- Russia Demands US "Leave Syria & Deal With Your Own Problems" Amid Protests
Russia Demands US “Leave Syria & Deal With Your Own Problems” Amid Protests
Tyler Durden
Tue, 06/09/2020 – 02:45Recall that last month, shortly before George Floyd protests plunged a number of American cities into unrest and chaos which witnessed often violent confrontations between demonstrators and police, a top US envoy for Syria policy boasted “my job is to make Syria a quagmire for the Russians.”
But in the wake of the raging protests, which last week created a bit of a crisis for the White House as it mulled “action” against the worsening security situation on the Capitol, Russia has gone on the offensive, demanding that US forces get out of Syria in order to handle America’s own mess at home.
Instead of “protecting” oil fields in Eastern Syria, should the US Army be protecting the streets of America? pic.twitter.com/CCx8Gt8hH4
— Bassem (@BBassem7) June 1, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Specifically this was in response to a statement days ago from Assistant Secretary of State David Schenker, who called on Russia to ‘go out of the Middle East’.
“For 45 years, this has been the cornerstone of American politics – to keep Russia away from the Middle East,” he further claimed.
The Russian Embassy in the US immediately reminded Washington that the “Russian military is stationed in Syria at the invitation of its government.”
Epic photo: a #Russia/n and #American military officers discussing on-the-ground de-confliction (allegedly taken earlier this year somewhere in N.#Syria) pic.twitter.com/lsCNYXo15E
— Maxim A. Suchkov (@m_suchkov) May 27, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The embassy added according to TASS: “The real question here: what are the grounds for the USA to occupy several swaths of this sovereign country? As far as we know none of them are legal. Neither the legitimate authorities nor the UN Security Council sanctioned American troops deployment.”
Additionally, the Russian Foreign Ministry called the remarks “crazy” and “stupid” – and added:
“The US should leave Syria and deal with its internal crisis.”
Both China, Russia, as well as other American rivals and officially dubbed “rogue regimes” by Washington have called out the US for its rank hypocrisy, lecturing others as it faces chaos at home, which has involved not only the police killing of George Floyd, but at least 15 deaths amid the ‘protest’ and riot mayhem which followed.
15 People Died In The Protests And Riots Following George Floyd’s Death. Here’s Who They Are https://t.co/995np2KlSy via @dailycaller
— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) June 7, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
* * *
Meanwhile…
So far WW3 between Russia and the US has been fought with a series of traffic incidents on Syrian roads. Not what was envisaged. 😐 pic.twitter.com/PL1IuMsBAt
— Syrian Girl 🇸🇾 (@Partisangirl) June 8, 2020
- Should NATO Have A Permanent Presence In The Arctic?
Should NATO Have A Permanent Presence In The Arctic?
Tyler Durden
Tue, 06/09/2020 – 02:00Authored by Lee Harding via The Epoch Times,
As Russia and China continue growing their footprint in the Arctic, some observers believe NATO should have a perpetual presence in the region to achieve a deterrence effect and safeguard maritime security.
Lieutenant Colin Barnard, an American who serves at NATO Maritime Command in the U.K., says the developing Arctic presence by Russia and China deserves attention. He made the case in a recent article for the Center for International Maritime Security titled “Why NATO needs a standing maritime group in the Arctic.”
Russia has increased its commercial and naval presence in the Arctic, upgrading old bases and building new ones while strengthening its military capabilities in the region.
China, meanwhile, has drilled for gas in the Kara Sea off of Russia’s northern coast, built icebreakers, asserted rights to fish in the Arctic, and is expanding tourism to the region. For at least five years, China has sailed cargo ships near Russia’s shores in what the Chinese Communist Party calls “the Polar Silk Road.”
Russia is paying attention, whether the West is or not. Since 2019, Russia has required that any foreign naval vessel that sails the Northern Sea Route must notify Moscow at least 45 days in advance, provide details about the ship, the purpose of the voyage, the route it will take, and the name of the ship’s captain.
If these rules are not followed, Russia can apply measures such as the apprehension and even destruction of the ship.
The United States, Canada, Iceland, Norway, and Denmark (via Greenland) constitute the Arctic Five as NATO countries that already have Arctic maritime borders. Barnard believes these nations could conduct freedom-of-navigation operations in the Arctic to “consistently challenge excessive maritime claims,” just as the United States does regarding China in the South China Sea.
The idea has its fans, including retired Colonel Ted Campbell. In a recent blog post, Campbell dreamed of Canada having three Arctic ocean bases, with a fleet of eight to fifteen nuclear-powered submarines plus a beefed-up Coast Guard and even a policing fleet for the RCMP.
James Fergusson, deputy director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba, is more circumspect. He told The Epoch Times that a recession destroyed Canada’s Cold War ambitions for nuclear submarines, and that the pandemic will present similar challenges.
“If they can hold the line to keep the future combat vessels on track as best as possible and actually continue to produce the offshore patrol vessels, the navy will be doing extremely well. But I wouldn’t put even money on that, because when these cuts come in—and they’re coming—hard choices are going to have to be made,” he said.
NATO currently has four standing maritime groups: two with destroyers and frigates and two that do mine countermeasures. In Barnard’s view, these groups are already overtasked and aren’t tailored for Arctic operations. Would an Arctic standing group be possible?
Fergusson says as it is, Canada can only commit one frigate to the NATO standing force in the Mediterranean and Black Sea. He believes that neither the Canadian navy nor our American allies would have much interest in Canada showing muscle in the Arctic.
“Where are you going to base them and what are they going to do? And are they not going to be provocative for the Russians? It doesn’t strike me as a smart thing that Canada should be engaged in. I don’t know if it’s a smart thing that NATO should be engaged in,” he says.
Russian nuclear-powered icebreaker Arktika returns to Saint Petersburg on Dec. 14, 2019. (Olga Maltseva/AFP via Getty Images)
Fergusson doesn’t think the Russian Arctic bases are cause for alarm and says a NATO standing group might create barriers to cooperation with the Russians on arctic search-and-rescue, research and development, and China’s activities.
“Our potential concerns about Chinese behaviour and what they might do or not do in the Arctic are mirrored by and are actually common to Russian interests about what the Chinese might be doing up there. And that’s one of the bases for cooperation—not only between Canada and Russia but between the United States and Russia,” he says.
Robert Huebert, a political science professor at the University of Calgary, points out that a standing force in the Arctic would help NATO allies learn to work together in that environment.
“The Russians have been developing some fairly sophisticated submarine capabilities, and if there is in fact some flare-up you need to be able to counter that,” he says.
However, Huebert believes an Arctic standing group would get “pushback from the Canadians” who fear a permanent NATO presence would undermine Canadian sovereignty instead of strengthening it. He says it’s better to expand operations of the NATO standing force further north.
“If you already have the existing ability and you are clearly focused on meeting the increasing Russian militarization of the region, I think that that would probably be a much more politically and therefore militarily better move,” he says.
The Chinese commercial presence in the Arctic will inevitably be followed by a military one, he adds.
“I firmly expect that you’re going to start seeing some Chinese capabilities in the Arctic,” he says.
“[China] has now emerged as the second strongest navy in the world. It is developing weapon systems that clearly are meant to challenge the Americans in the long term. They’re not focusing on a coastal or even a regional capability, but they are basically going for a global reach.”
China spent less on defence than Canada did in the early 1990s. Today, Canada spends $25 billion annually, Russia spends $65 billion, China nearly $300 billion, and the United States more than $700 billion.
“You combine what the Chinese are learning how to do from a cyber and a hybrid warfare perspective … and you combine that with its military build-up, and you start seeing that in a future regional conflict this starts giving China a very powerful ability to start to try to impose its will,” Huebert said.
- UK Rates 'Worst' National COVID-19 Response, Vietnam Best
UK Rates ‘Worst’ National COVID-19 Response, Vietnam Best
Tyler Durden
Tue, 06/09/2020 – 01:00The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic has affected countries varies vastly, connected in part to the respective government’s handling of the situation. As Statista’s Martin Armstrong shows below, these national responses can be worlds apart – both in terms of efficacy and as survey data from YouGov shows, the subsequent level of public approval, too.
You will find more infographics at Statista
In the UK, where the government’s response has been heavily criticised, the net approval rating (calculated by subtracting ‘handling badly’ from ‘handling well’ responses) is the joint-lowest of all countries surveyed.
Also with a rating of -15 is Mexico, where President López Obrador originally downplayed the severity of the pandemic and is now struggling to find the right balance between prioritizing public health and protecting the economy.
At the other end of the scale, Vietnam has so far recorded just over 300 cases and zero deaths.
In contrast to Mexico, Vietnam’s ‘overreaction’ to the crisis is thought to be the reason for the astonishing results achieved so far.
To compare to the countries at the bottom of the ranking, Our World in Data figures have the number of deaths per million people for the UK and Mexico at 596.07 and 104.79, respectively.
Countries included in the survey were: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, UK, USA, Vietnam.
- Weimar 2020
Weimar 2020
Tyler Durden
Tue, 06/09/2020 – 00:05Have you noticed the peculiar fact that despite the lockdown, the economic crisis, tens of millions unemployed and multiple corporations filing for bankruptcy, Wall Street is having a ball?
CNBC‘s Jim Cramer examined this anomaly earlier a few days ago, his verdict:
“we’re looking at a V-shaped recovery in the stock market, and that has almost nothing to do with a V-shaped recovery in the economy. What is going on is one of the greatest wealth transfers in history.”
How can the market rebound when the economy has not? Cramer’s answer is so simple.
“Because the market doesn’t represent the economy; it represents the future of big business.”
Cramer points out that while small businesses are dropping like flies, big business—along, of course, with bigger wealth, is coming through the crisis virtually unscathed.
Cramer projects that the transfer will have a “horrible effect” on the USA. We are already seeing a tsunami of bankruptcies. The economic fallout is inevitable. Federal data shows that the nation faces a 13.3 percent unemployment rate. The fortunes of U.S. billionaires increased by $565 billion between March 18 and June 4 while the same 11-week period also saw 42.6 million Americans filing jobless claims. The results are devastating, if hardly a news item: while the American people are getting poorer, the rich are getting richer.
One would have thought that the American Left and progressive political institutions would be the first to be alarmed by these developments. We tend to believe that tempering the rich and their greed, caring for working people and fighting for equal opportunities and justice in general are the Left’s prime concerns.
