Menu Icon

Debt Rattle March 13 2024

Mar 132024
 
 March 13, 2024  Posted by at 8:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Vincent van Gogh Le moulin de blute fin 1886

 

• Biden Impeachment Inquiry Reveals US Being Ruled by ‘Demented Gangsters’ (Sp.)
• Trump Tightens Control Over GOP – Politico (RT)
• Trump Did Propose 10,000 National Guard Troops on January 6th (Turley)
• Trump Vows to Free Jan. 6 ‘Hostages’ in First Act as President (ET)
• Biden, Along With NATO, Is Losing His Grip on Reality (Jay)
• Macron ‘Panicked’ Over Leaked Ukraine Reports – Marianne (RT)
• Polish Troops Would Never Leave Ukraine – Putin (RT)
• Why The Only Credible Peace Deal Between Russia And Ukraine Collapsed (Poletaev)
• Russia’s Response To Asset Seizure Could Trigger Global Financial Collapse (RT)
• US Builds Gaza Port To Facilitate Mass ‘Voluntary’ Migration: Anadolu (Cradle)
• What is it with Conservatives and Jews? (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Boeing Failed 37% of Audits by US Regulators (Sp.)
• Only Revolutionary Love Can Save Us Now (Alexander)
• Confident Dragon Lays Out Modernization Roadmap (Pepe Escobar)
• Twilight of the Blobs (Jim Kunstler)

 

 

 

 

Lots of Robert Hur snippet videos, topped off by Matt Gaetz’s description of Joe Biden:

“The elevator doesn’t go to the top floor.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


https://twitter.com/i/status/1767589194342506788

 

 

Hur Jordan

 

 

 

 

“..the old Delaware daughter sniffer” will be replaced by somebody “set up to lose to Donald Trump, or at least that’s the way it certainly looks right now.”

• Biden Impeachment Inquiry Reveals US Being Ruled by ‘Demented Gangsters’ (Sp.)

The weaponization of the US Department of Justice against US President Joe Biden’s accusers reveals that the United States is ruled by “complete and total demented gangsters,” Steve Poikonen, who serves as the host of the Slow News Day show, told Sputnik’s The Critical Hour on Monday. Poikonen was speaking with co-hosts Wilmer Leon and Garland Nixon about the impeachment inquiry into US President Joe Biden over claims the commander-in-chief was involved in alleged influence peddling scheme linked to his son, Hunter Biden. Poikonen said that Joe Biden is an “outright criminal,” adding that there is “more than enough evidence to impeach him and arrest him based on him bragging about stuff on camera.” “We really are being, allegedly, governed by complete and total demented gangsters,” he added later.

Asked about former FBI informant Alexander Smirnov, who was charged with lying to the FBI about Hunter Biden, despite being seen as a credible informant for years, Poikonen compared it to WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange’s extradition case, during which, a key witness, Sigurdur Ingiu Thordarson, admitted he fabricated his testimony to get immunity. “The convicted pedophile whose testimony was used in part to deny to make sure [Assange] was going to be extradited to the US, said ‘I made it up, I made it all up for the immunity agreement’… and [the DOJ is] going ‘this is still admissible and this is still something that helps solidify our case against a journalist’… on the other hand… the same DOJ is using the exact opposite [in the Biden case], ‘well, we believed him when we liked it, but now that we don’t like it, we’re going to tell you that he’s full of it.’” Poikonen further asserted the FBI does not want to look too deeply into the Hunter Biden case as it could potentially blow back on the agency. “The FBI is complicit in absolutely every facet of this,” he said.

Nixon noted former US President Donald Trump and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani were also charged or attacked after looking into the Biden family’s business dealings in Ukraine, in addition to Smirnov. Poikonen acknowledged that another name should be added to that list: former Hunter Biden business partner Jason Galanis. “[Galanis had to] testify from a prison cell because as soon as he had information that could lead to the arrest of Hunter or Joe Biden, he found himself going to court over a $60 million bond fraud … It’s selective prosecution based on perceived political opponents or real bumps in the road.” That situation has resulted in the US resembling something that looks “a whole lot less like any sort of democracy or a free and fair society and a whole lot more like an oligarchy that is ruled by violence and theft and extortion and threats.” Due to the corruption case and the American president’s apparent mental decline, Poikonen said he believes Biden, who he called “the old Delaware daughter sniffer” will be replaced by somebody “set up to lose to Donald Trump, or at least that’s the way it certainly looks right now.”

Read more …

Not half work. They learned their lesson.

“.. the firing of more than 60 McDaniel-era staffers, including the heads of the political, communications, and data departments.”

“..the RNC’s finance and digital teams will be moved to Palm Beach, Florida, to bring them closer to the Trump campaign’s base..”

