Race-denialism is all over the Western world – the notion that race itself is a sort of optical illusion; that different races can, after a bit of social engineering, be brought to present the same statistical profiles on all traits; that when they present different profiles the only possible explanation is malice on the part of white people; these are the great dogmas of our age [Antiracism, Our Flawed New Religion, by John McWhorter, Daily Beast, March 14,2017 ] carved on stone slabs and worshipfully preserved in the temples of our culture. Here’s a cute example: the epidemic of knife crime that has been plaguing Britain for several years past.
Guns are hard to get in Britain (although not that hard). So the more commonplace types of lethal interpersonal violence – notably underclass gang warfare – are stabbings with knives.
In the mid-1960s, when I lived in London and got my first real encounterswith multiculturalism, knife crime was associated with Cypriots.
I don’t know why this was so and have never tried to check the historical statistics. But it was an article of faith with Londoners back then that it was wise not to tick off a Cypriot (which mainly, in this context at that time, meant a Greek Cypriot) unless you wanted to feel a blade sliding between your ribs.
The native British seem to have maintained their prejudice against knife fighting down to the present day. But black and Muslim immigrants have taken up knives with enthusiasm. A high proportion of the names of knife-crime perps are Muslim; and on the rare occasions the media offer a picture of a perp, it is much more often than not a black guy.
What’s happened is this: the British government has a campaign going on to discourage young people from carrying knives. They’re promoting this campaign via public-service announcements on Twitter with #KnifeFree.
Well, a company that provides packaging for fast-food outlets has signed up to help with this campaign. The nature of their help: they have distributed boxes to fried chicken outlets—the boxes your take-out food comes packed in—carrying messages from the government campaign against knives.
Did you get that? To fried chicken outlets! Is that racist, or what?
It’s racist! Don’t take my word for it: here is an accredited authority, black Member of Parliament David Lammy, who bears an uncanny resemblance to the late Idi Amin of Uganda [Clip: the Idi Amin song]
Sorry, sorry, that just lurched into my mind there. Where was I? Oh yes, David Lammy. Tweet from him, tweet:
Since this news story comes from the sober, professional, magisterial BBC, you might think they’d offer some balancing numbers to prove that blacks are not especially prominent in the knife-crime statistics.
I mean, you might think that… if you’ve been in a deep coma for the past thirty years.
To be perfectly fair, the BBC story is not totally numbers-free. Four hundred words into the story we do get this, quote:
Recent figures showed most perpetrators of knife crime were over the age of 18.
None of the ten charts deals with race or ethnicity. But the accompanying text between Chart Four and Chart Five does let slip the following factlet:
The figures also show 25% of victims were black – the highest proportion since data was first collected in 1997.
Since only three percent of Britain’s population is black, that’s a massive over-representation – a multiple of more than eight.
Ah, but those are victims, you see – probably innocent black bodies, very likely carrying bags of Skittles, stabbed by hate-filled white supremacists filled with hateful hate.
That must be it.
Conclusion: In the 2005 movie Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo, Rob Schneider, who is, duh, white plays the title character; Eddie Griffin, who is black, plays his buddy T.J. Hicks. T.J.is on the run in Amsterdam. Deuce finds him in a chicken-and-waffles joint.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out … without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” – H. L. Mencken
The U.S. government is working hard to destabilize the nation.
No, this is not another conspiracy theory.
Although it is certainly not far-fetched to suggest that the government might be engaged in nefarious activities that run counter to the best interests of the American people, doing so will likely brand me a domestic terrorist under the FBI’s new classification system.
Observe for yourself what is happening right before our eyes.
Domestic terrorism fueled by government entrapment schemes. Civil unrest stoked to dangerous levels by polarizing political rhetoric. A growing intolerance for dissent that challenges the government’s power grabs. Police brutality tacitly encouraged by the executive branch, conveniently overlooked by the legislatures, and granted qualified immunity by the courts. A weakening economy exacerbated by government schemes that favor none but a select few. An overt embrace of domestic surveillance tactics if Congress goes along with the Trump Administration’s request to permanently re-authorize the NSA’s de-activated call records program. Heightened foreign tensions and blowback due to the military industrial complex’s profit-driven quest to police and occupy the globe.
The seeds of chaos are being sown, and it’s the U.S. government that will reap the harvest.
The training video is only five minutes long, but it says a lot about the government’s mindset, the way its views the citizenry, and the so-called “problems” that the government must be prepared to address in the near future through the use of martial law.
Even more troubling, however, is what this military video doesn’t say about the Constitution, about the rights of the citizenry, and about the dangers of locking down the nation and using the military to address political and social problems.
The training video anticipates that all hell will break loose by 2030—that’s barely ten short years away—but the future is here ahead of schedule.
We’re already witnessing a breakdown of society on virtually every front.
By waging endless wars abroad, by bringing the instruments of war home, by transforming police into extensions of the military, by turning a free society into a suspect society, by treating American citizens like enemy combatants, by discouraging and criminalizing a free exchange of ideas, by making violence its calling card through SWAT team raids and militarized police, by fomenting division and strife among the citizenry, by acclimating the citizenry to the sights and sounds of war, and by generally making peaceful revolution all but impossible, the government has engineered an environment in which domestic violence is becoming almost inevitable.
The danger signs are screaming out a message:
The government is anticipating trouble (read: civil unrest), which is code for anything that challenges the government’s authority, wealth and power.
What they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.
The chilling five-minute training video, obtained by The Intercept through a FOIA request and made available online, paints an ominous picture of the future—a future the military is preparing for—bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots.
And then comes the kicker.
Three-and-a-half minutes into the Pentagon’s dystopian vision of “a world of Robert Kaplan-esque urban hellscapes — brutal and anarchic supercities filled with gangs of youth-gone-wild, a restive underclass, criminal syndicates, and bands of malicious hackers,” the ominous voice of the narrator speaks of a need to “drain the swamps.”
Drain the swamps.
Surely, we’ve heard that phrase before?
Ah yes.
Emblazoned on t-shirts and signs, shouted at rallies, and used as a rallying cry among Trump supporters, “drain the swamp” became one of Donald Trump’s most-used campaign slogans.
Funny how the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Now the government has adopted its own plans for swamp-draining, only it wants to use the military to drain the swamps of futuristic urban American cities of “noncombatants and engage the remaining adversaries in high intensity conflict within.”
And who are these noncombatants, a military term that refers to civilians who are not engaged in fighting?
They are, according to the Pentagon, “adversaries.”
They are “threats.”
They are the “enemy.”
They are people who don’t support the government, people who live in fast-growing urban communities, people who may be less well-off economically than the government and corporate elite, people who engage in protests, people who are unemployed, people who engage in crime (in keeping with the government’s fast-growing, overly broad definition of what constitutes a crime).
In other words, in the eyes of the U.S. military, noncombatants are American citizens a.k.a. domestic extremists a.k.a. enemy combatants who must be identified, targeted, detained, contained and, if necessary, eliminated.
In the future imagined by the Pentagon, any walls and prisons that are built will be used to protect the societal elite—the haves—from the have-nots.
If you haven’t figured it out already, we the people are the have-nots.
Suddenly it all begins to make sense.
The events of recent years: the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers.
The government is systematically locking down the nation and shifting us into martial law.
This is how you prepare a populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.
You don’t scare them by making dramatic changes. Rather, you acclimate them slowly to their prison walls.
Persuade the citizenry that their prison walls are merely intended to keep them safe and danger out. Desensitize them to violence, acclimate them to a military presence in their communities, and persuade them that there is nothing they can do to alter the seemingly hopeless trajectory of the nation.
Before long, no one will even notice the floundering economy, the blowback arising from military occupations abroad, the police shootings, the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure and all of the other mounting concerns.
It’s happening already.
