Menu Icon

Debt Rattle November 4 2024

Nov 042024
 
 November 4, 2024  Posted by at 9:22 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,  42 Responses »


Berthe Morisot After luncheon1881

 

• Trump Could Become Second JFK – Medvedev (RT)
• Can A Tsunami of Trump Votes Give Power Back to the American People? (PCR)
• Trump’s Supporters Deserve A “Smack” – Biden (RT)
• I Shouldn’t Have Left The White House – Trump (RT)
• Rogan Exposes Democrats’ Plan To Destroy American Democracy (ZH)
• The Latest Harris Campaign Gaslighting Is Comedy Gold (Margolis)
• “We’re Not Going to Allow Them to Steal it”: Raskin (Turley)
• AI Will Kill Writing – Scientist (RT)
• The Internet Is Getting Flushed Down Orwell’s Memory Hole (ZH)
• The BRICS Summit Should Mark the End of Neocon Delusions (Jeffrey Sachs)
• Ukraine’s Territorial Losses Are Its Own Fault – Lavrov (RT)
• 101 Staff Members Accuse BBC of Pro-Israel Bias – Media (RT)
• UK FM Blames Civil Unrest In Europe On “Russian Disinformation” (ZH)
• Zakharova: Ukraine Took Back Just 279 POWs, Although 935 Were Offered (TASS)
• British King ‘Making Millions’ From Secret Property Empire – The Times (RT)

 

 

 

 

Polls

https://twitter.com/i/status/1853115111336276152

65 Project

Elon PA

Free speech

Young man

 

 

 

 

 

 

“..if he really attempts to [end the Ukraine conflict], he could become a new JFK..”

• Trump Could Become Second JFK – Medvedev (RT)

Should Donald Trump be elected US president and attempt to end the Ukraine conflict in earnest, he could end up sharing the fate of John F. Kennedy, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has claimed. He also argued that relations between Washington and Moscow will likely remain highly strained regardless of who comes out on top in the November 5 presidential election. During the course of his campaign, the GOP candidate has repeatedly vowed to put an end to the bloodshed in Ukraine in short order, if elected. However, he has not provided any specifics. His Democratic rival, Kamala Harris, has suggested that Trump would essentially force Kiev to surrender. Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has also expressed skepticism regarding the Republican nominee’s ability to stop the conflict overnight, noting that no “magic wand” exists with which he could do so.

In a post on his Telegram channel on Sunday, Medvedev, who currently serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, wrote that Moscow does not have high expectations regarding the outcome of Tuesday’s US presidential election. He argued that “for Russia, the election won’t change anything, as both candidates’ stances completely reflect the bipartisan consensus that our country has to be defeated.” According to Medvedev, while on the campaign trail, a “somewhat fatigued Trump” has been dishing out “banalities” regarding peace prospects for Ukraine, and his supposedly good relations with world leaders. However, if elected, the Republican “would be forced to observe all of the rules of the system,” and would be “unable to stop the war. Not in a day, not in three days, not in three months.” “And if he really attempts to [end the Ukraine conflict], he could become a new JFK,” the former Russian president warned.

John F. Kennedy, the 35th US president, was assassinated in 1963. As for Harris, the Russian official dismissed her as “stupid, inexperienced [and] controllable.” Medvedev alleged that if elected, she would be a mere figurehead, with other officials and members of former President Barack Obama’s family pulling the strings. In an exclusive interview with RT earlier this week, Medvedev stated that “if Western countries, especially the United States, had had enough flexibility and wisdom to make a security agreement with Russia, there would have been no special military operation [in Ukraine].” He said that the US and its allies failed to realize this in time because “they’re in the habit of bullying everyone into submission,” and operating “on the principle of American exceptionalism and the primacy of US interests.”

Read more …

“I caution Trump that he cannot merely make Kennedy and Musk advisors. He must give them an executive power base by putting them in charge of the agencies.”

• Can A Tsunami of Trump Votes Give Power Back to the American People? (PCR)

The Democrats are set to steal the election. They have everything in place except enough votes to hide their theft. Watch the video of the Trump Grand Finale, listen to the speeches by Robert Kennedy and Tucker Carlson. Marvel at the massive audience. It appears that Americans have cast off their insouciance and are going to take back their country from the two corrupt political parties, both of which have unleashed evil on America and the world. The American ruling elite, which is evil beyond comprehension, will not take kindly to their loss of power and exposure of their crimes. The FBI, CIA, NSA, Secret Service, and Clinton murder machine only have to assassinate four people–Trump, Bobby Kennedy, Tucker Carlson, and Elon Musk–and the country is back in their hands. Considering the extraordinary support that both Trump and Bobby Kennedy extend to Israel, it is unclear how an America that supports and enables the Genocide of Palestine can be made great again.

I do have to say that I am disturbed by Trump seeing Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea as enemies that he will be tough with. This leaves Trump susceptible to neoconservative influence. If Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are our enemies, it is because Washington made them enemies. It is not Russia that pulled off a Maidan Revolution in Germany and then used a Russian installed puppet to cause problems for NATO and the EU. It is Washington that used Ukraine to do that to Russia. It is not China that offshored its manufacturing to the US and then blames the US. It was not Iran that initiated 24 years of war in the Middle East. It was the US and Israel. It is Washington that has done everything possible to isolate and demonize North Korea for 70 years.

There is one threat in making American great again, and that threat is restoring American militarily dominance. The neoconservatives will use this American desire not only to foment wars but also in the name of national security to restore the spying, the restraints on free expression, and the name-calling that have eroded our civil liberties. “You are with us or against us” will be used to silence the voices of peace. Will MAGA Americans understand that a country can be great without being a hegemon? Permit me to explain that when Trump says there will never again be rallies like his MAGA ones, he is not being egotistical or claiming that no future candidate will be as popular with the people as he is. Neither is he giving assurance that he will not hold Third Reich style rallies. He is saying that once power is restored to the people, in place of political rallies there will be meetings to work out how to best get America back on course.

With Trump in the Oval Office, Elon Musk as Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Robert Kennedy as head of the Food and Drug Administration, Tucker Carlson as White House Press Spokesman, General Flynn as Director of the CIA, Edward Snowden as head of the National Security Agency, John W. Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute as Attorney General, Michael Hudson as Secretary of the Treasury, and Tulsi Gabbard as Secretary of State, there is a chance that America can be rescued and restored. These appointments might be too imaginative for Trump, and if Trump were to make them would the corrupt US Senate confirm them? I caution Trump that he cannot merely make Kennedy and Musk advisors. He must give them an executive power base by putting them in charge of the agencies. Otherwise, they will be cut out of the action by those in charge. If Kennedy and Musk are merely to give advice, they will soon quit out of frustration.

I caution Trump that he cannot give Scooter Libby a pardon and leave his January 6 supporters imprisoned. He cannot leave the attorneys legally harassed who collected evidence that the 2020 election was stolen by Democrats. There are a lot of people on his side who need rescuing. If Trump’s ego or stupid advisors cause him to be magnanimous to his deadly enemies who tried to assassinate him both politically and physically, he will fail. I think Trump has won the election. Nevertheless, the Democrats might try to steal it again, orchestrate an “insurrection,” invoke Pentagon Directive 5240.01, and prevent Trump from being inaugurated. We must keep in mind that the inauguration of a president comes two and one-half months after his election. There is plenty of time for Democrat and ruling elite mischief. The high and mighty have committed so many crimes that they are vulnerable if Trump regains the presidency. In many ways, for the ruling elite this election is an existential matter.

Read more …

He likes talking tough. Think he ever won a -fair- fight in his life?

• Trump’s Supporters Deserve A “Smack” – Biden (RT)

US President Joe Biden has condemned Republican nominee Donald Trump’s promise of lower taxes for high earners, and lashed out at “macho guys” who support such ideas. He made the remarks during a campaign stop in his birthplace of Scranton, Pennsylvania on Saturday, in support of Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate for the November 5 election. “There’s one more thing Trump and his Republican friends want to do. They want to have a giant tax cut for the wealthy,” Biden told the local chapter of the carpenters union. “Now, I know some of you guys are tempted to think it’s macho guys,” he continued in an apparent reference to Trump’s supporters.

“I tell you what, man, when I was in Scranton, we used to have a little trouble going down the plot once in a while. These are the kind of guys you’d like to smack in the ass,” he said while gritting his teeth and clenching his fists. “By the way, I’m serious,” he added. Throughout his presidential campaign, Donald Trump has proposed various tax cuts along with tariff increases on imported goods. This includes a 20% reduction in corporate tax rate. He also pledged to eliminate tax on overtime pay and on tips for service workers, and to make Social Security benefits for seniors tax-free.

Earlier this week, Biden caused an uproar when he branded Republican supporters “garbage,” accusing Trump of dividing the country “based on the race.” The White House later edited the transcript, claiming that there was “a difference in interpretation” while Biden said his comment was in response to “hateful rhetoric about Puerto Rico spewed by Trump’s supporters at his Madison Square Garden rally.” Both Democrats and Republicans have frequently engaged in harsh rhetoric, with Trump often describing Harris as a “low IQ individual,” calling her policies “plans of a simpleton” and the vice president accusing the former president of constantly lying and branding him a “petty tyrant.”

Read more …

“..the US has turned “a failed country” under the leadership of an “incompetent group of fools.”

• I Shouldn’t Have Left The White House – Trump (RT)

US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that he regrets leaving the White House after losing to Joe Biden in 2020, reiterating his claim of “stolen elections.” Speaking at a campaign rally in Lititz, Pennsylvania on Sunday, two days before Election Day, the former president said that the US has turned “a failed country” under the leadership of an “incompetent group of fools.” He went on to accuse the Democratic candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris of being unable to prevent the flow of illegal migrants across the border with Mexico. “We had the safest border in the history of our country, the day I left,” Trump said. “I shouldn’t have left. I mean, honestly, because we did so, we did so well.”

Trump labeled the Democratic Party a “corrupt machine” and claimed that the integrity of the election could only be guaranteed if US states only use paper ballots and require voter IDs. “In California, you are not even allowed to ask for a voter ID. They are only doing it because they want to cheat,” he suggested. Trump has never admitted that he lost the 2020 election, despite courts failing to find evidence of widespread voter fraud. He eventually stepped down as president after a crowd of his supporters stormed the US Capitol building on January 6, 2021, briefly interrupting the certification of Biden’s victory.

Read more …

“”There’s a significant number of these people that are illegal immigrants that have made their way to swing states. And then there’s been calls for amnesty..”

• Rogan Exposes Democrats’ Plan To Destroy American Democracy (ZH)

“Undeniably,” admits Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman to podcaster Joe Rogan, “immigration is changing our nation.” The two men spoke about a wide variety of political topics ranging from how Donald Trump won in 2016 to how immigration stands as a key issue in the election today. Specifically, Fetterman played the Democratic Party card, claiming that Republicans in 2024 “had an opportunity to do a comprehensive border-bipartisan-and that went down because Trump, he declared that that’s a bad deal after it was negotiated with the other side.” Rogan then brutally ‘fact-checked’ the stammering senator, pointing out the reality that that the deal made many concessions that Republicans concerned about the border found to be unacceptable. “But, didn’t that deal also involved amnesty,” responded Rogan,”and didn’t that deal also involve a significant number of illegal aliens being allowed into the country every year?”

Silence from Fetterman. Rogan continued: “I think it was 2 million people. So still the same sort of situation. And their fear is exactly what I talked about, that these people will be moved to swing states and that that will be used to essentially rig those states and turn them blue forever.” Finally, the PA Senator responded “I’ve never witnessed those kinds [illegals voting] of a thing… I don’t think there’s that level kinds of organization.” But Rogan once again would not allow the politician to ‘lie’ pointing out that “there is an organization that’s moving these people [illegals] to swing states.” “There’s a significant number of these people that are illegal immigrants that have made their way to swing states. And then there’s been calls for amnesty. There’s been calls for allowing these people to have a pathway to citizenship and allow them to vote.

The fear that a lot of people have is that this is a coordinated effort to take these people that you’re allowing to come into the country, then you’re providing them with all sorts of services like food stamps and housing and setting them up and then providing a pathway to amnesty. And then you would have voters that would be significantly voting towards the Democrats because they’re the people that enabled them to come into the country in the first place, first place and provided them with those services. This is a big fear that people have and that you’re rigging this system and that this will turn all these states into essentially locked blue like California is.” Fetterman’s responds: “undeniably,” adding that “immigration is changing our nation.” “I haven’t spent a lot of time in Texas but it’s very clear that immigration has remade Texas and I think it’s generally, it’s a good thing.”

Read more …

“The only thing the Harris campaign has functional at this point is a bulls**t machine that is dutifully repeated by the legacy media as if fact.”

• The Latest Harris Campaign Gaslighting Is Comedy Gold (Margolis)

The Harris-Walz campaign claims late-deciding voters are breaking their way, and by a lot. Former Obama campaign manager and current senior advisor to the Harris-Walz campaign made a rather bold claim on X/Twitter on Friday. According to Politico, Plouffe’s comments “echo[ed] those shared by senior campaign officials earlier Friday on a call with reporters.” “We have believed all along that there were still undecided voters here, and that the close of this race was really, really important,” said one of the senior campaign officials, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the state of the race. “And we are seeing that be the case as we are closing out in the last week.” The official said that a recent focus group with undecided voters in a battleground state showed that the racist, misogynistic and vulgar language at Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally in New York over the weekend isn’t just impacting Puerto Rican and Latino voters, but undecided voters as a whole.