• Trump Tightens Control Over GOP – Politico (RT)

Former US President Donald Trump has taken charge of the Republican National Committee (RNC), installing his daughter-in-law and political allies in senior leadership roles and, according to Politico, firing dozens of staffers. The swift takeover ensures that the party’s manpower and funding will be entirely directed toward his election campaign. Michael Whatley, a senior party official in North Carolina, and Lara Trump were voted in as the RNC’s new chair and co-chair on Friday, following the resignation of Ronna McDaniel. Trump had accused McDaniel of bungling the 2022 midterm elections and failing to sufficiently back his claims of fraud after the 2020 presidential election, and endorsed Whatley to take her position in February. Trump campaign adviser Chris LaCivita was named as the RNC’s new chief of staff, and the committee also voted to recognize the former president as the party’s nominee to take on President Joe Biden this November.

In his acceptance speech, Whatley said that the RNC will work “hand in glove” with the Trump campaign over the next eight months to mobilize voters and prevent voter fraud. While the Republican and Democratic national committees typically back whichever candidate secures their party’s nomination, Trump has yet to secure the support of enough Republican delegates to formally clinch the title. However, Trump has won 1,078 out of the 1,215 delegates needed for nomination, and with no primary challengers remaining after Nikki Haley bowed out of the race last week, he is all but certain to be picked when the Republican National Convention is held in July. Trump’s reshaping of the RNC continued on Monday, with Politico reporting the firing of more than 60 McDaniel-era staffers, including the heads of the political, communications, and data departments.

According to a report by the New York Times, the RNC’s finance and digital teams will be moved to Palm Beach, Florida, to bring them closer to the Trump campaign’s base. Under McDaniel, the RNC consistently failed to match the fundraising power of the Democratic National Committee. As of the end of December, the RNC had around $8 million cash on hand, roughly a third as much as the DNC’s war chest, Politico noted. Before dropping out of the race last week, Haley warned that Trump would likely use the RNC’s funds to pay his mounting legal bills. “I don’t want the RNC to become his piggy bank for his personal court cases,” she told CNN last month. Lara Trump has refused to say whether she would allow RNC funds to be used for this purpose, but told reporters that the former president’s supporters had “a big interest” in the cases against him.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1767324470971113773

Read more …

“..I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, the President wants to make sure that you have enough. You know, he is willing to ask for 10,000. I remember that number.”

• Trump Did Propose 10,000 National Guard Troops on January 6th (Turley)

One of the long-standing unanswered questions from the January 6th riot has been why the Capitol was so poorly prepared and defended on that day. A newly released transcript has caused a firestorm in Washington over allegations that the J6 Committee downplayed or even suppressed evidence that former President Donald Trump personally suggested the deployment of 10,000 national guard troops to prevent violence. The transcript also includes contradictions of major allegations that ran wild in the media. That includes the claim that Trump tried to physically grab the steering wheel of the presidential limo, “The Beast,” when Secret Service refused to take him to the Capitol. Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson was the source of the claim, which appeared in most of the media and was highlighted in her testimony. However, it appears that the J6 Committee had testimony of secret service agents directly contradicting that account, including the driver. However, it is the National Guard question that is more weighty for historical purposes.

Trump has long claimed that he proposed the deployment of the National Guard troops (as was done previously at the White House during violent protests). The January 6th Committee said that was a lie. The release of the transcript by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R., Ga.) triggered attacks on the J6 Committee. The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway wrote a column titled “Former Rep. Liz Cheney’s January 6 Committee suppressed evidence.” That triggered an angry response from former co-chair Liz Cheney which led to an even angrier reply from commentator Mark Levin. The anger is nothing new in a J6 investigation that seemed to produce more heat than light. Cheney’s spokesperson called the Federalist report “flatly false” and added “no transcripts were destroyed” while acknowledging that some material was not published “to allow the Secret Service to protect sensitive security information for interviews of its agents before preserving that testimony in the archives.”

The issue of the suppression or destruction of the evidence has drawn a lot of attention, but the more troubling question is the fact that such an offer was made and declined. The Committee found “no evidence” that the Trump administration called for 10,000 National Guard members to Washington, D.C., to protect the Capitol. That now stands contradicted and the question is whether Cheney or other members knew the public was being misled on the question. For example, the Washington Post “debunked” Trump’s comments with an award of “Four Pinocchios.” The Post’s Glenn Kessler admitted that Trump raised the issue but noted that he might have been suggesting the troops “not because he wanted to protect the Capitol,” but to suggest that he and his supporters were being threatened. He added that “Trump brought up the issue on at least three occasions but in such vague and obtuse ways that no senior official regarded his words as an order.”

However, the issue is not whether Trump issued “an order” but made an offer that was declined. For those of us who were covering the event on that day, the question has always been prominent in our minds. I was critical of Trump’s speech while he was still giving it. However, before the Capitol was breached, I also noted that I had never seen the Capitol so thinly protected in a major protest. We had just seen violent protests outside of the White House with a large number of police officers injured and extensive property damage, including arson. President Trump and his family had to be moved to a secure location out of concern of an imminent breach of the White House. National Guard were deployed and fencing installed. Even without an offer, it remains unclear why the violence around the White House did not prompt Congress to install the same barriers and deploy the same troops. (They ultimately took both steps but only after the rioters gained entry into the Capitol).

