Dec 13

Today’s News 13th December 2024

  • Provoked: The Long Train Of Abuses That Culminated In The Ukraine War
    Provoked: The Long Train Of Abuses That Culminated In The Ukraine War

    Authored by Carus Michaelangelo via The Mises Institute,

    [Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine, by Scott Horton, The Libertarian Institute, 2024; 690 pp.]

    “A fox knows many things, but a hedgehog knows one big thing.” Scott Horton is the liberty movement’s foreign policy hedgehog, endeavoring to convince the American public of one essential truth: the folly of war. But within that sphere, Horton is a fox, weaving an encyclopedic knowledge of various conflicts into an elaborate and convincing tapestry that indicts elites, intellectuals, the military-industrial complex, and—with characteristic vitriol—neoconservatives in pushing the US toward unnecessary wars.

    Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine, fits this mold to a tee—not because Horton contorts facts to a preconceived narrative. Rather, because it is often the same people pushing conflict after conflict who, unsurprisingly, resort to the same, well-worn playbook. Horton’s tome is riveting, from beginning to end. Here, I will focus on the early post-Cold War years, since this part of the story is oft-neglected in contemporary debates about the origins of the Ukraine war.

    With the closing of the Cold War, and the USSR dissolving, the US faced a crisis of success: what use is the NATO military alliance without the Soviet enemy to align against? More broadly, what grand strategy should the US adopt now that containing communism was obsolete? For neoconservatives, whose answer post-Cold War was benevolent global hegemony, the solution was to adapt NATO. NATO must gradually absorb more European nations, while leaving Russia out in the cold—contained and encircled, in an even worse position than during the Cold War. NATO must expand its mission to keep European peace and expand Western democracy, or wither on the vine.

    From George H.W. Bush to today, the record meticulously compiled by Horton demonstrates that US and other Western leaders communicated to Russia leaders and officials that NATO would not expand east—and could even allow for Russian membership in NATO. Various efforts like the Partnership for Peace and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe were promoted to foster this impression that Russia would be included in European affairs, alliances, and institutions, rather than these structures aligning against them. All the while, these same US and Western leaders took virtually the opposite positions internally, with the result that the US willfully misled the Russians. The exact internal and external postures waxed and waned over the years, but this ultimate pattern held firm. This was even though, all along, Russian officials warned about how they and the Russian people would react to NATO advancing east. What we see is, in terms with which Americans are well-familiar, “a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object.”

    It began with George H.W. Bush, who promised Mikhail Gorbachev, after the fall of the Berlin Wall as the Soviet Union careened towards collapse, that the US would not take advantage of the situation. This was also reflected in a NATO resolution on June 7, 1991. Bush and his advisors promised that NATO would not expand if the Soviet Union would withdraw and allow German reunification. The 1990 settlement would only specify that the US would not put troops in East Germany, a nuance which Russia hawks have exploited to argue there was no promise not to expand NATO. But this does not fly. Horton asks the rhetorical question: what sense would it make for the Soviet Union to extract a promise not to put troops in East Germany, if the US had a free hand to bring the rest of Eastern Europe into a military alliance? This agreement only makes sense on a backdrop of agreeing not to expand NATO.

    The sins of the Clinton years were legion. In the early 90s, the US sent economists from the Harvard Institute of International Development to Russia to enact what came to be called a “shock therapy” economic policy. It was so badly designed and had such poor outcomes that many Russian thought it must be deliberate. Unsurprisingly, this did not dispose ordinary Russians to view the West favorably. Throughout the decade, Clinton and his advisors duplicitously offered Russia promises that a “Partnership for Peace” process would be pursued rather than NATO expansion—and that NATO would lose its military character—all the while planning to expand NATO.

    The Clinton administration was heavily involved in the Balkans wars of Bosnia and Kosovo, which present strong cases against “humanitarian” intervention. The result of Bosnia was that NATO proved itself capable of fulfilling a new mission, while the US solidified itself at the head of European affairs, each of which were necessary for subsequent NATO expansion. Kosovo further solidified NATO’s new role on the continent—even intervening in civil wars—while the bombing campaign against Serbia convinced Russians that the US was an aggressive, ruthless great power, who would violate international rules when it suited them. The US engaged in this aggressive war, in violation of the UN Charter, without approval of the UN Security Council (on which Russia sat). So much for the liberal rules-based international order. The US’s frequent remaking of the rules was a frequent complaint of Russia, including during the Iraq War.

    Moreover, when Russia went to war with break-away Chechnya, Clinton’s CIA and US allies supported Chechen rebels and separatist mujahideen fighters fighting on Chechnya’s side against the Russians, with the goal to disrupt an existing Russian oil pipeline running through Chechnya. This, too, Putin cited when invading Ukraine. (If this were all not bad enough, Horton shows how the Clinton administration supported the bin Ladenite terrorists in the Balkans wars and in Chechnya. Indeed, more than half of the September 11 hijackers were involved in these wars in the Balkans and Chechnya—often both.)

    Putin’s rise was itself a consequence of the Clintonian interventions in the 1990s: from the “shock therapy” economic policy, to helping Yeltsin get reelected in 1996, to Kosovo and Chechnya. As Horton points out, ironically, Putin invoked the Kosovo precedent of intervening in a civil war to “protect” an ethnic minority to justify invading Ukraine. In one stunning example from the Kosovo war, Horton recounted how the Clinton administration ordered the bombing of a Serbian TV station. These actions still influence Putin’s thoughts about the West today. Putin’s strike on a TV tower in Kiev in February 2022 likely called back to that conflict.

    The NATO-Russia Founding Act of May 1997 was another milestone in US duplicity toward Russia. It assured that NATO would not deploy nuclear weapons or “substantial” troops to new NATO nations’ territories. Importantly, the Clinton administration misled Russia into thinking the Founding Act would give Russia a genuine role in NATO deliberations—although it would not have a say within the NATO alliance itself—when, in the words of Clinton advisor Strobe Talbott, the US’s view was that “all we’re really promising them is monthly meetings.”

    Throughout Clinton’s term, the Clinton administration fed Russia the lie that claimed NATO’s mission was becoming political, rather than military, so agreeing not to expand NATO would be admitting that NATO’s mission was to contain Russia. He even said he would leave open the possibility of Russia entering NATO. But Horton shows they had no intention to do any of this. To make matters worse, in July 1997 NATO and Ukraine signed an agreement that would provide for training Ukraine’s military and improve their interoperability with NATO, and in August 1997 planned a military exercise involving several former Warsaw Pact states and Soviet republics to simulate US military intervention in an ethnic conflict in Crimea.

    No, this was not all. The US tried to cut out Russia from Caspian Basin oil by refusing to run a pipeline from Azerbaijan through Russia, pushing it to a Western route through Turkey instead. The US also backed the GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) grouping to “speed European integration and exclude Russia influence from the South Caucasus,” according to Horton, which Russia strongly opposed, calling it an “Axis of Evil” in 2005. The Clinton administration also violated Bush and Gorbachev’s Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe in 1999, incredulously claiming that the “permanent US military bases in Bulgaria and Romania” were actually just temporary.

    The close of the Clinton years began a wave of “color revolutions” in Russia’s backyard. The key thing about these “revolutions” is that they are heavily funded and supported by foreign governments or NGOs, such as George Soros’ groups. Rather than directly or covertly overthrow an existing regime, these organizations operate “above board,” meaning they avoid specifically endorsing candidates—since that would be illegal—and instead fund and assist groups that promote more generic, non-partisan efforts like “democracy.” In context, of course, their activities are geared to “benefit . . . a favored candidate or party.” A favorite tactic is using “parallel vote tabulation” or exit polls, which are used to dispute official election results. The dispute typically spills over into street demonstrations with the goal of ousting the ostensible victor.

    The “revolutions” began in Serbia in 2000 with the ousting of Clinton’s bĂȘte noire Slobodan MiloĆĄević. As Horton sardonically comments, this culminated in the “sacking and burning of the [Serbian] parliament building in what would surely be called a violent insurrection by American Democrats if they had not been behind it.” Numerous other states would be targeted for color revolutions by the US and its Soros-backed NGO allies over the next decades.

    Incredibly, this only begins to scratch the surface of these early, post-Cold War provocations toward Russia that Horton documents, let alone the follies and misdeeds that occurred during the George W. Bush presidency and thereafter. Horton has persuasively made the case that the US provoked Russia over the course of three decades, knowing that Russia would respond with hostility toward NATO expansion. Yet, with reckless abandon, US leaders and officials pushed on, achieving their wildest dreams of NATO expansion and setting their sights on what was always their crown jewel—Ukraine. It did not have to be this way, and it still does not. But time is ticking. Defying expectations, President Biden manages to reach new heights of absurdity in his escalatory policy toward Russia, ticking off a box on Zelensky’s deadly five-point “peace” plan. The war cannot end soon enough.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 23:25

  • UnitedHealthcare CEO Assassination Could Spark "Next Wave" Of "Occupy Wall Street 2.0," Warns Security Expert
    UnitedHealthcare CEO Assassination Could Spark “Next Wave” Of “Occupy Wall Street 2.0,” Warns Security Expert

    In an interview, QUX Technologies CEO Keith Hanson told Fox News that the death of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO could ignite the “next wave” of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

    “It’s the Occupy Wall Street 2.0 at this point where you have the original wave of the ‘everybody gets a trophy’ generation was hitting the real world and suddenly realizing that everybody from their teachers to their professors at college had pretty much lied to them about the way that the real world works,” Hanson said.

    The law enforcement trainer continued: “And now I’m starting to see an uptick in the resentment and the vitriol towards corporations and to corporate CEOs. And I guess it would make sense that this is kind of the next wave. I mean, this is basically the proletariat rising against the bourgeois class and taking what’s theirs. And it’s concerning.”

    In New York City, posters featuring UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson’s portrait marked with a red X appeared around town, alongside “wanted” images of other top healthcare CEOs.

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

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

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

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

    In Seattle, a construction sign read: “One less CEO, Many more to go.” 

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

    Hanson disclosed that following the assassination of CEO Brian Thompson last week, allegedly by 26-year-old Ivy League graduate Luigi Mangione, corporate America has been ramping up private security amid fears of copycat attacks.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 23:00

  • Escobar: Syria's Post-Mortem – Terror, Occupation, And Palestine
    Escobar: Syria’s Post-Mortem – Terror, Occupation, And Palestine

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

    The short headline defining the abrupt, swift end of Syria as we knew it would be: Eretz Israel meets new-Ottomanism. The subtitle? A win-win for the west, and a lethal blow against the Axis of Resistance.

    But to quote still-pervasive American pop culture, perhaps the owls are not what they seem.

    Let’s start with former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s surrender. Qatari diplomats, off the record, maintain that Assad tried to negotiate a transfer of power with the armed opposition that had launched a major military offensive in the days prior, starting with Aleppo, then swiftly headed southward toward Hama, Homs, aiming for Damascus. That’s what was discussed in detail between Russia, Iran, and Turkiye behind closed doors in Doha this past weekend, during the last sigh of the moribund “Astana process” to demilitarize Syria.

    The transfer of power negotiation failed. Hence, Assad was offered asylum by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. That explains why both Iran and Russia instantly changed the terminology while still in Doha, and began to refer to the “legitimate opposition” in a bid to distinguish non-militant reformists from the armed extremists cutting a swathe across the state.  

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov – his body language telling everything about his anger – literally said, “Assad must negotiate with the legitimate opposition, which is on the UN list.” 

    Very important: Lavrov did not mean Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the Salafi-jihadi, or Rent-a-Jihadi mob financed by the Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT) with weapons funded by Qatar, and fully supported by NATO and Tel Aviv. 

