- Chinese New Home Prices Soar by 12.4% in December — Higher by 25% in Tier One Cities
What can go wrong, after all? The Chinese government has already informed us their real estate market, which is being driven by records amount of debt, is NOT in a bubble, so relax, chill and enjoy a large overflowing bowl of wanton soup.
Take Larry Hu, for example, economist from Macquarie. He posited, back in October, that the +25% year over year price jumps for Chinese property wasn’t indicative of a bubble…because MUH lack of supply. Perfectly normal stuff.
Source: BBG
Big cities like Shanghai are experiencing net immigration with only limited blocks of land coming on the market. “If Shanghai sells only one parcel of land in a year, the price of the land must be extremely high – this is not a bubble; this is a shortage of supply,” Hu said.
We can revisit a litany of smug remarks by any number of US economists before the US housing market collapsed — almost mocking those who warned against unchecked gains in property prices.
Take, for example, the missives of Jonathan McCarthy and Richard W. Peach — senior economists at the NY Fed.
“Home prices have been rising strongly since the mid-1990s, prompting concerns that a bubble exists in this asset class and that home prices are vulnerable to a collapse that could harm the U.S. economy.
“A close analysis of the U.S. housing market in recent years, however, finds little basis for such concerns. The marked upturn in home prices is largely attributable to strong market fundamentals: Home prices have essentially moved in line with increases in family income and declines in nominal mortgage interest rates.”
Or, we can look back at the advice of Chris Flanagan, head of ABS Research, JP Morgan — and laugh at how stupid he was.
“Based on what we know and see in terms of employment and interest rates, it is extremely difficult to see how five years from now we could be looking back and observing a historical 5-year growth rate of, say, less than 5%. That should be more than adequate to support the continued good credit performance of sub-prime mortgage pools.
“It is important to understand — we can contemplate home price growth rates declining, albeit modestly, but we do NOT envision home prices declining!”
This out of China tonight — record home prices.
Source: Beijing Monitoring Desk
Average new home prices in China’s 70 major cities rose 12.4 percent in December from a year earlier, slowing slightly from a 12.6 percent increase in November, an official survey showed on Wednesday.
Compared with a month earlier, home prices rose 0.3 percent nationwide, slowing from November’s 0.6 percent, according to Reuters calculations from data issued by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing prices rose 23.5 percent, 26.5 percent and 25.9 percent, respectively, from a year earlier.
Monthly growth in Shanghai and Shenzhen slowed but was unchanged in Beijing as local governments’ tightening measures took effect. China relied heavily on a surging real estate market and government stimulus to help drive economic growth in 2016, but policymakers have grown concerned that the property frenzy will fuel price bubbles and risk a market crash, with serious consequences for the broader economy. Soaring home prices have prompted more than 20 Chinese cities to tighten lending requirements on house purchases, while regulators have told banks to strengthen their risk management on property loans.
Hindsight is 20/20 and it’s never easy to time tops or bottoms. But this is child’s play. None of these gains are due to some grass roots renaissance, thanks to some technological breakthrough or keystone event that caused prices to jump. The price jumps in China are due to record levels of debt, leverage, greed, avarice, and wanton chicanery.
It’s most definitely a bubble — whether it cracks this year or not is anyone’s guess.Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com
- A Violent Inauguration? A Call For Peace On Inauguration Day
Submitted by David Battistella
A Violent Inauguration? A Call For Peace On Inauguration Day
Now that all attempts to delegitimize President Elect Trump to this point including failed recounts, the constant drum beating about popular vote victory, intimidation, bullying and desperate pleas to the Electoral college and the attempt at cold War 2.0 have failed, will inauguration day be the last stand? Now even millionaire Catholic socialist filmmaker Michael Moore is leveraging a Trump presidency to catapult himself back into relevance while his home state is already feeling the benefits of the Trump effect.
Moore has already shown up to Trump tower with his trademark (and tired) Roger and Me shtick and he is a leading voice in calling for civil disobedience protests, a whole hundred days of them, starting on inauguration day. While this is probably a key way to gather material for his next film about how awful America is, he left out a key word in his call to action – peaceful.
While Michael Moore is calling for civil disobedience, many signs are pointing to the possibility of violent protests. All this while President Elect Trump is already putting jobs back into Moore’s home state of Michigan and the country is already seeing some signs of being hit with the Trump’s economic defribulator. What a sad pair Moore and Rosie O’Donnell make, leading the charge!
I’m sure Mr. Moore would be on his soap box had Obama done anything this useful for Michigan in the last eight years, but alas, we seem to have become so attached to identity politics that we can no longer celebrate the good even when it directly impacts issues like jobs, the one issue Michael Moore staked his entire career on back before his net worth took him into the one percent.
Meanwhile at DNC headquarters, Donna Brazile has it backwards, it’s Democrats who have a great chance to move back toward their roots and embrace Americana again by getting behind proposed initiatives that might help the American worker and stimulate a browbeaten economy.
In any case, it seems definite that there will be a wave of protests on January 20th as Americans who oppose this presidency rightly should exercise their right to free speech. The larger question though is whether those protests will turn violent and turn inauguration day into an international spectacle. This might not have a desired effect on the rest of the world.
