In the latest sign that the economic powerhouse of Europe is teetering on the edge of recession thanks to the trade war between the US and China, Germany’s export-heavy economy shrank by 0.1% in the three months through June, according to official data published Wednesday by Destatis, the country’s federal statistics office.
The disappointing economic data – the second contraction in four quarters – comes one day after the ZEW Survey of financial market experts showed that German economic sentiment in August dropped to its lowest reading since 2011, which is stoking concerns that the German economy could slide into recession during Q3.
The industrial sector tipped the economy into contraction in 2Q, said BBG economic Jamie Rush, and there’s risk of further weakness in the second half of the year.
“If there’s any good news to take from this release, it’s that services must have continued to expand, indicating patches of resilience persist.”
Economy Minister Peter Altmaier tried to put a positive spin on the numbers, telling Bild that Germany can avoid a recession if the government responds with the right policies. However, the Q2 data are a “a wake-up call and a warning sign,” Altmaier said.
“We are in a phase of weak growth but not yet a recession,” he said. “The simmering trade conflicts are taking their toll and Germany’s export-orientated manufacturing sector is particularly affected” Germany needs “intelligent policies for growth,” including easing the burden on small and mid-sized companies, cutting corporate tax and a “clear plan” for the complete withdrawal of the so-called “Solidarity Tax.”
As the US-China trade war rages, Europe is finding that it’s particularly exposed.
Following this latest blow to global growth, the 10s2s Treasury curve inverted on Wednesday morning for the first time since the financial crisis. 10-year bund yields also dropped to near all-time lows of minus 0.624% as traders price in the prospect of more ECB easing.
The weak GDP print has heaped pressure on Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is finishing up her final term in office, to consider fiscal stimulus. But according to the FT, Chancellor Angela Merkel said she didn’t see the need for a fiscal stimulus package “so far,” though she conceded that “It’s true, we’re heading into a difficult phase…We will react depending on the situation.”
Once again, analysts are bandying about the phrase “the sick man of Europe” to describe Germany, per BBG.
“The sick man needs its medicine,” Naeem Aslam, chief market analyst at TF Global Markets said. “Hence, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, will have to unleash a new fiscal stimulus package for her country to combat the effects of U.S.-China trade war. This may just do some of the trick for the euro-zone’s economy.”
Weakness in Germany appears to be rippling out across the region, but with one notable exception: The Netherlands reported surprisingly robust Q2 growth rate of 0.5% as domestic demand remained robust.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2N1gI28 Tyler Durden
In the latest blockbuster report about how the chronic understaffing and mandatory overtime at MCC helped contribute to Jeffrey Epstein’s “suicide” (or at least that’s the official narrative that certain parties are trying to push), the New York Times reported on Wednesday that the two guards tasked with monitoring Epstein’s unit were asleep when the pedophile-financier tied a bedsheet around his neck and the other end to a top bunk, before pitching himself forward.
When the guards awakened after not checking on Epstein for three hours to discover, to their horror, that Epstein had apparently committed suicide, they decided to falsify records to cover their tracks, something that could draw criminal charges, per the NYT.
Ladies and gentlemen, have we found our patsies?
The two staff members in the special housing unit where Mr. Epstein was held – 9 South – falsely recorded in a log that they had checked on the financier, who was facing sex trafficking charges, every 30 minutes, as was required, the officials said. Such false entries in an official log could constitute a federal crime.
In fact, the two people guarding Mr. Epstein had been asleep for some or all of the three hours, three of the officials said.
The two employees were placed on administrative leave on Tuesday, while Warden of the jail was temporarily reassigned pending the outcome of the investigation, while the Warden of the federal prison in Otisville has been named acting warden of the Manhattan jail.
Those disclosures came on Tuesday as the two employees were placed on administrative leave and the warden of the jail, the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, was temporarily reassigned, pending the outcome of the investigation into Mr. Epstein’s death, the Justice Department announced.
One of the staff members who was working to guard Epstein that night was a former corrections officer who had recently taken a desk job inside the prison. But he had recently volunteered to cover some shifts as a corrections officer once again for the extra overtime pay. The second officer, a woman who was assigned to that wing, had been forced to work overtime because of staffing shortages.
