Today’s News 23rd December 2023

• Israeli-Linked Tanker Struck By Drone Off India, Signaling Attacks Set To Widen
  Israeli-Linked Tanker Struck By Drone Off India, Signaling Attacks Set To Widen

  In a truly unprecedented scenario, an Israeli-linked tanker has come under attack not in the Red Sea, but as far away as off India’s coast. 

  Maritime security firm Ambrey has confirmed a Liberia-flagged chemical products tanker, which reportedly has Israeli ties, was struck by a drone some 200 nautical miles (370km) off the west coast Indian city of Veraval, according to BBC reporting.

  

  While it’s not yet clear who was behind the Saturday attack, Israeli media is pointing the finger at Iran, per Times of Israel: “Israel believes the drone fired at a tanker off the coast of India a short while ago was launched directly from Iran, Channel 12 reports, although this remains unconfirmed.”

  The Indian navy is said to be en route to assist the damaged tanker, identified in the following: 

  It caused structural damage to the tanker – identified in Indian media as the crude oil-carrying MV Chem Pluto – and water was taken onboard.

  Ambrey said the event, which is the first of its kind so far away from the Red Sea, fell within an area the firm considered a “heightened threat area” for Iranian drones.

  While Yemen’s Houthis have never conducted an operation from such a great distance, certainly the Iranians have the capability, also considering Iran’s southern coast is closer to Indian waters.

  The tanker had reportedly been transiting from its origin port in Jubail, Saudi Arabia to India’s Manglore…

  

  All 20 of the crew members aboard the MV Chem Pluto are reported safe and uninjured, and a fire resulted from the drone strike but appears to have been successfully extinguished.

  An Indian Navy helicopter has filmed the damaged vessel as assist ships are responding, including from the Indian Coast Guard – this after the the United Kingdom’s Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) issued an initial emergency alert over the incident.

  Breaking: First visuals of missile hit MV Chem Pluto from Indian Coast Guard’s Dornier. The commercial vessel bound for India’s Mangalore came under attack earlier today. @WIONews https://t.co/6j8eGhDcx2 pic.twitter.com/2HzFWSKRLo

  — Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) December 23, 2023

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

  Already international shipping transit has been forced to be drastically diverted away from Red Sea lanes, which translates to companies increasing spending for extra crews, fuel, supplies, port charges and other expenses – not to mention higher risk insurance premiums.

  Saturday’s attack off India could signal a widening of attacks on tankers in international waters, which threatens to inject more chaos for routing major container lines.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 14:35

• The "Control System" Is Collapsing – 'The Great Taking' Looms As Globalism's Last Gasp
  The “Control System” Is Collapsing – ‘The Great Taking’ Looms As Globalism’s Last Gasp

  Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

  The Great Taking: The Latest “Anti-Mainstream” Conspiracy

  A new book has exploded on the alternative / conspiracy / fringe landscape over the past few weeks – I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense. Zerohedge, Bombthrower Media, et al, we all occupy this space. Let’s call it, “anti-mainstream”.

  

  The book is called “The Great Taking” and there is now a YouTube video documentary of it here. You can’t actually find it on Amazon (deliberate choice by author, I presume); I bought my copy via Lulu, but you can download the PDF for free here.

  At the risk of oversimplifying it: The Great Taking puts forth a warning that a virtually unknown entity called “The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation” (DTCC) is effectively the “owner” of all the publicly traded companies in the world, and in fact all debt-based assets of any kind:

  “It is about the taking of collateral (all of it), the end game of the current globally synchronous debt accumulation super cycle. This scheme is being executed by long-planned, intelligent design, the audacity and scope of which is difficult for the mind to encompass.

  Included are all financial assets and bank deposits, all stocks and bonds; and hence, all underlying property of all public corporations, including all inventories, plant and equipment; land, mineral deposits, inventions and intellectual property. Privately owned personal and real property financed with any amount of debt will likewise be taken, as will the assets of privately owned businesses which have been financed with debt.”

  Over the course of the book, the author describes a 50-year process by which ownership of shares in public companies, and all debt collateral has been “dematerialized”.

  In the olden days, you invested in a company – they gave you physical share certificates – and you were now part owner of the company. This is still how many value investors including me think of stock ownership.

  We’re not invested in all of these companies in The Bitcoin Capitalist Portfolio simply because we’re trying to time the oscillations in the price movements. We think of ourselves as partial owners of these businesses.

  Michael Saylor, Brian Armstrong, Mike Novogratz, Frank Holmes, Jamie Leverton et al, aren’t just celebrity CEOs in this space (Bitcoin)… they’re our partners. Granted, we’re the minority partners, silent ones, betting the jockeys and just along for the ride; but we don’t think of these positions as just stock charts and price gyrations – we think of them as businesses in which we are part owners.

  At least I do.

  According to The Great Taking, author David Rogers Webb, this is not true. We don’t own small pieces of these companies, we own claims on those pieces, because – over the course of decades, through the exigencies of ever-increasing trading volumes, combined with the machinations behind the scenes of diabolical manipulators – stock ownership has been supplanted by “security entitlements”.

  Webb posits that when the debt super-cycle culminates in its ultimate blow up; the trap will be sprung, and actual ownership over all these companies and assets will be subsumed by the clearing houses. An infinitesimal cadre of elites will effectively own everything, and the masses of the world will be reduced to serfdom.

  Which sounds familiar; it seems to be the common theme from The Great Taking to the WEF’s Great Reset (or Stakeholder Capitalism, or whatever they’re calling it these days).

  It’s the mother of all wealth transfers, one that makes the ongoing wealth transfer of inflation and the Cantillon Effect – or the sharp shock heists that occur during every crisis from the dot-com bust through the GFC to the Covid Panic (the last of which saw an overt war on small business as those deemed “non-essential” were shut down while the megacorps were propped up by the central banks) – seem tame.

  Here’s my thoughts on The Great Taking:

  Modernity could be described as humanity’s accelerating pace of technological advancement. Part of that advancement is the ever increasing level of intellectual abstraction.

  If you’ve been a member or following my writings long enough, you’ll have heard me talk about the W R Clement book, Quantum Jump; written in 1998, it ascribed the entire scientific revolution from the Enlightenment onwards, to the discovery of perspective (then called “God’s space”), in art:

  

  Brunelleschi and the re-discovery of Linear Perspective circa 1400’s

  That “quantum leap” began the process of rewiring all our brains for ever higher levels of intellectual abstraction. It enabled us to go from ownership of a coal mine, for example, being ascribed to whomever physically occupied the space – including militarily – to people, and even corporatized entities like pension funds or investment clubs, owning fractional pieces of that mine, from far off places, even other countries.

  Initially we did this using physical pieces of paper to represent that ownership. There is a scene in an Agatha Christie “Miss Marple” mystery, “The Moving Finger”, where a man of leisure (played by William D’Arcy) takes to convalesce in a small cottage in a country town, and he visits the local barrister to register his securities with him, reaching into the inside pocket of his sport jacket and handing him the physical share certificates.

  Today, he’d just handle everything from a smart phone he carries around in his jeans.

  That’s increasing abstraction.

  What The Great Taking is warning us about, is that this increasing level of abstraction comes with a price – that we’re no longer really fractional owners of these businesses, we’re owners of claims on these businesses.

  And he may be right.

  Webb is a former high level financier and an expert in the legislation and regulatory framework that governs the space. The book looks to be meticulously documented and the legalities well researched.

  This is no different, I might add, from our mantra: “Not your keys, not your coins”.

  In fact as I read through The Great Taking, I found myself marvelling at how closely everything Webb was describing resembled what happened during the crypto carnage of 2022-23, when hapless users who had deposited their crypto with exchanges found their assets rehypothecated, collaterized – even appropriated from under them.

  It drove home the lesson, hard.

  Holding shares of Amazon in your E*Trade account may, when the chips are down, be no different from keeping your stack of BTC on an exchange (please don’t).

  The businesses to survive an event like The Great Taking, may end up being privately held ones. The assets you keep may be the ones with no counter-party risk – sound familiar? It’s only a core tenet of the entire Bitcoin philosophy.

  It is possible that in the event of an even larger financial crisis than we’ve seen prior (and in case you haven’t noticed, each one is typically an order of magnitude larger than the previous), everybody holding publicly traded stocks on platforms gets rug-pulled – and some mysterious and shadowy entity winds up with all the marbles.

  Should that occur, I would expect it to signify the end of the global financial system as we know it, and not in a way wherein the society simply continues as a world of penniless serfs, subservient to about 0.001% of the elites.

  It would be more of a “last gasp of Globalism” than a final takeover of the world.

  Some closing thoughts from the book’s author seems to concur:

  I will make a startling assertion. This is not because the power to control is increasing. It is because this power is indeed collapsing. The “control system” has entered collapse.

  Their power has been based on deception. Their two great powers of deception, money and media, have been extremely energy-efficient means of control. But these powers are now in rampant collapse.

  This is why they have moved urgently to institute physical control measures. However, physical control is difficult, dangerous and energy-intensive. And so, they are risking all. They are risking being seen. Is this not a sign of desperation?

  This has also been my read on it from fairy early in the pandemic, and more so since – especially after the #FreedomConvoy. Official narrative aside, that event sounded the death knell for not only Covid Tyranny, but for WEF-inspired globalism itself.

  Within a year of that happening, all Covid emergency measures had ended worldwide, vaccination uptake rates went into secular decline, and the mainstream media entered into a full-on death spiral.

  Webb continues:

  “We have entered a time in which their nature is being recognized. Knowledge of their existence has become unavoidable. Their grasping will come to an end, because all of humanity cannot allow it to continue.

  Once it is recognized, humans will bond against a common existential threat.

  People from all walks of life will join in common cause. We have witnessed this already.”

  It follows a theme I’ve been developing for a few years now, one that I didn’t originally conceive but came across and feel is accurate:

  That theme is that the next, worldwide conflict (“World War III”, in essence) will not be a geo-political struggle of the US vs China, or West vs East, or NATO vs China/Russia: it will be populations against their own governments.

  When you think about it, it almost fits the historical definition of the Marxist “class struggle”, only we – hopefully – don’t get a Communist “utopia” at the end of it.

  In fact, I think that’s what everybody will be rebelling against: the imposition of a technocratic socialism that attempts to hoover up the property rights of the rest of humanity.

  Those attempting to capitalize on this, the elites and the technocrats, have only really had one superpower with which to build their position over time:

  “They promote the belief that they are all-powerful. They are not. 

  All they have had is the power to print money. 

  The rest, they have usurped from humanity.”

  Of course, Bitcoin is the kryptonite to this superpower, the one thing elites had which enabled them to rig the entire system in their favour is basically finished, and they know it.

  At the risk of going on too long about it here, but wanting to do the topic some justice, The Great Taking scenario isn’t incompatible with what we’ve been calling The Great Bifurcation since the onset of the pandemic, encapsulated by my glib, cynical quip:

  “In the future, there will only be one occupation: managing one’s wealth. And most people, are gonna be unemployed.”

  We see The Great Bifurcation happening all around us already: tent cities from Burnaby to Toronto, fentanyl zombies roving San Francisco, increasing masses behaving like savages; this isn’t because of race, politics, religion or even a far-reaching global conspiracy to impoverish humanity or depopulate the earth (although there are almost certainly cells of elites who would wish that) – it’s because we’re using debt for money, we can’t stop, and the level of intellectual abstraction that is required to operate, let alone thrive, within a hyper-financialized world, is leaving larger and larger chunks of the population behind.

  

  Anytown of the future.

  It’s Alvin Toffler’s “Future Shock” (tl;dr: the rate of technological change will accelerate and compound) released in 1971, combined with Clement’ “Quantum Jump” (intellectual abstraction will become increasingly more complex) from 1998, writ large.

  These two accelerating dynamics conspire to create a veritable “Breakaway society” where those who are positioned and have the cognitive ability to front run the technology live in the future, and the rest, who can’t, fall behind into the past.

  The main difference that I see is Webb’s Great Taking is a deliberate conspiracy driven by successive generations of insular elites, whereas my concept of The Great Bifurcation is, as I always say, more the result of perverse incentives and dynamics than outright conspiracy.

  The reality is probably elements of both.

  Having said all that, we should be clear in our motivations and strategies for what we are holding in our equities portfolios:

  We hold Bitcoin, in proper self-custody, so nobody can take it from us in the event of a catastrophic collapse of the financial system.

  We may hold some physical gold, silver, junk silver for the same reasons, and we may have property somewhere, farmland, anything that we can lay physical claim to – although we may find ourselves in a situation where we have to somehow enforce those claims.

  Stocks, ETFs, even Bitcoin stocks or weird crypto moonshots, we don’t hold these to survive the collapse of the system. We hold these to try and garner out-sized investment returns within the system so long as it continues to function.

  I don’t know about you, but I actually don’t want the financial system to collapse. I don’t want society to go off the rails, I am not an accelerationist.

  I’m not hoping for a hyper-inflationary flameout of the entire global economy. That would suck, and I’d prefer to be wrong about that.

