Tag: news

After an ‘icy’ (pardon the pun) meeting between Rex Tillerson and Russia Foreign Secretary Sergei Lavrov last week in Moscow, Vladimir Putin has just released the first public photos of a giant, top-secret military base recently built on the arctic island of “Alexandra Land.”  According to media reports, the base is believed to be fully-armed with missile systems and nuclear-ready fighter jets.

A virtual tour of the facility can be viewed here.

Per The Sun, Russian economists figure the arctic outpost could hold the key to the Kremlin unearthing almost $25 trillion of oil and gas buried deep beneath the snow.  And with that kind of money on the line, it’s only natural that the base would be heavily fortified with nuclear ready fighter jets and reindeer-riding specials forces.

More than 150 troops will be based at the clover-shaped compound – which is decked out in the red, white and blue of the Russian flag.

 

And more worryingly, Moscow’s defence minister Sergei Shoigu confirmed nuke-ready Su-34 fighter jets will be deployed at a nearby air base.

The 150,000 sq ft (14,000 sq m) facility is designed to house 150 personnel, on 18-month tours of duty, and includes living quarters, a cinema, a chapel, a gymnasium, a billiards room and an orangery.

Meanwhile, in a heaping dose of the obvious, Defense Secretary James Mattis confirmed: “Russia is taking aggressive steps to increase its presence there.” 

We’re still awaiting confirmation of whether the gallons of vodka required daily to operate such a facility will be imported or distilled on the premises.

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

We almost made it a full month without a prominent hedge fund shuttering – an eternity in an age when ETFs and passive vehicles soak up several billion in capital each day at the expense of “active” managers – and then Bloomberg spoiled the streak when moments ago it reported that John Burbank, one of the handful of investors who made a killing from shorting subprime, and head of the $2.4 billion Passport Capital is shutting down one of his core hedge funds, the latest in a string of closings hitting the industry.

Passport Capital’s Long-Short Strategy Fund is winding down and will return money to investors. The fund, which had an AUM of $833 million as of December 31, and $636 million as of March 17 according to HSBC, lost 2.1% in the first two months of this year. In 2016 the Long-Short fund lost 11.8% reversing its 2015 gains, when Passport Long/Short gained 10.1%.

A catalyst for the closure may have been a January 2017 decision by the San Bernardino employees fund to pull its funds from Passport.

Bloomberg adds that the firm’s flagship Passport Global Strategy Fund will remain open.

A recent report by Hedge Fund Research showed that more hedge funds closed in 2016 than in any year since the financial crisis. Also on Wednesday, Guard Capital told investors that it’s closing its $885 million macro hedge fund. Last month, former Goldman Sachs trader Eric Mindich said he’s winding down his $7 billion firm, Eton Park Capital Management, which was one of the biggest hedge fund startups when it launched 13 years ago. In September, Richard Perry threw in the towel on his almost three-decade-old hedge fund.

Many more will follow, because as Goldman explained earlier this week, in a centrally-planned market, one which never falls, active returns are no nearly enough to prevent an LP exodus.

via http://ift.tt/2ooJ1IT Tyler Durden

Authored by Antonius Aquinas,

It is altogether fitting that the US attack on a Syrian airport, the dropping of a MOAB on defenseless Afghanistan, and the potential outbreak of nuclear war with North Korea have all come in the very month one hundred years earlier that an American president led the nation on its road to empire.  President Trump’s aggressive actions and all of America’s previous imperialistic endeavors can ultimately be traced to Woodrow Wilson’s disastrous decision to bring the country into the First World War on April 6, 1917.

This month, therefore, should be one of national mourning for the decision to enter that horrific conflict changed America and, for that matter, the world for the worse.

Had the US remained neutral, the war would most likely have come to a far quicker and more politically palatable conclusion, however, the entry of America on the Entente side prolonged the conflict and extended its economic and political destruction to such a degree that the Old Order could not be put back together again.  The great dynasties (Germany, Russia, and especially Austria) were ruthlessly dismantled at the conclusion of WWI by the explicit designs of Wilson which left a power vacuum across Central Europe.  The vacuum, of course, was filled by the various collectivist “isms” which produced the landscape for another global conflagration even greater than WWI.