    What happened after the funeral in Doha was quite murky, suggesting a western intel remote-controlled coup, developing as fast as lightning, complete with reports of domestic betrayals. 

    The original Astana idea was to keep Damascus safe and to have Ankara manage HTS. Yet Assad had already committed a serious strategic blunder, believing in lofty promises by NATO messaged through his newfound Arab leader friends in the UAE and Saudi Arabia.    

    To his own astonishment, according to Syrian and regional officials, Assad finally realized how fragile his own position was, having turned down military assistance from his stalwart regional allies, Iran and Hezbollah, believing that his new Arab allies might keep him safe.

    The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) was in shambles after 13 years of war and ruthless US sanctions. Logistics were prey to deplorable corruption. The rot was systemic. But importantly, while many were prepared to fight the foreign-backed terror groups once again, insiders say Assad never fully deployed his army to counterattack the onslaught.

    Tehran and Moscow tried everything – up to the last minute. In fact, Assad was already in deep trouble since his visit to Moscow on 29 November that reaped no tangible results. The Damascus establishment thus regarded Russia’s insistence that Assad must abandon his previous red lines on negotiating a political settlement as a de facto signal pointing to the end. 

    Turkiye: ‘we have nothing to do with it’

    Apart from doing nothing to prevent the increasing atrophy and collapse of the SAA, Assad did nothing to rein in Israel, which has been bombing Syria non-stop for years. 

    Until the very last moment, Tehran was willing to help: two brigades were ready to get into Syria, but it would take at least two weeks to deploy them.      

    The Fars News Agency explained the mechanism in detail – from the Syrian leadership’s inexorable lack of motivation to fight the terror brigades to Assad ignoring serious warnings from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei since June, all the way to two months ago, with other Iranian officials warning that HTS and its foreign backers were preparing a blitzkrieg. According to the Iranians: 

    “After Aleppo fell, it became clear that Assad had no real intentions of staying in power, so we started to engage in diplomatic talks with the opposition, and arranged the safe exit of our troops from Syria. If the SAA does not fight, neither will we risk our soldiers’ lives. Russia and the UAE had managed to convince him to step down, so there was nothing we could do.”

    There’s no Russian confirmation that they convinced Assad to step down: one just needs to interpret that failed meeting in Moscow on 29 November. Yet, significantly, there is confirmation, before that, about Turkiye knowing everything about the HTS offensive as far back as six months ago. 

    Ankara’s version is predictably murky: HTS told them about it, and asked them not to intervene. Additionally, the Turkish Foreign Ministry spun that President-Caliph Recep Tayyip Erdogan tried to warn Assad (no word from Damascus on that). Ankara, on the record, via Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, firmly denies orchestrating or approving the Rent-a-Jihadi offensive. They may regret this yet, with everyone from Washington to Tel Aviv jumping in to take credit for the fall of Damascus.

    Only the NATO propaganda machine believes this version – as HTS has been for years completely supported not only by Turkiye, but also, covertly, by Israel, which was outed for paying salaries to the extremists during the Syrian war, and famously helped rehabilitate Al-Qaeda fighters injured in battle. 

    All that leads to the predominant scenario of a carefully calculated CIA/MI6/Mossad controlled demolition, complete with a non-stop weaponizing flow, Ukrainian training of takfiris on the use of FPV kamikaze drones, and Samsonites full of cash bribing high-ranking Syrian officials. 

    New Great Game reloaded

    The Syrian collapse may be a classic case of “extending Russia” – and also Iran, when it comes to the all-crucial land bridge that connects it with its allies in the Mediterranean (the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance movements). Not to mention sending a message to China, which, for all its lofty “community of a shared future” rhetoric, had done absolutely nothing to help in the reconstruction of Syria. 

    On the geo-energy level, now there are no more obstacles to the resolution of an epic Pipelineistan saga – and one of the key reasons for the war on Syria, as I analyzed it nine years ago: building the Qatar–Turkiye gas pipeline through Syrian territory to provide Europe with an alternative to Russian gas. Assad had rejected that project, after which Doha helped fund the Syrian war to depose him.

    There’s no evidence that key Persian Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and UAE will gleefully accept Qatar’s geoeconomic stardom if the pipeline is built. For starters, it needs to run through Saudi territory, and Riyadh may no longer be open to that. 

    This burning question connects to a pile-up of other questions, including, with the Syrian gateway all but gone: how will Hezbollah receive weapons supplies in the future, and how will the Arab world react to Turkiye trying to go full Neo-Ottoman?   

    Then there’s the thorny case of BRICS partner-state Turkiye directly clashing with top BRICS members Russia, China, and Iran. Ankara’s new turn may even end up causing it to be rejected by BRICS, and not granted a favorable trade status by China. 

    While a case can certainly be made that losing Syria may be devastating for Russia and the Global Majority, hold those horses – for now. In the event of losing the port of Tartous that the USSR-Russia has run since 1971, alongside the Hmeimim air base – and thus being ousted from the Eastern Mediterranean – Moscow would have replacing options, with different degrees of feasibility. 

    We have Algeria (a BRICS partner), Egypt (a BRICS member), and Libya. Even the Persian Gulf: that, incidentally, could become part of the Russia–Iran comprehensive strategic partnership, to be officially signed on 25 January in Moscow by Putin and his Iranian counterpart President Masoud Pezeshkian. 

    It’s extremely naĂŻve to assume that Moscow was caught by surprise by the staging of an alleged Kursk 2.0. As if all Russian intel assets – bases, satellites, ground intel – would not have scrutinized a bunch of Salafi-Jihadis for months assembling an army of tens of thousands in Greater Idlib, complete with a tank division.   
    So it’s quite plausible that what’s being played is classic Russia, combined with Persian guile. It didn’t take long for Tehran and Moscow to do the math on what they would lose – especially in terms of human resources – by falling into the trap of supporting an already enfeebled Assad in yet another bloody, protracted ground war.  Still, Tehran offered military support, and Moscow, air support, and negotiations scenarios till the very end.

    Now, the whole Syrian tragedy – including a possible Caliphate of all-Sham led by reformed, minority-hugging jihadist Abu Mohammad al-Julani – falls into the full managing responsibility of the NATO/Tel Aviv/Ankara combo. 

    They are simply not prepared to navigate the ultra-complex tribal, clannish, embedded in corruption Syrian matrix – not to mention the magma of 37 terror outfits only kept together, so far, by the tiny glue of ousting Assad. This volcano will certainly explode in their collective faces, potentially in the form of horrendous internal battles that may last at least a few years.   

    Syria’s northeast and east are already, instantly, mired in total anarchy, with a multitude of local tribes bent on keeping their mafioso schemes at all costs, refusing to be controlled by a US–Kurd Rojava composite that is largely communist and secular. Some of these tribes are already getting cozy with the Turk-supported Salafi-jihadis. Other Arab tribes had this year joined forces with Damascus against both the extremists and Kurdish secessionists.    

    Western Syria may also be anarchy territory, as in Idlib: bloody rivalry between terror and bandit networks, between clans, tribes, ethnic groups, and religious groups regimented by Assad, the panorama even more complex than in Libya under former President Muammar al-Gaddafi. 

    As for the Head-Choppers’ supply lines, they will inevitably be stretched – and then it will be easy to cut them off, not only by Iran, for instance, but also by the NATO wing via Turkiye/Israel when they turn against the Caliphate, as they invariably may if the latter’s abuses become too media-apparent.   
    No one is able to foresee what will happen to the carcass of Assad-dynasty Syria. Millions of refugees may return, especially from Turkiye, which Washington has for years tried to prevent to protect its “Kurdification” project in the north – but at the same time, millions will flee, terrified by the prospect of a new Caliphate and a renewed civil war.

    Is there a possible ray of light amongst such gloom? The leader of the transition government will be Mohammad al-Bashir, who was, until recently, the prime minister of the so-called Syrian Salvation Government (SSG) in HTS-ruled Idlib. An electrical engineer by training, Bashir added a further degree to his education in 2021: Sharia and law.

    Losing Syria should not mean losing Palestine 

    The Global Majority may be mourning what, on the surface, looks like a nearly lethal blow against the Axis of Resistance. Yet there’s no way Russia, Iran, Iraq – and even thunderously silent China – will let a NATO-Israel-Turkiye-backed Salafi-jihadi proxy army prevail. Unlike the collective west, they are smarter, tougher, infinitely more patient, and consider the contours of the Big Picture ahead. It’s too early; sooner or later they will start rollin’ to prevent western-backed jihadism from spilling into Beijing, Tehran, and Moscow.  

    Russian foreign intel agency Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki (SVR) now has to be monitoring 24/7 what will be the next destination of the large cross-Heartland Salafi-jihadi brigade in Syria, overwhelmingly Uzbeks, Uighurs, Tajiks, and a sprinkle of Chechens. There’s no question they will be used to “extend” (US Think Tankland terminology) not only Central Asia but the Russian Federation. 
    Meanwhile, Israel will be overstretched in the Golan. The Americans will temporarily feel safe and secure around the oil fields from which they will keep stealing Syrian oil. These are two ideal latitudes for the start of what would be the first concerted BRICS retaliation against those who are unleashing the First BRICS War.  

    Then there’s the ultimate tragedy: Palestine. A massive plot twist took place right inside the venerable Umayyad mosque in Damascus. The NATO-Israeli-Turk Head-Chopping Army is now promising the Palestinians they are coming to liberate Gaza and Jerusalem. 

    Yet until this past Sunday, it was all “We love Israel.” The MC of this PR op – designed to fool the Muslim world and the Global Majority – is none other than the Caliph of al-Sham himself, Julani.

    As it stands, the new regime in Damascus will be, for all practical purposes, backed by those who support and engineer Eretz Israel and the genocide of Palestine. It’s already out in the open, coming from Israeli cabinet officials themselves: Tel Aviv ideally would love to expel the population of Gaza and the West Bank to Syria, though Jordan is their preferred destination.

    This is the battle to focus on from now on. The late Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah was adamant when he insisted on the deeper meaning of losing Syria: “Palestine would be lost.” More than ever, it’s up to a Global Resistance not to allow it. 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 22:35

  • Gold & The Evil Cycles Of War And Economic Destruction
    Gold & The Evil Cycles Of War And Economic Destruction

    Authored by Egon von Greyerz via vongreyerz.gold,

    As we approach what usually should be a blissful holiday period, the treacherous path the world is now on does not bode well for 2025 and beyond.

    Two global crises will dominate the world for at least several years and possibly decades.

    FINANCIAL CRISIS

    The crisis I have been discussing and writing about for many years is the end of the current monetary era, especially in the West. The exponential growth of debt, which we have experienced since 1971 when Nixon closed the gold window, is reaching an uber-exponential phase in the current century with runaway deficits and debt. 

    The likely course of events is unlimited money printing to counter an uncontrollable debt crisis. This leads to monetary debasement, high inflation or hyperinflation, which eventually turns into a deflationary collapse of the financial system and depression. 

    THERE CAN BE NO CLEARER SIGN OF THE END OF AN ECONOMIC ERA THAN WHEN THE RESERVE CURRENCY DECLINES BY 99%.  

    A possible alternative would be that the financial system implodes before the money printing has taken effect, with a subsequent deflationary implosion. This would mean a period without functioning banks and money. 

    As this is the way every monetary system has ended in history, without fail, anyone questioning this inevitable outcome will be entirely wrong. It is only a question of when, not if. 

    As the Austrian economist von Mises said:

    As always in history, an economic crisis always goes hand in hand with political or geopolitical turmoil. 

    When a country spends money it doesn’t have, starting a war is the most convenient way of creating new paper money, which, of course, has ZERO intrinsic value. 

    Expanding credit or printing money does not create economic value, but buys time.

