House Democrat Warns Nuclear War With Russia “Real Possibility”

Having failed to find any evidence that Russia interefered with the election, it seems Democrats are resorting to the 1980s playbook as Rep. Seth Moulton – a member of the House Armeed Service Committee – tells CNN that a nuclear war with Russia is a real possibility the U.S. should prepare for.

As The Hill reports, Moulton said Friday on CNN's "New Day"…

For a long time, Russia and the United States had this sort of mutual agreement, mutually assured destruction,

 

“If they shot their weapons at us, we’d shoot our weapons at them, and therefore a nuclear war was unlikely to happen. But what Russia now says is that they will quote, 'escalate to deescalate'."

If that didn't have you searching for fallout shelters already, Moulton goes to explain that US military forces are unprepared… though offers no facts to back that up…

"They are willing to use nuclear weapons to deescalate a conventional attack. I think that the problem here is that we don’t really have a plan to deal with that."

 

Moulton said he can imagine scenarios where the Trump administration must respond to Russian use of nuclear weapons.

"If Russia starts using nukes against our allies in Europe, we may well use nukes in retaliation,” said Moulton, a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

 

“What if they target American troops — like the American troops who are training right now in Poland — with a nuclear attack?” he asked.

 

"What are we going to do and how quickly can that get out of control? That is why this is such a serious threat and why the Trump administration has got to take this more seriously.

Which seems odd because the only possible reaction to such an event would be nuclear retaliation and the 'mutually assured destruction' which he seems to believe is no longer vald. Either way, we are fairly certain that not since The Bay of Pigs has the word 'nuclear' been so relevant…

via http://ift.tt/2n9Cx2F Tyler Durden

Russian Parliament Launches Investigation Of “CNN And Other American Media”

A few days ago Jeanne Shaheen, a Democratic Senator from New Hampshire, introduced a piece of legislation that would give the Department of Justice “new authority” to investigate potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act by the ‘Russian Times’.  Among other things, Shaheen said the legislation was necessary to determine whether “RT News is coordinating with the Russian government to spread misinformation and undermine our democratic process.”  We won’t even bother to touch on the inherent hypocrisy of such a statement, but here is the press release from Shaheen’s website:

Following intelligence reports that RT News operates as a propaganda outlet for the Russian government, U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) has introduced legislation that gives the Department of Justice new authority to investigate potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act by RT America.

 

“We have good reason to believe that RT News is coordinating with the Russian government to spread misinformation and undermine our democratic process,” said Shaheen. “The American public has a right to know if this is the case. RT News has made public statements boasting that it can dodge our laws with shell corporations, and it’s time for the Department of Justice to investigate. My bill provides the authority needed to request documentation of RT News and find out who they’re accountable to.”

 

The Director of National Intelligence’s recent report titled Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections concluded that RT News officials have structured their affiliate organizations to deliberately circumvent U.S. reporting and disclosure requirements under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.  Senator Shaheen’s Foreign Agents Registration Modernization and Enforcement Act gives the Department of Justice new authority to compel organizations like RT America to produce documentation on funding sources and foreign connections.

Well, as it turns out, Russian officials have the power to launch meaningless witch hunts in their country as well and have decided to demonstrate that power with the announcement today that they’ll launch a similar investigation into all U.S. media currently operating in Russia.  Per Reuters:

The Russian lower house of parliament, the State Duma, has approved a proposal to launch an investigation into U.S. media organizations that operate in Russia, it said in a statement posted on its web site late on Friday.

 

The investigation, which will be conducted by the Duma’s information policy, technologies and communications committee, will check whether CNN, the Voice of America, Radio Liberty and “other American media” are complying with Russian law.

 

Deputy Konstantin Zatulin, who initiated the move, calls it “a response to the actions of American politicians who have systematically accused Russian news media of interference in U.S. internal affairs,” according to the Friday statement.

Putin

 

Shaheen’s legislation, of course, drew wide criticism from Russian agencies including the Russian Foreign Ministry whose spokesperson mocked the bill saying it should have included a clause defining a list of books that should be collected for burning.

The statement said the Duma backed the move on Friday evening after Konstantin Zatulin, an MP from the pro-Kremlin United Russia party, proposed an investigation to retaliate for what he called a “repressive” U.S. move against Russian state-funded broadcaster RT.

 

He said he was referring to an initiative by U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen, who has introduced a bill to empower the Justice Department to investigate possible violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act by RT.

 

Foreign media in Russia are overseen by the Russian Foreign Ministry, whose spokeswoman Maria Zakharova this week singled out Shaheen’s demarche for criticism, quipping ironically that the senator should have included a clause drawing up a list of books for burning.

 

The U.S. move also solicited the ire of Margarita Simonyan, RT’s editor-in-chief, who on Wednesday told the daily Izvestia it had echoes of the activities of U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, who oversaw a campaign to expose people he regarded as communists in the 1950s.

Meanwhile, all of this comes even as top Democrats admitted on Friday that their investigation into Trump’s campaign was unlikely to yield any evidence of collusion with Russia (see “The Democrats’ Trump-Russia Conspiracy Campaign Collapses“).  Of course, not many politicians are willing to let facts get in the way of a good narrative.

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

Caught On Video: Hillary Clinton Warns She’s “Ready To Come Out Of The Woods”

After months of crying in bed and moping around the woods of Chappaqua sulking over her shocking loss last November, Hillary Clinton told “The Society of Irish Women” at a St. Patrick’s Day speech in Scranton, Pennsylvania on Friday night that she’s finally ready to “come out of the woods.”  And while that comment could be interpreted in a whole bunch of different ways, we’re going to take the high road and assume that it’s simply a hint that she’s ready to return to public life in some capacity.

“Our country seems so divided right now. I do not believe that we can let political divides harden into personal divides.  And we can’t just ignore or turn a cold shoulder toward someone because they disagree with us politically.”

 

“We’ve gotta keep trying to listen to each other, to reason together and try to work to help people have better lives.”