The American reality, however, suggests the opposite. Instead of uniting us in a fierce battle against Wall Street and its broad daylight robbery of what is left of American wealth, the American Left is investing its last drops of political energy in a ‘race war.’ Instead of committing to the Left’s key ideological values, namely: class struggle that unites us into one angry fist of resistance against this theft and discrimination, and without regard to our race, gender, or sexual orientation, the American Left makes us fight each other.
The silence of the Left on the current Wall Street “wealth transfers” is hardly an accident. American Left and Progressive institutions are supported financially and by Wall Street and global financiers. This funding means that, in practice, the American Left operates as a controlled opposition. It maintains its relevance by sustaining social and racial tensions that draw attention away from Wall Street and its crimes. The so called ‘Left’ is also reluctant to point at Wall Street and its current theft, as such criticism, however legitimate, would immediately be censured as ‘antisemitic’ by the Jewish institutions that have appointed themselves to police Western public discourse.
There is plenty of history of such divisive politics from the Left and the way it often ends up betraying the Working Class. The collapse of the German Left in the early 1930s is probably the most interesting case-study of this.
Prior to the 1929 economic collapse, Germany’s fascist movement was a relatively marginal phenomenon consisting of various competing factions. In the 1928 elections the Nazi Party received 2.8 percent (810,000 votes) of the general vote. But then the 1929 crash led to a rapid and sharp rise in unemployment; from 1.2 million in June 1929 to 6 million in January 1932. Amidst the crisis, production dropped 41.4 percent from 1929 to the end of 1931, resulting in skyrocketing poverty. Like millions of Americans at the moment, in the early 1930s millions of Germans spent many days and nights in food queues.
One would assume that the collapse of capitalism would have been politically celebrated by the German Communists and Marxists as the Germans lost hope in ‘bourgeois democracy’ and capitalism alike. The German Communist Party (KPD), like the Nazi party, increased its power exponentially following the economic meltdown. Yet the German Left missed its golden opportunity. Despite the poverty and the austerity measures, it was Hitler who eventually won the hearts and the souls of the German working class. By the September 1930 election Hitler had won 18.3 percent and then in July 1932 37.4 percent. In just four years the Nazis increased their support by 13 million votes.
A lot has been written about the failure of the German Left, both Marxists and Communists, to tackle Hitler and Fascism. Some Marxists are honest enough to admit that it was actually the KPD, its authoritarian and divisive politics that paved the way for Hitler and Nazism.
Like Stalin, the German KPD was quick to employ the term ‘fascist’ to describe any and all political opponents. In an act of gradual self-marginalisation, the German Left reduced itself into irrational political noise that finally lost touch with reality. The KPD were so removed from understating the political transition in Germany that on January 30, 1933, the day Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany, the KPD foolishly declared: “After Hitler, we will take over!”
Like the American radical Left today, the KPD fought in street battles against the Nazis from 1929 to 1933. These battles cost the lives of hundreds of Nazis and KPD members. But in 1933 no political group paid as high a price in blood as the KPD. Nearly a third of KPD members ended up in prison.
It is notable that one of the most concerning aspects of Left politics is the peculiar fact that agitators who claim to be inspired by ‘dialectics’ appear blind to their own ideological past. Consequently, they are detached from the present and totally removed from a concept of ‘future.’
I have been saying for some time that Trump often makes the right decisions if always for the wrong reasons. For instance, he declared ‘a war’ on social media authoritarianism in the name of the 1st Amendment. Though this is clearly the right result, Trump is not motivated by any genuine concern for ‘freedom of speech’ or ‘human rights’ he is simply upset that his tweets are subject to ‘fact checks.’ The Left, peculiarly enough, tends to make the wrong decisions if usually for good reasons. Fighting racism is, no doubt, an important goal; Combating America’s police brutality or racial discrimination is a major crucial battle, however, fuelling a race conflict is the worst possible path toward eliminating both racism and discrimination. Such a tactic will only deepen the divide that already splits the American working class. I wonder whether this divide is exactly what the American Left is trying to achieve: is this possibly what it is paid to do?
Today as American progressives and leftists gear up for a long relentless battle, I have a little advice to offer. History teaches us that Fascism always wins when the conditions for a Marxist revolution are perfect. When you push for a race conflict and further fragmentation of the American society, bear in mind that you may end up facing a real Trump character (as opposed to Donald) that may be able to unite America and make it great for real, but you won’t find your place in it.
- Zoloft Shortage Strikes As Census Bureau Finds One Third Of Americans Now Show Signs Of Clinical Depression
Zoloft Shortage Strikes As Census Bureau Finds One Third Of Americans Now Show Signs Of Clinical Depression
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 23:45In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic crash, which triggered depression-like unemployment with 40 million initial claims filed in ten weeks, a third of Americans are now showing signs of clinical anxiety and depression, according to new data collected by the Census Bureau. This, by far, is the most comprehensive and troubling sign yet of the psychological toll inflicted on Americans due to months of lockdowns.
The Census Bureau contacted one million households between May 7 and 12, and about 42,000 responded, said The Washington Post. The survey was about 20 minutes long and buried deep within, several questions asked respondents about depression and anxiety. Those who answered provided a laggard but clearest snapshot into people’s mental state at the tail end of the lockdown, where many folks were subjected to isolationism, virus fears, and widespread unemployment.
When asked about mental health, 24% of respondents exhibited severe signs of depression, and 30% showed symptoms of anxiety. It was suggested that the mental health of Americans quickly deteriorated during lockdowns.
It found New York, which was the epicenter of the virus outbreak of the world, ranked 12th nationwide in the number of respondents who felt depressed. More than half of the respondents from Mississippi felt depressed. By contrast, in Iowa, only 25% felt depressed.
The latest findings are a significant increase from a pre-corona world. The question of depression, concerning the percentage, has doubled since the 2014 survey.
Millennials, women, and poor people had the highest rates of depression and anxiety. “It’s been a problem many have been studying with no clear answers – whether it’s social media or the way this generation [millennials] was reared or just a greater willingness to talk about their problems,” Maria Oquendo, a professor psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, told The Post.
“What’s worrying is the effect this situation is clearly having on young adults,” Oquendo said.
The psychological toll of lockdowns hit low-income folks much harder than the rich, exacerbating the already weakening mental health of the bottom 90% who were already experiencing extreme wealth inequalities.
The Food and Drug Administration recently reported that Zoloft, one of the most widely prescribed antidepressants, has fallen into short supply in the last several months. Demand has surged during lockdowns, due mostly because, as shown by the Census Bureau, Americans are experiencing an unprecedented mental health crisis.
Bloomberg noted Zoloft prescriptions jumped 12% YoY to 4.9 million in March, the most ever in the US. Prescriptions dropped to 4.5 million in April but still elevated.
You will find more infographics at Statista
We recently noted an Express Scripts report showed antidepressant prescriptions soared between mid-February and March.
“Americans are turning to medications for relief, demonstrates the serious impact COVID-19 may be having on our nation’s mental health,” Express Scripts said in its “America’s State of Mind Report.”
And last month we said:
“The intense anxiety and fear that many people are feeling today could lead to social instabilities as the virus crisis and economic collapse continues to worsen.
“Some of those instabilities could be a “suicide wave,” protests, violent crime, and a rise in drug overdoses.”
At the start of lockdowns (in mid/late March), President Trump warned the psychological toll will have “tremendous repercussions. There will be tremendous death…probably more death from that than anything that we’re talking about with respect to the virus.”
- Dr. Fauci: Hero, Liar, Or Sociopath?
Dr. Fauci: Hero, Liar, Or Sociopath?
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 23:25Via Monty Pelerin’s World blog,
The media made Dr. Fauci a hero. Was it because of his superior medical knowledge or because his “wisdom” would harm Donald Trump and his re-election chances?
Dr. Fauci clearly has impressive credentials but so do many other medical experts. Those who disagreed with Fauci’s draconian recommendations used data to justify their doubts. Fauci used data also, but data that was fallacious, based on models designed to scare everyone. Even when these models were corrected (at least twice) and down to levels that were no longer out of line with previous virus outbreaks, Dr. Fauci did not change his recommendations.
Science is based on hypotheses. A hypothesis can never be proven true, but it can be proven untrue. When that happens, that hypothesis is rejected and replaced with a new one which then becomes the target to measure data against. There was little evidence of Dr. Fauci changing recommendations even when the original hypotheses were dis-proven.
I have no medical training. I do understand the methods of science which proceeds by positing hypotheses and then rejecting them if they are shown to be false.
I believe I understand politics. When politics and science intersect, science is always compromised. My opinion, expressed earlier in Impeachment 2.0, suggested that politics had taken over science with regard to the coronavirus effort.
My views of Dr. Fauci are certainly less than favorable. However, they are quite restrained when compared with others. John Nolte is particularly upset with Dr. Fauci:
Is Fauci a fraud or liar?
Was all his talk about concern for public health, his duty to tell it like it is no matter the personal or political fallout, just a big lie? Is he a fraud who still believes these mass gatherings are a nightmare scenario, but is unwilling to use his massive public platform to say so out loud because shaming protesters who hold the “approved” views among America’s hideous elite would risk Fauci feeling the disapproval of those elites?
Or is he a liar, does he in fact know the coronavirus is nowhere near as deadly as he played it up to be? Is he a liar who misled us into agreeing to destroy our amazing economy in order to undermine the Bad Orange Man’s re-election?
Either way, Fauci’s a sociopath. Either he’s a sociopath who furthered his political ambitions and abused his authority and public trust to talk hundreds of millions of Americans into shattering their own lives and mental wellbeing when there was no real danger, or he’s a sociopath who chooses the good opinion of elites over raising the alarm to save the lives of thousands and thousands of protesters, and the countless millions those thousands will infect.
What kind of man raises the alarm about the fact the black population is disproportionately killed by this virus and then remains silent as the black population gathers en masse, and remains silent as his fellow healthcare workers openly encourage the mass gathering of black America?
I’m almost as disgusted with myself for trusting Fauci as I am with him.
Pretty strong words from Mr. Nolte who claims Dr. Fauci is a sociopath regardless of the truth. Perhaps that not be so. Perhaps he is merely a politician.
Politics always corrupts. And those attracted to it are the easiest to corrupt.
