US Warship Given Permission To Cross Bosphorus, Enter Black Sea

Yesterday it was two Russian and one Ukrainian warships which had crossed the Bosphorus in direction Crimea, today it is the Americans. As Hurriyet reports, Turkish authorities have given permission to a U.S. Navy warship to pass through the Bosphorus within the next two days as fears grow that the standoff between Russia and Ukraine and the West over Crimea could soon become militarized.

Turkish sources, speaking with the Hürriyet Daily News on March 5, declined to elaborate on the name of the U.S. warship. The same officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, however, noted that it was not the USS George H.W. Bush nuclear aircraft carrier as suggested in some news reports, as it did not meet the standards specified by the 1936 Montreux Convention in terms of weight.

The U.S. Navy ship to pass through the straits will conform to the convention’s standards, the sources said.

According to the Montreux Convention, the total weight of military ships that non-littoral states to the Black Sea may deploy to the body of water cannot exceed 45,000 tons.

As a reminder we have been tracking the CVN-77 for the past week, ever since it crossed the straits of Gibraltar and as of yesterday it was in Piraeus, Greece. It is also worth noting that while the Montreux Convention provides guidelines, it is not restrictive, which means that should the US really want to, it will have no problems getting its aircraft carrier into the Black Sea.

That said, even a simple frigate or cruiser in proximity to a boatload of Russian and Ukraine warships already on edge, will make an already combustible situation extremely volatile with an abundance of false flag provocation opportunities, which those who are most interested in escalating military events, will be delighted to take advantage of.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1dsI74B Tyler Durden

“I want gay people to be able to protect their marijuana plants with guns.”

Tim Moen is a Canadian who is apparently
the first federal Libertarian Party candidate
to run for
Parliament from the Fort McMurray-Athabasca area in Alberta.

Here he is talking to the site of
Fort McMurray Today
:

“To me, that meme [above] is the message of classical
liberalism and the philosophy of liberty”…

“People should be allowed to marry whoever they want, put what
they want into their bodies as long as no one is hurt, and protect
themselves and their property.”…

“I was initially skeptical that political action could
make any positive change in the world, but I was convinced by a
number of people that I would be best at spreading the message of
liberty across the region and Canada.”…

“I do believe if property rights for people and especially
First Nations were enforced, there would be a slower, more
sustainable and responsible pace of development.”…

“The only say I should have, as a government representative, is
with helping resolve disputes.”…

“Gun control is not about protection, so much as it is
about control. We’ve seen what happens in countries that allow
these liberties to be eroded and it’s not pretty.”

The platform of Canada’s LP is summarized thusly:

The party believes in a commitment to free trade. It also
supports the elimination of income tax and the GST [goods and
services tax, a form of sales tax or VAT], opting instead for a
system of fees.

It also supports the elimination of all subsidies, social and
corporate welfare programs and gun control laws.


More here.

Read more at Moen’s
site
 and Facebook page.

Hat tip: The Twitter feed of Isidro by way of
Victoriano Urbano
by way of Frances
Martel
.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1l2jNYR
via IFTTT

E-Cigarettes Are Bad Because They Look Like Cigarettes. E-Hookahs Are Bad Because They Don’t.

The
main rap against e-cigarettes, as
summarized
by the Los Angeles Times in its story
about that city’s
brand-new ban
on vaping in public, is that they look so
much like the real thing that they could “make smoking socially
acceptable after years of public opinion campaigns to discourage
the habit,” thereby “undermining a half-century of successful
tobacco control.” By contrast, the main rap against e-hookahs, as

explained
by The New York Times today, is that
they are “shrewdly marketed to avoid the stigma associated with
cigarettes of any kind.” They do not look like hookahs, but neither
do they resemble conventional cigarettes, since these
vapor-emitting cylinders “come in a rainbow of colors and
candy-sweet flavors.” In fact, they are so distinctive in
appearance and branding that people who buy them do not necessarily
identify themselves as e-cigarette users.

Why is that a problem? Apparently because this fuzziness about
the name of the product makes life more complicated for social
scientists:

The emergence of e-hookahs and their ilk is frustrating public
health officials who are already struggling to measure the spread
of e-cigarettes, particularly among young people. The new products
and new names have health authorities wondering if they are
significantly underestimating use because they are asking the wrong
questions when they survey people about e-cigarettes.