 

“I’m like a lot of my friends right now. I have a hard time watching the news, I’ll confess.  I am ready to come out of
the woods and to help shine a light on what is already happening around
kitchen tables, at dinners like this.”

Unfortunately, while Hillary is all too willing to encourage the rest of us to “listen to each other”, she’s apparently not yet ready to listen to the advice of the 60+ million people around the country who decided they would prefer she not be an active participant in public life any longer.

 

Of course, these latest comments will inevitably spark rumors, once again, of Hillary possibly throwing her hat in the ring for the New York City Mayoral race.  As we pointed out a couple of months ago, while polls show that Mayor De Blasio will win in a blowout against most candidates, he would almost certainly lose in a landslide to Hillary…

The latest example comes from a Quinnipiac University Poll which analyzed a hypothetical head-to-head match-up between Clinton and New York’s current mayor, Bill de Blasio.  Unfortunately for de Blasio, the poll found that, while he would beat almost everyone else whose name has been mentioned as potential contender, he would almost certainly be crushed by Hillary. 

In a very hypothetical race for New York City Mayor, Hillary Clinton, running as an independent, tops incumbent Bill de Blasio, running as a Democrat, 49 – 30 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

 

“New Yorkers aren’t in love with Mayor Bill de Blasio, but they seem to like him better than other possible choices – except Hillary Clinton, who probably is an impossible choice,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

 

“None of the possible contenders has made any real noise or spent any money, so this race still could get interesting.”

 

In the Clinton – de Blasio matchup, Clinton leads 61 – 29 percent among Democrats and 45 – 31 percent among independent voters. Republicans back de Blasio 28 – 18 percent. She leads among men and women and black, white and Hispanic voters. She also leads in every borough except Staten Island, which goes to de Blasio 28 – 22 percent.

And here is a full break down of the results:

Hillary Poll

 

…that is, unless that nagging case of “pneumonia
that brings with it random, yet inevitable, bouts of full-body paralysis, rears its ugly head again.

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

Trump Administration Rolls Back Obama Protections On Student Loans…Sorry, Snowflakes

Just days after reports emerged that student loan defaults are soaring, which is undoubtedly due to some combination of, among other things, poor job prospects for the millions of snowflakes who graduate each year with their $200,000 educations in anthropology and the moral hazard created by liberal politicians constantly calling for student debts to be ‘forgiven’ (a.k.a. forcefully jammed down the throats of taxpayers), the Trump administration has revoked rules put in place by Obama that barred student debt collectors from charging penalty fees on past-due loans.

Originating from the Department of Justice, the “Dear Colleague” letter (full letter included at end of post) says that Obama’s unilateral rules implemented in 2015 could have “benefited from public input”…but what good is being King if you can’t unilaterally force new laws on the masses? Per the Washington Post:

The Education Department is ordering guarantee agencies that collect on defaulted debt to disregard a memo former President Barack Obama’s administration issued on the old bank-based federal lending program, known as the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program. That memo forbid the agencies from charging fees for up to 16 percent of the principal and accrued interest owed on the loans, if the borrower entered the government’s loan rehabilitation program within 60 days of default.

 

The Obama administration issued the memo after a circuit court of appeals asked for guidance in a case against United Student Aid Funds (USA Funds) challenging the assessment of collection costs. Bryana Bible took the company to court after being charged $4,547 in collection costs on a loan she defaulted on in 2012. Though she had signed a “rehabilitation agreement” with USA Funds to set a reduced payment schedule to resolve her debt, the company assessed the fees.

 

Education officials sided with Bible, prompting USA Funds to sue the department in 2015. Earlier this year, the company agreed to pay $23 million to settle a class-action lawsuit born out of the Bible case, though it did not admit any wrongdoing.

DeVos

 

Of course, it didn’t take long for Elizabeth Warren to draft a letter to the Education Department urging them to not take away ‘freebies’ from America’s entitled snowflakes.

On Monday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) sent a letter urging the Education Department to uphold the Obama administration’s guidance on the collection fees, which they said “results in an unnecessary financial burden on vulnerable borrowers.”

 

“Congress gave borrowers in default on their federal student loans the one-time opportunity to rehabilitate their loans out of default and re-enter repayment,” the letter said. “It is inconsistent with the goal of rehabilitation to return borrowers to repayment with such large fees added.”

Of course, these new rules came just days after new data published by the U.S. Department of Education revealed that $137 billion of federal student loans were in default as of December 2016, a 14% year-over-year increase.  Key findings from the Consumer Federation of America:

Average amount owed is $30,650 per federal student loan borrower. Average amount owed per borrower continues to tick up, rising 17% since the end of 2013, when borrowers owed on average of $26,300.

 

$137 billion in default. For federal loans originated by financial institutions (FFEL) and the US Department of Education (Direct), a total of $137.4 billion in balances were in default, a 14% increase from 2015. This cumulative level of defaulted balances includes loans which defaulted in previous years. Defaulting on a federal student loan comes with severe consequences. Borrowers can face seizure of their tax refund, garnishment of their wages, and an inability to pass employment verification checks.

 

1 million Direct Loan defaults in 2016. In 2016, 1.1 million Federal Direct Loan borrowers defaulted. Federal law typically defines a federal student loan default as being 270 days past due. Borrowers defaulting for the first time slightly decreased compared to 2015, though borrowers re-defaulting slightly increased compared to 2015.

 Seems the cost of financing those spring break trips to Cancun just got a little costlier…sorry, snowflakes.

 

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

9/11 Widow Questions Trump: “America First Or Saudi Arabia First?

Authored by Kristen Breitweiser via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Dear President Trump,

This week you met with Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. 

As a 9/11 widow who has fought for more than 15 years for truth, justice, accountability and transparency with regard to the murder of my husband, Ron, I have a considerable interest in your meeting with the Deputy Crown Prince.

King Salman of Saudi Arabia and his entourage arrive to greet President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama at King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Jan. 27, 2015. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

First, foremost and for good reason, I fear that the Deputy Crown Prince will not be forthright with you about his Kingdom’s role in the 9/11 attacks and global terrorism.

