Nov 05

Today’s News 5th November 2023

  • The Great Reset, Part 1: The Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse
    The Great Reset, Part 1: The Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse

    Authored by Simon Elmer via Off-Guardian.org,

    ‘The technologies at the heart of the Fourth Industrial Revolution are connected in many ways — in the way they extend digital capabilities; in the way they scale, emerge and embed themselves in our lives; in their combinatorial power; and in their potential to concentrate privilege and challenge existing governance systems.’

    – Klaus Schwab, Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, 2018

    The Wikipedia entry for the Great Reset, the first part of which is quoted in a blue panel as a corrective to any mention or discussion of this term on YouTube, reads as follows:

    The Great Reset Initiative is an economic recovery plan drawn up by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The project was launched in June 2020, with a video featuring the then Prince of Wales Charles released to mark its launch. The initiative’s stated aim is to facilitate rebuilding from the global COVID-19 crisis in a way that prioritizes sustainable development.

    The initiative triggered a range of diverse conspiracy theories spread by American far-right and conservative commentators on social media such as Facebook and Twitter. Such theories include that the COVID-19 pandemic was created by a secret group in order to seize control of the global economy, that lockdown restrictions were deliberately designed to induce economic meltdown, or that a global elite was attempting to abolish private property while using COVID-19 to enslave humanity with vaccines.

    I am not an American, have never belonged to any far-right organisation, my views are not conservative with either a big or a little ‘c’, and I have published a number of articles arguing against the conspiracy theory of history; but I have also argued that a virus with the infection fatality rate of seasonal influenza never constituted anything approaching a ‘pandemic’; that lockdown restrictions were imposed not to induce the ‘meltdown’ of the economy but, to the contrary, to insulate the real economy from the $12 trillion of quantitative easing created to bail out the collapsing financial sector between September 2019 and April 2022; and that, far from attempting to ‘abolish’ private property, the stakeholder model of capitalism promoted by the World Economic Forum and implemented by its corporate partners under the umbrella of ‘sustainable development goals’ is designed to privatise national assets, natural resources and, ultimately — as Klaus Schwab openly advocates — the existing system of governance in the West.

    In this respect, the Wikipedia entry is exemplary of how the accusation of ‘conspiracy theory’, illustrated with extreme or inaccurate or just plain ridiculous examples (‘enslave humanity with vaccines’) to which very few people subscribe, works to discredit and dismiss by association any and more rational criticisms of the global technocracies, international companies and national governments that, in the wake of multiple manufactured ‘crises’, have taken into their control the institutions, procedures and platforms by which a political, scientific and media consensus is reached.

    Strange as it may seem, however, this grudging concession of the existence of a global economic plan, its origins in a corporate think-tank and its support by the now Head of State of the UK is an age away from the vociferous denials and mocking denunciations of being a ‘conspiracy theorist’ that were hurled at anyone who dared even to refer to the ‘Great Reset’ in the first year of lockdown. These only gradually diminished when someone pointed out that the term was openly used on the website of the World Economic Forum and had provided the title of the book published by its founder and Executive Chairman, Klaus Schwab, in July 2020, barely 4 months since the ‘pandemic’ was declared by the World Health Organization.

    And while the accusation of conspiracy theory is still used to silence anyone who attributes anything other than purely beneficent motives to the 1,200 banks, asset managers, information technology conglomerates, media corporations, energy utilities, industrial manufacturers and other companies that, on the same day the ‘pandemic’ was declared, formed themselves into a ‘COVID-19 Action Platform’, the term itself is now more or less openly used by politicians, civil servants, corporate CEOs, marketing executives, digital engineers, journalists, activists and other promoters of what the World Economic Forum calls ‘stakeholder capitalism’.

    It’s hard to say which term is more likely to attract censure and censorship when used by those not authorised to do so, but the most accurate description of the Great Reset — and the one most suppressed by those overseeing its implementation — is that it is the historical shift from the economic, political and social paradigm by which the West has been governed for the past forty years into stakeholder capitalism. As the emerging political economy of the West, this seeks to merge the separation of powers between executive, legislature and judiciary on which Western democracy has been founded into a technocratic form of governance that will signal the end of politics, properly speaking, insofar as politics designates — at least in principle — a space of debate, contestation, representation and accountability.

    For Schwab, whose latest book is titled Stakeholder Capitalism, this merger represents a revolution from shareholder capitalism, in which individual economies overseen by national governments were run for the benefit of company shareholders, into a global economy governed by the same companies, but ostensibly for the benefit of all, inclusively, sustainably, profitably. The investment in which these multinational companies hold a stake, therefore, is the world itself. ‘A global economy that works for progress, people and the planet’ is the subtitle of Schwab’s book, which like those preceding it doesn’t lack in ambition, hubris and a complete disregard for anything one could call democratic process, accountability or a mandate from those it claims to benefit.

    If we were to pick a starting date for this revolution in Western capitalism, whose economic forces lie in the neoliberal revolution of the late 1970s and the rise of finance capitalism as the dominant economic model of the West, it began in September 2019 with the spike in interest rates in the US repurchase agreement market that triggered the latest Global Financial Crisis, and to which the lockdown of the real economies of global capitalism in March 2020 was the concerted response. My two collections of essays, Virtue and Terror and The New Normal, written between March 2020 and October 2021 when the UK was still ruled by emergency powers under lockdown restrictions, sought to describe this first phase of the Great Reset, its legislative frameworks and economic motivations.

    My argument in this book is that we have now moved out of the first phase of this revolution, whose trajectory and precedents I described in The Road to Fascism: For a Critique of the Global Biosecurity State, and into the second phase. In its sequel, The Great Reset: Biopolitics for Stakeholder Capitalism, I try to articulate what this new phase is and what it means for us. Hopefully — and what hope we have is one of the questions this book tries to address — by understanding this new phase of the Great Reset better, we will be able to offer more resistance to its enforcement than we managed in its first phase, which was met with almost universal credulity, compliance and collaboration.

    FROM LEGISLATION TO BIOPOWER

    A lot of things have changed in the UK and across the Western World since, in March 2022, the coronavirus-justified restrictions on our human rights and civil liberties began to be lifted; but that doesn’t mean, as too many opposed to lockdown initially thought, that the Great Reset of Western capitalism for which those restrictions laid the ground is over. Far from it. To emphasise how far from over the Great Reset is, I have referred to this new phase as the ‘Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse’. This is not only for dramatic effect but also because it gravitates around four apparatuses of biopower, not all of which are new, but which are being implemented simultaneously and are, indeed, dependent on each other for their implementation. Much of this book is about this interdependence, which Schwab refers to as their ‘combinatorial power’.

    But what is ‘biopower’?

    It’s a term I’ve been using since we were first locked in our homes on the justification of stopping the spread of the coronavirus, and I’ve made many attempts to describe it — which I shall continue to do, no doubt, because it is under its paradigm that the world is now governed and will be for the foreseeable future. The term was first introduced into political discourse by the French philosopher and historian, Michel Foucault, who died in 1984. As Professor of the History of Systems of Thought at the Collège de France, Foucault explored its genesis in his lecture series of 1975-1979. But he first used the term in his published work in The Will to Knowledge, where, in the pages titled ‘Right of Death and Power over Life’, Foucault described the movement from a juridical to a biopolitical paradigm of governance:

    Another consequence of this development of bio-power was the growing importance assumed by the action of the norm, at the expense of the juridical system of the law. Law cannot help but be armed, and its arm, par excellence, is death; to those who transgress it, it replies, at least as a last resort, with that absolute menace. The law always refers to the sword. But a power whose task is to take charge of life needs continuous regulatory and corrective mechanisms. Such a power has to qualify, measure, appraise and hierarchise, rather than display itself in its murderous splendour; it does not have to draw the line that separates the enemies of the sovereign from his obedient subjects; it effects distributions around the norm. I do not mean to say that the law fades into the background or that the institutions of justice tend to disappear, but rather that the judicial institution is increasingly incorporated into a continuum of apparatuses (medical, administrative, and so on) whose functions are for the most part regulatory. A normalising society is the historical outcome of a technology of power centred on life.

    Foucault viewed the rise of biopower and the technologies of its implementation within a historical context that began around the time of the French Revolution of 1788, and which he associated with the First Republic’s formulation of human rights. It was through these rights that the state first assumed its duty and its right to defend, but also to control, not only the life but also the quality of life of its citizens: our health, our bodies, our needs, our happiness — which have most recently been condensed into the new category of our ‘well-being’. For Foucault, this represented a historical shift from the legislative power by which the sovereign and his government had authority over the life and death of his subjects, and within which laws have a purely punitive function that sets restrictions and obligations which, if broken, have penalties up to and including death, into a biopolitical paradigm, within which the technologies of power qualify, measure, appraise and hierarchise the life of the citizen.

    This shift has parallels with what is happening now largely in the West under the banner of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, by which the new apparatuses of biopower and the technologies of which they dispose will qualify our access to what were previously the universal, indivisible and inalienable rights of citizenship; measure our levels of compliance with regulatory and corrective mechanisms that have not been written into any laws; appraise us through a system of surveillance and monitoring justified by ‘crises’ whose very existence it prohibits us from questioning; and, by doing so, will produce a new hierarchy of Social Credit rated according to our levels of obedience not only to the by-now familiar regulations of the Global Biosecurity State but also to new actions of the norm extending into every aspect of our lives.

    It’s important to bear in mind that the shift Foucault described is an historical one that happened over several hundred years; but history does not move at an even pace, and at times of social and political revolution — such as the one the West entered in March 2020 — what might otherwise have taken a century to unfold can be implemented in a decade or less. We’ve seen this demonstrated most materially in the succession of industrial revolutions that the People’s Republic of China has undergone in the space of 70 years, but which took the UK, by contrast, 250 years or more. Moreover, the shift from a juridical to a biopolitical paradigm does not happen all at once and definitively. Just as there are emergent social, political, legal and technological forces in any given society, so too there are residual elements formed under earlier economic models that continue to play a role.

    Under lockdown, for example, Western capitalism was governed — if we can use this word to describe the vast levels of theft of the future wealth of its populations — under a State of Emergency whose legal precedents can be traced back to the French Revolution. But now, as we have emerged out of lockdown to be plunged into a biopolitical paradigm of governance, that juridical framework of human rights, legislative oversight, judicial appeal, media scrutiny of government and democratic accountability to the electorate — all of which utterly failed to defend what democracy we had — is being replaced — again, not completely but to a further and greatly expanded degree — by the technologies of biopower.

    To recall, briefly, the juridical framework by which we were ruled for two years in the UK, and which continues to implement the biopolitical framework within which the apparatuses of biopower are being implemented, since March 2020 the following Acts and Statutes have been made into UK law:

    • The Coronavirus Act 2020, whose 384 pages, 102 provisions and 29 schedules went through just one week of reading and three days of debate in Parliament before, according to a convention agreed to by Her Majesty’s Opposition, being ‘nodded through’ by MPs rather than approved by a democratic vote.

    • 580 coronavirus-justified Statutory Instruments made into law at a rate of 6 per week, 537 of which were only laid before Parliament after they came into force.

    • The Health and Care Act 2022, which furthered the privatisation and outsourcing of the National Health Service while granting the Secretary of State authority over its procurement.

    • The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, which empowers the police to impose conditions on demonstrations, effectively banning protest in the UK. It also permits the police to have access to our private education and health records, and criminalises trespass on privately-owned land.

    • The Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022, which empowered the law courts to suspend and limit challenges by UK citizens to the legality of, and redress for, the decisions and actions of the UK Government and other public bodies.

    • The Nationality and Borders Act 2022, which empowers the Home Secretary to revoke, without prior notification, the British citizenship of anyone who is not born in the UK, who is of dual nationality, who is judged to be a threat to national security, or whose behaviour is deemed to be ‘unacceptable’.