“It really kind of crystallized for them the choice in their minds between the vice president, who they’re seeing talk about being a president for everyone, someone focused on them and solving their problems, and Trump, and these really kind of dark, divisive language and events and activities,” the official said. “We don’t always see, when we’re talking to swing voters, anything that you can really see them kind of finalize their point of view or finalize their opinion.” According to the Harris campaign, we’re supposed to believe that a comedian’s joke holds more significance than pressing issues like the economy, immigration, and foreign policy. During a 2WAY livestream, Mark Halperin took aim at the media for uncritically accepting David Plouffe’s claims, saying the assertion “seems questionable on the face.”

He argued that proving whether undecided voters were truly swayed by the Madison Square Garden event would require precise analytics, but that hasn’t stopped the media from treating Plouffe’s statements “like it’s a fact” despite lacking hard evidence. Halperin also shared that, based on his conversations with the Trump campaign, they believe undecided voters lean 2-to-1 in Trump’s favor. He may not believe that’s entirely true, but was clearly less convinced by Plouffe’s suggestion, which Halperin believes was intended to create a “bandwagon effect” for Kamala, shifting the narrative to portray her as gaining momentum. Consider this: if the Access Hollywood tape couldn’t derail Trump’s campaign in 2016, there’s little reason to believe that a comedian’s joke at one of his rallies would, either. Americans recognized Trump’s comments as “locker room talk” back then, just as they understand that a comedian known for crude humor is simply aiming for laughs.

When Halperin asked Trump’s campaign advisor, Chris LaCivita, for his take, LaCivita responded bluntly: “What the hell is he going to say? He’s losing? Fact of the matter is David can’t do anything but bulls**t until Tuesday because we are kicking his a**. The only thing the Harris campaign has functional at this point is a bulls**t machine that is dutifully repeated by the legacy media as if fact.” In the end, both campaigns believe, or are at least claiming, that they have the edge with late-deciding voters. Ignore it all. Just get out there and vote, and make sure every Trump supporter you know votes.

Read more …

“This could prove a long night, if not a long week.”

• “We’re Not Going to Allow Them to Steal it”: Raskin (Turley)

On Bill Maher’s HBO Show on Friday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) appeared to repeat his reservation about accepting a Trump win in the presidential election. Raskin said that Democrats will only support a “free and fair election.” Trump was widely criticized for the same position when he said “If everything’s honest, I’ll gladly accept the results.” Raskin previously said that he would not guarantee certifying Trump and that, if he wins, he may be declared as disqualified by Congress: “It’s going to be up to us on January 6th, 2025 to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he’s disqualified. And then we need bodyguards for everybody and civil war conditions.” Raskin went on HBO to repeat his reservation on accepting the results of any Trump victory: “When I say we will support a free and fair election, no, we we’re not going to allow them to steal it in the states, or steal it in the Department of Justice or steal it with any other election official in the country.

If it’s a free and fair election, we will do what we’ve always done. We will honor it.” Remarkably, as the audience applauded Raskin, Maher added “That is the Democrats’ history: They honor it. That’s the big difference between the parties.” However, that is not the history and Raskin knows it. The certification of President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election was opposed by Democrats and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) praised the effort of then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) who organized to challenge. Jan. 6 committee head Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) voted to challenge it in the House. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to block certification of the 2016 election result.

Raskin also insisted on CNN that the effort to prevent citizens from voting for Trump is the very embodiment of democracy: “If you think about it, of all of the forms of disqualification that we have, the one that disqualifies people for engaging in insurrection is the most democratic because it’s the one where people choose themselves to be disqualified.” Democrats not only sought to strip Trump from the ballot this election, but sought to cleanse ballots of 126 House members. We are already seeing an ominous uptick of challenges, which I discuss in my column this weekend. There are also new allegations of systemic fraudulent registrations in multiple districts. Raskin presumably expects any voters to protest “peacefully” if they are declared the losers.

I am leaving for New York today to join in the coverage. This could prove a long night, if not a long week.

Read more …

“Some 86% of students use AI in their studies..”

“There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be.”

• AI Will Kill Writing – Scientist (RT)

The use of Artificial intelligence (AI) for writing both at work and in school will result in the majority of people losing the skill in several short decades, Paul Graham, a computer scientist and author, has warned. This will create a problem because writing means thinking, Graham, a veteran investor and cofounder of Y Combinator, a startup accelerator and venture capital firm, believes. “The reason so many people have trouble writing is that it’s fundamentally difficult. To write well, you have to think clearly, and thinking clearly is hard,” he said in an essay posted on his website last week. However, the development of technology has allowed people to outsource writing to AI.

There’s no longer a need to actually learn how to write, or hire someone to do it for you, or even plagiarize, the English-American scientist wrote. “I’m usually reluctant to make predictions about technology, but I feel fairly confident about this one: in a couple decades there won’t be many people who can write,” Graham said. It’s common for skills to disappear as technologies replace them; after all, “there aren’t many blacksmiths left, and it doesn’t seem to be a problem,” he admitted. But people being unable to write is “bad,” he insisted. “A world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots,” Graham believes.

It won’t be an unprecedented situation, he observed, referring to preindustrial times, when “most people’s jobs made them strong.” “Now if you want to be strong, you work out. So there are still strong people, but only those who choose to be,” Graham said. In his view, it will be the same with writing. “There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be.” Some 86% of students use AI in their studies, according to a recent survey by the Digital Education Council. While 28% of them resort to technologies to paraphrase documents, 24% use AI to create first drafts, the study has found.

Read more …

“For the first time in 30 years, we have gone a long swath of time – since October 8-10 – since [the Wayback Machine] has chronicled the life of the Internet in real time..”

• The Internet Is Getting Flushed Down Orwell’s Memory Hole (ZH)

We interrupt today’s important election coverage for a story that could have impacts even longer-lasting than President Kamala Harris’s first ten-trillion-dollar budget. I’ll wash my keyboard out with soap later for typing the phrase “President Kamala Harris.” When the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine was hacked in early October, it looked at first like just another email-and-password smash-and-grab. But that was followed up by repeated Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks that crippled the service. The Internet Archive was hit again on Oct. 20, “this time with the threat actors gaining access to their Zendesk support email system.” The Wayback Machine came back but as a read-only service. What that means is, while you can search archived webpages from before the attacks, “you can’t currently capture an existing web page into the archive.”

That matters bigly. When the New York Times, Washington Post, or anyone else stealth-edits a news report to hide the truth, you could still find the original on the Wayback Machine. That’s no longer true. “For the first time in 30 years, we have gone a long swath of time – since October 8-10 – since this service has chronicled the life of the Internet in real time,” the Brownstone Institute reported this week. As of this writing, fully three weeks of web content have not been archived. What we are missing and what has changed is anyone’s guess. And we have no idea when the service will come back. It is entirely possible that it will not come back, that the only real history to which we can take recourse will be pre-October 8, 2024, the date on which everything changed. But it gets worse. Google killed off its cache feature — similar to the Wayback Machine — right around the time the Internet Archive got hacked. Coincidence? Probably. But I’m making a tinfoil hat, just in case.

The White House just got caught altering Presidentish Joe Biden’s “garbage” remarks. “Nothing to see here,” Sean Davis quipped, “just the Biden-Harris administration deliberately falsifying federal records.” They got caught this time, and sources like X still have the original video. But what happens next time, when some politician or MSM editor waits until the furor dies down before making their stealth edit — and there’s no Wayback Machine to catch them? Wikipedia is the defacto internet encyclopedia but has proven time and again to be biased at best and subject to stealth edits at worst. More people are using AI to perform their web searches and summaries for them, but the large language models are scraping data from sources increasingly subject to manipulation.

Read more …

“Time has run out on the neocon delusions, and the U.S. wars of choice..”

• The BRICS Summit Should Mark the End of Neocon Delusions (Jeffrey Sachs)

The recent BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia should mark the end of the Neocon delusions encapsulated in the subtitle of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book, The Global Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives. Since the 1990s, the goal of American foreign policy has been “primacy,” aka global hegemony. The U.S. methods of choice have been wars, regime change operations, and unilateral coercive measures (economic sanctions). Kazan brought together 35 countries with more than half the world population that reject the U.S. bullying and that are not cowed by U.S. claims of hegemony. In the Kazan Declaration, the countries underscored “the emergence of new centres of power, policy decision-making and economic growth, which can pave the way for a more equitable, just, democratic and balanced multipolar world order.”

They emphasized “the need to adapt the current architecture of international relations to better reflect the contemporary realities,” while declaring their “commitment to multilateralism and upholding the international law, including the Purposes and Principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations (UN) as its indispensable cornerstone.” They took particular aim at the sanctions imposed by the U.S. and its allies, holding that “Such measures undermine the UN Charter, the multilateral trading system, the sustainable development and environmental agreements.” Time has run out on the neocon delusions, and the U.S. wars of choice.

The neocon quest for global hegemony has deep historical roots in America’s belief in its exceptionalism. In 1630, John Winthrop invoked the Gospels in describing the Massachusetts Bay Colony as a “City on the Hill,” declaring grandiosely that “The eyes of all people are upon us.” In the 19th century, America was guided by Manifest Destiny, to conquer North America by displacing or exterminating the native peoples. In the course of World War II, Americans embraced the idea of the “American Century,” that after the war the U.S. would lead the world. The U.S. delusions of grandeur were supercharged with the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991. With America’s Cold War nemesis gone, the ascendant American neoconservatives conceived of a new world order in which the U.S. was the sole superpower and the policeman of the world. Their foreign policy instruments of choice were wars and regime-change operations to overthrow governments they disliked.

Following 9/11, the neocons planned to overthrow seven governments in the Islamic world, starting with Iraq, and then moving on to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. According to Wesley Clark, former Supreme Commander of NATO, the neocons expected the U.S. to prevail in these wars in 5 years. Yet now, more than 20 years on, the neocon-instigated wars continue while the U.S. has achieved absolutely none of its hegemonic objectives. The neocons reasoned back in the 1990s that no country or group of countries would ever dare to stand up to U.S. power. Brzezinski, for example, argued in The Grand Chessboard that Russia would have no choice but to submit to the U.S.-led expansion of NATO and the geopolitical dictates of the U.S. and Europe, since there was no realistic prospect of Russia successfully forming an anti-hegemonic coalition with China, Iran and others. As Brzezinski put it:

“Russia’s only real geostrategic option—the option that could give Russia a realistic international role and also maximize the opportunity of transforming and socially modernizing itself—is Europe. And not just any Europe, but the transatlantic Europe of the enlarging EU and NATO.” (emphasis added, Kindle edition, p. 118) Brzezinski was decisively wrong, and his misjudgment helped to lead to the disaster of the war in Ukraine. Russia did not simply succumb to the U.S. plan to expand NATO to Ukraine, as Brzezinski assumed it would. Russia said a firm no, and was prepared to wage war to stop the U.S. plans. As a result of the neocon miscalculations vis-à-vis Ukraine, Russia is now prevailing on the battlefield, and hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are dead. Nor—and this is the plain message from Kazan—did U.S. sanctions and diplomatic pressures isolate Russian in the least. In response to pervasive U.S. bullying, an anti-hegemonic counterweight has emerged.

Simply put, the majority of the world does not want or accept U.S. hegemony, and is prepared to face it down rather than submit to its dictates. Nor does the U.S. anymore possess the economic, financial, or military power to enforce its will, if it ever did. The countries that assembled in Kazan represent a clear majority of the world’s population. The nine BRICS members (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa as the original five, plus Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates), in addition to the delegations of 27 aspiring members, constitute 57 percent of the world’s population and 47 percent of the world’s output (measured at purchasing-power adjusted prices). The U.S., by contrast, constitutes 4.1 percent of the world population and 15 percent of world output. Add in the U.S. allies, and the population share of the U.S.-led alliance is around 15 percent of the global population.

The BRICS will gain in relative economic weight, technological prowess, and military strength in the years ahead. The combined GDP of the BRICS countries is growing at around 5 percent per annum, while the combined GDP of the U.S. and its allies in Europe and the Asia-Pacific is growing at around 2 percent per annum. Even with their growing clout, however, the BRICS can’t replace the U.S. as a new global hegemon. They simply lack the military, financial, and technological power to defeat the U.S. or even to threaten its vital interests. The BRICS are in practice calling for a new and realistic multipolarity, not an alternative hegemony in which they are in charge.

American strategists should heed the ultimately positive message coming from Kazan. Not only has the neocon quest for global hegemony failed, it has been a costly disaster for the US and the world, leading to bloody and pointless wars, economic shocks, mass displacements of populations, and rising threats of nuclear confrontation. A more inclusive and equitable multipolar world order offers a promising path out of the current morass, one that can benefit the U.S. and its allies as well as the nations that met in Kazan. The rise of the BRICS is therefore not merely a rebuke to the U.S., but also a potential opening for a far more peaceful and secure world order. The multipolar world order envisioned by the BRICS can be a boon for all countries, including the United States. Time has run out on the neocon delusions, and the U.S. wars of choice. The moment has arrived for a renewed diplomacy to end the conflicts raging around the world.

Read more …

“The longer the Ukrainian leadership, with Western support, keeps scuttling one agreement after another, the less territory remains under its control..”