  In other words, were The Great Taking scenario to play out and come true, it would be a permutation of a catastrophic collapse we’ve been positioning for anyway – and we never really considered our equities portfolio (at least we shouldn’t) as part of our toolkit for navigating the collapse of the financial system.

  One way or another, should the entire system collapse, I expect our stocks to be among the first casualties, via bail-ins, capital controls, forced conversions into government debt, recapitalizing zombie banks or after all those – if we’re unfortunate enough to have been wildly correct about our positions – “windfall taxes” taking much of what’s left. (I am not alone in thinking this; any of you who also read Mark Faber’s Gloom Boom Doom report know he expects to have upwards of 25% of his wealth confiscated by technocrats during some future, exigent crisis).

  That’s why I said in the November letter, on this cycle (or the next) we will have to individually make our exits from the equities based on our own financial goals. While we keep our Bitcoin stack forever and make plans for inter-generational succession – and we may do that with some of our stocks (I could see *** and *** being legacy, dynastic holdings) – for the most part we’re in these to strategically profit within the existing system and cash out to meet our financial objectives.

  Everybody knows I want my lake-house in the Muskokas, and you should know what it is that you want.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 14:00

• Watch: CNN Caught Editing RFK Jr Speech To Mislead Viewers
  Watch: CNN Caught Editing RFK Jr Speech To Mislead Viewers

  When he appeared on CNN last week, independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. was confronted with a video from one of his speeches — a video CNN clipped to convey a false impression that he had compared Covid restrictions to conditions in Nazi Germany. 

  

  The dishonest ambush came on Dec. 15 as Kennedy was interviewed by former MSNBC anchor Kasie Hunt. Hunt showed a video of Kennedy speaking at a January 2022 rally in Washington, which includes a passage in which he said…

  “Even in Hitler’s Germany, you could cross the Alps into Switzerland, you could hide in an attic like Anne Frank did.

  Today, the mechanisms are being put in place that will make it so none of us can run and none of us can hide.”  

  Hunt had framed the clip to suggest Kennedy was specifically comparing Covid mandates to Hitler’s Germany.

  As we’ll soon show, that was false.

  In the passage from which the above excerpt was drawn, Kennedy was broadly addressing the rise of technology that threatens to enable a “turnkey totalitarianism” that would wildly surpass the capabilities of Hitler’s Nazi regime.   

  To spice things up, Hunt next displayed a tweet from Kennedy’s own wife, Curb Your Enthusiasm actress Cheryl Hines, which came a few days after the speech. 

  At the time, Hines had been repeatedly nagged by NBC News reporter Ben Collins and others on social media asking if she stood by Kennedy’s remarks. She eventually folded and posted a tweet in which she threw her own husband under the bus, embracing the ridiculous, politically-correct notion — propped up by the likes of the Anti-Defamation League — that nobody’s allowed to compare anything to the Holocaust:

  My husband’s reference to Anne Frank at a mandate rally in D.C. was reprehensible and insensitive. The atrocities that millions endured during the Holocaust should never be compared to anyone or anything. His opinions are not a reflection of my own.

  — Cheryl Hines (@CherylHines) January 25, 2022

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

  “Is she right?” Hunt asked Kennedy. “No, she’s not right,” replied Kennedy, noting that Hines felt compelled to issue the tweet because, at the time, CNN’s Jake Tapper had similarly distorted Kennedy’s remarks and used them to contrive a bogus controversy.  

  Kennedy asked Hunt to play the full clip of his remarks. Exasperatingly, Hunt asked the producers to play the same cropped passage again, prompting Kennedy to interject and reiterate that he wanted CNN viewers to see the full context. Hunt replied, “We do not have a longer version of the clip,” condescendingly concluding, “I do think that the clip that we have is very clear.” 

  “What you’re doing is misleading the public right now,” said Kennedy.  

  Here’s a nice breakdown that first shows CNN’s framing of RFK’s speech, and then the full passage that contained RFK Jr’s allusion to Nazi Germany — not as mirroring the then-current state of affairs in America, but as a contrast to a looming menace around the globe, as governments are poised to obtain powers over individuals never before available: 

  Wow!
  CNN caught red-handed lying about Robert Kennedy’s record by selectively editing a clip.
  RFK Jr.’s campaign put out this video showing the full context of his statement next to the version CNN aired, which mischaracterises part of his speech to mean something he didn’t say. pic.twitter.com/vzRq2vAcPR

  — Christian (@ChristianM_74) December 22, 2023

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

  …and here’s a transcript of the key passage from that January 23, 2022 speech: 

  What we’re seeing today is what I call turnkey totalitarianism. They are putting in place all of these technological mechanisms for control that we’ve never seen before. It’s been the ambition of every totalitarian state from the beginning of mankind, to control every aspect of behavior, of conduct, of thought, and to obliterate dissent. 

  None of them have been able to do it. They didn’t have the technological capacity. Even in Hitler’s Germany, you could cross the Alps into Switzerland, you could hide in an attic like Anne Frank did. I visited, in 1962, East Germany with my father and met people who had climbed the wall and escaped. So, it was possible. Many died trying, but it was possible. Today, the mechanisms are being put in place that will make it so none of us can run and none of us can hide. 

  Within five years, we’re going to see 415,000 low-orbit satellites. Bill Gates says his 65,000 satellites alone will be able to look at every square inch of the planet, 24 hours a day. They’re putting in 5G to harvest our data and control our behavior. Digital currency, that will allow them to punish us from a distance and cut off our food supply.

  Vaccine passports…you have a series of rights. As flawed as our government is, you can still go out and go to a bar, you can go to a sporting event, you can get on a bus or an airplane and you can travel. You have certain freedoms, you can get educated, et cetera. The minute they hand you that vaccine passport, every right that you have is transformed into a privilege contingent upon your obedience to arbitrary government dictates. It will make you a slave. And what do we do about this? What do we do? We resist.” 

  When she told Kennedy that CNN didn’t have the full context available, Hunt promised, “I will make sure that we look at the further remarks as well.” However, there’s no indication of that promised follow-up. Indeed, in a CNN article summarizing Hunt’s interview, the network doubled down on the deception, flatly declaring that Kennedy “compared the Covid lockdowns to Nazi Germany, arguing that ‘even in Hitler’s Germany, you could cross the Alps into Switzerland’.”  

  The mistreatment of Kennedy comes as he continues to hold substantial support among voters desperate for something other than a Biden or Trump re-run:

  • A new Quinnipiac University nationwide poll has Biden leading Trump by one point in a head-to-head contest, and by two in a three-way contest with Kennedy — with RFK Jr grabbing a substantial 22% share. 

  • A Monmouth University poll found a comparably balanced impact of Kennedy’s presence, but with Kennedy drawing a little more from Biden than Trump. 

  • In the Quinnipiac poll, Kennedy is the top choice of independents — 36% prefer Kennedy to 32% for Biden and 26% for Trump. 

  Of course, the rubber really meets the road in individual state races, and some are hoping Kennedy can throw a wrench in the Red-Blue duopoly that’s steering America to ruin.

  “With the right electoral college vote strategy, he could pick off one or more states, thereby throwing the election into the US House of Representatives for the first time since 1824,” writes David Stockman.  

  While Kennedy’s ultimate impact on the major party candidates is still uncertain and evolving, one thing is clear: CNN and the entire establishment badly want the Kennedy wild card out of the 2024 deck. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 13:25

• 'Misery Index' Near Lowest Level Since Pre-COVID, But Are Americans Happy?
  ‘Misery Index’ Near Lowest Level Since Pre-COVID, But Are Americans Happy?

  Authored by Sam Bourgi via CreditNews.com,

  Americans should be in a better financial position heading into the holidays, according to a famous formula developed in the 1960s under President Lyndon Johnson.

  

  The sum of U.S. unemployment and inflation – known as the “misery index” – fell to 6.8% in November from 7.5% the previous month. That’s the lowest since the summer and fast approaching pre-Covid levels.

  The misery index is calculated by adding up the current unemployment rate (3.7%) and the inflation rate (3.1%). The formula provides a simple way to gauge whether the well-being of Americans is improving or not.

  Misery peaked in April 2020 when the index spiked to 15%, the highest since 1982. Conditions have improved since the early onset of Covid, but it hasn’t been smooth sailing.

  

  After falling back to 7.7% in January 2021, the index re-accelerated over the next two years as inflation surged. The misery index was 12.5% in June 2022—the same month that annual inflation hit 9.1%.

  The unemployment component of the index has been faring well since Covid emergency measures were lifted back in 2021. The unemployment rate has remained below 4% for nearly two years—even as the economy begins to slow.

  But economists warn that the misery index doesn’t offer a complete picture of how the average American is doing.

  You can tell just by asking them how they feel about the economy and personal finances.

  How do Americans really feel?

  Economist Greg Ip, who heads economic commentary at The Wall Street Journal, compared the misery index to the University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment index—one of the most closely-watched consumer surveys.

  “Based on historic correlations, sentiment has been more depressed this year than you would expect given the level of economic misery,” Ip wrote, arguing that consumers are more pessimistic than the misery index would suggest.

  A deeper dive into the sentiment data reveals that Americans are still frustrated about inflation and the impact of high interest rates on their finances. And while the consumer sentiment index rose in December—breaking a four-month skid—some economists attributed it to a temporary holiday boost ahead of Christmas.

  “Consumer spirits are perking up for the holiday season which is a sign Christmas is still coming this year,” said Christopher Rupkey, chief economist at FWDBONDS, a New York-based financial research company.

  

  A separate sentiment survey from LSEG/Ipsos paints an even less enthusiastic picture of the average consumer.

  The December primary consumer sentiment index—which measures Americans’ attitudes toward jobs, investments, the economy, and personal finances—declined from November and was only up slightly compared to 12 months earlier.

  According to the survey, attitudes toward the current situation, investments, and jobs “showed significant declines this month.”

  The impact of cumulative inflation

  As Creditnews Research reported in a recent study, Americans aren’t celebrating the slowdown in inflation because they’re still reeling from the cumulative price increases of the past three years.

  While inflation has fallen to 3.1%, consumer prices have increased by a cumulative 19% since the start of 2020. Food prices are up a whopping 25% over that period.

  Americans spent the better part of two years—April 2021 to January 2023—seeing inflation grow faster than their paychecks. That trend reversed in February of this year.

  But even with stronger purchasing power this year, the vast majority of Americans (92%) said they reduced their spending in the six months through September, according to a Morning Consult survey for CNBC.

  A majority of respondents across all wage brackets said current economic conditions negatively impacted their finances.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 12:50

• "It's Disgusting What They're Doing": Tucker Carlson Describes Visit With Julian Assange
  “It’s Disgusting What They’re Doing”: Tucker Carlson Describes Visit With Julian Assange

  As Julian Assange approaches his ‘final’ appeal against extradition to the United States, where he faces some 18 counts related to the release of vast troves of damning and embarrassing evidence against the US government, the 52-year-old WikiLeaks founder received a visit from Tucker Carlson to discuss his situation.

  

  Carlson describes Assange as “one of the greatest journalists of our age,” who has “spent his adult life bringing previously concealed facts to the public about what our leaders are doing.”

  Perhaps most notably, Assange published internal emails from the Democratic National Committee, revealing among other things that the Hillary Clinton campaign conspired to cheat against rival Bernie Sanders. These leaks, claimed by Democrats to be Russian hacks, were actually internal leaks, according to Carlson.

  What’s more, Carlson noted how a fabricated, media-amplified sexual assault charge in Sweden was used against Assange, who spent more than seven years in asylum at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. And when he exposed the CIA’s spying apparatus, former CIA Director Mike Pompeo discussed kidnapping or assassinating him while not being charged with any crime in the US at the time.

  Watch below as Carlson lays out the Assange situation…

  TC Shorts: Julian Assange pic.twitter.com/usckyGH9B2

  — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) December 22, 2023

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

  Subscribers to the Tucker Carlson Network (which of course, everyone should be) can watch the rest of the segment, in which Carlson describes sitting down with Assange for around an hour (no cameras allowed). He also discusses the situation with Assange’s wife, Stella.

  Highlights:

  • “We talked about why he is in prison, and my first question to him was: ‘what do you think this is actually about?’,” to which Assange replied that he “first became famous when WikiLeaks published documents and videos that the US government had kept secret from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that were politically embarrassing to the Pentagon – but that wasn’t the red line. The red line was several years later, when WikiLeaks published information about surveillance by the CIA.“

  • “It’s a total outrage that they’re holding him, and he hasn’t even committed or been charged with a crime in this country.”

  • “The inmates are treated like animals. And he’s not an animal, he’s a journalist who has committed no crime. And so, anyone who’s in favor of that, anyone who supports his continued torture, is your enemy.”

  • “Assange looks like press photographs of him, maybe older, pale, he hasn’t been outside in 13 years…”

  As Paul Craig Roberts notes, the Assange situation “shows conclusively that Washington regards truth as its most dangerous enemy.”