    • The Elections Act 2022, which made voter ID a requirement for voting, setting another precedent for the implementation of a system of Digital Identity in the UK.

    • The Public Order Act 2023, which further increases the powers of police to criminalise protest through extending stop and search powers to allow police to search for and seize objects that may be used in the commission of a protest-related offence; as well as issuing Serious Disruption Prevention Orders.

    • The Online Safety Act 2023, whose title, like that of most UK legislation, means the opposite of the powers it makes into law, and which in this case requires the providers of online platforms to censor and impose restrictions on what we can and cannot say, write, watch, read and hear online in compliance with the dictates of Ofcom, the UK Government and, ultimately, the transnational technocracies in which it has membership. Fines for non-compliance are set at up to £18 million or 10 per cent of global turnover.

    • The Energy Bill 2023, when made into law, will amend existing legislation to empower the Government to regulate and fine those responsible for the supply, transport, storage, safety, performance, consumption and disposal of energy for failing to comply with the restrictions consequent upon the drive to Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050. This include the installation of smart meters in all homes and businesses by the end of 2025, with non-compliance incurring a fine up to £15,000 or imprisonment for 1 year.

    Significantly, the bulk of these Parliamentary Acts, as distinct from the Statutory Instruments under which we lived during lockdown, were made as the regulations for the latter were revoked, with the remainder made into law this year. We haven’t, therefore, moved out of a juridical framework — ‘incorporated’ is the word Foucault uses to describe this transition — and which is not, moreover, limited to the legislation I’ve listed here.

    But what I want to focus on in this book is the incorporation of the judicial institution, which this legislation is clearing the legal barriers to, into what Foucault called the regulatory apparatuses of biopower.

    These — my Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse — are:

    Most citizens of the UK — if we can still call ourselves that — will have heard of some or all of these. It’s safe to say that, after two years of lockdown and the threat of what were called ‘vaccine passports’, everyone in the UK will know something about Digital Identity. But few, perhaps, will be aware of the programme of eco-austerity imposed by the UN’s Agenda 2030 and 2050, even though all will be familiar with the claims of the environmental activists that receive promotion in our media that only the world’s richest individuals and institutions can buy. Fewer still will have heard of the World Health Organization’s Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response Treaty, or of the Bank of England’s plans for a Central Bank Digital Currency. But the problem, as it was under lockdown, is that as soon as the plans and intentions of the so-called global elite become sufficiently public for opposition to them to gain critical mass, the media — both mainstream and social — first dismisses that knowledge as a conspiracy theory and then — as we saw with the leaked text messages of Matt Hancock about the Government’s use of terror to enforce compliance from the British people — the actual import of those plans are displaced onto mundane concerns.

    As examples of which — and which I discuss in greater detail in my book — what concerns there have been around the Pandemic Treaty and Central Bank Digital Currency have been about the UK’s loss of national sovereignty, or elderly people who don’t have a bank account or smartphone being excluded, or not being able to give spare change to beggars. Time and again we are told that CBDC is merely another form of digital payment and not appreciably different from existing bank cards; or that the WHO Treaty will simply make us more prepared for the next pandemic and therefore must be a good thing — except to those who denied the existence of the last one. Similarly, what concerns have been expressed about Agenda 2030 is that the corporate influence on the UN might be inhibiting its implementation of Net Zero rather than, as is the case, driving it to their own ends.

    To use a word that is as abused as any other these days, this is ‘disinformation’, created and disseminated to inform the public just enough to allow us to inform ourselves no further, and to comfortably dismiss anyone who does as a conspiracy theorist. The truth, which this book sets out to demonstrate, is that these four regulatory apparatuses of biopower are going to fundamentally, and in certain aspects irreversibly, change the social contract between the British people and the state.

    Crucially, in this book I show how all four of these regulatory apparatuses — the discourses justifying them, the institutions formulating them, the programmes implementing them, the legislation imposing them, the agendas requiring them, the treaties agreeing to them and the technologies enforcing them — are all interdependent on each other. Indeed, as instruments of the new totalitarianism I discussed in The Road to Fascism, they couldn’t be other than part of a totalising system of surveillance, control and domination.

    The Book of Revelation was written around 90 A.D., almost two thousand years ago, and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse it announced appeared, respectively, wearing a crown, wielding a sword, carrying a scales and bearing the name of death. The emblems and technologies of power have changed since then, but the means by which the powerful seek to control us remain the same today: by conquest of a people, by waging war, by economic destitution, and by causing plagues and famine. The difference is, now it’s being done, under the beneficent hand of stakeholder capitalism, ‘for our own good’.

    In Part 2 of this article, I will look at the consequences of incorporating the legal framework within which the rights of citizenship have been written into law into regulatory apparatuses through which the obligations of biosecurity are enforced by the state.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 23:55

  • Seattle Limits Cops From 'Knowingly Lying' After Suspect Commits Suicide
    Seattle Limits Cops From ‘Knowingly Lying’ After Suspect Commits Suicide

    The city of Seattle has implemented a new policy that prevents police officers from knowingly lying to influence suspects, after incidents in 2018 and 2020 may have contributed to a suicide, and incited chaos during the George Floyd protests, MYNorthwest reports.

    Seattle Police Department vehicle (KIRO 7)

    Following the two incidents, the Office of Inspector General for Public Safety and City Councilmember Lisa Herbold pushed for the policy change, which Mayor Bruce Harrell (D) announced on Oct. 30.

    In the 2018 case, a suspect in a Seattle automobile accident committed suicide after an SPD officer lied in a ruse, falsely telling the man’s friend that a woman was in critical condition from the crash.

    The man — who has since been identified as Porter Feller — had fled from the scene of a multi-vehicle accident in May of 2018. Two officers followed up at the home his car was registered to, telling his friend, Maggie Parks, that a victim in the hit-and-run was near death, despite the fact that there no actual injuries reported from the crash. One of the officers remarked to his partner, “it’s a lie, but it’s fun.” -MYNorthwest

    “Effective public safety requires community buy-in, and this new policy is an important step to build understanding with the public, demonstrating that for SPD operations to be successful, they must be paired with a commitment to unbiased, constitutional policing,” said Harrell in a statement. “This innovative new policy will lead to better police work thanks to the voices of many, including the media who brought attention to this tactic, community members who called for guidelines to match our values, and Seattle accountability and police leaders who developed a plan to make that vision real.”

    According to Seattle PD Chief Adrian Diaz, the policy is the first of its kind in the US, and continues SPD’s “long tradition of public safety innovation rooted in accountability and a commitment to building public confidence.”

    Remember kids, cops are allowed to lie…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 23:20

  • The World's Largest Biometric Digital ID System, India's Aadhaar, Just Suffered Its Biggest Ever Data Breach
    The World’s Largest Biometric Digital ID System, India’s Aadhaar, Just Suffered Its Biggest Ever Data Breach

    Authored by Nick Corbishley via NakedCapitalism.com,

    In one fell swoop, roughly 10% of the global population appears to have had some of their most valuable personal identifiable information (PII) compromised. Yet Aadhaar continues to receive plaudits from Silicon Valley. 

    An anonymous hacker claims to have breached the digital ID numbers, as well as other sensitive personal data, of around 815 million Indian citizens.

    To put that number in perspective, it is more than 60% of the 1.3 billion Indian people enrolled in the government’s Aadhaar biometric digital identity program, and roughly 10% of the entire global population. Thanks to the breach — the largest single one in the country’s history, according to the Hindustan Times — the personal data of hundreds of millions of Indians are now up for grabs on the dark web, for as little as $80,000.

    To register for an Aadhaar card, Indian residents have to provide basic demographic information, including name, date of birth, age, address and gender, as well as biometric information, including ten fingerprints, two eyeball scans and a facial photograph. Much of that data has apparently been compromised.

    Media reports suggest that the source of the leak was the Covid-19 test data of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), which is linked to each individual’s Aadhaar number.

    The alarm was first raised by Resecurity, a Los Angeles-based cyber security company, which on Oct 15 included the following in a blogpost on its corporate website:

    On October 9th, a threat actor going by the alias ‘pwn0001’ posted a thread on Breach Forums brokering access to 815 million “Indian Citizen Aadhaar & Passport” records. To put this victim group in perspective, India’s entire population is just over 1.486 billion people.

    HUNTER investigators established contact with the threat actor and learned they were willing to sell the entire Aadhaar and Indian passport dataset for $80,000.

    The data set offered by pwn0001 contains multiple fields related to the PII of Indian citizens, including but not limited to:

    – name
    – father’s Name
    – phone Number
    – other Number
    – passport Number
    – aadhar Number
    – age
    – gender
    – address
    – district
    – pincode
    – state…

    One of the leaked samples contains 100,000 records of personal identifiable information (PII) related to Indian residents. In this sample leak, HUNTER analysts identified valid Aadhaar Card IDs, which were corroborated via a government portal that provides a “Verify Aadhaar” feature. This feature allows people to validate the authenticity of Aadhaar credentials,” Resecurity said…

    Resecurity acquired… 400,000 records and contacted multiple victims to validate the information, as well as used the “Verify Aadhaar” feature available via official government WEB-resource in India.

    The contacted victims from the acquired data set confirmed the validity of their data, and stated they have never been notified about [the breach] before.

    Digital Identity Theft

    A leak of such highly sensitive personal identifiable information (PII) creates a significant risk of digital identity theft, warns Security Affairs:

    Threat actors leverage stolen identity information to commit online banking theft, tax refund fraud, and other cyber-enabled financial crimes. Nation-state actors are also hunting for Aadhaar data with the goal of espionage and influence campaigns that leverage detailed insights on the Indian population. Resecurity observed a spike in incidents involving Aadhaar IDs and their leakage on underground cybercriminal forums by threat actors who look to harm Indian nationals and residents.

    Aadhaar (Hindi for “foundation”) is a 12-digit unique identity (UID) number issued by the government after confirming a person’s biometric and demographic information. Launched in 2012 as part of an initiative to give each Indian resident with a unique identification number, it is the largest digital identity system on the planet, with 1.3 billion UIDs issued by 2021, covering a staggering 92% of India’s population.

    It was ostensibly created to provide people without identification a formal government ID as well as crack down on duplicate, fake or stolen IDs used to benefit from government programs and welfare schemes.

    And it quickly drew interest and praise from elite quarters around the world, including Silicon Valley.

    In a 2019 entry of his “Gates Notes” blog, Bill Gates lauded Aadhaar for making “India’s invisible people visible.” Three years earlier, in a lecture on Technology for Transformation, Gates had said that Aadhaar is something that had never been done before by any government, not even in a rich country. He also claimed it does not pose any privacy risks; try telling that to the 815 million people whose personal data is now up for grabs on the Dark Web!

    Together with Nandan Nilekani, one of the co-founders of Indian tech giant Infosys who is widely recognised as Aadhaar’s chief architect, Gates went on to play a key role in exporting Aadhaar to other parts of the so-called Global South, much of it financed by the World Bank. The two tech billionaires also reportedly helped persuade the Modi government to embark on the disastrous path of demonetisation in order to expand cashless payment alternatives. Demonetisation is believed to have caused a 2% drop in India’s GDP growth in 2016/17 alone — the equivalent of $52 billion, according to the Sunday Guardian.

    Even today, Aadhaar continues to receive plaudits from Silicon Valley, despite all of its security flaws, privacy concerns and other issues. Worldcoin, the controversial cryptocurrency project set up by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman that uses an eye-scanning “orb” to give users a unique digital identity to verify whether they are human, recently said it seeks to emulate India’s Aadhaar system in its own creation of a global identity and financial network.