The sight of police clad in body armor and gas masks, wielding semiautomatic rifles and escorting an armored vehicle through a crowded street, a scene likened to “a military patrol through a hostile city,” no longer causes alarm among the general populace.
Few seem to care about the government’s endless wars abroad that leave communities shattered, families devastated and our national security at greater risk of blowback.
The Deep State’s tactics are working.
We’ve allowed ourselves to be acclimated to the occasional lockdown of government buildings, Jade Helmmilitary drills in small towns so that special operations forces can get “realistic military training” in “hostile” territory, and Live Active Shooter Drill training exercises, carried out at schools, in shopping malls, and on public transit, which can and do fool law enforcement officials, students, teachers and bystanders into thinking it’s a real crisis.
Still, you can’t say we weren’t warned about the government’s nefarious schemes to lock down the nation.
Back in 2008, an Army War College report revealed that “widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” The 44-page report went on to warn that potential causes for such civil unrest could include another terrorist attack, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”
In 2009, reports by the Department of Homeland Security surfaced that labelled right-wing and left-wing activists and military veterans as extremists (a.k.a. terrorists) and called on the government to subject such targeted individuals to full-fledged pre-crime surveillance. Almost a decade later, after spending billions to fight terrorism, the DHS concluded that the greater threat is not ISIS but domestic right-wing extremism.
Meanwhile, the government has been amassing an arsenal of military weapons for use domestically and equipping and training their “troops” for war. Even government agencies with largely administrative functions such as the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Smithsonian have been acquiring body armor, riot helmets and shields, cannon launchers and police firearms and ammunition. In fact, there are now at least 120,000 armed federal agents carrying such weapons who possess the power to arrest.
Rounding out this profit-driven campaign to turn American citizens into enemy combatants (and America into a battlefield) is a technology sector that has been colluding with the government to create a Big Brother that is all-knowing, all-seeing and inescapable. It’s not just the drones, fusion centers, license plate readers, stingray devices and the NSA that you have to worry about. You’re also being tracked by the black boxes in your cars, your cell phone, smart devices in your home, grocery loyalty cards, social media accounts, credit cards, streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon, and e-book reader accounts.
All of this has taken place right under our noses, funded with our taxpayer dollars and carried out in broad daylight without so much as a general outcry from the citizenry.
And then you have the government’s Machiavellian schemes for unleashing all manner of dangers on an unsuspecting populace, then demanding additional powers in order to protect “we the people” from the threats.
Seriously, think about it.
The government claims to be protecting us from cyberterrorism, but who is the biggest black market buyer and stockpiler of cyberweapons (weaponized malware that can be used to hack into computer systems, spy on citizens, and destabilize vast computer networks)? The U.S. government.
The government claims to be protecting us from foreign armed threats, but who is the largest weapons manufacturer and exporter in the world, such that they are literally arming the world? The U.S. government. For that matter, where did ISIS get many of their deadliest weapons, including assault rifles and tanks to anti-missile defenses? From the U.S. government.
The government claims to be protecting us from terrorist plots, but what country has a pattern and practice of entrapment that involves targeting vulnerable individuals, feeding them with the propaganda, know-how and weapons intended to turn them into terrorists, and then arresting them as part of an elaborately orchestrated counterterrorism sting? The U.S. government.
The U.S. government isn’t protecting us from terrorism.
The U.S. government is creating the terror. It is, in fact, the source of the terror.
Just think about it for a minute: Cyberwarfare. Terrorism. Bio-chemical attacks. The nuclear arms race. Surveillance. The drug wars.
Almost every national security threat that the government has claimed greater powers in order to fight—all the while undermining the liberties of the American citizenry—has been manufactured in one way or another by the government.
Did I say Machiavellian? This is downright evil.
We’re not dealing with a government that exists to serve its people, protect their liberties and ensure their happiness. Rather, these are the diabolical machinations of a make-works program carried out on an epic scale whose only purpose is to keep the powers-that-be permanently (and profitably) employed.
It’s time to wake up and stop being deceived by government propaganda.
Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats.
I’m referring to “government” with a capital “G,” the entrenched Deep State that is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and has set itself beyond the reach of the law.
I’m referring to the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.
Be warned: in the future envisioned by the government, we will not be viewed as Republicans or Democrats. Rather, “we the people” will be enemies of the state.
What the government failed to explain was that the domestic terrorists would be of the government’s own making, and that “we the people” would become enemy #1.
You want to change things? Start by rejecting the political labels and the polarizing rhetoric and the “us vs. them” tactics that reduce the mass power of the populace to puny, powerless factions.
Find common ground with your fellow citizens and push back against the government’s brutality, inhumanity, greed, corruption and power grabs.
Be dangerous in the best way possible: by thinking for yourself, by refusing to be silenced, by choosing sensible solutions over political expediency and bureaucracy.
When all is said and done, the solution to what ails this country is really not that complicated: decency, compassion, common sense, generosity balanced by fiscal responsibility, fairness, a commitment to freedom principles, and a firm rejection of the craven, partisan politics of the Beltway elites who have laid the groundwork for the government’s authoritarian coup d’etat.
Let the revolution begin.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/33TW3mT Tyler Durden
Starship Technologies, an autonomous delivery company, focused on last-mile delivery services, announced Tuesday via a company press release, that it will launch delivery robots on 100 university campuses across the US in the next 24 months.
The announcement said the delivery robots have already arrived at the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, in preparation for the fall semester. Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, will receive robots on Sept. 9 and an additional 98 university campuses by late 2H21.
“An entire generation of university students are growing up in a world where they expect to receive a delivery from a robot after a few taps on their smartphone. The reception to our service both on campuses and in neighborhoods has been phenomenal. Our customers appreciate how we make their lives easier and give them back the gift of time,” said Lex Bayer, CEO of Starship.
In the coming weeks, students at the University of Pittsburgh will be able to order their favorite food and drinks from Einstein Bros. Bagels and Common Grounds via delivery robots to any set location they want, in the proximity of the campus. Students, according to the release, can use their meal plan points to pay for food and delivery charges.
Not too long ago, Starship started a pilot delivery program at George Mason University (Fairfax, VA) and Northern Arizona University (Flagstaff, AZ). Since the tests, students at both campuses have fallen in love with the robots. The company said they had to increase robots in both schools to stay with demand.
When the expansion to all 100 campuses by 2H21 is completed, the company expects to have the delivery service readily available to more than one million students.
The Starship app is a revolutionary way of last-mile delivery; students must first download the app on iOS and Android before they can place an order.
Once their meal plan, credit card, or their parents’ credit card is connected to the account, students can select their favorite food or drink items, then drop a pin on a map of where they want the robot to drop off the goods. As per the release, delivery charges could cost around $1.99, depends on several factors, including distance and how busy the service is at the time.
Starship robots use sensors, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to navigate sidewalks and avoid obstacles. These last-mile robots can cross streets, climb curbs, avoid potholes, travel in most weather conditions, and even at night.
The company claims since the robots are battery-powered, it can reduce pollution. As we’ve pointed out in the past, numerous studies have concluded that electric cars and or e-scooters are dirtier for the environment than most think.
The death of millionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein behind bars should trigger “system-wide self-reflection” on how prisoners are treated. The Metropolitan Correctional Center “is sort of like an American gulag for people who have not been convicted of anything,” Epstein lawyer Marc Fernich said.
And another person currently jailed for giving the American public information the United States government desperately wanted to keep secret, is Julian Assange. His health is failing and the highly dubious death of Jeffrey Epstein in a U.S. maximum-security prison is another strong reason not to extradite Assange into one.
Epstein’s death has gotten his lawyer to speak out about the conditions in American prisons, likening them to the gulags of the Soviet Union. MCC is “institutionally ill-equipped” to deal with someone like Epstein who wouldn’t last long in general population but who isn’t a hardened criminal, Fernich explained to RT.