- 11 Cognitive Biases That Influence Political Outcomes
11 Cognitive Biases That Influence Political Outcomes
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 23:05With the 2020 U.S. presidential election fast approaching, many people will be glued to the 24-hour news cycle to stay up to date on political developments. Yet, as Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu details below, when searching for facts, our own cognitive biases often get in the way.
If this isn’t problematic enough, third parties can also take advantage of these biases to influence our thinking. The media, for example, can exploit our tendency to assign stereotypes to others by only providing catchy, surface-level information. Once established in our minds, these generalizations can be tough to shake off.
Such tactics can have a powerful influence on public opinion if applied consistently to a broad audience. To help us avoid these mental pitfalls, today’s infographic from PredictIt lists common cognitive biases that influence the realm of politics, beginning with the “Big Cs”.
The First C: Confirmation Bias
People exhibit confirmation bias when they seek information that only affirms their pre-existing beliefs. This can cause them to become overly rigid in their political opinions, even when presented with conflicting ideas or evidence.
When too many people fall victim to this bias, progress towards solving complex sociopolitical issues is thwarted. That’s because solving these issues in a bipartisan system requires cooperation from both sides of the spectrum.
A reluctance towards establishing a common ground is already widespread in America. According to a 2019 survey, 70% of Democrats believed their party’s leaders should “stand up” to President Trump, even if less gets done in Washington. Conversely, 51% of Republicans believed that Trump should “stand up” to Democrats.
In light of these developments, researchers have conducted studies to determine if the issue of confirmation bias is as prevalent as it seems. In one experiment, participants chose to either support or oppose a given sociopolitical issue. They were then presented with evidence that was conflicting, affirming, or a combination of both.
In all scenarios, participants were most likely to stick with their initial decisions. Of those presented with conflicting evidence, just one in five changed their stance. Furthermore, participants who maintained their initial positions became even more confident in the superiority of their decision—a testament to how influential confirmation bias can be.
The Second C: Coverage Bias
Coverage bias, in the context of politics, is a form of media bias where certain politicians or topics are disproportionately covered. In some cases, media outlets can even twist stories to fit a certain narrative.
For example, research from the University of South Florida analyzed media coverage on President Trump’s 2017 travel ban. It was discovered that primetime media hosts covered the ban through completely different perspectives.
Each host varied drastically in tone, phrasing, and facts of emphasis, […] presenting each issue in a manner that aligns with a specific partisan agenda.
– Josepher, Bryce (2017)
Charting the ideological placement of each source’s audience can help us gain a better understanding of the coverage bias at work. In other words, where do people on the left, middle, and right get their news?
The horizontal axis in this graphic corresponds to the Ideological Consistency Scale, which is composed of 10 questions. For each question, respondents are assigned a “-1” for a liberal response, “+1” for a conservative response, or a “0” for other responses. A summation of these scores places a respondent into one of five categories:
Overcoming coverage bias—which dovetails into other biases like confirmation bias—may require us to follow a wider variety of sources, even those we may not initially agree with.
The Third C: Concision Bias
Concision bias is a type of bias where politicians or the media selectively focus on aspects of information that are easy to get across. In the process, more nuanced and delicate views get omitted from popular discourse.
A common application of concision bias is the use of sound bites, which are short clips that can be taken out of a politician’s speech. When played in isolation, these clips may leave out important context for the audience.
Without the proper context, multi-faceted issues can become extremely polarizing, and may be a reason for the growing partisan divide in America. In fact, there is less overlap in the political values of Republicans and Democrats than ever previously measured.
In 1994, just 64% of Republicans were more conservative than the median Democrat. By 2017, that margin had grown considerably, to 95% of Republicans. The same trend can be found on the other end of the spectrum. Whereas 70% of Democrats were more liberal than the median Republican in 1994, this proportion increased to 97% by 2017.
Overcoming Our Biases
Achieving full self-awareness can be difficult, especially when new biases emerge in our constantly evolving world. So where do we begin?
Simply remembering these mental pitfalls exist can be a great start—after all, we can’t fix what we don’t know. Individuals concerned about the upcoming presidential election may find it useful to focus their attention on the Big Cs, as these biases can play a significant role in shaping political beliefs. Maintaining an open mindset and diversifying the media sources we follow are two tactics that may act as a hedge.
- Mike Krieger: "Resist The Crazy"
Mike Krieger: “Resist The Crazy”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 22:45Authored by Michael Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
Where’s evil? It’s that large part of every man that wants to hate without limit, that wants to hate with God on its side. It’s that part of every man that finds all kinds of ugliness so attractive – it’s that part of an imbecile that punishes and vilifies and makes war gladly.
– Kurt Vonnegut, Mother Night
As things felt like they were spiraling out of control last week, as Americans and people around the world were inundated with endless videos of street violence in addition to reactionary calls to deploy the U.S. military to cities across the country, the temptation to lose control of one’s mental faculties and basic humanity was heightened.
I saw evidence of this all around me. There was a dark and vicious energy in the air, and it felt contagious.
I’m sensing a very dark and vicious energy out there which seems to be affecting all sorts of people who normally wouldn’t be sucked into it.
I need to make a conscious effort to not have it influence me or my thoughts. If you’re feeling the same, try to retain sanity.
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) June 4, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The responses to the tweet above were encouraging and demonstrated many others sensed the same thing and were likewise troubled by it. The overall madness of last week reminded me of the months following Donald Trump’s election. In both cases, the worldview of large numbers of people was shaken to its core. I think the root cause of the breakdown in both instances was that many people’s model of what is “normal” was suddenly shattered.
For example, the idea of Donald Trump being elected president was so incomprehensible and concerning to so many people, they completely lost it when he won. Likewise, images of American cities burning amidst widespread looting caused another group to crack. Neither group had fully come to grips with how broken and corrupt the U.S. economy and society had become, and that these sorts of things happen when states begin to fail.
The reaction to Trump being elected from many of those traumatized by it was to try to remove him at all costs, even if this meant spreading an outlandish Russiagate theory for three years straight. Likewise, the knee-jerk reaction from many to the riots was to send in the military to crush them. In both cases, those who had their comfort zones shattered responded by trying to make the uncomfortable situation go away as soon as possible. Nobody wanted to ask why.
Why was Trump elected? People are angry. Why did cities erupt into civil disobedience? People are angry. Lots of people are angry, but why? We should probably try to honestly answer that question sooner rather than later. There are a lot of very good reasons to be angry.
That being said, unless your life is in immediate danger, the best response to an event that shocks you to your core is to step back and take a deep breath. You don’t have to like what’s happening, but you should consider what a productive or creative response to the situation might look like, as opposed to immediately resorting to an instant-gratification, emotionally charged, reptilian response. The response to a crisis is often worse than the crisis itself.
Someone mentioned to me that he tells all his friends: “you must stand guard at the door of your mind.” Great advice in general, but particularly necessary during times like these. This is also partly what it means to be more conscious, a topic I’ve written about extensively in recent years (see my series on Spiral Dynamics)
It’s never been more important for those who are somewhat conscious to remain that way, because just as consciousness can evolve, it can also devolve. Characteristic of an evolved consciousness is being able to acknowledge one’s own flaws and vulnerabilities. It means being aware of your more base instincts as a human, which means admitting that just as you have the capacity for love, compassion and generosity, you also have the capacity for hate, apathy and selfishness.
Being honest about this and attempting to confront it is key to evolving one’s consciousness, but ego tends to get in the way. The ego has an image it needs to maintain and protect, which ends up acting as a severe roadblock on the path to sustainable self-improvement. It affects and stifles everyone to varying degrees.
An old Cherokee is teaching his grandson about life. “A fight is going on inside me,” he said to the boy.
“It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves. One is evil – he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.” He continued, “The other is good – he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith. The same fight is going on inside you – and inside every other person, too.”
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?”
The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”
It’s important to understand that virtually everyone considers themselves a good person. That person on the complete opposite side of the political spectrum whom you detest, thinks of themselves as a righteous warrior fighting for all that’s good and just. Everyone sees themselves in this sort of way to a greater or lesser degree, but not everyone can be right. So we divide ourselves into tribes that reinforce our views of how right and great we are, and how bad everyone else is. This prevents us from seeing where other people are coming from, and it prevents us from uniting on the really big issues that affect us all.
Moreover, there are people who understand this about human nature and intentionally use it against us. A perfect summary of how this plays out every day via social media can be found in the following excerpt from a post recently published at The Prepared.
You should also remember that the split-screen effect means media types can tell whatever story they want to tell. As in the Venezuela clip above, there are some outlets who focus on the peaceful and joyful parts of the present protests, and others who focus purely on the violence and chaos.
All of this stuff—the beautiful and the ugly—is really happening and really matters, but you have to be extremely careful in using news reports to develop a sense of how much of what is happening where.
You need to be the guardian of your mind, and you need to recognize that people are constantly trying to push your consciousness into a fight or flight state where you’re malleable and easier to manipulate. There are times in life when fight or flight is appropriate to survive, but it’s not a healthy state of mind to resonate in over the course of an average day.
You can contribute to the crazy, or you can contribute in some other way. A new world is on the horizon, but we need to be careful about how we go about building it. What the world desperately needs right now is more conscious people. From that well, a brighter future can be born.
* * *
Liberty Blitzkrieg is an ad-free website. If you enjoyed this post and my work in general, visit the Support Page where you can donate and contribute to my efforts.
- China Warns US: "Abandon Plans" For Nuke Testing Or Risk "Undermining Global Stability"
China Warns US: “Abandon Plans” For Nuke Testing Or Risk “Undermining Global Stability”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 22:25Just over two weeks ago The Washington Post revealed that “the Trump administration has discussed whether to conduct the first US nuclear test explosion since 1992.”
It was said to have been under serious discussion during a May 15 “deputies meeting” of senior national security officials at the White House – and though doesn’t appear to currently be something seriously pursued – the possibility remains “very much an ongoing conversation,” according to a senior admin official.
While all eyes were initially on Russia’s reaction, the Chinese Foreign Ministry has belatedly issued a response, warning Washington in a press briefing on Monday that it must abide by its international obligations and abandon any possible plans to carry out nuclear tests.
Nuclear missile on display at the Military Museum in Beijing, AFP/Getty. “We insist that the United States should strictly abide by its obligations to end nuclear testing… and we hope that it will listen to the international community,” ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said. “The US should abandon plans that could undermine global stability and strategic order,” she added.