Violence is a line, which when crossed, catapults the violent aggressor into another category beyond how civilized democracies should operate. When it comes to debate and protest I can listen to and follow any discourse, weigh the arguments and always respect a peaceful protest process. The moment that process turns to violence, looting, destruction of property, injury to peace officers and civil unrest; (to me at least) the messenger is no longer playing by the rules of a peaceful democracy. They have, in effect, suspended some of the rights afforded them and their expression of free speech.
When mired in violence respect for any cause is lost or eroded. Engaging in violence, violent behaviour and destruction of property is the moment where we move out of the realm of what civilized, peaceful democratic process is about. Think Gandhi when trying to understand how much power lies in peaceful, well reasoned, organized protest movements. Think bullying and terrorism when this important step is bypassed and a violent mob rule takes over. Smashing property is not going to garner respect. It might make a good news hit for CNN, who most probably will be looking for the violence at every turn and rebroadcasting it as the main story.
One thing is almost certain, that if there are violent outbursts during the Trump inauguration, there is a high degree of probability that the violence will be blamed squarely on Donald Trump. The logic for this might be that somehow Donald Trump, by just being Donald Trump, is enough of a reason to become violent and in some twisted form of reason, that violence would become acceptable under the circumstances. Perhaps they are mad at Russia too.
The real threat of violence is not purely blowing smoke. Check out Carl Rove talking about inauguration day security threats in 2008 and how staff security clearances played an important role with a serious threat. Zoom up to the 6 minute mark.
But I’d like to offer another suggestion though, and I know I am speaking in hypotheticals here, but any violence around inauguration day speaks squarely to the current lack of top leadership. President Obama’s passive-aggressive, fence-sitting, double-speak stance, through both his words and his omission, lends quiet support and encouragement and has contributed to creating a climate where violent protest is acceptable behavior. How well off would we all be if The outgoing President would renounce violence nearly as fast as Democrats demand renouncements and retractions on any number of issues.
Obama said at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. “And I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests. So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent.”
The President of the United States would not advise them to be silent? Really? So what is the take-away here when this prevailing attitude come straight from the top of the alt-left.It’s precisely this kind of murky messaging that well funded and radical organizations use as a battle cry and even permission to turn civil disobedience and peaceful protest into intimidating, violent outburst ultimately designed not to be heard but really designed to silence others. Do these protesters not have to be extremely careful in not becoming exactly what they oppose? Folks who engage in violence need to take a very hard look not only at what they are fighting for, but exactly how they are fighting for it.
I’ve never heard the current President clearly (I mean in non wishy washy terms) renounce the use of violence, rioting, looting and destruction of property after recent cop killing and protests in major US cities. This includes the murder of Police officers (remember when we used to call them “peace” officers). His is more a conciliatory tone, an understanding of the frustrations of what arrises, but saying nothing firmly to denounce violence and encourage a deeper thinking and peaceful way forward. This kind complacency might lead to things like dead police officers in Dallas and riots in other US cities.
Obama said, “In a movement like Black Lives Matter, there is always going to be some folks who say things that are stupid or imprudent, or over-generalize, or are harsh (edit) and I don’t think that you can hold well-meaning activists who are doing the right thing and peacefully protesting responsible for everything that is uttered at a protest.”
This opinion is dangerous, more dangerous than saying nothing at all. Essentially it is saying, go ahead and organize and if something happens so be it, the leadership is not responsible for anything done, said or perhaps for violence that “breaks out”.
Should violence occur on inauguration day, a story which will emerge and quickly spread internationally will be one of a divided America, an inauguration with a violent and extreme reaction to a “divider president”, Donald Trump. But it is not Donald Trump who has been sitting in the seat of power over the past eight years using veiled encouraging statements like this to his SJW audience; that one falls squarely into the lap of the sitting president.
But in the end would violence and disruption amount to Trump’s violent entrance? Or would this be Obama’s violent exit, a stain on his scandal-free war-time Presidency?
It’s an important narrative to watch and one the MSM will ultimately need to take a great deal of responsibility for. If the MSM want to restore their place in the public trust, perhaps they should be the first to renounce any violence around the Inauguration, rather that rebroadcast it ad nauseum.
To me, any story which emerges which is not a peaceful transition and inauguration of newly democratically elected Donald Trump, (if things turn violent and we pray it does not) falls at the feet of the outgoing President and his slurping lapdog, aka the MSM.
President Bush had eggs hurled at his limo on inauguration day, which of course made it into a Michael Moore film. However, as the Obama’s have expressed, the Bush family were nothing but gracious and welcoming when their time in the White House had come to a close. Can we really say the same now while every possible barrier has been put up by a sore loser campaign a party and a President who struggles with narrative and his legacy by planting the protest seeds in the form of executive orders and last minute actions and disruptions designed as trip wires to the front door of the White House?
Cue the next narrative, “we tried real hard and we forced laws through” by abusing Presidential executive orders with “a pen”, but now Trump and the Republicans (who happened organize themselves well enough to to win power across the important houses of government at every level) just want to change all the good we tried to impose through executive action.
While Obama has professed a peaceful transition his actions speak much louder. Pushing American troops the the Russian border, looking the other way on Isreal, giving himself and his VP presidential medals, last minute actions on monuments and National Parks, that pen sure has been busy Mr. Constitution. It does not seem that the Obama’s are exiting with the same kind of grace of presidents past and if Washington, NYC or any other major city do turn violent on inauguration day you could chalk it up to inaction and statements that do nothing to encourage a peaceful process. Michelle Obama’s loss of hope is a great example. Maybe she is being honest, but gracious, classy, supporting peaceful process, um, no.