“This is one of the toughest pre-trial detention facilities in the country. And the conditions are inhumane.”
Epstein, he insists, was “presumed innocent,” despite his 2008 conviction for soliciting underage prostitutes – part of a slap-on-the-wrist plea deal the fallout from which culminated in this year’s sex trafficking charges – and should not have been confined in such “barbaric” conditions.
But there is every reason to fear Assange is already in danger, in Belmarsh maximum-security prison, where he is currently incarcerated. Assange did the unthinkable. He exposed the government for what it really is: a corrupt authoritarian entity that firmly believes it has the right to enslave everyone else. Pressenza wrote: “The Establishment has conspired to reduce his ability to defend himself in court. I am not convinced it is not conspiring to destroy him.”
Do not forget Julian #Assange. Or you will lose him.
I saw him in Belmarsh prison and his health has deteriorated. Treated worse than a murderer, he is isolated, medicated and denied the tools to fight the bogus charges of a US extradition. I now fear for him. Do not forget him.
John Pilger has been attempting to alert the public to what several governments are attempting to do to Assange for the crime of publishing the truth.
Visiting Julian #Assange in prison I glimpsed his barbaric treatment. Isolated, denied proper exercise, access to the library, a laptop, he cannot prepare his defence. He is even denied calls to his US lawyers. His UK lawyer wrote to the governor on 4 June. Silence. How lawless.
Truth is treason in the empire of lies. Deaths like Epstein’s had the benefit of at least waking up some of the public to the lies and deception by the propaganda outlets also known as the mainstream media. They are desperately trying to silence anyone who questions the establishment’s official narrative. But even Fernich himself is “skeptical”about the medical examiner’s conclusion that Epstein committed suicide. “It would not surprise me… to learn of anything that might have happened to Jeffrey Epstein,” he says, adding that Epstein’s mysterious death will be the subject of discussion for decades. Similarly, the mainstream media has blood on their hands when it comes to Assange, according to another tweet by Pilger.
Watch this revelation by Mark Davis, the award-winning journalist and lawyer, a crucial witness to the Guardian’s and NY Times’ betrayal of Julian #Assange who faces extradition for what they did, too. Note their silence as #Assange fights for his life.https://t.co/n3oABBDDdX
“People in the United States are skeptical of anything that the government puts out because the intelligence-gathering process in our country has been weaponized for political ends,” said Fernich.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Mxo9yQ Tyler Durden
“It’s looking like the end game for the revolution in Syria as rebels lose another town,” reports the LA Times. Yet the Syrian Army has now gained control of not just any town — but Khan Sheikhoun — site of the April 2017 claimed “Assad chemical attack” which Trump used as a pretext to bomb Syria for the first time.
Starting Tuesday the AP reported that insurgents began abandoning the town in southern Idlib en masse amid a heavy pro-Assad forces onslaught. The city had first been wrested from government control by Jabhat al-Nusra (Syrian al-Qaeda) and FSA forces starting in 2014.
It’s been held since by current Nusra manifestation Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which in April 2017 claimed to have been victim of a sarin gas attack by Syrian jet airstrikes. In response to claims which until this day have never been investigated by an official international team on the ground, the White House unleashed its first, limited bombing campaign of Syria.
In April 2017 international media was flooded with images and YouTube videos of a claimed “Sarin attack”. Al-Qaeda linked HTS then sent its own team to examine the impact site and gather evidence.
This would lead to larger tomahawk strikes on Damascus the next year in 2018 after a Saudi-backed insurgent group claimed an Assad forces chlorine gas attack in Douma, outside the capital.
This week even the Associated Press seemed to finally acknowledge what the mainstream media has for years refused to admit — that the Syrian Army is advancing in Idlib on none other than al-Qaeda:
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, Syria’s main al-Qaida-linked faction, said in a statement that its fighters carried out “a re-deployment,” withdrawing to areas south of the town of Khan Sheikhoun. From there, they would continue to defend the territory, it said.
Pro-government areas are celebrating the liberation of the key city, with President Bashar al-Assad releasing a statement saying, “The victories that were achieved show the determination of the people and the army to strike terrorists, until all parts of Syria are liberated,” according to comments released by his office.
The Syrian Army celebrating entrance into the newly liberated area, via Al-Masdar News.
Concerning the broader campaign to take back Idlib province, it must be remembered that in 2015 US intelligence directly assisted the al-Qaeda coalition Army of Islam (now morphed into Hayat Tahrir al-Sham) from an “operations room” in Turkey in capturing the provincial capital Idlib City. Since then Washington has threatened to intervene at prior moments whenever it looked like the Syrian Army was ready to advance in the province.
There’s also a huge likelihood that as anti-Assad fighters get ever closer to their final defeat in Idlib, some kind of mass casualty “chemical event” perpetrated by Assad will be claimed by al-Qaeda linked forces as a provocation to again draw in Western military intervention.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/30swzuw Tyler Durden
If someone asked you to describe the Green New Deal, what would you say?
According to Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., it’s a “bold idea” that would “create millions of good-paying jobs” and help “rebuild communities in rural America that have been devastated.”
Oh, you thought the Green New Deal was all about fighting climate change? Well, think again.
Turns out it’s a green-glossed Trojan horse designed to increase government control over the economy.
Just ask Saikat Chakrabarti, chief of staff to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., the author of the deal. “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” Chakrabarti said. “We really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”
Just how much change would the Green New Deal bring to the economy? Put simply, it would bring it to its knees.
We know, because when we tried to use the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Model to assess how the plan would affect the economy, the model crashed.
The Green New Deal is big on vision, but sparse on details. For example, it calls for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 60% below 2010 levels by 2030, with the ultimate goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. But it doesn’t say how to get there.
One thing is clear: to meet these goals, Washington would have to force all Americans to reduce their energy consumption and/or switch to “green” energy sources—and fast. And the only way to do that is to impose coercive taxes and regulations.
To assess the economic effects of such a scheme, we started by looking at a carbon tax—the most popular recommendation of those asking government to “nudge” us off of fossil fuels.
Using the Energy Information Administration’s model, we tested to see how high a carbon tax would have to go to meet the Green New Deal’s emission targets. We ratcheted the tax up to $300 per ton, which dropped emissions 58% below 2010 levels—but not until 2050.
That left us far short of reaching the deal’s targets, but when we tried to push the tax higher, the model crashed. Clearly, the Green New Deal’s emission targets are unrealistic. Yet the danger they pose to the economy are far too real.
Before the model’s lights went out, we found that a $300 per ton carbon tax and associated regulations would cost a family of four nearly $8,000 per year in income lost to higher energy costs, consumer prices, and foregone wages. The 20-year cost totals $165,000.
During that same 20-year period, the tax would siphon off an average of 1.1 million jobs per year and diminish gross domestic product by a total of more than $15 trillion.
That’s a hefty price to pay for getting barely halfway to the net-zero emissions goal. Is it worth it? After all, proponents of eliminating conventional fuels argue that the cost of climate change dwarfs the cost of climate policy.
However, in terms of “climate insurance,” eliminating greenhouse gas emissions doesn’t get you very far.
To see if this is true, we turned to another tool: the Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Induced Climate Change. Developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, this model assesses how much increases and decreases in greenhouse gas trajectories will affect global temperatures and sea levels.
Running this model, we found that overhauling America’s economy – as envisioned in the Green New Deal – would abate global warming by approximately 0.2 degree Celsius by the year 2100. The reduction in sea-level rise would be less than 2 centimeters.
In other words, the Green New Deal offers minimal climate improvement at impossibly high prices.
Chakrabarti is spot on. The Green New Deal isn’t a “climate thing” at all. And it would certainly change the economy—for the worse.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2KPoHOu Tyler Durden
Apartments in the Wall Street area languished into late summer as a glut plagues the Manhattan real estate market, reported Bloomberg.