Emphasizing Beijing has repeatedly urged the US to honor its commitments, the top diplomat continued: “The US needs to contribute to international cooperation to ensure disarmament and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”
However, the administration is sure to shrug off these words and hit back, given it’s lately repeatedly accused China and Russia of ‘illegally’ conducting low-yield nuclear tests, which both countries have denied. In Beijing’s case it’s believed China’s military is able to conceal such provocative tests at an elaborate underground testing facility.
There hasn’t been an American nuclear test (that’s officially known about at least) since 1992, upon the end of the Cold War and collapse of the USSR in the year prior. But there are signs we could all soon witness a new provocative test given landmark weapons treaties with Moscow are fast being shed, also as Trump might entertain using nuke tests as powerful “leverage” for desired negotiations “for a better deal” – as he’s said in the past.
Trump envisions a three-way nuclear pact. China has other ideas https://t.co/ajRkKKIAWG
— The Japan Times (@japantimes) June 2, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
All of this leaves the potential for a new global arms race centered on nukes, given at this point Beijing, Moscow, and Washington are already trading warnings to step back from the brink of nuclear testing.
Meanwhile Beijing has shown itself resistant to Trump’s floating the idea of a new nuclear weapons pact involving China. He dumped the INF in part because it failed to take into a account developing Chinese missile technology and capabilities, according to admin officials.
- What Is "Systemic Racism," Really?
What Is “Systemic Racism,” Really?
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 22:05Authored by Robert Merry via TheAmericanConservative.com,
Sometimes big political developments arrive in the country like Sandburg’s fog, on little cat feet, silent and unnoticed until they envelop the nation. The emergence of Donald Trump four years ago is an example. Though a loud and clamorous candidate, he seemed to many like a kind of political clown destined for defeat. Establishment politicians believed almost to a person that the “blue wall” of Democratic electoral dominance would hold against this guy. The Midwest would stay solid, and Hillary Clinton would win the presidency.
But a silent fog was moving in. It was a growing sense among middle-class voters in heartland America that something was seriously wrong with the country, that the nation’s leaders were transforming America in bad ways and unraveling their future in the process. But there was no street protest or fiery rhetoric, no coalescence of civic activism or public demands. Certainly the mainstream media, so aligned with the country’s elites, didn’t detect anything of consequence bubbling up from within the polity. Why would they? Everything seemed fine to them.
Meanwhile, the disaffected merely bided their time, silently waiting for their opportunity to express themselves in the quiet sanctity of the voting booth.
After they did, Donald Trump was the next president. Hardly anyone saw it coming.
Something similar is likely to happen in the wake of the widespread street demonstrations–with attendant riots, looting, destruction, and violence–that followed the awful death of George Floyd in Minneapolis at the hands of a brutal police officer who pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes. That a black man could have his life snuffed out by a white cop in such a manner is just cause for a national outpouring of grief and soul-searching. Not surprisingly, public-opinion surveys showed widespread popular support for the peaceful demonstrations that were organized to honor the life and condemn the senseless death of George Floyd.
But the polls also demonstrated widespread indignation toward the rioting and looting. Thus, the civic drama that followed Floyd’s death, including the sprees of destruction and increasingly aggressive rhetoric from the left, intensified some ongoing political tensions that lie at the heart of the country’s current distemper. It accentuated the extent to which America is becoming two nations with two narratives about the times we live in and the problems we face.
One narrative, call it the liberal one, has been projected with increasing force in recent years and particularly since George Floyd’s death. It is that America is an inherently racist country, infected with something called “systemic racism.” You can’t always see it; often it is hidden behind a facade of phony white benignity. But it lurks in the hearts of whites nonetheless and is activated in subtle ways to keep down minorities, particularly blacks, and make them feel inferior.
This systemic civic virus, according to the narrative, is particularly problematic in police departments throughout the land, in which rampant racism poses serious dangers to blacks, particularly young black males. Much of the rhetoric that emanates from this narrative would have us believe that innocent blacks are killed in accumulating numbers across the country in a surge of uncontrolled law enforcement bigotry and brutality.
There’s a corollary to this narrative of systemic racism and ongoing violence against black Americans. It is that whites, based on the sins of their forebears and today’s lingering bigotry, need to be put in their place. In this regard, a certain abasement and humiliation is prescribed. This part of the narrative has become increasingly brazen in recent years.
The other narrative, the conservative one, is largely defensive. In this view, there is no doubt that racism lingers in the body politic and must be addressed when it can be seen. Racial profiling by police also must be dealt with whenever and wherever it appears. But the country has made tremendous progress since the Civil Rights era of the 1960s in addressing overt racism, eliminating barriers to equal opportunity, and recognizing the racial sensibilities of minorities. The problem with the allegation of systemic racism is that it is too vague to be discerned clearly and hence can’t really be effectively addressed even if it exists, which many dispute.
As for police racism leading to the killing of blacks in telling numbers, the statistics simply don’t bear that out. Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute notes that, based on a Washington Post database, police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks in 2019 (and 19 unarmed whites). Based on the numbers of black homicide victims generally (7,407 in 2018), Mac Donald calculates that the fatal shooting of unarmed blacks represents about 0.1 percent of all African-Americans killed in 2019. She bolsters her position by citing studies by the National Academy of Sciences, a Justice Department survey of Philadelphia police practices, and research by a Harvard economist. The Academy of Sciences study found “no significant evidence of antiblack disparity in the likelihood of being fatally shot by police.”
In the wake of the Floyd killing, the liberal narrative soon dominated the country’s political discourse. It is seen everywhere–in most of the mainstream media, in stark expressions from agitated civic groups, in the ravings of the celebrity culture, in mass street demonstrations, and, yes, even in the rioting and looting that destroyed businesses, livelihoods, and neighborhoods.
The rhetoric of the liberal narrative these days is delivered vociferously, with defiance and a forcefulness that brooks no dissent or even passivity. Consider the experience of Drew Brees, the heralded quarterback for the New Orleans Saints, who responded to a question about whether the George Floyd fallout would include a revival of NFL players protesting racial injustice by taking a knee during the playing of the National Anthem before games. He would not participate in such a protest, said Brees, because “I will never agree with anybody disrespecting the flag of the United States of America or our country.” He followed that with a plainly heartfelt and eloquent expression of patriotism, harking back to the memory of his war-veteran grandfathers and the courage of Civil Rights activists who struggled to improve the nation.
The result: an explosion of opprobrium, vicious attacks, and mean-spirited vitriol. An telling example was a Washington Post piece by a black sports columnist for the paper named Jerry Brewer. First he praised Brees as “among the most exceptional human beings in sports,” a man who “epitomizes the character, benevolence and grace that people seek in a sports role model.” But just because he’s a good guy and exemplary human being, snarled Brewer, that doesn’t mean he should get away with distancing himself from the Colin Kaepernick brand of protest.
Brees, wrote Brewer, showed himself to be a “misguided, insensitive dolt….a sometimes ignorant, lazy thinker in desperate need of a broadened perspective.” It was journalistic thought control in action, and it worked. Brees abjectly apologized–twice–for his transgression against humanity.
Jerry Brewer was serving as enforcer for the proposition that the liberal narrative is sacrosanct, and you can’t say or do anything that calls it into question in any way. You see the same motivation behind the recent fate of the University of Washington women’s basketball coach, Jody Wynn. In response to George Floyd’s death, she issued a sincere statement of concern that read in part that “we must stand with our Black Amerians & seek justice! Black, brown, yellow…ALL lives matter.”
Oops. You can’t say that! Systemic racism in action. We’re talking about black lives here, and to confuse that with expressions of concern about other racial groups is absolutely unacceptable. Her Twitter account was deactivated, according to the Seattle Times, and Wynn quickly issued a replacement statement saying she was talking only about black lives. “I would like to sincerely apologize,” she wrote in a gesture of self-abasement, adding that she understood that her words were “hurtful to people of color….I’ve learned a hard and important lesson in this moment and am committed to educating myself…on how we can best create change.” She vowed to be part of change that is aimed at ending racism.
But it isn’t enough for those of the liberal narrative to bully and humiliate genuine heroic figures like Drew Brees into recanting their expressions of genuine patriotism. They also refuse to condemn the riots and looting that unfolded on the nation’s television screens, as local police officials hovered out of the way. Why? Because, it seems clear, they want to preserve the narrative that animates the left and gives it propulsion in the fiery discourse of American politics.
The underlying essence of the narrative is an increasingly brutal and incendiary polemical assault on a demographic segment of the nation–white people. They are guilty, it is said with increasing aggressiveness, for the sins of their forebears, for the racism of the past. And they must confess their guilt and seek absolution through self-abasement.
This was captured in stark reality in a video segment aired on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News program the other day. A young white woman on the street during the New York protests is approached by a man who identifies himself as working for Black Lives Matter. “Since I work for that company,” says the man (who is white), “my CEO has told me to come out today and bring you on your knees because you have white privilege. So if they see that a white person is getting on their knees, that shows solidarity for the situation.”
She slowly, without saying anything, gets down on her knees on the sidewalk.
“And could you just please apologize,” says the guy, “for, you know, your white privilege?”
She doesn’t seem to know what to say.
“Just apologize?” he persists, ever so politely.
“I am,” she says. “I’m trying to think of the words to thank you.”
No doubt many within the nation’s elites would view that scene as touching, perhaps even inspiring–a young white woman getting to her knees and apologizing for….what exactly? Certainly not anything she did, as far as we know. No, she was placed into humiliation because of her race, and she accepted it, apparently, as a normal consequence of her heritage.
But a lot of Americans aren’t going to view it that way. They will see it as a racial assault and a huge power grab. The cry of “systemic racism” constitutes a threat to white people. We all know that racism is the country’s most potent social taboo. Even innocent slips of the tongue or benign observations can bring severe opprobrium, societal and professional sanctions, ostracism. Thus does the allegation constitute a serious threat to millions of Americans. And it constitutes also great political leverage for those tossing around the allegation.
