iftttwall

Via Disobedient Media

On Tuesday, September 5th, 2017,  the board of MGM Resorts International decided to approve a $1 billion share repurchase program. At a net worth of $17.7 billion today, the program represented a significant portion of its current market cap. By the end of the week, MGM’s CEO, James Murren, had coolly divested himself of 80% of the shares he owned in his company. The divestment came just days before the ex-dividend date on September 8th, 2017.

The sales were originally disclosed in a document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Murren had previously divested 57,269 shares on July 31st and August 9th, 2017.

It’s currently unclear why Murren chose to sell when he did. To date, MGM’s stock has not experienced a significant decline in value due to the repurchasing program. As the CEO of MGM, it runs against the company’s interests to convey a sense of urgency in the selling personal stock of shares immediately after the announcement of my company’s share repurchase program. It’s also strange that the CEO of a company would sell more than half of their stake (let alone 80%) in the company that they represented.

Mr. Murren and his fellow board members were not the only speculators who were bearish on MGM’s prospects. Billionaire investor George Soros also bought $42 million worth of puts on the company, according to SEC filings from mid August.

That point being made, it needs to be asked why any profit-oriented CEO of any company would sell 80% of his personal stake in his own corporation, especially after he thought it was in the business’ best interest to initiate a massive share repurchase program which one would theoretically assume to reduce the number of shares in the company and increase the price of each share, ceteris peribus. Why would the individual with the most information about the company sell 80% of his shares immediately after the commencement of a program that most would consider positive for the stock? Shouldn’t he want to hold on to his shares? Is there something he knew, that others didn’t, that lead to so much movement in such little time? What a week!

On September 5th, 2017, 18 analysts were bullish on MGM, 1 had a hold rating, and 1 had a sell rating. Taking the events of September and October into consideration, has MGM’s picture heading forward improved, or worsened?

via http://ift.tt/2y8InH4 William Craddick

Yesterday when we discussed the dramatic crash in the Turkish lira, resulting from the visa suspension drama at both Turkish and US consulates, we noted that “this is the currency’s seventh consecutive decline, after dropping on Friday amid concern Fed tightening would hurt EM currencies, and should it persist may finally have an adverse impact on other EM currencies, not to mention various other local Turkish asset classes when markets reopen in a few hours.”

Well, it’s now a few hours later, and as expected the selloff has spread, with the Borsa Istanbul 100 Index dropping as much as 4.7% to the lowest since June 21: the selloff was the biggest one-day drop since the “failed coup” of July 18, 2016; with the index breaking below 100-DMA, and now in a correction, down 10% since peak in late August. Among biggest decliners on Monday are Turkish Airlines, down 8%; Karsan Otomotiv (-8.9%), Zorlu Enerji (-8.4%), Dogan Sirketler Grubu (-8.3%)

As for the Lira, it continued sliding and at one point the session drop was a large as 8%.

But more importantly, overnight the risk of EM contagion stemming from the Turkish crash was also the topic of the latest note from Mark Cudmore – Bloomberg’s versatile FX and macro strategist – who just like us, believes that unless the TRY crash is stabilized, it could lead to a broader EM rout. As Cudmore notes, “International investors have been gobbling up Turkish debt this year. Those positions were beginning to look vulnerable as the lira led the broad emerging-market FX correction that started almost a month ago. Such investments became more vulnerable last week, when Turkish inflation data confirmed prices are spiraling out of control and real yields in the country are too low. The move toward the exit by bond holders may soon become a stampede.”

More importantly, there is precedent: “In 2006, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index sold off 25% in five weeks. That happened in the middle of the golden age for EM and a multi-year bull market for the asset class. Back then, there didn’t seem to be anything wrong until the Turkish lira suddenly blew up in early May. That prompted position trimming across EM, which then triggered stop losses across the sector in a negative loop.”

Finally, Cudmore warns that “the pain may not be limited to EM. The asset class has been one of the most resilient and entrenched trades of 2017. As losses and volatility both mount in EM, it’s likely to lead to position trimming and higher volatility elsewhere as well.“

If Cudmore is right, keep an eye on the chart below: it could be the catalyst for the much anticipated and long overdue correction in EM… and from there spread to developed markets….