“There was so much new development in that neighborhood, and I think that many of the people who wanted to buy there did,” said Steven Gottlieb, a broker at Warburg Realty. “I don’t know that there is such a huge a demand for that neighborhood anymore.”
Lower Manhattan apartment inventory spiked 24% in 2Q19 YoY, led by a tidal wave of new supply, according to a report by Corcoran Group.
The supply has caused panic in the area, average resale prices have fallen 11%, and average new development prices plunged 46%.
The days of $1,600 per square foot are over. This was the first time that has happened since 2013, signaling the slowdown in the overall Manhattan real estate market is gaining momentum in 2H19.
“Buyers are keenly aware of the amount of inventory available, and want to negotiate at all price points,” said Garrett Derderian at the brokerage Core.
StreetEasy says data from May and June shows the median time that Lower Manhattan apartments had been on the market was longer than Brooklyn and Long Island City.
Four new luxury residential towers are expected to open in Lower Manhattan in 2020, including residential towers at 130 William St., 77 Greenwich St., 25 Park Row, and 1 Wall St. The new supply won’t just make it harder for existing listings to sell, but could lead to further price declines for the next several years.
The Real Deal reported that developer Metro Loft is in contract to purchase AIG’s headquarters at 175 Water St in 2021. As soon as that happens, the developer will transform the top half of the building into residential units, could add to supply in 2022 to 2024.
Martin Eiden, a broker at Compass Real Estate, said it’d been at least a decade since conversions of office-to-residence projects were done, and it now seems like that trend is reemerging into 2020.
Bloomberg notes one of the first office-to-residence conversions in the area was at 15 Broad St., the former headquarters of JPMorgan Chase & Co., was completed in 2006. A 28th-floor studio with two bathrooms currently lists for about $1.5 million.
Down the street, 25 Broad St., a condo conversion completed in April, has two-bedroom, two-bath unit listed for about $1.6 million.
With the migration of some of the largest financial institutions from Lower Manhattan to Midtown in recent years, the highest paid jobs have also gravitated north, forcing developers to build smaller apartments for entry-level analysts in the financial district.
“The majority of housing stock available for purchase consists of one-bedroom or studio floorplans,” said broker Gill Chowdhury at Warburg Realty.
Scott Avram, senior vice president of development at Lightstone Group, a developer in the area, said singles or young families could find Lower Manhattan appealing because of the housing glut, has transformed it into a buyers market.
“If you want to live in Manhattan, you can often get the best product and the best value, whereas people were previously priced out of Manhattan and had to move to Brooklyn and Long Island City,” Avram said.
However, the housing decline isn’t just limited to Lower Manhattan, mega-mansions in the Hamptons, Wall Street’s favorite party spot, are also languishing, indicating the high-end market has peaked. And it makes sense why President Trump is demanding 100bps cuts and QE-4, it’s because his economic advisors have told him the real estate market, and the overall economy, are quickly slowing ahead of an election year.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Zaqhmy Tyler Durden
All attention is focused on the twists-and-turns of the very noisy US-Iran dispute in the Persian Gulf, but all the while the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is rapidly and quietly consolidating a dominant presence in the area with the active support of Russia.
Beijing, as a result, is fast acquiring immense influence over related key dynamics such as the price of oil in the world market and the relevance of the petrodollar. The PRC and the Russians are capitalizing on both the growing fears of Iran and the growing mistrust of the US. Hence, the US is already the main loser of the PRC’s gambit.
The dramatic PRC success can be attributed to the confluence of two major trends:
(1) The quality and relevance of what Beijing can offer to both Iran and the Saudi-Gulf States camp; and
(2) The decision of key Arab leaders — most notably Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin ‘Abd al-’Aziz al Sa’ud (aka MBS) and his close ally, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (aka MBZ) — to downgrade their traditional close ties with the US, and reach out to Beijing to provide a substitute strategic umbrella.
Hence, the PRC offer to oversee and guarantee the establishment of a regional collective security regime — itself based on the Russian proposals and ideas first raised in late July 2019 — is now getting considerable positive attention from both shores of the Persian Gulf. Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, and Oman appear to be becoming convinced that the PRC could be the key to the long-term stability and prosperity in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula.
Iran is also considering the expansion of security cooperation with Russia as an added umbrella against potential US retaliation.
Overall, according to sources in these areas, the US was increasingly perceived as an unpredictable, disruptive element.
The profound change in the attitude of the Saudi and Emirati ruling families, who for decades have considered themselves pliant protégés of the US, took long to evolve. However, once formulated and adopted, the new policies have been implemented swiftly.
The main driving issue is the realization by both MBS and MBZ that, irrespective of the reassuring rhetoric of US Pres. Donald Trump and Jared Kushner, their bitter nemesis — Qatar — is far more important to the US than the rest of the conservative Arab monarchies and sheikhdoms of the GCC. The last straw came in early July 2019 in the aftermath of the visit of the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, to Washington, DC. Sheikh Tamim received an extravagant reception from both Pres. Trump in person and official Washington. Trump lavished praises on Qatar and the Emir, and emphasized the US renewed commitment “to further advancing the high-level strategic cooperation between our two countries”.
There are good reasons for the US preference of Qatar.
The Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar is by far the most important US base in the entire greater Middle East. Qatar is mediating between the US and several nemeses, including Afghanistan, Iran, and Turkey. Qatar is providing “humanitarian cash” to HAMAS in the Gaza Strip, thus buying quiet time for Israel. Qatar has given generous “political shelter” to numerous leaders, seniors, and commanders of questionable entities the US would like to protect but would never acknowledge this (including anti-Russia Chechens and other Caucasians, and anti-China Uighurs).
Qatari Intelligence is funding and otherwise supporting the various jihadist entities which serve as proxies of the CIA and M?T (Milli ?stihbarat Te?kilat?: the Turkish National Intelligence Organization) in the greater Middle East (mainly Syria, Iraq, Libya, Jordan, Yemen) and Central Asia (mainly Afghanistan-Pakistan, China’s Xinjiang and Russia’s Caucasus and the Turkic peoples of eastern Siberia).
On top of this, Qatar is purchasing billions of dollars’ worth of US-made weapons; and paying cash on-time (unlike the habitually late Saudis who now cannot afford to pay what they’ve already promised).
Moreover, the Middle East is awash with rumors that Qatari businessmen saved the financial empire of the Kushner family by investing at least half-a-billion dollars in the 666 5th Avenue project in New York. The rumors are very specific in that the investment was made for political reasons on instruction of the Emir. In the conspiracies-driven Arab Middle East, such rumors are believed and serve as a viable motive for the policies of the Trump White House: an ulterior motive the Saudis and Gulfies cannot challenge.
The handling by the Trump White House of the Iranian shootdown of the US RQ-4A/BAMS-D Global Hawk drone on June 20, 2019, only exacerbated further the anguish of both MBS and MBZ. Both of them, along with other Arab leaders, urged the Trump White House to strike hard at Iran in retaliation. Both MBS and MBZ communicated in person with the most senior individuals at the White House. They were stunned to learn that Trump communicated directly with Tehran on the possibility of a largely symbolic retaliatory strike, and the prospects of bilateral negotiations.
Both MBS and MBZ consider the last-minute cancellation of the US retaliatory strike a personal affront and humiliation because Trump did not accept and follow their positions and demands for action. Both MBS and MBZ are now convinced that not only the US demonstrated weakness and lack of resolve, but that Pres. Trump was personally not committed to fighting Iran on behalf of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf sheikhdoms.
Furthermore, there is growing trepidation in Saudi Arabia about the viability of the Pakistani guarantees to the Kingdom, particularly concerning nuclear deterrence.
In the past, Islamabad mediated the Saudi purchase of ballistic missiles from the PRC (procurements which are supported by Pakistani military technicians and security personnel) and had allocated two nuclear warheads for launch from Saudi Arabia in case of an Iranian attack, all in return for lavish Saudi funding of Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic weapons programs.