    Money printing also buys votes. Reelection is the primary objective of any government in a democratic system.

    Consecutive US governments have increased US Federal debt almost every year since the early 1930s. 

    The current deficit is over $2 trillion, and tax revenue is only $5 trillion. With over $7 trillion in federal spending, the US government needs to borrow another 40% on top ($2T) to make ends meet.

    I created the graph below in November 2016, when Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States. I forecast that 8 years later (whoever was president), the debt that Trump inherited ($20 trillion) would be $40 trillion in early 2025. I based the forecast on a simple extrapolation. Since 1981, US debt has, on average, doubled every 8 years. Well, the debt will probably not reach $40T by 20 January 2025, but still, it went up by $16T rather than the $20T that I forecast. 

    More importantly, as the graph below shows, debt has increased 44X since 1981, but tax revenue has only increased 6X to $4.9T.  

    Can anyone explain how this debt will be repaid? The standard reply is that governments don’t need to repay their debt. 

    Well, let me again cite history, which is such a useful empirical tool. 

    Throughout history, a country which has not repaid its debts has, without fail, always defaulted, and the currency has gone to ZERO. 

    No one must believe that it will be different this time!

    A monetary crisis at the end of a major cycle leads to economic collapse, poverty and misery. 

    However, this current financial cycle is already developing in parallel with a geopolitical crisis of a magnitude and scale that could be greater than those of WWI and WWII. 

    GEOPOLITICAL CRISIS 

    The financial and geopolitical conflicts are clearly linked. As in many armed conflicts, the US has been involved since WWII, although the country is not directly threatened.

    This has been the case in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine. 

    Most of these wars are about fear of losing the US hegemony. The US government subscribes to the 1904 Mackinder theory that whoever controls the Heartland controls the world. The Heartland is the area of Eastern Europe stretching to the Yangtze River in the east and the Himalayas in the south. This area has massive natural resources. 

    Syria probably just fell to opposition groups backed by Turkey in an attack supported by the US military. Interestingly, the latest conflict started the same day as the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. Clearly, it’s not a coincidence. 

    So Turkey, which for a while has ridden two horses, a Russian and an American, has now taken the US side. 

    Turkey is a NATO member and also a prospective BRICS member, among others, Russia, China, Iran and India. 

    With Turkey now on the US side and against Russia, we see the first military conflict between the West and BRICS.  

    Nobody knows if Syria will regroup again with Assad in Moscow and the soldiers deserting the army. For the Russia – Iran axis, Syria is strategically critical. But Russia cannot win that war with just air power and most probably does not want to divert resources from Ukraine. 

    Thus, we now have yet another crisis in the Middle East, a situation with dire consequences for the area and the world.

    So we are likely to see continued war in Syria, with anarchy and the rise of more jihadist groups. 

    As Thanassis Cambanis, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, said: “In the best case scenario, Syria’s factions will struggle for primacy through contained local battles. At the other extreme, the collapse will spur a renewed period of total warfare in which factions target civilians.”

    So, it is likely that more Syrian people will be homeless and migrate to Europe and the US. As we know, no Western country has the capacity to take care of these people, so again, another humanitarian catastrophe has hit the world. 

    Losing access to Syria and the Mediterranean has weakened Iran, which will look for other options. The danger has always been that Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz, which would lock in 24% of global oil. The US could not stop this. It would lead to oil prices at least doubling or more and a major global depression. 

    The UAE (United Arab Emirates), which includes Dubai, is right by the Strait of Hormuz. 

    Personally, I have always been surprised that so many people move to and invest in Dubai, given the major geopolitical risk that this area carries.

    The world is in a severe war cycle, which, at best, will include insoluble and intractable wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe with both the US and Russia involved. And at worst, a nuclear war.

    I was always of the opinion that the Ukrainian conflict is a war Russia is very unlikely to lose. And neither the US nor European NATO troops have sufficient resources to win a war with boots on the ground. 

    Russian missiles are currently superior, but anything can happen in a nuclear conflict.

    In a nuclear war, there is no winner, and that could be the end of the world, so it is not worth speculating about the outcome of such a war.

    THE TRIUMPH OF DEATH

    Peter Bruegel painted the “Triumph of Death” in 1562. 

    Currently, the world, and especially the West, is on a path to geopolitical and economic destruction.

    No one knows how this will end. Even if it takes years, the world is unlikely to be the same once these two cycles have run their course. 

    I have already stated that the end of the current economic cycle will be devastating for the world but bearable relative to the worst outcome of the war cycle. 

    I had a hope that Trump would settle the Ukrainian situation if the US Neocons didn’t manage to escalate it severely before January 20. 

    However, the Middle East conflict, with Iran involved, makes the situation much more complex, even with Trump’s best intentions. 

    I always believe in finding solutions, but it is hard to be optimistic when the two Cycles of Evil prevail so strongly. 

    At least anyone who has savings should take action to protect these against the coming implosion of financial assets. 

    MARKETS

    Stocks in the US are massively overvalued. 

    The Buffett Indicator, US Stocks to GDP, is at 208%, an all-time high.

    Just a normal correction would be a 50% to 75% fall.

    The Price Earnings Ratio of Nasdaq stocks is 49X. 

    A decline of at least 80%, like in the early 2000s, is likely. 

    Obviously, bubbles can always grow bigger before they implode. 

    However, the risk of a market collapse sometime in the next few months is extremely high.

    Inflation will rise rapidly, as will interest rates, driven by money printing. 

    The US 10-year treasury will greatly exceed 10%, as in the 1970s. 

    WEALTH PRESERVATION 

    Finally, gold will continue to reflect the destruction of the dollar and most currencies. 

    Gold in US dollars is up 10X in this century. It is likely to rise by multiples from here as money dies. I explain why in this article: THE CASE FOR GOLD IS INCONTROVERTIBLE.

    Gold must be held in physical form and outside the financial system with direct access to your gold. And preferably in a safe jurisdiction outside your country of residence. 

    Finally, especially in periods of crisis, helping others and having a close circle of family and friends is more important than all the gold in the world. 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 21:45

  • A New Chapter Of The Bible Was Found Hidden Inside 1,750-Year-Old Text
    A New Chapter Of The Bible Was Found Hidden Inside 1,750-Year-Old Text

    Via The Mind Unleashed,

    Hidden for centuries, a forgotten chapter of the Bible has emerged from the shadows of history. Researchers, armed with ultraviolet light and meticulous scholarship, have uncovered a 1,750-year-old text that offers a fresh glimpse into the evolving nature of scripture. This find isn’t just a historical curiosity; it’s a profound insight into how faith and tradition were shaped in early Christianity.

    Preserved in an ancient Syriac manuscript, the chapter challenges long-held assumptions about biblical texts and their seemingly static nature. With its subtle variations and expanded narrative, this rediscovery raises compelling questions: What does this mean for the modern understanding of faith? And how many more hidden chapters might still be waiting to be found?

    Unearthing a Lost Piece of Biblical History

    In a groundbreaking intersection of technology and ancient history, scholars have uncovered a hidden chapter of the Bible within a 1,750-year-old Syriac manuscript preserved in the Vatican Library. Using ultraviolet (UV) light, researchers revealed traces of erased writing—a palimpsest—buried beneath layers of overwritten text. This painstaking process illuminated an earlier version of scripture, lost to time but now reintroduced to the world.

    The manuscript, part of the Syriac translations of the Bible, is more than just a relic. It represents a key moment in Christianity’s history, when scribes worked tirelessly to preserve scripture under challenging conditions. Early Christians relied on Syriac texts to disseminate their teachings across cultural and linguistic boundaries, making this find a window into their lived experiences.

    What makes this discovery especially remarkable is its collaborative nature. Historians, linguists, and scientists pooled their expertise to decode the faded script, each stroke of ink offering clues to a story untold for nearly two millennia. This isn’t just a triumph for biblical studies; it’s a testament to the enduring power of curiosity and innovation to uncover humanity’s shared past.

    The Hidden Chapter: What We Know So Far

    The newly unveiled chapter offers an expanded version of Matthew 12, a passage where Jesus and his disciples are criticized for picking grain on the Sabbath. In this version, subtle textual variations bring fresh theological nuances to light, emphasizing compassion and mercy over rigid observance of religious laws. While the core message aligns with established teachings, these differences hint at the dynamic and adaptive nature of early Christian scripture.

    Written in ancient Syriac, one of the earliest languages used to transmit biblical texts, the chapter provides a rare glimpse into Christianity’s early cultural diversity. Syriac was instrumental in spreading scripture beyond its Jewish origins, tailoring messages to resonate with varied linguistic and cultural communities. This adaptation reflects the pragmatic approach of early Christians, who shaped their sacred texts to meet the needs of a rapidly growing faith.

    What’s particularly striking is the role of early scribes. Far from being passive transcribers, they actively engaged with the material, reinterpreting and preserving it in ways that reflected their own spiritual and societal realities. This hidden chapter, with its emphasis on mercy, reveals a faith not rigidly bound to dogma but alive with reinterpretation and evolution—a window into the beliefs and priorities of communities navigating the complexities of their time.

    The Technology That Unveiled the Forgotten Chapter

    It’s hard to believe that something written almost 2,000 years ago could still be hiding in plain sight. But that’s exactly what happened here. Using ultraviolet light, researchers managed to reveal a forgotten chapter of the Bible, hidden beneath layers of overwritten text on an ancient manuscript. It’s like uncovering a secret message written centuries ago, invisible to the naked eye but waiting to be found.

    The process wasn’t exactly a walk in the park. Think about it—this manuscript is old, fragile, and irreplaceable. Every move had to be precise, every scan done with the utmost care. Months of work went into piecing together faint traces of erased ink, with experts from all over—historians, linguists, scientists—working side by side. It’s amazing to think that this discovery wouldn’t have been possible even a few decades ago. The tools they used, like UV imaging, are giving us new ways to see the past in ways we never thought possible.

    But here’s what really gets you thinking—what else is out there? If something as groundbreaking as a hidden chapter of the Bible can be uncovered, what other secrets might still be lying in wait? This is more than a cool tech story; it’s a reminder that history always has more to give, as long as we keep asking the right questions.

    A Manuscript’s Journey Through Time

    Think about this for a second: early Christians lived in a world where their beliefs could literally get them killed. Their sacred texts weren’t just important—they were lifelines, hidden and protected at all costs. That’s the world this 1,750-year-old Syriac manuscript comes from. Imagine scribes painstakingly copying and preserving these words, knowing the risks they faced if they were caught.

    Back then, parchment wasn’t exactly easy to come by. It was expensive, rare, and, honestly, every bit as valuable as the words written on it. To make the most of it, scribes would scrape off old texts and reuse the material—creating what we now call palimpsests. It’s kind of wild to think that their recycling efforts accidentally preserved traces of history that they probably thought were gone for good.

    Here’s another fascinating detail: this manuscript is written in Syriac. It’s one of the earliest languages used to spread Christianity and shows how the faith started to move beyond its Jewish roots. Syriac wasn’t just a language—it was a tool that helped Christianity adapt and grow, reaching new communities and cultures. That’s what makes this discovery so powerful. It’s not just about words on a page; it’s about the lengths people went to protect and share their beliefs.

    And now, centuries later, we’re uncovering their story. You can almost picture the hands that wrote and rewrote this text, working in secret, determined to pass on what they believed mattered most. It’s a humbling reminder of just how much history can hide beneath the surface—literally—and how much these ancient voices still have to say.

    What Scholars Are Saying: A New Lens on Scripture

    This hidden chapter of the Bible has sparked lively debates among scholars. Many see it as a fascinating window into how early Christian communities understood and adapted scripture. The chapter’s emphasis on mercy over strict adherence to religious laws aligns with Jesus’ teachings but adds a fresh perspective to familiar passages. This nuance suggests early Christians may have tailored scripture to address the unique challenges of their time.

    At the heart of the debate is the question of why this chapter was erased. Some scholars suggest it might have been excluded as church leaders worked to formalize the biblical canon, streamlining texts to unify doctrine. Others argue that its omission could simply reflect the practical realities of the time, with scribes overwriting older texts due to the scarcity of parchment. Whatever the reason, the discovery underscores the dynamic and evolving nature of early Christianity.

    Ultimately, this find is about more than one chapter. It’s a reminder that the Bible, far from being a static document, was shaped over centuries by human hands and decisions. For scholars and believers alike, the chapter offers a chance to reexamine the past while raising new questions about the stories still waiting to be uncovered.

    Hidden Truths, Endless Possibilities

    The discovery of this hidden Bible chapter is more than a historical footnote—it’s a vivid reminder of how much the past still has to teach us. From the resilience of early Christian communities to the evolving nature of scripture itself, this find opens a window into a world where faith and history were deeply intertwined. It also shows how modern technology can breathe life into ancient artifacts, revealing secrets thought lost to time.

    But this is likely just the beginning. Who knows what other forgotten chapters, erased writings, or hidden narratives are still waiting to be uncovered? Each discovery invites us to ask new questions, challenge old assumptions, and deepen our understanding of the stories that have shaped human history. Whether it’s faith, curiosity, or a little of both driving the search, one thing is certain—history still has plenty of mysteries left to share.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 20:05

  • Marc Andreessen Gives Insider Peek At DOGE Decisions, Helping Trump Pick The Next Administration
    Marc Andreessen Gives Insider Peek At DOGE Decisions, Helping Trump Pick The Next Administration

    Billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen gave a wide-ranging interview to Free Press’s Bari Weiss, confirming his involvement with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and sharing behind-the-scenes insights on working with President-elect Donald Trump. Andreessen discussed his role in assisting Trump with assembling the next administration and provided a glimpse into what it’s like to spend time with the incoming commander-in-chief. During the two-hour conversation, Andreessen also revisited his experience with Biden administration officials, claiming the government expressed the orwellian desire to take “complete control” over AI development in the United States. 

    “I’m an unpaid volunteer,” Andreessen said when asked by Weiss about his reported involvement. A recent report from The Washington Post revealed that Andreessen, along with fellow Silicon Valley titans Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, is contributing to the ambitious program. Andreessen outlined DOGE’s two chief objectives: slashing spending and reducing regulations.

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

    “There’s basically two big parts to it,” Andreessen explained. “One is they’re going to do a top-to-bottom review of government spending, and they’re going to cut as much cost as they possibly can. They have a whole theory and strategy on that.”

    “In conjunction with that and related to it, they’re going to do the same thing for regulations,” the billionaire continued. “They’re going to do a top-to-bottom review of the regulatory—what they call the regulatory state or the administrative state.”

    “The connective tissue there, that they don’t talk about in public, is actually quite important. A lot of the reaction of the Doge from institutional Washington is like, well, that’s impossible, you can’t do that; there are all these laws, statutes, and regulations,” he added.

    Andreessen, along with his A16z co-founder Ben Horowitz, endorsed Trump during the final stretch of the 2024 election. Since Trump’s victory, Andreessen revealed to Weiss that he has spent a great day of time at Mar-a-Lago and the Palm Beach area, assisting the 47th leader of the free world with assembling his administration.

    While Andreessen said he has spent “maybe half [his] time” at Mar-a-Lago since the election, he is quick to clarify his position:

    “I’m not claiming to be in the middle of all the decision-making, but I’ve been trying to help in as many ways as I can,” the tech titan told Weiss. Andreessen explained that his contributions focus on areas where his expertise aligns with Trump’s agenda, including tech policy, business, and economic development. “When I talk about these things, it’s around, as I said, tech policy, business, economics, and then, you know, the health of the country, the success of the country,” he noted.

    Andreessen shared his observations of Trump’s warm personal approach, highlighting qualities that he believes are often overlooked by his Democrat critics.

    “Everybody says this who meets with him, but he’s an incredible host,” Andreessen remarked. “For however people think, whatever, he’s an incredible host. He runs his own private worlds.”

    What stood out most to Andreessen was Trump’s ability to connect with people from all walks of life.

    “He treats everybody the same and talks to everybody,” Andreessen said. “He will happily talk to distinguished visitors about who the Vice President should be, and then he’ll ask the caddy.”

    Reflecting on his involvement in the transition process, Andreessen noted the exceptional caliber of candidates he encountered. “The caliber of a lot of the people that I’ve met has been very high,” he said, adding that recent appointments, particularly at the next level down in staff positions, have included “very impressive people.”

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

    Addressing concerns about whether qualified individuals might hesitate to join a Trump administration due to the controversies surrounding his previous term, Andreessen said he has observed the opposite trend: “I think the flow of qualified people from outside the system now is actually much stronger.”

    Yet another mainstream media narrative busted.

    Addressing also reiterated that his support for Trump stemmed from a series of “horrifying” meeting in which Biden officials expressed plans to control AI.

    “They said, look, AI is a technology basically that the government is going to completely control,” Andreessen revealed. The officials explicitly discouraged the idea of entrepreneurial ventures in AI, stating, “Don’t start, don’t do AI startups… it’s not something that we’re going to allow to happen.”

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

    According to the billionaire, the officials conveyed that AI innovation would be concentrated among “two or three big companies… working closely with the government,” with startups effectively barred from the space. “We’re going to basically wrap them in a government cocoon, protect them from competition, control them, and dictate what they do,” Andreessen paraphrased, highlighting the stark divergence from the open-market approach that has historically driven tech innovation.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 19:40

  • Operators Of LAX Restaurants Face A $30 Hourly Wage
    Operators Of LAX Restaurants Face A $30 Hourly Wage

    By Peter Romeo of Restaurant Business,

    The City Council of Los Angeles is scheduled to consider a proposal on Dec. 11 to raise the minimum wage for workers employed in the restaurants at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) to $30 an hour.

    The initiative slated for consideration calls for increasing the minimum wage to $25 an hour no later than six months after traffic in the airport resumes the levels of 2019, or before air travel dropped precipitously because of the pandemic. That threshold is expected to be reached possibly this year, meaning the increase would come in 2025.

    The minimum would then rise by $1 every July until the pay floor reaches $30 an hour.

    The minimum permissible wage for the workers is currently $19.25.

    Hotel employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement hammered out with the city during the first quarter of 2024 would also be eligible for the raises. The trigger for those workers would be hitting the occupancy rate enjoyed by city hotels in the pre-pandemic days of 2019.

    Workers in several dozen hotels would be affected.

    The Airport Restaurant & Retail Association, a trade group for airport concessionaires, called the proposal “a bridge too far.” It noted that the proposed increases would amount to a 56% wage hike over a four-year period for the eligible employees.

    According to the association, the wages of airport-restaurant employees have been soaring. The lift is coming in part because of the additional challenges someone working in an airport restaurant is forced to address. For instance, their trip to work can easily take 45 minutes because they have to traverse the airport and contend with security screenings. Someone working in a streetside facility may need only 10 minutes to get to the job, the group stressed.

    In addition, nearly 70% of airport concession workers are covered by collective bargaining agreements.

    The proposal to be considered by the City Council is the result of what labor authorities called segmental bargaining, or negotiating a labor contract across a group of employees doing similar work across a multitude of employers.

    Segmental bargaining came to the restaurant industry in April with the creation of the Fast Food Council, a nine-person panel empowered by the state to set wages for fast-food employees who work for a restaurant with at least 59 sister branches nationwide. The council consists of four workers’ representatives and four employers, with a neutral government worker wielding a ninth and potentially tie-breaking vote.

    Simultaneous with the creation of the council, the minimum wage for covered fast-food workers rose to $20 an hour on April 1, from a previous floor of $16.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 19:15

  • "Polar Vortex" Is Upon Us: Arctic Outbreaks To Round Out December
    “Polar Vortex” Is Upon Us: Arctic Outbreaks To Round Out December

    It’s almost that time of year when a polar vortex split occurs, displacing cold Arctic air from the Earth’s North Pole into Canada and spilling into the Lower 48. 

    Data from Bloomberg shows that mentions of “polar vortex” in corporate media typically begin to surge in late December or the first half of January, signaling that the countdown has begun. 

    On Wednesday, private weather forecaster BAMWX pushed out new weather models on X, showing confidence is growing for a polar vortex split to occur for the Lower 48. 

    “The stage is set for Arctic outbreaks to round out December and kick start the new year!” BAMWX wrote on X. 

    BAMWX said, “More favorable trends for stronger cold fronts in week 2. I don’t see any signs of a consistent torch in the eastern US. Ensembles cannot resolve the +TNH & +PNA pattern right now making them consistently too warm late week 2.” 

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

    Michael Clark, chief meteorologist for BAMWX, was confident about the incoming polar vortex.

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

    Clark also sees a more active precipitation pattern for the eastern half of the US. 

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

    “The persistence in the PNA and the TPV (500mb tropospheric polar vortex location is the reason we believe the storms can easily pull down the Arctic air behind them,” BAMWX said. 

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

    The eastern half of the US appears to be setting up for a cold Christmas. 

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

    And possibly a white one…

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

    “Both GFS and ECMWF AI model data hinting at a bigger storm threat ~22nd of Dec,” BAMWX wrote in a forecast.

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

    Here’s more from Clark in a video titled “Stage set for ARCTIC OUTBREAKS to start 2025” … 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 18:50

  • Trump Says RFK Jr. Will Study Possible Link Between Childhood Vaccines And Autism As HHS Secretary
    Trump Says RFK Jr. Will Study Possible Link Between Childhood Vaccines And Autism As HHS Secretary

    Authored by Jeff Louderbeck via The Epoch Times,

    President-elect Donald Trump said on Dec. 8 that he will give Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the freedom to investigate the potential link between vaccines and autism if the latter gains Senate confirmation to become Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    Kennedy has said for years that autism is likely tied to childhood vaccines.

    He was nominated to serve as HHS secretary by Trump last month and has promised sweeping changes to agencies under the HHS, like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

    The NIH supports and funds research into autism, as well as potential new vaccines.

    Kennedy told The Epoch Times in September that he would revamp the NIH to focus on the causes of autism, autoimmune diseases, and neurodevelopment diseases instead of developing drugs and serving as an incubator for pharmaceutical products.

    In the Dec. 8 interview with Meet The Press, Trump noted that autism cases have increased in recent decades. When asked if Kennedy would explore the issue, Trump said he is “open to anything.”

    “When you look at some of the problems, when you look at what’s going on with disease and sickness in our country, something’s wrong,” Trump said.

    “I think somebody has to find out. If you go back 25 years ago, you had very little autism. Now you have it.”

    CDC information shows that around one in 36 American children today has an autism diagnosis, compared to one in 150 in the year 2000.

    Fighting chronic disease, improving children’s health, and addressing corporate influence on government agencies were vital parts of Kennedy’s campaign platform when he ran for president as a Democrat and then as an independent.

    Kennedy suspended his presidential campaign and backed Trump in August. He told The Epoch Times that it was a “heart-wrenching decision” and a necessary step toward achieving his mission of saving Americans from the chronic disease epidemic.

    Under the “Make America Healthy Again” campaign, Kennedy intends to curtail what he calls the chronic disease epidemic by addressing the so-called “corporate capture” of federal health agencies and removing toxic chemicals from the nation’s food supply, among other objectives.

    Leading to announcing his presidential bid in April 2023, Kennedy was chairman of Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit organization devoted to removing toxic exposures that harm children and promoting vaccine safety.

    Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks to reporters at the media filing center and spin room at the Pennsylvania Convention Center ahead of the presidential debate between Republican nominee former President Donald J. Trump and Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris in Philadelphia on Sept. 10, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

    He co-founded the World Mercury Project in 2016 with the intent to remove neurotoxic mercury in fish, medical products, dental amalgams, and vaccines; and make sound science the driver of public policy, according to the Children’s Health Defense website.

    The World Mercury Project became Children’s Health Defense in 2018. The organization’s four pillars include advocacy, education, litigation, and science.

    On Dec. 4, Kennedy submitted his letter of resignation from CHD.

    “One of my most important priorities is to have the agencies I oversee provide better access to minority scientific and public policy views,” he wrote.

    “I promise you and the members of CHD to bring a new openness and inclusion to the health and science part of the government, both in receiving input from the public and all stakeholders, and disseminating information and the data collected by these agencies.”

    Several Republicans have praised Trump’s move to nominate Kennedy as HHS secretary.

    Some critics opposed the nomination because they considered Kennedy to be anti-vaccine or anti-science—characterizations that Kennedy has said are not true.

    Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) called Kennedy a conspiracy theorist and said that “he will destroy our public health infrastructure and our vaccine distribution systems.”

    Peter G. Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said in a statement that the center “opposes this nomination“ and that ”nominating an anti-vaxxer like Kennedy to HHS is like putting a Flat Earther at the head of NASA.”

    Kennedy has consistently said that he isn’t against vaccines and that he advocates vaccine safety and informed consent.

    For parents and vaccine safety advocates like MaryJo Perry and Scott Shoemaker, extensively studying potential links between childhood vaccines and autism is long overdue.

    “I don’t understand the hysteria over his plan to thoroughly study the issue and finally settle it,” said Perry, who is president of Mississippi Parents for Vaccine Rights. “Why would anyone be afraid of knowing the truth?”

    Shoemaker’s son was diagnosed with autism at the age of 15 months, and he said he reversed the condition by removing toxic metal poisoning.

    “Shouldn’t we as parents want to know whether or not what we are allowing to go into our children’s bodies is safe?” said Shoemaker, who is president of Health Freedom Ohio.

    A video documenting the changes that he posted in 2019 was removed by Facebook, he told The Epoch Times.

    “My son had an MMR shot. He was in bed for two weeks when he got home. At the time, I wasn’t concerned because the doctor said before the shot that some kids have problems with it and they might feel sick,” Shoemaker said.

    “He was different after the shot. He didn’t talk or look us in the eye. It was hard to get his attention. I experienced what most parents of vaccine-injured children experience from medical professionals. We are gaslit and told they don’t know what caused the autism, but it’s not the vaccines that caused the problem.”

    Signed by President Ronald Reagan, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 eliminated potential liability of vaccine manufacturers because of vaccine injury claims. Perry and Shoemaker would like to see pharmaceutical companies held liable if their products injure recipients. They also hope that, under Kennedy, the CDC’s vaccine schedule is addressed.

    According to Children’s Health Defense, there has not been a double-blind placebo-controlled safety study on infant vaccines.

    “That needs to happen,” Perry told The Epoch Times. “There is no liability and no accountability for pharmaceutical companies. That needs to change.”

    Perry said that she believes no vaccine should be mandated.

    “If it’s good and safe, parents will use it. You won’t have to coerce parents if it’s good and safe,” she said.

    Shoemaker agrees.

    “The bottom line is we want the truth. We want safe products for our kids. We don’t want big pharma to just say vaccines are safe and effective and they can’t show non-partisan studies,” he said.

    “We’re told by government agencies that the science is settled, but that is contrary to the purpose of science—to test, retest, study, and evolve.”

    Shoemaker said Kennedy is the right person to bring the changes parents like him would like to see.

    “He is not tied to big pharma. He just wants the truth and he is someone who is not afraid to do what is needed to get to the truth,” Shoemaker said.

    Kennedy will face confirmation hearings with the Senate Finance Committee, which is scheduled to be led by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). The full Senate will vote on his nomination if he is approved by that panel.

    Kennedy said he believes little will change until the influence of giant or private corporations on the FDA, the CDC, and the Department of Agriculture is addressed.

    During an interview with The Epoch Times last year, he explained his stance.

    “I’ve never been anti-vaccine. People should have choice, and that choice should be informed by the best information possible,“ he said. ”I’m going to ensure that there are science-based safety studies available and people can make their own assessments about whether a vaccine is good for them.”

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 18:25

  • World's Largest Asset Manager Suggests Up To 2% Is "Reasonable" Bitcoin Portfolio Allocation
    World’s Largest Asset Manager Suggests Up To 2% Is “Reasonable” Bitcoin Portfolio Allocation

    The world’s largest asset manager, BlackRock, said a portfolio allocation of up to 2% is “reasonable” for investors who wish to hold Bitcoin, in their latest Investment Perspectives report.

    They begin the report by noting that “bitcoin cannot be compared to traditional assets,” but from a portfolio construction perspective, Samara Cohen (CIO of ETFs) and her team suggest that the so-called “Magnificent 7” group of mega-cap tech stocks is a useful starting point.

    “Those stocks represent single portfolio holdings that account for a comparatively large share of portfolio risk as with bitcoin.

    In a traditional portfolio with a mix of 60% stocks and 40% bonds, those seven stocks each account for, on average, about the same share of overall portfolio risk as a 1-2% allocation to bitcoin.

    We think that’s a reasonable range for a bitcoin exposure.”

    As with gold, bitcoin can be driven by sentiment, narratives and momentum – both up and down.

    Why not more, they ask (and answer):

    “Going beyond that would sharply increase bitcoin’s share of the overall portfolio risk.”

    With approximately $11.5 trillion in assets under management (and manager of the largest spot BTC ETF, iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), which holds net assets of nearly $54 billion), they are worth listening to.

    According to BlackRock, investors “need to think about Bitcoin’s expected returns in a different way: it has no underlying cash flows for estimating future returns. What matters: the extent of adoption.”

    “Bitcoin may also provide a more diversified source of return,” BlackRock said, adding:

    “We see no intrinsic reason why Bitcoin should be correlated with major risk assets over the long term given its value is driven by such distinct drivers.”

    Longer term, BTC “could potentially also become less risky – but at that point it might no longer have a structural catalyst for further sizable price increases,” the report said.

    Instead, “investors may prefer to use it tactically to hedge against specific risks, similar to gold.”

    Launched in January, spot BTC ETFs emerged as 2024’s most popular investment vehicles, breaking $100 billion in net assets in November. 

    As CoinTelegraph reports, these surging inflows from institutional investors could cause “demand shocks” in 2025, driving up BTC’s spot price, according to a Dec. 12 report by Sygnum Bank.

    “Our analysis shows how even relatively modest allocations from this segment can fundamentally alter the crypto asset ecosystem,” Sygnum said.

    The report, dubbed ‘Sizing Bitcoin in portfolios’, was released by BlackRock Investment Institute on Dec. 12.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 18:00

  • 'USA' Chants Roar As Trump Rings NYSE Bell After Being Named TIME 'Person Of The Year'
    ‘USA’ Chants Roar As Trump Rings NYSE Bell After Being Named TIME ‘Person Of The Year’

    Donald Trump has been crowned TIME magazine’s Person of the Year after reclaiming the presidency, marking him as only the second U.S. president in history to serve non-consecutive terms. The announcement came on Thursday, placing Trump at the pinnacle of a contentious list of global influencers.

    “Trump’s political rebirth is unparalleled in American history,” TIME wrote in an announcement, after speaking with the President-elect ahead of the announcement.

    Trump dubbed his campaign “72 Days of Fury” after a term that Trump himself coined. This win sets Trump apart as a political figure of singular historical significance, having first held the title in 2016 when he initially seized the presidency from Hillary Clinton.

    Trump’s political rebirth is unparalleled in American history. His first term ended in disgrace, with his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results culminating in the attack on the U.S. Capitol. He was shunned by most party officials when he announced his candidacy in late 2022 amid multiple criminal investigations. Little more than a year later, Trump cleared the Republican field, clinching one of the fastest contested presidential primaries in history. -TIME

    The competition for this year’s title was fierce, with Trump edging out other high-profile names such as Vice President Kamala Harris, his tech mogul supporter Elon Musk, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Catherine, Princess of Wales. Notably, Musk was the magazine’s pick back in 2021.

    Reflecting on his tumultuous path to victory, Trump’s year included overcoming significant challenges: a stark clearing of the GOP field, a conviction in a New York courtroom, and surviving not one, but two assassination attempts.

    The campaign saw surprising alliances, including consolidations of support from unexpected quarters such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Elon Musk, alongside a dramatic shift in the Democratic nomination.

    According to TIME, Trump’s win gave him the “political capital to address the sources of American discontent at home and abroad” Trump himself suggested a bold agenda, including plans to pardon Jan. 6 political prisoners.

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

    “It’s going to start in the first hour … maybe the first nine minutes,” Trump told the outlet.

    The Person of the Year title, a tradition since 1927, is not necessarily a mark of honor but rather a recognition of influence. TIME has historically selected presidents during their election victories, with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris jointly receiving the nod in 2020, and other repeat honorees including Barack Obama and George W. Bush.

    Trump’s victory lap included ringing the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange in Manhattan, where chants of “USA’ broke out…

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

    Trump is the first president to ring the bell since Ronald Reagan.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 17:44

  • The Evaporation Of The Obama Mystique
    The Evaporation Of The Obama Mystique

    Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

    Barack Obama had long been rumored as the catalyst for the 2020 Biden nomination—and thereafter played the whispering puppeteer behind the subsequent lost Biden administration years.

    As such he and his coterie proved the virtual architects of the Biden administration, one of the most unpopular and failed presidencies in American history.

    Recall earlier that after a flailing candidate Joe Biden lost the first three 2020 primaries and caucuses, his inert campaign was headed nowhere.

    Barack Obama and fellow Democratic insiders abruptly engineered the withdrawal of his rival 2020 presidential candidates: hard left but likely sure-loser candidates, including Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg.

    The Obamas ignored or withheld from the public their own firsthand knowledge that Biden was suffering from signs of dementia.

    Instead, they found Biden’s cognitive decline and his former concocted reputation as workingman’s Joe useful as a veneer for a veritable Obama third-term, “phone it in” administration. Or as wistful Obama once conditioned his dream of a third term—”If I could make an arrangement where I had a stand-in, a front man or front woman, and they had an earpiece in.”

    The Obamaites then got their wish for four years of enacted hard-left directives that they could only have dreamed of while in actual power.

    But their radical menu since 2021 had divided and nearly wrecked the nation—hyperinflation, 12 million illegal aliens, a ruined border, spiraling crime, a shattered foreign policy of appeasement, the popular backlash against DEI/Woke/trans chauvinism, partisan lawfare, and weaponization of the government.

    And the ruling radicalism beneath the Biden facade eventually cost the Democrats nearly everything—the presidency, the House, and the Senate.

    An inert Biden is departing office with a 36 percent favorability rating in a recent Emerson poll. His Democratic nominee replacement, losing presidential candidate Vice President Harris, also has virtually vacated her office with 40 days left of her tenure.

    Failed candidate Harris has been roundly faulted by staffers and donors for blowing through some $2 billion in assorted 2024 campaign money.

    She ended up doing worse against Trump than Biden himself had in 2020.

    Many Democrats believe that they might have done just as well had Biden stayed on the ticket even in his vastly diminished state.

    The Obamas were further blasted for nullifying the wishes of 14 million primary voters by forcing Biden off the ticket—ironically in the same backroom, anti-democratic manner they had cleared the way for him in 2020.