    Ironically, both Aadhaar and World Coin were featured in a recent report by Moody’s Investor Services as examples of how not to develop a digital identity system. As I noted at the time, it is not clear whether Moody’s criticisms were merely poorly timed, given the geopolitical backdrop, or form part of a broader campaign in the Anglosphere against India’s interests. The Modi government and Indian tech businesses are desperately keen to export the so-called “Indian Stack” — the Jan Dhan Yojana, a financial inclusion program; UPI, an instant payments system launched in 2016, just six months before the government yanked 84% of India’s cash notes out of circulation in its infamous demonetisation campaign; and Aadhaar.

    Mission Creep on Steroids

    Aadhaar was first introduced as a voluntary way of improving welfare service delivery. But the Modi government rapidly expanded its scope by making it mandatory for welfare programs and state benefits.

    The mission creep didn’t end there. Aadhaar has become all but necessary to access a growing list of private sector services, including medical records, bank accounts and pension payments. According to Security Affairs, it is the security weaknesses of many of these third parties, including utility companies, independent service providers, mobile and telecommunication operators, and lending and fintech services, that are behind many of the data breeches.

    Plans are also afoot to link voter registration to Aadhaar, despite the system’s glaring security flaws. Besides the vulnerability of its data storage, India’s Aadhaar system has many other downsides, as I noted in my book Scanned:

    For a start, it tracks users’ movements between cities, their employment status and purchasing records. It is a de facto social credit system that serves as the key entry point for accessing services in India. While the system has helped to speed and clean up India’s bureaucracy, it has also massively increased the Indian government’s surveillance powers and excluded over 100 million people from welfare programs as well as basic services.

    The public body in charge of Aadhaar, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), is yet to comment on the latest breach. But if past form is any guide, when it does it will deny all charges. It has so far refuted all accusations of data breaches, since the Aadhaar system went fully live seven years ago, including claims from Wikileaks that the CIA might have access to the database and allegations in the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2019 that Aadhaar had “suffered multiple breaches that potentially compromised the records of all 1.1 billion registered citizens.”

    Given the sheer number of breaches Aadhaar has suffered, this level of denialism is becoming untenable. Even Biometric Update, the most important trade publication for the biometrics industry, has warned that India is “bleeding biometric data.” And biometric data is our most valuable personal identifiable information. If it is hacked there is no way of undoing the damage. You cannot change or cancel your iris or fingerprint like you can change a password or cancel a credit card.

    The chances of that data being hacked are significant given how pourous most databases are, notes Professor Sandra Watcher, a data ethics professor at the Oxford Internet Institute:

    “The idea of a data breach is not a question of if, it’s a question of when. Welcome to the internet: everything is hackable.

    Given the sheer number and scale of recent breaches,  the “Indian govt’s insistence that Aadhaar is secure rings hollow,” concludes Biometric Update:

    A piece in Security Affairs reports that earlier this month, the cybersecurity firm Resecurity found hundreds of millions of records containing personally identifiable information (PII) for sale on the dark web. Aadhaar cards were among the data on offer.

    Also in October, the PII of applicants to a program for young filmmakers at the International Film Festival of India was exposed on a government website for the event. The Deccan Herald reports that the Times of India was able to access a parent directory that contained the Aadhaar IDs, PAN cards and other PII of more than 100 people who applied through the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC).

    Furthermore, as reported in The Hindu, a police raid on a brothel in Bengaluru found that sex workers had been given fake Aadhaar cards, and prompted an investigation into wider production of fake government IDs, voter cards and other documents.

    And finally, there is the now-resolved case of fingerprint biometrics, digital ID numbers, identity documents, photographs and images submitted to Aadhaar being exposed by the West Bengal state government website.

    The latter case is particularly pertinent since it reveals how fragile biometric identifiers can be, especially when it comes to finance. In recent years, a consortium of public and private sector players, including the Reserve Bank of India, UIDAI, the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) and the Institute for Development and Research in Banking Technology, has developed a cardless banking system called the Aadhaar-enabled Payment System, or AePS. To avail of the service, all customers need is a bank name, an Aadhaar number and the biometric identifiers captured during their Aadhaar enrolment. It’s quick, easy but not remotely safe.

    A recent criminal case in Bengal has revealed that a purely biometric-enabled payment system, involving no cards and no PIN numbers, is not secure, particularly when the biometric identifiers in question and Aadhaar numbers are easily accessible on the World Wide Web. As always in these cases, enterprising fraudsters are leagues ahead of the authorities. From Business Standard:

    The latest scam alert came to light after Kolkata Police uncovered cases where fraudsters are stealing data, including thumbprints, from land registries off the West Bengal Government’s land records website. Two individuals were reportedly arrested for their involvement in fraudulent transactions using the Aadhaar Enabled Payment System (AePS).

    “These accused developed fake fingerprints that were used to withdraw money from the complainant’s bank account. Primarily. It has been found that the electronic data are gathered from different public domains/websites,” a senior officer of Kolkata Police told the Indian Express.

    Subsequently, Kolkata Police requested the state Finance Department to conceal biometric data, including fingerprints, and Aadhaar card numbers extracted from property deeds or any other documents uploaded to the state government’s property registration website.

    The response from certain banks and law enforcement agencies is revealing: they are telling bank customers to lock their biometrics at m-Aadhaar app/UIDAI portal and start using a four-digit pin to authenticate payments and prevent unauthorized access to their bank accounts. It is an open admission that biometric identifiers, on their own, are not safe enough for transaction purposes. Nor are they being stored securely by public or private entities. This should (but probably won’t) serve as a cautionary tale for all the other governments and companies around the world seeking to harness the power of biometric identifiers and digital identity.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 22:45

  • "Allahu Akbar, Fu*k Joe Biden!": Enraged Pro-Palestinian Protesters Gather Outside White House
    “Allahu Akbar, Fu*k Joe Biden!”: Enraged Pro-Palestinian Protesters Gather Outside White House

    Tens of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters marched across Washington DC on Saturday to protest US involvement in the Israel-Hamas war, stopping outside the White House to shout “Allahu Akbar” , “Fuck Joe Biden,” and “Biden, Biden, you can’t hide! We charge you with genocide!” –  while smearing red paint and pushing on the gate.

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

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

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

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

    They also defaced and vandalized historic monuments across DC.

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

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

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

    Earlier Saturday, rapper Macklemore spoke at a pro-Palestinian rally in DC, in which he told the crowd that “They told me to be quiet, they told me to do my research, to go back, that it’s too complex to say something, to be silent in this moment,” referring to the pro-Israel camp.

    “In the last three weeks, I’ve gone back and I have done some research, I’m teachable,” he told the crowd. “I don’t know everything, but I know enough to know that this is a genocide.”

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

    Macklemore first offered Palestinians his support two weeks ago on Instagram, where he said he couldn’t “stay silent any longer.”

    The rapper said he was “deeply hurt for the Israelis that lost loved ones,” but didn’t believe in “killing innocent humans in retaliation.”

    “This is why I am supporting the people around the world who are calling for a ceasefire. We are witnessing an unfolding genocide in Palestine at this very moment.”

    At the DC event, many speakers took hits at the President, especially his pledge to send $14 billion in aid to Israel. -NY Post

    Some pro-Palestinian voters in the US say they will no longer vote for US President Joe Biden due to his support for Israel [Ali Harb/Al Jazeera]

    Thousands of protesters have rallied in support of Palestinians in Washington, DC [Ali Harb/Al Jazeera]

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) also spoke out, posting a video in which he condemned Israel’s “indiscriminate bombing” for “hitting hospitals, refugee camps, and killing thousands of innocent people.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsThe anti-Biden backlash to US support of Israel is a serious issue for Democrats, whose support they rely on.

    The leftists at The Hill panicked, framing the situation as “Sure – American Muslims might be pissed, but Trump’s worse!“

    …which comes on the heels of the White House’s ham-fisted ‘strategy to combat Islamophobia,” which the DC protesters immediately saw right through.

    Oh, and Kamala Harris’s stepdaughter (whose father is Jewish) just raised $8 million for Gaza. Let’s see if that’s enough to convince protesters that $14.3 billion to Israel right now isn’t ‘funding genocide,’ as they say.

    Bonus footage:

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

     

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 22:13

  • Zelensky Complains War In Gaza Is "Taking Away The Focus" From Ukraine
    Zelensky Complains War In Gaza Is “Taking Away The Focus” From Ukraine

    He really spoke the words out loud… Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky said Saturday that the war in the Middle East between Israel and Hamas is “taking away the focus” from the Ukraine conflict. 

    He made the remarks in a press conference in Kiev while standing alongside EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, at a moment headlines have turned negative on the prospect of ever being able to beat back the Russians. “Of course, it’s clear that the war in the Middle East, this conflict, is taking away the focus,” Zelensky said in the surprisingly blunt admission.

    He began his remarks by commenting on the front line situation, which hasn’t changed significantly in many months. “Time has passed, people are tired… But this is not a stalemate,” he said.

    “No one among our partners is pressuring us to sit down with Russia, talk to it, and give it something,” he added, after reports have in the last days emerged that Washington is exploring possible concessions to the Russians behind the scenes. 

    Zelensky claimed that it’s “Russia’s goal” to take global focus away from the Ukraine war. “We have already been in very difficult situations when there was almost no focus on Ukraine,” he said, before adding, “I am absolutely sure we will overcome this challenge.”

    Now nearly one month after the horrific Hamas Oct.7 terror attack on southern Israel, the crisis in Gaza is completely dominating headlines. In recent weeks, news of Ukraine-Russia has actually slipped from the front page of major American newspapers.

    In Saturday’s press conference he also tried to push back against the slew of recent pessimistic headlines, per Bloomberg:

    President Volodymyr Zelenskiy pushed back on an NBC report that US and European officials have begun pressuring Kyiv toward possible peace negotiations with Moscow. “I do not know who is publishing this and for what,” Zelenskiy said

    As we explained earlier, in the wake of Ukraine’s costly and futile counteroffensive, Washington’s proxy war with Russia is facing strong headwinds at home: 

    • The war between Hamas and Israel has diverted public attention and sapped the war state’s ability to propagandize voters. Indeed, Biden’s Oval Office address appealing for aid for Ukraine and Israel was originally planned to focus solely on Ukraine, NBC reports. 
    • The US public’s pro-Ukraine fervor has cooled: A new Gallup poll found 41% say the US is doing too much for Ukraine — a big leap from the 29% who said that in June. Many Americans think that money should be used to improve conditions at home. 
    • A growing number of congressional Republicans have put away their rubber stamp for Ukraine aid, and have thus far thwarted Biden’s request for $61 billion in additional funding for the war. Biden’s ploy of a joint funding request that combines controversial Ukraine aid with Israel aid is in grave jeopardy, as House Republicans demand separate votes. 

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

    Washington’s blank-check support for Israel’s destruction of Gaza is further straining an already Ukraine-sapped American arsenal. Tens of thousands of artillery shells that had been earmarked for Ukraine are being redirected to the IDF.

    Even before Hamas attacked Israel, an increasingly severe shortage of conventional shells for the artillery-heavy war in Ukraine led Biden to give Zelensky toxic, depleted uranium shells, stirring an international outcry.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 22:10

  • From Gold To Bitcoin: The Evolution Of Retirement Assets & The Rise Of Bitcoin IRA
    From Gold To Bitcoin: The Evolution Of Retirement Assets & The Rise Of Bitcoin IRA

    Authored by Ivan Serrano via Bitcoin Magazine,

    Gold has traditionally played the role of a conservative and uncorrelated investment vehicle, but that is starting to be seriously challenged by Bitcoin…

    Gold has played a vital role in economics and politics, influencing much of human financial activity through shifts in economic systems. It has proven versatile and stable across upheavals and social changes. It even became a vital tool in global trade and currency exchange as we know it today.

    In the 19th century, gold was the backbone of the global monetary system. Nations relied on the gold standard until the Great Depression and World War I. These events were significant inflationary catalysts, and economies, in a decades-long transition, abandoned the gold standard.