• Ukraine’s Territorial Losses Are Its Own Fault – Lavrov (RT)

The more agreements with Russia and other parties the Ukrainian government violates, the less territory will remain under Kiev’s control, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned. During his speech at the 16th Assembly of the Russian World in Moscow on Saturday, Lavrov reiterated the country’s readiness to search for a diplomatic solution to the conflict with Kiev. According to Moscow, an integral part of the political settlement should be “protecting the rights and freedoms, as well as the legal interests of the Russian people and Russian speakers… alongside ensuring Ukraine’s non-aligned, neutral, and non-nuclear status, and eliminating any and all threats to Russia’s security that may come from within its borders,” he said. “Acknowledging the actual state of affairs on the ground is of paramount importance,” the minister stressed. Lavrov urged Kiev against delaying the launch of substantive negotiations any further.

“The longer the Ukrainian leadership, with Western support, keeps scuttling one agreement after another, the less territory remains under its control,” he warned. “Had they honored their commitments in February 2014, nothing would have happened, and Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. However, they chose to break the agreement because they couldn’t wait to seize power,” the foreign ministry recalled. On February 21, 2014, at the height of the Maidan protests in Kiev, an EU- and Russia-brokered deal to deescalate tensions was struck between Ukraine’s democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovich and the opposition. However, the coup leaders violated it almost immediately, with the head of state being forced to flee the violence the next day. The regime change in the nation’s capital prompted Crimea to hold a referendum the following month, in which the peninsula’s population voted overwhelmingly to reunite with Russia.

“Had it [the Kiev government] honored the Minsk Agreements in February 2015, Ukraine would have still kept all its territories within its borders, including all of Donbass (Crimea was already gone by that time). They chose not to implement these agreements and not to grant a special status to a portion of Donbass,” Lavrov continued. The Minsk II deal, the guarantors of which were Germany, France and Russia, introduced a ceasefire between the authorities in Kiev and the breakaway regions of Donetsk and Lugansk, and was intended to pave the way for administrative and political reform in Ukraine as well as for autonomy and local elections in the Donbass republics. In December 2022, former Chancellor Angela Merkel and former President Francois Hollande, who helped broker the accord, admitted that it had been nothing more than a ruse to help Ukraine buy time and prepare for a future conflict with Russia.

“Their third chance came up in Istanbul in April 2022,” when Russia and Ukraine last sat at the negotiating table, the foreign minister said. Russia, which initially expressed satisfaction with the results of the meeting and withdrew its forces from the outskirts of Kiev as a goodwill gesture, later accused Ukraine of backtracking on all progress achieved in Türkiye, saying it had lost trust in Kiev’s negotiators. Russian President Vladimir Putin revealed earlier this year that, during the talks in Istanbul, Ukraine was willing to declare military neutrality, limit its armed forces, and vow not to discriminate against ethnic Russians. In return, Moscow would have joined other leading powers in offering Ukraine security guarantees, he said. According to the Russian leader, Kiev withdrew from the talks on the order of its Western backers. “Without a doubt, today looks quite different from April 2022,” Lavrov said, referring to any future negotiations with Kiev.

Read more …

“..holds itself to very high standards, and we strive to live up to our responsibility to deliver the most trusted and impartial news.”

• 101 Staff Members Accuse BBC of Pro-Israel Bias – Media (RT)

Dozens of BBC employees have accused the British state broadcaster of exhibiting pro-Israel bias in its coverage of the Gaza conflict, The Independent reported on Saturday. The newspaper, citing a letter allegedly sent to BBC Director-General Tim Davie, said the appeal was also publicly signed by other media representatives, including broadcaster Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, who previously served as senior minister of state for foreign and commonwealth affairs. The Independent claimed that accusations of partiality were levelled at the BBC by 101 staff members, who chose not to reveal their identities. The letter allegedly highlights a lack of “fair and accurate evidence-based journalism in coverage of Gaza.” BBC employees urged the organization to report “without fear or favour” and to “recommit to the highest editorial standards – with emphasis on fairness, accuracy, and due impartiality.”

The letter allegedly stressed the need to make it clearer in BBC reporting that Israel is preventing foreign journalists from accessing Gaza, and to provide more historical context behind the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Independent quoted an anonymous BBC employee, who signed the letter, as saying that “levels of staff confidence” are unprecedentedly low, with some of colleagues having “left the BBC in recent months because they just don’t believe our reporting on Israel and Palestine is honest.” Another supposedly told the newspaper that they “see that we are losing the trust of audiences across the world.” The unnamed signatory cited headlines that often leave out Israel, in an apparent attempt to deflect blame.

A BBC spokesperson has rejected the allegations of bias, stressing that the broadcaster “holds itself to very high standards, and we strive to live up to our responsibility to deliver the most trusted and impartial news.” Meanwhile, in September, The Telegraph published a report pointing to a “deeply worrying pattern of bias and multiple breaches by the BBC of its own editorial guidelines on impartiality, fairness and establishing the truth.” According to an analysis prepared by a group of lawyers and data scientists, the broadcaster exhibited anti-Israel bias in its output on television, radio, podcasts, websites, and social media over a period of at least four months in the wake of the deadly Hamas incursion into Israel on October 7, 2023. The BBC has dismissed the findings, calling into question the reliability of AI tools employed by the researchers.

Read more …

“..Russia is involved in psy-ops as any country at war would be. That said, so is David Lammy and his ilk and they aren’t only at war with Russia, they’re also at war with the UK and EU populace.”

• UK FM Blames Civil Unrest In Europe On “Russian Disinformation” (ZH)

The majority of official surveys monitoring American and European support for Ukraine are many months old now. The last time we saw a flurry of polling on the issue was this summer and the media has been rather quiet on the issue since. Why? Because public support for the proxy war is in steep decline. The last numbers show that 52% of Americans no longer want additional funding for Ukraine. With Donald Trump increasingly likely to return to the White House in 2025 the Ukrainians are already preparing for steep cuts to military aid (the US provides the vast majority of arms to Ukraine). This leaves the EU to pick up the slack. However, Europe simply doesn’t have the capacity to provide enough military aid to make a difference in the war and is currently discussing schemes to transfer frozen Russian assets to the effort while simultaneously scaling back their own funding. Central EU nations like Germany are already cutting their contributions in half in the coming year.

The decline in aid follows two important factors: Public support for the war in America and Europe is waning. And, Ukraine is clearly losing the conflict with their defensive lines in the east collapsing. Ukraine has received well over $200 billion in the past two years from NATO nations, which eclipses Ukraine’s annual GDP of around $160 billion. In other words, the war cannot continue without NATO. The disconnect between US and European governments vs the desires of the general public could not be more obvious. Even the Washington Post admits: “As they signaled enduring support for Ukraine last week, European leaders worried about how long they can sustain it…” “European leaders promise to support Ukraine as long as it takes, but they are increasingly threatened by public fatigue, a weakening of the political center and the prospect of Trump’s return…”

“More than 20 years into Russia’s war, public fatigue risks taking hold in some countries. Some European leaders are now in politically precarious positions and more constrained in what they can do. And across the continent, parties from the hard right to the hard left are pushing narratives against sending cash or arms…” In the UK and Europe, protests have erupted over a number of problems, most importantly the threat of mass immigration from third world countries and the deliberate agenda to erase traditional European culture. Some of the unrest has also been related to the Ukraine war and ongoing discussions about “conscription” among government officials. The UK Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, is one of many bureaucrats that are trying to lump all civil actions together, labeling them a “threat to democracy.” The narrative also seeks to tie these events to “Russian disinformation.” In other words, according to David Lammy the public is being brainwashed by Vladimir Putin into protesting and this is a strategy by the Kremlin to sow discord within Europe.

The U.K. government sanctioned three Russian agencies and their senior executives this month, accusing them of orchestrating disinformation campaigns and seeking to fuel anti-Ukraine protests across Europe. The Social Design Agency (SDA), Structura National Technologies, and Ano Dialog, alongside their directors, are accused of spearheading a vast malign online network commonly known as “Doppelganger.” The network used deceitful tactics… to mask the truth around Russia s illegal invasion of Ukraine and distract from the true nature of the war, the U.K. Foreign Office said in a statement Monday. Lammy and others claim this constitutes a “threat to democracy” and he says he will take action to shut down all sources of disinformation. To be sure, Russia is involved in psy-ops as any country at war would be. That said, so is David Lammy and his ilk and they aren’t only at war with Russia, they’re also at war with the UK and EU populace.

It should be noted that Lammy is becoming a regular fixture at The Atlantic Council, which has been deeply involved in the escalation of Ukrainian tensions with Russia for over a decade. He is also on the advisory board for the European branch of the Council On Foreign Relations. His relationships with globalist institutions helps to explain his hostility to conservative and anti-progressive movements. As Lammy argues in his recent conference with Ukrainian officials, any sense that allies are not united ‘only benefits Putin.’ Clearly this “unity” must also extend to the civilian population (by force if necessary), otherwise Lammy and his cohorts look rather ridiculous. The tactic of attaching all civil dissent to the schemes of a foreign adversary is a tale as old as oligarchy. It’s a way for governments to negate or dismiss public opposition to policy without losing face, because they can claim all the dissent is astroturf created by malicious foreign agencies.

Read more …

“These are practically 700 people who could have returned to their families in Ukraine..”

• Zakharova: Ukraine Took Back Just 279 POWs, Although 935 Were Offered (TASS)

The Russian Defense Ministry offered to hand over 935 Ukrainian prisoners of war this year, but Kiev took only 279 of them, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said. “This year, the Russian Defense Ministry handed over to the Coordination Headquarters for the Handling of Prisoners of War a proposal to give back 935 Ukrainian prisoners of war to the Ukrainian side as part of exchanges,” the diplomat said in an online news conference. “How many of this number of people do you think the Kiev regime took back? I will emphasize they are its own citizens. Only 279.” “These are practically 700 people who could have returned to their families in Ukraine,” Zakharova went on to say.

“They were simply shrugged off by the Kiev regime, and yet its representatives continue to travel to Canada and around the world and supposedly call on, and negotiate with the international community for mediation efforts and, as [former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry] Kuleba said, for protection of Ukrainian nationals in Russia.” The spokeswoman called such actions of the Kiev regime “political tourism on the blood of its own citizens, its own servicemen.” “Not those who have been experiencing hatred for years, not the thugs who are ready to kill everyone with weapons in their hands – both Russian citizens and residents of the African continent, as it now turns out, but those whom they literally forcibly mobilized, telling them that Ukraine must be saved, sending them into these human wave attacks. They are not interested in their fate,” Zakharova said.

Read more …

Stuck in the Middle Ages.

• British King ‘Making Millions’ From Secret Property Empire – The Times (RT)

King Charles III and his son Prince William have contracts with UK taxpayer-funded public services, charities, government departments and even a prison, which help them earn millions every year, the Sunday Times has claimed. That’s in addition to the so-called sovereign grant the royals get from the government. In 2023 alone, Charles and William’s “private fiefdoms,” the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall – raised £27.4 million (over $35 million) and £23.6 million ($30 million) respectively for the British royal family, the newspaper found as part of a joint investigation with Channel 4’s Dispatches program. The paper said Saturday that they used the royal addresses to uncover their business contracts and discovered how the duchies are making money “via a series of commercial rents and feudal levies on land largely seized by medieval monarchs.”

Dubbed “Duchy Files,” the investigation claims to have found that King Charles and Prince William “charge for the right to cross rivers, offload cargo onto the shore, run cables under their beaches, operate schools and charities, and even dig graves.” “They earn revenue from toll bridges, ferries, sewage pipes, churches, village halls, pubs, distilleries, gas pipelines, boat moorings, opencast and underground mines, car parks, rental homes and wind turbines,” The Times claims. Some 5,410 landholdings and properties are held by the royal duchies, the investigation claims. For instance, a deal with an NHS foundation trust will reportedly pay the King’s Duchy of Lancaster £11 million ($14 million) over 15 years to rent a warehouse for ambulances. Prince William’s Duchy of Cornwall receives £1.5 million ($1.9 million) a year from the Ministry of Justice for using Dartmoor Prison, The Times claims.

The duchy of the King’s eldest son, the Colonel-in-Chief of the Army Air Corps, also charges the military “for the right to train” on its 67,500 acres of land in Dartmoor. The sum it gets has not been revealed. The estates also rent out over 900 residential homes and farms to tenants, according to the report. The duchies, both established in the 14th century, are operating as commercial landlords, but are exempt from paying tax on their corporate profits, the paper notes. The King and Prince pay income tax voluntarily at the highest rate, 45%. In 2022, the last time King Charles published his tax filings, he paid 25% of the £23 million ($30 million) in duchy profit “because he deducted expenses he considered related to his official duties,” The Times pointed out.

The “Duchy Files” investigation marks the first time that the complete list of property holdings for the two royal estates has been made public, the paper says, adding that even the British parliament was denied access to it. “The ancient property empires that fund the King and the Prince of Wales have remained a closely guarded secret within the royal family and its small circle of advisers for centuries,” it claimed. The two duchies are separate from the Crown Estate, a vast property business owned by the British monarch but run independently. Because of its soaring profits, the taxpayer-funded sovereign grant that pays for official royal duties will rise from £86.3 million ($111 million) in 2024-25 to £132 million ($170 million) in 2025-26.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Whats Ur name?