Add to this the whole Russian spy narrative as a reason Hillary Clinton failed (not that she was outworked or anything). Now that this narrative is being embarrassingly debunked and turned into another colossal failure the next narrative/target is the FBI through a DOJ probe. It’s not into Hillary Clinton’s fast-and-loose home server, open for the world’s lamest hackers to access top state secretes by not going through official channels, but rather, the FBI departments who wanted to investigate her while she was Secretary of State selling off bits of America to the highest donor to CGI and the Clinton foundation.
What message does this all of this ultimately send?
With January 20th days away this is just a heads up to what the world hopes for out of days like this in American politics. The world looks to America to promote and preserve peace and stability.
America must represent a proactive attitude of peace, hope and prosperity. America needs to project this to to the world and be the leaders of a new global movement. No person knows how this Presidential term will turn out, but it can start on a correct path with a peaceful transition and the peaceful inauguration of a new Presidency.
Americans owe a peaceful transition to themselves, to the world and to its tattered Democratic party. However bruised, the Democrats are Americans, who with their fellow Americans, need to roll up their sleeves and get back to a work within balanced and fair democracy based on principles and ideas established in America and based on its constitution which is admired the world over.
This week and the entire lead up to the transition needs to be about peace and prosperity.
Peace is in your hands America, and that non-violent peace starts with the American people participating in a peaceful process.
- Trader Warns: The "Cure-Through-Greater-Inequality" Paradigm Just Snapped
Investors won’t be able to trade markets if they can’t settle on a base-case scenario, and, as Bloomberg's Richard Breslow warns, they have to accept that some unknowns are less unknown than others.
Every tweet that restates what Donald Trump has been saying consistently for many months shouldn’t come as a surprise to traders and send global asset prices into a tizzy.
The same goes for today’s speech by U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May.
If people are on edge waiting for the next installment on protectionism or a hard Brexit, it should be because their positions would be affected on the chance that the messages are reversed, not reiterated.
There seems to be this enduring tendency for market participants to believe that these politicians will “come to their senses” and this will all have been campaign or negotiating tactics.
A bad dream. It’s why his election night victory speech had such a profound affect.
But whether you like what’s going on or not, you need to position for the most likely scenarios and what you think it means for markets. On the latter, opinions may differ and that’s all right. But don’t feign being surprised that some pretty remarkable things are being said and proposed — regularly.
For years, post-financial crisis policy was conducted on the self-serving belief that it works best by propping up asset (especially equity) prices, which will then cause some of the goodies to trickle down… known in the non-official journals as “cure through greater inequality”.
Traders, and I guess the clever people who program computers, can’t get this out of their heads…
Of course we’ll eventually get market-friendly prescriptions.
So we’ll always price for that outcome.
It’s a big part of why geopolitical events have notoriously had such little affect on markets.
There was always more liquidity in the bag.
It really isn’t profound to point out that if global politics turn decidedly ugly, it could act as a drag on world growth…
Unless you assume you're owed a policy response just as soon as it happens. Now that’s an assumption that should be weighed carefully!
- "Common Sense" – Addressed To The Inhabitants Of 2017 America
Submitted by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog,
“Without the pen of the author of Common Sense, the sword of Washington would have been raised in vain.” – John Adams
Thomas Paine was born in 1737 in Britain. His first thirty seven years of life were pretty much a series of failures and disappointments. Business fiascos, firings, the death of his first wife and child, a failed second marriage, and bankruptcy plagued his early life. He then met Benjamin Franklin in 1774 and was convinced to emigrate to America, arriving in Philadelphia in November 1774. He thus became the Father of the American Revolution with the publication of Common Sense, pamphlets which crystallized opinion for colonial independence in 1776.
The first pamphlet was published in Philadelphia on January 10, 1776, and signed anonymously “by an Englishman.” It became an instantaneous sensation, swiftly disseminating 100,000 copies in three months among the two and a half million residents of the 13 colonies. Over 500,000 copies were sold during the course of the American Revolution. Paine published Common Sense after the battle of Lexington and Concord, making the argument the colonists should seek complete independence from Great Britain, rather than merely fighting against unfair levels of taxation. The pamphlets stirred the masses with a fighting spirit, instilling in them the backbone to resist a powerful empire.
It was read aloud in taverns, churches and town squares, promoting the notion of republicanism, bolstering fervor for complete separation from Britain, and boosting recruitment for the fledgling Continental Army. He rallied public opinion in favor of revolution among layman, farmers, businessmen and lawmakers. It compelled the colonists to make an immediate choice. It made the case against monarchy, aristocracy, tyranny and unfair taxation, offering Americans a solution – liberty and freedom. It was an important precursor to the Declaration of Independence, which was written six months later by Paine’s fellow revolutionaries.
Paine’s contribution to American independence 241 years ago during the first American Fourth Turning cannot be overstated. His clarion call for colonial unity against a tyrannical British monarch played a providential role in convincing farmers, shopkeepers, and tradesmen reconciliation with a hereditary monarchy was impossible, and armed separation was the only common sense option. He made the case breaking away from Britain was inevitable, and the time was now. Armed conflict had already occurred, but support for a full-fledged revolution had not yet coalesced within the thirteen colonies. Paine’s rhetorical style within the pamphlets aroused enough resentment against the British monarchy to rally men to arms, so their children wouldn’t have to fight their battles.