    This process culminated in 1971 when the Federal Exchange could no longer exchange US dollars for gold. In 1976, the gold standard was abandoned entirely, and gold became a free asset.

    Today, it is still considered a reliable store of value with a well-established market. After all, it has had the luxury of centuries—through various cycles of prosperity and economic upheavals—to prove its reputation. Gold boasts high liquidity and can be easily traded or sold in multiple forms: bars, coins, jewelry, or other representative instruments.

    GOLD VS BITCOIN: THE BATTLE OF UNCORRELATED ASSETS

    In retirement investments, gold is an uncorrelated asset, showing an average annual return that has reliably kept pace with inflation. In times of economic uncertainty, investors move to gold because of its reputation as a store of value and its non-correlation with stocks, which makes it ideal during market downturns.

    However, today’s evolving monetary technology has provided investors with a new option: Bitcoin. Although it is a relatively new asset whose economic impact is still unfolding, Bitcoin has already been called “digital gold.” It shares many characteristics with gold, including its capped supply and its potential as a store of value.

    In addition, Bitcoin offers a new type of value in the age of connectivity. It can be transferred digitally, something that physical gold cannot do. It is the world’s first digital bearer asset, a remarkable feat achieved through the convergence of economic design, cryptography, and decentralized networks.

    For investors, the perfect portfolio—a balance of assets that echoes an individual’s risk preference and fits the economic climate of the times—is an ever-evolving target. All investors and professional fund managers seek new ways to add growth and diversification.

    Retirees seek investments that provide diversification, preservation of wealth, and stability. On top of these, many retirees seek continued income that can only arise from growth—investments that capitalize on the opportunities of the times.

    Finding the right mix of less risky, stable, and higher-risk growth assets has always been challenging for even the most experienced financial planners. Some believe Bitcoin fits into the new retirement portfolio as an added diversifier. Like gold, it can work as an uncorrelated asset and hedge against systemic risks.

    BITCOIN IRAS: EXPOSURE TO THE BEST PERFORMING ASSET OF 2023

    Another way to replicate current investment products is the creation of Bitcoin IRAs. The IRS considers Bitcoin and other crypto investments in retirement accounts as property. Government rules prevent Roth IRAs from holding “coins” and “collectibles,” but these do not appear to cover Bitcoin.

    According to NYDIG’s most recent reports, Bitcoin tops its 2023 returns list based on asset class. As of October 6, 2023, it boasts a 63.3% increase YTD, besting US large caps (28.2%), commodities (6%), cash (3.8%), and gold (1.1%). On a countdown to its next halving—around April 2024—many investors are eyeing Bitcoin as a possible addition to their retirement accounts.

    Some IRA providers are already offering crypto investments in the form of cryptocurrency IRAs—specifically Bitcoin IRAs. A Bitcoin IRA works like any traditional self-directed IRA (SDIRA) and carries the same benefits. Instead of investing in Bitcoin directly and taking charge of one’s custody, Bitcoin IRAs provide the investor convenience, security, and ease.

    A Bitcoin IRA lets you buy and sell Bitcoin in a tax-advantaged retirement account. A Bitcoin IRA allows retirees to maintain traditional retirement accounts while having a separate account that invests in novel currencies like Bitcoin.

    WHY ADD IT TO YOUR PORTFOLIO?

    Many Bitcoin advocates promote Bitcoin as “digital gold.” This simplified view has been held and promoted by those who believe Bitcoin can serve as a reliable store of value in digital form.

    Based on this view, Bitcoin investments analogous to gold products are already being created. Just as gold ETFs hold physical gold as their underlying asset, Bitcoin products are structured similarly to these ETFs and provide exposure through funds traded on stock exchanges.

    The first applications of Bitcoin ETFs have been lodged in recent years, with multi-trillion asset managers like BlackRock and Fidelity providing optimism about their future. The recent verdict of a DC court on Grayscale’s bitcoin ETF application invalidating the SEC’s argument for denying its Bitcoin investment product has been interpreted as a turning point for the industry.

    Proponents of Bitcoin ETFs remain vigilant as efforts to gain approval for a spot Bitcoin ETF persist from prominent asset managers. Depending on how the SEC reacts, Bitcoin ETF approvals may follow, opening the floodgates for increased demand.

    Image by Kanchanara on Unsplash

    MAKE RETIREMENT PLANNING LESS COMPLEX WITH A BITCOIN IRA

    Despite its status as a new asset, Bitcoin’s performance in 2023 stood out for its ability to keep a narrow trading range despite intense external pressures. It’s been trading sideways around the $25,000 to $31,000 range, resisting volatility and breakouts in either direction.

    Retirees or those planning for retirement interested in adding riskier assets to their portfolios, moving with the times, and seeking avenues for future growth can add Bitcoin to their retirement investments without learning the technical nuances of keeping their Bitcoin safe.

    They can set up Bitcoin IRAs either as traditional or Roth accounts. A Roth Bitcoin IRA permits tax-free withdrawals in retirement. A traditional Bitcoin IRA offers tax-deferred growth. Retirees in higher tax brackets can take advantage of this feature.

    Why consider Bitcoin IRAs over purchasing and storing Bitcoin directly? Bitcoin IRAs extend to estate planning easily, providing a new advantage compared to traditional retirement accounts. Swan Bitcoin IRA, for example, offers enterprise-grade custody with insurance coverage. It provides a layer of protection essential for retirees who may not be well-versed in crypto security.

    Moreover, Bitcoin IRAs provide a legal framework for individual investors, protecting them from tax issues, legal uncertainties, and non-compliance risks. Investors are assured that their investments are fully compliant with existing financial regulations.

    Despite being a novel instrument, Bitcoin IRAs may provide a path for continued wealth-building during retirement. They offer the potential for growth, diversification, and tax advantages in one package within the framework of a familiar and regulated environment. They are one way to benefit from Bitcoin’s uncorrelated nature and future potential.

    As with any investment, retirees should consult a financial advisor to confirm whether a Bitcoin IRA investment conforms with their resources, risk tolerance, time horizon, and financial goals. In a brave new world of retirement planning, Bitcoin IRAs offer an alternative, innovative, and compelling proposition to explore the rewards of Bitcoin investments, even for those not delving into the technological complexities of crypto.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 21:35

  • Berkshire Cash Pile Hits All-Time High $157 Billion, As Buffett Sells A Record $38BN In Stock In Past Year
    Berkshire Cash Pile Hits All-Time High $157 Billion, As Buffett Sells A Record $38BN In Stock In Past Year

    Over the years, Warren Buffett has been opportunistic and “fluid” with his ideals and political opinions – he describes himself as a “democrat” yet without batting an eyelid will demand government bailouts for his portfolio of companies –  but he has been steadfast about one thing: he refuses to spend money on stock purchases or corporate acquisitions unless there is significant value to be exploited. In which case, one can probably conclude that the market is still woefully overvalued because earlier today Buffett’s conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway reported solid Q3 earnings but more importantly, revealed a cash pile that had grown by $10 billion in the third quarter to a record $157.2 billion (consisting of $30.8 billion in cash and $126.4 billion in investments in T-Bills, up from $93 billion at the end of last year), and set to overtake Apple’s own cash hoard (which as we noted earlier this week has been declining) of $162 billion as soon as this quarter.

    “Cash deployment is definitely slowing,” said Jim Shanahan, an analyst with Edward Jones. “Ultimately Berkshire’s going to start feeling some pressure to put cash to work.”

    Perhaps… but not yet; in fact in the third quarter, Berkshire was a net seller of stock for the fourth quarter, liquidating another $5.3 billion in shares and bringing the total sales over the past 12 months to a record $38.3 billion.

    Despite ramping up Berkshire’s acquisition machine in recent years, the company has still struggled to find many of the big-ticket deals that galvanized Buffett’s renown, leaving him with more cash than he and his investing deputies could quickly deploy. After hanging back during the pandemic, he’s since snapped up shares in Occidental Petroleum (despite owning 26% of the company, Buffett has said he has no plans to acquire the company outright) and struck a $11.6 billion deal to buy Alleghany. Buffett has also leaned heavily on share repurchases amid the dearth of appealing alternatives, saying the measures benefit shareholders.

    Separately, the conglomerate also reported operating earnings of $10.76 billion, a jump on the prior year, as it benefited from the impact of elevated interest rates on the cash pile and gains at its insurance businesses. However, including investment and derivatives losses, Berkshire posted a loss for the quarter of almost $12.8 billion, well above last year’s $2.8 billion loss, which largely came from a decline in its big Apple stake. Shares of the iPhone maker fell 11.7% during the quarter but have rebounded over 3% since.

    Strength in Berkshire’s insurance unit, plus the inclusion of Pilot Flying J earnings which Berkshire did not include in results last year, helped drive profitability. Berkshire said its insurance businesses posted a profit of $2.42 billion versus a loss in the prior-year period, when the insurance industry was being pummeled by catastrophes.

    Geico, the crown jewel of Berkshire’s insurance empire and Buffett’s “favorite child,” reported another profitable quarter as it curtailed advertising expenses by 54% year-to-date; total underwriting earnings at the unit were $1.1 billion. The auto insurer is in the middle of a turnaround after losing market share to competitor Progressive. The improvement follows efforts by the division to overhaul underwriting after struggling with higher costs for replacing or repairing damaged vehicles. The effort cost it market share — raising the question if it will seek to reclaim that ground.

    Berkshire’s railroad, BNSF, however, saw a 15% decline in earnings as the railroad division grappled with lower volumes and higher costs.

    Berkshire posted stronger operating earnings despite Buffett cautioning at its annual meeting in Omaha in May that earnings at the majority of its operating units could fall this year as an “incredible period” for the US economy draws to the end. Still, the Fed’s rapid rate hikes helped the firm reap huge returns on the cash it stockpiles mostly in short-dated US Treasuries.

    That said, those higher rates also created headaches for some of Berkshire’s industrial businesses: the conglomerate’s building products businesses saw revenue slip 11% due to the run-up in mortgage rates.

    “The effects of significant increases in home mortgage interest rates in the US over the past year has slowed demand for our home building businesses and our other building products businesses,” Berkshire said in a report detailing results. “We continue to anticipate certain of our businesses will experience weakening demand and declines in revenues and earnings into 2024.”

    The jump in profits has been rewarded by the market, which pushed Berkshire’s Class B shares to a record high in September as investors sought out its diversified range of businesses as a hedge against deteriorating economic conditions. And while the shares pared some of those gains, the stock is still up almost 14% for the full year, in line with the S&P500.

    A part of that boost to BRK’s stock came from the company itself: the firm spent $1.1 billion on buybacks in Q3, bringing the total for the first nine months of the year to about $7 billion. The conglomerate trimmed its overall equities portfolio in the quarter, making almost $15.7 billion on sales net of purchases.

    As usual, Berkshire Hathaway asked investors to look past the quarterly fluctuations in Berkshire’s equity portfolio.

    “The amount of investment gains/losses in any given quarter is usually meaningless and delivers figures for net earnings (losses) per share that can be extremely misleading to investors who have little or no knowledge of accounting rules,” the company said in a statement.

    Berkshire also acknowledged the negative economic impact from the pandemic, as well as geopolitical risks and inflation pressures.

    “To varying degrees, our operating businesses have been impacted by government and private sector actions to mitigate the adverse economic effects of the COVID-19 virus and its variants as well as by the development of geopolitical conflicts, supply chain disruptions and government actions to slow inflation,” Berkshire said. “The economic effects from these events over longer terms cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 21:00

  • Don't Fall For Biden's Latest Talking Point
    Don’t Fall For Biden’s Latest Talking Point

    Authored by Connor O’Keefe via The Mises Institute,

    As the long-hyped Ukrainian counteroffensive against Russia stalls and a new war in Gaza draws the world’s attention, American support for funding Kyiv’s war has waned. In an effort to reverse this, the Biden administration is changing its messaging. A Politico report from last week details how White House aides are now telling members of Congress to sell Americans the lie that continuing to send money and weapons to Ukraine is good for the economy.