However, there has been a profound turnaround in Pakistani policies starting in the Summer of 2019.
First, Pakistan reached a comprehensive military agreement with Turkey with the latter providing weapons and other military systems, as well as training, in order to replace US and Western systems which were no longer available. In the first area of active cooperation, Turkey mediated modalities for trilateral cooperation (Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan) in fighting Baluchi jihadists and insurgents. Second, Pakistan is expediting the shipping of huge quantities of Iranian gas to western China by mainly using existing pipelines, from the Fars fields to Chabahar, then via the Iran-Pakistan pipeline to Gwadar, and then via the CPEC (the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor) pipeline to Xinjiang. As well, Iran and Pakistan cooperate closely in negotiations with various Afghan factions to ameliorate any US achievements in the Doha negotiations with the Taliban.
Hence, both MBS and MBZ wonder, can Saudi Arabia trust Pakistan to deter and confront Iran and its allies on behalf of Saudi Arabia?
Concurrently, with the face-off with the US not going away, Iranian Supreme Leader AyatollahSayyed Ali Khamene‘i convened anew the key Iranian leaders in order to reiterate the tenets of Tehran’s strategy and to reinforce their resolve. Khamene‘i stressed his and Iran’s commitment to becoming the leading regional power, and repeated that there was no possibility for a negotiated compromise with the US. In the meeting, Khamene‘i stated “three directives for Iran” which were to be followed and realized under any condition. As reported by authoritative commentator Elijah Magnier, Khamene‘i’s directives are:
“1. Adherence to Iran’s right to nuclear enrichment and everything related to this science at all costs. Nuclear enrichment is a sword Iran can hold in the face of the West, which wants to take it from Tehran. It is Iran’s card to obstruct any US intention of ‘obliterating’ Iran.
“2. Continue to develop Iran’s missile capability and ballistic programs. This is Iran’s deterrent weapon that prevents its enemies from waging war against it. Sayyed Ali Khamene‘i considers the missile program a balancing power to prevent harm against Iran.
“3. Support Iran’s allies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, and never abandon them, because they are essential to Iran’s national security.”
Elijah Magnier further explained that “Sayyed Khamene‘i recommended these commandments to preserve the Islamic Republic of Iran, and that each of these three items is equally important for the safety of Iran, its existence and continuity, and national and strategic security.”
The aggregate objective of these three directives, Khamene‘i elaborated, was to enable and expedite the ascent of Iran as a regional power. The Iranian strategic ascent would manifest itself by tight control over both the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al Mandab, as well as the entire Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea; that is, controlling the region’s oil and gas exports. Emboldened, the Iranians would intensify their demands for the return of “traditional Iranian territory”, starting with Bahrain [even though the Iranian Government of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi had formally relinquished its claim on Bahrain in 1970 — Ed.].
There can be expected to be growing demands from Tehran to empower the Shi’ite population of the eastern Arabian Peninsula — where all the oil and gas reserves are located — in accordance with Iran’s long-term commitment to the establishing of an Islamic Republic of Eastern Arabia. These are all traditional long-term demands of Iran. The novelty in Khamene‘i’s most recent address is the assertiveness and immediacy of the Iranian quest to meet these demands.
The importance and essence of Khamene‘i’s message spread across the Persian Gulf quickly. Consequently, both MBS and MBZ are cognizant that Khamene‘i’s Tehran was unlikely to compromise or go back on these commitments and objectives. There was no similar indication of resolve coming from Trump’s Washington. Thus, MBS, MBZ and most other Arab leaders had become increasingly convinced that the US would sooner or later withdraw from the Persian Gulf and the greater Middle East. The current bluster and assertiveness of the Trump Administration could not negate the overall trend: that of the US disengagement and withdrawal.
The Arab leaders believe that the US would empower Israel as a subcontractor, but Israel has its own priorities and vital interests. Michael Young articulated the perception of the region’s leaders in the August 7, 2019, issue of The National of the UAE. “A new regional security order is emerging, with Israel taking a much more interventionist approach and playing a military rôle partly replacing that previously fulfilled by Washington, particularly with regard to Iran. Israel’s efforts to counter Iran have paralleled those of a number of Arab states, with all sides adapting to a new situation in which the US has decided to militarily disengage from the Middle East.”
Both MBS and MBZ concluded that they need a far stronger strategic umbrella than the US and Israel could offer in order to survive in the era of Iran’s ascent.
As a result, MBZ reached out to Beijing in early July 2019. After comprehensive preparatory negotiations, MBZ arrived in Beijing on July 20, 2019, for a milestone visit in which he met PRC Pres. Xi Jinping for lengthy discussions. According to PRC senior officials, Mohammed bin Zayed and Xi Jinping “elevated the two countries’ relationship to that of a strategic partnership”. The key outcome was the UAE’s acceptance of the dominance of the PRC and Russia in the Persian Gulf.
“The UAE and China are moving towards a promising future,” MBZ said in his concluding meeting with Xi Jinping. His visit aimed at “developing co-operation and a comprehensive strategic partnership, as well as opening new horizons for joint action in various sectors,” MBZ explained. Xi Jinping responded by stressing “the profound significance of China-Arab relations”. The PRC and the UAE would now work closely together to transform the Persian Gulf into “a security oasis” rather than a new “source of turmoil”.
Significantly, Xi Jinping referred to “a hundred years of grand plan” when describing the PRC’s relations with the UAE. MBZ also signed a large number of bilateral agreements, both economic and strategic.
While in Beijing, Mohammed bin Zayed asked Xi Jinping to mediate a deal with Tehran in order to negate the US-driven escalation and possible war. The PRC moved very fast, and within a few days dispatched to Tehran a high-ranking delegation led by the head of the International Liaison Department of the Communist Party of China (CPC), Song Tao. His mandate was to discuss the new security regime for the Persian Gulf, as well as the conditions for increasing PRC purchase of Iranian oil in disregard of the US sanctions. On the Iranian side, Song Tao’s official host was the highly influential Secretary of the Expediency Council, Mohsen Rezaei. This meant that Khamene‘i was directly involved. Song Tao stayed in Tehran for three days and met with a large number of senior officials, mostly members of Khamene‘i’s innermost circle of confidants and advisors.
All the Iranian officials were very assertive regarding Iran’s resolve to withstand US pressure at all cost, and eager for PRC cooperation in stabilizing the region and preventing war.
Rezaei articulated Iran’s strategy. “Any kind of insecurity and conflict in this region would carry harm to global peace and security,” he stated. “Americans and Britain have been fanning the flames of war in the Persian Gulf region and they want to pretend they have control over the Strait of Hormuz and the movement of vessels. Of course, we do not allow this to happen. In the meantime, we expect cooperation from our friends in China.”
He hoped for Chinese cooperation in preventing escalation. Should such cooperation fail to materialize, Iran would have to act boldly. “Persian Gulf security is our security and we have to respond to their attacks and destabilizing actions in order to maintain security,” Rezaei stated. Tehran’s preference is for the PRC to help in securing “free shipping and security in the Persian Gulf”.
The Head of Iran’s Foreign Policy Strategic Council, Kamal Kharrazi, reminded Song Tao that “both Iran and China are opposed to US’s unilateralism and hegemony”.
Hence, both countries should work closely together in confronting the US. The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Ali Larijani, also stressed that close cooperation “can help counter the US animosity and neutralize its consequences”. He suggested that Russia should be brought into the new security regime in the Persian Gulf. Larijani urged the PRC to expedite its anti-US intervention in the Persian Gulf because “success of this plan is contingent upon practical steps”. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif noted “the two countries’ common strategic outlook toward international developments”, and urged close cooperation in order to reverse “Washington’s attempts to impose its own hegemony on the world”.
All the Iranian officials had no problem with some form of rapprochement with the UAE and Saudi Arabia provided they did neither participate in a war against Iran, nor permit the US to use their territory and bases for strikes against Iran and Iranian proxies.
The PRC delegation was impressed by the Iranian eagerness to cooperate and to accept a PRC umbrella.
Song Tao told his interlocutors that “the mission of the delegation is to strengthen the strategic coordination and dialogue between the two countries and we are willing to confront challenges and problems together”. He agreed with the imperative to jointly confront the US, and accepted the need to move fast jointly. Song Tao concurred that “there are complicated and rapid developments happening on the international stage that have created challenges for the countries of China and Iran, but our resolve and determination is to support Iran’s legal and legitimate rights to development and progress”. Song Tao promised to discuss in Beijing concrete ideas how to improve and expand the PRC’s policy of “long-term strategic” ties with Iran in view of the current situation in the Persian Gulf.
By now, the PRC Government had already organized the first meeting between Emirati and Iranian senior officials. First, on July 26, 2019, an Emirati “peace delegation” arrived in Tehran for secret discussions on the new modalities of bilateral relations, new security regimes in the Persian Gulf and Yemen (from where the UAE is withdrawing to the chagrin of Saudi Arabia), and overall GCC-Iran relations. The emphasis was on crisis management and the prevention of accidental escalation in the Persian Gulf. On July 30, 2019, the UAE dispatched a high-level Coast Guard delegation to Tehran.
Officially, the two sides discussed maritime border control and patrolling in order to avoid misunderstandings and clashes. The delegation included an undeclared senior emissary of MBZ. He assured his Iranian interlocutors that the UAE was ready for a fundamental change of relationship with Iran including a “rapprochement” and expansion of trade. The UAE also committed to distancing from the US, accepting PRC influence in the entire region, and working with Iran for a regional security regime.
One of the key issues raised with the Emirati delegation in Tehran was the Saudi position. The UAE emissary asserted that all of the recent activities, including the request for PRC mediation, were the outcome of close coordination between MBZ and MBS. However, he explained, given the close relations between MBS and the Trump White House, MBS felt more constrained in making a dramatic shift the way MBZ did.
Therefore, on July 31, 2019, Zarif offered an olive branch.
He declared that “Iran is prepared for dialogue if Saudi Arabia is also ready”. He repeated the message in an interview with the official IRNA. “If Saudi Arabia is ready for talks, Iran is always ready for negotiation with neighbors,” Zarif stated. Tehran “is interested in cooperation with [her] neighbors.” Just to be on the safe side, the next day — August 1, 2019 — Iran sent a reminder of the alternative. The Houthis launched a ballistic missile attack on Saudi military positions near Dammam city.
Located in the Shi’ite area on the shores of the Persian Gulf, Dammam is a critical center of the Saudi oil infrastructure, including a major oil port. Riyadh got the message. Hence, on August 3, 2019, the UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash stated that “the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia prefer a political approach to their problems with Iran”.
Iran acted on the message. High-level emissaries traveled secretly to Mecca in early August 2019 as part of the Iranian delegation to prepare for the Hajj (August 9-14, 2019). They held secret talks about the future of the Persian Gulf with Saudi senior officials. These talks were personally supervised and micromanaged by MBS, who made all the decisions and determined the Saudi positions. Although the Saudis were forthcoming, and repeatedly expressed their desire to avoid escalation and fighting, they were also reticent to break with the US.
Simply put, the Saudis — reflecting the persona of MBS — were risk-averse and incapable of making concrete decisions. They neither said “no” to anything, nor did they commit to anything concrete.
The Iranian negotiators were encouraged by the overall spirit of the negotiations, but frustrated with the slow progress of the discussions. Therefore, on August 7, 2019, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif taunted Riyadh. He urged Saudi Arabia to make its own decision rather than be subservient to the US.
“Some countries see their future and security hinged upon dependence and regard security as something purchasable, and think that they can maintain their security by paying money and buying weapons and learn nothing from history,” Zarif said. “How come [Saudi Arabia] did not realize that money does not bring security?” The Saudi posture is in stark contrast to the posture of the Islamic Republic of Iran. “We never buy security, nor do we sell security because we derive our security, development, and legitimacy from [our] people,” Zarif concluded.
One of the reasons Tehran felt confident to prod both Riyadh and Abu Dhabi was that both were by now engulfed in a major crisis concerning the US. For a long time, MBS, MBZ and their close aides suspected that the US was hiding major matters from them. While the Trump White House kept demanding uncompromising confrontation with Tehran and warning against any and all contacts, MBS and MBZ suspected that Washington was not itself following these principles. Both Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have long known about active channels and mediation efforts by Doha, but whenever the subject came up, Trump’s Washington would assure them that the Qatar channel was only procedural and not much different from the US interests office in the Swiss Embassy in Tehran.
Then, on August 5, 2019, the US Ambassador to Iraq, Matthew Tueller, dropped the bomb.
“We have direct communication channels with Tehran,” he acknowledged. And these are not simple channels. While diplomatic discussions and de facto negotiations are taking place via the good services of Doha, the back-channel in Baghdad was specifically with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC: Pasdaran) Qods Force. These contacts were aimed to minimize the likelihood of clashes and misunderstandings in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and the Persian Gulf. This venue was most logical because the local Iranian Ambassador is Brig. Gen. Iraj Masjedi who is the right-hand man and deputy of Qods Force Commander Maj.-Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
According to Iraqi senior officials, some of the US-Iranian communications regarding the aftermath of the shoot-down of the US drone were held via this venue. The US also used this channel to try and convince Tehran not to attack the US forces in al-Tanf (southern Syria) and in the Ein al-Assad Air Base and adjacent bases (western Iraq).
Both Riyadh and Doha were stunned and humiliated because the Trump White House did not bother to inform them of the Baghdad back-channel, while pressuring them to avoid all contacts and negotiations with Iran.
Another reason for the growing self-confidence and assertiveness of Iran was the most recent evolution of its strategic relations with Russia. On July 28, 2019, the Commander of the Iranian Navy, Rear Adm. Hossein Khanzadi, was in Russia, ostensibly for the Navy Day celebrations. He conducted major discussions about a new level of military cooperation specifically in order to counter the US Navy threats.
At the end of the visit, Khanzadi reported in Tehran: “Iranian and Russian armed forces have signed a ‘classified’ deal to expand cooperation through a series of projects, one of which will be joint military drills in the Persian Gulf before the end of the year.” “Some articles of this agreement are classified, but overall, it is aimed at expanding military cooperation between the two countries.”
Khanzadi termed the new agreements a “turning point” in the “military-to-military ties between Iran and Russia”. The agreement includes Russian-Iranian joint naval maneuvers to be held in the northern part of the Indian Ocean and in the Strait of Hormuz before the end of 2019. A major part of the classified agreement concerned giving the Russian Navy base-level installations in the Iranian Navy facilities in Chabahar, Bandar-e-Bushehr, and in the Strait of Hormuz (Bandar-e-Jask and/or Bandar Abbas).
The Russian Navy would also be able to use a Naval Aviation airbase near Bandar-e-Bushehr. In addition to technical, logistics and communications personnel, Russia would keep in these bases SPETSNAZ detachments for both local security and the ability to help Russian and allied ships in distress in the Persian Gulf.
On August 3, 2019, Khamene‘i’s closest aides conducted sensitive talks with a secret delegation of Russian officials. Tehran wanted to ascertain the Russian reaction to a US attack on Iran in case of a major escalation. “[An] attack on Iran would be an attack on Russia,” the Russians stated without equivocation. Hence, Khamene‘i formally approved and ratified the new agreements with Russia on August 4, 2019. Khamene‘i also authorized follow-up high-level discussions in Moscow about jointly implementing the Russian “proposed security plan for the Persian Gulf”, while adapting it to the new agreement with the PRC. The first rounds of discussions took place on August 6-7, 2019.
Russia, it was clear, had no problem with the new PRC rôle and stature in the Persian Gulf.
Meanwhile, the continued contacts with Washington reinforced Tehran’s conviction that a major confrontation in the greater Middle East remained possible despite the day-to-day cooling down of the situation in the Persian Gulf. Khamene‘i instructed better coordination of the diplomatic and military preparations for the next phase.
The new challenge for the IRGC was to up-date the contingency plans for the confrontation and war with the US and Israel under the new conditions where the US could no longer use bases in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain (on top of Qatar and Iraq which had long ago announced they would not permit the US to use their territories and installations for strikes against Iran). It was imperative for the Qods Force to ascertain firsthand how confident Tehran was about the new position of the Arab royals from across the Gulf.
As a result, on August 6, 2019, Qassem Soleimani met Mohammed Javad Zarif at the Foreign Ministry in downtown Tehran.
They discussed coordination of forthcoming regional crises and diplomatic initiatives. They agreed that the current dynamic vis-à-vis the US could lead to either a US capitulation and withdrawal, or to a major escalation all over the greater Middle East. Soleimani believed the latter option was more likely. Therefore, Soleimani and Zarif discussed how to better utilize the Russian and PRC umbrella to not only shield Iran against US onslaught, but to also convince the Arab states to stay out of the fighting.
Soleimani assured Zarif that “the IRGC’s Qods Force is fully supportive of the diplomatic apparatus of the country in all encounters against the US harsh policies”. In a brief photo-op, Soleimani addressed the newly-imposed US sanctions on Zarif, and “congratulated the Foreign Minister on becoming a target of the US anger and animosity because of [his] affiliation with [the] Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamene‘i”.
In early August 2019, the Gulf sheikhdoms and Saudi Arabia agreed to seek and accept the PRC umbrella as proposed to them, and so notified Beijing. According to the plan, the PRC would provide an overall umbrella capable of containing and restraining the US, while Russia would join China in calming down Iran and ameliorating threats to the Arabs.
Among the Arab leaders involved, Mohammed bin Zayed was the most enthusiastic and active in embracing the new regional order which was effectively anti-US. Mohammad bin Salman followed, but somewhat hesitantly. MBS was afraid to acknowledge the collapse of what he had perceived to be his close personal relations with the upper-most echelons of the Trump White House: that is, Trump and Kushner.
On August 6, 2019, the PRC Ambassador to Tehran, Chang Hua, delivered the decision of the Forbidden City to play the active and leading rôle in the establishment of a new regime of collective security in the Persian Gulf.
Beijing was convinced, he stated, that “any projects and initiatives that aim to strengthen security in the Persian Gulf must be proposed and carried out by the regional countries themselves”. Chang Hua explained that “the Chinese side, as President Xi Jinping has said, is hopeful that the Persian Gulf will remain a region of peace and security”. The PRC was ready to actively contribute to the sustenance of peace and security in this crucial area. “The Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz are the most critical channel and gateway in the world for transferring energy; therefore, they are significant for the world’s policy-making, security and economy,” Chang Hua concluded.
The PRC also started to implement specific undertakings.
First came the decision to increase the importation of Iranian oil, not only to help an ally in distress, but also as an affront to the United States. According to PRC senior officials in Beijing: “China continues oil imports from Iran to show independence from US sanctions.” The PRC also agreed to purchase oil with yuans, euros, and other currencies in order to reduce their vulnerability to US financial sanctions. The PRC would continue to import its Iranian crude via at least a dozen Iranian tankers also in order to demonstrate to all that “China [is] a country powerful enough to bust US sanctions”.
Moreover, the anticipated large-scale PRC imports of Iranian crude would have a major impact on the price of oil. Experts in the US and Europe concluded that under such circumstances, the oil price could sink by as much as $30 a barrel. The experts worried that the PRC might decide to purchase large quantities of Iranian oil as a retaliation for the trade/tariff war with the US.
“This decision would both undermine US foreign policy and cushion the negative terms-of-trade effects on the Chinese economy of rising US tariffs,” concluded a Bank of America Merrill Lynch Global Research report. Significantly, the original price estimate discussed between the US and Saudi Arabia was $60 a barrel. That estimate was based on the idea that increased Saudi and US oil production would fill the gap created by the imposition of the US sanctions on Iranian oil. But the PRC commitment to buying more Iranian oil invalidated this plan. Thus, while the UAE was willing to accept such a price drop as a necessary evil needed to prevent a calamitous regional war, Saudi Arabia was furious, given its financial woes which the oil price hike could have eased.
Meanwhile, also on August 6, 2019, the PRC Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, Ni Jian, formally informed Abu Dhabi that, should there be a deterioration in the security situation, the PRC’s PLA Navy would start escorting tankers and other commercial vessels in the Persian Gulf. “If there happens to be a very unsafe situation, we will consider having our navy escort our commercial vessels,” Ni Jian stated.
Officially, Beijing did not rule out coordination with the US-led initiative to escort tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. However, given the PRC commitment to buying and shipping Iranian oil that the US initiative was intended to prevent, the prospects for PRC cooperation would probably be nil. Ni Jian emphasized the PRC support for regional security arrangements and regional negotiations of the type the UAE has with Iran. “We have the position that all disputes should be sorted by peaceful means and by political discussions, not … military actions,” Ni Jian concluded.
Beijing’s agreeing to assume a major, and, for the PRC, unprecedented, rôle in the Persian Gulf comes at a crucial time for the PLA.
On July 28, 2019, the PRC issued a major White Paper titled China’s National Defense in the New Era. The document constituted an authoritative statement regarding the PRC’s military reforms and strategic aspirations under the leadership of Xi Jinping.
For the first time, an official PRC defense document acknowledged the rivalry with the US military and clearly articulated China’s long-term goal to confront and challenge “US dominance”. These goals would be attained through, among other things, the expansion of the PRC “power projection capabilities”, particularly the Navy’s. The White Paper heralded a significant shift in maritime strategy from “near seas defense” to “the combination of near seas defense and far seas protection”. Adopting the “far seas” strategy, the White Paper stated, would enable the PRC to “build itself into a maritime power”.
Xi Jinping’s longer-term objective was for the PLA to become a global force. With the new rôle in the Persian Gulf, Xi Jinping’s PRC was taking a major step toward attaining this goal.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2NnqA6r Tyler Durden
As ZH readers are no doubt aware, America’s most ‘progressive’ cities have become ground-zero for a what has become an all-out homelessness crisis, leaving these once-beautiful cities a bastion of human suffering which rival some third-world nations.
This summer, Fox News‘ Barnini Chakraborty embarked on an ambitious project to chronicle the crisis in four West Coast cities; Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon.
“In each city, we saw a lack of safety, sanitation and civility,” writes Chakraborty. “Residents, the homeless and advocates say they’ve lost faith in their elected officials’ ability to solve the issue. Most of the cities have thrown hundreds of millions of dollars at the problem only to watch it get worse.”
In May, new data revealed that homelessness in San Francisco had jumped 17% since 2017, and would have risen by 30% if the city had used past definitions.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s definition of homelessness includes people who are living on the streets, in cars or in shelters. San Francisco’s own definition widens the category to people without a permanent address who are in prison, rehab or hospitalized. If the city used the same measurement it had in years past, the numbers would show an increase from 7,400 to 9,784 — or 30 percent in 2019. –Fox News
On Monday and Tuesday, Chakraborti published her findings on Los Angeles, and San Francisco, which notably points out the disparity between progressives driving around in supercars while homeless residents – many of whom are addicted to drugs or have mental problems which prevent them from working, languish on shit-covered streets.
“It’s the stale stench of liquor and human waste that hits you first, Chakraborti writes of Los Angeles. “Then it’s visual — row after row of dirty tarp tents crammed together on the sidewalk next to piles of rotting trash and broken appliances. There are half-dressed, drugged-out shells of people wandering aimlessly in the middle of the street. Some curse at cars. Others just stare. There are fights, prostitution and rodent burrows. This is the fabled Skid Row in Los Angeles and it’s a disaster.“
Failed liberal policies coupled with decades of neglect and mismanagement have turned an old problem into a modern-day nightmare. Some fear the City of Angels is at the point of no return and are angry at elected officials who talk a big game but rarely deliver.
“I don’t want to see them on camera anymore,” Marquesha Babers, who lived on Skid Row as a teenager, told Fox News. “I don’t want them to write any more articles about how much they care or how much they’re trying to change things. I want to see them do it.” –Fox News
Meanwhile, on any given day in San Francisco “you can see souped-up Lamborghinis and blinged-out trophy wives in one part of the city, then walk over a few blocks and see piles of human feces, puddles of urine and vomit caked on the sidewalks. The misery of homelessness, mental illness and drug addiction hits deep in San Francisco and has turned parts of a beautiful city into a public toilet,” according to the report.
As the problem grows, residents are finding themselves at a crossroads. The compassion for those struggling is constantly being challenged by a fear for their own safety and quality of life. It never had to get this bad, say critics, who are appalled that it’s getting worse every day. –Fox News
“I won’t visit my son who lives out there again,” Amelia Cartwright told Fox News. “It’s disgusting. I went there a few months ago for the first time and this guy who looked homeless and really beat up spit on me. Can you imagine? He spit on me!”
A cleaning woman who works in downtown San Francisco told Fox News that a homeless woman makes a daily appearance to curse at her and spit on the window.
What’s more, mentally ill people harassing residents has taken a dangerous turn.
Last week, Austin Vincent, a homeless man, was caught on camera attacking a 26-year-old woman outside her condo complex. As he threw Paneez Kosarian on the ground, he allegedly talked about saving her from robots and offered to kill another woman nearby so he could earn her trust.
Vincent was arrested and pleaded not guilty to a false imprisonment charge and two counts of battery and attempted robbery. Instead of being thrown in jail, Superior Court Judge Christine Van Aken released Vincent over the objections of the district attorney’s office. Her decision caused a huge backlash in the community and was slammed by Mayor London Breed and other city officials. The judge eventually ordered Vincent to wear an ankle monitor.
On Monday, Vincent was arrested again for an alleged assault that occurred in February. The police said he was armed with a knife and approached a woman and her friends as they waited for a ride. Vincent allegedly threatened to kill the woman and lunged at the group. –Fox News
“The goal was to be more helpful to society, helpful to the homeless issue, helpful to the police department and the court system. But as we saw, it’s a total failure at this point,” said former mayoral candidate, Richie Greenberg, who added “The intention was to help, of course, but what it really wound up doing is that it made San Francisco more attractive to those who are both homeless and those who are drug addicts to move here. We are now finding that homelessness is increasing. Drug addiction is increasing and the number of people here — the numbers are increasing, as well.“
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/30spIkM Tyler Durden
From time to time it’s important to take a giant step back and take a fresh look at everything that’s going on with a big picture perspective.
The last few weeks has been nothing short of incredible… so many important things happening that have never happened before ever. Let’s take a step back together:
1) $50 billion to “elevate your consciousness”
As we discussed on Monday, WeWork filed its formal IPO paperwork in the United States last week, indicating that the company will be worth nearly $50 BILLION when it goes public.
WeWork has never turned a profit. It doesn’t expect to turn a profit. It doesn’t have a plan to turn a profit. And it claims its mission is to ‘elevate the world’s consciousness’.
WeWork owns no real estate. It has almost no assets. In fact, WeWork’s primary asset is the office space it currently leases (i.e. does not own).
And to be fair, they’re leasing a LOT of space. WeWork hopes to eventually lease 40 million square feet of office space.
But at $50 BILLION, investors are essentially paying $1,250 for each square foot of office space that WeWork is LEASING.
That’s almost as expensive as what it costs to BUY in New York City.
Talk about overpaying.
Then there’s are the ridiculous shenanigans of WeWork’s co-founder/CEO Adam Neumann, who has a history of unethical behavior.
Neumann charged his own company nearly $6 million for the “We” trademark earlier this year. He borrowed money from the company to buy real estate that he immediately leased back to WeWork.
And now he’s selling shares in this IPO to investors which have dramatically diminished voting rights… further cementing his power over the company.
So not only are investors dramatically overpaying for a company that has very few assets and burns cash with no end in sight, but they’re willingly giving up control to someone who has a history of enriching himself at their expense.
2) Yikes! Interest rates
But perhaps even more insane than WeWork (if that’s even possible) is what’s happening with interest rates.
Last week the yield on the 30-year US Treasury Bond hit an ALL-TIME LOW, breaking below 2% for the first time ever.
In other words, investors have essentially agreed to loan money to the US federal government for THREE DECADES at less than 2% per year.
That’s pure madness. That rate doesn’t even keep up with inflation… let alone take into consideration that the US government is totally insolvent.
But if you think that’s bad, Germany’s 30-year bond is presently at MINUS 0.12%! In fact, there is not a single German government bond that has a yield above zero right now.
(According to the Financial Times, there’s more than $15 TRILLION worth of bonds in the world right now that have negative yields!)
And next door in Austria, the government has issued a 100-year bond that yields just 1.1%.
100 years! Just think of everything that could happen over that period of time. It was barely a century ago, in fact, that the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed after World War I and the Austrian republic even came into existence!
And then of course there was the great hyperinflation of the 1920s, the German invasion of 1938, etc.
But I’m sure the next 100 years will be all rainbows and buttercups… more than justifying a 1.1% annualized return that doesn’t even keep up with inflation.
3) Stock market jitters
The past few weeks have seen the US stock market swooning, down 400 points, up 500 points, down 800 points. These are pretty wild swings, suggesting that investors are extremely uncertain and struggling to find anywhere sensible to put their money.
4) The Federal Reserve is extremely aggressive
It’s remarkable that the Federal Reserve (along with most of the world’s central bankers) is cutting interest rates.
By most measurements, the US economy is overheating. Unemployment is at a historic low. Yet the Fed is CUTTING interest rates (which are already WAY below historic averages).
Central banks typically only cut rates in a time of economic weakness, or rising unemployment. Cutting rates during ‘good times’ is incredibly unusual.
This leads me to gold…
None of this is supposed to be happening.
Investors aren’t supposed to overpay for shares of a real estate company that doesn’t actually own any real estate.
They’re not supposed to suffer NEGATIVE interest rates… or record low yields on long-term bonds.
The market isn’t supposed to constantly bounce around like a pinball. The Fed isn’t supposed to be aggressively slashing interest rates when the unemployment rate is near a record low.
The general theme here is chaos and uncertainty. The system is clearly broken. Again, none of this is supposed to be happening.
And that’s what makes gold such a sensible asset to own right now.
Gold is an asset with a 5,000+ year history of value and marketability. But it’s especially valuable in times of chaos and uncertainty.
I’ve been writing about this for quite some time, arguing back in December and January that it was a great time to buy gold.
Gold prices are up 20% since then. But they could still have more room to rise. (And silver could rise a LOT more.)
Stocks are still hovering near all-time highs. Bonds are at all-time highs. Property prices are near all-time highs.
Nearly every major asset class is near an all-time high. But not gold. Gold is still 30% from its all-time high. And silver would need to more than double to reach its all-time high.
Nothing goes up or down in a straight line… and gold has been rising for months. So it’s possible there may be a correction on the way.
But longer term, if this insanity, chaos, and uncertainty continue, gold is poised to do very well.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/33PewAG Tyler Durden