  A country without a media cannot be free or have an accountable government.  Americans who think that they live in a free country are completely deluded. They are pathetic.

  We encourage you to jump over to Tucker’s site and watch the rest here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 12:15

• The Rise Of Black Support For Trump
  The Rise Of Black Support For Trump

  Authore3d by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Fearing backlash, some black people feel they can only whisper, “I’m voting for Trump.”

  

  But others are becoming louder and prouder in voicing support for former President Donald Trump.

  Mark Fisher, co-founder of a Black Lives Matter (BLM) group in Rhode Island, made waves recently with his endorsement of the former president.

  “I knew I was going to pay a price for it,” Mr. Fisher told The Epoch Times, “but I felt like the benefit of doing it far outweighed the cost of me playing it safe.”

  Mr. Fisher said he felt obligated “to clear a path” for those who think the way he does.

  He and other pro-Trump black people are considered renegades.

  THE NIGGAS FOR TRUMP MOVEMENT HAS BEGUN BABY!

  🙌🏾 THANK YOU JOE BIDEN, WHAT A BIG WIN FOR TRUMP.#FJB #blackout #Blacks4Trump pic.twitter.com/IFLbsJuWdm

  — Omarr Shabazz (@OmarrShabazz) August 26, 2023

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

  That’s partly because President Trump’s foes have tried to brand him as a racist unworthy of votes from black Americans. But it’s also because he’s a Republican.

  For generations, black leaders and churches have encouraged black people to vote for Democrats, including President Joe Biden.

  But the tide seems to be turning. Opinion polls are showing that more black people are willing to break rank, as Mr. Fisher did.

  Since President Trump’s win in 2016, black support for him has more than tripled, now exceeding 20 percent in some surveys.

  Polling suggests that black people and other minorities who once spurned President Trump now appear willing to give his candidacy a fresh look—a trend that could help spell the difference between victory and defeat in the 2024 election.

  The Biden campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment.

  Three main factors appear to be spurring black people to pivot toward President Trump, according to Mr. Fisher and others who spoke to The Epoch Times: the economy, the criminal justice system, and the influence of other black people going public with their support.

  Blacks for Trump are on fire outside the Fulton County Jail.pic.twitter.com/vRanvDZ8wC

  — Simon Ateba (@simonateba) August 24, 2023

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

  Americans are continuing to feel the pinch of economic conditions under President Biden. Just about everyone, regardless of skin color, feels the weight of higher prices for groceries, gasoline, housing, and other essentials; for months, polls have been showing that a vast majority of citizens disapprove of the president’s economic policies, dubbed “Bidenomics.”

  People are also noticing the justice system’s seemingly unjust treatment of President Trump—a fate many black people have experienced.

  “They’re saying to themselves: ‘Now wait a minute; this looks very familiar,'” Mr. Fisher said. “Subconsciously, that’s a powerful thing.”

  Black people also lament that authorities are letting violent crime and illegal immigrants run amok, while they’re targeting President Trump and others for alleged nonviolent offenses.

  Having prominent black people, including musicians, revealing pro-Trump opinions, has emboldened others to do the same.

  Mr. Fisher said these endorsements made him feel he wasn’t alone; those trailblazers inspired him to come out of the shadows.

  “I saw other black people expressing themselves, displaying courage and independent thought, not being afraid of what other people think about them,” he said. “And I felt that my community needed me to do that too.”

  

  Strong Reactions

  Although Mr. Fisher said he “took a lot of heat” for endorsing President Trump, he also got “a lot of powerful, impactful, and profound messages from people all around the world,” along with interview requests from as far away as Japan.

  President Trump thanked Mr. Fisher with a surprise phone call and a dinner invitation. Some people excoriated the former president for doing so, considering Mr. Fisher’s history with BLM.

  President Trump and BLM have accused each other of sowing seeds of hatred and violence.

  “I feel like the white racists hate me and the black racists hate me,” Mr. Fisher said. “But what I’m doing is separating the wheat from the chaff. I’m creating a safe space for all those who want to be on the right side of history, who want to come together for the betterment of America and improvement of the people of America.

  “People are welcome to join in on that vision, or walk away from it. It’s that simple.”

  This fall, before Mr. Fisher revealed his support for President Trump, black rapper Waka Flocka Flame posted a profile picture of himself alongside President Trump on X, formerly Twitter. Separately, he posted: “TRUMP2024.”

  The photo attracted at least 13.5 million views. It also sparked controversy for the rapper, who had previously made derogatory remarks about the former president.

  Top Trump adviser Bruce LeVell told The Epoch Times that the musical artist had quietly begun shifting toward the former president some time ago; Mr. LeVell and Waka Flocka Flame met in 2022 and posed for a photo together.

  

  Being Informed

  Other black people, whether prominent or not, are starting to realize that Big Tech companies and government agencies worked together to suppress and twist information about President Trump, other political figures, and many hot-button issues in society, Mr. LeVell said.

  “This is, as I call it, ‘The Season of Exposure,’” he said. “And the great lies are being exposed.”

  A woman who goes by the name McKayla Rose on X agrees. Ms. Rose, 36, of Dallas, spoke to The Epoch Times on condition that her real name not be used because she wants to avoid repercussions.

  Ms. Rose said she initially “fell into the propaganda of Trump being bad.”

  🔥🚨 Trump’s arrest is only making him more popular in the black community!!

  “Trump is a brother now.”

  “They f**ks with people that been to jail.”

  MUST WATCH & SHARE!! 🔥👇🏼 pic.twitter.com/LctpGLZzAf

  — TONY™️ (@TONYxTWO) August 25, 2023

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

  “I was like, ‘Man, if everybody hates Trump, he must be a bad guy,'” she said.

  But things started to change for her about four years ago. As a mother of two, Ms. Rose became increasingly concerned about issues affecting her children. So she started spending more time researching government policies and politics.

  Originally from Tampa, Ms. Rose grew up amid a mix of white people, Hispanics, and Asians. That real-life experience convinced her that “America is not a racist country,” countering leftists’ claims that it is.

  “I know the majority of people aren’t racist, and I had more faith that people wouldn’t vote for such a blatantly ‘racist’ person,” she said, referring to how mainstream media tended to portray President Trump.

  Ms. Rose started seeking unfiltered sources of information. She began following President Trump’s Twitter account and listening to his public speeches.

  

  She started to see a pattern. After watching one of President Trump’s speeches, Ms. Rose would see leftists and news media outlets “completely, like, twist his words,” she said.

  Ms. Rose said she thinks other black people have started to similarly inform themselves.

  “I think Trump has overcome a lot of what has happened to him, and I really believe a lot more people are with him now, more than ever, especially black folks,” she said.

  Still, black Trump supporters can expect to be ostracized, Ms. Rose said, as she has been.

  After revealing her pro-Trump stance, Ms. Rose said she lost many of her black friends; she has been called a “coon,” “an Uncle Tom,” and “the ‘N-word.'”

  But the opposition from white liberals is the worst, she said, because “they’re just so condescending.”

  She said they ask her: “How could you vote for someone that hates you? You know he hates your people, right?”

  And they tell her: “You’re so dumb; you don’t know any better.”

  “And I’ve basically had them telling me that, because I’m black, I’m obligated to be Democrat—and that I must hate myself because I’m black and I’m a Trump supporter,” Ms. Rose said.

  

  Knowing they would face similar reactions for voicing support for President Trump, “a lot of black folks are still in hiding,” she said.

  “They stay silent because they want to get invited to the barbecue,” she said. “If you are black and you support Trump, you really kind of get disowned—not just in your own family but also in the black community.”

  Neither Biden nor Trump?

  Marv Neal, a 52-year-old black man who hosts a weekly radio show on Boston’s “Urban Heat” radio station, 98.1 FM, agreed that black people are reluctant to admit they dislike President Joe Biden or his policies—and therefore might consider casting a ballot for President Trump.

  But Mr. Neal told The Epoch Times that he and others have been disenchanted with both major parties’ candidates.

  This impression fits with findings of a new survey. A GenForward survey reported on Dec. 12 that about 20 percent to 25 percent of most minorities would have voted for “someone other than” President Trump or President Biden if the election had been held last month.

  Mr. Neal, a registered Democrat, said, “Just because you’re a Democrat doesn’t mean you’re going to get my vote.”

  He hasn’t always felt that way.

  “I was raised Democrat and it was just like, everything was Democrat … you got to vote Democrat, Democrat, Democrat, Democrat,” he said.

  But Mr. Neal said another black broadcaster at the same radio station, Larry Higginbottom, changed his perspective.

  “Like Larry says: ‘Vote your interest or whoever speaks to your interest. It doesn’t matter if they’re Democrat or Republican.'”

  

  Thus far, President Biden’s policies seem to lack benefits for “average, everyday citizens,” Mr. Neal said.

  Homeless shelters in Boston are “at capacity,” and legal residents can’t get the help they need because money is being spent to help immigrants and foreign nations, he said. Hotel rooms are being used to house immigrants, so the rates for any unused rooms have gone up for everyone else, he said.

  Mr. Neal said he initially disliked President Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration. “I was like: ‘Why you have to act like that, man? Why can’t you just help these people?'”

  But he said that now he sees that those border security policies benefited U.S. citizens.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 11:40

• Pentagon's Operation Prosperity Guardian "Falls Apart" As Spain, Italy, France Reject Request   
  Pentagon’s Operation Prosperity Guardian “Falls Apart” As Spain, Italy, France Reject Request   

  Australia is the latest country to reject a request from the United States to send warships to the Red Sea under the command of the Pentagon’s Operation Prosperity Guardian to protect commercial vessels along the critical maritime trade route from Iran-backed Houthi. 

  Defense Minister Richard Marles told Sky News that Australia’s military would not send a “ship or a plane” to the Red Sea but would triple the number of troops for the US-led maritime force. 

  “We need to be really clear around our strategic focus and our strategic focus is our region,” Marles said.

  The Australian Government continues to work with the United States and other partners in support of the international rules-based order in the Middle East and surrounding region.

  — Richard Marles (@RichardMarlesMP) December 21, 2023

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

  The Pentagon’s formation of Operation Prosperity Guardian, a new task force to protect shipping from Houthi drone and missile attacks in the Bab Al-Mandeb Strait and the Red Sea, requires increased warship patrols by the US and allies. This will create a security umbrella over commercial vessels to defend from attacks. 

  Reuters said about twenty countries have signed up for the Pentagon’s new operation. However, several countries, including Australia, Spain, Italy, and France, have rejected the Pentagon’s request to participate in the operation. 

  Spain’s Defence Ministry said it would only participate in NATO-led missions or European-coordinated operations – not ones commanded by the Pentagon: 

  “We will not participate unilaterally in the Red Sea operation.” 

  Italy’s Defence Ministry voiced similar concerns, indicating it would send naval frigate Virginio Fasan to the Red Sea but only respond to requests by Italian shipowners. 

  “Operation Prosperity Guardian in the Red Sea has practically Collapsed as France, Spain, and Italy have all announced their Withdrawal from the US Command Structure for the Operation, with the Three Nations stating they will only conduct further Maritime Operations under the Command of NATO and/or the European Union and not the United States,” X account OSINTdefender wrote. 

  Operation Prosperity Guardian in the Red Sea has practically Collapsed as France, Spain, and Italy have all announced their Withdrawal from the U.S. Command Structure for the Operation, with the Three Nations stating they will only conduct further Maritime Operations under the… pic.twitter.com/zhfih2XpTa

  — OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) December 23, 2023

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

  Another X user wrote: 

  “France, Spain, and Italy aren’t withdrawing because they don’t want to escalate the conflict. On the contrary, they’re withdrawing because they don’t believe the operation coordinated by Biden regime will protect their vessels. This is the result of a weak ‘President’ / lack of leadership.” 

  France, Spain, and Italy aren’t withdrawing because they don’t want to escalate the conflict. On the contrary, they’re withdrawing because they don’t believe the operation coordinated by Biden regime will protect their vessels. This is the result of a weak ‘President’ / lack of…

  — Marc 🇺🇸 (@gopher_marc) December 23, 2023

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

  The number of warships around the Bab Al-Mandeb Strait has increased this week. 

  

  We reminded readers of Zoltan Poszar’s prediction of central-bank-analogized ‘military protection’ and said it’s soon to become a reality… and just like that, it has:

  Protection is a conceptual counterpart to par. When you decide to take money out of a sight deposit, you expect the same amount back that you put in (par).

  When you sail foreign cargo from port A to port B, you expect to unload the same amount of cargo that you onloaded.

  Banks can deliver par on deposits most of the time. When not, central banks step in to help.

  Commodity traders can deliver foreign cargo from port A to port B most of the time, but when not, the state intervenes again: not the monetary arm, but the military arm of the state.

  What central banks are to the protection of par promises, the military branch is to the protection of shipments: foreign cargo needs to sail on sea routes and through choke points like the Strait of Hormuz, and “par” in this context

  As of Saturday morning, the number of container ships in the Red Sea with destinations to Asia, Europe, and the US is less than five. 