Moreover, if an offer was clearly made, it undermines the allegations that Trump was actively seeking an insurrection. While he has never been charged with an insurrection or even incitement, that allegation was used more recently to support his disqualification from the ballots in Colorado, Maine, and Illinois. The transcript contains the testimony of former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato’s interview on January 2022 with Cheney present. Ornato states that he clearly recalled the offer of 10,000 troops being made by Trump in a conversation with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser: “I was there, and he was on the phone with her and wanted to make sure she had everything that she needed. Because I think it was the concern of anti and pro groups clashing is what I recall…I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, the President wants to make sure that you have enough. You know, he is willing to ask for 10,000. I remember that number.”

Ornato said that Browser said that they would not need the troops. (She ultimately asked for only 300 troops). There are also reports that then Speaker Nancy Pelosi was worried about the “optics” of military reinforcements at the Capitol. Ornato also said that he recalled that, after Bowser refused additional National Guard members, the White House requested the Defense Department have a “quick reaction force” ready on that day. He gave details on meetings with the Defense Department and follow up from Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. Hemingway noted in her report that Ornato’s testimony was supported by former Trump administration aide Kash Patel. Cheney has attacked Patel as unreliable. Ornato also testified that Meadows and others were frustrated by the delay in getting those troops to the Hill. The delay was blamed on the logistics, not some conspiracy to enable or facilitate an insurrection.

Read more …

“..he would not pardon all of those imprisoned, telling the audience that “a couple of them, probably they got out of control.”

• Trump Vows to Free Jan. 6 ‘Hostages’ in First Act as President (ET)

Former President Donald Trump has vowed to release individuals imprisoned over the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol if he wins the 2024 election in November. President Trump made the comments in a statement on Truth Social on March 11, noting that it would be among one of his first acts upon taking office in the White House. The Republican said shutting down the U.S.-Mexico border and increasing oil drilling as part of efforts to make America more energy independent would also be among his first actions as president. “My first acts as your next President will be to Close the Border, DRILL, BABY, DRILL, and Free the January 6 Hostages being wrongfully imprisoned!” President Trump said. President Trump said during a rally in Texas in 2022 that he would consider pardoning those convicted of their involvement in the Jan. 6 breach, noting that his administration would treat them “fairly.”

“If it requires pardons, we will give them pardons, because they are being treated so unfairly,” he said at the time. Last year, President Trump told a town hall hosted by CNN at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire that he was inclined to pardon a “large portion” of those charged with crimes relating to the breach. However, the Republican stressed he would not pardon all of those imprisoned, telling the audience that “a couple of them, probably they got out of control.” At a rally in Iowa on the third anniversary of the breach at the start of this year, President Trump referred to the individuals arrested in the wake of the Jan. 6 breach as “hostages” who had suffered enough.” He then urged President Joe Biden to release them adding: “You can do it real easy, Joe.” President Trump’s latest comments mark the first time he has suggested that releasing those imprisoned over the Jan. 6 breach would be a top priority and that he will take immediate action to do so if he wins the November election.

According to the most recent statement from the Department of Justice (DOJ), more than 1,358 individuals from nearly all 50 states have been charged with crimes linked to the breach of the U.S. Capitol. This includes more than 486 individuals who were handed felony charges for assaulting or impeding law enforcement. Most recently, a 43-year-old Maryland man was arrested on felony and misdemeanor charges—including offenses of civil disorder and assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers—in relation to the events of Jan. 6. President Trump himself has been indicted over allegations related to his actions on Jan. 6 and alleged attempts to challenge the results of the 2020 election, including conspiring to defraud the country and obstructing an official proceeding. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Read more …

“.. the American public who are more concerned about the price of groceries, gas pumps and their utility bills rather than what was going on in 1941..”

• Biden, Along With NATO, Is Losing His Grip on Reality (Jay)

The state of the union speech was an insight into how the senile U.S. president is stuck in the past, out of touch with the reality of a multipolar world. While many will wonder whether he wrote the speech himself or it was drafted for him, President Joe Biden made his case to the American public in simple terms. Vote for me, as I am living the dream of USA 80 years ago. The references to the second world war should have shocked the American public who are more concerned about the price of groceries, gas pumps and their utility bills rather than what was going on in 1941. And yet 1941 for any half-rate history teacher in Alabama would seem an odd choice of dates to pluck out of nowhere and use as a reference point to present America as an unchallenged superpower. As it was, after all, the date where German troops took on their greatest challenge – Russia – and were mercilessly defeated through, amongst other military considerations – being both deluded about their strengths and poor military planning.

Those two points might be on the minds of western elites while Biden used the podium to once again beg Congress to approve his aid package for Ukraine. As even the BBC correspondent in Ukraine admitted – that Russia was now advancing and its troops no longer taking villages but now towns – it would seem that NATO planners have indeed repeated the Barbarossa lesson. Is this the real reason why the bill cannot get passed? The Americans have realised they have simply bitten off more than they can chew in Ukraine and the humiliation already of three U.S.-made Abrams tanks – the most cumbersome, impractical and overrated piece of modern U.S. military hardware ever conceived – along with a general ground swell of opinion that the war can never be won is weighing down on them. Even the Guardian newspaper recently published an opinion piece by Simon Jenkins who argued the case the NATO had become “reckless” in Ukraine, citing the carelessness of the German phone tap which revealed the plan to hit the bridge in Crimea, seemed to draw a new water line of despondency.