Here is the full Macro View note from Cudmore:

This Lira Sell-Off Isn’t Just a Turkish Issue

 

The losses in the Turkish lira are sizable enough to cause contagion. Investors everywhere should prepare. 

 

The lira is being hit by an escalation in political tensions with the U.S. Outside Turkey, most assets are calm this Monday. Don’t be lulled into a sense of complacency.

 

This is the largest lira drop since the attempted coup on July 15, 2016, and the currency is at its weakest level ever versus the euro-dollar basket. That doesn’t just matter psychologically. It also puts real pressure on Turkey’s massive FX liabilities.

 

International investors have been gobbling up Turkish debt this year. Those positions were beginning to look vulnerable as the lira led the broad emerging-market FX correction that started almost a month ago.

 

Such investments became more vulnerable last week, when Turkish inflation data confirmed prices are spiraling out of control and real yields in the country are too low. The move toward the exit by bond holders may soon become a stampede.

 

Investors in other EM countries will be compelled to take note as value-at-risk measures climb; developing-nation currency volatility has already been marching higher since August. With a stronger dollar and higher U.S. yields, the macro environment is looking a lot less friendly than it was a month ago.

 

High-yielding, high-volatility EM currencies like the South African rand, the Brazilian real and the Mexican peso may be the first places where contagion shows up.

 

The pain may not be limited to EM. The asset class has been one of the most resilient and entrenched trades of 2017. As losses and volatility both mount in EM, it’s likely to lead to position trimming and higher volatility elsewhere as well.

 

In 2006, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index sold off 25% in five weeks. That happened in the middle of the golden age for EM and a multi-year bull market for the asset class. Back then, there didn’t seem to be anything wrong until the Turkish lira suddenly blew up in early May. That prompted position trimming across EM, which then triggered stop losses across the sector in a negative loop.

 

That’s just a reminder that market corrections often begin in unexpected places and unpredictable ways.

via http://ift.tt/2yAfmFk Tyler Durden

Authored by Stephen Lendman,

Like America, Britain is unfit and unsafe to live in – both countries police states, serving privileged interests exclusively, allied in waging wars OF terror in multiple theaters, along with abolishing fundamental homeland freedoms.

The latest civil rights abuse came from hardline home secretary Amber Rudd.

She’s spearheading a Tory effort to criminalize readership of so-called extremist content online – punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

The same holds for anyone publishing content Tories call extremist, especially about Britain’s military, intelligence services and police that could be considered related to preparing terrorist acts.

“I want to make sure those who view despicable terrorist content online, including jihadi websites, far-right propaganda and bomb-making instructions, face the full force of the law,” Rudd blustered, adding:

 

“There is currently a gap in the law around material (that) is viewed or streamed from the Internet without being permanently downloaded.”

 

“This is an increasingly common means by which material is accessed online for criminal purposes and is a particularly prevalent means of viewing extremist material such as videos and web pages.”

A Home Office analysis showed thousands of online ISIS tweets and other material over the past year.

Unmentioned was US and UK support for the terrorist group, recruiting, arming, funding, training and directing its fighters, using them as imperial foot soldiers in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.

The way to end extremist online content from ISIS and likeminded terrorist groups is by no longer supporting them, combating their fighters instead of using them.

Most important is ending US-led imperial wars in multiple theaters. ISIS and likeminded terrorist groups were created to serve as imperial ground forces, aided by Pentagon-led terror-bombing.

Changes Rudd proposed aim to strengthen Britain’s 2000 Terrorism Act. It authorizes civil liberties-destroying police powers, including repressive stop-and-searches ruled illegal by the European Court of Human Rights.

It criminalizes being a member of, supporting, or wearing clothing arousing suspicion of involvement with a proscribed group. Dozens named are nearly all Muslim ones.

Current UK law applies only to downloaded and saved extremist material. Proposed changes criminalize reading it online.

Commenting on the proposed measure, Law Professor Jonathan Turley noted that “civil libertarians have warned that Great Britain has been in a free fall from the criminalization of speech to the expansion of the surveillance state.”

Tories aren’t “satiated by their ever-expanding criminalization of speech. They now want to criminalize even viewing sites on the Internet.”

 

“As always, officials are basically telling the public to ‘trust us, we’re the government.’ “ Criminalizing readership of online content amounts to “an anti-civil liberties campaign.”

A previous article discussed Prime Minister Theresa May wanting greater government control of the Internet.

If readership of material Tories call unacceptable is criminalized, what’s next?

Thought control? Criminalizing legitimate criticism of government policies? Public protests against government policies? Banning free expression on any topics online or in public spaces altogether?

Turley quoted from Orwell’s 1984 as follows:

“We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites.”

 

“The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives.”

 

“They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal.”

 

“We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end.”

 

“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.”

America, Britain and other Western nations are heading toward instituting full-blown tyranny.

Perhaps another state-sponsored 9/11-type incident will assure it.

via http://ift.tt/2g3LcCr Tyler Durden

In a furious tweetstorm this weekend, Facebook's Chief Security Officer warned interfering desperate politicians and triggered letfists that the fake news problem is more complicated and dangerous to solve than the public thinks.

As a reminder, we noted that Alex Stamos was seemingly pressured into 'finding' Russian evidence after Senator Mark Warner paid the social media company a visit –

A few weeks after the French election, Warner flew out to California to visit Facebook in person. It was an opportunity for the senator to press Stamos directly on whether the Russians had used the company’s tools to disseminate anti-Clinton ads to key districts.

 

Officials said Stamos underlined to Warner the magnitude of the challenge Facebook faced policing political content that looked legitimate.

 

Stamos told Warner that Facebook had found no accounts that used advertising but agreed with the senator that some probably existed. The difficulty for Facebook was finding them.

 

For months, a team of engineers at Facebook had been searching through accounts, looking for signs that they were set up by operatives working on behalf of the Kremlin. The task was immense.

 

Warner’s visit spurred the company to make some changes in how it conducted its internal investigation. Instead of searching through impossibly large batches of data, Facebook decided to focus on a subset of political ads.

 

Technicians then searched for “indicators” that would link those ads to Russia. To narrow down the search further, Facebook zeroed in on a Russian entity known as the Internet Research Agency, which had been publicly identified as a troll farm.

 

“They worked backwards,” a U.S. official said of the process at Facebook.

 

The breakthrough moment came just days after a Facebook spokesman on July 20 told CNN that “we have seen no evidence that Russian actors bought ads on Facebook in connection with the election.”

And the rest is history as 3000 "Russian Ads" were suddenly discovered to enable Warner to keep the narrative alive – and more crucially demand social media companies crackdown on 'fake news', on politically-sponsored and divisive ads, and on anything they decide is not really fitting their identity-politics-based narratives.

However, given this weekend's tweetstorm by Stamos, we suspect he has finally snapped and been forced to shove some common sense down the throats of the vengeful politicians who see no unintended consequences in their demands for big-brother-esque newspeak. 

"It’s very difficult to spot fake news and propaganda using just computer programs," Stamos said in a series of Twitter posts on Saturday.

 

“Nobody of substance at the big companies thinks of algorithms as neutral,” Stamos wrote, adding that the media is simplifying the matter.

 

“Nobody is not aware of the risks.”

 

For example, lots of journalists have celebrated academics who have made wild claims of how easy it is to spot fake news and propaganda.

— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) October 7, 2017

So if you don't worry about becoming the Ministry of Truth with ML systems trained on your personal biases, then it's easy!

— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) October 7, 2017

My suggestion for journalists is to try to talk to people who have actually had to solve these problems and live with the consequences.

— Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) October 7, 2017

 

As Bloomberg reports, the easy technical solutions would boil down to silencing topics that Facebook is aware are being spread by bots — which should only be done “if you don’t worry about becoming the Ministry of Truth” with machine learning systems “trained on your personal biases,” he said.

“A lot of people aren’t thinking hard about the world they are asking [Silicon Valley] to build,” Stamos wrote.

 

“When the gods wish to punish us they answer our prayers.”

Stamos’s comments shed light on why Facebook added 1,000 more people review its advertising, rather than attempting an automated solution.

The company sent a note to advertisers telling them it would start to manually review ads targeted to people based on politics, religion, ethnicity or social issues. The company is trying to figure out how to monitor use of its system without censoring ideas, after the Russian government used fake accounts to spread political discord in the U.S. ahead of the election.

The silver lining at least is that Stamos is aware of what a terrible idea the kind of censorship that Democratic politicians (and John McCain) are demanding… whether this means that, behind the smoke and mirrors of actively managing your news feed to provide you with your self-bias-perpetuating perspective, anything will change, is anyone's guess.

via http://ift.tt/2z9kKw8 Tyler Durden

Hundreds of thousands of Catalonians took to the streets – estimated by the police at 350,000 people, though organizers said it was twice that – to demonstrate against independence this weekend:

“Catalonia is not all for independence,” said José Manuel Alaminos, a 64-year-old lawyer. He said that Carles Puigdemont, the regional president who has led the independence movement, “is supposed to represent all of us.”

 

The separatist push has brought about one of Spain’s worst constitutional crises since the end of the Franco dictatorship nearly 43 years ago.

 

“But we are Catalonians too! The world doesn’t know the truth,” Mr. Alaminos said, pointing to the enormous crowd. “This is the truth.”

Despite the overwhelmning results of the referendum, the region remains, in fact, deeply split over independence.

Additionally, in an interview with El Pais newspaper, Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said he will consider taking the so-called "nuclear option" – the dramatic measure of suspending Catalonia's autonomous status – as Catalan leaders escalate threats to declare independence from the country, which could culminate with a parliamentary announcement as soon as Monday.

Asked if he was ready to trigger article 155, Rajoy told El Pais newspaper:

“ I am not ruling out anything that the law says. What I have to do is do things at the right time, which is the most important thing right now. The ideal situation would be to not have to take drastic solutions, but for that to happen there would have to be rectifications."

It remains unclear just how the current Spain crisis is resolved: the past week in Catalonia has been nothing short of chaotic, but James George Jatra, via The Strategic Culture Foundation, has one potential solution: All Of Spain Should Vote On Catalan Independence.

There is a certain frame of mind that believes that secession by ethnic minorities is an absolute good in itself. Asked the question, “Should Region X have the right to secede from Country Y?”, a lot of people will answer with a resounding “Yes!” without knowing or even caring where X and Y are or who lives there.

Others are more selective, relying instead on the Bolshevik principle of kto-kovo (“who-whom”), which relegates the righteousness of secession to whether or not the observer likes or dislikes the state in question. This is typical of western governments. Good secessions are from countries we don’t like – Serbia above all, of course. Independent Kosovo: good. Montenegro’s separation from its union with Serbia: good. But Republika Srpska’s possible separation from Bosnia and Herzegovina: bad. Independence of Serbian Kraijinas from secessionist Croatia: emphatically bad. Northern Kosovo and Metohija’s separation from “sovereign, independent Kosovo”: very, very bad.

The only constant: Serbs are always wrong.

The same subjective kto-kovo frames conflicts in the former Soviet Union. The deus ex machina independence of all the former Union Republics was an automatic and positive development. But the desire of any portion of them – Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Adzharia (Georgia), Pridnestrovie, Gagauzia (Moldova), Crimea, Donbass (Ukraine) – to leave its former Union Republic is per se illegitimate, notwithstanding the 1990 Soviet law on secession requiring separate referenda in such entities.

The desire of Catalans – or more precisely, of some undetermined portion of people living in Catalonia – to secede from Spain is different because it doesn’t fit into the usual kto-kovo international lineup. One finds among Catalan sympathizers many of the usual partisans of biased western selectivity as well as some of their fiercest critics (such as the usually sound Pepe Escobar). Likewise, members of both of the usual camps have expressed opposition to Catalan secession, either out of mechanical support for “western institutions” (the European Union, the US) or consistent support for the principle of state sovereignty (the government of Serbia and most of the countries that oppose an independent Kosovo).

In the court of public opinion, the pro-independence camp has gained the upper hand. While the Catalan referendum was clearly illegal under Spanish law and the Spanish authorities had every right to shut it down, the TV images of police using physical force to prevent people from casting a ballot played badly against Madrid – which is no doubt what was intended. If, as expected, Catalan independence is declared in the coming days, Madrid will have little choice but to suspend Catalonia’s autonomy, further radicalizing the situation. (Remember how the west falsely cited Slobodan Milosevic’s supposedly “abolishing” of Kosovo’s “constitutionally guaranteed autonomy” in 1989 as proof of an impending “final solution” against the province’s Albanians.)

The morality play of Madrid’s “authoritarian” violation of “democracy” brings us to another canard: the notion that the “will of the Catalan people” is paramount. This is misguided for at least two reasons…

First, who decided that Catalonia as a subdivision of Spain, or of Catalans as a distinct nation, is in a position to asset a sovereign, united “will” apart from the rest of Spain? As was the case with Kosovo (and just a week ago, in Iraqi Kurdistan), Catalonia demonstrates the futility of granting autonomy to a region based on a minority ethnic, linguistic, or religious identity. Doing so only whets that minority’s demand for more cession of power, culminating in the demand for independence. (Hence, in Serbia the League of Social Democrats of Vojvodina endorsed the Catalan referendum.)

Second, granting presumptive sovereignty to an aspiring secessionist entity always ends up shortchanging those who don’t want to secede. This can take more than one form. One example is the “West Virginia” model, whereby one region within the entity doesn’t want to leave; comparable to Pridnestrovie, South Ossetia, Republika Srpska, etc. Another is intimidation of citizens who are loyal to the common state – who according to polls represent a majority in Catalonia. As stated by film director Isabel Coixet i Castillo in El País:

I see now, with horrifying clarity, that no matter what happens next, there is no room here for me or for anybody who dares to think independently, even though this is my birthplace. Today it is insults against me, yesterday it was insults against members of my family; the day before it was insults against friends of mine whose other friends openly criticize the fact that the former are still friends with me. And tomorrow, it will be something worse. [ . . . ]

 

Because if, when you condemn the (Spanish) government’s actions, you don’t also condone the Catalan government’s actions, you immediately become an enemy, a fascist, a fascistoid, a Franco follower, the scum of the earth. And you think about the fear that has already covered, like spores, the skin of all those people who keep quiet but who secretly come tell you that they’re on your side – that they are grateful for what you are doing, and then they tell you that they don’t even talk about the situation inside their own homes, for fear that their children will hear them and get into trouble at school.

 

These are not mere anecdotes. This is the reality on the ground for those of us who live here. This is the new, shocking fracture of a society that used to live in peace and without fear, with logical differences of opinion and different values and different criteria, but always on a foundation of respect.

Madrid has stumbled badly. Whether the situation is already unsalvageable is unclear at this point. What is clear is that increasing confrontation and repression, however legal and even necessary, will bolster the intolerant, revolutionary repression of Spanish patriots and embolden secessionists.

When Catalan authorities scheduled their referendum, Madrid could have coopted it by saying, “Great idea! The whole of Spain will vote on whether Catalonia should be independent.”

Not only would that have given the rest of the country a voice, it would have allowed the cowed and silent majority within Catalonia to express its will. Perhaps even at this late date it’s an idea the Spanish government should consider.

via http://ift.tt/2yRwu5j Tyler Durden

There’s something deeply wrong at Creech Air Force Base, the notorious home of America’s drone program, where pilots remotely order US Reaper and Predator drones to unleash destructive missile strikes on unsuspecting villagers in Yemen, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and other war zones.

Less than a week after the Department of Homeland Security advised all federal agencies using anti-virus software created by Kaspersky Labs to remove the programs from their systems immediately, Ars Technica reports that two weeks ago the Defense Information Systems Agency detected mysterious spyware embedded in the drone “cockpits” – the control stations that pilots use to control the deadly machines.

Investigators have been unable to determine the virus’s provenance, or even if it was intentionally introduced to the drone systems, or the result of an accidental infection. But perhaps the virus’s most perplexing feature is its passivity. Instead of hastening away reams of classified information, it has simply logged keystrokes.

More curious still, the virus has resisted all attempts to remove it from the Air Force’s systems.

The virus, first detected nearly two weeks ago by the military’s Host-Based Security System, has not prevented pilots at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada from flying their missions overseas. Nor have there been any confirmed incidents of classified information being lost or sent to an outside source. But the virus has resisted multiple efforts to remove it from Creech’s computers, network security specialists say. And the infection underscores the ongoing security risks in what has become the US military’s most important weapons system.

 

“We keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back,” says a source familiar with the network infection, one of three that told Danger Room about the virus. “We think it’s benign. But we just don’t know.”

 

Military network security specialists aren’t sure whether the virus and its so-called “keylogger” payload were introduced intentionally or by accident; it may be a common piece of malware that just happened to make its way into these sensitive networks. The specialists don’t know exactly how far the virus has spread. But they’re sure that the infection has hit both classified and unclassified machines at Creech. That raises the possibility, at least, that secret data may have been captured by the keylogger, and then transmitted over the public internet to someone outside the military chain of command.

As Ars notes, drones have become America’s weapon of choice for waging stealth warfare across the Middle East and Africa, a fact that was underlined by the killing of four US green berets in Niger earlier this week. The military advisers were serving at a waystation for American drones that were used to carry out attacks on nearby Al Qaeda affiliates.

Drones have become America’s tool of choice in both its conventional and shadow wars, allowing US forces to attack targets and spy on its foes without risking American lives. Since President Obama assumed office, a fleet of approximately 30 CIA-directed drones have hit targets in Pakistan more than 230 times; all told, these drones have killed more than 2,000 suspected militants and civilians, according to the Washington Post. More than 150 additional Predator and Reaper drones, under US Air Force control, watch over the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. American military drones struck 92 times in Libya between mid-April and late August. And late last month, an American drone killed top terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki — part of an escalating unmanned air assault in the Horn of Africa and southern Arabian peninsula.

And while they represent America’s most sophisticated weaponry in the never-ending war on terror, the drone program has well-known security flaws. Last fall, the US Air Force investigated a secure network outage in early September at Creech. Around the time of the outage, there were three incidences of drones striking three unintended targets. The Air Force said it was just a coincidence. 

But despite their widespread use, the drone systems are known to have security flaws. Many Reapers and Predators don’t encrypt the video they transmit to American troops on the ground. In the summer of 2009, US forces discovered “days and days and hours and hours” of the drone footage on the laptops of Iraqi insurgents. A $26 piece of software allowed the militants to capture the video.

Authorities believe the virus was spread by the use of remote drives used by technicians to upload maps and other data to the drone piloting systems, which are “air gapped” from the rest of the Air Force’s systems.

Use of the drives is now severely restricted throughout the military. But the base at Creech was one of the exceptions, until the virus hit. Predator and Reaper crews use removable hard drives to load map updates and transport mission videos from one computer to another. The virus is believed to have spread through these removable drives. Drone units at other Air Force bases worldwide have now been ordered to stop their use.

But given the hysteria surrounding Kaspersky’s software allegedly being used as a tool for espionage by the Russian government, how long until this breach is connected with a broader narrative about Russian hackers trying to destabilize American society?

Or, worse – how much longer until a malicious actor manages to seize control of America’s drone program and harness its destructive capabilities for its own ends?

via http://ift.tt/2xslD5O Tyler Durden

Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

• Andrej Babis, one of the Czech Republic's wealthiest people, presents himself as a non-ideological results-oriented reformer. He has pledged to run the country like a business after years of what he calls corrupt and inept management. He is demanding a return of sovereignty from the European Union and rejects the euro.
• Babis's anti-establishment party ANO (which stands for "Action of Dissatisfied Citizens" and is also the Czech word for "yes") is centrist, technocratic and pro-business. ANO, which rejects political labels, has attracted voters from both left and right, pulling support away from the established parties.
• "The West European politicians keep repeating that it is our duty to comply with what the immigrants want because of their human rights. But what about the human rights of the Germans or the Hungarians? Why should the British accept that the wealth which has been created by many generations of their ancestors, should be consumed by people… who are a security risk and whose desire it is not to integrate but to destroy European culture?" – Andrej Babis, candidate for prime minister of the Czech Republic.

A "politically incorrect" billionaire businessman opposed to further EU integration is on track to become the next prime minister of the Czech Republic.

Andrej Babis, a Slovak-born former finance minister who has been sharply critical of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's open-door migration policy, is leading the polls ahead of general elections, set for October 20.

Babis, one of the country's wealthiest people, presents himself as a non-ideological results-oriented reformer. He has pledged to run the Czech Republic like a business after years of what he calls corrupt and inept management. He is demanding a return of sovereignty from the European Union and rejects the euro; he argues that it would "be another issue that Brussels would be meddling with." He has also said he plans to cut government spending, stop people from "being parasites" in the social welfare system, and fight for Czech interests abroad. Babis is often referred to as "the Czech Donald Trump."

Babis's anti-establishment party ANO (which stands for "Action of Dissatisfied Citizens" and is also the Czech word for "yes") is centrist, technocratic and pro-business. ANO, which rejects political labels, has attracted voters from both left and right, pulling support away from the established parties. Babis has said that ANO aims to replace left and right with "common sense."

A recent poll shows that support for ANO has grown to 30.9%, while the support for the Czech Social Democrats has dropped to 13.1%. The pro-Russian Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia has 11.1%; the nationalist Civic Democratic Party 9.1%. TOP 09, the only openly pro-EU party, will not pass the 5% barrier of entry into Parliament; it is supported by only 4.4% of Czech voters.

Babis's approach to the EU is pragmatic: "They give us money, so our membership is advantageous for us." He does not want the Czech Republic to leave the EU, but he is opposed to the country joining the eurozone:

"No euro. I don't want the euro. We don't want the euro here. Everybody knows it's bankrupt. It's about our sovereignty. I want the Czech koruna, and an independent central bank. I don't want another issue that Brussels would be meddling with."

Andrej Babis (left), then Finance Minister of the Czech Republic, meets with Austria's Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz (right) on February 13, 2015. (Image source: Austrian Foreign Ministry)

Babis has expressed opposition to mass migration: "I have stopped believing in successful integration and multiculturalism."

He has called on Merkel "to give up her political correctness and to begin to act" on securing European borders:

"In return for billions of euros, she should make sure that Greece and Turkey completely stop the arrival of refugees in Europe. Otherwise, it will be her fault what happens to the European population. Unfortunately, Mrs. Merkel refuses to see how serious the situation is in Germany and in other EU nations. Her attitude is really tragic."

Babis blamed Merkel for the December 2016 jihadist attack on a Berlin Christmas market:

"Unfortunately, the migration policy is responsible for this dreadful act. It was she who let migrants enter Germany and the whole of Europe in uncontrolled waves, without papers, therefore without knowing who they really are. Germany is paying a high price for this policy. The solution is peace in Syria and the return of migrants to their homes. There is no place for them in Europe."

Babis has rejected pressure from the European Commission, which has launched infringement procedures against the Czechs, Hungarians and Poles for refusing to comply with an EU plan to redistribute migrants. In August 2016, he tweeted:

"I will not accept refugee quotas for the Czech Republic. The situation has changed. We see how migrants react in Europe. There is a dictator in Turkey. We must react to the needs and fears of the citizens of our country. We must guarantee the security of Czech citizens. Even if we are punished by sanctions."

In June 2017, Babis reiterated that the Czech Republic would not be taking orders from unelected bureaucrats in Brussels:

"We have to fight for what our ancestors built here. If there will be more Muslims than Belgians in Brussels, that's their problem. I don't want that here. They won't be telling us who should live here."

Babis has called on the EU to establish a system to sort economic migrants from legitimate asylum seekers: "The EU must say: You cannot come to us to be unemployed and immediately take social benefits."

In an interview with the Czech daily Pravo, Babis said:

"We are not dutybound to accept anyone and we are not even now able to do so. Our primary responsibility is to make sure that our own citizens are safe. The Czech Republic has enough of its own problems, people living on the breadline, single mothers. The West European politicians keep repeating that it is our duty to comply with what the immigrants want because of their human rights. But what about the human rights of the Germans or the Hungarians? Why should the British accept that the wealth which has been created by many generations of their ancestors, should be consumed by people without any relationship to that country and its culture? People who are a security risk and whose desire it is not to integrate but to destroy European culture?

 

"The public service media in some countries have been brainwashing people. They have been avoiding problems with the immigrants. Politicians have also been lying to their citizens. This has only increased tension between the indigenous population and the immigrants. It is not acceptable that Europeans should have fewer rights than immigrants.

 

"It is unthinkable that the indigenous European population should adapt themselves to the refugees. We must do away with such nonsensical political correctness. The refugees should behave like guests, that is they should be polite, and they certainly do not have the right to choose what they want to eat. Europe and Germany in particular are undergoing an identity crisis. There is a deep chasm between what people think and what the media tell them….

 

"Many of the Middle Eastern refugees are unusable in industry. Many of them are also basically illiterate and they only know two German politicians: Merkel and Hitler."

via http://ift.tt/2y646NV Tyler Durden

Before we can journey to the stars, we must first go to Mars.

That’s Elon Musk’s philosophy, anyways – and as Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins reports, just days ago he revealed new details on his ambitions to colonize the Red Planet, including sending two cargo rockets by 2022 and four rockets (two manned, two cargo) by 2024.

In 40 to 100 years, Musk suggested that up to a million people could live there.

CHANGE OF SEASONS

As Elton John wisely noted, “Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kids”.

Indeed, the average temperature on Mars is −55 °C (−67 °F), dust storms are frequent and potentially deadly, and the planet has extremely low atmospheric pressure (about 1% of Earth). Because of the atmosphere and temperature swings, meaningful occurrences of liquid water on the planet’s surface are almost impossible. And while Mars is thought to have plenty of frozen water at its poles and in underground deposits, the logistics of tapping into these resources could be quite difficult.

In other words, for any meaningful and long-lasting human presence on Mars, we would likely want to alter the planet and its atmosphere to make it more habitable for human life. And while the exact mechanisms we would use to accomplish this are still up for debate, the basics behind what’s needed to achieve Earth-like conditions are actually pretty straightforward.

TERRAFORMING 101

Today’s infographic comes to us from Futurism, and it details what might need to happen on Mars to make it more accommodating to human life.

Here are two steps we could take to get Mars into the “Goldilocks Zone”, where water is liquid – and harmful ionizing radiation like x-rays, UV rays, and gamma rays are not problematic.

Greenhouse Gases
One way to ward off harmful ionizing radiation is to add a thicker layer of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere of Mars. Such an atmosphere would also allows less heat to escape, meaning warmer temperatures on the planet.

 

Magnetic Field
A strong magnetic field on Earth is something else that makes life easier. Earth’s solid inner core, composed primarily of iron, creates this field when the planet spins – and it deflects cosmic rays and other harmful types of radiation.

One interesting solution to solve this problem on Mars would to have a magnetic field generator in front of the planet at all times, deflecting any such rays coming from the sun.

THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY

While terraforming is still a mixture of theory and science fiction at this point, we do know some of the major problems that have to be solved for attaining a habitable environment – and it will be interesting to see how plans around Mars develop as the prospect of colonization becomes more real.

You need to live in a dome initially but over time you could terraform Mars to look like Earth and eventually walk around outside without anything on.

 

… So it’s a fixer-upper of a planet.

 

– Elon Musk

via http://ift.tt/2wHmICo Tyler Durden