  

  This once-busy waterway that connects to the Suez Canal has seen a plunge in container ship activity this week. 

  

  Remember, this critical waterway is responsible for 10-12% of the world’s maritime freight. Vessels are now being diverted around the Cape of Good Hope, adding 1-2 weeks in travel time. Plus, container rates are soaring. 

  Red Sea is now largely closed to traffic. That’s 8.8 million bpd of daily oil transit, and nearly 380 million tons of daily cargo transit.

  Global traffic now will be rerouted around Cape of Good Hope, adding 40% to voyage distance (and even more to cost) pic.twitter.com/Xct7x03tFI

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 18, 2023

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

  The fact that seven major shipping companies, including Taiwanese container shipping line Evergreen and Belgian tanker owner Euronav, have halted sails through the Red Sea shows their lack of confidence in the US protecting the critical waterway. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 11:05

• 3 Out Of 5 Illegal Alien Households Are Supported By Taxpayer-Funded Welfare
  3 Out Of 5 Illegal Alien Households Are Supported By Taxpayer-Funded Welfare

  Authored by Eric Lendrum via American Greatness,

  A new analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) reveals that almost 60% of all illegal aliens households in the United States are benefiting from at least one form of taxpayer-funded welfare benefits.

  Breitbart reports that the study, written by CIS’ Steven Camarota and Karen Zeigler, found that illegal aliens households, as well as legal immigrants, use “significantly more” welfare than actual American citizens. Of illegal aliens currently occupying land in the U.S., 59% are on welfare that is funded by legal American citizens; 52% of legal immigrants are also using welfare. Meanwhile, less than 40% of American citizens use welfare.

  

  Among the most common forms of welfare for illegals are food stamps, Medicaid, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

  “This is primarily because the American welfare system is designed in large part to help low-income families with children, which describes a large share of immigrants,” the study explains.

  “Compared to households headed by the United States-born, immigrant-headed households have especially high use of food programs (36 percent vs. 25 percent for the U.S.-born), Medicaid (37 percent vs. 25 percent for the U.S.-born), and the Earned Income Tax Credit (16 percent vs. 12 percent for the U.S.-born),” CIS continues.

  The problem of illegals increasingly stealing welfare programs meant for American citizens will only get worse as the illegal population continues to surge to destabilizing levels. Now, after three years of Joe Biden’s open-borders policy, there are at least 49.5 million foreign-born individuals living in the United States, which is by far the largest amount ever recorded in American history. Under Biden, that total increased by about 4.5 million. If the trends remain the same, then the foreign-born population will surpass 70 million by the year 2060.

  While on the campaign trail in 2020, Biden and all other Democratic candidates pledged during the primary debates that they would support giving taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal aliens, alongside other forms of welfare.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 10:30

• Christmas Comes Early For 1 In 5 American Families
  Christmas Comes Early For 1 In 5 American Families

  Christmas traditions vary greatly across the world.

  While some countries hold the main celebration on Christmas Eve, others wait until Christmas Day to get festive and, most importantly at least to kids, to open presents.

  In the United States, most families unwrap their gifts on Christmas Day, with the majority not waiting until breakfast to get cracking or unpacking.

  But, as Felix Richter reports, according to data from Statista Consumer Insights, Santa comes early to 1 in 5 families, however, as 18 percent of respondents said they mainly open presents on Christmas Eve in their household.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Additionally, according to Statista Consumer Insights, a Christmas tree in the house tops the list of holiday must-haves this year, with 55 percent of Americans considering it essential to a proper celebration.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Some proper holiday tunes (there’s more than “Last Christmas”) and Christmas movies, think “Home Alone”, “Love Actually” and (to some) “Die Hard”, are other key ingredients to the holiday season with 50 percent of Americans calling both essential traditions.

  

  When asked about what they are looking forward to most thinking about the holiday season, Americans show that community and family still beat the commercial aspects of the holidays. 70 percent of the respondents look forward to spending time with friends and family, making it the top answer by far. Interestingly Americans also prefer giving presents over receiving them, showing that not all is lost for Christmas romantics.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 09:55

• It Was Meant To Be A Campaign Winner. Has 'Bidenomics' Become A Liability?
  It Was Meant To Be A Campaign Winner. Has ‘Bidenomics’ Become A Liability?

  Authored by Emel Akan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  President Joe Biden, who has typically refrained from discussing the stock market, finally broached the subject in mid-December, celebrating a record high for the Dow Jones. It was an apparent attempt to appeal to voters who are still pessimistic about inflation and the economy.

  

  The president recently trolled former President Donald Trump in a campaign video posted on social media; mocking his predecessor’s 2020 warning of a stock market crash if Mr. Biden were elected.

  “Good one, Donald,” President Biden wrote in a Dec. 15 post on X, formerly Twitter.

  During the 2020 presidential campaign, President Trump said, “If Biden wins, you’re going to have a stock market collapse the likes of which you’ve never had.”

  The recent rally shows three major U.S. indexes notching gains for seven consecutive weeks thanks to the Federal Reserve’s “dovish” stance. Since Oct. 27, the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500 surged by 15 percent, and the Nasdaq jumped by 17 percent.

  On Dec. 13, the central bank concluded its final policy meeting of the year, signaling that its anti-inflation campaign is making progress and that monetary policy tightening has likely come to an end.

  The Fed’s policymakers are now predicting three rate cuts in 2024, more than previously projected, offering a ray of hope to investors who have been gloomy for the past two years.

  President Biden, who’s running for reelection, has struggled to win over Americans with his economic agenda, which he calls “Bidenomics.” The 46th president may now want to capitalize on the recent stock market gains with the hope of making his economic message appealing to voters.

  According to a new CBS News poll, Americans perceive the current economic challenges as the most severe they’ve faced in generations, surpassing the 2008–09 financial crisis and even the inflation rates and gas shortages experienced in the 1970s.

  Despite positive job reports and discussions of a “soft landing” in the economy, people still focus on their personal experiences rather than broader economic data. An overwhelming number of respondents say their incomes aren’t keeping up with the rising cost of living.

  According to a recent poll by Bankrate, 59 percent of Americans believe the United States is in a recession, with many referring to it as a “silent recession.”

  

  ‘Wealth Effect’

  Individual struggles have a tremendous influence on people’s perceptions, exposing the disconnect between macroeconomic facts and personal financial conditions, according to Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar at the Institute for Policy Innovation, a public policy think tank.

  “Within the economy, there’s reality and there’s perception, and perception always trumps reality,” he told The Epoch Times.

  The main reason Americans are still struggling, according to Mr. Matthews, is that Bidenomics has erased the so-called wealth effect.

  The wealth effect is a behavioral economic theory that suggests people feel more financially secure and confident about their wealth when the values of their homes or investment portfolios rise. When consumers feel wealthy, they tend to spend more, which benefits the economy as a whole.

  Economic factors such as the stock market, inflation, home values, and consumer confidence contribute to the wealth effect.

  For example, when Americans witness their retirement savings plateau or decline, it has a significant influence on their sense of financial well-being. This is especially important given that the majority of Americans are investors in the stock market.

  According to a Gallup survey, 61 percent of Americans own stock, whether through direct investments or a retirement savings account such as a 401(k).

  Mr. Matthews, in a recent op-ed in The Hill, stated that Americans of all income levels experienced the wealth effect during the Trump years. Bidenomics, on the other hand, has brought the wealth effect to a standstill, which is one of the main reasons President Biden’s polling numbers are so poor, he said.

  

  The Dow Jones index was slightly below 20,000 when Donald Trump took office in January 2017. It reached above 30,000 when he left office, a roughly 50 percent increase in four years. That was despite a huge drop in spring 2020 due to the government shutdowns over the COVID-19 pandemic.

  During President Biden’s first year in office, the Dow rose to 36,000, a roughly 20 percent increase. While there have been some ups and downs since then, the Dow has largely moved sideways over the past two years, essentially remaining stagnant inside a tight range and producing mediocre returns. This has put yet another negative light on Bidenomics.

  

  To combat excessive inflation, the Fed began hiking interest rates in March 2022. As a result, Treasury yields have begun to look more attractive compared to stocks. This is one of the reasons investors have started to pull out of the stock market.

  Even though economic data is improving and the stock market has risen in recent weeks, President Biden may face additional economic challenges in 2024.

  “As always, the economy will play a big part in next year’s election and could constitute a major headwind for the Biden campaign,” Desmond Lachman, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told The Epoch Times.

  “While so far economic growth has held up well and inflation has been coming down, there is a high risk that we will experience an economic recession before the election.”

  Mr. Lachman said that the economy has yet to witness the full effects of the Fed’s monetary policy tightening.

  Inflation Erodes Wealth

  Inflation has played a larger role than the stock market in erasing the wealth effect.

  Americans haven’t witnessed inflation of this magnitude since the early 1980s. The real value of household wealth has been declining over the past two years, at the fastest rate in more than four decades, according to the Financial Times.

  Price increases reduce the purchasing power of consumers, devalue people’s wages and savings, and increase the cost of living. As a result, people feel poorer and cut back on their consumption and spending.

  Lower-income households with already tight budgets have felt the effects of inflation the most.

  

  Although the annual inflation rate has significantly dropped from its peak of 9.1 percent in June 2022 to 3.1 percent in November 2023, it’s important to note that prices remain elevated when compared to the time President Biden took office.

  Overall, prices have surged by more than 17 percent since January 2021—nearly 20 percent for food, more than 43 percent for gasoline, and 18 percent for housing, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 09:20

• In The Wake Of ESG's Ongoing Death, The Texas-Focused ETFs Have Arrived
  In The Wake Of ESG’s Ongoing Death, The Texas-Focused ETFs Have Arrived

  No sooner have we witnessed the death of ESG investing, including the shuttering of several ESG and “green” themed ETFs, than we bear witness to the launch of two “Texas-Based” ETFs.

  Coming online this past week was the Texas Capital Texas Oil Index ETF and the Texas Capital Texas Small Cap Equity Index ETF, being brought to market by the Texas Capital Funds Trust. 

  The SEC prospectus for the Texas Capital Texas Oil Index ETF says it “seeks to provide investment results that, before fees and expenses, correspond generally to the total return performance of the Alerian Texas Weighted Oil and Gas Index”.

  The Texas Capital Texas Small Cap Equity Index ETF “seeks to provide investment results that, before fees and expenses, correspond generally to the total return performance of the Texas Capital Texas Small Cap Equity Index”, the prospectus says.

  

  “The Adviser believes that companies headquartered in Texas, including small-capitalization companies, enjoy certain economic, regulatory, taxation, workforce and other benefits relative to companies headquartered in other states,” it reads.

  “In the Adviser’s view, the strong business environment in the State of Texas is demonstrated by, among other things, its infrastructure spending and resources, relatively low cost of conducting business, export data, and third-party rankings and recognitions.”

  “In addition, the Texas economy is large and diverse,” it says. “The Texas economy, if considered on a standalone basis, would represent the 9th largest economy globally, and, in the Adviser’s view, offers the best business environment in the United States.”

  “The Texas economy enjoys a relatively younger workforce and has enjoyed relatively faster growth, compared to the rest of the country. The Adviser believes that the Fund offers a cost-effective opportunity to invest directly in small-capitalization companies that benefit from the economic environment in Texas.”

  And as Bloomberg’s Eric Balchunas noted this week, it isn’t just Texas-based ETFs coming online. Coal ETFs are also starting to have a resurrection:

  Today, a Coal ETF launched and now a Texas Oil ETF has been filed. Fossil fuels having a bit of a post-ESG-shaming rebirth. https://t.co/s1p6T4nxwY

  — Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) December 20, 2023

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

  Recall, we have written about the dying off of ESG and “green” investment products over the last few months. Most recently, this month, Goldman Sachs shuttered its ActiveBeta Paris-Aligned Climate U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF. 

  The ETF is shutting down, per a Goldman Sachs press release which says that “the Fund’s Board of Trustees, at the recommendation of GSAM, has approved a plan of liquidation for the Fund”. 

  “The Fund will begin the process of liquidating portfolio assets and unwinding its affairs in an orderly fashion over time,” the release says. 

  Balchunas pointed out earlier this month that “there was just way too much supply for the demand” with the ETF and that “it’s going to get worse too”. Balchunas says the ETF only took in $7 million over the course of 2 years. 

  We also wrote just days ago about Jeff Ubben – who is shuttering his sustainability fund – calling traditional climate summitry an “echo chamber” of diplomats. 

  Less than a week before that we noted that $30 billion has been shaved off the value of clean energy stocks over the last 6 months. 