Perhaps this explained why Biden didn’t take too much time on harping on about Ukraine in his speech, preferring more to use the opportunity to strike out at Trump – a tactic which surely confirms that he is as stupid as he looks as it will surely backfire on him and raise Trump’s prowess ever further. Instead, Biden attempted at great length to divert cash back into the pockets of humble Americans who don’t understand how the so-called trickle down affect is supposed to work – how big businesses making huge profits don’t always distribute their gains throughout the financial system – by admitting that it is not working. On paper, the figures show that the U.S. is doing well. Try explaining that to millions of Americans facing hardship on a scale never before seen. Biden is going to be remembered in history as the buffoon who left office while two wars raged in the world, while he raised taxes from corporations and can’t remember where he is, or what day of the week it is. He will be remembered for the fiasco of the pullout of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and for his incoherent dithering. And for that bloody ice cream.

Read more …

“Make no mistake, up against the Russians we are an army of cheerleaders!”

• Macron ‘Panicked’ Over Leaked Ukraine Reports – Marianne (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron’s talk about maybe sending troops to aid Kiev may have been spurred by three assessments produced by the French military that painted a dire picture of the Ukraine conflict, according to the magazine Marianne. The reports, which have somehow found their way into the weekly’s possession, argued that Ukraine wrecked its Western-trained force in the failed 2023 offensive, has run out of men to mobilize, and that its recent loss in Avdeevka shows it can’t even hold the line against Russia. “Ukraine cannot win this war militarily,” concludes the first report, written in the fall of 2023, following Kiev’s disastrous ground offensive. It praises the Russian forces as the new “tactical and technical” standard of how to run defensive operations and debunks the media myth of “meat assaults.”

For the West to continue pursuing a military solution in Ukraine would be “the most serious error of analysis and judgment,” the classified document said, according to Marianne. Sending French troops to Ukraine would be “unreasonable,” one senior officer wrote. “Make no mistake, up against the Russians we are an army of cheerleaders!” he added. The second report, outlining the prospects for 2024, says that Kiev needs 35,000 men per month but is “recruiting less than half” of that number, while Russia enlists 30,000 volunteers monthly. Meanwhile, the 2023 offensive “tactically destroyed” half of Kiev’s 12 combat brigades. “The West can provide 3D printers to manufacture drones or loitering munitions, but will never be able to print men,” the report said. One solution it advised was sending Western troops to Ukraine to carry out support tasks in the rear, freeing the Ukrainians for frontline duty.

The second report also acknowledged the Western special forces and “soldiers in civilian clothes” had a far greater presence in Ukraine than officially acknowledged, including “quite a few British,” as well as French naval commandos training the Ukrainians. The third and latest report, which had the French observers “in cold sweat,” described the Battle of Avdeevka as a possible “rout” of Ukrainian forces. It described how Russia created “hell” for the Ukrainian troops by using massive glide bombs to inflict more than 1,000 casualties per day. The French document also described the Ukrainian retreat on February 17 as “sudden and unprepared.” At the end of February, Macron made an argument to NATO members that all options for helping Ukraine should be “on the table,” implying the possibility of sending ground troops. The idea was publicly repudiated by most members of the US-led bloc, however.

Read more …

”..Polish officials sleep and dream of returning “those lands that they consider historically their own, and which were taken from them by… Joseph Stalin..”

• Polish Troops Would Never Leave Ukraine – Putin (RT)

Any attempt to send Polish troops into Ukraine may end up with a long-term occupation, President Vladimir Putin has warned in an extensive interview with Russian journalist Dmitry Kiselyov, which is set to be aired by Rossiya 1 TV and RIA Novosti on Wednesday. “If Polish troops enter the territory of Ukraine in order to, as they say, secure the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, for example, or in some other places to free up Ukrainian rear military units to participate in hostilities on the frontline, then I think that Polish troops will never leave,” Puitin said, according to snippets of the interview.

The deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine amid the conflict with Russia is “not unthinkable,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski claimed last week. He was commenting on a statement by French President Emmanuel Macron, who said late last month that he “cannot exclude” the possibility of soldiers from the US-led military bloc being sent to aid Kiev. Putin believes that Polish officials sleep and dream of returning “those lands that they consider historically their own, and which were taken from them by… Joseph Stalin, and transferred to Ukraine.” “They certainly want them back. So if official Polish units enter there, they are unlikely to leave,” he reiterated.

Read more …

‘The decision is yours, Mr. Zelensky. If you choose war, we will support you with money and weapons; if you choose peace, you will be left on your own with Putin..’

• Why The Only Credible Peace Deal Between Russia And Ukraine Collapsed (Poletaev)

So, what really happened in April 2022? Apparently, upon arriving in Kiev, Johnson told Zelensky (speaking on behalf of the UK, US, and France) something along the lines of: ‘You can sign anything you want, but we will not sign anything and we are not ready to provide any guarantees, especially considering your requirements and wording. ‘The decision is yours, Mr. Zelensky. If you choose war, we will support you with money and weapons; if you choose peace, you will be left on your own with Putin.’ This matches the West’s subsequent actions and decisions, since so far, no one in the West has taken on any legal obligations in regard to Ukraine. Even the agreements on military assistance concluded this spring are nothing more than a set of declarations which are convenient for the West. Here’s the collective stance of Western leaders: NATO is not ready to provide any guarantees to Ukraine and will not sign any agreements.