    President Joe Biden made this point himself when he introduced a $105 billion proposal to send military aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan:

    We send Ukraine equipment sitting in our stockpiles. And when we use the money allocated by Congress, we use it to replenish our own stores, our own stockpiles, with new equipment. Equipment that defends America and is made in America. Patriot missiles for air defense batteries, made in Arizona. Artillery shells manufactured in 12 states across the country, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas. And so much more.

    With this new talking point, the Biden administration is echoing Senator Mitch McConnell, who has for months been saying that the war in Ukraine is an excellent deal because American companies get paid, the Russian regime is weakened, and only Ukrainians have to die.

    Setting aside the morality or practicality of Biden and McConnell’s foreign policy ambitions, the argument that all this military spending is good for the American economy relies on one of the oldest, most pervasive economic fallacies in our political discourse—the broken window fallacy.

    First outlined by French economist Frédéric Bastiat in his essay “That Which Is Seen and That Which Is Not Seen” and later expounded upon by economic journalist Henry Hazlitt in his book Economics in One Lesson, the broken window fallacy is the false belief that spending money on restoring things that have been destroyed can make an economy richer.

    To make this point, Bastiat used the example of a broken shop window. After his careless son breaks a pane of glass, a shopkeeper is forced to hire a glazier to repair the damage. A group of bystanders reflect on the situation and question their impulse to condemn the boy. After all, they ask, “what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?”

    In Hazlitt’s telling, the bystanders point to all the economic activity that will come from the shopkeeper’s purchase of a new $50 windowpane. “The glazier will have $50 more to spend with other merchants, and these in turn will have $50 more to spend with still other merchants, and so ad infinitum.” That leads the crowd to the fallacious conclusion that because of all the resulting economic activity that his breaking of the window incited, the shopkeeper’s son should be considered a public benefactor.

    The problem with this thinking, Bastiat and Hazlitt explain, is that it cites only the economic activity that can be seen to result from the broken window. What goes unseen is the cost—all the economic activity the shopkeeper would have instead spurred had he not been forced to buy a new window.

    And because the shopkeeper would have preferred to spend the $50 elsewhere, the breaking of the window can only be considered a net loss. The glazier benefits from the shopkeeper’s loss, but the shopkeeper and therefore the overall economy are made poorer.

    How does this relate to the Biden-McConnell talking point? After all, isn’t the destruction happening far away in Ukraine and Gaza?

    It’s important not to get distracted by the act of destruction in Bastiat’s parable. The central element of his argument is not the broken window alone but the fact that the shopkeeper is forced to pay for a new one.

    When the American people are forced to pay for weapons and equipment to replace those sent to Ukraine, they lose out on all the economic activity that they would have preferred to partake in, just like the shopkeeper.

    And although, like the glazier, the five prime defense contractors benefit from the influx of tax dollars, the American people as a whole can only be made worse off. There is no growth, only a forced transfer of wealth to the weapons companies.

    We have so far been forced to pay for over $44 billion worth of weaponry for Ukraine and $3.3 billion per year in military aid to Israel. Now another $60 billion for Ukraine and $10 billion for Israel have been proposed. This spending would increase the burden that has already been forced on the American people. If Biden, McConnell, and their supporters think Americans have an obligation to shoulder that cost, they should at least have the decency not to pretend it’s making us more prosperous.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 20:25

  • Couple Steals Two Sculptures Worth $13,000 From A Carnival Cruise
    Couple Steals Two Sculptures Worth $13,000 From A Carnival Cruise

    In keeping with the stereotype that only the absolute classiest people in the world take cruises, a couple on a Carnival Cruise Line from Baltimore to Bermuda has been accused of stealing nearly $13,000 in sculptures.  

    Carnival’s ships feature “an ever-changing collection of fine art”, their website says. The company even conducts art auctions, with ABC News pointing out that the company’s marketing materials invite customers to “[s]ip some champagne, browse the gallery and bid on a piece to take home as a trip memento.”

    But now the FBI says two pieces worth $13,000 were taken by one couple…without them bidding on it. 

    According to ABC, in legal papers submitted this past Tuesday to a federal court in Baltimore, the FBI reveals that an art auctioneer aboard a ship stumbled upon the disappearance of two art pieces on Oct. 1, a day following the vessel’s return to Baltimore after a week’s voyage. 

    The absent artwork includes a Lucite sculpture valued at $6,200, crafted by the American artist Robert Wyland and titled “Kiss the Sea,” which showcases two sea turtles and is comparable in size to a small rucksack.

    Source: ABC News

    The second piece, a marginally smaller work by American artist Marcus Glenn called “Tappin’ the Keys for the Love,” presents a man at a piano with a heart backdrop and has an estimated worth of $6,600, as stated by the FBI.

    Subsequent analysis of the ship’s security camera recordings by Carnival’s security team revealed footage of two individuals. Captured slightly after 2 a.m. a couple of days prior, these two are seen entering the art gallery with nothing in hand and departing shortly thereafter, clutching items resembling the absent artworks, the article says. 

    Following a deeper probe, court records indicate that the suspects are a trucking firm worker and his female partner. A Facebook scan by an FBI agent revealed a photo of the male suspect wearing attire matching that in the security footage. Upon receiving judicial consent, the FBI conducted searches at the suspects’ residences, leading to the recovery of the stolen artworks, as confirmed by a U.S. Attorney’s Office representative in Baltimore.

    While their names haven’t yet been released, the FBI is considering pressing federal charges pertaining to theft and transporting stolen items. The cruise line even jokes about the quality of its auctions on its website, writing they are far from the “room of too-serious old men, many wearing monocles, paying top-dollar for priceless antique works of art.”

    We can already see the couple’s defense now: “So, what’d ya expect us to do?”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 19:50

  • Election Group Slapped With RICO Says It Can Prove Trump Won Georgia In 2020
    Election Group Slapped With RICO Says It Can Prove Trump Won Georgia In 2020

    Authored by Samantha Flom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Former Black Voices for Trump leader Harrison Floyd’s legal team intends to prove his innocence of claims he unlawfully participated in an election subversion plot in Fulton County, Georgia, by showing that former President Donald Trump won the state’s 2020 presidential election.

    Harrison Floyd, as seen in an undated mugshot, is the only one of the 19 Fulton County defendants to be held in jail without bond. (Fulton County Sheriff’s Department)

    Mr. Floyd was charged on Aug. 14 alongside the 45th president and 17 other co-defendants with violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, conspiracy to commit solicitation of false statements and writings, and influencing witnesses.

    He was the only defendant to spend time in jail due to the indictment before he was released on bond on Aug. 30.

    “Your Honor, this case isn’t about whether you or I think that Donald Trump lost the election. It’s about what Mr. Floyd believed at the time,” noted Chris Kachouroff, one of Mr. Floyd’s defense attorneys, at a Nov. 3 hearing before Judge Scott McAfee.

    “It’s also [about] what the false statements are alleged to have been, and indeed, are they really false,” he said.

    Opening the Door

    The judge ordered the hearing in response to motions to quash three sweeping subpoenas Mr. Floyd’s legal team served to the office of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, the Fulton County Clerk of Courts, and the Fulton County Board of Elections.

    Materials the attorneys requested included the ballot images and envelopes for all absentee ballots cast in the 2020 general election, all absentee ballot application forms, reports from the Dominion voting machines used, and all laptops and poll pads used by election workers, along with other documents, files, and drives.

    Attorneys also requested all documents and recordings concerning the secretary of state’s post-election investigation into allegations of election fraud.

    “The state chose to open this door,” Mr. Kachouroff said. “It is a broad and sweeping complaint. They opened the door wide open for us to walk in and ask for these things.”

    The attorney noted that the 98-page indictment repeatedly asserts as fact that President Trump lost the 2020 election in Georgia, and the charges against Mr. Floyd are predicated on that claim. But if Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is wrong and President Trump actually won the election, then Mr. Floyd cannot be guilty of soliciting “false statements and writings” that conveyed as much.

    The indictment also maintains that Mr. Floyd and the other co-defendants were aware that President Trump lost the election and that their actions constituted an unlawful conspiracy to change the results in his favor.

    That assertion, Mr. Kachouroff said, would also be undermined by proof that the former president won or even just proof that the election’s outcome is uncertain. And the subpoenaed materials, he argued, are likely to contain that proof.

    “We could make that argument that he’s innocent no matter what happened,” he noted. “And, of course, we would. We’re defense attorneys; that’s what we do.

    “But at the end of the day, those are the possible options down the road that could arise. Right now, we believe we’re at Option 1, that President Trump indeed won the election, and we can prove it—with respect to Fulton County.”

    Pushback

    Mr. Raffensperger’s office, represented by Attorney Jackson Sharmon III, has argued that the broad scope of materials requested by the defense would place an “undue burden” on an entity that is not even a party in the case.

    Contesting the subpoena before the judge, Mr. Sharmon said the requested documents contain “little, if anything,” relevant to Mr. Floyd’s defense.

    “If the purpose is state of mind, his intent, the documents we would produce—which he didn’t know about, he didn’t have—are not going to have any effect on the determination of his intent at the time he allegedly undertook the acts that are in the indictment.”

    Mr. Sharmon also challenged the defense’s argument that proving President Trump won the election would necessarily erase the possibility that Mr. Floyd had criminal intent.

    “With all due respect, I don’t think that’s the case,” he said. “That’s not the way intent, in a criminal case, is adjudicated.”

    Meanwhile, attorneys for Fulton County said it could take months to produce the requested materials. And in terms of relevance, they pointed to Mr. Kachouroff’s admission that he could argue his client’s innocence even without the requested materials as evidence they weren’t needed.

    But for Mr. Kachouroff, the state’s arguments didn’t negate his client’s right to those materials.

    “Harrison Floyd is looking at between eight and 33 years. That’s his liberty interest. Courts take liberty interest very seriously so that liberty interest overcomes any burden the state has to be set back by a month or two or three.”

    By the end of the hearing, the three subpoenas were reduced to two as it was revealed that the Board of Elections did not possess any of the requested materials, which are held by the Clerk of Courts.

    The judge, expressing concern over the potential disclosure of voters’ personally identifiable information, said more information was needed to determine what exactly was being requested, the extent of the state’s burden in producing it, and whether a protective order was needed.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 19:15

  • Musk Reveals New AI Chatbot, Kicks Off 'Counter LLM' Movement Against 'Woke' OpenAI
    Musk Reveals New AI Chatbot, Kicks Off ‘Counter LLM’ Movement Against ‘Woke’ OpenAI

    Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence venture, xAI, is positioning itself as a competitor to OpenAI, which Musk helped establish in 2015 before eventually parting ways with it. xAI is rolling out its own large language model, just like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, featuring a new capability to scrape the ‘free speech’ platform X in real-time. 

    Early Friday morning, Musk posted, “Tomorrow, @xAI will release its first AI to a select group. In some important respects, it is the best that currently exists.” 

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

    Then, on Friday night, Musk wrote, “As soon as it’s out of early beta, xAI’s Grok system will be available to all X Premium+ subscribers.” 

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

    Musk’s post reveals Grok is a model that answers questions conversationally and could be based on models similar to train ChatGPT and other text-generating models (such as Meta’s Llama 2).

    Here’s some of Musk’s humor:

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

    Details about Grok remain scarce, yet indications are that the wealthiest man in the world is initiating a ‘counter LLM’ movement that will challenge the already mass-available LLMs on the market, such as ChatGPT, which is super ‘woke’ and has Soviet-style censorship. 