Prison staff found Epstein, 66, dead in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center at 6:30 a.m. on Saturday, officials said. Earlier reports said staff heard shrieking coming from his cell around the time of his death. He was awaiting trial on charges of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls. Just days before, thousands of pages of documents were released by the US Attorney of the Southern District of New York’s office revealing at least half a dozen new names who had never been associated with Epstein and his sex ring before, including former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and Marvin Minsky, to name a few.
It’s this particularly curious timing that has prompted some to speculate that conspiracy theories that Epstein was murdered or switched with a body double might be real, since without Epstein, there won’t be a trial (though AG William Barr has vowed to bring his co-conspirators to justice, his most prominent associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, is nowhere to be found).
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2H2MSq3 Tyler Durden
The ComRes survey for The Telegraph found that 54 per cent of British adults think Parliament should be prorogued to prevent MPs stopping a no-deal Brexit.
The poll suggested the Prime Minister is more in tune with the public’s views on Brexit than MPs, following his promise to deliver Brexit by October 31 “do or die”.
Parliament vs Boris Johnson
The new poll revealed that, should MPs act to attempt to block Brexit, they may not have the support of voters. Asked whether they thought Parliament was more in tune with the public than Mr Johnson, 62 per cent disagreed.
Nine in 10 of those asked said Parliament was out of touch with the public (88 per cent), while 89 per cent believed most MPs were ignoring the wishes of voters to pursue their own agenda on Brexit. The public also overwhelmingly rejected the idea of the Queen being dragged into Brexit after John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, threatened to send Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, to Buckingham Palace “in a cab” to tell the 93-year-old monarch the Opposition was “taking over” if Mr Johnson were to lose a vote of no confidence but refused to resign.
Asked if the Queen should remain above politics and refuse to get involved in Brexit, 77 per cent said yes and 23 per cent said no.
Lesson of the Day
I take these polls with a grain of salt. Yet, the results are hardly shocking.
People are sick of Brexit dominating every facet of their lives for three years.
They want this mess over.
People’s Vote Madness
There is no support for a people’s referendum.
Nor is there any agreement on how to word a People’s Vote, nor any reason to believe the EU would wait months to organize such a vote.
MPs take note. Tories who vote against the government or the will of their constituencies will be voted out of office. Many Labour voters want Brexit as well.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Z1ljI6 Tyler Durden
Every once in a while, a widely read, ostensibly “respectable” newspaper publishes a satirical op-ed (or sometimes even a piece written by a regular columnist) that triggers an earth-shattering backlash. Soon, public editors are issuing apologies and writing columns about the editorial staff’s “thought process”, the hyper-sensitive twitter mob demands that writers be fired/editors be fired or that everybody cancel their subscriptions immediately risk supporting the cause of racism/bigotry/white supremacy etc. (something like this happened last week at the NYT, though the spat was over a print-edition-only headline).
Well, the latest example, surprisingly enough, comes from the UK, where local writers’ mastery of the art of satire has been widely regarded for centuries.
At a time when tensions are already running high (thanks to that whole Brexit debacle), journalist Rod Liddle published a column in the Sunday Times where he argued that it might be time for the UK to start another war. But this time, not with one of its European neighbors (that would presumably be far too easy).
Instead, Liddle writes, the UK should consider a more challenging adversary like China as its target for aggression. Two nuclear powers going head to head? How bad could it possibly get?
And in case you were wondering, Liddle isn’t attempting to satirically arguing for the type of modern, high-tech war like the strategies the US employed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Liddle is advocating for a more old-school, total war.
His reasoning? As a society, Britons have become too soft thanks to so many decades free of major wars.
“We have become softened and prone to be frit at everything, perpetually discombobulated in our pacific affluence and our ease, to the extent that we would throw it all away….to prove “the beneficial social effects of war.”
War “reduces personal dissatisfaction” and “increases social cohesion and integration,” Liddle claims.
Thousands were outraged not because they didn’t grasp the fact that Liddle’s column was satire, but because they worried readers in other languages – for example, the Chinese – might miss something in translation, and interpret the column as an actually call to war.