If all this is indeed true (and the facts seem to leave no room for doubt), then it was Zelensky who made the fatal decision to stop negotiations. And while the West pushed him to this decision, its leaders also fell into the trap of believing that the conflict could be settled on the battlefield. At some point, instead of following a rational course, Western elites allowed their emotions to get the better of them. Zelensky convinced them that the Armed Forces of Ukraine could defeat Russia, and they believed this to such an extent that they were willing to risk their political standing and even the future of the entire current liberal world order. All this has led the West to a decisive fork in the road: What to do if Ukraine loses? Should Western leaders follow the example of Johnson and leave Ukraine alone with Moscow, or should they start a big war with Russia? Either way, the path that they chose will influence the entire course of world history.

Read more …

“.. The Euroclear Bank boasts of over €37 trillion of assets in custody globally, but if it runs out of liquidity amid a litany of lawsuits – the Belgian central bank may be forced to withdraw its license..”

• Russia’s Response To Asset Seizure Could Trigger Global Financial Collapse (RT)

While Brussels is searching for legal loopholes to send frozen Russian assets to Ukraine, it must keep some of the cash as a “safety buffer,” should its clearing house Euroclear get in trouble, potentially jeopardizing the entire global financial system, a senior EU official told Reuters. The West has frozen roughly $300 billion in holdings belonging to the Russian central bank since the start of the Ukraine conflict two years ago. Brussels-based Euroclear holds around €191 billion ($205 billion) of them, and the EU is reportedly fast-tracking the decision to send Kiev the first tranche of up to €3 billion ($3.2 billion) from profits generated by frozen Russian assets as early as July. However, Brussels will have to “ensure that there is no breach of financial stability,” an unnamed EU official told Reuters on Tuesday. “The moment the war ends and all settlements can be made, all the money that was provisionally retained will also be transferred to Ukraine. But we need a significant amount in Euroclear… because Euroclear will face a lot of claims,” the official added.

Should the West proceed with expropriating the funds, the Russian central bank is likely to seize some €33 billion of Euroclear money held in the national securities depository in Moscow, the official noted. Russia may also sue to seize Euroclear cash from depositories in Hong Kong and Dubai. Moscow has repeatedly warned that it will respond in kind if the West goes through with threats to confiscate Russian assets. The finance ministry said last month that Western states and companies themselves still have holdings in Russia that could be jeopardized if the frozen funds were tapped. If Western banks begin suing Euroclear for the loss of their money invested in Russia “that’s the mechanism how Euroclear could be totally emptied,” the EU official warned. The Euroclear Bank boasts of over €37 trillion of assets in custody globally, but if it runs out of liquidity amid a litany of lawsuits – the Belgian central bank may be forced to withdraw its license, causing a global financial crisis, the official warned.

Read more …

“..making conditions in Gaza so uninhabitable that its population would be forced to flee to other countries, including Egypt’s Sinai, Greece, Spain, and Canada..”s

• US Builds Gaza Port To Facilitate Mass ‘Voluntary’ Migration: Anadolu (Cradle)

A US military ship set sail on 11 March to travel to the coast of the besieged Gaza Strip to build a temporary port. However, doubts about US intentions for the port’s construction continue to emerge. Hisham Khreisat, a Jordanian military and strategic affairs expert, suggested the motivation for building the port was instead to facilitate the deportation of Gaza’s population by ship. Khreisat told Anadolu Agency that “the floating port off the shores of Gaza is a humanitarian facade hiding voluntary migration to Europe.” “This military tactical port will receive Israeli approval because Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been seeking this idea since the beginning of the war, aiming for the voluntary displacement of Gazans and their [flight] to Europe,” he added. The White House claims it wishes to build the port to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza as hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are at risk of starvation due to Israel’s blockade.

But the BBC noted that the port would take at least 60 days to build and that “charities have said those suffering in Gaza cannot wait that long.” If the US wished to stave off famine in Gaza, it could simply use its leverage as Israel’s leading supplier of weapons to force Tel Aviv to allow more aid to enter by truck convoys through existing land crossings. On 13 October, just days after the beginning of the war on Gaza, the Israeli Ministry of Intelligence issued a document calling for the forcible expulsion of the strip’s 2.3 million inhabitants under a humanitarian guise. The leaked document recommends making conditions in Gaza so uninhabitable that its population would be forced to flee to other countries, including Egypt’s Sinai, Greece, Spain, and Canada. Israel could justify the deportation to the international community, the plan stated, if it appears to lead to “fewer casualties among the civilian population compared to the expected number of casualties if they remain,” the document says.