    In April, Musk sat down with Tucker Carlson in an interview and discussed the need to develop his own LLM called TruthGPT, a “maximum truth-seeking AI that tries to understand the nature of the universe.”

    “I’m going to start something which you call TruthGPT or a maximum truth-seeking AI that tries to understand the nature of the universe. And I think this might be the best path to safety in the sense that an AI that cares about understanding the universe is unlikely to annihilate humans because we are an interesting part of the universe.”

    By July, Musk launched xAI. The company is led by the billionaire and former employees of OpenAI, DeepMind, Google Research, and Microsoft Research, as well as employees from Tesla and folks from the University of Toronto. 

    Musk has taken issue with OpenAI’s GPT in the past, expressing that the underlying model is super biased and “woke.” 

    “The overarching goal of xAI is to build a good [artificial general intelligence] with the overarching purpose of understanding the universe,” the billionaire has previously said, adding, “The safest way to build an AI is to make one that is maximally curious and truth-seeking.”

    In September, Larry Ellison, co-founder of Oracle, revealed that xAI had signed a contract to train its AI model on Oracle’s cloud. 

    On Thursday, Musk, speaking at the United Kingdom’s AI Safety Summit, warned AI is “one of the most disruptive forces in history.” 

    He told British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, “AI will be a force for good most likely, but the probability of it going bad is not zero percent.” 

    Musk then compared AI to a “magic genie” and explained that fairy tales with magic genies that grant wishes “don’t end well” and cause people to “be careful what you wish for.”

    To sum up, Musk has just kicked off the counter LLM movement against the censorship industrial complex’s current chatbots on the market. This is more evidence the parallel economy is gaining momentum. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 18:40

  • Game Over: US, European Officials Quietly Nudge Ukraine To Seek Peace
    Game Over: US, European Officials Quietly Nudge Ukraine To Seek Peace

    With the world’s attention squarely fixed on the Israel-Gaza war — while baseless hope for a Ukrainian expulsion of the Russian army has evaporated — US and European officials have started quietly conferring with Ukraine on potential concessions that could bring the war to an end, NBC News was first to report Friday evening.  

    These discussions aren’t about a new counteroffensive — they’re about what concessions Ukraine could live with pursuant to a peace agreement. Some of the conversations, which officials describe as delicate, happened during an October meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, an affiliation of more than 50 governments siding with Ukraine.   

    In eyebrow-raising comments to the The Economist this week, Ukraine’s top commander admitted there will be no breakthrough and the battlefield situation is in a stalemate. The New York Times characterized his remarks as “the first time a top Ukrainian commander said the fighting had reached an impasse.”

    In September, the Times itself splashed cold water on anyone who still believed Ukraine had any hope of pushing the Russian army out of eastern and southeastern Ukraine, much less Crimea. Its detailed analysis found that, in the wake of a Ukrainian counteroffensive, “Russia now controls nearly 200 square miles more territory in Ukraine compared with the start of the year.”  

    ISW‘s assessed control of terrain in Ukraine as of November 3 2023

    Russia’s territorial gains are close to matching the goals President Vladimir Putin outlined at the start of what he calls a “special military operation.” He said Russia sought to secure Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts (provinces), which he recognized as republics shortly before the invasion. Russian forces now control nearly all of those areas, which are together called the Donbas.

    Russia also controls most of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts, giving Russia a land bridge to the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia annexed in 2014 after a Western-aided overthrow of a democratically elected president and the installation of an anti-Russia government in Kiev. Crimea and the eastern provinces of Ukraine have heavily ethnic-Russian populations. 

    The front lines have moved little in recent months. In anticipation of Ukraine’s highly-hyped 2023 counteroffensive, Russia was content to install formidable defensive fortifications and allow the Ukrainian army to degrade itself and achieve nothing. 

    In its match-up with a far larger country, Ukraine’s ability to refresh its military ranks is vanishing fast. “Manpower is at the top of the administration’s concerns right now,” an official told NBC. The West can keep sending them weapons, “but if they don’t have competent forces to use them it doesn’t do a lot of good.” Even the most optimistic western warmongers must acknowledge the coming winter guarantees Ukraine won’t accomplish anything for months. 

    In the wake of Ukraine’s costly and futile counteroffensive, Washington’s proxy war with Russia is facing strong headwinds at home: 

    • The war between Hamas and Israel has diverted public attention and sapped the war state’s ability to propagandize voters. Indeed, Biden’s Oval Office address appealing for aid for Ukraine and Israel was originally planned to focus solely on Ukraine, NBC reports. 

    • The US public’s pro-Ukraine fervor has cooled: A new Gallup poll found 41% say the US is doing too much for Ukraine — a big leap from the 29% who said that in June. Many Americans think that money should be used to improve conditions at home. 

    • A growing number of congressional Republicans have put away their rubber stamp for Ukraine aid, and have thus far thwarted Biden’s request for $61 billion in additional funding for the war. Biden’s ploy of a joint funding request that combines controversial Ukraine aid with Israel aid is in grave jeopardy, as House Republicans demand separate votes. 

    Washington’s blank-check support for Israel’s destruction of Gaza is further straining an already Ukraine-sapped American arsenal. Tens of thousands of artillery shells that had been earmarked for Ukraine are being redirected to the IDF. Even before Hamas attacked Israel, an increasingly severe shortage of conventional shells for the artillery-heavy war in Ukraine led Biden to give Zelensky toxic, depleted uranium shells, stirring an international outcry.    

    As for what it would take for Zelensky to surrender the international spotlight and agree to peace, we’re guessing a big deposit to a Swiss bank account would do just fine. However, officials are pondering some type of Western security guarantee that stops short of NATO membership. The specter of Ukraine become a NATO member played heavily in Moscow’s motivation for invading. The war has been a crisp illustration of Richard Sakwa’s brilliant assertion that “NATO exists to manage the risks created by its existence.”

    Just weeks after Russia’s 2022 invasion, Russia and Ukraine had reportedly tentatively agreed to a peace deal in which Russia would withdraw to an extent that it would still control portions of the Donbas, in exchange for Ukraine forswearing its NATO ambitions while having security deals with several states. Via a visit from then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the Western war machine, eager for a proxy war, seems to have pressured Zelensky to break off the talks. Months of misery ensued, with only the military-industrial complex and Ukraine’s aid-scraping bureaucrats better off for it. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 18:15

  • FBI = Following Biden's Instructions?
    FBI = Following Biden’s Instructions?

    Authored by James Bovard via JimBovard.com,

    Does “FBI” now stand for “Following Biden’s Instructions”? The FBI is doing backflips to boost Joe Biden’s re-election campaign. Unfortunately, federal courts don’t recognize law enforcement shenanigans as a violation of the Voting Rights Act.

    The FBI is categorizing Donald Trump’s supporters as terrorist suspects, according to a new report in Newsweek. The FBI created “a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers,” Newsweek revealed. The FBI is relying on the same counterterrorism methods honed to fight al Qaeda to go after the incumbent president’s political opponents.

    Naturally, the latest Washington crusade against extremism has more malarkey than a White House summit. Federal bureaucrats heaved together a bunch of letters to contrive an ominous new acronym for the latest peril to domestic tranquility. The result: AGAAVE—“anti-government, anti-authority violent extremism”—which looks like a typo for a sugar substitute.

    Recently, the FBI vastly expanded the supposed AGAAVE peril by broadening suspicion from “furtherance of ideological agendas” to “furtherance of political and/or social agendas.” Anyone who has an agenda different from Team Biden’s could be AGAAVE’d for his own good. The great majority of the FBI’s “current ‘anti-government’ investigations are of Trump supporters,” William Arkin, a highly respected investigative journalist, reported in Newsweek.

    The FBI crackdown is following some of the most overheated political rhetoric of our era. Biden has denounced Trump supporters for “semi-fascism.” Biden tweeted last November, “Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are a threat to the very soul of this country.”

    Biden’s Homeland Security Advisor Liz Sherwood-Randall declared, “The use of violence to pursue political ends is a profound threat to our public safety and national security…it is a threat to our national identity, our values, our norms, our rule of law—our democracy.” And since Team Biden says that Trump supporters could be violent, suppressing them is the only way to protect “the will of the people” or whatever honorific is used for rigged election results.

    In June, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security issued a warning: “Sociopolitical developments—such as narratives of fraud in the recent general election, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and conspiracy theories promoting violence—will almost certainly spur some domestic terrorists to try to engage in violence.”  In other words, alleging that there was election fraud in past elections can qualify a person as a terrorist suspect—and justify suppressing their political activity in subsequent elections.

    Biden’s FBI views Trump supporters as a deadly threat to democracy, thereby justifying subverting or crippling Trump supporters’ ability to oppose Biden and other Democrats.

    The FBI is required to have (or claim to have) solid information before launching a criminal investigation. But the bureau needs almost zero information to open an “assessment.” The FBI conducted more than 5,500 domestic-terrorism “assessments” in 2021, a 10-fold increase since 2017 and a 50-fold increase since 2013. “Assessments are the closest thing to domestic spying that exists in America and generally not talked about by the Bureau,” Arkin noted. The House Weaponization Subcommittee warned that  “the FBI appears to be complicit in artificially supporting the Administration’s political narrative” that domestic violent extremism is “the ‘greatest threat’ facing the United States.”

    Those assessments could prove perilous because the official demand for terrorists far exceeds the domestic supply. A top federal official told Newsweek last year, “We’ve become too prone to labeling anything we don’t like as extremism, and then any extremist as a terrorist.” “Trespassing plus thought crimes equals terrorism” is the Biden standard for prosecuting January 6 defendants.

    FBI whistleblower Steve Friend complained of current FBI leadership, “There is this belief that half the country are domestic terrorists and we can’t have a conversation with them. There is a fundamental belief that unless you are voicing what we agree…you are the enemy.”

    Did the Biden administration secretly want Newsweek to vindicate the fears of legions of Trump supporters? Perhaps those “assessments” are repeating a tactic used against Vietnam War protesters: FBI agents were encouraged to conduct frequent interviews with antiwar activists to “enhance the paranoia endemic in such circles” and “get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox,” according to an FBI memo from that era.

    The more abusive the FBI becomes, the more outraged that Trump supporters sound, thereby justifying further FBI repression. That also makes it easier for Team Biden to portray Trump supporters as public menaces.

    Biden’s war on extremism could become a self-fulfilling prophecy that destroys American political legitimacy. An official in the Office of Director of National Intelligence lamented, “So we have the president increasing his own inflammatory rhetoric which leads Donald Trump and the Republicans to do the same”—and the media follow suit. Biden is exempt from official suspicion even when he denounced Republicans as fascists who want to destroy democracy. Yet if Republicans sound equally overheated, Biden’s FBI has pretexts to unleash the hounds.

    Is there any limit to the federal entrapment operations designed to spur headlines that make politicians applaud? The latest FBI crackdown echoes a DHS campaign that was leaked to the press in 2021. Federal policymakers launched a “legal work-around” to spy on and potentially entrap Americans who are “perpetuating the ‘narratives’ of concern,” CNN reported. The DHS plan would “allow the department to circumvent [constitutional and legal] limits” on surveillance of private citizens and groups. Federal agencies are prohibited from targeting individuals solely for First Amendment-protected speech and activities. But federal hirelings would be under no such restraint.

    Will the FBI’s interventions in the 2024 presidential election be even more brazen than its 2016 and 2020 stunts? Will the agency exploit its “assessments” to recruit knuckleheads to engage in another pre-election Keystone Kops plot to kidnap a governor, as it did in Michigan in 2020?

    The FBI has a sordid history of intervening in presidential elections since 1948—if not before. A 1976 Senate report on FBI abuses warned, “The American people need to be assured that never again will an agency of the government be permitted to conduct a secret war against those citizens it considers threats to the established order.” Unfortunately, Americans may not learn the damning details of another FBI “secret war” until long after the next election.