 

 

Thank you
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852753037242319021

 

 

Performer

 

 

Deer brush
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852760089603813813

 

 

Octopus
https://twitter.com/i/status/1853063328152653966

 

 

Turtle

 

 

Jesus
https://twitter.com/i/status/1852973368519152063

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle October 12 2024

Oct 122024
 
 October 12, 2024  Posted by at 8:46 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Jean-Francois Millet In the Auvergne 1869

 

• Suspicions Grow That Some Polls May Be Masking True Size Of Trump’s Lead (JTN)
• ‘60 mInutes’ Airs Two Different Answers From Harris To Same Question (RT)
• US Media Regulator Comments On Trump’s CBS Demand (RT)
• Biden Ordered Trump To Be Protected As A ‘Sitting President’ (RT)
• Judge Agrees To Release More Trump Material Before the Election (Turley)
• Elon Musk Predicts Joe Rogan Will Interview Donald Trump (ZH)
• Democrats, Media Misrepresent Abortion Policies On Both Sides (JTN)
• US Weaponizing Dollar – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)
• Zelensky Is Making Enemies In America (Lolaev)
• Raytheon Making Billions From Weapons for Ukraine (Sp.)
• In The War Economy Russia Has Taught The Pigs To Sing (Helmer)
• International Law Does Not Exist (Pacini)
• Could Palestine Be The Catalyst For An Islamic Renaissance? (Pepe Escobar)
• Timetable Announced For UK Novichok Trial In Kangaroo Court (Helmer)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We Robot

FSD

 

 

Tips

What can be

The President
https://twitter.com/i/status/1844442775745634513

Cellphones
https://twitter.com/i/status/1844085783516545366

Appellate

 

 

“..it’s simply not possible for her to win the PV if she is running this poorly in NY, MD, NJ, CA, etc. Not possible math..”

• Suspicions Grow That Some Polls May Be Masking True Size Of Trump’s Lead (JTN)

A string of polls from legacy outfits has pointed to a shift toward former President Donald Trump in most of the major battleground states while Vice President Harris maintains a national lead, but some analysts see a critical disconnect between state and national polling that could suggest the Republican is on even stronger footing. Harris currently leads Trump by 2.0% in the RealClearPolitics polling average, with 49.1% support to his 47.1%. That figure includes a Rasmussen Reports survey showing Trump with a two-point lead, a Reuters/Ipsos survey showing Harris up two, a Morning Consult poll with Harris up five, a Yahoo News poll with the race tied, and a number of other surveys. A New York Times/Siena College survey showed Harris up three points. But pollsters have pointed to an apparent disconnect between state and national level polls, with state-level surveys increasingly shifting toward Trump while Harris seemingly holds steady at the national level.

They have further observed two consistent patterns of national polling that appear to vary widely due to methodology.Dominating headlines this week was a bombshell Quinnipiac University survey, which is typically favorable to Democrats, that showed Trump leading by 2% in Wisconsin and 3% in Michigan. “The Harris post-debate starburst dims to a glow as Harris enters the last weeks slipping slightly in the Rust Belt,” Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy wrote. Far from an outlier, other surveys have followed those results, showing Trump either tied or leading Harris in those battlegrounds. A survey from The Hill/Emerson College, for instance showed the Michigan race tied at 49% each. That survey found the same result in Wisconsin. Polling averages currently show Trump poised to take Pennsylvania, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Arizona. Harris, for her part, holds narrow leads in Minnesota and Nevada. Should such results hold, Trump would handily carry the Electoral College, barring major upsets.

The campaign released its own internal polling in a Thursday memo, showing Trump winning all seven of the key battleground states it tracked. Betting markets have also shifted decidedly in favor of Trump. Polymarket currently assigns him a 55.3% chance of winning, compared to 44.3% for Harris. The vice president was the race’s favorite just days ago. “People want America to be strong, and there really is no comparison between what Donald Trump showed us in his four years and what Kamala Harris has shown us [in] her four years as Vice President, and, you know, her tenure in the Senate,” Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley said on the “John Solomon Reports” podcast. “And so I think as people are looking at the world through that prism, it’s not surprising that we’re starting to see the polls kind of shifting our way.”

Compared to his prior elections, Trump is in a far more favorable position at this stage in the race. Against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016, he trailed by 5.8% on Oct. 10. Against President Joe Biden in 2020, he trailed by 10.0%. But that aggregate includes a handful of polls showing either a tied race or moderate Trump lead and a slew showing Harris with a 3-5% edge. “There have been two universes. 1) A close race with a marginal Trump edge. 2) Ridiculous leads for Harris larger than Obama that are never going to happen,” posted Big Data Poll Director Rich Baris in response to an Emerson College poll showing Trump ahead in Pennsylvania. NYT/Siena pollster Nate Cohn this week outlined a key methodological divide leading to some of the apparent polling conflicts, that of “weighting on recalled vote.” In that method, polls ask respondents for whom they voted in 2020 and weight those results to ensure a sample that matches the outcome of the prior election.

Polls that use such a weighting method, he asserted, tend to more closely resemble 2020 election results, while those that don’t, seem to mirror the 2022 midterms. The NYT/Siena College poll does not “weight by recalled vote.” While the issue of “weighting by recalled vote” might explain a chasm between different national polls, it would not explain the apparent disconnects between state and national data from the same outlets. Harvard CAPS/Harris poll director Mark Penn, for instance, highlighted what he called a “polling paradox,” noting that “[t]he Times/Siena poll shows Harris up 3 nationally (within their margin of error) but losing to Trump by 14 in Florida.” “Newsflash — they can’t both be right. It would be paradoxical for Harris to be up with seniors nationally and down with Floridians,” he added. “Florida has high concentrations of seniors and Latinos and if Trump is winning those groups he is sweeping Pa.,Nv and Az. The state polls and national polls have to be in sync and I can’t say which is right but one or both are off base.”

Baris also pointed to an apparent split, with polls showing Harris poised to win the popular vote despite faring significantly worse in deep-blue states such as California and New York. Baris, like Penn, pointed to the NYT/Siena poll, but notably pointed to a drop in Harris’s support in Democratic bastions. He further accused the Times of “giving their readers bipolar results for copium.” “More polls today showing Harris down in key states but also running way behind Clinton and Biden in another blue state. To the point I made yesterday, it’s simply not possible for her to win the PV if she is running this poorly in NY, MD, NJ, CA, etc. Not possible math,” he wrote. “I’m watching this being covered as a good thing for Harris. It’s an absolute catastrophe for her,” Baris wrote, in response to Mason-Dixon/Telemundo data showing Harris leading Trump among California Hispanics 55% to 35%. Biden, by contrast, won that bloc 75% to 23%. Those figures mark a 32% swing in one of the state’s largest voting blocs toward Trump.

Read more …

“Why did 60 Minutes choose not to air Kamala’s full word salad, and what else did they choose not to air?”

• ‘60 mInutes’ Airs Two Different Answers From Harris To Same Question (RT)

The ‘60 minutes’ program on CBS has broadcast two different answers to the same question from US Vice President and Democratic presidential nominee, Kamala Harris. During the segment, interviewer Bill Whitaker asked Harris if she believed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not listening to the US amid an escalation in the Middle East. The vice president’s reply to that question was not the same in the preview that aired on Sunday as it was in the actual show that was broadcast on Monday. In the preview, which was shown as part of the ‘Face the Nation’ program, Harris said: “Well Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region.” However, when the actual ‘60 minutes’ episode aired the next day, the Democratic presidential nominee’s answer was changed to a completely different one, which was shorter and more clear.

“We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end,” Harris said during the program. On Tuesday, the campaign of former US president and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump urged CBS and the producers of ‘60 minutes’ to release the full interview with Harris. “On Sunday, 60 Minutes teased Kamala’s highly-anticipated sit-down interview with one of her worst word salads to date, which received significant criticism on social media. During the full interview on Monday evening, the word salad was deceptively edited to lessen Kamala’s idiotic response,” Trump campaign national spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, said.

“Why did 60 Minutes choose not to air Kamala’s full word salad, and what else did they choose not to air? The American people deserve the full, unedited transcript from Kamala’s sit-down interview… What do they, and Kamala, have to hide?” Leavitt insisted. The Harris campaign insisted that it had nothing to do with the changes made to her interview. “We do not control CBS’s production decisions and refer questions to CBS,” a campaign aide told several outlets, including Fox News and Variety. Trump took to his Truth Social platform on Thursday, accusing ‘60 minutes’ of replacing Harris’ answer with another in order to “make her look better,” and labelling CBS itself a “a giant Fake News Scam.” “CBS should lose its license, and it should be bid out to the Highest Bidder, as should all other Broadcast Licenses, because they are just as corrupt as CBS – and maybe even WORSE!” he wrote.

Read more …

Fake news is protected as free speech?!

• US Media Regulator Comments On Trump’s CBS Demand (RT)

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s criticism of the way CBS edited its interview with his Democratic rival Kamala Harris is a threat to free speech and democracy, the head of the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has stated. Trump had accused CBS of perpetrating “the Greatest Fraud in Broadcast History” by rearranging the ‘60 Minutes’ interview with Harris, aired earlier this week, to make her look more coherent. He called for the network to lose its license. ”While repeated attacks against broadcast stations by the former President may now be familiar, these threats against free speech are serious and should not be ignored,” FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, said in a statement on Thursday. “The FCC does not and will not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage.”

According to Rosenworcel, “the First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy.” That particular section of the US Constitution prevents the government from infringing on freedom of speech, the press, assembly or religion. Harris recorded the ‘60 Minutes’ interview as part a media blitz, trailing Trump in many polls as the November 5 election approaches. A preview of the interview, aired on Sunday, showed her giving a confusing and convoluted response to a question about Israel. The full show, however, contained a completely different response – leaving viewers baffled as to what Harris actually said and when. Trump responded with several posts on his Truth Social platform, accusing CBS of having “sliced and diced” Harris’ “virtually incoherent” answers to make her look good, in what he called a stain on the reputation of both ‘60 Minutes’ and the network.

“It is the very definition of FAKE NEWS! The public is owed a MAJOR AND IMMEDIATE APOLOGY!” he posted on Thursday. The former and aspiring future US president suggested that other broadcast networks weren’t any better and should get their licenses pulled as well. Rosenworcel’s statement comes amid a widespread push by Democrats to censor social media in the name of combating “disinformation” to “protect our democracy.” Meanwhile, the FCC has voted along party lines to fast-track the purchase of over 200 radio stations in more than 40 markets across the US by a group backed by Democrat mega-donor George Soros. Republican commissioner Brendan Carr has called the decision “unprecedented” and said it did not follow the requirements and procedures codified in federal law.

Read more …

“President Joe Biden promised to provide everything needed, “as long as he doesn’t ask for F-15s.”

• Biden Ordered Trump To Be Protected As A ‘Sitting President’ (RT)

Former President Donald Trump’s campaign has requested additional resources, including military aircraft, to protect the Republican candidate in the final weeks before the election. President Joe Biden promised to provide everything needed, “as long as he doesn’t ask for F-15s.” Following two assassination attempts against Trump in recent months, his campaign has been in contact with the White House and the Secret Service to request military assets for added protection, according to multiple US media reports on Friday. President Biden stated that he had ordered his administration to provide Trump “all that he needs” when asked about these reports. ”As long as he doesn’t ask for F-15s,” he told reporters, before adding that he “was being facetious.” “Look, I’ve instructed the department to give him every – every single thing he needs for his… as if he were a sitting president. Give him all that he needs. If it fits within that category, that’s fine. But if it doesn’t, he shouldn’t,” the US leader explained.

The request for military assets includes aircraft and vehicles to transport Trump between campaign events and expanded flight restrictions over his homes and rallies. However, reports from the New York Times, Washington Post, and CNN did not mention whether the Republican campaign sought fighter jet escorts. Trump’s presidential rival, Kamala Harris, receives protection from the US Marines as Vice President and travels on a US military aircraft designated as Air Force Two. The Secret Service, responsible for protecting presidential candidates, confirmed that it received requests for increased protection but did not disclose details. “The former president is receiving the highest levels of protection,” said a representative for the agency, noting that the Secret Service would continue to adjust its protective posture as needed to address evolving threats.

The agency faced criticism after the first assassination attempt against Trump in July, which resulted in the resignation of its director. Since then, it has increased its defensive measures for Trump, including the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, counter-drone technology, and other protective and surveillance systems. Last month, Trump claimed there are “big threats” to his life from Iran after he and his team met with representatives from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The agency declined to disclose details of the meeting, although the Trump campaign stated it focused on “real and specific threats from Iran to assassinate him in an effort to destabilize and sow chaos in the US.” Trump narrowly escaped death on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania, after a 20-year-old man fired shots from a rooftop, grazing Trump’s ear and killing one audience member.

The would-be assassin, Thomas M. Crooks, was killed by the US Secret Service, and his body was quickly cremated; his social media accounts have since been scrubbed. Another would-be assassin, 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Routh, was arrested by the Secret Service on September 15 after being spotted near a Trump-owned golf course in Florida, apparently attempting to take a shot. Routh, a convicted felon, spent much of the past three years in Ukraine, claiming to various Western media outlets that he was fundraising and recruiting for Kiev’s war effort. The FBI is investigating both incidents as attempted assassinations, but authorities have yet to provide any information about possible motives and have not revealed any evidence linking to an Iranian plot.

Read more …

“Many are left with a Ned Flanders moment of “well, if that don’t put the “dink” in co-inky-dink.”

• Judge Agrees To Release More Trump Material Before the Election (Turley)

It appears that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan and Special Counsel Jack Smith are not done yet in releasing material in advance of the election. In a previous column, I criticized the release of Smith’s 180-page brief before the election as procedurally irregular and politically biased, a criticism shared by CNN’s senior legal analyst and other law professors. Nevertheless, on Thursday, Judge Chutkan agreed to a request from Smith to unseal exhibits and evidence in advance of the election. The brief clearly contains damning allegations, including witness accounts, for Trump. The objection to the release of the brief was not a defense of any actions taken on January 6th by the former president or others, but rather an objection to what even the court admitted was an “irregular” process.