For America, after a brief revival of isolationism and non-interventionist sentiment throughout the land, the country, led by another ruthless and power-mad chief executive, provoked and schemed its way into the second general European war within a generation, this time via “the backdoor” with Japan.  A second US intervention, making the war global, could not have come about had there been no WWI, or if that war had ended on better terms.

After the Second World War, the US emerged as the world’s dominant power with bases across the globe and entered into a string of never ending hot and cold wars, regime changes, destabilizations, assassinations, bombings, blockades, and economic sanctions that have continued to this very day and hour.  Quickly after the war’s conclusion, the American media, academia, and the security and military industrial complex had to invent the myth that the Soviet Union and the US were of equal military might which turned out to be a blatant lie.  After being decimated in WWII and its adherence to unworkable and economic destructive socialistic planning, the Soviet Union could never produce the wealth necessary to maintain a global empire as the US did, and still does.  The “Soviet threat” was always a ruse to get gullible Americans to vote for and support greater and greater “defense” spending.

Besides Ron Paul and to a far lesser extent his son, Donald Trump was the only viable candidate who spoke of taking a new, less interventionist foreign policy which is why he was able to garner so much support from millions of empire-weary Americans during the presidential campaign.  He rightly called the Iraqi War a “disaster,” spoke of getting along with Russia, and the US’s commitment to NATO should be rethought, among other refreshing comments on foreign affairs.

In one of the most memorable and hopeful passages of his Inaugural Address, the new president championed non-intervention abroad:

We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first. We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example. We will shine for everyone to follow.

Unlike Ron Paul, however, Trump had no grounding in a true America First foreign policy.  While critical of his predecessors’ foreign policy decisions, Trump was not opposed philosophically to the US Empire or saw it as the greatest threat to world peace which currently exists.

Without an ideological basis against American globalism, Trump was easy pickings against the threats and machinations of the Deep State.  Without a refutation of the ideology which drove Wilson and all of his successors to promote military adventurism abroad, Trump will be little different than his imperial predecessors and with a personality that is thin-skinned, impulsive and unpredictable, Trump could, God forbid, become another Woodrow Wilson.

via http://ift.tt/2pE61aF Tyler Durden

The enemy of my enemy has safe air bases.

In a move which either suggests that i) Syria is preparing for more US attacks, ii) really likes Russians, or iii) is simply doing the logical thing, CNN reports that the Syrian government has moved most of its combat planes to a base located in close proximity to the Russian air base in Syria to protect them from potential US strikes. The movement of the aircraft to the air base at Bassel Al-Assad International Airport began shortly after the US’s April 6 Tomahawk cruise missile strike on Sharat air base, which destroyed some 24 Syrian warplanes.

After the move, the majority of Syria’s operation airforce will be located next to Russia’s Khmeimim Air Base, where the majority of Russian air forces helping ally Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime are based, in Latakia, Syria.

The Khmeimim base, along with a naval facility in Tartus, is one of the two of the primary Russian military installations in Syria, and has in the past been shown to be protected by one or more Russian anti-aircraft missile installations.

While the motive behind the move is obvious, CNN nonetheless points it out:”The regime in Damascus may be calculating that the US would be more reluctant to strike in close proximity to the Russian troops and their anti-aircraft systems.”

Two weeks ago, the US warned Moscow via a pre-established channel in advance of its April 6 cruise missile strike in order to prevent any Russian casualties. So with Russian military assets clearly on the “do not target” list, it was only logical that Assad would do everything to move as many of his own assets as close to the Russian air base as possible.

It was unclear what the current state is of the transported Syrian airplanes. Shortly after the April 6 strike, US defense officials said that the its retaliatory strike incapacitated some 20% of the regime’s operational fixed-wing aircraft, making the preservation of the remaining planes of the utmost importance to Damascus.

“The Syrian Air Force is not in good shape. It’s been worn down by years of combat plus some … significant maintenance problems,” Secretary of Defense Gen. James Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon.
The US has not ruled out additional strikes against the regime should it opt to use chemical weapons in the future. “The Syrian regime should think long and hard before it again acts so recklessly in violation of international law against the use of chemical weapons,” Mattis said, later adding: “If they use chemical weapons, they are going to pay a very, very stiff price.”