    Ironically, the Biden administration is vilifying anti-government opinions at the same time judges are exposing federal crimes. Federal court decisions in July and September condemned the Biden censorship regime—and those rulings were preceded by Supreme Court decisions striking down President Joe Biden’s student-loan-forgiveness scheme and vaccine mandates.

    But Team Biden still presumes anyone who suspects the feds are violating the Constitution is up to no good. In the same way that Biden based his 2020 election campaign on vilifying Charlottesville 2017 protests, so the Biden re-election campaign will vilify anyone who distrusts the feds. Regardless of the outcome, the 2024 election will be another boomtime for cynics.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 18:05

  • No Country Has A "Right to Exist"
    No Country Has A “Right to Exist”

    By Brian McGlinchey via starkrealities.substack.com

    In the weeks since 2,500 Hamas militants went on a murder and kidnapping rampage in southern Israel, a wave of pro-Palestinian demonstrations has erupted across the United States and around the world. These displays have only grown in size and number as Israel’s military responds by punishing the entire, densely-packed population of Gaza with a blockade on food, water and medicine, a devastating bombing campaign and now a ground invasion.

    While no mass protest is free of people with bigotry and amoral stances, proponents of Israel have been far too quick to accuse pro-Palestinian protesters of antisemitism. One of the most common of such false accusations rests on a false premise — namely, that it’s inherently antisemitic or genocidal to question Israel’s “right to exist.”

    That premise is false for a number of reasons, the most salient of which is this: No country has a “right to exist.”

    After all, what is a country — or, in more precise terminology, a state — other than a political arrangement? And why would any political arrangement be deemed as having “rights,” much less a supposed right to never be altered or cancelled?

    While definitions vary, Murray Rothbard best distilled the state in his classic long essay, “Anatomy of the State.” Rothbard wrote: “The state is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area.”

    Whether the associated flag of the state in question has a Star of David, stars and stripes, or a hammer and sickle, the suggestion that it’s immoral to propose that such a monopoly be rearranged or replaced is preposterous on its face. Over the broad sweep of history, the norm is not states existing in perpetuity. Rather, history is the story of never-ending rearrangements of these many monopolies on the use of force and violence.

    Europe, circa 1789

    Did the Soviet Union have a “right to exist”? What about Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia or the Ottoman Empire? Are we all culpably-silent bystanders to some kind of ongoing injustice as long as those bygone states are not reconstituted?

    Rather than having a right to exist, each state — from Israel to Ukraine to the United States — must have permission to exist. As expressed in the Declaration of Independence, “Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

    To embrace that fundamental principle is to acknowledge that the State of Israel — a political entity — can only justly continue imposing its monopoly on the use of force and violence if it has the consent of those it governs.

    And who does Israel govern? For all the talk of a two-state solution, and maps depicting the West Bank and Gaza as something somehow separate, the fact is that the State of Israel rules everything “between the river and the sea,” to invoke a contentious phrase we’ll revisit shortly.

    “Between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, one state controls the entry and exit of people and goods, oversees security, and has the capacity to impose its decisions, laws, and policies on millions of people without their consent,” wrote Michael Barnett, Nathan Brown, Marc Lynch and Shibley Telhami in Foreign Affairs. Their April essay presciently warned that “a storm is gathering in Israel and Palestine that demands an urgent response.”

    The population across that Israel-ruled territory includes 7.5 million Jews and 7.5 Arab Israelis and Palestinians, with each group subject to different treatment.

    Palestinians at an Israeli military checkpoint

    West Bank Palestinians endure restrictions on their movements, from checkpoints to segregated highways. The State of Israel frequently demolishes Palestinian homes and businesses for lack of permits that are extraordinarily difficult to secure. Palestinians endure ongoing harassment and under-reported acts of vandalism, agricultural destruction and violence perpetrated by settlers who operate under the protection of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

    In neighborhoods such as East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah, Palestinians are frequently evicted from their homes under a complex law that perversely declares them to be “absentees” even if they’ve lived in their house for decades. In one infamous video of such an eviction, an obese Jewish settler tells a distraught Palestinian homeowner, “If I don’t steal it, someone else is gonna steal it.”

    Meanwhile, Gaza is rightly labelled “the world’s largest open-air prison.” Though Israel withdrew forces and settlers from the 25-mile long strip in 2005, it’s continued to control the territory from the outside, in a way that creates a miserable existence for 2 million inhabitants in one of the world’s most dense population centers.

    Controlling Gaza’s air, sea and land borders, the State of Israel imposes an ongoing, economic blockade that fluctuates in intensity. Individuals are only granted travel permits under narrow circumstances. Israel does not allow Gaza to operate an airport or seaport, and imports and exports via road are tightly restricted. Egypt has compounded the situation with its own restrictions and periodic border closures.

    The result is economic devastation: The pre-Oct 7 unemployment rate was over 46%, per capita income only about 25% of the West Bank’s level, and 65% of Gaza residents were below the poverty line.

    Given the reality of life for Palestinians in this de facto single state that includes Gaza and the West Bank, it’s understandable that many would call for an entirely new system of government between the river and the sea. As the Declaration of Independence asserts, when “any form of government becomes destructive” of the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, “it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government.”

    Intentionally using inflammatory language, Israel’s defenders often say that those who call for a new government are advocating the “destruction” of Israel.

    “Dissolution” would be more precise when discussing a government, but “destruction” serves their public relations goal of demonizing the opposition by connoting they’re bent on physical destruction.

    Israel supporters employ similarly flawed characterizations of an often-used Palestinian slogan that’s ubiquitous in the ongoing protests: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” It’s reasonable to interpret that as a call for the dissolution of the State of Israel, but those pushing back against pro-Palestinian voices regularly declare the slogan is nothing less than a call for genocide.

    While any slogan will mean different things to different people, this one has been used for decades by Palestinians seeking the same liberties as Israeli Jews throughout the entire territory ruled by the State of Israel.

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

    Chief among their wishes is for the freedom of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza to return to what is now considered Israel proper. Some 700,000 Palestinians were either expelled or forced to flee that land when the State of Israel was instituted in 1948.

    Any intellectually honest appraisal of the situation in Israel must center on an acknowledgement that the two-state solution’s ship sailed long ago, thanks to relentless Jewish settlement of the West Bank having eliminated any possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state.

    Given the facts on the ground, a growing number of advocates inside and outside greater Israel are calling for a different one-state arrangement — one with a secular government securing equal rights for all it serves.

    Belying assertions that calling for the State of Israel to be replaced is antisemitic, those advocates include many Jews.

    To take one prominent example, abandoning his long-running defense of Israel, prominent American Jewish intellectual Peter Beinart embraced the idea in a milestone 2020 New York Times essay, “I No Longer Believe in a Jewish State.”

    Thanks to a cultivated mythology that falsely depicts Arab-Jew conflict as something intrinsic and eternal rather than something that largely bloomed in the 20th century, many Westerners can’t conceive of Jews and Muslims living peacefully in the same country.

    However, that was the condition in Palestine before the creation of the State of Israel — and it’s even the condition today in the Zionist state’s archenemy, Iran. There, the Middle East’s largest Jewish minority operates synagogues, enjoys kosher restaurants, runs hospitals and schools, and even has a reserved seat in the Iranian parliament.

    Western Governments Weaponize False Premises to Limit Speech

    It would be bad enough if references to a nonexistent “right to exist” and false accusations of genocidal intent were only used as intellectually bankrupt talking points. However, in a variety of countries, these falsehoods are alarmingly being hard-wired into government policies and used to curtail speech and the exchange of ideas.

    In Switzerland, police this month banned a planned protest simply because promotional messaging included “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” which authorities declared an incitement to violence.

    Berlin police went further, declaring it illegal to speak the slogan and already arresting at least one man for doing so.

    Europe has long held the lead in the West’s race to authoritarian dystopia, but politicians like 2024 Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley are doing their best to help the United States catch up.

    Haley recently promised to “change the official federal definition of antisemitism to include denying Israel’s right to exist,” and to use that warped definition to cancel the federal tax exemption of any college that allows students or professors to freely argue for a different political order in what is now greater Israel.

    Those who support the State of Israel are free to present a case that it’s a just arrangement for the 7.5 million Jews and 7.5 million Palestinians “between the river and the sea.” However, painting those who demand a new arrangement as inherently immoral, genocidal or antisemitic is ignorant at best and maliciously misleading at worst.

    *  *  *

    Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Read more and subscribe at starkrealities.substack.com 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 16:55

  • Showtime: World's Largest Rocket Ready For 'Mid-November' Launch
    Showtime: World’s Largest Rocket Ready For ‘Mid-November’ Launch

    Elon Musk’s SpaceX announced on Friday that the most powerful rocket ever built, Starship, currently under review by the US Fish & Wildlife Service, could be ready for the second launch as soon as mid-November. 

    “The second flight test of a fully integrated Starship could launch as soon as mid-November, pending regulatory approval,” SpaceX wrote in a statement on its website. 

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

    This comes several days after the Federal Aviation Administration concluded a safety review focused on potential impacts on public health and property. The FAA’s report is part of a more comprehensive assessment required before the next launch. Currently, the Fish & Wildlife Service is still conducting an Endangered Species Act of 1973 review of the launch and has upwards of 135 days to issue an opinion. 

    “The consultation is still underway, so we don’t have any timeline updates,” Aubry Buzek, public affairs for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Texas, told Bloomberg via email. 

    There have been mounting concerns the US government under the Biden administration has weaponized federal agencies against the billionaire for his ‘free speech’ social media platform X. 

    Musk recently described the apparent ‘beef’ that the Biden administration has with him. In September, he told All-In Podcast host entrepreneur David Sacks:

    “…there does seem to be some significant increase in the weaponization of government and really sort of misuse of prosecutorial discretion in many areas… I think this is really a dangerous thing for there to be partisan politics with government agencies.”

    Musk continued:

     “I don’t think the whole administration has it out for me,” he added.

     “But I think there’s probably aspects of the administration… or aspects of interests aligned with President Biden who probably do not wish good things for me.”

    On Sept. 5, Musk said Starship was ready for launch. 

    “Starship is ready to launch, awaiting FAA license approval,” Musk wrote on X, sharing a video of world’s largest rocket at the SpaceX Starbase launch facility in south Texas. 

    Musk was somewhat optimistic in a recent interview where he said, “We think it will work, but we aren’t sure if it will work.” 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 16:20

  • America's Immigration Daydream Is Coming To An End
    America’s Immigration Daydream Is Coming To An End

    Authored by Matthew Boose via American Greatness,

    The Atlantic, one of the most prestigious and reliably liberal publications in America, has a new article semi-frankly acknowledging the downsides of the last half century of unrestricted immigration.

    Author David Leonhardt, a regular columnist for the New York Times, confronts – or rather, politely circumambulates – the “unintended” consequences of the landmark 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which fundamentally remade America’s immigration process by opening the floodgates to the Third World.

    Leonhardt focuses chiefly on the economic impact of mass immigration on working class wages and rising inequality between the poor and the middle class. There is nothing groundbreaking here, as any disciple of Patrick Buchanan (or anyone with a working understanding of supply and demand) could tell you. But it is always a little surprising to see common sense in the pages of a magazine like The Atlantic, even if it comes in the usual milquetoast packaging. Leonhardt even takes apart the quietly elitist “jobs Americans won’t do” talking point that liberals love: “Immigrants typically work in jobs that native-born Americans do not want at the wages that employers are offering. One reason that employers can offer such wages….is the availability of so many immigrant workers.”

    But one can only expect a respectable liberal writer to take things so far. Leonhardt tempers “the hard truth about immigration” with the usual sentimental mush about its intangible benefits. To quote Mary Poppins, a “spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down.”

    According to Leonhardt, the 1965 Act was flawed but nevertheless a “monumental achievement.” For who? For millions of newcomers, it undoubtedly changed life for the better.

