set to overtake the US economy by no later than 2032  – but in military strength and global influence as well.

  

  And, as Thucydides Trap clearly lays out, that kind of unprecedented superpower transition – one in which the world’s reserve currency moves from state A to state B – always takes place in the context of a war.

  Which explains BofA’s long-term strategic recommendation: “We believe investors should thus own global defense, tech & cybersecurity stocks, particularly companies seen as “national security champions” over the next 10-years.”

  And here’s the reason why:

  

  Because one might as well make some money before the next world war breaks out…

  

• Bill Ryerson – Dealing With The Elephant In The Room: Overpopulation

  Authored by Adam Taggart via PeakProsperity.com,

  Worldwide, three new humans are born every second. Every day, 225,000 more mouths are added to the global dinner table.

  

  That adds up to 80 million new people per year — the population equivalent of the five largest cities in the world. That’s like a new Shanghai, a new Beijing, a new New Delhi, a new Lagos, and a new Tianjin being added every year.

  This growth trajectory is simply not sustainable from a planetary resources standpoint. As the global population continues to grow at an exponential rate, its demand is causing key resources like fresh water aquifers, rainforest canopies, fishing stocks, fertile topsoils, etc to similarly deplete exponentially. These oppositional exponentials, mathematically, can only result in an evitable planetary ‘overshoot’ — which many argue we are already well into.

  

  What can be done? Bill Ryerson, president of the Population Institute, joins us to discuss the work of the Population Media Center in addressing the interconnected issues of the full rights of women and girls, population, and the environment. It’s mission is to empower people to live healthier and more prosperous lives and to stabilize global population at a level at which people can live sustainably with the world’s renewable resources.

  Our earlier podcast with Bill focused on the existential dangers of overpopulation (you can listen to it here). This week’s podcast focuses on the strategies that show the most promise for slowing, or perhaps even reversing, world population growth, should we be willing to pursue them:

  All of those new people on the planet have needs for food, shelter, housing, and clothing. When you look at their environmental impact, the number of new people is a major driver of lost biodiversity, and it’s a significant factor in climate change.

  Now, I’ve heard a lot of environmentalists say ‘Well, population doesn’t matter’ because the real culprits in climate change are the high consumers of the West who each have a huge carbon footprint. But in fact, if you take the median projection of population growth by the UN Population Division from now to 2050 — an additional 2.5 billion people — and multiply that times the admittedly low per capita carbon emissions of a citizen in the developing world, it’s the climate equivalent of adding two United States to the planet.

  Put another way, projections show that whether we have a major effort to promote family planning and small family norms and delayed marriage and stopping child marriage, or a minor effort, that will result in a difference, from a climate standpoint, of 2 United States by 2050.

  I would venture that the leaders of virtually every environmental group, if spoken to privately, would clearly recognize that population growth is a major threat to the environmental goals of their organization. And yet, publicly, they’ve made a decision not to touch that issue for fear that they’ll get themselves in trouble. And part of the reason for that I think has to do with their approach to environmental issues.

  Many environmentalists think in terms of regulation as the solution to everything: if we have a climate problem, let’s have a carbon tax; if we have a pollution problem, let’s have pollution laws and regulations. But if we have a population problem — oops, what does that mean? Does that mean we have to tell people how many children to have? Therefore they conclude they better stay away from population because telling people how many children to have would obviously get them into trouble.

  But what’s very clear is that coercion, in addition to being a human rights violation, is not effective. Persuasion and modeling of behavior that helps people understand the benefits to them, of educating their daughters rather than selling them into marriage, of allowing women to have say in how many children to have and allowing women equal rights in the workplace outside the home and various other goals including information and access to family planning services – that all this, within a human rights context, has been the reason that countries like Thailand have moved from rapid population growth to below replacement-level fertility. Environmentalists just haven’t come to grips with the fact, or realized that, indeed, the population problem can be much better resolved through human rights-based approaches.

  Click the play button below to listen to Chris’ interview with Bill Ryerson (41m:14s).

  

• Secretive Russian Surface-To-Air Missile Test Is World's Longest Ever

  CNBC has just announced, citing an anonymous military source, that Russia quietly conducted the world’s longest anti-air missile system test, destroying mock enemy targets at record range.

  If and when this missile system becomes deployed, it could be a gamechanger for the Russian military, with increased area denial capabilities in Europe, East Asia, and the Middle East – that will undoubtedly frighten Washington.

  

  Futuristic drawing of the S-500 air defense missile system. (Source: Almaz-Antey)

  The source with direct knowledge of U.S. intelligence regarding the S-500 Prometey, also known as 55R6M “Triumfator-M,” a surface-to-air missile/anti-ballistic missile system intended to replace the A-135 missile system and supplement the S-400, said the missile test struck a target 299 miles away — 50 miles further than the existing S-400 system.

  Components of the S-500 system

  

  Moscow claims the S-500 is a new-generation surface-to-air missile system and has the capability of “intercepting hypersonic missiles, drones and aircraft as well as stealth warplanes like the F-22 and the F-35. The S-500 system would expand the Kremlin’s capabilities to engage multiple targets with precision strikes,” said CNBC.

  Russia’s 2016 S-400 air defense system range in Europe, the Middle East, and Russia. 

  

  Besides ballistic and hypersonic missiles, Moscow also claims the S-500 has a range capable of intercepting low-orbit satellites, space weapons launched from hypersonic aircraft, and hypersonic orbital platforms.

  However, the anonymous military source neglected to provide CNBC with specific knowledge of timing and location of the test.

  The video below is of a test of the S-400 anti-ballistic missile system 

  Earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Almaz-Antey, the weapon’s designer, had been alerted to prepare the S-500 missile systems for mass production.

  “One of the key tasks is to improve anti-precision warfare means. It is necessary to develop and build up technological groundwork in the area of air defense, to continue modernization of Pantsir systems, to finish the development and preparations for mass production of the S-500 newest systems capable of hitting targets at super-high altitudes, including near-the-earth space,” Putin said at a meeting with Russia’s top brass and executives of defense-sector enterprises.

  Although neither Putin nor the weapon designer have yet made any official statements about the tests, it seems as production for the missile system is about to ramp up for the 2020 deployment date. Meanwhile, with the longest surface-to-air missile range in the world, coupled with a claim that it can destroy American stealth fighters and hypersonics, the S-500 missile system has undoubtedly shocked Washington. What will Trump’s response be? Well, of course, more defense spending until the country goes bankrupt.

  

• Everything You Need To Know About GDPR

  You’ve likely heard about the General Data Protection Regulation act (GDPR) pushed out by the EU recently. If you’re from Europe then chances are you’ve been bombarded with boring emails about it.

  

  However, this new European privacy law, which took effect today, has caused several major U.S. news websites to suspend access across the region as privacy activists filed complaints and data-protection regulators prepared to brandish their new enforcement powers.

  Sites including the Chicago Tribune, the New York Daily News, and the Los Angeles Times were inaccessible for millions of European users after missing the May 25 deadline to be GDPR compliant.

  At the time of writing, LiveLeak reports that users in the European Union were met with the following message when trying to access their websites:

  “Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism.”

  As boring as it might be, it’s still a very important piece of legislation and it’s one you should know about. With that in mind, here’s everything you need to know about GDPR.

  As ValueWalk explains…

  Let’s start with the obvious and explain just what the GDPR are. It’s a piece of legislation that the European Commission passed in April 2016. Companies were given two years to comply with the legislation, which goes into effect on May 25, 2018.

  GDPR was designed to replace the previous law known as the Data Protection Directive and it aims to create a single set of rules for European Union member states. It aims to give consumers more control over the personal data companies collect about them. Not only does the legislation affect organizations based within the EU itself, but it also applies to companies outside of the EU if they provide services to – or monitor the activities of – EU citizens. As you can see, it’s going to have a major impact felt around the world.

  How Did All This Come About?

  The GDPR is one of the latest EU parliamentary measures designed to protect personal data as much as possible. The EU Charter itself states that protection of personal data is a fundamental right associated with protection of one’s natural person.

  While American laws tend to be in favor of businesses more so than consumers, the EU takes a consumer-first approach. The Data Protection Directive and the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OCED) started the process and now the GDPR continues it.

  Make no bones about it; the EU cares a lot about protecting consumer privacy and they always have. It has now paved the way for this approach to be taken globally thanks to the GDPR, it’s policies, and the punishments for those that break them.

  What are the Key Policies?

  A key focus of the legislation is strengthening the conditions of consent. This means that companies are no longer able to get your data out of you by using vague and confusing statements. They will also no longer be able to make users consent to several things at once. Users should be able to consent to individual things individually, rather than being presented with a list of things and then being asked to consent to everything at once. On top of this, a parent or guardian must consent to data collection on children aged under 16.

  Another GDPR rule says that companies must notify their data protection authority about any breaches within 72 hours of them becoming aware it happened. Those in charge of processing data must notify customers as soon as possible once the breach has been discovered.

  Consumers will also be given more control over their user data. They will have the right to access the personal information that companies store on them and find out what the data is being used for and where it is being kept. It also gives users the right to be forgotten. That means that you have the right to ask people to delete the information they have on you and prevent third parties from getting access to it. It also allows for people to transfer their information between service providers easily.

  How Will it Affect Individuals?

  While consumers are given more control over their information and are given the right to be forgotten, there are some gray areas about how all this applies in reality. In theory, the law would allow for people to demand that social networks such as Facebook completely delete their profile permanently. How feasible this is remains to be seen. There are also other problems, such as the freedom of expression. Laws built around the freedom of expression prevent this right to be forgotten from extending to news articles.

  Will There Be Punishments for Breaking GDPR?

  There will be some potentially major fines associated with breaking the rules of the GDPR. Organizations that breach the rules will be subject to fines of up to 4% of their annual global turnover or 20 million euros (around $25 million), whichever figure is higher. Given that some tech companies such as Facebook and Google make billions of dollars each year, this could be a potentially massive fine.

  How Does GDPR Affect Firms?

  Organizations have had two years now to prepare for GDPR, so hopefully the impact won’t be as big. Big tech firms such as the aforementioned Facebook and Google have already opened up about what they plan to do. These are organizations that handle huge amounts of data and so preparation has been key. Facebook in particular released a new set of privacy tools to help their organization comply with GDPR and other companies have released their own plans and tools.

  Is There Anything Else Businesses Should be Aware Of?

  The Information Commissioner’s Office of the UK recently released their own set of guidelines in order to help businesses prepare for the move. One thing that they recommended was that companies should review their privacy policy notices. It’s also recommended that businesses make the changes now so that they comply with the law. Many businesses are already doing this, as discussed above.

  Don’t be too worried about the changes though. The Information Commissioner’s Office insists that these new measures will retain many of the same principles and concepts as the current Data Protection Act. Not many things are going to change, but it still helps to know what is changing. Even so, most companies that already abide by the old legislation are likely already complying with the new one. Of course, it never helps to hire a data protection officer to ensure complete compliance and have the right people ready when they are needed.  Betipy have created the below infographic titled “55 Things You Need To Know About GDPR”, and offers business owners and members of the public a detailed look at the main points.

  

  Source: ValueWalk.com

  Still don’t get it? This should help…

  This is my favorite. #GDPRday pic.twitter.com/fQrz2K6NHQ

  — Whitney Merrill (@wbm312) May 25, 2018

  

• "Massacre" As Caribbean Pirate Attacks Up 160%

  Modern-day pirate attacks in the Caribbean and Latin America are out of control, according to a Wednesday report which found a 163% spike in pirate activity that led to the loss of $948,690 in stolen goods. The report, produced by nonprofit group Oceans Beyond Piracy, found that 59% of the attacks involved robberies on yachts.

  

  “We have observed a significant increase in violent incidents and anchorage crime, particularly in the anchorages of Venezuela and the recent violent incidents off Suriname in the first part of this year,” says Maise Pigeon, the report’s lead author. “Pirate activity in 2017 clearly demonstrates that pirate groups retain their ability to organize and implement attacks against ships transiting the region.”

  

  Pirates have hit waters off the coast of Suriname hard.

  In April, at least a dozen fishermen from Guyana went missing or were feared dead following a pirate attack in the area.

  Guyana President David Granger called the attack a “massacre.”

  And a fishing boat captain was shot dead after his ship was attacked in May. The rest of his crew survived.

  The buccaneers also attacked anchorages in Venezuela, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Colombia and St. Lucia. –Marketwatch

  

  

  

  According to the report, “854 seafarers were affected by piracy and armed robbery in Latin America and the Caribbean; an increase from 527 impacted seafarers in 2016. A significant increase was observed in failed boardings and attacks, as well as robberies.”

  

  Read the entire report covering pirate activity around the world below:

   

  Here’s how they deal with pirates off the coast of Somalia (sound warning): 

  Then there’s the British Royal Navy:

  Then there’s Russia’s approach:

   

  

• When The U.S. Government Defaulted

  Via Global Macro Monitor,

  One of the most pervasive myths about the United States is that the federal government has never defaulted on its debts.

  There’s just one problem: it’s not true, and while few people remember the “gold clause cases” of the 1930s, that episode holds valuable lessons for leaders today. – Sebastian Edwards, Project Syndicate,  May 21, 2018

  My friend, UCLA professor,  Sebastian Edwards, is out with a must-read summer book, American Default: The Untold Story of FDR, the Supreme Court, and the Battle over Gold.

  

  Sebastian has also published an excellent synopsis of the the book, Learning from America’s Forgotten Default, on the Project Syndicate (PS) website.   It is an excellent introduction to the subject material but only scratches the surface and should not be a substitute or excuse for not purchasing the book.

  Money quotes from the Project Syndicate  piece:  

  • There was a time, decades ago, when the US behaved more like a “banana republic” than an advanced economy, restructuring debts unilaterally and retroactively

  • In April 1933, in an effort to help the US escape the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt announced plans to take the US off the gold standard and devalue the dollar. 

  • …this would not be as easy as FDR calculated. Most debt contracts at the time included a “gold clause,” which stated that the debtor must pay in “gold coin” or “gold equivalent.” 

  • These clauses were introduced during the Civil War as a way to protect investors against a possible inflationary surge.

  • …the gold clause was an obstacle to devaluation. If the currency were devalued without addressing the contractual issue, the dollar value of debts would automatically increase to offset the weaker exchange rate, resulting in massive bankruptcies and huge increases in public debt.

  • Congress passed a joint resolution on June 5, 1933, annulling all gold clauses in past and future contracts.

  • Republicans were dismayed that the country’s reputation was being put at risk, while the Roosevelt administration argued that the resolution didn’t amount to “a repudiation of contracts.”

  • On January 30, 1934, the dollar was officially devalued. The price of gold went from $20.67 an ounce – a price in effect since 1834 – to $35 an ounce.

  • …those holding securities protected by the gold clause claimed that the abrogation was unconstitutional. 

  • Lawsuits were filed, and four of them eventually reached the Supreme Court; in January 1935, justices heard two cases that referred to private debts, and two concerning government obligations.

  • On February 18, 1935, the Supreme Court announced its decisions. In each case, justices ruled 5-4 in favor of the government – and against investors seeking compensation. 

  • Justice James Clark McReynolds… wrote the dissenting opinion – one for all four cases… He ended his presentation with strong words: “Shame and humiliation are upon us now. Moral and financial chaos may be confidently expected.”

  • …the 1935 ruling is invoked [today] when attorneys are defending countries in default (like Venezuela). And, as more governments face down new debt-related dangers – such as unfunded liabilities associated with pension and health-care obligations – we may see the argument surface even more frequently.

  • …the US government’s unfunded liabilities are a staggering 260% of GDP – and that does not include conventional federal debt and unfunded state and local government liabilities.

  • A key question, then, is whether governments seeking to adjust contracts retroactively may once again invoke the legal argument of “necessity.”

  • The US Supreme Court agreed with the “necessity” argument once before. It is not far-fetched to think that it may happen again.  – Sebastian Edwards

  

  A Roadmap? 

  There you have it, folks.

  The good professor lays it all out, which may or may not be the roadmap for how the U.S. and other highly indebted governments resolve their ,massive and almost impossible to fulfill contractual obligations to both creditors and its citizens.   The Supremes have already ruled in favor of the government under the “necessity” argument.

  Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)

  Sebastian’s material gives us much ammunition in arguing with the Modern Monetary Theory crowd, who believe a sovereign government cannot and will never default on its local currency obligations if it has an independent central bank.    Of course, they will argue that FDR and the U.S. didn’t have an independent monetary policy because of its link to the gold standard.

  Russia 1998

  When we bring up Russia’s 1998 default on local currency GKO debt (David Tepper’s worst trade, BTW) the MMTs argue “special case.”

  It seems to us the MMT crowd believe that because a government has an independent central bank and can always print money to payoff debt, they will never, ever experience rollover risk.  Complete nonsense.

  Can you say Venezuela?

  When a government experiences financing problems through a sudden stop in funding, the leaders must make a political decision on whom to inflict the pain.

  Either default, which hurts their creditors, and who may be predominantly made up of foreigners, as was the case in Russia in 1998; and is the case with the U.S. federal government marketable debt in 2018;  or monetizing the rollover, resulting in hyperinflation and wiping out domestic residents.

  We have the first-hand experience of the latter and have written many posts about it,

  We’ll also never forget being in the Bulgarian central bank in 1996 just before some very large maturities of treasury bills were coming due.  The market had lost confidence in the government and a high ranking central bank official looked us straight in the eye and said “we will not let the government default.”

  We knew instantly a massive amount of liquidity was about to hit the local markets, the demand for the currency was going to collapse, and the country was headed for hyperinflation.   Rioting broke out, the government fell, and the country eventually implemented a currency board, not too dissimilar from  that of the Euro, in order to enforce fiscal discipline upon the government. – GMM, November 2011

  We suspect when the day of reckoning comes for the United States to pay for its debt profligacy, it won’t be such a simple binary choice. There will be many and various types of public sector obligations in the queue to be paid, which may require differential treatment.

  Sebastian’s example of the U.S. government default in the 1930’s is a combination of both.  The default on the contractual gold clause and the inflating away of much of the debt through devaluation.

  This is tantamount to an emerging market government unilaterally and retroactively converting its foreign currency debt into local currency and then monetizing it, and supported by the legal system.

  How would that work out for, say,  Venezuela dollar denominated bond holders?

  Let’s hope our political leaders and policy makers come to their senses before that dreadful day is upon us.

  Now take the few minutes to read the full article and go buy the book for some excellent beach reading. .

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escaped Ebola Patients Risked Spreading Virus At Packed Prayer Meeting

  Two Ebola patients who escaped from a quarantine in the Democratic Republic of Congo attended a prayer meeting with 50 other people, raising the possibility that those exposed could reignite the Ebola epidemic that was on the edge of spreading throughout the world back in 2014.

  According to the Daily Star, health agencies confirmed that two of the three fugitives from the quarantine may have spread the virus before dying. Government officials are now worried that the deadly and highly infectious disease could spread as victims fail to grasp the seriousness of being infected.

  

  The virus appears to be spreading despite 7,540 vaccines being distributed in the DRC by the World Health Organization. Another 8,000 doses are due to be provided in the coming days.

  One doctor said the world is “on the knife’s edge” of another outbreak.

  “We are on the epidemiological knife edge,” Dr. Peter Salama, the World Health Organization’s deputy director.

  “The next few weeks will really tell if this outbreak is going to expand to urban areas or if we are going to be able to keep it under control.”

  So far, seven of the confirmed Ebola cases have been found in urban settings. Doctors say the outbreak has “potential to expand.” Following a meeting with reporters, Dr. Peter Salama said the outbreak “could go either way in the coming weeks.” At last count, 27 people have died and at least 58 cases have been reported in the DRC since May 8.

  “We are working around the clock to make sure it [goes] in the right direction,” he said.

  According to Al Jazeera, the fatality rate for those infected with Ebola is roughly 50%.  The DRC’s present Ebola outbreak – its ninth since the virus was identified in 1976 – initially appeared confined to a remote village in the country’s northwestern province, but no more.

  

  One case was confirmed last week in the city of Mbandaka, home to 1.2 million people.

  

  This marked the beginning of a “new phase” in the crisis, according to DRC Health Minister Oly Ilunga. The Health Ministry has taken efforts to emphasize that the number of cases is “normal” in the context of past outbreaks.

  “As soon as you have a few confirmed cases, the persons who have been in contact with them are at risk. We knew there was a risk of more cases coming in,” Ilunga told Al Jazeera.

  “What we are trying to do first is contain the outbreak so that it doesn’t spread towards other urban centres in the DRC.”

  Vaccines are used on people who have come into contact with confirmed cases, since the virus has a three week incubation period.

  Here is the #Ebola response timeline so far.
  Briefing 📄 https://t.co/UxCM72fgL6
  📽️ https://t.co/7pQOoM7890#WHA71 pic.twitter.com/8izMomZ5ju

  — World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) May 23, 2018

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

  Ebola can cause multiple organ failure and is passed from person to person through contact with blood or other bodily fluids.

  

• The Skripal Case Is Being Pushed Down The Memory Hole With Libya and Aleppo

  Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  On the fourth of March, in the sleepy British cathedral town of Salisbury, an ex-spy named Sergei Skripal was poisoned by an assassin with the most deadly nerve agent known to man.

  

  The Russian government was immediately blamed by a shocked and outraged world. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson assured the people of Great Britain that “There’s no doubt” that Moscow was responsible. In a large and sudden leap forward in cold war escalations, Russian diplomats were thrown out of countries all around the globe, including my own Australia, in a show of solidarity with the United Kingdom. It was the largest collective ejection of Russian diplomats in history.

  Two months after his earth-shattering assassination, as the world stared spellbound at the weekend’s immensely popular PR spectacle of a royal wedding, Sergei Skripal was quietly discharged from the hospital he’d been staying at. The BBC reports that he is walking and approaching complete recovery.

  Wait a second. Haven’t I seen this Python skit before?

  So to recap, an ex-spy who had been retired and strategically irrelevant for years was reportedly poisoned by the Kremlin with Novichok, a scary Russian-sounding word which refers to a group of extremely deadly and fast-acting nerve agents that start shutting down the body’s muscles and respiratory system within 30 seconds to two minutes.

  Except in the case of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia it was several hours with a leisurely stroll, a meal, and beers in between.

  The poison was placed in Yulia Skripal’s suitcase. Actually no, they got that wrong, it was the air vents in their car. Wait, no, that doesn’t work either. Maybe it was administered via weaponized miniature drone! Wait, no, it wasthe family’s car door handle. Actually, scratch that, it was the front door of the house. Definitely the front door of the house. We’re absolutely sure. Either that or Sergei Skripal’s favorite Russian cereal. They were given 100 grams of Novichok. Wait, no, that’s ridiculous, we retract that. Okay, maybe we have no idea what happened. Oh hey, their pets were completely unaffected by the poison. Let’s incinerate them.

  Oh, and Johnson’s claim that the Porton Down laboratory had assured him “There’s no doubt” that Russia was behind the poisoning? Turns out that was just a bald-faced lie; Porton Down said no such thing and it was never its job to make such an assessment. Johnson lied, and both the Foreign Office and British mainstream media attempted to cover it up; tweets were deleted, transcripts were re-written, and narratives were given a good spin of historic revisionism by asserting that the UK government’s unequivocal insistence that the Kremlin poisoned the Skripals had been merely a “suggestion”.

  And now both Sergei and Yulia Skripal, alleged victims of a poisoning by highly trained assassins using the deadliest nerve agent ever created, are doing fine. 

  But you’re still supposed to fear and hate Russia. Just don’t think too hard about it or remember too much.

  Remember Aleppo?

  I wouldn’t blame you if you didn’t; corporate media outlets hardly ever talk about it anymore. It’s almost like they want us to forget the horror stories they told us about how the city that had been occupied by good, noble freedom fighters was about to be taken by an army of depraved psychopaths who wanted to rape women, burn children alive, and shoot civilians in their homes. Back at the tail end of 2016, though, it was all you ever heard about. The “fall of Aleppo”, they called it. If the west didn’t intervene to stop Damascus and Moscow from retaking East Aleppo from the good-hearted rebels, everyone there would be raped, tortured, and butchered by the soulless army of the Syrian government.

  Well, Moscow and Damascus did recapture East Aleppo, and it turns out that everything we were told about it was a lie. The atrocities the Syrian Arab Army were accused of intending to commit proved to be completely unfounded, those “freedom fighters” were predominantly cruel Al Qaeda affiliates, and the city is now thriving and bustling with busy marketplaces. But after all the constant apocalyptic alarmism, the mass media outlets who’d been warning of all the horrific crimes against humanity which would surely be committed after the “fall of Aleppo” forgot all about the city once they were proven completely wrong about everything.

  Aleppo was pushed down the memory hole. It’s a non-thing now. Turns out Gary Johnson was ahead of the curve.

  

  How about Libya? Remember Libya? Libya’s that country that got pushed down the memory hole the second the western empire got the regime change it was after. Before Muammar Gaddafi was mutilated in the streets to the sadistic cackles of Hillary Clinton, we were all told with increasing urgency that humanitarian interventionism was needed because Gaddafi’s troops are doing evil things like taking Viagra to help them commit mass rapes against Libyan civilians. Now Gaddafi is dead, we know that both thecase for humanitarian interventionism and the Viagra-for-rape stories were lies, and Libya is a humanitarian disaster with an open slave trade after western interventionism created a failed state.

  Where are all those cries for humanitarian interventionism in Libya now? Now that the nation is infinitely worse off than it was under Gaddafi?

  Doesn’t matter. Memory hole.

  Time and time again, we’re fed these deceitful narratives to manufacture support for the agendas of the western war machine, and when the truth begins to surface that we were lied to once again, the news churn moves on and we’re distracted with something else as the old narrative is shuffled back beyond the reach of memory.

  Maybe a year or two later we wonder to ourselves “I wonder what ever happened with that major news story? I should google it,” but nothing comes up and most of us shrug and move on.

  And now a very suspicious and possibly Christopher Steele-related silence has descended on the matter of the Skripals, to the point where Sergei himself can walk out of the hospital and barely cause a blip in the news, and nobody can talk to either of them but everyone pretends that’s perfectly normal. This case which points very clearly to a mountain of lies and cover-ups by the British government and its affiliates is now being shuffled out of the news cycle and replaced with vapid nonsense about Meghan’s dress and Trump’s latest obnoxious tweet.

  “Unlike everybody else in the media, I have no intention of letting go of Salisbury because the international ramifications of the Salisbury poisoning affair are too grave to allow them to be pushed out of the news by a Royal Wedding, by Wimbledon or whatever else it is..” pic.twitter.com/7KScziA2M2

  — George Galloway (@georgegalloway) May 4, 2018

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

  But we won’t let them forget. We won’t let the world forget that these steadily increasing imperialist escalations against Russia and its allies were given a hefty bump by lies about what happened in Salisbury. There are plenty of people on alternative media like me who will keep pointing at that big dark hole of unanswered questions and yelling “Hey! What about all those lies you guys told us about the Skripals?”

  This one isn’t going down the memory hole, guys. There are some turds that just won’t flush. This one’s staying around forever. We’ll keep reminding everyone. We won’t let anyone forget.

  

• If You're A Muslim, Move To Melbourne During Ramadan

  For many in the world, an all too often heard phrase is “if only there were more hours in the day.” For muslims, however, during the month of Ramadan, we suspect the hope is the exact opposite.

  The Ramadan, the ninth month of the Islamic lunar calendar is, according to the tradition of the Quran and the Hadiths, the month of fasting.

  As Statista’s Patrick Wagner explains, with the ascension of the first crescent, Muslims all over the world stop to eat from dawn till dusk.

  Every day after sunset, people gather for Iftar to break fast with friends and family. Since the time of fasting per day is dependent on daylight hours, Muslims living in the northern hemisphere currently must wait the longest until Iftar starts.

  And so, for Muslims living in Oslo, Norway for example, they will fast for over 19 hours a day, more than 8 hours longer than their religious peers living in Melbourne, Australia…

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  However, Ramadan remains a duty for every able-bodied Muslim and in order to enable believers living near the polar circle to fulfill their duty, most scholars agree that you can either choose the fasting times of Mecca or the nearest state with a Muslim majority.

  

• End Of Unipolar World Looms As 'New World Order' Responds To US Demands On Iran

  Authored by F. Michael Maloof, op-ed via RT.com,

  If Mike Pompeo’s ultimatum to Iran, after US withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal, was fulfilled it would inflict economic warfare on the country and set up Tehran for failure while reasserting a US-led unipolar world order.

  

  However, it is doomed to failure. As Iranian President Hassan Rouhani pointed out following the US Secretary of State’s declaration mirroring the views of President Donald Trump’s new national security adviser, John Bolton, the era when the US will “decide for the world” is over.

  Pompeo outlined the 12 demands on Iran in a speech on May 21 before the US think-tank Heritage Foundation. Even many of the conservative participants in attendance seemed to be skeptical of how effective the demands would be to prevent the US from imposing more onerous sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

  Pompeo’s ultimatum demanded that Iran halt all uranium enrichment, with access to “all sites”“anywhere, anytime.” Yet, the Islamic Republic is a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which entitles it to enrich uranium for civilian use, as does the Iranian nuclear agreement, formerly known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

  The ultimatum went well beyond anything to do with Iran’s nuclear program – demanding that the Islamic Republic halt its missile development, support for Hezbollah and Hamas and demanded that it withdraw all forces under the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from Syria, where it has been fighting along with Hezbollah against the Islamic State and al-Qaeda at the invitation of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

  Left unsaid in Pompeo’s demands was that the US is in Syria without invitation, supporting the jihadi Salafists who also are backed by Israel and Saudi Arabia and are threatening Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran itself.

  Barbara Slavin, who directs the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, observed that:

  Pompeo’s speech has “almost no chance of working. It’s likely to further alienate the US’s economic allies, boost China as a global economic and political power and gladden Iranian hardliners looking for more reason to start proscribed nuclear activities to continue their interventions in the Middle East.”

  In plain-talk English, what Pompeo and Bolton want through their economic warfare against Iran is regime change. Pompeo is signaling an effort to reassert US leadership of a Western world order on Middle East countries, as are European Union countries in resisting Trump’s new brand of economic warfare.

  Trump’s 180-degree turn represents a strategic change from his previous position of wanting to pull out of the Middle East. Strangely, it comes at the same time when Americans at home are just beginning to realize the benefits of the tax cut and creation of more jobs at home, promises that Trump said he would fulfill during the campaign.

  But he also promised to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem and drop out of the JCPOA.  What has occurred is that one campaign promise has cancelled out the benefits of the other as a result of Trump imposing sanctions not only on Iran but on companies anywhere in the world that have contracts with US companies but continue trading with Iran.

  In turn, he has created further tensions in the Middle East, prompting the price of oil to rise from $70 to $80 a barrel just in the week that I was in Iran. Such an increase is already being reflected in the rise of gasoline prices Americans are having to pay, thereby minimizing any benefit from tax savings.

  Trump’s actions reflect the fact that the neo-conservatives advising him are back in full fury pursuing a new geopolitical strategy that mirrors what has been left undone following the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 when Saddam Hussein was removed as part of a pre-emptive policy of regime change throughout the Middle East.

  When I was at the Defense Department during that period, I had an occasion to brief Bolton one time during which he outlined pursuing regime change not only in Iraq, but then in Syria, Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia – all countries at the time that were regarded as enemies of Israel. As with back then, we are witnessing the Trump administration implementing Israeli foreign policy.

  Given the initial resistance by European Union countries to Trump’s sanctions and dropping out of the JCPOA – a watershed moment – they have signaled staying in the agreement. But that may not last due to sanctions the US can impose on European companies which have contracts with American firms that continue trading with Iran.

  I recently was in Iran talking to Iranian officials just after Trump announced dropping out of the JCPOA. I was there at the 6th International New Horizons conference held in Iran’s spiritual city of Mashhad.

  What emerged from the three-day conference was a call to resist Trump’s actions of reasserting his version of a US-led unipolar order by undertaking a “multi-polar” approach that will see a new economic order, with the idea of separating countries from American economic dependency and isolating the US and Israel.

  What is evolving in response to the US dropping out of the JCPOA is a new world order that could begin to see Iran, China, Russia, Eastern European and Central Asian countries creating their own economic engine to minimize the impact of US influence.

  It could include a reinvigorated Shanghai Cooperation Organization founded by China and Russia and Central Asian countries. With China nearing completion of its One Belt, One Road Initiative from Asia to Europe, it could open the way for European countries who are members of the EU and Eastern Europe to expand trade and escape the yoke of weaponized US economic influence. This development already appears to be happening.

  British Prime Minister Theresa May has been dealing with Brexit, a long and tedious process to separate from the EU. She had hoped to turn to the US as an alternative, more favorable market. Yet, she has announced that she intends to resist Trump’s sanctions. Her efforts, however, may be short-lived, since Britain is only the size of Indiana and its companies could not survive without the US market. Consequently, she has begun to look to China as an alternative market.

  In response to Trump’s recent action on the JCPOA, Russian President Vladimir Putin could once again extend an invitation to Iran to join the SCO. Putin already has said he sees no obstacles to Iran joining the SCO.

  Its membership had been offered following completion of the 2015 nuclear agreement. However, the effort was rejected. This time, it could be different, since Iran is in full compliance with the JCPOA but Trump broke from that agreement.

  Iranian officials told me that if the US wants to work with Iran, it needs to “decouple” its Israeli policy from dealing with the Islamic Republic. In effect, Trump has done everything Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sought – moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and dropping out of the JCPOA.

  They wondered who is controlling whom: Is Trump controlling Netanyahu, or is Netanyahu controlling Trump in conducting US foreign policy? One Iranian source at the University of Tehran told me that “what is definitely happening is that Iran is tilting heavily, and perhaps permanently, to China and Russia.”

  “We are hoping for the best,” he said, but in the event Trump’s pressure on Iran turns kinetic, he added, “Iran is preparing for the worst.”

  

• Do Women Work Harder Than Men?

  In this day and age of equal opportunism, sexism, PCism, and any other ‘-ism’ one can imagine, its is probably enough to get one banned from Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram just for asking the question “do women work harder than men.”

  Traditionally in most cultures, it is the man which would spend the most hours each day at work and, as analysis from MenCare’s ‘State of the World’s Fathers’ report shows, this is still generally the case in most parts of the world.

  However, as Statista’s Martin Armstrong points out, there can though, be a difference between being ‘at work’ and ‘working’.

  For many people, ‘working’ doesn’t entail going to the office or the factory, but staying at home or in the local community as a caregiver. This kind of work doesn’t usually come with a financial benefit, of course, and according to the UN this unpaid care can include “meal preparation, cleaning, washing clothes, water and fuel collection and direct care of persons (including children, older persons, persons with disabilities, as well as able-bodied adults)”.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  And, as the infographic above shows, it is the world’s women that are putting in the largest amount of these unpaid hours and in every region, the total amount of time spent working, paid or unpaid, is higher for women than it is for men.

  With the exception of East Asia & the Pacific, where it is an almost 50:50 split, the majority of women’s time spent working is unpaid.

  So the answer to the question is simple – as any married man knows – of course women work harder than men.

  

• How To Hack The Price Of A Hotel Suite

  Submitted by Priceonomics

  

  Suites are the crown jewel of the hotel experience: generally, they’re more spacious, more meticulously appointed, and well-suited to house larger groups looking to share a space. 

  There’s only one problem: they’re typically a lot more expensive than standard hotel rooms. But that is that always the case?

  We analyzed data from Priceonomics customer Suiteness, a site that lets you book hotel suites. We looked at the price of traditional hotel suites, compared to an interesting hack called the “connecting suite” — suite configurations where more than one bedroom is connected to the living area of a suite — that is typically a lot cheaper. We also looked the price of these suites compared to vacation rentals in top American travel cities.

  How much more affordable is a connector suite than a traditional two-bedroom suite? How do these rates compare with a two-bedroom vacation rental? How about two separate hotel rooms?

  In this post, we’ll dive deep into our findings — but here’s a quick overview:

  Summary of findings

  • Booking a “hacked” suite with a connector room ($1,484), is nearly half the price of a traditional two-bedroom suite ($2,665) over two weekend nights. That’s $1,181 cheaper.

  • In New York, you can save an average of $5,409 over two weekend nights by booking a suite with a connector room instead of a two-bedroom suite.

  • Airbnb appears to be marginally cheaper than hotel rooms and suites — though these bookings often come with extra cleaning fees and platform fees that can boost the price up a few hundred dollars over a two-day stay.

  A quick note on methodology

  Suiteness specializes in accommodations for groups of four or more, so we decided to compare five different two-bedroom options: a suite, a connector suite, two separate hotel rooms, an Airbnb, and a VRBO. 

  The suite data was sourced from Suiteness, the data for hotel rooms from Expedia, and the data from Airbnb and VRBO from those respective platforms. For each dataset, we gathered rates for high and low seasons and calculated the average between the two for a two weekend nights.

  Lastly, for our analysis, we focused on the nine markets for which we had the most data on: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Diego, San Francisco, D.C., Las Vegas, Miami, and Orlando.

  What’s the cheapest two-bedroom accommodation?

  Let’s start with the overall averages for each of the two-bedroom accommodations we researched. Keep in mind that the prices below reflect the cost for two weekend nights, averages across high and low seasons.

  

  Two-bedroom suites are overwhelmingly pricier than any other option, at $2,665 — or $1,332 per weekend night across the markets we analyzed. VRBO, which primarily features full-space rentals, places second, at an average of $1,718.

  At $1,312, the two-bedroom Airbnb edged out the cost of two hotel rooms by $76. But, it should be noted that the Airbnb price here reflects the average of a wide variety of neighborhoods. Most hotel suites are more centrally located, and also offer a wider range of amenities.

  The connector suite, at $1,484, is 44% cheaper than the typical two-bedroom suite — a huge value considering that the only real difference between the two is a separate private entrance for the connecting room.

  Let’s take a closer look at the price differential between the two, by city.

  

  On average, booking a connector suite instead of a standard suite will save you $1,181, but in certain markets, the difference is astronomically higher. In New York (the most expensive suite market), the average two-bed suite runs a whopping $6,995 for a weekend. Alternatively, booking a connector suite ($1,586) will save you $5,409.

  In 8 of the 9 cities we analyzed, connector suites are cheaper: in San Diego, a connector suite will save you $1,562; in LA, $1,547, in Chicago, $907; in San Francisco, $611, and in Las Vegas, $501.

  Only Washington, D.C. featured nominally higher-priced connector rooms ($167 more than a standard suite).

  A city-by-city analysis

  Breaking this data down by market, we can see that prices for certain accommodations vary widely by location.

  

  For instance, the average two-bedroom suite across all markets runs $2,665 per weekend, but that ranges from as high as $6,996 in New York to $752 in Orlando. Las Vegas, perhaps most renowned for its suites, runs in the middle of the pack ($2,306).

  

  Connector suites average $1,484 per weekend. And, while Miami ($1,842) and Las Vegas ($,1805) run higher here, we see much more affordable rates for New York ($1,586), Los Angeles ($1,611), and San Diego ($1,120).

  

  San Francisco — the most expensive rental market in the U.S. — also tops the list for priciest standard hotel rooms, at an average of $2,135 per weekend. For nearly $600 less, you can get a connector suite.

  In Las Vegas, two hotel rooms can be booked for an average of $1,760 per weekend, but a connector suite can be had for just $45 more. And in Los Angeles, two hotel rooms run just about the same cost as a connector suite.

  

  Average two-bedroom VRBO rentals range from $3,677 in New York to $888 in Orlando, and overall, at $1,718 per weekend, are pricier than both connector suites and two hotel rooms.

  Only Airbnb offers a more affordable alternative than the connector suite — but it typically doesn’t come with the amenities of a hotel suite.

  

  Airbnb appears to be cheaper than hotel rooms and suites — though these bookings often come with extra cleaning fees and platform fees that can boost the price up to a few hundred dollars over a two-day stay.

  Cheat sheet

  Lastly, to help navigate all this data, here’s a “cheat sheet” with both high and low season averages for each accommodation type, by city.

  

  So, what does this data ultimately tell us?

  It’s easy to think of hotel suites as a ridiculously expensive, intangible booking option for vacations — an accommodation reserved for presidents and celebrities. But suites can actually be a lot more affordable than you might think. Sometimes, they could even be the cheapest possible option for a large group.

  By booking a connector suite you can save more than $1,100 over a standard suite price. And when you consider the average group size that stays in a connector suite is 5.9 people (compared to 3.5 for a traditional suite), the cost per person is even lower: $251 per person for two weekend nights, versus $761 per person, on average.

  Lastly, while Airbnb does offer a slightly cheaper alternative to a connector suite, one should consider the additional amenities a suite offers. For an average of $86 more per night, a suite offers: first-class customer and concierge service, fully-stocked inventory and an on-call maintenance staff; housekeeping at no additional cost; and a huge convenience factor.

  

• China's Terrifying "Social Credit" System Has Already Blocked 11 Million From Taking Flights

  China’s terrifying ‘social credit’ system, which is a rating assigned to each citizen based on government data regarding their economic and social status, has effectively blocked more than 11.14 million flights and 4.25 million high-speed train trips at the end of April, according to a senior government official.

  

  Government officials first announced the proposal for a social credit system in 2014 — where each Chinese citizen would be rated according to their online, social, financial, and legal behavior. Misdeeds, such as late credit card payments, criminal record, jaywalking, using fake IDs, refusal to sign up for required insurance, and failing to pay taxes, could result in a travel ban for an extended period. The penalty for misdeeds went into full effect in May.

  China’s Social Scoring System

  

  The government decides who gets these goods and services:

  

  It is still unknown which misdeeds the government cracked down on to induce such a large number of travel bans within the country. Former deputy director of the development research center of the State Council, Hou Yunchun, is quoted by the Global Times as saying the system needs a few more tweaks so that “discredited people become bankrupt.”

  “If we don’t increase the cost of being discredited, we are encouraging discredited people to keep at it,” Hou was quoted by Sina Finance at an annual credit development forum in Beijing on Saturday.

  In addition to blocking the flights and trains, the Global Times noted that the names of 33,000 companies which violated laws had been shamed on a public list, said Meng Wei, spokeswoman for the National Development and Reform Commission, via news website chinanews.com. Those on the list could be denied loans, grants, and other forms of government assistance, Wei added.

  “Hou’s phrase that the ‘discredited people become bankrupt’ makes the point, but is an oversimplification,” Zhi Zhenfeng, a legal expert at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing, told the Global Times.

  “How the person is restricted in terms of public services or business opportunities should be in accordance with how and to what extent he or she lost his credibility.”

  “The punishment should match the deed.”

  “Discredited people deserve legal consequences.”

  “This is definitely a step in the right direction to building a society with credibility.”

  Since the launch of the ‘social credit’ system, state media has reported that pilot tests have been successful. There is even chatter about a China-wide social credit system expected in the early 2020s. In the meantime, senior government officials plan for eight more pilot credit systems, including the continued testing of Sesame Credit, an Alibaba affiliate Ant Financial, that deducts credit points off people who default on court fines.

  

  A screenshot from the Sesame Credit app, showing score 729 on a scale from 350

  Many observers have likened China’s ‘social credit’ system to that shown in Netflix’s Black Mirror episode ‘Nosedive’ in which a world where people can rate each other from one to five stars for every interaction they have.

  

• In The Wake Of Mass-Shootings, Parents Reconsider Mass-Schooling

  Authored by Kerry McDonald via The Foundation for Economic Education,

  In the wake of recent tragic school shootings, anxious parents are contemplating homeschooling to protect their children. After February’s school shooting in Parkland, Florida, the Miami Heraldreported that more parents were considering the homeschooling option. And after Friday’s disturbing school shooting in Santa Fe, Texas, a local ABC news affiliate in Alabama reported the increasing appeal of homeschooling.

  

  “If I had the time, I would teach my kids myself, and I would know that they’re safe,” a father of four told ABC station, WAAY31.

  A public school teacher interviewed by the channel disagreed with the idea of homeschooling. According to the news story, the teacher “says resorting to homeschooling is teaching your children to run from reality.”

  But that raises the question: Is compulsory mass schooling “reality”?

  Public Schools Are Consuming More and More of Kids’ Time

  Segregating children by age into increasingly restrictive, test-driven classrooms where they are forced by law to be unless a parent or caregiver liberates them is hardly “reality.” What’s worse is that young people are spending increasingly more time in this coercive “reality” than ever before.

  For young children ages six to eight, schooling increased from an average of five hours a day in 1981-82 to an average of seven hours a day in 2002-03. And for today’s teens, schooling consumes much more of their time than it did for previous generations, seeping into summertime and other historically school-free periods. According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 42 percent of teens were enrolled in school during July 2016, compared to only 10 percent enrolled in July 1985.

  In the case of teens, spending more time in school and school-like activities may be further separating them from the actual real world in which they previously came of age. As Business Insider reports: “Almost 60% of teens in 1979 had a job, compared to 34% in 2015.” Spending more time in the contrived reality of forced schooling and less time in authentic, multi-age, productive communities may be taking its toll on today’s youth.

  Compulsory Mass Schooling Is Hurting Our Kids

  New findings from researchers at Vanderbilt University show a disturbing correlation between time in school and suicidal thoughts and attempts by young people, which have been increasing over the past decade. Whereas most adults see suicide spikes in July and August, most kids see suicide dips in summer. Children’s suicidal tendencies appear strongest during the school year.

  Boston College psychology professor Dr. Peter Gray believes that increasingly oppressive schooling is leading to serious psychological damage in some children. He writes on his blog at Psychology Today:

  Children now often spend more time at school and at homework than their parents spend at their full-time jobs, and the work of schooling is often more burdensome and stress-inducing than that of a typical adult job. A century ago we came to the conclusion that full-time child labor was child abuse, so we outlawed it; but now school is the equivalent of full-time child labor. The increased time, tedium, and stress of schooling is bringing many kids to the breaking point or beyond, and more and more people are becoming aware of that. It can no longer be believed that schooling is a benign experience for children. The evidence that it induces pathology is overwhelming.”

  Recent school shootings may be extreme examples of this rising school-induced pathology.

  Instead of overreacting, parents who decide to remove their children from school to homeschool them may be acknowledging the disconnect between the inherent coercion of compulsory mass schooling and the freedom to live in the genuine world around us. Rather than sheltering their children, parents who select the homeschooling option may be endeavoring to widen their child’s community, broaden their experiences, and restore their emotional well-being.

  Former New York State Teacher of the Year, John Taylor Gatto, writes in his book Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling about his growing disillusionment with mass schooling:

  I began to realize that the bells and the confinement, the crazy sequences, the age-segregation, the lack of privacy, the constant surveillance, and all the rest of the national curriculum of schooling were designed exactly as if someone had set out to prevent children from learning how to think and act, to coax them into addiction and dependent behavior.”

  Parents who remove their children from the confines of the conventional classroom are not running away from reality. They are running towards it.

  

• Signs From The Peak: Carlyle Group's Rubenstein Admits "Never Been Easier" To Raise Money

  In the latest indication of just how much money is sloshing around the global financial system after nine years of unceasing central bank asset purchases, Carlyle Group co-founder David Rubenstein admits that it’s “never been easier” to raise money.

  In an interview with Bloomberg News, Rubenstein said he’s seeing more money flowing into private equity right now than at any point during his three-decade career, even as the facile “global synchronous recovery” narrative is unraveling.

  

  He added that raising money is “one of the biggest trends” in asset management, he said. Of course, when investors are handing out money to anybody with a CFA, that’s a clear warning to be careful.

  The private equity industry brought in $453 billion globally in 2017, according to Preqin data cited by Bloomberg. And that sum is expected to climb as higher yields push investors to look for better returns.

  Carlyle alone is purportedly on track to meet a four-year fundraising goal of $100 billion by the end of 2019, Rubenstein said. He expects to raise $25 billion this year, following $43.3 billion raised in 2017.

  “When you take a look at what the biggest trends are right now, number one: There is a lot of money that’s being raised,” Rubenstein said at a conference hosted by the Investment Company Institute in Washington Tuesday.

