iftttwall

The United States Army gave up its jungle training school in Panama in 1999 when the U.S. returned land there to the Panamanian government.  A couple years later jungle training was all but phased out in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks as the Army focused money and manpower on preparing soldiers to fight in the mountainous desert terrains of Afghanistan and Iraq. 

Now, surviving and fighting in tropical rainforests has once again recaptured the Army’s interest and sparked the launch of its first jungle training school in decades located some 30 miles inland from Hawaii’s Waikiki Beach.  Per the AP:

Brig. Gen. Stephen Michael, deputy commander of the 25th Infantry Division, said the Army set up the school as its footprint was shrinking in Iraq and Afghanistan after more than a decade of war in those countries.

 

“The jungle school gives us that focus, it reinforces that we’re in the Pacific,” Michael said. “If you’re in the 25th, you understand you got to fight in the tough environment of the Pacific.”

 

Of course, as we pointed out earlier, Trump released his first budget blueprint this morning that included massive cuts to several departments, albeit with one notable exception…

 

And, as Staff Sgt. Ascencion Lopez points out, Hawaii’s new jungle school is going to need every bit of their allocation of that incremental funding as the U.S. Army “has to relearn everything” about jungle warfare from the development of new uniforms all the way down to how to carry modern equipment and protect against deadly infections.

First it needed instructors. The Army sent soldiers to military jungle schools in Brazil, Brunei and other tropical spots to reacquire long-lost skills. Instructors-in-training poured over old Army jungle manuals.

 

“We had to relearn everything,” said Staff Sgt. Ascencion Lopez, who was one of the first instructors at the school, which is part of the 25th Infantry Division’s Lightning Academy.

 

The soldiers quickly discovered their existing uniforms stood out among the trees and the fabric took too long to dry. The Army is currently developing a new uniform and boots specifically for the jungle. Instructors in Hawaii are testing out some early models.

 

The soldiers have also had to adjust how they carry their ammunition, canteens and other gear. In the desert, soldiers frequently strap gear on their chests so it’s accessible while riding vehicles. But instructors recommend soldiers carry gear on their sides in the jungle so it won’t get caught on roots and vines while they’re maneuvering on the forest ground.

 

“The minute your feet go, you’re done. You’re not going to be able to function in the jungle,” Lopez said.

Soldiers must also develop the mental stamina to persevere in a place where they’re constantly wet, thick vegetation can hide the enemy and deadly animals may be lurking. (Though soldiers are spared threatening animals in Hawaii as the state has no snakes and the only native land mammal is a small, rare bat.)

“Soldiers that aren’t as mentally tough — they’re either going to find their toughness or they won’t. But the jungle doesn’t care either way,” said Staff Sgt. Michael Johnson, another instructor.

 

And while Brian Price, a professor in diplomacy and military studies at Hawaii Pacific University, said the Army is simply training in the jungle so it will be ready just in case some future crisis demands it…one has to wonder why preparations for combat in these regions of the world suddenly became a priority for the U.S. Army again.

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

Authored by Darius Shatahmasebi via TheAntiMedia.org,

An overlooked interview of Maria Zakharova with Russia’s 1 TV Channel, Russia’s Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, on a national Russian TV show has brought insight into the frustration Russia encountered in dealing with the Obama administration over the years. Zakharova suggested President Barack Obama will go down in history as one of America’s evilest presidents.

In the program, Zakharova explains that Russia was warned countless times in 2015 during diplomatic talks that if they were to go into Syria to fight “terrorists,” their work would be undone by the media, which would label them the aggressor. This has clearly has been the case for the past year-and-a-half.

“[T]he media was one thing,” Zakharova noted. “The U.S. State Department and the White House, from the mouths of their official representatives, directly threatened to cause us pain.”

Zakharova continued:

“Then, official Foreign Affairs representatives began to call upon their people to come out and protest in front of Russian embassies.”

This is likely a reference to British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson’s calls for anti-war protesters to target Russia.