Even if it were satire, it’s still profoundly disrespectful.
Feel the need to add that even as satire, this is offensive and extremely not funny to those who have experienced war.
Sorry that my sense of humour cannot be stretched to encompass the death toll in Iraq.
Gwent Police in the UK warned Facebook users that mocking a criminal’s hair was “offensive” and could lead to an investigation.
The farce began when Gwent Police posted an image of 21-year-old Jermaine Taylor, who was sentenced to three years in jail for dealing drugs.
Taylor was released early on license but subsequently breached his licence condition and is now a wanted criminal.
After Facebook respondents mocked Taylor’s distinctive balding hairstyle, Gwent Police posted a message warning them that they could be arrested.
“Please remember that harassing, threatening and abusing people on social media can be against the law. Our advice is to be as careful on social media as you would in any other form of communication. If you say something about someone which is grossly offensive or is of an indecent, obscene or menacing character, then you could be investigated by the police,” read the message.
After the post received over 87,000 comments, Gwent Police posted another message admitting some of the remarks “made us laugh.”
“However, when the line is crossed from being funny to abusive, we do have to make sure we are responsible and remind people to be careful about what they write on social media,” they added.
The top rated comment on the post stated, “He was last seen in town; Police are combing the area.”
Meanwhile, Jermaine Taylor remains a wanted man.
* * *
There is a war on free speech. Without your support, my voice will be silenced. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2N0Mw7i Tyler Durden
The German ZEW headline number on Tuesday crashed to -44.1 versus -28.5 expectations and -24.5 last. The indicator measures economic sentiment shows the Germany economy could be teetering on the edge of a manufacturing recession.
The most recent escalation in trade disputes between the US and China, the risk of a full-blown trade war and competitive devaluations, has put extreme pressure on the European economy, that is visible in declining freight performance at major airport cargo hubs.
Data from the Airports Council International (ACI) reports freight performance at Europe’s airports in 1H19 has been faltering, with only 30% of the top ten cargo gateways reporting YoY growth, reported JOC.
In 1H19, Madrid, Barcelona, and London were the only airports to record YoY growth. Frankfurt, the top air cargo hub in Europe, registered a drop of -2.5% YoY.
ACI said cargo gateways at airports across Europe, on an overall basis, recorded a -3.5% fall in 1H19.
Olivier Jankovec, director-general of ACI Europe, said European air freight data experienced significant deterioration in June, indicates that the rest of the summer through early fall could remain in decline.
“The slump in freight traffic is where it really bites at the moment,” he said.
“And it is not getting any better, with June registering a drop of 7.1%, the worst monthly performance in more than seven years.”
Air France-KLM freight data from July show freight markets continued to slump. Transported tonnage for the Franco-Dutch carrier declined 6% YoY last month.
Denmark’s DSV reported a drop of 5% YoY in 1H9 of its air freight segment, mainly due to recessionary conditions in the European auto sector.
The German economy is in decline, and that is also damaging Italy, France, Poland, and Spain.
Europe’s automobile industry plunged 8% in sales in June, the ninth monthly decline in the last ten months.
“The fact that the air freight market is down 5% year to date is worrying,” said Jens Bjørn Andersen, CEO of DSV.
“We are struggling to figure out what is driving this negative volume in air freight apart from automotive. You speak to one customer and he tells you one thing, but speak to another and he tells you almost the opposite. I think that some of the emergency shipments that we saw a year ago have gone and their supply chains are being managed more efficiently now.”
Growth rates in air freight cargo prices have remained depressed across all major global shipping routes this year. The most significant declines can be seen in Frankfurt to South East Asia, -28% YTD; Hong Kong to North America, -23.5% YTD; and Hong Kong to North America, -23.5% YTD.
International Air Transport Association (IATA) reported global air freight volumes in 1H19 fell for the eighth consecutive month. Demand, measured in freight ton-kilometers, dropped 4.8% in June YoY.
“Global trade continues to suffer as trade tensions — particularly between the US and China — deepen. As a result, air cargo markets continue to contract,” said Alexandre de Juniac, IATA director general and CEO.