“I prefer peace, but if trouble must come, let it be in my time that my children may know peace.” – Thomas Paine
Paine did not write Common Sense or The American Crisis pamphlets for his contemporaries like John Adams, Samuel Adams, Jefferson, Madison, or Franklin. These intellectual giants were already convinced of the need to permanently break away from the British Empire and form a new nation. Paine wrote his pamphlets in a style understandable to the common man, rendering complex concepts intelligible for the average citizen. Paine seized this historic moment of crisis to provide the intellectual basis for a republican revolution. To inspire his citizen soldiers, George Washington had Paine’s pamphlets read aloud at their encampments.
“These are the times that try men’s souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like Hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives everything its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated.” – Thomas Paine – The American Crisis
The wealthy landowners and firebrands who comprised the Continental Congress leadership were not the audience Paine was trying to sway. They were focused on how a Declaration of Independence would affect the war effort. They were deficient in making their case to the less informed populace.
Without public support and volunteers to fight the Redcoats, the revolution would have failed. Paine’s indispensable contribution to our country’s independence was initiating a public debate and disseminating ideas about independence among those who would need to do the fighting and dying if independence was to be achieved.
Paine was able to synthesize philosophical enlightenment concepts about human rights into common sense ideas understood by ordinary folks. Paine was not a highly educated intellectual and trusted the common people to make sound assessments regarding major issues, based upon wisdom dispensed in a common sense way. He used common sense to refute the professed entitlements of the British ruling establishment. He used common sense as a weapon to de-legitimize King George’s despotic monarchy, overturning the conventional thinking among the masses.
Paine was able to fuse the common cause of the Founding Fathers and the people into a collective revolutionary force. Even though their numbers were small, Paine convinced them they could defeat an empire.
“It is not in numbers, but in unity, that our great strength lies; yet our present numbers are sufficient to repel the force of all the world” – Thomas Paine, Common Sense
Paine didn’t know he was propelling the American Revolution Fourth Turning towards its successful climax when he wrote those pamphlets. His use of the term Crisis as the title to his second group of pro-revolutionary pamphlets displayed his grasp of the mood in the colonies toward the existing social order. The majority of the 2.5 million people living in the 13 colonies in 1776 were native born. Their loyalty to a distant monarch, treating them with contempt and taxing them to support his far flung empire, had been waning as time progressed. They were ready to shed the cloak of oppression and Paine gave them the rationale for doing so.
The American Revolution Crisis was ignited by the fiery Prophet Generation leader Samuel Adams with the provocative Boston Tea Party in 1773. The colonial tinderbox was ignited as Adams’ committees of correspondence rallied resistance against the Crown and formed a political union among the 13 colonies. After the battles of Lexington & Concord, arming of militias and the formation of the Continental Army under command of George Washington, the regeneracy was at hand.
Paine, as a Liberty Generation nomad, did what his generation was born to do – be a hands on, pragmatic, get it done leader. His vital contribution to the revolution was rousing the colonists with the toughness, resolution, and backbone to withstand the long difficult trials ahead. He, along with other members of his generation – George Washington, John Adams, and Francis Marion, did the heavy lifting throughout the American Revolution.
They knew they would hang if their labors failed, but the struggle for liberty against a tyrannical despot drove them forward against all odds. Paine’s pamphlets, followed shortly thereafter by the Declaration of Independence, marked the regeneracy of the first American Fourth Turning, as solidarity around the cause of liberty inspired by brave words and valiant deeds, propelled history towards its glorious climax at Yorktown.
When you’re in the midst of a Fourth Turning it is hard to step back and assess where you are on a daily basis. This Fourth Turning began in September 2008, with the global financial implosion created by the Fed and their Wall Street puppet masters. We have just achieved the long awaited regeneracy as Trump has stepped forth as the Grey Champion to lead a revolution against the corrupt tyrannical establishment.
The election of Trump did not mark the end for the Deep State, but just the beginning of the end. Just as Paine’s Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence denoted the beginning of a long string of bloody trials and tribulations, Trump’s ascendency to the presidency has marked the beginning of a battle – with the outcome dependent upon our response to the clashes ahead.
The regeneracy spurred by Thomas Paine and the nation’s Founding Fathers in 1776 was followed by five years of ordeal, misery, misfortune, bloody routs, and numerous junctures where total defeat hung in the balance. Lesser men would have abandoned the cause during the dark bitter winter at Valley Forge in 1778.
The shocking victory by Trump has revealed the depth of corruption among the corporate mass media, both political parties, surveillance agencies, and shadowy Deep State moneyed players behind the scenes. The ivory tower D.C. politicians, their entitlement culture, blatant corruption, vile disregard for the Constitution, and complete disregard for the plight of average Americans living outside their bastions of liberal elitism (NYC, L.A., S.F., D.C., Chicago), have shown their true colors since November 8.
Trump utilized the same populist messaging invoked by Paine in his Common Sense pamphlets during his unorthodox presidential campaign. He mobilized the large alienated silent majority who has been left behind as the globalists, corporatists, and militarists reaped the rich rewards of a growing corporate fascist surveillance state. Average Americans in flyover country watched as the fetid swamp creatures in the mainstream media, along with debased political establishment hacks, Hollywood elites, left wing billionaires, and so called social justice warriors coalesced behind a criminal establishment candidate. The out of touch elite have controlled the government for decades, treating the country and its people like a two dollar whore.