Unless, of course, as Oliver Stone most recently suggested, it wasn’t Syria using chemical weapons and instead the attack was as Putin said last week, a false flag. Which begs the question: should another “chemical attack” or “false flag” take place, will the US dare to target Syrian assets in dangerous proximity to the Russian base, or will it simply decide to aim for Assad’s palace. After all, by now it is clear to most that the US goal, from the beginning, has been regime change.

via http://ift.tt/2pDVF7E Tyler Durden

Japanese adjusted trade balance tumbles over 500 billion yen in March (after surging around 500 billion yen in February) as lunar new year effects washed out and left the lowest trade surplus since January 2016.

Exports (up 12% YoY) and Imports (up 15.8% YoY) both soared at the fastest pace in years.

Japan’s exports expanded for a fourth consecutive month in March, supporting a moderate economic recovery, according to data released by the Ministry of Finance on Thursday.

Under the surface it was all China…

• Exports to the U.S. increased 3.5 percent from a year earlier.
• Those to the EU rose 1.4 percent.
• Shipments to China, Japan’s largest trading partner, climbed 16.4 percent.

“The February exports number was pretty high because of the Lunar New Year, so the March number will be more stable,” said Yoshiki Shinke, chief economist at Dai-Ichi Life Research Institute, before the release. “That should just be seen as volatility from the holiday. Exports are continuing to increase.”

via http://ift.tt/2pE15j8 Tyler Durden

In an open letter to outgoing Pomona College President David Oxtoby, a group of  self-identified black students from the Claremont Colleges assail the president for, of all things, affirming Pomona’s commitment to free speech, a concept which they argue simply allows “hegemonic institutions” who seek to “perpetuate systems of domination a platform to project their bigotry.”

The letter was written in response to an April 7th email from President Oxtoby in which he reiterated the college’s commitment to “the exercise of free speech and academic freedom” in the aftermath of protests that shut down a scheduled appearance by an invited speaker, scholar and Black Lives Matter critic Heather Mac Donald, on April 6.

“Protest has a legitimate and celebrated place on college campuses,” Oxtoby wrote. “What we cannot support is the act of preventing others from engaging with an invited speaker. Our mission is founded upon the discovery of truth, the collaborative development of knowledge and the betterment of society.”

But that statement was just more than the ‘triggered’ snowflakes of Pomona could handle.  As such, they fired off a letter to the president explaining that apparently the notion of “free speech” was only intended for “marginalized” persons and not society as a whole.

Free speech, a right many freedom movements have fought for, has recently become a tool appropriated by hegemonic institutions. It has not just empowered students from marginalized backgrounds to voice their qualms and criticize aspects of the institution, but it has given those who seek to perpetuate systems of domination a platform to project their bigotry.

 

“Thus, if ‘our mission is founded upon the discovery of truth, how does free speech uphold that value?”

The students go on blast the president for apparently requiring minority students to “subject themselves routinely to the hate speech of fascists”….because ignoring visitors with whom they have a difference of opinion would simply be impossible.

As President, you are charged with upholding principles of Pomona College. Though this institution as well as many others including this entire country, have been founded upon the oppression and degradation of marginalized bodies, it has a liability to protect the students that it serves.  The paradox is that Pomona’s past is rooted in domination of marginalized peoples and communities and the student body has a significant population of students from these backgrounds. Your recent statement reveals where Pomona’s true intentions lie.

 

Either you support students of marginalized identities, particularly Black students, or leave us to protect and organize for our communities without the impositions of your patronization, without your binary respectability politics, and without your monolithic perceptions of protest and organizing. In addition, non-Black individuals do not have the right to prescribe how Black people respond to anti-Blackness.

 

The idea that we must subject ourselves routinely to the hate speech of fascists who want for us not to exist plays on the same Eurocentric constructs that believed Black people to be impervious to pain and apathetic to the brutal and violent conditions of white supremacy.

And, of course, the students finish their letter with a list of demands that includes, among other things, a call for punishment of the entire “Claremont Independent editorial staff for its continual perpetuation of hate speech, anti-Blackness, and intimidation toward students of marginalized backgrounds.”

Also, we demand a revised email sent to the entire student body, faculty, and staff by Thursday, April 20, 2017, apologizing for the previous patronizing statement, enforcing that Pomona College does not tolerate hate speech and speech that projects violence onto the bodies of its marginalized students and oppressed peoples, especially Black students who straddle the intersection of marginalized identities, and explaining the steps the institution will take and the resources it will allocate to protect the aforementioned students.