But, if America is infected with systemic racism, who are the systemic racists? Certainly not, in the view of those pushing the liberal narrative, themselves. Not the cable news liberals who toss out the allegation with abandon. Not the mandarins of Hollywood who spout out about it constantly. Not the think tank mavens with their phony studies and charts. Not the Democratic establishment persistently leveraging identity politics. Not the professional celebs whose household recognition qualify them, in their view, as authority figures. Not those in the top level of the meritocratic elite living their pristine lives in gated communities. And certainly not the nation’s minorities, spoon-fed the liberal narrative day by day.
Who’s left? Middle-class and working-class whites, already beleaguered economically by the hollowing out of the nation’s industrial base and struggling to survive in the new service and high-tech environment. And now they have to worry about becoming the next Exhibit A in the elites’ persistent search for evidence of systemic racism. Deplorables again.
This is scary stuff to people who just want to live their lives without feeling vulnerable to being singled out as specimens of systemic racism and called to account for slipping into some hazardous lapse such as thinking that all lives matter or any other innocuous racial observation that never would have raised eyebrows among whites or blacks just a few years ago.
When the political reaction comes, as it inevitably will, it will come on little cat feet. And the nation’s elites, secure in the thought that the systemic racism charge has worked brilliantly in intimidating any lingering dissenters into submission, won’t see it coming.
It’s an open question whether this can help Donald Trump in November. His is a failed presidency, and the collective electorate seldom rewards failed presidencies with retention in office.
But down the road, as the issue intensifies and as white Americans feel increasingly beleaguered by the left’s identity politics and disdain for Middle America, as more demonstrations and riots ensue with more destructive force, a counter-movement will emerge.
It likely will approach the body politic as quietly as Sandberg’s fog. But, once it arrives, it won’t stay quiet for long.
- Black Gun Ownership Soars As Nation's Inner Cities Burn
Black Gun Ownership Soars As Nation’s Inner Cities Burn
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 21:45As radical leftists attempt to create a utopian “police-free future” society and defund law enforcement across the country, terrified African Americans interested in buying guns have soared in the age of social unrest.
The conversation about gun ownership among black folks emerged in early May when five armed men escorted African American State Representative Sarah Anthony from the Michigan State Capitol building following armed pro-Trump protesters gathered in the area for anti-quarantine demonstrations.
Sarah Anthony escorted with armed guards In fact, in the age of President Trump, firearm retailers across the nation have reported a rise in the number of African Americans interested in purchasing guns. As of recent, especially with social unrest across many inner cities, and now, radical leftists are attempting to defund and disband police forces, gun ownership among blacks is quickly gaining popularity, which could prove disastrous for anti-gun Democrats come election season.
The National African American Gun Association (NAAGA) has also reported an “explosion in the number of black gun owners nationwide,” said The Daily Beast.
NAAGA started with one chapter in Atlanta in 2015 and now has over 100 chapters nationwide and 40,000 gun-toting members. The group said more than 10,000 of the members joined this year alone.
Philip Smith, the president and founder of NAAGA, has been shocked by all the new growth in members.
“Today, we’re getting so many different types of folks,” Smith told The Daily Beast. “Doctors, engineers, unemployed state workers, federal workers, policemen, military. We even have white, Latino, and Asian members. You can be gay, straight, loud, quiet, dorky, rich, or poor.”
In early March, Asian-Americans were panic hoarding weapons and ammo in California as many feared the pandemic would trigger social unrest.
Rik Stevenson, founder of the NAAGA chapter in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and now a Gainesville, Florida resident and teacher at the University of Florida, said, “black people are seeing that they are targets,” which is one of the main reasons the group has gained so much popularity, as of recent.
Stevenson said he never expected to be a gun owner, but now he’s packing a “Glock 23.”
Mel Atkins, a firearms instructor and deputy for the Kent County Sheriff’s Department in Michigan, said expanding the gun culture to his community has been transformative. Atkins owns 30 guns and considers himself the lone black guy with guns in Michigan.
“Black people still aren’t very social about their firearms,” Atkins told The Daily Beast. “Our state (Michigan) allows me to walk around with a firearm on my hip or strung across my shoulder as long as it’s visible to everybody. Black people never do that. Only damn fools and maybe some Republicans ever do that. And black gun owners are very quiet about it, because historically a black gun owner could get in trouble for it. There’s that stigma attached to it, that I’m going to get hassled by law enforcement for the mere possession of a firearm.”
Black folks interested in purchasing guns before this year’s chaos was a well-defined trend. But now, more than ever, these folks are arming themselves as they see their communities, already devastated from decades of wealth inequality, on the brink of even more disaster as social unrest, the disintegration of law and order, and high unemployed could result in a turbulent period where a firearm is a necessity for survival.
Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot told people Sunday to avoid using weapons in self-defense and call the police…
Chicago Mayor tells citizens to not use guns to defend themselves during riots…urges them to call police instead
ha… pic.twitter.com/yaIJ3f0cyx
— Lola Netty (@TXTrumpette89) June 7, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Folks in inner cities see the writing on the wall. Their politicians, mainly anti-law liberals, are pushing hard to collapse America’s police forces, which would transform communities into lawless warzones where gang warfare would dominate the streets (already happening in Baltimore City and Chicago). The push for guns by black residents is the result of America’s inner cities imploding. It’s going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better.
- CEOs Bank Big Bonuses As Oil Companies Go Bankrupt
CEOs Bank Big Bonuses As Oil Companies Go Bankrupt
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 21:25Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,
When public oil and gas companies are doing relatively well, many are happy to adopt a pay-for-performance model to reward CEOs and executives.
However, the tables are quickly turned when things go to the dogs. When these companies go bankrupt, the misery is shared by employees who lose their jobs; retirees see their benefits and pensions go up in smoke, while shareholders and bondholders get wiped out. In sharp contrast, it’s very common for blue-chip executives who have run their companies to the ground to receive multi-million dollar golden sendoffs. Indeed, top executives of oil and gas companies going through Chapter 11 frequently receive very fat payouts in the form of cash bonuses, stock grants, and other benefits that often exceed payments during the good times.
It’s not any different this time around.
At a time when hundreds of thousands of employees in the U.S. shale industry have lost their jobs, Bloomberg has reported that some 35 executives at Whiting Petroleum Inc.(NYSE:WLL), Chesapeake Energy Corp.(NYSE:CHK) and Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc.(OTCMKTS: DOFSQ) are set to receive nearly $50 million after their companies declared bankruptcy or are on the verge of doing so.
Rewarding Failure
It’s the manner in which these head honchos continue to award themselves fat bonuses despite federal legislation to crack down on the practice that really grates.
The board at Whiting, an oil and gas producer that filed for Chapter 11 in April, approved a $6.4M bonus for CEO Brad Holly just days before the company went under, exceeding his previous annual compensation package by nearly a million dollars.
In May, California Resources Corp. (NYSE:CRC) warned investors about “…a substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern…” but still went ahead and guaranteed company executives their 2020 bonuses.
So, what’s the justification for this egregious, bizarre, and perverse practice?
According to Kelly Mitchell, an analyst at corporate watchdog group Documented, companies do it so as to incentivize these executives to stick around because they understand the company better and, ostensibly, have better odds of pulling them through. Never mind the fact that their decisions are very often to blame for the company’s sad situation in the first place. They also do it in a bid to cut costs and maximize value for creditors using tools such as tax credits or untapped resources.
No Accountability
You could argue that this practice is not unique to the energy industry and is, in fact, common in corporate America–and you would be right.
Last year, former Equifax CEO Richard Smith, walked away with a very generous ~$19.6 million in stock bonuses, $24-million pension and $50,000 in tax and financial planning services after the credit agency suffered one of the worst data breaches in the history of the U.S. Interestingly, none of Smith’s compensation was docked under the company’s clawback provision meant to hold top executives accountable for their actions or inactions, which was negligence in this case.
In 2014, American retailing giant, Target Corp., paid ex-CEO Steinhafel more than $30 million after he handed in his resignation following another massive hacking attack that saw millions of customers’ personal records stolen.
You can also rationalize that energy executives are not individually responsible for the oil price collapse that has adversely impacted their companies (though they share collective responsibility for the overproduction that triggered the collapse).
But whichever way you slice it, it’s clear that oil and gas companies go too far with their bonus payments to executives. Over the past decade, the leaders of 15 large E&P companies collected more than US$2 billion in aggregate compensation despite their companies posting total returns of -15% compared to a 150% gain by the S&P 500 Index over the timeframe.
It’s hard to justify the hefty rewards being awarded to executives of fallen energy companies. In the case of Equifax and Target, their respective stocks did suffer big selloffs after the hacks but quickly recovered and have actually outperformed their peers by quite a wide margin since the events. In contrast, WLL shares are down 89% in the year-to-date; CRC has lost 83.5%, CHK has returned -91.5% while DOFSQ is down 95% YTD, much worse compared to the sector benchmark, XLE, which is down a more modest 30.5% YTD. Bloomberg has reported that energy companies use their peers, not the broad market, as the benchmark, and executives of companies that perform less badly than others tend to be rewarded–bankruptcy is the ultimate underperformance, meaning these guys should not be getting such huge bonuses.
Energy companies need to have some level of accountability for their executives when things go awry. They have a willing accomplice, though. According to Patrick Hughes, judges tend to sign off on these fat payouts more often than not despite laws introduced in 2005 to limit their size.
- Satellite Data, Internet Searches Suggest COVID-19 Hit China 'Long Before' Previously Known: Harvard
Satellite Data, Internet Searches Suggest COVID-19 Hit China ‘Long Before’ Previously Known: Harvard
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 21:05Significant spikes in hospital traffic and Baidu internet searches for terms related to COVID-19 suggest that the virus hit Wuhan, China “beginning in late Summer and early Fall 2019,” according to a new study by Harvard Medical School.
Commercial satellite imagery reveal “a dramatic increase in hospital traffic outside five major Wuhan hospitals beginning late summer and early fall 2019,” according to Harvard’s Dr. John Brownstein who led the research, adding that the increase in traffic “coincided with” increased queries on Chinese search engine Baidu for “certain symptoms that would later be determined as closely associated with the novel coronavirus.”
According to ABC News, Brownstein says that the study provides an important new data point regarding the origins of COVID-19.
Brownstein and his team, which included researchers from Boston University and Boston Children’s Hospital, have spent more than a month trying to pin down the signs for when the population of Hubei province in China first started to be stricken.