“That which began in October 2015 – ended with the murder of our Ambassador in December 2016.”

 

“I’ll remind you of one more thing – we’ve talked about this – let’s remember the real attacks. Not those campaigns with plastic arms and legs in London, or posters in front of our embassies in the E.U., but the shelling of the Russian Embassy in Damascus,” Zakharova also noted.

She then vented her frustrations regarding the instances when Vitaly Churkin (another diplomat who died mysteriously last month) questioned attacks committed by NATO-backed rebels in Syria at the U.N. According to Zakharova, the same diplomats who promised that Russia would feel pain for intervening in Syria were the same people blocking statements condemning these attacks, hindering progress on the issue. In doing so, Zakharova was unable to confirm if she was referring specifically to former secretary of state John Kerry, though this appears to be the implication of her allegations.

Asked about Obama’s failure to offer condolences for the death of Russia’s ambassador in Turkey in December 2016, Zakharova responded:

“Obama, I think, is a unique person…But Obama is a person, and I mean, the whole administration under him, whose team — as it worked out on the international arena — was bad for everyone. I think during his 8-year term, under the pretext of their “exclusivity,” they became the subject of disgust for the entire world. That is my impression.”

She continued:

“They did not deliver on any responsibilities they had to other nations, nor did they deliver on what the American people entrusted to them, on the international arena. This is an obvious thing.”

Zakharova didn’t hold back in her repeated criticism of the Obama administration.

“And the main thing – of course, I am not a lawyer or a human rights activist – but from a moral point of view they have committed crimes,” she added,  apparently disregarding numerous allegations against Russia’s complicity in war crimes of their own. “They showed us that the strongest military has unlimited rights to create evil.”

Nevertheless, Zakharova concluded:

“This is what’s going to go down in history for this administration. Let me say it again – they demonstrated that the strongest has the right to create evil.” [emphasis added]

via http://ift.tt/2mBgI8S Tyler Durden

While Rutte's victory in Holland has the elites and the media proclaiming the populist revolution is dead (despite a surge in Wilders' support relative to mainstream parties), movements driven by Euroskepticism and "anti-establishment" sentiment remain top of mind in all of Europe’s key elections this year.

On some level, as Goldman notes, the “populist” political trends in these countries are nothing new; strong populist influences have ebbed and flowed in Europe over time. But this tide has again swelled in recent years for both economic and socio-cultural reasons.

While few think Euroskeptic forces will win control of government in any of the upcoming elections, as GS Chief European Economist Huw Pill argues, even that result should be far from comforting for proponents of the European vision. And one glance at the statistics below makes it clear that anti-establishment-ism is anything but dead in Europe…

 

Did somebody say fragmentation?

Largest party’s % of the vote in parliamentary elections (lhs) vs. number of parties that won seats in the same election (rhs), period average

In Pill's view, mainstream European parties are caught in a trap, with needed reforms likely to draw ire from both ends of the political spectrum. The upshot: Unless mainstream politicians use their (expected) wins this year to capitalize on the favorable macro environment and move swiftly to overcome voter concerns, Euroskeptic threats will continue to rise and support for European integration will further erode.

via http://ift.tt/2nymUj2 Tyler Durden

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

The toxic dollar is bringing hell in a handbasket.

Along with the student loan debt bubble and other major financial factors, the looming pensions crisis is bound to be the death of us all.

Because it’s based on a future promise to pay, it has long been a benefit dangled to solve strikes and union disputes – because, in the end, it is just more debt, whether private or public.

With tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities, the weight of an avalanche remains dangling over our heads. An aging population is cashing in on needed retirement benefits while the younger generations must support multiples that are unsustainable financially.

Somewhere between the retiree that needs clothing, food and lodging, and the bankruptcy of cities and state governments is the makings of the next economic crisis.

via AgainstCronyCapitalism.org:

This is one of those things that few will pay attention to until it’s a 5 alarm fire. Then the policymakers will run around with their hands in the air saying they didn’t see it coming.