Just as Paine hit a nerve among the great unwashed masses, Trump united blue collar workers, small business owners, family men, working mothers, guns rights champions, disaffected conservatives, realistic libertarians, disaffected millennials and various anti-establishment types sick and tired of the status quo. He gave voice to the little man with his in your face populist rhetoric against the corrupt dominant elites.
His plain spoken, aggressive, no holds barred, pugnacious approach to crushing his enemies rallied millions to his cause. The Make America Great Again revolution has only just begun and the violent, vitriolic pushback from the vested interests are only the opening volleys in this Second American Revolution. The entrenched Deep State establishment will concede nothing. Tyranny will not be defeated without bloodshed.
“Power concedes nothing without demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.” – Thomas Paine
The same common sense Paine used to argue against a tyrannical, oppressive hereditary monarchy applies today when judging our corrupt, authoritarian, co-opted government. His themes of society as a blessing, government as evil, and revolution as inevitable are as applicable today as they were 241 years ago. As we approach Trump’s inauguration it has become clear the ruling elite feel threatened and are using their control of the media, intelligence services, military, and financial system to try and undermine his presidency before it begins.
As their fake news propaganda falls on the deaf ears of disgusted Americans, their next ploy will be violence, war or assassination. The vested interests have no intention of relinquishing their power and wealth, just as King George and his Parliament had no intention of allowing the colonies to form an independent republic.
If you thought voting Trump into the office of the president constituted a victory, you are badly misreading historical precedent and the inevitable paths of Fourth Turnings. The fight is just beginning. The leftist social justice warriors, their wealthy elite puppeteers, the neo-con military industrial complex warmongers, globalists, multi-culturists, and surveillance state apparatchiks have all made it clear they will violently and rhetorically, through their corporate media mouthpieces, resist Trump and his common man revolution.
I don’t know if the normal people who supported Trump realize how abnormal, deviant, and despicable their opponents are. Blood will be spilled. Violence will beget violence. The country is already split and the divide will only grow wider. Someone will win and someone will lose. Our choices will matter.
“The seasons of time offer no guarantees. For modern societies, no less than for all forms of life, transformative change is discontinuous. For what seems an eternity, history goes nowhere – and then it suddenly flings us forward across some vast chaos that defies any mortal effort to plan our way there. The Fourth Turning will try our souls – and the saecular rhythm tells us that much will depend on how we face up to that trial. The saeculum does not reveal whether the story will have a happy ending, but it does tell us how and when our choices will make a difference.” – Strauss & Howe – The Fourth Turning
In Part Two of this article I will try to show how Paine’s Common Sense, even though written three generations ago, has essential pertinence during these troubled times of our current Fourth Turning.
- US F-16 Photographed In Mock Dogfight With Russian Su-27 Above Area 51
A curious sight was observed in the skies above Area 51 in Nevada, on November 8, the day Donald Trump was elected President, by vacationing air traffic controller Phil Drake. According to Drake, the photographs below all taken by him, show a Russian-built Su-27P fighter jet taking on a US Air Force F-16 engaged in a mock dogfight training mission.
The moment a US F-16 was caught in a mock dogfight with a Russian SU-27 fighterDrake, a 42-year-old enthusiast from Hampshire in the UK, told the Mail he was visiting the desert surrounding Area 51 on the day of the Presidential election, and hoped to see some fast jets involved in a training mission. Instead, what he photographed appears to have been Russian Su-27 involved in a combat training with a US fighter jet.
Drake said the Russian jet was a Su-27P Flanker-B, which has never been officially imported into the United States.
Drake said the aircraft was a Russian SU-27P Flanker-B with Soviet style camouflague
The jets performed a series of high-speed passes during an intense training mission“This aircraft was anonymous and unidentifiable, apart from the Soviet style camouflage it wore,” he said. “After they finished their mission they flew into Groom Lake’s highly restricted airspace.” Shooting from Tikaboo Valley, near Groom Lake (Area 51’s official name), Drake had to push his camera zoom to the limit to document the incident.
Drake’s location outside Area 51
He said: “The planes were operating above 20,000 feet, and a couple of miles east of me, so the distance between me and the planes was at least six miles. They were literally specks in the sky, but of course that’s the reason that no-one has photographed them before.
Drake believes these are the first pictures of a single-seat Sukhoi Su27 Flanker – on a training mission or otherwise – inside the United States.
‘Initially, during the mission, the aircraft were just outside of Area 51 airspace.
“The Americans practice air to air combat with Russian aircraft to give them an advantage in combat. They also try out new weapons systems on aircraft to test their effectiveness against a bona fide Russian-built target.”
According to Drake, “the Flanker is rumoured to have been flying from Groom Lake for nearly 20 years, but no-one has ever managed a definitive photograph to prove it does exist. This sequence of photos is the first proof that the Americans are flying this aircraft, which is the premier Air Defence Fighter in use with the Russian and Chinese Air Forces.”
He continued: “Things went quiet around 1300. Very quiet. Nothing moved for two hours and I was thinking of moving to another vantage point, such as Queen City Summit, or maybe the Powerlines Overlook. Then the sound of jet noise caught my attention and that’s when I got my first sight of a Groom Lake Su-27 Flanker.”