As discussed earlier, Smith has been unrelenting in his demands for a trial before the election. He has even demanded that Donald Trump be barred from standard appellate options in order to expedite his trial. Smith never fully explained the necessity of holding a trial before the election beyond suggesting that voters should see the trial and the results — assaulting the very premise of the Justice Department’s rule against such actions just before elections. To avoid allegations of political manipulation of cases, the Justice Department has long followed a policy against making potentially influential filings within 60 or 90 days of an election. One section of the Justice Department manual states “Federal prosecutors… may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election.”

Even if one argues that this provision is not directly controlling or purely discretionary, the spirit of the policy is to avoid precisely the appearance in this case: the effort to manipulate or influence an election through court filings. With no trial date for 2025, there is no reason why Smith or Chutkan would adopt such an irregular process. The court could have slightly delayed these filings until after the approaching election or it could have sealed the filings. If there is one time where a court should err on the side of avoiding an “irregular” process, it is before a national election. What may look like simply an adversarial process to some looks like oppo research to others. Delaying the release would have avoided any appearance of such bias.

For Smith, the election has long been the focus of his filings and demands for an expedited process. Smith knows that this election is developing into the largest jury verdict in history. Many citizens, even those who do not like Trump, want to see an end to the weaponization of the legal system, including Smith’s D.C. prosecution. Trump has to lose the election for Smith to be guaranteed a trial in the case. Chutkan has given the Trump team just seven days to oppose her order. That would still allow the material to make it into the public (and be immediately employed by the media and Harris campaign) just days before the election. The move will only increase criticism that this looks like a docket in the pocket of the DNC. It is telling that, once again, the timing just works out to the way that is most politically impactful. Many are left with a Ned Flanders moment of “well, if that don’t put the “dink” in co-inky-dink.”

Read more …

“I have had the opportunity to have him on my show, more than once, and I have said no every time. I don’t want to help him, I’m not interested in helping him.”

• Elon Musk Predicts Joe Rogan Will Interview Donald Trump (ZH)

Just minutes before the scheduled start of the much-anticipated Robotaxi event on Thursday night, Elon Musk took to Twitter to tell the world an interview between Joe Rogan and Donald Trump “will happen”. Musk made the post responding to our article, “Joe Rogan Has 25 Days To Interview Donald Trump”, submitted by Zero Hedge contributor Quoth the Raven, who wrote on Tuesday: “I can’t listen to another 4 years of Rogan bitch about how bad things have gotten if he won’t talk to Trump.” Rogan has been notoriously uninterested in the interview, which he has been asked about multiple times over the last half decade. Back in June 2023, when asked about the idea, Rogan said to Lex Fridman: “I have had the opportunity to have him on my show, more than once, and I have said no every time. I don’t want to help him, I’m not interested in helping him.”

By August 2023, it looked like Rogan might be changing his tune, as he told Valuetainment’s Patrick Bet-David: “I don’t know. Maybe. At a certain point in time. Just like, it would be interesting to hear his perspective on a lot of things.” Since then, Rogan has stated his admiration for RFK, Jr., who is now supporting Trump. He has also given a platform to Tulsi Gabbard, who is campaigning with, and for, Trump. The idea that Rogan wouldn’t interview Trump, who has recently done podcasts with Theo Von and Andrew Schultz, to name a few, seems bizarre. QTR wrote on his blog Tuesday night that “If anything, an interview would give Rogan an opportunity to push Trump on the things that he disagrees with him on. Bring him on and give him hell if you want, Joe. Rogan could even extend an invitation to the Harris campaign and invite her on for a separate appearance if she wants.”

“I don’t want to pretend to understand what the problem is that Rogan has with Trump, but all I know is that it’s not bigger than the potential consequences of this election,” he wrote. “After listening to Rogan’s podcast for nearly 2,000 episodes, I’m confident in my assessment that he’s a person of integrity and a man of character. The truth is, whether he likes it or not, putting his personal animus aside and getting Trump on the largest media platform in the world can only make an impact for the next month or so.” He concluded: “After the November election, especially if Trump loses, there will be no point — and it’ll be impossible to listen to Rogan crow about the lunatics on the left any further, knowing he didn’t talk to Trump when he had the chance. So let’s get real, Joe: what the hell are you waiting for?”

QTR first predicted the interview would happen in September 2023: “To me, this meeting seems inevitable over a long enough timeline. There’s sufficient positive motivation for both parties to make it happen before the 2024 election, which is why I predict the interview will likely air before the end of the first quarter of 2024.” He’s got about 3 weeks left…

Read more …

This for me goes much too far.

“In Walz’s state and on his watch, five infants were “born alive” in 2021 during failed abortions, and none received life-saving care, though two got “comfort care..”

• Democrats, Media Misrepresent Abortion Policies On Both Sides (JTN)

Democrats and the media have misrepresented the abortion policies of Republicans and the Democratic vice presidential nominee, claiming that the former are secretly much more strict than they are and arguing that the latter is not as liberal as he appears. From Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz’s abortion policies as Minnesota governor to Republicans’ stance on a national abortion ban, Democrats have distorted both their own record and their opponents’ on abortion in the months leading up to the presidential election. Following the reversal of Roe v. Wade in 2022, which returned the abortion question back to the states, Democrats have made abortion a top priority in their campaigns. According to a Gallup poll from May, 50% of U.S. adults said that abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances, while 35% believe it should be legal under any circumstances, and 12% said it should be illegal in all circumstances.

Abortion was a discussion topic in both the presidential and vice presidential debates. Former President Donald Trump said in the last presidential debate in September that Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ “vice presidential pick says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine. He also says execution after birth — it’s execution, no longer abortion, because the baby is born is okay, and that’s not okay with me.” ABC News’ Linsey Davis pushed back on Trump’s statement during the presidential debate, saying, “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born.” NPR also said that abortions after birth are currently illegal in all 50 states. “Nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion,” Harris said during the presidential debate. “That isn’t happening; it’s insulting to the women of America.”

However, the states of Alaska, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, D.C., allow abortion through the ninth month of pregnancy, according to the National Catholic Register. During the vice presidential debate earlier this month, Walz was put on the defensive when asked about his state’s law on babies surviving botched abortions and Trump’s statement. “The question got asked and Donald Trump made the accusation that wasn’t true about Minnesota,” Walz said. Later on in the debate, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, said, “[a]nd maybe you’re free to disagree with me on this and explain this to me, but as I read the Minnesota law that you signed into into law, the statute that you signed into law, it says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives, the doctor is under no obligation to provide life-saving care to a baby who survives a botched late-term abortion.”

Walz pushed back, claiming, “[t]his is a very simple proposition. These are women’s decisions to make about their healthcare decisions, and the physicians who know best when they need to do this. Trying to distort the way a law is written to try and make a point, that’s not it at all.” When Vance asked Walz if what he said was incorrect, Walz responded, “That is not the way the law is written.” “In Walz’s state and on his watch, five infants were “born alive” in 2021 during failed abortions, and none received life-saving care, though two got “comfort care,” the Minnesota Department of Health reported on July 1, 2022. Three other infants were “born alive” during abortions in 2019, Walz’s first year as governor, and they too perished without life-saving care, according to a July 1, 2020, report from the same state agency.

Read more …

‘Stop doing it, this is crazy, it will destroy trust in the dollar.’ You can’t go on with the system like this, it’s not just Russia.”

• US Weaponizing Dollar – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)

The US government has weaponized the dollar rather than having it serve as a medium of exchange or a store of value, award-winning American economist and public-policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs has said. Sachs made the remark on Thursday in his address via video link to a meeting of BRICS ministers of finance and central bank governors. The officials were meeting in Moscow to discuss the improvement of the international monetary and financial system, ahead of the BRICS 2024 summit in Kazan later this month. According to the economist, the weaponization of the dollar was obviously happening through the seizure of frozen Russian assets. He also mentioned the freezing by the US government of Iranian, Venezuelan, Afghan and other state funds. The US and its allies have frozen around $300 billion in Russian central bank assets, around $5 billion of which is sitting in American banks, as part of its Ukraine-related campaign of sanctions.

In April, President Joe Biden signed a bill allowing the seizure of Russian funds held in the US and their transfer to a Ukraine reconstruction fund. “You can’t use the dollar as a payments mechanism,” Sachs said, when a president alone can sign orders and seize essentially billions of dollars in Russian assets. The US currency has become “an instrument of aggressive form of policy,” he concluded. “I’ve said to my own government for the last 15 years ‘Stop doing it, this is crazy, it will destroy trust in the dollar.’ You can’t go on with the system like this, it’s not just Russia.” He pointed out that China wants to have normal trade without threats of US sanctions but, although Chinese banks are part of the SWIFT system, they have to abide out of a fear of being cut off the international financial network.

“So, the point is we need alternatives, this is clear,” Sachs stated. “Of course, countries need non-dollar payment mechanisms. We are going to need some quick, special-vehicle entities that are not also engaged in the dollar payment systems… entities that cannot be directly sanctioned…” The economist stressed that “the best alternative would be if the US recovers sense, decency and legality and stops imposing unilateral sanctions.” US actions are “absolutely incorrect” and illegal by the standards of international law and the UN Charter, said Sachs, who is also president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

Read more …

“Vance, known for opposing aid to Kiev, has consistently argued for negotiating an end to the war, even if it involves ceding territory..”

• Zelensky Is Making Enemies In America (Lolaev)

The US presidential election campaign is entering its final stretch ahead. The outcome is crucial to many of Washington’s foreign partners but particularly for the current government in Kiev. At the end of September, Vladimir Zelensky made another visit to America. Officially coinciding with “UN Week” and a speech at the General Assembly, Zelensky’s six-day trip was primarily focused on one existential issue for his administration – securing continued financial and military support from Washington, regardless of the election results in November. However, achieving this goal proved far more challenging than anticipated. Even Ukraine’s well-oiled PR machine, honed over a decade, struggled to navigate the increasingly polarized American political landscape without incurring damage. Issues arose even before Zelensky touched down on US soil. In an article published in The New Yorker, he described Donald Trump’s running mate JD Vance as “too radical” for suggesting that US support for Ukraine should be reconsidered and that a peace deal might require territorial concessions to Russia.

Vance, known for opposing aid to Kiev, has consistently argued for negotiating an end to the war, even if it involves ceding territory. In response to Zelensky’s comments, the former president’s son Donald Trump Jr criticized the Ukrainian leader for meddling in US domestic affairs, asserting that it is unacceptable for a foreign leader dependent on American taxpayers’ support to speak out against Republican candidates. Things only worsened from there. Zelensky’s first stop was a defense manufacturing plant in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where he thanked workers for churning out the 155mm artillery shells that are critical to Ukraine’s military. The facility had significantly increased production over the past year, shipping over three million shells to Ukraine. Throughout the visit, Zelensky was heavily protected, with law enforcement patrolling the area.

His trip to Pennsylvania, accompanied by the state’s Democratic governor, led to a backlash from Republicans. Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri, a Trump supporter, remarked that Zelensky’s visit appeared to be a campaign event for Democrats in a key battleground state ahead of the presidential election. Sean Parnell, a former Senate candidate from Pennsylvania and also a Trump supporter, labeled Zelensky’s visit as “foreign interference in our election,” citing the visitor’s criticism of Vance, as well as his closeness to Democrats. The Republican Majority Leader in the House Mike Johnson went even further, refusing to meet with Zelensky and demanding that he dismiss his ambassador in Washington for organizing a visit to Pennsylvania without Republican participation. Johnson characterized the event as “an obvious partisan effort to assist Democrats before the election.”

Following this rocky start, Zelensky found himself with one last chance to salvage his image among conservative audiences – a face-to-face meeting with Trump. Negotiating this encounter proved to be extremely difficult, with the Republican occasionally agreeing, then backing off again. In the end, the conversation that extended Zelensky’s stay by an extra day finally took place. During the meeting, Trump expressed his willingness to work toward ending the war between Russia and Ukraine, aiming for a “fair settlement for both sides.” He emphasized that Ukraine has “been through hell.” He also voiced his support for maintaining good relations not only with Zelensky but also with Russian President Vladimir Putin, believing this could facilitate finding common ground. However, when reporters pressed him to clarify what he considered a fair outcome, he suggested it was too early to define, as the conflict remains a complex “puzzle.”

Read more …

“..five consecutive quarters of sales growth since the fourth quarter of 2022, after struggling with sales decline for four consecutive quarters before that..”

• Raytheon Making Billions From Weapons for Ukraine (Sp.)

US defense contractor Raytheon, the world’s largest producer of guided missiles, has been profiting from Ukraine-related military supplies despite previously struggling with sales up until the start of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, a Sputnik correspondent’s analysis of the company’s earnings reports showed. Raytheon Missiles & Defense (RMD), the subsidiary specializing in missile production under the RTX Corporation, has produced the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) directly for Ukraine, while the Stinger and Javelin missiles manufactured by the company have been sent to the conflict zone since early 2022. As a manufacturer of air defense systems such as the Patriot and the missiles used by such systems, RMD has received new orders for these missile systems after such weapons were sent to Ukraine by other Western countries.