Is there any other objection to e-hookahs? “Beneath the
surface,” the Times warns, “they are often virtually
identical to e-cigarettes, right down to their addictive nicotine
and unregulated swirl of other chemicals.” That “unregulated swirl”
sounds scary, but the components
of e-cigarette vapor—mainly propylene glycol and water, plus
nicotine and flavoring—are vastly preferable to the complicated
mixture of toxins and carcinogens generated by burning tobacco. The
Times offers no evidence that e-cigarettes, by
whatever name they are called, pose a significant hazard to
consumers or bystanders.

So what are those “public health officials” worried about, aside
from the need to revise their survey questions? The Times
says they worry that calling e-cigarettes “e-hookahs,” “vape
pipes,” “vape pens,” or “hookah pens” instead of e-cigarettes
“will lead to increased nicotine use and, possibly, prompt some
people to graduate to cigarettes.” The logic here eludes me: People
who are attracted to e-hookahs because they want nothing to do with
smoking will change their minds because…?

Although many smokers have switched to vaping, the
Times, which is running a series on e-cigarettes, does not
seem to have located a single example of a vaper who switched to
smoking. As far as I know, neither has any other news outlet.
Although that transition is theoretically possible, the evidence
suggests it is not very common. The recent increase in vaping among
teenagers has been accompanied by a
continued decline
in smoking, and in a 2013
survey
of 1,300 college students, only one respondent reported
vaping before he started smoking. The lead researcher said “it
didn’t seem as though it really proved to be a gateway to
anything.”

To sum up: E-cigarettes are bad because they look like
cigarettes. E-hookahs are bad because they don’t. Using either of
them might lead to smoking, although we can’t find any real-life
examples of that. Fruity flavors show these products are aimed at
children—or maybe at young
women
,
middle-aged actresses
, or old
Arab men
. But the point is, they are aimed at somebody, and the
companies selling them clearly are trying to make them appealing,
which cannot be tolerated.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1l2jKfG
via IFTTT

Canada Not Interested in Legalizing Marijuana, Would Like to Give Cops the Power to Ticket Marijuana Users Instead

oh, canadaCanada’s marijuana laws may have at some point
been considered relatively lax, but as legalization is adopted in
places like Colorado and Washington and Uruguay, it’s looking
increasingly not so. Canada’s opposition leader, the Liberal Justin
Trudeau,
appears open to legalization
, and wants Canada to look toward
U.S. states that have legalized for lessons, while Canada’s
Conservative government slammed him for daring to answer a question
about marijuana legalization asked by during a high school Q&A.
Nevertheless, the Conservative government, too, appears open to
revising the criminal code on marijuana. In what may be becoming a
kind of “Canadian approach,” it suggests imposing fines on the use
of marijuana, to give cops an option less harsh than arrest, but
better than nothing.
Via the Canadian Press:

The Conservative government is seriously considering
looser marijuana laws that would allow police to ticket anyone
caught with small amounts of pot instead of laying charges, Justice
Minister Peter MacKay said Wednesday.

“We’re not talking about decriminalization or legalization,” MacKay
said prior to the weekly Conservative caucus meeting on Parliament
Hill.

“The Criminal Code would still be available to police, but we would
look at options that would … allow police to ticket those types
of offences.”

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is open to such an approach, he
added.

It’s a transparent attempt at creating a revenue stream out of
people accused of nothing more than enjoying the consumption of a
substance of their choice. Last summer, Canada’s police chiefs
called for
just such a solution
, ticketing, in complaining that they were
being forced to do all the work involved with an arrest or “turn a
blind eye.”

Could the U.S. legalize marijuana before Canada? It could, if
the chief executive
grows a pair
, and an interest.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1iakRIh
via IFTTT

US Sues Sprint For Overbilling For Surveillance Services

Monday, the Obama administration filed a lawsuit in a district
court, claiming Sprint knowingly charged $21 million extra in
spying fees between 2007 and 2010.

Sprint, the telecommunications provider, complied with court
orders to wiretap for the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA), Bureau of Alcohol, and other government agencies. It charged
the U.S. government reimbursement fees for the costs of complying
with wiretaps and intercepts.

But the government finds fault with this. The U.S. points to the
Communications Assistance in Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), a law
that makes wiretapping more manageable for law
enforcement agencies. Associated Press
explains
:

In 1994, lawmakers passed a law requiring communication
companies to upgrade their equipment and facilities to ensure they
can comply with court orders seeking wiretaps of their
customers. 