Indeed, many in the Kingdom refuse to tell the truth about their continued, long-standing, and well-documented clandestine, logistical and financial support of radical Islamist terrorist groups that target and kill innocent Americans.

For example, last summer when the infamous 2002 Joint Inquiry of Congress’ “28 pages” were finally released, Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al Jubeir claimed that the Saudis were exonerated and that the matter surrounding the Saudi role in the 9/11 attacks was “now finished.”

In reality, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its role in facilitating the 9/11 attacks is far from over. And, in truth, the “28 pages” – actually 29 pages of the 832-page report – prove to be quite illuminating, devastating and damning towards that end:

On page 415: “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support and assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government.… [A]t least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers.”

On page 417: One of the individuals identified in the pages as a financial supporter of two of the 9/11 hijackers, Osama Bassnan, later received a “significant amount of cash” from “a member of the Saudi Royal Family” during a 2002 trip to Houston.

On page 418: “Another Saudi national with close ties to the Saudi Royal Family, [deleted], is the subject of FBI counterterrorism investigations.”

On pages 418 and 419: Detained al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida had in his phone book the unlisted number for the security company that managed the Colorado residence of the then-Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan.

On page 421: “a [deleted], dated July 2, 2002, [indicates] ‘incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists inside the Saudi Government.’”

On page 426: Bassnan’s wife was receiving money “from Princess Haifa Bint Sultan,” the wife of the Saudi ambassador. (Her correct name is actually Princess Haifa bin Faisal.)

On page 436: The general counsel of the U.S. Treasury Department, David Aufhauser, testified that “offices [of the Saudi charity al-Haramain] have significant contacts with extremists, Islamic extremists.” CIA officials also testified “that they were making progress on their investigations of al-Haramain.… [T]he head of the central office is complicit in supporting terrorism, and it also raised questions about [then-Saudi Interior Minister] Prince Nayef.”

Holding the Saudis Accountable

Fortunately, as you know President Trump, JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act) was enacted into law — overriding President Obama’s veto — on Sept. 28, 2016 and the 9/11 Families were given the right to hold the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia accountable in a court of law for its alleged role in the 9/11 attacks.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then Saudi ambassador to the United States, meeting with President George W. Bush in Crawford, Texas, on Aug. 27, 2002. (White House photo)

Thanks to discovery and subpoena power, the 9/11 families hope to unearth and reveal a panoply of compelling information surrounding the Saudi role in the 9/11 attacks. Suffice it to say, we do not believe the Saudis should be considered an ally of America.

Unsurprisingly, the Saudis continue to wage war against the 9/11 Families and JASTA by paying millions to their 14 powerful, insider Washington DC lobbying firms, like the Podesta Group, to repeal JASTA and rob us of our day in court.

In addition, some of the Saudis’ key legislative supporters who threaten to repeal JASTA are Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain. Sadly, McCain and Graham choose to protect the Saudis rather than American victims of terrorism.

Quite horrifically, one of the Saudi lobbyists — Qorvis — was recently caught trying to dupe, manipulate, and pit U.S. veterans against the 9/11 families. According to media reports, Qorvis offered vets an all-expense-paid trip to Washington (staying at the Trump Hotel) to lobby against JASTA without telling the vets that it was Saudi money funding their trip. Given that many of these vets had joined the military in the wake of 9/11, the discovery that they were now being duped into “working” for the enemy they enlisted and risked their lives to fight against, was extremely upsetting. Pitting American veterans against American victims is the lowest of the low — yet, there seems to be no lengths that the Saudis will not go.

Which brings me to my last point — the Saudi Aramco IPO on Wall Street. Mr. President, my husband was burnt to death on September 11th. The remains I received included his two arms, a few fingers, and his wedding band.

Thousands of innocent people were brutally slaughtered and turned to ash in broad daylight on that horrific day, now more than 15 years ago. The notion that the Saudis — whom the 9/11 Families are currently trying to hold accountable in a court of law for their role in the murder of our loved ones — want to return to the scene of their own alleged crime to make billions of dollars is immoral and simply untenable.

As my fellow 9/11 widows and I have repeatedly said – not over our husbands’ dead bodies.

President Trump, you have structured your campaign and current policies around being for America First. The 9/11 Families certainly hope that you remain steadfast in your belief that Americans must be protected, supported, and heard, first and foremost above all others – particularly those like the Saudis who fund radical Islamic terrorists that target and kill Americans.

via http://ift.tt/2n1XdsI Tyler Durden

Paris Airport Attacker’s Last Words: “I Am Here To Die For Allah, There Will Be Deaths”

The man shot dead by French soldiers at Paris Orly airport on Saturday shouted he was there to “die for Allah” when as reported this morning, he tried to seize a soldier’s assault rifle, apparently intending to open fire on passengers, a Paris prosecutor said. According to the Paris prosecutor, Francois Molins, who held a press conference in the French capital on Saturday evening the attack is being treated as a terrorist incident, and three people – the assailnt’s father, brother and cousin – have been placed in custody.

The attacker, named as Ziyed Ben Belgacem, arrived at Orly airport on Saturday morning, threw down a bag containing a can of petrol and seized hold of a woman air force member who was part of a military patrol at the airport. Using the servicewoman as a shield, he put his air pistol to her head and shouted at other soldiers with her: “Put down your guns. Put your hands on your head. I am here to die for Allah, there will be deaths.”

He was right, but the death was only one… his, because the moment he grabbed the woman, two soldiers fired eight bullets in three bursts at the man, killing him instantly. A Koran was found on his body.

According to Reuters, the prosecutor said the assailant, who tried to grab the woman’s Famas assault rifle, seemed bent on carrying out a serious attack. “Given the violence that is shown in the (CCTV) pictures … you sense that he was determined to go through with it,” Molins told a news conference. “Everything leads one to believe he wanted to seize the Famas so that there were deaths and then to fire at people.”

On his body, police found a Koran and 750 euros in cash. At his home, they found several grams of cocaine, a machete and some foreign currency, Molins said. Prosecutors are investigating a number of terrorism-related offences, including attempted murder. Belgacem’s choice of target and evidence that he had been radicalized justified launching a terrorism investigation, Molins said.  Belgacem’s father, brother and a cousin are in police custody, Molins said.

Belgacem, 39, was already on the authorities’ radar. They spotted him as a radicalized Muslim when he served a prison term several years ago for drug-trafficking. The prosecutor said that Ben Belgacem, who had been born in Paris, had been sentenced to five years for robbery with a weapon, for offenses beginning in 1998, and was given a three and a five-year term for drug trafficking.

As reported this morning, several hours prior to the airport attack Belgacem shot and wounded a police officer with his air pistol after a routine traffic stop north of Paris before fleeing, officials said. After the first incident, Belgacem called his father and brother saying he had done something stupid, the prosecutor said. Later he entered a bar in Vitry-sur-Seine on the other side of Paris and opened fire with his air gun without hitting anyone. He also stole a car before arriving at the airport.

More than 230 people have died in France in the past two years at the hands of attackers allied to the militant Islamist group Islamic State, whose strongholds in Syria and Iraq are being bombed by an international coalition including France. These include coordinated bombings and shootings in November 2015 in Paris when 130 people were killed and scores injured.

With the country in the throes of a highly-charged election campaign before a two-round presidential election in April and May, the attacks will fuel the political debate. Conservative presidential candidate Francois Fillon said in a video message that France was in a “situation of virtual civil war” and there was no justification for lifting a state of emergency in place since the November 2015 attacks, after the justice minister said this week conditions were in place for lifting it.

Anti-immigrant candidate Marine Le Pen said the death of the Orly airport attacker, who she said was a multiple repeat offender, had averted a “possible massacre”. “Our government is overwhelmed, stunned, paralyzed like a rabbit in the headlights,” she told an election rally.

President Francois Hollande said the case had shown the need for the “Sentinelle” security operation brought in after 2015 attacks. The soldiers involved were patrolling the airport as part of the “Sentinelle” operation. Last month, Egyptian Abdullah Reda al-Hamahmy, 29, was shot and seriously wounded near the Louvre museum when he launched himself at a group of soldiers, crying out “Allahu Akbar” (God is greatest).

via http://ift.tt/2mVs3lf Tyler Durden

Trump Thinks Your Car’s Gas Mileage Is… Your Business

Via Eric Peters Autos,

The Clovers are aghast that Trump is threatening to do the unimaginable – and stop threatening the car companies with federal fuel economy fatwas (and add-on fatwas forbidding or restricting how much plant food – carbon dioxide – cars may emit).

He appears to be entertaining the horrible idea that the people who buy cars ought to be free to decide for themselves how much fuel economy matters to them – since they will be the ones paying for both the car and the gas. And – oh my god! – that this is really none of the business of the “concerned” scientists and other professional busybodies who regard their opinions and preferences as holy writ enforceable at gunpoint.

“We’re going to work on the CAFE standards so you can make cars in America again,” said Trump. He should have added the qualifier – affordable cars in America again.

Leaving aside the moral issue – who are these people to tell anyone whether their next car should get 10 MPG or 40 MPG? – the issue never addressed by the media, including the automotive media, is how much will all this cost us?

Obama’s mullahs uluated about the many billions (allegedly) which would be “saved” by force-marching every automaker to build cars that average 54.5 MPG. It is the sort of “savings” one realizes by emptying your bank account to buy something you don’t need that’s 5 percent off.

Only worse, because you’re not given the option to keep your money in the bank.

A week or so ago, executives from the major automakers came to the White House to explain to Donald – who probably already grokked it – that to get a single car to average 54.5 MPG requires more than merely ululating that it will be so. A new Prius hybrid almost manages it – and the hybrid Prius costs several thousand dollars more than an otherwise similar but not 54.5 MPG non-hybrid car.

And to get every car made to average 54.5 MPG – which is what Obama’s EPA ululated in the last weeks of his regime – won’t magically just happen, either – even if the entire regulatory Mecca ululates in unison for a week straight.

In the first place, it requires technology – and new designs. These generally involve work and resources, which cost money. New components don’t generally rain from Allah’s merciful bounty, upon ululation.

The executives pointed this out to Trump – who almost certainly grokked it beforehand, since he appears to be a man who probably knows where the dipstick is under the hood of a car and also what it’s for.

It is doubtful Obama knew – or did.

Or cared.

The current CAFE fatwa is 35.5 MPG and to achieve this without going hybrid across the board has required some very elaborate – some very expensive – technology. Two specific examples: Direct injection and transmissions with eight, nine and lately ten forward speeds.

These are coming online (the new Ford F-150 pick-up, reviewed here,  has a ten-speed automatic and probably two-thirds of all new vehicles are already direct-injected) because of the existing CAFE fatwa.

But they offer no particular advantage to the buyer, in terms of how the car drives or performs. Indeed, cars with these too-many-speeds automatics often have strange driving characteristics.  I can vouch for this; I test drive and review new cars each week.

For instance, the sensation that the car is surging forward (it is) when the transmission skips up three or four gears on a downhill because the computer is desperate to get the transmission into the top overdrive gear as quickly as possible in order to cut engine revs to the minimum in order to squeeze out a teensy uptick in MPGs, for the sake of CAFE.

Direct injection, meanwhile, has supplanted port fuel injection (PFI) with a two-stage system that operates at extreme pressure (3,000 psi vs. 35 or so psi) and which has created a carbon deposit problem inside the engine. In engines fed fuel via PFI or TBI or even a carburetor, the fuel washes over the backsides of the valves as it enters the combustion chamber – and because gas is a solvent, that action keeps the valves from crudding up. But in a DI system, the fuel is sprayed through a hole inside the combustion chamber and there is no solvent effect.

And so, crud forms.

To fix this problem the automakers are adding a separate, additional port-fuel circuit to keep the valves clean. So now you car will have two fuel injection systems – and multiple fuel pumps rather than just one.

It is not free.

What would it take to get all cars to average 54.5 MPG?

Keep in mind that not a single non-hybrid/non-electric new car comes close to that. Obama’s fatwa was in a way an ululation demanding that most if not all cars be hybrids or electric cars – because that is probably the only way to get to a “fleet average” (CAFE terminology) of 54.5 MPG absent the discovery of miracle technologies such as Roswell Crash-style ultra-light metal that is also ultra strong (so that other fatwas regarding “safety” can also be complied with).

This brings us back to the moral issue: Why is how much or little fuel our cars use anyone else’s business, since we pay for the car and the fuel? If gas “costs too much,” we can buy a different car that uses less.

And there is another issue, very obvious, but – like the cost of the fatwas – never asked or discussed:

If the market is so “concerned” about fuel economy – as the various scientists, “public citizens” and other such self-appointed voxxers of the populi claim, why not allow the market to apply the pressure?

Can’t have that. Pressure must come from above.

It doesn’t matter that there are already cars available that were designed to deliver much higher-than-average mileage – the Prius, for instance – which people are free to pay for if that is their priority. What the various “concerned” and the mullahs within the EPA and federal apparat are really concerned about is that people can choose not to buy such. That they are free to buy something else.

For the ululators, everyone must buy the same thing – the thing the uluators insist they buy. Or else.

Always, collectivism and coercion.

Never free choice, liberty – the market.

It’s worth recalling that the literal translation of laissez-faire is… leave us alone.

Exactly.

Good on Donald.

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

Mexicans Flood Into Canada As 2017 Border Detentions Surpass All Of 2016

A couple of days ago we noted that Mexican immigrants were suddenly flooding into Canada to avoid deportation from the U.S.  The increase in northern border crossings came, at least in part, courtesy of Canada’s decision to lift visa requirements for Mexican ‘tourists’ as of December 1st.  Per the new rules, rather than a visa, under Trudeau’s administration, Mexicans are now only required to have a so-called Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) which can be purchased online for CAD $7.

Unfortunately, while Canada’s relaxed travel requirements were applauded as an enlightened, progressive alternative to Trump’s xenophobic, racist approach to immigration, under the surface, Canada’s policies still function much like Trump’s proposals.  As Mexican immigrants are suddenly finding out, while Canada is happy to host ‘tourists’ from our Southern neighbor, getting a work visa can be nearly impossible and Mexicans with a criminal record are not welcome.

All of which has resulted in a record number of Mexicans being detained by Canadian border officials in the opening months of 2017.  Per Reuters:

The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) said it detained 444 Mexican nationals between Jan. 1 and March 8, compared with 410 for all of 2016, 351 for 2015, and 399 for 2014.

 

The CBSA can detain foreign nationals if it is believed they pose a danger to the public, if their identity is unclear or if they are deemed unlikely to appear for removal or for a proceeding.

 

The number of Mexicans turned back at the airport has risen, too – to 313 in January, more than any January since 2012 and more than the annual totals for 2012, 2013 and 2014.

Canada

 

Meanwhile, Canadian border officials are already starting to question Trudeau’s relaxed immigration policies as over 70,000 ETAs have already been issued in a matter of months.

Canada issued 72,450 travel authorizations to Mexican citizens between Dec. 1, 2016, and March 10, 2017 – a significant increase compared with a similar period when visas were required.

 

Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Minister Ahmed Hussen has said his department is monitoring the situation.

 

“It would be premature to draw conclusions or to speculate on future policy at this point,” Hussen’s spokeswoman, Camielle Edwards, wrote in an email Friday evening.

Don’t you just love it when a beautifully planned out ‘progressive’ policy gets crushed by reality?

* * *

For those who missed it, here is our previous note:

Canada has been applauded in recent months for its decision to lift visa requirements for Mexican ‘tourists’ as of December 1st.  Rather than a visa, under Trudeau’s administration, Mexicans are now only required to have a so-called Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) which can be purchased online for CAD $7.

As one media outlet praised, the move “provides a stark contrast to proposed policies from the US president-elect Donald Trump, who has said he will immediately deport between two and three million illegal immigrants and will build a wall along the US-Mexican border.”

Not surprisingly, news of the rule changes in Canada quickly made the rounds in the migrant community with one recently-deported Mexican nationalist declaring that “For those without documents, I think (the United States) is over. Now it’s Canada’s turn.”

Sure enough, in just the three months since Canada’s visa rules were relaxed, the number of Mexicans interested in “vacationing” in Canada has soared over 300%. Sure, who wouldn’t want to abandon the sweltering 70 degree heat in Mexico for a relaxing vacation in the frozen tundra of our northern neighbor in the dead of winter…it just makes sense. Per Reuters:

Canadian government data shows a tripling of Mexicans seeking to travel to Canada in the three months since the visa requirement was shelved.

 

It is not a firm indicator as many people could be genuine tourists. But tie it to a surge in calls and emails to immigration lawyers from recently arrived Mexicans looking for work permits, as well as the accounts of deportees like Rita and Mexicans already in Canada, and it suggests a new migration pattern may be emerging.

 

Seven immigration lawyers, consultants and activists told Reuters that requests for legal advice from Mexicans who had entered Canada since Dec. 1 had roughly tripled compared with the same period in 2015-2016.

 

Between December and late February, Canada has granted more than 61,500 eTAs (Electronic Travel Authorization forms) to Mexicans, about triple the number of quarterly tourist applications received in the year before the visa requirement was scrapped, official Canadian data shows. The true scale of Mexican immigration will only become fully apparent in June, when early arrivals on these eTAs are due to leave.

 

Flight bookings from Mexico to Canada also swelled 90 percent in January and February versus the same period in 2016, according to travel analysis company ForwardKeys, which reviews all major travel agency bookings. It is unclear what percentage of those bookings were made by people looking to work illegally in Canada.

Migrants

 

Of course, the problem with relaxed immigration policies is not attracting additional ‘tourists’ to your country but getting them to go home once their invitation expires.  As one migrant who recently immigrated to Toronto told Reuters, once his time as a ‘tourist’ expires he’ll have no choice but to “stay and work illegally.”

In 2015, Victor Avila, a 37-year-old architect from Oaxaca, returned home voluntarily from the United States after five years working illegally in Freehold, New Jersey. Shocked by the low wages in Mexico and traumatized by the local murder of his brother, he applied for an eTA.

 

Avila arrived in Toronto a few weeks ago and found work in a restaurant. He was in the process of applying for a work visa, but said he would stay on illegally for a year if it wasn’t granted.

 

“I think for many of us in Canada, there’s no other option but to stay and work illegally,” he said.

Unfortunately, while Canada’s relaxed travel requirements were applauded as an enlightened, progressive alternative to Trump’s xenophobic, racist approach to immigration, under the surface, Canada’s policies function much like Trump’s proposals.  As immigration lawyers point out, while ‘vacationing’ in Canada is easy, getting a work visa can be nearly impossible and Mexicans with a criminal record are not welcome.

Many Mexicans believe the eTA is all they need to set up in Canada, but in almost all cases they are wrong, immigration lawyers said. The eTA does not even guarantee entry.

 

Even if they get past the airport, many low-skilled Mexicans hoping to work illegally are likely to be disappointed, lawyers said, noting that it’s difficult for those entering on tourist visas to get work permits without an employer’s sponsorship.

 

Some Mexican visitors told Reuters that Canadian immigration officials went through their phones and asked tough questions designed to trip up those seeking to stay and work illegally. While some got through, others were sent home.

 

Canada says those convicted of crimes, as well as gang members, are inadmissible, making it hard for criminally convicted Mexicans deported from the United States to enter.

Just ask Alejandro Becerra’s how accommodating Canada’s open-minded, progressive immigration policies are..

Alejandro Becerra’s experience is a cautionary tale for Mexicans dreaming of a new life in Canada.

 

The 30-year-old former bankteller from Mexico City got a job offer to work in construction in Toronto and flew to the city on Feb. 7 on an eTA.

 

Becerra told a border official at the airport that he was coming as a tourist and showed him his return flight. The official didn’t believe him and examined his phone, where he found messages discussing Becerra’s job in Toronto.

 

Becerra spent the night in a detention center, and the next morning he was taken in handcuffs to a plane that would return him to Mexico.

Perhaps Mexicans are learning that our ‘progressive’ northern neighbor isn’t so progressive after all…oh well, there’s always California.

via http://ift.tt/2nzn3pR Tyler Durden

Is Denmark On The Brink?

Authored by Erico Matias Tavares via Sinclair & Co.,

Iben Thranholm examines political and social events with focus on their religious aspects, significance and moral implications. She is one of Denmark’s most widely read columnists on such matters. Thranholm is a former editor and radio host at the Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR), at which she created a religious news program that set a new standard for religious analysis in the newsroom. She has traveled extensively in the Middle East, Italy, the United States and Russia to carry out research and interviews. She has been awarded for her investigative research into Danish media coverage of religious issues.

 

E Tavares: Iben, thank you for being with us today. Over a year ago we talked to Dr. Tino Sanandaji, an economics professor at a leading Swedish university, on the inconsistencies of Swedish immigration policies. The resulting post was hit, revealing a significant interest for this topic. 

In a sense Sweden is the canary in the coalmine of Europe’s demographic future, since they have been at the forefront of this transformation and openly embrace it. Being a close neighbor we would like to get your views on what is happening there, as well as in Denmark. How do the Danes look at Sweden, with hope or apprehension? 

I Tranholm: With absolute horror! 

The Swedish media, which is quite pro-government and its leftwing policies, does not always report the full extent of the problems in their society. So it is hard to have a very accurate picture of what is going on. But we in Denmark have a good sense. We are very aware of the murders, rapes, riots, violence and the hand grenades that go on there. This does not often make the news but we know it is going on. And we don’t want to go down the same route. 

This is the result of decades of policies promoting multiculturalism in Sweden. And what is left is this hollow house. You know, in the Bible it is said that if a house is left swept, tidied and unoccupied it eventually it will be taken over by evil. And I fear that this is what is happening in Sweden. Far from being a multicultural paradise, the problems can no longer remain hidden. 

ET: Indeed, even President Trump made some controversial comments about Sweden at a recent rally in the US, causing an international uproar, with many debates on whether he was right or wrong. Did this cause some discussion in Denmark as well?

IT: It wasn’t much of a discussion because we in Denmark know what is happening in Sweden. Malmo is very close so we only need to go there to see it with our own eyes. 

There was a TV ad partially paid by the Swedish government recommending that all Swedes integrate into this new multicultural society they are creating. Think about that. Even old Swedes now need to adjust to this new reality, instead of immigrants adapting to Swedish society. They call it “Det nya landet”, which means the new country. Traditional Sweden is gone.

ET: Swedes and Danes share many cultural traits. What explains this divergence in opinions? Is it because you do not face the same societal problems? 

IT: We are not as politically correct as the Swedes. So there is a lot of discussion here. (…) As such we have a greater awareness of our heritage and tend to be more protective of it.

Which is not to say we don’t have problems. We do. We face the same identity issues, and our traditions – in particular our Christian heritage – are fast disappearing from our society. That same hollowness is now becoming mainstream in Denmark. And this eliminates much of the arguments to defend ourselves against the importation of foreign values and customs, many of which are at odds with our own. Simply forbidding things will not change this reality. 

ET: And how has integration been? Seems to be going better than other European countries since we don’t hear much about “no-go” zones and riots in your country, unlike France and Sweden, for instance.

IT: We have those problems as well but because Denmark is a small country you won’t hear about them as much. 

We have this belief here that welfare is the solution for everything. No matter who comes here from whatever part of the world will get housing, work, entertainment and healthcare. The government will give those to you with the expectation that if you have all those things you will happily assimilate into Danish society, learn Danish and adapt to our culture. As a result we will become a vibrant multicultural society. 

The reality is quite different. The relativism that this multiculturalism engenders ends up putting different sides of society at odds with each other, especially when their values and beliefs are very different to begin with.

When immigrants come to Denmark they may be taken care of, but they have no dominant culture that they can assimilate into, certainly not in the religious sense. We are completely devoid of God. And as a result they end bringing elements of their culture and religion which often create friction, misunderstandings and also crime. So Danish society becomes more and more divided as a result. 

ET: Politicians seem to be getting the message. Your parliament recently passed legislation to ensure that immigration would never reach a level that would threaten Danish national identity. What do you make of this?

IT: We have a very divided society here as well, even without considering the waves of immigration that have recently settled here. 

Half of the population wants open borders, mass immigration and welfare for all. They reject traditional values and are very much in favor of globalism and multiculturalism. The other half is very much opposed to that, but they lack any persuasive arguments to support that position. All they can do is to forbid immigration, forbid women from wearing a head cloth and so on. 

We no longer have a moral compass. Before, Christianity provided this role, keeping us united over centuries. Now we can no longer distinguish between good and evil, and ultimately this is what this struggle comes down to. Without this any preventive measures like this are just quick fixes that will not solve anything over the longer term. What is needed is a positive alternative in a moral sense. 

ET: Is there any data or independent studies on the benefits and costs of immigration in Denmark? In Sweden for instance this topic is almost taboo, but there are many concerns in terms of finding good employment opportunities for immigrants, coming from the immigrants themselves in fact.

IT: With this new culture we have adopted in the West we stopped having enough children to support our welfare state. So yes, one argument is that we need more people to support it. 

In our own very secular society the state is God. It is supposed to provide and care for everybody. So the economic arguments become less relevant. Of course they are consideration since people are paying for these policies, but in a sense they are secondary.

ET: We are at the cusp of an automation wave that threatens to displace millions of workers across the developed world. This will raise even more concerns regarding mass immigration, which traditionally consists of lower skilled workers. Is there any discussion in Denmark about this?

IT: No. The only discussion is around the cultural aspect, namely the impact on our values and traditions. 

And in a sense this just shows how weak we are. For instance, there are only 250,000 Muslims in Denmark, so a tiny minority. And yet the majority of our political debates focusing on culture over the last ten years have largely revolved around Islam. That’s how weak our culture has become.

So while as an open society there is resistance to women having to cover themselves up, having separate swimming pools for men and women and so forth, we have lost the argument to combat these imported traditions largely because we have lost our Christian roots and values. So over time they will become more prevalent in our society. We are already seeing it.

ET: Secular Muslims may also lose out a result. Many cherish Western values but will increasingly find a native society that is at odds with them, as their own communities become more extremist. Many complain that the Islam in Denmark and other European countries is more hardcore or even radical than in their home countries.

IT: That is true. And again that is largely a result of this cultural hesitation in the societies that host them. As a result, those more aggressive forms gain more ground to the detriment of everyone, especially women. 

ET: Much of the developing world faces a difficult situation and undoubtedly the countries that can help should. Let’s face it, faulty Western foreign policies have made bad situations even worse across much of the Middle East, although other very important sectarian and ethnic conflicts play a large role as well. 

There are those who suggest that instead of opening the borders this help should be provided at the origin, which would be cheaper and thus could help many more people, would place refugees closer to their homes and avoid many of the social problems we are unfortunately seeing across Europe – caused by a minority to be sure, but still very problematic. What do Danish politicians think about this?

IT: That would be logical in many ways, but again the debate is not economical. People want to be perceived as doing good, meaning opening their communities, welcoming and caring for others. 

I would be in favor of that if we were talking about women and their children, even families. But the reality is different. The majority of people we have welcomed in recent years, especially following the migrant crisis, are fit young men. They bring their conflicts and their frustrations with them, creating a difficult environment for everyone. 

So yes, arguably it would be more efficient to provide care at the source but this is not how the debate is framed.

ET: Denmark is supposedly the happiest country on the planet. But you have little reason to be happy these days as you find yourself on the receiving end of government censorship, not only for expressing your concerns about the future of your country but also for working for a Russian news outlet. What happened here? You recently wrote a powerful piece about this, expressing your feelings not only as a woman who does not toe the party line but especially as a Christian. 

IT: In 2015 I wrote an article criticizing our politicians who for the most part hate Christianity but nevertheless use Christian values, especially charity and compassion, to promote their own agendas, in particular mass immigration. So I called them out on that.

A few months later I got a call from a politician here who told me that I was on a government blacklist, supposedly acting as a pro-Russian propagandist agent, despite having absolutely no evidence to that effect. I occasionally work for a Russian news outlet, but that’s simply my job as a journalist. 

Today, in a society where supposedly there is freedom of speech, if politicians want to silence their critics they simply accuse them of working for the Kremlin, or having some unexplained ties with Russia. That is what happened to me, and it also happening to high profile politicians and journalists in the US, France and Germany. If you don’t agree with the multicultural policies of Europe then you are labeled a Russian agent. Which is really a form of political or character assassination. 

They are so afraid of the rise of what leftist politicians in Europe call “populism”, which threaten the existence of their beloved European Union. And this year the stakes are very high with elections in France and Germany. So they resort to these kinds of tactics to quash any dissenters. 

So I find myself in a blacklist in a supposedly free country like Denmark, but if a conflict with Russia emerges I can end up in prison under the pretext of being a foreign agent. Again, with no proof and no judicial process. This is very much how totalitarian societies operate. First they put you on a list, then when there is a problem or a made-up reason they will come for you.

ET: You were only expressing views that are consistent with those of many conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic. There are certainly many people concerned about the future of Western societies. In many ways this evokes memories of the Soviet Union, and the great new society they tried to create, with the disastrous consequences we all know.

That is actually a very real and concerning comparison. After all, communism was a Western idea and it was imposed on Russia, they did not create it. And it did not die with the collapse of the Soviet Union. On the contrary, it is still very much alive and roaming around our continent. While it operates differently, the goals are not too dissimilar. The version we have spreading across the West is Cultural Marxism.

We no longer have families, religion, even genders. In Sweden now they have invented a gender neutral term to address little boys and girls at kindergarten. This is a complete change from traditional Western values that have kept Europe safe from outside invasion for centuries. And this is now gone. 

All this talk of multiculturalism and open borders sounds very nice, but in practice it has led to a progressive transformation of our societies, and as Sweden shows not for the better. Less freedoms, less safety, less cohesion; more crime, more fragmentation, more social problems. It really is a struggle of good versus evil, and we in the West can no longer distinguish between the two. I would even call it diabolical disorientation. 

ET: So how long you think before the Christian cross is removed from your flag? And how does the Danish monarchy, which is sworn to protect Danish culture and religion, feel about all of this?

IT: No European politician will stand up for Christianity. Nobody. Expect from perhaps Hungarian Prime Minister, Victor Orbán. 

There is this unholy alliance between the left and radical Islam. Many Europeans have such a disdain for their own traditions that they would prefer to see Christianity being eradicated even if it might cost their way of life and even personal freedoms in the end. 

We have this bizarre situation where Western feminists support women having to wear a head cloth, along with foregoing many of the rights they should be able to enjoy in our countries. And these women often get penalized by their own communities when they try to assimilate into our society, while the feminists stay quiet. It is all very multicultural and good.

ET: You know Russia well as part of your work. Can you contrast what is happening there relative to the transformation taking place across much of Western Europe?

Believe it or not, we have swapped lanes. Now it is Russia who is adopting Christianity as the West gets rid of it by any means possible. 

Christianity runs very deep in Russia: in their literature, in their arts, in their culture. When the Soviets brutally tried to suppress it, at the cost of countless lives, it survived underground. People still celebrated it in secrecy, performing baptisms and the like behind closed doors. 

President Putin recently inaugurated an enormous statue of St. Vladimir, the patron saint of the Russian Orthodox Church, about 100 yards from the Kremlin walls. If you stand at a certain point across the street from the Kremlin, the cross that he bears is even taller than the star in the Red Square, so the symbolism is very potent. 

In the West, as we discussed, we are going the other way. We can’t discard our values and heritage fast enough. 

ET: There was a 2014 Russian movie, Leviathan, which alluded to this transformation. However it put Orthodox Christianity in a less positive light, essentially being used as an ideological argument to justify the power of the oligarchs in society. President Putin is certainly no saint. Isn’t this all just superficial?

IT: There are people in Russia who are also opposed to their own traditional values and who want a more Westernized Russia. I have not seen that movie so I can’t say if the director supports that view or not. 

People need to go to Russia and see it for themselves. President Putin is only responding to what is happening there and he respects the Russian people’s faith in Orthodoxy.

This is one of the reasons why I believe the West hate the Russians so much. They cannot tolerate the thought of having a resurgent and powerful Christian Russia who openly rejects their Cultural Marxism. And accordingly they demonized it in much of our media and political circles.

ET: So, is Denmark on the brink? Indeed, is the rest of Europe on the brink?

IT: Yes, Denmark is on the brink. And Europe is on the brink. We completely lost our culture, our values and our moral compass. What used to be good is now evil and vice-versa. 

You mentioned Denmark being the happiest country in the world but I am not sure that is true. We have high alcohol consumption and about half a million people on happy pills for a reason. 

Channel 1, our main TV channel here, recently aired a documentary on three Danish girls who converted to Islam out of their own will, not because they got married or anything like that. They all had the same background, coming from broken homes, dealing with alcoholism and so forth – basically part of the legacy of the 1968 revolution we had across Europe. What these girls lacked was structure, and they found it in Islam because it regulates all aspects of your life: how you dress, what you eat, with whom you can socialize with, how to pray, how to interact as a wife and so on. 

That is what the right-wing parties in Europe don’t understand. This is a spiritual battle. There is no political freedom without spiritual freedom. If you go around just forbidding things, like don’t wear the head cloth and so forth, it will not work. Our civilization will gradually disappear.

The only thing that can save Europe right now is a true spiritual, dare I say Christian, revival across the Continent. This played a significant role in the demise of communism in the Soviet Union and East Germany. The churches there provided hidden venues for people to congregate, express ideas and share their faith and hardships.

Since its inception Christianity was always about fighting evil with love, prayer and faith because these three are the key to freedom. And these are the values that the radical left and radical Islam do not tolerate, because of course both demand total obedience to the state and their conception of God, respectively. 

ET: Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and your courage. You deserve to be in the cover of a magazine, not on some government blacklist. Wish you all the best.

IT: Thank you.

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

Liberty Links 03/18/17

If you appreciate our work, and want to contribute to genuine, independent media, consider visiting our Support Page.

A couple of weeks ago, I was the victim of a well planned, very aggressive hack. I shared my story to warn others:
Hackers Stole My Phone Number – A Personal Story

Must Reads

A Fork in the Road (Important article by Vinny Lingham on the dangerous situation Bitcoin is in right now, Medium)

Key Democratic Officials Now Warning Base Not to Expect Evidence of Trump/Russia Collusion (Glenn Greenwald writing at The Intercept)

Rand Paul Is Right: NSA Routinely Monitors Americans’ Communications Without Warrants (Another from Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept)

Sanders: ‘Democratic Agenda and Approach Has Been a Failure’ (YouTube)

Rejecting ‘Campus Illiberalism’ (We need more of this, a lot more, Inside Higher Ed)

Security Advisory: Mobile Phones (This sort of thing happened to me, Kraken Blog)

U.S. Politics

See More Links »

from Liberty Blitzkrieg http://ift.tt/2n1uDYB
via IFTTT