 

Of course they did. But addressing the problem is hard and will make people unhappy in the short term.

This blog pointed out the sad, and quiet fact that entities like the government of South Carolina are deep in debt over pensions. Everywhere there are failing social systems.

And somewhere, the rubber is going to met the road, and people are going to get hurt.

As SHTF previously reported:

In 2014 a new Federal law made it possible for pension funds to cut benefits for their recipients.

 

[I]n October of [2015] the canary in the coal mine fell over and died when Illinois announced that the State was posting pension payments because it ran out of money.

 

Fast forward a few more months and things have been taken to the next level. The Central State pension fund in Kansas became the first such fund to take advantage of the 2014 law as 400,000 Americans who depend on their monthly pension income to pay for such things as their mortgage, groceries and medical expenses saw an average of $1,400 per month sliced of their monthly benefits.

Unfortunately, there may be no avoiding some very painful lapses in checks in the difficult years ahead.

As Market Watch reports:

But take a look South Carolina’s government pension plan, which covers roughly 550,000 people — one out of nine state residents — but is a staggering $24.1 billion in the red.

 

This is not a distant concern, but a system already in crisis.

 

Younger workers are being asked to do much more to support the pensions of retirees. An analysis by the The Post and Courier of Charleston noted recently that “Government workers and their employers have seen five hikes in their pension plan contributions since 2012, and there’s no end in sight.” (Most now contribute 8.66% of their pay, vs. 6.5% before the changes.) At the same time, the pension fund has been chasing more stocks and alternative investments instead of relying on stable investments like bonds that may be much less volatile but generate only meager returns.

 

And if that’s not troubling enough, South Carolina’s pension fund is far from alone.

Yeah.

California’s Calpers public retriree system is notoriously underfunded and doomed to implode. Chicago, Detroit and other urban wastelands are sagging under abysmal debt. Dallas, Texas pensions went insolvent. Puerto Rico is nothing but a propped up holding corp(se).

Something massive has been swept up just under the carpet.

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

Authored by Michael Jabara Carley via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

On 10 January 2017 Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau fired his minister of external affairs, Stéphane Dion, and replaced him with Chrystia Freeland, who was then minister of international trade. This cabinet shuffle might not have gotten much public notice except that Dion is a distinguished parliamentarian, former leader of the party and leader of the opposition, and a former key minister in the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien. Freeland, on the other hand, is a well-known Ukrainian ultra-nationalist and self-declared Russophobe and hater of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

On 10 January 2017 Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau fired his minister of external affairs, Stéphane Dion, and replaced him with Chrystia Freeland, who was then minister of international trade

The sacking of Dion was also noteworthy because Trudeau had run on an electoral platform in 2015 promising, inter alia, to improve Canadian relations with Russia, spoilt by the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. When Dion became minister of external affairs, he confirmed the Liberal commitment to re-establish more constructive Canadian-Russian relations.

He kept to this line even though Prime Minister Trudeau said that Canada would continue its close relations with the government in Kiev including the maintenance of Canadian military advisors in the Ukraine. Essentially, Trudeau said he intended to continue Tory policy on relations with Russia. No one paid much attention to the contradiction between Trudeau’s affirmation of Harper’s policy, and Dion’s periodic statements to the contrary.

Dion could make little or no progress in improving Canadian-Russian relations, most certainly because the prime minister and Minister Freeland were against it. Nothing much was said publically because Trudeau had promised a different policy during the election campaign. Was he just another fork-tongued politician? Perhaps he is, and wanted to divert attention from un-kept electoral promises. Nor would it have been desirable to publicise a policy split inside the government.

While Dion is a distinguished parliamentarian, former leader of the party and leader of the opposition, Freeland is a well-known Ukrainian ultra-nationalist and self-declared Russophobe

When the news broke that Trudeau had replaced Dion with Freeland, Liberal sources whispered that Dion was not really suited to be a diplomat. He was irritable, they said, and had not mastered the diplomacy of using speech to conceal his thoughts. Radio Sputnik contacted me at the time for an interview. I commented that Freeland’s appointment was «a catastrophe» for Canadian-Russian relations, as indeed it is. Some elements of the Mainstream Media (MSM) in Canada picked up on my comments saying that Russian sources had claimed the sacking of Dion was a catastrophe. I rejoined that it was me, a Canadian citizen, who had so characterised the Freeland appointment, and not Russian sources.

Is Trudeau just another fork-tongued politician?

Why should Canadians care one way or another whether their government supports the Ukraine and sends arms and advisors there to strengthen Ukrainian military forces? Well, the most important reason is that the present government in Kiev is illegitimate in spite of democratic appearances. It is the spawn of a violent coup d’état in February 2014, brokered and supported by the United States and the European Union, which overthrew the democratically elected president Viktor Yanukovich. The vanguard of the Kiev coup d’état are neo-Nazi, fascist or ultra nationalist political and paramilitary organisations, notably the political party Svoboda, the paramilitary Pravyi sektor and various other paramilitary forces such as the so-called Azov and Aidar battalions. These paramilitary units were and are used to crush opposition in those parts of the Ukraine controlled by Kiev. Politicians, journalists, anyone speaking against the putsch government in Kiev could be, or were killed, beaten, jailed or forced to flee. The Ukrainian communist party was declared illegal. The governing Party of Regions has disappeared, some of its members being charged with criminal offences for having contacts with Russian counterparts. Others abandoned the party because it was neither safe nor practical to remain as members.

Everywhere in the Kiev-controlled Ukraine, Nazi or SS symbols are readily observable

The United States claims that the neo-Nazis are freaks and «a few bad apples». But the signs of fascism can be observed everywhere in the Kiev-controlled Ukraine. Nazi or SS symbols are readily observable. The Nazi swastika can be seen as a frequent tattoo amongst fascist militiamen. Torch light parades redolent of Nazi Germany are often staged in Kiev and other cities to frighten people opposed to the coup d’état. As with Nazism and Italian fascism, violence, force and atavistic masculinity are exalted to intimidate any opposition. Nazi collaborators during World War II are now transformed into national heroes, Stepan Bandera, for example, or the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) which perpetrated mass murders amongst Soviet and Polish civilian populations.

In Ukraine, Nazi collaborators during World War II are now transformed into national heroes

Neo-Nazi violence and intimidation worked in many places, but not in others. In the Crimea, the population united almost to the last man and woman, to toss out the putschist authorities and to vote for reunification with Russia. In the east, in the Donbass, the anti-fascist resistance repulsed Kiev punitive forces with heavy losses. These remarkable feats of arms, redolent of so many others in Russian history, were wasted by Moscow, which disregarded a first principle of war that one never lets an enemy withdraw to fight another day. «He who spares the aggressor», Stalin once remarked, «wants another war.» It may shock some people to hear Stalin quoted, but Plutarch, Sun Tzu, or Clausewitz might have said the same thing. Moscow supported the so-called Minsk peace accords which were never respected by the Kiev authorities. Ultra-nationalists even boasted that they had agreed to Minsk solely in order to rest and refit their beaten forces. It was only a ruse de guerre.

In the Crimea, the population united almost to the last man and woman, to toss out the putschist authorities and to vote for reunification with Russia

These are the forces which the Canadian government now supports with the enthusiastic backing of Minister Freeland. For her, it must be a lifelong dream-come-true. There has been much press comment during the last week or so about Freeland’s Ukrainian grandfather, Mykhailo Chomiak, a Nazi collaborator during World War II. Freeland claimed that he was only a refugee from Stalinist violence. He might have been, but he also collaborated with Nazi Germany. In many places in Europe, France and Italy, for example, collaborators were summarily shot or imprisoned after the war. In France, more than 5,000 were executed including Pierre Laval, a prominent French politician, who sided with Nazi Germany and vaunted collaboration to oppose the USSR. Another 38,000 French collaborators were jailed. Chomiak was lucky he was not hanged and that he ended up in northern Alberta, to die a well-to-do farmer.

The story about Freeland’s grandfather was first put out by John Helmer, a long-time independent journalist living in Moscow. Freeland claimed a week or so ago that Russia was attempting «to destabilize the Western democracies»; and Canadian Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale asserted that poor Ms. Freeland was a victim of «Russian disinformation tactics».

Should Freeland be held responsible for the sins of her grandfather? Obviously not. What is disturbing about Freeland is her intense hatred of Russia and the Russian government, and her confusion about her own national identity. I am, she has written, «one of Ukraine’s democrats.» If this is so, what is she doing as a minister in the Canadian government? Is she first and foremost a Canadian, or is she a Ukrainian ultra-nationalist whose primary objective is to use her ministerial post to defend the putsch government in Kiev and to exacerbate Canadian relations with Russia?

If Freeland should be not be condemned for the sins of her grandfather—although she might not see them as sins—she can be condemned for her own words, publications and deeds. Even by her own proud admission, she has left a long trail of venomous hatred of Russia which can easily be uncovered by internet searching. She defends the putschists in Kiev and overlooks their violence. With more than a hint of Orwellian «newspeak», Freeland asserts that the violent coup d’état in Kiev against the democratically elected president was a defence of «democracy». Is she pursuing the same objectives, twice removed, of dedushka, or Grandpa Chomiak, by supporting the Kiev junta?

That’s the problem with Freeland, who now constitutes a smoking grenade ready to go off at any moment under Canadian-Russian relations. Until now, the virulent, irrational, Russophobia afflicting the United States has not metastasised into Canada. It’s true that the Harper Conservatives were Russophobes, but when they lost power, it was possible to believe that sanity and pragmatism would return to Canadian relations with the Russian Federation. One had only to listen to Dion’s occasional statements on the subject to think that Canada was recovering its common sense. Canadians could breathe a sigh of relief and return the widely held idea that Canada is somehow a more civilised, sensible place to live than the United States.

Unfortunately, Canadian complacency appears premature. On 8 March Macleans, the Canadian equivalent of Time magazine, published a big article as Russophobic and preposterous as any piece of American yellow journalism. The headline reads: «Russia’s Coming Attack on Canada». The subtitle is: «The smear job on Chrystia Freeland is only the start. Why Canada is a logical next target in Moscow’s desperate clandestine war.» The «smear job» is of course the outing of Grandpa Chomiak as a Nazi collaborator. The author spouts one line of rubbish after the next about Russia and then accuses the Russian government of outing Chomiak. In fact, it appears to have been John Helmer, an Australian, who published the first article on Freeland’s forebears.

Further revelations followed from Alex Boykowich, a Ukrainian Canadian, who consulted Chomiak’s personal papers held in the Alberta provincial archives in Edmonton.

«God, why did Grandpa keep those damned papers», Freeland must be thinking: «I should have burned them long ago.» Too late now, Ms. Freeland, the cat’s out of the bag.

«Ravings» (délires), one Montréal journalist called Freeland’s accusations against Russia and Putin. Of course, no one would care about Freeland’s obsessive Russophobia except that she is  minister of  external affairs. She can encourage the metastasis of Russophobia into Canada, as she indeed has started to do.

Trudeau’s neoliberalism is more American than Canadian

The psychosis is spreading, as I discovered the other day in casual conversation with a respected colleague. Putin is another Stalin, he said, he’s crushed democracy in Russia, press freedom is dead, and no one dares to speak against him. Anyone who has spent time in Moscow knows that lots of people complain about Putin. He knows too, and tolerates it.

«Sure he does» my interlocutor replied with a smile.

I understood and changed the subject.

People who voted Liberal in the last election thinking Trudeau fils would be like Trudeau père are now waking up to the reality that the son is nothing like the father. He is just another neoliberal pretty face, exploiting identity politics to pursue policy lines little different than those of his predecessor, the hated Stephen Harper. Trudeau’s neoliberalism is more American than Canadian. Is he part of the movement to sabotage any improvement of US-Russian relations?  If so, he’s pursuing a dangerous policy.  His external affairs minister is a fanatical Russophobe, hoist upon the petard of her words going back a long way. Is Freeland pursuing grandpa’s old dreams, collaborating with the ultra-nationalists and neo-Nazis in Kiev, all the while pretending they don’t exist?

What should Canada’s surviving veterans think about the Liberal government sending Canadian advisors to train Kiev’s armed hooligans?

More than 42,000 Canadian soldiers died during World War II to destroy fascism and Nazism. Is Freeland kicking sand on their graves by supporting the Kiev authorities and their celebration of Nazi collaboration? What should Canada’s surviving veterans think about the Liberal government sending Canadian advisors to train Kiev’s armed hooligans? «Against Russian aggression», Freeland would no doubt retort. But even MSM journalists in Canada, not as venal as their American counterparts, have derided such talk as «delusional». The question is will the majority of Canadians fall for Freeland’s dangerous Russophobia?

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

Growing up in a dominant Italian household, with pasta served every god damned night, I never bonded with my Irish side. My Father had died when I was 4, so I never got to know him or his side of the family. It was only when I got older did I begin to embrace my Irish side — especially on St. Paddy’s Day — a day designated for everyone to embrace the Irish culture. It might bemuse you to learn that I regale myself in all of the traditional accouterments — a full blown leprechaun trotting around in green garb, with dastardly designs at becoming as drunk as humanly possible.

Over the years, I’ve had many memorable St. Paddy’s days, none of which included the fag parade. Typically, upon waking up, I toss the corned beef in a pot brimming with water, beer, and mustard seeds. After several hours of boiling the bastard, I always open up another beer (maybe 2) and pour it into the pot. Spending my time wisely, I drink a half dozen beers in record time — write a bunch of shit on the internet, trade a few stocks, then I peel a bunch of potatoes and dice up some cabbage.

Making sure the beef is progressing according to schedule, I open the pot and poke at it — as if I know what the hell I’m doing. Then I simply drop all of the potatoes and cabbage into the pot, cover it, and then forget it ever existed for the next two hours or so.

Dinner is well on its way.

My house is usually filled with guests, all wanting to eat boiled food and drink lots of strong beer, so we make more than one pot of corned beef. Sometimes I crock pot one — or as my good friend likes to say, when pretending to be a world class chef, ‘slow cook’ it.

Soon enough, the company begins to pile in — most clad in green garments or off-white cable knit sweaters — looking like old seamen just back from a month at sea. “How was the catch?”, I ask them. “Pretty good lad — now get me a fargin’ beer, would ya?”

“Aye.”

We’re playing the songs from the old country, naturally. Here are a few crowd pleasers.

After we’ve been properly inebriated, the fatty meat, potatoes, and cabbage are served, liberally. People usually bring their own corned beef — so there’s plenty to go around. The music is blasting and the beers are being consumed at an industrial rate. Not before long, whiskey and single barrelled scotch are being passed around like bubble gum in a little league baseball dugout. The men venture outside to smoke a pipe or cigar, any sort of tobacco, and the rest of the night becomes a slow motion blur — intermingled between laughter, comical moments, and juvenile foolishness.

Alas, by the end of the night, we’re all Irish — outraged, mind you, by the treatment of ‘our people’ by those fucking Brits.

We wait one year hence and then do it all over again.

Happy St. Paddy’s Day.
Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

via http://ift.tt/2mVElf5 The_Real_Fly

Costco has to be the single best retail business in the world. A new Costco just opened in area and I signed up for their ‘executive’ membership card, which is something that I feel wholly ridiculous — but I did so nevertheless.

In order to attain the privilege of shopping there, customers must pay an annual fee. In an era where every retailer is tripping over themselves to attract customers, this concept isn’t dually brilliant and absurd.

Their private brand, Kirkland’s, has also attained legendary status — viewed by many as representative of value and quality. A new engine of growth for Costco is now enjoyed in wine, beer, and spirits.

Last year, alcohol brought in $3.8b, half coming from bullshit wine. This business has grown by 46% over the past 5 years, outpacing food and sundries.

“Private label continues to grow as a dominant strategy in retail — especially when it migrates from being a ‘label’ to more of a ‘brand,’ which Kirkland has done,” said David Bassuk, managing director at consulting firm AlixPartners in New York. “Now it’s a well-known name and gives the consumer a perception of value and a good deal.”

 
The reason for their success lies in the perceived value. The company only marks up prices by 10-14% compared to industry norms of 25-40%.
 

 

“They’re doing the opposite of looking to cut corners,” he said. “They’re looking for maximum quality and minimum markup to drive value for the member.”

 
Other retailers like Whole Foods, Walmart, and Target have entered the private label business for booze too and have enjoyed success, thanks to America’s proclivity to drink themselves into stupors. Even still, Costco is widely regarded as the winner in this high growth space — clawhammering local liquor stores into a thousand pieces wherever they encounter them.

Both the stock and revenue/earnings trends have been steady eddy, in spite of an overall lackluster retail environment.

Ancillary beneficiaries are $STZ, $DEO and BF-b.

Happy pre St. Paddy’s day.
Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

 

via http://ift.tt/2mVy1nX The_Real_Fly

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

Over the years I have heard the word “tribalism” used consistently as a way to deride and attack conservative groups with political stances outside the boundaries of globalization. Many readers have been exposed to this propaganda recently as “tribalism” becomes the go-to denouncement of the Trump Administration. From The Atlantic to CNBC to The Washington Post and beyond, tribalism is used almost as often as the fascist label, and there are very specific reasons for this.

Tribalism (like nationalism and populism) has slowly but surely been falsely associated with totalitarianism, as if the two are synonymous. The use of “tribalism” as a dismissal of sovereignty concepts is a distinctly globalist and leftist habit; clearly, they hate the very notion of it, so much so that they have sought to turn it into a four letter word. But why?

The fact of the matter is, tribalism revolves around sets of principles; meaning, some people hold principles that are completely incompatible with other people's principles. Some principles simply cannot be reconciled with other principles, and they cannot coexist. Groups tend to form around principles, and thus, certain groups cannot live in close proximity with other groups. When they do live in close proximity, one will invariably absorb the other or destroy the other.

This is more likely to occur when two groups have diametrically opposing views rather than minor deviations and disagreements.

For example, the mass injection of millions of Muslim immigrants into European nations has in a very short period of time resulted in the steady decline of Western ideals and even the decline of legal frameworks in the areas where the immigrants concentrate. Sharia law is a direct antithesis to traditional Western values such as religious freedom, free speech, freedom of association, individual rights, economic independence, free markets, etc. (It is interesting to note that western socialists and communist ideals run parallel to Muslim culture when it comes to the desire to dismantle sovereignty.) The effects of this clash of principles are quite obvious at this point.

Sharia-based groups have been transplanted into the Western sphere in what I consider a deliberate Cloward-Piven strategy of cultural destabilization of Europe.

These groups do not assimilate, they devour the surrounding culture and turn it into something that sublimates in accordance with their principles. This is why the leftist and globalist call for “multiculturalism” is nonsensical. You cannot have two or more diametrically opposed cultures within the same society — one of them has to take precedence over all the others. Globalists in particular KNOW this is the reality, and they use multiculturalism as a means to undermine nations specifically built upon traditional sovereign values.

Leftists are in most cases merely useful idiots that promote multiculturalism as a means of “penance.” That is to say, they believe that traditional western culture should be punished for past transgressions and in due course, phased out completely in exchange for a new utopian system.

Both leftists and globalists will often try to argue that if tribalism was not prevalent there would be no ill will between Muslims and Westerners or any other groups for that matter. But, as stated earlier, what they are glossing over is the inevitability of groups separating based on principals.  The only way for all groups to coexist in close proximity in the multicultural paradise we are being sold is for ALL value systems to be eliminated except for one. And perhaps that is the point.

Globalists prefer an outcome in which traditional values are erased and replaced with a “new world order” mindset; a system that is rooted in collectivist suppression of individual liberty, where freedom is exchanged for “harmony;” one global tribe worshiping one global god — the state.

The existence of tribalism might lead to conflicts if opposing cultures are deliberately mashed together, but it also makes the formation of a single overarching tyranny very difficult. Globalists seek to irritate existing divisions and trigger chaos between groups because ultimately, they want to demonize the very concept of tribalism and make way for a one world ideal that fits THEIR agenda.

Leftists are decidedly less self aware on why they fight so hard against tribalism. They see cultural division of any kind on the part of the west as inherently evil. Ironically, when it comes to so called “victim groups” like Muslims, social-justice warriors will argue that their aggressively divisive behavior is off limits to criticism because you have to be “from that culture to understand it”.  So, tribalism on the part of designated victim groups is beyond reproach, and tribalism on the part of westerners is a cancer that must be eradicated.

To reiterate, leftists love tribalism initiated by those they consider victim groups.  They only hate tribalism when it is initiated by conservatives and the traditional western middle class.  The double standard is evident.

Exactly what is happening here? Well, we are being given a false choice. We are offered tribalism at the cost of endless social crisis (which is being deliberately instigated), or, the erasure of tribalism and traditional principles for the sake of “peace.”  No other solutions are being presented.

Liberty proponents like myself would point out that there is an underlying principle within natural law that could solve many of the problems that arise between groups with differing world views without sacrificing everything to join a one-world collectivist hive mind. That rule would be the “Non-Aggression Principle.”  To summarize, the non-aggression principle holds that no person or group has the right to impose their beliefs or will on another person or group. The only time force of action is warranted is in self defense and the defense of innocents.

If a society was to operate by the rule of non-aggression, and people were to abide by that rule, then most groups and cultures could live peacefully. For the people who do not abide, removal from that society or nation would be necessary. This is the intrinsic advantage of tribalism in its purest form; tribalism allows us to discriminate against groups with destructive principles and behaviors, or against those that have different objectives. Some divisions are useful divisions. This allows for a group with shared goals to accomplish those goals without constant internal obstruction or sabotage. As long as the non-aggression principle is adhered to, tribalism is the ideal system.

Of course, there are certain groups that are incapable of accepting this dynamic.

Leftist ideology depends upon thought control and manipulation in order to remain relevant. Because their values are not based in logic or self examination, they don’t have the ability to win people over through compelling arguments; all they have are lies and force. When in power, they use the force of government. When out of power, they use the threat of the mob. If tribalism and the non-aggression principle were to thrive, the leftists in their current form would represent a failed group, and they would fade away.

Globalists see themselves as social architects, and an architect cannot function if his building materials will not cooperate. Globalism is impotent without the ability to impose will and the ability to undermine practical divisions between ideological opposites. Tribalism in the name of sovereignty and free society is an impassable wall to globalization. Their only option is to utilize and exploit groups that are anti-liberty as a weapon against existing societies that still have some basis in sovereignty. This is much easier to do when anti-liberty groups are organized within those free systems, or, when they are imported into them. A strong, free people cannot be destroyed from without, they can only be destroyed from within.

Social divisions are absolutely rational and healthy, and there is nothing “evil” or totalitarian about organizing only with people that share your values. The real evil comes from those that would suppress our values in the name of “harmonization” — there is no such thing.  Globalists and leftists argue for the adoption and toleration of all ideologies and principles as a means to peace, but what they really want in the end is the erasure of all the ideologies and principles they see as disagreeable in order to make way for their own.

via http://ift.tt/2mP0I48 Tyler Durden

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.

 

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/2nxOvkz Tyler Durden