Russia has repeatedly stated that arms supplies to Ukraine lead to further escalation of the conflict and directly involve NATO countries in it. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that any cargo containing weapons for Ukraine would become a legitimate target for Russia. The United States and NATO are directly involved in the conflict, including not only by supplying weapons, but also by training personnel, Lavrov said. Raytheon has seen five consecutive quarters of sales growth since the fourth quarter of 2022, after struggling with sales decline for four consecutive quarters before that, the company’s latest earnings report showed. Details from the earnings reports of Raytheon illustrate how the US defense contractor has been able to make billions from continued US military aid to Ukraine and turn its business prospects around by taking advantage of the new demands.

Raytheon’s backlog, which refers to signed but unfilled defense contracts, also expanded from $63 billion at the end of 2021 to $77 billion at the end of the second quarter of this year, according to the latest earnings report. New orders for RMD began to dry up from the fourth quarter of 2021 with an 8% year-on-year drop, the company’s earnings reports showed. By the second quarter of 2022, RMD had experienced a third consecutive quarter of sales decline, with an 11% drop from the same period of the previous year. However, RMD’s new orders in the second quarter of 2022 had already begun to show signs of increasing demand for its products following the escalation of the military conflict in Ukraine in early 2022.

Read more …

“In Russia, meat consumption is rising per capita to a level never recorded before in Russian history..”

• In The War Economy Russia Has Taught The Pigs To Sing (Helmer)

If you want to understand who is winning the American war against Russia on the Ukrainian battlefield, and also in the world’s commodity trade markets, you can start by calculating the life expectancy of a NATO-trained Ukrainian soldier on the front line, or of a NATO staff officer in a command bunker he thought was safe. Then you can check the life expectancy of a Russian pig. The losses of the former are Russia’s tactical gains; they aren’t yet victory in the war. But it’s the latter, the Russian pig who, upon turning into pork, is breaking through the enemy’s defences towards strategic victory of Russian economic power to capture a world market. This means defeat – unrecoverable loss of market share – for the hostile states led by the once powerful pork exporters, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Canada, and the US.

As the most recent European Union (EU) pig and pork slaughter data show, the war is pushing up the energy and feed costs of pig farming, and drastically cutting European exports of pork to the Asian consumer market, the biggest in the world. There, Russia’s strategic ally China has cancelled the closure of its market in effect for Russia since 2008, and simultaneously has begun pork trade restriction moves against Spain, Denmark and The Netherlands, the principal European exporters of pork to China. In trade war retaliation, China is also steadily reducing the volume and value of its pork imports from the US since 2021. Behind the Ukraine front, the test of who is winning the war against Russia is also who puts their money and their meat where their mouth is. In Russia, meat consumption is rising per capita to a level never recorded before in Russian history. At the same time, the country has become the world’s fifth largest pork producer.

From self-sufficiency in pork production in 2018 to the export of market surplus, this industry achievement has been based on direct and indirect state support measures, including retaliation against EU imports which followed the start of the EU’s anti-Russian sanctions in 2014. “Practically speaking,” says Yury Kovalev, “we no longer have imports, but not because this is closed, but because over the past fifteen years an entire industry has been created, production has grown every year, and we have almost completely abandoned import dependence.” Kovalev is general director of Russia’s National Union of Pig Breeders (NSS). Kovalev is also forecasting that Russian pork exports will soon capture about 10% of the Chinese import market – about 300,000 tonnes per annum – displacing the Europeans.

Read more …

“This macabre and dark “new normality” is an antidote to the lies of International Law..”

• International Law Does Not Exist (Pacini)

The assumption of benign global hegemony, that economic and political liberalism was a silver bullet to transcend power politics, turned out to be a liberal illusion fueled by hubris. New international geometries have taken hold. NATO expansion predictably inflamed tensions with Russia as Moscow reasonably perceived it as an existential threat, while China’s simple economic rise became a challenge to U.S. global primacy. Globalization as a neoliberal, Westernized-centric process has become unsustainable, in fits and starts with the U.S. stock market crisis. The excesses of liberalism are now repudiated within the West and outside it, causing polarization within societies and the international system. In all of this, International Law has always been seen as a kind of “guarantee” above the parties, to be appealed to indiscriminately, a kind of neutral power that could settle disputes… or play in favor of the stronger.

Ipso facto, International Law in the twentieth century became United Nations Law, with the UN as the macroscopic entity capable of imposing its dominance. But this hierarchical advantage was not the subject of democratic discussion, let alone confrontation among the various world players: it was an arbitrary and unilateral choice, that of the United States of America, which enjoyed the advantage of victory in World War II, rapidly and effectively expanding its hegemony, both military, cultural, political and especially economic, through the extension of the dollar as the global currency of comparison. An intentional choice? Perhaps. A fluke of history? Equally likely. What is objectively detectable is that we have arrived at the present day with an American-centric International Law, with transnational organs deputed to various functions all reporting to the main Organization, headquartered in New York. Even the various European international institutions and courts have a dependence on Lady USA.

And we come to the present day From here it is easy to see why, today, we have a crisis of International Law and an obvious problem of trust in its so-called institutions. Equally complicated is the transition to an International Law of a multipolar character. Are the events themselves that have caused people to lose confidence in this branch of Law. For there is very little of “law” left. In Kosovo, NATO was allowed to do whatever it wanted, violating Serbia’s territorial sovereignty and creating the puppet “state” of Kosovo; the U.S. can “export democracy” with bombs by attacking in the Middle East whenever it wants, because it is done in the name of “civilization.” in Ukraine, human rights were valid until a few years ago, when the Kiev regime was put on trial for child trafficking and a fratricidal coup, then once the new “villain” was found magically those rights disappeared and the perspective was reversed; Netanyahu can safely make phone calls from UN headquarters and order a carpet bombing of a city in a country, declaring a war, without anything happening to him, despite the fact that he is a proponent of a genocide that has been going on ruthlessly for more than a year. This macabre and dark “new normality” is an antidote to the lies of International Law – or at least how we have been made to believe and practice it for a century to date.

Read more …

“The U.S. may opt to remove Netanyahu”, as in the Democrats terrified of losing because of the Netanyahu cabinet’s war spiral.”

• Could Palestine Be The Catalyst For An Islamic Renaissance? (Pepe Escobar)

Of all the countless analyses across the lands of Islam about the profound significance of fateful Al-Toofan (Al-Aqsa Flood) on October 7, 2023, this one stands out: a cycle of conferences in Istanbul earlier this week, including October 7, titled Palestine: the Lynchpin of Civilizational Renaissance, linked to the Kuala Lumpur Forum for Thought and Civilization.Call it a Malaysia-Turkiye partnership: Southeast Asia meets West Asia, a graphic illustration of the multi-nodal world that will be congregating in less than two weeks in Kazan, capital of Muslim Russia, for the long -awaited BRICS summit under the Russian presidency. Significantly, the centrality of Gaza was not debated in Doha, Riyadh, or Abu Dhabi, all of which would have unlimited funds to host such discussions. Istanbul was a unique opportunity to compare insights by Osama Hamdan, representing the whole Palestinian Resistance; Numan Kurtulmus, the speaker of the Turkish Parliament; Hamas top diplomat Khaled Meshaal, speaking from Doha on the “strategic victory” of the Resistance.

And all that compounded by a strong message by Dr. Mahathir Mohammad, former Malaysian Prime Minister and president of the Kuala Lumpur Forum. Dr. Mahathir emphasized that a sound solution would be “a UN peace-keeping force in Gaza protecting them”. The main problem is the Ummah “not having an alternative to UN veto powers”. Hence “Muslim countries must team up – as there are no means of applying pressure to Israel.” Illustrating Mahathir’s call, Muslim-majority nations are responsible for only 6% of global GDP and 6% of investments, while harboring 25% of the world’s population. Mahathir boldly proposed, “we can deny our oil to the rest of the world” and “take back funds invested in dollar bonds, thus forcing the West to take action” in Gaza. Now try to convince MbS in Riyadh and MbZ in Abu Dhabi about it. “Focus on popular organizations. Forget about governments”

The redoubtable Sami al-Arian, Kuwaiti-born Palestinian, director of the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) at the Sabahattin Zaim University in Istanbul, and whose astonishing life story includes being persecuted and thrown in solitary confinement in the U.S. as a “suspected terrorist” summed up the impotence of Arab political elites when it comes to Palestine: after all the Arab world “is the weakest link on global terms” – with 63 military bases only in West Asia controlled by CENTCOM. And still, “what other cause can galvanize the whole world apart from Palestine?” Al-Arian stressed that Al-Aqsa Flood “exposed the Arab world”, as the destruction of Palestine was “imposed to make Israel the regional hegemon”. There is a glimmer of hope though: “Look at all those things that divide us. We should focus on popular organizations. Forget about governments.”

Al-Arian, who lives and works in Istanbul, tackled head on one of the key running themes of the conference: the complex relationship between Turkiye and the West: “Turkiye is with the West, basically. There is no 100% support for Palestinians. Many are still subject to notions of Orientalism.” He also evoked how 35 then future nations lived in peace within the borders of the Ottoman Empire, which spanned 35 million square kilometers. In Palestine, Al-Arian sees three possible scenarios ahead:

1.The continuity of “Netanyahu’s delusions”. There is “no evidence” that the U.S. is opposing any of them. There is “no deterrence apart from the Axis of Resistance.”

2. Denying these delusions is hard as “Israel has [Arab] regimes on its side. Yet Israel must be engaged on all fronts.” Palestine “is the symbol of all that is just”, and “not a symbol only for Palestinians.” It is imperative to “dismantle the Zionist structure, and Palestine cannot do it on its own.”

3.The third scenario is not so far-fetched anymore – considering the looming U.S. presidential elections: “The U.S. may opt to remove Netanyahu”, as in the Democrats terrified of losing because of the Netanyahu cabinet’s war spiral.

Read more …

“The six-year proceeding is due to close by Christmas. By then it will have violated every rule in British court practice on the admissibility of evidence..”

• Timetable Announced For UK Novichok Trial In Kangaroo Court (Helmer)

The timetable for public hearings has been announced by the British government and its judge, Lord Anthony Hughes, to repeat the official allegations of Novichok attacks by Russian agents against Sergei and Yulia Skripal on March 4, then Dawn Sturgess on June 30, 2018. The first hearing will open on next Monday, October 14, in Salisbury, the Wiltshire county town where the Skripal attack first occurred. The hearings will then move to the International Dispute Resolution Centre in London. On November 25, a session has been scheduled for Hughes to hear police, intelligence agents, and government lawyers argue the agenda item, “Russian state responsibility”. That session will then be followed in early December by closing statements.

The six-year proceeding is due to close by Christmas. By then it will have violated every rule in British court practice on the admissibility of evidence. . No testimony by the Skripals has been allowed by Hughes. Instead, he has decided that the police, MI5 and Secret Intelligence Service will publish their version of what the Skripals said during interviews they were obliged to give without legal representation in 2018.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Libertarian

 

 

Benefit

 

 

Pup

 

 

Elk

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle November 6 2021

Nov 062021
 
 November 6, 2021  Posted by at 9:02 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  44 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Baigneuses 1918

 

• Drastic Drop In Covid Vaccine Effectiveness (RT)
• Dramatic Decline In Effectiveness Of All Three Covid-19 Vaccines Over Time (LAT)
• Pfizer Shares Surge After Release Of ‘Miracle’ COVID Pill (ZH)
• Woke Gets Whacked — But Hold the Victory Lap (Kunstler)
• No, It’s Not Legal (Denninger)
• Unvaccinated Troops Now Threatened With Losing All Their Veterans Benefits (ZH)
• UKHSA Efficacy Stats Death Watch: Week 44 (eugyppius)
• De Blasio To Pay Kids $100 To Get The Covid-19 Vaccine (Fox)
• Florida Court Reinstates Governor’s Ban on Masking in Schools (ET)
• A Review and Autopsy of Two COVID Immunity Studies (Kulldorff)
• NFL Star Aaron Rodgers Responds To ‘Fake’ Vaccine Controversy (RT)
• The Man Who Called Bullshit on Uber (MJ)
• “The Fed Is Our Master And ‘We The People’, Its Puppet” – G. Edward Griffin (ZH)

 

 

Doshi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1456482148089794560

 

 

Door-to-Door vaxxinations in QLD!
https://twitter.com/i/status/1456552719188176900

 

 

 

 

In a normal world, this would be the nail in the coffin. This is not a normal world.

• Drastic Drop In Covid Vaccine Effectiveness (RT)

Three different coronavirus shots – those mainly available in the US and Europe – have shown a dramatic decline in efficacy over time, a study of nearly 800,000 Americans reveals. Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness against both infection and death was studied in three US approved jabs – the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA shots, and the Janssen viral vector vaccine. Having analyzed data from 780,225 US veterans of different ages and sexes between February and October, researchers came to a disturbing conclusion. Vaccine protection against Covid-19 infection dropped from 89.2% at its highest to a low of 13.1%, according to a joint study by the Public Health Institute, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and the University of Texas Health Science Center, published in the Science journal on Thursday.

While effectiveness against infection in March was 89.2% for Moderna, 86.9% for Pfizer, and 86.4% for Janssen, by September there were massive declines to 58%, 43%, and 13% respectively. The emergence and dominance of the Delta strain of the virus during the time of the study may have played a role, researchers said, adding that vaccine protection waned across all studied age groups. More than 26,000 positive PCR tests occurred in some 498,000 fully vaccinated veterans. The authors said the pattern of breakthrough infections shows a “worrisome temporal trend.” While the analysis covers 2.7 percent of the US population, other domestic and international studies have shown significantly waning efficacy.

On a brighter note, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization and death remained high. As breakthrough infections, hospitalizations, and deaths continue to emerge in fully vaccinated people, there is “an urgent need to reinstate multiple layers of protection, such as masking and physical distancing – even among vaccinated persons,” the scientists warn.