European air freight data suggests that the probability of an economic recovery in Europe in 2H19 is low. What could be around the bend is a recession that starts, or has already stared in Germany.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/300iap3 Tyler Durden
Since Boris Johnson took over as Britain’s new prime minister three weeks ago he has been holding intensive phone calls with US President Donald Trump, according to media reports. There is a buzz that the much-vaunted “special relationship” between the US and Britain is finding new ardor.
But this supposed special alliance is never about equals, despite pretensions. It’s all about Britain doing the bidding of its master in Washington. So when the pair are patting each other’s backs that means potential trouble for the rest of the world from abuse of power by Washington and its enabling British lackey.
The intensity of renewed alignment between Washington and London saw Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton visit the UK capital this week. During two days, Bolton had a flurry of meetings with top figures in Johnson’s hardline Brexit cabinet. It was reportedly the most senior American delegation to Britain since Johnson took over in 10 Downing Street on July 23.
Last week, Dominic Raab, the new British foreign secretary, was in Washington where he was greeted at the White House by Trump. Raab subsequently gushed to media about how “effusive” the American president was towards Britain’s plans under Johnson to quit the European Union on October 31 without a departure deal. The so-called “hard Brexit” option.
Johnson is expected to have his first meeting as British PM with Trump later this month during the G7 summit to be held in Biarritz, France.
Trump has gone out of his way to compliment Johnson as Britain’s new leader, in particular praising his harder line towards the EU over separation terms. The American president had a fraught relationship with former PM Theresa May, and was often scathing about her proposed “soft Brexit” from the EU involving a transition customs and trade deal with the European bloc.
Trump’s contempt for the EU is in line with Boris Johnson’s and that of his hard Brexit cabinet. Johnson’s Downing Street office and acolytes like Dominic Raab and Brexit planner Michael Gove are gunning for an abrupt exit in which Britain will not have any transitional trading relations with the EU. It will instead be moving to World Trade Organization rules as a sole trading nation.
That’s partly why Johnson and his government are assiduously courting the Trump administration. London needs to find favor with the White House in order to avail of a US-British trade deal as a substitute for the EU, which has up to now been Britain’s biggest market for imports and exports.
With several predictions of economic turmoil facing Britain in the event of a hard Brexit, Johnson is desperately relying on Trump to throw a trade life-line to the UK. That acute reliance on Washington by Britain makes Johnson an even more pliable British leader to American demands.
Already the American master is calling the tune for London’s merry dancing. When foreign secretary Dominic Raab was summoned to the White House last week, the two main topics on the president’s agenda were “trade” and “security”. That coupling suggests a quid quo pro is being furnished. Then the British diplomat had meetings with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and John Bolton. Their discussions were said to revolve around Iran and Hong Kong.
This week in London, Bolton underscored the linkage between post-Brexit trade talks with Britain and international security issues. But the American side is intensifying its “price” for Britain to avail of a US trade deal. Bolton forcefully let it be known that the White House wants Britain to take a much tougher line in the Persian Gulf towards Iran and also towards China, in accordance with US demands.
That tougher line outlined by Bolton is thought to involve Britain deploying more naval forces along with the US in a maritime show of strength towards Iran. Former British foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt, who was ousted by Johnson, had pushed for a European naval mission for commercial shipping security in the Gulf. Now, however, Johnson’s cabinet is throwing their naval lot in with the Americans. And Bolton is upping the ante for Britain to show more muscle. It is understood that Bolton is seeking for Britain to break with the EU line on supporting the international nuclear accord with Iran. If Britain walks away from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the Trump administration seems to be demanding, then that will undermine Europe’s position of supporting the JCPOA, and will embolden Washington’s “maximum pressure” policy towards Tehran. That, in turn, dangerously escalates tensions towards a military confrontation.
Another “price” being extracted from Britain by Washington in return for a post-Brexit trade deal is for London to join US sanctions on China’s telecoms firm Huawei. The Trump administration is demanding that the Johnson government cancel plans to partner with Huawei in setting up advanced telecoms infrastructure across Britain. Washington claims its objection to Chinese involvement in Britain and Europe is motivated by “national security” concerns.