  “It’s easier to raise money than anytime I’ve been in the business over the past 30 years or so.”

  Of course, nobody can say with certainty where exactly we are in the business cycle (for all we know, we could be in the middle of the longest expansion on record, or the recession could be just around the corner). But not everybody shares Rubenstein’s optimism. Bank of America’s Michael Hartnett said in his latest report that we are now “so long in the vermouth” that the late-cycle is getting “tipsy”.

  And when growth falters, there isn’t much the Fed will be able to do. As the chart shows, we’ve reached peak policy stimulus as the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest level in a decade.

  

  And the liquidity supernova that has kept asset prices inflated is due to disappear as central banks start reducing their asset purchases.

  

  But Rubenstein’s firm likely stands to benefit in either case. If a recession does arrive in 2019, something that many investors, including Jeffrey Gundlach, fear could happen, interest rates would likely be wrestled lower again, bolstering the appeal of private equity and other investment strategies that can offer better returns.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• What Backlash? Facebook Usage Jumped After Cambridge Analytica Scandal

  Not unlike the stock itself, it looks like Facebook users “bought the dip” on using the social media platform after the Cambridge Analytica scandal: the backlash that we were warned about for Facebook as a result of this scandal never happened.

  In fact, Facebook usage numbers were actually higher for April 2018 – the month that the scandal had the most impact and news coverage. 

  As Business Insider reported, the movement for consumers to delete their Facebook accounts simply never took hold. Data provided by Goldman Sachs stated that Facebook‘s unique users on mobile devices were actually up 7% in April 2018, at the same time that the scandal was in its heyday.:

  Facebook weathered the worst of the storm and usage actually increased, according to a client note from Goldman Sachs, citing ComScore figures. In other words, the #deleteFacebook backlash never really arrived.

  Goldman Sachs said Facebook’s US unique users on mobile rose 7% year-on-year to 188.6 million in April, when the scandal was biting hard. Time spent on Facebook also went up. The graph below says it all.

  

  As you can see above, the company actually wound up gaining usage according these newly released figures. This seems to prove that the cash generating social media giant made its way through “its biggest crisis” without even ruffling its feathers.

  The company had announced also that it was purging more than 583 million fake accounts related to “Russian interference” recently, but Deutsche Bank noted that this purge also didn’t seem to have an effect on audience reach:

  And there’s more good news for Facebook. Deutsche Bank said its advertising system checks had shown that the purge of 583 million fake accounts following Russian interference in the US election has had “little to no impact on audience reach.” It produced a graph revealing that ad targeting across all demos has actually grown.

  “We note that this data represents audience reach across properties, not strictly tied to core Facebook, but we suspect they are cleaning up fake accounts across the board and view this as a broad indication that ad reach across Facebook continues to grow,” Deutsche Bank said.

  

  As you may recall, after the Cambridge Analytical scandal broke, there was no shortage of analysts and pundits on television, including Tesla uber-bull Ross Gerber, who exclaimed on CNBC that “it’s all over”, “its going to be much worse than you’re seeing” and that Facebook “had allowed their platform to be a gutter for so many evil things”. 

  “Trust me, this is just the tip of the iceberg here,” he told CNBC on the first day Facebook was down about 7%.  

  

  Business Insider continued, echoing that “other research” showing trust in Facebook had been lost has ultimately been proven inaccurate, at least as it relates to both the stock and Facebook overall usage:

  The findings, coupled with a full recovery in Facebook’s share price, completely undercut other research, which suggested that people’s trust in Facebook has nosedived since mid-March, when whistleblower Christopher Wylie first helped reveal that 87 million users had their data compromised by Cambridge Analytica.

  As companies that generate $27 billion plus in operating cash per annum will tend to do, Facebook shelled out to launch a full court press PR campaign and went on the defensive, running apology videos on national television alongside of other disgraced companies, like Wells Fargo, doing the same. It worked. As a result, Facebook’s share price recovered in little time. Since then, the stock had dipped to near the $150 level but has promptly made its way back up to “pre-crisis levels” near $185 again, where it is today.

  

  The Business Insider article notes that this should give Zuckerberg momentum during his upcoming testimony with EU lawmakers, which will take place next week:

  The figures will give Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg confidence as he prepares for a crunch week, in which he will be grilled by top EU lawmakers. He will be questioned on privacy, fake news, and regulation by European Parliament’s political leaders.

  But then Zuckerberg has already suggested that Facebook has seen little impact from Cambridge Analytica in terms of user engagement. He told Congress an immaterial number of users deleted their accounts as a result of the scandal.

  We’re sure this “grilling” won’t have any tangible effect on Facebook going forward, similar to the way Zuckerberg’s testimony in the U.S. had no effect. There were some analysts who accurately prognosticated that his congressional testimony would do very little, as most congressional testimony tends to not produce any results and is simply a forum for political grandstanding.

  In the meantime, Cambridge Analytica got the worst of the scandal – and recently filed for bankruptcy, as was reported 5 days ago by Bloomberg:

  Cambridge Analytica, overwhelmed by a scandal over how it harvested data from Facebook to influence the last U.S. election, filed for bankruptcy in New York.

  The U.K.-based political consulting firm, which had already said it would cease operations and wind down in its home country, listed liabilities of $1 million to $10 million. The Chapter 7 petition to liquidate U.S. affiliates — including SCL Elections Ltd., and SCL USA Inc. and SCL Social Ltd. — was signed by board members Rebekah Mercer and Jennifer Mercer, daughters of former New York hedge fund manager Robert Mercer whose family backed Donald Trump presidential campaign and helped reshape American conservative politics.

   

  

  For the time being, Mark Zuckerberg looks to continue being “the golden child” – escaping what has arguably been his most prominent scandal to date with little to no repercussions. This should help keep his schedule wide open so that he can continue to prepare for his presidential bid.

  

• The Emerging China-Iran-Pakistan Alliance Is Directed Decidedly Against The United States

  Authored by Lawrence Sellin, op-ed via The Daily Caller,

  In a January 10, 2018 Daily Caller article titled “China May Have Just Brokered An Iran-Pakistan Accommodation,” I outlined the extensive diplomatic and military initiatives underway in the past year to foster reconciliation between Iran and Pakistan, orchestrated behind the scenes by China.

  

  That strategy supports the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China’s blueprint for global hegemony. It is a development plan, a program of infrastructure projects and a network of commercial agreements designed to link the world directly to the Chinese economy through inter-connected land-based and maritime routes.

  As French Asia expert, Nadége Rolland noted, BRI is soft power projection with an underlying hard power component, a comprehensive China-centered economic, financial and geopolitical web with far-reaching, cascading consequences affecting American national interests. It is not just resource acquisition or utilization of China’s industrial over-capacity, but projects specifically designed to ensure economic and, in parallel, military dominance.

  As China expands commercially, the Chinese military, in particular its navy, will advance concomitantly to protect China’s growing economic empire, as did the British in an earlier era. Chinese intent is to gain access to a number of harbors and airports to create a chain of mutually-supporting military facilities.

  China’s plans to expand its naval footprint in Pakistan have accompanied signs  of increasing military cooperation between Tehran and Beijing over the last several years.

  In June 2017, Iranian warships joined a Chinese naval flotilla conducting exercises in the Persian Gulf. The Chinese ships also made an official visit to the Iranian port city of Bandar Abbas after having earlier docked in Karachi, Pakistan. One Chinese military affairs expert, speaking at the time, said China was poised to increase its military presence in the Middle East to support BRI and would involve itself more in the affairs of the region.

  Chinese efforts towards Iran-Pakistan cooperation have also borne fruit. In recent months, there has been a flurry of agreements in trade, defense, weapons development, counter-terrorism, banking, train service, parliamentary cooperation and — most recently — art and literature.

  Secret security-related discussions among the Chinese, Pakistanis and Iranians military officials have been ongoing for at least a year. Early this March, for example, sources reported a nighttime meeting held at the Iran-Pakistan border near the strategic Pakistani port of Gwadar.

  A major stimulus for those discussions has been the planned construction of a Chinese naval base on Pakistan’s Jiwani peninsula, immediately west of Gwadar near the Iranian border, a report confirmed here and here. It is not just its proximity to Iran, but that the Iranian navy is building one of its most sophisticated intelligence collection facilities right across the Jiwani Bay in Pasabandar, Iran. Combined, they would have enormous strategic significance.

  A China-Iran-Pakistan alliance would have sweeping ramifications for U.S. foreign policy. For starters, it would render our current efforts in Afghanistan untenable, most likely provoking an American exit under conditions dictated by the Chinese and Pakistanis. It would initiate the beginning of an anti-access, area denial strategy against the U.S. Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea region, similar to what the Chinese have attempted to implement against the U.S. Pacific Fleet in the South China Sea. Even the mere contemplation of such an alliance could give the Iranians considerable leverage in the face of American sanctions.

  Nevertheless, China’s expansion will inevitably expose geopolitical vulnerabilities, which can be employed to thwart its plan for regional domination.

  Strategic disruption of Chinese ambitions would involve traditional diplomatic dexterity and power projection capabilities of containment policy, coupled with covert measures exploiting nation-state conflicts, the Sunni-Shia divide, ethnic separatism and the splits among Islamic extremist groups — all features present in the region.

  

• Beijing Warns New Stealth Fighters Will Conduct Patrols In Taiwan's Airspace

  Beijing has once again hinted that its new J-20 stealth fighter jets will conduct patrols around, or above, Taiwan’s airspace to pressure the island nation to reunify with China.

  

  The warning message recently announced by Wang Mingliang, a Chinese military strategist with the China National Defense University during special programming on China Central Television program about Taiwan.

  “J-20s can come and go at will above Taiwan,” said Mingliang, adding that Taiwan was frightened about “precision strikes on the leadership or key targets.”

  Mingliang said that the fifth-generation stealth jet is designed to pierce through Taiwan’s air defense identification zone and launch either reconnaissance or assault missions on the island. The military strategist said the stealth fighter could easily take on the “antiquated” F-16s and Mirage 2000s, which are still the backbone of Taiwan’s air defense. In other words, the Chinese strategist said the stealth fighters would reign supreme in any combat operations or dogfight above or around Taiwan.

  

  China Central Television report shows an inside view of a J-20’s cockpit. (Source: CCTV)

  Earlier this month, a similar threat was echoed by Zhou Chenming, another Chinese military strategist, who said sea training exercises indicated that the stealth fighters would be sent to Taiwan and the heavily disputed regions of the South China Sea.

  

  “The J-20 drill is another warning message because it went unseen by the Taiwanese air force and these stealth fighters are capable of a precision strike on the leadership,” Chenming said. “The PLA air force jets will enter the Taiwan [air defence identification zone] sooner or later.”

  Beijing’s “goal is reunification with Taiwan” and “this is just one piece,” Dan Blumenthal, the director of Asian Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, told Business Insider, adding that cyber, sea, and political warfare are three domains that Beijing would remain dominant in the attempt to reunify Taiwan with the mainland.

  Business Insider points out that Taiwan has a strategy to counter Beijing’s stealth fighters: new mobile passive radars and new active radars for their F-16Vs, according to Taipei Times. Taiwan is beefing up its electronic warfare units and advanced missiles, in the hopes to deter Beijing from violating its airspace with stealth fighters.

  “It’s exactly what they should be doing,” Blumenthal said. “Just like any country would, they’re going to try to chase [the J-20s] away,” adding that Taiwan’s plan would be effective but that the country still wouldn’t be able to defend its airspace as well as major powers such as the US.

  “Taiwan could probably use all sorts of help,” Blumenthal added.

  Given that J-20 production is still a small number, it is hard to estimate how many stealth fighters Beijing will have for the next war patrol over Taiwan’s airspace. One thing is certain, the probability of a shooting war between China and Taiwan is growing by the week. As for now, stay tuned for future headlines of J-20s penetrating Taiwan’s airspace…China wants its island back.

  

• More Police State Surveillance: Courtesy Of The Pentagon

  Authored by Jeremiah Johnson (Nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces) via SHTFplan.com,

  There was an article by Joseph Marks of Nextgov published on 5/16/18 that was neither picked up by the larger news networks nor kept in view for long. The article is entitled The Pentagon Has a Big Plan to Solve Identity Verification in Two Years, and here is a portion of it:

  The Defense Department is funding a project that officials say could revolutionize the way companies, federal agencies and the military itself verify that people are who they say they are and it could be available in most commercial smartphones within two years. The technology, which will be embedded in smartphones’ hardware, will analyze a variety of identifiers that are unique to an individual, such as the hand pressure and wrist tension when the person holds a smartphone and the person’s peculiar gait while walking, said Steve Wallace, technical director at the Defense Information Systems Agency. 

  Organizations that use the tool can combine those identifiers to give the phone holder a “risk score,” Wallace said.

  If the risk score is low enough, the organization can presume the person is who she says she is and grant her access to sensitive files on the phone or on a connected computer or grant her access to a secure facility. If the score’s too high, she’ll be locked out.

  Amazing. The Pentagon’s technical director omitted much in his quest to act as if such actions are “government streamlining” and occurring matter-of-factly, in the interests of securing information for the government and its contractors.

  

  The problem: if it’s in the software of all the commercial smartphones (the ones bought in the stores), that biometric data will be transmitted by all the phones, not just the contractors to the federal government.

  We also know where this is heading. The government will back-door everyone’s cell phones and make tracking and surveillance even more ubiquitous than it is now, and that’s saying something. Read this portion:

  Another identifier that will likely be built into the chips is a GPS tracker that will store encrypted information about a person’s movements, Wallace said. The verification tool would analyze historical information about a person’s locations and major, recent anomalies would raise the person’s risk score.  The tool would be separate from the GPS function used by mapping and exercise apps, he said. The tool does not include biometric information, such as a thumbprint or eye scans at this point, Wallace said, because DISA judged that existing commercial applications of biometric information are too easy to spoof.

  So, they’re telling us up front. GPS tracking will be used to monitor… and store… your movements… deciding if you’re a “risk” by where you go. “Anomalies,” the actions are termed, that “would raise the person’s risk score.”

  Anomalous (an anomaly) is defined as something “deviating from a general rule; abnormal,” (Webster). Such a subjective assessment could literally be applied for anything outside of normative and fostered “Fisher-Price” conduct: Awake at 7am, breakfast at 8am, work by 9am, lunch 12-1pm, work until 5pm, drive to obtain gas/grocery store/bank, and then home, dinner at 6pm, tv 7-9pm, and go to sleep…repeat ad nauseum.

  Anything outside of that basic, predictable “matrix” can be listed as an anomaly to increase your risk-score. This out of the Pentagon, mind you: the embodiment of the Military Industrial Complex warned about by Eisenhower (who ironically played a big part in its creation). It is not unpredictable: the militarization of the police departments, the sprouting of the fusion centers (with PO box addresses and not physical addresses, mind you), the “green light” from the FCC or a blind eye toward “Oath” (the company that gobbled up Yahoo, and forces you to allow it to read your e-mails and access your bank accounts), and other giants such as Google.

  The Pentagon used to handle military matters, but the NDAA initiated by Bush Jr. and perfected under Obama redefines the “battlefield” as being the whole world (including the domestic, continental United States). The “War on Terrorism” was created to “justify” military actions against the citizens of the United States, hence to take measures heretofore forbidden under Constitutional law. In the interests of national security, the “protectors” have become the jailers…the police state that is being crafted by the day as the Statists concurrently work on removing all our rights as enumerated under the Constitution. The war is being conducted by the State against the citizens, the new “enemy” against the conformity of globalism and the totalitarian dictatorship that will eventually be complete in the United States.

  

• Mysterious Booms Across Pennsylvania Triggers FBI Investigation

  For the past month, residents in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, have been reporting mysterious booms overnight. However, nobody — not even local authorities — can explain.

  Now, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has arrived in Upper Bucks and Lehigh Counties to investigate the nighttime explosions. Springfield Township police say that multiple earth-shaking booms occurred as recent as 4 a.m. on Tuesday, according to KYW-TV.

  

  While federal authorities are circling the region in search of the source, everyone is puzzled at what is causing the explosions.

  “I thought that somebody was making a tunnel or space junk fell out of the sky,” said Susan Crompton, who lives in Haycock Township.

  “From poachers, gunfire, to explosions to a sonic boom,” said Jerry Hertz of the mysterious sound.

  KYW-TV said there had been no shortage of theories among residents, but still, no clear answer of the cause.

  “It’s a rumble, it actually like rumbles the ground like an earthquake would happen but with a loud like boom,” Crompton added.

  “I’ve been in the military, I’ve got experience with explosives, I was a Navy diver and was definitely not a gunshot,” Hertz said.

  Mysterious Booms, House-Rattling Sounds In Pennsylvania Under Investigation By FBI

  Since early April, local law enforcement agencies have noticed that all reported booms have taken place between the 2 a.m. and 4:30 a.m.

  Crompton and her daughter have heard the booms twice, indicating that it felt like an explosion, as it shook her house.

  “It is imperative that we get the information as soon as possible in order to track these events,” said police.

  What is even more perplexing, is that another explosion was reported on early Sunday morning in Nockamixon Township. Resident Nick Zangli told the Bucks County Herald “it was one hell of an explosion,” who lives down the street from a 4-foot wide by 1-foot deep cavity, which he alleges opened up after the blast.

  Zangli said there was “nothing in the hole, which was filled with water because of heavy rain over the weekend.” Law enforcement came out Monday to investigate the sinkhole but did not respond to any media requests.

  Mysterious booms are not just limited to Pennsylvania. There are local media reports from all across America of booms rocking towns from coast to coast. While officials have zero answers to provide their citizens, it is hard to prepare for an event if it is not yet identifiable. Mother nature is knocking and something does not seem right. Have you prepared? 

  

• Visualizing Trump's Trade Flip-Flops On Actual Shipping Routes

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

  The bulk carrier RB Eden changed course twice thanks to Trump’s trade reversals. A third time may be in the works.

  

  The Voyage of the RB Eden tracks Trump’s trade policy reversals with China.

  The bulk carrier RB Eden was loaded with the grain at Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.’s terminal in Corpus Christi, Texas, and was initially bound for Shanghai. When China announced a 179 percent tariff on imports of sorghum in mid-April, it performed a U-turn in the Indian Ocean, according to vessel data tracked by Bloomberg, and sailed back around southern Africa toward Europe.

  The vessel’s destination was changed to Cartagena, Spain, but according to the data, it never docked. On May 18, China scrappedits anti-dumping and anti-subsidy probe into sorghum. The same day, the RB Eden began sailing back toward the Atlantic. It’s currently bound for Singapore.

  Reversal

  

  Saga of the RB Eden

  In response to Trump’s sanctions on Chinese telecom giant ZTE, China put huge tariffs on US agricultural goods.

  That’s what caused the RB Eden to turn the first time.

  Then, just as the RB Eden nearly reached dock in Spain, Trump removed sanctions on ZTE and in turn, China removed tariffs on agricultural goods.

  The RB Eden turned around and is headed back to Asia.

  Will the RB Eden make it this time?

  It’s rather questionable. Trump has again reversed course on China.

  Under pressure from Congress, Trump reversed course on ZTE sanctions yesterday, after declaring trade success on Sunday.

  If China responds with agricultural tariffs again, the RB Eden will not make it to port in China.

  Neither Here Nor There

  I made a fitting comment yesterday, unaware of the saga of the RB Eden.

  “Trump’s trade policy is like a page from French president Emmanuel Macron. It’s neither here nor there, nor anywhere.“

  

• Nobel Prize On The Rocks: North Korea Calls Pence A "Political Dummy", Threatens To Call Off Summit

  Trump’s Nobel Peace Prize is suddenly in jeopardy.

  Just a few weeks after the US president seemed on the verge of a historic diplomatic breakthrough by getting North Korea to open its borders to the world and end its nuclear program, progress appears to have taken a sharp U-turn, and after several rounds of increasingly harsher verbal outbursts, a senior North Korean official called VP Mike Pence a “political dummy”, repeated a threat to call off the planned summit with President Donald Trump and in a flashback to Pongyang’s ICBM launch days, warned that Pyongyang could “make the U.S. taste an appalling tragedy it has neither experienced nor even imagined.”

  As the WSJ reports, “in its most direct language aimed at Washington following a recent rapprochement between the two countries, Choe Son Hui, the North’s vice minister of foreign affairs, said if the June 12 talks were called off, the U.S. could instead face off with North Korea in a “nuclear-to-nuclear showdown.“

  In other words, the US is almost back to square one in dealing with Kim.

  

  In the past few weeks, tensions between North Korea and the United States have once again been rising after Korea refused to meet the United States’ demand of denuclearization, while the reason why Choe called Mike Pence a “political dummy” is in refernce to his Fox News interview earlier this week in which the VP reiterated the administrataion’s insistence on denuclearization for North Korea.

  She also criticized the vice president for bringing up Libya in the context of denuclearization—a sensitive subject for North Korea, after Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown and killed in 2011, eight years after giving up Libya’s nuclear weapons. Mr. Pence said the Libya model would only come about if North Korea failed to denuclearize.

  Choe’s statement followed “strongly worded statements” last week from other senior North Korean officials aimed at U.S. national security adviser John Bolton and at the South Korean government of Moon Jae-in, who has pushed for dialogue with Pyongyang to avoid a nuclear standoff. The latest outburst also follows yesterday’s meeting at the White House between Trump and Moon, who as the WSJ puts it “have both staked their hopes—and their credibility” on a successful U.S.-North Korea summit, which has been planned for June 12 in Singapore.

  However, that summit is looking increasingly precarious, especially after a series of ominously worded North Korean statements: Last week, Pyongyang warned the U.S. and South Korea against conducting joint air force drills, and called on Seoul to muzzle defectors who were questioning the North’s motives in seeking detente. The North also canceled previously scheduled talks with Seoul after the US refused to call off joiont US-South Korean military drills in the region. Then last ago, a senior North Korean official said that Pyongyang wasn’t interested in a summit with the U.S. focused solely on denuclearization and accused Washington of trying to “impose on our dignified state the destiny of Libya or Iraq.”

  Trump said in his meeting with Moon on Tuesday that he would call off his summit with Kim if the conditions didn’t work out, and put the odds of it continuing as planned at about 50-50.

  “I don’t want to waste a lot of time, and I’m sure he doesn’t want to waste a lot of time. So there’s a very substantial chance that it won’t work out. And that’s OK,” Mr. Trump said.

  Still, Trump had expressed hope that Mr. Kim was sincere about wanting to make a big change in policy: “He has a chance to do something that maybe has never been done before,” Mr. Trump said. “If you look 25 years into the future—50 years into the future—he will be able to look back and be very proud of what he did for North Korea, and actually for the world.”

  Meanwhiole, Pompeo who secretly flew to Pyongyang over Easter to meet with Kim and break the ice between the two nations, remained adamant that denuclearization must be part of any deal with North Korea in some capacity despite the country’s refusal to do so. The U.S. has maintained that they will keep military pressure on North Korea until denuclearization is achieved.

  So far North Korea does not appear will to make any concessions.

  In her Thursday statement published by KCNA, Choe took issue with Pence’s Fox News interview in which he suggested that the North sought the summit meeting with Trump; she called Pence’s words “unbridled and impudent,” and said that “Pence should have seriously considered the terrible consequences of his words.”

  “As a person involved in the U.S. affairs, I cannot suppress my surprise at such ignorant and stupid remarks gushing out from the mouth of the U.S. vice president,” she said and added that if the U.S. continues to offend the North’s “goodwill,” she would tell leader Kim Jong Un to reconsider the Singapore summit with the U.S.

  “It is the U.S. who has asked for dialogue, but now it is misleading the public opinion as if we have invited them to sit with us,” Ms. Choe said. “We will neither beg the U.S. for dialogue nor take the trouble to persuade them if they do not want to sit together with us.”

  And so, with just over three weeks left until the highly anticipated meeting between the two nations, Trump will have to decide whether it will back off its denuclearization demand or take a more aggressive approach with North Korea.  If it is the latter, the US will likely end up using the “Libya model”, and instead of winning the Nobel prize, Trump will instead find himself greenlighting a decapitation strike, and potentially launching a new global conflict.

  

• US Will Blow $700 Billion On Obamacare Subsidies In 2018

  While Democrats have continuously griped about how Republican measures to slowly dismantle the Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Obamacare) will sink their chances of cementing control of Congress in this year’s midterm elections, the US government is now estimating that it will spend $700 billion on subsidies this year to help provide Americans under the age of 65 with health insurance through their jobs or in government-sponsored health programs, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

  

  The subsidies come from four main categories:

  Roughly $300 billion is federal spending on programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which typically help insure low-income people.

  Almost as big are the tax write-offs that employers take for providing coverage to their workers.

  Medicare-eligible people, such as the disabled, account for $82 billion.

  Subsidies for Obamacare and for other individual coverage are the smallest segment, at $55 billion.

  Or, as the chart below shows, a plurality of spending goes to Medicaid + CHIP:

  

  While Obamacare initially added tens of millions of Americans to the rolls of the insured, 29 million people will likely go without health coverage for an average of at least one month this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

  

  According to Bloomberg, the subsidies in the Affordable Care Act are designed to insulate people from the deleterious impact of premium hikes. The CBO forecast that premiums for mid-range plans will hike by 15% by 2019, and by about 7% annually through 2028.

  Several rule changes enacted by the Trump administration have impacted the program more broadly. The non-payment of those subsidies, less enforcement of a rule requiring people to have insurance and limited competition caused insurers to raise their premiums by about 34 percent in 2018, compared to 2017.

  That increased the cost of the subsidies to the federal government, according to the CBO.

  Thirty-five million Americans could lack coverage by 2028 as rising premiums and the elimination of the individual mandate drive more people to drop coverage.

  

• Sharyl Attkisson: 8 Signs Pointing To A Counter-Intel Op Deployed Against Trump

  Authored by Sharyl Attkisson, op-ed via The Hill,

  It may be true that President Trump illegally conspired with Russia and was so good at covering it up he’s managed to outwit our best intel and media minds who’ve searched for irrefutable evidence for two years. (We still await special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings.)

  But there’s a growing appearance of alleged wrongdoing equally as insidious, if not more so, because it implies widespread misuse of America’s intelligence and law enforcement apparatus.

  

  Here are eight signs pointing to a counterintelligence operation deployed against Trump for political reasons.

  1. Code name

  The operation reportedly had at least one code name that was leaked to The New York Times: “Crossfire Hurricane.”

  2. Wiretap fever

  Secret surveillance was conducted on no fewer than seven Trump associates: chief strategist Stephen Bannon; lawyer Michael Cohen; national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn; adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner; campaign chairman Paul Manafort; and campaign foreign policy advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.

  The FBI reportedly applied for a secret warrant in June 2016 to monitor Manafort, Page, Papadopoulos and Flynn. If true, it means the FBI targeted Flynn six months before his much-debated conversation with Russia’s ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

  The FBI applied four times to wiretap Page after he became a Trump campaign adviser starting in July 2016. Page’s office is connected to Trump Tower and he reports having spent “many hours in Trump Tower.”

  CNN reported that Manafort was wiretapped before and after the election “including during a period when Manafort was known to talk to President Trump.” Manafort reportedly has a residence in Trump Tower.

  Electronic surveillance was used to listen in on three Trump transition officials in Trump Tower — Flynn, Bannon and Kushner — as they met in an official capacity with the United Arab Emirates’ crown prince.

  The FBI also reportedly wiretapped Flynn’s phone conversation with Kislyak on Dec. 31, 2016, as part of “routine surveillance” of Kislyak.

  NBC recently reported that Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney, was wiretapped. NBC later corrected the story, saying Cohen was the subject of a “pen register” used to monitor phone numbers and, possibly, internet communications.

  3. National security letters

  Another controversial tool reportedly used by the FBI to obtain phone records and other documents in the investigation were national security letters, which bypass judicial approval.

  Improper use of such letters has been an ongoing theme at the FBI. Reviews by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General found widespread misuse under Mueller — who was then FBI director — and said officials failed to report instances of abuses as required.

  4. Unmasking

  “Unmasking” — identifying protected names of Americans captured by government surveillance — was frequently deployed by at least four top Obama officials who have subsequently spoken out against President Trump: James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence; Samantha Power, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations; Susan Rice, former national security adviser; Sally Yates, former deputy attorney general.

  Names of Americans caught communicating with monitored foreign targets must be “masked,” or hidden within government agencies, so the names cannot be misused or shared. 

  However, it’s been revealed that Power made near-daily unmasking requests in 2016.

  Prior to that revelation, Clapper claimed ignorance. When asked if he knew of unmasking requests by any ambassador, including Power, he testified: “I don’t know. Maybe it’s ringing a vague bell but I’m not — I could not answer with any confidence.”

  Rice admitted to asking for unmasked names of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports after initially claiming no knowledge of any such thing.

  Clapper also admitted to requesting the unmasking of “Mr. Trump, his associates or any members of Congress.” Clapper and Yates admitted they also personally reviewed unmasked documents and shared unmasked material with other officials.

  5. Changing the rules

  On Dec. 15, 2016 — the same day the government listened in on Trump officials at Trump Tower — Rice reportedly unmasked the names of Bannon, Kushner and Flynn. And Clapper made a new rule allowing the National Security Agency to widely disseminate surveillance material within the government without the normal privacy protections.

  6. Media strategy

  Former CIA Director John Brennan and Clapper, two of the most integral intel officials in this ongoing controversy, have joined national news organizations where they have regular opportunities to shape the news narrative — including on the very issues under investigation.

  Clapper reportedly secretly leaked salacious political opposition research against Trump to CNN in fall 2017 and later was hired as a CNN political analyst. In February, Brennan was hired as a paid analyst for MSNBC.

  7. Leaks

  There’s been a steady and apparently orchestrated campaign of leaks — some true, some false, but nearly all of them damaging to President Trump’s interests.

  A few of the notable leaks include word that Flynn was wiretapped, the anti-Trump “Steele dossier” of political opposition research, then-FBI Director James Comey briefing Trump on it, private Comey conversations with Trump, Comey’s memos recording those conversations and criticizing Trump, the subpoena of Trump’s personal bank records (which proved false) and Flynn planning to testify against Trump (which also proved to be false).

  8. Friends, informants and snoops

  The FBI reportedly used one-time CIA operative Stefan Halper in 2016 as an informant to spy on Trump officials. 

  Another player is Comey friend Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor, who leaked Comey’s memos against Trump to The New York Times after Comey was fired. We later learned that Richman actually worked for the FBI under a status called “Special Government Employee.”

  The FBI used former reporter Glenn Simpson, his political opposition research firm Fusion GPS, and ex-British spy Christopher Steele to compile allegations against Trump, largely from Russian sources, which were distributed to the press and used as part of wiretap applications.

  *  *  *

  These eight features of a counterintelligence operation are only the pieces we know.

  

  It can be assumed there’s much we don’t yet know. And it may help explain why there’s so much material that the Department of Justice hasn’t easily handed over to congressional investigators.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• 100s Of White South African Farmers Apply To Australia For Humanitarian Rescue

  Back in February, after literally years of scandal, abuse, and incompetence, South Africa’s president Jacob Zuma was finally forced to resign last week, and new President, Cyril Ramaphosa, was supposed to represent a positive, new chapter for South Africa.

  However, as Simon Black wrote at the time, Ramaphosa addressed the nation’s parliament in Cape Town and made clear that his priority is to heal the divisions and injustice of the past, going all the way back to the original European colonists in the 1600s taking land from the indigenous tribes.

  

  Ramaphosa called this “original sin”, and stated that he wants to see “the return of the land to the people from whom it was taken… to heal the divisions of the past.”

  How does he plan on doing that?

  Confiscation. Specifically– confiscation without compensation.

  “The expropriation of land without compensation is envisaged as one of the measures that we will use to accelerate redistribution of land to black South Africans.”

  Ramaphosa minced no words: he’s talking about taking land from white farmers and giving it to black South Africans.

  And as we noted at the time, the problem is – a 2017 government audit found white people owned 72 per cent of farmland in South Africa. According to the 2011 census, there are about 4.6 million white people in South Africa, accounting for 8.9 per cent of the population.

  

  And as Australia’s News.com reported, the racially charged issue of land rights and farm murders has been the subject of fierce debate in the country and internationally.

  According to civil rights group Afriforum, which represents around 200,000 white farmers largely from the Afrikaner minority, 82 people were killed in a record 423 attacks on farms last year. In 2018 so far, there have already been 109 attacks and more than 15 murders.

  Afriforum says it is forced to compile its own numbers because the South African government — which denies the attacks are racially motivated or that white farmers are killed in disproportionate numbers — stopped releasing farm murder statistics in 2008.

  “Our rural areas are trapped in a crime war,” Afriforum head of safety Ian Cameron said in a statement, adding that torture with irons, blowtorches, melted plastic and boiling water often continued for hours during the attacks.

  “Although the South African government denies that a violence crisis is staring rural areas in the face, the numbers prove that excessive violence plague these areas. Government cannot deny the facts — our people are being mowed down.”

  Which is why, earlier this month, Australian Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton floated the idea of fast-tracked humanitarian visas for white South African farmers, saying they faced “horrific circumstances” and needed help from a “civilised country.”

  “We’re looking at ways we can help people to migrate to Australia if they’re finding themselves in that situation.”

  And despite the facts of savage attacks on white farmers, this statement outraged South Africa’s government who claimed “the threat did not exist” and accused Mr Dutton of being an “out and out racist.”

  This was followed just a few weeks later by perhaps the most Orwellian statement yet, as the head of South Africa’s radical Marxist opposition party – who declared his party was “cutting the throat of whiteness” – called Australia a “racist country” for offering fleeing white farmers a refuge.

  

  Malema, who was convicted of hate speech in 2011 for singing the apartheid-era revolutionary song Shoot the Boer, Kill the Farmer and in 2016 told supporters he was “not calling for the slaughter of white people‚ at least for now”, said farmers should “leave quietly”.

  “We’re too busy,” he said. “Don’t make noise, because you will irritate us. Go to Australia. It is only racists who went to Australia when Mandela got out of prison. It is only racists who went to Australia when 1994 came. It is the racists again who are going back to Australia.”

  But he said they would be “poor in Australia”. “They are rich here because they are exploiting black people. There is no black person to be exploited in Australia, they are going to be poor.

  “They will come back here with their tail between their legs. We will hire them because we will be the owners of their farms when they come back to South Africa. As to what we are going to do with the land, it’s our business, it’s none of your business.

  “We want Africa back. Africa belongs to our people.

  Last year, some 82 people were killed in a record 423 farm attacks, and there have been 109 attacks and more than 15 murders in 2018, Afriforum, a South African civil rights group reported in March.

  

  And so, after those threats from Malema and Ramaphosa – and on the back of Australia’s offer, RT reports this week that more than 200 farmers from South Africa have applied for humanitarian visas in Australia after allegedly suffering attacks for being white, according to the Australian Home Affairs Ministry.

  “The type of criteria they of course have to meet – or the key one – is evidence of persecution, so that’s exactly what we will be looking at,” Home Affairs Deputy Secretary Malisa Golightly said.

  Home Affairs said 89 refugee visa applications relating to 213 people had been received, although they did not specify their ethnicity or any other details.

  

  Finally, as a reminder, the actions that Malema and Ramaphosa are taking are exactly what Zimbabwe did.

  Seeking to correct similar colonial and Apartheid-era injustices in his country, Zimbabwe’s president Robert Mugabe initiated a land redistribution program in 1999-2000.

  Thousands of white-owned farms were confiscated by the government, and the farmers were forced out.

  Bear in mind that Zimbabwe used to be known as the breadbasket of southern Africa. Zimbabwe’s world-class farmers were major food exporters to the rest of the region.

  But within a few years of Mugabe’s land distribution, food production plummeted.

  Without its professional, experienced farmers, the nation went from being an agricultural export powerhouse to having to rely on handouts from the United Nations’ World Food Programme.

  Hyperinflation and a multi-decade depression followed.

  If there’s an economic model in the world that you DON’T want to follow, it’s Zimbabwe.

  And judging by the action in the Rand since this confiscation was announced, Zimbabwe is what they will get…

  

  

• Sweden Warns Every Single Household To Prep For War

  Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

  The government of Sweden has produced a 20-page pamphlet which they’ll be sending to each of the 4.8 million households in the country urging them to get prepared for…WAR.

  

  Although they haven’t been at war for over 200 years, for some reason, right now, they want their citizens to get prepped – and fast. This goes along with an article I wrote in January of 2018 when the government urged their people to be ready to cope “without help” for at least a week.

  Shortly before Christmas, the Swedish government quietly published a paper called “Resilience.” Initially, the requirement had been for people to be prepared for 3 days without help, but it seems like that was a baby step. The government itself wants to be prepared for a 3-month long civil emergency and they’re urging citizens to take responsibility, too.

  It really makes you wonder what is looming ahead, doesn’t it? (source)

  This, however, is a direct approach, with the preparedness instructions delivered to their doors.

  Here’s what the government of Sweden is recommending.

  The booklet, titled, If Crisis or War Comes, is an updated version of one distributed in the 1980s. It was compiled by the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) and references several potential crises that could occur, according to the Swedish media:

  • disruptions to IT systems

  • incidents occurring in the rest of the world

  • climate change

  •  increased tension in the Baltic region

  The brochure warns Swedes of things that every prepper knows. “In the event of a societal emergency, help will be provided first to those who need it most. The majority must be prepared to cope on their own for some time.” Here’s what Swedish website The Local has to say about the warnings.

  “Water, food and warmth” as well as an ability to obtain information from authorities are the most important things in such a scenario.

  The guide provides a checklist of foodstuffs and goods it’s useful to have at home just in case, ranging from basic vegetables to long-lasting oat or soy milk, tinned protein like sardines or boiled meat, and items for providing warmth, access to communications, and for storing water.

  The booklet also has a checklist to help Swedes be better prepared to cope with misleading information and influence operations, noting that “the best protection against false information and hostile propaganda is to critically appraise the source” by asking questions like “is this factual information or opinion?” and “who has put this out?”.

  “We all have a responsibility for our country’s safety and preparedness, so it’s important for everyone to also have knowledge on how we can contribute if something serious occurs,” MSB General Director Dan Eliasson said in a statement.

  “Sweden is safer than many other countries but threats exist.” (source)

  Supply checklists are included, with suggestions for stocking up on things like mineral water, wet wipes, and tinned hummus. There are directions to bomb shelters, as well as instructions for what to do if ATMs, cellphones or the internet stop working.

  

  Here’s the English version of the brochure, which can be downloaded. (It was published in 13 languages.)

  Sweden urged citizens to be prepared to defend their country.

  The preparedness brochure also reminds citizens of the possibility of conscription (the draft) for anyone between the ages of 16 and 70, because everyone has “duty to contribute to total defence.”

  

  The mention of propaganda is repeated in this section.

  “If Sweden is attacked by another country, we will never give up. All information to the effect that resistance is to cease is false.” (source)

  But speaking of propaganda, there’s no mention of the unchecked immigration that has turned parts of major cities into war zones. Is it possible that the war of which they’re warning could be a civil one?

  An influx of asylum seekers from the Middle East and Africa has strained the welfare system and the criminal justice system.

  The crime in Malmo and Stockholm has skyrocketed. You can read about it in these articles:

  • Violent crime in Sweden is soaring

  • Hand grenades and violence rattle Sweden’s middle class

  Violence against women has also increased dramatically.

  According to the Swedish Crime Survey, compared to 2015, attempted rape against girls 15 – 17 was up 46 percent in 2016.

  Rape of teens in that same date and age range is up 19 percent.

  Attempted rape of girls under 15 increased 16 percent; rape of young girls in that same age increased by 26 percent.

  Rapes against adult women increased by 7 percent…

  …The politically correct laws of Sweden mean that the perpetrators cannot be described to the public, including their ethnicity. The women of Sweden have had to change how they live or risk attack…

  …

  The fact that much of the crime is committed by migrants in a no-go zone is swept under the rug, which is pointed out in this article in Sputnik News (a Russian government-controlled news agency).

  • Sweden Refusing New Study of Migrant Crime Despite Alarming Figures From Norway

  (source)

  In the article quoted above, there are videos and quotes from police officers who are breaking their silence about the migrant crime wave.

  Could it be that the real enemies are already within Sweden? Whether their worry is the Russians, the refugees, or some other threat, one thing is certain.

  Sweden is getting ready for battle and we all need to pay attention.

  

• Trump Is Pushing For 10% Cut In Aluminum, Steel Imports From EU

  While the US-China trade talks have dominated headlines in the financial press this week, the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday published details from the Trump administration’s ongoing trade negotiations with the European Union, which increasingly look like they, too, have arrived at an impasse.

  According to WSJ, Trump is pushing the EU to reduce steel and aluminum exports to the US by about 10%, according to several high-ranking EU officials who have apparently chafed at the administration’s demands. Officials have gone so far as to declare the measures illegal under World Trade Organization rules.

  Negotiations are unfolding rapidly as the EU seeks to extend its temporary exemption from steel and aluminum tariffs that the Trump administration has said will expire June 1.

  

  The Trump proposal has offered two avenues for arriving at the US’s desired result. One is a quota fixed at 90% of US imports from the EU in 2017. The other would impose tariffs on a certain quota of imports with the aim of achieving the same 10% reduction, according to Poland’s Entrepreneurship and Technology Minister Jadwiga Emilewicz, who added that EU governments discussed the matter on Tuesday. However, the exact scope and details of the quotas have not yet been made clear.

  “We are under the impression that somehow they want to limit steel imports to the U.S.,” European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said of continuing negotiations with Washington before briefing EU governments.

  “Aluminum as well,” she said, without providing details.

  European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom has reportedly been in regular contact with Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross ever since the US surprised the world by announcing its steel and aluminum tariffs back in March. Still, despite their close cooperation, Malmstrom said that deciphering Trump’s wants and needs has been by far the most frustrating aspect of the negotiations.

  * * *

  When it comes to setting a benchmark for their discussions with Trump, European countries have interpreted South Korea’s trade concessions as a cautionary tale. Seoul agreed to cap its US steel exports at 70% of their average from the past three years – a decision that created daunting problems for Korean steelmakers.

  Seoul agreed to cap its U.S. steel exports at 70% of the average export total over the past three years. That created a daunting task for South Korean steelmakers, the third-largest supplier to the U.S., which filled their annual quota in nine out of 54 categories in the first four months of 2018. Quarterly limits imposed by the Trump administration pose another challenge, with any steel exports exceeding the cap facing delays, redirection or destruction.

  “The devil is in the details,” an EU official said. “There is more to a quota than catches the eye, it’s about how you manage it.”

  European officials have asked Trump not to punish US allies for a global steel glut precipitated by Chinese overproduction. The EU has readied countermeasures, including €2.8 billion ($3.3 billion) in levies against US goods, should the US reject the trade bloc’s offers to accept US import quotas and lower some EU trade barriers in exchange for receiving a permanent waiver on steel and aluminum tariffs. European officials have also scoffed at the US’s justification of tariffs on national security grounds, claiming this approach violates WTO rules.

  European officials have repeatedly called on Mr. Trump not to punish U.S. allies for the global steel glut driven by overproduction in China. The president’s national security justification for steel and aluminum tariffs amounts to illegal protectionism under WTO rules, according to the EU. The bloc also balks at the notion that its exports threaten the U.S.. Twenty two of the EU’s 28 members are also in North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies.

  “We are allies, but we are not vassals,” French State Secretary Jean-Baptiste LeMoyne said Tuesday at the Brussels gathering, adding the EU was prepared to counter the Trump administration if it doesn’t grant an unlimited waiver to the bloc.

  […]

  “We want to avoid a trade war,” German Economic Affairs and Energy Minister Peter Altmanier said Tuesday in Brussels. “It’s important to come to an agreement that is in the interest of both sides.”

  Overall, Trump’s trade relationship with China has continued to deteriorate despite a “trade truce” touted by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin over the weekend. And what’s worse, NAFTA negotiations have apparently stalled, ratcheting up the likelihood that Congress won’t be able to ratify a new agreement until next year at the earliest.

  Given these problems, preserving a strong trade relationship with the European Union is looking increasingly important – particularly where markets are concerned.

  

• When Things Fall Apart: A Graduation Message For A Dark Age

  Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  Those coming of age today will face some of the greatest obstacles ever encountered by young people.

  

  In addition to being overtaxed and underemployed, they will also be forced to march in lockstep with a government that no longer exists to serve the people but which demands they be obedient slaves or suffer the consequences. 

  Unfortunately, we who should have known better, but we failed to guard against such a future.

  Worse, we neglected to maintain our freedoms or provide our young people with the tools necessary to survive, let alone succeed, in the impersonal jungle that is modern America. 

  Based on the current political climate, things could very well get much worse before they ever take a turn for the better.

  Here are a few pieces of advice that will hopefully help those coming of age today survive the perils of the journey that awaits:

  Be an individual. As John F. Kennedy warned, conformity is “the jailer of freedom, and the enemy of growth.” Worry less about fitting in with the rest of the world and march to the beat of your conscience.

  Learn your rights. We’re losing our freedoms for one simple reason: most of us don’t know anything about our freedoms. So grab a copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, study them, and stand up for your rights before it’s too late.

  Speak truth to power. Don’t be naive about those in positions of authority. People in power, more often than not, abuse that power. To maintain our freedoms, this will mean challenging government officials whenever they exceed the bounds of their office.

  Resist all things that numb you. Resist all things that numb you, put you to sleep or help you “cope” with so-called reality. As George Orwell warned, “Until they become conscious, they will never rebel, and until after they rebelled, they cannot become conscious.” It is these conscious individuals who change the world for the better.

  Don’t let technology turn you into zombies. Techno-gadgets are merely distractions from what’s really going on in America and around the world. If you’re going to make a difference in the world, you’re going to have to pull the earbuds out, turn off the cell phones and spend much less time viewing screens. 

  Help others. None of us can exist very long without help from others. If we’re going to see any positive change for freedom, then we must help one another. That will mean gaining the courage to stand up for the oppressed.

  Give voice to moral outrage. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter.” There is no shortage of issues on which to take a stand. Choose one and start making your voice heard.

  Cultivate spirituality, reject materialism and put people first. We must change our values to reflect something more meaningful than technology, materialism and politics. Standing at the pulpit of the Riverside Church in New York City in April 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. urged his listeners:

  [W]e as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a “thing-oriented” society to a “person-oriented” society. When machines and computers, profit motive and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

  Pitch in and do your part to make the world a better place. Don’t rely on someone else to do the heavy lifting for you. Don’t wait around for someone else to fix what ails you, your community or nation. As Gandhi urged: “Be the change you wish to see in the world.”

  Say no to war. Addressing the graduates at Binghampton Central High School in 1968, Twilight Zone creator Rod Serling declared:

  Too many wars are fought almost as if by rote. Too many wars are fought out of sloganry, out of battle hymns, out of aged, musty appeals to patriotism that went out with knighthood and moats… do not accept the shedding of blood as a natural function or a prescribed way of history—even if history points this up by its repetition… find another means that does not come with the killing of your fellow-man.

  Finally, prepare yourselves for what lies ahead. The demons of our age—some of whom disguise themselves as politicians—delight in fomenting violence, sowing distrust and prejudice, and persuading the public to support tyranny disguised as patriotism. Overcoming the evils of our age will require more than intellect and activism. It will require decency, morality, goodness, truth and toughness. As Serling concluded in his remarks to the graduating class of 1968:

  “Toughness is the singular quality most required of you… we have left you a world far more botched than the one that was left to us… Part of your challenge is to seek out truth, to come up with a point of view not dictated to you by anyone, be he a congressman, even a minister… Are you tough enough to take the divisiveness of this land of ours, the fact that everything is polarized, black and white, this or that, absolutely right or absolutely wrong. This is one of the challenges. Be prepared to seek out the middle ground … If you must swing left or you must swing right—respect the other side. Honor the motives that come from the other side. Argue, debate, rebut—but don’t close those wondrous minds of yours to opposition. In their eyes, you’re the opposition. And ultimately … ultimately—you end divisiveness by compromise. And so long as men walk and breathe—there must be compromise…”

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the only way we’ll ever achieve change in this country is for the American people to finally say “enough is enough” and fight for the things that truly matter. 