“Flying NE at around 30,000 feet leaving an intermittent contrail. The time was 1500 and the sun was moving to the west as the Flanker and a F-16 gave me a private 25 minute air display. The pair seemed to perform a series of head on intercepts at descending altitudes from 30,000 feet to around 20,000 feet, only a mile or two to the east of me. This meant they were beautifully illuminated by the afternoon sun. After the head on intercept, the pair would break into a turning dogfight, with the Flanker using it tremendous maneuverability to try and get behind the F-16. “
“I took a long series of photographs, but as the aircraft were fairly high my autofocus couldn’t cope. I had to shoot in manual mode, constantly moving the focusing ring to attempt to get some reasonable images. The Su-27 was clearly a single seater, a Su-27P Flanker-B.”
“This Flanker was in the classic 1990’s two-tone blue colour scheme, with white nose and white fin tips. A very different aeroplane. There had been rumours that the US had obtained two single seat Flankers from Belarus in 1996 or 1997, so I figured it should have been one of them.”
“After the final dogfight, when I was lucky enough to catch on camera the F-16 flashing directly in front of the Flanker, the pair climbed back to 30,000 feet or so, and headed SW back into Groom Lake restricted airspace. Interestingly the Flanker left a solid contrail, while the F-16 left none despite being at a similar altitude.”
* * *
There has been no official statement from either the US Air Force, the Dept of Defense or Dept of Energy, on these curious, perhaps historic, photographs emanating from one of the most secretive US army bases in the world.
- Liberal Preppers Are "Tired Of Being Perceived As Wusses" – Stock Up On Guns, Food As Trumpocalypse Looms
Submitted by Shane Dixon Kavanaugh via Vocativ
With Trump on the horizon, the survivalist movement — long a pastime of the right — is picking up progressive converts fast.
Colin Waugh bought a shotgun four weeks before November’s election.
An unapologetic liberal, he was no fan of firearms. He had never owned one before. But Waugh, a 31-year-old from Independence, Missouri, couldn’t shake his fears of a Donald Trump presidency — and all of the chaos it could bring. He imagined hate crimes and violence waged by extremists emboldened by the Republican nominee’s brash, divisive rhetoric. He pictured state-sanctioned roundups of Muslims, gays, and outspoken critics.
“I kept asking myself, ‘Do I want to live under tyranny?’” said Waugh, who supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary and later backed Hillary Clinton. “The answer was absolutely not.”
With Trump now days away from assuming the White House, Waugh’s preparing for the worst. He’s made “bug-out bags” stuffed with ammo, energy bars, and assorted survival gear for his wife and their three cats. He’s begun stowing water and browsing real estate listings in Gunnison County, Colorado, which he’s determined to be a “liberal safe-haven.” Last month, Waugh added a 9mm handgun to his arsenal.
His advice to others on the left fearful of the next four years? “Get ready. Pay attention. Keep your wits about you.”
Waugh’s not alone. He is among a new cadre embracing extreme self-reliance in the wake of Trump’s surprising victory. Long a calling among conservatives spooked by big government boogymen and calamitous natural disasters, the so-called prepper movement is gaining a decisively liberal following.
“We’re tired of being perceived as wusses who won’t survive when shit hits the fan,” said Stacy, a Texas Democrat who recently caught the prepper bug. She spoke with Vocativ on the condition we not publish her last name. “I, for one, don’t like to be thought of as some precious snowflake.”
After years cast as a fringe survival group, preppers entered a kind of golden age during the Obama presidency. A horrific housing crash and the spectacle of Hurricane Sandy helped give rise to reality television shows like Doomsday Preppers and Doomsday Bunker, and fueled a multi-billion dollar survival industry. Branded by some as a foreign-born, gun-grabbing socialist, Obama aroused deep suspicion among the patriot groups, right-wing conservatives, and apocalyptic Christians at the center of the growing movement.
Trump’s provocative posturing and unpredictability is now inspiring a fresh wave of panic on the left. Those who spoke with Vocativ have envisioned scenarios that could lead to military coups led by loyalists of the president-elect and internment camps packed with political opponents, bloody social unrest and an all-out civil or nuclear war. Sound bonkers? Perhaps. But, for many, so was the prospect of a President Trump.
“It’s the nature of the political beast,” said Kevin O’Brien, a conservative prepper and realtor who specializes in off-the-grid properties in eastern Tennessee. “Obama had many on the right really wound up. Now it’s the left’s turn.”
The signs of change are surely in the air. Groups that cater to gun-toting bleeding hearts — such as the aptly named Liberal Gun Club — say they’ve seen a surge in paid membership since the election. Candid talk of disaster preparedness among progressives is showing up on social media. Even companies that outfit luxury “safe rooms” — which protect their wealthy owners from bombs, bullets, and chemical attacks — attribute recent boosts in business to the incoming administration.
“I don’t think we’d have the same level of interest if Hillary had been elected president,” Tom Gaffney, whose fortified home shelters at Gaffco Ballistics run as high as $400,000, told Vocativ in an interview.
Looking for likeminded folks to weather the Trumpocalypse, Waugh started a private Facebook group called the Liberal Prepper shortly after the election. In nine weeks, it’s drummed up more than 750 members, all of whom are individually screened and vetted, Waugh said. Dozens more flock to it daily.