Washington also wants Britain to take a more critical position towards China over the weeks-long Hong Kong protests. Beijing has already decried “interference” in its internal affairs by Washington and London. Relations are thus set to become even more torrid.
What this all means is that Britain is set to pander even more than usual to Washington’s imperious foreign policy. The Anglo-American axis has been responsible for numerous criminal wars in the Middle East and countless other subterfuges. Washington and London have worked together to escalate hostility and tensions towards Russia.
With the unscrupulous Johnson as prime minister and Britain’s post-Brexit desperation for American economic favors, the British bulldog will not merely be attentively hearing its master’s voice. It will be snapping and yapping to please too. That’s a bad sign for international relations and peace.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2MgmNs6 Tyler Durden
“It is often the case that police shootings, incidents where law enforcement officers pull the trigger on civilians, are left out of the conversation on gun violence. But a police officer shooting a civilian counts as gun violence. Every time an officer uses a gun against an innocent or an unarmed person contributes to the culture of gun violence in this country.” – Journalist Celisa Calacal
Here’s what we’ve learned about the government’s gun violence since Ferguson, according to The Washington Post: If you’re a black American, you’ve got a greater chance of being shot by police. If you’re an unarmed black man, you’re four times more likely to be killed by police than an unarmed white man. Most people killed by police are young men. Since 2015, police have shot and killed an average of 3 people per day. More than 2,500 police departments have shot and killed at least one person since 2015. And while the vast majority of people shot and killed by police are armed, their weapons ranged from guns to knives to toyguns.
Clearly, the U.S. government is not making America any safer.
Indeed, the government’s gun violence—inflicted on unarmed individuals by battlefield-trained SWAT teams, militarized police, and bureaucratic government agents trained to shoot first and ask questions later—poses a greater threat to the safety and security of the nation than any mass shooter.
In Chicago, a SWAT team—wearing “army fatigues with black cloth covering their faces and wearing goggles,” armed with automatic rifles, and throwing flash-bang grenades—crashed through the doors of a suburban home and proceeded to storm into bedrooms, holding the children of the household at gunpoint. One child, 13-year-old Amir, was “accidentally” shot in the knee by police while sitting on his bed.
In St. Louis, Missouri, a SWAT team on a mission to deliver an administrative warrant carried out a no-knock raid that ended with police kicking in the homeowner’s front door, and shooting and killing her dog—all over an unpaid gas bill. Taxpayers will have to find $750,000 to settle the lawsuit arising over the cops’ overzealous tactics.
In South Carolina, a 62-year-old homeowner was shot four times through his front door by police who were investigating a medical-assist alarm call that originated from a cell phone inside the home. Dick Tench, believing his house was being broken into, was standing in the foyer of his home armed with a handgun when police, peering through the front door, fired several shots through the door, hitting Tench in the pelvis and the aortic artery. Tench survived, but the bullet lodged in his pelvis will stay there for life.
In Kansas, a SWAT team, attempting to carry out a routine search warrant (the suspect had already been arrested), showed up at a residence around dinnertime, dressed in tactical gear with weapons drawn, and hurled a flash-bang grenade into the house past the 68-year-old woman who was in the process of opening the door to them and in the general direction of a 2-year-old child.
These are just a few recent examples among hundreds this year alone.
Curiously enough, in the midst of the finger-pointing over the latest round of mass shootings, Americans have been so focused on debating who or what is responsible for gun violence—the guns, the gun owners, the Second Amendment, the politicians, or our violent culture—that they have overlooked the fact that the systemic violence being perpetrated by agents of the government has done more collective harm to the American people and their liberties than any single act of terror or mass shooting.
Violence has become our government’s calling card, starting at the top and trickling down, from the more than 80,000 SWAT team raids carried out every year on unsuspecting Americans by heavily armed, black-garbed commandos and the increasingly rapid militarization of local police forces across the country to the drone killings used to target insurgents.
The government even exports violence worldwide, with one of this country’s most profitable exports being weapons. Indeed, the United States, the world’s largest exporter of arms, has been selling violence to the world for too long now. Controlling more than 50 percent of the global weaponry market, the U.S. has sold or donated weapons to at least 96 countries in the past five years, including the Middle East. The U.S. also provides countries such as Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan and Iraq with grants and loans through the Foreign Military Financing program to purchase military weapons.