Read more …

About the same report, with added benefits: 1/ LA Times manages to turn the utter failure of the vaccines into a promo for the same vaccines and 2/ a booster after 28 days. Soon coming to your town.

• Dramatic Decline In Effectiveness Of All Three Covid-19 Vaccines Over Time (LAT)

As the Delta variant became the dominant strain of the coronavirus across the United States, all three COVID-19 vaccines available to Americans lost some of their protective power, with vaccine efficacy among a large group of veterans dropping between 35% and 85%, according to a new study. Researchers who scoured the records of nearly 800,000 U.S. veterans found that in early March, just as the Delta variant was gaining a toehold across American communities, the three vaccines were roughly equal in their ability to prevent infections. But over the next six months, that changed dramatically. By the end of September, Moderna’s two-dose COVID-19 vaccine, measured as 89% effective in March, was only 58% effective. The effectiveness of shots made by Pfizer and BioNTech, which also employed two doses, fell from 87% to 45% in the same period.

And most strikingly, the protective power of Johnson & Johnson’s single-dose vaccine plunged from 86% to just 13% over those six months. The findings were published Thursday in the journal Science. The three vaccines held up better in their ability to prevent COVID-19 deaths, but by July — as the Delta variant began to drive a three-month surge of infections and deaths — the shots’ effectiveness on that score also revealed wide gaps. Among veterans 65 and older who were inoculated with the Moderna vaccine, those who developed a so-called breakthrough infection were 76% less likely to die of COVID-19 compared with unvaccinated veterans of the same age. Older veterans who got the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and subsequently experienced a breakthrough infection were 70% less likely to die than were their unvaccinated peers.

And when older vets who got a single jab of the J&J vaccine suffered a breakthrough infection, they were 52% less likely to die than their peers who didn’t get any shots. For veterans younger than 65, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines provided the best protection against a fatal case of COVID-19, at 84% and 82%, respectively. When younger veterans inoculated with the J&J vaccine suffered a breakthrough infection, they were 73% less likely to die of COVID-19 than were their unvaccinated peers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recommended booster shots for everyone who got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine at least two months earlier.

Boosters are also recommended six months after a second dose of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines for everyone 65 and older; those with medical conditions that make them more vulnerable to a serious case of COVID-19; those who live in nursing homes or other group settings; and those who live or work in high-risk settings such as hospitals or prisons. In addition, all people with compromised immune systems are advised to get a booster shot if it’s been at least 28 days since their vaccine took full effect.

Read more …

Not long ago, Pfizer “falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported..” Now that’s a come back.

• Pfizer Shares Surge After Release Of ‘Miracle’ COVID Pill (ZH)

Thursday was a rough day for Moderna shares after the company released revenue figures and FY guidance that deeply disappointed Wall Street expectations (potentially destroying the reputation of financier Steve Weiss, arguably Moderna’s biggest promoter on Wall Street, in the process). But on Friday, Pfizer – Moderna’s biggest rival – rubbed Moderna’s nose in it by announcing a revolutionary new oral COVID antiviral similar to the Merck ‘miracle pill’ that won approval from UK regulators yesterday. The news sent Pfizer’s stock surging, while Moderna and Merck shares tumbled, during premarket trade. Pfizer shares were trading up 11%+:

The key takeaway from the Pfizer announcement is this: Pfizer said studies showed its COVID-19 pill reduced hospitalizations and deaths in high-risk patients by 89%. That’s even higher than the 50% reduction in hospitalizations and deaths shown by the Merck pill. Again, like Merck, Pfizer said that it was no longer taking new patients in a clinical trial of the treatment “due to the overwhelming efficacy” of the drug, which it now plans to submit its findings to the FDA for emergency authorization (just like Merck is doing). Yesterday, Merck won approval for its new COVID antiviral, molnupiravir, from regulators in the UK, and it’s pushing to wrack up as many EUAs as possible from regulators from all over.

Pfizer is already planning to seek approval emergency approval from the US government because, according to the numbers, its drug is even more effective than molnuiravir. According to the headline numbers, Pfizer’s new antiviral is even more effective than the rival pill from Merck. Pfizer’s pill, which will be sold under the brand name Paxlovid, cut the risk of hospitalization or death by 89% when taken within three days after symptoms emerge (the number for Merck’s drug was it needed to be taken within 5 days of infection). “The results are really beyond our wildest dreams,” said Annaliesa Anderson, a Pfizer executive who led the drug’s development. She expressed hope that Paxlovid “can have a big impact on helping all our lives go back to normal again and seeing the end of the pandemic.”

Read more …

“Citizens have a right to object to this, and to the illegal vaccine “mandate” invoked by the pugnaciously stupid “Joe Biden” regime..”

• Woke Gets Whacked — But Hold the Victory Lap (Kunstler)

The CDC and the FDA have unleashed a set of untested vaccines on the public that have been shown to produce alarmingly high rates of adverse reactions, both disabling and leading to death. The CDC’s VAERS system for reporting all that is so janky that doctors can barely use it and the CDC refuses to fix it; meanwhile doctors are being punished for even attempting to report adverse reactions. The whole of medical officialdom has militated aggressively against early treatments of Covid-19 with cheap and easily available drugs, even firing doctors who attempt to use the protocols.

The entire approval process of the various vaccines has been rife with fraud, gamed statistics, sabotaged trials, bait-and-switch scams, and unaccountable manufacturing screw-ups — all immersed in a stench of moneygrubbing. The drug companies have refused to fully reveal the contents of the vaccines. Now they are ramping up an urgent campaign to vaccinate children following rushed and falsified clinical trials, with the statistical certainty that many more kids will be injured or will die from the vax than they would from Covid-19 itself.

Citizens have a right to object to this, and to the illegal vaccine “mandate” invoked by the pugnaciously stupid “Joe Biden” regime. There is an awful creeping suspicion in the USA and in other countries that people who have received vaccinations are beginning to present fatal cardiovascular and neurological illness in large numbers, and that an attempt is underway to cover all this up. There is likewise a growing body of evidence that the vaccines and “boosters” incrementally disable the human immune system so that later in the winter of 2021-2022 millions of people will be at risk of dying from Covid variants and virtually any other disease that comes along, including cancers. How many of us are prepared for that?

Read more …

In Greece yesterday, the police were using water cannon against protesting firemen.

• No, It’s Not Legal (Denninger)

OSHA claims this is an “Emergency” and requires immediate action. However, it wasn’t an emergency 11 months ago. Nor was it one in September, when there were many, many more cases and deaths than there are today. It also isn’t one now until January 2nd, directly after a number of industry groups complained about the impact of it on the holidays. Note that the alleged “authority” that OSHA has to deal with workplace insults and risks when it comes to an ETS depends on it being an actual emergency. OSHA cannot deliberately decide to sacrifice employees “up to a specific date because its inconvenient for their employers.” Indeed that act alone invalidates the ETS as it makes clear there is no emergency at all and the claim of one is a pretext.

OSHA’s regulatory authority is limited to workplaces. A risk that is diffuse and beyond the workplace in at least equal quality and severity is beyond their mandate. A respiratory virus is in that category. Can OSHA mandate asbestos regulations or concentrations of chemicals in the factory or other working environment? Sure. Can they mandate that which is in the outside air in the ordinary environment at the same level of risk? No. There is no specific and articulable risk within general employment that is not present everywhere else in ordinary life.

OSHA is required to back up their findings and claims with actual science. They can’t. Specifically there is no evidence that being jabbed is superior to being infected — in fact, its the other way around. Even if it is superior at some point in time the alleged “rule” does not differentiate and, in the instant case, the evidence is that those who were jabbed in January of last year either lost all protection or actually have negative protection .vs. someone who was never vaccinated at all. This, incidentally, makes their entire argument pretextual (and which the administration has admitted.)

OSHA is required to use the least-invasive means to address whatever it claims needs addressing. Demanding an invasive and permanent medical procedure is not the least-invasive means. For example they might be able to get away with a mask rule provided those medically-contraindicated are exempted or moved to other jobs and provided the employer pays for the masks; there are protocols for safe use of same which are in fact required in other industries and certain atmospheres. That’s reasonable and carries no negative risk of temporary, permanent or catastrophic harm.

OSHA has admitted that a less-invasive means exists through their “mask and test” option and thus is required to issue that, if they issue anything. The Civil Rights Act does not give you the right to put murder others. As such OSHA cannot mandate a jab if an alternative that is less-intrusive, which they admit to, is deemed acceptable. They deemed it reasonable, acceptable and effective. Their mandate thus falls by their own hand.

OSHA further cannot mandate you play Russian Roulette in order to keep a job nor can they mandate your employer force you to playing Russian Roulette, even if they assert there is some other risk they’re mitigating by doing so. They can put in place a standard that carries no identifiable risk, and do — for example there is no identifiable risk to mandating guards on a punch press, hard hats on a construction site, air circulation standards in a factory where potential dust or other contamination is present, and similar. This mandate is for an invasive medical procedure that carries risk and it does not matter how small the risk is. OSHA simply has no authority to issue a rule that your employer must demand you risk grievous injury or death under penalty of fining them if you refuse.

In short OSHA must demonstrate that (1) the risk is unique to or concentrated in the workplace, (2) the requirement for an ETS is emergent and exigent, not one of convenience or pretextual, (3) the risk mitigated is of great bodily harm or death and (4) it is the least-invasive means of doing so. OSHA has repeatedly had their ETS issued standards thrown out because one or more of those requirements is not met. They rarely use this mechanism for this reason — and their record of success on challenge is poor.

This will go up in smoke folks — it’s just another threat by Biden and his pals, this time aimed at employers with the threat of huge fines if they push back. But you, as an employee, have all the power. No hospital runs without nurses. Garbage is not picked up without garbagemen and women. Fires are not put out without firefighters, nor are traffic accidents attended to and the “Jaws of Life” don’t operate themselves. Water and sewer systems don’t run themselves either.

Read more …

The end of morals.

• Unvaccinated Troops Now Threatened With Losing All Their Veterans Benefits (ZH)

We detailed Thursday that many thousands of active duty Air Force personnel have still remained unvaccinated even after the Tuesday deadline has come and gone for the Air Force’s mandate to receive both Covid jabs, which was the earliest set deadline among US military branches. Already some branches like the Navy and Marines have clarified that members who refuse the mandate will be relieved of duty and separated from the service. After Tuesday’s deadline at least 8,500 active-duty members of the Air Force and Space Force are in non-compliance and now risk being kicked out. However, there’s no indication as of yet that commanders have booted anyone at this early point.

But now the Department of Defense (DoD) taking its threat of punitive action a big step further, saying unvaccinated service members could see their veterans’ benefits taken away. This would be based on personnel receiving other-than-honorable discharge, which will reportedly be determined by a base’s local command. The Pentagon is saying such a drastic penalty, which would result in individual veterans potentially losing everything from education benefits such as the GI Bill, to eligibility for a veterans home lone, is necessary as lack of vaccination impacts “readiness”. A new report in the Military Times quotes Gil Cisneros, Department of Defense (DoD) undersecretary for personnel, who told Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, “We see the vaccines as a readiness issue. Any discharge decision is up to the individual service as to how they proceed with that.”

The report describes that “Individuals with honorable discharges will be eligible for things like GI Bill benefits, VA home loans and transition assistance programs. Individuals with other-than-honorable discharges are still guaranteed mental health care services through VA, but may be blocked from most other benefits.” An honorable discharge would guarantee all of these benefits, while anything less throws them into doubt in terms of eligibility. Other branches have their deadlines for all personnel to get vaccinated coming in the next weeks. As for the Air Force, what might happen next is a mass expulsion of non-vaxxed service members. There was no word on what career fields the un-vaxxed were in. If some are pilots, especially ones operating stealth jets and bombers, the overreaching vaxx mandate could much more directly jeopardize America’s readiness for war.

Read more …

Managing expectations.

• UKHSA Efficacy Stats Death Watch: Week 44 (eugyppius)


Vaccinated vs. unvaccinated case rates in the United Kingdom, from the latest UK Health Security Agency vaccine surveillance report

Yet again I had to draw this graph myself, and yet again, the UK Health Security Agency wants you to know that these rates are extremely, totally, absolutely unadjusted. They just don’t know precisely why or how. As I noted on Twitter, it’s emerged that UKHSA inserted all of their ill-advised disclaimers after coming under fire from the Office of Statistics Regulation, a regulatory body which periodically complains about statistics published by the British government. OSR director Ed Humpherson met with UKHSA hours before they published their Week 43 report, demanding they do something about these awkward graphs. They responded by ditching the graphs altogether and calling every last number unadjusted. This failed to satisfy him, so in the days afterwards he issued this unbelievable open letter.

“Dear Jenny, COVID-19 vaccine surveillance statistics
Thank you for the constructive meeting on Thursday 28 October to discuss the UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) COVID-19 vaccine surveillance statistics. We focused on the risk that the data presented on rates of positive cases for those who are vaccinated and those who are unvaccinated have the potential to mislead – and indeed we noted that these data have been used to argue that vaccines are ineffective. We welcome the changes you have made to the Week 43 surveillance report, published on 28 October. It is also very good that you are working closely with my team and with the relevant teams in the Office for National Statistics (ONS).”