Israel’s horrific bombardment of Gaza since 7 October has created just such conditions, killing at least 30,000 Palestinians, the majority women and children. The risk of famine, caused by Israel’s blockade, has also created conditions to make the deportation of 2.3 million Gazans appear as a humanitarian gesture. These conditions could further be created should Israel conduct a ground operation in Rafah, where over a million Gazans displaced from other areas of the strip are sheltering. Egypt has so far refused to allow Gazans into the Sinai, making deportation by sea to Europe more attractive for Israeli planners. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) also issued a warning about the US plan to build a temporary port off the shore of Gaza. The resistance movement emphasized that the US plan is “suspicious and dubious,” as it would open the door to the forced displacement of Gaza’s population under humanitarian and other pretexts.

Read more …

“..the rise of status based law that protects some chosen ethnicities and persecutes others..”

• What is it with Conservatives and Jews? (Paul Craig Roberts)

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem is a conservative hero. Her CPAC speech was well received. Yet she doesn’t hesitate to pass legislation that turns the First Amendment into a hate crime. She has just had a law passed that turns “anti-semitism” into a hate crime. She says the law defines anti-semitism and will serve as the model for other states to follow. Governor Noem herself engages in hate speech. She says Joe Biden and Kamala Harris “suck” and she wants to humiliate them. If she said “Jews suck and I want to humiliate them,” under her own law she would probably be guilty of a hate crime. And if not, close to it. Governor Noem apparently doesn’t realize, along with many other people, that erasing the First Amendment means that any protected ethnicity can define hate speech as any words they claim to experience as “painful.” Ultimately, this will mean that they, as individuals, cannot be charged with a crime. South Africa’s experience with the International Court of Justice shows how difficult it is to charge the Israeli government with a crime even when Israel is committing genocide.

The Israel Lobby long ago defined anti-semitism. It is any criticism, true or false, of a Jew or of Israel. For example, to protest Israel’s slaughter or genocide of Palestinians is anti-semitic. To even report, quoting their own words, Israeli government officials and rabbis calling for the murder of Palestinian women and children and for the extinction of Palestinians is anti-semitism. If you can’t complain about mass murder, or even report the words of those calling for it, what can you complain about? Recently three presidents of Ivy League universities, all female and one black, were called before the US Congress and scolded for allowing their students to protest Israel’s slaughter of Palestinians. The three women were guilty of permitting students to have First Amendment rights and were treated as if they had organized the protests themselves. The black female president of Harvard had to resign. In the UK, University of London students were suspended for their pro-Palestine protests. I find it extraordinary that Jews alone among all ethnicities can control what can be said about them.

Curiously, it is progressive and woke students at progressive institutions, not conservatives, who are defending both their First Amendment right and expression of moral conscience. The Independent Institute, a conservative/libertarian institute that thoughtfully analyzes economic and social policies with which I have been associated in some way or the other for many years, inexplicably chose the moment of Israel’s announced policy of bombing the Palestinians out of existence and completing the theft of their country to publish a book, The New American Anti-Semitism by Benjamin Ginsberg. Ginsberg writes that anti-semitic progressives are a threat. He urges conservatives and Jews to stop their gifts to progressive universities and to “form new political alliances, particularly with evangelical Christians.” It is remarkable to see the Independent Institute in favor of an alliance between Jews, conservatives, and Christians against the First Amendment.

It is also an attack on the 14th Amendment’s requirement of equality under law. Currently, a hate crime, consisting only of words, can only be committed against a black, a Jew, and a sexual pervert. Anything can be said about white gentiles and Palestinians, who have no recourse. The real threat is not anti-semitism. The real threat is the destruction of free speech and the rise of status based law that protects some chosen ethnicities and persecutes others. What is really needed is an alliance against those who are destroying the foundations of truth, freedom, and accountable government. The growing limits on free speech are already damaging scholarship and science. Do we want to live in a world where “truth” consists of controlled narratives that serve the interests of the ruling elites?

Read more …

Feel lucky, punk?

• Boeing Failed 37% of Audits by US Regulators (Sp.)

Boeing has failed 33 of 89 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspections, following a January incident in which part of the fuselage of an Alaska Airlines 737 MAX was lost, the New York Times reports, citing FAA data. According to the New York Times, auditors examined “many parts of the 737 MAX” as well as employees’ understanding of product quality control principles. The inspections lasted six weeks and involved both Boeing and the supplier, Spirit AeroSystems, which makes the fuselage for the Boeing 737 MAX. The newspaper notes that Boeing passed 56 of the 89 audits. The auditors focused on “many parts of the 737 MAX, including the wings and a number of other systems,” as well as employees’ understanding of product quality control principles.

The audits found 97 instances of alleged noncompliance with manufacturing standards. Spirit AeroSystems failed seven out of the 13 inspections according to FAA documents. Representatives observed mechanics at Spirit AeroSystems using a hotel key card to check the door seal, as well as using liquid soap as a lubricant during the assembly process on the seal. The Boeing 737 is a group of narrow-body, short- to medium-range passenger and transport airliners produced by the Boeing Corporation since 1967. It holds the title of being the most mass-produced passenger aircraft in the history of commercial aviation, with the delivery of the 10,000th airplane taking place on March 13, 2018.

Read more …

“I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice.”