While Americans have to jump through an increasing number of hoops in order to own a gun, the government is arming its own civilian employees to the hilt with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment, authorizing them to make arrests, and training them in military tactics.
In the hands of government agents, whether they are members of the military, law enforcement or some other government agency, these weapons have become routine parts of America’s day-to-day life, a byproduct of the rapid militarization of law enforcement over the past several decades.
Over the course of 30 years, police officers in jack boots holding assault rifles have become fairly common in small town communities across the country. As investigative journalists Andrew Becker and G.W. Schulz reveal, “Many police, including beat cops, now routinely carry assault rifles. Combined with body armor and other apparel, many officers look more and more like combat troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Does this sound like a country under martial law?
You want to talk about gun violence? While it still technically remains legal for the average citizen to own a firearm in America, possessing one can now get you pulled over, searched, arrested, subjected to all manner of surveillance, treated as a suspect without ever having committed a crime, shot at and killed by police.
You don’t even have to have a gun or a look-alike gun, such as a BB gun, in your possession to be singled out and killed by police.
There are countless incidents that happen every day in which Americans are shot, stripped, searched, choked, beaten and tasered by police for little more than daring to frown, smile, question, or challenge an order.
Growing numbers of unarmed people are being shot and killed for just standing a certain way, or moving a certain way, or holding something—anything—that police could misinterpret to be a gun, or igniting some trigger-centric fear in a police officer’s mind that has nothing to do with an actual threat to their safety.
With alarming regularity, unarmed men, women, children and even pets are being gunned down by twitchy, hyper-sensitive, easily-spooked police officers who shoot first and ask questions later, and all the government does is shrug, and promise to do better, all the while the cops are granted qualified immunity.
Killed for standing in a “shooting stance.” In California, police opened fire on and killed a mentally challenged—unarmed—black man within minutes of arriving on the scene, allegedly because he removed a vape smoking device from his pocket and took a “shooting stance.”
Killed for carrying a baseball bat. Responding to a domestic disturbance call, Chicago police shot and killed 19-year-old college student Quintonio LeGrier who had reportedly been experiencing mental health problems and was carrying a baseball bat around the apartment where he and his father lived.
Killed for opening the front door. Bettie Jones, who lived on the floor below LeGrier, was also fatally shot—this time, accidentally—when she attempted to open the front door for police.
Killed for running towards police with a metal spoon. In Alabama, police shot and killed a 50-year-old man who reportedly charged a police officer while holding “a large metal spoon in a threatening manner.”
Killed for running while holding a tree branch. Georgia police shot and killed a 47-year-old man wearing only shorts and tennis shoes who, when first encountered, was sitting in the woods against a tree, only to start running towards police holding a stick in an “aggressive manner.”
Killed for crawling around naked. Atlanta police shot and killed an unarmed man who was reported to have been “acting deranged, knocking on doors, crawling around on the ground naked.” Police fired two shots at the man after he reportedly started running towards them.
Killed for wearing dark pants and a basketball jersey. Donnell Thompson, a mentally disabled 27-year-old described as gentle and shy, was shot and killed after police—searching for a carjacking suspect reportedly wearing similar clothing—encountered him lying motionless in a neighborhood yard. Police “only” opened fire with an M4 rifle after Thompson first failed to respond to their flash bang grenades and then started running after being hit by foam bullets.
Killed for driving while deaf. In North Carolina, a state trooper shot and killed 29-year-old Daniel K. Harris—who was deaf—after Harris initially failed to pull over during a traffic stop.
Killed for being homeless. Los Angeles police shot an unarmed homeless man after he failed to stop riding his bicycle and then proceeded to run from police.
Killed for brandishing a shoehorn. John Wrana, a 95-year-old World War II veteran, lived in an assisted living center, used a walker to get around, and was shot and killed by police who mistook the shoehorn in his hand for a 2-foot-long machete and fired multiple beanbag rounds from a shotgun at close range.