 

We also demand that Pomona College and the Claremont University Consortium entities take action against the Claremont Independent editorial staff (http://ift.tt/2oMGryR) for its continual perpetuation of hate speech, anti-Blackness, and intimidation toward students of marginalized backgrounds. Provided that the Claremont Independent releases the identity of students involved with this letter and such students begin to receive threats and hate mail, we demand that this institution and its constituents take legal action against members of the Claremont Independent involved with the editing and publication process as well as disciplinary action, such as expulsion on the grounds of endangering the wellbeing of others.

Let this be a lesson to all you college presidents out there who may be thinking about taking a stand in support of ‘free speech’…that kind of aggression will not stand, man.

The full letter can be viewed here:

via http://ift.tt/2oN4Nsj Tyler Durden

In March of last year, Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone warned the world:

"we're going to war – either hybrid in nature…or a hot war (which will destroy our country). Our citizens should know this, but they don't because our media is dumbed down in its 'Pravda'-like support for our 'respectable', highly aggressive government."

And strongly rejected the establishment's "the Russians are coming" narrative shortly after the election and correctly forecast that it wouldn't be long before the deep state pushed Trump into an anti-Kremlin position…

"As much as we may disagree with Donald Trump (and I do) he’s right now target number one of the MSM propaganda — until, that is, he changes to the anti-Kremlin track over, God knows, some kind of petty dispute cooked up by CIA, and in his hot-headed way starts fighting with the Russians…

 

I never thought I’d find myself at this point in time praying for the level-headedness of a Donald Trump. "

Stone was correct and in a Facebook post tonight expresses his disappointment at Trump and disgust for The Deep State (and America's wilful ignorance).

“So It Goes”

I confess I really had hopes for some conscience from Trump about America’s wars, but I was wrong — fooled again! — as I had been by the early Reagan, and less so by Bush 43. Reagan found his mantra with the “evil empire” rhetoric against Russia, which almost kicked off a nuclear war in 1983 — and Bush found his ‘us against the world’ crusade at 9/11, in which of course we’re still mired.

via http://ift.tt/2oQDax1 Tyler Durden

Back in December we wrote about the efforts of Facebook to combat the spread of “fake news” over social media with the introduction of a filter intended to flag ‘fake’ content so that users wouldn’t haven’t to go through the hassle of critically analyzing information on their own.  As we noted at the time, it was a genius plan, except for one small issue:  who determines what is considered “fake news” and how exactly do they draw those conclusions?  From our prior post (see “Facebook Launches Campaign To Combat “Fake News”“):

The first problem, however, immediately emerges because as NBC notes, “legitimate news outlets won’t be able to be flagged”, which then begs the question who or what is considered “legitimate news outlets”, does it include the likes of NYTs and the WaPos, which during the runup to the election declared on a daily basis, that Trump has no chance of winning, which have since posted defamatory stories about so-called “Russian propaganda news sites”, admitting subsequently that their source data was incorrect, and which many consider to be the source of “fake news”.

 

Also, just who makes the determination what is considered “legitimate news outlets.”

Now, it seems as though the first confirmed victim of Facebook’s ‘fake news’ crusade may be none other than the Chicago Tribune, a newspaper that undoubtedly considers itself a “legitimate news outlet.”

The discovery was highlighted in an article written by the Chicago Tribune’s own Deputy Editor for Digital News, Kurt Gessler, who noted that a curious thing happened back in December when Facebook first changed up its algorithms to target fake news, namely their traffic crashed.  Per the chart below, the typical Tribune post went from attracting the interest of 30-35k people down to 15-20k people in a matter of months.

Meanwhile, the number of Tribune articles shared over Facebook that reached less than 10,000 viewers (i.e. the “duds”) skyrocketed while the number of highly successful articles, those reaching 50,000+ people, simultaneously plunged.

So, either the Chicago Tribune suddenly started producing a lot of garbage that no one wanted to read, which just happened to coincide with the implementation of Facebook’s new “fake news” algo, or the media outlet was pumping out content that Facebook suddenly figured to fit the definition of ‘fake’.

Certainly, the issue couldn’t be attributed to a loss of followers….

…or less content creation.

Perhaps Facebook’s algos are better at identifying “fake news” than we thought.

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