The UK has backed itself into publishing some less-than-useful numbers. Now the office responsible for this publishing will have to work closely with a gaggle of political commissars, responsible for cleansing official discourse of anything that might be “used to argue that vaccines are ineffective.” Because he appears to be a genuinely stupid man, Humpherson spells this point out explicitly: “It remains the case that the surveillance report includes rates per 100,000 which can be used to argue that vaccines are not effective. I know that this is not the intention of the surveillance report, but the potential for misuse remains. In publishing these data, you need to address more comprehensively the risk that it misleads people into thinking that it says something about vaccine effectiveness.”

Read more …

The end of morals.

• De Blasio To Pay Kids $100 To Get The Covid-19 Vaccine (Fox)

New York City will begin offering $100 to incentivize COVID-19 vaccines for kids ages 5-11. “Everyone can use a little more money around the holidays but most importantly we want our kids and our families to be safe,” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said in a statement. The new policy will apply to New York City-run vaccine sites and comes two days after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention approved Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use for children 5-11-years-old. The mayor said that getting the vaccine now will allow children to be fully vaccinated before Christmas, hoping that the $100 incentive will drive people to show up and get extra money for holidays.

The city is hoping to speed its effort to get kids vaccinated before they travel for the holidays, noting that the updated CDC guidance says that children have to wait three weeks between Pfizer doses, even though the dosage is smaller than the adult dose. The mayor also said that every public school in the city that serves children in the targeted age range will hold a dedicated vaccination day for those students beginning next week, which will cover about 1,070 sites over the course of the week by hitting roughly 200 schools per day. The city stressed that parents should be present to give verbal consent, whether at a school site or a city-run site, for their children to receive the shot, though de Blasio noted that parents and guardians can also give verbal consent over the phone.

“All choices are good choices, but we want to make it available and easy for parents who prefer just to go to their local school building,” de Blasio said. While millions of doses of the Pfizer vaccine have already been shipped around the country in advance of the guidance, pediatricians in the city say they have not been overwhelmed by calls for appointments for kids to get the shot. “We do NOT yet have the vaccine in our office. We placed an order last week and are awaiting confirmation about when the vaccine will be delivered. We will NOT schedule appointments until we have it,” a letter from Uptown Pediatrics in Manhattan sent to families Wednesday said. But city Health Commissioner David Chokshi stressed that parents can choose from multiple sites to get their children vaccinated. “There’s no wrong door here. We just wanna get as many kids vaccinated as quickly as we can,” Chokshi said.

Read more …

“Florida now has the lowest COVID-19 case rate in the entire country..”

• Florida Court Reinstates Governor’s Ban on Masking in Schools (ET)

In Florida’s ongoing battle over masking mandates in schools, the First District Court of Appeal (DCA) overruled the decision of a Leon County circuit court judge on Wednesday, reinstating the governor’s ban on forced masking in schools. Some Leon County parents are cheering the ruling as a big win for parents’ rights and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. In August, Leon County Circuit Judge John Cooper ruled that DeSantis exceeded his authority in banning forced masking in public schools. In September, the First DCA overruled Cooper. But the following week, Cooper ruled that his order to prevent the state from enforcing school mask mandates should take immediate effect. On Oct. 27, the First DCA again overruled Cooper and emphasized three reasons why his ruling was wrong.

To begin, the First DCA ruled that the case never should have gone to trial because the plaintiffs did not have standing. The plaintiffs, a group of parents and students, could not sue to protect the institutional authority of local school districts and the Florida Department of Health. “Those entities alone must advance their own institutional rights,” the First DCA wrote. Second, the plaintiffs were not harmed by DeSantis’ order because the order took no action against them. In fact, all the governor did was direct other state agencies to protect parental rights. Third, the plaintiffs’ claim of receiving injury because they were exposed to COVID-19 by unmasked students was not “concrete” or “palpable” enough to warrant judicial intervention in public health policy.

Most notable was how the First DCA admonished Cooper for inventing his own legal theory to ultimately rule against the governor’s school mask policy by saying DeSantis somehow violated the Parents’ Bill of Rights by giving parents more rights. “While the Parents’ Bill of Rights undoubtedly played a role in the governor’s issuance of the executive order—and was even pleaded as an affirmative defense—the [Plaintiffs] never sought relief in their complaint based on an alleged violation of the Parents’ Bill of Rights,” the First DCA wrote. “They certainly never requested an injunction against a state administrative actor proceeding in some way in contravention of the Parents’ Bill of Rights.”

Similar court battles are playing out in other Florida counties. While the full appeal in the Leon County case is still pending, Christina Pushaw, executive press secretary for DeSantis said “the preliminary ruling shows that the Plaintiffs have little chance of saving the trial court’s ruling, so this is a win for Governor DeSantis and parents’ rights in Florida!” “Florida now has the lowest COVID-19 case rate in the entire country,” Pushaw told The Epoch Times. “Infections statewide have declined more than 90 percent since schools in Florida opened. The rate of decline was the same for districts that had mask mandates and districts that followed state law by allowing parents to choose whether their kids wore masks or not.”

Read more …

“..the vaccinated were 191/8=23 times more likely to have subsequent symptomatic disease than the Covid recovered.”

• A Review and Autopsy of Two COVID Immunity Studies (Kulldorff)

In the Israeli study, the researchers tracked 673,676 vaccinated people who they knew not to have had Covid and 62,833 unvaccinated Covid-recovered individuals. A simple comparison of the rates of subsequent Covid in these two groups would be misleading. The vaccinated are likely older and, hence, more prone to have symptomatic disease, giving the Covid recovered group an unfair advantage. At the same time, the typical vaccinated patient received the vaccine long after the typical Covid-recovered patient got sick. Most Covid recovered patients got the infection before the vaccine was even available. Because immunity wanes over time, this fact would give an unfair advantage to the vaccinated group. To make a fair and unbiased comparison, researchers must match patients from the two groups on age and time since vaccination/disease.

That is precisely what the study authors did, matching also on gender and geographical location. For the primary analysis, the study authors identified a cohort with 16,215 individuals who had recovered from Covid and 16,215 matched individuals who were vaccinated. The authors followed these cohorts over time to determine how many had a subsequent symptomatic Covid disease diagnosis. Ultimately, 191 patients in the vaccinated group and 8 in the Covid recovered group got symptomatic Covid disease. These numbers mean that the vaccinated were 191/8=23 times more likely to have subsequent symptomatic disease than the Covid recovered. After adjusting the statistical analysis for comorbidities in a logistic regression analysis, the authors measured a relative risk of 27 with a 95% confidence interval between 13 and 57 times more likely for the vaccinated.

The study also looked at Covid hospitalizations; eight were in the vaccinated group, and one among the Covid recovered. These numbers imply a relative risk of 8 (95% CI: 1-65). There were no deaths in either group, showing that both the vaccine and natural immunity provide excellent protection against mortality. This is a straightforward and well-conducted epidemiological cohort study that is easy to understand and interpret. The authors addressed the major source of bias through matching. One potential bias they did not address (as it is challenging to do) is that those with prior Covid may have been more likely to be exposed in the past through work or other activities. Since they were more likely to be exposed in the past, they may also have been more likely exposed during the follow-up period. That would lead to an underestimate of the relative risks in favor of vaccination. There may also be misclassification if some of the vaccinated unknowingly had Covid. That would also lead to an underestimate.

Read more …

Reigning NFL MVP, treated like a five year old.

• NFL Star Aaron Rodgers Responds To ‘Fake’ Vaccine Controversy (RT)

NFL star Aaron Rodgers has hit out at reports that he ‘lied’ about his vaccination status as he reveals that he has been taking advice on alternative Covid therapies from podcast host Joe Rogan, including the use of Ivermectin. Reigning NFL MVP Rodgers, 37, was the source of a media frenzy this week when he was accused of lying about his vaccination status against Covid-19 after telling the media in August that he had been “immunized” against the virus. That was despite it emerging this week that he was unvaccinated after contracting the illness, forcing him out of the Green Bay Packers’ crunch showdown with Patrick Mahomes and the Kansas City Chiefs this weekend.

Rodgers’ vaccination status comes amid strict rules within the NFL designed to compel players to receive one of the various vaccines, with harsh financial penalties imposed on players who fall foul of the league’s vaccine protocols. It emerged that, despite Rodgers not having received a vaccine, he appeared without a face-mask at various press events – a situation strictly disallowed for unvaccinated players. By contrast, the Packers had made a host of their unvaccinated players available to the media only by teleconference. Addressing the firestorm for the first time on former NFL player Pat McAfee’s radio show, Rodgers said that he was aware that he had enflamed tensions with the ‘woke’ mob and that he had become the darling ‘cancel culture’ brigade.

He outlined that he had sought alternative methods to protect himself from the potentially fatal virus – including following podcast host and UFC presenter Joe Rogan’s alternative theories by taking the controversial Ivermectin medication. “I realize I’m in the crosshairs of the woke mob right now, so before my final nail gets put in my cancel culture casket I think I’d like to set the record straight on so many of the blatant lies that are out there about myself right now,” said Rodgers. “I didn’t lie in the initial press conference. During that time there was a very… a ‘witch hunt’ that was going on across the league where everybody in the media was so concerned about who was vaccinated and who wasn’t, and what that meant and who was being selfish and who would talk about it.

“[It was about] what they meant when they said it was a ‘personal decision’, [and that] they shouldn’t have to disclose their own medical information… “And at the time, my plan was to say that I had been immunized. It wasn’t some sort of ruse or lie, it was the truth. “Had there been a follow-up to my statement that I’d been immunized, I would have responded with this: look, I’m not some sort of anti-vax flat-earther. I am somebody who is a critical thinker. You guys know me, I march to the beat of my own drum. “I believe strongly in bodily autonomy and the ability to make choices for your body, not to have to acquiesce to some sort of ‘woke’ culture or crazed group of individuals who say you have to do something.”

Read more …

Profitable destruction.

• The Man Who Called Bullshit on Uber (MJ)

In December 2016, Forbes put Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick on its cover. “Super Uber,” a headline declared. “The most valuable startup ever isn’t content to be the Uber of Uber. How the $68 billion juggernaut is about to change the way everything moves.” bThe story opened with Kalanick pacing about a conference room. He was not just some “bro” or “douche.” As “jam sessions” like this one revealed, he had a “special sauce.” This was Uber’s actual genius: A PR machine that could transform six men listening to a boss in gray chinos into something almost mystical.bTwo weeks before, Hubert Horan, a little-known expert on the airline industry, wrote a blog post for an equally little-known website, called Naked Capitalism, that went in a different direction.

Horan’s thesis was that Uber was a tremendously unprofitable, inefficient, and not particularly innovative company that would make money only if it bought its way to an unregulated monopoly. Compared to the Forbes piece and many others like it, Horan’s article was a fiduciary root canal. (“There is no simple relationship between EBITAR contribution and GAAP profitability,” reads part of one sentence.) The goal was to show that Uber was hugely unprofitable and how, in the event that it did succeed, profit would come from hurting consumers and overall economic welfare by cornering the taxi market. Horan, who started consulting in the airline industry after getting his MBA at Yale in 1980, has now written 26 more installments of his Uber series. When combined as PDFs, the posts run 193 pages.

They reveal him to be much more a Cassandra than a crank. Uber has lost in the neighborhood of $28 billion since it launched in 2009. Its rides now cost far more than cabs in many major cities, its workers are as exploited as ever, and taxi drivers face massive debts, partly as a result of its business practices. Consumers, meanwhile, are shocked to learn what the rides investors have been subsidizing actually cost. =bIn Uber’s telling, the dynamic is about to change. In a late September SEC filing, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi announced that the company was reaching an “important milestone” after running “more profitably than ever before” in the third quarter of 2021, which ended in September. As the beginning of another Forbes headline put it: “Uber Poised To Turn A Quarterly Profit.” It will likely officially announce this newfound profitability during its quarterly earnings call on Thursday.

But Uber has not actually become profitable. Instead, as the company stated in its September SEC filing, it believes it will be profitable based on its own “adjusted” formula, which excludes 13 categories the company does not like to count, such as stock-based compensation and the money it’s spending to respond to the pandemic.

Read more …

“The government doesn’t control the banks; the banks control the government..”

• “The Fed Is Our Master And ‘We The People’, Its Puppet” – G. Edward Griffin (ZH)

The Federal Reserve has become so powerful over the years that its intended roles have entirely reversed and gone haywire, according to G. Edward Griffin, author of the book, many claim a financial bible – The Creature from Jekyll Island. In a rare and exclusive interview, Griffin joined anchor Daniela Cambone on Stansberry Research to discuss the true nature of the Federal Reserve and its place in American society, foreshadowing a world without the institution as we know it. As Cambone points out, the controversial yet influential voice Griffin promulgates would be argued as necessary, among former Congressman Ron Paul and Robert Kiyosaki. Griffin presents a stark reality that dives into the Fed’s foundational structure and how its practices are that of a “banking cartel.” On the surface, one might find it extreme to say that a private institution working in cohesion with the government is playing the role of “masters” to citizens.


Griffin presents his argument accurately by pointing out how Chairman Powell and the Federal Reserve swiftly implemented economic policies contributing to the greatest wealth transfer in human history. “The government doesn’t control the banks; the banks control the government,” he says to round out this servant-master metaphor. In a world where central bank digital currencies will inevitably be the new form of money, Griffin warns, people could lose control of their money because the banks could “just throw a switch and shut you out of your account if they don’t like you.” He then says it’s crucial to hold “marketable assets” outside of what the banking cartel cannot control, such as valuable physical objects – to the likes of precious metals, noting that gold is only one of the few safe places to hide.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

Vaxxism
https://twitter.com/i/status/1456435096190341123

 

 

Weird.

 

 

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