Killed for holding a garden hose. California police were ordered to pay $6.5 million after they opened fire on a man holding a garden hose, believing it to be a gun. Douglas Zerby was shot 12 times and pronounced dead on the scene.
Killed for calling 911. Justine Damond, a 40-year-old yoga instructor, was shot and killed by Minneapolis police, allegedly because they were startled by a loud noise in the vicinity just as she approached their patrol car. Damond, clad in pajamas, had called 911 to report a possible assault in her neighborhood.
Killed for looking for a parking spot. Richard Ferretti, a 52-year-old chef, was shot and killed by Philadelphia police who had been alerted to investigate a purple Dodge Caravan that was driving “suspiciously” through the neighborhood.
Shot seven times for peeing outdoors. Eighteen-year-old Keivon Young was shot seven times by police from behind while urinating outdoors. Young was just zipping up his pants when he heard a commotion behind him and then found himself struck by a hail of bullets from two undercover cops. Allegedly officers mistook Young—5’4,” 135 lbs., and guilty of nothing more than taking a leak outdoors—for a 6’ tall, 200 lb. murder suspect whom they later apprehended. Young was charged with felony resisting arrest and two counts of assaulting a peace officer.
This is what passes for policing in America today, folks, and it’s only getting worse.
In every one of these scenarios, police could have resorted to less lethal tactics.
They could have acted with reason and calculation instead of reacting with a killer instinct.
They could have attempted to de-escalate and defuse whatever perceived “threat” caused them to fear for their lives enough to react with lethal force.
That police instead chose to fatally resolve these encounters by using their guns on fellow citizens speaks volumes about what is wrong with policing in America today, where police officers are being dressed in the trappings of war, drilled in the deadly art of combat, and trained to look upon “every individual they interact with as an armed threat and every situation as a deadly force encounter in the making.”
Remember, to a hammer, all the world looks like a nail.
Violence begets violence: until we start addressing the U.S. government’s part in creating, cultivating and abetting a culture of violence, we will continue to be a nation plagued by violence in our homes, in our schools, on our streets and in our affairs of state, both foreign and domestic.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YLaPgM Tyler Durden
A petition that began nearly three months ago urges the Commission on Presidential Debates to elect comedian and podcast superstar Joe Rogan as one of the moderators for the upcoming presidential debates in 2020, has gained massive amounts of signatures on Monday and Tuesday.
The petition explains Rogan has interviewed both progressive and conservative politicians, such as Andrew Yang (D), Tulsi Gabbard (D), Kyle Kulinski (D), Gary Johnson (L), Benjamin Shapiro (R), and Candace Owens (R), have all recently appeared on “The Joe Rogan Experience” program.
“Joe Rogan has an audience containing viewers from all areas of the political spectrum. Joe Rogan is not registered under any political party and is well-known for having civil, productive, and interesting, conversations about political issues without partisan bias,” the petition said.
Bernie Sanders (I) made headlines last week when he was on Rogan’s show discussing free healthcare, free college, and open access to classified government documents about aliens.
Dozens of comments on the “News & discussion” tab of the petition’s Change.Org page, said the current debate structure is broken and outdated. Some said Rogan would talk about the real issues rather than letting cable news networks and their corporate sponsors dictate the topics and questions. Here are some of the comments:
“I believe Joe Rogan would be an impartial, yet highly enlightened choice to moderate the debates. He would see through the lies and get down to the REAL issues in the debate,” one commenter said.
“Joe Rogan is a very good interviewer, so naturally would be a good moderator.. He is very un-biased and really can sit and listen to two opposing sides with an open mind. Not unfairly coming into the interview with his mind already made up and his opinions set in stone. In other words Joe will really listen to what people have to say (with no political agenda in mind) and agree with the morally right people and when he agrees with a policy or an idea its cause he truly believes in it and not cause the Democrat party supports it or visa versa .. joe rogan is an overall good person at heart and Intelegiant and he is closer to the people than any of these news anchors or even politicians, so I think he naturally fits in this moderator position if he even wants to do it , which there is a strong chance he does not lol ..,” another said.