  It doesn’t matter how old you are or what your political ideology is. If you have something to say, speak up. Get active, and if need be, pick up a picket sign and get in the streets. And when civil liberties are violated, don’t remain silent about it. 

  Wake up, stand up, and make your activism count for something more than politics.

  

• Israel Becomes The First State To Use F-35 Fighter Jets In Combat

  There is a running joke that while the US is the world’s biggest maker and exporter of weapons, no other country uses military equipment and weapons as much as Israel. And, when it comes to state-of-the-art fighter jets, this is now officially the case: an Israeli military official said Israel was the first regime in the world to have used the US-made F-35 stealth fighter jets in attack mode, claiming that the fighter jets have been twice used in the Middle East.

  “We are flying the F-35 all over the Middle East. It had become part of our operational capabilities. We are the first to attack using the F-35 in the Middle East and have already attacked twice on different fronts,” Israeli air force chief Amikam Norkin said at a conference in Herzilya on Tuesday.

  The Israeli Air Force chief, however, did not specify which targets were actually hit by the jets, though Tel Aviv recently launched a massive attack inside war-ravaged neighbor Syria. It has also been blamed for a number of similar attacks, though weaker in scale.

  Israel has been “managing a campaign against Iranian forces, especially on Israel’s northern border” for the past two years, Norkin stressed, adding that Iran launched 32 missiles toward Israel in early May.

  He also displayed a photo that he said showed one Israeli F-35 over Lebanon’s capital, Beirut.

  

  Manufactured by Lockheed Martin Corp, the F-35 is also known as the Joint Strike Fighter and, in Israel, by its Hebrew name “Adir” (Mighty). In December 2016, Israel was the first regime outside the US to obtain the fighter jet when it got the first two planes out of an order of 50. Tel Aviv has at least nine so far.

  Norkin said that while the F-35 did not take part in the most recent airstrike on Syria, it did so in the two previous strikes.

  It will hardly be the last time Israel uses ultramodern weapons against its neighbors as the Israeli regime has a storied history of airstrikes in the region; over the past few years, the Israeli military has launched sporadic attacks against various targets on Syrian soil. Earlier this month, Israeli jets attacked dozens of targets inside Syria in what some alleged was a provoked attack meant to give greenlight an Israeli airborne incursion into Syria where various Iranian military outposts were attacked.

  On May 10, minister of military affairs, Avigdor Lieberman, claimed that Israel had “hit almost all of the Iranian infrastructure in Syria” in response to a barrage of 20 rockets fired at Israeli military outposts in the occupied Golan Heights. However, the Syrian ambassador to China, Imad Moustapha, rejected the Israeli claim that its assault had been directed at Iranian infrastructure.

  In February, Israel was furious when the Syrian military hit at least one intruding Israeli F-16 warplane that attacked positions inside Syrian territory, sending it down in flames. The warplane was the first Israeli fighter jet lost in 35 years, since the regime’s war on Lebanon in 1982.

  

  Reports said that the displaying of a photo of the fighter jet flying over Lebanon is considered an implicit threat to the Lebanese resistance movement of Hezbollah. The Israeli regime has waged three wars on Lebanon — in 1982, 2000, and 2006. It has also carried out assassinations in Lebanese territory.

  The Israeli military also frequently bombs the Gaza Strip, where civilians are often collateral damage of such attacks. On May 17, Israeli fighter planes carried out bombing raids on several locations in northern Gaza.

  Israel has also launched several wars on the Palestinian coastal sliver, the last of which began in early July 2014. The military operation, which ended on August 26, 2014, killed nearly 2,200 Palestinians. Over 11,100 others were also wounded in the war.

  

• Ron Paul: Haspel Is Not The Problem…The CIA Is The Problem

  Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

  As a general rule, when Dick Cheney favors a foreign policy position it’s best to be on the opposite side if you value liberty over war and authoritarianism. The former vice president’s enthusiastic endorsement of not only Gina Haspel as CIA director but of the torture program she oversaw should tell us all we need to know about Haspel.

  

  Saying that Haspel would make a great CIA director, Cheney dismissed concerns over the CIA’s torture program.

  Asked in a television interview last week about the program, Cheney said, “if it were my call, I’d do it again.”

  Sadly, the majority of the US Senate agreed with Cheney that putting a torturer in charge of the CIA was a good idea. Only two Republicans – Senators Paul and Flake – voted against Haspel. And just to confirm that there really is only one political party in Washington, it was the “yes” vote of crossover Democrats that provided the margin of victory. Americans should really be ashamed of those sent to Washington to represent us.

  Just this month, the New York Times featured an article written by a woman who was kidnapped and send to the secret CIA facility in Thailand that Haspel was said to have overseen. The woman was pregnant at the time and she recounted in the article how her CIA torturers would repeatedly punch her in the stomach. She was not convicted or even accused of a crime. She was innocent. But she was tortured on Haspel’s watch.

  Is this really what we are as a country? Do we really want to elevate such people to the highest levels of government where they can do more damage to the United States at home and overseas?

  As the news comes out that Obama holdovers in the FBI and CIA infiltrated the Trump campaign to try and elect Hillary Clinton, President Trump’s seeming lack of understanding of how the deep state operates is truly bewildering.

  The US increasingly looks like a banana republic, where the permanent state and not the people get to decide who’s in charge.

  But instead of condemning the CIA’s role in an attempted coup against his own administration, Trump condemned former CIA director John Brennan for “undermining confidence” in the CIA. Well, the CIA didn’t need John Brennan to undermine our confidence in the CIA. The Agency itself long ago undermined the confidence of any patriotic American. Not only has the CIA been involved in torture, it has manipulated at least 100 elections overseas since its founding after WWII.

  

  As President Trump watched Gina Haspel being sworn in as CIA director, he praised her: “You live the CIA. You breathe the CIA. And now you will lead the CIA,” he said. Yes, Mr. president, we understand that. But that’s the problem!

  The problem is not Haspel, it’s not John Brennan, it’s not our lack of confidence. The problem is the CIA itself. If the president really cared about our peace, prosperity, and security, he would take steps to end this national disgrace. It’s time to abolish the CIA!

  

• For The First Time, Americans More Likely To Pay Their Cell Phone Bill Over Car Loan

  American consumers are now more likely to pay off their cell phone bill than their auto loan, a new report by PeerIQ has found. However, instead of focusing on this as a potential catalyst for more pain in the already precarious world of auto loans, the media, always the finder of silver linings, is emphasizing how this finding will boost demand for securities that are backed by cell phone purchases going forward. 

  Yes, Cell-Phone Backed lines of credit are coming to a Goldman Sachs retail branch near you. From Bloomberg:

  U.S. consumers are more devoted to their mobile phones than their automobiles.

  The sea change has taken place over the last few years as mobile devices become an integral tool not just for communication with loved ones or employers, but also everything from banking to dating to watching TV and listening to music. As cars grow relatively less important, borrowers struggling to pay back their loans on time are increasingly prioritizing payments on the latest iPhone instead of making sure they hold on to their pickup or coupe.

  The shift is increasing the attractiveness of bonds generated from mobile-phone loans, a small but growing portion of the asset-backed securities market. While just $7.7 billion of bonds backed by phone purchases have been issued since 2016 — and all by Verizon Communications Inc. — the number may increase over coming years.

  The reason for the skewed importance is simple: mobile phones have become a universal hub of information and accessibility, allowing consumers to order car rides wherever they need at the push of a button while enjoying the wealth of information and productivity provided by a cell phone, including having anything you want delivered directly to your house, making it a more important accessory than owning a car. Of course, one can simply spend hours each day on Facebook stalking one’s ex, which is what most use it for. 

  

  Bloomberg continues:

  “Payment priority of cell phones is higher than personal and auto loans and similar to or slightly lower than that of mortgage,” Ram Ahluwalia, the chief executive officer of PeerIQ, a New York-based provider of data and analytics for the consumer lending sector, said in an interview. “Now with Lyft and Uber, you can access transportation via cell phone. The car no longer is a central asset. Technological change is driving shifts in consumer behavior.”

  Yet despite the “stickyness” of mobile phone cash flows, so far Verizon has been the only company to take advantage of issuing securities backed by it’s cell phone contracts. Incidentally, based on their spreads, the market is treating such cell-phone backed securities on part with prime auto loans.

  “Back in 2008 cell phones probably weren’t as present as they are now and have moved up the scale,” said Ken Purnell, the head of ABS portfolio management at Invesco Advisers Inc., based in Louisville, Kentucky. “In the ABS market it gives investors another very high-quality type of security to invest in that didn’t exist two years ago.”

  While the market is set for growth, so far there have only been six sales by Verizon, the largest U.S. mobile-phone carrier. Its bonds are backed by customers’ monthly device payments, which are usually bundled with their service bills. The spreads on the securities have tightened and are generally in line with prime auto debt.

  And while the above is good news for cell phone sellers and consumer hoping to find easy cell phone financing terms, it’s not so good for providers of auto loans, because as less creditworthy borrowers continue focus on paying off their cell phone bills instead of paying their car payments, this would lead to growing auto loan delinquencies. In 2007 and 2008, one of the reasons for the housing crisis was because it no longer made sense for homeowners to keep paying off their house: either it was worth less than what they paid, they had already extracted the equity from it it simply wasn’t a priority for them anymore, or they simply couldn’t afford it. Ten years later we are back in the same place.

  The article concludes:

  “Surveys are showing that the cell phone payment is a high priority for the consumer, and from that perspective we think that fundamentally they are pretty sound,” said Clayton Triick, an Atlanta-based portfolio manager at Angel Oak Capital Advisors, which manages $8.5 billion. ”More recently, spreads have just validated that.”

  Angel Oak sold its Verizon cell-phone bonds, but Triick said his team would consider buying similar securities in the future if there is an attractive entry point, perhaps when new issuers come to the market.

  

  The idea of creating a brand new bubble in the latest and greatest securitization – cell phone-backed debt securities – is appealing to many, and we have no doubt that companies will be ravenously elbowing each other out of the way to corner the market and issue the riskiest contract backed debt securities possible in as short amount of time as possible to help “diversify” the risk. This will ultimately create yet another more bubble we will have to deal with in the future. However, until then, everyone will be focusing on the new cash flows, ignoring how this will effect other outstanding paper; and nobody is pointing out that this could further exacerbate the already dire auto loan industry.

  Meanwhile, as readers will recall, the subprime auto industry is already in a crisis of its own. As we reported just days ago, default rates are now higher than during the financial crisis. 

  One month ago, when discussing the most recent trends in the US subprime auto loan space, we revealed how despite a virtual halt in direct loans by depositor banks to subprime clients following the financial crisis, the US banking sector now has over a third of a trillion dollars in indirect subprime exposure, in the form of loans to nonbanks financial firms which in the past decade have become the most aggressive lenders to America’s sub-620 FICO population.

  

  As we further explained, the banks’ total indirect exposure to subprime loans – not just auto loans, but also subprime mortgages, and subprime consumer loans – could be pieced together through public filings, and according to FDIC reports, bank loans to nonbanks subprime lenders soared this decade, with the following 5 names standing out:

  • Wells Fargo: $81 billion, up from $13.4 billion in 2010
  • Citigroup: $30 billion, up from $4.1 billion in 2010
  • Bank of America: $30 billion, up from $2.8 billion in 2010
  • JP Morgan: $28 billion, up from $10.4 billion in 2010
  • Goldman Sachs: $22 billion
  • Morgan Stanley: $16 billion

  Visually:

  

  But while the supply side of the subprime equation is clearly firing on all cylinders – as only the next crash/crisis will stop desperate yield chasers – things on the demand side are going from bad to worse, and according to the latest Fitch Autoloan delinquency data, consumers are defaulting on subprime auto loans at a higher rate than during the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

  

  It will be ironic if the tipping point that sends the house of subprime auto cards crashing is something as trivial and “novel” as securitized cell phone bills.

  And come to think of it, how is it possible that deep into the “second longest expansion in US history”, millions of American consumers can’t even afford to purchase their cell phones outright and instead will serve as the basis for yet another prime, then subprime, securitization bubble product?

  

• How The Feds Use Transportation Funds To Spy On You

  Authored by Mike Maharrey via The Mises Institute,

  A recent announcement by a local transit authority in Virginia sheds light on how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are building a massive, intrusive surveillance network built on America’s transportation system.

  

  The Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) recently announced plans to install more than 100 live surveillance cameras at stops along a rapid transit line. According to a WTVR report, GRTC plans to install approximately four cameras at 26 Pulse stops along Broad Street. The system will be live 24 hours a day and directly connected to the city’s 911 facility.

  The ACLU of Virginia opposes the system. The organization’s director of strategic communications said constant monitoring changes the nature of a community.

  “There’s very little evidence that this type of surveillance enhances public safety, and there is every reason to think that it inhibits people. That it causes us to behave differently than we would if we weren’t being watched,” Bill Farrar said, adding that the system will “keep tabs” on people who rely on public transit.

  “GRTC has said in promoting this, in promoting the need for this particular line, we want to help people get out of the East End food desert. So we’re saying use this to get the food that you need, but we’re going to watch you while you do it.

  GRTC Pulse is “a modern, high quality, high capacity rapid transit system serving a 7.6-mile route.” It was developed through a partnership between the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Virginia Department of Transportation, the City of Richmond and Henrico County.

  According to Style Weekly, “this new system will bring the total number of easily accessible, city or government-owned cameras available to police and other authorities to more than 300, including roughly 200 stationary cameras Richmond police already have easy access to, and 32 cameras owned by city police.”

  Farrar called the proliferation of cameras in the city “troubling.”

  “In practice, the use of these systems and the data they collect is almost always expanded, giving law enforcement more information than they need or should have about the personal lives of law-abiding people.”

  According to WTVR, the federal government required the installation of surveillance cameras along the new transit route as a condition of funding the project. 

  “Officials said the federal TIGER grant used to fund the half of the project required the installation of the camera system.”

  This spotlights how the federal government uses funding to incentivize state and local agencies to participate in the expansion of a national surveillance state. Not only do they attach strings to project funding such as this camera requirement in Richmond, they also finance many state and local surveillance programs outright.

  State and local agencies have access to a mind-boggling array of surveillance equipment. The federal government offers grants and other funding sources for this spy-gear. By tapping into federal money, law enforcement agencies can sometimes even keep purchases of surveillance technology “off the books.”

  In other words, they can purchase high-tech surveillance equipment without any local government or public oversight. In fact, city councils, county governments and mayors may not even know police have obtained the equipment. This makes it difficult to determine just how expansive the American surveillance state has become.

  When reports come out such as the recent revelation of Richmond’s transit stop cameras, it cracks open the door and allows us to see just how the feds work with state and local agencies to expand its massive surveillance network.

  In this case, it reveals that the federal government is piggybacking onto the transportation system to spy on Americans.

  MassPrivatel monitors the expanding surveillance state across the U.S. A recent blog post on its website asserted that the “DHS and the TSA’s role in turning public transportation into city-wide police surveillance networks is unmistakable.”

  Digging into this government scheme to turn the transportation system into a surveillance platform reveals a complicated web of state, local and federal government agencies, along with private organizations, all involved in expanding the surveillance state.

  A 2010 US Government Accountability Office (GAO) report titled ‘Public Transit Information Sharing’ highlights the TSA and DHS’s role in creating a giant public transit surveillance network working through various partnerships. The report also reveals information sharing going on between local transit authorities, local law enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA.

  Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government, including DHS, has taken a number of actions to enhance the security of transportation systems. These actions include improving information sharing with its critical sector stakeholders, which is highlighted in the 2008 Department of Homeland Security Information Sharing Strategy, as well as the 2009 National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP). To help facilitate information sharing with the public transit industry, DHS and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) have created and funded a number of mechanisms, including the Public Transportation Information Sharing and Analysis Center (PT-ISAC), which is administered by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). The PT-ISAC was created under the direction of the Department of Transportation (DOT) in 2003 and is currently funded by TSA via DOT’s Federal Transit Administration (FTA). In addition to DHS, other federal agencies, such as the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and FTA, have also taken action to enhance their efforts to share security-related information with public and private stakeholders, including public transit agencies.

  The APTA is a nonprofit organization serving as an advocate for the advancement of public transportation programs and initiatives in the U.S. Its website describes it as “the leading force in advancing public transportation.” But as the GAO report indicates, it also administers the PT-ISAC – a transportation surveillance program. PT-ISAC collects, stores and disseminates information related to transportation security. It also publishes The Transit And Rail Intelligence Awareness Daily (TRIAD).

  “The TRIAD is developed from the numerous sources of intelligence available to the Transportation community today, focusing on counter-terrorism, suspicious activity reports, and general security awareness. The Surface Transportation Security Information Library, available to those vetted to receive the TRIAD, acts as an information repository housing all sources of information provided in the TRIAD as well as other security products, information reviews, and intelligence not provided in the TRIAD. The information will remain available to users as a means for accessing the entirety of intelligence reviewed in the TRIAD and other relevant information, serving as a resource for future research into threats or mitigation techniques.”

  Where does information filling the Surface Transportation Security Information Library come from? Almost certainly from camera systems and other surveillance technology funded by the federal government, or required by it in transportation grant awards such as the one used to fund Richmond’s rapid transit line.

  Further digging revealed how this works.

  A private company called IIT operates the PT-ISAC for the APTA. The company website confirms the whole system operates as a two-way information highway with surveillance data moving back and forth between state, local and federal agencies.

  “The PT-ISAC collects, analyzes, and reports critical cyber and physical security and threat information from innumerable sources to include the U.S. private infrastructures, U.S. intelligence community, U.S, Government, U.S. Military, law enforcement, academia, and the international CERT community on a 24×7 basis. The PT-ISAC provides a secure, two-way reporting and analysis structure that enables the transmission of critical alerts and advisories as well as the collection, analysis and reporting of security information for transit agencies across the nation.”

  To sum this up, the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA continue to develop a massive, intrusive surveillance network built on America’s transportation system. A private, nonprofit organization administers the system and a private company actually runs it.

  Meanwhile, federal agencies including the DHS, the Department of Transportation and the Department of Justice fund the equipment used to collect reams of information on millions of Americans, and also requires participation in the surveillance state as a condition of funding various transportation infrastructure projects.

  This demonstrates the federal government’s dependence on state and local government actors to run the ever-growing surveillance. It also reveals its Achilles heel. If state and local governments prohibit participation in such schemes, they could effectively pull the plug on these surveillance programs.

  There are several steps state and local governments need to take.

  1. Refuse federal funds that require participation in surveillance programs.

  2. Prohibit storage and sharing of surveillance data with other agencies without a warrant.

  3. Institute warrant requirements for surveillance technologies such as stingrays, drones and mobile cameras.

  4. Require government agencies to get local government approval before acquiring or using surveillance technology.

  

• Image Of Jewish Temple Photoshopped Over Jerusalem Mosque Embroils US Embassy In Controversy

  As if US-Palestinian relations weren’t already at the lowest point in perhaps all of history, they just sank even lower after a controversial photo (to put in mildly) surfaced of the American Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, receiving a large aerial photograph of Jerusalem as he toured the largely ultra-Orthodox Jewish city of Bnei Brak, just east of Tel Aviv.

  As Ambassador Friedman attended an event sponsored by an Israeli charity, one of the staff members presented him with the framed photograph which featured a photoshopped imagined Jewish Temple in the place where Al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock currently stand. 

  

  The Israeli Haaretz newspaper describes the image as “bearing a simulation of the Third Temple” placed in the photograph at the heart of Jerusalem’s walled old city, with the ‘Third Temple’ featured front and center. 

  Israelis refer to the area on top of which Islam’s third holiest mosque sits as the “Temple Mount” as it is purported to be the site of two Jewish temples in ancient times, now the location of the Western Wall. There has long been a Jewish and Christian Zionist movement dedicated to restoring the temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in about 70 A.D. — an initiative that’s practically impossible because it would mean razing the Islamic holy site.

  US Ambassador Friedman Gifted With Photo Of Jerusalem Featuring The Holy Temple On The Temple Mount https://t.co/cP0EVua7Rt pic.twitter.com/G8i2Gl3pvH

  — Temple Institute (@TempleInstitute) May 22, 2018

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

  Concerning the long-term controversy that’s raged over the fate of the Temple Mount and the Dome of the Rock, the US has long held its official position of observing the status quo of the separate religious communities being allowed access their respective sites. 

  Haaretz explains that the photo of the ambassador with the image first appeared on an obscure Jewish website before quickly going viral:

  First reported on the ultra-Orthodox news site Kikar Hashabat, the photo was taken during a tour of Bnei Brak held by the Achiya organization, aids children who suffer from learning disabilities. 

  It was unclear at the time whether Friedman noticed the change and was endorsing the picture or not.

  Though the US Embassy is reportedly outraged at the incident which it says the ambassador did not endorse and was not immediately aware of, it’s seems hard to miss the huge stone temple prominently at the forefront of the image.   

  The embassy issued a statement claiming that Friedman “was not aware of the image thrust in front of him when the photo was taken. He was deeply disappointed that anyone would take advantage of his visit to Bnei Brak to create controversy.” 

  The official statement concluded with the following: “The U.S. policy is absolutely clear: we support the status quo on the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.”

  As Haaretz reports further:

  A U.S. Embassy official told Haaretz they have demanded an apology from the organization “for allowing one of their staff to present this controversial image to the ambassador during the visit.”

  For its part the Israeli charity responsible for the controversial photograph has issued an apology to Friedman and the embassy, saying further that Ambassador Friedman seemed unaware of the image’s content, and that the staff member indeed took advantage of the situation.

  Palestinian advocates on social media were immediately outraged:

  It’s cute that the US embassy is trying to walk back this photo, but that’s Trump’s fanatical Ambassador to Israel, David “there is no occupation” Friedman, smiling with a poster that eliminates the Muslim Aqsa & Golden Dome of the Rock on Jerusalem’s temple mount. pic.twitter.com/BGNxBAa29P

  — Omar Baddar (@OmarBaddar) May 22, 2018

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

  David Friedman @USAmbIsrael needs not explain anything here. We know where his heart is and where he stands. “Putting Israel first” is a motto he lives by.
  U.S. ambassador to Israel receives picture of Jerusalem with Third Temple replacing Muslim mosques https://t.co/w7aA0iiwIs

  — Osama Abuirshaid (@OsamaAbuirshaid) May 22, 2018

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

  The Achiya organization’s apology statement reads as follows: “We wish to thank the ambassador Mr. David Friedman and the staff members for their professionalism and courtesy … regretfully the entire event was marred by a cheap political act, the responsible staff member was identified and apologizes and we will deal with the matter internally in the organization.”

  Friedman, however, has been known for engaging in provocations aimed at showing his personal devotion to the Jewish state and preferred changes in US policy toward the conflict; for example, he’s long attempted to pressure the State Department to use terminology more friendly to the idea that the West Bank belongs to Israel, something rejected by official American policy. The ambassador has also been known to spearhead fundraising efforts — to the tune of tens of millions of dollars — for Beit El settlement in the West Bank, known as among the most radical Jewish settler movements in the region. 

  In both Gaza and Jerusalem tensions continue to mount after the US Embassy’s ceremonial opening in Jerusalem a week ago, which came on the same day 60 Palestinians were gunned down by Israeli live fire after protesters approached the border fence area between Israel and Gaza, with also resulted in over a thousand Palestinians wounded. The United Nations Human Rights Council has since voted to open a formal investigation into the killings.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• "It's Ridiculous" – Parents Furious As Australia Seeks To Ban Use Of "Boy" Or "Girl" In Books

  “For goodness sake, this is social engineering gone crazy…

  Leave kids alone to be kids. Stop trying to destroy kids’ childhoods…”

  That is an example of the furious reaction from parents in Victoria, Australia where the local city council has announced plans to audit children’s books and toys with a plan to ban them from kindergartens, schools and libraries if they don’t meet strict gender guidelines.

  

  The Herald Sun reports that the local government’s justice warriors were inspired by research from the Australian National University that showed children were influenced by gender stereotyping, and urged a ban on the terms ‘boy’ and ‘girl’.

  

  The research suggests educators should “minimise the extent to which gender is labelled” and avoid telling children what girls and boys should do.

  Parents reacted angrily to the story on social media…

  “This needs to stop. I’ve got a two-year-old daughter (yes I picked her gender based on what genitals she was born with) and she plays with cars, trains, tractors, Barbies, dolls and uses her imagination and pretends she’s cooking food or being a doctor…

  Let’s just let kids be kids.”

  Billie Deborah Chin wrote:

  “Banning the availability of anything, or taking choice away, is definitely the wrong way to go about making classrooms gender neutral. It should be about making everything available to everyone.”

  We leave it to Ron Wilson from Smooth FM, who told Sunrise “it’s about inclusion, not exclusion” but that it’s important “boys are boys and girls are girls”.

  “I wouldn’t be banning things, but I would be including more things for everybody to be involved in. When you’ve got kids, you suddenly realise that boys are boys and girls are girls and viva la difference. I don’t want to see androgyny out there.

  “I don’t want to see our children just being children. The fact (is) they are boys and girls and they are different and there’s no question about that. We should celebrate that...

  I think we need respect. We don’t need social engineering.”

  Following the uproar generated by the report, Melbourne City Council very quickly responded…

  “Our libraries aim to promote diversity, not censor books,” adding that “none of the books mentioned in media reports have been banned. The books mentioned are in stock at City Library.”

  So Winnie The Pooh and Thomas The Tank Engine are safe…for now.

  

  

• The Baltic States Ask The US For A Bigger Military Presence On Their Soil

  Authored by Arkady Savitsky via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  The foreign ministers (FMs) of the Baltic states have wound up their May 16-18 visit to Washington. They asked National Security Adviser John Bolton to reinforce the NATO battalions that have been deployed to their countries with air and naval units. They also want their air-defense capability enhanced. Lithuanian FM Linas Linkevicius emphasized that it’s not just the numbers that are important, but also training exercises, visits, the distribution of equipment, and the establishment of new military facilities. Latvian FM Edgars Rinkevics called for making the US military presence in the Baltic states and Poland permanent. It’s hardly a coincidence that the issue has been raised prior to the NATO 2018 summit that will take place on July 11-12.

  

  The leaders of the Baltic states have always stressed that they see the current military build-up as only the starting point for a larger effort that will include modernized routes and infrastructure sites, as well equipping their national forces with more up-to-date weapons for offensive operations.

  NATO has deployed four battalion-sized battle groups (roughly 4,500 troops) to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. The nations that comprise the backbone of this force are the US, the UK, Germany and Canada. Twelve other allies also contribute to the Enhanced Forward Presence (EFP). Eight small staffs known as NATO force integration units have also been established. Common rules of engagement (ROE) are in the process of being hammered out, taking into account regional nuances. In the event of war, the Graduated Response Plan (Eagle Defender) with its own detailed ROE will come into play.

  Under the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), the US military has transferred over to Europe a 3,500-strong armored brigade combat team and a 2,200-strong combat aviation brigade that is headquartered in Germany, and a combat sustainment support battalion (750 troops) that is stationed on Polish soil to be used as a logistics hub in Romania. It has also deployed a support team to Lithuania.

  In total, America now has three combat-ready brigades stationed in Europe, along with pre-positioned stockpiles of weapons systems and equipment that will allow a fourth brigade to rapidly beef up its forces to launch an attack against Russia. NATO reinforcement would also include the 13,000-strong NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) or Spearhead Force, which is an element of the Enhanced NATO Response Force (NRF) that would join the combat later. The NRF consists of 40,000 troops. All these forces are capable of joining the fight on short notice.

  These armed corps possess an attack capability that Russia cannot ignore. Nor can Moscow turn a blind eye to the fact that NATO’s collective military boasts 3.2 million active personnel — compared to Russia’s 830,000 — in addition to the US arsenal of long-range attack systems. Germany, France, and some other allies see that as enough, but no, the Baltic states are never satisfied. They keep on begging for more. They want to fully exploit their status of “frontline states” in order to reap the political benefits.

  And not only that, NATO is ratcheting up tensions by holding an increasing number of large-scale exercises right on Russia’s borders. This greatly elevates the risk of inadvertent escalation. For instance, three major exercises are scheduled to be held in the Baltic region this summer.

  On June 3-15, the Saber Strike exercise organized by the US Army Europe will encompass the three Baltic states and Poland, involving over 18,000 troops from 19 countries. About 3,000 American soldiers and over 1,500 combat vehicles will travel from Germany to Latvia and Lithuania. Public roads will be used to move heavy equipment. On June 12-13, the soldiers of the US 2nd Cavalry Regiment will construct a bridge in order to cross the Neman River in Lithuania (in the Kaunas district). Their main mission is to ensure that the forces are ready to rapidly advance, not to merely defend their positions.

  Eight thousand American airborne troops will land in Latvia during the Swift Response exercise, in order to train alongside Lithuanian and Polish troops. Namejs 2018 will be held from August 20 to September 2 and will involve over 9,200 Latvian forces, including the military, police, border guards, volunteer reservists, and other state institutions. They will be joined by 650 troops from the US, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, and the Czech Republic.

  All these large-scale intensive training activities will take place in the background of the planning for Trident Juncture 2018, the largest NATO exercise involving about 40,000 troops, 70 ships, and about 130 aircraft from over 30 nations, which will be deployed to central and northern Norway in October for the live portion of the event. A command post phase will be conducted in Italy. Norway does not have a shoreline in the Baltic Sea but it is a member of the Council of the Baltic Sea States.

  When the construction is over, Powidz, a Polish village with a population of 1,000, will have become a NATO hub for the Baltics and all of Northern Europe. That will be the control center for the operations in the region.

  Anakonda 2018, the largest event ever staged by NATO since the end of the Cold War, involving 100,000 troops, 5,000 vehicles, 150 aircraft and helicopters, and 45 warships will be hosted by Portugal this summer. This particular event will be held outside the Baltic Sea region, but it’s an important part of the bigger picture because the training activities of the bloc have been incorporated into a unified plan. It’s the vast scale that is so impossible to ignore.

  All the exercises are being staged to allow the forces to hone their skills for conducting offensive operations against Russia, not for fending off attacks from trenches dug along the lines of defense. All these events are large-scale and the operational tempo is unprecedented, all of which makes the security status of Europe extremely precarious.

  Nothing is working to ease the tensions. The agreement on the Prevention of Incidents at (INCSEA) and the Agreement on the Prevention of Dangerous Military Activities (DMA) seem forgotten and dust-covered. No one appears to remember they even exist. Incidents and dangerous activities take place regularly, especially during exercises. The agreements do nothing to prevent them.

  In 2016, then-German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier proposed arms control discussions to defuse tensions. Russia welcomed the idea but the initiative ended up more or less swept under the rug. Moscow has proposed updating the risk-reduction procedures envisaged under the Vienna Document (Chapter III), but the alliance rejected the idea of direct Russia-NATO talks. It wants discussions to be held under the auspices of the OSCE, which makes no sense. It’s NATO, not the OSCE, that Russia has security problems with. It’s the North Atlantic Alliance, not the OSCE, that holds provocative military exercises near Russia’s borders while painting it as the state that harbors aggressive intentions. NATO has rejected Russia’s initiatives to reduce the risk of incidents, including in the Baltic region.

  These exercises, which are in truth provocations, in addition to the longing of the Baltic nations to acquire the status of “frontline states,” the absence of any Russia-NATO dialog aimed at addressing security issues, the creation of the bloc’s infrastructure to launch offensive operations (an issue that has been kept out of the media spotlight), and the growing American presence inside states that share with a common border with Russia — all these developments are fraught with dire consequences. To a large extent, NATO is responsible for the present state of affairs and the Baltic states have greatly helped to turn northern Europe into a real hot spot.

  

• Pentagon Spends $1 Billion To Acquire More War Robots

  According to a new report from Bloomberg, the Pentagon is spending approximately $1 billion over the next several years for a variety of robots designed to complement combat troops on the modern battlefield.

  

  In addition to scouting and explosives disposal, these new war robots will reportedly be able to perform more complex tasks, including surveillance missions, detection of chemical or nuclear agents, and even have the ability to transport soldiers’ rucksacks.

  “Within five years, I have no doubt there will be robots in every Army formation,” said Bryan McVeigh, the Army’s project manager for force protection. He applauded the efforts of the Pentagon to field more than 800 robots over the past 18 months.

  “We’re going from talking about robots to actually building and fielding programs,” he said. “This is an exciting time to be working on robots with the Army,” McVeigh added.

  Bloomberg says the Pentagon has classified its robot platforms into light, medium and heavy categories.

  Last month, the Army awarded a $429.1 million contract to two Massachusetts robotic defense companies, Endeavor Robotics and QinetiQ North America, for miniature size war robots weighing less than 25 pounds. Not too long ago, Endeavor Robotics was awarded two other contracts worth roughly $34 million from the Marine Corps for medium size robots.

  

  Modular Advanced Armed Robotic System. (Source: QinetiQ) 

  In 4Q17, the Army awarded Endeavor a $158.5 million contract for 1,200 medium size war robots, called the Man-Transportable Robotic System (MTRS), Increment II, weighing around 165 pounds. Bloomberg said the MTRS is designed to detect “explosives as well as chemical, biological, radioactive and nuclear threats,” with a deployment date set for the second half of 2019.

  

  Endeavor Robotics Product Overview. (Source: Endeavor Robotics)

  “It’s a recognition that ground robots can do a lot more, and there’s a lot of capabilities that can and should be exploited,” said Sean Bielat, Endeavor’s chief executive officer. He points out “the dull, the dirty and the dangerous” infantry tasks are being supplemented by war robots.

  The introduction of war robots onto the modern battlefield is undoubtedly intended to streamline tasks in combat situations for infantry troops, but the primary objective is to increase the survivability rate of America’s bravest warriors.

  “The Army’s current approach is to field more inter-operable robots with a common chassis, allowing different sensors and payloads to be attached, along with standardized controllers for various platforms,” McVeigh explained to Bloomberg.  

  While Trump signed the record-setting defense spending bill earlier this year, Bloomberg says the addition of robots on the battlefield is geared towards affordability. “If we want to change payloads, then we can spend our money on changing the payloads and not having to change the whole system,” McVeigh said.

  The Army will have a ramp-up period to field the use of its newer, more advanced robots; indications point to more than 2,500 of the medium and small robots will enter the modern battlefield in the next several years.

  

  Line-up of QinetiQ robots. (Source: QinetiQ) 

  “Just strapping a conventional weapon onto a robot doesn’t necessarily give you that much” for ground troops, said Bielat, the Endeavor Robotics CEO. “There is occasional interest in weaponizing robots, but it’s not particularly strong interest. What is envisioned in these discussions is always man-in-the-loop, definitely not autonomous use of weapons.”  

  There are significant concerns about the rapid development and deployment of advanced robotic technologies on the battlefield, especially the use of autonomous weapon systems.

  Last year, a group of the world’s leading AI researchers and humanitarian organizations warned about lethal autonomous weapons systems, or killer robots, that select and kill targets without human control. About two dozen countries have called for the ban on fully autonomous weapons, though the U.S. failed to join.

  Killer robots are closer than you think

  “It seems inevitable that technology is taking us to a point where countries will face the question of whether to delegate lethal decision-making to machines,” said Paul Scharre, a senior fellow and director of the technology and national security program at the Center for a New American Security.

  Last August, Tesla’s Elon Musk and over 100 experts sent a letter to the United Nations demanding the organization ban lethal autonomous weapons.

  “Once developed, lethal autonomous weapons will permit armed conflict to be fought at a scale greater than ever, and at timescales faster than humans can comprehend,” the letter warned. “These can be weapons of terror, weapons that despots and terrorists use against innocent populations, and weapons hacked to behave in undesirable ways.”

  Peter W. Singer, a leading strategist on 21st-century warfare, chatted with Business Insider about the “the killer robots debate,” and said, “it sounds like science fiction, but it is a very real debate right now in international relations. There have been multiple UN meetings on this.”

  As Singer put it, advanced robotic technologies have opened countless discussions about legal and ethical questions for which “we’re really not all that ready.”

  “This really comes down to, who is responsible if something goes bad?” Singer said, explaining that this applies to everything from war robots to autonomous vehicles.

  “We’re entering a new frontier of war and technology and it’s not quite clear if the laws are ready.”

  It seems like the new frontier of war and technology is ushering in a “Terminator”-style dystopic evolution of warfare. It is inevitable that this new generation of weaponry could quickly make its way out of the military and into the hands of terrorist organizations. Nevertheless, with the Pentagon throwing billions of dollars at defense companies to manufacture war robots, we ask one simple question: what could go wrong?

  

• How Russia And China Gained A Strategic Advantage In Hypersonic Technology

  Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  A hot topic in military prognostications regarding China, Russia and the United States revolves around the development and use of hypersonic technology for missiles or UAVs as an invulnerable means of attack. As we will see, not all three countries are dealing successfully with this task.

  

  The United States, China and Russia have in recent years increased their efforts to equip their armed forces with such highly destructive missiles and vehicles seen in the previous article. Putin’s recent speech in Moscow reflects this course of direction by presenting a series of weapons with hypersonic characteristics, as seen with the Avangard and the Dagger.

  As confirmed by US Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, Dr. Michael Griffin:

  We, today, do not have systems that can hold them [hypersonic weapons] at risk…and we do not have defenses against those [hypersonic] systems. Should they choose to deploy them we would be, today, at a disadvantage.

  Further confirmation that the US is lagging in this field came from General John Hyten, Commander of US Strategic Command:

  “We don’t have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us, so our response would be our deterrent force, which would be the triad and the nuclear capabilities that we have to respond to such a threat.”

  The development of hypersonic weapons has been part of the military doctrine that China and Russia have been developing for quite some time, driven by various motivations. For one thing, it is a means of achieving strategic parity with the United States without having to match Washington’s unparallelled spending power. The amount of military hardware possessed by the United States cannot be matched by any other armed force, an obvious result of decades of military expenditure estimated to be in the range of five to 15 times that of its nearest competitors.

  For these reasons, the US Navy is able to deploy ten carrier groups, hundreds of aircraft, and engage in thousands of weapon-development programs. Over a number of decades, the US war machine has seen its direct adversaries literally vanish, firstly following the Second World War, and then following the collapse of the Soviet Union. This led in the 1990s to shift in focus from one opposing peer competitors to one dealing with smaller and less sophisticated opponents (Yugoslavia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, international terrorism). Accordingly, less funds were devoted to research in cutting-edge technology for new weapons systems in light of these changed circumstances.

  This strategic decision obliged the US military-industrial complex to slow down advanced research and to concentrate more on large-scale sales of new versions of aircraft, tanks, submarines and ships. With exorbitant costs and projects lasting up to two decades, this led to systems that were already outdated by the time they rolled off the production lines. All these problems had little visibility until 2014, when the concept of great-power competition returned with a vengeance, and with it the need for the US to compare its level of firepower with that of its peer competitors.

  Forced by circumstances to pursue a different path, China and Russia begun a rationalization of their armed forces from the end of the 1990s, focusing on those areas that would best allow them the ability to defend against the United States’ overwhelming military power. It is no coincidence that Russia has strongly accelerated its missile-defense program by producing such modern systems as Pantsir and S-300/S-400, which allows for a defense against ballistic attacks and stealth aircraft. Countering stealth technology became an urgent imperative, and with the production of the S-400, this challenge has been overcome. With the future S-500, even ICBMs will no longer pose a problem for Russia. In a similar vein, China has strongly accelerated its ICBM program, reaching within a decade the ability to produce a credible deterrent with their equivalent of the Russian SS-18 Satan or the American LGM-30G Minuteman III, possessing a long range and multiple independent reentry vehicles (MIRVs) armed with nuclear warheads.

  After sealing the skies and achieving a robust nuclear-strategic parity with the United States, Moscow and Beijing begun to focus their attention on the US anti-ballistic-missile (ABM) systems placed along their borders, which also consist of the AEGIS system operated by US naval ships. As Putin warned, this posed an existential threat that compromised Russia and China’s second-strike capability in response to any American nuclear first strike, thereby disrupting the strategic balance inherent in the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD).

  For this reason, Putin has since 2007 been warning Russia’s western partners that his country would develop a system to nullify the American ABM system. In the space of a few years, Russia and China have succeeded in this task, testing and entering into production various hypersonic missiles equipped with breakthrough technologies that will strongly benefit the entire scientific sector of these two countries, and against which the US currently has no counter.

  Currently there are no defenses against hypersonic attacks; and given the trend of employing ramjet/scramjet engines on new generations of fighter jets, it seems that more and more countries will want to equip themselves with these game-changing systems. Russia, to counter America’s naval superiority, has already entered into service the Zircon anti-ship missile, and already plans an export version with a range of 300 kms.

  India and Russia have long been working on the Brahmos, which is yet another type of hypersonic missile that could in the future be launched from the Su-57. Although it is a relatively new technology, hypersonic weapons are already causing more than a headache for many Western military planners, who are only coming to realize just how far they are lagging behind their competitors.

  It will take a while for the US to close the hypersonic technological and scientific gap with China and Russia. Lockheed Martin has been awarded a contract to this end. In the meantime, the two Eurasian powerhouses are focusing on their overland integration via the Belt And Road Initiative (BRI) and the Eurasian Union, a strategic arrangement that denies the US and NATO the ability to easily intervene in an area so far inland, compounded by its inability to control the airspace, and ultimately outnumbered on the ground in any case.

  The objective of the Russians and the Chinese is the realization of a highly defended (A2/AD) environment on their coasts and in their skies, which are buttressed by hypersonic weapons. In this way, Russia and China possess the means to disrupt the maritime logistical chain of the US Navy in the case of war. In addition, the A2/AD would be able to stop US power projection, thanks to HGV weapons able to sink aircraft carriers and target specific land-based ABM systems or logistic-chain hubs.

  It is a defensive strategy that could potentially halt US Naval power projection as well as its ability to control the skies, two linchpins in the way the US plans to fight its wars. No wonder think-tanks in Washington and four-star generals are starting to sound the alarm on hypersonic weapons.

  

• Iran Announces Plan To Stay In Syria As Pompeo Issues Unprecedented Threats

  After last Thursday’s relatively brief meeting in Sochi between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad wherein Putin stressed that it is necessary for all “foreign forces” to withdraw from Syria, there’s been much speculation over what Putin actually meant. 

  Many were quick to point out that Assad had agreed that “illegal foreign forces” should exit Syria — meaning those uninvited occupying forces in the north and northeast, namely, US troops, Turkish troops and their proxies, and all foreign jihadists — while most mainstream Western outlets, CNN and the Washington Post among them, hailed Putin’s request to see Iran withdraw from Syria. 

  Whatever non-Syrian entity Putin intended to include by his words, both Syria and Iran gave their unambiguous response on Monday: Iran announced it would stay in Syria at the request of the Assad government.

  

  “Should the Syrians want us, we will continue to be there,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi declared from Tehran, cited by Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency. “Nobody can force Iran to do anything; Iran has its own independent policies,” Qasemi said, in response to a question referencing the widespread reports that Russia desires Iran to withdraw forces from Syria.  

  “Those who entered Syria without the permission of the Syrian government are the ones that must leave the country,” he said further in a clear reference to the some 2000 US troops currently occupying Syrian-Kurdish areas in the northeast and eastern parts of the country.   

  As we noted in the aftermath of Israel’s May 10 massive attack on multiple locations inside Syria which marked the biggest military escalations between the two countries in decades, Russia has appeared content to stay on the sidelines while Syria and Israel test confrontational limits; however, Russia is carefully balancing its interests in Syria, eager to avoid an uncontrolled escalation leading to a direct great power confrontation. 

  But increasingly Israel’s patience appears to be wearing thin after Prime Minister Netanyahu’s oft-repeated “Iranian red line” warning has gone unheeded. In multiple summits with Putin going back to 2015 (the two have met over 6 times since then), Netanyahu has repeatedly stressed he would not tolerate an Iranian presence in Syria and further signaled willingness to go to war in Syria to curtail Iranian influence. 

  “Iran is already well on its way to controlling Iraq, Yemen and to a large extent is already in practice in control of Lebanon,” Netanyahu told Putin in one especially tense meeting in August 2017, and added further that, “We cannot forget for a single minute that Iran threatens every day to annihilate Israel. Israel opposes Iran’s continued entrenchment in Syria. We will be sure to defend ourselves with all means against this and any threat.”

  Israel’s uptick in military strikes on Syria — attacks on sites purported to be Iranian bases housing Iranian assets — have intensified exponentially over the past half-year, nearly leading to an unprecedented breakout of region wide war during the May 10 exchange of fire, wherein Israel claimed to have been attacked by Iranian rocket fire. 

  

  The fact that both Iran and Syria can so openly and confidently announce Iran’s intent to stay in Syria means Damascus sees itself in new position of strength after both shooting down multiple Israeli missiles and simultaneously firing rockets into Israeli occupied Golan territory — a response perhaps very unexpected by Israel’s leadership which had grown accustomed to attacking the Syrian army and its allies with impunity. 

  Meanwhile, Damascus announced Monday that all suburbs around the capital have been fully liberated from al-Qaeda and ISIS terrorists, marking the end of a years long insurgency in and around the capital. As Al-Masdar News noted, “The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) is in full control of Damascus city and its countryside for the first time since the advent of this conflict.”

  Yet the pattern which has emerged over the past few years has been that every time the Syrian Army emerges victorious or carries overwhelming military momentum, Israel or the US launches an attack. 

  #Pompeo‘s Iran plan is practically a declaration of war. No country with any dignity and self respect would accept the conditions he is putting on #Iran to stop the sanctions campaign that he announced. #Irandeal https://t.co/eVeqOktqzd

  — Walid (@walid970721) May 21, 2018

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

  The US for its part issued one of its strongest ultimatums yet to Iran yet via Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who vowed on Monday that Tehran will struggle to “keep its economy alive” if it does not comply with a list of 12 US demands, including Iranian withdrawal from Syria.

  Here is Secretary Pompeo’s list of 12 demands from Iran via @GalloVOA pic.twitter.com/3nZ1qM0QUT

  — Golnaz Esfandiari (@GEsfandiari) May 21, 2018

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

  Iranian President Hassan Rouhani rejected Pompeo’s bombastic demands and vowed to continue “our path,” insisting that the US could not “decide for the world.”

  Rouhani’s words, as quoted by ILNA news agency, were as follows: “Who are you to decide for Iran and the world? The world today does not accept America to decide for the world, as countries are independent … that era is over… We will continue our path with the support of our nation.” This continuing escalation of rhetoric will likely only ensure Iran becomes even more entrenched in Syria, but it will be interesting to see how Russia responds diplomatically.

  We’ve already seen Israel’s “diplomacy” in the form of repeat missile attacks, but how much will Russia and Iran sit back and take before enforcing their own red lines against Israel and the West? 

  

• The U.S. Is Shackled By Historic Debt

  Authored by Lawrence Thomas via The Gold Telegraph,

  Do you feel as if you’re drowning in debt? It’s worse than you think.

  

  The U.S. government reached a new milestone when our country’s debt topped $21 trillion for the first time. The national debt grows by an average of $17,000 every second – more than some people earn in an entire year. That’s only an average, and During the past eight months, the national debt grew by $52,000 per second. And the trend toward bigger and higher spending is only getting worse.

  

  The ratio of national debt to GDP is at 105 percent, larger than the economy as a whole. In 1981, the national debt comprised a mere 31 percent of GDP. We are not moving in the right direction. The Treasury Department has plans to borrow $1 trillion this year, an 84% jump from last year. 

  When individuals borrow, they can use the money wisely to increase their wealth. That’s what happens when people make good investments. What does the government do with all this money? While some of it may be put to good use, the National Science Foundation’s spending $856,000 on having mountain lions run on treadmills can’t be termed prudent spending. Nor can the $2 billion spent on former President Obama’s healthcare website. In 2017, Brooklyn, NY spent $2 million on a 400 square feet restroom in a public park. Flushing money down the toilet?