    What about the American people? For them, it was a swindle of historic proportions.

    The 1965 immigration revolution was sold to the American people as a modest shift, as Leonhardt points out. But he omits a striking quote from famous liberal Ted Kennedy, who pledged the bill “will not upset the ethnic mix of our society.”

    In the end, the reform was a strike at the heart of democracy. The people were misled on the most political of questions – who gets to be part of our community? America entered the late 20th century as a prospering, majority-white country. In the span of a few generations, whites would become an untouchable minority. They now face the prospect of spending the remainder of their natural lives under hostile, one-party rule. The majority party, the Democrats, grows stronger, and more hostile to the nation’s historic majority, with each wave of foreigners. Under President Biden, this process of demographic replacement and marginalization has accelerated like never before.

    It was Kennedy’s brother John Kennedy who stamped the nation’s conscience with pablum about America being a “nation of immigrants.” President Johnson made that sappy vision into a reality. If the America of 1965 could see the effects that mass immigration would have in the ensuing decades, it is doubtful Johnson’s reform would have passed at all. At the time, a bare majority favored scrapping country quotas, and only 7 percent wanted immigration to increase, a preference that remains to this day (not that it appears to have influenced policymakers).

    Many Americans who grew up during the Kennedy years look back on the post-war boom as an idyllic dream. Their yearnings can’t be written off as mere nostalgia bias. Compared to the present, the early ‘60s must have been like paradise: the single breadwinner was the standard, the country had a real sense of identity, and people trusted their neighbors enough to leave doors unlocked. That’s all gone now. As a result of the monumental demographic change unleashed over the past half century, America is more divided than it has ever been since its greatest crisis in 1865. The country is Balkanizing, and politics have become radical and violent.

    Leonhardt is more concerned with how diversity can be exploited by the right than its actual disintegrating effects on society. To liberals, immigration can only be conceived as a problem (if ever) when framed in terms of class. But immigration is not only an economic question, as current events have shown. With the war in Israel, reality has come crashing into the daydream of multiracial utopia. America’s rapidly browning youth is sympathetic to Hamas. It is likely that some Atlantic readers are having doubts about immigration for the first time in their lives. The issue can be avoided for a while longer, but not forever.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 15:45

  • Mark Meadows Sued By Book Publisher After Testimony "Squarely Contradicts" 2020 Election Fraud Claims
    Mark Meadows Sued By Book Publisher After Testimony “Squarely Contradicts” 2020 Election Fraud Claims

    Former Trump Chief-of-Staff Mark Meadows is being sued by his book publisher, after his testimony before Congress contradicted claims made in his 2021 book, “The Chief’s Chief” – which he attested were true at the time he wrote them.

    “Meadows, the former White House Chief of Staff under President Donald J. Trump, promised and represented that ‘all statements contained in the Work are true and based on reasonable research for accuracy’ and that he ‘has not made any misrepresentations to the Publisher about the Work,’” alleged All Seasons Press in their suit against Meadows.

    In his book, Meadows insisted that President Trump was the true winner of the 2020 Presidential Election – which he said was “stolen” and “rigged” with assistance from “allies in the liberal media” who ignored “actual evidence of fraud,” according to the lawsuit.

    Meadows also says in the opening sentence to one chapter: “I KNEW HE DIDN’T LOSE.”

    Yet, Meadows testified to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s grand jury that Trump was being “dishonest” with voters when he claimed victory on election night. According to ABC News, Meadows admitted that Trump lost the election when questioned by prosecutors.

    “Meadows’ reported statements to the Special Prosecutor and/or his staff and his reported grand jury testimony squarely contradict the statements in his Book, one central theme of which is that President Trump was the true winner of the 2020 Presidential Election and that election was ‘stolen’ and ‘rigged’ with the help from ‘allies in the liberal media,’ who ignored ‘actual evidence of fraud,’” alleges All Seasons Press.

    The publisher is seeking a $350,000 clawback of Meadows’ advance, $600,000 in out-of-pocket damages, and at least $1 million for reputational damage suffered by the company (plus another $1 million for loss of expected profits) on sales of the book, which they claim have plummeted given Meadows’ involvement in several Jan. 6 investigations.

    The suit reveals a long and tense relationship between Meadows and his publisher, which has published a suite of books from conservative figures.

    In December 2021, All Seasons Press sent a letter to Meadows saying it would withhold the final of three $116,666 advance payments over concerns his book may contain false information. The suit also notes it planned to continue with publication “pending an investigation.”

    A few days later the company got a letter from attorney Blake Meadows, whom the suit says is Meadows’s son, demanding the final installment. –The Hill

    “Mr. Meadows is aware of the specious allegations that were published regarding a portion of the book which was taken out of context, and which have already been addressed by both Mr. Meadows and former President Trump in multiple press releases,” wrote Meadows’ son, Blake, to the company (according to the complaint).

    According to the publisher, they decided to move forward with the book “after conducting the appropriate due diligence and based upon repeated assurances from Meadows that facts in the Book were true,” and that “rumors circulated in the media” that Meadows might have flipped on Trump harmed their bottom line.

    “As a result, public interest in the Book, the truth of which was increasingly in doubt, precipitously declined, and ASP sold only approximately 60,000 of the 200,000 first printing of the Book,” the suit states.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 15:10

  • Newsom Rewrites Pandemic History
    Newsom Rewrites Pandemic History

    Authored by Leighton Woodhouse and Alex Gutentag via Public Substack,

    This week California Governor Gavin Newsom blatantly lied about his record on Covid-19.

    “I’m not consumed by what we did wrong,” Newsom said to Fox Los Angeles’ Elex Michaelson.

    “I’m consumed a little bit more by what we did right… There’s no large state that outperformed California, one of the top performing states, in terms of health, wealth, and education.”

    Newsom went on to say that California’s per capita Covid mortality was “substantially lower than places like Texas and Florida,” that the state’s economy fared better than that of other states, and that we saw less learning loss than Florida. All these statements are misleading at best. Newsom’s claims about California’s economy have already been debunked, and in age-adjusted Covid mortality, as many have pointed out, California and Florida fared about the same. What’s more, cumulative age-adjusted all-cause excess deaths have been higher in California than Florida since early 2020. 

    As for why schools were closed for so long, Newsom said it was because he gave school districts “local control.” Evidently, Newsom wants to claim both that he is not responsible for his own school policies, and that these policies were effective. Yet both of these claims are completely untrue, and Newsom’s failure on schools is a scandal of colossal proportions. 

    In 2020, Newsom’s Department of Health created color coded tiers that effectively prevented California schools from reopening. In 2021, statewide guidelines continued to shape restrictions. These guidelines were based on pseudoscience like a six foot rule that created a major barrier to reopening and was not proven to prevent Covid transmission. 

    While allowing private and charter schools to open and sending his own kids to in-person private school, Newsom never challenged the California teacher’s union to push for full public reopening. Only in March 2021, when the state was facing a lawsuit, and after basically every other state had reopened, did Newsom call for public schools to resume limited in-person classes. 

    To this day, Newsom insists that school closures and the state’s catastrophic learning loss were no big deal. Florida, he told Michaelson, “had more learning loss in every single category… These are facts.” But are they really?

    Newsom appears to be relying on a single 2022 test, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), to make this assertion, despite a mountain of evidence that contradicts it. Only a small sample of students in the country take the NAEP. In contrast, all students in grades 3 through 8 and 11 take California’s official state test, the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). 

    While the 2022 NAEP, which only about 4,000 kids in the state took, made it appear that California’s learning loss was not so bad, the dismally low SBAC scores from 2022 showed that school closures had likely wiped out years of educational progress. This disparity strongly suggests there may have been a significant sampling bias in the NAEP, which is probable given that California’s chronic absence rate tripled statewide in the 2021-2022 school year. 

    Although the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) touted its supposed success on the NAEP, the district’s test results were essentially manipulated. In 2019, high-performing charter schools did not participate in LAUSD’s test, but in 2022 they did. Additionally, demographic changes between 2019 and 2022 may have been a factor, since the district’s enrollment fell by an alarming 10%. 

    Newsom and other California officials are cherry-picking the data and intentionally neglecting to analyze and address the complete picture of student learning loss. To avoid political repercussions, they are deliberately ignoring the majority of testing results as well as the many studies which show that remote instruction had a severe impact on learning. 

    Andrew Dean Ho, psychometrician and professor at Harvard Graduate School of Education, reviewed California’s test results as an expert witness in an ongoing lawsuit against the state.

    Wrote Ho in his testimony, “In my review of transcripts from depositions of state officials, I find numerous responses that indicate to me a lack of awareness of or interest in data that could enable accurate estimates of academic learning loss.”

    The state has abandoned its duty to assess all relevant data and may be concealing it.

    “Data currently exist in state repositories to answer questions about the magnitude of academic learning loss for jurisdictions and subgroups in the state of California, untapped,” wrote Ho. 

    Ho’s revealing testimony is corroborated by the fact that the Department of Education threatened to muzzle and retaliate against California researchers who planned to testify against the state. 

    As Newsom increasingly seems to be pursuing presidential ambitions, his Covid mistakes should come under greater scrutiny, especially as he remains intent on never admitting to them.

    In Newsom’s view, the only reason he’s had any criticism at all is because hindsight is 20/20.

    “We should acknowledge at the time we didn’t know what we didn’t know,” he told Michaelson.

    “And we’re experts, we’re geniuses in hindsight.”

    But California’s education failure is not just about 2020 and 2021 – it’s about the state’s refusal to examine the learning loss data to this day, and Newsom’s clear choice to prioritize his own political ambitions over his accountability to the children and families of his state. 

    Subscribers can read the full substack here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 14:35

  • Watch: Massive Airstrikes Level Large University In Gaza
    Watch: Massive Airstrikes Level Large University In Gaza

    Shocking footage is widely circulating showing what appears to be massive airstrikes on Al Azhar University in Gaza, which was first opened in 1991, and is among a handful of Palestinian campuses of high learning.

    Videos circulating show multiple large airstrikes utterly demolishing multiple university buildings, and it’s unclear if the buildings were occupied at the time or if there are casualties. Some pro-Israel pundits have claimed that the presence of large secondary explosions suggests Hamas was hiding large ammunition stores there, hence the follow-up detonations. Watch:

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

    But it’s also very evident that Israel’s warplanes are targeting Gaza’s large buildings and infrastructure as part of scorched earth tactics. 

    On Friday, Israel admitted to targeting ambulances near the Strip’s largest hospital, claiming that the ambulances were actually used by Hamas. The UN and other international bodies have condemned the attack as the death toll mounts and grisly images were widely shared online of bodies piled up in the aftermant.

    Politico describes of the attack:

    The Israeli army bombed a convoy of ambulances near the largest hospital in Gaza on Friday, an attack that “horrified” United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

    The facility — Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City — is overcrowded with patients and serves as a refuge for some 20,000 displaced people, according to local health authorities.

    The attack resulted in 15 deaths and at least 60 wounded civilians, according to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS). In a statement, the PRCS said the convoy of five ambulances tried to transport casualties toward the Rafah border crossing, but was returning to the hospital because the road was blocked with rubble when it was targeted by two missiles.

    Meanwhile, a new report in Axios utilizing satellite imagery and data says in total 25% of all buildings in northern Gaza have been severely damaged or destroyed after nearly a month of airstrikes and fighting. 

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

    At this point more than 9,200 Palestinians have been killed, with an estimated half of these being women and children. 

    Israel has come under condemnation from several countries, especially of Arab states, for appearing to target fleeing civilian convoys even after urging people to flee to southern Gaza. Axios writes, “This analysis also confirms that Israel continues to strike southern Gaza, including areas along the main evacuation routes, even after urging civilians from the north to relocate there.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 11/04/2023 – 14:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest