- Ancient Apocalypse & Graham Hancock's "Dangerous Ideas"
Ancient Apocalypse & Graham Hancock’s “Dangerous Ideas”
Authored by JR Leach via Off-Guardian.org,
Why has the popular Netflix documentary ignited the ire of the media?
It never ceases to amaze me what seemingly innocuous ideas the establishment media find ‘dangerous’ or ‘controversial’.
Netflix recently released an eight-part documentary series titled Ancient Apocalypse, where Graham Hancock (who has a been a household name for “alternative archeology” since the release of his book ‘Fingerprints of the Gods’ in 1995), introduces us to his central theory that human civilisation is considerably older than current archeological orthodoxy believes, but that most evidence for this was wiped out by a colossal natural disaster around 12,000 years ago.
He supports this theory with physical evidence for such a natural disaster, curious geological anomalies and seemingly ancient megalithic structures.
He points out that the mainstream view of pre-history insists civilisation did not and had never existed before the year 4000BC, but that recent discoveries such as the Temple at Gobekli Tepe, which dates back to 9600BC call that mainstream view into question.
He also collates mythic stories and old legends from over around the world that all reference some massive, global catastrophe. (Floods, earthquakes, giant snakes in the sky, strange visitors from across the sea etc.) And then emphasises their many eerie similarities.
Through the collation of this research, Hancock then asks some questions of the mainstream view of our ancient history and posits a theory of his own – that ‘we are a species with amnesia’, who have forgotten our own past.
These are not new ideas, solely from Hancock’s imagination. Immanuel Velikovsy said something very similar half a century ago, in fact his last book, published posthumously, was titled “Mankind in Amnesia”, and explored the psychological impact of us, as a species, repressing the memories and forgetting the stories that echo from a distant, traumatised past.
These questions might sound intriguing to you, or you may be indifferent to them, or you may even vehemently disagree with them, but I bet you didn’t know they were racist, did you?
That’s right. Racist. Don’t believe me, you conspiracy theorist? Just ask the Guardian.
Yes, the Graun has spoiled us with not just one hit-piece, but two! All in the space of one week.
Robin McKie writes his from an archaeological standpoint, while Stuart Heritage speaks as an entertainment critic. However, one is very much like the other. They both agree the Netflix series is wholly unacceptable. All of it. These are ‘dangerous ideas’ that shouldn’t be ‘allowed’.
McKie alleges Hancock’s claims reinforce ‘white supremacist ideas’, because questioning the age of human civilisation
…strip[s] indigenous people of their rich heritage and instead gives credit to aliens or white people”
McKie further explains:
Then there were the Nazis. Many swore by the idea that a white Nordic superior race – people of “the purest blood” – had come from Atlantis. As a result, Himmler set up an SS unit, the Ahnenerbe – or Bureau of Ancestral Heritage – in 1935 to find out where people from Atlantis had ended up after the deluge had destroyed their homeland.”
There we have it, you see! Don’t even bother linking to any sources, Robin (which he doesn’t). I hear you, loud and clear. The idea of Atlantis is inherently racist, because the Nazis believed in it.
The fact Hancock never mentions race, or white people (or aliens) in the series, nor (to the best of my knowledge) in any of his books, makes no difference to this.
So, what are you going to do now? Keep researching the Atlantis myth?
Like a Nazi would?
Of course, going by this logic, we should really do away with Christianity as well. God in general, in fact. Perhaps we should cancel Volkswagen and Wagner too. Nazis also brushed their teeth and wore shoes, I believe, neither of which shall I be taking part in from this day onwards, just to be sure.
So, there we have it – Ancient Apocalypse is racist, even though it never mentions race.
The remainder of their twin critiques are no better argued or supported by reality. Here is a typical example of the intellectual level they work on:
For a story that was first told 2,300 years ago, the myth of Atlantis has demonstrated a remarkable persistence over the millennia. Originally outlined by Plato, the tale of the rise of a great, ancient civilisation followed by its cataclysmic destruction has since generated myriad interpretations.”
It was this opening paragraph alone that prompted my response. As it is so uniquely meaningless.
What does he mean by ‘For a story 2,300 years old it has demonstrated remarkable persistence’? As opposed to what? All those other stories that we don’t know about? How is that measurable, exactly?
Besides, we have a plethora of stories and mythologies dating back two and half thousand years, and even much further into the past than that. Including all the Greco-Roman myths, plays by Sophocles and Aesop’s Fables. We have detailed legends and lore passed down from Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Old Testament fits the bill as well.
And of course, Homer’s Iliad, which describes the fabled Trojan War.
Let us remember that the City of Troy was also believed to have been just a myth until we discovered that it wasn’t. And I’m sure before 1870, when it was first discovered, that there was no shortage of academics decrying the search for Troy as a heretical waste of time.
What is the essential attraction of the tale? For answers we only have to look at the works of Tolkien, CS Lewis, HP Lovecraft, Conan Doyle, Brecht and a host of science fiction writers who have all found the myth an irresistible inspiration.”
Simplicity itself! The reason the Atlantis myth is so popular is because it’s so popular!
Robin then asserts as fact that Plato intended the tale of Atlantis to be little more than an allegory. There is no way of knowing that, of course, he merely asserts it and then goes into a Gish Gallop.
“As to the likely site of the original Atlantis, the serious money goes on the destruction of the Greek island of Santorini and its impact on Crete and puts the blame on volcanic eruptions – not errant comets, as Hancock argues”
Whoa there, Robin. Firstly, Graham Hancock never ‘argues’ that the Greek island of Santorini was struck by an errant comet. That is misleading. He argues that a comet struck somewhere in North America and rising sea levels may have obliterated an island civilisation (that Plato calls Atlantis) in the Atlantic Ocean. It’s only you, Robin, who is conflating this Atlantis myth with Santorini.
[NB – Robin also fails to mention the physical evidence for just such an impact at the beginning of the Younger Dryas.]
Secondly, should we not give credit where credit is due, and assume that Plato (and Solon, from whom Plato got the story, and the Dynastic Egyptians, from whom Solon got the story), most likely knew the difference between ‘inside the Mediterranean’ and ‘outside the Mediterranean’?
If they place Atlantis beyond the Pillars of Hercules, should we not at least consider it possible that this is indeed where “the original Atlantis” was? (I invite readers to listen to Plato’s accounting yourselves and see what you make of it, here is an unabridged and well-produced reading.)
The history of Santorini’s volcanic eruption was probably, by contrast, relatively well known. Santorini didn’t actually sink, after all, as Atlantis is said to have done. It’s still there. The Ancient Greeks called it ‘Thera’ and they were perfectly well aware of its existence. It shares no cultural, historical or technological similarities to Plato’s description of Atlantis at all, short of ‘being an island’.
But none of that bothers McKie who at this point, and without ceremony, just sort of stops writing. Job Done. Atlantis debunked. What’s for lunch?
Moving on to Stuart Heritage’s piece, which is thankfully briefer but in no way less smug. In his subheading he boldly asks:
“Why has this been allowed?”
Allowed?
I’m not sure which authority he’s calling on here. Netflix execs? Local, national or perhaps global government? Or maybe it’s rhetorical, and he’s beseeching the Lord God himself how such evil could come into the world.
Beyond this, Stuart seems even less interested in debunking or debating these ‘dangerous ideas’ than McKie was, and far more focused on analysing and ridiculing its (presumed) target audience.
Fortunately, Stuart, with his view unbiased and his mind wide open, has discerned exactly who that is in the first five minutes – because he saw (or thinks he saw) Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson flash up in the pre-show reel.
Joe Rogan appears in one quick interview, which is used in the first episode and the last.
Jordan Peterson does not appear in this documentary at all.
And I’m really not sure why Stuart thought he did. Perhaps he just didn’t watch closely enough to realise this before rushing his five-hundred words off to be published in one of the largest news outlets in the world.
More notably when Heritage later amended the change, he just removed the ‘Jordan Peterson’ reference and neither he nor the editors or sub-eds even bothered to correct the syntax:
“Fortunately, you don’t have to watch for long to find out. In quick succession, during the pre-show sizzle reel, we are treated to a clip of the show’s host Graham Hancock being interviewed by Joe Rogan.”
The laziness is staggering.
Just ‘a different person’. It’s not important who anymore. He’s not on the Guardian’s ‘naughty list.’
Equally strangely, both McKie and Heritage seem to think ‘Ancient Apocalypse’ makes claims of ‘super intelligent beings’ and ‘aliens’, when it simply does not.
Hancock’s argument – whether you accept it or not – is that human beings were more advanced than academia admits. Not robots with flying cars, but more advanced than we currently give them credit for, and he cites evidence for this which both Stuart & Robin ignore in favour of critiquing Hancock for things he does not say.
They cite no sources and debate no actual claims. They use buzzwords and identity politics in place of analysis and between the two of them couldn’t fill one page of A4. It’s as if even they (and their editors) had no faith or interest in what they were doing.
Although Stuart does rather give the game away in his closing statement.
“That’s the danger of a show like this. It whispers to the conspiracy theorist in all of us. And Hancock is such a compelling host that he’s bound to create a few more in his wake. Believing that ultra-intelligent creatures helped to build the pyramids is one thing, but where does it end? Believing that election fraud is real? Believing 9/11 was an inside job? Worse?”
He’s got me stumped there. Because, for the life of me, I literally can’t think of anything worse than ‘believing in election fraud’, which is obviously as fanciful as believing in the Loch Ness Monster. What next? Believing in tax evasion!?
Presumably he’s referring to the 2020 US election. Because the Guardian has claimed fraud is very real in some elections. Russia, Syria, Bolivia, Brazil, Libya, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela to name a few.
And they were pretty darn adamant that it was Russian collusion that got Trump into office in 2016.
Stuart presumably believes election fraud is only a ‘conspiracy theory’ when it happens here, in the UK. Either that or he believes it has literally never happened. Ever. In the whole history of the world.
Or perhaps he’s simply typing up any old nonsense just to get that word count a little higher. Sense and consistency be damned.
Who’s to say?
However, the fragile honesty underlying this is quite telling. He is essentially saying:
“If people become sceptical of one thing, they may become sceptical of another.”
Which is to be expected, but what I can’t understand is how anybody could think this is a bad thing.
People should be sceptical. Scepticism in all things but cynicism in none. People should ask questions, and they should expect answers, especially from those who profess to know them. One should be open-minded and always pursue the truth. And to better decipher what that may be, we need people sharing new ideas, questioning the mainstream view and challenging the established narrative as new evidence presents itself. We need that. Science, progress and discovery all depend on it. Even if the ideas turn out to be false. Prove them false.