Section 103 of the law says that carriers are “prohibited from
using their intercept charges to recover the costs of modifying
equipment, facilities or services that were incurred,” U.S.
attorneys wrote in the
complaint. But Sprint did charge for these services, and it led to
a 58 percent hike in expenses for the federal government.

The Electric Frontier Foundation, in a FAQ disputing the law,
argued that
demanding telecommunication companies pick up the tab for
government’s surveillance expenses is unreasonable. Added costs for
the carrier are most likely passed on to the consumer. “Quite
literally,” it reads, “consumers would be subsidizing the
surveillance state.”

Regardless, Sprint thinks that the law rolls in its favor and
that the government must pony up for the added expenses incurred.
Sprint
issued
a statement to Ars Technica:

Under the law, the government is required to reimburse Sprint
for its reasonable costs incurred when assisting law enforcement
agencies with electronic surveillance. The invoices Sprint has
submitted to the government fully comply with the law.

The U.S. seeks $63 million, or triple the costs incurred, if
Sprint is found guilty.

The telecommunications company will
challenge
the lawsuit, “We have fully cooperated with this
investigation and intend to defend this matter vigorously.”

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1ne1QIb
via IFTTT

John Kerry To Explain Today’s Progress – Live Feed

The best they can say about today’s meetings in Paris is that all the leaders agree to disagree – both over possible sanctions and over whether Russia is doing anything illegal. Confused yet? US Secretary of State John Kerry will explain it all in his press conference due up soon…

 

 

Lavrov said in his comments today that

Kerry acknowledged that… in conditions of threats and ultimatums, it is very difficult to work on honest agreements that will then help the Ukrainain people to stabilise the situation.”

Via Xinhua,

U.S. secretary of state, British foreign secretary and Ukrainian interim foreign minister on Wednesday urged Russia to honor the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

 

“The Budapest Memorandum sets out the obligations of signatories in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons,” John Kerry, William Hague and Andriy Deshchytsia said in a joint statement while meeting in Paris Wednesday.

 

The Memorandum also obliges the UK, U.S. and Russia to consult in the event of a situation arising where the memorandum commitments are questioned,” the statement said.

 

The United States had conveyed an invitation to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, but he didn’t attend the meeting, according to the statement.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1cv9tZZ Tyler Durden

David Stockman Berates Bruce Berkowitz’s Bogus Bombast

Submitted by David Stockman via Contra Corner blog,

The Fed’s serial bubble machine has not only bestowed massive speculative windfalls on the 1%, but it has also fostered a noxious culture of plunder and entitlement in the gambling casinos of Wall Street. After each thundering sell-off during the bust phase, crony capitalist gamblers have been gifted with ill-gotten windfalls during the Fed’s subsequent maniacal money printing spree.

Worse still, this trash-to-riches syndrome has unfolded so consistently since the late 1980s that there now exists a marauding gang of permanent vulture-speculators who impudently claim entitlement to any and all action by the state that might be needed to quickly reflate their gleanings from the bottom. The passel of hedge funds led by Elliot Capital which blackmailed the Obama White House into paying billions for the worthless debt of Delphi during the GM bailout is only one especially odious example.

In this context comes Bruce Berkowitz “scolding” and firing “salvos” at Washington from the front page of the Wall Street Journal. As it has happened, the usually craven denizens of the beltway have so far managed to ignore his petulant demands for a multi-billion payday on the worthless Fannie and Freddie preferred stock that his fund scooped up after the housing bust. Recall, these were the securities issued in 2008 at $25 per share to shore up the tottering housing finance agencies just before Hank Paulson’s bazooka sputtered.

Not inappropriately, when the Republican White House nationalized Freddie and Fannie in September 2008 these preferred shares plunged to 25 cents—-their true value all along. The fact is, the so-called GSEs do not “earn” profits; they merely book bloated accounting margins that reflect nothing more profound than the fact that Freddie and Fannie drastically underpay for renting Uncle Sam’s balance sheet. As finally became official when the U.S. Treasury threw them a $180 billion lifeline, the GSEs are now—and have always been—a branch office of the U.S. Treasury Department.

The only reason Freddie and Fannie are not prosecuted for filing fraudulent accounting statements, therefore, is the beltway fiction that they are “off-budget”. This convenient scam was first invented by Lyndon Johnson to magically shrink his “guns and butter” fiscal deficits, but it has since metastasized into a giant business fairy tale—namely, that behind the imposing brick façade of Fannie Mae there is a real company generating value-added services that are the source of its reported profits and current multi-billion pink sheet valuation. In fact, there is nothing behind those walls except a stamping machine that embosses the signature of the American taxpayer on every billion dollar package of securitized mortgages it guarantees and on all the bonds it issues to fund a giant portfolio of mortgages and securities from which it strips the interest.

If we wanted to have honest socialist mortgage finance, a handful of GS-14s could run Freddie and Fannie out of the U.S. Treasury building. Civil servants could emboss the taxpayers’ guarantee on every family’s home mortgage just as proficiently as the make-believe business executives who populate the GSEs today; and in the process we could dispense with the sheer waste involved in applying GAAP accounting to the operations of a mere government bureau.

In an alternative political universe not corrupted by crony capitalist mythology about the elixir of homeownership, of course, there would be no need for a Treasury Bureau of Home Mortgage Finance. The decision to own own or rent would be made by 115 million American households based on their best lights, not the inducements and favors of the state. Markets would clear the interest price of mortgage debt and set credit terms and maturities consistent with the risks involved. Undoubtedly, rates would be a few hundred basis points higher and 30-year fixed rates mortgages quite rare. And like in the seemingly prosperous precincts of Germany, the home-ownership rate might be 55% or any other number not selected by pandering politicians of the type who pinned the 70% disaster on the wall during the Clinton-Bush era.

At the end of the day, having 40 million renter-households and 25 million mortgage-free owner-households provide (in their capacity as taxpayers) trillions of subsidized credit to upwards of 50 million mortgage-encumbered households is absurd. Yet it could be dismissed as just another expression of the capricious and random shuffling of income among American citizens that is the tradecraft of the Washington puzzle palace.

Unfortunately, the reality is not so anodyne. In order to hide this random redistribution mischief, the Treasury Bureau of Home Mortgage Finance has been gussied-up to form the simulacrum of a profit-making enterprise—otherwise known as a GSE. In that posture, the GSEs have been repeatedly plundered by insiders like Franklin Rains, the 90 million dollar man who drove Fannie off the cliff; and by fast money stock speculators who managed to drive the combined market cap of Freddie and Fannie to the lunatic level of $140 billion during their hay-day at the turn of the century; and by the Wall Street dealers and so-called fund managers who inventory trillions of GSE debt securities in order to scalp profits from the economically pointless spread between regular treasury bonds and the GSE variant of the same thing.

All of these hundreds of billions were pocketed by adept cronies and speculators in the various debt, equity and preferred securities of the GSEs during the decades culminating in the 2008 financial crisis. Given the trauma of those events, Secretary Paulson’s desperate and ill-disguised nationalization of Freddie and Fannie should have put an end to the plunder.

But it hasn’t because there is no end to the zero cost-of-goods carry trades by which speculators scoop-up and fund financial assets—busted and not—during the Fed’s money printing marathons. Likewise, there is no end to crony capitalist marauders like Berkowitz, who have the temerity to demand make-wholes from the state, and K-Street hirelings—lawyers, accountants and consultants— who are skilled at the manufacture of specious public policy rationalizations for outright thievery.

So now comes the patented crony capitalist rush. The worthless Freddie and Fannie preferreds have lately erupted from $0.25 per share to $12, meaning that some speculators have already garnered a paper return of 48X. And why did this revival miracle transpire? Quite simply because Berkowitz’s Fairholme Capital and his posse of punters—-John Paulson, Perry Capital and Pershing Square, among others—have taken turns bidding up the paper.

Meanwhile, their deplorable plan to do the American people a favor and swap these bogus securities for those of a new tax-payer underwritten, mortgage guarantee stamping machine, has but one objective—that is, to put a statutory floor under the current $12 per share price and enable them to dicker with Capitol Hill staffs for an ultimate take-out at par($25) under the guise of “privatization”. The larceny intended here is not modest: the payday for Berkowitz and his hedge fund posse would amount to $35 billion on toxic paper which was purchased for rounding errors.

To be sure, Berkowitz and his sharpies blather that Freddie and Fannie have now returned $200 billion to the US Treasury, thereby repaying the original $180 billion drawdown, with some change to spare. But what hay wagon do they think even the clueless officialdom of Washington rides upon? Roughly $50 billion of that was for writing-up a “tax asset” that had earlier been written-down, owing to the fact that absent nationalization the GSEs had no prospect of booking even accounting income in the future. And the remaining $150 billion represents dividends paid to the Treasury since 2009 based on using Uncle Sam’s credit card to issue the bonds and guarantees which fund the assets from which these so-called GSE dividends are scalped.

In other words, the Berkowitz Gang wants to be paid a king’s ransom for ownership shares in what amounts to a bureau of the US Treasury. And yet these con men pound the table demanding to “wake up the (GSE) boards” so that they will execute their “fiduciary responsibility”. Indeed, so shameless are Wall Street’s princes of plunder that Berkowitz told a skeptical CNBC questioner last fall “we’ve helped before with AIG”, and that he now merely seeks a “win-win” to “help with jobs, help with the economy, help with the dream of homeownership”!

That gibberish is the measure of the crony capitalist deformation that has infested the nation’s financial markets and system of political governance. The obvious thing for Washington to do is close the doors at Fannie and Freddie and allow their $5 trillion portfolio to run-off in the manner of any liquidation. And if it must subsidize home mortgage credit, just bring back the metal filing cabinets in the Treasury Building where the so-called “secondary mortgage market” was birthed in 1938. Yet what it dare not do is succumb to the bogus bombast of the punters and sharpies who troll the financial wreckage inexorably created by the Fed’s serial bubble machine.

If it does, the people will find their pitchforks and torches – one of these days.


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1hMh7yo Tyler Durden

Arab States “Unprecedentedly” Withdraw Ambassadors From Qatar After “Stormy” Meeting

The UAE, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain said on Wednesday they were withdrawing their ambassadors from Qatar after it had not implemented an agreement among Gulf Arab countries not to interfere in each others’ internal affairs. The move, unprecedented in the 30-year history of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), follows the Bahrain state minister for information Samira Rajab saying she has evidence of Qatari media provocation against her country. As Gulf News reports, Qatar has been a maverick in the region, backing Islamist groups in Egypt, Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East that are viewed with suspicion or outright hostility by some fellow GCC members. Not a good sign for the oil-generating center of the world.

 

Via Gulf News,

The move by the three countries, conveyed in a joint statement, is unprecedented in the three-decade history of the Gulf Cooperation Council, an alliance of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE and Oman.

 

 

The statement said GCC members had signed an agreement on November 23 not to back “anyone threatening the security and stability of the GCC whether as groups or individuals – via direct security work or through political influence, and not to support hostile media”.

 

GCC foreign ministers had met in Riyadh on Tuesday to try to persuade Qatar to implement the agreement, it said. Media reports described the meeting as “stormy”.

 

 

“But unfortunately, these efforts did not result in Qatar’s agreement to abide by these measures, which prompted the three countries to start what they saw as necessary, to protect their security and stability, by withdrawing their ambassadors from Qatar starting from today, March 5 2013,” the statement said.

 

 

The nations have also asked Qatar “not to support any party aiming to threaten security and stability of any GCC member,” it added, citing media campaigns against them in particular.

 

 

Media reports have said that Shaikh Tamim was given an ultimatum by Saudi Arabia in the November meeting in Riyadh that was facilitated by the Kuwaiti emir, Shaikh Sabah Al Ahmed. The new emir was told to change Qatar’s ways and bring the country in line with the rest of the GCC with regards to regional issues. The GCC has in particular been concerned about Qatar’s support for the Muslim Brotherhood, its close relations with Turkey, its opposition to the new regime in Egypt and its perceived support for Al Houthi rebels in Yemen.

 

 

Relations between Qatar and the UAE have been rocky lately. A top UAE court on Monday sentenced Qatari national Mahmoud Al Jidah to seven years in prison followed by deportation after he was convicted with two Emiratis of raising funds for a banned local Muslim Brotherhood-linked group, Al Islah. The move was criticised by Qatar’s National Human Rights Committee, which is close to the government.

 

 

Early in February, in a rare move for Gulf countries, the UAE announced that it had summoned Qatar’s ambassador in Abu Dhabi for remarks made by controversial Egyptian-Qatari cleric Yousef Al Qaradawi. Dr Anwar Mohammad Gargash, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, expressed the UAE Government’s “extreme resentment” over Al Qaradawi’s statement. Speaking live on Qatari state TV from a Doha mosque, Al Qaradawi criticised the UAE for supporting the current Egyptian government. He claimed that the UAE “has always been opposed to Islamic rule”.

 

We have held back so that our neighbour can clearly reject such insult, extend sufficient clarifications and guarantee that such provocation and defamation will not recur,” Gargash said then.

 

 

Qatar, which used to enjoy close relations with Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Turkey and Bashar Al Assad’s Syria, has in recent years found itself isolated after relations with Hezbollah, Iran and Al Assad deteriorated. The GCC’s decision is expected to further isolate the new emir.

Arab Spring 2.0?


    



via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1kyU517 Tyler Durden

Alabama House Passes Ban on Abortion After 6 Weeks

The Alabama House of Representives
passed four separate abortion measures Tuesday
, one of which
would practically end abortion in the state by making the procedure
illegal once a fetal heartbeat is detected. This can happen as
early as six weeks into pregnancy—i.e., before many women even
realize they’re with child. The other abortion bills approved
Tuesday would: 

None of the latter three measures are likely to significantly
impact the abortion rate in Alabama (their ostensible goal). But
they do make the process more burdensome for those seeking
abortions, in keeping with anti-choice legislators’ punitive
bureaucracy strategy. The
ban on abortions after six weeks
is also unlikely to impact
abortion rates, considering it will almost certainly be stymied by
the courts. Enforcement of similar bans in North Dakota and
Arkansas have been halted by federal judges.

So it’s not time to get all
worked up about lack of abortion access in Alabama
yet—but it
is time for noting that, once again, legislators are wasting energy
on something they know full well is absolutely futile. Good
job, guys!
You’ve made Alabama uteri exactly zero percent
safer for fetuses, all while wasting time and taxpayer
money
… As Rep. Napoleon Bracy (D-Prichard) told her fellow
lawmakers:

“We already know this is unconstitutional before you even vote
on it. But you decide you want to vote on this so you can go back
home and say, ‘Look what I did.'”

Or so their’s can be the match that finally sparks a Supreme
Court challenge. Interestingly, the lawmakers behind the heartbeat
bill are making no qualms about admitting this is their strategy.
Generally, supporters of clearly unconstitutional abortion
restrictions will swear ’til they’re blue in the face that their
sole motive is babies/women/safety in their state. But Alabama
House Speaker Mike Hubbard (R-Auburn) and other supporters of the
measure admitted outright that their intent is to overturn Roe
v. Wade

The four measures will now go to the state Senate. 

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1dsvaHP
via IFTTT

Meet “Goldfinger” – The $850k Motorcycle with “Many Buyers Interested”

Welcome back to pre-financial crisis insanity levels. I recall one of the wildest stories I read back in early 2008 near the height of the oil price bubble was about how the wealthy in the UAE were spending tens of millions of dollars on license plates. Yes, just your regular aluminum license plates. The most insane example of this was the $14.3 million paid for one in particular.

Well the stupidity is back, and this time it’s coming in the form of $850,000 motorcycles.

CNBC reports that:

It wasn’t that long ago that the first $1 million car was news. Now, a two-wheel vehicle is about to hit seven figures.

The motorcycle, called “Goldfinger,” was plated with 24-karat gold and covered with 250 small diamonds totaling more than 7 carats. The seat is upholstered with what the company calls a “unique cognac-colored crocodile skin” and the bike’s parts—859 of them—were individually gold-plated by hand.

It was shown at special events in Monaco and Dubai, before a private buyer snapped it up.

The sale price: $850,000.

Uffe Lauge Jensen, the company’s founder and chief creator, declined to comment on the buyer or even the buyer’s country. But he said there were many buyers interested in Goldfinger despite the price.

“It was very popular,” he said.

But Lauge Jensen said he’s already working on something bigger. Though he’s vague on specifics, he said he’s working with a customer on a motorcycle that could easily top $1 million. Basically, he said, it’s a piece of jewelry on two wheels.

Can we finally stop persecuting the poor billionaire oligarchs already?

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 1LefuVV2eCnW9VKjJGJzgZWa9vHg7Rc3r1

 Follow me on Twitter.

Meet “Goldfinger” – The $850k Motorcycle with “Many Buyers Interested” originally appeared on A Lightning War for Liberty on March 5, 2014.

continue reading

from A Lightning War for Liberty http://ift.tt/NURsZi
via IFTTT