  

  Even the government’s legitimate spending is out-of-control. In 2017, half the entire budget went toward Social Security and Medicare. More than all tax revenues are spent on entitlement programs and defense. The rest is “borrowed,” and that creates interest payments. Of course, as the debt increases, so do the interest payments. Which means the government needs to borrow even more money just to pay interest on money it’s already borrowed. What happens when the U.S. debt reaches $30 million? President Trump is showing no signs of curtailing this spending/borrowing spree. The interest rate was recently raised to 3 percent, and it will go higher yet.

  Since the government can print fiat money at will, it probably isn’t overly concerned. However, what about companies and individuals who need to borrow at increasingly higher rates?

  When it comes to interest rates, we need to look at LIBOR, the benchmark interest rate used by leading banks around the globe. The LIBOR rate is intrinsically tied to government debt. According to JP Morgan, the U.S. has approximately $7.5 trillion in LIBOR-related-debt alone. Individual loan debts are 97 percent LIBOR-related. Fifty percent of the corporate debt is tied to LIBOR. As interest rates rise, it will hurt individuals and corporations.Chapter 11 bankruptcies have increased to a seven-year high.

  Why is the government raising interest rates at a time consumer prices and wages are rising only marginally? During Obama’s administration, prices rose 14.6 percent, and the Federal Reserve kept interest rates low. Inflation is up by a mere 2.2 percent since Trump took office, and interests rates keep rising. Is the Federal Reserve playing politics? While the rate of inflation was somewhat higher during the Obama years, the Federal Reserve didn’t get aggressive in handling the problem until Trump came to office. If it’s politics, what game is being played?

  

  One thing is certain. Government borrowing will continue at an increasingly faster rate, and the unprecedented debt is creating a very vulnerable economy. While revenues are growing, the spending increase is 300 percent of our total revenue.

  The current budget for 2018 is expected to be $804 billion, up from $665 billion in 2017. By 2020, the annual budget is expected to top $1 trillion. How long can this type of borrowing be sustained without creating an eventual economic crisis?

  People have cause to be concerned. But how does U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin feel about this pile of debt? “It’s a very large, robust market — it’s the most liquid market in the world [U.S. bond market], and there is a lot of supply… But I think the market can easily handle it… I’m not concerned about that. I think that there are still a lot of buyers for U.S. Treasuries.”

  Mnuchin assumes there will be a continuing supply of foreign investors willing to buy up U.S. bonds. The interest in U.S. bonds is decreasing, however. Foreign buyers currently hold about 40 percent of U.S. bonds – or debt. This is at a new low since November 2016. Foreign investors have been on a downward trend since its high of 55 percent in 2008. The combination of reduced foreign demand and the need for increased funding could spell disaster for the U.S. economy.

  During times of economic chaos, the government has historically resorted to giving the printing presses free reign and flooding the economy with fiat currency. This will devalue the dollar more than it is already, leading to higher inflation.

  But Mr. Mnuchin isn’t worried a bit. At least, he won’t admit that he is. The problem is that putting on a smiley face won’t rescue a troubled economy. We can only hope Mr. Mnuchin has the good sense to begin frowning very soon…

  

• Saudi Women's Driving Activists Accused Of Running "Spy Cell" – Could Face Execution

  Weeks before Saudi Arabia is set to lift its longtime ban on women driving, a group of seven women’s rights activists has been arrested on treason and espionage related charges — offenses which can bring the death penalty. The kingdom plans to lift the driving ban on June 24th, though significant restrictions will still remain to allow women to drive “in accordance with Islamic laws.” 

  This comes after the Western public has been subjected to months of propaganda editorializing by the likes of David Ignatius and Thomas Friedman ensuring us the young crown prince Mohammed bin Salman is a “modernizer and reformer” (Friedman penned a hagiographic style essay declaring MbS is spearheading an “Arab Spring” revitalization of the kingdom), and after MbS completed an extended tour across the US which took him from from the the White House to Silicon Valley to Hollywood — all places where he was fawned over as the red carpet rolled out. 

  

  On Saturday Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the Gulf Centre for Human Rights issued a statement indicating the seven activists have been detained since May 15th, and further that they had come to the attention of Saudi authorities as leading voices campaigning on behalf of women driving, and against the male guardianship system in general. They had reportedly been previously ordered by the royal court to cease all contact with foreign media, something which they apparently defied. 

  The detained include a prominent Saudi blogger, Eman al-Nafjan, and Lujain al-Hathloul, who had previously been imprisoned for 73 days after driving from UAE into Saudi Arabia. Multiple reports indicate further that the crackdown on women’s rights activists may be ongoing, and that charges have reached the level of espionage.

  And perhaps most shockingly, the detained activists could face the death penalty, as Middle East Eye reports:

  According to Saudi lawyers and judges, the prominent women’s rights activists, who were arrested last week and branded as “traitors” by government-aligned media outlets, may by sentenced to death should investigations result in the charge of treason and conspiracy against the state.

  The Riyadh-based English language daily newspaper, Arab News, has accused the women of being part of a “spy cell” supported by hostile foreign entities — echoing the claims of Saudi authorities and the official Saudi Press Agency:

  Members of a “spy cell,” arrested by Saudi Arabia’s state security presidency two days ago, sought to “incite strife by communicating with foreign entities hostile to the Kingdom and to establish a false legal organization,” according to information received by Asharq Al-Awsat from informed sources.

  The sources said most of the cell’s suspects claim to have religious obligations and were using human rights as a pretext to violate the country’s systems.

  The report further accuses the women of using their activist groups as fronts for communications and financial dealings with countries “hostile to Saudi Arabia, to receive financial support in exchange for continuing to incite trouble.” Over the past year especially, this has typically been code for interaction with Iran or Shia-linked groups, viewed by the Saudis as desiring to infiltrate and destabilize Saudi society. 

  HRW’s Rothna Begum told Al-Jazeera that the move ultimately aims to silence critics of the Saudi regime: “While it’s not clear why they were arrested, today we have seen Saudi press reports come to suggest that these women are traitors and have been arrested because they are undermining the national unity of the country,” she explained.

  It appears the women have been charged within the guidelines of current Saudi law, as last November a new anti-terror law (which replaced a prior 2014 law) was put in place which defines specific acts of terror and corresponding sentencing guidelines in an incredibly vague way, and is further broad in its application while allowing for severe consequences for so much as criticizing the king or crown prince.

  The kingdom has long aggressively rooted out dissent, arresting and prosecuting individuals for engaging in protest, even if merely on social media, but the November anti-terror law now gives the Saudi regime greater ease in labeling political activities treasonous. The law also brings terror-related cases under the direct administrative oversight of the king — thus the arrests and detentions are sanctioned directly under the authority of the king and/or crown prince.

  Late last year HRW provided examples of the types of vague protest related activities that Saudi Arabia can now deem “terrorism”: The new law, however, does not restrict the definition of terrorism to violent acts. Other conduct it defines as terrorism includes “disturbing public order,” “shaking the security of the community and the stability of the State,” “exposing its national unity to danger,” and “suspending the basic laws of governance,” all of which are vague and have been used by Saudi authorities to punish peaceful dissidents and activists.

  As the media continues celebrating the ‘reforming prince’ and much hyped newly opened cinemas and greater employment opportunities for Saudi women, it appears MbS is playing a double game in enhancing his public image abroad while cleaning house of unwanted critics at home (something made especially clear by MbS’ rounding up over 300 royals and other prominent officials to lock them at Riyadh’s Ritz Carlton, many of them forced to pay their way out). And the American mainstream is all too happy playing along.

  As we recently noted, close US ally Saudi Arabia has executed over 48 people so far this year, half of them related to nonviolent drug charges, according to HRW. Meanwhile the US State Department has remained completely silent, choosing instead to talk solely of Iran and Syria’s human rights violations.  

  

• The Friendly Mask Of The Orwellian Oligarchy Is Slipping Off

  Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

  Gina Haspel has been confirmed and sworn in as America’s new CIA Director, fulfilling her predecessor Mike Pompeo’s pledge to turn the CIA into “a much more vicious agency”. “Bloody Gina” has reportedly been directly involved in both torturing people and destroying evidence of torture in her long and depraved career, which some say hurts the CIA’s reputation.

  

  Others say it just makes it more honest.

  The lying, torturing, propagandizing, drug trafficking, coup-staging, warmongering Central Intelligence Agency has done some of the most unspeakably horrific things to human beings that have ever happened in the history of our species. If you think I’m exaggerating, do your own research into into some of the CIA’s activities like the Phoenix Program, which used “Rape, gang rape, rape using eels, snakes, or hard objects, and rape followed by murder; electric shock (‘the Bell Telephone Hour’) rendered by attaching wires to the genitals or other sensitive parts of the body, like the tongue; the ‘water treatment’; the ‘airplane’ in which the prisoner’s arms were tied behind the back, and the rope looped over a hook on the ceiling, suspending the prisoner in midair, after which he or she was beaten; beatings with rubber hoses and whips; the use of police dogs to maul prisoners,” and “The use of the insertion of the 6-inch dowel into the canal of one of my detainee’s ears, and the tapping through the brain until dead. The starvation to death (in a cage), of a Vietnamese woman who was suspected of being part of the local political education cadre in one of the local villages…The use of electronic gear such as sealed telephones attached to…both the women’s vaginas and men’s testicles [to] shock them into submission.”

  This is what the CIA is. This is what the CIA has always been. This is what Mike Pompeo said he wanted to help make the CIA “much more vicious” than. Appointing Gina Haspel as head of the agency is just putting an honest face on it.

  It really couldn’t be more fitting that the US now has an actual, literal torturer as the head of the CIA. It also couldn’t be more fitting that it has a reality TV star billionaire President, an Iraq-raping Bush-era neoconservative psychopath as National Security Advisor, a former defense industry directoras Secretary of Defense, a former Goldman Sachs executive as Secretary Treasurer, and a former Rothschild, Inc. executive as Secretary of Commerce. These positions have always facilitated torture, oppression, war profiteering and Wall Street greed; the only thing that has changed is that they now have a more honest face on them.

  The mask of the nationless Orwellian oligarchy which dominates our world is slipping off all over the place.

  Israel is now openly massacring unarmed Palestinian civilians, prompting a UN investigation into possible war crimes. Only two nations voted in opposition to the investigation, and surprise surprise it was the two nations apart from Israel who most clearly owe their existence to the institutionalized slaughter and brutalization of their indigenous occupants in recent history: the US and Australia. All other members of the UN Human Rights Council either voted in support of the investigation or abstained.

  Important to note that the US and Australia, two countries built on the genocide of the indigenous populations have objected to the UN inquiry and are effectively expressing support to Israel’s on going genocide of the Palestinians.

  — Tariq Zarif (@TariqZarif) May 18, 2018

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

  Internet censorship is becoming more and more brazen as our governments become increasingly concerned that we are developing the wrong kinds of political opinions. Ever since the establishment Douma and Skripal narrativesfailed to take hold effectively, we’ve been seeing more and more frantic attempts to seize control of public discourse. Two weeks after the Atlantic Council explained to usthat we need to be propagandized by our governments for our own good, Facebook finally made the marriage of Silicon Valley and the western war machine official by announcing a partnership with the Atlantic Council to ensure that we are all receiving properly authorized information.

  The Atlantic Council is pure corruption, funded by powerful oligarchs, NATO, the US State Department, empire-aligned Gulf states and the military-industrial complex. Many threads of the establishment anti-Russia narrative trace back to this highly influential think tank, from the DNC hack to the discredited war propaganda firm Bellingcat to imaginary Russian trolls to the notorious McCarthyite PropOrNot blacklist publicized by the Washington Post. Facebook involving itself with this malignant warmongering psyop factory constitutes an open admission that the social media site considers it its duty to manipulate people into supporting the agendas of the western empire.

  We’re seeing similar manipulations in Twitter, which recently announced that it will be hiding posts by more controversial accounts, and by Wikipedia, which has been brazenly editing the entries of anti-imperialist activists with a cartoonishly pro-establishment slant.

  Announcing New Election Partnership with the Atlantic Council https://t.co/piSxpTDJfa

  — Facebook Newsroom (@fbnewsroom) May 17, 2018

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

  At long last, the union of Silicon Valley and the military-industrial complex becomes official. They’ve been dating for years, now they’re finally tying the knot. This is your real royal wedding, everyone. https://t.co/3CkVtvBs0s

  — Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) May 17, 2018

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

  It is always a good sign when people in power become concerned that their subjects are developing the wrong kinds of political opinions, because it means that truth is winning. All this gibberish we’ve been hearing about “Russian disinformation” and “Russian propaganda” is just a label that has been pinned on dissenting narratives by a mass media propaganda machine that has lost control of the narrative.

  And this is why it’s getting so overt, barely even attempting to conceal its true nature anymore. Our species’ newfound ability to network and share information has enabled a degree of free thinking that the cultural engineers did not anticipate and have not been able to stay ahead of, and they’re being forced to make more and more overt grabs to try and force us all back into our assigned brain boxes.

  But the oligarchs who rule us and their Orwellian power structure is already in a lose-lose situation, because the empire that they have built for themselves rests upon the illusion of freedom and democracy. The most powerful rulers of our world long ago eschewed the old model of sitting on thrones and executing dissidents in the town square, instead taking on a hidden role of influence behind the official elected governments and using mass media propaganda to manufacture the consent of the governed.

  This system is far more efficient than the old model because a populace will never rebel against rulers it doesn’t know exist, and it has enabled the western oligarchs to amass more power and influence than the kings of old ever dreamed possible. But it has a weakness: they have to control the narrative, and if they fail to do that they can’t switch to overt totalitarianism without shattering the illusion of freedom and provoking a massive public uprising.

  So the wealth-holding manipulators are stuck between a rock and a hard place now, trying to use new media outlets like Facebook, Twitter and Wikipedia to herd the unwashed masses back into their pens. The more brazen they get with those manipulations, however, the more the mask slips off, and the greater the risk of the public realizing that they aren’t actually free from tyrannical rule and exploitation.

  The real currency of this world is not backed by gold, nor by oil, nor by bureaucratic fiat, nor even by direct military might. No, the real currency of this world is narrative, and the ability to control it. The difference between those who rule this world and those who don’t is that those who rule understand this distinction and are sufficiently sociopathic to exploit it for their own benefit.

  Power only exists where it exists because of the stories that humans agree to tell one another. The idea that government operates a certain way, that money operates a certain way, these things are purely conceptual constructs that are only as true as people pretend they are. Everyone could agree tomorrow that Donald Glover is the undisputed King of America and the new official US currency is old America Online trial CDs if they wanted to, and since that was the new dominant narrative it would be the reality. Everyone could also agree to create a new system which benefits all of humanity instead of a few sociopathic plutocrats. The only thing keeping money and government moving in a way that benefits our current rulers is the fact that those rulers have been successful in controlling the narrative.

  They’ll never get that cat back into the bag once it’s out, and they know it. We the people will be able to create our own narratives and write our own rules about how things like money and government ought to operate, and there is no way that will work out to the benefit of the ruling manipulators and deceivers. So they fight with increasing aggression to lull us back to sleep, often overextending themselves and behaving in a way that gives the public a glimpse behind the mask of this entire corrupt power structure. Someday soon that mask will slip right off and come crashing to the floor. That crash will wake the baby, and that baby will not go back to sleep.

  *  *  *

  Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website, so you’ll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, or buying my new bookWoke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

  

• Canada's Brookfield On Buying Spree In Brazil, Where There's "Blood In The Streets"

  Brookfield Asset Management is one of Canada’s largest investing firms, with over $285 billion under management. The company was formerly founded in 1899 as the Sao Paulo Railway, Light and Power Company, but over the course of over a century has turned itself into somewhat of a Berkshire Hathaway of Canada, with deep ties to investing in Brazil. Not unlike Berkshire Hathaway, Brookfield looks for deep value and distressed situations – exactly what it was able to find, and capitalize on, in Brazil over recent years.

  

  The recent economic climate of corruption and recession in Brazil has meant that assets have been put up for sale at dirt cheap prices. Brookfield has been quietly and methodically scooping up these assets, using its experience in Brazil as a guided to navigate a volatile economy. Reuters reported:

  In 2016, for example, Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP (BIP.N) led a $5.2 billion acquisition of a pipeline operator from Petroleo Brasileiro SA (PETR4.SA), the state-controlled oil company at the heart of the Car Wash scandal. Recently, another Petrobras pipeline network with half the capacity fetched a top bid of around $8 billion from other investors. Bargain-hunting Brookfield gave that deal a pass.

  The Canadians’ savvy is built on nearly 120 years of experience in South America’s largest economy. But the recent buying spree pushed the company to new extremes of due diligence and bulletproofing, according to interviews with six people involved in the deals.

  Brookfield’s CEO was tongue in cheek about the way he described buying distressed assets in the company’s letter to its investors from February of this year, using the term “sellers in need of capital” instead of something less tasteful, like “desperate sellers”:

  Chief Executive Bruce Flatt, whom some call the Warren Buffett of Canada for his value-investing approach, called recent Brazil acquisitions “quality businesses from sellers in need of capital” in a February letter to investors.

  Left wing politicians in Brazil have been notably against the scooping up of state assets by private companies. But Brookfield has been sharper, drawing up agreements that result in compensation if they are broken, and covering their bases when it comes to due diligence and potential legal liabilities:

  Brookfield’s purchase of gas pipeline operator Nova Transportadora do Sudeste SA (NTS) from Petrobras was part of a controversial divestment program aimed at trimming the oil firm’s massive debt load.

  Critics have decried the privatizations, and Ciro Gomes, a leading leftist presidential candidate, has pledged to reverse sales of state energy assets if elected this year.

  Foreseeing the risk, Brookfield tasked dozens of lawyers with drafting an ironclad agreement. Brookfield has a right to compensation if Petrobras changes the contracts in a way that hurts the Canadians’ cash flow, according to three people with knowledge of the matter.

  The head of Brazilian investment banking at a global bank, who was not involved in the NTS deal, said it was an example of Brookfield’s willingness to bet big while protecting itself.

  The climate of corruption in Brazil has not come without its challenges, even for Brookfield. The company has been accused of being involved with a few relatively smaller bribery scandals of its own. Reuters continued:

  Its homebuilding unit was among around 30 developers accused of paying bribes to building inspectors in Sao Paulo between 2010 and 2012. Former employees of the unit, which later changed its name to Tegra, confessed to paying bribes and were cooperating witnesses in the trial of the building inspectors.

  Brookfield said the company was not a target of the investigation and cooperated with authorities.

  In a separate case, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) opened an investigation in 2012 into accusations that Brookfield’s Brazil shopping mall unit bribed Sao Paulo officials to win construction permits. The SEC dropped the case in 2015 without bringing any enforcement action. Brookfield denied wrongdoing.

  One of Brookfield’s toughest recent deals will test its ability to avoid fallout from another municipal graft scandal.

  Last year it agreed to pay $1 billion for a 70 percent stake in a sewage and water utility owned by Odebrecht SA, an engineering group ensnared in the Car Wash probe. Prosecutors accused Odebrecht of paying bribes to secure contracts with some of the 186 municipalities where the utility operates.

  Odebrecht, which reached a leniency deal with prosecutors, said in a statement it is cooperating with law enforcement and “has created internal controls to detect and prevent unlawful behavior.”

  

  But Brookfield, with its seemingly bottomless pit of capital and resources at its disposal, made sure that it had the legal protection in place to cover itself:

  Some 60 lawyers working for Brookfield spent eight months assessing the risks. They arranged for $100 million of the purchase price to be set aside to cover potential liabilities if city governments break off contracts or demand compensation due to alleged kickback schemes.

  Since subsidiary Brookfield Business Partners LP (BBU_u.TO) closed the deal in April 2017, none of the municipal contracts held by the company, now called BRK Ambiental, were rescinded and only one is in litigation, according to two people with knowledge of the matter.

  At this point, Brookfield’s “investment” in Brazil is starting to look like the country could eventually become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the company.

  We commented a couple of months ago about the turmoil and unrest in Brazil, writing about how the Army was tasked with “restoring order” in Rio de Janeiro. With public spending on police and social services collapsing amid Brazil’s worsening economic crisis, violent crime has crept back up in Rio de Janeiro, a city widely recognized for its favelas – urban hillside slums teeming with violence, drugs and prostitution, according to Bloomberg.

  

  And ahead of an October election where President Michel Temer will try to win his first full term in office, the president is trying to send in the army to seize control of the city’s streets and restore order to an increasingly lawless town.

  President Michel Temer issued a decree on Friday putting an Army general in charge of Rio’s security forces, including the state’s civilian police. The intervention, which requires congressional approval, will last until the end of the year, according to the decree.

  “Our prisons will no longer be offices for thieves, our public squares party halls for organized crime,” Temer said after signing the decree.

  “I know it’s an extreme measure but many times Brazil requires extreme measures to put things in order.”

  But as is often the case with Brazilian politics, Temer has a plausible ulterior motive: By sending in the army, he might create enough of a distraction to avoid voting on an unpopular pension bill because Brazilian law conveniently prohibits making constitutional changes during times of military crisis.

  Temer told Reuters that the intervention wouldn’t halt negotiations over pension reform or stop a vote on the plan, which is deeply unpopular with the country’s retirees, who stand to see their benefits cut.

  

  Meanwhile, crime in the city has erased nearly a decade of progress, climbing back to its highest level since 2009. Temer’s decision is the first time the military has intervened in public affairs since the former military dictatorship ended in the mid-1980s and the country returned to democracy.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Scientists Revise Understanding Of Novichok After It Fails To Produce Expected Lethal Effects

  Authored by Rob Slane via The BlogMire blog,

  Warning: This article is likely to contain traces of satire.

  

  In the aftermath of the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury on 4th March, scientists are currently re-evaluating their understanding of A-234 – or Novichok as it is more commonly known. Prior to the poisoning, it had been thought that the substance was around 5-8 times more toxic than VX nerve agent, and therefore that just a tiny drop would be likely to kill a person within minutes or possibly even seconds of them coming into contact with it. In the unlikely event of a person surviving, it was believed that their central nervous system would be completely destroyed, and that they would suffer numerous chronic health issues, including cirrhosis, toxic hepatitis, and epilepsy before dying a premature and miserable death, probably within a year or so.

  However, according to an anonymous source at the Porton Down laboratory, which is located just a few miles down the road from Salisbury, scientists now believe they may have completely misunderstood the properties and effects of the chemical:

  “All the available information we had about Novichok before March this year suggested that it was by far the most lethal nerve agent ever produced, and we had assumed that even the tiniest drop would kill a person within minutes. However, after studying the movements of the Skripals after being poisoned, we have now revised our understanding, and we now believe that one of its primary effects is to generate in its victims a strong desire to go out for a beer followed by a pizza.”

  Yet it’s not only the effects of the substance that have led to this reappraisal, but also its mysterious ability to move about from location to location, seemingly at will. According to the source:

  “At first, differing reports of the location of the poisoning baffled us. First it was the restaurant, then it was the pub, followed by the bench, the car, the cemetery, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge, and then finally the door handle three weeks after the incident. However, we now believe we have an explanation for this phenomena. When Novichok was developed, we think it may have been given the ability to appear in one place, only to then disappear and turn up in an entirely different place.

  This is what we saw in the Skripal case, where the media would assure the public that investigators had found the source of the poisoning, only to report a day or two later that it wasn’t in fact there at all, but somewhere else entirely. It’s all remarkably clever, and it seems to have been specifically designed to generate the impression to the uninitiated that investigators are simply making it up as they go along.”

  Another quality of the substance, which at first puzzled the scientists, is its apparent ability to multiply:

  “We now know that the substance was poured on a door handle,” said the source.

  “Yet according to all our experiments where we’ve replicated this scenario, no matter how carefully we’ve poured liquid on a door handle, what we’ve found is that it has an uncanny tendency to run off, leaving a fairly insignificant amount. Yet we know that from this tiny amount, the substance has been turning up in multiple hotspots around Salisbury. The most probable explanation for this, we think, is that the along with it being developed to appear, disappear and reappear in various places, it was also developed with the alarming ability to replicate itself.”

  Asked why this hasn’t led to the deaths of hundreds or thousands of residents in the City, the source pointed back to their revised conclusion of the effects of Novichok as being more likely to lead to a craving for beer and pizza than to death.

  They also mentioned another surprising revision that they have had to make, which is the seemingly mundane way in which objects that have come into contact with Novichok can be decontaminated:

  “Given our prior understanding about the toxicity of Novichok, we had of course assumed that cleaning it up could only be done by specialists wearing protective clothing,” said the source.

  “And so when Public Health England advised people who thought they might have come into contact with it to wash their clothes and wipe their phones with baby wipes, I must admit we were a bit surprised. None of the research papers out there mentions baby wipes as being an effective method of treating exposure to Novichok, and we did wonder whether they were perhaps talking about another chemical altogether. But of course they can’t have been, can they? Still,” he added with a wry smile, “I guess it all goes to prove the old saying: you learn something new every day.”

  Yet, although the new discoveries of the properties of Novichok mentioned above have taken the scientific community by surprise, the one that is causing the most excitement is the revelation that it can apparently render its victims invisible:

  “To be frank, this has created a huge buzz,” said the source.

  “I mean, the Skripals apparently came into contact with Novichok over two months ago, as did Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. And yet since then nothing has been seen of any of them. It’s almost as if they’ve vanished into thin air, a bit like Bilbo Baggins at his 111th birthday party when he slips the Ring of Power on.”

  And it’s not just the scientific community that is excited about the potential this might have. The Magic Circle has also a expressed an interest in knowing more about the substance, since its ability to make those who come into contact with it disappear without trace could potentially be a huge addition to the illusionist’s toolkit.

  However, any excitement that this might bring comes with considerable caution. According to a spokeswoman for the Magic Circle:

  “Of course we’re bound to be interested in the existence of a substance that can make a person disappear. However, whilst making someone disappear is great, what we’d really like to see is their reappearance at some point. Otherwise, I think it unlikely that it will ever catch on amongst our members.”

  My previous (and less satirical) pieces on the Skripal Case:

  • 30 Questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case

  • 20 More Questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case

  • The Skripal Case: 20 New Questions That Journalists Might Like to Start Asking

  • The Lady and the Curiously Absent Suspect — Yet Another 20 Questions on the Skripal Case

  • The Slowly Building Anger in the UK at the Government’s Handling of the Skripal Case

  • The Three Most Important Aspects of the Skripal Case so Far … and Where They Might be Pointing

  • A Bucketful of Novichok

  • What Would Sherlock Holmes Have Made of the Government’s Explanation of the Case of Sergei and Yulia Skripal?

  

• Visualizing What Happens In An Internet Minute In 2018

  In your everyday life, a minute might not seem like much.

  But, as Visual Capitalist’s Jeff Desjardins notes, when it comes to the vast scale of the internet, a minute of time goes much further than you ever could have imagined. That’s because the internet has a degree of scale that our linear human brains are unaccustomed to operating on.

  An internet minute in 2018

  Today’s infographic is from Lori Lewis and Chadd Callahan of Cumulus Media, and it shows the activity taking place on various platforms such as Facebook or Google in each 60 second span.

  

  Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

  It really helps put an internet minute in perspective.

  Just a minute, please

  The numbers for these services are so enormous that they can only be shown using the 60 second time scale.

  Any bigger, and our brains can’t even process these massive quantities in any useful capacity. Here are just a few key numbers scaled to a monthly basis, for fun:

  42,033,600,000 Facebook logins

  159,840,000,000 Google searches

  1,641,600,000,000 WhatsApp messages sent

  8,078,400,000,000 emails sent

  On an annualized basis, the data becomes even more ridiculous, with something close to 100 trillion emails sent. (No wonder it’s so hard to get to inbox zero!)

  Previous minutes

  If the internet minute visualization looks familiar, that’s because it gets updated and re-released every year using the latest data available. See below for a direct comparison of the last two years:

  

  Image: Visual Capitalist

  The biggest and most noticeable jump comes in Netflix hours watched – a number which we believe may be too good to be true. While we have not seen the exact methodology of these calculations, we do know that in December it was announced by Netflix that users were watching approximately 140 million hours per day. This works out to roughly 100,000 hours per minute according to our math, which is still mind-boggling.

  See the additional evolution of this chart by checking out the 2016 version as well.

  

• Russia's Navy Establishes Permanent Presence In Mediterranean Sea

  Authored by Peter Korzun via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  Russian President Vladimir Putin said a naval standing force, including warships with Kalibr long-range land attack cruise missiles, will be permanently deployed in the Mediterranean Sea. The statement was made at a meeting with top military officials and defense industry leaders that took place in Sochi on May 16. One of the missions is delivering strikes against terrorist targets in Syria.

  102 expeditions of ships and submarines are planned in 2018. The force will go through intensive training.

  

  The Russian Black Sea Fleet has become a much different force in comparison to what it was just three years ago. Since 2015, the year the operation in Syria was launched, it has received 15 new ships, including two frigates and six conventional submarines armed with Kalibr cruise missiles. With S-400 and S-300V4 air defense systems, Krasukha-4 electronic warfare systems and shore-based anti-ship Bastion batteries deployed on the Syrian coast, the ships in Eastern Mediterranean operate in a relatively safe environment. Kalibr missiles have already been fired from frigates and submarines at terrorist targets in Syria.

  Last July, a 15-strong Mediterranean Task Force was established to be based out of Tartus, Syria’s leased naval facility. The ships provide a buffer on the southern flank of NATO. Russia needs to counter aggressive activities of the bloc in the region, including the Black Sea. Maintaining robust presence in the Mediterranean is the best way to defend Russia’s Black Sea borders.

  All southern Europe, including such NATO military assets as Allied Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy, Combined Air Operations Centers in Larissa, Greece, and in Poggio Renatico, Italy, Headquarters Allied Land Command and Air Power Command in Izmir, Turkey, NATO Incirlik air base in Turkey, Graf Ignatievo and Bezmer air bases in Bulgaria used by US Air Force as well as a lot of other key NATO defense infrastructure sites happen to be within the range of Kalibr missiles installed on the platforms patrolling the Mediterranean Sea. They’ll all be knocked out with first salvos in case a Russia-NATO war starts.

  The Fleet’s operations are not limited to the Black Sea basin and the Mediterranean. It is on the way of transition from a green-water naval formation to a blue water force, demonstrating the Russian flag as the ships move beyond the Strait of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal on the way to the World Ocean.

  The establishment of permanent naval presence in the region can be explained by a number of rational calculations. The Mediterranean Sea is Russia’s only exit to the open ocean for the Black Sea Fleet. The permanent presence is a logical step in view of Russia’s growing political influence in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

  Foreign Ministries are not the only ones to shape external policy. Any port call is a diplomat mission, providing an opportunity for official meetings and public diplomacy, with the events covered by media. Take the famous German Kiel Week or Kieler Woche in German, the biggest annual maritime festival and international forum visited by about three million people coming from all over the world. Warships from many countries are an important element of the event. Ships also take part in the Irish maritime festival at Drogheda Port. Russian frigate The Shtandart, a replica of the man-of-war built by Peter the Great in 1703, will visit Drogheda on June 10-11 this year.

  The naval visits reflect foreign policy trends. In 2017, Russian ships made 46 port calls to drop anchor at 28 ports of 27 countries worldwide. The list includes five Western or West-friendly states: Greece, Portugal, Cyprus, Japan and South Korea, which account for 19% of the countries visited by Russian ships. Nine (33%) of the states on the list belong to the Asia-Pacific region, with other 13 (48%) situated in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia. The 81% vs.19% ratio illustrates Russia’s rebalancing from the “collective” West toward other countries and power poles. The Russian Navy also conducted six international exercises, demonstrating its global presence and power projection capability.

  The growing trade brings to the fore the task of sea lanes’ protection. Russia has longstanding economic ties with many Mediterranean states, including Greece, Libya, Cyprus, and Algeria. The relations include defense cooperation.

  US Navy deployments in support of ballistic missile defense are viewed as provocative moves to downgrade Russia’s strategic nuclear capability. With Russia’s continuous presence in the region, Aegis ships as well as aircraft carriers become sitting ducks for state-of-the art anti-ship missiles.

  Like it or not, the Mediterranean Sea has ceased to be a “NATO Lake” dominated by US 6th Fleet. American vessels don’t own these waters anymore. As a great power, Russia has its own interests in the region and it has a powerful naval force permanently deployed to defend them.

  

• Roger Stone Says He's "Prepared For Mueller Indictment"

  Roger Stone, one of President Trump’s earliest political advisors and a fixture on the Sunday show circuit, told NBC News’ Chuck Todd that he’s “prepared” to be indicted as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

  “I am prepared should that be the case,” Stone said on “Meet The Press”. “But I think it just demonstrates, again, this was supposed to be about Russian collusion, and it appears to be an effort to silence or punish the president’s supporters and his advocates.”

  “It is not inconceivable now that Mr. Mueller and his team may seek to conjure up some extraneous crime pertaining to my business, or maybe not even pertaining to the 2016 election,” Stone said. “I would chalk this up to an effort to silence me.”

  Stone, who has already testified before the House Intelligence Committee, said he has not been interviewed by Mueller. He also reiterated that Mueller’s team had found “no evidence whatsoever” to connect Trump to Russia, and that it hasn’t found any evidence to connect Stone to Russia, either.

  Regardless, Stone speculated that Mueller might try to bust him on some unrelated charges – perhaps something pertaining to his business.

  Continuing with his attack on Mueller, Stone said some friends and associates of his had been subpoenaed by the special counsel. He also continued to deny having a relationship with Wikileaks or with Russia, adding that he had “no advance notice of the content, source, or the exact disclosure time of the Wikileaks disclosures.”

  

• Canada's Debt Spiral: Does Justin Trudeau Live In An Alternative Reality?

  Authored by Lee Friday via The Mises Institute,

  Living beyond our means requires us to borrow money to cover the difference between our income and our spending. Many Canadians now understand the financial consequences of this practice and regret the choices they’ve made. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Trudeau is not one of them, as evidenced by his government’s budget deficits which are further eroding the financial wellbeing of Canadians. He has broken a campaign promise, ignored basic economic principles, and seems hell-bent on setting an ignominious record.  According to the Fraser Institute: “Justin Trudeau is the only prime minister in the last 120 years who has increased the federal per-person debt burden without a world war or recession to justify it.”

  

  The Broken Promise

  The Liberals had won the 2015 federal election with a pledge to run annual shortfalls of no more than $10 billion over the first three years of their mandate, and to eliminate the deficit by 2019-20.

  The deficit for 2016-17, Trudeau’s first full fiscal year, was $17.8 Billion. The forecast for 2017-18 is $19.9 Billion, and for 2018-19, the forecast is $18.1 Billion.

  And now, from the government’s 2018 budget, we read this:

  While austerity can come from fiscal necessity, it should not turn into a rigid ideology about deficits that sees any investment as bad spending.

  The government says deficits are economically beneficial, and compares deficits to loans taken out by entrepreneurs and business owners. But here’s the rub: in order to spend, the government must first raise money by taxing or borrowing (deficits). This deprives the private sector of money which would otherwise be available for businesses to borrow and invest in new production, thereby creating jobs and raising our standard of living.

  Moreover, government ‘borrowing and spending’ imposes a financial burden on future taxpayers who must pay pay back both the loan and the interest payments.  In contrast, repayment of private business loans imposes a burden on the entrepreneurs — and because entrepreneurs are held personally liable, they are incentivized to be prudent decision makers. Politicians, on the other hand, lacking personal liability, tend to be fickle, reckless, arbitrary, and wasteful.

  Why Government Spending is Bad

  When a private business earns a profit by converting various resources (labour, raw materials etc.) into products which consumers voluntarily buy, this means it has made efficient use of the resources. Wealth is created. In contrast, a private business incurs losses when it fails to persuade consumers to voluntarily buy its products, which means it is wasting resources. If the firm cannot improve, it will discontinue operations, thereby conserving resources for entrepreneurs who can use them efficiently. 

  Economic progress (wealth creation, rising living standards) comes from efficient allocation of resources through profitable enterprises, where consumers determine what gets produced. These are the basic economic principles which Justin Trudeau ignores.

  Politicians can pander to special interest groups because profit/loss calculations do not exist within government. This prevents consumers (taxpayers) from expressing their preferences as they do in the marketplace, where they “vote with their dollars.” The government forces taxpayers to subsidize whatever it supplies, at a price it dictates, whether we want it or not. Thus, the government’s coercive taxing and spending tends to waste resources, which is economically counterproductive. And, as noted earlier, government spending reduces private investment.

  As Charles Lammam and Hugh MacIntyre wrote in the Financial Post (emphasis added):

  business investment in Canada has declined by a staggering 18 per cent (after accounting for inflation) since the end of the third quarter of 2014.”

  Crucial to any plan to improve our country’s long-term economic prospects is encouraging private-sector investment, innovation and entrepreneurship … on this front, federal policy choices have been counterproductive.

  And Morneau’s fiscal update makes clear that the government will continue to run persistent deficits and rack up more debt, which signals potentially higher taxes in the future (since debt is simply deferred taxation), creating yet more uncertainty today among investors and entrepreneurs.

  … 64 per cent of CEOs said Canada’s investment climate had worsened in the last five years, noting growth in the tax and regulatory burden.

  Does Justin Trudeau Live in an Alternate Reality?

  That is the economic reality to which the Prime Minister seems oblivious. Private business investment is limited by government spending and regulations, but Trudeau’s government thinks everything is fine. From their 2018 budget, we read this:

  … Canadians are feeling more optimistic about the future. Everyday dreams — whether it’s paying down debt, saving for a first home or going back to school to train for a new job — are closer to reality.

  I’m not sure what reality Justin is living in, but here is the reality on Earth:

  One third of Canadians have stretched themselves so thin that they can no longer cover monthly bills and debt payments, according to a survey …

  Thirty-three per cent of respondents … admitted to being stretched beyond their means on a monthly basis, marking an eight-point increase since MNP’s last survey in September …

  … almost four in 10 respondents … admitted they regret the amount of debt they’ve taken out in their lifetime.

  … Forty-two per cent of respondents … said they’ll be in financial trouble if rates rise much higher. Moreover, nearly one-third said they could be forced into bankruptcy because of rising interest rates.

  Trudeau’s government is either out of touch with reality or they simply don’t care about economic growth and the financial plight of Canadians. Either way, the lack of personal accountability among politicians is a concern.

  

  Accountability

  If I break my neighbour’s window, accident or not, I pay for the replacement. The compensation comes out of my own pocket. I am accountable for my actions.

  If the Liberals lose the federal election next year, there are many who will say they have been held accountable for various mistakes. In fact, this is what we are always told, “If you don’t like the government, then don’t forget to vote, because this is your opportunity to hold them accountable.”

  Really? That’s how we define accountability in politics? Does our anger disappear simply because we kicked the bums out of office? Is it enough to see teary-eyed politicians deliver concession speeches on election night?

  If I walk around the neighbourhood and break all the windows in all the houses, then lose my job, do my neighbours forgive and forget? I think not.

  What about the financial hardship that government spending inflicts on Canadians? The private investments not made. The wealth and jobs not created. The products not manufactured. The debt incurred. These are real financial consequences which individual Canadians are forced to absorb. Who will compensate them?

  If politicians knew they would be held personally accountable for the damage they inflict — they would inflict far less damage.

  Conclusion

  Many ‘experts’ have encouraged the government to balance the budget, but the size of the budget is the real problem. Government spending, and taxes, must be slashed. How much? The sky is the limit. There is nothing the government does that the private sector can’t do better, at far less cost.

  A drastic reduction in the size and scope of government would trigger massive private investment and economic growth. But until voters learn some basic economic principles, they will continue to get the government they deserve, whether it be the Trudeau regime, or a different party of con artists.

  

• Contaminated Fukushima Water Storage Tanks "Close To Capacity", TEPCO Admits

  The Tokyo Electric Power Company is running out of container space to store water contaminated by tritium outside the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, and it’s also running out of room for building more tanks, according to Yomiuri Shimbum, a Japanese newspaper, which is creating an intractable problem for the utility, which has been tasked with supervising the cleanup of Fukushima.

  The Japanese government has been desperately trying to accelerate the cleanup ahead of the upcoming 2020 Olympic Games in Tokyo – and it’s a miracle it hasn’t run into this issue sooner. TEPCO is still struggling with how to dispose of the tritium-tainted water. Options discussed have included dumping it into the ocean, but that proposal has angered local fishing communities.

  

  At some point, TEPCO and the government will need to make a difficult decision. Until then, ground water will continue to seep into the ruined reactor, where it becomes contaminated. Afterward, TEPCO can treat the contaminated water to purify it, but they can’t remove the tritium, which is why the supply of water contaminated with tritium continues to grow.

  As one government official pointed out, Japan can’t simply store the radioactive water forever. As of now, the company should be able to store water until 2020.

  Efforts have been made to increase storage capacity by constructing bigger tanks when the time comes for replacing the current ones. But a senior official of the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry said, “Operation of tanks is close to its capacity.”

  TEPCO plans to secure 1.37 million tons of storage capacity by the end of 2020, but it has not yet decided on a plan for after 2021. Akira Ono, chief decommissioning officer of TEPCO, said, “It is impossible to continue to store [treated water] forever.”

  But after that, Tepco is either going to need to start releasing the tritium water into the ocean (something that has been done by many power plants, but is politically popular in Japan) or find another solution. In fact, an average of 380 trillion becquerels had been annually released into the sea across Japan during the five years before the accident. If the water from Fukushima is diluted to the point that tritium content is only 1 million becquerels per liter, which is more than 10 times higher than the national average for sea release. But if it’s diluted, it can eventually be released. However, an industry report has determined that sea release would be the safest and most efficient option.

  Regarding disposal methods for the treated water, the industry ministry’s working group compiled a report in June 2016 that said that the method of release into the sea is the cheapest and quickest among five ideas it examined. The ideas were (1) release into the sea, (2) release by evaporation, (3) release after electrolysis, (4) burial underground and (5) injection into geological layers.

  After that, the industry ministry also established an expert committee to look into measures against harmful misinformation. Although a year and a half has passed since the first meeting of the committee, it has not yet reached a conclusion.

  At the eighth meeting of the committee held on Friday, various opinions were expressed. One expert said, “While the fishery industry [in Fukushima and other prefectures] is in the process of revival, should we dispose of [the treated water] now?” The other said, “In order to advance the decommissioning, the number of tanks should be decreased at an early date.”

  The working group is planning to hold a public hearing to consider other methods of disposal. But if none can be found, Japan will have no choice but to dump the contaminated water into the ocean.

  

• How The FBI And CIA Restarted The Cold War To Protect Themselves

  Authored by Thomas Farnan via Townhall.com,

  On December 29, 2016, the Obama Administration – with three weeks remaining in its term – issued harsh sanctions against Russia over supposed election interference.  Two compounds in the United States were closed and 35 Russian diplomats were ordered to leave the country.  

  

  Russia responded by calling the actions “Cold War déjà vu.”

  In the two years that have elapsed since, it has been learned that the “intelligence” that formed the basis for the sanctions was beyond dubious.   

  A single unverified “dossier” compiled by an ex-British spy with no discernable connections to Russia was shopped to FISA judges and the media as something real.

  The dossier was opposition research by the Hillary Clinton campaign, a fact that was not disclosed and actively hidden by off-the-book transactions through the law firm Perkins Coie.

  As a dog that chases its tail, the fake dossier was being used to cause the investigation which itself lent credibility to the notion of Russian interference.

  The FBI and CIA thumbed the eye of an armed nuclear state based on false intelligence.  Why?  

  The answer is now obvious: to cover up their own election year shenanigans they thought would remain forever hidden in the inevitable Hillary Clinton victory.

  Russian collusion had first come to the electorate’s attention in July.  The DNC had lost a cache of its emails either to a phishing scheme or to a hacker.  The emails showed the Clinton campaign and the DNC conspiring to fix primaries against Bernie Sanders. 

  The outcry among Sanders supporters was sufficiently loud that DNC chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned on the eve of the democratic convention.   

  It was a huge scandal.  To squelch it for their expected future boss Hillary Clinton, the FBI and CIA constructed a Rube Goldberg machine of “Russian collusion” to blame Trump.

  The FBI never bothered to test the computers for a hack.  That task was left to CrowdStrike, a private contractor whose CTO and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a Russian ex-patriot and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a think tank with an anti-Russian agenda.

  The Atlantic Council is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, a $10 million donor to the Clinton Foundation.  The fix was in.  CrowdStrike dutifully reported that the Russians were behind the hack.

  Lat year The Nation, a progressive publication, got a group of unaffiliated computer experts to test CrowdStrike’s hypothesis and they concluded that the email files were removed from the computer at a speed that makes an off-site download from Russia impossible.  

  Incredibly, Trump was placed on the defensive for email leaks that showed his opponent fixing the primaries.  His campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, resigned because of past dealings with Russia.

  Trump protested by stating the obvious: the federal government has “no idea” who was behind the hacks.

  The FBI and CIA called him a liar, issuing a “Joint Statement” that suggested 17 intelligence agencies agree that it was the Russians.  Hillary Clinton took advantage of this “intelligence assessment” in the October debate to portray Trump as Putin’s stooge.  

  She said, “We have 17, 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyber-attacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin.  And they are designed to influence our election. I find that deeply disturbing.”

  The media’s fact checkers excoriated Trump for lying.  It was the ultimate campaign dirty trick: a joint operation by the intelligence agencies and the media against a political candidate.

  Trump won anyway against this level of cheating.  It has since been learned that the “17 intelligence agencies” claptrap was always false.  Powerful insiders at the FBI and CIA authored the intelligence assessment and deceptively packaged it as a consensus.

  By December 2016, the FBI and CIA needed something to justify their illegal wiretaps and spying.  If not the quid, they at least needed the pro quo: an event that could be portrayed through a hard squint as collusion.

  They were not without means.  They had members of Trump’s transition improperly wiretapped.  If they could catch one making a concession to the Russians, they could say “gotcha” – this proves you were always in bed with them.

  That is when the CIA and FBI shopped their phony intelligence assessments to President Obama and he sanctioned Russia.  Then they listened in on the Trump transition’s conversation with the Russian ambassador the next day.  

  Surely General Flynn, Trump’s incoming national security advisor, would scoff at the sanctions and promise to lift them.  That would be the pro quo that proved the quid.   They would finally have anecdotal evidence that showed Trump delivering for Putin.

  General Flynn, though, was uncharacteristically noncommittal.   It didn’t work.  

  The machinations that followed, the secret memos and special counsel, the prosecution of Flynn anyway for what happened in his conversation, the whole sordid mess, is a cover-up.

  In the inverse logic of Russian collusion, the investigation itself supplies credibility to the collusion narrative.  Any attempt to end the investigation is obstruction of justice.   

  One person has the constitutional responsibility end this nonsense.  Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who himself was duped into recusing himself by since discredited intelligence, should bow to recent disclosures of impropriety and say enough is enough.  

  His Inspector General will be issuing a report to him sometime soon.   Maybe then he will lift his recusal and start the prosecutions.  People should go to jail for this.

  

• "The Outlook Is Not Good": Goldman Sees U.S. In Dire Straits As Deficit Hits $2 Trillion In 10 Years

  Three months ago, Goldman first among the big banks warned that the US fiscal trajectory was dire, warning that “US fiscal policy is on an unusual course” with the budget deficit expected to widen over the next few years, as a result of prior imbalances and recently enacted policies – namely Trump’s dramatic fiscal stimulus – which should lead to a federal debt/GDP ratio of around 85% of GDP by 2021.

  

  This, Goldman’s economists warned, stands in contrast to the typical relationship between the economic cycle and the budget balance, as shown in Exhibit 2, which shows that the US deficit should be small and shrinking, not large and growing at this stage in the business cycle when the unemployment rate is near its cyclical lows.

  

  But the biggest risk by far, according to Goldman, was the rising interest expense on the Federal Debt, which all else equal, would send the US into banana republic “uncharted territory.” This is what Goldman warned back in February:

  … we project that, if Congress continues to extend existing policies, including the recently enacted tax and spending legislation, federal debt will slightly exceed 100% of GDP and interest expense will rise to around 3.5% of GDP, putting the US in a worse fiscal position than the experience of the 1940s or 1990s.

  

  The bank’s conclusion in February was just as dire: “the continued growth of public debt raises eventual sustainability questions if left unchecked.”  Of course, “sustainability questions” is a polite bank euphemism for economic and financial catastrophe.

  * * *

  Fast forward to today when, three months after its original dire assessment, Goldman doubles down and in a note assessing “what’s the worst that could happen” with the US budget deficit, writes that “the US fiscal outlook is not good” and among other things, predicts that the US fiscal deficit will double from $1 trillion over the next 12 months to $2 trillion by 2028, pr a near record 7% of GDP:

  We project the federal deficit will increase from $825bn (4.1% of GDP) to $1,250bn (5.5% of GDP) by 2021. By 2028, we expect it to rise to $2.05 trillion (7.0% of GDP) in our baseline scenario, which assumes that expiring tax provisions will be extended and that discretionary spending, which was recently increased, will increase only slightly further in
  nominal terms.

  

  All else equal, Goldman’s distressing forecast sees US federal debt rising to 105% of GDP in ten years, a whopping 9% higher than CBO’s latest projections.

  Making matters worse, that is the baseline forecast, or as analysts on the sellside call it, the optimistic outlook. As a result, as Goldman warns, while surprises are clearly possible in both directions, the bank believes “the risks are tilted in the direction of larger deficits than projected” and presents four possible alternative, and adverse, scenarios:

  1. Congress keeps revenue and discretionary spending in line with historical averages;
  2. the interest rate-growth differential worsens due to slower than expected growth;
  3. a recession; and
  4. Congress agrees on a deficit reduction package similar to the major deals of the early 1990s.

  Of course, while nobody wants to say it, the recession scenario is a guaranteed on as otherwise the US would have been in an expansion for nearly 20 years, or 234 consecutive months by December 31, 2018, as we calculated one month ago, with the laughable pro forma result shown below.

  

  A recession, as Goldman points out, would obviously widen the deficit and boost the debt/GDP ratio more than any of our other scenarios over the next few years. However, as report author Alec Phillips warns, “over the next ten years the outlook is worse under a low-growth scenario or continued fiscal laxity.“

  

  And while a recession is a given, if nobody wants to admit it, Goldman points out that the “most striking scenario” would be the most optimistic one, where Congress enacts a deficit reduction package as large (as a share of GDP) as the largest two deficit reduction packages of the early 1990s.

  What is especially concerning, is that even under this best case scenario, with a budget-friendly assumption, “the deficit and debt level would still reach around 5% and 95% of GDP respectively, very close to CBO’s baseline forecast for 2028.”

  What does all this mean in practical terms? Adding soaring deficits to rising rates, and an exponential debt issuance calendar, and you get a very troubling outcome: much higher rates, at least in the beginning, as eventually the stock market will crash, and trillions in capital flows will once again flee stocks for the “safety” of US bonds, fiscal crisis be damned. Goldman, focuses on “the beginning” part, and notes that “An expanding deficit and debt level is likely to put upward pressure on interest rates, expanding the deficit further.”

  This also changes the sensitivity analysis between deficit and yields as follows:

  Building on our recent work on deficits and interest rates, our baseline scenario suggests that the widening of the deficit from 3.5% to 5% of GDP should boost 10-year yields by 30bp, other things equal, while our forecast of a chronic deficit in the range of 6-7% of GDP in the next decade would imply a cumulative boost of around 70bp over time.

  Of course, before everyone panic sells their duration exposure, Goldman has one big caveat: “whether such an interest rate move occurs depends in part on if market participants believe lawmakers would allow such a fiscal outcome.” The problem, as Phillips conclude, “while Congress will eventually address the widening budget gap, it also seems quite likely to take longer than most market participants might expect.”

  Here is the full assessment of what happens next from a political standpoint:

  Little Chance of Near-Term Fiscal Reforms

  Eventually, lawmakers are likely to become more sensitive to the fiscal situation and will take action to reduce the budget deficit. However, this doesn’t seem likely in the near-term, for at least two reasons.

  • First, we will soon enter the period in the political cycle where deficit reduction measures are less common. Deficit reduction legislation is more common at the start of the four-year political cycle (1990, 1993, and 1997 marked the major deficit reduction packages of the 1990s for example) than just before a presidential election. Admittedly, the 2011 Budget Control Act that introduced the current spending caps stands as at least one exception to this pattern. Nevertheless, the odds of meaningful deficit reduction policies seem likely to decline further as the 2020 presidential election approaches.
  • Second, there is less political consensus than usual regarding the need for reform. Only 2-3% of the public in recent polling cite the deficit as one of the most important problems facing the government, compared with levels of 15-20% during the fiscal battles of the mid-1990s or the 2011-2013 period. This could change if political leaders increase their focus on the issue, as they did during those earlier periods. However, it seems unlikely that Congress will reverse any of the recently enacted tax cuts or discretionary spending increases, which leaves entitlement spending as the only  area of the budget where fiscal consolidation seems plausible over the next few years. However, the Trump Administration has not made this a priority—the President opposed cutting Medicare and Social Security spending in the 2016 campaign, though the most recent White House budget proposed modest savings in these areas—and one of the chief proponents of entitlement reform in Congress, Speaker Paul Ryan, is retiring from Congress at year end.

  Deficit reduction proposals do not seem likely to figure prominently in 2018 midterm election campaigns and, at least at this early stage, do not seem likely to become an important issue in the 2020 election either. This suggests  that the fiscal outlook is unlikely to change substantially due to policy actions until at least 2021, leaving it dependent largely on the path of the economy until then.

  Said otherwise: with the 10Y now well north of 3.00%, Goldman newly reconstituted prop trading desk is buying all the paper its clients wish to sell. Trade accordingly.

  

• Is Wikipedia An Establishment Psyop?

  Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

  If you haven’t been living in a hole in a cave with both fingers plugged into your ears, you may have noticed that an awful lot of fuss gets made about Russian propaganda and disinformation these days.

  Mainstream media outlets are now speaking openly about the need for governments to fight an “information war” against Russia, with headlines containing that peculiar phrase now turning up on an almost daily basis.

  Here’s one published today titled “Border guards detain Russian over ‘information war’ on Poland“, about a woman who is to be expelled from that country on the grounds that she “worked to consolidate pro-Russian groups in Poland in order to challenge Polish government policy on historical issues and replace it with a Russian narrative” in order to “destabilize Polish society and politics.”

  Here’s one published yesterday titled “Marines get new information warfare leader“, about a US Major General’s appointment to a new leadership position created “to better compete in a 21st century world.”

  Here’s one from the day before titled “Here’s how Sweden is preparing for an information war ahead of its general election“, about how the Swedish Security Service and Civil Contingencies Agency are “gearing up their efforts to prevent disinformation during the election campaigns.”

  This notion that the US and its allies are fighting against Russian “hybrid warfare” (by which they typically mean hackers and disinformation campaigns) has taken such deep root among think tanks, DC elites and intelligence/defense circles that it often gets unquestioningly passed on as fact by mass media establishment stenographers who are immersed in and chummy with those groups. The notion that these things present a real threat to the public is taken for granted to such an extent that they seldom bother to even attempt to explain to their audiences why we’re meant to be so worried about this new threat and what makes it a threat in the first place.

  Which is, to put it mildly, really weird. Normally when the establishment cooks up a new Official Bad Guy they spell out exactly why we’re meant to be afraid of them. Marijuana will give us reefer madness and ruin our communities. Terrorists will come to where we live and kill us because they hate our freedom. Saddam Hussein has Weapons of Mass Destruction which can be used to perpetrate another 9/11. Kim Jong Un might nuke Hawaii any second now.

  With this new “Russian hybrid warfare” scare, we’re not getting any of that. This notion that Russians are scheming to give westerners the wrong kinds of political opinions is presented as though having those political opinions is an inherent, intrinsic threat all on its own. The closest they typically ever get to explaining to us what makes “Russian disinformation” so threatening is that it makes us “lose trust in our institutions,” as though distrusting the CIA or the US State Department is somehow harmful and not the most logical position anyone could possibly have toward historically untrustworthy institutions. Beyond that we’re never given a specific explanation as to why this “Russian disinformation” thing is so dangerous that we need our governments to rescue us from it.

  Two weeks after the Atlantic Council explained to us that we need to be propagandized for our own good, Facebook announces a new partnership with the Atlantic Council to make sure we’re getting the right kinds of information.https://t.co/aXwHvxdREXhttps://t.co/3CkVtvBs0s pic.twitter.com/sEz52VjNTe

  — Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) May 17, 2018

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

  The reason we are not given a straight answer as to why we’re meant to want our institutions fighting an information war on our behalf (instead of allowing us to sort out fact from fiction on our own like adults) is because the answer is ugly.

  As we discussed last time, the only real power in this world is the ability to control the dominant narrative about what’s going on. The only reason government works the way it works, money operates the way it operates, and authority rests where it rests is because everyone has agreed to pretend that that’s how things are. In actuality, government, money and authority are all man-made conceptual constructs and the collective can choose to change them whenever it wants. The only reason this hasn’t happened in our deeply dysfunctional society yet is because the plutocrats who rule us have been successful in controlling the narrative.

  Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. This has always been the case. In many societies throughout history a guy who made alliances with the biggest, baddest group of armed thugs could take control of the narrative by killing people until the dominant narrative was switched to “That guy is our leader now; whatever he says goes.” In modern western society, the real leaders are less obvious, and the narrative is controlled by propaganda.

  Propaganda is what keeps Americans accepting things like the fake two-party system, growing wealth inequality, medicine money being spent on bombs to be dropped on strangers in stupid immoral wars, and a government which simultaneously creates steadily increasing secrecy privileges for itself and steadily decreasing privacy rights for its citizenry. It’s also what keeps people accepting that a dollar is worth what it’s worth, that personal property works the way it works, that the people on Capitol Hill write the rules, and that you need to behave a certain way around a police officer or he can legally kill you.

  And therein lies the answer to the question. You are not being protected from “disinformation” by a compassionate government who is deeply troubled to see you believing erroneous beliefs, you are being herded back toward the official narrative by a power establishment which understands that losing control of the narrative means losing power. It has nothing to do with Russia, and it has nothing to do with truth. It’s about power, and the unexpected trouble that existing power structures are having dealing with the public’s newfound ability to network and share information about what is going on in the world.

  Please, please, please do read this – the tip of a very sinister iceberg. I intend to write about it myself including the incredibly defensive, rude reaction of Jimmy Wales and @wikimediauk when “Philip Cross” is raised, and the bigging up of MSM figures. https://t.co/stR3wa8TQZ

  — Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) May 17, 2018

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

  Until recently I haven’t been closely following the controversy between Wikipedia and popular anti-imperialist activists like John Pilger, George Galloway, Craig Murray, Neil Clark, Media Lens, Tim Hayward and Piers Robinson. Wikipedia has always been biased in favor of mainstream CNN/CIA narratives, but until recently I hadn’t seen much evidence that this was due to anything other than the fact that Wikipedia is a crowdsourced project and most people believe establishment-friendly narratives. That all changed when I read this article by Craig Murray, which is primarily what I’m interested in directing people’s attention to here.

  The article, and this one which prompted it by Five Filters, are definitely worth reading in their entirety, because their contents are jaw-dropping. In short there is an account which has been making edits to Wikipedia entries for many nears called Philip Cross. In the last five years this account’s operator has not taken a single day off–no weekends, holidays, nothing–and according to their time log they work extremely long hours adhering to a very strict, clockwork schedule of edits throughout the day as an ostensibly unpaid volunteer.

  This is bizarre enough, but the fact that this account is undeniably focusing with malicious intent on anti-imperialist activists who question establishment narratives and the fact that its behavior is being aggressively defended by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales means that there’s some serious fuckery afoot.

  

  “Philip Cross”, whoever or whatever that is, is absolutely head-over-heels for depraved Blairite war whore Oliver Kamm, whom Cross mentioned as a voice of authority no fewer than twelve times in an entry about the media analysis duo known collectively as Media Lens. Cross harbors a special hatred for British politician and broadcaster George Galloway, who opposed the Iraq invasion as aggressively as Oliver Kamm cheered for it, and on whose Wikipedia entry Cross has made an astonishing 1,800 edits.

  Updated: The Philip Cross Affair – UPDATE “Philip Cross” has not had one single day off from editing Wikipedia in almost five years. “He” has edited every single day from 29 August 2013 to 14 May 2018. Including five Christmas Days. That’s 1,721 https://t.co/z5NRExlLon

  — Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) May 19, 2018

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

  Despite the overwhelming evidence of constant malicious editing, as well as outright admissions of bias by the Twitter account linked to Philip Cross, Jimmy Wales has been extremely and conspicuously defensive of the account’s legitimacy while ignoring evidence provided to him.

  “Or, just maybe, you’re wrong,” Wales said to a Twitter user inquiring about the controversy the other day. “Show me the diffs or any evidence of any kind. The whole claim appears so far to be completely ludicrous.”

  “Riiiiight,” said the totally not-triggered Wales in another response. “You are really very very far from the facts of reality here. You might start with even one tiny shred of some kind of evidence, rather than just making up allegations out of thin air. But you won’t because… trolling.”

  “You clearly have very very little idea how it works,” Wales tweeted in another response. “If your worldview is shaped by idiotic conspiracy sites, you will have a hard time grasping reality.”

  As outlined in the articles by Murray and Five Filters, the evidence is there in abundance. Five Filterslays out “diffs” (editing changes) in black and white showing clear bias by the Philip Cross account, a very slanted perspective is clearly and undeniably documented, and yet Wales denies and aggressively ridicules any suggestion that something shady could be afoot. This likely means that Wales is in on whatever game the Philip Cross account is playing. Which means the entire site is likely involved in some sort of psyop by a party which stands to benefit from keeping the dominant narrative slanted in a pro-establishment direction.

  

  A 2016 Pew Research Center report found that Wikipedia was getting some 18 billion page views per month. Billion with a ‘b’. Youtube recently announced that it’s going to be showing text from Wikipedia articles on videos about conspiracy theories to help “curb fake news”. Plainly the site is extremely important in the battle for control of the narrative about what’s going on in the world. Plainly its leadership fights on one side of that battle, which happens to be the side that favors western oligarchs and intelligence agencies.

  

  How many other “Philip Cross”-like accounts are there on Wikipedia? Has the site always functioned an establishment psyop designed to manipulate public perception of existing power structures, or did that start later? I don’t know. Right now all I know is that an agenda very beneficial to the intelligence agencies, war profiteers and plutocrats of the western empire is clearly and undeniably being advanced on the site, and its founder is telling us it’s nothing. He is lying. Watch him closely.

  *  *  *

  Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website, so you’ll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, or buying my new bookWoke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Why The Soaring Dollar Will Lead To An "Explosive" Market Repricing: A Flow Chart

  Something curious took place one month ago when the PBOC announced on April 17 that it would cut the reserve requirement ratio (RRR) by 1% to ease financial conditions: it broke what until then had been a rangebound market for both the US Dollar and the US 10Y Treasury, sending both the dollar index and 10Y yields soaring…

  

  … which led to an immediate tightening in financial conditions both domestically and around the globe, and which has – at least initially – manifested itself in a sharp repricing of emerging market risk, resulting in a plunge EM currencies, bonds and stocks.

  

  Adding to the market response, this violent move took place at the same time as geopolitical fears about Iran oil exports amid concerns about a new war in the middle east and Trump’s nuclear deal pullout, sent oil soaring – with Brent rising above $80 this week for the first time since 2014 – a move which is counterintuitive in the context of the sharply stronger dollar, and which has resulted in even tighter financial conditions across the globe, but espetially for emerging market importers of oil.

  Meanwhile, all this is playing out in the context of a world where the Fed continues to shrink its balance sheet – a public sector “public Quantitative Tightening (QT)” – further tightening monetary conditions (i.e., shrinking the global dollar supply amid growing demand), even as high grade US corporate bond issuance has dropped off a cliff for cash-rich companies which now opt to repatriate cash instead of issuing domestic bonds, with the resulting private sector deleveraging, or “private sector QT”, further exacerbating tighter monetary conditions and the growing dollar shortage (resulting in an even higher dollar).

  

  And while the latest incarnation of the dollar’s “impossible trilemma” – rising dollar, rising oil, rising yields (not to be confused with its more conventional Chinese variant) makes a short, if perplexing appearance, ultimately it’s all about the value of the dollar, and its impact on downstream assets and volatility.

  This is the point made by Deutsche Bank’s derivatives expert Aleksandar Kocic, who in his latest report writes that in the context to the Fed’s normalization and monetary policy fine tuning, the “USD is emerging as the key variable — it presents a compact summary of the underlying macro risks that could destabilize the current Fed path.” In other words, the last thing the Fed wants right now as it accelerates its balance sheet normalization, is a sharp spike in the dollar. And yet, that’s precisely what is happening. Kocic explains:

  A strong USD corresponds to generally hawkish Fed in an environment where the US is recovering fast while the rest of the globe is still too slow or recessionary, or that the Fed is pushing rates above the neutral and causing excessive tightening of financial conditions and potentially triggering recession. A weak USD path, on the other hand, can materialize either as an inflation or credit (twin deficits) risk, a troubling possibility to which there is no adequate policy response.

  For Kocic, the relative strength of the dollar is the exogenous event that could awake markets from their peaceful slumber, resulting in a violent reassessment of monetary conditions as the Fed quietly undoes the biggest monetary experiment in history, or as he puts it, “although unwind of stimulus and Fed exit continue without disrupting the markets, the underlying stability remains local, threatened potentially by the tail risk.”

  For now, the DB strategist notes, “the current market configuration appears to be cooperating with the Fed’s efforts in either scenario” and “market positioning and flows are likely to cause offsetting pressure to each macro risk and therefore help stability of the system.”

  In particular, strong USD, which is bullish for bonds, in terms of global sponsorship, is also bearish for EM currencies and reserve managers there are likely to defend local currencies by selling US assets, which goes against macro. Similarly, their response to weaker USD would stabilize bear steepeners on the back of defending their exports through stabilization of EM currencies and support for the US long end.

  The bigger problem, one discussed by Kocic previously, and which also takes the shape of the yield curve in consideration, is that with every passing day of normalization manifesting itself in bear flatteners, the market gets closer to the tipping point of duration decrease in which a rotation from risk assets into the short-end of the curve threatens a forced “price discovery” of the new “Fed put” (which Kocic recently calculated was in the 2,300-2,400 range).

  So in this context of a creeping bear flattener, Kocic observes that together with the stronger USD, these two discrete trends have a potential to create more volatility and discomfort across all market sectors than bear steepeners if they both remain localized and do not trigger tail risk.

  How does this look schematically? Luckily, the Deutsche Banker has come up with a handy flowchart showing the next steps in how the stronger dollar could lead to an “explosive” move in not only the front end of the curve, but across all markets:

  Causality chain of strong USD and its potential knock-on effect is shown in the chart. We start at the lower left corner. Fed hikes and strong USD open up the EM dilemma: Facing the outflows or defending the currency at expense of stifling the growth. This implies both, more volatility and potential sell off in EM, and bearish pressure on the long end of the UST that would offset the underlying bid for US bonds (strong USD is bullish). Turbulence in EM could have a knock-on effect on risk assets in the US.

  

  Why is the above critical? Because if the cycle were to play out, it would result in the same set of conditions which led to a global bear market back in 2015 in the aftermath of China’s devaluation (odd, there’s China again precipitating a global market crisis):

  An example is the 2015 episode where asset managers faced redemptions due to EM losses and had to sell the best performing assets (US equities) to cover those costs. This means more turbulence in developed markets and possible tightening of financial conditions, which could question the strength of the USD and possibly push Fed to take a pause.

  But the real punchline is just how trapped the Fed now is, because should Powell “relent” and hint that the Fed may take a break in order to spare EMs and stocks, well the result would be an avalanche of short covering in the Eurodollar market, one which would lead to an even more dramatic, or as Deutsche calls it “explosive” move in the short end:

  Given record shorts on the Eurodollar curve (Figure), Fed pause is likely to trigger unwind of these position which could be explosive and the front end of the curve could rally hard.

  

  The punchline: the dollar surge, catalyzed by the April 17 PBOC RRR cut, has launched a feedback loop which, very much like the Chinese 2015 devaluation, culminates in one of two possible unpleasant – for the Fed – outcomes: a collapse in EMs should dollar strength not be arrested, which then morphs into a broad-based liquidation of all risk assets (the most likely result of this is Fed intervention, in the form of sharp rate cuts and/or more QE) or if the Fed verbally relents again, as it did in 2016 with the Shanghai Accord, and suggests that financial conditions are now too tight, it threatens to crush the biggest ED spec short position ever, leading to trillions in paper losses, and an unprecedented collapse in the short end:

  The EPFR data reflecting the ETF and Mutual Funds Flows show continued outflows from the emerging markets and inflows into the short end of the UST curve, which is only increasing the stress in this sector. So, although we should see continued stability at the long end of the curve due to offsetting pressures between macro and flows, a slow grind of the front end, if persists, could morph into a volatile whipsaw. Further strength in the USD and the front end sell off on the back of more hawkish Fed could be potentially bearish for risk assets and act as a trigger for rates reversal.

  In short, while the Fed has found itself trapped before, it was only the recent spike in the dollar (thanks China) that has forced the Fed to act, with either decision – either further hawkishness or a dovish relent – leading to major market pain. And the longer the Fed delays making the key decision, the more painful the outcome will eventually be.

  

• "May The Better Liar Win" – How Democracy Ended

  Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  What killed democracy was constant lying to the public, by politicians whose only way to win national public office is to represent the interests of the super-rich at the same time as the given politician publicly promises to represent the interests of the public — “and may the better liar win!” — it’s a lying-contest.

  

  When democracy degenerates into that, it becomes dictatorship by the richest, the people who can fund the most lying. Such a government is an aristocracy, no democracy at all, because the aristocracy rule, the public don’t. It’s the type of government that the French Revolution was against and overthrew; and it’s the type of government that the American Revolution was against and overthrew; but it has been restored in both countries.

  First here will be discussed France:

  On 7 May 2017, Emmanuel Macron was elected President of France with 66.1% of the vote, compared to Marine Le Pen’s 33.9%. That was the second round of voting; the first round had been: Macron 24.0%, Le Pen 21.3% Fillon 20.0%, Melenchon 19.6%, and others 15%; so, the only clear dominator in that 11-candidate contest was Macron, who, in the second round, turned out to have been the second choice of most of the voters for the other candidates. Thus, whereas Le Pen rose from 21.3% to 33.9% in the second round (a 59% increase in her percentage of the vote), Macron rose from 24.0% to 66.1% in the second round (a 275% increase in his percentage of the vote). In other words: Macron didn’t just barely win the Presidency, but he clearly dominated both rounds; it was never at all close.

  But once in office he very quickly disappointed the French public:

  On 11 August 2017, Le Figaro bannered (as autotranslated by Google Chrome) “A hundred days later, Macron confronted with the skepticism of the French”, and reported that 36% were “satisfied” and 64% were “dissatisfied” with the new President. 

  On 23 March 2018, Politico bannered “Macron’s approval ratings hit record low: poll” and reported that, “Only 40 percent of the French population said they have a favorable opinion of Macron, a drop of 3 percentage points from last month and 12 percentage points from December, while 57 percent said they hold a negative opinion of the president.” 

  On 22 April 2018, Europe 1 reported that 44% were “satisfied” with Macron, and 55% were “dissatisfied” with him; and that — even worse — while 23% were “very dissatisfied” with him, only 5% were “very satisfied” with him.

  So, clearly — and this had happened very quickly — the French public didn’t think that they were getting policies that Macron had promised to them during his campaign. He was very different from what they had expected — even though he had won the Presidency in a landslide and clearly dominated both rounds. That plunge in support after being elected President required a lot of deceit during his campaign.

  Second, is US:

  The situation in the US was very different in its means, but similar in its outcome: it was a close election between two candidates, each of whom had far more of the electorate despising him or her than admiring him or her. Neither of the two candidates in the second round was viewed net-favorably by the public.

  The key round of elimination of the more-attractive candidates, was in the primaries; and, after that, it became merely a choice between uglies in the general election. Any decent (or even nearly decent) person had already been eliminated, by that time. Consequently, the ultimate winner never had the high net-favorable rating from the US public, that Macron did from the French public.

  America’s system of ‘democracy’ is very different than France’s:

  Throughout the primaries-season — America’s first round — the most-preferred of all candidates in the race was Bernie Sanders, who, in the numerous one-on-one polled hypothetical choices versus any of the opposite Party’s contending candidates, crushed each one of them except John Kasich, who, throughout the primaries, was the second-most preferred of all of the candidates (and who performed far better than did Trump did in the hypothetical match-ups against Clinton). In the hypothetical match-ups, Sanders beat Kasich by 3.3%, whereas Kasich beat Clinton by 7.4% — that spread between +3.3% and -7.4% is 10.8%, and gives a pretty reliable indication of what the Democratic National Committee threw away when rigging the primaries and vote-counts for Hillary Clinton to win the Party’s nomination. Sanders beat Trump by 10.4%, whereas Clinton beat Trump by 3.2%. That spread was only 7.2% in favor of Sanders over Clinton; but, in any case, the DNC cared lots more about satisfying its mega-donors than about winning, when they picked Clinton to be the Party’s nominee.

  (Ms. Clinton’s actual victory over Mr. Trump in the final election between those two nominees turned out to be by only 2.1% — close enough a spread so as to enable Trump to win in the Electoral College (which is all that counts), which counts not individual voters but a formula that represents both the states and the voters. Sanders would have beaten Trump in a landslide — far too big a margin for the Electoral College to have been able to go the opposite way, such as did happen with Clinton. This fact was also shown here and here. That’s what the DNC threw away.) 

  Hillary Clinton received by far the biggest support from billionaires, of all of the candidates; Sanders received by far the least; and this is why the Democratic Party, which Clinton and Barack Obama (two thoroughly billionaire-controlled politicians) effectively controlled, handed its nomination to Clinton. On 7 June 2016, the great investigative journalist Greg Palast headlined and documented “How California is being stolen from Sanders right now”, and four days later a retired statistician’s review of other statisticians’ statistical analysis of data from all of the primaries and caucuses, reaffirmed their findings, that the Democratic nomination had been stolen by the Democratic National Committee, and he concluded that “the whole process has been rigged against Bernie at every level and that is devastating even though I don’t agree [politically] with him.” A more detailed study was published on 1 August 2016, titled “Democracy Lost: A Report on the Fatally Flawed 2016 Democratic Primaries”.

  Basically, what had happened is that the most-preferred of all the candidates got deep-sixed by Democratic Party billionaires, who ultimately control the DNC, just as Republican billionaires control the RNC. The US Government is squabbles between billionaires, and that’s all. That’s what’s left of American ‘democracy’, now.

  On 12 August 2016, Julian Assange noted: “MSNBC on its most influential morning program, Morning Joe, was defending Bernie Sanders. Then Debbie Wasserman Schultz [head of the DNC] called up the president of MSNBC. Amazingly, this is not reported in the US media. It is reported in the US media that they called up Chuck Todd who’s the host of Meet The Press. Something much more serious is not reported — that Debbie Wasserman Schultz herself personally called up the president of MSNBC to apply pressure in relation to positive coverage about Bernie Sanders on Morning Joe.” That was typical of what went on.

  Hillary Clinton’s favorable rating, by Election Day, was 40.3%, her unfavorable was 55.3%. Donald Trump’s favorable was 39.8%, unfavorable was 53.4%. Bernie Sanders, as of the end of the primaries on 29 June 2016, was 50.8% favorable, 39.6% unfavorable, and it has been getting steadily better afterward. But the suckered Democratic Party voters (the ones who were counted, at any rate) voted slightly more for Hillary than for Bernie. Even despite Sanders’s having had support from few if any billionaires, he almost won the Democratic nomination, and that’s remarkable. He might actually have received more votes during the primaries than Hillary did, but we’ll never know.

  So: America is a dictatorship by the billionaires. And this means that it operates by fooling the public. France is similar, though it achieves this via a different way. And, in both countries, deceit is essential, in order to achieve its dictatorship. Fooling the public is now what it’s all about, in either case. Democracy can never be won by fooling the public; because fooling the public means removing the public’s ability to control the government. So, calling such a nation a ‘democracy’, is, itself, deceiving the public — it’s part of the dictatorship, or else support of the dictatorship.

  In former times, this system was rationalized as ‘the divine right of kings’. Now it’s rationalized as ‘the divine right of capital’. But it’s also become covered-over by yet another lie: ‘democracy’. This is a ‘democratic’ aristocracy; it is an ‘equal opportunity’ aristocracy. In it, each citizen has ‘equal rights’ as every other citizen, no matter how wealthy. It’s just a castle of lies. And its doors are actually open only to the few richest-and-well-connected.

  Here, a former CIA official tries to describe how the American dictatorship works – the enforcement-part of the system, and he does (even if only by implication) also touch upon the financial sources of it.

  He discusses his personal case: why he could no longer tolerate working for the CIA. But his description of how he, as an Agency official, saw the system to function, starts at 3:45 in the video. Key passages start at 12:45, and at 20:15.

  Maybe any American who would email this article to friends who don’t understand how the system functions, will come under increased US surveillance, but that CIA official’s career and family were destroyed by what the system did to him, which was lots worse than just surveillance.

  Remarkably, he nonetheless had the courage to persist (and thus did that video). However, when one sees how politically partisan (and so obtuse) the viewer-comments to that video are, one might be even more depressed than by the account this former CIA official presents. But, even if the situation is hopeless, everyone should at least have the opportunity to understand it. Because, if the aristocracy are the only people who understand it, there can’t be any hope for democracy, at all.

  

• Did Putin Just Ask For Iran's Exit From Syria In Meeting With Assad?

  Syrian President Bashar al-Assad paid an unannounced visit to Vladimir Putin on Thursday evening at the Russian president’s summer home in the Black Sea resort city of Sochi where the two leaders discussed the process for winding down the war in Syria, and notably the reduction of foreign troop presence in the country.

  This marks the third such known meeting inside Russia between Assad and President Putin since 2015, and the first since two major instances of external airstrikes on the Syrian government dramatically escalated the prospect for broader war. The first was the April 13th US-led coalition attack involving over one hundred missiles on sites in and around Damascus; and the second was the May 10 Israeli attack on dozens of targets inside Syria in what was the biggest military escalation between the two countries in decades.

  

  No doubt the two leaders, both long branded international pariahs by the West, had a lot to discuss after the uptick of external military action in Syria, but likely looming larger was the Iran and Israel question, and Israel’s continued threats of attack should its “Iranian red line” go unenforced.

  Recall that a mere week ago Netanyahu concluded a 10-hour visit with Putin in Moscow just as Israeli jets were in the air beginning strikes against Syrian bases said to house Iranian troops.

  And crucially, Syria’s state-run SANA has confirmed that Putin told Assad during the meeting that “foreign armed forces” would leave Syria.

  The official readout of the meeting quotes President Putin as saying, “We affirm that with the achievement of the big victories and the remarkable successes by the Syrian Arab army in the fight against terrorism and with the activation of the political process, it is necessary for all foreign forces to withdraw from the Syrian Arab Republic territories.”

  This is a reference to the still ongoing but thorny Astana, Kazakhstan centered talks involving Russia, Turkey, and Iran which has been by and large rejected by the vast majority of anti-Assad fighters, especially due to Iran’s contentious role as a main guarantor of the deal. 

  For this reason most media outlets commenting on Putin’s reference to “foreign forces” interpret this as a jab at key Syrian ally Iran; however, a number of Middle East based journalists and analysts point to US occupying forces in Syria’s northeast, as well as Turkey’s military and armed proxy groups in the formerly Syrian Kurdish Afrin canton near Aleppo, and the tens of thousands for foreign jihadists that continue to fight in Syria — many of them state sponsored by Saudi Arabia and other external actors. 

  The Washington Post and CNN, for example, focused on Iran and Hezbollah as key foreign forces that have “helped to prop up the embattled President [Assad].” The Post’s Liz Sly said, “In the context of current debates for a [political] settlement, that’s code for Iran. No indication whether Assad agreed.”

  Putin to Assad in Sochi tonight: “Foreign armed forces will be withdrawn from the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic.” In the context of current debates for a settlement, that’s code for Iran. No indication whether Assad agreed. The Kremlin readout: https://t.co/7n0lhQkYJV

  — Liz Sly (@LizSly) May 17, 2018

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

  However former Sunday Times journalist Hala Jaber countered that Putin did not refer to Iran or other Syrian allied forces: “Iran‘s presence is not viewed in the same league as that of the U.S. and as such is not negotiable nor will be used by Syria as an exchange commodity… U.S. presence is viewed as totally illegal…[there’s] no comparison” she wrote.

  Notably, Assad’s statement while meeting with Putin named “illegal foreign forces” compared with Putin’s mention of “foreign forces.” Jaber further argued that “the reference by both Putin and Assad relates to both Turkish and U.S. forces and not Iran, which has a defense agreement with Syria… its current presence is not part of any such deals to be made.”

  Incorrect.. the reference by both Putin & Assad, relates to both Turkish & U.S forces and not Iran, which has a defence agreement with Syria.. it’s current presence is not part of any such deals to be made.

  — Hala Jaber (@HalaJaber) May 18, 2018

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

  As we noted in the aftermath of Israel’s latest massive attack on multiple locations inside Syria, Russia has appeared content to stay on the sidelines while Syria and Israel lobbed missiles at each other; however, Russia is carefully balancing its interests in Syria, eager to avoid an uncontrolled escalation leading to a direct great power confrontation. 

  Though a number of Western analysts have interpreted Russia’s relative silence on the latest Israeli strikes (as well as apparent U-turn on prior indications that it would supply Syria with with S-300 missiles) as signs of a weakening Moscow-Damascus alliance, it is more likely that Russia is pleased with Syria’s current air defense systems, and sees the battlefield as increasingly stabilizing in spite of limited Israeli incursions, hence Putin’s desire of “stepping up the political process” as he confirmed Thursday. 

  As we reported, Syria’s current missile defense seems to have performed well. SANA indicated that the army’s air defenses had “shot down dozens of Israeli missiles, preventing most of them from reaching their targets,” however, some of the rockets managed to hit radars and an ammunition depot. But beyond this, the multiple videos purporting to show direct intercepts by Syrian defenses make for a convincing case that Syria still possesses robust deterrent capabilities. 

  Yet in typical fashion the mainstream media can only interpret all recent events as signs of Syrian-Russian weakness and increased internal tensions. Time will tell.

  

• National Economic Disparity Could Spell Political Shifts

  Authored by Ben Isaac via Free Market Shooter blog,

  In the years following the housing crash of 2008, most local housing markets have made a full rebound from the dire straits that befell a huge portion of the population and took the economy with it. Many markets are now even stronger than they were in that time. The recent tax deductions passed by Congress and signed by President Trump in December have put more after tax cash in the pockets of virtually all Americans, yet there is one feature of the bill that has been seen as a detractor for the health of the American economy: State and local tax deductions.

  

  The major reduction has many high earners in higher tax states and cities in a bit of a panic over their new tax liability which they can no longer write off, which has resulted in some high revenue companies and large income earners looking to other parts of the country where the cost of doing business is much less burdensome.

  The South has been a large beneficiary of its collective policies of low taxes and other barriers to entry over the past couple decades, particularly in the automotive industry. Since 2000 foreign car manufacturers have anchored themselves in various places throughout the South, creating first, second, and third tier supplier jobs in the surrounding localities and reviving small southern towns, and continue to do so.

  Nissan, already based in Smyrna, Tennessee, announced a new $1.8 billion plant in Hunstsville, Alabama. An industry that was once reserved for Detroit and nearby suppliers who could access the Great Lakes has now moved to states filled with blue collar workers and colleges who partner with these manufacturers to produce educated and knowledgeable career employees.

  

  This phenomenon is not reserved for just the South either. High taxes and unwelcoming political landscapes have chased software developers out of its typical Silicon Valley oasis in California to places in Texas, Arizona, and North Dakota. Even the movie industry which gave California its glamour in the first place has found new roots in Atlanta. Boston’s medical research industry has begun migrating toward North Carolina, while Boeing has focused on growth in their South Carolina plant rather than investing in their Seattle headquarters. Charlotte, NC has become a hub for consumer banking when it used to all be set in New York City.

  The real estate markets have been affected in similar ways. Costs of living have inflated in places like Chicago, Washington DC, NYC, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and plenty of others to the point that you need a hyper inflated income just to maintain an average, ordinary life. A 2 bedroom in a desirable neighborhood of DC could just the same get a 4 bedroom house on an acre in South Carolina, and more and more people are taking notice of that.

  Developers and home builders are flocking to places like the Deep South and Southwest and in many instances own up to 75% of the available housing inventory at a given time, and they’re selling just as fast as they can build. Much of this is related to the vast underdeveloped land in areas surrounding these cities, but it can also be attributed to the desirability of living in an affordable place where the cost of living is reasonable and it’s actually realistic for once to save and start a family. Many people even take pay cuts to move to these places with the understanding that the net value is the same or better.

  By now you may be noticing a pattern: No matter the industry, it seems to spell out the same sentiment – People and businesses are moving from traditionally very blue states to traditionally solid red states. This could be a very good thing in the sense of waking up political leaders to the notion that high taxes have strangled their state and local economies to the point where they are now missing out on billions in revenue and everyday transactions.

  

  But there’s a second element to this shift: These citizens moving from these blue states to red states aren’t just abandoning political loyalties while they’re at it. They are still going to maintain their same beliefs in their new homes, which has caused some seemingly “safe” red states to come into question.

  This is particularly troubling for places like Georgia and Texas. These higher volumes of people in typically liberal industries such as entertainment and technology have suggested potential political shifting, noted in the 2016 election. And while both states did end up safely red this time around, neither was as comfortable a win as Republicans are used to enjoying. President Trump’s margin of victory in Georgia was 6 points. In Texas it was 9, and in North Carolina it was under 4. Those three states alone account for 59 Electoral Votes and an integral part of any Republican’s strategy for victory.

  President Trump fortunately has an advantage in turning over the typically-blue rust belt states of Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, while losing by only a point and a half in Minnesota. However, if Republicans want to maintain any share of that success in future elections it’ll mean delivering on economic promises and maintaining the faith of those disaffected by Democrat neglect.

  

  A big question that remains is how all this economic migration through these states will affect the 2020 census, which will not be accounted for in the 2020 elections, but the ones thereafter. This subtle blue-shifting of these deep red states could have proportionally larger consequences than expected if they gain more Electoral value. The issue for Republicans is that this affects their states far more than the blue states. Many of these people and jobs are moving from wildly blue states like New York, California, Massachussetts, and Washington, which will not “miss” them, at least politically speaking. Those states will remain safely blue with or without their votes, and so it’s only these states in the South and elsewhere who could fall victim to their best intentions with their attractive economies.

  

• Over 80% Of 2017 IPOs Had 'Negative' Earnings – Most Since Dot-Com Peak

  2017 was a banner year for many things – record low volatility, record high complacency, and record amounts of money printed by the world’s biggest central banks, among many others.

  All of which heralded the belief in the super-human, ‘can-do-no-wrong’ venture capitalist… and of course the ‘exit’ cash-out moment.

  

  108 operating companies went public in the U.S. in 2017 with the average first day return a healthy 15.0% – well above the average 12.9% bump seen since the start of the 21st century.

  But of most note in years to come, we suspect, is the fact that over 80% of IPOs in 2017 had negative earnings… the most since the peak of the dot-com bubble in 1999/2000…

  

  Source: Jay Ritter, University of Florida

  Put a slightly different way, 2017 was the biggest “money for nothing” year since Pets.com… consider that the next time you’re told to buy the dip. Remember the only reason “the water is warm” is because it has been ‘chummed’ by the the last greater fool ready for the professional sharks to hand their ‘risk’ to…

  

  

• Pakistan And America Are In The Throes Of A Serious Diplomatic Crisis

  Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,

  The steady deterioration of relations between these two erstwhile long-time allies is continuing with the latest political crisis between them that was sparked by the US’ decision to limit the distance that Pakistani diplomats in DC could travel outside the city.

  

  Islamabad imposed reciprocal measures against American diplomats located anywhere in the country, and the situation has since remained frozen, but is nowhere near resolved.

  While American-Pakistani relations have been worsening for the past couple of years now and especially since Trump’s aggressive New Year’s tweet against the country, they hit a low point when an American military attaché who had hit and killed a motorcyclist was originally forbidden from leaving the country aboard a US military plane that had come to retrieve him last week. A Pakistani court had ruled that he didn’t have full diplomatic immunity but he nevertheless left the country on Monday under unclear circumstances.

  It was presumably the legal actions initially pursued against this diplomat that infuriated the US to the point of wanting to humiliate all Pakistani diplomats in the American capital through the imposition of new travel restrictions, but Islamabad had a good reason for broadening its own reciprocal decree to include all American diplomats anywhere in the country.

  

  It was reported at the end of last month that the CIA failed in its secret plan to stage a jailbreak to free its local agent who was accused of cooperating with American intelligence in its quest to kill Bin Laden, and it’s well-known that US diplomats sometimes clandestinely go beyond their official duties in running spies inside their host nation. That’s probably what the Pakistanis are worried about after the news broke that the CIA was trying to organize a jailbreak, one which probably would have been violent and likely resulted in the deaths of some prison guards.

  All states have the sovereign right to implement what they claim to be national security requirements, whether they really are like in the Pakistani case or are just unbelievably said to be like in the American one, but the reason why this political crisis in particular is so sensitive is because it involves the privilege of diplomatic immunity as established by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as well as the respect given to other countries’ diplomats more broadly. In this instance, Pakistan was right to press for the American diplomat to be brought to justice for brazenly running a red light and killing a young man, even though he was eventually allowed to leave the country, while the US is exploiting its now-irrelevant response in order to humiliate all Pakistani diplomats in the American capital. Given the national security danger that American diplomats pose after the CIA’s failed jailbreak plans, there’s a legitimate reason why Pakistan’s reciprocal response extends to all US diplomats in the country.

  Nevertheless, it can be expected that the US and its global Mainstream Media partners will reframe everything in the reverse by making the world think that the Pakistani victims are really the aggressors and that the Americans are completely innocent of any wrongdoing.  This high-level intensification of the Hybrid War on Pakistan is intended to damage its target’s international reputation, but might counterproductively raise its soft power profile among its newfound multipolar partners such as Russia by proving the sincerity of the game-changing Eurasian geopolitical pivot that it’s recently commenced and which provoked the US’ rage to begin with.

  

• Extremely Rare Bottles Of Whiskey Fetch Over $2 Million At Auction

  Just six months after a Leonardo painting sold for $450 million, smashing all auction records, this week the world’s record excess liquidity once again underwent a “non-sterilized intervention”, when two bottles of whiskey sold for a mindboggling $2.11 million at a Hong Kong Bonhams auction on Friday, smashing the record for the most expensive bottles ever sold, according to the South China Morning Post.

  

  After a rare 60-year-old Macallan whiskey named after British pop artist Peter Blake went for $1.01 million (HK$7.96 million) from a bidder over the phone, a second bottle from the same vintage named after Italian artist Valerio Adami sold for $1.1 million (HK$8.64 million) to a bidder in the room. Only twelve of each Macallan were ever made. 

  The label for one of the bottles was designed by Blake, who is popularly known for co-creating the cover art for the album Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band by The Beatles. –scmp

  

  Both were distilled in 1926 and matured in a sherry hogshead cask until they were bottled in 1986.

  They were expected to fetch between $450,000 and $575,000. The previous record at auction for a bottle of whiskey was set in 2014, when a six-liter Macallan went for $624,000. 

  “These bottles are some of the oldest whiskies produced by Macallan in the 20th century,” said Daniel Lam On-tai, head of fine wine and whisky for Bonhams in Hong Kong. “They were not meant for sale. They were given to very important clients of Macallan.”

  

  The bottles were presented in specially designed cabinets made out of brass and glass, according to Lam. 

  Other highlights from the auction include the oldest Karuizawa whiskey known in existence at 52-years-old, setting a new record for a single bottle of Japanese whiskey at $312,000. It was one of 41 bottles produced in its batch, and was estimated to fetch between $190,000 and $230,000. 

  All 645 items in the auction fetched a total of $5.9 million, or as the Fed would call it, an “non-sterilized intervention” in liquidity conditions.

  

• Credit Card Delinquencies Spike Past Financial-Crisis Peak

  Authored by Wolf Richter via WolfStreet.com,

  Subprime is calling…

  In the first quarter, the delinquency rate on credit-card loan balances at commercial banks other than the largest 100 – so at the 4,788 smaller banks in the US – spiked in to 5.9%. This exceeds the peak during the Financial Crisis. The credit-card charge-off rate at these banks spiked to 8%. This is approaching the peak during the Financial Crisis.

  A sobering set of numbers the Federal Reserve Board of Governors releasedthis afternoon.

  But overall, across all commercial banks, including the largest banks with the largest credit-card loan balances outstanding, the delinquency rate was 2.54% (not seasonally adjusted). This overall rate was pushed down by the largest 100 banks, whose combined delinquency rate in Q1 was 2.48%.

  These large banks have been offering appealing incentives to consumers for years, and they’ve been going after consumers with the higher credit ratings, and they’ve been following good underwriting practices – having not yet forgotten the lesson from the last debacle – and this conservative approach is now helping to keep losses down.

  But the thousands of smaller banks couldn’t compete with those offers, and so they got deeply into subprime cloaked in sloppy underwriting. This way, they were able to reel in new credit-card customers that the big banks didn’t want, and those customers needed the money and charged up their new cards in no time, and the interest rates of 25% or 30% looked good on the banks’ income statement and helped maximize executive bonuses, yes even at smaller banks.

  But turns out, those banks had reeled in the most fragile customers and had eagerly doused them in irresponsible levels of debt at usurious interest rates – and now what? These customers won’t ever be able to pay off the balances or even pay the interest. For many of them, there’s only one way out. This caused the delinquency rate to spike from 3.81% to 5.90% in just three quarters.

  This chart shows delinquency rates for the largest 100 banks (blue line) and for the remaining 4,788 banks (red line):

  

  Credit card balances are deemed “delinquent” when they’re 30 days or more past due. The rate is figured as a percent of total credit card balances. In other words, among the smaller banks, nearly 6% of the outstanding credit card balances are now delinquent.

  The bank tries to collect these delinquent loans, and some customers are able to catch up. Others are not. After recovering what it could, the bank moves the remaining delinquent balance out of the delinquency basket and into the charge-off basket. This is when the loan is “charged off” against loan loss reserves.

  These charge-offs among the largest 100 banks rose to 3.73% in Q1 (not seasonally adjusted), the highest since the first quarter 2013.

  But among the remaining 4,788 banks, the charge-off rate spiked to 7.99%, the highest since Q2 2010. The rate among smaller banks had peaked during the Financial Crisis in Q4 2009 at 8.78%:

  

  Both charts show that the largest 100 banks had suffered massive losses during the Financial Crisis as their credit card loans blew up, and as consumers, many of whom had lost their jobs, could no longer keep up with their credit card debts.

  The smaller banks had been more conservative leading up to the Financial Crisis, and their delinquency and charge-off rates had been somewhat less catastrophic.

  The difference between then and now is that back then, unemployment was heading toward 10% and millions of people had lost their jobs; now the unemployment rate is near historic lows and the economy is humming. Yet already the smaller banks are booking these losses on their credit card portfolios. What will they do when the economy ever slows down?

  That was a rhetorical question.

  In the overall scheme of things, these 4,788 smaller banks hold only a small portion of all banking assets, including credit card balances. Of the $1 trillion in credit debt outstanding, these small banks hold only a fraction. So they won’t jeopardize the US financial system. And that’s why the Fed, as banking regulator, is relatively sanguine about these dizzying charge-off rates at the smaller banks.

  But the surge in charge-offs at these banks points at something fundamental: Credit problems at the margin. The consumer spending binge in recent years has been funded not by surging incomes at the lower 60% of the wage scale, where real wage stagnation has reigned, but by borrowing – particularly via credit cards and auto loans. Both of them have turned sour at the margins. And these are still the best of times.

  Only about half of retail is under attack from e-commerce, but that half is getting crushed. Read… Brick & Mortar Meltdown Pummels These Stores the Most 
   

  

• Russian Supersonic Bombers Head To Arctic Borders, 500 Miles From Alaska

  The Russian military plans on sending Tu-160 supersonic bombers to its sub-Arctic, eastern maritime borders this year, Lieutenant-General of the Russian Aerospace Forces, Sergei Kobylash, said Friday.

  

  “This year we are planning to fly to Anadyr also with Tu-160 aircraft. Now the Arctic is of strategic importance for us, that’s why we are developing new aerodromes and products for ourselves, which will ensure the country’s security from the maritime borders and in this direction. With the expansion of the spectrum and the scale of the problem are increasing. Accordingly, the requirements for the command of long-range aviation. Therefore, the attention of the leadership of the state to us is appropriate,” Lt.-General Kobylash said in an interview with the Krasnaya Zvezda (Red Star) newspaper.

  Anadyr is Russia’s easternmost Arctic port town. For the first time, Russia recently flew a Tu-22 bomber to Anadyr, according to Lt.-General Kobylash. He said the more advanced Tu-160 would be arriving at the sub-Arctic airfield in Anadyr this year — a 5oo-mile flight from Nome, Alaska.

  

  He added that the increasing use of these bombers confirms that Russia is expanding its geographical network of military flights.

  “Flights of strategic bomber-rocket-bomber crews to the equator, to Indonesia say that the range of tasks increases along with the range of those directions and airfields on which we are entrusted to designate our presence,” Lt.-General Kobylash emphasized.

  Since 2017, an increasing amount of U.S. warplanes have been intercepting Russian bombers off Alaska’s coast. Last week’s intercept was marked by U.S. F-22 Raptors escorting large Russian bombers in international airspace within 200 miles of Alaska’s coast for roughly 40 minutes.

  “We regularly encounter them, especially during air patrolling,” Kobylash said, “Near the borders of their countries, the aviation of these countries have the same right to escort us as we do to patrol flights.”

  Here is footage of the intercept:

  Russian strategic bombers escorted by US F-22 over neutral Arctic waters – MoD https://t.co/cSMejLcZhI pic.twitter.com/edqZO4iBiC

  — Russia Today News (@TodayRussia) May 12, 2018

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

  According to Newsweek, Russian President Vladimir Putin is quickly rebuilding military bases and airfields in Arctic territories, known as the Soviet-era Arctic triangle.

  “President Putin has unveiled two multi-purpose bases in lands adjacent to the Arctic circle since 2015 and four more are planned to follow. Experts have likened Russia’s rebuilding of bases and airfields in Arctic territories to a restoration of the Soviet-era Arctic triangle, spanning the Kola and Kamchatka peninsulas. Whether any of these facilities will be operating near full capacity in times of peace, it is not clear.

  Some of the upgrades have focused on Russia’s northeast, in the direction of the U.S. and Canada, where Moscow has deployed a new radar and sent anti-submarine aircraft to explore a new route through the North Pole —a journey not carried out since the Soviet Union’s collapse. “

  In this regard, it seems as Russia is increasing its military capabilities and capacities in the Arctic region to a much higher degree than the West has ever seen or done in the area before. We ask one question: Why does Russia want to store supersonic bombers 500 miles from Alaska? 

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The "Fake News" Story Is Fake News

  Authored by Philip Weiss via MondoWeiss.net,

  Almost every day on public radio or public television, I hear reports about how fake news is undermining our democracy.

  

  These high-minded reporters and anchors seem truly to believe that a feverish menace is overwhelming the minds of once-sensible people.

  

  This story is itself fake news for several obvious reasons.

  We’ve never had more good information than we have now; people are as well-informed as they want to be. There will always be outlets purveying lies; that is the nature of communication. And the insistence on the “fake news” issue is an effort to assign Trump’s victory not to those who brought it to us (the electorate, and the incompetence of the Clinton campaign) but on some nefarious agents.

  The fact that we have more and better information today than ever almost goes without saying. When I started in the news business more than 40 years ago, few reporters carried tape recorders, largely because they worked for a guild and were never subject to correction. Today there are countless outlets, thanks to the internet, and important events are almost always recorded. The amount of data we have on public figures is vast compared to even ten years ago.

  We can all argue about whether this is a good thing or a bad thing; but we are today awash in information. That information is more reliable than it has ever been before. My own work on Palestine and the Israel lobby has shown me that global consumers can get more accurate information about that conflict than they’ve ever had. Yes, as we assert here all the time, the mainstream US media is in the tank for Israel; but it’s not as if better information is not available at your fingertips, much of it from Europe and Palestine, often citizen video.

  Before the internet, alternative sources were much harder to obtain. You had to subscribe to journals, or go to Hotaling’s newsstand in Times Square for out-of-town papers. The best example is  sports. I had to hope the newsstand had the late edition of the Times, or that the Times carried the box score for my hometown team. Today I can find out any score and see videos of my team’s performance in an instant. And the destruction of the guilds by the internet has brought us sharp commentators who would never had access to the media traditionally (like this tweeter I turn to every morning to get the score).

  “Do you trust everything you read on social media?” an ad for WNYC radio asks. They used to say the same thing about newspapers when I was a kid! The idea that information used to be a clean pool before all the clever internet liars arrived is a delusion on the part of entitled reporters of the fake news storyline. Storytelling is a primordial human experience. It is rooted in the need for knowledge to enhance our survival. We tell stories in an effort to make our lives better, more fulfilling, more understandable. And from the beginning of the story, there were lies. Some say that human beings have tongues in their mouths to deceive others, while some fiction writers will tell you that artifice is the soul of story. We all learn to sort out sincere and truthful from exaggerated and bogus. No, we don’t always succeed as readers and listeners at that job, but we try. Just as reporters seek to convey accurate versions of events despite their limitations; and artificers seek to construct more perfect tales to relate social and psychological quandaries.

  There are surely hundreds of thousands of news sites today (millions?) where there used to be thousands of news outlets. The great preponderance of these sites do as we do here, try and present the most genuine version of events they are able to. As Ezra Pound once said, there is only one standard for writing: accuracy of statement. It’s not rocket science, but it is a struggle.

  Are there sites that try to hoodwink readers? Of course. There have always been sensational papers, yellow journalism, scandal sheets, rumors, disinformation, boys crying wolf, and unreliable sources. Readers have always had a duty to sort this out. How many of us feel that we can size up the accuracy of an unknown site in a few seconds, from one sign or another? Readers are way more sophisticated than the fake-news reporters believe them to be. More than that, we know that some of the biggest lies originate from authorities. Which gives rise to conspiracy stories, going back to Shakespeare…

  The claim that liars and fake-news sites handed the election to Donald Trump is fiction. A democracy gives the franchise to a lot of stupid people, on all sides. People believe what they want to believe. No doubt the internet has served to socialize information, tailoring it to tribal audiences (I seek out that baseball tweeter because we are likeminded, still our team can’t win), but it’s not as if information was objective before. The belief that people were manipulated into voting for Trump may be comforting to those who love the neoliberal elitism and interventionism of the post-9/11 world, but it doesn’t answer the complex reality that is American society.

  The smartest reporting on the 2016 election was the study showing that Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin all had high casualty rates from America’s wars; and that these voters regarded Clinton as pro-war. And Clinton failed to campaign in Wisconsin and Michigan, even as her surrogates advocated for regime change in Syria on the cables. Those factors would seem to be as determinative as anything else that the big papers have told us about the debacle November 8. It would be a lot better if they would actually interview Trump voters, rather than lecturing us about fake news.

  The claim that the Russians are behind fake news and they threw the election is just more fiction from a Democratic Party determined to have a new cold war in order to excuse itself from its failures to reach the white Obama voters who voted for Trump. Do people really think that the ads Russians placed on Facebook, or the data that Trump allies had access to through Cambridge Analytica, swayed people to vote for Trump? Is that how you made up your mind? Maybe a few fools changed their vote because of lies; but again that does not go to the real dynamics of the 2016 race. People disliked Clinton for good reasons. People sought a disrupter for good reasons.

  If Russians were behind the Wikileaks hack of the Democratic National Committee emails, maybe we should be thanking them. The hack exposed real corruption: on my issue, the Clinton team’s active efforts to sell Clinton’s stance on Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) to big pro-Israel donors as a way to salve them for her support for the Iran deal. No one has disputed the accuracy of these emails, and they are a disturbing window on how politics works. It would be nice if the media would spend a little time on the substance of those emails. But no, the fake news story has a life of its own.

  P.S. Judy Woodruff’s picture is atop this post because she and the PBS News Hour have taken the fake news story way too seriously. In fairness, I urge readers to watch her interview of two Boko Haram survivors, some of the best journalism you will ever see. 

  

• All 34 Bishops In Chile Suddenly Resign Over "Absolutely Deplorable" Pedophile Priest Scandal

  All 34 bishops in Chile have tendered their resignations in the wake of yet another pedophile priest scandal in which high level officials covered up the institutionalized sexual abuse of minors – even threatening officials tasked with investigating sex crimes and the destruction of evidence.

  

  Thirty-one active bishops and three who are signed a document with their offers to resign following an emergency meeting this week with Pope Francis. Francis can accept the resignations one by one, reject them outright or delay a decision. 

  

  Calls had mounted for the resignations after details emerged of the contents of a 2,300-page Vatican report into the Chilean scandal leaked early Friday. 

  Francis had accused the bishops of destroying evidence of sex crimes, pressuring investigators to minimize abuse accusations and showing ‘grave negligence’ in protecting children from paedophile priests.

  In one of the most damning documents from the Vatican on the issue, Francis said the entire Chilean church hierarchy was collectively responsible for ‘grave defects’ in handling cases and the resulting loss of credibility that the Catholic Church has suffered. –Daily Mail

  “No one can exempt himself and place the problem on the shoulders of the others,” Francis wrote in the document published by Chile’s T13 television and confirmed as accurate Friday by the Vatican.

  Responding to the 2,300-page report, Chilean bishops called the contents of the document “absolutely deplorable,” and showed an “unacceptable abuse of power and conscience,” along with sexual abuse. 

  The bishops asked for forgiveness from the victims, the Pope and all Catholics worldwide. 

  

  Pope Francis summoned the entire bishops conference to Rome after he said he made “grave errors in judgement” in the case of Chilean priest Juan Barros – who stands accused of victims of pedophile Rev. Fernando Karadima of witnessing and ignoring their abuse. 

  But the scandal grew beyond the Barros case after Francis received the report written by two Vatican sex crimes experts sent to Chile to get a handle on the scope of the problem. 

  Their report hasn’t been made public, but Francis cited its core findings in the footnotes of the document that he handed over to the bishops at the start of their summit this week.

  And those findings are damning. –Daily Mail

  While some of the pedophile priests and brothers were expelled from their congregations following the discovery of “immoral conduct,” many had their cases “minimized of the absolute gravity of their criminal acts, attributing them to mere weakness or moral lapses,” wrote Francis. 

  

  Those same offenders “were then welcomed into other dioceses, in an obviously imprudent way, and given dicoesan or parish jobs that gave them daily contact with minors,” wrote the pope.

  The harsh assessment of the quality of seminaries suggests that a possible next step might be a full-on Vatican investigation of Chilean schools of priestly training. 

  Pope Benedict XVI ordered such an investigation into Irish seminaries after he convened the entire Irish bishops’ conference for a similar dressing-down in 2010 over their dismal handling of abuse cases. –Daily Mail

  “The problems inside the church community can’t be solved just by dealing with individual cases and reducing them to the removal of people, though this – and I say so clearly – has to be done,” Francis wrote. 

  “But it’s not enough, we have to go beyond that. It would be irresponsible on our part to not look deeply into the roots and the structures that allowed these concrete events to occur and perpetuate.” 

  Francis Knew

  For all of the “holier-than-thou” admonishments in his letter, Pope Francis is not without blame. The Associated Press reported earlier this year that Francis drew scorn over his appointment of Barros bishop of Osnoro, Chile, in 2015. 

  The Associated Press reported earlier this year that Francis did so over the objections of other Chilean bishops who knew Barros’ past was problematic and had recommended he and other Karadima-trained bishops resign and take a sabbatical.

  The AP subsequently reported that Francis had received a letter in 2015 from one of Karadima’s most vocal accusers, Juan Carlos Cruz, detailing Barros’ misdeeds. That letter undercut Francis’ claim to have never heard from victims about Barros.

  Francis further enraged Chileans and drew sharp rebuke from his top abuse adviser when, during a January trip to Chile, he said the accusations against Barros were ‘calumny’ and said he was ‘certain’ he was innocent.

  Not so certain now, are we Pope? 

  

• One Angry, Disillusioned Philly Resident Reflects On "30 Blocks Of Slavery"

  Authored by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog,

  “Trump is my brother. You don’t have to agree with Trump but the mob can’t make me not love him. We are both dragon energy. He is my brother. I love everyone. I don’t agree with everything anyone does. That’s what makes us individuals. And we have the right to independent thought.” – Kanye West

  

  The last few weeks has seen far too much honesty for the Democrat Party slave owners in Washington D.C. and the other liberal urban ghetto strongholds, as a couple uppity blacks have dared to question the liberal narrative. It all started when Kim Kardashian’s better half – Kanye West – dared to go off the plantation and speak his mind about Donald Trump, Candace Owens and black people in general. His tweet about Candace Owens started the shitstorm.

  “I love the way Candace Owens thinks.”

  It seems innocent enough, but Candace Owens happens to be a young black woman who has become a social media Twitter sensation because she promotes conservative values and criticizes the black victim-hood narrative promoted by liberal politicians and their mainstream media mouthpieces. Twitter exploded with outrage from the left and accolades from the right. Never to let an opportunity pass, Trump promptly tweeted:

  “Thank you Kanye, very cool!”

  The outrage and vitriol only grew more intense as Twitter exploded over the next few days. Trump, who Democrats and the left wing media constantly portray as a racist, again received props from another well known black rap artist – Chance the Rapper—who tweeted:

  “Black people don’t have to be democrats.”

  You could practically see the heads of Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Chuckie Schumer, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Cuomo exploding simultaneously as their black victim-hood narrative began to unravel. How dare these rogue black men and woman question the standard orthodoxy of the left, used to elect Democrats for decades in the deteriorating urban shitholes in which blacks overwhelmingly inhabit.

  The left’s powerful hold on black voters is dependent upon them believing the welfare state benefits the black community. Any discussion of personal responsibility, jobs, marriage, and real education would loosen the chains enslaving blacks in Democrat controlled districts across the country. Smelling liberal bloodletting, Trump immediately poured gasoline on the growing fire with this tweet:

  “Kanye West has performed a great service to the Black Community – Big things are happening and eyes are being opened for the first time in Decades – Legacy Stuff! Thank you also to Chance and Dr. Darrell Scott, they really get it (lowest Black & Hispanic unemployment in history).”

  Trump conveniently ignores the fact the number of blacks not in the labor force is also at a record high. It’s amazing how low you can drive the unemployment rate if you pretend tens of millions are not really in the labor force. But why let some facts get in the way of a feel good story about black people. As liberals condemned Kanye and inferred he had lost his mind again, he managed to take the outrage to level 11 with this doozy of a tweet:

  “When you hear about slavery for 400 years … For 400 years? That sounds like a choice.”

  

  It was priceless watching left wing nutjob rage, anger and wrath against such an outrageous traitorous statement by this presumptuous black man with 28 million Twitter followers. The faux outrage on MSNBC and CNN revealed them to be as vacuous and weak minded as all critical thinking people know them to be. West was not saying slavery was not a terrible scourge and negative era in our history. He was telling black people slavery was abolished over 150 years ago, so stop blaming your problems on something that hasn’t impacted them in generations. The liberal race baiter politicians use the slavery narrative to keep blacks downtrodden on their urban ghetto plantations.

  

  This is the same Kanye West who shocked the world by declaring Bush didn’t care about black people on national TV during a telethon for Hurricane Katrina victims. Along with his no talent fat assed reality TV star wife Kim Kardashian, Kanye West is an attention whore. It’s good for business. His tweets have elevated his name recognition and will generate more CD sales and concert sellouts. The conservative twitterphere has gone bonkers over Kanye, especially after a minuscule Reuters poll of 200 black men showed a doubling in Trump support from 11% to 22% after Kanye’s tweets.

  The slavery and plantation analogy used by Kanye strikes me as appropriate, since I’ve been trekking through the urban ghetto plantation of West Philly for the last twelve years observing the slaves in their natural habitat. With the recent acquisition of a basic cheap smart phone a few months ago, I’ve been unleashed to document the 30 Blocks of Squalor with my camera. Mistimed stop lights and gaping potholes along the route make progress very slow, offering plenty of opportunity to take pictures. I believe the observable reality of West Philly confirms the points of view offered by Kanye West and Candace Owens.

  In 59 voting divisions in Philadelphia, mostly in North and West Philadelphia, Mitt Romney received ZERO votes in the 2012 presidential election. The communities I pass through in West Philly are 95% occupied by black folks. In Philadelphia, Obama beat Romney by 486,000 votes in 2012 and Clinton beat Trump by 455,000 in 2016. Every urban ghetto shithole across the land, controlled by the Democrat plantation owners, sees the same result in every election. The black slaves vote overwhelmingly for their continued poverty and enslavement. The welfare mentality has been ingrained in their psyches after 50 years of Great Society programs  worked their magic.

  Democrats have had complete control of Philadelphia for the last six decades. The downward spiral has been accelerating as the Democrat solutions are always higher taxes, more welfare payments, bowing down to unions, corruption, and awful government run schools. The result has been white flight, business flight, dependency mentality, poverty, unpayable government union pension liabilities, politicians in prison, crime, gaping potholes, exploding water pipes, houses that collapse during a heavy rainstorm, and ever expanding squalor. The implementation of the welfare state has strengthened the chains of black slavery, insuring their subjugation in squalor.

  When viewing the dilapidated hovels I’ve photographed on my daily commute through the 30 Blocks of Squalor, remember these were once well built sturdy housing occupied by people who worked for a living and took care of their homes and neighborhood. Of course, that was prior to LBJ’s Great Society promises in 1965. This despicable excuse for a human being is still revered by Democrats and black leaders despite his true thoughts about his Great Society legislation that has destroyed the black community. But, so far, his prediction has been accurate through the first 53 years:

  “I’ll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years.” – Lyndon B. Johnson

  This lovely duplex is located on Girard Avenue in West Philly. The city’s response to abandoned properties is to board up the windows and let nature eat away at the structure until it collapses during a heavy rainstorm (I’ve seen it happen). Notice the multiple Direct TV dishes on the building, including the boarded up side. It is baffling to me that in neighborhoods where the average household income is $15,000 (mostly welfare payments) and the average house is worth $25,000, every house has a satellite dish, every person shuffling along the streets has a smartphone, and there are a multitude of $40,000 vehicles parked on the garbage strewn streets.

  

  The hand written sign on the side of this dilapidated crumbling fleapit says “Everything Must Go”. Everything went a long time ago. The orange sticker from the city says it’s condemned, but it looks to be in the same shape as 50% of the occupied buildings along Market Street in West Philly. It’s shocking that an Obama inspired black entrepreneur hasn’t snatched up this prime retail location and started a thriving business.

  

  This picture captures so much of the ambiance of West Philly. You’ve got a couple ramshackle boarded up houses, the required roll down steel security shutters for every business, graffiti applied by some fine upstanding scholars, an abandoned vehicle, and garbage and trash littering the entire scene. The degradation, apathy and descent into societal abyss of this black community all wrapped up in one photograph.

  

  I wonder if the houses in Baghdad require bars across both the downstairs and upstairs windows. It appears the two best businesses to be in along the 30 Blocks of Squalor is selling security gates and plywood. I guess if you feel it is OK to throw your trash on the street, shoveling your sidewalk is probably out of the question.

  

  I can honestly say there are absolutely no retail establishments in my slice of suburbia that feel the need to install roll down steel security shutters or security gates when they close up shop for the evening. This requirement along the 30 Blocks of Squalor reveals an uncivilized, lawless, dangerous community, inhabited by people lacking comprehension of right and wrong. They have no sense of community or morality, as stealing, killing and throwing garbage on their streets is deemed acceptable. The local news, every evening, details the murders, robberies, rapes and assaults in this urban kill zone.

  

  I’ve determined a perfect test for how dangerous and run down a section of West Philly is with my mural index. Democrat politicians and black community leaders seem to believe having white artists painting glorious murals portraying the black people of that community as fearless leaders, academics and heroes will actually inspire the downtrodden, ignorant, welfare dependent residents to rise up in the world. Instead, the irony is lost on these bozos, as the mural index shows – the more murals per square block, the more likely you are to be murdered on that block. With two murals side by side, you should be ducking while driving by. Interpreting the meaning of the murals must require a PhD in ebonics.

  

  I’ve always found this biker bar to be amusing in a warped sort of way. The sign on their entrance says “Death to the KKK”. That’s an interesting message, considering the KKK is not and never has been an organization prominent in any way in Philadelphia or the Northeast United States. I’m guessing they aren’t too welcoming towards white people in that bar. I picture the black bar scene in Animal House with Otis Day singing Shama lama ding dong.

  

  You know you are in a bad neighborhood when the Pest Control business (probably the most profitable business in West Philly) is completely encased in bars to keep the feral neighborhood dogs at bey. They are peerless in exterminating rats, roaches, mice and any other varmints frequenting your dilapidated dump.

  

  Just before reaching the West Philly border in Upper Darby (the nice Darby – lower Darby might be worse than West Philly) a large building filled with crappy furniture pretends to be a retail store. When your main marketing message is OPEN, the quality of your merchandise is probably iffy. The little blue sign says NO CREDIT needed. They know their clientele.

  

  A billboard further down the road for another furniture store also touts NO CREDIT NEEDED. This is the ghetto. The real unemployment rate is north of 50%. The other 50% are working at low paying shit service jobs. Only a fool would lend them money to buy furniture. Unless it’s just the plantation owners keeping the slaves subservient and subdued. The Wall Street cabal has a monopoly on credit through their control of the Federal Reserve. If the Fed provides free money to Wall Street and they charge 29% interest to poverty stricken black people who don’t understand math, they can afford high default rates. Great business plan. And if it all goes to shit, the American taxpayer will bail them out.

  

  There is no way for poor black people in West Philly to escape their chains of debt enslavement when their only options are subprime debt to finance furniture, appliance and auto purchases. They are dependent upon the state for their welfare subsistence and eternally dependent upon the Wall Street cabal to finance their living at loan shark level interest rates and terms. The Great Society programs were supposed to lift minorities up, but they have created generations of bitter, dismayed, ignorant, dependent, poor, Democratic voters. And it all revolves around the engineered destruction of the family unit and purposeful failure to educate the children.

  Government programs promoting the destruction of the black family unit have created havoc in West Philly and in urban ghettos across the land. In 1960 22% of black children lived with single parents. By 2006, the 1960 percentage had more than doubled to 56%. Less than 20% of black children were born out of wedlock in 1960. Today, 73% of black children are born out of wedlock. Amazingly, government will always get more of what it incentivizes. When welfare programs pay people more money to have children out of wedlock and not marry, this is the result. The destruction of the black family unit by Democrat policies has wrought destruction, poverty and generations of helpless slaves.

  “If you want to see the poor remain poor, generation after generation, just keep the standards low in their schools and make excuses for their academic shortcomings and personal misbehavior. But please don’t congratulate yourself on your compassion.” – Thomas Sowell

  Education was the only way for black people to cast off their chains, obtain jobs paying middle class wages, and rising out of poverty. Faux liberal compassion, government run schools with dumbed down standards, unionized teachers matriculating unmotivated, fatherless, ignorant kids through a demented socialization program disguised as education for an average cost of $12,000 per student has destroyed any chance for generations of black children to succeed in life and elevate their community. It’s almost as if corrupt politicians and feckless government bureaucrats want to keep their black constituents ignorant, dependent and helpless.

  Despite billions spent on welfare programs to supposedly elevate poor blacks, virtually all businesses along the 30 Blocks of Squalor are owned and operated by whites and Asians. The old building on Market Street that formerly housed Dick Clark’s American Bandstand now houses the government funded Enterprise  Center, an organization that counsels minority-owned businesses and disadvantaged entrepreneurs. The counseling hasn’t worked. Without strong two parent households and a good education, black entrepreneurs are more scarce in West Philly than a woman with a wedding ring. It is a wonder the white and Asian owners of steak shops and delis stay. They are robbed and shot on a regular basis.

  

  Another fascinating observation on the 30 Blocks is the presence of H&R Block, among other national tax preparation firms. Why would this be? With average household incomes below $20,000, most of the people in West Philly pay no Federal Income taxes. Chalk it up to another welfare scam designed to help the poor and downtrodden. The Earned Income Tax Credit is available to people who don’t work and earn no income. You, the taxpayer, pay your taxes so they can be handed as tax refunds to people who pay no income taxes. The fine folks at H&R Block fill out all the forms, charge the poor people outrageous fees and then lure them into borrowing against their refunds at Shylock level interest rates.

  

  This is how corporate America extracts their crops from the plantation. H&R Block utilizes the rampant ignorance in West Philly to generate profits. They capitalize on their lack of impulse control and delayed gratification abilities to offer them their refunds before the IRS sends the check. Meanwhile, H&R Block extracts a “fee” that equates to north of 50% interest. It’s the same story with the $70 billion food stamp program. JP Morgan administers the program and extracts hundreds of millions in fees. Wal-Mart and the other corporate mega-retailers reap the windfall of the spending. Corporate America loves the welfare state.

  I have far more respect for the Muslim dude selling baby turtles next to the Phila Zoo at 34th and Girard than I do for Wall Street bankers and mega-corporations raping the poor. On hot days you will find young black guys selling cold water bottles in the stopped traffic. Given some skills and opportunity, these guys might succeed in this world. But on most days they are usually outnumbered by the lazy beggars.

  

  As you motor around these days you might notice most of the newly constructed buildings are either banks or government offices. That should tell you everything you need to know about the winners and losers in the economy today. The newest building on the 30 Blocks of Squalor is a Social Security Administration Building. Why in the ghetto of West Philly? My guess is that after the Obama extended unemployment scam ended, deadbeats needed to fake disabilities in order to get onto the SSDI gravy train. So they made it easy for the “not in the labor force” West Philly patrons to shuffle on over to the Social Security office and pretend they have a soft tissue disability or depression or diabetes because they weigh 350 pounds. The victim-hood mentality is ingrained in this community.

  

  I found it amusing a couple weeks ago when liberals screamed in outrage at Ben Carson’s proposal to increase the amount residents must pay towards their public housing rent from 30% to 35% of their household income. Carson, who grew up in extreme poverty in Detroit and became a neurosurgeon, captured the essence of what these welfare programs should do:

  “Government should not keep people in a dependent state. It should be used as a springboard, and not as a hammock.”

  The formula for public housing subsidies is warped. Just like all these programs, they encourage people not to work and not to generate “too much” income. The history of public housing has been a disaster. The picture below represents the old and the new of public housing. Both buildings are located at 45th and Market. The rat and drug infested tenement  on the left is a 20 story crime scene built in the 1970s. Cops are afraid to enter this building. It will eventually be imploded, like many before it.

  The new and improved public housing is of the townhouse variety. Some even have gated parking and retail storefronts built within them. Democrat politicians are sure if they build retail storefronts, retailers will come. The 8 storefront shops in the Mantua Square low income housing mecca are 100% unoccupied four years after being built with your tax dollars. Notice the gate around the low income housing townhouses. There are deadly spikes on the top of the gate. Seems like a great neighborhood where you can safely raise your fatherless children. These townhouses will deteriorate and crumble, as the residents feel entitled to free housing and will not take care of them. The spiked gate should remind them, they are still on the government plantation.

  

  In 2014 Obama designated the 2 square miles of Mantua, in West Philly, as one of his Promise Zones, promising to redevelop the neighborhood, create jobs, and make it safe again. I drive through this neighborhood every day. Absolutely nothing has changed since 2014. A few dilapidated buildings have been bulldozed, but nothing replaced them. No new businesses. No jobs. The schools are as pathetic as ever. The murders and robberies haven’t ceased. And drug dealing is still the top job in the community. Thomas Sowell had Obama pegged:

  “One of the reasons it has taken so long for some people to finally see through Barack Obama is that people do not like to admit, even to themselves, that they have been played for fools by a slick-talking politician.”

  Black people have been played by Obama and other race baiting liberal politicians for decades. After spending over $10 trillion on welfare programs since 1965, the poverty rate has barely budged. The dependency mentality has been passed down though multiple generations. Liberal politicians, in conspiracy with Wall Street, the liberal media, and corporate America, have enslaved urban blacks in chains of ignorance, welfare addiction, blaming white people, immorality, and criminal mentality.

  Highly educated conservative minded black men like Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams, and Ben Carson are scorned and ridiculed by the left. But when a rapper like Kanye, hero to millions of young black people, breaks with the plantation owners and speaks the truth, panic ensues. The liberals will circle the wagons to protect their black voting block. They will likely succeed, as it will be tough to break 50 years of trained dependency. If Trump can pull off convincing 20% of black people to vote for him and the Republican party, he will become a legend.

  

  George Carlin’s American Dream tirade captures the essence of our predicament, and it particularly applies to the inhabitants of West Philly and all the other urban ghettos in Democrat strongholds around the country.

  “There’s a reason education sucks, and it’s the same reason it will never, ever,  ever be fixed. It’s never going to get any better, don’t look for it, be happy with what you’ve got. Because the owners, the owners of this country don’t want that.

  They don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests.

  You know what they want? They want obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shitty jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, and the reduced benefits.” –George Carlin

  

• The Most Prosperous Cities In The US Are…

  Wealthy coastal enclaves no longer have a monopoly on prosperity, according to a recent ranking by RentCafe.

  After analyzing Census data from between 2000 and 2016, RentCafe ranked 303 cities according to changes in overall prosperity. RentCafe examined a mix of factors, with a final prosperity score that was based on the combined value of six  individual fields. Surprisingly, Texas cities occupied six of the top 20 spots, disrupting the longstanding east coast west coast rivalry.

  With crude oil prices moving higher once again, it’s hardly a coincidence that the Midland-Odessa area – one of the main employment hubs in the Permian Basin with some of the lowest unemployment rates in the country – showed up on the list.

  

  In a separate ranking that only takes into account “large” cities (i.e. those with populations greater than 300,000), Rent Cafe discovered that Washington, New York and Miami are among the most prosperous of the major American cities.

  More surprising is the number of cities that experienced growth across all six categories used to calculate prosperity.

  

  RentCafe calculated prosperity by incorporating the magnitude of proportional changes that affected a city’s population, median income, home values, share of inhabitants holding a higher education degree, poverty rate and its unemployment rate.

  

• The Long Death Of America's Middle Class

  Authored by Nick Giambruno via CaseyResearch.com,

  In America, what separates the “haves” and the “have nots” has never been wider. It’s a genuine crisis. And yet, few people know why this is happening…

  

  The American middle class is dying.

  In 2015, it dipped below 50% of the population for the first time since data collection started on the issue. It’s now an official minority group.

  Meanwhile, nearly half of Americans don’t have enough money to cover a surprise $400 expense. Many are living paycheck to paycheck, with little to no cushion. And US homes are less affordable than they’ve been in decades—possibly ever.

  I’ll tell you why this is happening and how to secure your spot among the “haves” in a moment. But first, let’s take a look at the America that was.

  The Largest Middle Class in World History

  The late 1950s was the golden age of America’s middle class.

  This isn’t nostalgia talking. The US really did have robust Main Streets and thriving small businesses.

  Back then, the US produced three-quarters of the world’s cars and airplanes. Americans produced most of the world’s steel and built the majority of the world’s skyscrapers.

  Plus, the US stock market held the bulk of the world’s total stock market capitalization.

  All this productivity gave the average American an unusually high standard of living.

  Around then, a husband could support his family on an average income. He and his wife likely owned their own home, as well as their car. They had multiple children—and didn’t think much of the cost of having more. Plus, they had money to save.

  The Bleak Situation Today

  Compare that to the average family today. Both spouses likely have to work—whether they want to or not—just to afford the same basic lifestyle.

  Plus, it now costs well over $200,000 to raise a child, on average. And that doesn’t even include college costs. Back in 1960, it cost roughly $25,000.

  This hefty price tag is one of the main reasons middle-class families are having fewer children… or none at all.

  In short, the average American’s standard of living has taken a huge hit over the past generation or so.

  For example, consider a typical high school teacher’s financial situation.

  In 1959, the median annual salary for a US high school teacher was $5,276, according to the Department of Labor. Meanwhile, the median US home value was $9,627, according to the US Census Bureau.

  That means a teacher made enough money each year to cover over half of the price of a middle-class home. Or 55%, to be exact.

  Take a minute and think… How does your annual income compare to the price of your home? I’d bet many people make far less than 55%.

  Today, the median purchase price of a US home is $241,700. To maintain the 1959 income-to-home price ratio, a high school teacher would need to make $132,935 annually.

  Of course, the average high school teacher doesn’t make nearly that much. Not even close. He or she makes around $48,290—just enough to cover 36% of the median home price.

  It All Went Downhill in the ’70s

  The high school teacher’s predicament is only one example of a broader trend. In fact, circumstances are actually worse than it lets on.

  As you can see in the chart below, the median income-to-home price ratio is just a hair above 20% now. That’s a historical low. And a far cry from the 58% peak it hit in the late 1950s.

  Notice that the downtrend starts in the 1970s. More on that shortly…

  

  Clearly, home prices have risen much faster than income levels since 1970.

  Of course, Americans haven’t stopped buying homes. They’ve just gone deeper and deeper into debt to do it.

  That debt has helped hide the slump in the average person’s standard of living.

  Cars are another large expense for Americans. Debt has helped camouflage a big price increase there, too.

  Americans are now over $1.1 trillion in auto debt. This figure has skyrocketed 2,954% since 1971.

  Americans have also racked up more than $1 trillion in credit card debt. This debt explosion also started in the early 1970s. Credit card debt is up 14,281% since 1971.

  The Work-Wage Divide

  So why are Americans going deeper and deeper into debt?

  It’s simple: The cost of living for the average middle-class family has risen dramatically faster than its income.

  Since 1971, there’s been a dramatic—and growing—split between work and wages. As the next chart shows, the average person’s real wages have more or less stagnated since the early 1970s.

  With higher expenses and stagnating wages, people have made up the difference with debt.

  

  What Happened in 1971?

  It’s no coincidence that things started to go downhill for the middle class in the early 1970s. August 15, 1971, to be exact.

  This is the date President Nixon killed the last remnants of the gold standard.

  Since then, the dollar has been a pure fiat currency. This allows the Fed to print as many dollars as it pleases. And—without the gold standard to hold it in check—it does precisely that.

  The US money supply has exploded 2,075% since 1971.

  There’s an important lesson here: The Federal Reserve is the mortal enemy of the common man.

  The Four Tenets of Lasting Wealth

  Eventually, I think this trend will lead to a genuine crisis. And it won’t be pretty.

  In the meantime, a perfect storm of economic pressures will further hollow out the middle class. Tens of millions of Americans will be kicked down the ladder.

  As Doug Casey puts it:

  Most middle-class people will end up joining either the upper or lower classes—mostly the lower—and that’ll be a moral disaster for the country.

  If you want to firmly establish yourself in the world of the “rich,” I recommend…

  1. Owning hard assets like physical gold, silver, and certain real estate.

  2. Owning the highest-quality, elite businesses. Think businesses with attractive dividend yields—even better if you buy these standouts at bargain prices.

  3. Holding some speculative investments. They can leapfrog your wealth. Think transformative technologies like cryptocurrency and blockchain, the booming cannabis industry, and natural resource stocks.

  4. Protecting what you’ve earned from taxation, inflation, and other forms of confiscation by internationalizing your assets. This reduces the threat any one particular government poses to your wealth.

  These are the four tenets of lasting wealth. They’re time-tested strategies. And they work.

  

• Company Selling Real-Time Cell Phone Tracking Ends Up Leaking Location Data

  On Tuesday we covered a disturbing story from the New York Times and ZDnet.com detailing how some of the country’s largest cellular providers have been selling your real-time location information, allowing a Texas-based prison technology company, Securus, to track any phone “within seconds” – all without a warrant – through an intermediary called LocationSmart. 

  

  Now, as KrebsOnSecurity reports, in addition to a story from Motherboard on a hacker which had broken into the Securus servers and stolen the usernames, email addresses, phone numbers and other information of 2,800 users – mostly law enforcement, it turns out that a flaw in LocationSmart’s tracking demo website gave anyone the ability to surveil anyone else’s cell phone on the open web.

  Several hours before the Motherboard story went live, KrebsOnSecurity heard from Robert Xiao, a security researcher at Carnegie Mellon University who’d read the coverage of Securus and LocationSmart and had been poking around a demo tool that LocationSmart makes available on its Web site for potential customers to try out its mobile location technology. –KrebsOnSecurity

  The demo, which has since been taken down, was a free service that would give anyone the approximate location of their own cell phones by entering their name, email address and phone number into a form. LocationSmart’s service would then text the supplied phone number and request permission to ping that device’s nearest cellular tower. Once consent was obtained, the service would then reveal the subscriber’s approximate latitude and longitude on a Google Street View map. 

  As Krebs notes, “It also potentially collects and stores a great deal of technical data about your mobile device. For example, according to their privacy policy that information “may include, but is not limited to, device latitude/longitude, accuracy, heading, speed, and altitude, cell tower, Wi-Fi access point, or IP address information.” 

  But according to Xiao, a PhD candidate at CMU’s Human-Computer Interaction Institute, this same service failed to perform basic checks to prevent anonymous and unauthorized queries. Translation: Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about how Web sites work could abuse the LocationSmart demo site to figure out how to conduct mobile number location lookups at will, all without ever having to supply a password or other credentials.

  “I stumbled upon this almost by accident, and it wasn’t terribly hard to do,” Xiao said. “This is something anyone could discover with minimal effort. And the gist of it is I can track most peoples’ cell phone without their consent.”

  Xiao’s tests showed that he could easily command LocationSmart’s service to ping the closest cell phone tower to a subscriber’s mobile device. He says he checked a friend’s cell phone number multiple times over a few minutes while that friend was moving – and he was able to manually plug the provided coordinates into Google Maps to track his directional movement. 

  “This is really creepy stuff,” Xiao said, adding that he’d also successfully tested the vulnerable service against one Telus Mobility mobile customer in Canada who volunteered to be found. (Krebs)

  Before LocationSmart’s demo was taken offline today, KrebsOnSecurity pinged five different trusted sources, all of whom gave consent to have Xiao determine the whereabouts of their cell phones. Xiao was able to determine within a few seconds of querying the public LocationSmart service the near-exact location of the mobile phone belonging to all five of my sources.

  

  One of the queries “came within 100 yards of their then-current location” says Krebs, while another was 1.5 miles away. The remaining participants in the test say that the results were accurate to approximately 1/5 to 1/3 of a mile at the time. 

  When Krebs reached out to LocationSmart Founder and CEO Mario Proietti, he said that the company was investigating. 

  “We don’t give away data,” Proietti said. “We make it available for legitimate and authorized purposes. It’s based on legitimate and authorized use of location data that only takes place on consent. We take privacy seriously and we’ll review all facts and look into them.”

  It’s not clear exactly how long LocationSmart has offered its demo service or for how long the service has been so permissive; this link from archive.org suggests it dates back to at least January 2017. This link from The Internet Archive suggests the service may have existed under a different company name — loc-aid.com — since mid-2011, but it’s unclear if that service used the same code. Loc-aid.com is one of four other sites hosted on the same server as locationsmart.com, according to Domaintools.com. –KrebsOnSecurity

  ***

  Last week Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) sent a letter to the FCC demanding an investigation into Securus, after the New York Times revealed that former Mississippi County sheriff Cory Hutcheson used the service almost a dozen time to track the phones of other officers, and even targeted a judge. 

  Between 2014 and 2017, the sheriff, Cory Hutcheson, used the service at least 11 times, prosecutors said. His alleged targets included a judge and members of the State Highway Patrol. Mr. Hutcheson, who was dismissed last year in an unrelated matter, has pleaded not guilty in the surveillance cases. –NYT

  Hutcheson has pleaded not guilty to charges of unlawful surveillance. 

  How did this happen?

  How is it that LocationSmart obtained real time location data on millions of Americans? Moreover, who else has access to that information?

  Kevin Blankston, director of New America’s Open Technology Institute told ZDNet in a phone call that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act only restricts telecom companies from disclosing data to the government. It does not restrict carriers from disclosing information to other companies – a loophole Blankston calls “one of the biggest gaps in US privacy law.” 

  “The issue doesn’t appear to have been directly litigated before, but because of the way that the law only restricts disclosures by these types of companies to government, my fear is that they would argue that they can do a pass-through arrangement like this,” he said.

  LocationSmart, a California-based technology company, is one of a handful of so-called data aggregators. It claimed to have “direct connections” to cell carrier networks to obtain real-time cell phone location data from nearby cell towers. It’s less accurate than using GPS, but cell tower data won’t drain a phone battery and doesn’t require a user to install an app. Verizon, one of many cell carriers that sells access to its vast amounts of customer location data, counts LocationSmart as a close partner. –ZD Net

  LocationSmart boasts coverage of 85 percent of the country due to its relationships with major US carriers – including Virgin, Boost, MetroPCS and US Cellular, along with Canadian providers Rogers, Telus and Bell.

  We utilize the same technology used to enable emergency assistance and this includes cell tower and cell sector location, assisted GPS and cell tower trilateration,” said a case study on the company’s website.

  “With these location sources, we are able to locate virtually any US based mobile devices,” the company claimed. The precise location of a target can be returned in as little as 15 seconds, according to a different study.

  ZDNet reached out to carriers for comments. What follows is their responses:

  Sprint spokesperson Lisa Belot said the company shares personally identifiable location data “only with customer consent or in response to a lawful request such as a validated court order from law enforcement.”

  The company’s privacy policy, which governs customer consent, said third-parties may collect customers’ personal data, “including location information.”

  Sprint said the company’s relationship with Securus “does not include data sharing,” and is limited “to supporting efforts to curb unlawful use of contraband cell phones in correctional facilities.”

  When asked the same questions, Verizon spokesperson Rich Young provided a boilerplate response regarding Securus and would not comment further.

  “We’re still trying to verify their activities, but if this company is, in fact, doing this with our customers’ data, we will take steps to stop it,” he said.

  AT&T spokesperson Jim Greer said in a statement: “We have a best practices approach to handling our customers’ data. We are aware of the letter and will provide a response.” Our questions were also not answered.

  A spokesperson for T-Mobile did not respond by our deadline.

  “It’s important for us to close off that potential loophole and that can easily be done with one line of legislative language,” said Bankston, “which would also have the benefit of making every other company careful about always getting consent before disclosing your data to anyone.”

  Senator Wyden has called on each carrier to stop sharing data with third parties – arguing that it “skirts wireless carriers’ legal obligation to be the sole conduit by which the government may conduct surveillance of Americans’ phone records.”

  

• Pat Buchanan: A Trump Doctrine For Singapore And Beyond

  Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

  After Pyongyang railed this week that the U.S.-South Korean Max Thunder military drills were a rehearsal for an invasion of the North, and imperiled the Singapore summit, the Pentagon dialed them back.

  The B-52 exercises alongside F-22 stealth fighters were canceled.

  But Pyongyang had other objections.

  Sunday, NSC adviser John Bolton spoke of a “Libyan model” for the North’s disarmament, referring to Moammar Gadhafi’s surrender of all his weapons of mass destruction in 2004. The U.S. was invited into Libya to pick them up and cart them off, whereupon sanctions were lifted.

  As Libya was subsequently attacked by NATO and Gadhafi lynched, North Korea denounced Bolton and all this talk of the “Libyan model” of unilateral disarmament.

  North Korea wants a step-by-step approach, each concession by Pyongyang to be met by a U.S. concession. And Bolton sitting beside Trump, and across the table from Kim Jong Un in Singapore, may be inhibiting.

  What was predictable and predicted has come to pass.

  If we expected Kim to commit at Singapore to Bolton’s demand for “complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization,” and a swift follow-through, we were deluding ourselves.

  At Singapore, both sides will have demands, and both will have to offer concessions, if there is to be a deal.

  

  What does Kim Jong Un want?

  An end to U.S. and South Korean military exercises and sanctions on the North, trade and investment, U.S. recognition of his regime, a peace treaty, and the eventual removal of U.S. bases and troops.

  He is likely to offer an end to the testing of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, no transfer of nuclear weapons or strategic missiles to third powers, a drawdown of troops on the DMZ, and the opening of North Korea’s borders to trade and travel.

  As for his nuclear weapons and the facilities to produce them, these are Kim’s crown jewels. These brought him to the attention of the world and the Americans to the table. These are why President Trump is flying 10,000 miles to meet and talk with him.

  And, unlike Gadhafi, Kim is not going to give them up.

  Assuming the summit comes off June 12, this is the reality Trump will face in Singapore: a North Korea willing to halt the testing of nukes and ICBMs and to engage diplomatically and economically.

  As for having Americans come into his country, pick up his nuclear weapons, remove them and begin intrusive inspections to ensure he has neither nuclear bombs nor the means to produce, deliver or hide them, that would be tantamount to a surrender by Kim.

  Trump is not going to get that. And if he adopts a Bolton policy of “all or nothing,” he is likely to get nothing at all.

  Yet, thanks to Trump’s threats and refusal to accept a “frozen conflict” on the Korean peninsula, the makings of a real deal are present, if Trump does not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

  For there is nothing North Korea is likely to demand that cannot be granted, as long as the security of South Korea is assured to the degree that it can be assured, while living alongside a nuclear-armed North.

  Hence, when Kim cavils or balks in Singapore, as he almost surely will, at any demand for a pre-emptive surrender of his nuclear arsenal, Trump should have a fallback position.

  If we cannot have everything we want, what can we live with?

  Moreover, while we are running a risk today, an intransigent North Korea that walks out would be running a risk as well.

  A collapse in talks between Kim and the United States and Kim and South Korea would raise the possibility that he and his Chinese patrons could face an East Asia Cold War where South Korea and Japan also have acquired nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.

  In the last analysis, the United States should be willing to accept both the concessions to the North that the South is willing to make and the risks from the North that the South is willing to take.

  For, ultimately, they are the one who are going to have to live on the same peninsula with Kim and his nukes.

  Trump ran on a foreign policy that may fairly be described as a Trump Doctrine: In the post-post-Cold War era, the United States will start looking out for America first.

  This does not mean isolationism or the abandonment of our allies. It does mean a review and reassessment of all the guarantees we have issued to go to war on behalf of other countries, and the eventual transfer of responsibility for the defense of our friends over to our friends.

  In the future, the U.S. will stop futilely imploring allies to do more for their own defense and will begin telling them that their defense is primarily their own responsibility. Our allies must cease to be our dependents.

  

• Feds Allow Florida Officials To Battle Mosquitoes With Advanced Drones

  The controlled airspace above Southwest Florida might become more congested now that the Trump administration has cleared the way for Lee County Mosquito District (LCMD) as one of ten state, local, and tribal governments as participants in the new Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration Pilot Program.

  

  On Wednesday afternoon, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao named Lee County and nine others among 149 applicants for the UAS Integration Pilot Program that “will help tackle the most significant challenges to integrating drones into the national airspace,” according to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) press release.

  “Data gathered from these pilot projects will form the basis of a new regulatory framework to safely integrate drones into our national airspace,” said Secretary Chao.

  Here is the full list of the ten selectees:

  • Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Durant, OK

  • City of San Diego, CA

  • Virginia Tech – Center for Innovative Technology, Herndon, VA

  • Kansas Department of Transportation, Topeka, KS

  • Lee County Mosquito Control District, Ft. Myers, FL

  • Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority, Memphis, TN

  • North Carolina Department of Transportation, Raleigh, NC

  • North Dakota Department of Transportation, Bismarck, ND

  • City of Reno, NV

  • University of Alaska-Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK

  “The enthusiastic response to our request for applications demonstrated the many innovative technological and operational solutions already on the horizon,” Secretary Chao added.

  The Trump administration is expecting to stimulate economic development through the deployment of drones in agriculture, energy, public safety, media, infrastructure, and construction. Secretary Chao also plans to test detection and tracking of the drones and traffic-management systems in each of the ten selected regions.

  

  “Our nation will move faster, fly higher and soar proudly toward the next great chapter of American aviation,” said President Donald Trump, who approved the program late last year.

  According to CNBC, the pilot program allows Lee County to incorporate drones into their fleet of aircraft used to control Florida’s ubiquitous mosquito population. The pilot program could provide mosquito control drone operators with more relaxed federal regulations, such as enabling flights above the maximum allowable altitude of 400 feet.

  “The pilot program could allow not only expanded use for observation and spraying but also potentially at higher altitudes or in more remote areas where visual contact might no longer be a requirement,” said Eric Jackson, a public information officer at the Lee County Mosquito Control District in southwestern Florida.

  “We’ve been doing this for 60 years with aircraft dealing with mosquito issues, so I’m thinking that might have played a part (in our selection),” Jackson told CNBC, describing the region’s mosquito populations as a public health risk.”Our district relies heavily on aerial operations.”

  Jackson said his department used drones for about a year to “take images of aquatic bodies to see where there’s a lot of vegetation.”

  “Because where you have vegetation crowding out water, sometimes mosquitoes can grow in those,” he added.

  Jackson told CNBC that the department hopes to acquire an advanced 1,500 lbs. drone in its surveillance and pest treatment operations fleet. The pilot program would relax current federal drone laws, allowing the mosquito control drone operator to fly above 400 feet, at night, and beyond the line of sight.

  “We potentially could be using it more for surveillance and in more isolated areas for treatment missions,” Jackson said. “We’re trying to be as innovative as we can and as efficient as we can. And if this can be used safely, we’re open to anything.”

  “Really, the whole point of this program is to be able to expand beyond the current regulations to see how this can be used,” he said.

  “We have pilots in the air, and as the airspace becomes more crowded and people start flying above 400 feet and out of line of sight, [we asked ourselves] how can we make sure we have a seat at the table to where we can help draft these regulations to keep our pilots safe.”

  While Lee County is simply one of the ten selectees for the drone pilot program, we are curious to see what the other nine municipalities will do with their new drones. So far, Jackson is hellbent in replacing his fleet of expensive aircraft and human pilots with inexpensive 1,500 lbs. drones.

  

• Ranking The Cities With The Most Passionate Live Music Fans

  Via Priceonomics.com,

  For many music fans across the country, there’s nothing quite like seeing live music: an exhilarating experience of listening, dancing, and joyfully connecting with an artist and fellow concertgoers. Some people more than others, though, seem to have a nearly insatiable appetite for concerts.

  

  That raises the question: which cities in America have the most passionate fans of live music?

  One way to answer that question is to look at the cities where people are interested in purchasing a concert ticket when an artist they like is coming to town. We decided to analyze data from Priceonomics customer SeatGeek, the live events ticketing platform, to see where people in America are tracking the most live music artists based on a “tracks per user” metric.

  On SeatGeek, users can track any musical artist, team, or event to be notified of ticket availability. So, according to this data set, where are people following live music the most passionately? And where do the biggest fans of various music genres such as Country, Rap, and Electronic reside?

  We found that the city with the most passionate live music fans is Oklahoma City, followed by Salt Lake City and Denver. Knoxville, TN has the most country music fans, while Miami is home to the biggest rap fans. And Tulsa, a city of just 400,000 people, has the most passionate pop music fans in the country.

  For this analysis, we looked at anonymized SeatGeek data up to March 2018 to see which live music artists and genres people are tracking. The study includes data from the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S., and for music genre data, we looked at the 100 most popular artists on SeatGeek.

  So, which metro area has the most passionate users when it comes to “tracking” live music events? The following chart shows the cities where SeatGeek users track the most live concert events.

  

  Data source: SeatGeek

  The metropolitan area with the most passionate live music fan base is Oklahoma City, where the typical user tracks almost 21 different artists to see when they are coming to town. And fortunately for the city that has the the most dedicated live music fans in America, OKC just welcomed a new 4,000 seat theater that attracts major artists to the city.

  Salt Lake City and Denver round out the top three, with major metros like San Francisco, Boston, Washington DC, and Atlanta making the top 20.

  Oklahoma City might have the most die-hard fans of live music overall, but slicing the numbers by country, electronic, pop, rock, and rap music tells a different story.

  First up: which metro areas have the biggest appetite for country music?

  

  Data source: SeatGeek

  Knoxville has the highest percentage of country music fans in the United States, even beating out Nashville (which came in a very respectable third). On the other end of the spectrum, Miami, Los Angeles and New York were the cities that had the fewest people that tracked country music. Someone in Knoxville is more than four times as likely as someone in Miami to be a fan of country music.

  Next, let’s look at a completely different genre, electronic music. The below chart shows the cities where people are the most and least passionate about this type of music based on their tracks:

  

  Data source: SeatGeek

  This list is nearly the opposite of where people like country music!

  New York, Miami and San Francisco have the most people tracking electronic music in the country. Someone in Louisville, however, is only half as likely to follow electronic music as someone in New York City. Louisville, Memphis and Knoxville are the places that like electronic music the least.

  A lot of people across the country like pop music, as the word is short for “popular” after all. But in which cities do people favor pop music over other genres?

  

  Data source: SeatGeek

  Tulsa is the metro in the United States with the most users who follow pop music stars to see when they’ll be coming to town. On the other hand, Atlanta, GA has the fewest users tracking the live music schedules of pop stars. That said, Atlanta still has a lot of people that like pop music — those fans just have other interests as well.

  A very similar picture emerges for cities that are interested in Rock music. In every city, a pretty high percentage of people track Rock concerts:

  

  Data source: SeatGeek

  Salt Lake City has the highest percentage of rock music fans in the country, followed by Denver and Seattle. Atlanta, New Orleans and Greensboro are one third less likely to follow rock concerts on SeatGeek.

  Finally, we turn our attention to rap music. Of the top 100 most followed artists on SeatGeek, 44% of them are rap artists (Drake being the most popular, followed by Eminem). The chart below shows the cities where people track rap artists at the highest and lowest rates:

  

  Data source: SeatGeek

  Miami, Los Angeles, and Atlanta are the metropolitan areas that have the most rap fans. On the other hand, the cities that favored country and pop music like Tulsa, St. Louis and Knoxville have the fewest people tracking rap artists.

  Now it is official: Oklahoma City has the fans with the biggest appetite for live music of any city in the country. Fans in Knoxville like country music at the highest rates, while people in Miami tend to enjoy electronic music. Everyone across the country likes pop, rock, and rap, but fans in Tulsa, Salt Lake City, and Miami do so at the highest rates respectively.

  *  *  *

  If you’re a company that wants to work with Priceonomics to turn your data into great stories, learn more about the Priceonomics Data Studio.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Average Croatian Doesn't Leave Home Until They're 32!!

  Figures from Eurostat have revealed the average age at which young people leave their parent’s house in Europe.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As Statista’s Martin Armstrong reports, at the top of the list is Montenegro where the nest is generally flown at the ripe age of 32.5.

  This is also indicative of the trend that young people in the more southern nations tend to stay with their parents for longer, with Croatia, Slovakia and Italy all at the top of the ranking.

  At the bottom, the north of the continent is represented by Finland, Denmark and Sweden.

  

• Europe: National Sovereignty Vs. International Conquest, At Stake Over Iran

  Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  Europe now faces its ultimate ideological fork-in-the-road, which it has thus far ignored but can no longer ignore:

  They need to decide whether they seek a world of nations that each is sovereign over its own territory but over no other (and this would not be a world at war);

  or whether they seek instead a world in which they are part of the American empire, a world based on conquests – NATO, IMF, World Bank, and the other US-controlled international institutions – and in which their own nation’s citizens are subject to the dictatorship by America’s aristocracy: the same super-rich individuals who effectively control the US Government itself (see this and this — and that’s dictatorship by the richest, in the United States).

  Iran has become this fateful fork-in-the-road, and the immediate issue here is America’s cancellation of the Iran nuclear deal that America had signed along with 6 other countries, and America’s consequent restoration of economic sanctions against Iran — sanctions against companies anywhere that continue trading with Iran.

  

  First, however, some essential historical background on that entire issue: 

  The US aristocracy overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Government in 1953 and imposed there a barbaric dictatorship which did the bidding of the US and allied aristocracies, by installing the Pahlavi Shah there, just as they had earlier, in 1932, installed the Saud King in Saudi Arabia — which land never ever had known democracy. As Wikipedia says of Ibn Saud, who became King in 1932, “After World War I, he received further support from the British, including a glut of surplus munitions. He launched his campaign against the Al Rashidi in 1920; by 1922 they had been all but destroyed,” with Britain’s help.

  Similarly, the US and its British Imperial partner installed Pahlavi as Iran’s Shah in 1953. This was done by US President Dwight David Eisenhower. After the death of the anti-imperialistic US President FDR, in 1945, the US Government quickly became pro-imperialistic under President Harry S. Truman (whom imperial England’s Winston Churchill wrapped around his little finger), and then even more so under Eisenhower, so that during the brief presidency of Ike’s successor President JFK, the anti-imperialistic ghost of FDR was coming to haunt the White House and thus again threaten the conjoined US-UK’s aristocracies’ surging global control. Kennedy was quickly souring on, and coming to oppose, imperialism (just as FDR had done) – he was opposing conquest and dominion for its own sake.

  So, he was assassinated and the evidence was covered-up, so that the CIA, which Truman had installed and which Eisenhower placed firmly under the control of America’s aristocratically controlled military-industrial complex, became increasingly America’s own Deep State, designed for global conquest (though using an ‘anti-communist’ excuse and cover for their real and ruling motive of global conquest and dominion). 

  When the US-imposed Shah was overthrown by an authentic revolution in 1979, America’s continued alliance with the UK-US-installed Saud family turned into a US-UK alliance against Iran, which nation has ever since been demonized by the US and UK aristocracies as being a ‘terrorist regime’, even though Saudi Arabia actually dominates global Islamic terrorism, and Iran is opposed to terrorism (except to terrorism that’s aimed against Israel). And everybody who knows anything on sound basis is aware of these established historical facts. But, actually, the US-Saudi alliance is even worse than that: global Islamic terrorism was invented and organized by the US aristocracy in conjunction with the Saud family starting in 1979 when Iran freed itself from the US-UK dictatorship and restored Iranian sovereignty (even though in a highly compromised Shiite theocratic way, nothing at all like the secular Iranian democracy that had been overthrown by the US and UK aristocracies in 1953).

  The US and Sauds created Islamic terrorism in 1979 in order to draw the Soviet Union into Afghanistan and ultimately used these terrorist proxy “boots on the ground” so as to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan — thereby draining the Soviet economy in the hope of ultimately conquering the USSR and then conquering Russia itself, which the US President GHW Bush on the night of 24 February 1990 made clear that the US and its allies must do — he gave the European vassal-nations their marching-order on that date, and they have reliably followed that order, until now.

  Russia, which the US aristocracy craves to conquer, is an ally of Iran (which they hope to re-conquer).

  The basic principle of America’s aristocracy is repudiation of national sovereignty. That’s what the US Government globally stands for today.

  Russian Television headlined on May 11th, “‘Are we America’s vassals?’ France vows to trade with Iran in defiance of US ‘economic policeman’” and reported that US President Donald Trump’s re-imposition of US economic sanctions against any companies that do business with Iran, is being resisted by all the other nations that had signed the Obama-Kerry nuclear accord with Iran, the “JCPOA” treaty: UK, France, China, Russia, US, and EU (which is led by Germany).

  The US regime knows that if even America’s allies — UK, France, and Germany — hold together with Iran, to defy the Imperial actions punishing them for continuing with Iran even after the US pull-out from the treaty, then the Western Alliance will be jeopardized, if not terminated altogether, and finally the Cold War, which GHW Bush had ordered the allies to continue even after the end of the USSR, and of its communism, and of its Warsaw Pact military alliance mirroring America’s NATO alliance, will finally end also on America’s side, just as it had ended in 1991 on the Soviet Union’s side. Such an end to the Cold War would possibly cause America’s military-industrial complex — and the stock values of mega-corporations such as Lockheed Martin — to collapse. 

  Thus, the US aristocracy is afraid of peace replacing their existing permanent-war economy. All those trillions of dollars that have been invested in machines of mass-murder abroad, could plunge in value, if UK, France, and Germany, terminate the Western Alliance, and become individual sovereign nations who join with Iran — another individual sovereign nation — to say no to the Imperial power (the US), and yes to national sovereignty, which sovereignty constitutes the sole foundation-stone upon which any and all democracies are constructed. No democracy can exist in any nation that is a vassal to some other (the imperial power). In a world where national sovereignty is honored, democracy would not necessarily exist everywhere, but it would no longer be internationally prohibited by an imperial power, which inevitably is itself a dictatorship, no real democracy at all.

  On March 3rd, the 175-year-old imperial magazine, The Economist, headlined against China as an enemy in this continuing Cold War, “How the West got China wrong” and explained “the Chinese threat”: 

  “China is not a market economy and, on its present course, never will be. Instead, it increasingly controls business as an arm of state power… Foreign businesses are profitable but miserable, because commerce always seems to be on China’s terms.”

  The imperialistic view is that the international dictator and its corporations should rule — there should be no real sovereign other than this dictatorship, by the US regime now, since America is today’s imperialist nation.

  Perhaps Europe now will make the fateful decision, between international dictatorship on the one side, or else the supreme sovereignty of each and every nation on the other, to determine its own laws — and to require any corporation that does business there to adhere to its legal system and to none other: the supremacy of each nation within its own territory, not of any international corporations, not even of ones that are based in some international-bully country that says it’s “the one indispensable nation” — meaning that every other nation is “dispensable.” Russia won’t accept that. Iran won’t accept that. China won’t accept that. Will Germany accept it — the land of the original: “Deutschland über alles”? Will France? Will UK? 

  Americans accept it. The US public are very effectively controlled by America’s aristocracy. A Yougov poll at the start of 2017 (the start of Trump’s Presidency) asked over 7,000 Americans to rate countries as “enemy”, “unfriendly”, “friendly”, “ally”, or “not sure”; and, among the 144 rated countries, Americans placed at the most hostile end, in order from the very worst, to the 13th-from-worst: North Korea, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, Libya, Somalia, Pakistan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Sudan. Other than Saudi Arabia, which the US Government treats as being its master if not as being its very top ally, and which is, in any case, by far the US military’s biggest customer (other than the US Government, of course), that list from Yougov looks very much like, or else close to, what America’s aristocracy would want to see targeted, as being America’s ‘enemies’. So, other than Americans’ including the top ally both of America’s aristocracy and of Israel‘s aristocracy, Saudi Arabia, on that list of enemies, the list was very much what the US aristocracy’s ’news’media had been promoting as being America’s ‘enemies’.

  In fact, even though those ‘news’media haven’t informed Americans that 92% of Saudi Arabians approve of ISIS, or that the Saudi royal family financed and organized the 9/11 attacks (in conjunction with others of George W. Bush’s friends), Americans view Saudi Arabia hostilely. That’s acceptable to America’s aristocracy, because the Saud family’s hatred is focused against Iran, the main Shiite nation, and the US public (have been deceive to) prefer Saudi Arabia over Iran. In fact, a 17 February 2016 Gallup poll showed that Iran was seen by Americans as being even more hostile toward Americans than is Saudi Arabia.

  So, America’s aristocracy have no reason to be concerned that their chief ally and second-from-top governmental customer, the Saud family, are unfavorably viewed by the US public. Both in America and in Saudi Arabia, the aristocracy effectively controls its public. Thus, the American people think in the way that the American aristocracy want them to — supporting any conquest (e.g., Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Syria 2012-) that the aristocracy want to perpetrate. Of course, the way to achieve this control is by means of the windows through which the public get to see the world around them, which windows on the world are the nation’s ‘news’media.

  On May 12th, Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) reported that the American people are very effectively controlled to believe Iran to be America’s enemy and very dangerous to us. The headline was “Media Debate Best Way to Dominate Iran” and the article documented that the American people are being very intensively propagandized by the aristocratically controlled media, to favor aggression against Iran, and are being heavily lied-to, in order to achieve this.

  So, though the American public will continue to support the American Government (despite distrusting both their government and their ‘news’media), foreign publics aren’t so rigidly under the control of America’s aristocracy; and therefore Europe’s aristocracies could abandon their alliance with the US aristocracy, if they strongly enough want to. Their ‘news’media would obediently do whatever they’re told, and could begin immediately portraying the reality of the US Government, to their people — including, for example, the reality that the US stole Ukraine, and some of the participants have even confessed their roles; Russia did not steal Crimea (and the Crimea-Ukraine issue was the alleged spark for the ‘restoration’ of the Cold War — which The West never actually ended on its side, only Russia did on its side). 

  An end of The Western Alliance (America’s empire) could happen. But it would require — from the EU’s leaders (and/or from Turkey’s Erdogan) — courage, conviction, and a commitment to national sovereignty’s being the foundation-stone to any democracy anywhere, and this change-of-political-theory would be something drastically new in Europe (and-or in Turkey), which is a region that has historically been staunchly supportive of empires, and thus supportive of dictatorships (ones that are compliant — foreign stooge-regimes). It would require a historic sea-change.

  

• Special Ops Getting 1000s Of Small Glide Munitions That Pack A Bigger Punch Than Hellfires

  As global counterterrorism operations show no signs of slowing down, U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) are receivingthousands of light, gliding missiles that are smaller and more powerful than an AGM-114 Hellfire and fired from a Lockheed C-130 Hercules above the modern battlefield.

  

  Dynetics Small Glide Munition. (Source: Defense News)

  In recent years, insurgent groups have outsmarted American precision-guided weapons launched from an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) with fast traveling vehicles. However, a new powerful gliding munition can chase down and destroy these fast-moving targets.

  

  Dynetics Small Glide Munition. (Source: Aviation Week)

  According to the United State Special Operations Command (SOCOM) report about an upcoming contract award, it signed a deal with Alabama-based defense contractor Dynetics for the supply of about 4,000 more of the 59-lb. GBU-69B Small Glide Munitions (SGM) over the next four years.

  The GBU-69B Small Glide Munitions (SGM) can glide for more than 20 miles and slam into a moving target traveling up to 70 mph with its lightweight, 36-lb. warhead, which is more powerful than a Hellfire, but has about half the weight coming in at 59-lb.

  

  Breaking Defense points out that Dynetics’ secret to weight reduction is in “a lighter tube thanks partly to the fact that the SGM is unpowered, and uses wings that unfold after launch to glide to its target.” The company told Breaking Defense that the weapon was designed to be “modular” so that the SGM could fit on a wide variety of platforms.

  In a justification document breaking down why it was not purchasing more SGMs, SOCOM said it wanted to “expeditiously complete development, integration, test, and fielding an SGM capability for the AC-130W, AC-130J, and other Special Operations Forces (SOF) platforms” because “the combat need is immediate.” The document also discussed how SOCOM had terrible luck with another comparable munition, which “was removed from service on SOCOM aircraft due to failure to achieve lethality performance and high cost to redesign to meet mission requirements.”

  The contract, which could be awarded as early as July, will require Dynetics to provide “700 SGMs in 2018 and 2019, with 900 more in 2020,” said Breaking Defense. The number is expected to increase to 1,000 per year in 2021 and beyond.

  Highlighted in the recent Department of Defense’s National Defense Strategy (2018), counterterrorism operations in the Middle East, Yemen, Eastern Africa and Libya will be abundant well into the 2020s. According to the newest US Army’s Training and Doctrine Command, or TRADOC, these operations will be considered hybrid wars, that are small, fast-paced, and rely on precision-guided munitions to protect Special Operations Forces.

  Dynetics told Breaking Defense that the SGMs laser-guided munition uses lattice control fins at the back of the missile are similar to the GBU 43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast, and the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator.

  In the past, SOCOM tested several other lightweight munitions, but none seemed to pan out with successful field tests. SOCOM tested Raytheon’s Griffin, Northrop Grumman’s Viper Strike, and Textron’s G-CLAW. Here is what the justification document said:

  • SOCOM “phased the Viper Strike out of the inventory due to failure to achieve lethality performance, and high cost to redesign to meet mission requirements.”

  • Textron’s G-CLAW “is 2-3 years behind the SGM in maturity and experienced failures in its first flight test with a seeker,” and

  • Raytheon’s Griffin “does not address the required aspects of the 360 degree employment zone, launch signature, and support engagement scenarios in which attack azimuth and impact angle must be precisely controlled. At this time, there is no viable alternative to the SGM.”

  Dynetics further told Breaking Defense that the company is experimenting with strapping the SGMs to fighter jets and helicopters, and “nothing that would preclude it from unmanned or light aircraft or gunship derivatives.” Dynetics added that the SGM could be an excellent fit for the Army’s lightweight precision munition program.

  Perhaps, lightweight munitions for SOCOM’s hybrid wars in Africa and the Middle East is another way of saying, the military cannot afford to field overpriced munitions, as its endless wars could undoubtedly bankrupt this nation.

  

• An Empire Of Nothing At All – A Staggeringly Well-Funded Blowback Machine

  Authored by Tom Engelhardt via TomDispatch.com,

  [This essay is the introduction to Tom Engelhardt’s new book, A Nation Unmade by War, a Dispatch Book published by Haymarket Books.]

  As I was putting the finishing touches on my new book, the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute published an estimate of the taxpayer dollars that will have gone into America’s war on terror from September 12, 2001, through fiscal year 2018. That figure: a cool $5.6 trillion (including the future costs of caring for our war vets).

  On average, that’s at least $23,386 per taxpayer.

  

  Keep in mind that such figures, however eye-popping, are only the dollar costs of our wars. They don’t, for instance, include the psychic costs to the Americans mangled in one way or another in those never-ending conflicts. They don’t include the costs to this country’s infrastructure, which has been crumbling while taxpayer dollars flow copiously and in a remarkably — in these years, almost uniquely — bipartisan fashion into what’s still laughably called “national security.” That’s not, of course, what would make most of us more secure, but what would make them — the denizens of the national security state — ever more secure in Washington and elsewhere. We’re talking about the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. nuclear complex, and the rest of that state-within-a-state, including its many intelligence agencies and the warrior corporations that have, by now, been fused into that vast and vastly profitable interlocking structure.

  In reality, the costs of America’s wars, still spreading in the Trump era, are incalculable. Just look at photos of the cities of Ramadi or Mosul in Iraq, Raqqa or Aleppo in Syria, Sirte in Libya, or Marawi in the southern Philippines, all in ruins in the wake of the conflicts Washington set off in the post–9/11 years, and try to put a price on them. Those views of mile upon mile of rubble, often without a building still standing untouched, should take anyone’s breath away. Some of those cities may never be fully rebuilt.

  

  And how could you even begin to put a dollars-and-cents value on the larger human costs of those wars: the hundreds of thousands of dead? The tens of millions of people displaced in their own countries or sent as refugees fleeing across any border in sight? How could you factor in the way those masses of uprooted peoples of the Greater Middle East and Africa are unsettling other parts of the planet? Their presence (or more accurately a growing fear of it) has, for instance, helped fuel an expanding set of right-wing “populist” movements that threaten to tear Europe apart. And who could forget the role that those refugees — or at least fantasy versions of them — played in Donald Trump’s full-throated, successful pitch for the presidency? What, in the end, might be the cost of that?

  Opening the Gates of Hell

  America’s never-ending twenty-first-century conflicts were triggered by the decision of George W. Bush and his top officials to instantly define their response to attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center by a tiny group of jihadis as a “war”; then to proclaim it nothing short of a “Global War on Terror”; and finally to invade and occupy first Afghanistan and then Iraq, with dreams of dominating the Greater Middle East — and ultimately the planet — as no other imperial power had ever done.

  Their overwrought geopolitical fantasies and their sense that the U.S. military was a force capable of accomplishing anything they willed it to do launched a process that would cost this world of ours in ways that no one will ever be able to calculate. Who, for instance, could begin to put a price on the futures of the children whose lives, in the aftermath of those decisions, would be twisted and shrunk in ways frightening even to imagine? Who could tote up what it means for so many millions of this planet’s young to be deprived of homes, parents, educations — of anything, in fact, approximating the sort of stability that might lead to a future worth imagining?

  Though few may remember it, I’ve never forgotten the 2002 warning issued by Amr Moussa, then head of the Arab League. An invasion of Iraq would, he predicted that September, “open the gates of hell.” Two years later, in the wake of the actual invasion and the U.S. occupation of that country, he altered his comment slightly. “The gates of hell,” he said, “are open in Iraq.”

  His assessment has proven unbearably prescient — and one not only applicable to Iraq. Fourteen years after that invasion, we should all now be in some kind of mourning for a world that won’t ever be. It wasn’t just the US military that, in the spring of 2003, passed through those gates to hell. In our own way, we all did. Otherwise, Donald Trump wouldn’t have become president.

  I don’t claim to be an expert on hell. I have no idea exactly what circle of it we’re now in, but I do know one thing: we are there.

  The Infrastructure of a Garrison State

  If I could bring my parents back from the dead right now, I know that this country in its present state would boggle their minds. They wouldn’t recognize it. If I were to tell them, for instance, that just three men — Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and Warren Buffett — now possess as much wealth as the bottom half of the US population, of 160 million Americans, they would never believe me.

  How, for instance, could I begin to explain to them the ways in which, in these years, money flowed ever upward into the pockets of the immensely wealthy and then down again into what became one-percent elections that would finally ensconce a billionaire and his family in the White House? How would I explain to them that, while leading congressional Democrats and Republicans couldn’t say often enough that this country was uniquely greater than any that ever existed, none of them could find the funds — some $5.6 trillion for starters — necessary for our roads, dams, bridges, tunnels, and other crucial infrastructure? This on a planet where what the news likes to call “extreme weather” is increasingly wreaking havocon that same infrastructure.

  My parents wouldn’t have thought such things possible. Not in America. And somehow I’d have to explain to them that they had returned to a nation which, though few Americans realize it, has increasingly been unmade by war — by the conflicts Washington’s war on terror triggered that have now morphed into the wars of so many and have, in the process, changed us.

  Such conflicts on the global frontiers have a tendency to come home in ways that can be hard to track or pin down. After all, unlike those cities in the Greater Middle East, ours aren’t yet in ruins — though some of them may be heading in that direction, even if in slow motion. This country is, at least theoretically, still near the height of its imperial power, still the wealthiest nation on the planet. And yet it should be clear enough by now that we’ve crippled not just other nations but ourselves in ways that I suspect — though I’ve tried over these years to absorb and record them as best I could — we can still barely see or grasp.

  In my new book, A Nation Unmade by War, the focus is on a country increasingly unsettled and transformed by spreading wars to which most of its citizens were, at best, only half paying attention. Certainly, Trump’s election was a sign of how an American sense of decline had already come home to roost in the era of the rise of the national security state (and little else).

  Though it’s not something normally said here, to my mind President Trump should be considered part of the costs of those wars come home. Without the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and what followed, I doubt he would have been imaginable as anything but the host of a reality TV show or the owner of a series of failed casinos. Nor would the garrison-state version of Washington he now occupies be conceivable, nor the generals of our disastrous wars whom he’s surrounded himself with, nor the growth of a surveillance state that would have staggered George Orwell.

  The Makings of a Blowback Machine

  It took Donald Trump — give him credit where it’s due — to make us begin to grasp that we were living in a different and devolving world. And none of this would have been imaginable if, in the aftermath of 9/11, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney & Co. hadn’t felt the urge to launch the wars that led us through those gates of hell. Their soaring geopolitical dreams of global domination proved to be nightmares of the first order. They imagined a planet unlike any in the previous half millennium of imperial history, in which a single power would basically dominate everything until the end of time. They imagined, that is, the sort of world that, in Hollywood, had been associated only with the most malign of evil characters.

  And here was the result of their conceptual overreach: never, it could be argued, has a great power still in its imperial prime proven quite so incapable of applying its military and political might in a way that would advance its aims. It’s a strange fact of this century that the U.S. military has been deployed across vast swaths of the planet and somehow, again and again, has found itself overmatched by underwhelming enemy forces and incapable of producing any results other than destruction and further fragmentation. And all of this occurred at the moment when the planet most needed a new kind of knitting together, at the moment when humanity’s future was at stake in ways previously unimaginable, thanks to its still-increasing use of fossil fuels.

  In the end, the last empire may prove to be an empire of nothing at all — a grim possibility which has been a focus of TomDispatch, the website I’ve run since November 2002. Of course, when you write pieces every couple of weeks for years on end, it would be surprising if you didn’t repeat yourself. The real repetitiousness, however, wasn’t at TomDispatch. It was in Washington. The only thing our leaders and generals have seemed capable of doing, starting from the day after the 9/11 attacks, is more or less the same thing with the same dismal results, again and again.

  The U.S. military and the national security state that those wars emboldened have become, in effect — and with a bow to the late Chalmers Johnson (a TomDispatch stalwart and a man who knew the gates of hell when he saw them) — a staggeringly well-funded blowback machine. In all these years, while three administrations pursued the spreading war on terror, America’s conflicts in distant lands were largely afterthoughts to its citizenry. Despite the largest demonstrations in history aimed at stopping a war before it began, once the invasion of Iraq occurred, the protests died out and, ever since, Americans have generally ignored their country’s wars, even as the blowback began. Someday, they will have no choice but to pay attention.

  

• Graduates From America's Largest Schools Move Here With Their Diplomas

  The notion that Americans need a college education to succeed in the modern workforce is at the root of most of the millennial generation’s problems: With Americans bearing a collective $1.4 trillion debt burden, economists have blamed this debt pile for holding back millennials – keeping them from buying homes and starting families. 

  But the truth is much more complex. 

  In a recently published study, the Wall Street Journal gathered data from 445 large research universities and liberal arts colleges – as well as NCAA D-I schools – detailing where their alumni move after college.

  The maps below show their movement to 70 big metropolitan areas, as well as the share who moved to smaller communities.  

  As one might expect, graduates from brand-name Ivy League schools, along with their cohorts at smaller liberal arts institutions, overwhelmingly flock to urban areas like New York City, Washington DC and San Francisco.

  Meanwhile, students who attended large public research universities are more likely to settle down in suburban areas.

  WSJ breaks down its findings in a presentation showing how graduates disperse throughout the country.

  Las Vegas Has Little To Offer:

  

  * * *

  Some Punch Above Their Weight:

  

  The biggest cities don’t necessarily draw the most students from colleges and universities in our study.

  San Francisco, for example ranks 11th in population but fifth in drawing power, attracting 2% or more of alumni from 139 schools.

  * * *

  Smaller Metro Areas Sometimes Have More Drawing Power:

  

  

  Boston is the 10th biggest metro but ranks sixth in drawing 2% or more of alumni from institutions traced by some 120 schools.

  However, New York City, the country’s largest city, also draws 2% or more of the alumni of 263 schools, the most of any US city.

  * * *

  Smaller Metro And Rural Areas Have Less Drawing Power:

  

  Only 62 schools in WSJ’s database saw more than half of their alumni move to smaller metropolitan and rural areas. Many of these colleges and universities are part of state university systems like the University of Connecticut or Purdue.

  * * *

  Big East Alumni Are More Likely To Live In Cities; SEC Grads Less So:

  

  The Big East is the most urbane conference. Schools like Georgetown and Villanova send a large segment of their grads to New York City and Washington DC. Each of the 10 schools in the conference sends more than 75% of its former students to big metropolitan areas.

  

  The SEC, which includes Ole Miss, Auburn and Kentucky, sends more students to smaller cities and rural areas than any other conference. Among SEC schools, only Vanderbilt sends more than 75% of its alumni to big city metro areas.

  And as millennials continue to favor urban environments, it’s likely these trends will continue to intensify, sending urban property values even higher than they already are.

  

• Ranking The Most (And Least) Productive Industries

  Via Priceonomics.com,

  A common complaint for people about their workplace is that things never get done. Bureaucracy, politics, and coordination costs among teams means that projects are completed at a snail’s pace, if it all.

  You often see this complaint among people at large companies, where these dynamics can be especially pronounced. You also tend to hear about it in certain industries with a reputation for slowness.

  But is that actually true? Does it take longer for big companies to get work done than small companies? Are certain industries more or less productive than others? We decided to analyze our data to find out the answers to these questions.

  

  We analyzed data from Priceonomics customer Redbooth, a project management software company, to see how long it takes for work to get done at different types of companies. We looked at anonymized data from nine million tasks completed over the last year to see how long it takes to get work done and whether smaller or larger companies get work done faster. Not only that, but we also looked at whether some industries were more productive than others.

  We found that in fact, large companies get work done at about the same rate as small ones.  However, medium sized ones are 6.7% less productive than small ones, taking about 2.5 days more to complete a task.

  Among industries, there is a huge variation in how long it takes to get work done. The energy industry ranks as the slowest to get tasks done (tasks take 59 days on average). Financial companies are the fastest industry, where a task is completed in 31 days on average.

  *  *  *

  To begin, we look at how long it takes for work to get done and whether that varies by company size. On Redbooth, the foundational unit of measurement is a task. When you’re working on a project, users create a task and then mark the task as complete when they’re done. The time difference between task creation and completion is how long it takes to get your work done.

  While projects across companies and industries may be very different, at the task level there is a lot of commonality in terms of things that need to get done; tasks are often things like complete an RFP, fix a broken wireless network, hire a new employee. 

  The chart below shows the average time it takes to complete a task, split by small, medium and large companies:

  

  Data source: Redbooth

  Enormous companies with over five thousand employees get work done about as quickly as small ones with less than fifty people. It takes about an average of 36 days for a task to get done at a small or large company.

  Interestingly, mid-sized companies are the least productive. It takes 2.4 days more for an employee at a mid-sized companies to get their work done than at a small one. It’s possible that as companies grow, they become less productive as they cease to be small startups and now have to coordinate with many people. However, at some point, productivity enhancements need to be put in place to scale up to a large company. 

  Our findings partially confirm some recent economic research that in most countries, large companies are more productive than smaller ones. Not all small companies are fast moving startups after all, some are just small companies that struggle to compete against larger ones with more resources.

  Below, we break down the company size cohorts into more granular buckets. A similar picture of productivity remains: 

  

  Data source: Redbooth

  The segment of 51 to 10,000 employees is consistently the least productive. Companies with fewer than 10 employees or more than 100,000 both take on average about thirty five days to complete a task.  

  Our data indicates that large companies are just as productive as very small ones. Or if they are not, they’re at least good at scoping tasks in their project management system to be achievable during a reasonable time frame. 

  ***

  As the data above shows, company size plays a sizable role in productivity, but what other factors influence how quickly work gets done at a company?

  Next, we turn our attention to productivity by industry. Do certain sectors have more or less productive employees, as defined by how quickly it takes them to complete a task on average? 

  The chart below shows the average time to complete a task based on industry sector:

  

  Data source: Redbooth

  There is a pretty dramatic difference in how long it takes work to get done by industry. A task in the Energy sector takes about twice as long to complete as one in Financials. The next “slowest” industries are Materials and Utilities. Information Technology and Financials get work done the fastest. Later, we’ll dive into this data at a more granular level, but industries creating infrastructure and physical products tend to work at a more measured pace than ones that sell services.

  It might not necessarily be a bad thing, however, for a company to take a long time to complete its work tasks. If the tasks in the Energy industry are more complicated than in IT, you would expect the tasks to take longer. Or if you work in highly regulated industry like Healthcare, additional compliance steps may result in work taking longer to complete.

  We also have the ability to dive deeper into the industry taxonomy to get a more nuanced picture. Which “sub-industries” (more specialized work areas within a sector) get their work done completed fastest and slowest: 

  

  Data source: Redbooth

  Of the 51 industries we looked at, IT Services gets their work done in the least amount of time. This isn’t terribly surprising if the tasks are high priority items like “fix the email server” that have to be completed quickly for businesses to operate.  Dominating the “gets work done fast” are consumer facing industries ike Beverages, Personal Products, and Real Estate as well as “services” for businesses.

  Next, we look at industries that take the longest to get tasks accomplished:

  

  Data source: Redbooth

  The industry that takes the longest to complete a task is Metals & Mining.  It takes almost four times as long for a task to be completed here compared to IT services. Industries producing complicated physical goods like Aerospace & Defense and Technology Hardware, also take a long time for work to be completed.

  Curious where your industry stacks up in terms of productivity? To conclude, we present all the data on how long it takes for task completion in each industry where we have sufficient data to provide a productivity estimate. The chart belows shows industries grouped by their sector, sorted from working the slowest to the fastest:

  

  Data source: Redbooth

  Within a given sector, there are huge differences in how long it takes to complete work. For example in the Material sector, Metals & Mining tasks take almost 73 days, whereas Containers &  Packaging tasks take 26 days. Similarly, in the Financials sector, Capital Markets tasks take nearly twice as long as real estate ones do.

  *  *  *

  Depending on your industry and company size, it takes different amounts of time for work to get done.

  While one might expect big companies to be the slowest, the results revealed that they are just as productive at finishing their tasks as small companies. However, medium sized companies with 51 to 5000 employees are significantly slower at completing tasks than smaller or larger ones.

  Not surprising, the industry you work in helps determine the pace at which work gets done. Industries like Metals and Mining, Technology Hardware, and Aerospace & Defense have work that takes a long time to complete. On the other hand, service providers like IT Services and Commercial Services providers are expected to get their work done much faster. If you’re building a rocket, you can take your time. If you’re responsible for fixing the Internet in the office, you best get the task done quickly.

  

• Median-Priced Home In San Francisco Requres $333,000 Annual Income

  San Francisco County Real Estate is so hot right now that in order to afford a median priced home of $1,610,000, a household needs to bring in around $333,000 in annual income, according to a quarterly survey by the California Association of Realtors. 

  

  Nearby San Mateo county isn’t much better – where a $1,575,000 median priced home requires an income of $326,000. 

  The good news, at least for well off San Franciscans, is that more households – 15% – were able to buy a median-priced single-family home in the first quarter of 2018 vs. the fourth quarter of 2017, thanks to rising incomes which rose faster than the increase in home prices and interest rates. 

  

  Six out of nine bay area counties (Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara) were responsible for the majority of the affordability gains, according to the CAR, while affordability decreased in two counties (Solano and Sonoma). 

  Statewide the situation is much more reasonable:

  • Thirty-one percent of California households could afford to purchase the $538,640 median-priced home in the first quarter of 2018, up from 29 percent in fourth-quarter 2017 but down from 32 percent a year ago.

  • A minimum annual income of $111,500 was needed to make monthly payments of $2,790, including principal, interest, and taxes on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at a 4.44 percent interest rate.

  • Thirty-nine percent of home buyers were able to purchase the $449,720 median-priced condo or townhome. An annual income of $93,090 was required to make a monthly payment of $2,330.

  

  In Southern California, affordability improved in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventuira, while remaining flat in Orange and San Diego counties during the first quarter in 2018. 

  For those seeking California’s most affordable areas, Lassen, Kern, Kings and San Bernardino counties top the list. 

  California counties have become far less affordable since “peak affordability” in 2012, with Bay Area homes dropping from 45% to 23% in just 8 years, while the overall affordability in the United States went from 75% in 2012 to 57% in Q1 2018. 

  

  

  Fun fact: Property tax on the average San Francisco home is $1,593 per month – while the average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment in California is $1,430 per month ($940 nationally). 

  

• Big Brother: Police Raid Home Of Man Who Posted Pictures Of His Mushroom Dinner On Facebook

  Authored by Jay Syrmopoulos via TruthInMedia.com,

  On May 11, a man named John Garrison posted a public photo on Facebook showing morel mushrooms he had gathered while foraging with his girlfriend Hope Deery, and wrote of his plans to “sautee them with brown sugar and cinnamon and see how that turns out.”

  Garrison went on to claim that his original Facebook post about morel mushrooms, which are a legal and sought-after delicacy, led to a visit to his home hours later from law enforcement apparently investigating possible use of psychedelic mushrooms commonly referred to as “magic mushrooms.”

  

  Photography is Not a Crime reported that police appeared at his house less than 24 hours later, questioning Garrison and Deery about why they were “eating mushrooms and posting about it online.”

  

  “We had just finished eating the Morels we found today and heard a knock on the door. A police officer and an RA were standing outside. We let them in and as soon as the police officer walked in he asked us why we were eating mushrooms and posting about it online. He thought he was on the biggest bust of his career thinking we were having a magic mushroom party before I explained to him that Morels are a native choice edible mushroom similar to truffles,” Garrison wrote in an additional Facebook post.

  The officer allegedly refused to believe that the couple ingested legal mushrooms. Garrison, in an effort to prove that they were simply morel mushrooms, said that he retrieved a piece of the mushroom from the trash— but the officer still refused to believe they hadn’t broken the law until a second officer arrived on the scene and confirmed it was a legal mushroom. Before the officers left, Garrison said his ID was processed.

  “He wasn’t convinced. So I rummaged through the trash to find a piece of a Morel so that he would have evidence that we weren’t taking psychedelic mushrooms. I showed him and he still wasn’t convinced that they weren’t magic mushrooms, Which was shocking to me because morels look nothing like a psychedelic psilocybin mushrooms and I figured a police officer would know what illegal drugs looked like. A second police officer showed up and I showed her the Morel and she immediately knew it was a Morel which was a relief. They processed our ID’s and eventually left. What an experience,” Garrison wrote.

  It appears Big Brother is well and truly here… and he’s watching you!

  

• US Birth Rate Hits All-Time Low: What's Behind The Decline?

  The number of babies born in the United States has hit a 40-year low, according to figures published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

  

  Provisional 2017 estimates reveal that around 3.8 million babies were born in the U.S. in 2017, a fertility rate of 1.76 births per woman. This is a 2% drop from 2016 – marking the largest single-year drop in the U.S. birth rate since 2010, and is significantly lower than the 4.31 million babies born in 2007 when the fertility rate was 2.08 births per woman.

  

  When the data is restricted to women aged 15 – 44, there were around 60 births per 1,000 mothers – a 3% drop from 2016, and the lowest record rate since the government began keeping track in 1909. 

  Since 2007, fertility has fallen the most for the youngest women, but in the last year, declines have set in for women in their 30s as well. Fertility declines increasingly seem to be about much more than just postponed fertility, or else these women must be planning to have some very fertile 40s.

  At least through 2016, this trend appeared to be mostly driven by changes in marital status. Births to never-married women are down more than births to ever-married women: age-adjusted marital fertility is down 14% since 2007, while age-adjusted never-married fertility is down 21%, as of 2016. Preliminary data from several states suggest these trends are likely to continue in 2017. –IFS

  The teen birth rate fell 7% from 2016-2017, down to 19 births per 1,000 teen mothers aged 15-19 – while the birth rate for women under 40 generally declined to record lows. 

  

  When looking at fertility by race, the decline has hit minorities particularly hard vs. non-Hispanic whites. 

  the decline in fertility has been far greater among minorities than among non-Hispanic whites.

  …

  The deficit varies across racial and ethnic groups. American Indians and Alaska Natives have it worst among racial groups, having lost a whopping 15% of expected fertility from 2008 to 2016, or about 83,000 births, with total fertility rates falling from 1.62 births per woman to a shockingly low 1.23. It’s unclear exactly why Native American fertility has fallen so quickly and why it is so low, but they are indisputably the hardest-hit race in the fertility declines of the last 10 years. –IFS

  

  African American births are down 9.6%, or around 700,00 babies – which is only slightly worse than whites, who are down 9.3%, or around 3.2 million births.

  “Black fertility declined from 2.15 births per woman to 1.89, while white fertility fell from 2.14 to 1.82,” reads IFR‘s analysis, while “Asians experienced a less severe decline, but their fertility was somewhat lower to start with.”

  The fertility rate among whites is a bit misleading, admits IFR, as it includes most Hispanics – who have historically higher birth rates than non-Hispanic whites. When looking at Hispanics as a whole, the birth rate between 2008-2016 has declined nearly 19%.

  Thus, in racial or ethnic terms, America’s “Baby Bust” is kinda, sorta, a little bit racist: it’s hammered Native Americans and Hispanics particularly hard, and hit even African Americans harder than whites generally, and certainly harder than non-Hispanic whites. The call to boost fertility is far from being a call for whites to keep up with minority fertility; rather, it’s an exhortation that we need to be listening to the fertility desires of women of racial and ethnic minorities, who are experiencing precipitous declines in fertility, largely unnoticed by the white-dominated world of mommy-blogs and late-in-life fertility treatments. Any serious pro-natal policy in America worth its salt would primarily result in birth gains among minority mothers, not white ones. Accelerating the national birth rate would also accelerate the pace at which the non-Hispanic white population share declines.-IFR

  North Dakotans Are Gettin’ It On

  While birth rates in most states have declined, North Dakota has experienced an increase in births. 

  

  On the other hand, residents of Arizona don’t seem to feel the need to breed – where fertility rates have fallen from 2.47 births per woman in 2007 to an estimated 1.81 last year.  

  Provisional data from early 2018 suggests these declines are likely to continue. Arizona is double-whammied by two different racial or ethnic trends: steep declines among Hispanics and steep declines among Native Americans. Both groups make up a larger share of Arizona’s population than the national average. Both groups have seen steep declines within Arizona; steeper even than their peers in other states. –IFR

  In terms of education, the drop in fertility rates have been higher for less educated woman vs. their more educated peers. As IFR notes, “Age-adjusted fertility has fallen 15% for women with a bachelor’s degree or less, versus just 7% for women with graduate degrees. On the whole, births to women with no bachelor’s have totaled 12% below what would be expected if 2007 fertility rates had continued, yielding 3.1 million missing births, while births to women with a bachelor’s degree are down 10% for 1.1 million missing births, and births to women with a graduate degree are down just 7%, or 300,000.”

  

  The takeaway is that class is not the biggest factor in declining fertility rates. Instead, race, ethnicity, marital status and geography appear to have far more relevance.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Putin Drives Dump Truck Across $3.6 Billion Bridge He Built To Crimea

  Russian President Vladimir Putin unveiled the auto section of a $3.6 billion (223 billion rouble) road-and-rail bridge over the Kersch Strait on Tuesday linking Russia to the Crimean peninsula – much to the consternation of Ukrainian officials who said the bridge showed “disregard for international law.” 

  The bridge will be the longest dual-purpose span bridge in Europe, with the rail section expected to be completed at the end of 2019. 

  The road stretch of the bridge was due to be completed by the end of 2018, but the opening was moved up at Putin’s request. He inspected the bridge in March ahead of the presidential election he won, saying it was important to have the link to the Black Sea peninsula open for the summer tourist season. –CBC

  “Putin initiated this project himself. Many didn’t believe these plans were possible,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Tuesday before the ceremony, adding “This is an extremely important day from this point of view and in a practical sense and in symbolic terms.”

  

  

  

  Drone footage captures opening day of Kerch Strait Bridge pic.twitter.com/cPSFZkuYKm

  — Ruptly (@Ruptly) May 15, 2018

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

  Putin drove the Russian-made KAMAZ dump truck in a convoy of vehicles across the 19-kilometre [11.8 mile] bridge over the Kerch Strait. Some Russians are calling it “Putin’s bridge,” designed to link Crimea into Russia’s transport network. –CBC

  Putin, dressed in blue jeans, was met by cheering workers on the Crimean side who he told “At last, thanks to your talent, this project, this miracle, has happened.”  

  [insert: 0917_Ukraine_Russia_infra_kerch_bridge Crimea Cropped.jpg , DdP3YlMX4AIxpCr.jpg ]

  

  

  The Kerch Strait is a notoriously difficult place to build, with undersea mud volcanoes and seismic activity. pic.twitter.com/8X02gWSnpX

  — RFE/RL (@RFERL) May 15, 2018

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

  Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko slammed Putin’s actions from Kiev.

  “The illegal construction of the Kerch bridge is the latest evidence of the Kremlin’s disregard for international law,” Poroshenko said, adding “It is particularly cynical that its opening is happening on the eve of the latest anniversary of the deportation of the Crimean-Tatar people by the Stalin regime.”

  

  Meanwhile, US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert says the United States condemns the construction and partial opening of the bridge, which it says was done “without the permission of the government of #Ukraine. Crimea is Ukraine.” 

  The United States condemns #Russia’s construction and partial opening of the Kerch Strait Bridge between Russia and occupied #Crimea, which was done without the permission of the government of #Ukraine. Crimea is Ukraine. https://t.co/YjR4nserzN

  — Heather Nauert (@statedeptspox) May 15, 2018

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

  The United States condemns Russia’s construction and partial opening of the Kerch Strait Bridge between Russia and occupied Crimea, which was done without the permission of the government of Ukraine. Crimea is part of Ukraine. Russia’s construction of the bridge serves as a reminder of Russia’s ongoing willingness to flout international law.

  The bridge represents not only an attempt by Russia to solidify its unlawful seizure and its occupation of Crimea, but also impedes navigation by limiting the size of ships that can transit the Kerch Strait, the only path to reach Ukraine’s territorial waters in the Sea of Azov. We call on Russia not to impede this shipping. -US Department of State

  The bridge also drew criticism from Europe, after the French foreign ministry said “France condemns the construction by Russia of the Kerch Bridge, which deprives Ukraine of full access and the use of its internationally recognized territorial waters.” Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the European External Action Service said on Tuesday that the bridge was “another violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” 

  “The European Union continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by Russia and will not recognize this violation of international law,” the spokesperson said.

  Crimea broke away from Ukraine following a bloody US-sponsored coup, when in a March 2014 Crimean referendum 95% of participating voters were in favor of secession of the ethnically Russian region. Ukrainian officials disputed the vote, with then-acting President Oleksander Turchinov stating that “The authorities in Crimea are totally illegitimate, both the parliament and the government.” 

  The State Department-backed fiasco led to the Obama administration imposing harsh sanctions on the Russian Federation, after Obama told Putin during a phone call that “Russia’s actions were in violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” 

  Putin pushed back, likening Crimea’s self-determined referendum to Kosovo’s breakaway from Serbia in 2008. 

  “Regarding the March 16 referendum in Crimea, Mr Putin said that the decision to hold the referendum was in line with international law and the U.N. Charter, and was also in line with the precedent set by Kosovo,” the Kremlin said.

  While the reaction on Twitter was mostly tepid, there were a few tweets of support for the bridge: 

  1.000s of people have already used the Kerch bridge in the first few hours after its opening. A dream came true for all the Russian people.
  Thanks @KremlinRussia_E#Crimea pic.twitter.com/d1Q2AJ6r4d

  — Enrico Ivanov ☦ (@Russ_Warrior) May 16, 2018

  #КрымскийМост https://t.co/mkFIT8nOzs – The Presidents full 16 minute drive across the Kerch Strait! Great achievement.🇷🇺 pic.twitter.com/a9AtqjFaQR

  — Stephen Fenton (@StephenFenton88) May 15, 2018

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

• Armenia's Pashinyan Meets Putin: Pledges Continued Russian-Armenian Friendship

  Authored by Alexander Mercouris via The Duran,

  Russian President Vladimir Putin and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan – the latter recently installed as Armenia’s leader following nationwide protests – had their first bilateral meeting in Sochi on Monday on the sidelines of the Eurasian Economic Union summit.

  

  The summary of the exchanges between the two leaders provided by the Kremlin’s website shows that Putin took the opportunity to remind Pashinyan of Russia’s economic importance to Armenia, whilst Pashinyan for his part thanked Putin for Russia’s neutral position during the protests, and reaffirmed Armenia’s continued friendship with Russia.

  Pashinyan specifically reaffirmed Armenia’s continued membership of the Russian led Eurasian Economic Union, and spoke of deepening Armenia’s military ties with Russia.

  President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr Prime Minister, colleagues,

  I would like to welcome you to Russia and to congratulate you once again, this time in person, on your election to the high position of Prime Minister of Armenia.

  First of all, I would like to say that we view Armenia, as everyone knows, as our closest partner and ally in the region. I am referring to both economic and security cooperation.

  As you know, Russia is a leading trade and economic partner of Armenia. Its share is estimated at over 25 percent. Russia’s investment accounts for approximately 35 percent of all foreign investment in Armenia. Our trade has grown recently, also by some 25 percent. Armenian agricultural deliveries to Russia are growing at a fast pace, or more precisely, by 38 percent over the past few months.

  Overall, this is very good progress and I hope that we will not just maintain but also boost it.

  I would like to wish you every success on the post of the Prime Minister of Armenia. I hope that our relations will continue to develop consistently, just as they did before, and that we will continue to work together on the international stage as well as at international organisations, starting from the UN, where Armenia and Russia have always supported each other, and ending with regional organisations, both in security and economic development matters.

  Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan: Mr President, thank you for your kind words.

  It is very gratifying that, just a few days after I was elected Prime Minister of Armenia, I have this opportunity to have a meeting with you, because I think that we have things to discuss.

  There is also something that does not need to be discussed: the allied strategic relations between Armenia and Russia. In general, I can assure you that there is consensus on this matter in Armenia, and nobody has ever questioned the strategic importance of Armenian-Russian relations, or ever will.

  We are quite set on giving a fresh impetus to our relations – both in the political and trade and economic sense. We hope to develop our relations in the military technical sector as well as in other industries.

  Many people from Russia visit Armenia, which is very good. I think Russians like Armenia very much, and Armenians also enjoy having so many tourists in Yerevan.

  I would like to say that we highly appreciate the balanced position that Russia held in the course of our domestic political crisis, and I think it was a very constructive position; it is highly appreciated not only by our Government, but also in Armenian society in general.

  Once again, please accept my best wishes on Victory Day. It was very interesting to watch the May 9 parade on Red Square. It is popular in Armenia and we are very impressed by the achievements that the Russian defence industry has made.

  Thank you once again for this opportunity.

  Pashinyan’s pledges of continued friendship to Russia will be judged cynically by many people, including by my colleague in The Duran Frank Sellers, who see them as nothing more than a device by Pashinyan to play for time whilst he sets about cutting back Armenia’s connections to Russia.

  Many see hope in the fact that he plans to attend the Eurasian Economic Union summit next month and to meet with the Russian President Vladimir Putin, together with the fact that he admits that Armenia needs Russia as a military ally, but given his life story and participation in the events recorded here, there seems to be little real hope of that.

  Is this a Western backed color revolution? It’s actually hard to cast doubt on that fact, given his connections with Soros funded NGOs who have as their purpose the remaking of Armenia into a NATO member state which looks somewhat less than fondly at Russia as the originator of Armenia’s woes.

  With a perception that prosperity will surely be the Armenian inheritance of an integration into the Western political and economic bloc, which perception comes from anywhere but reality. It really can’t be doubted that this movement, led by a man with a history of hostility towards Russia and a long history of working in the interests of the US and its NGOs, is something that was hatched in Washington and delivered via the CIA’s vicarious operatives, the Open Society Foundation and its ilk.

  The country’s post soviet poverty and Sargsyan’s perceived power grab are the grievances that were immediately capitalized upon in order to carry out this so called ‘velvet revolution’. Pashinyan says that he wants to maintain Armenia’s balancing act between the East and West, preserving ties and agreements with Russia while pursuing the partnership of the West, it should be noted that Saakashvili made a similar such promise upon assuming control of Georgia in a similar such incident.

  Of course, he knows that he can’t be so bold as to immediately cut off ties with the Russians this early in the game, as Armenia is simply too dependent on Russia to make any real changes to Armenia’s foreign policy at this time, but that this represents his long term goal remains a matter to be seen.

  I take the diametrically opposite view.  I believe that whatever Pashinyan may have said in the past his pledges of continued friendship with Russia and of Armenia’s adhesion to the Eurasian Economic Union are genuine.

  After all, as Pashinyan himself said over the course of his meeting with Putin,

  …….there is consensus on this matter in Armenia, and nobody has ever questioned the strategic importance of Armenian-Russian relations, or ever will…..

  Given Armenia’s economic and geographic realities, and the rapid military build up in Azerbaijan, Armenia has no real choice, even if the Armenian people wanted such a choice, of which there is no real sign that they do.

  Armenia’s relations with Russia were not an issue in the recent protests, which at no point took on an anti-Russian character.

  As I have pointed out previously, that is in total contrast to the Maidan protests in Ukraine of 2013 and 2014, in which passionate hostility to Russia was the main driving factor.  That in itself is a major point of difference between the two sets of protests: the recent protests in Armenia and the Maidan protests in Ukraine.

  I remain of the view that the Armenian protests were a strictly internal affair, provoked by the actions of the previous Sargsyan government, and have no geopolitical significance.

  Moreover the very fact that – as Pashinyan says – there is “consensus” within Armenia about the importance of Armenia’s relations with Russia in itself places limits on what Pashinyan can do, even if he genuinely does seek to sever Armenia’s relations with Russia, which of course he denies.

  Last but not least, there is the fact that even Western oriented commercially minded Armenians – and all Armenians, at least in their own estimation, are to an extent commercially minded – can see for themselves the huge commercial and economic benefits to them personally and for Armenia of Armenia retaining access to the vast Russian market through its membership of the Eurasian Economic Union.

  By contrast it is impossible to see a good economic future for Armenia – or indeed (given the geopolitical realities) any real future for Armenia – if it severs its links to Russia.

  For all these reasons, unlike Frank Sellers, I believe that when Pashinyan says he wants to maintain or even enhance Armenia’s relations with Russia, he means what he says.

  He would be a fool if he didn’t, and whatever else he is, Pashinyan doesn’t seem to me to be a fool.

  Time will show which of us – Frank Sellers or myself – is right.

  

• Checkmate: Russia's Hypersonic Missile Ready For War By 2020

  Russia’s new weapons for the modern battlefield, including an array of hypersonic missiles and the latest nuclear systems, will secure the country’s security for many decades, President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday at a conference with top military officials.

  

  Speaking in Sochi, Putin said the brand-new weapon systems unveiled this year will significantly expand Russia’s military capabilities and “ensure a strategic balance for decades” with the United States.

  President Vladimir Putin used his state-of-the-nation speech in March to deliver a stern warning to Washington that Moscow possesses hypersonic weapons that can render NATO’s U.S.-led missile defense system completely “useless.”

  

  Underwater drones, hypersonic warheads, balls of fire, “menacing” ICBMs – the peak of Putin speech at the state-of-the-nation address in March. (Source: Tom Parfitt) 

  “Efforts to contain Russia have failed, face it,” Putin announced in a two-hour speech at his annual state of the nation address in Moscow, which included computer simulations of new weapons including hypersonic systems, intercontinental missiles, and underwater drones.

  Earlier this week, CNBC validated Putin’s claim of a hypersonic weapon the U.S. is currently unable to defend against, which the report indicates the weapon will be ready for war by 2020, according to sources with vast knowledge of American intelligence reports.

  The sources told CNBC that Moscow successfully tested the hypersonic glide vehicle in 2016, which was configured to carry nuclear warheads. Sources said a third test was completed in October 2017 and resulted in a mishap seconds before obliterating its target.

  The hypersonic glide vehicle, dubbed “Avangard” (also called ‘Objekt 4202′, Yu-71 and Yu-74), is fastened onto an intercontinental ballistic missile using scramjet engine technology. Once launched, the Avangard reaches speeds of Mach 20 with the capacity to carry both nuclear and conventional payloads.

  Avangard video demonstration from Putin’s speech in March.

  #Avangard Mach20 speed ultra maneuverable hypersonic glider vehicle 🇷🇺 #Putin speech
  (deployed from ICBMs) pic.twitter.com/XSCPg5VEHY

  — Plutonium General ☫ (@nukesn_missiles) March 1, 2018

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

  Sources said it is still unclear whether the hypersonic glide vehicle will carry explosives, due to just Mach 20 capabilities can pack enough force to annihilate targets. In March, Putin said the Avangard strikes “like a meteorite, like a fireball.”

  Putin said at Tuesday’s conference that Russia’s hypersonic program to produce the world’s most advanced weapons would remain a high priority. He mentioned in March that the missile entered series production.

  “These kinds of boost-glide vehicles attack the gaps in our missile defense system,” Thomas Karako, director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told CNBC.

  “There’s no time like the present to modify our current missile defense posture,” Karako added, saying it was “unfortunate that we have let Russia come this far.”

  Sources familiar with Russia’s hypersonic program asses that the hypersonic glide vehicles equipped with “onboard countermeasures,” can defeat NATO’s U.S.-led missile defenses. The weapon is capable of sharp evasive maneuvers — making it virtually undetectable to radar.

  The intelligence reports, which were released for government officials this spring, estimate that Russia’s hypersonic glide vehicles could be on the modern battlefield by 2020, a significant move on the geopolitical chessboard that would surpass Washington and Beijing in their capacity to yield an operational hypersonic weapon on the modern battlefield.

  In March, the commander of the United States Strategic Command told the Senate Armed Services Committee that U.S. forces are unable to shield against a hypersonic weapon attack.

  “We don’t have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us,” Air Force Gen. John Hyten, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Both Russia and China are aggressively pursuing hypersonic capabilities,” he added, noting that the U.S. has “watched them test those capabilities.”

  Hyten suggested that the U.S. is powerless against hypersonic weapon threats and has to rely on increased deterrence to counter the threat.

  Hyten added, “so our response would be our deterrent force which would be the triad and the nuclear capabilities that we have to respond to such a threat.” In other words, if Russia launches a hypersonic missile attack on the U.S., the Pentagon will respond with nuclear war.

  On the geopolitical chessboard, it seems as Moscow declared checkmate with Washington via the development and rapid fielding of hypersonic weapons that render NATO’s U.S.-led missile defense system entirely worthless. America’s military-industrial complex recognizes this as a crisis and is willing to bankrupt the United States with unprecedented amounts of military spending to counter this threat. As for now, Russia has the upper hand in hypersonic weapons, which Washington is starting to realize the idea of American Hegemony is beginning to crack.

  

• NHTSA Opens Third Investigation Into A Tesla Crash This Year

  Just yesterday we wrote that it was starting to feel like the movie Groundhog Day for Tesla when it comes to the company’s executive departures.  Now, there is again a distinct Groundhog Day feel to Tesla – but this time as it relates to U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigations.

  Continuing in what has been an unprecedented storm of negative headlines for Elon Musk’s company that started a couple months ago, it was announced today that the NHTSA is going to be investigating a recent Tesla crash in Utah. Reuters reported:

  The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said on Wednesday that it was sending a team to investigate the crash of a Tesla Inc vehicle last week in Utah that the driver said occurred while the car was in autopilot mode. It is the third Tesla crash that may be linked to the semi-autonomous Autopilot system being investigated by the government agency since January.

  “The agency has launched its special crash investigations team to gather information on the South Jordan, Utah, crash,” the agency said on Wednesday. “NHTSA will take appropriate action based on its review.”

  That crash, as described previously, involved a Tesla Model S sedan which smashed into a Salt Lake City fire truck while traveling at 60 miles per hour last Friday night. The driver said she was using autopilot at the time of the crash and suffered a broken ankle.

  

  The big surprise, as the article points out, is that this is the third investigation that the NHTSA has launched into Tesla since January. This should be of concern for the company as the NHTSA has the authority to force the company into issuing recalls which, if costly enough, could be a financial hurdle that Tesla might have trouble surviving in its current financial state.

  NHTSA is also investigating a fatal crash in March that involved a Tesla Model X using Autopilot. It is also probing the January crash of a Tesla vehicle apparently traveling in Autopilot that struck a fire truck. Both incidents were in California.

  Last week, NHTSA also said it would probe a May 8 Tesla accident in Florida that killed two teenagers and injured another. Autopilot was not thought to play a part.

  NHTSA can order a recall if it finds a defect poses an unreasonable risk to safety.

  Certainly the timing of this NHTSA regulatory scrutiny couldn’t be worse for the company, because in addition to its precarious financials, the company main liason to regulators sch as the NTSB and NHTSA departed the company just days ago. 

  Last Saturday, Tesla competitor Waymo announced that Tesla’s Matt Schwall has begun working for the self-driving car unit. According to Schwall’s LinkedIn Bio, he had been Tesla’s “primary technical contact” with both the NTSB & NHTSA, suggesting the company’s troubles with government regulators may be set to escalate.

  Regulators aside, analysts have continued to question why the revolving door of executives continues and explore what the potential complications could be as a result. Needless to say, it isn’t good news for Tesla. 

  Also as a reminder, on Sunday morning the WSJ wrote a scathing critique of Tesla’s autopilot,” In Self-Driving Car Road Test, We Are the Guinea Pigs” in which it questioned the validity of Elon Musk’s claims about Tesla’s safety record:

  Tesla says that its cars with autonomous driving technology are 3.7 times safer than the average American vehicle. It’s true that Teslas are among the safest cars on the road, but it isn’t clear how much of this safety is due to the driving habits of its enthusiast owners (for now, those who can afford Teslas) or other factors, such as build quality or the cars’ crash avoidance technology, rather than Autopilot.

  In the wake of a fatal 2016 crash, which happened when Autopilot was engaged, Tesla cited a report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as evidence that Autopilot mode makes Teslas 40% safer. NHTSA recently clarified the report was based on Tesla’s own unaudited data, and NHTSA didn’t take into account whether Autopilot was engaged. Complicating things further, Tesla rolled out an auto-braking safety feature—which almost certainly reduced crashes—shortly before it launched Autopilot.

  As the WSJ also notes, “there isn’t enough data to verify that self-driving vehicles cause fewer accidents than human-driven ones.” A Rand Corp. study concluded that traffic fatalities already occur at such relatively low rates—on the order of 1 per 100 million miles traveled—that determining whether self-driving cars are safer than humans could take decades.

  For now, we’ll wait for the NHTSA’s verdict.

  

• Brandon Smith: Global Elitists Are Not Human

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

  It is often said that “other-izing” people overall can be dangerous and other-izing your enemies specifically can be tactically detrimental. For one, it can lead to a false sense of superiority over those people as you assert some kind of imagined genetic advantage. It can also lead to dangerous generalizations of vast groups as you categorize and pigeonhole millions as being exactly the same when this is rationally impossible. However, other-izing is perhaps the only option when faced with a very particular type of person embracing a very particular brand of ideology; other-izing can become a matter of survival.

  I am of course talking about globalists.

  

  Not the low level cronies and useful idiots within the globalist push or “movement,” because many of them simply represent a underlying gullibility or stupidity among people attracted to the inbred world of academia. Instead, I’m talking about the people behind the curtain; self proclaimed “globalists” or internationalists that have positioned themselves into strategic power centers.

  I am talking about the people that influence or outright control government policy as they stand over the shoulders of supposedly freely elected officials. I am talking about the people that influence economic security or insecurity through unaccountable central banking conglomerates. I am talking about the men and women that desire to dictate the fate of billions.

  These people are not easily identified by anything other than their rhetoric and actions. They are made up of multiple ethnic groups. They herald from all corners of the planet. They do not subscribe to any one spiritual doctrine, but they do publicly devote themselves to many different religions as a means to “fit in” with the common citizen. Globalism IS their religion. And their god? Well, they see themselves as gods.

  To be a globalist, though, one has to do more than merely subscribe to the tenets of globalism; there is a matter of character traits and actions which must be examined.

  After studying the behavior of globalists and their organizations for quite some time, I have noticed that their psychological patterns tend to match with a narrow band of people that are best described as “criminally insane.” More accurately, globalists behave like high-functioning narcissistic sociopaths and psychopaths. But what are the traits of such people? Let’s take a look at some of them…

  False Sense Of Superiority – Self-Aggrandizement

  Every person wants to be seen as important or unique. But, narcissistic sociopaths believe themselves to be entitled to special treatment and see themselves as above the laws and niceties of normal society. They sometimes seek to prop up this attitude through “accomplishment;” scratching for positions of power and influence in order to reinforce the notion that they are special compared to others.

  Of course, power is usually an artificial construct because the only power we have over others is the power they give us, knowingly or unknowingly. Power does not make one special. The narcissistic sociopath does not make such distinctions, however. He/she only distinguishes between the people who strive for dominance and everyone else. In their minds, people that covet power are a superior subspecies, while people who do not covet power are considered bugs.

  Frankly, I see no reason why we should not make the same absolute statement, only in reverse.

  Narcissistic sociopaths and psychopaths are stricken with visions of assumed greatness. They do not view the content of their accomplishments as necessarily important. Meaning, they think they were born great, therefore, it is not for them to accomplish anything that serves to help others or advance the knowledge of humanity. They don’t care about proving their greatness through legitimate achievement, they only care that people BELIEVE they are special, that they are anointed.

  Manipulation And Coercion

  A narcissistic sociopath usually prefers to get what they want easily. They expect people to hand them adoration and control automatically. But if they don’t get what they want as a matter of course, they will use any means at their disposal.

  This usually includes the threat of force or the use of force, the use of torture, the use of elaborate lies and schemes to push their target into a corner (to make them behave in a specific manner), the use of psychological conditioning (molding behavior, usually through fear responses) and also the use of “gaslighting” (accusing the target of being “crazy” if they do not subscribe to the narcissist’s twisted view of the world).

  Of course, this kind of disturbed person is never actually satisfied, even when they do get what they want. They always want more, there is always something else they need to fill the endless void within.

  Lack Of Empathy For Others

  Not all narcissists are sociopaths, but most sociopaths are narcissists. When we speak of narcissists, it is important to remember that there are varying degrees of this psychological cancer. When I mention globalists in particular as being “narcissistic,” I am referring to their propensity to be high functioning narcissists with sociopathic tendencies. In other words, they are narcissists that not only have an inflated sense of self worth, but they are also devoid of empathy and conscience. They are willing to harm others to any degree to get what they want in the moment as long as they think can avoid consequences for doing so.

  There is also the matter of distinction between sociopaths and psychopaths. This is a little hard to describe being that they are so similar in many respects. I would put it this way — while sociopaths chase a goal and are willing to step on people to get to it, psychopaths step on people even when they don’t have a goal in mind. That is to say, the psychopath enjoys the act of destruction; what they want most of all is other people’s pain.

  Sociopaths and psychopaths both appear to permeate the ranks of globalist institutions. Some of them want to build an idol to themselves and don’t care who they harm in the process. Some of them derive great enjoyment from simply hurting as many people as possible.

  Desperate Need For Adoration

  It is not enough for the narcissistic sociopath to attain a level of respect through coercion. Ultimately, what they want is for the lowly masses to voluntarily ACCEPT their greatness as absolute, as an obvious and undeniable fact of life. What they want is reverence and devotion. As mentioned earlier, they want to be treated as gods by the people around them, and if they are particularly ambitious, by everyone in the world.

  This is a strange dynamic indeed, for it requires a highly elaborate set of schemes and manipulations. If one is not a great person, let alone god-like, the amount of psychological conditioning needed to convince people otherwise is substantial. This makes the narcissistic sociopath a potential slave to his/her own incessantly engineered conspiracies; lies pile upon lies and schemes upon schemes in the search for something they will never truly achieve.

  Globalists Are Psychologically Broken Non-Humans

  In the world of alternative analysis and investigative journalism it is not uncommon to run into people who attribute an otherworldly status to globalists. Some people see them as a representation of biblical Apocalypse — minions from the depths of hell. Others see them as literally alien — interdimensional beings posing as human. And while many will laugh at such people as fringe conspiracy freaks, I think it is important to understand why they see the globalists this way.

  When faced with true and organized evil empty of all care or remorse, one may be tempted to apply supernatural explanations.  I’m not sure that I am against the idea.

  Globalists exhibit most if not all the telltale signs of narcissistic sociopaths, including being devoid of conscience and moral compass. While there are many definitions of what it is that makes us human, there is a kind of universal requirement regardless of culture; namely the requirement of something like a soul.

  What makes a soul? How about a basic desire to do right by others even if that means not getting what we want all the time?  This is a good starting point, but there is more to it than that.

  Psychologists and scientists have over many decades found a pattern of inherent character traits hardwired in the human psyche, traits present in humans from the moment of birth that stand outside of the influences of social environment. Carl Jung was the foremost expert in this field of “archetypal qualities,” with a vast catalog of case studies from around the world including studies in tribal Africa. An important part of archetypal or inborn knowledge and traits is the notion of good and evil; we are born understanding that certain behaviors are constructive while others are destructive and abhorrent. This is most likely the source of what we call “conscience.”

  Unfortunately, not all people are born with a conscience. In some people, the difference between good and evil or constructive and destructive behavior is treated as blurry or frivolous. Jung and other psychologists mark this subset of our species as “latent” sociopaths and psychopaths. Together they make up around 10% of any given culture or group. Many of them remain “latent” and more or less harmless for their entire lives unless certain unstable environmental conditions provide fuel for their malfunction. Around 1% are born as full blown sociopaths and psychopaths. These are what I would call the “non-humans.”

  This is because high level narcissism and sociopathy are not traditional “mental illnesses,” but ingrained character traits. A narcissistic sociopath cannot be “cured” of his ailment because it is not an ailment, it is who they are. If you were to take the narcissism and sociopathy away from them, there would be nothing left to their personality.

  When a normal person comes in contact with someone that has no inherent conscience there is an immediate recoil; a sense that they have just stumbled across a monster. This is not an exaggeration, this is entirely accurate.

  High level narcissists and sociopaths are physically human of course, but if we were to peer in at a visual representation of their psyche, we would find a barren wasteland — a place where ghouls lurk. They do not dream as normal people dream. They do not feel joy in the manner normal people do. They do not feel fulfillment in the things that commonly lift up the rest of us. They are incapable of love for others. They are incapable of regret for their actions, and only ever feel regret over failing to get what they want. They do not see other people as individuals, they see them as tools to be exploited.

  Being sociopathic though does not mean that they are ignorant of what makes the rest of us function. On the contrary, sociopaths are very good at identifying the personal desires and drives of others, and mimicking people in a way that makes them seem “human.” They are parasites by nature,and thus they have to be able to get close to their host victims if they are to survive.

  The globalist dynamic is interesting in that it is an example of organized narcissistic sociopathy.  Globalists have stood at the forefront of numerous wars, economic collapses and tyrannies over the years, all ending in great suffering for the masses.  Contrary to popular belief, sociopaths and psychopaths DO work together towards a common goal as long as there is a sense of mutual benefit. In fact, these people seem to gravitate to each other in odd ways. It is my belief that globalist hierarchies actually seek out people with narcissistic and sociopathic personalities; that they do this deliberately when they wish to expand their ranks. These seem to be the only aspects that they all have in common.

  It is quite a ‘conspiracy theory’, I know. But look at it this way, how else can we explain their tendencies and behaviors? If organized annihilation was an intrinsic value of humanity then we would have died out long ago. The globalists are not human, though. They are something opposite, and if you do not understand this core truth, they can be bewildering and terrifying.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here.  We greatly appreciate your patronage.

  

• Ultrasonic Attacks Can Trigger Alexa & Siri With Hidden Commands, Raise Serious Security Risks

  Over the last two years, academic researchers have identified various methods that they can transmit hidden commands that are undetectable by the human ear to Apple’s Siri, Amazon’s Alexa, and Google’s Assistant.

  According to a new report from The New York Times, scientific researchers have been able “to secretly activate the artificial intelligence systems on smartphones and smart speakers, making them dial phone numbers or open websites.” This could, perhaps, allow cybercriminals to unlock smart-home doors, control a Tesla car via the App, access users’ online bank accounts, load malicious browser-based cryptocurrency mining websites, and or access all sort of personal information.

  In 2017, Statista projected around 223 million people in the U.S. would be using a smartphone device, which accounts for roughly 84 percent of all mobile users. Of these 223 million smartphones users, around 108 million Americans are using the Android Operating System, and some 90 million are using Apple’s iOS (operating system). A new Gallup poll showed that 22 percent of Americans are actively using Amazon Echo or Google Assitant in their homes.

  With much of the country using artificial intelligence systems on smartphones and smart speakers, a new research document published from the University of California, Berkeley indicates inaudible commands could be embedded “directly into recordings of music or spoken text,” said The New York Times.

  For instance, a millennial could be listening to their favorite song: ‘The Middle’ by Zedd, Maren Morris & Grey. Embedded into the audio file could have several inaudible commands triggering Apple’s Siri or Amazon’s Alexa to complete a task that the user did not instruct — such as, buying merchandise from the music performer on Amazon.

  “We wanted to see if we could make it even more stealthy,” said Nicholas Carlini, a fifth-year Ph.D. student in computer security at U.C. Berkeley and one of the paper’s authors.

  At the moment, Carlini said this is only an academic experiment, as it is only a matter of time before cybercriminals figure out this technology. “My assumption is that the malicious people already employ people to do what I do,” he added.

  The New York Times said Amazon “does not disclose specific security measure” to thwart a device from an ultrasonic attack, but the company has taken precautionary measures to protect users from unauthorized human use. Google told The New York Times that security development is ongoing and has developed features to mitigate undetectable audio commands.

  Both companies’ [Amazon and Google] assistants employ voice recognition technology to prevent devices from acting on certain commands unless they recognize the user’s voice.

  Apple said its smart speaker, HomePod, is designed to prevent commands from doing things like unlocking doors, and it noted that iPhones and iPads must be unlocked before Siri will act on commands that access sensitive data or open apps and websites, among other measures.

  Yet many people leave their smartphones unlocked, and, at least for now, voice recognition systems are notoriously easy to fool.

  There is already a history of smart devices being exploited for commercial gains through spoken commands,” said The New York Times.

  Last year, there were several examples of companies and even cartoons taking advantage of weaknesses in voice recognition systems, including Burger King’s Google Home commercial to South Park‘s episode with Alexa.

  While there are currently no American laws against broadcasting subliminal or ultrasonic messages to humans, let alone artificial intelligence systems on smartphones and smart speakers. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) warns against the practice, calling it a “counter to the public interest,” and the Television Code of the National Association of Broadcasters bans “transmitting messages below the threshold of normal awareness.” However, The New York Times points out that “neither says anything about subliminal stimuli for smart devices.”

  Recently, the ultrasonic attack technology showed up in the hands of the Chinese. Researchers at Princeton University and China’s Zhejiang University conducted several experiments showing that inaudible commands can, in fact, trigger voice-recognition systems in an iPhone.

  “The technique, which the Chinese researchers called DolphinAttack, can instruct smart devices to visit malicious websites, initiate phone calls, take a picture or send text messages. While DolphinAttack has its limitations — the transmitter must be close to the receiving device — experts warned that more powerful ultrasonic systems were possible,” said The New York Times.

  

  DolphinAttack could inject covert voice commands at 7 state-of-the-art speech recognition systems (e.g., Siri, Alexa) to activate always-on system and achieve various attacks, which include activating Siri to initiate a FaceTime call on iPhone, activating Google Now to switch the phone to the airplane mode, and even manipulating the navigation system in an Audi automobile. (Source: guoming zhang) 

  DolphinAttack Demonstration Video 

  While the number of smart devices in consumers’ pockets and at their homes is on the rise, it is only a matter of time before the technology falls into the wrong hands, and unleashed against them. Imagine, cybercriminals accessing your Audi or Tesla via ultrasonic attacks against voice recognition technology on a smart device. Maybe these so-called smart devices are not smart after all, as the dangers of these devices are starting to be realized. Millennials will soon be panicking.

  

• Why Global Growth Hit A Wall: China Credit Growth Continues To Slow

  Submitted by Gordon Johnson of The Vertical Research Group

  QUICK TAKE: In short, our thesis is that city-level and regional macroprudential tightening policies in China currently will render economic growth in 2Q18, but more importantly 2H18, dismal; we believe this will spread to emerging markets, rendering the “global coordinated growth” bulls out of sync with reality. This, we believe, in turn, will weigh on metals prices, pushing many of the commodity pundits (i.e., Jeffery Gundlach) to reassess their bullishness. As this happens, we expect  steel/bulk exports out of China to rise (as profitability domestically falls with weakening domestic demand) pushing global bulk commodities prices lower.

  Exhibit 1: China Total Credit Growth versus Bank Asset Growth, %Y/Y

  
  Source: Peoples’ Bank of China (PBOC), Vertical Group.

  Exhibit 2: It Appears Emerging Markets are no Longer “Feeling the China Love”

  
  Source: Bloomberg, Vertical Group.

  So how do things look at this juncture? Well, below we highlight the key takeaways from China’s April 2018 data dump. However, in short, looking at the below data in aggregate, we believe our thesis remains firmly intact; furthermore, in checks “on the ground” in China this week, we learned that the Consensus among domestic traders is that steel prices in China have “peaked” for the year as of this week.

  GROWTH INTERNALS. As detailed below, while Y/Y industrial production growth edged higher to +6.9% in April 2018 (from +6.8% in March 2018), the all-important Fixed Asset Investment metric in China hit lows not seen in nearly two decades (at +7.0% Y/Y for April 2018 vs. +7.5% Y/Y in March 2018), while retail sales also dipped lower in the month of April at +9.4% Y/Y (vs. +10.1% Y/Y in March 2018). At risk of stating the obvious, at the margin, this suggests to us that China’s key growth internals are indeed slowing.

  Exhibit 3: Growth Internals – China (FAI, Industrial Production, & Retail Sales)

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics, Vertical Group.

  CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. Taking a closer look under the hood, we notice real estate floor area sales slowed incrementally in April 2018 up just +1.3% YTD (vs. +3.6% YTD Y/Y in March 2018), and fell a concerning -4.1% Y/Y for the month of April 2018.

  Exhibit 4: China Residential + Commercial + Office Space Sold

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics, Vertical Group.

  However, when looking to new starts, while growth did slow to +7.3% Y/Y in April 2018 from +9.7% Y/Y in March, this rate of progress remains comfortably above the +2.9% Y/Y growth seen in Feb. 2018 (although, with credit growth in China on the decline, we see this metric disappointing throughout the remainder of 2018).

  Exhibit 5: China Residential + Commercial + Office Construction Starts

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Vertical Group.

  Total floor area under construction saw YTD Y/Y growth edge higher to +1.6% from +1.5% in March 2018. However, we feel this metric will move towards 0% by year end (floor area under construction typically follows sales growth; and sales growth is currently consolidating at an accelerated clip – Exhibit 4).

  Exhibit 6: China Residential + Commercial + Office Space Under Construction

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Vertical Group.

  What is the culprit for this slowing? Well, as our readers know, in addition to weakening overall credit growth (Exhibit 1), city-level and regional macroprudential policies have tempered mortgage lending in the world’s second largest economy – this tends to bode ill for overall real estate activity.

  Exhibit 7: Household Loans, Y/Y%

  
  Source: PBoC, Bloomberg.

  More to the above, first tier cities are in a slow melt while lower tiers are growing at sustainable levels; so from the PBoC’s perspective, there’s really no real reason to shift policy either way yet; and if it comes, adjustment will much more likely be the removal of local lending restrictions than interest rate cuts.

  The third key signal is deficit spending, and especially infrastructure. You’ll see lots of announcements from the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”) and spikes in credit drivers… not in bank or shadow-bank lending, but the bond markets. So how are the bond market fairing? Well, China government bond issuance saw growth slow to +23.0% Y/Y in April vs. +24.0% Y/Y in March, and China corporate bond issuance fell from -1.7% Y/Y to -3.9% Y/Y over the same timeframe.

  Exhibit 8: Chinese Bond Issuance, Y/Y%

  
  Source: ChinaBond, Bloomberg.

  What about Open-Belt-Open-Road (“OBOR”)? Well, here’s a look at infrastructure investment, where it seems China has really slowed things down (manufacturing and real estate are not fairing that well either).

  Exhibit 9: China Fixed Asset Investment, Y/Y%

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics of China, Vertical Group.

  OTHER INDICATORS. On the positive side, it seems construction activity did indeed pickup in April (albeit, Y/Y growth slowed from the records seen last April – April marks the peak of China’s construction season, so this data point could be a bit backward looking).

  Exhibit 10: China Construction Vehicle Sales, Y/Y%

  
  Source: Hong Kong Teng Yuan Co. Ltd., Vertical Group.

  What about the other data points?

  Exhibit 11: Evidence of Seasonality in China’s Manufacturing PMI Survey

  
  Source: China Federation of Logistics and Purchasing, Vertical Group.

  Exhibit 12: Industrial Output Volumes, Y/Y% (cement lagging + steel leading = potential for steel price correction)

  
  Source: CEIC, Vertical Group.

  Exhibit 13: China Li Keqiang Index

  
  Note: Chinese Premier Li Keqiang once remarked to a U.S. diplomat that China’s GDP data was “man made”. To track growth he preferred to look at change in bank lending, rail freight, and electricity consumption. This ticker takes a weighted average of annual growth rates in outstanding bank loans CNLNTTLY Index DES (40%), electricity production CZINELEC  Index DES (40%), and rail freight volume CHTPFR1Y Index DES (20%). Electricity production is used  rather than electricity consumption as they are conceptually similar and a longer historical series exists for electricity  production. Source: CEIC, Vertical Group.

  Exhibit 14: Inflation Gauge – Consumer & Producer Price Indexes

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics, Bloomberg, Vertical Group.

  Exhibit 15: Average Price Change of New Residential Buildings, by Tiered-Cities, Y/Y%

  
  Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Vertical Group.

  Exhibit 16: JPM Global PMI – just off Mar. ’18 five month low

  
  Source: JPM, Bloomberg Vertical Group.

  * * *

  CONCLUSION: China will likely continue to slow, yet it seems the PBoC has a good handle on its targeted slowdown, making the need to rush in with “bazooka” stimulus unnecessary right now (in our view, that is). Will it happen? Based on history, of course it will (as it always does). But are we there yet? We think not. Translation… more pain to come before Xi Jinping “rides to the rescue of bulk commodity bulls”, meaning as the summer slow-down sets in, steel/iron-ore prices likely have acute downside risk (this is not Consensus at the moment – see Jeffery Gundlach’s comments from the Sohn conference several weeks ago).

  

• How Much Do You Need To Be "Wealthy" In America? Here Is The Magic Number

  The age old question of whether or not money can buy happiness seems to have once again be answered with a resounding yes, and we even have a number. And, predictably, the amount of money that the younger generation says it will will need to be happy has risen again.

  Bloomberg reports the results of an annual survey used to determine how much “wealth“ people feel they need to be happy. 

  Many Americans cite leading a stress-free life and having “peace of mind” as their personal definition of wealth. That doesn’t sound too money-centric on the face of it—until you consider that money, or specifically the lack of it, is a major source of stress.

  Americans don’t like to admit that assets can buy happiness—just 11 percent of those surveyed for the second annual Modern Wealth Index from Charles Schwab chose “having lots of money” as their definition of wealth. But while most respondents selected more high-minded concepts as their keys to contentment, they weren’t afraid to put a number on what they needed to get there.

  Aside from the fluff, the survey asked for specific dollar amounts, and the monetary targets that the younger generations seek to be “comfortable” have moved higher, up to $1.4MM from $1.2MM, while those hoping to be happy with their wealth, will need to have at least $2.4MM to their name:

  To be financially comfortable in America today requires an average of $1.4 million, up from $1.2 million a year ago, according to the survey. The net worth needed to be “wealthy”? That’s an average $2.4 million, the same as last year in the online survey of 1,000 Americans between age 21 and 75.

  

  To be sure, as with every survey about money, many respondents said that “money can’t buy happiness”, and instead survey participants gave warm and fuzzy answers to the question of what makes them feel “rich”:

  There were some heartening signs amid the numbers. While 18 percent defined wealth as being able to afford anything they desired, 17 percent said it was “loving relationships with family and friends.” That jibes with how Joe Duran, chief executive officer of money manager United Capital, said he likes to think of “wealth.” After building and selling his first company, “I realized that money is nothing more than fuel,” he said. “It is a resource that lets you have choices, but if you don’t think about what you are working for, you will die rich but not live rich.” 

  The survey asked people to choose which of the below statements came closest to their personal definition of wealth. When asked about what made respondents feel “wealthy” in their daily lives, the survey found that spending time with family was most commonly cited, at 62 percent overall. That was followed by what can be the most elusive of things, cited at about the same level across generations: “taking time for myself,” which came in at 55 percent. Hard to do either of those without some bank, though.

  

  Which, of course, is ironic, considering that money is required to do all the things list above like travel and live stress-free. You’re going to be hard pressed to find anyone who can “live stress free”, “afford anything they want” or “enjoy life’s experiences” without having the giant wallet needed to fund all these expensive plans. But still, the American dream seems to still be in tact, at least in the minds of younger generations:

  Millennials displayed some youthful optimism when it came to their financial future. Some 64 percent of twenty- and thirty-somethings believe they’ll be wealthy (the cash kind) at some point in their lives, compared with 22 percent of boomers. Maybe better financial habits will help that happen, since more millennials than boomers said they regularly rebalance their portfolio—49 percent compared with 43 percent, respectively. The same percentage of millennials and boomers, 24 percent, felt “very confident” about reaching financial goals.

  This is also ironic, as we just reported weeks ago that millenials with student debt have negative net worth for the first time ever. Recall that the Young Invincibles released an update to their report, “The Financial Health of Young America: Measuring Generational Declines Between Baby Boomers & Millennials”, which included a cross-generational study of the financial well-being of Millennials today versus Baby Boomers when they were in their adolescence. The update covered the economic challenges facing millennials age 25 to 34 between 2013 and 2016.

  What it found was shocking: despite the fact that this has reportedly been the second longest economic expansion/central bank-induced channel of financial capital into speculation and financialization, the update showed how the millennial generation has transformed into the lost generation, as their financial security has eroded late in the business cycle.

  

  For the first time, young adults age 25 to 34 with college degrees and student loans have a median net wealth of negative $1,900, said the advocacy group.

  So while it may be true that you don’t need to be a billionaire in order to find happiness and/or freedom for yourself, getting past a certain point of savings and wealth is certainly paramount in achieving “happiness” – regardless of how you define it.

  As for most of today’s youth, stuck in a negative net worth prison, the goal to reaching the “magic number” between $1.4 and $2.4 million seems virtually unachievable.

  

• John Whitehead: "It's Time For A Bracing Dose Of Reality, America"

  Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  We labor today under the weight of countless tyrannies, large and small, carried out in the name of the national good by an elite class of government officials who are largely insulated from the ill effects of their actions, and inflicted on an overtaxed, overregulated, and underrepresented populace.

  

  Consider, for example, that federal and state governments now require – on penalty of a fine – that individuals apply for permission before they can grow exotic orchids, host elaborate dinner parties, gather friends in one’s home for Bible studies, give coffee to the homeless, let their kids manage a lemonade stand, keep chickens as pets, or braid someone’s hair, as ludicrous as that may seem.

  A current case before the Supreme Court, Niang v. Tomblinson, strikes at the heart of this bureaucratic exercise in absurdity that has pushed overregulation and overcriminalization to outrageous limits. This particular case is about whether one needs a government license in order to braid hair.

  Missouri, like many states across the country, has increasingly adopted as its governing style the authoritarian notion that the government knows best and therefore must control, regulate and dictate almost everything about the citizenry’s public, private and professional lives.

  In Missouri, anyone wanting to braid African-style hair and charge for it must first acquire a government license, which at a minimum requires the applicant to undertake at least 1500 hours of cosmetology classes costing tens of thousands of dollars. Tennessee has fined residents nearly $100,000 just for violating its laws against braiding hair without a government license.

  It’s not just hair braiding that has become grist for the overregulation mill.

  Almost every aspect of American life today – especially if it is work-related – is subject to this kind of heightened scrutiny and ham-fisted control, whether you’re talking about aspiring “bakers, braiders, casket makers, florists, veterinary masseuses, tour guides, taxi drivers, eyebrow threaders, teeth whiteners, and more.”

  For instance, whereas 70 years ago, one out of every 20 U.S. jobs required a state license, today, almost 1 in 3 American occupations requires a license.

  The problem of overregulation has become so bad that, as one analyst notes, “getting a license to style hair in Washington takes more instructional time than becoming an emergency medical technicianor a firefighter.”

  This is what happens when bureaucrats run the show, and the rule of law becomes little more than a cattle prod for forcing the citizenry to march in lockstep with the government.

  Overregulation is just the other side of the coin to overcriminalization, that phenomenon in which everything is rendered illegal and everyone becomes a lawbreaker.

  This is the mindset that tried to penalize a fisherman with 20 years’ jail time for throwing fish that were too small back into the water and subjected a 90-year-old man to arrest for violating an ordinance that prohibits feeding the homeless in public.

  It’s no coincidence that both of these incidents—the fishing debacle and the homeless feeding arrest—happened in Florida.

  Despite its pristine beaches and balmy temperatures, Florida is no less immune to the problems plaguing the rest of the nation in terms of overcriminalization, incarceration rates, bureaucracy, corruption, and police misconduct. 

  In fact, the Sunshine State has become a poster child for how a seemingly idyllic place can be transformed into a police state with very little effort. As such, it is representative of what is happening in every state across the nation, where a steady diet of bread and circuses has given rise to an oblivious, inactive citizenry content to be ruled over by an inflexible and highly bureaucratic regime.

  Just a few years back, in fact, Florida officials authorized police raids on barber shops in minority communities, resulting in barbers being handcuffed in front of customers, and their shops searched without warrants. All of this was purportedly done in an effort to make sure that the barbers’ licensing paperwork was up to snuff.

  As if criminalizing fishing, charity, parenting decisions, and haircuts wasn’t bad enough, you could also find yourself passing time in a Florida slammer for such inane activities as singing in a public place while wearing a swimsuit, breaking more than three dishes per day, farting in a public place after 6 pm on a Thursday, and skateboarding without a license.

  This transformation of the United States from being a beacon of freedom to a locked down nation illustrates perfectly what songwriter Joni Mitchell was referring to when she wailed, “They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.”

  Only in our case, sold on the idea that safety, security and material comforts are preferable to freedom, we’ve allowed the government to pave over the Constitution in order to erect a concentration camp. 

  The problem with these devil’s bargains, however, is that there is always a catch, always a price to pay for whatever it is we valued so highly as to barter away our most precious possessions.

  We’ve bartered away our right to self-governance, self-defense, privacy, autonomy and that most important right of all—the right to tell the government to “leave me the hell alone.”

  In exchange for the promise of safe streets, safe schools, blight-free neighborhoods, lower taxes, lower crime rates, and readily accessible technology, health care, water, food and power, we’ve opened the door to militarized police, government surveillance, asset forfeiture, school zero tolerance policies, license plate readers, red light cameras, SWAT team raids, health care mandates, overcriminalization, overregulation and government corruption.

  In the end, such bargains always turn sour.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is what happens when the American people get duped, deceived, double-crossed, cheated, lied to, swindled and conned into believing that the government and its army of bureaucrats—the people we appointed to safeguard our freedoms—actually have our best interests at heart.

  Yet when all is said and done, who is really to blame when the wool gets pulled over your eyes: you, for believing the con man, or the con man for being true to his nature?

  It’s time for a bracing dose of reality, America.

  Wake up and take a good, hard look around you, and ask yourself if the gussied-up version of America being sold to you—crime free, worry free and devoid of responsibility—is really worth the ticket price: nothing less than your freedoms.

  

Digest powered by RSS Digest