  We also pointed out weeks ago how the ESG grift was reaching endgame after Markus Müller, chief investment officer ESG at Deutsche Bank’s Private Bank stated that sustainability funds should include traditional energy stocks, arguing that not doing so deprives investors of a prime opportunity to invest in the transition to renewable energy.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 08:45

• Britain’s Net Zero Disaster And The Wind Power Scam
  Britain’s Net Zero Disaster And The Wind Power Scam

  Authored by Rupert Darwall via RealClear Wire,

  “This is not about complicated issues of cryptocurrency,” assistant U.S. attorney Nicolas Roos declared in the Sam Bankman-Fried trial, after accusing the defendant of building FTX on a “pyramid of deceit.” Much the same can be said about the foundations of Britain’s net zero experiment. Energy is complicated, and electricity is essential to modern society and our quality of life, but as with FTX, the underlying story is straightforward: wind power and net zero are built on a pyramid of deceit.

  

  Net zero was sold to Parliament and the British people on claims that wind-power costs were low and falling. This was untrue: wind-power costs are high and have been rising. In the net zero version of “crypto will make you rich,” official analyses produced by the Treasury and the Office for Budget Responsibility rely on the falsehood that wind power is cheap, that net zero would have minimal costs, and that it could boost productivity and economic growth. None of these has any basis in reality.

  The push for net zero began in 2019, when the U.K.’s Climate Change Committee produced a report urging the government to adopt the policy. Part of the justification was historic climate guilt. In the words of committee chair Lord Deben, Britain had been “one of the largest historical contributors to climate change.” But the key economic justification for raising Britain’s decarbonization from 80% to 100% by 2050 – i.e., net zero – was “rapid cost reductions during mass deployment for key technologies,” notably in offshore wind. These illusory cost reductions, the committee claimed, “have made tighter emission reduction targets achievable at the same costs as previous looser targets.” It was green snake oil.

  During the subsequent 88-minute debate in the House of Commons to write net zero into law, the clean-energy minister, Chris Skidmore, also asserted that net zero’s cost would be the same as the previous 80% target, which Parliament had approved in 2008. Challenged by a Labour MP on the absence of a regulatory-impact assessment, Skidmore misled Parliament, saying that there had been no regulatory-impact assessment in respect of raising the initial 60 percent target to 80 percent.

  The regulatory-impact assessment that Skidmore says doesn’t exist gave a range of £324 billion to £404 billion when the target was raised to 80% – an estimate that excluded transitional costs – and cautioned that costs could exceed this range. Unlike today’s political pronouncements, the assessment was honest about the consequences of Britain acting if the rest of the world did not. “The economic case for the UK continuing to act alone where global action cannot be achieved would be weak,” it warned.

  The Climate Change Act was passed to show Britain’s climate leadership and inspire the rest of the world to follow its example. How did that work out? In the 11 years that transpired from passing the Act to legislating net zero in 2019, Britain’s fossil fuel emissions fell by 180 million metric tons – a 33% reduction. Over the same period, the rest of the world’s emissions increased by 5,177 million metric tons – a rise of 16%. Put another way, 11 years of British emissions reduction were wiped out in around 140 days by increased emissions from the rest of the world.

  Someone who claims that he’s a leader but who has no followers is typically regarded as a fool. It’s different with climate. Politicians parade their green virtue – Skidmore is to quit the House of Commons, and he teaches net zero studies at Harvard’s Kennedy School – while voters get mugged with higher energy bills. Analysis of Britain’s Big Six energy companies’ regulatory filings reveals that fuel-input costs for gas and coal-fired power stations were flat from 2009 to 2020. Still, the average price per kilowatt hour (kWh) of electricity paid by households rose 67%, driven by high environmental levies to subsidize renewable-energy investors. Yet supposedly the cost of renewable energy has plummeted.

  During Prime Minister’s Questions earlier this year, Rishi Sunak claimed the cost of offshore wind had fallen from £140 per megawatt hour (MWh) to £40 per MWh, numbers assiduously propagated by the wind lobby and the Climate Change Committee. His claim is flat-out false. The prime minister has been suckered by falling per MWh price bids made by wind investors in successive allocation-round bids for offshore wind subsidies.

  The explanation for this is to be found not in falling costs but in a flawed bidding process that rewards opportunistic bidding by wind investors. The government was giving away valuable options that commit the government to honor the prices paid for winning bids but commit investors to nothing. Because investors don’t pay anything for these options, the only way they can get them is by cutting the price they offer – but are not obliged to take – for their electricity unless they choose to exercise their options much later in the process.

  Falling prices in successive allocation rounds are thus an artefact of moral hazard hardwired into the allocation mechanism; they reveal nothing about the trend in the costs of offshore wind. Analysis of audited financial data of wind farm companies undertaken by a handful of independent researchers comprehensively debunks the falling wind costs claim. The unavoidable move to deeper waters offset any cost reductions and operating costs per MWh of electricity for new offshore wind projects; the prices for the move are around double those assumed in the subsidy bids.

  Preeminent among these researchers is Gordon Hughes, a former economics professor at Edinburgh University and adviser to the World Bank on power plant economics. Hughes’s analysis shows that by the twelfth year of operation, rising per MWh operating costs of deep-water wind turbines exceed their government-guaranteed prices, squeezing out their capacity to repay their capital and financing costs.

  The intermittency and variability of wind and solar led the government to create a capacity market to pay for standby generation. In any economic appraisal of renewables, the costs of running the capacity market should be allocated to wind and solar as their intermittency and variability create the need for it. Electricity procured from the capacity market is not cheap. In 2020, German-owned Uniper’s thermal power stations obtained an average price of £224 per MWh, around four times the typical wholesale price.

  Confirmation that offshore wind has huge, likely insuperable, cost and operating difficulties came in June, when Siemens Energy issued a shock profits warning and saw its shares plunge by 37 percent, in part because of higher-than-anticipated turbine failure rates. According to Hughes, the implication is that future wind operating costs will be higher, and output significantly lower, shortening the turbines’ economic lives. His conclusion is crushing:

  The whole justification for the falling costs of wind generation rested on the assumption that much bigger wind turbines would produce more output at lower capex cost per megawatt, without the large costs of generational change. Now we have confirmation that such optimism is entirely unjustified . . .  It follows that current energy policies in the UK, Europe and the United States are based on foundations of sand – naïve optimism reinforced by enthusiastic lobbying divorced from engineering reality.

  The British government has been conned into placing a massive bet on offshore wind and is forcing electricity consumers to spend billions of pounds on a dead-end technology.

  The falling cost of wind deception contaminates official assessments of the macroeconomic consequences of net zero. The Office for Budget Responsibility claims that the cost of low-carbon generation has fallen so fast that it is now cheaper than fossil fuel generation. Similarly, the Treasury erroneously took falling prices in wind subsidy allocation rounds as indicating falling wind costs. Both see the economy riddled with multiple layers of market failures, while not recognizing the real danger of government policy being captured by vested interests, as, indeed, it has been. Taken to its logical conclusion, theirs is an argument for switching to central planning and a command-and-control economy.

  The Treasury argues that “other things being equal,” the added investment required by renewable energy “will translate into additional GDP growth.” Other things, of course, are not equal. As recent history shows, there’s a world of difference between investors and politicians making capital-allocation decisions. The centrally planned economies of the former communist bloc squandered colossal amounts of capital, immiserating their populations. Few now believe that investment in those economies boosted growth.

  We don’t need to hypothesize. Government data disprove the Treasury’s contention and demonstrate that increasing deployment of renewable capacity reduces the productivity of Britain’s grid. In 2009, 87.3 gigawatts (GW) of generating capacity, comprising only 5.1 percent of wind and solar, generated 376.8 terrawatt hours (TWh) of electricity. In 2020, 100.9 GW of generating capacity, with wind and solar accounting for 37.6 percent of capacity, produced 312.3 TWh of electricity. Thanks to renewables, 13.6 GW (15.6 percent) more generating capacity produced 64.5 TWh (17.1 percent) less electricity.

  Those numbers are damning for renewables and demonstrate why they make electricity more expensive and people poorer. Before mass deployment of renewables, 1 MW of capacity in 2009 produced 4,312 MWh of electricity. In 2020, 1 MW of capacity generated 3,094 MWh, a decline of 28.3 percent. It’s as clear as can be: investment in renewables shrinks the economy’s productive potential. This is confirmed by the International Energy Agency’s net zero modelling. Its net zero pathway sees the global energy sector in 2030 employing nearly 25 million more people, using $16.5 trillion more capital and taking an additional land area the combined size of California and Texas for wind and solar farms and the combined size of Mexico and France for bioenergy – all to produce 7 percent less energy.

  Britain’s energy-policy disaster has lessons for America. The physics and economics of wind power are not magically transformed when they cross the Atlantic. Whenever a politician or wind lobbyist touts wind as low-cost or says net zero will boost growth, they become accessories to the wind power scam. The data lead ineluctably to a decisive conclusion: net zero is anti-growth. It is a formula for prolonged economic stagnation. Anyone who wants the truth about renewables should look at Britain and the sorry state of its economy. For the last decade and a half, it has been going through its worst period of growth since 1780.

  Unlike in business and finance, there are no criminal or civil penalties for those who promote policies based on fraud and misrepresentation. Rather, net zero is similar to communism. Like net zero, communism was based on a lie: that it would outproduce capitalism. But it failed to produce, and belief in communism evaporated. When the collapse came, it was sudden and rapid. The truth could not be hidden. A similar fate awaits net zero.

  Rupert Darwall is a senior fellow of the RealClear Foundation and author of  The Folly of Climate Leadership: Net Zero and Britain’s Disastrous Energy Policies.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 08:10

• SBF's Lawyer Says FTX Co-Founder Was 'Worst' Witness Ever
  SBF’s Lawyer Says FTX Co-Founder Was ‘Worst’ Witness Ever

  Stanford Law professor David Mills, who led Sam Bankman Fried’s criminal defense trial, says the FTX co-founder went off the rails when he took the stand.

  

  “He may be at the very top of the list as the worst person I’ve ever seen do a cross examination,” said Mills, a close friend of Bankman-Fried’s parents.

  The 76-year-old Mills says that while the verdict was inevitable, SBF refused to adopt a key strategy in the face of his co-founders throwing him under the bus on the witness stand, Bloomberg reports.

  “I thought it was almost impossible to win a case when three or four founders are all saying you did it,” said Mills. “Even if they’re all lying through their teeth, it’s really, really hard to win a case like that.”

  

  Mills says that if he had his way, SBF would have admitted to everything the witnesses and prosecution said, and then focused on convincing the jury that it was all part of a good-faith effort to save FTX.

  “That’s not how Sam remembers things, to put it kindly,” said Mills. “I thought there was a really good story there. But he can’t tell the story that all these people are lying. You got five people who say one thing, one person says another thing. Well, you’ve got no shot—zero.”

  Instead of admitting to his mistakes, SBF became combative, quibbling over prosecutors’ phrasings, while claiming not to remember damning statements he made. The now-jailed SBF came off as evasive, while his cross examination devolved into death by a thousand cuts, as prosecutors dragged his nose in his own words.

  Mills eventually had enough, and was notably missing from the courtroom when the jury delivered its verdict.

  Meanwhile, he says he won’t have anything to do with any appeal by the FTX co-founder, and worries about his relationship with SBF’s parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried.

  “I’m concerned, when you believe in your child’s complete innocence, that you need to blame someone,” he said. “and I am a likely candidate.”

  Bankman and Fried, meanwhile, said in a statement: “We love David Mills. He has been a fantastic lawyer for us. He has also been an amazingly steadfast friend and will be grateful to him for being with us in a dark time, forever.”

  

  Mills isn’t so sure.

  “My sadness for them is extreme, and I don’t know that our friendship will survive this.“

  So sad. But let’s not lose sight of the fact that SBF was convicted of fraud, and dug his own grave. In February, he will face five additional charges at a second trial, including bank fraud and bribery.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 07:35

• Luongo: No One Has Really Grokked How Big The Suez/Houthi Gambit Is
  Luongo: No One Has Really Grokked How Big The Suez/Houthi Gambit Is

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  We’ve had a lot of foreshadowing of the Suez Canal being a major hotspot for conflict over the past couple of years. Think back to the Evergreen beaching itself in the canal in 2021. Everyone is just now waking up to the idea that global shipping is at risk here.

  

  This Twitter thread (by a self-professed moron who, IMO, seems to have a good grasp on things) is representative of the level of analysis being put forth by people still in love with the US Navy’s ability to force project around the world. He’s just waking up to the importance of this situation but he hasn’t picked up on the nuance of it from the other side of the battlefield.

  This Red Sea situation is very very bad. And while the best person to consult is a logistician, I want to take a laymans stab at it.

  Currently, container ships are being attacked regularly with anti ship missiles and drones via the Houthi’s(Iranian Proxies in Yemen). The USS… pic.twitter.com/71exFF3tQh

  — 🏛 Aristophanes 🏛 (@Aristos_Revenge) December 19, 2023

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

  In order to set the stage properly I’m going to have to go back in time. So, let’s start with October 7th and the attack on Israel by Hamas. In the October issue of the Gold Goats ‘n Guns Newsletter I laid out why I thought everyone had an incentive to allow and/or instigate that event.