In short: No one should be the gatekeepers of our history. Least of all those who laud their certitude in the face of the unknowable.
The mystery is exciting. The evidence is compelling. The series is engaging. Even if none of it turns out to be true, the questions are still worth asking.
These ideas are only ‘dangerous’ if you fear what they question.
And those who fear questions fear the truth.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 23:40 - Health Experts Urge Beijing To Accelerate Approval Of Enhanced Covid Jabs Amid 'Winter Wave' Of Deaths
Health Experts Urge Beijing To Accelerate Approval Of Enhanced Covid Jabs Amid ‘Winter Wave’ Of Deaths
China’s government dramatically pivoted from its ultra-harsh ‘zero Covid’ policy in the last several weeks, which will likely cause a massive outbreak, as health experts urged Beijing to speed up the approval process of new vaccines to counter Covid-19 variants.
Sinovac and Sinopharm Covid jabs have been widely distributed among the majority of the Chinese population to fight the original Covid strain from Wuhan in 2020. But old vaccines might not be enough to fight variants.
“We can’t rely on old vaccines which are currently being used nationwide going forward,” a Beijing-based adviser to the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention told Financial Times.
The health advisor, who spoke under cover of anonymity, said CDC facilities “are filled with Wuhan virus-based vaccines that aren’t of much use.”
Beijing has yet to approve the latest version of the jabs to target more infectious Covid variants, leaving the older generation vulnerable this cold season.
According to a new projection by Feng Zijian, a former deputy chief at the CDC, relaxed health restrictions could result in 80 to 90% of the Chinese population being injected with the virus.
“It’s going to be inevitable for most of us to get infected once, regardless of how the Covid-fighting measures are adjusted,” Feng said.
While China faces a ‘winter wave’ of deaths as the economy reopens, Beijing has yet to import foreign-made messenger RNA vaccines.
The CDC adviser said that China needed “locally made mRNA vaccines in our toolbox,” which might not arrive until “next April.” There are seven domestic companies in the late stage of clinical trials. The advisor added clinical trial results for the improved Sinovac and Sinopharm jabs will be announced in March, then “the government may issue an emergency use license.”
Jin Dong-yan, a virologist at the University of Hong Kong, said the coming “tsunami” of infections means “China should have an accelerated mechanism for approval to change vaccines based on the circulating strains. There is no need for a full clinical trial.”
Infections across the country are already moving higher.
Covid is rapidly spreading through Chinese households and offices after the country’s pandemic rules were unexpectedly unwound last week, sparking confusion on the ground as ill-prepared hospitals struggle to deal with a surge in cases. -Bloomberg
Dong-yan warned that by the time new jabs are approved, Covid variants would be the dominant strain:
“The regulatory body needs to show some flexibility. Ba. 5 is already giving way to BQ. 1.1 in the US and XBB in Singapore. He added: “They will never catch up.”
So the question we have: Why did Beijing ease zero Covid policies when no preparations have been made to meet the coming winter ‘tsunami’ of infections?
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 23:20 - What's Inside The House-Passed Military Spending Bill
What’s Inside The House-Passed Military Spending Bill
Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The House of Representatives just passed the mammoth $858 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), an annual must-pass bill setting out defense spending levels.
See what’s inside, and what was left out, below.
The U.S. Capitol building in Washington, on Dec. 20, 2020. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images) Military Vaccine Mandate Repealed
In a major win for Republicans and critics of President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 policies, this year’s iteration of the NDAA will include a repeal of a vaccine mandate for military service members.
Biden announced in August 2021 that all federal employees, including military service members, would be required to take the COVID-19 vaccine or lose their job, despite a dearth of long-term testing on the vaccine.
U.S. President Joe Biden (R) speaks at the White House in Washington on Dec. 8, 2022. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) Republicans were opposed to the mandate from the beginning, calling it a violation of the personal liberty of citizens to make their own health decisions.
Initially, service members who refused the vaccine were liable to face consequences up to and including court martial and dishonorable discharge. A dishonorable discharge, roughly the military equivalent of a felony conviction, can severely impact a service member’s life, as many employers will not even consider hiring someone with a less-than-honorable military discharge.
Last year, the Senate passed a draft of the NDAA barring the Department of Defense (DOD) from dishonorably discharging service members solely for refusal to take the vaccine.
However, the mandate remained in effect. Even after Biden boldly declared that “the pandemic is over,” the Pentagon refused to budge on its vaccine requirements.
But in the past several weeks, efforts to repeal the mandate once and for all ramped up among Republicans.
After rumors began circulating that the NDAA would undo the mandate, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)—the frontrunner in the race for the speakership of the 118th Congress—vowed during an appearance on Fox Business Network’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that his caucus would not pass the bill unless it ended the vaccine mandate.
“We will secure lifting that vaccine mandate on our military because what we’re finding is, they’re kicking out men and women that have been serving,” McCarthy said. “That’s the first victory of having a Republican majority, and we’d like to have more of those victories, and we should start moving those now.”
Democrats yielded on the issue, giving Republicans a major policy win.
The passage of the bill through the lower chamber came just days after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed his desire to continue imposing the mandate.
“We lost a million people to this virus,” Austin told reporters, although studies and data have shown the vast majority of people who died from COVID-19 were elderly or have compromised immune systems. “A million people died in the United States of America. We lost hundreds in DOD. So this mandate has kept people healthy.”
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin speaks during a news conference at the Pentagon in Washington on Nov. 3, 2022. (Andrew Harnik/AP Photo) Following the addition of the amendment ending the mandate, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the most vocal critics of Biden’s diktat, applauded the outcome.
“This is a big day for our men and women in the military,” Paul said in a tweet. “We won, and the NDAA will be amended to respect medical autonomy and religious freedom.”
“These young men and women are willing to put their lives on the line, and now we’ve come forward to say they deserve to be treated with respect,” Paul said in a press conference.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), another key proponent of the amendment, also applauded the bill as “a huge victory for our troops.”
No Reinstatement of Troops
Though the bill will undo Biden’s mandate, hopes that the bill would reinstate those who were kicked out of the military for refusal to take the vaccine did not come to fruition.
According to Defense Department data, 3,717 Marines, 1,816 soldiers, and 2,064 sailors have been discharged for refusing to get vaccinated against COVID-19, although a small portion has been allowed to remain in service owing to religious or medical waivers.
As of Dec. 1, over 11,500 members of the Army, Army National Guard, and Army Reserve have declined to get vaccinated against COVID-19, Axios reported, while 97 percent of the Army’s active personnel received the shot.
In an exclusive interview with The Epoch Times, Air Force Lt. Col Adam Conrad, who asked that his name be changed to protect him from retaliation by the DOD, said that he had “never seen morale so low” as it got after the imposition of the mandate.
Various military bodies have been struggling to meet their recruitment goals in part over the vaccine mandate, with the U.S. Army reaching just 75 percent of its recruitment goal of 60,000 for this year, according to Army Secretary Christine Wormuth.
Still, the NDAA will not reinstate those troops who were removed due to their opposition to taking the experimental vaccine.
In a statement after the passage of the bill, McCarthy applauded the end of the mandate and suggested that Republicans will continue to work to reinstate discharged service members when they take control of the lower chamber in January.
President Joe Biden (L) and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in file images. (Getty Images) “The end of President Biden’s military COVID vaccine mandate is a victory for our military and for common sense,” McCarthy said. “Last week, I told the president directly: it’s time to end the COVID vaccine mandate and rehire our service members.”
“While I applaud the end of this onerous mandate—the Biden administration must go further. Unfortunately, the mandate has already had negative consequences for our military,” McCarthy said, citing the difficulties that the military has faced in recruiting.
“These heroes deserve justice now that the mandate is no more,” he continued. “The Biden administration must correct service records and not stand in the way of re-enlisting any service member discharged simply for not taking the COVID vaccine.
“Make no mistake: this is a win for our military. But in 28 days the real work begins—the new House Republican majority will work to finally hold the Biden administration accountable and assist the men and women in uniform who were unfairly targeted by this Administration.”
This may be a difficult promise to keep, however, as Democrats retain the upper chamber and will have substantial leverage over the House GOP majority.
Another Million-Dollar Dole to Ukraine
The bill will also grant another $800 million of taxpayer funds to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative as part of the U.S. effort to help Ukraine defend itself against an ongoing Russian invasion.
The United States has already sent around $68 billion in humanitarian and military assistance to Ukraine in three major packages.
The first aid package, passed as part of the $1.5 trillion omnibus spending bill for fiscal year (FY) 2022, sent Ukraine $13.6 billion. In May, Congress passed another standalone bill granting Ukraine $40 billion. Again in September, an additional $13.7 billion was sent to Ukraine.
Though the appropriation is smaller than past handouts, Americans are in the dark as to how exactly Ukraine is using the aid.
Alarmingly, reports indicate that weapons purchased with taxpayer funds have wound up as far afield as Nigeria, falling into the hands of terror groups.
President Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria said during a summit of African leaders that “the raging war in Ukraine serve[s] as major sources of weapons and fighters that bolster the ranks of the terrorists in Lake Chad Region.”
He added, “A substantial proportion of the arms and ammunitions procured to execute the war in Libya, continues to find its way to the Lake Chad Region and other parts of the Sahel. Weapons being used for the war in Ukraine and Russia are equally beginning to filter to the region.”
Because of this, calls have escalated among Republicans for Ukraine’s use of taxpayer funds to be audited.
During a Dec. 9 hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a measure proposed by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to audit the Eastern European nation was defeated by Democrats.
“The American people deserve full transparency and oversight of where their hard earned tax dollars have gone and that’s why we should audit Ukraine,” Greene said in a Twitter post after the vote.
“An audit isn’t pro or against Ukraine, it’s just the right thing to do.”
The $800 million figure is far short of the $37.7 billion in additional aid for Ukraine requested by the White House at the end of November.
Silence on Pentagon Abortion Policy
The bill does not address a policy recently announced by Defense Secretary Austin that would see taxpayer dollars used to fund travel costs for women in the military to get abortions.
The policy came in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in which the court overturned Roe v. Wade. As a result of this decision, the right to regulate abortions has been returned to state legislatures for the first time in nearly 50 years.
Austin argued that because military servicemembers often have to travel for work, they should not be restricted from getting an abortion if they are stationed in a state with more restrictive abortion laws.
“Our Service members and their families are often required to travel or move to meet our staffing, operational, and training requirements. Such moves should not limit their access to reproductive health care,” Austin wrote in an October memo.
He contended that the “practical effects of recent changes” would harm military readiness.
“In my judgment, such effects qualify as unusual, extraordinary, hardship, or emergency circumstances for Service members and their dependents and will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force,” he wrote.
Republicans were quick to blast the decision.
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) called it “outrageous,” and demanded that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) allow a vote on an amendment to prohibit it.
While the text of the bill does not actively give the green light to this policy, it also does not contain language prohibiting it.
The Pentagon is given a great deal of latitude on how it uses the funding granted by each year’s iteration of the NDAA. While large chunks of it are appropriated for specific purposes, a large proportion of these taxpayer dollars are left to the discretion of the Pentagon to spend as they will.
This means that, if the bill passes with no prohibition of the policy, taxpayers will find themselves indirectly footing the bill for abortions in contravention of an existing law known as the Hyde amendment, which restricts the use of federal funds for abortions.
Klobuchar Media Bill Fails
An effort by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) to attach a controversial bill rider to the package was rejected.
Read more here…
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 23:00 - 'Just A Few Rogue Actors' Behind Banning Of Trump From Twitter; Nothing To See Here…
‘Just A Few Rogue Actors’ Behind Banning Of Trump From Twitter; Nothing To See Here…
Authored by Sundance via TheConservativeTreehouse.com,
The fifth installment of the Twitter Files release drops today courtesy of Ms. Bari Weiss [READ HERE]. The focus of Ms Weiss was on the decision to ban President Donald Trump from the platform, and her outline walks through the events leading up to the decision to remove him.
After a review of internal discussions, slacks and conversations within the social media platform, ultimately the officers within the company decided to protect their view of democracy by removing their biggest ideological opponent.
The Twitter executives justified their actions by echo-chambering a belief that President Trump was tweeting “coded messages,” the secret transmission of thoughts that can only be received by those wearing red hats, tuned to a specific psychological frequency. As Weiss notes: “Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be “coded incitement to further violence.”
President Trump tweeted the term “American Patriots,” which would be viewed by the Twitter ideologues as something akin to “the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.”
It did not take long for the narrative to embed as the most senior Twitter regulatory officers assembled. “One hour later, Twitter announces Trump’s permanent suspension “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”
The entirety of Twitter File #5 release surrounds this internal Twitter dynamic, carefully avoiding any discussion or sunlight from outside government actors who may have been in direct contact with the senior Twitter team.
Indeed, the documents chosen to provide evidence of the debate and decision to remove President Trump are transparently devoid of any inbound government contact to the Twitter organization.
Thus, at the end of Ms. Weiss carefully written expose’, she concludes with this:
See, it’s only “a handful of people at a private company“…. Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.
Apparently, DHS, FBI and CISA officials were involved in direct contact with Twitter through their DHS “trusted partnership” portal to get rid of innocuous rebel voices and influence agents like Dan Bongino, Q conspiracy theorists, and various COVID doctors who were providing information against the interests of the government.
However, when it came to removing the most powerful voice of President Donald John Trump, there was nothing but static radio silence from the government side of the DHS portal.
You getting this?
Do you see how this is presented? “A handful of people at a private company,” that’s the story and they are sticking to it. Swear.
Move along folks, move along. Nothing to see here, just move along.
That sound you hear in the background is not Ms. Bari Weiss providing an application of spray paint after careful Bondo application.
Comrades, the social media messaging vehicle known as Twitter is a clean/refreshed information & communication platform as provided by the magnanimity of Mr Elon Musk, unknown financial underwriting notwithstanding.
Brilliant.
Now, let’s talk about President DeSantis…
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 22:20 - Japan, Netherlands Agree To US Request To Curb Chinese Chip Exports
Japan, Netherlands Agree To US Request To Curb Chinese Chip Exports
In a move that is sure to set Sino-Japanese relations several years back, on Monday morning Japan and the Netherlands agreed “in principle” to join the US in tightening controls over the export of advanced chipmaking machinery to China, Bloomberg reported cited according people familiar with the matter, in what is the latest “potentially debilitating blow to Beijing’s technology ambitions.”
The news follows a report from Japan’s Kyodo according to which, the US had “asked the Japanese government for cooperation in stymieing China’s efforts to develop high-end semiconductors.” The request, noting that the countries are allies sharing strategies against China, was made by U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo during her phone conversation with Japanese industry minister Yasutoshi Nishimura on Friday, according to the sources.
The request made to Nishimura was the first ministerial one from the United States on the issue. Washington’s push to create a multilateral regulatory framework comes amid concerns that there will be loopholes in its export controls if Japan and the Netherlands continue to provide China with devices essential to manufacture advanced chips. It comes after the United States unveiled a sweeping set of export controls on certain high-end chips that could be used by Beijing to train artificial intelligence systems and power advanced applications in the military and surveillance fields.
Last week, Bloomberg News reported that Dutch officials were planning new export controls on China. The Japanese government agreed to similar restrictions in recent weeks since the two countries wanted to act in concert. Japan had to overcome opposition from domestic companies that would prefer not to lose sales into China, sources said. Besides Tokyo Electron, Nikon and Canon are minor players in the market.
In response to the back-door US pressure, Japan and the Netherlands are likely to announce in the coming weeks that they’ll adopt at least some of the sweeping measures the US rolled out in October to restrict the sale of advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment, according to the people, who asked not to be named because they are not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. The Biden administration has said the measures are aimed at preventing Beijing’s military from obtaining advanced semiconductors.
The three-country alliance – if it comes to pass – would represent a near-total blockade of China’s ability to buy the equipment necessary to make leading-edge chips, according to Bloomberg. The US rules restricted the supply from American gear suppliers Applied Materials Inc., Lam Research Corp. and KLA Corp. Japan’s Tokyo Electron Ltd. and Dutch lithography specialist ASML Holding NV are the two other critical suppliers that the US needed to make the sanctions effective, making their governments’ adoption of the export curbs a significant milestone.
“There’s no way China can build a leading-edge industry on their own. No chance,” said Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon.
The three countries are the world’s top sources of machinery and expertise needed to make advanced semiconductors. ASML shares added to losses in Amsterdam on the news and were down 2.2%, in late Monday trading.
Senior US National Security Council official Tarun Chhabra and Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security Alan Estevez were in the Netherlands late November to discuss export controls, Bloomberg reported, while Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo talked about the same issues with METI chief Yasutoshi Nishimura via teleconference last week.
With the move, Dutch and Japanese officials will essentially codify and expand their existing export control measures to further restrict China’s access to cutting-edge chip technologies. The two governments are planning to impose a ban on the sale of machinery capable of fabricating 14-nanometer or more advanced chips to China, Bloomberg sources said. The measures align with some rules Washington set out in October.
The 14nm technology is at least three generations behind the latest advances available on the market, but it is already the second-best technology that China’s chipmaking champion Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. owns.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 22:00 - Grand Jury Indicts Former Loudoun County Superintendent Scott Ziegler, Top Spokesperson
Grand Jury Indicts Former Loudoun County Superintendent Scott Ziegler, Top Spokesperson
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,
A special grand jury has indicted two Loudoun County officials for making false statements, according to indictments made public on Dec. 12.
Grand jurors indicted Scott Ziegler, the just-fired county superintendent, on three counts, including false publication, according to copies of the indictments obtained by The Epoch Times.
That count stemmed from Ziegler “knowingly” transmitting to media outlets on or about June 22, 2021, a “false and untrue statement.” The statement was not identified.
They also indicted Wayde Byard, a top spokesperson for Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS), on a count of perjury.
LCPS and Byard did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Ziegler could not be reached.
“We are beyond pleased that the families who were harmed by the egregious failures of the leadership of Loudoun County Public Schools, exacerbated by its repeated acts of deceit and dishonesty, will receive some measure of justice,” Ian Prior, executive director for the Fight for Schools Group, said in a statement.
The indictments were released shortly after a report from the special grand jury found that Ziegler lied when he claimed in June 2021 that he was not aware of any assaults occurring in school bathrooms.
According to emails, Ziegler was, in fact, aware that a 15-year-old girl was assaulted the previous month by a male student inside a bathroom at Stone Bridge High School.
The principal of the high school told grand jurors that the statement was “not true” and another witness said it was a “bald-faced lie.”
Ziegler later claimed to misunderstand the question that prompted his false statement.
Loudoun County school officials did not record instances of sexual assault despite being required to do so.
The same male assailant, who has been described as “gender fluid,” went on to assault another female student at a different school in October 2021. He was found guilty of both assaults and sentenced to juvenile detention until he is 18.
Grand jurors said they were largely stonewalled by LCPS and Loudoun County School Board members during the investigation.
“We expected these public servants to provide clarity, transparency, and a willingness to report truthfully to their constituents. Instead, we were met with obfuscation, deflection, and obvious legal strategies designed to frustrate the special grand jury’s work,” they said.
The board voted on Dec. 6 to fire Ziegler without cause. Board chair Jeff Morse told reporters that the board was “misled” by Ziegler. Morse declined to say whether any other officials mentioned in the report should be fired.
The grand jury was convened by Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, a Republican, at the direction of Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, another Republican. Both entered office in January.
The school board failed in attempts to block the investigation, with the Virginia Supreme Court finding that the board had not offered any convincing arguments for why the investigation infringed on its oversight of schools in the county.
Other Counts
The other two counts against Ziegler relate to Erin Brooks, a special education teacher who sued LCPS in June for allegedly failing to protect her against being sexually assaulted and retaliating against her when she spoke out about the matter.
The suit says Brooks was assaulted dozens of times each day starting in February and that tactics she attempted did not work.
Brooks messaged and met with school administrators but LCPS personnel who were in positions to intervene “repeatedly dismissed and ignored” her pleas for help, the filing states.
Brooks was later falsely deemed to have released personally identifiable information and undertook unprofessional conduct and the school board released a statement about her that was defamatory, the suit says. LCPS also decided against renewing her contract, which was allegedly done out of retaliation.
One of the new indictments says that Ziegler unlawfully fired or took adverse action against Brooks. The other says that he unlawfully used his position to retaliate or threaten to retaliate against Brooks “for expressing views on matters of public concern or for exercising any right that is otherwise protected by law.”
All three of the counts against Ziegler are misdemeanors.
Ziegler faces up to 12 months in prison and up to $3,500 in fines if convicted.
The count against Byard is a felony.
Byard faces between one and 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $2,500.
Interim Superintendent Appointed
The board appointed Daniel Smith as interim superintendent.
“I accept the challenges that come with my new role. And I look forward to refocusing the efforts of our employees on maintaining and improving a world-class school division,” Smith, who had been chief of staff at LCPS since April, said.
Morse said he and vice chair Ian Serotkin reached out to Smith for the position because they viewed Smith as “an important stabilization factor” when observing him closely as chief of staff. In addition, Smith wasn’t present during the two sexual assaults in 2021.
Smith assured the reporters on the night of his appointment, “Absolutely, our kids are safe, and that’ll remain our priority.” He said his priorities would be ensuring that the school division “focused on teaching and learning of our kids.”
Morse said the board would embark on a nationwide search for a permanent superintendent to have the recruit in place by July 1, 2023, to be ready for the 2023–2024 school year.
The board has another meeting scheduled for Dec. 13. Agenda items include reviewing and discussing the recommendations outlined in the grand jury report.
The board will “consider meaningful approaches to address those recommendations,” the agenda states.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 21:40 - Putin Unexpectedly Cancels Annual Year-End Marathon Press Conference
Putin Unexpectedly Cancels Annual Year-End Marathon Press Conference
Likely we are about to witness an avalanche of further Western media speculation as to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s alleged ‘deteriorating health’, given the Kremlin announced Monday he’s decided to cancel his annual end-of-year press conference, which is a first in ten years.
“As for the big press conference, yes, it won’t happen before the New Year,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters in a regular press briefing. “But we hope that the president will still find an opportunity to talk with [journalists], as he regularly does, including during foreign [visits],” Peskov added.
No reason was given by Peskov for the break from the long-standing tradition of the Russian leader. Putin has been rare among world leaders for on certain occasions giving very lengthy, sometime multiple hours-long, press conferences and Q&A back-and-forths, for example at annual events like the Valdai Discussion Club.
His latest Valdai appearance in October included the longest speech yet, given before hundreds of reporters and officials, and clocking in at a record-breaking 3 hours and 40 minutes.
A typical year-end press conference also goes on for hours, and is widely looked upon as one of the biggest Russian political events of the year, resulting in an array of headlines as Putin tends to address everything from foreign policy, to energy policy, to societal ills of the West such as gender ideology and the ‘woke’ invasion of culture.
At last year’s 4-hour end of year event, high on the agenda was looming conflict with Ukraine. When asked at the time about the potential for military action, the Russian leader had asserted “This is not our choice, we do not want this.”
Throughout the now 10-month long ‘special operation’ in Ukraine, there’s been widespread speculation and rumors about Putin’s health, ranging from reports that he has Parkinson’s disease or even cancer. Some reports have gone so far as to suggest the risky Ukraine invasion is related to worsening health in the Russian president impacting his personality and decision-making. However, the Kremlin has batted these theories down at every turn, and as yet there’s no firm evidence pointing to severe health decline.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 21:20 - 4 Minutes Of Undiluted Truth On Mainstream TV
4 Minutes Of Undiluted Truth On Mainstream TV
The last thing you’d ever expect to hear on a mainstream news channel, is the truth.
But – strange as it might seem – that’s exactly what happened on Wednesday night on the Tucker Carlson Show. Carlson interviewed veteran journalist Glenn Greenwald in a 4-minute segment that provided the best ‘easy-to-understand’ summary of the Ukraine War you’ll hear anywhere.
And what was so shocking about the interview, was how casually both men veered onto topics that are essential to grasping “How we got to where we are today” but which are entirely banned on all the other cable news channels.
You are not allowed to know, for example, that Russia was “lured into the conflict in Ukraine”. That does not fit the script that has been passed-along from the Biden State Department to their lapdogs at the cable news stations. You’re also not allowed to know that the US does not fight wars “to spread democracy” or that “the US has no vital interests in Ukraine” or that “Russia is not really our enemy”. All of those topics are verboten. You’re not even allowed to think about these things, which is why– for the most part– they have been completely scrubbed from any-and-all discussion of foreign policy in the corporate media.
That’s what makes the segment with Greenwald such a stunner, because it’s 4 glorious minutes of pure, unvarnished truth delivered from a platform that typically only produces, lies, disinformation and propaganda.
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald: “If you want to believe the fairy tale that the US government goes to war to spread democracy, Ukraine is not the place for you.” pic.twitter.com/dxgaVNYuj7
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) December 8, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
That’s why I transcribed the entire interview. Any mistakes are mine. Here it is:
Tucker Carlson– What bothers me is not so much what Zelensky is doing– there’s a lot of tyranny abound the world (and) I don’t brood on it. But the fact that (a) we are paying for it, and (b) our leaders are defending it. I think every American should be upset about that.
Glenn Greenwald– “I think in general, Americans should be very skeptical when the government says ‘We’re going to fight wars on the other side of the world and spend tens of billions of dollars in military aid to spread democracy.’ The US government doesn’t actually care about spreading democracy. Many of its closest allies in the world have always been some of the world’s most despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. All the US government cares about is whether these regimes serve US interests. …If you want to believe the fairy tale that the US government goes to war to spread democracy, then Ukraine is not the place for you. You mentioned the argument that ‘Zelensky is in war, he has to curb liberty’, but go back to 2021, a year before Russia invaded and you’ll find articles where he shut down opposition television stations and shut down opposition political parties (which is) the hallmark of what every tyrant or despot does….and that was true even before Russia invaded.”
Tucker Carlson– I wonder how Republicans can continue to defend this (because) I think you are right; I think our foreign policy is almost always about defending our interests…. But I don’t see our critical interests at stake here, so, what is this about?
Glenn Greenwald– If the US government was honest… they would get rid of this script that we have to go and defend democracy. That is a fairy tale that tries to get Americans to feel better about the fact that we are involved in many, many countries all over the world. That is not the real reason. The only reason to do it is for ‘vital US interests’. The line in Washington for decades was the US has no vital interests in Ukraine. That was Obama’s view, that was the bipartisan view. Why did that change? The only reason is because we saw an opportunity to trap Russia inside Ukraine all based on the view that Russia is our enemy (which is) something only Democrats should believe because they think Russia is to blame for the 2016 election and Hillary’s defeat. But why would Republicans want confrontation with Russia? What American benefits from that except arms manufacturers? …
Tucker Carlson– That’s a really good question, and I haven’t unraveled it. (But) It seems pretty clear that the Biden administration baited Russia into this invasion. You had the Vice President (Kamala Harris) in western Europe days before telling Zelensky to join NATO which, of course, they knew was a red line (for Russia) They wanted this invasion, I think that’s very obvious. Do you think this was all about ‘preparing for war with Russia’?
Glenn Greenwald– If you think Russia is a grave enemy of the United States, then it makes sense to try to lure them into a war that they can’t win, like we got lured into Afghanistan for 20 years or like we lured the Soviet Union into Afghanistan back in the ’70s because it does deplete your enemy. The question is: Why should Russia be seen as our enemy? Both Obama and Trump said there’s no reason to see Russia that way. It has one-fifteenth the size of our military budget. It’s not threatening American borders. Why are we so obsessed with spending tens of billions of dollars to weaken Russia which we could be using here at home to benefit the lives of American citizens when Russia is not doing anything to the United States unless you are a crazy ‘resistance’ person who believes they’re the reason Donald Trump won. But if you don’t believe that, what is the rational for this? There is none.”
Tucker Carlson– “I know, and as always, they have hijacked the best instincts of the American people, their compassion, and turned it against them. Glenn Greenwald, great to see you tonight”.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 21:00 - Biden Fires Kinky They/Them Luggage-Stealing Nuke Official
Biden Fires Kinky They/Them Luggage-Stealing Nuke Official
Who could have seen this coming?
they/them are/fired pic.twitter.com/QYHTam2spK
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 13, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Having been accused of stealing luggage from airports in two separate incidents, President Biden’s non-binary deputy assistant secretary for spent fuel and waste disposition has left the administration.
A Department of Energy spokesperson said on Monday evening:
“Sam Brinton is no longer a DOE employee. By law, the Department of Energy cannot comment further on personnel matters.”
Brinton, 35, who was appointed in June, faces charges for the incidents at both the Las Vegas and Minneapolis airports and they are due in court in Minnesota on December 19.
The White House has repeatedly refused to comment on the scandal, claiming it is a non-political issue.
The Department of Energy has also tried to distance Biden from the issue.
We are sure the groundswell of the Alphabet-Twitter will be up in arms decrying the Biden administrations decision to fire the klepto as some brazen act of prejudice and bias is some form transphobism?
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 20:40 - A Tale Of Two Narratives: Twitter Edition
A Tale Of Two Narratives: Twitter Edition
Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,
We’ve done quite a few episodes of commenter TAE Summary’s “Tales of Two Narratives” through time. Let’s add this one, why don’t we. Reading through -especially- Twitter, the past 24 hours or so, it struck me how fitting this is. We’re talking narratives that are so many light years apart, never the twain shall meet.
Interested in time travel? This is for you.
On the one hand, lots of people react to the following tweet by Elon Musk, by claiming Fauci saved millions of lives. On the other hand, just as many people (or so it seems) claim Fauci killed millions of people. It’s hard to get a bigger, and more consequential, chasm, than that.
And apparently this Musk tweet got the most likes in Twitter history. What does that tell us? This chasm is not just on Twitter, this is the entire country plus anywhere else on the planet where people follow this.
Despite the enormous 24/7 pressure to accept “The Science”, get a shot and a mask, and shut up.
Of all people, John Brennan tried. The ex-CIA director who was caught lying to the Senate in 2014, and in 2017 to the House Intelligence Committee (Steele Dossier) about Russian interference during the 2016 election, still appears to think he has some form of moral high ground. Which is remarkable in and of itself. But at least Brennan has “class”.
Elon Musk’s reaction has been loud and clear (note: this tweet is not a direct reaction to Brennan):
Elon Musk has promised us a “full” record of the decision making process behind the censoring and banning by Twitter’s former staff, of renowned doctors like Peter McCullough, Robert Malone, Pierre Kory, Robert Marik, Richard Urso, and many more. Many of these distinguished scientists have seen their careers and livelihoods hampered, even destroyed by Fauci -and Twitter- over the past -almost- 3 years. And, of course, anyone else who dared question “The Science”.
This was (is?!) a highly concerted effort. How many people died who could have been saved with ivermectin? Or just Vitamin D3, for that matter? HCQ? So many lives were lost to FDA, Fauci et al banning anything but Pfizer. Many more will perish because they now have mRNA in their bodies, and will never be able to get rid of it anymore.
The “full record” will be a spectacle. Even if some things still remain hidden. Elon Musk may not be a saint, I very much hope he’s not, saints scare me, but I’d take him over Tony Fauci any day of the week.
Here’s TAE Summary:
The Mainstream Narrative
-
As a worldwide ‘public square,’ Twitter should be heavily regulated for misinformation and spamming by hostile interests. Twitter bears a responsibility to take action against disinformation and hate. Content moderation on platforms like Twitter is absolutely necessary to safeguard our democracy. As a private company Twitter is under no legal obligation to protect free speech and everything Twitter has done is within the law. Twitter and other social media platforms were instrumental in combating disinformation about Covid 19, climate change, election integrity and the war in Ukraine.
-
Elon Musk is an arrogant, toxic person. He doesn’t really care about free speech. His goals in purchasing Twitter are political. His takeover of Twitter is the most terrifying development in recent history. His purchase of Twitter will destroy it by driving away advertisers and providing a platform for Neo-Nazis and other hate-speechers. Under Musk, Twitter is a scammer’s paradise. Elon Musk decimated the staff of Twitter (breaking Federal labor laws) while restoring accounts that spread disinformation. Control of Twitter involves national security risks and Musk’s takeover should be investigated by the US Government.
-
The so-called “Twitter Files” are a feast for conspiracy theorists and have re-enlivened the influence of entities like QAnon. Journalists like Matt Taibbi writing about the Twitter Files are selling their souls to do PR work for the richest man in the world. The Twitter Files entries are sloppy, anecdotal and devoid of context. They are a nothing event about nothing event. The hysteria surrounding the Twitter Files is being used by Republicans for political gain.
-
The Hunter Biden laptop story was difficult and the truth was not known early and so caution was justified. There is no evidence in the Twitter Files that the government was involved in the suppression of the Hunter Biden Laptop story. There is nothing on Hunter Biden’s laptop that actually implicates Joe Biden. James Baker took the careful approach and urged Twitter to weigh both sides of the Hunter Biden Laptop story before proceeding.
-
Hate speech has dramatically increased since Must took over Twitter and these hateful tweets will lead to violence against the already marginalized. Right wing accounts such as those of Donald Trump, Project Veritas and the Babylon Bee should continue to be banned.
The Counter Narrative
-
Twitter management was openly against free speech and used techniques such as “Visibility Filtering” to limit the reach of some posts. Twitter had secret blacklist files to limit the distribution of certain tweets specifically targeting right wing users. Twitter and other social media platforms have been instrumental in distributing disinformation and hiding the truth about Covid 19, climate change, election integrity and the war in Ukraine. Twitter censorship was used by the Democrats for political gain
-
Elon Musk is a hero. He bought Twitter to restore free speech. Twitter, pre-Musk, was a major accomplice and enabler in selling-out America’s future. Twitter was bloated with excess and left wing employees.
-
The Twitter Files show that the DNC and FBI were directly involved in suppressing free speech and prove that the 2020 elections were not free and fair. Twitter was clearly involved in election interference. The government interactions with Twitter were similar to Nazi propaganda methods. Twitter employees and their government contacts should be made to answer for their actions before congress. So-called journalists criticizing Matt Taibbi for his work on the Twitter Files are embarrassing in their uniformity and mindless support of a corrupt system.
-
The files on Hunter Biden’s laptop prove that Joe Biden used his office to make money and Twitter’s suppression of the laptop story was done to help get Joe Biden elected. It is a bigger scandal than Watergate. James Baker was involved in RussiaGate at the FBI and the Hunter Biden Laptop suppression at Twitter. Baker deleted some of the content that should have been in the Twitter Files.
-
The claims that hate speech has increased on Twitter since Musk’s takeover are utterly false. Hate speech is not tolerated on Twitter. Twitter largely ignored child trafficking issues until Musk took over. Lifting the ban on Donald Trump, Project Veritas and the Babylon Bee on Twitter are victories for free speech.
Red pill or blue pill?
* * *
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 20:20 -
- 'Merchant Of Death's Victory Tour: Praises Putin, "Volunteers" For War, & Joins Ultra-Nationalist Party
‘Merchant Of Death’s Victory Tour: Praises Putin, “Volunteers” For War, & Joins Ultra-Nationalist Party
Just two Monday headlines perfectly illustrating the extreme imbalance of the one for one Brittney Griner, Viktor Bout trade last week which Russia is now positively celebrating:
- In Russia: Viktor Bout’s victory tour: Freed Russian arms dealer praises Putin and joins ultranationalist party
- In America: Griner dunks in first basketball workout since Russian detention
The convicted international arms trafficker who was only a week ago still serving out a 25-year sentence in a US federal penitentiary on terror-related charges is wasting no time. Not only has he done public appearances and state media TV interviews, wherein he praised President Vladimir Putin and pledged his full support for the Ukraine invasion, but he could already be on his way to a parliament seat.
Days after his exchange for Brittney Griner, Viktor Bout has joined the LDPR, so surely it’s only a matter of time before he gets himself a seat in the Duma
If this happens he’ll join the likes of Andrei Lugovoi, wanted for poisoning Alexander Litvinenko, in their esteemed ranks pic.twitter.com/dMv1URJNt7
— Francis Scarr (@francis_scarr) December 12, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The “Merchant of Death” has joined Russia’s ultra-nationalist Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR), the organization announced Monday, and received his LDPR membership card at a ceremony from party leader Leonid Slutsky.
Slutsky praised the newly freed arms dealer, saying, “We are the party of patriots! I am sure that Viktor Bout — a strong-willed and courageous person — will take a worthy place in it. Welcome to our ranks!”
This after on Saturday in Bout’s first interview since arriving in Moscow to a hero’s welcome he actually “volunteered” to go fight in Ukraine. He declared his willingness to go fight at the front lines if he had to opportunity and “necessary skills.”
Via Reuters He further described that his only complaint is that Putin didn’t launch an attack on Ukraine sooner…
“Hero of our time,” read a description of the RT interview posted on YouTube. In that interview, Bout was eager to play the role of national martyr. “Everything that happened to me is now happening to our country,” he said, alluding to the international condemnation Russia has experienced since launching the invasion of Ukraine earlier this year.
“I am proud that I am Russian, and that Putin is our president. I honestly don’t understand why we didn’t do this earlier,” he said of the unprovoked attack on Ukraine.
Without doubt, Russian media is eager to loudly gloat over the fact that the Kremlin obtained the release of a very high profile prisoner from the US, and all it had to do was hand over a celebrity WNBA player who brought cannabis vape cartridges into the country.
Fully aware that American officials and the public would be keeping an eye out for his first statements since being released, parts of the RT interview were delivered in English, in order to send a ‘message’.
Lord of War ‘24
pic.twitter.com/MH5nq8NH44— Dan Lyman (@realdanlyman) December 10, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Bout spoke about the internal “suicide” of Western civilization as it has lost its values, which is a similar theme Putin himself has emphasized over the last several years.
Meanwhile, American media ‘celebrated’ Griner’s first basketball workout after being freed from Russian prison and delivered in safety back home. The aforementioned Axios story unironically began: “WNBA star Brittney Griner did a light basketball workout on Sunday and pulled off a dunk in her first move back after nearly 10 months behind bars in Russia.”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 20:00 - Supreme Court Agrees To Take up Another Challenge Against Biden's Student Debt Program
Supreme Court Agrees To Take up Another Challenge Against Biden’s Student Debt Program
Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear President Joe Biden’s appeal of a judge’s ruling that blocked his student debt relief program and found it unlawful, taking up the matter alongside another lawsuit against the policy.
The Biden administration appealed a recent decision handed down by Texas-based U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman to block the program, siding with an advocacy group. An appeals court also ruled against the relief program and placed it on hold.
The case the court announced Monday it would take up involves two holders of student loan debt – Alexander Taylor and Myra Brown – who said the federal government did not follow the right procedure in announcing and implementing the plan earlier this year. In an order, the Supreme Court wrote that it would determine whether Taylor or Brown had standing to file their lawsuit and will then hear the merits of it.
On Dec. 1, the Supreme Court confirmed would hear arguments on the legality of the debt relief program in another case pursued by six mostly Republican-led states. At the same time, the court will keep Biden’s multi-billion-dollar program on hold as it hears arguments next year.
The forgiveness program, which was announced by Biden in August, included up to $20,000 in loan relief for low- and middle-income debt holders. Some 26 million individuals already applied for relief, according to the Department of Education, which said that about 16 million of those have been approved.
The Texas lawsuit was filed by two borrowers who were partially or fully ineligible for the loan forgiveness, backed by the Job Creators Network Foundation, a conservative advocacy group founded by Bernie Marcus, a co-founder of Home Depot Inc.
Pittman, appointed as a judge by former President Donald Trump, ruled that the administration overstepped its authority to order debt cancellation under a 2003 law called the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, which can “waive or modify” student financial assistance during war or national emergency.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit later ruled to allow the judge’s injunction to stay until a final ruling in the case is issued. That prompted the Biden administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Attorneys general in Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina filed a lawsuit against the relief plan several weeks after it was unveiled to the public. Those states had claimed that they have the legal standing to challenge the plan, which they also argued exceeds the federal government’s authority.
According to the Supreme Court order issued Monday, the Brown case will be “deferred pending oral argument,” which reports say is slated for February of next year, alongside Biden v. Nebraska, the suit that was filed by the six states. No specific date was given.
Under a separate COVID-19-related order, those with student loan debt currently don’t have to make payments. Last week, the White House pushed back the payment pause until mid-2023 while the lawsuits are resolved.
President Joe Biden announces student loan relief with Education Secretary Miguel Cardona on Aug. 24, 2022. (Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images)
Other Challenges
“The act requires a real connection to a national emergency,” the states’ lawyers wrote in court papers in late November. “But the department’s reliance on the COVID-19 pandemic is a pretext to mask the president’s true goal of fulfilling his campaign promise to erase student-loan debt.”
Lawyers for the administration, in asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court’s injunction against the program on Nov. 18, wrote that the injunction should be lifted because it means that millions of people won’t be able to pay back their loans.
Because the plan won’t be implemented in the immediate future, the injunction “leaves millions of economically vulnerable borrowers in limbo, uncertain about the size of their debt and unable to make financial decisions with an accurate understanding of their future repayment obligations,” argued U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar in favor of the White House.
Prelogar asserted that the six states do not have the legal standing to file the lawsuit, she said, adding that the federal government acted within its authority to set up a debt-relief program.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated (pdf) that the program could total $400 billion over about 10 years. Because of the hefty price tag, Republicans criticized the program, while they also claimed the Biden administration announced the relief plan to coincide with the Nov. 8 midterm elections.
“These responsible Americans paid off their student debt, worked their way through college, or chose a career path that did not require student debt—but Biden is now forcing them to pay off other people’s loans,” Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), who recently won her reelection, told The Epoch Times on Oct. 21.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 19:40 - Ukraine Attacked 'Wagner HQ' Using US-Supplied Rockets: Report
Ukraine Attacked ‘Wagner HQ’ Using US-Supplied Rockets: Report
Ukraine says it delivered a huge blow to Russian forces after targeting a hotel in Luhansk province said to have members of Russia’s mercenary Wagner Group based there.
Luhansk Governor Serhiy Haidai on Sunday touted that Ukrainian forces conducted a strike on a hotel in the city of Kadiivka “just where Wagner headquarters was located.” However, Russia is denying that a ‘Wagner HQ’ was struck, and details or confirmable facts remain murky into Monday. Importantly, the Russian side says the attack was carried out with US-supplied missiles.
A US Army M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS). Image source: US Air Force Russia’s state TASS reported that HIMARS rockets were used, and that “The hit was on a private hotel… in an area in a central market. It did not work.”
The Ukrainian side has countered that “many” Wagner mercenaries were killed in the ‘successful’ strike, with some officials posting photos of a destroyed hotel building to Telegram.
On Monday afternoon, The New York Times summarized what it knows of the incident as follows:
A Ukrainian rocket attack on a hotel in the east of the country killed members of the Wagner Group, a Russian paramilitary force whose leader has closed ties to President Vladimir V. Putin, regional Ukrainian military authorities have said.
…The Russian state news agency Tass reported in a Telegram post that a HIMARS rocket had destroyed a hotel close to the central market but did not mention the Wagner Group. Using the old Soviet name for the city, Stakhanov, in the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic, the report cited the office of the mayor and said that rescuers were clearing the rubble. It did not give details of casualties or say who was staying in the hotel.
But the Times report goes on to acknowledge that little can be verified of the strike, stressing that “There was no independent confirmation that Wagner forces were in the hotel, but such a strike would fit a pattern of attacks by Ukrainian forces on critical points of military infrastructure or concentrations of troops in territory occupied by Russian forces.”
Looks like the strike on the Wagner Group HQ in Kadiivka resulted in dozens of Russian fatalities.
HIMARS was probably used to strike the hotel which served as a command center for the Wagner soldiers operating near Bakhmut. pic.twitter.com/UNFR6U79RF
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) December 11, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The Wagner Group itself stayed quiet in the initial aftermath of the Sunday attack, with no official statements or social media posts verifying the Ukrainian version of events, or that its members suffered any casualties.
If accurate, however, it would mark a huge escalation given the high visibility of Wagner Group as a leading private contractor firmed with links to President Vladimir Putin, and also given the allegations a devastating strike was carried out using the US HIMARS system – a weapon that allows Ukrainian forces to strike deep behind Russian lines. It also goes without saying that whole incident risks a greater Russian response.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 19:20 - The "Barbarous Relic" Helped Enable A World More Civilized than Today's
The “Barbarous Relic” Helped Enable A World More Civilized than Today’s
Authored by George Ford Smith via The Mises Institute,
One of history’s greatest ironies is that gold detractors refer to the metal as the barbarous relic. In fact, the abandonment of gold has put civilization as we know it at risk of extinction.
The gold coin standard that had served Western economies so brilliantly throughout most of the nineteenth century hit a brick wall in 1914 and was never able to recover, or so the story goes. As the Great War began, Europe turned from prosperity to destruction, or more precisely, toward prosperity for some and destruction for the rest. The gold coin standard had to be ditched for such a prodigious undertaking.
If gold was money, and wars cost money, how was this even possible?
First, people were already in the habit of using money substitutes instead of money itself—banknotes instead of the gold coins they represented. People found it more convenient to carry paper around in their pockets than gold coins. Over time the paper itself came to be regarded as money, while gold became a clunky inconvenience from the old days.
Second, banks had been in the habit of issuing more bank-notes and deposits than the value of the gold in their vaults. On occasion, this practice would arouse public suspicion that the notes were promises the banks could not keep. The courts sided with the banks and allowed them to suspend note redemption while staying in business, thus strengthening the government-bank alliance. Since the courts ruled that deposits belonged to the banks, bankers could not be accused of embezzlement. The occasional bank runs that erupted were interpreted as a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people lined up to withdraw their money because they believed their bank was insolvent, the bank soon would be. People had no idea their banks were loaning out most of their deposits. They did not know fractional reserve banking, a form of counterfeiting, was the norm.
Gold coin redemption requirements put limits on fractional reserve banking. Such limits were not welcomed by banks. Since banks could loan to the government, limitations also capped government spending, so the government did not like the limitations of gold coin redemption either.
Which brings us to the wall gold allegedly hit.
Preparing for War Means Preparing for Inflation
In his 1949 book, Economics and the Public Welfare, economist Benjamin Anderson tells us, “the war [in 1914] came as a great shock, not only to the masses of the American people, but also to most well-informed Americans—and, for that matter, to most Europeans.” And yet, Germany, Russia, and France began accumulating gold prior to the war (with Germany starting first in 1912). Gold was taken “out of the hands of the people” and carried to the reserves of the Reichsbank, the German central bank. People were given paper notes “to take the place of gold in circulation.”
When war broke out in August 1914, Gary North explains that the pre–World War I policy of gold coin redemption was
independently but almost simultaneously revoked by European governments. . . . They all then resorted to monetary inflation. This was a way to conceal from the public the true costs of the war. They imposed an inflation tax, and could then blame any price hikes on unpatriotic price gouging. This rested on widespread ignorance regarding economic cause and effects regarding monetary inflation and price inflation. They could not have done this if citizens had possessed the pre-war right to demand payment in gold coins at a fixed rate. They would have made a run on the banks. Governments could not have inflated without reneging on their promises to redeem their currencies for gold coins. So, they reneged while they still had the gold. Better early contract-breaking than late, they concluded.
If governments had not broken their promise to redeem paper notes for gold coins, they would have had to negotiate their differences rather than engage in one of the deadliest wars in history. Abandoning the gold coin standard, which had always been under government control, was the deciding factor in going to war.
Though the US did not formally abandon gold during its late participation in the war, it discouraged redemption while roughly doubling the money supply. Blanchard Economic Research discusses the situation in “War and Inflation”:
War also causes the type of inflation that results from a rapid expansion of money and credit. “In World War I, the American people were characteristically unwilling to finance the total war effort out of increased taxes. This had been true in the Civil War and would also be so in World War II and the Vietnam War. Much of the expenditures in World War I, were financed out of the inflationary increases in the money supply.”
Governments had a choice to make: fight a long, bloody war for specious reasons, or retain the gold coin standard. They chose war. US leaders found their decision irresistible. It was not J.P. Morgan, Woodrow Wilson, Edward Mandell House, or Benjamin Strong who would be fighting in the trenches.
When we hear that “going off gold” was the prerequisite for global peace and harmony, we should remember places such as the Meuse-Argonne American Cemetery in France, where grave markers seemingly extend to infinity. These are mostly the graves of young men who died for nothing but the lies of politicians and the profits of the politically connected. Gold wanted no part in the slaughter. But politicians and bankers knew a paper fiat standard was the monetary prerequisite to achieving their goals.
Conclusion
John Maynard Keynes, who coined the term “barbarous relic” in reference to the gold standard, wrote about the world that was lost when gold was abandoned:
What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man that age was which came to an end in August, 1914! . . . The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various products of the whole earth, in such quantity as he might see fit, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep. . . . He could secure forthwith, if he wished it, cheap and comfortable means of transit to any country or climate without passport or other formality, could despatch his servant to the neighboring office of a bank for such supply of the precious metals as might seem convenient, and could then proceed abroad to foreign quarters, without knowledge of their religion, language, or customs, bearing coined wealth upon his person, and would consider himself greatly aggrieved and much surprised at the least interference. But, most important of all, he regarded this state of affairs as normal, certain, and permanent, except in the direction of further improvement, and any deviation from it as aberrant, scandalous, and avoidable.
If Keynes had read what he wrote, he might have been a better economist. And we might be living in a better world today.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 19:00 - Sam Bankman-Fried Arrested In The Bahamas, Charged With Wire/Securities Fraud And Money Laundering
Sam Bankman-Fried Arrested In The Bahamas, Charged With Wire/Securities Fraud And Money Laundering
Update (8:35pm ET): According to the NYT, the charges against SBF which in an indictment which will be unsealed on Tuesday included wire fraud, wire fraud conspiracy, securities fraud, securities fraud conspiracy and money laundering. Of course, SBF should also be charged for talking too damn much and adding 15 years to his sentence by being a megalomaniac sociopath, but we’d take attempted bribery of the entire Democratic Party instead.
A lawyer chimes in, pointing out that according to federal sentencing guidelines, SBF could be looking at approximately 612,000 years in prison.
According to federal sentencing guidelines, if you account for all of today’s developments, it looks like SBF is looking at *checks notes* 612,000 years in prison. pic.twitter.com/WrAWfhCelP
— Wendy Peffercorn (@SandLot84) December 12, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
While more than half a million years in prison may seem excessive, life in prison for the disgraced democrat donor sounds about right.
JUST IN: Sam Bankman-Fried “could be looking at life in prison” if convicted. pic.twitter.com/3hxOqW3xS1
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) December 13, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
And since SBF was the only person charged in the indictment, it appears that we were right when we said that his co-worker (and former lover) Caroline Ellison would roll on him (see “Alameda’s Caroline Ellison Spotted In NY Amid Speculation She Is About To Roll On SBF After Hiring Iconic Clinton Lawyer”).
* * *
Just hours after refusing to attend a Senate hearing on his role in the collapse of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried has been arrested by The Royal Bahamian Police Force, according to a statement from the Attorney General of The Bahamas Sen. Ryan Pinder KC.
The arrest came after the U.S. filed criminal charges against Bankman-Fried. US prosecutors say they’ll unseal an indictment on Tuesday…
USA Damian Williams: Earlier this evening, Bahamian authorities arrested Samuel Bankman-Fried at the request of the U.S. Government, based on a sealed indictment filed by the SDNY. We expect to move to unseal the indictment in the morning and will have more to say at that time.
— US Attorney SDNY (@SDNYnews) December 12, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
It does make one wonder at the timing, as this happened just a week after Carline Ellison – the former CEO of Alameda Capital – was spotted in NY (not in custody) and had sought council, represented by DC law firm, WilmerHale.
Did his girlfriend throw him under the bus pre-emptively as she saw the ‘Simple Jack’ defense gaining ground?
Furthermore, the statement said that the nation expects the U.S. to request The Bahamas extradite Bankman-Fried in short order.
“As a result of the notification received and the material provided therewith, it was deemed appropriate for the Attorney General to seek SBF’s arrest and hold him in custody pursuant to our nation’s Extradition Act.
At such time as a formal request for extradition is made, The Bahamas intends to process it promptly, pursuant to Bahamian law and its treaty obligations with the United States.”
This should not have come as a total surprise after John Ray, the current FTX CEO, wrote in prepared remarks that FTX had ‘commingled’ funds…
Ok, enough with @SBF_FTX bullshit “i am an idiot too dumb to be a criminal” media world tour.
Where is the @TheJusticeDept, where is the @FBI – this is officially a crime as per FTX’s new CEO pic.twitter.com/X2kjs5OjDj
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 12, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Responding to SBF’s arrest, Prime Minister Davis stated:
“The Bahamas and the United States have a shared interest in holding accountable all individuals associated with FTX who may have betrayed the public trust and broken the law. While the United States is pursuing criminal charges against SBF individually, The Bahamas will continue its own regulatory and criminal investigations into the collapse of FTX, with the continued cooperation of its law enforcement and regulatory partners in the United States and elsewhere.”
Presumably this means he will not be attending tomorrow’s Congressional hearing with Maxine Waters… which is a shame because we would have liked to hear some answers…
Tomorrow, Sam Bankman-Fried was scheduled to testify in front of the House Financial Services Committee. @HouseGOP was ready to grill him six ways to Sunday.
Now breaking tonight, SBF was just arrested!🧐
Why not allow him to 1st testify tomorrow and answer our many questions?
— Lee Zeldin (@RepLeeZeldin) December 13, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
In his prepared remarks for that hearing, Bankman-Fried offered a blunt assessment of his plight.
“I would like to start by formally stating under oath: I f*cked up,” he said in the remarks obtained by Bloomberg News.
Indeed you did young man…
* * *
Official Statement below:
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 18:44 - Why Supertanker Rates Are Suddenly Crashing
Why Supertanker Rates Are Suddenly Crashing
Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,
-
Supertanker rates reached record levels earlier this year.
-
Very Large Crude Carrier rates have plunged to just $38,000 per day, falling some 62% from a few weeks ago.
-
OPEC+ cuts and waning SPR releases are short-term volume headwinds in the oil transportation sector.
Earlier in the year, supertanker freight rates hit record levels as traders scrambled to park crude in storage to take advantage of a record gap between spot and future prices shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine. Freight rates for very large crude-oil carriers (VLCC) along the Middle East Gulf to China route reached as high as $180,000 a day while VLCC time charter rates for floating storage jumped to as much as $120,000 per day.
But the situation has now reversed with supertanker rates plunging sharply. According to Bloomberg, ships capable of hauling 2 million barrels of crude are now earning about $38,000 a day, down 62% from just weeks ago after OPEC+ cut production and reduced releases from US reserves lowered seaborne volumes, Bloomberg reports.
“Clearly OPEC+ cuts and waning SPR releases would both be short-term volume headwinds. They cut production from the first of November and you would expect some lag, and we are seeing activity in the Middle East cooling off somewhat. That’s the simple explanation,” Lars Bastian Ostereng, an analyst at Arctic Securities has told Bloomberg.
Lower freight rates are encouraging some crude to travel longer distances. For instance, Bloomberg has reported that a South Korean refiner bought 2 million barrels of U.S. crude for March arrival. Meanwhile, offers for long-haul U.S. cargoes for delivery to Asia have declined partly due to lower shipping costs.
But things could not be more different in the natural gas arena.
Energy Crisis Sparks Mad Dash For Floating LNG Terminals
Demand for LNG floating storage and regasification units (LNG-FSRUs) has increased sharply this year, with Europe facing an energy supply squeeze as Russia has progressively cut pipeline gas flows.
Demand for LNG imports has intensified after the ruptures on the key Nord Stream pipeline system quashed any prospect of Russia turning its gas taps back on. This has forced dozens of countries in Europe to turn to FSRUs or floating LNG terminals, which are essentially mobile terminals that unload the super-chilled fuel and pipe it into onshore networks.
Currently, there are 48 FSRUs in operation globally, with Rystad Energy revealing that all but six of them are locked into term charters.
According to energy think-tank Ember, the EU has lined up plans for as many as 19 new FSRU projects at an estimated cost of €9.5bn.
The biggest beneficiaries are Korean shipbuilding, for whom FSRUs are a major revenue-generator. Korea is the definitive world leader in this field. According to local media, Korean shipbuilders managed to book 46% more orders so far, YoY. And the government’s goal is for the country to grab 75% of the market share by 2030.
The setup couldn’t be better. With the supply of these vessels so tight, the cost of charters into Germany has doubled year-on-year to $200,000 a day.
“Last year there was a surplus of FSRUs and this year there is a deficit. Up until now there have been sufficient vessels in the market, but as most have now been taken, it’s becoming more challenging,” Per Christian Fett, the global head of LNG at shipbrokers Fearnley LNG in Oslo, has told Bloomberg.
Texas-based Excelerate Energy Inc. is sending three FSRUs to Europe with combined throughput capacity to import 15 billion cubic meters of gas, or about 10% of the pipeline and LNG imports from Russia in 2021. Demand for the terminals in Europe is so strong that it could make it less affordable for emerging nations to use FSRUs for their own needs.
“The risk is real that underutilized facilities in other regions of the world could be relocated to Europe, existing charter terms permitting,”Kaushal Ramesh, a senior analyst at consultant Rystad Energy, has said.
New Dutch terminal
The Netherlands has taken its first delivery of LNG at a new terminal, boosting Europe’s efforts to wean itself off Russian gas. Previously, the Netherlands could only import LNG through Rotterdam; however, that has changed with the commissioning of two FSRUs, the Golar Igloo and Eemshaven LNG, moored in Eemshaven. The FSRU project was completed in record time Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. With the pair of floating ships now supplying gas to the landlocked Czech Republic and Germany.
“The arrival of the new LNG terminal is an important step not only for the Netherlands, but for the whole of Europe to completely phase out the dependence on energy from Russia as quickly as possible,” Rob Jetten, Dutch minister for climate and energy, has declared. FRSUs offer the quickest and most efficient way for Europe to end its reliance on the pipelines that bring in large quantities of natural gas from Russia.
Europe has been working hard to wean itself off Russian energy commodities ever since the latter invaded Ukraine. The European Union has banned Russian coal and plans to block most Russian oil imports by the end of 2022 in a bid to deprive Moscow of an important source of revenue to wage its war in Ukraine.
But ditching Russian gas is proving to be more onerous than Europe would have hoped for. Whereas supplies of Russian pipeline gas–the bulk of Europe’s gas imports before the Ukraine war–are down to a trickle, Europe has been hungrily scooping up Russian LNG. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the bloc’s imports of Russian liquefied natural gas jumped by 41% Y/Y in the year through August.
“Russian LNG has been the dark horse of the sanctions regime,” Maria Shagina, research fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, has told WSJ. Importers of Russian LNG to Europe have argued that the shipments are not covered by current EU sanctions and that buying LNG from Russia and other suppliers has helped keep European energy prices in check.
Source: WSJ
LNG Deluge
Maybe Europe’s LNG imports from Russia can be justified on a purely economic basis.
Natural gas prices in Europe have plunged over the past few weeks with CNBC reporting that a “Wave of LNG tankers is overwhelming Europe in an energy crisis and hitting natural gas prices.” According to MarineTraffic via CNBC, 60 LNG tankers, or ~10% of the LNG vessels in the world, are currently sailing or anchored around Northwest Europe, the Mediterranean, and the Iberian Peninsula.
It’s a fair bet that a good chunk of those vessels originated from the United States.
Europe’s natural gas demand has skyrocketed as the EU tries to lower its reliance on Russian natural gas following its invasion of Ukraine. Europe has displaced Asia as the top destination for the U.S. LNG, and now receives 65% of total exports. The EU has pledged to reduce its consumption of Russian natural gas by nearly two-thirds before the year’s end while Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have vowed to eliminate Russian gas imports outright. Unlike pipeline gas, supercooled LNG is much more flexible and can be shipped from far-flung regions, including the U.S. and Qatar.
Europe is not alone here. Shipping data has revealed that China has imported nearly 30% more gas from Russia so far this year, typically at a steep discount.
Thankfully, there’s a clear upside to imports of Russian LNG to Europe: the continent has managed to fill its gas stores well ahead of schedule, with Reuter’s gas meter revealing that 90% of the EU gas storage is currently filled.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 18:20 -
- Democratic Lawmakers Make Rare Visit To Cuba In Normalization Push
Democratic Lawmakers Make Rare Visit To Cuba In Normalization Push
Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,
A delegation from the Congressional Progressive Caucus met with the Cuban president, in a rare high-level meeting among government officials. Washington maintains a Cold War-era embargo against Havana.
The Associated Press reported Representatives James McGovern (D-MA), Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Troy Carter (D-LA) met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel in Havana on Sunday. Miguel Díaz-Canel tweeted, “we address our differences and topics of common interest. The shared will to improve bilateral relations was ratified. I expressed the need to put an end to measures that harm the Cuban population.”
Representatives James McGovern (D-MA), Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Troy Carter (D-LA) met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel in Havana via Twitter. “In the past year, Cuban arrivals to the U.S.-Mexico border have skyrocketed, and a growing number of boats packed with migrants have been found off of Florida’s coast,” the AP has noted. “In October, Cubans replaced Venezuelans as the second most numerous nationality after Mexicans arriving at the border. U.S. authorities stopped Cubans 28,848 times, up 10% from the previous month, the latest data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection shows.”
Havana was a client of Moscow throughout much of the Cold War. Washington first sanctioned weapon sales to Cuba in 1958. Two years later, Cuba nationalized American-owned businesses. The US responded by placing an embargo on Cuba.
In February 1962, Washington extended the blockade of Cuba to include nearly all exports. Eight months later, the US and USSR nearly engaged in a nuclear exchange over strategic missiles deployed in Cuba.
Near the end of his second term, Barack Obama took a number of steps to normalize relations with Cuba. President Donald Trump walked back nearly all of Obama’s détente policies. The Trump administration justified the U-turn claiming American diplomats in Cuba were targeted with a mysterious weapon that caused a wide variety of symptoms.
The US government dubbed the so-called disease ‘Havana Syndrome.’ However, a recording of the alleged weapon was identified to be the sound of native crickets. Joe Biden was expected to adopt the policy of his former boss for Cuba, but the White House has been slow to return to diplomacy with Havana.
Via Cuban presidency’s office In July 2021, the US imposed sanctions on Cuba over human rights abuses committed by government forces. While the Cuban government is repressive, the worst human rights abuses in Cuba occur at Guantanamo Bay. The US military occupies a portion of the island and has operated the infamous torture prison at the base for two decades.
In June, the White House eased some sanctions on Havana, signaling some loosening of the embargo. Last month at the UN, the US voted to keep the blockade against Cuba. Recent talks between Washington and Havana have focused on slowing Cuban immigration to the US.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 17:40 - SEC Chairman Gensler Scrubbed Evidence Of Clinton, Soros And Pelosi Meetings: FOIA Lawsuit
SEC Chairman Gensler Scrubbed Evidence Of Clinton, Soros And Pelosi Meetings: FOIA Lawsuit
Sunlight is the best disinfectant – unless you’re Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Gary Gensler – who scrubbed evidence of a meeting with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from his calendar, along with key details of a meeting with Billionaire leftist-operative George Soros.
He also concealed September 21 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and former Bill Clinton White House official-turned-DC consultant, Minyon Moore.
Gensler, a former Goldman Sachs executive, Obama administration official, Clinton’s 2016 campaign CFO, and FTX associate, essentially had two calendars. His public calendar showed that on Aug. 7, 2021, he only had a staff meeting, while his private calendar lists a meeting with Hillary Clinton, Fox News reports.
Thirteen days later on Aug. 20, 2021, Gensler’s public calendar does list a meeting with Soros, but the agenda was hidden. His private calendar reveals that the meeting was held to discuss an upcoming WSJ op-ed Soros was planning to write in which he slammed BlackRock for launching investment products for Chinese customers, while also applauding the company’s ESG policies.
Gensler’s private calendar revealing the discrepancies was obtained by the watchdog group Energy Policy Advocates and shared with Fox News Digital. The group was only able to obtain the internal records after filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the SEC.
In recent days, around the time Fox News Digital contacted the SEC, the agency updated Gensler’s public calendar to include his meeting with Clinton in August 2021. As recently as Wednesday the public calendar didn’t include the meeting, and archived copies of the webpage from April also list just a meeting with staff. -Fox News
When contacted for comment, the SEC initially lied – saying that the Clinton meeting was visible on Gensler’s public calendar. When confronted with screenshots to the contrary, the spokesperson said that the agency updates calendars “from time to time” when inaccuracies are discovered (by watchdog groups?).
Gensler also concealed several September 2021 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Minyon Moore – both of which have been now updated on Gensler’s public calendar.
“That even George Soros is calling out progressive darling BlackRock for craven blundering is striking — even if it did carry the requisite, tribal praise for BlackRock’s truly damaging ‘ESG’ (environmental, social and governance) campaigning to impose their shared ‘climate’ agenda on the U.S., an agenda also much to China’s delight,” said Chris Horner, a lawyer representing Energy Policy Advocates. “That it appears Soros received counsel from Gary Gensler on the mega-donor’s call for more SEC powers as a result is truly astonishing.”
“This gives further credence to the widespread concern that Gensler is deeply politicizing a supposedly independent commission,” he continued. “He may have been Hillary Clinton’s ‘Progressive Beacon’ not long ago, but Gary Gensler is now the SEC chairman, and his calendar indicates he knew the purpose of the meeting. It seems important to know whose idea this was, why, what was said arranging it and through what channel.”
According to the SEC spokesperson, Gensler has never asked anyone to ‘draft or submit’ an op-ed, but declined to comment on the meeting with Soros.
Gensler has faced heavy criticism from business groups and Republican lawmakers for pushing progressive policies, including a climate disclosure rule that would require publicly traded companies to share carbon emissions data and other climate information.
Reps. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and Andy Barr, R-Ky., two top GOP members on the House Financial Services Committee, introduced legislation this month that would limit the SEC’s ability to require such climate disclosures. -Fox News
“That this and Gensler’s consultation with Hillary were scrubbed from the public version of his calendar is frankly the least surprising aspect of this,” Horner continued. “The SEC first told Energy Policy Advocates that the publicly posted calendars were all they would get.”
“Energy Policy Advocates challenged that, pointing out that these sanitized versions, typically posted months after the fact, were certainly not produced from memory and the group wanted the originals. Here you see the reason for the scrubbing these internal versions receive.“
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 17:20 - Will Central Banks Do What It Takes?
Will Central Banks Do What It Takes?
Authored by Carmen Reinhart via Project Syndicate,
Few would doubt that, after 15 years of ultra-low interest rates, reining in inflation by restoring real positive rates will be difficult. And with 2023 expected to bring heightened global financial and economic risks, monetary tightening will almost certainly become even more complicated.
The advanced economies are experiencing their highest inflation in 40 years, with a median rate of nearly 9% for the 12 months ending in September 2022. For central banks and financial markets, the expectation – or, more accurately, the hope – that the inflation spike would be transitory has been broadly replaced by the sobering realization that price growth is a persistent problem that demands significant and sustained monetary tightening. With the exception of the Bank of Japan, the major central banks are now raising interest rates and moving to stabilize or reverse balance-sheet growth
Few would doubt that, after 15 years of exceptionally low interest rates, this policy shift will be difficult, especially with the global economy teetering on the edge of recession. But with 2023 expected to bring heightened global financial and economic risks – not to mention rising geopolitical tensions – it will almost certainly become even more complicated.
A historical perspective illuminates some of the challenges that are likely to emerge as international financial conditions tighten. Real policy interest rates (nominal interest rates minus inflation) in the world’s financial center, the United States, have been consistently negative since the 2008-09 global financial crisis.
Real interest rates have remained negative for multiyear periods in a global financial center only four times since the mid-1800s (at least). The first three episodes were during the two world wars and in the aftermath of the OPEC oil shock from 1974-1980. In these three cases, average inflation in the US ranged from 7% to 15%, and the restoration of positive real interest rates was part of an effort to tackle inflation.
The current period of prolonged negative real interest rates is the longest of the four. Moreover, real rates in other advanced economies have been even more deeply negative. In much of Europe and Japan, nominal interest rates were also negative – a historical novelty.
Yet another historically anomalous feature of the recent “low-for-long” interest-rate era is that, under the heading of quantitative easing (QE), advanced-economy central banks have purchased massive amounts of government (or government-guaranteed) debt, setting new peacetime records. While central-bank balance sheets shrank modestly after the global financial crisis ended, they remained far larger than they were before the crisis, and swelled to new highs during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This exceptional accommodation explains why, despite significant rate hikes, the US federal funds rate remains well below the 12-month inflation rate of about 8%. Likewise, the European Central Bank’s policy rate remains well below the US federal funds rate, while eurozone inflation nears double digits.
Against this backdrop, restoring positive real interest rates – thereby stabilizing inflation – may require monetary policy to be kept tighter for longer than many policymakers and market participants seem to expect. Yet it is far from clear that central banks will maintain their commitment to tightening in the face of weakening economic activity. The persistence of inflation in the 1970s can be explained partly by the US Federal Reserve’s tendency to do too little too late or to waver in the tightening process.
Experience also points to another underappreciated risk: the return of volatility in fixed-income (bond) markets. The recent turmoil in the United Kingdom, which forced the Bank of England to launch an emergency bond-buying program, is a case in point.
Price volatility is standard in global commodity markets, regardless of the interest rate. But, in fixed-income markets, higher volatility is the handmaiden of higher and more unstable inflation rates. The variation in inflation rates across the major advanced economies was about seven times higher in 1974-89 than in 2008-21.
This means that, in the era of sustained ultra-low interest rates, fixed-income-market volatility declined steadily. Low and stable inflation rates across the advanced economies also contributed significantly to a reduction in exchange-rate volatility after 2008, as Kenneth Rogoff, Ethan Ilzetski, and I have shown.
Persistent ultra-low interest rates shaped balance sheets by encouraging private-sector and government borrowing and aggressive risk-taking in search of yield (increasing the likelihood of asset-price bubbles). While ultra-low rates technically strengthen government balance sheets, they may have created or aggravated off-balance-sheet losses, including by undermining pension-fund solvency (especially among local governments). “Low for long” has, in some cases, weakened fiscal discipline and delayed reforms.
For countries with very high debts (such as Italy), negative interest rates – together with massive debt purchases by central banks – may have replaced debt restructuring, which at least in principle can deliver faster and greater progress on debt reduction. It remains to be seen how that gap will be filled in an era of tighter monetary policy.
The message is clear: the risks posed by the exit from sustained negative real interest rates extend well beyond recession. The question is how central banks will respond when those risks manifest.
Central-bank independence seems to have eroded – not necessarily de jure, but possibly de facto, as officials weigh the broader consequences of their actions. If leverage (public and private) and risk exposures raise doubts about financial stability, will central banks return to accommodation? What if fears of a market crash emerge, or sovereign insolvencies seem imminent (as might occur in the eurozone)? In the 1970s, economies endured years of high inflation before the exit from negative real interest rates was complete.
And yet more risks loom in 2023. China – a key engine of global economic growth after the last global financial crisis – is grappling with financial and political fragilities. Tighter global financial conditions could severely damage emerging-market and developing economies in the short run. Those with large US-dollar-denominated debts will suffer even more. Already, more than 60% of low-income countries are either at high risk of distress or already there.
But just as the exit from the “low-for-long” interest-rate era raises grave risks, so, too, does persistent high inflation, which, among other things, exacerbates inequality within and across countries. To say that this is a challenging time for governments and central banks would be a massive understatement.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 12/12/2022 – 17:00
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