• Only Revolutionary Love Can Save Us Now (Alexander)

Of all the incredible speeches that Martin Luther King, Jr. gave in his life, I think the one that speaks most directly to the times that we are living in now, and that models what is required of us as we face multiple existential threats to our democracy and our world, is the speech that King gave when he publicly condemned the Vietnam War—and was immediately cancelled. That speech has become a touchpoint for me in recent years. Whenever I need a moral compass or my courage begins to falter, I return to the words King spoke on April 4, 1967, one year before his assassination, at the Riverside Church in Manhattan. King said, “I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice.” He explained that “a time comes when silence is betrayal” and that time had come in relation to Vietnam.

It is difficult to overstate the political risk that King was taking when he stepped to the podium at Riverside Church. Our nation had been at war with Vietnam for two years, more than 400,000 American service members were deployed, and roughly 10,000 American troops had been killed. The war had enthusiastic bipartisan support within the political establishment, and those who dared to criticize the war were often labeled Communists and subjected to vicious forms of retaliation and backlash. Many of King’s friends and allies warned him that speaking the whole truth about the war would jeopardize the fragile gains of the civil rights movement. Little could be gained, they said, by speaking up for people halfway around the world and much could be lost. “Why are you joining the voices of dissent? Aren’t you hurting the cause of your people?” they asked.

King acknowledged the source of their concerns but said that their questions revealed that they did not really know him, his commitment, or his calling. Indeed, as far he was concerned, “they do not know the world in which they live.” King acknowledged that it is not easy for people to speak out against their own government, especially during wartime, and that the situation in Vietnam was complex. But he felt morally obligated to speak for the suffering and helpless children of Vietnam. He said: “This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls “enemy,” for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.”

Far from soft-pedaling his criticism, King described the American government as “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world,” and urged our nation to get on the right side of the liberation struggles occurring around the world. He wondered aloud what the Vietnamese people must think of us, a nation that promises democracy, dignity, and equality but delivers bombs instead. “We herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps where minimal social needs are rarely met,” he said. “They know they must move on or be destroyed by our bombs.” In unflinching terms, King condemned the moral bankruptcy of a nation that does not hesitate to invest in bombs and warfare around the world but can never seem to find the dollars to eradicate poverty at home. He called for a revolution of values. He said:

“We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered”. The moment King ended his speech, he was cancelled. More than 60 newspapers railed against him, including the Washington Post and The New York Times. The Post claimed that King’s speech had “diminished his usefulness to his cause, to his country, and to his people.” Many civil rights leaders and organizations criticized him too, including the NAACP. But despite the withering public condemnation, King continued to speak out against the Vietnam War on both moral and economic grounds until his death.

Read more …

“..it is definitely unacceptable that certain countries must be at the table while others can only be on the menu.”

• Confident Dragon Lays Out Modernization Roadmap (Pepe Escobar)

This is the Year of the Wooden Dragon, according to China’s classic wuxing (“five elements”) culture. The dragon, one of the 12 signs of the Chinese zodiac, is a symbol of power, nobility and intelligence. Wood adds growth, development and prosperity. Call it a summary of where China is heading in 2024. The second session of the 14th National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) was finalized on Sunday in Beijing. The wider world should know that within the framework of grassroots democracy with Chinese characteristics, an extremely complex – and fascinating – phenomenon, the importance of the CPPCC is paramount. The CPPCC channels wide-ranging expectations of the average Chinese to the decision level, and actually advises the central government on a vast range of issues – from everyday living to high-quality development strategies.This year, most of the discussion focused on how to drive China’s modernization even faster.

This being China, concepts – like flowers – were blooming all around the spectrum, such as “new quality productive forces, “deepening reform,” “high-standard opening-up,” and a fabulous new one, “major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.” As the Global Times emphasized, “2024 is not only a critical year for achieving the goals of the ‘14th Five-Year Plan’ but also a key year for achieving the transition to high-quality development of the economy.” So let’s start with Chinese Premier Li Qiang’s first “work report” delivered a week ago, which opened the annual session of the National People’s Congress. The key takeaway: Beijing will be pursuing the same economic targets as in 2023. That translates as 5% annual growth. Of course deflationary risks, a downturn in the real estate market and somewhat shaky business confidence simply won’t vanish. Li was quite realistic, emphasizing Beijing is “keenly aware” of the challenges ahead: “Achieving this year’s targets will not be easy.” And he added: “Global economic growth lacks steam and the regional hotspot issues keep erupting. This has made China’s external environment more complex, severe and uncertain.”

Beijing’s strategy remains focused on a “proactive fiscal policy and prudent monetary policy”. In a nutshell: the song remains the same. There won’t be a “stimulus” of any kind. Deeper answers should be found in the work report/budget released by the National Development and Reform Commission: the focus will be on structural change, via extra funds to science, technology, education, national defense, agriculture. Translation: China bets on strategic investment, the key for a high-quality economic transition. In practice, Beijing will be heavily invested in modernizing industry and developing “new quality productive forces” such as new-energy vehicles, biomanufacturing and commercial space flight. Science Minister Yin Hejun made it clear: there was an 8.1% increase in national investment in research and development in 2023. He wants more – and he will get it: R&D spending will grow by 10% to a total of 370.8 billion yuan. The mantra is “self-reliance”. On all fronts – from chipmaking to AI. A no holds barred tech war is on – and China is totally focused to counter “tech containment” from the Hegemon as much as its ultimate goal is to wrest tech supremacy from its prime competitor.

Beijing simply cannot allow itself to be vulnerable to U.S.-imposed tech choke points and supply chain disruptions. So short-term economic problems will not be causing sleepless nights. The Beijing leadership is always looking ahead – focusing on long-term challenges. Beijing will continue to steer the economic development of Hong Kong and Macau, and invest even more in the crucial Greater Bay Area, which is the premier southern China high tech, services and finance hub. Taiwan of course was central to the work report; Beijing fiercely opposes “external interference” – code for Hegemon tactics. That will become even trickier in May, when William Lai Ching-te, who flirts with independence, becomes president. On defense, there will be only a 7.2% increase in 2024, which is peanuts compared to the Hegemon’s defense budget now approaching $900 billion: China’s stands as $238 billion, even as China’s nominal GDP is approaching the U.S.

A great deal of China’s defense budget will go for emerging tech – considering the immensely valuables lessons the PLA is learning out of the Donbass battlefield, as well as the deep interactions part of the Russia-China strategic partnership. And that brings us to diplomacy. China will continue to be firmly positioned as a champion of the Global South. That was made explicit by Foreign Minister Wang Yi in a press conference on the sidelines of the National People’s Congress. Wang Yi’s priorities: to “maintain stable relations with major powers; join hands with its neighbouring countries for progress; and strive for revitalisation with the Global South”. Wang Yi once again stressed that Beijing favors an “equal and orderly” multipolar world and “inclusive economic globalization”. And of course he could not allow U.S. Secretary of State Little Blinken – always out of his depth – to get away with his latest “recipe”: “It is impermissible that those with the bigger fist have the final say, and it is definitely unacceptable that certain countries must be at the table while others can only be on the menu.

Read more …

“..what “capital” is? (Real wealth, not figments, wishes, bets, and hallucinations. . . hard things like good land, ore pockets, installed machinery, railroad tracks, and so on. . . .)”

• Twilight of the Blobs (Jim Kunstler)

[..] in all the ongoing debates about the wonders and dangers of A-I, and Bitcoin, and suffocating surveillance, nobody ever talks about the sketchy condition of the electric grid that all these worrisome phenomena utterly rely on. In our chatter over Peak Oil, there’s little awareness of oil production’s utter dependence on steady capital flows. In all the guff about centralized control emitted by Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum, there’s no mention of the centrifugal forces driving human affairs to re-localization, dis-aggregation of large states, and down-scaling of many activities. In our zeal to become Gods, we miss a lot. Imagine: Bitcoin shoots up to a million dollars. You’re a zillionaire! Uh Oh. . . somewhere outside Zaneseville, Ohio, a squirrel takes a final chaw through some old insulation on a wire coming out of a transformer. His head blows up in a blue arc flash, and in a few seconds all the electricity goes out from Chicago to Boston.

It turns out that seventeen substations in ten states have blown relays, transformers, and switchgear. Some of those components were forty years old and are now manufactured twelve thousand miles away in a country that doesn’t like us anymore. The replacement parts get held up in a Chinese port. The power doesn’t come back on for weeks. Nobody who lives in the eastern USA can get to his Bitcoin wallet, which is just a virtual entity made of computer code residing in a digital “cloud,” i.e., nowhere real. Of course, in an event that bad, a lot of other things would fail — really just about everything that comprises modern life — but for sure you could kiss your Bitcoin goodbye, perhaps forever, because by the time the juice comes back on (if it even does), nobody will ever again want to invest their wealth in digital “money” they can’t access, and Bitcoin will go back to whence it came: zero.

Likewise, the financial system we depend on is a gigantic apparatus grown extremely janky from over-elaboration and hyper-complexity — to the degree that all kinds of things denoted as having “moneyness” are simply hallucinations of the markets that trade them. How many quadrillions of dollars do “derivative” financial instruments represent on the landscape of “money” these days? Most of these things amount to little more than bets that some number — an interest rate, a currency, a revenue flow — will change either up or down. That is, they are figments.

Under Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), the evolution of figments can theoretically go on forever. Derivatives can be ever more abstracted from what they purport to represent, until they fly up the system’s cloacal vent. MMT has become popular economic dogma, but its theory remains to be substantiated. Since the formula relies on the unlimited “printing” of money by central bank proxies for governments, you might bet that something will go wrong with such a system — and it kind of looks like something is about to go wrong in the system we’ve built for regulating and distributing capital. And do we need to state what “capital” is? (Real wealth, not figments, wishes, bets, and hallucinations. . . hard things like good land, ore pockets, installed machinery, railroad tracks, and so on. . . .)

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Rogan Musk

 

 

Haiti

 

 

Mom
https://twitter.com/i/status/1767536784575959419

 

 

Bearded vulture

 

 

Orca

 

 

Plenty fish

 

 

Cubs

 

 

Pharaoh

 

 

Italian society
https://twitter.com/i/status/1767360701226435007

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.