The logic of Brownstein’s research project was straightforward: respiratory diseases lead to very specific types of behavior in communities where they’re spreading. So, pictures that show those patterns of behavior could help explain what was happening even if the people who were sickened did not realize the broader problem at the time. –ABC News
“Something was happening in October,” said Brownstein, chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital and the director of the medical center’s Computational Epidemiology Lab. “Clearly, there was some level of social disruption taking place well before what was previously identified as the start of the novel coronavirus pandemic.”
“What we’re trying to do is look at the activity, how busy a hospital is,” Brownstein added. “And the way we do that is by counting the cars that are at that hospital. Parking lots will get full as a hospital gets busy. So more cars in a hospital, the hospital’s busier, likely because something’s happening in the community, an infection is growing and people have to see a doctor. So you see the increases in the hospital business through the cars… We saw this across multiple institutions.”
Other hospitals showed up to a 90% increase when comparing traffic between fall of 2018 and 2019, according to the study. At Wuhan Tongji Medical University, the spike in car traffic was found to have occurred in mid-September 2019.
To ensure they were not reaching faulty conclusions, researchers said they took into account everything that could explain away traffic surges — from large public gatherings to the possibility of new construction at the hospitals. Still, they said they found statistically significant increases in the numbers of cars present. –ABC News
“If you look at all of the images, observations we’ve ever had of all of these locations since 2018, almost all of the highest car counts are all in the September through December 2019 time frame,” said RS Metrics CEO Tom Diamond, who worked with Brownstein’s team.
Of note, Chinese officials in Wuhan only confirmed cases of pneumonia of ‘unknown cause’ on December 31, however US intelligence officials knew about it as early as late November and notified the Pentagon, according to the report, citing four sources briefed on the confidential information.
Since emerging from Wuhan, COVID-19 has officially infected over 7 million people worldwide and killed over 400,000 according to the Johns Hopkins University tracker.
Brownstein says that the traffic figures – while not conclusive, are telling.
“This is all about a growing body of information pointing to something taking place in Wuhan at the time,” he said. “Many studies are still needed to fully uncover what took place and for people to really learn about how these disease outbreaks unfold and emerge in populations. So this is just another point of evidence.”
Internet searches in the Wuhan region, meanwhile, surged for terms such as “cough” and “diarrhea.”
“While queries of the respiratory symptom ‘cough’ show seasonal fluctuations coinciding with yearly influenza seasons, ‘diarrhea’ is a more COVID-19-specific symptom and only shows an association with the current epidemic,” according to the study. “The increase of both signals precede the documented start of the COVID-19 pandemic in December.”
The ABC News report then quotes Peter Daszak – president of EcoHealth Alliance in Mahnattan – which notably had its funding pulled by the NIH when it was revealed that they were providing US funds for bat coronavirus research in Wuhan.
Daszak called the Harvard study “absolutely fascinating,” adding “You need to look at every possible bit of evidence, where it came from and when it emerged.”
“When we do analysis after outbreaks, we find that the diseases had been in circulation days, weeks, months, years before. I really believe that’s what we’re going to find with COVID-19.”
Spoken like a guy with a vested interest in the ‘natural origin’ theory that coronavirus emerged from an animal intermediary – and not the lab his organization was funding.
“We’ve done previous studies where we could show that what people search for online is an indicator of disease in the population,” Brownstein said. “And we actually saw people searching for symptoms that might be related to COVID: diarrheal disease, cough. That was even starting as early as late summer.
“Now, we can’t confirm 100% what the virus was that was causing this illness and what was causing this business in hospitals,” Brownstein said. “But something was going on that looked very different than any other time that we had looked at.”
Read the rest of the report here.
- The Week America Lost Its Way
The Week America Lost Its Way
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 20:45Authored by Frank Miele via RealClearPolitics.com,
“What are we? Humans? Or animals? Or savages?”
The line is from William Golding’s classic novel “Lord of the Flies,” but it might as well be emblazoned on the forehead of every American after last week — just as it universally must be asked of every person who is tasked with choosing between order and chaos.
The policeman who put his knee on George Floyd’s throat failed the test for humanity. His haughty disregard for Floyd’s precious life was more akin to the instinctive calm of an apex predator than to a civilized human being. It is no wonder that he provoked an angry response from not only the black community in Minneapolis but from the entire country, yet when protest morphed into riot it behooved everyone to ask of themselves — not of someone else — “What are we?”
Instead, many were asking a different question: “Who can we blame?”
Behind their convenient COVID-19 masks, people were able to disguise their shame and unloose their inner demons.
The parallels to “Lord of the Flies” were obvious as I watched America’s cities reenact the paranoia and tribalism that infected the novel’s disparate group of British school boys who found themselves stranded without parental supervision on an island following a plane crash. Their initial attempts to establish order eventually gave way to score-settling and a realization that power is not necessarily a function of righteousness.
“The world, that understandable and lawful world, was slipping away.”
That’s what happened in America last week when mob violence replaced police as the standard of authority.
When you saw white people taking a knee to prostrate themselves before looters and to renounce their “white privilege,” you also saw parallels to Mao’s Cultural Revolution and Hitler’s Kristallnacht, the Night of Broken Glass.
The Cultural Revolution began with an attack on the old order, the old “privilege” represented by shop owners and college professors. To avoid the mob’s rage, the victims were forced to humiliate themselves publicly and to utter self-denunciations, to confess their “crimes” against the mob’s ideology. But there was no escaping the demented wrath of the self-anointed protectors of virtue. Eventually millions of those intellectuals and entrepreneurs were put to death — sometimes buried up to their necks so that they could continue to abase themselves until their final breath.
Kristallnacht is the name given to a pogrom carried out against Jewish shops, homes, cemeteries and synagogues in November 1938 by Nazi paramilitaries known as Brownshirts. They were an exact parallel of the black-garbed stormtroopers that ravaged neighborhoods in dozens of U.S. cities the last 10 days or so. Don’t let the name Antifa fool you. These “anti-fascists” have adopted the tactics of the fascists as their own (and even the uniform of the Italian Blackshirts).
Just as Kristallnacht was intended to send a message to Jews, so too were the riots last week intended to send a signal to law-abiding whites. The words that journalist Hugh Greene wrote about Kristallnacht in 1938 could just as easily have been written today about the riots that followed the murder of George Floyd:
“Mob law ruled … throughout this afternoon and evening, and hordes of hooligans indulged in an orgy of destruction. … Racial hatred and hysteria seemed to have taken complete hold of otherwise decent people.”
You could make the case that the riots last week represented only a fraction of Americans, whether black or white, and that we should not ascribe too much importance to them. But that was true also in Nazi Germany and Mao’s China. The actual revolutionaries and radicals carrying out the acts of domestic terrorism are always few, but if they are not condemned forcefully and convincingly, then they are emboldened to strike again and again.
So-called “good” Germans celebrated the lawless attacks on Jewish citizens in 1938, giving tacit permission for the death camps that would kill millions. Many in the power structure of the United States are likewise giving a green light to current and future violence by sanctioning riots as “protests” and by excusing looting and murder as a reasonable response to Floyd’s death.
Tucker Carlson, who has become a modern-day Cassandra, warned us that “[w]hat we are watching is not a political protest; it is the opposite of a political protest. It is an attack on the idea of politics. The rioters you have seen are trying to topple our political system. That system is how we resolve our differences without using violence. But these people want a new system, one that is governed by force: Do what we say or we will hurt you!”
The rioting wasn’t about race or justice; it was about power. You saw people beat a woman in Rochester, N.Y., with a two-by-four; smash in the head of a man seeking to defend his store in Dallas; kill a retired 77-year-old policeman in St. Louis who was protecting a friend’s pawnshop; burn and destroy thousands of stores; and loot everything from Rolex watches to automobiles as if they were the Visigoths sacking Rome.
When such wanton destruction is occurring, normal people have no choice against overwhelming force. If there is no army or police force to protect them, they will either die or surrender and hope that obsequious fawning will buy them — or at least their families — safety. Perhaps that survival instinct is what has led our governing class to kowtow to the looters. The Democratic Party of Fairfax, Virginia, tweeted, “Riots are an integral part of this country’s march toward progress.” Hillary Clinton’s former spokesperson Brian Fallon sent a message to “Defund the police” – as if a nation without police could be anything but a barbaric lawless mess.
If you want more dead George Floyds, take away the police and the justice system and you will have thousands of them, ultimately millions. The point that the rioters and their enablers miss is that when police become criminals, there is a way to hold them accountable, but when criminals become police, they are a law unto themselves, with no court of appeal and no hope for justice.
Who knows what will happen to people in American cities going forward if they don’t denounce their so-called white privilege and bend a knee to those who have power and are willing to use it? A few boys on the island of “Lord of the Flies” resisted the tyranny of the mob and tried to maintain order by an appeal to reason. One boy, Ralph, had been elected as the group’s leader because he seemed to symbolize decency, kindness and honor. But slowly he was displaced by boys who valued action over honor, power over principle:
“The rules!” shouted Ralph, “you’re breaking the rules!”
“Who cares?” came the response from the children.
If that is the same response we accept from our mayors, our governors, our generals, and our media elites, then we have not only lost our honor; we have lost our country.
- Prince Andrew Claims He's Offered To Cooperate Three Times; DOJ Says He's "Unequivocally" Refused
Prince Andrew Claims He’s Offered To Cooperate Three Times; DOJ Says He’s “Unequivocally” Refused
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 20:27Lawyers for Prince Andrew refuted claims that he has been uncooperative with US prosecutors investigating Jeffrey Epstein accomplices, claiming in a Monday statement that the prince has offered to help the US Department of Justice three times this year, according to Reuters.
“Unfortunately, the DOJ has reacted to the first two offers by breaching their own confidentiality rules and claiming that the Duke has offered zero cooperation,” said Andrews’s lawyers, Blackfords. “In doing so, they are perhaps seeking publicity rather than accepting the assistance proffered.” The lawyers claim the DOJ only requested Andrew’s help on January 2nd, and that he has never been a target of their investigation (just like Comey told Trump?).
Federal prosecutors hit back later Monday, with US Attorney Geoffrey Berman saying that Andrew has “unequivocally” refused to be interviewed as part of their investigation into Epstein’s sex crimes.
* * *
The Justice Department has made a formal request that the British government hand over Prince Andrew for questioning over his relationship with deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, according to The Sun and confirmed by ABC News.
The request, made on behalf of prosecutors for the Southern District of New York would force the 60-year-old Andrew to help prosecutors investigate Epstein’s accomplices – despite his previous empty offer to cooperate. The DOJ filed for “mutual legal assistance” (MLA) directly with Britain’s Home Office, bypassing Buckingham Palace.
As The Sun notes, MLA requests are only used in criminal cases under a legal treaty with the UK, which if granted would formally request Andrew’s attendance at the London City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court for oral or written evidence under oath while DOJ lawyers question him. If he refuses, the Duke could be forced to attend by summons. That said, the evidence session could be held privately “in camera” without the public or press present.
And unlike the Queen Andrew does not enjoy sovereign immunity from prosecution. He could, however, “plead the Fifth” to avoid self-incrimination according to the report.
Last month former federal prosecutor Evan T Barr told Law.com “While the Prince would retain the right to decline to testify under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the impact on his already diminished reputation would be considerable and an adverse inference could be drawn against him in the related civil litigations, leading to a possible default judgment.”
Until now, it was thought that Andrew would at most have to answer to Epstein’s victims in US civil courts – not the US government.
Accuser attorney Lisa Bloom said Andrew had been an “enabler” of Epstein’s crimes. He has been accused of having sex with Virginia Roberts Giuffre in 2001, when she was 17 – however the Prince has claimed in an interview that he was at a Pizza restaurant in Woking during one of the alleged encounters.
Alleged victim Virgina Roberts Giuffre says she was trafficked by Epstein to have sex with Andrew in London in 2001.
She described Andrew as “sweating profusely” at Tramp nightclub before having sex at Ghislaine’s Mayfair flat.
Andrew later told Newsnight a “peculiar medical condition” meant he did not sweat.
And he insisted he did not go clubbing, claiming he remembered because he had been at Woking Pizza Express earlier that day. –The Sun
Was this the night he Andrew claims he was indulging in Pizza?
According to The Sun, the request – which has yet to be addressed by British officials – is likely to cause a diplomatic row with the US.
“It’s a huge statement of intent from the US and it moves Andrew into the realms of a criminal investigation,” said one source, adding “It’s also frankly a diplomatic nightmare.“
Andrew admitted to being friends with Epstein since 1999 following an introduction through socialite and Epstein’s so-called ‘madam’ Ghislaine Maxwell. Epstein and Andrew got together on at least ten occasions – with the Duke staying at the pedophile’s New York mansion, his Palm Beach home and his private ‘pedo’ island in the US Virgin Islands.
- 'Work-From-Home'-Epidemic Set To Bankrupt Suit-Sellers, "I Guarantee It"
‘Work-From-Home’-Epidemic Set To Bankrupt Suit-Sellers, “I Guarantee It”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 20:25It appears the days of “liking the way you look” are over as the forced work-from-home lockdowns mean the average working man in America is now only visible from the shoulder up on his Zoom calls.
This new normal of (in)formal meetings seems to have been the last nail in the coffin of America’s most iconic menswear retailers as Men’s Wearhouse and Brooks Brothers are reportedly preparing for bankruptcy.
NJ.com reports that the 202 year-old clothing retailer Brooks Brothers is in talks with banks about raising financing for a potential Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing amid the coronavirus pandemic, according to a report by CNBC.
Brooks Brothers Chief Executive Claudio Del Vecchio, told The New York Times this week that while he was not “eager” to consider a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing, he would not rule it out.
The bankruptcy filing could come as soon as July, the report said.
Brooks Brothers has more than 250 stores in North America and 500 worldwide.
And Bloomberg has just reported, Tailored Brands Inc., the owner of Men’s Wearhouse and Jos. A. Bank, is considering a potential bankruptcy after the coronavirus lockdown kept America’s office workers at home, putting a damper on demand for new suits.
The retailer and its advisers have started reaching out to interested parties about reworking its debts of more than $1 billion, Bloomberg reports according to people with knowledge of the matter.
The filings, should they occur, follow other retailers who sell men’s workwear (JCPenney, Neiman Marcus, and J.Crew) who have all filed for bankruptcy during the pandemic.
Of course, given the utter farce we have seen in the stock of bankrupt HTZ and CHK, it’s probably time to buy TLRD stock with both hands and feet…
No, that is not a suggestion, because if it files, it’s a ZERO, “I guarantee it!”
- WHO Says Asymptomatic COVID-19 Carriers Not Very Infectious As Global Total Tops 7 Million: Live Updates
WHO Says Asymptomatic COVID-19 Carriers Not Very Infectious As Global Total Tops 7 Million: Live Updates
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 20:05Summary:
- WHO says asymptomatic carriers actually not that infectious
- Cali reports statewide decline in cases while LA County cases near 64k
- NY State reports 0.2% jump in new cases as NYC reopens
- Cuomo says central NY region ready to enter ‘Phase 2’
- India reports another record jump in new cases with ~10k
- Pakistan hospitals running out of beds as cases pass 100k
- Cuomo holds briefing at 1130amET
- Florida reports slowdown following last week’s spike in new cases
- NYC enters ‘Phase 1’ reopening
- New Zealand declared ‘coronavirus free’ by PM
- Global coronavirus infections passes 7mil; US outbreak nears 2 mil
* * *
Update (1436ET): Following a report in today’s WSJ noting new data showing SARS-CoV-2 spreads more quickly in sparsely populated areas where homes are more crowded (perhaps because more extended family members live together) than densely populated but affluent areas like Manhattan and North Brooklyn, the World Health Organization has just announced another epic flip flop.
In an announcement that highlights once again how little scientists understand about the new coronavirus (as the NYT’s Nick Kristoff once noted, viruses are “full of puzzles”), the WHO announced that asymptomatic carriers of the virus apparently don’t infect nearly as many others as we once thought.
Early evidence indicated that the virus could spread via person-to-person contact, even if the carrier didn’t have symptoms. But WHO officials now say that while asymptomatic spread is certainly possible, it’s not the main route of transmission.
“From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,” Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said during a Monday briefing from the WHO’s Geneva headquarters. “It’s very rare.”
Of course, if scientists continue to see data showing asymptomatic spread isn’t a main factor in transmission, it could have dramatic implications for containment policy, including diminishing the need for social distancing, and allowing students and workers to return to the workplace in much larger numbers.
Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove
The data cited by the WHO was apparently gleaned from early contact tracing work. If it’s true that asymptomatic spread isn’t a major factor, than the importance of contact tracing has been vastly overstated. To be sure, more research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question, Van Kerkhove added.
“We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing,” she said. “They’re following asymptomatic cases. They’re following contacts. And they’re not finding secondary transmission onward. It’s very rare.”
Kayleigh McEnany, meanwhile, insisted that the US is heading in a “positive direction” when it comes to the coronavirus. Shortly afterward, California reported a statewide decline in new infections on Monday, though the number of new cases in LA County neared 64k, as the economic reopening has caused new cases to spike – a spike that experts who spoke to the LATimes say likely predated the anti-police brutality demonstrations.
Meanwhile, the number of global cases passed 7 million on Monday, according to Johns Hopkins, which counted 7,085,894 as of Monday evening in New York.
* * *
Update (1145ET): Cuomo has released the daily coronavirus data for Monday, claiming that the number of deaths reported in the state was fewer than 100 once again, and that much of central NY state is will soon enter ‘Phase 2’ of the reopening plan. Cases climbed just 0.2%, compared with a 7-day average of 0.3%.
Source: NYT
With central NY ready to enter Phase 2, Cuomo also shared 15 sites around the state for protesters to get tested, while claiming that “we don’t know” whether the demonstrations will cause a resurgence of new cases.
Cuomo laid out the data in a series of slides shared during his daily briefing:
Regarding his earlier ride on the 7 train (which we mentioned below), Cuomo says he wouldn’t ask New Yorkers to ride the trains if he didn’t feel comfortable riding them.
Finally, Cuomo warned NYers to “stay smart” after the reopening “because if you don’t, you can see a spike…and that is the last thing we want to see”.
“Stay smart…stay smart…look at facts around us – other states, the spike is going up, California, the numbers are going up, Florida, the numebrs are going up, Texas the numbers are going up…look at the reopening date and look at what happened after they reopened…that is the cautionary tale my friends,” Cuomo said.
Ask if he expected a spike in the coming weeks, Cuomo replied “are you a cynic, my friend?” before adding that subways have been opened this entire time, and that a rebound isn’t guaranteed “if we stay as smart and disciplined as we have for the past 100 days”.
* * *
Update (1120ET): After crossing the 200k-case threshold over the weekend, India has reported yet another record jump in new cases on Monday as it continues to ease its restrictive lockdown conditions in preparation for it to finally expire later this monht.
Monday marked the biggest unwind of lockdown restrictions so far, as malls, restaurants, hotels and places of worship were allowed to reopen, most for the first time since March 25, when India’s lockdown began.
However, the easing has been marred by a surge in infections, leading India to overtake Italy and Spain to become the fifth worst-hit nation in the pandemic, as we noted a few days back. But on Monday, nearly 10k new cases were reported, about even with the number of new cases being reported in Russia, where the outbreak continues to spread uncontrolled.
India has a total of 256,611 confirmed cases following the latest daily spike of 9,983. The country has recorded 7,135 deaths, according to India’s Health Ministry, although some suspect the true number could be much higher. Domestic flights and trains were allowed to restart in May, along with manufacturing activity, which re-started soon after.
Some restrictions will remain in New Delhi and Mumbai, among India’s worst-hit cities. In Delhi, local authorities have allowed private offices, restaurants and shopping complexes to reopen (though social distancing guidelines must be followed). But hotels and metro lines remain shuttered.
In Florida, Monday’s reported coronavirus cases and deaths declined slightly after a week where the most positive cases yet were reported.
The update from the state Department of Health showed 966 new positive cases of the virus, bringing Fla’s total to 64,904 cases to date, along with 12 new deaths, bringing the statewide total to 2,712.
In NY, Gov Cuomo will begin his daily press briefing at 1130amET, as per usual.
During the opening minutes of the briefing, Cuomo declared “we’re back, baby” while reporters mocked an earlier “socially distant” subway ride for a governor whose loathing for the subway is well known.
Guess the image of riding the subway finally “aligns with the governor’s can-do persona.”https://t.co/QBHX223zwU https://t.co/6cmypI12NT
— Jessica Pressler (@jpressler) June 8, 2020
Circling back to India’s outbreak, the country isn’t alone in West Asia: Across its heavily militarized border (where sectarian violence has flared again in recent days), Pakistan warns that hospitals are running out of beds to treat coronavirus patients as the number of confirmed cases passes 100,000, with ~2k deaths.
* * *
Following nearly 2 weeks of peaceful protests pockmarked by violence and looting – killings and shootings skyrocketed across NYC last week as the summer ‘killing season’ begins – America’s biggest “hot zone” kicked off “Phase 1” of its plan to reopen its economy on Monday, exactly 100 days after the first case of the virus was confirmed.
Since the outbreak began, more than 205,000 New Yorkers who have tested positive for the virus, while another 22,000 succumbed to the virus.
Exactly 100 days since its first case of coronavirus was confirmed, New York City, which weathered extensive hardship as an epicenter of the worldwide outbreak, is set to take the first tentative steps toward reopening its doors on Monday.
According to the NYT, as many as 400,000 workers will return to construction jobs, manufacturing sites and retail stores in the city’s first phase of reopening as the number of COVID-19 deaths recorded across the US continues to fall, with fewer than 1,000 deaths reported each day (remember when the NYT claimed that deaths would be north of 3,000/day by June 1?).
It’s a far cry from the ‘peak’ of the outbreak, when 800 NYC residents were dying from the virus every day.
The city ran more than 60k tests a day over the weekend, Gov Cuomo claimed.
Tomorrow is a new day. NYC reopens. #NewYorkTough pic.twitter.com/xxz0GKv5Ol
— Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) June 8, 2020
NYC enters Phase 1 of reopening tomorrow.
New Yorkers bent the curve by being smart.
Let’s keep being smart. #NYTough
— Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) June 7, 2020
That is low enough for New York City’s corps of contract tracers, who began work last week, to try to track every close interaction and, officials hope, stop a resurgence of the virus.
“You want to talk about a turnaround — this one, my friends, is going to go in the history books,” Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo said on Saturday.
Of course, it could be months before office workers return en masse, as the world waits to see how the city’s public transit will handle social distancing concerns. And for many retailers in the city, the conditions in ‘Phase 1’ are still too restrictive. Simply reopening doesn’t mean customers will return, and curbside pickup doesn’t make a lot of sense for many retailers either, according to the NYT. Business groups in the city say many retailers are waiting for the next phase to venture out, when outdoor dining is allowed, office workers are permitted to return and shoppers are allowed to take their time and browse. The earliest these shops might be able to reopen would be later this month.
Some employers have developed new technological solutions to this problem. When more than 100 workers return to Newlab, a “technology hub” in the Brooklyn Navy Yard, they will be offered a device that buzzes whenever they get too close to another worker. The essential workers that have remained in the office this entire time have already been wearing the devices.
The city’s army of thousands of contact tracers officially started their work last week, and will continue aiding in efforts to quash a rebound in infections. Meanwhile, city officials will be closely monitoring a suite of metrics, from emergency room admission data to new case numbers, for signs of a potentially crippling resurgence.
On the other side of the world, New Zealand lifted all social and economic restrictions except for its border controls on Monday after declaring that the small island nation is “coronavirus free”, making it one of the first nations to return to normalcy after the outbreak. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said she “danced for joy”. Restaurants, retailers, transit and virtually everywhere else reopened without mandatory social distancing. It has been 17 days since the country recorded a new case of the virus.
“While the job is not done, there is no denying this is a milestone … Thank you, New Zealand,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told a news conference, saying she had danced for joy at the news.
“We are confident we have eliminated transmission of the virus in New Zealand for now, but elimination is not a point in time, it is a sustained effort.”
Globally, the total case count topped 7 million late last night, while the number of deaths passed 400k over the weekend, as Brazil, Mexico, Russia and possibly India struggle to bring the outbreak to heel. In the US, the number of confirmed cases have surpassed 1.9 million, and the 2 million mark draws ever-nearer, with ~1.94 million as of Monday morning. At the current rate of ~20k cases a day, the US is on track to pass its next grim pandemic milestone by Thursday.
- "The Narrative Has Failed" – Ron Paul On The Incredible Disappearing Coronavirus
“The Narrative Has Failed” – Ron Paul On The Incredible Disappearing Coronavirus
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 20:05Via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,
Suddenly there is no talk about coronavirus.
Reputable doctors in Italy, the UK, and elsewhere are claiming the virus hardly exists any longer.
Just over a week ago much of America faced jail if they dared break the “social distancing” rules put in place by tyrannical governors and other public officials. Now tens of thousands gather to protest a police killing with impunity. And the spikes they warned about in areas where restrictions were eased are not happening. So what is happening?
Also, what to make of the Trump/Mattis/Esper spat over US troops deployed against rioters in the US?
Watch today’s Liberty Report:
- As BLM Protests Raged, Chicago Saw Highest Black-On-Black Murder Rate In 60 Years
As BLM Protests Raged, Chicago Saw Highest Black-On-Black Murder Rate In 60 Years
Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/08/2020 – 19:45“We’ve never seen anything like it, at all,” Max Kapustin, the senior research director at the University of Chicago Crime Lab told the Chicago Sun-Times in a new shocking report published Monday. “I don’t even know how to put it into context. It’s beyond anything that we’ve ever seen before.”
The group of University of Chicago researchers have confirmed numbers from Sunday, May 31, which the Crime Lab now says is the single most violent day on historical record: 18 dead and 85 wounded by gunfire. The record was previously at 13 people murdered on a single day on Aug. 4, 1991.
“From 7 p.m. Friday, May 29, through 11 p.m. Sunday, May 31, 25 people were killed in the city, with another 85 wounded by gunfire, according to data maintained by the Chicago Sun-Times.”
Chicago Police file image via MCT/Inquirer The Chicago Sun-Times report begins tragically:
A hardworking father killed just before 1 a.m.
A West Side high school student murdered two hours later.
A man killed amid South Side looting at a cellphone store at 12:30 p.m.
A college freshman who hoped to become a correctional officer, gunned down at 4:25 p.m. after getting into an argument in Englewood.
While Chicago was roiled by another day of protests and looting in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, 18 people were killed Sunday, May 31, making it the single most violent day in Chicago in six decades, according to the University of Chicago Crime Lab. The lab’s data doesn’t go back further than 1961.
A pastor of a local church and community anti-gun violence activist described that it was “open season” last weekend in his neighborhood, giving an eyewitness account of the situation on the South and West sides.
“On Saturday and particularly Sunday, I heard people saying all over, ‘Hey, there’s no police anywhere, police ain’t doing nothing,” Rev. Michael Pfleger, who pastors St. Sabina Church in Auburn Gresham said. “I sat and watched a store looted for over an hour,” he added.
“No police came. I got in my car and drove around to some other places getting looted [and] didn’t see police anywhere,” Pfleger said.
Eighteen people were killed on Sunday, May 31 — the most of any day in the city in at least six decades. https://t.co/D7HLjXKAJr
— Matthew Hendrickson (@MHendricksonCST) June 8, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The detailed and lengthy Chicago Sun-Times report went on to point out something that’s deeply unpopular to acknowledge in the realm of popular discourse:
Most homicide victims in Chicago are young, black men, and the suspects are, too. But murders have fallen significantly in recent years, along with police-involved shootings.
“There were 764 murders and 12 fatal police-involved shootings in 2016, compared with 492 murders and three fatal police-involved shootings last year,” the report adds.
The Chicago Sun-Times told the stories of young men and women who teachers remembered as “positive influences,” such as Mustafa Abdullah, gunned down on May 31 during a drive-by while riding in a targeted vehicle.
Or there’s also eighteen-year old Teyonna Lofton, shot on the day that her family held a ‘socially distanced’ graduation party. Thankfully, she survived, but faces months if not years of rehabilitative therapy:
For Teyonna Lofton, of Gresham, last Sunday started on a high note. The 18-year-old recently finished her senior year at Perspectives Leadership Academy, and her family was holding a socially distanced graduation parade to honor the occasion.
While the day “started off perfect,” a trip to a gas station at the corner of 81st and Racine — a half-mile south of St. Sabina — later that day quickly turned into the most harrowing experience of her young life.
As she waited in line outside the store, an SUV pulled up and someone inside opened fire into the crowd, striking Lofton and two others. Struck near her elbow, Lofton tried repeatedly to call 911 for help.
(1 of 7) This was Teyonna Lofton Sunday morning celebrating her HS graduation with her family at home.
She graduated with a 3.4 GPA and is planning to go to college in Louisiana.
Sunday afternoon, while trying to buy some water with her friends, she was shot in the arm. pic.twitter.com/ojzHBwJU9x— Arne Duncan (@arneduncan) June 7, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
It appears that as police responded en masse to major riots and looting ensuing soon after the horrific footage of the George Floyd killing by Minnesota police went viral, this resulted in other areas of the city spiraling into lawlessness, as well as apparently victims being disregard by city emergency response units.
Despite the gunshot wound which threatened her life, Teyonna Lofton said police and EMT assistance were nowhere in sight:
“When I needed help, to call the police and stuff, nobody responded. Nobody answered,” Lofton said. “My mom had to come from home, and we had to get to the hospital.”
On the way to Little Company of Mary Hospital in Evergreen Park, Lofton peered out her mother’s car window and saw the “madness” that was unfolding outside.
“It was just people jumping out their cars into stores and stealing and looting … Police was letting them do whatever they wanted,” she said.
“They did not care,” Lofton added. “Nobody cared.”
At a moment “Black Lives Matter” chants can be heard overtaking most every major American city, the now weekly reality of dozens tragically dying in black-on-black crime in Chicago and some other large cities (a trend that tends to increase into the hot summer months) remains a huge ‘blind spot’ in terms of the current ideologically charged media debate and public discourse.
Though CNN is now devoting much air time to an hour-long repeat segment called “Unconscious Bias: Facing the Realities of Racism” — it’s highly doubtful that much coverage will be given to the pressing crisis now unfolding in Chicago of black-on-black crime, which defies many of the simplistic sacred dogmas now being advocated.
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/chinanukes.jpg?itok=icgvPrYy){kind=link}
![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/Sarah%20Anthony%20escorted.jpg?itok=wNilX2rr){kind=link}
![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/chicagopolicefile.jpg?itok=HhWgWI6_){kind=link}