Few are wasting precious time. They trade tips on survival swag and solicit recommendations for solar panels, firearms, and raising chickens. There are discussions on homesteading and home safety. Links to news stories about the president-elect or signs of instability around the globe are never in short supply.
Occasionally, posts on the Liberal Prepper seem to veer close to parody. One debate thread last week centered around the merits of stocking up on recycled toilet paper rolls versus buying Angel Soft, a brand produced by Koch industries, a notorious climate change foe. And in another discussion, vegetarian and vegan members talked about the best meat- and dairy-free food supplies to have during a sustained crisis.
In a smaller Facebook group, Progressive Liberal Preppers, members who blacksmith, bow hunt, and operate ham radios are eager to teach their skills with others, said one the site’s administrators, who goes by the name of Blythe Bonnie. “The next thing we’re going to do is a class on home brewing and winemaking,” said Bonnie, a lifelong Democrat and 70-year-old now living in Arkansas.
While most of these liberal preppers say they are readying for any disaster — natural, manmade, or even zombie — a doomsday scenario at the hands of a President Trump continues to be a primary concern.
“With the new administration I worry about Nazi-style camps that would include my wife, our twins and myself,” said Melissa Letos, who lives with her family on a five-acre spread near Portland, Oregon. In a recent interview, she said she raises chickens, strives to keep a year’s supply of canned food, and is able to hold her own with a firearm. She and her family plan to a build a bunker-style basement in the future.
Even as Letos and other liberals brace for bedlam, some longtime preppers worry that others in the movement have let their guard down. Michael Snyder, author of The Economic Collapse blog, recently warned against those on the right who seemed overly optimistic about a Trump presidency. “Everyone is feeling so good about things, very few people still seem interested in prepping for hard times ahead,” he wrote, raising the specter of financial instability in Europe and a potential trade war with China. “It is almost as if the apocalypse has been canceled and the future history of the U.S. has been rewritten with a much happier ending.”
For Waugh and his liberal peers, the apocalypse may have just begun. “Fear is an unfortunate catalyst for a lot of folks,” he said. “But there are still too many caught up in the idea that the system is infallible and that it will persevere and prevail.”
- Julian Assange Responds Amid Growing Extradition Speculation
Five days ago, Wikileaks' Founder Julian Assange agreed to US extradition if Chelsea Manning was granted clemency by President Obama…
If Obama grants Manning clemency Assange will agree to US extradition despite clear unconstitutionality of DoJ case https://t.co/MZU30SlfGK
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 12, 2017
This evening we got confirmation that Obama has indeed granted Manning clemency.
By way of background, we noted previously, Assange has been living in the Ecuadoran embassy in London since June 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face sexual assault allegations. The Australian former computer hacker said he fears Stockholm will in turn extradite him to the US, where he angered Washington over WikiLeaks' publication of thousands of US military and diplomatic documents leaked by former US soldier Manning. The full details of which can be found here…
VICTORY: Obama commutes Chelsea Manning sentence from 35 years to 7. Release date now May 17. Background: https://t.co/HndsbVbRer
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 17, 2017
Interestingly, Assange's offer comes just days after his uncharacteristically emotional interview with Sean Hannity…
"I have been detained illegally, without charge for six years, without sunlight, lots of spies everywhere. It's tough… but that's the mission I set myself on. I understand the kind of game that's being played – big powerful actors will try and take revenge...it's a different thing for my family – I have young children, under 10 years old, they didn't sign up for that… and I think that is fundamentally unjust… my family is innocent, they didn't sign up for that fight."
And it is clear from the initial response from Wikileaks that Assange's biggest fear – and perhaps rightly so – was receiving a fair trial under an Obama/Lynch justice system…
Assange is confident of winning any fair trial in the US. Obama's DoJ prevented public interest defense & fair jury. https://t.co/Mb6gXlz7QS
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 17, 2017
Mr Assange added:
Assange: "Thank you to everyone who campaigned for Chelsea Manning's clemency. Your courage & determination made the impossible possible."
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 17, 2017
Followed by a full statement.
Statement from Mr. Julian Assange
I welcome President Obama's decision to commute the sentence of Ms. Chelsea Manning from 35 years to time served, but Ms. Manning should never have been convicted in the first place. Ms. Manning is a hero, whose bravery should have been applauded not condemned. Journalists, publishers, and their sources serve the public interest and promote democracy by distributing authentic information on key matters such as human rights abuses, and illegal acts by government officials. They should not be prosecuted. In order for democracy and the rule of law to thrive, the Government should immediately end its war on whistleblowers and publishers, such as Wikileaks and myself.
Mr. Assange's lawyers also made a statement
Mr. Assange welcomes President Obama's decision to commute Chelsea Manning's sentence. Whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning serve the public interest. She should never have been prosecuted and sentenced to decades in prison. She should be released immediately. Likewise, publishers of truthful information serve the public interest, promote democracy, and should not be prosecuted. The war on whistleblowers should end now and should not be continued in the new Administration. For many months, I have asked the DOJ to clarify Mr. Assange's status. I hope it will soon. The Department of Justice should not pursue any charges against Mr. Assange based on his publication of truthful information and should close its criminal investigation of him immediately."
So, to sum up, it appears that US extradition is on the cards for Julian Assange as he is "confident" of a fair trial under President Trump – a very different situation to Obama's Justice Department which "prevented a fair jury."
We wish him luck.
- 56 Years Ago Today, Eisenhower Warned Americans Of "The Unwarranted Influence" Of The Deep State
In his farewell address to the nation 56 years ago, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the American people for the first time to keep a careful eye on what he called the "military-industrial complex" that had developed in the post-World War II years. Fiscally conservative Eisenhower had been concerned about the growing size and cost of the American defense establishment since he became president in 1953, and as History.com notes, in his last presidential address to the American people, he expressed those concerns in terms that shocked many of his listeners.
Eisenhower began by describing the changing nature of the American defense establishment since World War II. No longer could the U.S. afford the “emergency improvisation” that characterized its preparations for war against Germany and Japan. Instead, the United States was “compelled to create a permanent armaments industry” and a huge military force. He admitted that the Cold War made clear the “imperative need for this development,” but he was gravely concerned about “the acquisition of unwarranted influence…by the military-industrial complex.” In particular, he asked the American people to guard against the “danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Eisenhower’s blunt language stunned some of his supporters. They believed that the man who led the country to victory in Europe in World War II and guided the nation through some of the darkest moments of the Cold War was too negative toward the military-industrial complex that was the backbone of America’s defense. For most listeners, however, it seemed clear that Eisenhower was merely stating the obvious. World War II and the ensuing Cold War resulted in the development of a large and powerful defense establishment. Necessary though that development might be, Eisenhower warned, this new military-industrial complex could weaken or destroy the very institutions and principles it was designed to protect.
From January 17th 1961… ("unwarranted influence" begins at 8:41)
Full – frighteningly prophetic – Speech:
Good evening, my fellow Americans.
First, I should like to express my gratitude to the radio and television networks for the opportunities they have given me over the years to bring reports and messages to our nation. My special thanks go to them for the opportunity of addressing you this evening.
Three days from now, after half century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor. This evening, I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other — Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the nation. My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and finally to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years. In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the nation good, rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling — on my part — of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts, America is today the strongest, the most influential, and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America’s leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches, and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace, to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity, and integrity among peoples and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension, or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt, both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insiduous [insidious] in method. Unhappily, the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defenses; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research — these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs, balance between the private and the public economy, balance between the cost and hoped for advantages, balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable, balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual, balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress. Lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration. The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their Government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of threat and stress.
But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. Of these, I mention two only.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. Our military organization today bears little relation to that known of any of my predecessors in peacetime, or, indeed, by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States cooperations — corporations.
Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system — ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society’s future, we — you and I, and our government — must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
During the long lane of the history yet to be written, America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect. Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations — past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of disarmament — of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent, I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war, as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years, I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
So, in this, my last good night to you as your President, I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and in peace. I trust in that — in that — in that service you find some things worthy. As for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I, my fellow citizens, need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nations’ great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America’s prayerful and continuing aspiration: We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its few spiritual blessings. Those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibility; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; and that the sources — scourges of poverty, disease, and ignorance will be made [to] disappear from the earth; and that in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
Now, on Friday noon, I am to become a private citizen. I am proud to do so. I look forward to it.
Thank you, and good night.
h/t Jim Quinn's Burning Platform blog
- North Dakota Lawmakers Want To Legalize Running Over Protesters
Submitted by Nadia Prupis via TheAntiMedia.org,
Running over protesters may soon be legal in North Dakota, if conservative lawmakers are successful in advancing legislation introduced last week.
House Bill Number 1203 (pdf) states that, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a driver of a motor vehicle who unintentionally causes injury or death to an individual obstructing vehicular traffic on a public road, street, or highway, is not guilty of an offense.”
The bill is slated to be heard by the North Dakota’s House Transportation Committee on Friday.
Rep. Keith Kempenich (R-Bowman), one of the bill’s co-sponsors, told the Bismarck Tribune on Wednesday, “[The roads are] not there for the protesters. They’re intentionally putting themselves in danger.”
“It’s shifting the burden of proof from the motor vehicle driver to the pedestrian,” Kempenich said.
Tara Houska, an Indigenous water protector and attorney who has resided at the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) resistance camps since August, told NBC News that the bill was “a direct violation of our First Amendment rights.”
“It’s shocking to see legislation that allows for people to literally be killed for exercising their right to protest in a public space,” said Houska, who also serves as the national campaigns director for Honor the Earth, an Indigenous-focused environmental nonprofit.
Water protectors at times blocked roads leading to DAPL construction sites as part of the resistance to the pipeline. Blocking traffic is also an occasional tactic of various environmental and human rights movements.
Houska also criticized another bill in the legislative lineup that would require North Dakota’s attorney general to sue the federal government to recoup some of the cost of policing the months-long DAPL protests.
“These [bills] are meant to criminalize the protests with no real concern for constitutional law,” she said.
Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault II added, “The state claims they want to work closely with the tribe on repairing our relationship with them. Clearly that is not happening when legislation that impacts us is being drafted without consultation, consent, or even basic communication.”
Allison Renville, an activist from the Lakota nation, saw the bills as an insult to sovereign Native American communities, and expressed concern about the recent naming of Republican Sen. John Hoeven, a supporter of the DAPL pipeline and fossil fuel industry, as chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.
“This is a really scary time for Indian Country,” Renville told NBC News. “To have such an avid supporter of the oil industry who has consistently stated his support for extractive industry projects on Native lands named to the position as chairman is akin to stepping on our sovereignty.”
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...