“Joe Rogan is fair, unbiased, direct and would ask the relevant questions most Americans want real answers to, minus all the fluff and bi-partisanship many past moderators have subscribed to. He resonates much closer to “the voice of the people” than any interviewer I have seen. Go Joe! We need ya buddy!” a commenter said.
With lots of interest sparking up in the last several days, the petition has about 56% of signatures needed by 7 pm est. Tuesday.
While over 85,000 signatures are only a small majority of Americans, the petition could spread like wildfire around the internet and achieve the 150,000 goal in the coming days, if not weeks.
This is one of the first movements where we’ve seen a grassroots effort to boot corporate media whores out of hosting presidential debates and have someone from the outside who might want to discuss the real issues that plague the bottom 90% of Americans.
Here are some topics Rogan could talk about: the wealth inequality gap, 50% of Americans don’t have $500 in their bank accounts, the housing affordability crisis, abolishing the Federal Reserve, endless wars in the Middle East, the national debt, and possibly how to stop the rise of the military-industrial complex.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2N2muR4 Tyler Durden
The “gray man” survival concept isn’t new in preppers’ circles, but it’s also something a lot of questions are asked about. Becoming a “gray man” essentially means strategically not drawing attention to yourself to avoid conflict.
Being a “gray man” is easier said than done. Since it’s impossible to predict what the future will hold, especially the future of survivalism, we can only speculate how to best achieve “gray man” status. That said, it is a skill that can be practiced now though, before the SHTF. Blending in, laying low, recognizing dangers, and situational awareness all play a role in this concept. Going unnoticed can keep you out of harm’s way.
It’s been said that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. So if you can avoid conflict or any need for self-defense, you’ll have an added advantage when the SHTF. This is one skill that actually costs nothing. All it takes is some rational thought and heightened awareness.
HOW TO BE A “GRAY MAN”
The first step is to observe others. Start to notice things like attire and how people speak to each other. Observe how people interact with each other and begin to recognize their mannerisms and inclinations. This requires you to first has some decent situational awareness skill – which is also free. After you’ve observed others, your goal is to fit in and avoid creating a stimulus (something that can be embedded in someone else’s memory and creates an impression). Be like those around you. If you stick out, you could become a target. Be remarkably unremarkable and unmemorable.
You want to be as invisible as possible, so while keeping with the general tone of attire others are wearing, you’ll want to make sure you wear muted colors, avoid prints (yes, even camouflage), and don’t accessorize. Avoid any military-style clothing. That makes a statement and ensures you will not appear invisible to others. Hide any distinguishable markings such as a birthmark or tattoos. These will make you easily identifiable.
You also want to appear non-threatening and make sure your demeanor matches your attire. Don’t go all out and cover your face with a bandanna under a hood. That will suggest that you’re up to no good. Instead, wear a baseball cap and give off the “vibes” of someone who is not doing anything at all except existing. Be boring, but walk as though you have a purpose.
Minimize interactions with all people, especially those you do not know. Once the SHTF, you’ll have more enemies than friends especially if your friends have failed to effectively prepare for the bad times.
Most importantly, you will want to learn to think like a “gray man.” Changing the way we think is difficult, and impossible for some. But if you want a chance at avoiding as many altercations as possible in dire situations, you’ll need to make the attempt. Watch the video below for some great advice:
Learning to be a “gray man” could save your life. Blending in while being forgettable and not leaving an impression on anyone will allow you to go about your business with very limited altercations. This is one skill that is ranked up there with situational awareness.
Both situational awareness and being a “gray man” are essential to a proper prepping mentality. Both are free, and in addition to this article, I suggest you read as much as you can about both and begin to use them in your everyday life as practice.
The Gray Man is the forgettable face, the ghost guy, the hidden human. Implementing the concepts is more than looking less tactical, less hostile, or less threatening. It is the willful abandonment of anything and everything that defines oneself as different. Using his unique “S” word conceptual approach featured in Appear to Vanish, camouflage and concealment expert Matthew Dermody discusses the concepts, tactics, and mindset necessary to assimilate into any urban environment. From the safety-conscious international traveler to the SERE contingencies of the deep cover foreign operative, GRAY MAN is the definitive urban concealment resource.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OT05IB Tyler Durden
