Menu Icon

Debt Rattle July 25 2026

Jul 252026
 
 July 25, 2026  Posted by at 10:13 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  10 Responses »


Théodore Géricault The Raft of the Medusa 1819


• Oil Slides Despite Unraveling ‘Diplomacy’ In Iran (ZH)
• Trump Sparked the Counterrevolution to End the Destruction of America (VDH)
• Struggle Session (James Howard Kunstler)
• EU Wants To Board Russian Shadow Fleet Tankers In The Indian Ocean (ZH)
• Trump’s Plan to Make Data Centers Bring Their Own Energy (DS)
• USTR Greer Calls Tariffs on 60 Countries Incl. Canada, Mexico, Europe (CTH)
• Germany Paying Five Times More For Gas After Ditching Russian Imports (RT)
• Elon Musk Tells Economist Editor-in-Chief : Britain Civil War Inevitable (MN)
• Trump Notes Europe’s Refusal to Accept Elimination of Marshall Plan (CTH)
• The South Carolina Supreme Court Again Rules Against Tattoo Speech (Turley)

 


 

 


 


Hit them where it hurts. It’s the only way.

• Oil Slides Despite Unraveling ‘Diplomacy’ In Iran (ZH)

Oil Eases by Week’s End on Signs of ‘Diplomacy Lite’
Somewhat surprisingly, oil prices are pushing lower by week’s close, especially after a succession of perhaps ‘diplomacy-lite’ headlines; however, the reality still remains is that the bombing campaign is escalating… and typically the region witnesses the biggest bombs away on a weekend, with markets closed:
• Pakistan exploring path toward resuming US-Iran talks: Reuters
• Pakistan’s push to resume talks follows pressure from China: Reuters
• Houthis say they don’t seek to close key Bab al-Mandeb Strait (only for Saudi shipping, they say)
• Trump to meet Netanyahu at the White House on Tuesday amid Iran escalation


President Trump took to Truth Social to warn China and Russia against giving or selling arms to Iran, saying: “If they did, it would be very bad for them”. However he also sought to clarify: “In my opinion, (they are) not participating.” Doing so was “certainly not in their best interests” – the president added. The president addressed a Reuters report that alleged Iranian strikes on CIA targets in the Gulf earlier in the war is being investigated, on concerns that Russia or China may have helped with such targeting. Xi “told me he would not,” Trump wrote. Was there a pinky promise?…


Iraqi Prime Minister Denies NYT Report on Ceasefire Offer
The latest little peace overture by Washington widely reported Thursday night was apparently a big nothingburger, as on Friday the Iraqi prime minister’s office has denied a New York Times report claiming that Iran rejected a US ceasefire proposal delivered to Tehran by Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi.

The fresh statement from the prime minister’s office said what was published in the Times was “entirely unfounded” and had “no relation to reality.” The statement underscored the temporary nature of the proposal and that it was the “only offer on the table” and still left the question of control over the Strait of Hormuz unresolved – and so Tehran was uninterested.It’s also the reality that Tehran wants to see Trump sweat and impose economic and political costs particularly ahead of the midterms in November, where Congressional Republicans must face voters over failing to rein in Trump’s Iran war. The Iranians continue to openly voice this, for example in the following from the parliament speaker:

13th Straight Night of US Bombing
Meanwhile, in what is becoming a brutal, nightly routine, US Central Command (CENTCOM) has wrapped up its 13th consecutive wave of airstrikes against Iran. The Pentagon said it targeted military command centers, drone storage facilities, communication networks, and coastal surveillance sites.

Iranian state media reported overnight into Friday heavy explosions rocking major hubs across the country, including Khorramabad, Jask, Ahvaz, Bandar Abbas, and the strategic outpost of Qeshm Island. Iranian media further said a US missile strike left four dead and five injured in the key industrial and transportation hub of Ahvaz. As the bombs fall, Tehran is still signaling that military pressure won’t force a cheap surrender – with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi lashing out at the US escalation, warning that “mindless aggression” will only see Trump pay a “heavier price” for a deal to end the war.

More Iran Retaliation on Gulf
Iranian retaliation on US-linked sites in the Gulf have continued at the same steady pace, with on Friday Bahrain’s military having intercepted “several treacherous Iranian air attacks” – according to the general command of the Bahrain Defense Force.

The Bahraini military further denounced Iran’s “systematic hostile approach” and “criminal attacks targeting civilians”. The statement emphasized, “The general command emphasises that the deliberate use of missiles and drones to target civilians and private property constitutes a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.”Throughout the morning the Iranian military’s targets also included locations in Jordan, Kuwait, and northern Iraq. Sky News is reporting that “Explosions were also heard near a base hosting the US in Iraq, near the Erbil International Airport.”

Fox Poll says Iran War More Unpopular Then Ever
Fox feeding its Boomer audience some Freedom Viagra with a helping of war crimes on the side:

But Fox News also reports the results of its latest poll which finds 56% oppose the ongoing American military action against Iran, including 40% who “strongly” oppose. “Disapproval of President Donald Trump’s handling of Iran hit a record high in July,” Fox writes. “A majority of voters oppose U.S. military action, and nearly two thirds think the conflict will last at least a year,” the report says.

Read more …

Victor Davis Hanson

Long excerpt, sorry. It’s just that he’s very right.

“He’s trying to undo the entire half-century progressive project within four years. That’s an impossible task. And yet he’s trying to do it. “

• Trump Sparked the Counterrevolution to End the Destruction of America (VDH)

I’d like to speak today about revolutionaries and counterrevolutionaries. Whether we realize it or not, we’ve been in a progressive revolutionary cycle for about 50 years. And by that I mean there has been the effort of most of the Democratic Party, and now the radical elements to accelerate that efforts as emblemized by the democratic socialists to take control of government, expand it, redistribute income so that many people in blue states especially are paying over 10% of their income, in addition to 38% of their federal tax or two or three percent in Obamacare tax and other add-ons.


And it’s not very difficult to pay 50% of your income or more for the taxpayer who’s salaried without much write-offs. And the welfare state, which has distributed over twenty trillion dollars since this started under the Great Society, is getting bigger and bigger, at least until Donald Trump. And this progressive revolution doesn’t believe in borders. It has let in—we have now 53 million people that were not born in the United States, and in California, it’s over a quarter of the population. It’s all-time high percentage-wise, 16% foreign-born.

They don’t have confidence that you, the people, will buy into the progressive project. And so, they want to import a demographic that is poor and needy on the idea that they will be constituents that will trade their votes for subsidies. And we saw that with the Somali community in Minnesota, and we’ve seen it with other communities here in California. And so, the progressive project has given us a real revolution. We never imagined that there were going to be more than two genders or sexes. We never imagined that they would try to normalize biological men taking over women’s sports or dressing among young teenage girls. We never imagined that.

We never imagined that prosecutors would let out career felons who had committed violent acts the same day they were arrested. We didn’t know we were gonna empty the prisons because we felt that punishment, penal punishment was too mean. We never really felt that our only real democratic country and ally in the Middle East, Israel, we would try to disassociate ourselves, and we would try to romanticize terrorists like Hamas. But what I’m getting at, this was the progressive project. It was anti-American, it was anti-Western, and it glorified other modes of civilization, so to speak: socialism, communism, anarchism. And it was very critical of the very society who had enriched most Americans.

I say most—the middle class of America is the largest middle class in the world and the most affluent, and our poor are better off than most middle class and upper middle class in other places. It’s important to remember that there has not been a counter-revolution. Ronald Reagan was the first and really last Republican president that had an economic counterrevolution. It was quite successful. He lowered the tax rate. He deregulated the economy, and by 1983-84, he was growing the economy at 7% GDP growth.

And then, of course, that was watered down in subsequent years. But the two Bushes, candidates like John McCain, Bob Dole, Mitt Romney, their agenda was to slow down the revolution, but not to try to overturn it. What do I mean by slow down? Kind of advise Hollywood that they didn’t have to be so anti-American and have movies that talked about race, class, and gender ad nauseam. Try to tell professional sports not to be weaponized. Try to tell K-12, calm it down a little bit. We don’t need sex education in the first grade, and there’s nothing wrong with a teacher occasionally giving a prayer that she inadvertently forgot was illegal.

Calm down. You don’t need to send the FBI to school board meetings, that kind of thing. We don’t need to take the knee at sports and ridicule “The Star-Spangled Banner.” So, this revolution had infiltrated K-12, the corporate boardroom, the universities especially, the media, the foundations, and popular culture. But the Republican and conservative movement had just tried to slow it down. And then came Donald Trump. He was not—he’s surely not a revolutionary. We were in the middle of a revolution, but he was not a trimmer either. He was a true counterrevolutionary.

The first term, he was not familiar with Washington. He made appointments with people who did not agree with him—not just they did not agree with his methodology, but they didn’t agree with his counter-revolutionary agenda. But it was still in places working. And what was the result? The result was COVID-19 and the COVID-19 lockdown, and it was aborted. The second time he came around, he tried to finish the counterrevolution. So he pretty much demolished the subsidies for green energy and re-emphasized oil and gas production, and we became the greatest producer of oil and gas in the history of civilization.

He sort of said, “We’re not going to regulate AI and robotics, cryptocurrency, genetic engineering, drone. We’re not gonna legislate them out of business. We’re not gonna have antitrust and complete investigations of all these people. We’re gonna promote it. We’re going to promote these new innovations and new technologies.” And lo and behold, we’re ahead of the Chinese in almost all of them now. He didn’t just say, “I am worried about the military. It may be that DEI has discouraged a particular demographic that over generation after generation has provided the largest percentage of our combat units, namely white males.”

He did away with DEI. And what was the result? All of a sudden, we have met all of our recruitment figures. He didn’t just say, “Well, the border’s been open. I know that we’ve let in 10 million people a year over four years. I know that 10,000 were coming a day under Biden. I understand that, so maybe I’ll say no more catch and release. Or maybe you have to apply for refugee status in, say, Mexico.” No, no. He said, “I’m going to finish the wall. I’m not gonna let anybody stop me. This time there’s going to be a wall, and we are going to deport people. We’re gonna deport a million people in my first year, and we’re gonna make sure a million others self-deport, and we’re gonna go after 500,000 with criminal records.”

He didn’t just say, “I am very worried about Latin America. “Under [Barack] Obama and under [Joe] Biden, we saw a wave of left-wing governments, and the Panama Canal is in danger. Venezuela has the largest oil reserves really in the Western Hemisphere, if not the world, and they are exporting convicts and drugs to the United States.” He didn’t just say that. He went down there and basically threatened Panama that we would take over the canal unless they honored our Panama Canal treaty and expelled the Chinese from trying to control the entry and exits of the canal.

He said to [Nicolas] Maduro, “You better stop because you’re exporting terror and communism and bullying your neighbors.” He didn’t, and he extradited him and ended that threat. And now as we look at Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, I could go on, they’re mostly center right. So, he staged a strong counterrevolution by reinforcing the Monroe Doctrine that had been rejected by the Left, and he made South America and Central America now a free market and, for the most part, a society that’s pro-American, with some notable exceptions.

For example, in Nicaragua, a beleaguered Daniel Ortega and a beleaguered Castroite government in Cuba that are both now for the first time in years isolated. In addition to that, he made our allies stronger. He used unorthodox methods. He was the proverbial gunslinger who came in to help the townspeople who were ossified and couldn’t deal with the robber barons or the cattle barons or the outlaws, and then he cleaned up the town, and then they got tired of him because of his methodology and rhetoric.

But nonetheless, he said to our allies, “We’re not gonna be in NATO unless you’re real NATO members. You’re not NATO members. You’re not arming yourself. You’re not abiding by your commitments.” Same held true to Canada. And lo and behold, now we have much stronger allies, and the alliance is stronger than ever. What am I getting at? Donald Trump is not a revolutionary. He’s a counterrevolutionary.

And what is he trying to do? He’s trying to undo the entire half-century progressive project within four years. That’s an impossible task. And yet he’s trying to do it. He’s the first authentic counterrevolutionary since Andrew Jackson.

Read more …

“. . .there is no saving the Left. There is only saving America from them.” — Sasha Stone

• Struggle Session (James Howard Kunstler)

The polycrisis of 2026 whirls like a demon-infested storm overcoming this human project of ours like a medieval panorama of the world’s end. Everything is fraught, tilting toward hazard, menace, ruin. Even under a summer sun, the mind sees only darkness everywhere it looks. Apocalypse now, it seems like. You almost can’t blame the doomers, the black pill-ers, lost in their transports of dread. But I tell you, we will get through this.


Is it a surprise that the IRGC has a death wish for its host, Iran? They’ve been advertising it loudly for half a century, yearning for martyrdom, the bliss of paradise, marriage to multiple perfumed virgins, all the pomegranates you could ever want, and perpetual dreamtime beside a gently burbling fountain in the palace of eternity. Trouble is, to get there you must have your head blown off.

That’s exactly what the IRGC is asking for, though the millions of ordinary Iranians probably have their doubts about the ask. They are hostages of the IRGC regime, which refuses to just stop being a problem for the world. Mr. Trump’s proffer for Iran still abides: become a normal nation, sovereign and all, only without atom bombs. Let ships sail through Hormuz unmolested. Sell your oil, make some money, trade with the other fellas across the Persian Gulf, have a nice civilized life with all the refinements of age-old Persian culture, even with its Islamic overlay. Be happy!

The USA does not seek to occupy Iran, steal its resources, subjugate its people, force them to buy Minnie Mouse plush toys, play baseball, eat Jimmy Dean sausage for breakfast, strum banjoes, or wear cowboy hats. Just stop projecting violence and discord all over the Middle East.

You can’t make us, the IRGC says. Yes, we will, the USA replies. And so it goes. Next up: bridges and power plants. Plus, every ship you damage, we’ll deduct the cost of repair from your frozen assets held in our banks. This is where things stand after the thirteenth night of strategic bombing against the IRGC’s launch sites, drone factories, missile storage caverns, and shoreline military installations. Iran prepared assiduously for this death-scene for decades, building hidey-holes here, there, and everywhere. But every time they launch something now, our satellites mark the coordinates, and boom, now there’s one less hidey-hole.

Iran’s currency, the rial, has an exchange rate against the US dollar of about 1,900,000 to one dollar. There is hardly a functioning economy left. The people are flat broke. Everyday life must be hell now. Could be the IRGC was getting tons of munitions and material for free from China, but days ago we blew up the railroad bridge at Aq Tekeh-Khan that was China’s main connection to Iran, so that’s over with.

You must doubt that Russia is capable of sending arms to Iran at this point. Russia needs every drone and missile it can fabricate now that Ukraine is sending drones clear into Moscow and St. Petersburg on a regular basis. Of course, that war is being stoked by NATO, which perforce includes the USA. A bill (H.R. 2913 — the Ukraine Support Act) that would furnish $1.3-1.8 billion in direct security, military, and reconstruction assistance for Ukraine plus $8 billion in loans was passed by the House in June, but languishes in the Senate. President Trump has threatened to veto it, as running counter to the administration’s preference for negotiations with Russia to end the Ukraine War rather than extend it.

These two conflicts must seem intractable for now, but the mojo driving them has clear and present limits. If the USA does not underwrite Ukraine’s war effort, then that leaves the EU nations, who are increasingly broke, and for all their idle talk are really incapable of mounting a major arms production campaign. The UK especially is skating on thin ice these days as Mr. Trump methodically cancels its long-running command and control of global finance through the City of London (as its “Wall Street” is called). In fact, it looks as if the floundering UK — with dopey Andy Burnham rolling in as Britain’s seventh Prime Minister in a decade — has passed the ball of globalist leadership to its forward striker (and all-purpose fixer) Mark Carney the Prime Minister of Canada.

Carney, who was previously chief of the Bank of England, has played a series of losing games against President Trump the past year, while Mr. Carney is busy wrecking the Canadian economy for the sake of the globalist “green” flimflam, a sustained high volume of third world immigration, and outlandish DEI activism that includes giving vast tracts of real estate back to Canada’s First Nations people, their Indians. Carney has also very actively played footsie with the CCP to a degree that is seriously pissing off Mr. Trump. Among all the other shocks and surprises upcoming, you might imagine him having to send the 82nd Airborne up to Ottawa to inform PM Carney that there will be no globalist seat of operations in North America.

Yes, things are getting that strange. And then, continuing the clean-up operation south of our border, there is Cuba to straighten out. Cuba is obviously next. Our patience with that failing state’s communist export project is particularly thin, now that the Democratic Party here is entertaining Marxist-Leninist dreams of glory.

Read more …

And when Russia defends itself, they’ll come crying to Trump.

• EU Wants To Board Russian Shadow Fleet Tankers In The Indian Ocean (ZH)

The European Union has authorized its naval mission in the Indian Ocean (apparently there is one) to stop and board Russian shadow fleet tankers suspected of operating under false flags, the bloc announced on Wednesday.

The Spanish Navy frigate Santa María F81, deployed as part of the European Union Naval Force Operation ATALANTA, seen off the coast of Mogadishu, Somalia, on April 24, 2025.


EU member states have authorized Operation Atalanta, the union’s counter-piracy naval mission off the Horn of Africa, to begin conducting flag-verification boardings of vessels suspected of belonging to Russia’s shadow fleet in the western Indian Ocean, DefenseNews reported. The decision, announced this week by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, extends to Atalanta a power already exercised by the EU’s Mediterranean mission, Operation Irini.

Kallas made the announcement alongside news that Irini forces had boarded the sanctioned oil tanker MV South Star on July 20, acting on suspicion that the vessel was sailing under a false flag. “Every illicit voyage helps sustain Russia’s war machine. We are matching our sanctions with action at sea,” Kallas said, adding that the Atalanta authorization “further tightens the net.”

The move considerably widens the EU’s geographic reach against the shadow fleet, a loosely defined network of tankers with opaque ownership structures that Moscow uses to sell oil above the Western-imposed price cap. While Irini patrols the Mediterranean, Atalanta operates across the Somali Basin, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, the Gulf of Suez, the Gulf of Aqaba and waters around Oman, and was launched as the EU’s first-ever naval mission in 2008 to combat piracy.

It is separate from the EU mission ASPIDES, which is designed to protect shipping in the Red Sea from attacks by the Iran-backed Yemeni Houthi rebels. One look at the exploding price of oil shows just how much the market thinks of Europe “defending” this particular waterway. The corridor where the mission operates is a critical transit route for tankers carrying Russian crude toward buyers in Asia. Brussels has already sanctioned more than 600 vessels suspected of belonging to the network.

Generally, ships on the high seas cannot simply be stopped and boarded by any third country. However, Article 110 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea permits warships to stop and inspect a vessel only where there is reasonable suspicion it is stateless or flying a flag to which it is not entitled. This falls short of a blanket authority to stop any sanctioned or Russia-linked ship, but flying false flags has been a frequent practice on Russian shadow fleet vessels.

The council decision, the operational plan and the rules of engagement that would spell out exactly how far Atalanta’s new powers extend have so far not been made public. The approach has already produced results elsewhere. Irini’s flag checks contributed to pressure that culminated in a Cameroon purge of 39 vessels from its shipping registry after investigators uncovered fraudulent paperwork and fake registry websites used to disguise shadow fleet tankers.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously denounced such interceptions as “piracy,” underscoring how the expanded mandate is likely to further sharpen tensions between Brussels and Moscow over enforcement at sea. One caveat to all this: unlike oil, Russian LNG (which Europe is absolutely desperate for) will remain exempt from EU sanctions. Which prompted Rabobank’s Michael Every earlier today to ask rhetorically “realpolitik or real weakness?”

Read more …

Why has that not been done from the get-go?

• Trump’s Plan to Make Data Centers Bring Their Own Energy (DS)

President Donald Trump said 23 governors have signed his pledge to protect everyday Americans from the energy costs associated with new artificial intelligence data centers.Governors, companies, and stakeholders who sign the pledge agree to “protect American consumers from price hikes due to data center energy and infrastructure requirements, and lower electricity costs for consumers in the long term.”“We know that the data centers and AI are dramatically increasing the demand for electricity,” Trump said Thursday.


“It’s only fair that the cost of building the new infrastructure required to meet the demand should be borne by the corporations themselves, not by the American American patriots, American citizens.” While Daniel Cochrane, senior fellow at the Institute for Family Studies’ Family First Technology Initiative, thinks this is a step in the right direction, he doubts the pledge will be enough to quell the rising sentiment against data centers for AI. Seven in 10 Americans oppose the construction of data centers in their community, according to a May 13 Gallup poll. Nearly half are strongly opposed.

Opponents of the rapid buildout of data centers reportedly held 142 protests across 42 states on Saturday. Some public officials are taking action. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, announced a one-year pause on data center construction in her state.“The bigger point is that the public opposition to data centers in general goes beyond just their localized impacts,” Cochrane told the Daily Signal. “It really goes to the public’s growing concern that AI as a technology, and the companies behind it, are diminishing human agency.”

It’s critical to recognize “the public’s larger resentment and concern with technology as a force and larger economic, social phenomenon,” Cochrane said. He said the question remains of how the pledge will prevent households and small businesses from bearing the brunt of higher prices when data centers begin operation, before their generation capacity is supplying additional energy to the grid.

“The companies say they’ll pay for additional generation capacity, but the generation capacity takes another five years to come online between the time that the data center actually begins operation and the time that their generation capacity is supplying additional energy to the grid,” Cochrane said. “Well, in the interim, who’s covering the costs of that?”

Nathan Leamer, executive director of the pro-AI advocacy group Build American AI, thinks blue-state policies, not data centers, are to blame for high electricity prices.“President Trump is doing the right thing, which is thinking creatively about how to protect ratepayers across the country, including in states where bad energy policies are leading to increased energy and electricity prices as as our nation relies more on electricity and energy,” Leamer told the Daily Signal.

Brendan Steinhauser, CEO of The Alliance for Secure AI, thinks the ratepayer protection plan will help some with anti-data center sentiment, but concerns remain.“The concerns are not just about energy and water, they’re about the nature of the technology itself,” he told the Daily Signal. “There’s still a lot of questions there. I think this is good policy, good politics. But I think the president and governors around the country are going to have to do more to kind of get at the crux of the matter regarding AI.”

Politicians must do more to calm people’s fears about the catastrophic risks associated with AI, Steinhauser said. He thinks Vice President JD Vance has done the best job addressing concerns about jobs and the economy. “Bring it up proactively,” he advised. “Like we hear you, we understand you’re worried about this. I’m worried too. We have to get this right.”

Read more …

What they try now is “forced labor practices”.

• USTR Greer Calls Tariffs on 60 Countries Incl. Canada, Mexico, Europe (CTH)

As expected, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has completed the Section 301 review of “forced labor practices” in manufacturing and trade.


As a result of the findings, a tariff rate of 10% to 12.5% is being added to the goods from a host of countries evaluated. These 301 duties are in addition to currently existing tariff rates. [FACT SHEET] Trading partners that have made commitments to adopt, and effectively enforce, forced labor import prohibitions will have a 10% tariff, and trading partners that have failed to adopt a forced labor import prohibition will have a 12.5% tariff rate.

• The following 54 economies have failed to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor:

Algeria; Angola; Argentina; Australia; the Bahamas; Bahrain; Bangladesh; Brazil; Cambodia; Chile; China, People’s Republic of; Colombia; Costa Rica; Dominican Republic; Egypt; El Salvador; Guatemala; Guyana; Honduras; Hong Kong, China; India; Iraq; Israel; Japan; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kuwait; Libya; Malaysia; Morocco; New Zealand; Nicaragua; Nigeria; Norway; Oman; Peru; the Philippines; Qatar; Russia; Saudi Arabia; Singapore; South Africa; South Korea; Sri Lanka; Switzerland; Taiwan; Thailand; Trinidad and Tobago; Türkiye; United Arab Emirates; United Kingdom; Uruguay; Venezuela; and Vietnam.

• The following six economies have failed to effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor:

Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, and Pakistan.

After consideration for current Free Trade Agreement parameters and Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) reciprocity internals, the basic outcome is this

• 10 percent is the appropriate rate of Section 301 duties for investigated economies that (i) impose a forced labor import prohibition; (ii) have committed to impose and enforce such a prohibition through an Agreement on Reciprocal Trade; or (iii) have imposed a partial regime with the effect of preventing the importation of certain forced labor goods. These economies are: Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Canada, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United Kingdom;

• 10 percent or 12.5 percent, net of Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) rate is the appropriate rate of Section 301 duties for certain products of the European Union, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Switzerland that are not otherwise exempted, as explained in greater detail in the Federal Register Notice; and

•12.5 percent is the appropriate rate of Section 301 duty for all other investigated economies. :

Read more …

“Long-term contracts with Moscow were not vulnerable to external shocks or market fluctuations, Berliner Zeitung has said..”

• Germany Paying Five Times More For Gas After Ditching Russian Imports (RT)

Germany is now paying five times as much for imported gas than it did before abandoning its long-term Russian supply contracts as part of the EU sanctions, Berliner Zeitung has reported.Berlin now has to rely on the volatile international energy market, which is reeling from the de-facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz during the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran, the newspaper wrote on Wednesday.


Once Europe’s industrial powerhouse, Germany abandoned cheap Russian gas imports in 2022 as part of the EU’s sanctions campaign against Moscow following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Combined with the phaseout of nuclear power in favor of renewables, this self-imposed embargo has dealt a major blow to Germany’s industrial sector.Before the embargo, Russia supplied 55% of the country’s natural gas imports. Germany now sources its gas from Norway (44%), the Netherlands (24%) and Belgium (21%), with American liquefied natural gas (LNG) accounting for most of the remainder.

According to Berliner Zeitung, Germany’s gas import price has risen from €12 ($13.65) per megawatt-hour in 2020, when long-term contracts with Russia were still in force, to more than €60 ($68.25) this week amid the continued exchange of strikes between Washington and Tehran.“The old Russian contracts were cheaper than the market price,” the media outlet said, adding that Germany would also be unable to increase gas imports if needed since “the pipelines from Norway are at their [full] capacity” and “cannot handle much more.”

The decision to abandon cheap Russian energy played a major role in slowing down the German economy. It contracted in both 2023 and 2024, its first back-to-back annual decline in more than two decades, and is forecast to grow by just 0.5% this year. Corporate insolvencies also rose by more than 22% in each of those years, according to official data.On Monday, Chancellor Friedrich Merz openly admitted that the ongoing energy crisis was caused by “the lack of Russian gas.”

Moscow has repeatedly said it is ready to resume gas deliveries through the Nord Stream pipeline string that survived the 2022 sabotage attack but has received no response from Berlin. Instead, Germany plans to impose new tariffs on its already struggling industrial sector to fund the construction of a national gas reserve. The EU also pledged to end all Russian gas imports by 2027, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stating in March that Brussels would stick to this course even in the event of physical gas shortages or the threat of power cuts.

Read more …

Because of your position, and your magazine, you get an exclusive interview, and this is what you do with it? You attack him?

• Elon Musk Tells Economist Editor-in-Chief : Britain Civil War Inevitable (MN)

During a terse exchange, Elon Musk told the virulently leftist editor-in-chief of The Economist that civil war in Britain is inevitable on current trends – driven by rapid migration of people whose beliefs clash with Western civilisation. In response, Zanny Minton Beddoes accused Musk of supporting the “far right,” and amplifying racists. Musk called the coming confrontation a “reckoning,” rejected the racist smear, and turned the tables on an interviewer determined to paint secure borders and opposition to rape and murder as fringe extremism.


When the interviewer insisted she lived in Britain and called the claim “nonsense,” he shot back: “You live a very closeted existence!” He expanded: “If you have a large and growing, rapidly growing, group of people whose beliefs are antithetical to western beliefs, at some point there will be a reckoning.” Musk described the prospect as inevitable and called it a “crying shame” that mainstream outlets refuse to recognise the threat to Western civilisation. Pressed on whether he was racist or anti-Muslim, Musk answered directly:

“My partner is half-Indian and I have four children with her. One of them was named after a famous Indian physicist. So I would say I’m not racist.” He continued: “If people are coming to a country with antithetical views, I am against that. I’m against rape and murder, I’m against the imposition of rules and laws that are contrary to what we’ve come to accept in the West.” The interviewer’s line of attack was clear. She framed Musk’s support for parties defending borders and cultural continuity as backing for the “far right” and even “very fringe parties.” Musk refused the frame. “No, I support the NORMAL people,” he said. “What you call the far right FALSELY.”

He pointed out that the same positions – secure borders, safe cities, sensible spending – were mainstream only 10 or 15 years ago. Speeches by Obama or Hillary Clinton on these subjects would today be denounced as Trumpian extremism by the “lunatic left.” When Beddoes claimed people “loathe” him, Musk was unmoved, firing back “I don’t care, but the fact that, as you pointed out, a quarter billion people follow me is that I think a lot more people actually like me than don’t. And I think a lot more people hate you and the media more than you realize.”

OOF. Feel the burn.

The pattern is familiar. Positions once held by centre-left politicians are now labelled extreme so that any defence of Western norms can be pathologised. Musk called it out without apology.

The full interview, spanning AI, Europe, politics and the rest, is available here (for now):

Musk’s warning with regards to Britain is not abstract theorising. It lands against a backdrop of UK government moves that look like quiet preparation for internal fracture.Last year Professor David Betz of King’s College London warned that official talk of a Russian invasion threat was a convenient cover for hardening infrastructure and building a citizen’s militia against domestic conflict. Low trust, political factionalism and demographic change, he argued, are pushing Britain toward civil strife.

Just days ago the UK government urged households to stockpile long-life food, water, medicines and wind-up radios while announcing the largest home-defence wargame in decades—Operation Albiston Shadow—again framed around hybrid Russian threats. Betz’s analysis remains the same: the real concern is internal, not external. Musk’s latest comments connect those dots in plain language.

The UK has seen repeated outbreaks of disorder linked to migration failures—Southport, Southampton and beyond. Official responses have often appeared two-tier. At the same time, the state is stockpiling resilience messaging and running large-scale domestic defence exercises while insisting the danger is primarily Russian. The academic critique from Betz and others is that this is politically safer language for a deeper problem: a society whose cohesion has been eroded by rapid demographic change and elite refusal to confront incompatible values.

Musk is simply saying the quiet part out loud. Large-scale importation of populations that reject core Western principles—equality under the law, free speech, protection of women and girls—creates friction that does not magically resolve. When media and political classes treat any discussion of that friction as “far right,” the pressure only builds. Britain’s leadership can keep pretending the only threats come from Moscow or from citizens who notice the transformation of their own towns. Musk is not pretending. Neither should anyone else who values the civilisation that still, for now, allows such interviews to happen.

Read more …

1952.

• Trump Notes Europe’s Refusal to Accept Elimination of Marshall Plan (CTH)

Most casual EU observers have missed the connection between President Trump eliminating the U.S-Europe Marshall Plan via entirely new trade and tariff policies, and the aggregate financial collapse of the European Union. Over four years (1948-1952), the United States provided $13.3 billion (equivalent to approximately $137 billion in 2025) directly to 17 Western European countries, including the United Kingdom, France, West Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. The intent was to rebuild Europe after World War II. However, included in the plan was a later system of one-way tariffs, where EU Countries would high-tariff U.S. goods and the U.S. would not tariff EU goods imported.


The direct funding ended in 1952, but the indirect funding via tariffs never ended until President Donald J Trump triggered reciprocal tariffs against Europe thereby removing the one-way benefit. This created an immediate and growing problem for Europe – particularly noted in the EU industrial base.Simultaneous to this EU tariff reset, President Trump levied tariffs against China. To offset the possibility of economic losses, and specifically to fund Beijing’s subsidies to impacted Chinese manufacturing, China stopped purchasing European industrial machines. [That’s the source of the picture above at the G7 in Canada]

This trade and tariff approach hit Europe twice as hard. First from American tariffs and second from diminished Chinese industrial purchasing. Immediately, Europe started looking for alternate sources of funds. That’s where the idea to tax American tech companies entered the discussion in Brussels. Today, President Trump addressed this directly.

TRUTH SOCIAL – “The European Union is at it again and, as usual, taking direct aim at GREAT American Companies! After having fined Apple, for no reason at all, 15 Billion Dollars, Meta, 3 Billion Dollars, Amazon 2.5 Billion Dollars, and many others, we have just been informed that Google, a truly advanced and amazing group, has been fined yet another 1 Billion Dollars, without explanation. This brings the Google total to over 18 Billion Dollars!

This illegal and highly discriminatory practice started at these high levels during the first year of the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration, but it’s not going to continue during the Trump Administration. The United States of America is not a “PIGGYBANK” for Europe, nor will we allow it to be! Please let this TRUTH serve to represent that we will immediately initiate a 301 Investigation into the practice of “ROBBING” American Companies and, in turn, the American Taxpayer.

The European Union will pay a very big price for this illegal and highly unethical conduct, which I have consistently warned them about. The penalties will be entirely reversed and, we anticipate, a substantial TARIFF to be placed on them at the earliest possible moment. Stay tuned!”

~President DONALD J. TRUMP

Keep in mind, all of this EU regulatory and compliance control is at the forefront of another element, the AI race.

In the USA we do not want a singular AI model to win support of the United States government and then end up with an AI regulatory system where the govt can start defining terms of “safety” to eliminate information adverse to the interests that regulate it. However, we can almost guarantee that Europe will select an approved singular AI model, predictably regulating it and taxing the use of it accordingly.

Read more …

“Lydia the encyclopydia..”

• The South Carolina Supreme Court Again Rules Against Tattoo Speech (Turley)

There is an interesting free-speech case filed in South Carolina brought by a tattoo parlor challenging a state law that not only bars tattoo facilities from 1000 feet of churches, schools, or playgrounds, but also bans tattoos on the face, neck, or head. The case presents a common challenge for free speech advocates like myself. I have a visceral dislike for tattoos (particularly on the face), but I believe that they are a form of free expression. I, therefore, view the South Carolina law, S.C. Code Ann. § 44-34- 100, as unconstitutional under the First Amendment. (The litigants include claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the 14th Amendment).


The lawsuit was brought by Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of a New York tattoo shop, Tiny Zaps, that is interested in opening a location in South Carolina. Tiny Zaps argues that “Tattoos are a form of artistic expression protected by the First Amendment. They communicate ideas, commemorate milestones, express beliefs, and allow people to present themselves to the world through permanent artwork created in collaboration with tattoo artists.”

It notes that the limits on store location make it difficult to open a store given the many churches, schools, and playgrounds in the state. However, it is the limits on the placement of the tattoo itself that is most interesting from my perspective. It argues that “Tattoo artists do not merely apply ink to skin. They collaborate with customers to create artistic works that often carry deeply personal expressive significance. The resulting artwork derives meaning not only from its design, but also from its placement on the body.”

It also argues that South Carolina has long been distinctly anti-tattoo expression: “South Carolina has long treated tattooing as disfavored expression. Until 2004, South Carolina was one of only two states that outlawed tattooing.”

In 2002, I wrote about a South Carolina challenge in the Los Angeles Times about the unconstitutionality of a state law barring tattooing. However, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that “the danger associated with the activity of tattooing, whether artwork or not, is a legitimate reason to regulate it.” In my criticism of the Court, I disagreed with the premise that “a tattoo might be a form of protected expression, the ‘process’ of tattooing was not protected.” I noted that “this is akin to treating the Declaration of Independence as protected speech but not Benjamin Franklin’s printing of the document.”

As Meagan O’Rourke has noted, that case was declined by the Supreme Court in a disappointment for many of us, but later courts have reached contrary decisions from the South Carolina Supreme Court’s opinion in White v. State. This will now give us a second bite at the apple to get this right. Despite my aversion to tattoos, they are clearly expressive. Indeed, some would say that they are downright educational:

“Lydia, oh Lydia, that encyclopydia Oh Lydia the Queen of Tattoo On her back is the Battle of Waterloo Beside it the wreck of the Hesperus, too And proudly above waves the red, white, and blue You can learn a lot from Lydia”

In support of the free speech case, I call on the ultimate counsel for the challengers to explain the cultural and educational value of tattoos. I give you Groucho Marx:

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 24 2022

Oct 242022
 
 October 24, 2022  Posted by at 8:31 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  55 Responses »


Paul Gauguin A seashore 1887

 

• Russia Says Kyiv Preparing False Flag “Dirty Bomb” Detonation In Ukraine (EWN)
• Kiev Denies Moscow’s ‘Dirty Bomb’ Allegations (RT)
• US Rejects Russia’s Allegations Of Kyiv’s Preparations To Use Dirty Bomb (Az)
• Macron Calls For Peace On Ukraine’s Terms (RT)
• ‘Dancing On Edge Of Volcano’ With Ukraine – Sarkozy (RT)
• Scholz and Von der Leyen Want A Marshall Plan For Ukraine (NOS)
• 101st Airborne Deployed to Ukraine’s Border ‘Ready To Fight Tonight’ (Antiwar)
• Weaponized Governmental Failure: A Primer (McKay)
• On Going Seriously Boom (Fred Reed)
• Musk Blasts ‘Hypocritical’ WaPo
• EU Displays ‘Height Of Hypocrisy’ – Russia (RT)
• Germany Should Go Back To Buying Gas From Russia – Saxony PM (RT)
• Energy Costs Will Bankrupt 90% Of English Schools (RT)
• Blocking Judicial Review Of A Half-trillion Tuition Giveaway (Turley)
• A Closer Look at the Covid Mortality Rate (Miller)
• A Pulse Check Of Australia As We Exit The Pandemic (news.com.au)

 

 

A Russian source whose name escapes me right now.

 

 

Quadruple

 

 

 

 

Gonzalo

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shoigu has allegedly also held multiple calls with US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin. No details were revealed.

• Russia Says Kyiv Preparing False Flag “Dirty Bomb” Detonation In Ukraine (EWN)

UPDATE 4.44 pm (October 23) – Russian state-controlled media outlet TASS has reported that Russia’s Defence Minister Shoigu spoke to Britain’s Ben Wallace about Kyiv’s plans to detonate a “dirty bomb” in Ukraine as a false flag operation to “increase anti-Russian rhetoric.” The Russian Defence Ministry told reporters on Sunday, October 23 revealed that Shoigu spoke to Wallace via a phone call to discuss the situation in Ukraine and discuss “possible dirty bomb provocations by the Ukrainian armed forces”. The ministry said: “On 23 October 2022, Russian Defence Minister Army General S.K. Shoigu and British Defence Minister B. Wallace. The situation in Ukraine was discussed. “Sergey Shoigu conveyed to his British counterpart his concerns about the possibility of provocations by Kyiv using a dirty bomb.” Earlier, it was reported by the state-owned media outlet RIA that the UK was also involved in the process with regard to “the possible transfer of nuclear weapon components to the Kyiv authorities.”

ORIGINAL 8.33 am (October 23) – According to “credible sources in various countries – including Ukraine”, Kyiv is reportedly preparing a false flag attack on Ukraine involving the detonation of a so-called “dirty bomb” or a low-yield nuclear weapon, as reported by RIA on Sunday, October 23. The source reportedly told the Russian news outlet that the “purpose of the provocation is to accuse Russia of using weapons of mass destruction in the Ukrainian theatre of war and thereby launch a powerful anti-Russian campaign in the world aimed at undermining Moscow’s credibility.” RIA also said that according to its information, the management of the Eastern Mining and Processing Combine, located in the city of Zheltiye Vody, Dnipropetrovsk Region, as well as the Kyiv Institute for Nuclear Research, have been instructed by top Ukrainian officials to produce the “dirty bomb”, which is believed to be in its final stages.

The news outlet said that the UK is also involved in the process with regard to “the possible transfer of nuclear weapon components to the Kyiv authorities.” It added that if the provocation succeeds then “most countries will react extremely harshly to the ‘nuclear incident’ in Ukraine and as a result, Moscow will lose the support of many of its key partners, while the West will once again try to raise the issue of stripping Russia of its permanent UN Security Council membership status and increase anti-Russian rhetoric.”

Read more …

Linking Russia to nukes is a popular pastime.

• Kiev Denies Moscow’s ‘Dirty Bomb’ Allegations (RT)

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has denied Moscow’s allegations that Kiev was preparing a false-flag attack with the use of a “dirty bomb,” and has pointed the finger at Russia instead. Zelensky was commenting on what he called “a phone carousel” by the Russian Defense Minister: on Sunday, Sergey Shoigu shared with his French, Turkish and British colleagues his concern over “possible provocations by Ukraine using a ‘dirty bomb.’” Russian state news agency RIA Novosti earlier reported that the goal of such a provocation would be to accuse Moscow of using weapons of mass destruction in a ploy to “launch a powerful anti-Russia campaign”. In a video address on social media, Zelensky claimed that “wherever Russia has brought death and degradation,” Ukraine is “returning a normal life.”

“And there’s only one subject who can use nuclear weapons in our part of Europe, and this subject is the one who ordered comrade Shoigu to call somewhere,” the Ukrainian leader said. So-called “dirty bombs” use conventional explosives along with radioactive material. While it could not rival a nuclear warhead in terms of power, such a device could disperse a radiation cloud around a radius of several kilometers from its explosion. Zelensky expressed confidence that “everyone understands” who is “the source of everything dirty that can be imagined in this war” and called on the world to react “in the toughest possible way” when it comes to “another escalating step” by Russia.

Earlier on Sunday, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba also commented on Moscow’s allegations, saying that “Russian lies” about a “dirty bomb” “are as absurd as they are dangerous.” “Firstly, Ukraine is a committed NPT (non-proliferation treaty) member: we neither have any ‘dirty bombs’ nor plan to acquire any. Secondly, Russians often accuse others of what they plan themselves,” the minister said. According to the British Defense Ministry’s readout of the conversation between its head, Ben Wallace, and his Russian counterpart Shoigu, the Russian minister “alleged that Ukraine was planning actions facilitated by Western countries, including the UK, to escalate the conflict in Ukraine.” Wallace “refuted these claims” and warned Shoigu that “such allegations should not be used as a pretext for greater escalation,” the ministry said.

Earlier, in an interview with Deutsche Welle, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that any use of nuclear weapons by Russia in Ukraine will lead to “severe consequences” for Moscow, but refused to reveal details on these. At the same time, he said that the risk of such a Russian attack remains low. Numerous Russian officials have been insisting that the country wasn’t threatening anybody with nukes and have pointed to Russia’s military doctrine, which states that nuclear weapons may only be used if such arms or other weapons of mass destruction are being deployed against the state, or if it is faced with an existential threat from conventional arms.

Read more …

Take a look at John McCain’s view of Blinken.

• US Rejects Russia’s Allegations Of Kyiv’s Preparations To Use Dirty Bomb (Az)

US Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken spoke with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba to reaffirm the United States’ steadfast support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, State Department Spokesman Ned Price said in a statement. “Secretary Blinken expressed to Foreign Minister Kuleba that the United States rejects Russian Defense Minister Shoygu’s transparently false allegations that Ukraine is preparing to use a dirty bomb on its own territory and that the world would see through any attempt by Russia to use this allegation as a pretext for escalation,” Price said.

 

 

McCain ..”Not only unqualified but one of the worst […] Mr Blinken has been a foreign policy advisor to VP Biden since his days in the Senate [but] Mr Biden has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy issue”
https://twitter.com/i/status/1584250474131517440

Read more …

Translation: Macron wants the war to continue indefinitely.

Second translation: The loser takes it all.

• Macron Calls For Peace On Ukraine’s Terms (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron called on Sunday for a peace deal in Ukraine, but insisted that Kiev will dictate the terms of such an agreement. The Ukrainian government, however, has repeatedly ruled out any compromise with Moscow. Speaking at a peace conference organized by a Catholic charity in Rome, Macron said that while “calls for peace might seem…like a betrayal” of Ukraine, the “international community” will one day support a negotiated settlement between Kiev and Moscow, the Associated Press reported. However, peace cannot be “captured by Russian power,” Macron added. “We want the Ukrainian people to decide at a certain point…the moment and the terms of peace.” The French president has expressed this same sentiment already, declaring earlier this summer that “Ukraine will decide when the conditions are met to build peace.”

The leaders of the US, UK, and NATO have issued similarly-worded statements while continuing to bankroll and arm Ukraine’s military, and France, along with the other members of the G7, has pledged to maintain this support for “as long as it takes.” Ukraine’s terms, however, will likely preclude any settlement in the near future. President Vladimir Zelensky has pledged not to negotiate with Russia as long as Vladimr Putin remains in power, signing a decree earlier this month forbidding talks with the Russian president. Zelensky has also promised to seize the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye, which acceded to membership of the Russian Federation following referendums last month. Additionally, the Ukrainian leader has vowed to capture Crimea, which joined Russia following a referendum in 2014.

Not only would an assault on these territories present a formidable military challenge for Zelensky’s forces, a full-scale attack on Russian land would invite Moscow to retaliate with “all the means available” to it, Putin cautioned in a recent speech. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was more blunt when he warned Kiev in July that an attack on Crimea would trigger “Judgement Day” for Kiev. Meanwhile, the Kremlin has warned the UK, France, and other Western powers that it believes Ukraine is preparing to detonate a so-called “dirty bomb” in a bid to frame Russia and escalate the conflict to the point of NATO intervention. While British Defense Minister Ben Wallace refuted these claims and intimated that London’s support for Ukraine would continue, he said after the call that the UK “stands ready” to “de-escalate this conflict.”

Read more …

Sarkozy does a lot better than Macron.

• ‘Dancing On Edge Of Volcano’ With Ukraine – Sarkozy (RT)

It’s high time for the EU to abandon its emotionally driven policies on Ukraine and start talking about achieving peace, former French president Nicolas Sarkozy has suggested. In an interview with Le Journal du Dimanche on Saturday, Sarkozy criticized Brussels for its involvement in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which has included sweeping sanctions on Moscow, weapons deliveries to Kiev, and calls for a military solution to the crisis. “The European Commission is primarily an administrative body. Moreover, I still haven’t understood under which article of the European treaties [the body’s president Ursula] von der Leyen justifies her competence in the field of arms purchases and foreign policy,” he said.

“The only thing the Europeans are hearing now is more and more billions of euros being spent on the purchase of weapons. More weapons, more deaths, more war,” the 67-year-old politician added. The EU’s policy regarding the conflict in Ukraine is driven by “miscalculation, exaltation, anger, superficial reactions,” and because of this “we’re dancing at the edge of a volcano,” said Sarkozy, who was the president of France between 2007 and 2012. The bloc was right to condemn Russia and show solidarity with Ukraine, but it also needs to exercise “composure” and work to prevent the escalation of the conflict, he added. “It’s high time for serious initiatives to be taken to start talking about the future and peace.”

Sarkozy also criticized Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky for signing a decree earlier this month, which officially made it “impossible” for him to hold talks with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin. Such a stance amounted to “demanding a regime change in Moscow,” the veteran politician pointed out. “I consider this to be a dangerous leap into the unknown, although it’s understandable that it’s difficult for the Ukrainian president to talk to Putin,” he said. Moscow, which has repeatedly invited Kiev to come to the negotiating table in recent months, has blamed the Ukrainian side for undermining any potential for a peaceful settlement of the crisis.

It has also repeatedly condemned the deliveries of weapons to Zelensky’s government by the US, EU, UK and some other countries, arguing that they won’t change the outcome of the conflict, but will prolong the fighting and increase the risk of a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO. Zelensky previously set out the only conditions under which negotiations with Russia would be possible: “They can return our territory back to us if they want negotiations. They must withdraw from our territory and leave us our land within the internationally recognized borders of 1991. And then we will say in what format and with whom we are ready to talk.”

Read more …

Google translate. I think this will be costed at $349 billion, the amount George Webb has been mentioning all along. He connects it to Kolomoisky, who is Zelensky’s puppeteer, and to an Israel pipeline.

• Scholz and Von der Leyen Want A Marshall Plan For Ukraine (NOS)

Ukraine’s reconstruction requires a strategy similar to the Marshall Plan after World War II. That write the German Chancellor Scholz and President von der Leyen of the European Commission in an opinion piece in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. According to the two politicians, supporting Ukraine is also in the interest of the European Union. “Ukraine also defends the international rule-based order, the basis of our peaceful coexistence and well-being worldwide,” they write. “So if we support Ukraine, we are building our future and that of our common Europe.” Scholz and von der Leyen call rebuilding the Russian-invaded country a lengthy task that must begin now. “While one has to be careful with historical comparisons, this is nothing less than a Marshall Plan for the 21st century.”

With the Marshall Plan, European countries received money, goods, raw materials and foodstuffs from the United States between 1948 and 1952. This was done in the form of loans and gifts. It was an initiative of the then US Secretary of State Marshall of State. The timing of Scholz and Von der Leyen’s plea is not coincidental. A conference on the reconstruction of Ukraine begins today in Berlin, which includes representatives from German and Ukrainian business. The summit will be opened by Scholz and Ukrainian Prime Minister Shmyhal. On Friday, von der Leyen announced that the European Union wants to support Ukraine with 1.5 billion euros every month next year. EU finance ministers have yet to work out the details of that new aid.

Read more …

“The 101st has not deployed to Europe since the last world war. ”

• 101st Airborne Deployed to Ukraine’s Border ‘Ready To Fight Tonight’ (Antiwar)

The White House has deployed thousands of American soldiers just miles from Ukraine to prepare for war, according to CBS News. Officers speaking with the outlet revealed they were there for combat against Russia. Brigadier General John Lubas confirmed nearly 5,000 troops from the 101st Airborne recently joined the 100,000 American soldiers already deployed to Europe. Lubas described his troops as being on “full deployment,” and they are preparing to fight Russian soldiers in Ukraine. “This is not a training deployment, this is a combat deployment for us. We understand we need to be ready to fight tonight,” he said. CBS Reporter Charlie D’Agata was embedded with the American forces as they conducted military drills – at a forward operating base – within four miles of Ukraine’s border.

The 101st Airborne is engaged in joint exercises with Romanian forces, simulating Ukrainian soldiers’ combat against Russian troops. Colonel Edwin Matthaidess said his forces have been “closely watching” the Russian soldiers, “building objectives to practice against” and conducting war games that “replicate exactly what’s going on” in Ukraine. CBS News reported, “[Russia’s] goal is to cut off all Ukrainian access to the sea, leaving the country and its military forces landlocked.” CBS News did not provide a source for that assertion. The Kremlin has publicly said its war goal is limited to eastern Ukraine. Lubas declared the division was “ready to defend every inch of NATO soil.” However, Moscow has never threatened to invade a NATO country. Ukraine is not a NATO member.

When President Zelensky said Ukraine should be allowed into the North Atlantic alliance last month, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg rejected Kiev’s proposal. The 101st Airborne is a light infantry division. It carries the nickname the “Screaming Eagles” as the Pentagon utilizes the 101st as a force that can deploy around the world within hours. Lubas described his division as bringing a “unique capability, from our air assault capability… We’re a light infantry force, but again, we bring that mobility with us, for our aircraft and air assaults.” Romanian Major General Lulian Berdila told CBS News that the presence of American troops was reminiscent of WWII, “The real meaning for me, to have the American troops here, is like if you were to have allies in Normandy before any enemy was there.” The 101st has not deployed to Europe since the last world war.

Read more …

“Middle-class voters tend to choose to live in places where they can expect to get actual value out of their tax dollars..”

So you fail them on purpose.

• Weaponized Governmental Failure: A Primer (McKay)

Let’s call it Weaponized Governmental Failure. It’s the single most explicative factor in the breakdown of American political consensus in the 21st century, even though it’s been around since the latter part of the 20th century. The simple definition of Weaponized Governmental Failure is this: it’s the deliberate refusal to perform the basic tasks of urban governance for a specific political purpose. The crime and the graft and the potholes and the bad drainage, not to mention the spotty trash collection or nonexistent snow shoveling, aren’t incompetence. In fact, none of what you see in the American public sector is incompetence. The people responsible for it are quite highly educated and well-trained in their craft. You just need to understand what their craft is. It’s a choice to do a poor job with the more mundane tasks of running a city, and an educated and purposeful choice at that.

If you do those things effectively, after all, what you will get is middle-class voters moving in. Middle-class voters tend to choose to live in places where they can expect to get actual value out of their tax dollars — good roads, safe streets, functional drainage, decent schools, a friendly business climate, and a growing economy, among other things — and those things are hard to produce when you govern the way the Left does. Put a different way, middle-class voters are a pain in the ass. They want lots of things that make for unrewarding grunt work for a mayor, and a Democrat blowhard like a Mitch Landrieu or Ted Wheeler of Portland would rather spend his time on vacuous cultural aggressions like “social change” and offering wealth redistribution and excuses for the bad personal habits that cause so many people to be poor.

Not to mention tilting at bronze statues of better men long dead and nearly forgotten as a means of “making a difference.” For a Landrieu, or a Kwame Kilpatrick, Marion Barry, Bill de Blasio, or Lori Lightfoot, it is no great loss if those middle-class voters declare themselves fed up and decamp to the suburbs. Their exodus simply makes for an electorate that is a lot less demanding and easier to control. That “white flight” is a feature. It’s not a bug. And it isn’t all that white either. Those suburbs the folks are leaving for? Their minority population share usually increases as their population does. Why do you think that is? Simple: the black middle class has no more use for these woke urban Democrats than the white middle class does. And it’s quite a mutual sentiment, to be sure.

The urban socialist Left wants a manageably small core of rich residents and a teeming mass of poor ones, and nothing in between. That’s what Weaponized Governmental Failure produces, and it’s a wide-scale success. New Orleans votes 90 percent Democrat. Philadelphia is 80 percent Democrat. Chicago is 85 percent. Los Angeles? Seventy-one percent. None of those cities will have a Republican mayor or city council again, or at least not in the foreseeable future.Because there are very few middle-class voters left in the cities.

Read more …

“What would happen in, say, New York City even if, improbably, it were not bombed? ”

• On Going Seriously Boom (Fred Reed)

A modern country is a system of systems of systems, interdependent and interconnected—water, electricity, manufacturing, energy, telecommunications, transportation, pipelines, and complex supply chains. These are interconnected, interdependent, and rely on large numbers of trained people showing up for work. Modern warheads are not the popgun squibs of Hiroshima. Talking of repair any time soon after the nuclear bombing of a conurbation is foolish because the city would have many hundreds of thousand of dead, housing destroyed, massive fires, horrendously burned people with no hope of medical care, and in general populations too focused on staying alive to worry about abstractions like supply chains.

The elimination of transportation might cause more death than the bombs. Cities, suburbs, and towns cannot feed themselves. They rely on a constant, heavy influx of food grown in remote regions. This food is shipped by rail or truck to distribution centers, as for example Chicago, whence it is transshipped to cities like New York. Heavy megatonnage on Chicago would disrupt rail lines and trucking firms. Trains and trucks need gasoline and diesel which come from somewhere, presumably in pipelines. These, broken by the blast, burning furiously, would take time to repair. Time is what cities would not have. What would happen in, say, New York City even if, improbably, it were not bombed?

Here we will ignore the likelihood of sheer, boiling panic and resultant chaos on learning that much of the country had been flattened. In the first few days there would be panic buying with shelves at supermarkets being emptied. Hunger would soon become serious. By day four, people would be hunting each other with knives to get their food. By the end of the second week, people would be eating each other. Literally. This happens in famines.Most things in America rely on electricity. This comes from generating plants which burn stuff, usually natural gas or coal. These arrive on trains, which would not be running, or in trucks, not likely to be running. They depend on oil fields, refineries, and pipelines unlikely to function.

All of the foregoing depend on employees continuing to go to work instead of trying to save their families. So—no electricity in New York, which goes dark. This means no telephones, no internet, no lighting, and no elevators. How would this work out in a city of high rises? Most people would be nearly incommunicado in a lightless city. Huge traffic jams would form as people with cars tried to leave—to go where?—as long as gasoline in the tank lasted.Where does water come from in New York? I don’t know, but it doesn’t flow spontaneously to the thirtieth floor. It needs to be pumped, which involves electricity, from wherever it comes from to wherever it has to go. No electricity, no pump. No pump, no water. And no flushing of toilets. River water could be drunk, of course. Think of the crowds.

Read more …

“The Washington Post is solely owned by Amazon tycoon Jeff Bezos, who also owns Blue Origin, a private spaceflight firm in direct competition with SpaceX.”

• Musk Blasts ‘Hypocritical’ WaPo

Elon Musk called the staff of the Washington Post “such hypocrites,” after the newspaper – which proclaims that “democracy dies in darkness” – ran a series of highly critical articles on him. One referred to the SpaceX CEO as a “security risk.” While it was Bloomberg that first reported the possibility that the federal government may investigate Musk’s companies after the billionaire made them “uncomfortable” with his remarks on Ukraine, the Washington Post fired off a salvo of fiercely critical articles on the SpaceX CEO on Saturday. One piece described how lawmakers in Washington allegedly consider Musk “too powerful and increasingly reckless,” partly over his since-abandoned demand that the government reimburse him for providing Starlink internet access to Ukraine for free.

An op-ed suggested that Musk’s Twitter musings on resolving the Ukraine conflict peacefully should make him “a person of interest to security hawks,” and another opinion piece slammed the supposed lack of “discipline and respectability” in Musk’s personal life. One of Musk’s Twitter followers called the newspaper out for its editorial line. “‘Democracy dies in darkness,’ their slogan says, but instead, ‘democracy dies when influential people use journalism to protect powerful interests while deceptive[ly] claim they are protecting common people’s interests,’” the commenter wrote. “Exactly,” Musk replied on Sunday. “WaPo are such hypocrites.”

Already under fire from the liberal media for his planned buyout of Twitter, Musk angered lawmakers in Washington and Kiev when he proposed a peaceful settlement to the Ukrainian conflict that would involve Ukraine abandoning its claim to Crimea. With one Ukrainian diplomat telling Musk to “f**k off” and US Senator Lindsey Graham proposing that the government pull subsidies to Tesla in response, the Washington Post declared that the tycoon’s “ego” put Ukraine’s “war efforts” in jeopardy. The Washington Post is solely owned by Amazon tycoon Jeff Bezos, who also owns Blue Origin, a private spaceflight firm in direct competition with SpaceX. The two firms have competed for federal contracts, with Bezos’ company having a lawsuit against NASA dismissed last year, after the agency awarded a lunar lander contract to SpaceX.

Read more …

” The European Union has lost the moral right to speak about war crimes because, for eight years, it has turned a blind eye to the killing of civilians, women and children during the shelling of the Donbass by the regime in Kiev.”

• EU Displays ‘Height Of Hypocrisy’ – Russia (RT)

The European Union doesn’t have the right to accuse Moscow of committing war crimes in Ukraine because the bloc has spent years ignoring the suffering of civilians in Donbass, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said. Russia’s statement came after EU’s main decision-making body, the European Council, condemned Moscow on Friday for “indiscriminate” missile and drone attacks on civilian targets in Kiev and elsewhere in Ukraine, adding that there was “growing evidence” of war crimes against Ukrainians. In a response released on Saturday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova rebuffed the accusations as “the height of hypocrisy.”

The European Union has lost the moral right to speak about war crimes because, for eight years, it has turned a blind eye to the killing of civilians, women and children during the shelling of the Donbass by the regime in Kiev. Zakharova further accused the European bloc of “covering up Kiev’s criminal actions.” She argued that, instead of seeking a peaceful solution, the EU has been “senselessly investing significant sums into prolonging the fighting.” The spokeswoman also claimed that Ukrainian soldiers who receive Western training and weapons are targeting civilians.

Russia stepped up strikes on Ukraine this month, hitting many thermal power plants and power lines across the country, among other targets. President Vladimir Putin said the intensification was a retaliation against “terrorist attacks” on Russian soil, including a truck bombing that had recently damaged a strategic bridge connecting the Crimean Peninsula with Russia proper. Kiev has not confirmed its involvement in the bridge attack, but several top officials and government agencies openly celebrated the bombing. President Vladimir Zelensky later accused Russia of killing civilians on purpose during its renewed strikes on Ukrainian territory.

Read more …

And soon. Start peace talks to save your economy.

• Germany Should Go Back To Buying Gas From Russia – Saxony PM (RT)

Germany needs to get back to purchasing gas from Russia as soon as the conflict in Ukraine ends, the prime minister of the German eastern state of Saxony, Michael Kretschmer, said on Saturday. His nation would still need “pipeline gas” from Russia, the official believes. “When the war is over, we should use gas from Russia again,” Kretschmer told the German tabloid Bild’s weekend edition when asked what he would say to people demanding the Russian Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline be commissioned. Nord Stream 2 was one of the two pipelines designed to deliver natural gas from Russia to Germany via a route along the bed of the Baltic Sea. The project was shelved in late February as Germany halted its certification process when Russia recognized the two Donbass republics as independent.

Kretschmer believes Germany would need the Russian gas pipeline infrastructure to be fully restored if it seeks to ensure sufficient energy supply. He was asked if he believes the two Nord Stream pipelines damaged in an alleged act of sabotage in late September would be repaired. “We will need pipeline gas and that is only possible with functioning pipelines,” he told Bild. Russia should not be the only energy supplier for Germany in the future, the prime minister said, adding that Berlin should also secure long-term gas contracts with the US, Qatar and other Arab nations, as well as “develop our own gas [fields] in the North Sea.” His words came amid an acute energy crunch in Germany as the EU has been striving to wean itself off Russian energy supplies. Brussels’ sanctions policy against Moscow has so far brought more ill than good to Germany, Kretschmer believes.

An economic “tsunami is building up now,” the state leader warned. According to him, entrepreneurs in Saxony face a “dramatic” struggle “for survival” and many of them “are about to give up” in a matter of “weeks, not months.” Kretschmer also said that the federal government relief measures had not yet been properly implemented, while Berlin’s energy saving tips only “get people annoyed.” The prime minister also called for a speedy diplomatic solution to the ongoing conflict, adding that the EU should team up with the US, China, India and Japan to stop the war. At the same time, he said there was “not a single reason why Ukraine should give up even one square meter of its territory.”

Russia must also compensate for all the damage the conflict dealt to Ukraine, he added. Four former Ukrainian regions – the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye regions – were officially declared part of Russia in early October, after voters in those territories overwhelmingly supported the move in referendums. Kiev and Western nations, including Germany, declared the votes a “sham” and continue to view the territories as part of Ukraine.

Read more …

Homeschooling?!

• Energy Costs Will Bankrupt 90% Of English Schools (RT)

Schools in England are struggling to pay their electricity and heating bills, and 90% will run out of money next year, the Observer reported on Saturday. With the cost of living crisis forcing some schoolchildren to go hungry, the government plans to cut spending across all departments. The National Association of Head Teachers told the newspaper that 50% of their schools will be in deficit this year, with the figure rising to 90% by next September. Power and heating bills at some schools have risen from £26,000 a year to £89,000 ($100,609), the report stated. On top of this increase, schools are having to fund a 5% teachers’ pay rise announced this summer. Chancellor Jeremy Hunt is expected to announce spending cuts to all departments, including education, at the end of the month.

Several school trusts told the newspaper that they are eating into their cash reserves to keep their buildings heated and their teachers paid. However, “there comes a point where we simply run out of money,” said Garry Ratcliffe, whose trust runs three primary schools in Kent. Furthermore, Ratcliffe said he’s seen an increase in the number of families unable to pay their own bills or feed their children. “Families who have never required support before are coming to us,” he said. “There is a great sense of shame for the dad who works every hour he can but still has to walk into school and ask for help.” A survey released last week by Chefs in Schools found that 83% of teachers reported children coming to school hungry because their parents were unable to afford food. Nearly a quarter said that children at their schools skipped lunch “due to poverty.”

Energy costs and inflation – which had been creeping upwards since the end of the Covid-19 pandemic – have skyrocketed since the UK decided to cut itself off from Russian fossil fuels. Outgoing Prime Minister Liz Truss exacerbated the economic crisis with a disastrous ‘mini-budget’ last month that crashed the British pound, and attempted to blame Britain’s economic woes on Russian President Vladimir Putin. Responding to The Observer’s latest report, a Department of Education spokesperson took a similar tack, blaming the “cost pressures” on schools on “international events,” and promising to offset the costs via an energy relief scheme.

Read more …

“No vote of Congress — just hundreds of billions of dollars written off by Biden, as if he is an American tsar.”

• Blocking Judicial Review Of A Half-trillion Tuition Giveaway (Turley)

In a speech at Delaware State University on Friday, President Biden was positively exuberant as he announced that he had prevailed in asserting unilateral authority to forgive hundreds of billions of dollars in tuition loans. He declared that “just yesterday, a state court and the Supreme Court said, ‘No, we’re on Biden’s side.’” Some of us immediately noted that these were actually federal judges and they did not rule that he has this authority but that the other parties in two cases did not have legal standing to challenge his authority. Indeed, one of those Biden “supporters” was Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who simply denied an emergency application to the court. If it seems unlikely that Barrett is now “on Biden’s side,” it is because the claim is perfectly delusional.

No one could possibly read these decisions as even remotely supporting Biden’s claim to have virtually absolute authority to give away roughly $500 billion owed to the American people shortly before a critical midterm election. Within a few hours of Biden’s boast, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit enjoined the lower court. However, even the Eighth Circuit will not decide whether to be “on Biden’s side” but only whether six states have the constitutional right to bring any challenge as a matter of legal standing. Even the trial judge said the merits of the challenge raised “important and significant” concerns about Biden exceeding his authority.

Overwhelming constitutional concerns are raised by this massive election-year giveaway. Biden simply announced that he would forgive up to $10,000 in student loan debt for borrowers earning less than $125,000 annually; those who received Pell grants could receive up to $20,000 in relief; couples can qualify despite a joint annual income of $250,000. No vote of Congress — just hundreds of billions of dollars written off by Biden, as if he is an American tsar.

Read more …

“..the initial WHO estimates were off by 99% for 94% of the world’s population..”

• A Closer Look at the Covid Mortality Rate (Miller)

The median infection fatality rate for those aged 0-59 was 0.035%. This represents 86% of the global population and the survival rate for those who were infected with COVID pre-vaccination was 99.965%. For those aged 0-69, which covers 94% of the global population, the fatality rate was 0.095%, meaning the survival rate for nearly 7.3 billion people was 99.905%. Those survival rates are obviously staggeringly high, which already creates frustration that restrictions were imposed on all age groups, when focused protection for those over 70 or at significantly elevated risk would have been a much more preferable course of action. But it gets worse. The researchers broke down the demographics into smaller buckets, showing the increase in risk amongst older populations, and conversely, how infinitesimal the risk was amongst younger age groups.

They added that “Including data from another 9 countries with imputed age distribution of COVID-19 deaths yielded median IFR of 0.025-0.032% for 0-59 years and 0.063-0.082% for 0-69 years.” These numbers are astounding and reassuringly low, across the board. But they’re almost nonexistent for children. Yet as late as fall 2021, Fauci was still fear-mongering about the risks of COVID to children in order to increase vaccination uptake, saying in an interview that it was not a “benign situation:” “We certainly want to get as many children vaccinated within this age group as we possibly can because as you heard and reported, that this is not, you know, a benign situation.” It’s nearly impossible for any illness to be less of a risk, or more “benign” than a 0.0003% risk of death.

Even in October 2021, during that same interview with NPR, Fauci said that masks should continue on children as an “extra step” to protect them, even after vaccination:And when you have that type of viral dynamic, even when you have kids vaccinated, you certainly – when you are in an indoor setting, you want to make sure you go the extra step to protect them. So I can’t give you an exact number of what that would be in the dynamics of virus in the community, but hopefully we will get there within a reasonable period of time. You know, masks often now – as we say, they’re not forever. And hopefully we’ll get to a point where we can remove the masks in schools and in other places. But I don’t believe that that time is right now.

Nothing better highlights the incompetence and misinformation from Dr. Fauci than ignoring that pre-vaccination, children were at vanishingly small risks from COVID, that vaccination uptake amongst kids was entirely irrelevant since they do not prevent infection or transmission, and that mask usage is completely ineffective at protecting anyone. Especially for those who didn’t need protection in the first place. The CDC, “expert” community, World Health Organization, media figures — all endlessly spread terror that the virus was a mass killer while conflating detected case fatality rates with infection fatality rates. Yet now we have another piece of evidence suggesting that the initial WHO estimates were off by 99% for 94% of the world’s population.

Read more …

Things that don’t rhyme:

“..37 per cent said they had not taken any vaccine..”

“..Only 35 per cent out of more than 45,000 people said they were vaccinated..”

“..more than 20 million Australians have received at least one dose of a Covid vaccine, or more than 95 per cent of the over-16 population..”

• A Pulse Check Of Australia As We Exit The Pandemic (news.com.au)

Today Covid has become an afterthought for many. We no longer have to isolate after a positive test, masks are rarely seen – even on flights. And the tense — and at times explosive — conversations between friends and family members over issues like vaccines are largely behind us. But we want to know how you feel as Australia emerges from the pandemic. Take our poll and see how the rest of the country views what we’ve been through and where we sit today.

After a day of voting, each question has received more than 42,000 responses, ranging up to more than 50,000. The results are striking. More than half of respondents either said they regret getting vaccinated, or were unvaccinated and happy with their decision. Only 35 per cent out of more than 45,000 people said they were vaccinated and would make the same decision again. Not a single person said they were unvaccinated and regret the decision. One fifth of respondents said they had received two doses of a vaccine, 26 per cent had three and 16 per cent had four shots, while 37 per cent said they had not taken any vaccine.

According to Health Department data, more than 20 million Australians have received at least one dose of a Covid vaccine, or more than 95 per cent of the over-16 population. An overwhelming majority of respondents said they were no longer concerned about Covid and no longer wore masks in public settings. Half of respondents said they caught Covid, with 6 per cent of those catching it more than once, while 40 per cent said they never did. Meanwhile, more than two thirds of respondents said Australia‘s leaders had been too heavy-handed in the pandemic response, 25 per cent said they did they best they could, and 8 per cent said as well as any other country.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yottabyte
https://twitter.com/i/status/1584197056406892544

 

 

 

 

Battery

 

 


Changing of the guards, Parliament building, Syntagma square, Athens

 

 

 

 

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