    Obama emerged from his comfortable retirement to hit the 2024 campaign trail, schooling the country that President-emeritus Donald Trump was a dictator, a fascist, a tyrant, and, of course, a “racist.”

    The more Trump polled even with, or ahead of, Kamala Harris, the more an exasperated and ignored Obama talked down to supposedly low-information voters.

    But by the time Harris lost the election, voters had tuned out a nagging and patronizing Obama—and his stale, now-dated hope-and-changey boilerplate speeches.

    What Obama did not mention, but what the voters knew, was that the border was more secure under Trump than during either the Obama or Biden tenure.

    Vladimir Putin invaded countries during the Obama and Biden administrations but stayed put on Trump’s watch.

    Barack Obama’s bizarre vision of a new Middle East had sought to empower Iran as a supposed counterweight against moderate Arab nations and our ally Israel.

    Years ago, Obama invited the Russians into Syria, empowered dictatorial Syria, berated Israel nonstop, and all but ignored the terrorist violence of Iran’s surrogate terrorists of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.

    But after October 7, Israel retaliated to the mass slaughter of Jewish civilians with all-out war against Hamas and Hezbollah—rendering these once feared terrorists nearly impotent.

    In an exchange of air attacks with Iran, Israel showed the world that Iran was as militarily weak as its chanting and threats were tiresome and shrill.

    Iran is now tottering on the brink, as its terrorist appendages—including most recently the Assad dynasty—are melting away.

    Israel and the moderate Arab regimes are in ascendance, as the entire crazy Obama-envisioned Middle East agenda melts away.

    The 2024 anemic Democratic campaign and the Trump electoral college and popular vote victories—combined with record defections of Hispanic and African-American voters from the Democratic Party to Trump—proved a resounding rejection of the Obama legacy and his surrogates’ left-wing visions.

    Yet after the people spoke in the election, the more Obama whined that democracy itself had failed him. Voters, he remonstrated, who disagreed with him were written off as racist and sexist.

    Obama again harped that constituents did not know what was good for them.

    And then, the disappointed former community organizer suddenly disappeared—pondering to which of his own four mansions his private jet would fly him home to commiserate.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 17:40

  • Conspiracy Fact: IG Report Confirms FBI Had Dozens Of Informants In Jan 6 Crowd
    Conspiracy Fact: IG Report Confirms FBI Had Dozens Of Informants In Jan 6 Crowd

    Just in time for the Trump pardons, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz revealed on Thursday that there were 26 ‘confidential human sources’ (CHSs) in Washington DC on Jan. 6, 2021.

    While the presence of FBI informants on J6 was known, the exact number had never been confirmed.

    And because they were CHS’s and not badge-carrying Agent Smiths, Politico decided to run with this piece of absolute propaganda.

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

    Of note, CHS’s have contributed to the prosecution of members of the Proud Boys and other people who were present on J6. According to Horowitz’s report, all but three of the informants were in there “in connection with” the protest and other events that took place that day.

    Four of the informants entered the Capitol, while 13 other entered restricted Capitol grounds despite not being authorized to do so.

    As the Epoch Times notes further,

    Of the 26 sources who went to Washington in connection with the protest and other events, two were tasked to report on subjects whom the FBI had learned were traveling to the nation’s capital for the events. A third informant had been tasked with reporting on people traveling to Washington for the events after notifying a handling agent about planned travel to Washington.

    The other 23 informants had not been tasked by the FBI with traveling to Washington. Thirteen of this subset informed their handling agent in advance of the trips, while the other 10 did not. None of the 23 were found to have engaged in illegal activity.

    Some lawmakers noted that none of the informants who entered the Capitol or the restricted grounds have been prosecuted.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, which has charged more than 1,500 people with crimes related to the breach, told the inspector general that the office “generally has not charged those individuals whose only crime on January 6, 2021 was to enter the restricted grounds surrounding the Capitol … and we have treated the CHSs consistent with this approach.”

    The inspector general’s investigation was launched in 2021, but paused in 2022 to avoid conflict with ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions. The probe resumed in 2023. By then, the inspector general’s office knew that multiple reports had been released on Jan. 6, and endeavored to focus on an area that it felt “has not yet been thoroughly reviewed by other entities.”

    Other Findings

    Horowitz said that the review found the FBI took significant and appropriate steps leading up to Jan. 6 to prepare for its role that day, which was a supporting capacity.

    The preparation included trying to identify known domestic terror subjects who planned to travel to Washington for the certification of electoral votes.

    After the Capitol was breached, the FBI was able to deploy agents to help clear the building and help the U.S. Capitol Police secure the perimeter.

    “We found that the FBI effectively carried out its tactical support function on January 6,” the report stated.

    The inspector general’s office also concluded that the FBI should have canvassed field offices for intelligence from the confidential informants before Jan. 6. Such an action would have helped both the FBI and other agencies prepare for the day, the inspector general said. The report quoted Paul Abbate, the FBI’s deputy director at the time, as saying the lack of a canvass was a “basic step that was missed.”

    In a letter dated Dec. 11, the FBI told the inspector general’s office that it disagrees with “certain of the factual assertions in the report regarding the manner of specific steps, and the scope of the canvass undertaken by the FBI in advance of January 6.”

    The agency agreed with the recommendation that the FBI look into the processes and procedures it uses to prepare for events that could involve domestic security issues.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 17:20

  • Russia Dodged A Bullet By Wisely Choosing Not To Ally With The Now-Defeated Resistance Axis
    Russia Dodged A Bullet By Wisely Choosing Not To Ally With The Now-Defeated Resistance Axis

    Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

    Putin made the right choice, which was always driven by his rational calculation of what was in Russia’s objective interests as a state, not due to “Zionist influence” like some in the Alt-Media Community now ridiculously claim to defame him after being mad that he didn’t lift a finger to save the Resistance.

    The Iranian-led Resistance Axis has been defeated by Israel. Hamas’ terrorist attack on 7 October 2023 prompted Israel’s collective punishment of the Palestinians in Gaza, which set into motion a series of conflicts that expanded to Lebanon and Syria. Israel has also bombed Yemen and Iran. Hamas’ and Hezbollah’s leaderships were destroyed, leading to a ceasefire in Lebanon, while the Assad government was just overthrown by a Turkish-backed terrorist blitz that severed Iran’s military logistics to Hezbollah.

    These outcomes were already surprising enough for those who believed the late Nasrallah’s claim that “Israel is weaker than a spider web”, but many were shocked that they occurred without Russia lifting a finger to save the Resistance, with whom they thought that it had allied against Israel long ago. That second-mentioned false notion will go down in infamy as one of the most successful psy-ops ever conducted against the Alt-Media Community (AMC), and ironically enough, by its own top influencers.

    It was explained in early October “Why False Perceptions About Russian Policy Towards Israel Continue To Proliferate”, which readers should review for more detail, but which can be summarized as top AMC influencers telling their audience what they thought they wanted to hear for self-interested reasons. These include generating clout, pushing their ideology, and/or soliciting donations from well-intentioned but naïve members of their audience depending on the personality involved.

    The preceding analysis also lists five related ones about Russian policy towards Israel since the start of the West Asian Wars, including this one “Clarifying Lavrov’s Comparison Of The Latest Israeli-Hamas War To Russia’s Special Operation”, which itself links to several dozen others. All of them also reference this May 2018 report about “President Putin On Israel: Quotes From The Kremlin Website (2000-2018)”. All of these materials rely on official and authoritative Russian sources to arrive at their conclusions.

    They prove that Putin is a proud lifelong philo-Semite who never shared the Resistance’s unifying anti-Zionist ideology, instead always expressing very deep respect for Jews and the State of Israel. Accordingly, as the final decisionmaker on Russian foreign policy, he tasked his diplomats with balancing between Israel and the Resistance. To that end, Russia never took either’s side and always remained neutral in their disputes, including the West Asian Wars.

    The most that he ever personally did was condemn Israel’s collective punishment of the Palestinians, but always in the same breath as condemning Hamas’ infamous terrorist attack on 7 October 2023. As for Russia, the most that it ever did was repeat the same rhetoric and occasionally condemn Israel’s strikes against the IRGC and Hezbollah in Syria, which Russia never interfered with. Not once did it try to deter or intercept them, retaliate afterwards, or give Syria the capabilities and authorization to do so either.

    This was due to the deconfliction mechanism that Putin and Bibi agreed to in late September 2015 shortly before the Syrian operation. It was never confirmed for obvious diplomatic reasons, but these actions (or rather lack thereof) suggested that Putin believed that Iran’s anti-Israeli activities Syria posed a legitimate threat to Israel. For that reason, Russia always stood aside whenever Israel bombed Iran there, but Russia still sometimes complained due to Israel’s attacks formally violating international law.

    It’s an objectively existing and easily verifiable fact that Russia’s opposition to Israel’s regional activities, be they in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, or Iran, always remained strictly confined to the political realm of official statements. Not once did Russia ever threaten to unilaterally sanction Israel, let alone even remotely hint at military action against it as punishment. Russia won’t even symbolically designate Israel as an “unfriendly state”, though that’s because it doesn’t abide by US sanctions and won’t arm Ukraine.

    Therein lies another fact that most in the AMC were either unaware of or in denial about and it’s that Israel isn’t the US’ puppet otherwise it would have already done those two things long ago. It’s beyond the scope of the present piece to explain this, as well as why the Biden Administration has tried to destabilize and overthrow Bibi, but this analysis here dives into the details and cites related articles. The point is that Russian-Israeli ties remain cordial and these two are far from the foes that some thought.

    It therefore never made sense to imagine that Putin, who considers himself to be the consummate pragmatist, would burn the bridge that he personally invested nearly a quarter-century of his time building with Bibi between their two nations. After all, Putin boasted in 2019 that “Russians and Israelis have ties of family and friendship. This is a true common family; I can say this without exaggeration. Almost 2 million Russian speakers live in Israel. We consider Israel a Russian-speaking country.”

    He was speaking before the Keren Heyesod Foundation, one of the world’s oldest Zionist lobbying organizations, during its annual conference in Moscow that year. Whenever members of the AMC were confronted with these “politically inconvenient” facts from official and authoritative sources such as the Kremlin’s own website, they spun a “5D chess master plan” conspiracy theory alleging that he was just “psyching out the Zionists”. Top influencers also aggressively “canceled” anyone who brought this up.

    The end result was that these false perceptions of Russian-Israeli relations as well as Putin’s own views towards this subject continued to proliferate unchallenged through the AMC, thus leading to the impression that they were secretly allied with Iran due to their allegedly shared anti-Zionist ideals. This notion became a matter of dogma for many in the AMC and correspondingly turned into an axiom of International Relations for them. Anyone who claimed otherwise was smeared as a “Zionist”.

    It’s now known after Russia didn’t lift a finger to save the Resistance that they were never actually allies. Some of those that still can’t accept that they’ve been lied to by trusted AMC influencers who duped them for self-interested reasons (clout, ideology, and/or soliciting donations) now speculate that Russia “betrayed” the Resistance and “sold out to the Zionists” even though Russia was never on either’s side. If they don’t soon shake off their cognitive dissonance, they’ll detach themselves further from reality.

    In retrospect, Russia dodged a bullet by wisely choosing not to ally with the now-defeated Resistance Axis since it would have needlessly ruined its relations with Israel, the undisputable victor of the West Asian Wars.

    Putin made the right choice, which was always driven by his rational calculation of what was in Russia’s objective interests as a state, not due to “Zionist influence” like some in the AMC now ridiculously claim to defame him after being mad that he didn’t lift a finger to save the Resistance.

    The takeaways from this are several: 1) Putin and his representatives don’t play “5D chess”, they always say what they truly mean; 2) Russia isn’t anti-Israel nor anti-Zionist, but it also isn’t anti-Iran nor anti-Resistance either; 3) the AMC is full of charlatans who, for self-interested reasons, tell their audience whatever they think they want to hear; 4) their audience should thus hold them to account for lying about Russian-Israeli and Russian-Resistance relations; 5) and the AMC requires urgent reform.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 17:00

  • South Korean Defense Chief Sent Drones To Pyongyang To Spark Retaliation, Justify Martial Law: Lawmakers
    South Korean Defense Chief Sent Drones To Pyongyang To Spark Retaliation, Justify Martial Law: Lawmakers

    Former South Korean former defense chief Kim Yong-hyun ordered a swarm of drones to North Korea’s capital with hopes of provoking an attack that could be used to justify a declaration of martial law by President Yoon Suk Yeol, South Korean legislators have alleged. Meanwhile, ahead of an expected weekend impeachment vote, Yoon used an address to the nation to promise that he would fight “until the very last minute” against being removed from power.  

    Kim was arrested on Tuesday for his alleged role in aiding Yoon’s attempt to impose military rule, suspend civil liberties and remove checks and balances — and attempted suicide shortly after midnight on Wednesday. Previous reports pointed to Kim’s deployment of troops to prevent lawmakers from convening after Yoon’s shocking Dec. 3 declaration of martial law. If true, the sensational new allegation from Park Beom-kye of the opposition Democratic Party suggests an entirely different layer of dangerous complicity.     

    Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun has been accused of sending drones to North Korea’s capital to provoke a response that could be used to justify a martial law declaration

    “The Defense Counterintelligence Command, where former commander Yeo In-hyung – a junior to Kim at the same high school – was posted, appears to have planned [the drone deployment],” said Park in remarks in the parliament on Monday, according to The Telegraph. Citing a “credible military source,” he later told reporters that the “drone operation appears to have been part of a larger plan, potentially tied to preparations for the martial law decree.”

    In October, the North Korean government said it had detected multiple South Korean drones that were sent to Pyongyang to shower the capital city with propaganda leaflets. North Korea published a photo of what appears to be a drone that had crashed into a group of trees. At that time and again this week, the South Korean government declined to confirm or deny the accusation. 

    This October photo of a crashed drone was released by the North Korean government, which said it was sent from South Korea 

    Park’s suggestion that Kim and Yoon may have conspired to provoke a North Korean military response — with an accompanying risk of the loss of South Korean lives — adds an explosive new dimension to the country’s ongoing political crisis that followed the declaration of martial law.  

    In April, Yoon’s People Power Party (PPP) was routed in elections that saw the Democratic Party take over the country’s assembly by a significant margin. In the ensuing months, mounting tensions took various forms, including an impasse over the 2025 budget and Democrats’ attempt to impeach top prosecutors.  On Dec. 3, Yoon stunned South Korea and the international community with a late-night declaration of martial law. In his announcement, Yoon railed against “shameless pro-North-Korean anti-state forces who are plundering the freedom and happiness of our citizens…I will eliminate anti-state forces as quickly as possible and normalize the country.”

    Soldiers and police immediately surrounded the National Assembly, but 190 of the 300 members of parliament managed to unanimously vote to annul the martial law declaration. Yoon retracted it and apologized, but the repercussions have continued to unfold since then. Defense chief Kim resigned upon being charged, was taken into custody on Tuesday and attempted to kill himself hours later. The country’s top two law enforcement officers have also been arrested, and police have made multiple attempts to search Yoon’s office.  

    Protesters at South Korea’s National Assembly demand Yoon’s resignation (Han Myung-Gu/EPA via Al-Jazeera)

    An impeachment vote last weekend failed in the face of a boycott by the ruling People Power Party (PPP), but the Democratic Party has announced it will move for impeachment again on Saturday, and some PPP members are now voicing their support. 

    On Thursday, Yoon returned to the kind of fiery rhetoric he used in his martial law announcement, calling the Democratic Party “a monster” composed of  “anti-state forces.”

    “I will fight to the end to prevent the forces and criminal groups that have been responsible for paralyzing the country’s government and disrupting the nation’s constitutional order from threatening the future of the Republic of Korea…The opposition is now doing a sword dance of chaos, claiming that the declaration of martial law constitutes to an act of rebellion. But was it really?”

    Yoon portrayed his martial law move as a legitimate use of government authority which should be exempt from the investigations that have been directed at it. He also claimed soldiers and police were sent to the parliament to keep order, not to thwart legislators.  

    According to Associated Press, opposition parties control 192 of the National Assembly’s 300 seats. With impeachment requiring a two-thirds majority, that means pro-impeachment forces will need to win over eight members of Yoon’s PPP. Significantly, PPP chairman Han Dong-hun has called for members to send Yoon packing. Yoon’s fiery Thursday speech has helped stir discord in his party. When Han told a party meeeting that Yoon’s remarks “a confession of rebellion,” he received angry jeers from Yoon backers, who told him to be quiet.   

    Polymarket speculators are convinced Yoon will leave office within the next few months. The “yes” contract on a departure before April 1 is going for 80Âą. Bettors are less convinced that he’ll be out by year-end, with the “yes” on that version priced at only 12Âą.  

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 16:40

  • Chicago Mayor Proposes 11 Tax- And Fee-Hikes As Part Of 2025 Budget
    Chicago Mayor Proposes 11 Tax- And Fee-Hikes As Part Of 2025 Budget

    By Dylan Sharkey of Illinois Policy

    Chicago is on the verge of adding $233.9 million in new tax hikes as part of the city’s $17.3 billion budget for 2025, if aldermen pass Mayor Brandon Johnson’s proposals.

    Johnson’s tax increases include hikes in property taxes, personal property leases, the city shopping bag tax and the tax on streaming services. Hikes are hitting vehicles with more speed cameras, parking taxes and rideshare fees.

    These have already passed the City Council Finance Committee, meaning it could pass the full council by the end of the week. The bulk of the tax hikes will come from:

    • $68.5 million: Property tax hike, down from Johnson’s original $300 million ask which was met with a unanimous “no” vote by the city council.
    • $128.1 million: Hiking personal property lease tax, including on cloud computing, to 11% from 9%.
    • $12.9 million: Increasing the amusement tax on streaming and tickets to live events to 10.25% from 9%.
    • $11.4 million: Increase number of speed cameras in the city.
    • $5.1 million: Raising paper and plastic, single-use shopping bag tax by 3 cents to 10 cents total.
    • $7.9 million: Other fees and taxes, including on parking and rideshares.

    Find your city council member and tell them Chicago taxes are already too high. The new budget is due by the end of the year, so they could vote on the hikes in a matter of days.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 16:20

  • Al Sharpton Pocketed $1M In Bonuses From Nonprofit Tied To Kamala Scandal
    Al Sharpton Pocketed $1M In Bonuses From Nonprofit Tied To Kamala Scandal

    Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

    MSNBC host Rev. Al Sharpton is yet again facing new criticism amid a report that revealed he awarded himself nearly $1 million in bonuses through his tax-exempt nonprofit, the National Action Network (NAN). 

    According to Fox News, Sharpton reported several compensation bonuses within his nonprofit that at times exceeded his base salary as evident in the non-profit’s tax filings. 

    In 2016, he paid himself $437,355 for “bonus & incentive compensation,” far more than his annual salary of $250,000. This practice seemingly began in 2014 when he granted himself $64,000. 

    In 2018, Sharpton received a bonus of $159,596, in addition to his $324,000 salary for that year. He also listed $563,352 in “other reportable compensation” that same year. 

    In 2021, he awarded himself a $278,503 bonus on top of his $348,174 salary, which amounted to 80 percent of his base pay. Over just seven years, Sharpton pocketed $940,053 in so-called compensation and bonuses. 

    It is not immediately clear whether such bonus practices are typical in other nonprofits. It is also unclear how often the IRS scrutinizes these generous bonuses. 

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

    Sharpton did not immediately respond to requests for comments from Fox News. However, this is not the first time Sharpton’s financial affairs have come under scrutiny.

    In November, Sharpton came under fire after his non-profit accepted a $500,000 donation from Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign ahead of a soft interview he conducted with her. 

    These donations, which came in the form of two $250,000 donations, were made in September and October and only became public after Harris lost the 2024 election to President-elect Donald Trump. 

    The Washington Free Beacon reported that the Harris donation to Sharpton’s non-profits blindsided MSNBC. “MSNBC was unaware of the donations made to the National Action Network,” a spokesperson told the Free Beacon. 

    An unnamed current MSNBC employee rebuked Sharpton’s acceptance of the donations, calling the affairs “another level of nonsense” and straight up “weird.” 

    “Harris could have given Al Sharpton an interview, and it would have gone the same way. But what are you paying for? 
 There’s no way that this can’t seem weird,” the employee added. “Everybody knows who Al Sharpton is 
 but this feels like a bridge too far. A big bridge too far 
 This is not landing well. This has a bit of a dirty feel to it 
 These things happen and they don’t bounce around MSNBC all that much. Like people just don’t care.” 

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

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 15:45

  • Canadian Dollar Tumbles After Turdeau (sic) Reportedly Weighs Export Tax On Uranium, Oil
    Canadian Dollar Tumbles After Turdeau (sic) Reportedly Weighs Export Tax On Uranium, Oil

    In a cute show of strength, Canada has flexed its tiny muscles for a second day in a row and in what it believes is an attempt to intimidate the Trump admin, has threatened to cut off its biggest customer from the one thing that keeps Canada’s economy running (hint: it’s not illegal aliens or illicit Chinese real estate funs): exports.

    According to Bloomberg, Canada is examining the use of export taxes on major commodities it exports to its largest trading partner – the United States – including uranium, oil and potash, to retaliate if incoming president Trump carries out his threat to impose broad tariffs.

    Today’s threat comes one day after Ontario premier Doug Ford (brother to infamous, and now deceased, Toronto mayor Rob Ford) also flexed what little muscles he has under that copious shell, and suggested that the province would cut off electricity exports to the US over Trump’s tariff threat (which amounts to some 14 million MWh, or enough to power to large data centers).

    Citing officials familiar with the discussions inside Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government, Bloomberg reports that export levies would be a last resort for Canada. Retaliatory tariffs against US-made goods, and export controls on certain Canadian products, would be more likely to come first.

    But commodity export taxes, which would drive up costs for US consumers, farmers and businesses, would be a real option if Trump decides to start a full-scale trade war, said the Bloomberg sources.

    The government of Turdeau, who recently hobnobbed with Trump at Mar-A-Lago exuding a self-indulgent smarminess found only among fanatical supporters of Fidel Castro, may also propose giving itself expanded powers over export controls as part of a scheduled update on the country’s fiscal and economic situation to be released on Monday. But since Turdeau’s government is already socialist, will anyone know the difference.

    Even though the US is essentially self-sufficient, Canada remains the largest external supplier of oil to the US as some refineries depend on buying cheaper Canadian heavy crude and have few alternatives to it (all that would be required to make Canadian oil imports redundant, is a few billion in refinery capex spending). As a result, the US Midwest may be hit by higher costs. Fuel makers in the region rely on Canada for almost half of the crude they turn into gasoline and diesel. Of course, if Canada doesn’t export its oil, its economy which is far less diversified, will be hit far harder if it were to voluntarily exclude its largest trading partner.

    Canadian uranium is also the biggest foreign source of fuel for US nuclear power plants, and potash from the country’s western provinces is a huge source of fertilizer for American farms. Meanwhile, the US Department of Defense has prudently been investing in Canadian projects to secure sources of cobalt and graphite and reduce reliance on Chinese supply chains.

    For those reasons, analysts have said they expect Trump will exempt commodities from his threat to place 25% levies on goods from Mexico and Canada, and focus instead on using tariffs against their manufacturing industries. In Canada’s case, that includes the auto manufacturing, aerospace and aluminum sectors, which are centered in Ontario and Quebec, where about 60% of Canadians live.

    It’s unclear if that would change things: Turdeau’s government (sic) would have no choice but to respond if Trump simply exempted energy while hitting all other Canadian products, said Bloomberg sources, adding that’s a scenario that could prompt the use of export taxes by Canada.

    But for the prime minister, going down this path would cause serious political divisions within Canada. Oil, uranium and potash production are concentrated in the western provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Those provinces are the strongest voter base for Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, and their provincial governments are staunch right-wing opponents of Trudeau.

    In short, while Turdeau may retaliate in a Trump trade war, such an action will likely be his last.

    “It’s a terrible idea,” Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said when asked about the possible use of export taxes.

    “I don’t support tariffs on Canadian goods and I don’t support tariffs on US goods because all it does is make life more expensive,” Smith said. “Instead, we’re taking a diplomatic approach and we’re meeting with our allies in the US.”

    Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said export taxes “are the wrong approach and Saskatchewan will vehemently oppose the federal government imposing export taxes on our potash, uranium or oil.”

    The market, however, does not have patience to see how all this plays out, and sent the loonie to a two year low, with the USDCAD surging to 1.420, the highest since the April 2020 depths of the covid crash.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 15:23

  • Understanding The Anger Over Healthcare In One Picture
    Understanding The Anger Over Healthcare In One Picture

    Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

    Healthcare costs have soared. Obamacare failed to live up to its promises. And my lead image dramatically understates the problems with costs…

    Data from the BLS, chart by Mish

    Changes Since 1983

    • CPI: 208 percent
    • Medical Care Services: 505 percent
    • Hospital Services: 975 percent
    • Medical Care Commodities: 308 Percent

    Changes Since Obamacare Started

    • CPI: 41.28 percent
    • Medical Care Services: 77.98 percent
    • Hospital Services: 77.98 percent
    • Medical Care Commodities: 29.94 percent

    Understanding BLS Calculations

    The numbers look bad but they are much worse than they look because of the way the BLS calculates the CPI.

    On all CPI calculations, the BLS only counts costs directly paid by consumers.

    To the extent corporations and Medicare are obscuring more of the costs, the CPI numbers are understated.

    Health Insurance Coverage 2023

    • Employment-based insurance: 54.5% of the population
    • Medicare and Medicaid: 18.8% of the population
    • Direct-purchase coverage: 9.9% of the population
    • TRICARE (Active Military Service): 2.4% of the population
    • VA and CHAMPVA coverage: 1.0% of the population 

    The above is an AI-generated response. It totals 86.6 percent.

    Census. Gov says that in 2022, 92.1 percent of people, or 304.0 million, had health insurance at some point in the year.

    Those in various Medicare plans have seen smaller increases than those buying insurance for themselves.

    And the cost of direct pay is outrageous. Large corporations can get better deals than smaller ones.

    The BLS averages this all in to arrive at the numbers posted in the chart. Heaven help anyone paying for their own insurance who gets cancer or other serious needs.

    Rolling the Dice

    Obamacare penalizes young and healthy for the benefit of those older and with conditions.

    Young adults not working for a company that provides health care benefits frequently opt out. No one can blame them.

    ObamaCare Con

    The Wall Street Journal discusses the ObamaCare Con

    Progressives are at last acknowledging that ObamaCare is a failure. They aren’t doing so explicitly, of course, but their social-media screeds against insurers, triggered by last week’s murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, suggest as much. “We’ve gotten to a point where healthcare is so inaccessible and unaffordable, people are justified in their frustrations,” CBS News medical contributor CĂ©line Gounder said during a Friday segment on the roasting of health insurers.

    Remember Barack Obama’s promise that if you like your health plan and doctor, you could keep them? Sorry. How about his claim that people with pre-existing conditions would be protected? Also not true. The biggest howler, however, was that healthcare would become more affordable.

    Grant Democrats this: The law has advanced their political goal of expanding government control over insurers, in return for lavishing Americans with subsidies to buy overpriced, lousy products. (One might observe that Democrats are driving a similar Faustian bargain to induce automakers to produce more electric vehicles.)

    One problem is that simply having insurance doesn’t change people’s behavior. It does, however, cause them to use more care. This is a particular problem in Medicaid, since beneficiaries often rush to the emergency room for nonemergencies because they don’t have deductibles or co-pays.

    Another problem: The nearly 100 million Americans on Medicaid or tightly regulated and generously subsidized exchange plans struggle to find doctors to treat them. Physician access for Medicaid patients has long been limited owing to the program’s low reimbursement rates.

    It has gotten worse since ObamaCare expanded eligibility, as states have tried to hold down Medicaid costs by reducing reimbursements. A 2019 study found that patients were only half as likely to get an appointment with a doctor compared with privately insured patients before the law passed. Post-ObamaCare, they were less than one-third as likely. Medicaid is insurance in name only.

    Patients with exchange plans hardly fare better. Affordable Care Act plan networks include on average only 40% of local physicians and 21% of those employed by hospitals. Patients must pay significantly more out of pocket to see out-of-network doctors. If you find a doctor in network, there’s no guarantee he’ll continue to be. Insurers are narrowing coverage to keep down costs.

    They are also hiking deductibles, which this year averaged $5,241 for a typical plan. That’s up from $2,425 in 2014. Although subsidies reduce how much people with ObamaCare plans pay toward their premiums, they are stuck paying out of pocket until they hit their deductible.

    Most healthy young people never do. That means their insurance is worthless except in the event of a catastrophic emergency, which was the gist of recent rants against insurers. Perhaps they should take up their grievances with Mr. Obama, since his law’s mandates and regulations are to blame.

    ObamaCare requires plans to cover myriad government-determined “essential benefits” regardless of whether people need them. It also prohibits insurers from charging higher premiums based on a patient’s health-risk factors and limits their ability to do so for older people. The young and healthy are thus required to subsidize their elders, while taxpayers are required to subsidize everyone on the exchanges.

    The WSJ noted “states have tried to hold down Medicaid costs by reducing reimbursements.”

    Everyone else pays more because if it. Wait times and the struggle to find a doctor who takes Medicaid are not factored into the CPI at all.

    ‘This Is A Warning’: Warren, Sanders Address Sympathy For UnitedHealthcare CEO Killing

    The Huffington Post reports ‘This Is A Warning’: Warren, Sanders Address Sympathy For UnitedHealthcare CEO Killing

    Two of the biggest critics of the U.S. health care system condemned the assassination of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO Brian Thompson while calling out “vile” insurance company practices aimed at maximizing profits.

    “The visceral response from people across this country who feel cheated, ripped off, and threatened by the vile practices of their insurance companies should be a warning to everyone in the health care system,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told HuffPost in an interview on Tuesday when asked about the cold response to Thompson’s death, which included celebratory posts on social media.

    “Violence is never the answer, but people can be pushed only so far,” Warren added. “This is a warning that if you push people hard enough, they lose faith in the ability of their government to make change, lose faith in the ability of the people who are providing the health care to make change, and start to take matters into their own hands in ways that will ultimately be a threat to everyone.”

    After drawing some criticism for her remarks, Warren clarified her comments in a statement provided to HuffPost on Wednesday.

    “Violence is never the answer. Period,” the senator said. “I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.”

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called Thompson’s killing “outrageous” and “unacceptable” before similarly criticizing insurance company practices.

    “I think what the outpouring of anger at the health care industry tells us is that millions of people understand that health care is a human right and that you cannot have people in the insurance industry rejecting needed health care for people while they make billions of dollars in profit,” Sanders said.

    Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) also criticized “vile” social media posts for celebrating an “assh*le that’s going to die in prison.”

    “If you gun someone down that you don’t happen to agree with their views or the business that they’re in, hey, you know, I’m next, they’re next,” he added. “And people want to celebrate it. It’s twisted.”

    It’s Twisted

    Government meddling is one of the reasons healthcare is so expensive.

    Obamacare failed across the board. And it did so by creating big pools of those who overpay and underpay.

    Let’s not mince words. People who smoke ought to pay more for healthcare because they are a higher risk. Those who are grossly overweight ought to pay more as well.

    Medicaid encourages emergency visits by paying primary care doctors so little that the doctors refuse new patients.

    To avoid lawsuits, doctors perform more tests than necessary. Fraud is rampant. Paperwork is excessive.

    “Medicare for All” would enhance problems in all of the above.

    No Skin in the Game

    Customers who have already reached their max out of pocket deductibles have no skin in the game. And that’s a huge problem.

    According to Medicare.Gov “No Medicare drug plan may have a deductible more than $505 in 2023. Some Medicare drug plans don’t have a deductible. In some plans that do have a deductible, drugs on some tiers are covered before the deductible.”

    Once deductibles are reached, sometimes in one month, consumers have no incentive to shop around.

    Other customers, unaware of cost differentials, fill prescriptions on the basis of convenience, that being the nearest pharmacy.

    Denver Health at “Critical Point” as 8,000 Migrants Make 20,000 Emergency Visits

    January 24, 2024: Denver Health at “Critical Point” as 8,000 Migrants Make 20,000 Emergency Visits

    The Denver hospital system is turning away local residents because it is flooded with migrant visits.

    Medicaid Expansion Was Supposed to Pay for Itself, Instead Hospitals Are Closing

    March 9, 2024: Medicaid Expansion Was Supposed to Pay for Itself, Instead Hospitals Are Closing

    10 states did not fall for the Medicaid expansion trap under Obamacare. The rest are suffering. Private payers (you, one way or another) make up the loss.

    Medicaid does not pay enough to cover hospitals’ costs, meaning hospitals need to make up for the shortfall by charging private payers more.

    This was one of the easiest “I Told You So” advance predictions in history.

    Best of all, we have a decade of data to prove it thanks to ten states that resisted the trap.

    Hospitals Turn to Pay In Advance, In Full

    May 9, 2024: Hospitals Turn to Pay In Advance, In Full

    If you are in the hospital emergency room, and that’s where most people without insurance go, then you get treated. Otherwise, many hospitals are turning to pay in advance for services.

    Nonpayment a Huge Problem

    It’s interesting to note that hospitals want payment in advance for births. Most illegals just walk in and never pay for anything.

    Nonpayment is one of the reasons costs are soaring for everyone who does pay.

    Obama claimed Medicaid expansion would pay for itself.

    Whenever you hear that claim please run. Free government handouts are never free and most often backfire completely.

    As long as we are going to have Medicare, and no politician will ever get rid of it, It would behoove Medicare and insurers to require the cheapest cost alternative on all drugs. That would force competition and eliminate fraudulent collusion.

    US consumers are subsidizing the rest of the world. I would put an end to that by allowing drug imports.

    The Right to Die

    It’s an uncomfortable topic, where demagoguery about “death squads” abounds, but we need to have a talk about the right to die and how much money we spend prolonging a terminal patient’s life, in massive pain, for a few weeks or months.

    I have made my wishes known. I do not want to be kept alive by heroic means if the quality of my life is expected to be grim. That’s a personal decision.

    At the national level, we must face this very uncomfortable question: Should we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars keeping someone alive whose life expectancy is 3 months? 6 months? a year?

    I say no to all for those without insurance, and no for me personally, regardless.

    Also, hospitals should be free to turn away those without insurance. We need tort reform to cut down legal expenses.

    When consumers have no skin in the game or not enough skin in the game, no one other than the insurers are interested in reducing costs.

    That is the fundamental problem with US healthcare. Senators Warren and Sanders proposals would make everything worse.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/12/2024 – 15:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.