  The October Setup

  So, here’s the backdrop for Davos and the US/UK:

  Now, if you are a cornered old money globalist oligarch with your finger on the pulse of these events…

  Then, you are seeing:

  1. The project in Ukraine hanging by a thread as European and American support wanes at every level just below the unelected leadership.

  2. The ECB failing to hold the line on rising bond yields to stave off a banking crisis.

  3. US Yield Curve blowing out on the long end, giving Yellen no good options for funding the current budget deficit or for rolling over existing debt, much of which is due in 2024.

  4. German state elections deeply embarrass the ruling coalition in Hesse and Bavaria as well as the CDU/CSU who lost significant votes to Alternative for Germany (AfD) in CSU stronghold Bavaria.

  5. Polish elections forcing the ruling Law and Justice Party (PiS) out of power despite tough words about Ukrainian refugees and shaking Germany down for WWII reparations.

  6. The BRICS adding five nations which give them control over major trade routes into and out of Europe, including, but not limited to, the Suez Canal.

  7. The US geopolitical position in the Middle East degrading as Saudi Arabia sides with Russia and Iran on every issue.

  8. Iran becoming an integral partner in the burgeoning Asian integration on trade and policy.

  Would you not conclude that time had run out, and upsetting the game board in some major way was your best, if not only, move?

  Now, from the other side we have the following circumstances:

  If this [revealing the depravity of Neocon hatred of Arabs] was Iran’s intended goal, then mission accomplished.

  It also implies that they are ready and willing to open up the entire can of worms across the Middle East in order to bring the Arab tribes together to further their regional ambitions. And there won’t be a T.E. Lawrence coming to bring them back into the British fold this time.

  Because Israel’s response here will likely preclude any of them being able to stand aside and let Israel just wipe out the civilians in Gaza, even if secretly they despise Hamas as much as the Israelis do.

  So, if you’re Iran and you see:

  1. Weak US leadership in Biden and a vacant speaker

  2. Support for Ukraine failing rapidly.

  3. The Arab oil states standing firm with Russia athwart US/EU sanctions.

  4. China investing in Syria’s reconstruction.

  5. Turkey openly attacking US-backed Kurdish SDF forces over Syrian oil fields.

  6. A cynical landgrab by Azerbaijan to break up the International North-South transport corridor in Armenia

  7. Russia returning to the European gas market via Turkey

  8. Increased influence regionally having re-opened diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia.

  Wouldn’t you do something to upset the status quo and force a choice on the US but also the rest of the Arab world?

  The initial US response was to quickly move in with massive naval force to signal our support of Israel and also to ‘warn Iran.’ Martin Armstrong immediately brought up the point of this being a trap for the US. The thread linked above has the current disposition of US naval forces deployed around the Arabian peninsula.

  The Thucydides Trap is one where a dominant power is provoked into a response against a rising power over an issue that it has to respond to to prove it still has that supremacy but they cannot win. This is exactly what the rising power wants the dominant power to do.

  The BRICS’ adding six pivotal countries in August, as I said then, was the point of this year’s Summit, not the introduction of some gold-backed BRICS coin.

  This is what Armstrong brought up, the possibility of Russia/Iran/China springing a Thucydides Trap on the US over Israel.

  Why the Yemen War is a War in Name Only

  So, how does the Houthi attacks on global shipping fit into this?

  The same way that “Iranian Militias” have stepped up their attacks on US forces stationed in Syria and Iraq. The goal is to push the US out of the Middle East and redraw the map potentially undoing both the Balfour Declaration and the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement.

  Israel has a choice, the Balfour Declaration is still negotiable, depending on their actions going forward.

  Skyes-Picot, however, is not. The Arabs and the Persians are tired of the conflicts the West flares up over old British-drawn borders.

  Everyone makes the mistake of thinking that the US backs Israel because of “The Jews.” Once that shibboleth is invoked all rational discussion is shut down. It’s done so to keep us from looking at the far more important thing at stake. That is literally the bullshit cover story for British strategic analysis of the world map from the perspective of a “former” maritime empire.

  And, sadly, as I’ve been arguing for years, jews are the ones who will suffer the backlash.

  The British (and old continental Europe) understand completely that globalism is dependent on global shipping. On its face, shipping is far more efficient and less vulnerable to sabotage ultimately than multi-thousand-mile-long pipelines.

  If you blow up or hijack a ship, you lose a ship. You blow up a $55 billion pipeline and that changes the map entirely.

  That was the lesson of the Nordstream bombings, to remind everyone of how fragile physical infrastructure is.

  So, to protect global shipping, which traditionally is controlled by the major European shipping companies and the City of London Insurance industry, attacks on physical infrastructure like pipelines, railways, refineries, etc. makes perfect sense. Blow up ports (Beirut) controlled by your enemy, and you force the world to go through the ports you control.

  What I’m suggesting now is that Iran/China/Russia are going after the idea that shipping isn’t as vulnerable as physical infrastructure. In fact, the US “empire” is a naval one just like the British one was. They are modeled on the same structure and worldview. The US is the inheritor of the British maritime empire.

  This is another reason why the rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia was so important. not just to end the Saudi war on Yemen, but to turn the Houthis from a thorn in the side of the Saudi oil business into an asset as they pivot from supporting the old US/British empire to the rising Chinese/Russian/Iranian-led one.

  Don’t you find it strange that Putin never really struck back after the US/UK blew up Nordstream? All talk of it being led by anyone other than the Neocon crazies in the National Security Council and GCHQ is just misdirection.

  Putin is patient. He understood symbolically what Nordstream represented. Pipeline diplomacy is Russia’s best chance at avoiding protracted war for the next century.

  Stitch the world together with gas and oil, stabilize borders, rebuild Russia, introduce a new kind of peace. It’s a kind of peace not dependent on maritime prowess, which is the British model, and well it should be since England is an island in the north Atlantic.

  It’s a land-based one with control over the geographic chokepoints around the Mediterranean Sea and the Arabian peninsula facilitating opening up new markets and ending old European colonial control over Africa, Asia and even South America.

  And now Putin’s taking his opportunity to strike at the heart of the maritime prowess of globalism itself by allowing Iran to activate the Houthis to attack commercial shipping around the Gulf of Aden.

  Target: Egypt

  Now, let’s look at the real target of the Hamas attack on Israel. Who has been at the center of all of the major challenges to the globalist plan in 2023?

  Egypt.

  It is Egypt that the Russians and Chinese were encouraging to default on their IMF debt, offering to write down their debt to Egypt if the IMF did the same. Alex Krainer and I have talked about this ad nauseum.

  It was Israel’s offer to forgive Egypt’s IMF debt if they would take all the Palestinian refugees from Gaza that really gave the game away. It was a real offer for once, not just returning stolen property which is the typical Davos-style offer.

  To reiterate, the purpose of the BRICS Summit in August was their taking ‘control’ over all the waterway surrounding the Arabian peninsula, i.e. the most globally important shipping lanes to old Europe and what’s left of the British Empire.

  The Suez Canal.

  Egypt was the prize folks. And since the moment it was announced that Egypt would be joining the BRICS, the focus has been on trying to stop it from happening by destabilizing the country. So, let’s start a brutal ground war over an attack that Israeli leadership knew was coming in order to create a refugee crisis into Egypt. Let’s step up pressure on the el-Sisi government and try for a color revolution again after the election.

  Here’s the War Street Journal headline, after el-Sisi wins re-election with nearly 90%.

  “Egypt’s Sisi Faces Stiff Challenges in Third Term as President”

  It was a surprise to me they didn’t even publicly challenge the result and try for another color revolution. Maybe we finally get to see just how limited the funds are now that Powell’s got rates at 5.5%, but I’m just being churlish.

  The WSJ article is a roadmap to Egypt’s future with respect to its relations with the West. We will try to economically pressure el-Sisi into submission. It won’t work because Egypt has powerful friends… that whole rising powers thing again.

  So, the way I see this in terms of move-countermove is the following”

  1. BRICS bring Egypt into the fold knowing that it opens up alternate funding options for the country outside of the IMF loan sharks.

  2. The Hamas attack is allowed to go forward with everyone thinking it’s to their advantage to do so.

  3. Israel/US/UK think they can pressure Egypt into submission

  4. Russia/Iran/China think they can up the pressure on the US to leave the region.

  5. Hamas was a sacrificial pawn in this game, by both sides… Iran and the UK.

  6. Netanyahu acts completely to type by launching a brutal land grab with talk everywhere about the oil fields, the new trade corridor from India to Israel into Europe, which are direct threats on the Suez.

  7. The US moves in multiple carrier groups to ‘protect vital shipping operations.’

  8. Iran clearly is provoking the US by then activating the Houthis to attack commercial ships. Piracy coming out of the Horn of Africa increases. Everyone still thinks they have cards to play.

  9. Davos wants the US in a position where it cannot maintain Pax Americana. The UK is desperate to maintain this…. this is the fundamental tension between the Neocons and old Europe.

  10. Davos is happy to cut a deal with China and Russia over keeping trade routes open so they announce quickly that all the major European shipping companies pull out of using the Suez Canal.

  11. But notice who the Houthis are threatening… Only the ships of the West, harassing the US Navy, hitting MAERSK liners, denying all ships bound for Israel.

  So, is the Suez now unsafe in general because of the lawlessness of the region or is it just unsafe for the West? If China’s cargo ships are allowed to go through and Russia’s oil tankers as well, then we have our answer.

  Because to me this whole thing reeks of a setup. Think about how quickly the Davos shipping companies announced their leaving the Suez behind. The obvious point is to deny Egypt the Suez transport fees. The other is that the Houthis are mining the Red Sea.

  But, it also possible despite all the posturing, the US refused to fall into the trap of trying to defend them with the US Navy? I don’t think this is a likely scenario. The costs to the US are simply too great here if they don’t swat the Houthis.

  The Hobson’s Choice for the US is if the navy intervenes that keeps Pax Americana in place for a little while longer but that let’s pressure off Egypt, because the minute we do then the Houthis will stop playing games. Egypt stabilizes, the Suez is reinforced and the squeeze is over.

  If the US doesn’t intervene then Pax Americana on the high seas is dead and the pressure on global shipping will increase. Egypt will have to be more directly supported economically by Russia and China. el-Sisi will have no other choice.

  But this also secures, in the long run, the pivot point for both China’s Belt and Road as well as Russia’s International North South Transport Corridor.

  And who is the crossroads for both of these? Iran.

  Lastly, the cost to Europe will be enormous as the extra travel time around Africa will only make goods coming out of Europe that much more expensive.

  The Real Oil Angle…

  So, now let’s talk about the effects on what this is really all about: oil demand.

  We’ve been subject to unbelievable gaslighting about marginal demand for oil through futures market manipulation, SPR releases, and sanctions policy. OPEC+ keeps cutting production to maintain the price the Saudis need to balance their budget, roughly $80 per barrel. That level also keeps inflation pressures in the US high, and European competitiveness low, forcing the ECB to defend the euro to keep domestic energy costs down, which they’ve done for nearly two years now.

  Adding length to the average trip for container ships won’t just send day-rates for bulk shipping containers higher, it will also use up more #6 bunker fuel, which is what these ships run on. #6 bunker fuel for the layman is just cleaned up crude oil.

  In an email to a private discussion group I’m in, the following back-of-the-envelope calculation on global oil demand was made…

  The average number of suez canal transits per day is 56 (let’s say 1/2 divert).  The extra deviation around Africa is about 10 to 12 days (use 10).  Fuel consumption per day is from 150 to 350 (call it 250).  There is about 7.5 bbls per ton of bunker fuel.  SO, 28 ships * 10 days * 250 mt * 7.5 bbls/mt = 525,000 bbls per day of extra consumption if 1/2 the ships that normally use the suez deviate.

  500,000 bbls/day is nothing to sneeze at. In fact, it’s immense in marginal demand terms. It undermines the entire Israeli gambit to pressure Egypt.

  And this is why OPEC+ (or BROPEC+) is not screaming about the attacks on shipping. The QED for this entire analysis is the following headline from Reuters:

  “Saudi Arabia urges US restraint as Houthis attack ships in Red Sea”

  Doesn’t anyone wonder why the Saudis are so quiet on this? This is piracy on their doorstep. The Houthis are supposed to be their enemies, since they’ve been fighting a war against them for years.

  But this gambit by the BRICS is clearly in their best interest and tells you all you need to know about who MbS and the rest of the royal family now back in all things geopolitical. Iranian-backed terrorists are openly harassing shipping around the Arabian peninsula and the Saudis “urge restraint?”

  The US announces a 10-nation coalition against Yemen and the Saudis and UAE (Both BRICS members now) say no?

  I don’t see how the US avoids the Thucydides Trap here. While I don’t think for a moment the US Navy can’t deal with the Houthis I also don’t think anyone is prepared for them sinking any US ships either.

  The smart move is resolving this without it getting to that point, i.e. engaging in real negotiations. With these idiots in the White House?

  Checkmate Putin.

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you want to avoid Traps

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/23/2023 – 07:00

• Is It Time To Rethink American Support For Israel?
  Is It Time To Rethink American Support For Israel?

  Authored by Joe Buccino via RealClear Wire,

  In the eleventh week of its war with Hamas, Israel, undeterred by U.S. admonitions, continues to demolish an already-shattered Gaza. As senior American officials come in and out of Tel Aviv to meet with Netanyahu’s government, a glaring question looms unanswered: How much influence does America gain from its ardent, often unquestioning support for Israel? With more than $300 billion in military aid since World War II, the U.S. commitment to Israel is not just a matter of foreign policy, but a reflection of our national values and strategic interests. As Israel renders Gaza a dystopian hellscape in the face of international outrage, it is crucial to scrutinize this flow of funds, not only in dollars but in terms of international standing and moral authority.

  

  Since its 1948 foundation, the U.S. has given Israel far more in military aid than any other nation. Uncritical U.S. support for Israel began with America’s 33rd president, Harry Truman publicly recognizing the state 11 minutes after its creation and continued through the successive 13 American presidencies. For most of the intervening 75 years, a country smaller than Massachusetts and roughly one-fifth the size of Kentucky has been the top recipient of financial American military assistance.

  The U.S.-Israel partnership is rooted in several geopolitical and domestic considerations, among them the identification with a democracy – though recently Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition threatens notation. Dwight Eisenhower, replacing Truman in the White House in 1953, saw the Jewish State as a nation that largely shares American social values in a part of the world that primarily does not. Ike clung tight to Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and the halls of American power followed.

  Lyndon Johnson, ascending to the role of America’s 36th president following JFK’s assassination in 1963, held perhaps the strongest emotional attachment to Israel of any American president. A deep-rooted historical and religious conviction in the rights of the Jewish people to establish a state in their ancestral territories animated LBJ. Israel served as a central plank in Nixon’s foreign policy when he assumed office in 1969. Nixon’s National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger established Israel as an anchor of American power in the Middle East, an ally with a cutting-edge military force in the world’s most volatile region.

  The majority of U.S. support is provided through military equipment grants, and from 1950 to 2020, the United States sourced the overwhelming majority of all IDF equipment. The Pentagon and State Department grant Israel access to the world’s most sophisticated military technology, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Israel is the only Middle Eastern state to purchase the fifth-generation fighter jet. Israel has a fleet of 50 F-35s, purchased with U.S. assistance, with 25 more on the way.

  Another factor in America’s tie with Israel – a critically important one among D.C. decision-makers – is the decades-long outsized influence of pro-Israel lobby groups. Such groups funnel far more funds to congressional candidates than any other group – more than six times that of the gun rights lobby.

  For decades, American presidents have declared our tie to Israel “unshakeable,” D.C.’s commitment to the Jewish state “ironclad,” and American support to Israel as long-term. Israel has served as the beneficiary of all this unwavering assistance: without U.S. weapons, Arab nations would have long ago carved Israel up.

  The flow of money continued without ebb In the face of significant settlement expansion in the West Bank. The American spigot continued to pour billions in the face of Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul bill that limited the power of Israel’s High Court and plunged the country into division and chaos. Unblinking American support for Israel is clear. What’s less clear is how all this support advances American interests.

  Such significant support over such a lengthy period would presumably have offered the D.C. the ability to influence Israel. That does not seem to be the case. President Biden criticized Israel over its indiscriminate bombing that has thus far flattened large swaths of Gaza. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan publicly called on the IDF to shift to a more precise, targeted phase of fighting. Israel has thus far resisted this pressure, continuing with the aerial bombardments versus intelligence-driven ground assaults. As the international community laments the devastation in Gaza, the war threatens to damage American standing in the world.

  Netanyahu also refuses to accept a role for any Palestinian body in the governance or security of Gaza after Hamas, insisting instead that Israel will exert control over the enclave. This places Israel at odds with the Biden administration which wants Palestinians to govern Gazans. The White House hopes a Palestinian-led arrangement will eventually lead to an improvement in political and economic conditions. Israel refuses. Despite these stark contrasts, U.S. administration officials publicly downplay any rift with the Netanyahu government on this or any other issue.

  In the months ahead, America’s hug of Israel will likely harm U.S. standing in the Arab world. The gruesome images of wounded Gazan children destroyed hospitals, and broken wasteland will grow etched in the psyche of the region. Meanwhile, Netanyahu will likely continue leading administration officials around by the nose.

  After the protests in American streets die down and college campuses move on, the Arab streets will remember. The long-term harm to American interests in the region is unknowable. One casualty may be the efforts, begun under the Trump administration and beginning to show great promise just this past September, to build a regional security architecture of Sunni Arab militaries that will allow the Pentagon to shift assets to the Indo-Pacific, the priority region for American national security resourcing.

  The United States’ longstanding and unquestioning support for Israel, exemplified through extensive military aid and political backing, demands a thorough reevaluation. While this partnership has historical and geopolitical roots, the adjudication of the war in Gaza raises questions about the alignment of American interests and values with the actions and policies of the Israeli government. The imperviousness of Israel to U.S. influence risks America’s standing in the international community, particularly in the Middle East. The time has come for the United States to demand more accountability and alignment with its principles in exchange for its support, redefining a relationship that is respectful of Israel’s sovereignty and mindful of the broader implications for U.S. foreign policy and international reputation.

  Joe Buccino is a retired U.S. Army colonel who served as U.S. Central Command communications director from 2021 until September 2023. He deployed to combat in the Middle East five times in his career. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Defense or any other organization.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/22/2023 – 23:30

• Trump Calls Biden An 'Insurrectionist' After Colorado Ballot Ban
  Trump Calls Biden An ‘Insurrectionist’ After Colorado Ballot Ban

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Former President Donald Trump on Thursday denied being an “insurrectionist” while labeling President Joe Biden as one, while citing as proof factors like the “open” border and accusing the president of “destroying” America with radical anti-fossil fuel policies.

  “I’m not an insurrectionist (‘PEACEFULLY & PATRIOTICALLY’), Crooked Joe Biden is,” President Trump said in a post on Truth Social, with the words “peacefully & patriotically” in reference to a fragment of his Jan. 6 speech in which he told members of the crowd to head to the Capitol building “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

  

  The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the former president’s claim.

  President Trump’s remarks came two days after the Colorado Supreme Court ruled to bar him from the state’s presidential primary ballot on the basis of a section of the 14th Amendment that blocks anyone from running for office who engaged in an “insurrection.”

  The former president called the Colorado court’s ruling a politically motivated decision and a “shame for our country,” while his attorneys vowed to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

  President Biden declined to comment on the Colorado Supreme Court decision but told reporters there was “no question” that the former president was an insurrectionist.

  “Is Trump an insurrectionist, sir?” one reporter called out, prompting President Biden to walk closer to the cameras, asking the reporter to repeat the question.

  “I think that’s certainly self-evident, you saw it all,” President Biden answered.

  “Now, whether the 14th Amendment applies, I’ll let the court make that decision,” he added. “But he certainly supported insurrection, no question about it, none, zero. And he seems to be doubling down on everything.”

  ‘Insurrectionist’ Tit-for-Tat

  President Trump accused President Biden of being an “insurrectionist” once again on Thursday, this time laying out a more extensive rationale.

  “Crooked Joe Biden is the Insurrectionist because he let millions of unknown people come recklessly and unchecked through our insane ‘Open’ Border, let a war begin in the Middle East and Ukraine, Weaponized our DOJ & FBI, SURRENDERED in Afghanistan when we could have left with dignity and strength—the most embarrassing event in the history of our Country, and is destroying America with the GREEN NEW SCAM!!!” the former president said in a post on Truth Social.

  The former president has repeatedly criticized President Biden for his lax border policies, which he says are responsible for an illegal immigration crisis of historic proportions. President Trump has also accused the president of pulling strings to get the Justice Department to launch various investigations and charges against him to undermine his 2024 presidential campaign—claims President Biden has denied.

  President Trump has also repeatedly criticized the incumbent for his anti-fossil fuel policies that he says are undermining America’s energy independence and national security. He, by contrast, has vowed to reverse President Biden’s policies if elected and “drill, drill, drill.”

  The former president also railed against the various “fake political indictments” against him, claiming that the White House is behind every case that the Justice Department has brought against him and that he’s fighting.

  “Crooked Joe Biden is a threat to democracy,” President Trump said in another post, while accusing him of election interference.

  The Ruling

  The Colorado Supreme Court’s Dec. 19 ruling centered on a section of the 14th Amendment that bars officials who have engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” from holding office.

  Specifically, it’s based on an interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which is known as the disqualification clause, which states that no person shall hold office if they have “previously taken an oath as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States” and engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” against the Constitution.

  The left-leaning group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) sued the Colorado secretary of state to block President Trump from appearing on the ballot, arguing that “officer of the United States” would surely cover the highest office in the federal government, and so the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause should apply.

  However, Colorado 2nd District Court Judge Sarah Wallace said in a 100-plus page ruling that there was “scant evidence” that was the case, noting that the authors of the 14th Amendment specifically listed offices, with the presidency not among them.

  Judge Wallace did, however, find that President Trump engaged in an “insurrection,” and, on appeal, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. president is a public “officer,” and so the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause does apply.

  The unprecedented ruling makes Colorado the first and only state to disqualify President Trump from appearing on a state primary ballot. It also makes President Trump the first candidate in U.S. history to be declared ineligible to run for the White House.

  Jan. 6 Backdrop

  President Trump held a rally near the White House on Jan. 6, 2021, in which he made statements encouraging his supporters to march to the Capitol, where Congress was in the process of certifying the results of the presidential election.

  While President Trump called for the day’s events to be peaceful, a group of people breached the Capitol, leading to a violent confrontation with law enforcement.

  The events of that day have been the subject of widespread scrutiny and debate, with President Trump’s political opponents accusing him of inciting an “insurrection.”

  The “insurrection” allegations underpin several legal efforts by President Trump’s opponents to block him from being listed on ballots in the 2024 presidential race on 14th Amendment grounds, seeking to portray him as the instigator of the Jan. 6 incident.

  These cases basically argued that the former president took part in an “insurrection” by giving an impassioned speech on Jan. 6 before the Capitol breach occurred.

  Even though President Trump said in his Jan. 6 speech that protesters should “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard,” his critics have seized on a portion of his remarks where he said “we fight like hell” and “if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore” as a call for violence.

  The former president has, on numerous occasions, denied calling for violent protests while insisting he meant his remarks about fighting like hell metaphorically.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/22/2023 – 23:00

• Federal Judge Blocks California's Concealed Carry Restrictions Banning Firearms In Most Public Places
  Federal Judge Blocks California’s Concealed Carry Restrictions Banning Firearms In Most Public Places

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A controversial California law that would ban licensed gun holders from carrying their firearms in multiple locations across the state was temporarily blocked by a federal judge on Dec. 20, meaning the legislation will not go into full effect as planned next year.

  

  Senate Bill 2 was part of a string of new gun restrictions introduced in California this year after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen in June of 2022 that found a New York law requiring a license to carry a concealed weapon in public was unconstitutional and that carrying a pistol in public was a constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

  Under California’s legislation, private citizens who hold concealed carry weapons permits would be prohibited from carrying concealed guns in 26 locations, including public parks and playgrounds, churches, banks, medical facilities, and any other privately owned commercial establishments that are open to the public.

  The ban would apply regardless of whether the person has a permit to carry a concealed weapon or not, although the measure includes exceptions for privately owned businesses that “clearly and conspicuously” put up signs at the entrance of the building or on the premises indicating that license holders are permitted to carry firearms on the property.

  Senate Bill 2 was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September and was set to take effect on Jan. 1, despite opposition from gun rights advocates and groups, including the California Rifle and Pistol Association, who filed a lawsuit against California state, county, and local law enforcement agencies and officials earlier this month.

  In their lawsuit, the groups argued the measure violates both the U.S. Constitution and state law.

  ‘Repugnant to the 2nd Amendment’

  In his decision to block the law Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney sided with the plaintiffs, writing that the law went too far and would “unconstitutionally deprive” concealed carry permit holders “of their constitutional right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.”

  

  Furthermore, the California law “is sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court,” Judge Carney, an appointee of President George W. Bush, wrote.

  “For many years, the right to bear arms, and so necessarily the right to self-defense, was relegated to second-class status,” the judge wrote. “But the United States Supreme Court made clear in its landmark decisions District of Columbia v. Heller, McDonald v. City of Chicago, and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated v. Bruen that relegation could no longer be permitted—individuals must be able to effectuate their right to self-defense by, if they so choose, responsibly bearing arms.”

  “SB2 turns nearly every public place in California into a ‘sensitive place,’ effectively abolishing the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding and exceptionally qualified citizens to be armed and to defend themselves in public,” he added.

  The judge further stated the preliminary injunction was warranted because plaintiffs suing the state would suffer “irreparable harm” without it.

  He also noted the measure did not make complete sense, given that it focused predominantly on law-abiding gun owners.

  “Although the government may have some valid safety concerns, legislation regulating [concealed carry] permitholders—the most responsible of law-abiding citizens seeking to exercise their Second Amendment rights—seems an odd and misguided place to focus to address those safety concerns,” Judge Carney wrote.

  Gun owners with concealed carry weapons permits “have been through a vigorous vetting and training process following their application to carry a concealed handgun,” he wrote. “The challenged SB2 provisions unconstitutionally deprive this group of their constitutional right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.”

  Newsom Condemns Ruling

  In a statement to multiple media outlets on Wednesday, Mr. Newsom said Judge Carney’s ruling “outrageously calls California’s data-backed gun safety efforts ‘repugnant.'”

  “What is repugnant is this ruling, which greenlights the proliferation of guns in our hospitals, libraries, and children’s playgrounds — spaces, which should be safe for all,” he said.

  The Democrat added that he “will keep fighting” for gun restrictions because “the lives of our kids depend on it.”

  Elsewhere, Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, praised Judge Carney’s ruling on Wednesday.

  “California progressive politicians refuse to accept the Supreme Court’s mandate from the Bruen case and are trying every creative ploy they can imagine to get around it,” he said. “The Court saw through the State’s gambit.”

  Mr. Michel added that Senate Bill 2 would have meant gun permit holders “wouldn’t be able to drive across town without passing through a prohibited area and breaking the law” and that the latest decision makes Californians safer.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/22/2023 – 22:30

• 96% Of Saudis Oppose Ties With Israel, Hamas Grows In Popularity: Poll
  96% Of Saudis Oppose Ties With Israel, Hamas Grows In Popularity: Poll

  Via Middle East Eye

  A new poll has found that 96 percent of Saudi nationals believe that Arab countries should cut ties with Israel in response to the war in Gaza, and that the popularity of Hamas has grown significantly amid Israel’s devastating military offensive on the embattled territory.

  The result of the poll, conducted by the Washington Institute for Near Eastern Affairs, a pro-Israel think tank based in Washington, shows the difficulties the United States faces as it pushes for Saudi Arabia to normalise ties with Israel. Prior to the war in Gaza, the US was actively working towards achieving an agreement that would see Israel and Saudi Arabia normalize relations.

  

  Such a deal would build upon existing normalization agreements such as those between Israel and Bahrain, Morocco, and the United Arab Emirates which were brokered under the Trump administration.

  During an interview with Fox News that aired in September, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman stated that the two countries were getting closer to such an agreement “every day”.

  Since then, however, Riyadh has put a pause on talks of normalisation and has publicised its diplomatic outreach as one that seeks “to stop the ongoing escalation”.

  While the kingdom has a monarchial system, public opinion plays a factor in the decision-making of Arab leaders, according to analysts.

  Friday’s survey also found that 40 percent of Saudis expressed positive attitudes toward Hamas, compared with just 10 percent according to a poll carried out months before the war began.

  The poll further found that the majority of respondents in Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt held favourable views towards Hamas. The poll’s findings highlight large-scale outrage in the Arab world over Israel’s military assault on Gaza, which came in response to the 7 October attack on southern Israel.

  Stunning poll on Saudi opinion:

  91% believe that “the war in Gaza is a win for the Palestinians.”

  96% believe that Arab countries should break all contacts w/ Israel.

  Doesn’t seem Saudis will support MBS normalizing w/ Israel…https://t.co/I34ZhT6arr

  — Trita Parsi (@tparsi) December 22, 2023

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

  That attack saw 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals killed, and around 240 people taken captive by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Israel responded by imposing a full siege on the already blockaded enclave. It then launched a devastating aerial bombing campaign followed by a ground invasion that has killed more than 20,000 Palestinians, the majority of whom are women and children.

  As a result, mass protests have erupted across the Arab world in support of the Palestinians in Gaza. In addition to the demonstrations in the streets, citizens across the Middle East are boycotting Israeli-linked businesses.

  The survey further found that 87 percent of Saudis believe “Israel is so weak and internally divided that it can be defeated some day”.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/22/2023 – 22:00

• Cargo Owners Consider Airfreight Alternative To Red Sea Shipping Delays
  Cargo Owners Consider Airfreight Alternative To Red Sea Shipping Delays

  By Eric Kullisch of FreightWaves

  Global businesses, uncertain how long the shipping crisis in the Red Sea will last and with a looming shortage of vessels for the export rush before China’s New Year celebration, are scrambling to shift some ocean cargo to airlines, according to logistics specialists.

  

  Major container lines have rerouted vessels around the Horn of Africa or docked them in safe locations to avoid the threat of drone and missile attacks by Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. The Houthis say they are targeting vessels with links to Israel in support of Palestinians under siege in the Gaza Strip. Thirty percent of container volumes transit the Red Sea and Suez Canal shortcut between Europe and Asia.

  The strikes on commercial shipping come as drought conditions force the Panama Canal, another trade chokepoint, to limit transits because of insufficient water to operate massive locks. Some vessel operators recently shifted services to the Suez route to avoid Panama transit delays and now are in a double bind.

  With no end in sight to the Gaza war and tensions rising, air cargo providers could see a surge in business following a prolonged market downturn that only lifted in recent months behind rising e-commerce exports from China for the holidays.

  “The e-commerce wave just broke and rates began crashing down this week. We expect the Red Sea shipping crisis will reverse this,” Marc Schlossberg, executive vice president at Unique Logistics International, told FreightWaves. “We are already seeing an impact on airfreight across multiple regions, industries, and supply chains. Some retailers are already flipping cargo bound for the U.S. East Coast from ocean to air from the Indian subcontinent as there are no good options that do not add two weeks. We have other customers assessing their needs to the U.K. and Europe from Asia.”

  Shipping experts say diversion around the Cape of Good Hope, which adds seven to 14 days’ sailing time to Europe and five to seven days to the U.S. East Coast, has unleashed a chain reaction that includes knocking vessels off scheduled arrivals, vessel bunching in ports, terminal congestion and difficulty repositioning containers around the world. Transits could be longer in some cases because the tip of Africa often has rough seas and storms.

  Vessels returning to reload with factory goods in Asia will now arrive a couple of weeks late for the seasonal pickup before Chinese New Year, which will result in a shortfall of shipping capacity, said Lars Jensen, CEO of consultancy Vespucci Maritime, on a Wednesday webinar presented by freight forwarder Flexport.

  Chinese New Year falls on Feb. 10, but factories will begin to slow production in mid-January before completely shutting down for the holiday and then slowly ramping up again — a lull that can last more than a month. Businesses pull forward their shipping requirements each year, which leads to a rush at Chinese ports, transportation delays and increased shipping rates.

  About 540 vessels are assigned to Suez services, with 136 currently being diverted around Africa and 42 that have paused their journey, according to a Flexport analysis. 

  Chicago-based Seko Logistics has had some inquiries about converting ocean shipments to air leading up to the Chinese holiday, “but this could very well extend and expand into 2024,” said Chief Commercial Officer Brian Bourke in an email.

  About 97% of total containerized trade by weight moves by sea, so even a slight shift in the mix could have a huge impact on airfreight volumes.

  Importers and exporters will likely transition their most critical goods to air carriers to make sure enough arrive on time for production or sales needs, especially since many flights from Asia to Europe are still quite full, Niall van de Wuow, chief airfreight officer at market intelligence firm Xeneta, said on a company webinar.

  

  “I had a call with a global appliance company with sites around the world. Airfreight is cheaper than lines down. We expect to see an airfreight surge for manufacturing as automotive, electronics and other supply chains assess their inventory needs in the next few days,” said Schlossberg.

  “We have customers searching for solutions from Egypt where the ports have been shut down and from Jordan where customers are not comfortable with the cross-border option. And ocean routing via Israel and Aqaba is no longer viable,” he added.

  Companies spent the better part of a year bringing down excess pandemic inventories to normal levels and may not have sufficient safety stock if the Red Sea bottleneck continues to disrupt shipping, said Trine Nielsen, Flexport’s head of ocean for Europe, the Middle East and Asia. She encouraged shippers to plan for extra lead times and rate increases, and to book shipments early.

  “Most of our fashion apparel retail customers had a strong holiday season. Inventories are in relatively good shape so a disruption like this will drive significant airfreight demand,” echoed Schlossberg.

  There is less urgency to make mode-conversion decisions because the industry is past the Christmas shopping rush, but that will quickly change without a resolution of the Middle East conflict, according to logistics managers.

  The airfreight market could get heated by mid-January as importers place new orders with Asia suppliers, especially since many airlines reduced freighter schedules in anticipation of a lull in transport demand, said Christos Spyrou, founder and CEO of wholesale network Neutral Air Partner.

  He predicted an increase in charter flights to meet demand, especially for time-critical and valuable goods, as well as more use of sea-air services via Dubai to Europe. Flexport, which helps companies place orders with overseas manufacturers and then manages shipment delivery, has also fielded inquiries about deferred airfreight and sea-air options through Dubai and Doha, Qatar, said Zeid Houssami, global head of airfreight, in an email. 

  The hybrid services are less expensive than airfreight but faster than ocean.

  Air capacity on the trans-Pacific might get tighter after Chinese New Year if ocean carriers divert vessels to Asia-eastbound lanes to provide more reliability, Houssami observed.

  Open-ended risk to ocean shipping

  The Suez route attracts a high proportion of the world’s largest vessels. Peter Sand, Xeneta’s chief data analyst, said shipping lines need 50 more ultralarge container ships on the eastbound corridor. Ship broker Clarksons estimates that 19% of global shipping capacity will be diverted from the Suez route. 

  Carriers have idle capacity at the moment, but not all vessels are suitable or can easily be restarted. 

  In addition to dealing with heightened supply chain uncertainty, shippers will face higher transportation costs because of the diversion of shipping away from the Red Sea.

  For starters, adding ships to move the same amount of containers means spending for extra crews, fuel, supplies, port charges and other expenses. If smaller ships are deployed they will have higher unit costs per nautical mile.

  Carriers will save $400,000 to $700,000 in Suez Canal tolls, but the 3,000 extra nautical miles to go around Africa to Europe will add $1 million in fuel costs per vessel, which will be passed on to customers, Sand explained. 

  Liner companies ZIM, Hapag-Lloyd and Maersk are now charging a war risk surcharge of  between $20 and $100 per container and ZIM is charging more for the longer route around Africa.

  

  Shipping line CMA CGM this week declared force majeure and implemented surcharges of up to $1,550 per container unit, depending on the origin and destination. Invoking a force majeure clause tells customers the carrier may not be able to fulfill contractual obligations due to circumstances beyond its control. 

  The formation of a multinational task force, led by the U.S., to protect commercial shipping is unlikely to alleviate the risk of attacks, prolonging the disruptive effects on supply chains, maritime experts say.

  Partner nations have previously escorted convoys to defend vessels against hijacking by Somali pirates, but air attacks present another level of danger for commercial operators. Participating navies may not have the right kind of anti-missile technology and no system is foolproof.

  Vespucci Maritime’s Jensen said small drones may not seem like a major threat to massive container ships but noted the danger from an explosion is fire that could quickly spread.

  “Are you going to risk life and limb of your seafarers and a billion dollars worth of cargo on the ship in the hope that they will shoot down all of those missiles? … Unless there is also a solution whereby the attacks themselves from land stop, or at least are eliminated drastically, I have a hard time seeing the carriers resume sending supersized post Panamax vessels through that region,” he said.

  The biggest shipping problem will be in the Mediterranean Sea because carriers that used to call on ports such as Genoa in Italy, on their way to major gateways in Northern Europe, will bypass the smaller destinations, said Jensen.

  Shippers should also brace for Med-bound containers to get stuck for up to a week in unfamiliar transshipment ports such as Tangiers in Morocco or Algeciras in Spain, where carriers will offload them to avoid lengthy detours from the main route.

  Jensen also warned that some consumer goods may swing back to the Panama Canal, pricing out Chilean and Peruvian agriculture growers who are less able to pay the reservation fees for priority access. 

  Shippers that bring products to the East Coast through the Suez Canal also have the option of using the trans-Pacific route and then moving inland by rail or truck. 

  Jensen said the combination of strong Chinese New Year demand and the effective decrease in global container capacity because of the extra ships necessary to sustain diversion around Africa could lead ocean rates to triple. Interviewed on CNBC on Friday, Jensen predicted the average global rate would double to about $3,000.

  Ocean rates are already spiraling upward. The rate for a forty-foot equivalent unit reached $1,875 between Asia and the Mediterranean on Dec. 14, according to the Xeneta platform – a 25% increase from the previous week. But shippers are being quoted more than $6,500 for high priority shipments on Mediterranean Shipping Company’s Diamond Tier service. And MSC implemented peak season surcharges of $2,000 for Asia-Mediterranean cargo.

  And, Jensen noted, a new European emissions trading scheme for maritime that is scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1 will be much for expensive as carriers have to pay carbon tax on emissions for going all the way around Africa.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/22/2023 – 21:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest