Datasets:

nixbel

/

ustest

like 0

Russophobia: War Party Propaganda : Information

Margaret Kimberley

Russophobia: War Party Propaganda The world’s most reactionary regime, the head-chopping, terror-sponsoring Saudi Arabian kleptocracy, was awarded the chair of the UN Human Rights Council, while Russia has been kicked out. The travesty was engineered by the Superpower of Lies to punish Moscow for resisting the U.S.-led war of sectarian massacre and regime change in Syria. The War Party is on the march, to the cheers of corporate media – and Hillary hasn’t even been elected yet. By Margaret Kimberley “All attempts to stop the fighting were rejected by the U.S. and NATO and sealed the fate of the Syrian people.” November 06, 2016 " Information Clearing House " - " BAR " - Did Russia invade Iraq and kill one million people? Does Russia have a greater percentage of its population behind bars than any other country in the world? Did Russia occupy Haiti after kidnapping its president? Are Russian police allowed to shoot children to death without fear of repercussion? Is Russia entering its 20th year of a terror war against the people of Somalia? All of these crimes take place in or at the direction of the United States. Yet the full force of propaganda and influence on world opinion is directed against Russia, which whatever its shortcomings cannot hold a candle to America in violating human rights. The dangers presented by a Hillary Clinton presidency cannot be overstated. She and the war party have been steadily working towards a goal that defies logic and risks all life on earth. Regime change is once again their modus operandi and they hope to make it a reality against Russia. Nearly every claim of Russian evil doing is a lie, a ruse meant to put Americans in a fighting mood and lose their fear of nuclear conflagration. It isn’t clear if Clinton and the rest of the would-be warriors actually realize they are risking mushroom clouds. Perhaps they believe that Vladimir Putin will be easily pushed around when all evidence points to the contrary. The unproven allegations of interference in the presidential election and casting blame on Russia as the sole cause of suffering in Syria are meant to desensitize the public. It is an age old ploy which makes war not just acceptable but deemed a necessity. The usual suspects are helping out eagerly. The corporate media, led by newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post , are front and center in pushing tales of Russian villainy. Human Rights Watch and other organizations who care nothing about abuses committed by the United States and its allies are also playing their usual role of choosing the next regime change victim. Russia lost its seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council in part because of American pressure and public relations assistance from the human rights industrial complex. The UNHRC is now chaired by Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy that funds the jihadist terrorist groups who caused 500,000 Syrian deaths. The Saudis are causing dislocation, death and starvation in Yemen, too, but they are American allies, so there is little opposition to their misdeeds. The openly bigoted Donald Trump has been the perfect foil for Hillary Clinton. That is why she and the rest of the Democratic Party leadership preferred him as their rival. He made the case for the discredited lesser evilism argument and his sensible statements about avoiding enmity with Russia made him even more useful. The United States and its allies are the cause of Syria’s destruction. Their effort to overthrow president Assad created a humanitarian disaster complete with ISIS and al Nusra fighters who love to chop off heads for entertainment. Far from being the cause of the catastrophe Russia left its ally to fight alone for four years. They even made overtures to negotiate Assad’s fate with the United States. All attempts to stop the fighting were rejected by the U.S. and NATO and sealed the fate of the Syrian people. The people of east Aleppo are being shelled by American allies but one wouldn’t know that by reading what passes for journalism in newspapers and on television. The American role in the slaughter is barely mentioned or is excused as an effort to protect the civilian population. The bloodshed was made in the U.S. and could end if this government wanted it to. The anti-Russian propaganda effort has worked to perfection. NATO is massing troops on Russia’s borders in a clear provocation yet Putin is labeled the bad guy. He is said to be menacing the countries that join in threatening his nation. The United States makes phony claims of Russian war crimes despite having blood on its hands. The latest Human Rights Watch canards about prosecuting Assad come straight from the White House and State Department and have nothing to do with concern for Syrians living in their fifth year of hell. There is no lesser evil between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. She is fully supported by the war party in her desire for a more “muscular” foreign policy. That bizarre term means death and starvation for millions more people if Clinton wins in a landslide. She must be denied a victory of that magnitude and any opportunity to claim a mandate. Peace loving people must give their votes to the Green Party ticket of Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka. They are alone in rejecting the premise of an imperialist country and its endless wars. The United States is the most dangerous country in the world. If it has a reckless and war loving president the threat becomes existential. That is the prospect we face with a Hillary Clinton presidency. If the role of villain is cast on the world stage she is the star of the show. Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com. ‘Russia kills civilians, US promotes democracy ’ – Washington’s mantra for domestic consumption

After Plagiarism Reports, Monica Crowley Won’t Take White House Job - The New York Times

Maggie Haberman

Monica Crowley, who was selected just weeks ago to serve in a post on Donald J. Trump’s National Security Council, has decided against taking the position after allegations that she plagiarized key passages in a 2012 book. Ms. Crowley, whose name was briefly floated as a candidate for White House press secretary, has been dogged by accusations of plagiarism in recent weeks, beginning with the discovery by CNN that she copied several passages in a book she published with HarperCollins. A later report in Politico unearthed similar issues in her doctoral dissertation. “After much reflection, I have decided to remain in New York to pursue other opportunities and will not be taking a position in the incoming administration,” Ms. Crowley said in a statement to The Washington Times. “I greatly appreciate being asked to be part of Trump’s team, and I will continue to enthusiastically support him and his agenda for American renewal,” she said. She did not address the allegations of plagiarism. Ms. Crowley is the second official announced by the transition team to decide not to go to the White House, following Jason Miller, who was to be the communications director. One person close to the transition said that Ms. Crowley’s role would have involved overseeing certain speeches, something that would have been difficult after the plagiarism claims. HarperCollins has withdrawn the digital edition of Ms. Crowley’s book “What the (Bleep) Just Happened?” Published by Broadside Books, a conservative imprint at HarperCollins, it is a critical look at Barack Obama’s presidency. It sold out 20, 000 copies in hardcover, Publishers Marketplace said. Mr. Trump’s transition team had labeled the plagiarism reports “a politically motivated attack” and defended Ms. Crowley’s ability to serve. “Monica’s exceptional insight and thoughtful work on how to turn this country around is exactly why she will be serving in the administration,” transition officials said in a statement to CNN. “HarperCollins — one of the largest and most respected publishers in the world — published her book, which has become a national best seller,” the statement said. “Any attempt to discredit Monica is nothing more than a politically motivated attack that seeks to distract from the real issues facing this country. ” Most publishers do not check for plagiarism, fabrication or factual inaccuracies.

Obama Puts Syria at Arm’s Length as Carnage Drags On - The New York Times

Mark Landler

WASHINGTON — When Secretary of State John Kerry took the floor at the United Nations on Wednesday to deliver a searing denunciation of the airstrike on an aid convoy headed for the Syrian city of Aleppo President Obama was crosstown, at his Manhattan hotel, preparing for a day of diplomacy that included Africa, Israel and Colombia — but, conspicuously, not Syria. It was typical of the arm’ approach the president has taken toward the Syria conflict on the world stage in recent weeks. At a summit meeting in China this month, he studiously avoided negotiating a with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, leaving the diplomacy to Mr. Kerry and his Russian counterpart. At the United Nations, he scarcely mentioned Syria in a farewell address to the General Assembly. Mr. Obama’s public distancing, White House officials insist, does not reflect a lack of concern. On the contrary, they say the president is desperate for Mr. Kerry to negotiate a viable agreement with Russia that would halt the relentless bombing of civilians in Aleppo and elsewhere in Syria — if only because he does not see a viable Plan B to stop the carnage. But as Mr. Obama’s presidency enters its final months, the negotiations with Russia have become a threadbare exercise, leaving a president who has long avoided military entanglement with Syria backing a policy that he himself believes is destined to fail. This week, his frustration boiled over publicly. The situation in Syria “haunts me constantly,” the president said in an interview with the historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, published Thursday in Vanity Fair. In a mix of candor and defensiveness, Mr. Obama said he had himself more on Syria than any other issue during his presidency. He repeated his rejection of critics who said he should have armed the moderate rebels much earlier in the conflict or carried through on his threat to take military action against the government of President Bashar after he fired poison gas at civilians in 2013. But he conceded that there might have been a failure of imagination in his response to the conflict. “I do ask myself, ‘Was there something that we hadn’t thought of? ’” the president told Ms. Goodwin. “‘Was there some move that is beyond what was being presented to me that maybe a Churchill could have seen, or an Eisenhower might have figured out? ’” While Mr. Obama has supported Mr. Kerry’s diplomacy — even over the objections of the Pentagon — he does not want to be drawn into it. When Mr. Kerry met with Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, at a Group of 20 meeting in Hangzhou, China, on Sept. 4, the two fell just short of a agreement over what officials said were minor details. American officials suspected the Russians were stalling so the deal could be sealed in a meeting the following day between Mr. Obama and Mr. Putin. After 90 minutes, a Mr. Obama emerged to say, “Given the gaps of trust that exist, that’s a tough negotiation, and we haven’t yet closed the gaps in a way where we think it would actually work. ” He instructed Mr. Kerry to keep talking to Mr. Lavrov, and the two came to terms five days later in Geneva. Mr. Obama, his aides said, was determined not to give Mr. Putin a platform to declare Russia was working hand in hand with the United States in Syria, particularly since he did not believe the Russians would abide by the terms of the agreement. “The president wasn’t prepared to offer the Russians what they wanted most — a symbolic show of U. S. cooperation — until the Russians delivered on their end of the bargain,” said the White House press secretary, Josh Earnest. “That’s why the bargain is structured the way it is. And it’s rooted in our skepticism that they would deliver. ” “The president doesn’t want U. S. credibility to be sullied by Russia’s dishonesty and willingness to sacrifice principle in the name of convenience,” Mr. Earnest added. Mr. Obama’s skepticism appeared warranted when the aid convoy was hit by a warplane that American officials believe was Russian. White House officials reacted harshly. Benjamin J. Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser, said, “The question is whether or not we just walk away from the table completely at this point, or whether or not we do some more diplomacy and consultation to determine whether or not there is some path forward. ” Again, though, Mr. Obama left it to Mr. Kerry to reproach Mr. Lavrov at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council. To the extent he mentioned Syria during the General Assembly, it was in humanitarian terms. At a meeting with other world leaders on the refugee crisis, Mr. Obama read a letter by a boy from Scarsdale, N. Y. who wrote to him to offer a home to Omran Daqneesh, the Syrian boy from Aleppo who was photographed, dazed and bloodied, after being rescued from an airstrike. The White House recorded the boy reading the letter aloud, and the video went viral on social media. Mr. Obama’s struggles with Syria are most palpable when he tries to sum up his legacy. In his speech to the General Assembly, for example, the president cited his diplomatic overtures to Cuba and Myanmar, as well as the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate accord, which he said exemplified the power of global collaboration. But when he referred to Syria, Mr. Obama spoke of constraints rather than possibilities. “If we are honest, we understand that no external power is going to be able to force different religious communities or ethnic communities to coexist for long,” he said, referring to Syria’s sectarian rifts. “I do believe we have to be honest about the nature of these conflicts. ” Mr. Obama made no direct reference to the negotiations with the Russians, saying only, “In a place like Syria, where there’s no ultimate military victory to be won, we’re going to have to pursue the hard work of diplomacy that aims to stop the violence, and deliver aid to those in need. ” Several former administration officials said they understood why Mr. Obama was keeping his distance from the issue. “Frankly, I doubt Obama engaging on the diplomatic side would help much,” said Robert S. Ford, a former American ambassador to Damascus who is now a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute. “Like Kerry, Obama wouldn’t have much leverage with the Putin unless Obama was also putting into play in the Syria war new elements of material — not verbal — pressure against the alliance. ” Dennis B. Ross, a former coordinator of Middle East policy at the National Security Council, said Mr. Obama’s dilemma went back to the earliest days of his response to the Syria conflict, when he viewed it as a sectarian quagmire similar to that in neighboring Iraq. As the war ground on and the opposition became more Islamist, Mr. Obama’s options narrowed. Now, Mr. Ross said, the president has little incentive to say anything. “He knows that anything he says either requires him to do something if it is tough — and he won’t — or makes him look weak and ineffective on an issue that will plague his legacy,” he said.

Here’s How Goldman Sachs Lays People Off | Financial Markets

beforeitsnews.com

(Before It's News) 43 here, 109 there and pretty soon 443 employees are dismissed Bank has to file ‘WARN notices’ with New York state agency The first “plant layoff” notice came in February: 43 people would lose their jobs. The second arrived six weeks later, increasing the cuts to 109 workers. Then a third, in April, for 146 more. And a fourth, in June: 98. Three more notices followed, including 20 dismissals announced last week. The “plant” in question — Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Like all big companies in New York State, the firm is required to file a “WARN notice” with state authorities when it plans to shed large numbers of employees as part of a plant closing, or “mass layoffs” involving 250 or more. Employers also must inform the state of smaller reductions under certain circumstances, and Goldman Sachs cited a “plant layoff” in each case. Last week’s notice brings this year’s job-cut tally to 443.With the run of notices, seven since the start of the year, the bank has signaled its intention to dismiss hundreds of employees in New York without placing a single, headline-grabbing number on the overall reduction, already its largest since 2008. The company’s approach differs from competitors, including Morgan Stanley, who have shown a preference for larger, one-time cuts. Big Number “When there’s a big number, people right away get that something is happening at that firm — it’s a negative,” said Jeanne Branthover, a partner at New York-based executive-search firm DHR International. “This is more, ‘We’re having layoffs and we don’t want to explain it.’ It’s more under the radar screen.” The 20 people in the latest reduction were notified either this month or last, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing staffing decisions. The terminations will take place between Nov. 7 and Jan. 5, according to the notice posted on the state Labor Department’s website. The workers aren’t represented by a union. Gena Palumbo, a managing director and the bank’s global head of employment law, is the sole Goldman Sachs contact listed on each of this year’s WARN notices. In 2008, the firm dismissed 900 people in New York in two different sets of cuts as the financial crisis raged. A spokesman for the bank declined to comment. Goldman Sachs set aside $9.2 billion for compensation and benefits this year through September, 13 percent less than the first nine months of last year. Total employees, including consultants and part-time workers, fell 5.4 percent to 34,900. While Goldman prefers a scalpel, its rival Morgan Stanley wielded an ax. That firm took steps to shrink in the fourth quarter, cutting 1,200 employees, including about 25 percent of the fixed-income trading staff, or about 470 traders and salesmen. When asked about how Morgan Stanley decided to make the changes, trading chief Ted Pick said he favored a bold move. “We took the view of taking tough medicine,” Pick, 47, said in February. Slower Approach Goldman Sachs’s slower approach may reflect a desire to avoid cutting too much if trading or dealmaking comes roaring back. Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein has spoken about staying nimble to respond to revenue opportunities when they arise. It also may reflect an outlook that got cloudier as the year progressed. In January, a person familiar with the firm’s thinking said Goldman Sachs was mulling cuts to more than 5 percent of its fixed-income staff. By March, that would expand to more than 5 percent but less than 10 percent. And by May, 10 percent. The job cuts continued after first-quarter revenue was the worst for the start of a year in Blankfein’s decade-long tenure. While trading business bounced back in the second and third quarters, total trading revenue for the first nine months declined 11 percent from last year. The WARN notices don’t capture firings outside New York and they don’t include voluntary retirements. More than a half-dozen partners have left Goldman Sachs this year, according to internal memos obtained by Bloomberg. “Everything Goldman does is scrutinized,” Branthover said. “This may be a signal or a sign that there are changes being made internally, or there are businesses and areas that are not performing satisfactorily. I would keep an eye on it.”

War on the Streets of Paris: Armed Migrants Fight Running Battles in the French Capital

Henry Wolff

War on the Streets of Paris: Armed Migrants Fight Running Battles in the French Capital Nick Gutteridge, Express, November 2, 2016 A migrant turf war erupted into violence on the streets of one of Paris’ trendiest neighbourhoods early this morning as asylum seekers beat each other to a pulp with wooden clubs. The area around Stalingrad Metro station was turned into a refugee battleground as rival gangs of migrants set upon each other in shocking scenes of violence. Asylum seekers wearing hooded tops wielded makeshift clubs fashioned from lengths of wood which they used to bludgeon each other as horrified pedestrians looked on. The blood-curdling brawl erupted just yards from the Stalingrad Metro station, where a squalid migrant camp has popped up following the demolition of the Jungle. It was not immediately clear what sparked the early morning fight, but rival gangs of people smugglers have previously been involved in violent brawls in Calais. And despite the horrific brawl, a pro-migrant rally is apparently being organised to take place at the camp at 6pm tonight. The once peaceful neighbourhood, in Paris’ 10th Arrondissement, used to be a popular area with tourists, boasting a lively nightlife scene bustling with restaurants and bars. But worried residents have revealed how it has become a no go zone in recent weeks following the establishment of the refugee camp, which has brought squalor and violence. Thousands of migrants–mostly from Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan, and Eritrea–have pitched tents under the Metro station after the demolition of the Jungle hampered their attempts to reach Britain. French police have tried and failed on many occasions to clear the squalid squat, but asylum seekers simply keep on returning and reestablishing it. There are now nore than 2,500 migrants pitching up in the makeshift camp, with locals saying the eyesore is ruining their businesses and making life a “living hell”. Residents in the once popular district say that the squatters are now becoming increasingly violent and dangerous, with increased reports of muggings. Faisal, a shopkeeper, told the French daily Le Figaro that Stalingrad locals are living in fear, threatening the future of his business. He said: “The stench of urine, faeces, and rubbish has made Stalingrad an insalubrious place to live. The place is dead – no-one wants to come here anymore. People are afraid to go out and lock themselves in. “I’m making less than €60 (£53) a day. A few more weeks like this and I’ll go bust! “French people have been kind to them. I know they’re desperate, but the least they can do is respect the law and try and integrate into French society.” Jeanne, another Stalingrad resident, told Le Figaro the migrants had become increasingly violent towards locals. She said: “Brazen migrants are snatching jewellery and handbags off passers-by–they’re even stealing bread. I’ve seen them beat people up too.” Police have raided the camp some 30 times in the past year, and on Monday French president François Hollande vowed to close the camp for good. But within 24 hours of a police operation to move migrants on tents had sprung up again, showing the uphill battle authorities in the French capital face to shut down such illegal encampments. Furious locals have demanded that the camp be closed once and for all, describing how they have heard “blood-curdling noises” coming from it in the middle of the night. Marie, who lives right next to the makeshift camp, told Le Figaro: “Life here has become unbearable. More than 2,500 squatters were evacuated in September, and now, less than two months later, they’re back. And now that the ‘Jungle’ camp has been closed, things are about to get even worse.” Another local, Monique, said that she was at “a loss for words” and “utterly distraught” over the situation. She said: “The streets are littered with rubbish and faeces. We can hear blood-curdling screams coming from the camp in the middle of the night.

NYU Prof on CIA's Media Control and Drive for War with Russia (Video)

Bias bashers NYU Prof on CIA's Media Control and Drive for War with Russia (Video) Prof. Mark Crispin Miller discussed the ways in which the mainstream media distorts the public's view of reality Offguardian Mark Crispin Miller is Professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University. His research interests include modern propaganda, history and tactics of advertising, American film, and media ownership. Mark Crispin Miller is the author of Boxed In: The Culture of TV; Seeing Through Movies, ed.; Mad Scientists: The Secret History of Modern Propaganda; Spectacle: Operation Desert Storm and the Triumph of Illusion; and The Bush Dyslexicon. His newest book is Cruel and Unusual: Bush/Cheney’s New World Order. Here he talks about US government propaganda, the corporate media, the CIA and the Russian “Putin” threat. He also discusses the recent attempt by the corporate media to get him fired using a NYU graduate student working for Rupert Murdock-owned VICE. Finally, he “looks at the role of the CIA and the US government in their organized effort to demonize Putin and Russia and create a US population hysteria similar to the 1950s. This interview was done during the Project Censored 40th anniversary at Sonoma State University on October 22, 2016 by Pacifica KPFA WorkWeek host Steve Zeltzer.”

Watch: Alec Baldwin’s Trump Faces 9th Circuit Judges in ’People’s Court’ Parody - Breitbart

Trent Baker

This week’s “Saturday Night Live” host Alec Baldwin brought back his President Donald Trump role in a “People’s Court” parody suing the judges from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals who ruled against President Trump’s temporary immigration ban. “He claims that some phony judges are being very mean to him,” the narrator said of “Trump. ” “First of all, Mr. Trump, you understand this is a TV court, right,” the judge asked Baldwin. He replied, “That’s OK, I’m a TV president. ” The judge threw out Trump’s case, and accused him of “doing too much. ” Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent

Turning the Tide Against Cholera - The New York Times

Donald G. McNeil Jr.

SUNDARBANS NATIONAL PARK, Bangladesh Two hundred years ago, the first cholera pandemic emerged from these mangrove swamps. It began in 1817, after the British East India Company sent thousands of workers deep into the remote Sundarbans, part of the Ganges River Delta, to log the jungles and plant rice. These brackish waters are the cradle of Vibrio cholerae, a bacterium that clings to human intestines and emits a toxin so virulent that the body will pour all of its fluids into the gut to flush it out. Water loss turns victims ashen their eyes sink into their sockets, and their blood turns black and congeals in their capillaries. Robbed of electrolytes, their hearts lose their beat. Victims die of shock and organ failure, sometimes in as little as six hours after the first abdominal rumblings. Cholera probably had festered here for eons. Since that first escape, it has circled the world in seven pandemic cycles that have killed tens of millions. Artists of the 19th century often depicted it as a skeleton with a scythe and victims heaped at its feet. It stalked revelers at a masked ball in Heinrich Heine’s “Cholera in Paris” and kills the protagonist in Thomas Mann’s “Death in Venice. ” Outbreaks forced London, New York and other cities to create vast public water systems, transforming civic life. Today cholera garners panicky headlines when it strikes unexpectedly in places like Ethiopia or Haiti. But it is a continuing threat in nearly 70 countries, where more than one billion people are at risk. Now, thanks largely to efforts that began in cholera’s birthplace, a way to finally conquer the plague is in sight. A treatment protocol so effective that it saves 99. 9 percent of all victims was pioneered here. The World Health Organization estimates that it has saved about 50 million lives in the past four decades. Just as important, after 35 years of work, researchers in Bangladesh and elsewhere have developed an effective cholera vaccine. It has been accepted by the W. H. O. and stockpiled for epidemics like the one that struck Haiti in 2010. Soon, there may be enough to begin routine vaccination in countries where the disease has a permanent foothold. Merely creating that stockpile — even of a few million doses — profoundly improved the way the world fought cholera, Dr. Margaret Chan, secretary general of the W. H. O. said last year. Ready access to the vaccine has made countries less tempted to cover up outbreaks to protect tourism, she said. That has sped up emergency responses and attracted more vaccine makers, lowering costs. “More cholera vaccines have been deployed over the last two years than in the previous 15 years combined,” Dr. Chan said. The treatment advances relied heavily on research and testing done at the International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, known as the ICDDR, B, in Dhaka. Although Dhaka may not be the first place one might look to find a public health revolution, the center is famous among experts in gut diseases. While its upper levels are quiet and scholarly, the center’s ground floor is the world’s largest diarrhea hospital. Its vast wards treat 220, 000 patients a year, almost all of whom recover within 36 hours. Doctors there save hundreds of lives a day. The ICDDR, B was originally the Cholera Research Laboratory, founded in 1960 by the United States as part of that era’s “soft diplomacy. ” Research hospitals were built in friendly countries both to save lives locally and to act as sentinels for diseases that might threaten America. The wards, which in the rainy season extend into tents in the parking lot, contain long rows of “cholera cots. ” On each iron or wood frame is a plastic sheet with a hole in the middle. A bucket beneath the hole catches diarrhea, while another beside the cot fills with vomit. An IV pole completes the setup. Defying expectations, the ward smells only of the antiseptic that the floors are constantly mopped with. Patients with severe watery diarrhea arrive around the clock, many of them carried in — limp, dehydrated and barely conscious — by friends or family. A nurse sees each one immediately, and those close to death get an IV line inserted within 30 seconds. It contains a blend of glucose, electrolytes and water. Cholera spurs the intestines to violently flush themselves, but it does not actually damage the gut cells. If the fluid is replaced and the bacteria flushed out or killed by antibiotics, the patient is usually fine. Within hours, patients start to revive. As soon as they can swallow, they get an antibiotic and start drinking a rehydration solution. Most walk out within a day. The techniques perfected here are so effective that the ICDDR, B has sent training teams to 17 cholera outbreaks in the past decade. Usually, the only patients who stay long in the hospital are infants so malnourished that another bout of diarrhea would kill them. They live for up to a month in a separate ward with their mothers, who are taught how to cook nutritious porridges from the cheapest lentils, squash, onions, greens and oil. Only about 20 percent of the patients at the center have cholera. The rest usually have rotavirus, salmonella or E. coli. The same therapy saves them all, but the cholera cases are more urgent because these patients plummet so precipitously toward death. “I thought I was dying,” Mohammed Mubarak, a gaunt printing press worker, said one afternoon from his cot. His roommates had carried him in at 7 that morning, unconscious and with no detectable pulse. Now, after six liters of intravenous solution, he was still weak but able to sit up and drink the rehydration solution and eat bits of bread and banana. “His stool is changing from to green, so he is recovering,” said Momtaz Begum, the ward nurse who monitors the buckets and makes sure patients take in as much liquid as they lose. Mr. Mubarak had first fallen ill at about 2 a. m. a few hours after he drank tap water with his dinner. “Usually I drink safe water, filtered water,” he explained. “But I drank the city water last night. I think that is what did this. ” Cholera, born in the swamps, arrived long ago in Dhaka. The city is home to more that 15 million, and a third of the population lives in slums. In some places, water pipes made of rubbery plastic are pierced by illegal connections that suck in sewage from the gutters they traverse and carry pathogens down the line to new victims, like Mr. Mubarak. Vibrio cholerae travels from person to person via fecal matter. In 1854, the epidemiologist John Snow famously traced cases to a single well dug near a cesspit in which a mother had washed the diaper of a baby who died of cholera and nd convinced officials to remove the well’s pump handle. Because cholera is a constant threat to hundreds of millions of people lacking safe drinking water in China, India, Nigeria and many other countries, scientists have long sought a more powerful weapon: a cheap, effective vaccine. Now they have one. Injected cholera vaccines were first invented in the 1800s and were long required for entry into some countries. But many scientists suspected they did not work, and in the 1970s studies overseen by the ICDDR, B confirmed that. In the 1980s, a Swedish scientist, Dr. Jan Holmgren, invented an oral vaccine that worked an impressive 85 percent of the time. But it was expensive to make and had to be drunk with a large glass of buffer solution to protect it from stomach acid. Transporting tanks of buffer was impractical. Making matters worse, it was fizzy, and poor Bangladeshi children who had never tasted soft drinks would spit it out as soon as it tickled their noses. In 1986, a Vietnamese scientist, Dr. Dang Duc Trach, asked for the formula, believing he could make a bufferless version. Dr. Holmgren and Dr. John D. Clemens, an American vaccine expert who at the time was a research scientist for the ICDDR, B, obliged. “This isn’t an elegant vaccine — it’s just a bunch of killed cells, technology that’s been around since Louis Pasteur,” said Dr. Clemens, who is now the ICDDR, B’s executive director. He and Dr. Holmgren lost touch with Dr. Dang, largely because of Vietnam’s isolation in those days. But seven years later, Dr. Dang notified them that he had made a new version of the vaccine. He had tested it on 70, 000 residents of Hue, in central Vietnam, and had found it to be 60 percent effective. Although his was not as effective as Dr. Holmgren’s, it cost only 25 cents a dose. If enough people in an area can be made immune through vaccination, outbreaks often stop spontaneously. In 1997, Vietnam became the first — and thus far, only — country to provide cholera vaccine to its citizens routinely, not just in emergencies. Cases dropped sharply, according to a 2014 study, and in 2003 cholera vanished from Hue, where the campaign focused most heavily. But Dr. Dang had not conducted a classic clinical trial, and Vietnam’s vaccine factory did not meet W. H. O. standards, so no United Nations agency was allowed to buy his vaccine. Because no pharmaceutical company had an incentive to pay for trials or factories, his invention languished in “the valley of death” — the expensive gap between a product that works in a lab and a version safe for millions. In 1999, Dr. Clemens approached what is now the Bill Melinda Gates Foundation, which was just getting organized. “They were literally operating out of a basement then,” he said. “I got a letter from Bill Gates Sr. It was very relaxed, sort of, ‘Here’s $40 million. Would you mind sending me a report once in a while?’ “But without that,” Dr. Clemens continued, “this wouldn’t have seen the light of day. ” With that money, Dr. Clemens reformulated Dr. Dang’s vaccine, conducted a successful clinical trial in Calcutta and found an Indian company, Shantha Biotechnics, that could make it to W. H. O. standards. Rolled out in 2009 under the name Shanchol, it came in a vial about the size of a chess rook, needed no buffer and cost less than $2 a dose. Even so, there was little interest, even from the W. H. O. The vaccine lacked the publicity campaign that pharmaceutical companies throw behind commercial products, and “cholera ward care” was saving many lives — when it could be organized. The new vaccine was not used in a cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe in 2009, or initially in Haiti’s explosive outbreak in 2010. The “valley of death” lengthened: Without customers, Shantha could not afford to build a bigger factory. The impasse was broken only when Dr. Paul Farmer, a founder of Partners in Health, which has worked in central Haiti since 1987, began publicly berating the W. H. O. for not moving faster. The agency approved Shanchol in 2011, and since then, the vaccine has slowly gained acceptance. In 2013, an emergency stockpile was started, and the GAVI Alliance committed $115 million to raise it to six million doses. The vaccine is now used in Haiti, and has been deployed in outbreaks in Iraq, South Sudan and elsewhere. A second version, Euvichol, from South Korea, was approved in 2015. And later this year, Bangladesh — where it all began — hopes to begin wiping out its persistent cholera. A local company has begun making a domestic version of the vaccine, called Vaxchol. Dr. Firdausi Qadri, a leading ICDDR, B researcher, estimated last year that success there would require almost 200 million doses. The world finally has a vaccine that, with routine administration, could end one of history’s great scourges. But what will happen is still hazy. With 1. 4 billion people at risk, the potential cost of vaccination in countries is enormous. And the disease tends to move, surging and vanishing among the many causes of diarrhea. Even Bill Gates, who paid for much of the research, has asked: “We actually have a cholera vaccine, but where should it be used?” Looking back on his long struggle to prove the vaccine’s value, and then to win acceptance, Dr. Clemens offered an explanation that blended wistfulness and cynicism. “We’re probably not bad scientists,” he said, “but we were lousy advocates. “If this disease had been in American kids, there would have been trials as fast as the Salk polio vaccine. ”

Donald Trump’s Executive Order: Officials Must Identify Immigration Applicants Who Support ’Acts of Violence’ - Breitbart

Neil Munro

President Donald Trump’s immigration Executive Order directs federal officials to set new immigration rules that will identify and exclude people who support the use of violence, and also hints at the exclusion of people who embrace orthodox Islam’s “violent extremism. ”[Senior officials “shall implement a program, as part of the process for [immigration] adjudications, to identify individuals who seek to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis, who support terrorism, violent extremism, acts of violence toward any group or class of people within the United States, or who present a risk of causing harm subsequent to their entry,” said Section 5 of the new Executive Order, which likely will reverse President Barack Obama’s policies to foreign migrants. The language in the new March 6 Executive Order is narrower and more legalistic than the language in the Jan. 27 Executive Order, which said: In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation. Allied and Islamic advocates, including Democratic activist Khizr Khan, complained that Trump’s “hostile attitudes” language was intended to exclude immigrants with Islamic beliefs. The language bolsters the language in the current citizenship application document, which asks applicants if they have “EVER advocated (either directly or indirectly) the overthrow of any government by force or violence? Have you EVER persecuted (either directly or indirectly) any person because of race, religion, national origin, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion?” The new memo also directs officials to collect and share information about immigrants and refugees who commit crimes, including the terror and crimes associated with people from countries. Section 11 of the new order declares officials should collect information about: (i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with offenses while in the United States convicted of offenses while in the United States or removed from the United States based on activity, affiliation with or provision of material support to a organization, or any other reasons, (ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and who have engaged in acts, or who have provided material support to organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, (iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of violence against women, including “honor killings,” in the United States by foreign nationals. (iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses. The new Executive Order says it does not “discriminate” against any particular religion, which is likely meant to rebut progressive claims that opposition to Islam’s combined religious and political ideology is similar to legal curbs on the practice of Christianity and other religions which do accept the separation of church from state. Executive Order 13769 did not provide a basis for discriminating for or against members of any particular religion. While that order allowed for prioritization of refugee claims from members of persecuted religious minority groups, that priority applied to refugees from every nation, including those in which Islam is a minority religion, and it applied to minority sects within a religion. That order was not motivated by animus toward any religion, but was instead intended to protect the ability of religious minorities — whoever they are and wherever they reside — to avail themselves of the USRAP in light of their particular challenges and circumstances. The Executive order directs agency heads to quickly establish the new entry rules, saying: The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the program described in subsection (a) of this section within 60 days of the effective date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the effective date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the effective date of this order. The president also directs the agencies to toughen routine screening of legal visitors, such as tourists or business executives. “In the first 20 days, [the Department of Homeland Security] will perform a global, review of the identity and security information that each country provides to the U. S. Government to support U. S. visa and other immigration benefit determinations. Countries will then have 50 days to comply with requests from the U. S. Government to update or improve the quality of the information they provide. ” Trump’s immigration and visitor rules will likely be very different from former President Obama’s policies. Obama described his globalist policy in a Nov. 2014 speech to Democratic supporters in Chicago: Sometimes we get attached to our particular tribe, our particular race, our particular religion, and then we start treating other folks differently. And that, sometimes, has been a bottleneck to how we think about immigration. If you look at the history of immigration in this country, each successive wave, there have been periods where the folks who were already here suddenly say, ‘Well, I don’t want those folks’ — even though the only people who have the right to say that are some Native Americans. Obama made the same claim in September 2015: When I hear folks talking as if somehow these [foreign] kids are different than my kids or less worthy in the eyes of God, that somehow that they are less worthy of our respect and consideration and care, I think that’s . I don’t believe that, I think it is wrong and I think we should do better, because that’s how America was made. Obama’s outside policy is expressed more crudely by the alliance of Islamic and groups which are protesting Trump’s immigration policies. #SFO: ”No borders, no nations, fuck deportations” pic. twitter. — Dieter Bohn (@backlon) January 29, 2017, On

Le Pen Pulling in Support Among Young Voters

Liam Deacon

Marine Le Pen is supported by a quarter of young voters in France, a poll has revealed, matching support within the age group for her liberal rival Emmanuel Macron. [The 18 to age bracket is usually notably liberal and broadly opposed to all expressions of nationalism, including Brexit and the election of U. S. President Donald J. Trump. Yet in France, some 24 per cent of this group told pollsters they intended to vote for the populist candidate and her Front National party in the first round of the presidential vote on the 24th of August. The young, photogenic centrist candidate Emmanuel Macron, who served as economy minister under outgoing president François Hollande, also gained 24 per cent of their support in the Harris Interactive survey for French radio station RTL. Another 19 per cent of those interviewed wanted the candidate Mélenchon to win the presidency and 14 per cent said they were rooting for Benoît Hamon of the Socialist party. This means that Ms. Le Pen is more popular than both candidates in the first round of voting among young people. In the second round, they will likely unite against her and she will lose. Meanwhile, only 10 per cent of voters aged 18 to 24 said they would be backing the Republican Party candidate François Fillon, who was the favourite to win before becoming embroiled in a corruption scandal. Furthermore, in a supposed age of political apathy 80 per cent of the 808 people interviewed between the 2nd and 6th of March told pollsters they were “interested” in politics, and were keeping a “keen eye” on the presidential race. However, Ms. Len Pen has stressed her scepticism towards polls during the presidential race, after pollsters failed to predict the Brexit vote or President Trump’s victory. “Polls are not the election” she told RTL on Tuesday.

Local Aunt’s 14th New Boyfriend This Year Probably ‘The One’

Julius Hubris

0 Add Comment SWIRLING rumours in one Waterford homestead suggest that Tramore woman and local aunt Deirdre Collane’s latest boyfriend may be ‘the one’. In a dramatic unveiling ceremony, Deirdre is believed to have presented Danny Mondran to her older sister, her brother-in-law and her 4 nieces and nephews and declared they were getting on so well she wouldn’t be surprised if they were married sometime next year in Spain, in a church she definitely hadn’t already picked out. Not wanting to speak too soon or ‘jinx it’, Deirdre tentatively suggested Mondran, her 14th boyfriend of the 2016 dating season, was likely to be the one, her future husband and mother of her 5 children named Daniel Jr, Ciara, Colm, Eoin and Ella. “More like future ex-husband,” Deirdre’s brother-in-law Martin whispered under his breath, not helping matters at all. Citing two dates they had gone reasonably well and a half remembered and drunken conversation about ‘wanting kids’ the 36-year-old school teacher was happy to report she had ‘called off the search’, much to the confusion of Daniel, who could have sworn Deirdre said they were going to the cinema and not to her sister’s house for a sit down meal. “I thought Graham was your boyfriend,” said one of Deirdre’s nieces, veering wildly off a carefully worded script provided to her by her mother, Elaine, as part of an effort to ensure one of Deirdre’s triggers weren’t activated. For his part, Daniel smiled politely and engaged in small talk as part of what he was almost sure was his last ever date with Deirdre.

The REAL REASON Hillary Was Not Prosecuted For Her Email Scandal Will Infuriate You

admin

The REAL REASON Hillary Was Not Prosecuted For Her Email Scandal Will Infuriate You Oct 28, 2016 Previous post Oh, Governor Terry McAuliffe… The smelly, Democratic cat of politics that just keeps returning to our doorstep. Just this summer he restored voting rights to thousands of felons with the hopes of garnering more votes for Clinton (I’m surprised his legislation wasn’t entitled, “Felons for Felons!”). Now we’ve found out that he and his money are likely part of the reason why Hillary Clinton was not prosecuted for her e-mail scandal. In a story line that would make the writers of House of Cards salivate, Governor McAuliffe donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the campaign of the Deputy FBI Director’s wife. Yes, you read that right. According to Zero Hedge : The latest allegation of potential impropriety and conflict of interest involving the Democratic Party and the FBI, which over the summer famously cleared Hillary Clinton of any criminal wrongdoing as relates to her personal email server, comes not from a Podesta email or a Wikileaks disclosure, but the WSJ which overnight reported that the political organization of Virginia Govenor Terry McAuliffe, an influential Democrat with longstanding ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton, gave nearly $500,000 to the election campaign of the wife of an official at the Federal Bureau of Investigation who later helped oversee the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email use . Campaign finance records show Mr. McAuliffe’s political-action committee donated $467,500 to the 2015 state Senate campaign of Dr. Jill FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK LINK

NC Trump Supporter Hangs Clinton In Effigy At Rally, Says She Deserves Prison (VIDEO)

Andrew Bradford

NC Trump Supporter Hangs Clinton In Effigy At Rally, Says She Deserves Prison (VIDEO) By Andrew Bradford on October 27, 2016 Subscribe Donald Trump held a rally Wednesday night in the crucial battleground state of North Carolina, and as he spoke, one of his supporters held up a Hillary Clinton doll with a noose around its neck. The woman who hung the Democratic nominee in effigy said her name was Ginger Glover. Glover said she decided to hang the “Lyin’ Hillary” doll to show that Clinton should be “incarcerated, at the very least.” So does Glover wish harm on the former Secretary of State? She insisted she didn’t: “It’s just for effect.” One is left wondering why, if Glover thinks Clinton should be imprisoned, she didn’t dress the doll in an orange jumpsuit or prison stripes. Perhaps she’s simply not bright enough to have thought of doing so. In recent weeks, various disturbing and violent displays have shown up at Trump rallies: Earlier this week at a rally in Virginia Beach, Trump supporters took a model of Clinton’s head and mounted it on a stake. Also, at that same rally, reporters saw a poster which depicted a bull’s-eye superimposed over Clinton’s face. It should also be noted that a frequent chant heard at Trump rallies is the oft-repeated “Lock her up” refrain which was a feature of the GOP convention in Cleveland. Yet the Trump campaign always denies that their supporters are are the least bit violent or seeking confrontations with those who disagree with them. Actions speak louder than words, and clearly the Trumpkins are a hate-filled basket of deplorables. Featured Image Via NBC News Screengrab About Andrew Bradford Andrew Bradford is a single father who lives in Atlanta. A member of the Christian Left, he has worked in the fields of academia, journalism, and political consulting. His passions are art, music, food, and literature. He believes in equal rights and justice for all. To see what else he likes to write about, check out his blog at Deepleftfield.info. Connect

Bombings Near Afghanistan’s Parliament Kill Dozens on Day of Assaults - The New York Times

Mujib Mashal and Taimoor Shah

KABUL, Afghanistan — A double bombing by the Taliban near the Afghan Parliament office compound in Kabul on Tuesday killed dozens of people during the rush hour, officials said. The assault in the Afghan capital was the deadliest of several attacks on Tuesday, including an explosion at a government guesthouse in the southern province of Kandahar that wounded the provincial governor and the visiting ambassador of the United Arab Emirates. Wahidullah Majrooh, a spokesman for the Afghan Health Ministry, said 80 injured people and 30 bodies were taken to Kabul hospitals. Many officials feared that the number of casualties would rise. The Taliban issued a statement claiming responsibility for the Parliament bombings. One witness who was inside the compound said the attack started when a suicide bomber detonated explosives nearby. Then, as security forces gathered in the area a few minutes later, a car bomb detonated on the busy road that passes in front of the compound, the witness said. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to reporters. An Afghan lawmaker, Kamal Safi, said meetings were underway in the compound when the attack took place, including one about the national budget. “The explosions took place exactly at the time when government employees were going home, so it was a rush hour,” Mr. Safi said. “More than a thousand people are working there, so I know the number of casualties are very high. ” An officer named Mirwais who was among those providing security for the Parliament building said most of the casualties came from a public bus that was passing by the compound when the car bomb exploded. “It was 4 p. m. and the workers were leaving — they either had private cars or were walking out to the main road for public transport,” Mr. Mirwais said. “The second attack happened on the main road by the gate, and that caused a lot of casualties. ” Violent attacks in Afghanistan have not subsided this year despite the harsh winter, with Taliban assaults reported on a daily basis across several provinces in the north and the south. The deteriorating situation in the south, in particular, prompted the dispatch of about 200 NATO military advisers to Farah Province. And in Helmand Province, where American and British troops struggled for years to loosen the Taliban’s grip at the height of the war, 300 United States Marines will return to help hold the provincial capital, Lashkar Gah, against the insurgents. The attacks in Kabul came hours after a Taliban bomber targeted a meeting of militia commanders in Lashkar Gah, killing seven to 11 people, according to various Afghan officials. The target of that attack revealed the chaotic reality of the province that has been slipping from the hands of the Afghan government: The bombing hit the house of Hajji Khudaidad, a Taliban commander who had recently switched sides to lead a clandestine government force, essentially a duplicate Taliban, to infiltrate insurgency lines, Afghan officials said. Col. Gulai Khan, the security chief of the province, said a meeting was underway at Mr. Khudaidad’s house in the city’s Second Precinct when the attack happened. “The suicide bomber parked his vehicle laden with explosive nearby the house and walked to the house, where he shot the watchman who was on duty, and later he blew up his explosives inside,” Colonel Khan said. He said that seven people were killed and three were wounded, and that a bomb squad was trying to clear the vehicle. Other accounts suggested the attacker might have thrown grenades inside and managed to flee before he was tracked down by the police. Abdul Karim Attal, head of the Helmand provincial council, however, put the number of dead at 11. Among the wounded, officials said, were Mr. Khudaidad and Mullah Ibrahim, a senior commander of a Taliban breakaway faction that is believed to have close ties with the government. Many officials in Helmand said the effort to create the militia was being led by Abdul Jabar Qahraman, President Ashraf Ghani’s special envoy to the province, who used similar militia tactics in the 1980s on behalf of the collapsing communist government at the time. Mr. Qahraman, in an interview, admitted that he was behind creating such a “secret force” but denied that the group targeted today was part of it. It amounts to a desperate attempt to break some of the Taliban’s momentum — the insurgents largely control six districts of the province, the government controls two, and another six are contested, according to Bashir Ahmad Shakir, the head of the security committee at the Helmand provincial council. Details about the attack at the governor’s guesthouse in Kandahar remained scant. Officials said the governor, Humayoon Azizi, was meeting with the visiting ambassador of United Arab Emirates for an evening reception when explosions went off. Gen. Abdul Raziq, the police chief of Kandahar Province, said bombs had been placed in couches in the governor’s house. “Eleven people have been killed and around 12 have been injured, including the governor and the U. A. E. ambassador, but their conditions are not ” General Raziq said. “The bodies of the dead are badly burned and beyond recognition. ”

Hearings Will Unmask ‘Swamp Creatures’ in Trump’s Cabinet, Democrats Say - The New York Times

Jennifer Steinhauer

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats concede they have little leverage to stop Donald J. Trump’s cabinet nominees. But that will not discourage them from trying to make life as uncomfortable as possible for many of his choices, with the hope of forcing their Republican colleagues and Mr. Trump to squirm along the way. With nominees like Representative Tom Price, a proponent of fundamental changes to Medicare, to be health secretary, and Steven Mnuchin, a Goldman Sachs trader turned hedge fund manager, as Treasury secretary, Democrats hope to use the confirmation hearings to highlight the wide river of incongruities between Mr. Trump’s campaign promises and much of the team he is assembling. The goal: to fuel a narrative that the incoming president, and the Republicans who support him, cannot be trusted. “ Trump promised that he was going to clean up the swamp,” said Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the incoming Democratic leader, “and a whole lot of his nominees have had their career in the swamp. ” One by one, Mr. Schumer said, Democrats will use the confirmation process to highlight positions held by nominees that are either inconsistent with Mr. Trump’s campaign promises or raise the sorts of ethical questions that Democrats tried in vain to hang around Mr. Trump’s neck during the campaign, like refusing to release his tax returns. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, who serves on committees that are likely to have contentious hearings, can be counted on to work over many nominees. “We should know what direction this administration is headed in,” Mr. Schumer said. “They didn’t win the election by saying they were going to hire people who want to cut Social Security and Medicare. I will also be looking for any ethical transgressions. ” For starters, Democrats announced this past week that they would push for a rule requiring all nominees to provide Congress with their tax returns, a move made to suggest that some of Mr. Trump’s selections may share and tax issues with the incoming president. Democrats have themselves to blame for their weakened position in challenging a nominee. In 2013, the Senate voted largely along party lines to remove the threshold on and Court judicial nominees. Mr. Trump’s nominees will now need the support of only 51 senators to be confirmed Republicans are expected to hold 52 seats next year. “At the end of the day, we were the ones who changed it to 51,” said Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, who voted for the measure. “I think it’s important to remember how righteous we were. ” It is highly unusual for Congress, even in an era of divided government, to outright filibuster cabinet nominees. Republicans have shown broad support for Mr. Trump’s choices so far, even those lawmakers who have been otherwise critical of him. In one telling move, Senator Susan Collins gave a fast nod to Mr. Trump’s choice of attorney general, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who came under immediate fire by Democrats for his positions on civil rights issues and his immigration stance that made him an early Trump ally. In short, Republicans say, bring it on. “Responsible Democrats responded to the election by saying they heard the message of the American people and pledged to work with the incoming administration and Republicans in Congress to move America forward,” said Antonia Ferrier, a spokeswoman for Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader. She added, “We hope responsible Democrats won’t be bullied by the radical left to turn the confirmation process into some political side show. ” But Democratic lawmakers can make the process afflictive. Mr. Price is expected to receive a particularly hot grilling. As a congressman from Georgia, Mr. Price has been the chief architect of a plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act and has long desired to transform Medicare into a voucherlike program for future participants. Mr. Sessions is likely to undergo tough questioning about accusations of racially insensitive comments from the 1980s that doomed his nomination to be a federal judge and his tentative embrace of Mr. Trump’s call for a ban on Muslim immigration. That effort seems most likely to backfire because Mr. Sessions has served in the Senate for more than a decade and has a complex record on civil rights back home in Alabama, and his Republican colleagues will likely be quick to defend him. “Our friend,” said Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Senate Republican, referring to Mr. Sessions, “is undoubtedly qualified and prepared for this role as attorney general because of the long career he spent protecting and defending our Constitution and the rule of law. ” Betsy DeVos, the Michigan billionaire Mr. Trump chose to lead the Department of Education, will also be questioned by Democrats for her unwavering support of charter schools, many of which have fared poorly in her state, and tax issues concerning her summer home. “There are a lot of pointed questions I plan to ask,” said Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, which oversees the Medicare program and already requires tax returns from nominees. “These nomination hearings are extremely important in that they are going to provide a key opportunity to lay out the concerns we have. ” Democrats hope that moderate Republicans, especially those up for in two years, will face an uncomfortable vote on someone like Mr. Price, given the popularity of the Medicare program. “Are Republicans going to want to vote for a guy who wants to raise the Medicare eligibility age?” said Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio. “I don’t think it’s a done deal. ” (It probably is a done deal.) But most Democrats seem more interested in pointing out that Mr. Trump’s nominees largely stand out of step with his campaign promises to “drain the swamp” of lobbyists, former bankers and Washington insiders. Mr. Mnuchin is a veteran of Goldman Sachs, and the billionaire investor Wilbur Ross, the choice for commerce secretary, signed a letter in support of the Partnership trade deal, which Mr. Trump has ridiculed as disastrous. Democrats plan to use the nomination process to underscore the dichotomy. “He’s filling it with bigger swamp creatures,” said Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, who is pressing for nominees to be required to disclose tax returns. And for whatever bumps Mr. Price or Mr. Sessions might face, other nominees will probably breeze through confirmation. Gov. Nikki R. Haley of South Carolina, whom Mr. Trump has chosen to be his ambassador to the United Nations, and Elaine L. Chao, a former labor secretary whom he has nominated for secretary of transportation, have encountered little opposition. Mr. McConnell is especially excited for Ms. Chao, his wife. “I think it was an outstanding choice,” he said.

Iraqi forces continue to advance on Mosul

Iraqi forces continue to advance on Mosul Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:49AM Ali MusawiPress TV, Mosul The Iraqi army and Kurdish Peshmerga forces continue to make advances on different fronts in the battle for Mosul. The strategic Iraqi city is now within the reach of Iraq’s elite counter terrorism units. Press TV’s Ali Musawi has more on the 10th day of the battle to retake Mosul from Daesh Takfiri terrorists. Loading ...

The View From Two Sides of the Standing Rock Front Lines - The New York Times

Jack Healy

CANNON BALL, N. D. — The prairie is seething. Work crews are plugging ahead on the Dakota Access oil pipeline, inching closer and closer to a river crossing that activists view as a critical juncture in their monthslong fight against a $3. 7 billion project that they say will threaten water supplies and that Native Americans say violates their right to sacred land. Last week, clashes erupted between lines of law enforcement officers and protesters. The air was filled with pepper spray and black smoke from burning tires. The authorities arrested 142 people during what local sheriffs denounced as a riot and protesters said was a peaceful demonstration. For months now, Mekasi Horinek and Deputy Jon Moll have lived these demonstrations, day in and day out. But they fall on opposite sides of the front lines, reflecting a community that is as divided as, well, oil and water. Mekasi Horinek, activist Mr. Horinek sees the pipeline protest from the rolling prairies, his arms locked with his fellow Native American activists to sing and pray. He sees tribe members standing up to years of racist slights and treaties. He sees prayer circles, pipe ceremonies and a unifying fight for clean water. He is the son of Ponca Tribe activists from Oklahoma who took him to rallies when he was a baby. Mr. Horinek, 43, remembers riding on his father’s and uncle’s shoulders as they marched with Cesar Chavez in the California ’ protests. “I can’t remember a time that I wasn’t being taught to stand up for human rights, native rights,” he says. He came to North Dakota for a cause. Here is how he describes that cause now: “What I said to the police officers when I was sitting down in a prayer circle, I asked them, ‘Don’t you drink water, too? ’” he says. “Don’t your children drink water? We’re here to protect the water. This isn’t just a native issue. We’re here protecting the water, not only for our families and our children, but for your families and your children. For every ranch and every farm along the Missouri River. ” Law enforcement officials have accused the protesters of rioting and attacking pipeline contractors, and they have arrested more than 400. But Mr. Horinek says the protesters — water protectors, they call themselves — are not the bad guys. He tells a story: Last week, he and 49 other demonstrators decided to link arms and sit together by the overturned earth where the Dakota Access pipeline is slated to go. They were on what the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe considers sacred ancestral land, but from a legal perspective, it is owned by the pipeline company. So sheriff’s officers arrested them for trespassing. Mr. Horinek says he and the others, including his mother, were and driven to the county seat, Mandan. He says he had bruises from being tied up so tightly, and from being thrown to the ground and pinned during his arrest. His mother and some of the older people were stiff and sore for days. Officials wrote numbers on their arms — his was 4838, he says — and held them overnight in cages in a parking garage, men and women separated by a plastic tarp. They spent the night singing and praying. “No matter what they do to us, they’re not going to strip our dignity, our honor,” Mr. Horinek says. “These are things we hold in our DNA, and we’ll never lose. ” The next morning, he bailed himself out of jail with money he had been keeping in his wallet in case he was arrested, and headed back to the camp. Jon Moll, sheriff’s deputy Deputy Moll sees the pipeline protest through a windshield, his patrol car slipping along North Dakota’s gravel county roads. He sees protesters occupying federal land and trespassing on private ranches. He sees tense confrontations, lost days off and threats to his fellow officers. He is the son of a Lutheran pastor, who moved the family from Ottertail, Minn. to Philadelphia. Mr. Moll, 38, remembers learning about the diversity of this country as the only white child in his class. “I’m the son of farmers, and we worked hard for everything we have,” he says. He came to Morton County, N. D. for work. Here is how he describes that work now: “Sometimes, the job sucks, but you do your job. It’s definitely been a strain. Every time we’ve been out, we’ve seen weapons. People screaming down this road at 100 miles per hour. Trespassing and squatting on federal property. If I wanted to build a house there, I’d have U. S. marshals knocking on my door, saying, ‘No, you can’t do that. ’” Activists have accused law enforcement of needlessly roughing up and demonstrators, and of responding to their and marches with militarized force. But Mr. Moll says the deputies are not the bad guys. He tells a story: Earlier this fall, about 70 demonstrators rallied at one of the ranches being bisected by the pipeline. Ranchers have grown angry and impatient with the protests and regularly come up to Deputy Moll when he gases up his car to ask him when it will all just be over. He says he sees the Standing Rock Sioux as neighbors and respects them, but he has a harsher view of what he sees as protesters from outside North Dakota. “Folks are terrified,” he says. On this day, officials decided to move in and arrest the protesters for trespassing. As they did, some in the crowd started to yell, “Bring out your horses!” to their fellow activists who had parked their trailers in a field of winter wheat. From his patrol car, Mr. Moll says, he saw one of the horses charge directly at a line of officers, and he hit the gas and raced over to cut off the horse as another officer raised a shotgun loaded with beanbag rounds at the rider. “You run a animal at a person, that’s a deadly threat,” Mr. Moll said. “They were willing to use the threat of the horse against us, all the while screaming, ‘We’re peaceful protesters. ’” He has been working around the protests almost every day since, and expects to be on straight through to Thanksgiving.

If Britain Favors ‘Brexit,’ Changes Will Come Slowly - The New York Times

Stephen Castle

LONDON — If Britain wakes up on Friday morning to the news that it has voted itself out of the European Union, about the only thing that everyone is sure to agree on is that the nation will face a protracted political and legal mess. For all the drama the moment would bring, there would be no instant change. European Union citizens could still come to Britain to live and work without a visa. Trade with the single market would continue unimpeded. Brussels would continue to regulate bananas. Instead, the process of decoupling would officially begin only when the British government chooses to invoke a previously unused provision of the bloc’s governing treaty, known as Article 50, that sets out the basics of the withdrawal process. The most critical element of Article 50 is that, once invoked, it sets a deadline for a negotiated departure. Beyond that, no one really knows how the process would work, since no country has ever left the European Union. Moreover, it is up to the British government when to invoke Article 50, and it is not entirely clear whether Prime Minister David Cameron, who has led the campaign to stay, would stick to his stated plan to invoke it immediately if the country votes to leave. In legal terms, the British government is not even bound by the result of Thursday’s referendum, which is generally considered a tossup at this point. In a report for the Constitution Society, Richard Gordon and Rowena Moffat said, “The government could, in strict law, choose to ignore it. ” Most members of Parliament — including the majority of the governing Conservatives in the House of Commons and nearly all of the opposition Labour Party — are also opposed to leaving the bloc, though Parliament would probably not get a direct vote on whether or when to invoke Article 50. Politically, however, it would be almost impossible to overlook the outcome of the first plebiscite on Britain’s place in Europe in 41 years. “Given the constitutional significance of the issue at stake,” the report’s authors say, “it is inconceivable that the government could choose not to be bound by the result. ” In fact, one of the few certainties about a vote in favor of Britain leaving the European Union — a Brexit — is that initially, at least, it will plunge capitals on both sides of the English Channel, but in Britain in particular, into complex negotiations and political jockeying that could last for years. Despite Mr. Cameron’s plans to invoke Article 50 swiftly after the vote, he would face pressure to delay starting the clock from those in his party who favor leaving. Their thinking is that before starting the clock, Britain should start informally negotiating a new trade deal with the European Union in tandem with the terms of Britain’s departure from the bloc. They suggest that Britain would lose considerable leverage in negotiating a new trade deal once it was outside the bloc, and that it could get a better trade deal as part of a negotiation that encompasses all aspects of the new relationship. Once the Article 50 term expires, Britain would be outside the single European market for services and become subject to possible tariffs on goods. The camp does not want to negotiate a new trade pact with that clock ticking. But while Britain might want to move slowly to leave Europe, countries like France and Germany would want to move swiftly, to reduce Britain’s leverage. They can also be expected to take no prisoners in the negotiations, in an effort to limit political contagion by making a tough example of Britain for other member states. Yet there appears to be no mechanism to force Britain to invoke Article 50 and set the clock running. Mr. Cameron’s assurances that he would do so in the event of a Brexit vote may not count for much, in that he may not survive such an outcome. Were he to quit, it would take the Conservative Party several weeks at least to select a successor. If he loses the referendum but decides to try to remain prime minister, as he has said he would, Britain could be consumed by political maneuvering for weeks or months, postponing a decision on how to proceed. “We don’t know who’s going to be in charge,” said Anand Menon, professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King’s College London. “The uncertainty extends to who’s going to be leading this show. ” Some Brexit supporters suggest that they could negotiate a departure without using Article 50. By contrast, in Brussels, there is discussion of somehow forcing the British to invoke it. Most legal experts say it would be impossible to avoid. Whatever Conservative government emerges would have to decide what kind of relationship to seek with the European Union, and get the British Parliament on its side for eventual ratification of a new arrangement covering trade and immigration, among other issues. The problem is, fewer than a third of the current Parliament members support leaving the bloc. Stephen Kinnock, an opposition Labour Party lawmaker, has said lawmakers might press for a relationship like Norway has with the European Union — outside the bloc but still having access to its single market. However, Norway not only pays into the bloc but also accepts the free movement of workers — two of the biggest and most emotional arguments Brexit supporters have made against membership in the European Union. Analysts say the arguments in Parliament could become so polarized that the government might be forced to seek new elections. But that would require changing a recently passed law on elections, and even then a new Parliament might still be hopelessly divided. Roger Liddle, a Union member of the House of Lords and a chairman of the Policy Network research institute, said, “Even if, as is likely, within weeks of a ‘leave’ vote we would have a new Brexit government with a new prime minister, which may be reinforced by a general election victory within six to nine months, it is very unlikely that a majority in either House of Parliament could be found for a credible leave option. ” A vote to leave the bloc would put Britain in a worse position to curb European migration until it actually departed. In February Mr. Cameron negotiated limits on welfare payments as a disincentive to some European migrants, but this concession is conditional on a vote to remain. Not only would this deal be moot in the event of a Brexit vote, but European citizens might race to enter Britain before the gates are closed. Chris Grayling, a cabinet minister campaigning to leave the bloc, has proposed quick legislation to end the right of free movement before Britain leaves formally, something that would put Britain in breach of European Union law. While European law would be hard to enforce on a country in the bloc’s departure lounge, it is unclear whether British lawmakers would approve such a legally contentious step in any case. Even if they did, that would complicate exit negotiations and could provoke retaliatory measures from Continental Europe. If a deal can be reached within the two years, it may need to be ratified in all 28 member nations and perhaps approved by the Parliament in Scotland, where all major parties want to remain in the bloc. Some of those not normally given to hyperbole have deep misgivings about what could go wrong while disentangling Britain from four decades of European integration. “The ghastliness of the legal complications is almost unimaginable,” Sir David Edward, a former judge at the European Court of Justice and professor emeritus at Edinburgh University, told a committee of the House of Lords. Professor Menon said he worries most about the political leadership if Britain leaves: “Who’s providing it, who has the authority to do anything, and whether political contagion spreads to our European partners, which then leads to a hideous, ugly standoff before the negotiations have even started. ”

Baton Rouge Police Shooting: What We Know - The New York Times

Katie Rogers

Three police officers were shot dead, and three others were wounded, in Baton Rouge, La. on Sunday morning. The gunman was killed, the authorities said. The area where the shooting took place has been the scene of protests in the weeks since the police shooting of Alton B. Sterling on July 5. • Around 8:40 a. m. on Sunday, the police in Baton Rouge responded to a report of a man with a gun dressed in black walking near the Hammond Aire Plaza shopping center on Airline Highway. The confrontation lasted less than 10 minutes, officials said. • The slain officers were identified as Montrell L. Jackson, 32, and Matthew Gerald, 41, of the Baton Rouge Police Department and Brad Garafola, 45, an East Baton Rouge Parish sheriff’s deputy. • The hospitalized officers are Nicholas Tullier, 41, a sheriff’s deputy who was in critical condition on Monday Bruce Simmons, 51, a sheriff’s deputy who underwent surgery for wounds that were not and an unidentified Baton Rouge police officer, 41, who also had injuries that were not . • The gunman was identified by the authorities as Gavin Long of Kansas City, Mo. Mr. Long, an was a former Marine who had served from 2005 to 2010, and he had been deployed to Iraq in 2008, according to military records. He had received a national defense service medal and a reward for good conduct. • Mr. Long is believed to have been the only gunman, the police in Baton Rouge said at a news conference, despite earlier reports of two others being at large. On Monday, the state police said Mr. Long had set out to ambush the officers. • A video on a site registered under the name of the gunman, Gavin Long, urges a bloody response to police killings of black men. • President Obama called for restraint at a time of extraordinary tension. “This has happened far too often,” he said at the White House on Sunday afternoon. “We don’t need inflammatory rhetoric. We don’t need careless accusations thrown around to score political points or advance an agenda. We need to temper our words and open our hearts, all of us. ”

Breitbart News Hires from The Hill, RealClearPolitics in Latest Expansion - Breitbart

Breitbart News

Jonathan Swan announces in Axios that Breitbart News is hiring a new editor and two reporters, grabbing talent from RealClearPolitics and The Hill. [From Axios: Alexander Marlow tells us they’re planning three new hires. They’re part of a broader planned expansion of both domestic and global coverage: These hires follow Breitbart’s recruitment last month of John Carney from the Wall Street Journal to run the website’s economics vertical. In addition to the new hires, Breitbart News is reassigning political reporters Michelle Moons and Adelle Nazarian to cover Capitol Hill. “We have plans to hire about 20 full time editorial personnel this year as of now and have made at least five such hires thus far,” says Marlow. Read the rest of the story here. Read the full press release below: BREITBART NEWS CONTINUES RAPID EXPANSION WITH NEW HIRES FROM REALCLEAR POLITICS AND THE HILL TO COVER DC POLITICS, (NEW YORK, NY) — Following the hiring of John Carney from the Wall Street Journal last month, Breitbart News Network continues its explosive growth in providing industry leading reporting with the addition of veteran DC journalists Sam Chi, formerly with RealClear Politics and Kristina Wong, formerly with The Hill. Sean Moran also joins to provide policy coverage. Sam Chi — Editor, Veteran editor and journalist Samuel Chi is joining Breitbart News Network after nearly nine years as a senior editor at RealClear Politics, where he oversaw the launching of several sites, including World, Science, Religion and History, as well as revamping Sports and Books. His work has been published in numerous major U. S. daily newspapers as well as CNN. com, The Diplomat, and ESPN. com. “I’m thrilled to be joining Breitbart at this important juncture in the history of the United States,” Chi said, “I truly believe Breitbart is at the forefront of a media revolution that will restore credibility and trust with a public that has been rightfully angered by biased and untruthful news coverage. ” Kristina Wong — Pentagon Department of Defense Reporter Kristina Wong previously reported for The Hill, covering the Pentagon and defense affairs on Capitol Hill. Prior to her work at The Hill, Wong worked at the Washington Times as a national security correspondent. There, she was a member of the Society of Professional Journalists team for its coverage of the 2013 Navy Yard shooting. She has embedded with troops in Afghanistan, and reported from Guantanamo Bay, and East Asia. Wong is delighted to be joining the Breitbart News team, “This is an exciting opportunity to be on the forefront of covering the military under the Trump administration, and I look forward to holding it accountable. ” Sean Moran — Policy Reporter, Sean Moran previously worked as a policy analyst for Americans for Prosperity and the Chamber of Digital Commerce. He is steeped deeply in policy matters such as financial, healthcare, technology and other regulations. He was critical in fighting against big government issues including Obamacare, Net Neutrality, and the Internet Sales Tax. At Breitbart News, Moran will focus on reporting on these and other critical policy issues on Capitol Hill and throughout the Trump administration. Breitbart News Alex Marlow says of the new hires, “This is the latest in an ongoing series of expansions Breitbart News has planned for 2017. Adding seasoned journalists like Kristina from The Hill, Sam from RealClear Politics, and John Carney from the Wall Street Journal is the perfect way to enhance our reputation for highly aggressive reporting. Breitbart News just got a whole lot stronger. ” Breitbart News Network President and CEO Larry Solov says the company is positioned for big growth in 2017, “2016 proved to be an exciting and unprecedented year of growth for Breitbart News. 2017 promises to be another where we are front and center bringing our brand of journalism to our 45 Million — and growing — monthly visitors. We are excited to welcome Kristina, Sam, and Sean to our team and know they will be instrumental in the aforementioned growth. ” In addition to the new hires, Breitbart News is reassigning political reporters Michelle Moons and Adelle Nazarian to Washington, D. C. to cover Capitol Hill. Moons covered Senator Ted Cruz during the 2016 Republican primary race and then embedded with Vice President Mike Pence during the general election. Nazarian has covered national security issues extensively for Breitbart News and also spent time embedded with Vice President Mike Pence. ABOUT BREITBART NEWS: Breitbart News Network operates the Breitbart. com website, which has over 250 million monthly page views and 45 million monthly unique visitors. It also hosts the daily radio show Breitbart News Daily, which is broadcast live on SiriusXM Patriot Channel 125 from Monday through Friday 6AM to 9AM Eastern, on Saturday from 10AM to 1PM Eastern, and on Sunday from 7PM to 10PM Eastern. Leading social media analytics company NewsWhip has ranked Breitbart #1 for political social media.

Five Outrages Inside UNESCO Resolution Denying Israeli Ties to Jerusalem, Judaism’s Holiest Sites

Aaron Klein

JERUSALEM — While Israelis here are celebrating the country’s Independence Day today, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) passed a resolution disavowing Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem and ignoring Jewish ties to the religion’s holiest sites. [In no particular order, here are five outrages within the text of the nonbinding UNESCO resolution, which was submitted by Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, and Sudan and passed in a UNESCO vote: 1 — The resolution designates Judaism’s second holiest site, the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, and Judaism’s third holiest site, Rachel’s Tomb, as “an integral part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. ” 2 — The resolution claims it is “safeguarding” the “cultural heritage of Palestine,” despite the fact that no such country exists. Palestine previously referred to territories that encompass present day Israel and Jordan. It was utilized in the 1917 Balfour Declaration to call for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. ” In the case of the resolution, UNESCO clearly intended “Palestine” to connote a Palestinian state within Israel even though there is no such state. 3 — The text refers to eastern sections of Jerusalem as an entity called “East Jerusalem” in a clear attempt to lobby for the division of Jerusalem. The full clause states: Affirming that nothing in the current decision, which aims, inter alia, at the safeguarding of the cultural heritage of Palestine and the distinctive character of East Jerusalem, shall in any way affect the relevant Security Council and United Nations resolutions and decisions on the legal status of Palestine and Jerusalem, including United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 (2016). In reality, Jerusalem is one city there is no city called East Jerusalem. The term is largely utilized to claim that Israel is occupying “East Jerusalem,” and that the city section should become part of a future Palestinian state. Jews maintained a historic presence in Jerusalem, including in the eastern sections, until they were forced to leave the Old City en masse in 1948. Jordan illegally occupied and annexed the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem from 1948 until Israel captured the lands in a defensive war in 1967. The 1967 Six Day War was launched after Arab countries used the territories to stage attacks against the Jewish state. In 1988, Jordan officially renounced its claims to the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem and unilaterally recognized terrorist Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization as “the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. ” 4 — The resolution refers to Israel as an “occupying power” in its own capital, Jerusalem. It claims all fundamental Israeli territorial actions in Jerusalem are “null and void. ” The text states: Reminding that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the “basic law” on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith. In actuality, the Palestinians never had a state in either the West Bank or eastern Jerusalem and they are not legally recognized as the authorities in those areas for Israel to be occupying the land from. The UNESCO resolution further ignores that the Temple Mount and Western Wall — the holiest sites in Judaism — are located in eastern Jerusalem, which is steeped in Jewish history. 5 — The resolution forbids Israel to carry out “excavations, tunneling, works and projects in East Jerusalem, particularly in and around the Old City of Jerusalem. ” The sponsoring countries seem to fear that excavations in these areas routinely uncover archaeological evidence further tying Jews to Jerusalem. For example, discoveries at the City of David, an archeological site just outside the Temple Mount, have unearthed the core of ancient Jerusalem, including Hezekiah’s Tunnel, evidence of the Gihon Spring, Jewish Temple artifacts, Temple purifying pools and more. Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio. ” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

5 Movies to See With (and Without) Family Over Thanksgiving - The New York Times

Mekado Murphy

The Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade has finished, turkey has been consumed and football has been watched. Time for a trip to the movies. Here is a look at five films that Times editors recommend after that last piece of pumpkin pie. If You Want a Family Film for Younger Kids Disney’s latest animated offering tells the story of an adventurous teenager (Auli’i Cravalho) in search of the demigod Maui (Dwayne Johnson). The visuals are lush and the songs (some written by the “Hamilton” creator Miranda) are lively, with plenty to hold the whole family’s attention. If it’s sold out: With crowds expected for “Moana,” you may need a second choice. Consider “Trolls,” another animated movie that has been in theaters a bit longer. If You Want a Family Film for Older Kids Harry Potter himself may not be back, but the wizarding world is at the center of this new film written by J. K. Rowling. The setting is 1926 New York and Eddie Redmayne plays Newt Scamander, a wizard with a suitcase full of unruly creatures. Kids who grew up on the Harry Potter series should feel at home here. The Times critic Manohla Dargis found the titular beasts a highlight, writing, “With the strange caws and showy displays, these beasties provide a lot of the movie’s easygoing pleasures. ” If it’s sold out: Consider “Doctor Strange,” Marvel’s latest “giddily enjoyable” adventure film that has been a big draw at the box office, but should be a little easier to get into now that it has been out a few weeks longer. If You Want to Get Away From Family Done playing nice around the dinner table and seeking a break from the family this holiday? Try this irreverent sequel to the irreverent comedy that became a hit in 2003. Billy Bob Thornton is back as the boozing, womanizing title character. (Did you know he wasn’t the first or even second choice for the role? Find out more in this oral history of the first film.) If You Want to Get Serious After the Holiday For the kind of film that will offer substance as well as a ray of hope, try the drama “Arrival. ” Amy Adams plays a linguist who figures out a way to communicate with alien visitors. It has sleek visual effects and a twisty narrative. In her review, Manohla Dargis praised the lead performance, writing, “By turns inviting and opaque, Ms. Adams turns softness and quiet into heroic qualities, keeping her voice low, modulated, and using stillness to draw you near. ” If You Want to Keep It Light After Thanksgiving Turkey Stuffed from the meal and in search of a movie that will go down easy? Try the comedy “Almost Christmas. ” The ensemble film focuses on an Alabama family gathering for the holiday, with comic turns from Danny Glover, Gabrielle Union, Omar Epps, J. B. Smoove and a wisecracking Mo’Nique, whom the critic Glenn Kenny called “simply magnificent” in his Times review.

Un daltónico cree tener el récord mundial de cubo de Rubik

Tomás Fuentes

Un daltónico cree tener el récord mundial de cubo de Rubik “ME LO PINTARON MUY NEGRO PERO RESULTA QUE ES FACILÍSIMO”, DICE récord Carlos Prados, daltónico de nacimiento, afirma haber finalizado el cubo de Rubik en un tiempo récord: 3,11 segundos. La increíble marca convertiría a este catalán daltónico en la persona más rápida en alcanzar el particular récord. “Todos me lo pintaban muy negro, y es verdad que al principio parecía un marrón, pero con el cubo en las manos todo me pareció facilísimo. En nada lo resolví”, explica. Los asistentes al World Rubik Fest mostraron cierta indiferencia ante la proeza de Prados. “Hay mucha envidia en este mundillo, seguro que por detrás me ponen verde”, comenta él. “Pobre chaval, está tan ilusionado que da cosa decirle nada, flipa en colores”, declara el jurado del certamen. El próximo proyecto del catalán es resolver diez cubos de Rubik en diez segundos. “Estoy esperando que el jurado dé luz verde al proyecto”, dice.

GOOGLE PLANNED MASSIVE AI INTEGRATED SOCIAL NETWORK SPY TOOL FOR HILLARY CAMPAIGN IN 2014

GOOGLE PLANNED MASSIVE AI INTEGRATED SOCIAL NETWORK SPY TOOL FOR HILLARY CAMPAIGN IN 2014 Source: Higgins News Network A newly released Podesta email reveals that Google CEO Eric Schmidt contacted the Hillary campaign in 2014 to begin their partnership in sponsoring Clinton’s campaign run for President in 2016. The revelations come from a memo in the email sent to Cherry Mills which was then forwarded Robby Mook, John Podesta, and David Plouffe. Schmidt’s memo outlines an overall campaign strategy for Hillary, Schmidt’s vision for a massive cloud-based AI integrate software program and also reveals that Google colluded with the Obama administration in the 2012 election. The memo goes on to layout plans to construct a massive cloud-based database, along with programs that leveraged machine learning (aka Artificial Intelligence) that would be used to first to track users online to create a partial digital voter ids. Those partial digital ids contain a collection of attributes about the users online behavior which Schmidt explains will all eventually be tied to a real voter id file by leveraging machine learning. Schmidt details the procurement of a development team and the use of outline money to create software that will be connected to users smart phones on 2016 that would allow volunteers the ability to access any and all voter data. Schmidt also outlines ideas for the using the integrated tool to monitor social media and news stories to help promote positive articles and target the source of “rumors” and negative articles. Given Google’s massive collection of personal user data combined with previous revelations that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerburg and Facebook COO were colluding with Hillary raises series concerns above user privacy, media manipulation and host of other problems. That combined with the fact that just about every other Silicon Valley company and executive is behind the Hillary Campaign makes this a chilling memo that should be getting much more attention than it is. Presented in full: Secondary verification by google.com DKIM key Fwd: 2016 thoughts Date: Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:56 PMSubject: 2016 thoughts Cheryl, I have put together my thoughts on the campaign ideas and I havescheduled some meetings in the next few weeks for veterans of the campaign to tell me how to make these ideas better. This is simply a draft but dolet me know if this is a helpful process for you all. Thanks !! Eric Notes for a 2016 Democratic CampaignEric Schmidt Here are some comments and observations based on what we saw in the 2012campaign. If we get started soon, we will be in a very strong position toexecute well for 2016. 1. Size, Structure and Timing Lets assume a total budget of about $1.5Billion, with more than 5000 paidemployees and million(s) of volunteers. The entire startup ceasesoperation four days after November 8, 2016 . The structure includes aChairman or Chairwoman who is the external face of the campaign and aPresident who is the executive in charge of objectives, measurements,systems and building and managing the organization. Every day matters as our end date does not change. An official campaignright after midterm elections and a preparatory team assembled now is best. 2. Location The campaign headquarters will have about a thousand people, mostly youngand hardworking and enthusiastic. Its important to have a very largehiring pool (such as Chicago or NYC) from which to choose enthusiastic,smart and low paid permanent employees. DC is a poor choice as its full ofdistractions and interruptions. Moving the location from DC elsewhereguarantees visitors have taken the time to travel and to help. The key is a large population of talented people who are dying to work foryou. Any outer borough of NYC, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Boston are all goodexamples of a large, blue state city to base in. Employees will relocate to participate in the campaign, and will find lowcost temporary housing or live with campaign supporters on a donated basis.This worked well in Chicago and can work elsewhere. The computers will be in the cloud and most likely on Amazon Web services(AWS) . All the campaign needs are portable computers, tablets and smartphones along with credit card reader s. 3. The pieces of a Campaign a) The Field Its important to have strong field leadership, with autonomy andempowerment. Operations talent needs to build the offices, set up thesystems, hire the people, and administer what is about 5000 people.Initial modeling will show heavy hiring in the key battleground states.There is plenty of time to set these functions up and build the humansystems. T he field is about organizing people, voter contact, and get outthe vote programs. For organizing tools, build a simple way to link people and activities as aworkflow and let the field manage the system, all cloud based. Build asimple organizing tool with a functioning back-end. Avoid deep integrationas the benefits are not worth it. Build on the cloud. Organizing isreally about sharing and linking people, and this tool would measure andtrack all of it. There are many other crucial early investments needed in the field:determining the precise list of battleground states, doing early polling toconfirm initial biases, and maintaining and extending voter protectionprograms at the state level. b) The Voter Key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates allthat is known about them. In 2016 smart phones will be used to identify,meet, and update profiles on the voter. A dynamic volunteer can easilyspeak with a voter and, with their email or other digital handle, get thevoter videos and other answers to areas they care about (“the benefits ofACA to you” etc.) The scenario includes a volunteer on a walk list, encountering a potentialvoter, updating the records real time and deepening contact with the voterand the information we have to offer. c) Digital A large group of campaign employees will use digital marketing methods toconnect to voters, to offer information, to use social networks to spreadgood news, and to raise money. Partners like Blue State Digital will domuch of the fund raising. A key point is to convert BSD and other partnersto pure cloud service offerings to handle the expected crush and load. d) Media (paid), (earned) and (social), and polling New tools should be developed to measure reach and impact of paid, earnedand social media. The impact of press coverage should be measurable inreach and impact, and TV effectiveness measured by attention and othersurveys. Build tools that measure the rate and spread of stories and rumors , andmodel how it works and who has the biggest impact. Tools can tell us aboutthe origin of stories and the impact of any venue, person or theme .Connect polling into this in some way. Find a way to do polling online and not on phones. e) Analytics and data science and modeling, polling and resourceoptimization tools For each voter, a score is computed ranking probability of the right vote.Analytics can model demographics, social factors and many other attributesof the needed voters. Modeling will tell us what who we need to turn outand why, and studies of effectiveness will let us know what approaches workwell. Machine intelligence across the data should identify the mostimportant factors for turnout, and preference. It should be possible to link the voter records in Van with upcomingdatabases from companies like Comcast and others for media measurementpurposes. The analytics tools can be built in house or partnered with a set ofvendors. f) Core engineering, voter database and contact with voters online The database of voters (NGP Van) is a fine starting point for voter recordsand i s maintained by the vendor (and needs to be converted to the cloud ).The code developed for 2012 (Narwahl etc. ) is unlikely to be used, andreplaced by a model where the vendor data is kept in the Van database andintermediate databases are arranged with additional information for a voter. Quite a bit of software is to be developed to match digital identities withthe actual voter file with high confidence . The key unit of the campaignis a “voter”, and each and every record is viewable and updatable byvolunteers in search of more accurate information . In the case w here we can’t identify the specific human , we can still have a partial digital voter id , for a person or “probable-person” with attributesthat we can identify and use to targe t. As they respond we can eventuallymatch to a registered voter in the main file. This digital key iseventually matched to a real person . The Rules Its important that all the player in the campaign work at cost and there beno special interests in the financing structure . This means that allvendors work at cost and there is a separate auditing function to ensure noone is profiting unfairly from the campaign. All investments and conflictsof interest would have to be publicly disclosed. The rules of the auditshould include caps on individual salaries and no investor profits from thecampaign function. (For example, this rule would apply to me.) The KEY things a) early b uild of an integrated development team and recognition that thisis an entire system that has to be managed as suchb) decisions to exclusively use cloud solutions for scalability, and choiceof vendors and any software from 2012 that will be reused.c) the role of the smart phone in the hands of a volunteer. The smartphone manages the process, updates the database, informs the citizen, andallows fundraising and recruitment of volunteers (on android and iphone).d) early and continued focus of qualifying fundraising dollars to build thefield, and build all the tools. Outside money will be plentiful andperfect for TV use. A smart media mix tool tells all we need to know aboutmedia placement, TV versus other media and digital media .

Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet - The New York Times

Sandra Aamodt

SIX years after dropping an average of 129 pounds on the TV program “The Biggest Loser,” a new study reports, the participants were burning about 500 fewer calories a day than other people their age and size. This helps explain why they had regained 70 percent of their lost weight since the show’s finale. The diet industry reacted defensively, arguing that the participants had lost weight too fast or ate the wrong kinds of food — that diets do work, if you pick the right one. But this study is just the latest example of research showing that in the long run dieting is rarely effective, doesn’t reliably improve health and does more harm than good. There is a better way to eat. The root of the problem is not willpower but neuroscience. Metabolic suppression is one of several powerful tools that the brain uses to keep the body within a certain weight range, called the set point. The range, which varies from person to person, is determined by genes and life experience. When dieters’ weight drops below it, they not only burn fewer calories but also produce more hormones and find eating more rewarding. The brain’s system considers your set point to be the correct weight for you, whether or not your doctor agrees. If someone starts at 120 pounds and drops to 80, her brain rightfully declares a starvation state of emergency, using every method available to get that weight back up to normal. The same thing happens to someone who starts at 300 pounds and diets down to 200, as the “Biggest Loser” participants discovered. This coordinated brain response is a major reason that dieters find weight loss so hard to achieve and maintain. For example, men with severe obesity have only one chance in 1, 290 of reaching the normal weight range within a year severely obese women have one chance in 677. A vast majority of those who beat the odds are likely to end up gaining the weight back over the next five years. In private, even the diet industry agrees that weight loss is rarely sustained. A report for members of the industry stated: “In 2002, 231 million Europeans attempted some form of diet. Of these only 1 percent will achieve permanent weight loss. ” The specific “Biggest Loser” diet plan is probably not to blame. A previous study found similar metabolic suppression in people who had lost weight and kept it off for up to six years. Whether weight is lost slowly or quickly has no effect on later regain. Likewise — despite endless debate about the relative value of different approaches — in comparisons, diet plans that provide the same calories through different types of food lead to similar weight loss and regain. As a neuroscientist, I’ve read hundreds of studies on the brain’s ability to fight weight loss. I also know about it from experience. For three decades, starting at age 13, I lost and regained the same 10 or 15 pounds almost every year. On my most serious diet, in my late 20s, I got down to 125 pounds, 30 pounds below my normal weight. I wanted (unwisely) to lose more, but I got stuck. After several months of eating fewer than 800 calories a day and spending an hour at the gym every morning, I hadn’t lost another ounce. When I gave up on losing and switched my goal to maintaining that weight, I started gaining instead. I was lucky to end up back at my starting weight instead of above it. After about five years, 41 percent of dieters gain back more weight than they lost. studies show dieters are more likely than to become obese over the next one to 15 years. That’s true in men and women, across ethnic groups, from childhood through middle age. The effect is strongest in those who started in the normal weight range, a group that includes almost half of the female dieters in the United States. Some experts argue that instead of dieting leading to weight gain, the relationship goes in the other direction: People who are genetically prone to gain weight are more likely to diet. To test this idea, in a 2012 study, researchers followed over 4, 000 twins aged 16 to 25. Dieters were more likely to gain weight than their identical twins, suggesting that dieting does indeed increase weight gain even after accounting for genetic background. The difference in weight gain was even larger between fraternal twins, so dieters may also have a higher genetic tendency to gain. The study found that a single diet increased the odds of becoming overweight by a factor of two in men and three in women. Women who had gone on two or more diets during the study were five times as likely to become overweight. The causal relationship between diets and weight gain can also be tested by studying people with an external motivation to lose weight. Boxers and wrestlers who diet to qualify for their weight classes presumably have no particular genetic predisposition toward obesity. Yet a 2006 study found that elite athletes who competed for Finland in such sports were three times more likely to be obese by age 60 than their peers who competed in other sports. To test this idea rigorously, researchers could randomly assign people to worry about their weight, but that is hard to do. One program took the opposite approach, though, helping teenage girls who were unhappy with their bodies to become less concerned about their weight. In a randomized trial, the eBody Project, an online program to fight eating disorders by reducing girls’ desire to be thin, led to less dieting and also prevented future weight gain. Girls who participated in the program saw their weight remain stable over the next two years, while their peers without the intervention gained a few pounds. WHY would dieting lead to weight gain? First, dieting is stressful. Calorie restriction produces stress hormones, which act on fat cells to increase the amount of abdominal fat. Such fat is associated with medical problems like diabetes and heart disease, regardless of overall weight. Second, weight anxiety and dieting predict later binge eating, as well as weight gain. Girls who labeled themselves as dieters in early adolescence were three times more likely to become overweight over the next four years. Another study found that adolescent girls who dieted frequently were 12 times more likely than to binge two years later. My repeated dieting eventually caught up with me, as this research would predict. When I was in graduate school and under a lot of stress, I started binge eating. I would finish a carton of ice cream or a box of saltines with butter, usually at 3 a. m. The urge to keep eating was intense, even after I had made myself sick. Fortunately, when the stress eased, I was able to stop. At the time, I felt terrible about being out of control, but now I know that binge eating is a common mammalian response to starvation. Much of what we understand about weight regulation comes from studies of rodents, whose eating habits resemble ours. Mice and rats enjoy the same wide range of foods that we do. When tasty food is plentiful, individual rodents gain different amounts of weight, and the genes that influence weight in people have similar effects in mice. Under stress, rodents eat more sweet and fatty foods. Like us, both laboratory and wild rodents have become fatter over the past few decades. In the laboratory, rodents learn to binge when deprivation alternates with tasty food — a situation familiar to many dieters. Rats develop binge eating after several weeks consisting of five days of food restriction followed by two days of free access to Oreos. Four days later, a brief stressor leads them to eat almost twice as many Oreos as animals that received the stressor but did not have their diets restricted. A small taste of Oreos can induce deprived animals to binge on regular chow, if nothing else is available. Repeated food deprivation changes dopamine and other neurotransmitters in the brain that govern how animals respond to rewards, which increases their motivation to seek out and eat food. This may explain why the animals binge, especially as these brain changes can last long after the diet is over. In people, dieting also reduces the influence of the brain’s system by teaching us to rely on rules rather than hunger to control eating. People who eat this way become more vulnerable to external cues telling them what to eat. In the modern environment, many of those cues were invented by marketers to make us eat more, like advertising, supersizing and the buffet. Studies show that dieters are more likely to eat for emotional reasons or simply because food is available. When dieters who have long ignored their hunger finally exhaust their willpower, they tend to overeat for all these reasons, leading to weight gain. Even people who understand the difficulty of weight loss often turn to dieting because they are worried about health problems associated with obesity like heart disease and diabetes. But our culture’s view of obesity as uniquely deadly is mistaken. Low fitness, smoking, high blood pressure, low income and loneliness are all better predictors of early death than obesity. Exercise is especially important: Data from a 2009 study showed that low fitness is responsible for 16 percent to 17 percent of deaths in the United States, while obesity accounts for only 2 percent to 3 percent, once fitness is factored out. Exercise reduces abdominal fat and improves health, even without weight loss. This suggests that overweight people should focus more on exercising than on calorie restriction. In addition, the evidence that dieting improves people’s health is surprisingly poor. Part of the problem is that no one knows how to get more than a small fraction of people to sustain weight loss for years. The few studies that overcame that hurdle are not encouraging. In a 2013 study of obese and overweight people with diabetes, on average the dieters maintained a 6 percent weight loss for over nine years, but the dieters had a similar number of heart attacks, strokes and deaths from heart disease during that time as the control group. Earlier this year, researchers found that intentional weight loss had no effect on mortality in overweight diabetics followed for 19 years. Diets often do improve cholesterol, blood sugar and other health markers in the short term, but these gains may result from changes in behavior like exercising and eating more vegetables. Obese people who exercise, eat enough vegetables and don’t smoke are no more likely to die young than people with the same habits. A 2013 (which combines the results of multiple studies) found that health improvements in dieters have no relationship to the amount of weight they lose. If dieting doesn’t work, what should we do instead? I recommend mindful eating — paying attention to signals of hunger and fullness, without judgment, to relearn how to eat only as much as the brain’s system commands. Relative to chronic dieters, people who eat when they’re hungry and stop when they’re full are less likely to become overweight, maintain more stable weights over time and spend less time thinking about food. Mindful eating also helps people with eating disorders like binge eating learn to eat normally. Depending on the individual’s set point, mindful eating may reduce weight or it may not. Either way, it’s a powerful tool to maintain weight stability, without deprivation. I finally gave up dieting six years ago, and I’m much happier. I redirected the energy I used to spend on dieting to establishing daily habits of exercise and meditation. I also enjoy food more while worrying about it less, now that it no longer comes with a side order of shame.

Pope Francis Commemorates 500th Anniversary Of Protestant Reformation

Kaitlyn Stegall

November 1, 2016 Pope Francis Commemorates 500th Anniversary Of Protestant Reformation Pope Francis is in Sweden to kick off the commemoration of 500 years since the Protestant Reformation. The reformation started in 1517 when Martin Luther nailed 95 theses to the church door to denounce what he saw as abuses by the Catholic Church. Email (will not be published) (required) Website Sow a seed to help the Jewish people Follow Endtime Copyright © 2016 All Rights Reserved Endtime Ministries | End of the Age | Irvin Baxter Endtime Ministries, Inc. PO Box 940729 Plano, TX 75094 Toll Free: 1.800.363.8463 DON'T JUST READ THE NEWS... understand it from a biblical perspective. Your Information will never be shared with any third party. Get a 2-year subscription, normally $29, now just $20.15. ONLY 500 deals are still available. Offer available while supplies last or it expires on December 31, 2015. close We are a small non-profit that runs a high-traffic website, a daily TV and radio program, a bi-monthly magazine, the prophecy college in Jerusalem, and more. Although we only have 35 team members, we are able to serve tens of millions of people each month; and have costs like other world-wide organizations. We have very few third-party ads and we don’t receive government funding. We survive on the goodness of God, product sales, and donations from our wonderful partners. Dear Readers, X close We have experienced tremendous growth in our web presence over the last five years. In fact, in 2010 we averaged 228,000 pageviews per month. Last year we averaged just over 2,000,000 pageviews per month. That’s an increase of 777% in five years! However, our servers and software are outdated, which causes downtime on occasion for many of you and additional work hours and finances to maintain for us at Endtime. Updating our servers and software as well as maintaining service for a year will cost us $42,000. If each person reading this gave at least $10, our bill to provide FREE broadcasting and resources to the world via our website would be covered for over a year! Learn more - Click Here ► Dear Readers,

Wells Fargo Needs to Make a Clean Break With the Past - The New York Times

Gretchen Morgenson

Even after two big shuffles at the top, Wells Fargo is still working from the same playbook. And for the bank’s stockholders, that could mean more frustration lies ahead. John Stumpf abruptly exited late Wednesday from his chief executive and chairman posts at the bank, taking responsibility for the bank’s phony accounts disaster. But the elevation of Timothy J. Sloan, the Wells Fargo president and former chief operating officer, to succeed Mr. Stumpf, and the simultaneous appointment of an independent board chairman seem like incremental moves from a bank that really needs a to repair the damage. Is Mr. Sloan, an almost veteran of Wells Fargo and a seasoned insider, the best executive to lead the bank out of crisis? Some of the experts I talked to don’t think so. Sarah Bloom Raskin, deputy secretary of the United States Treasury and a former member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, said that Wells Fargo needed to shift from a reactive stance to proactive risk management. And this may require more significant change than the company is offering. “The whole country is watching to see if this bank is seizing the opportunity to make a clean break from doing business in a way that strains its reputation with its customers to one that enhances it,” Ms. Raskin said. “This is an opportunity to bring in a new perspective at the top. ” Mr. Sloan may indeed be a great manager. But one of the big questions looming over him is whether his long tenure at Wells Fargo is an asset or a liability. Richard Bove, a veteran bank analyst at Rafferty Capital Markets, said Wells Fargo needed an overhaul that went far beyond the scandal itself. Yes, repairing the culture that allowed the fraudulent practices to occur is a crucial task for Mr. Sloan, but that alone will not get the bank back on track. In recent years, Wells Fargo’s competitors, Mr. Bove said, have vastly improved their operations by exiting significant businesses and selling off assets. Citigroup has gotten out of 30 businesses and sold off a large number of assets, he said. Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase have also downsized. But Wells Fargo has added lines of business during the period, Mr. Bove said, resulting in a bloated bank. “This is a company that must make massive revisions to its business model,” Mr. Bove said. “Someone has to get in there and rip the company apart. Sloan is not the guy to do that. ” There is also a question about Mr. Sloan’s previous position as the bank’s chief financial officer from February 2011 to May 2014. In that post, Mr. Sloan was required to sign periodic certifications that he had disclosed to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the board any fraud involving management or other employees that had a significant role in the company’s internal controls. The pervasive opening of sham accounts, a practice in a division overseen by Carrie Tolstedt, also a top Wells Fargo executive, would certainly seem to qualify as fraud relating to the bank’s internal controls. Did Mr. Sloan make disclosures about these practices to the board during his stint as chief financial officer? If not, why not? And if he did, why were the disclosures not acted on years ago? I asked these questions of Wells Fargo. A spokeswoman, Arati Randolph, emphasized that the bank had determined that the financial impact of the problematic practices was not meaningful. “The vast majority of the accounts reviewed did not generate fees or result in net income for the company,” Ms. Randolph said in a statement. “In fact, it cost Wells Fargo more than $10 million to open and service those accounts, which generated the $2. 6 million in fees that was returned to customers. ” Certainly, the bank’s shareholders are hoping that Mr. Sloan’s rise will stop the fall in the company’s share price. Wells Fargo’s stock has lost almost $28 billion in market value since early September, when the bank announced its settlement with regulators over the dubious practices. On Friday, after Mr. Sloan held a conference call with analysts, the stock fell 0. 6 percent from the previous day’s close. Annalisa Barrett, a clinical professor of finance at the University of San Diego school of business, thinks the bank may be making the best of a bad situation. She argued that the investor reaction could have been worse had the board announced it was looking for an outsider to replace Mr. Stumpf. “They likely would have named an interim C. E. O. while they conducted their search,” she said. “In my opinion, that would have been very disruptive and led to more uncertainty in the market and concern among employees and customers. ” Given the sad sequence of events at Wells Fargo, I couldn’t help but wonder: Why does it take a crisis of this magnitude to get a company or its board to act on governance matters that its shareholders have been agitating about? One such matter involves who runs the Wells Fargo board. For years, the position of chairman was held by the company’s chief executive, most recently Mr. Stumpf. This meant that the same person presided over the board even as he oversaw the bank’s operations. Recently, companies whose chief executives also lead their boards have come under pressure from investors who think these responsibilities should be divided to ensure an appropriate balance of power. At Wells Fargo’s annual shareholder meeting in April, for example, investors were once again asked to vote on a proposal that would have required an independent chairman to replace Mr. Stumpf in that role. Such a proposal has come up at the bank every year for more than a decade. Each time, Wells Fargo has recommended that shareholders nix it and each time the bank has gotten its way. This year was no different. But in arguing against the proposal, Wells Fargo made the following points. Its existing board structure, the company said, “provides effective independent oversight of management and board accountability” and its governance is “working effectively as evidenced by the company’s strong financial performance. ” Well, so much for that. On Wednesday, the company did an indicating that its governance prowess might not have been as effective as the company had contended. In his new position as C. E. O. Mr. Sloan will not become board chairman. That assignment now goes to Stephen W. Sanger, retired chief executive and chairman of General Mills, who will be assisted by Elizabeth A. Duke, a former Federal Reserve Board governor, as vice chairwoman. These two directors have a lot on their plates. They are essentially charged with waking up what has been a somnambulant board. Ms. Duke joined the Wells Fargo board only in early 2015, so she cannot be held responsible for overlooking years of problematic activities. Mr. Sanger, on the other hand, has been a Wells Fargo director since 2003. And since 2012, he has held the position of lead independent director of the bank’s board. In that job, he was supposed to ensure that Mr. Stumpf was putting his shareholders’ interests first. That didn’t happen then, but it better happen now.

Treasury Department Shoots Down Fannie and Freddie Obamacare Conspiracy Theory - Breitbart

John Carney

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has not endorsed claims that profits from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were diverted to fund Obamacare, a spokesman said. [Mnuchin also supports the ongoing sweep of the profits of the giants into the U. S. Treasury, the spokesman said. Special interest groups have been falsely claiming for several months that the Obama administration was diverting the profits of the giants to provide funding for portions of Obamacare for which Congress has declined to appropriate funds. These efforts have been aimed at manipulating conservative opponents of Obamacare into supporting efforts by hedge funds and other investors to suspend the quarterly dividends the companies pay to Treasury. In reality, the funds collected by Fannie and Freddie count as revenue to the U. S. Treasury, much like tax receipts, and are used to fund general government operations. There is no particular connection to Obamacare. Following an interview with Maria Bartiromo at a Milken Institute conference in Los Angeles Monday, advocates of Fannie and Freddie’s shareholders claimed Mnuchin had endorsed their position. “Mnuchin Confirms GSE Sweep May Have Funded Obamacare,” declared a pressure group called Investor’s Unite. What Mnuchin actually confirmed is much more mundane and widely known: the profits of Fannie and Freddie that get turned over each quarter to the U. S. Treasury as compensation for their bailout and Treasury’s ongoing support are used to fund the operations of the U. S. government. “Secretary Mnuchin believes the dividend from the GSEs should be paid per the agreement as compensation for the government. The Secretary clearly stated that the dividends were used to fund other parts of the government more broadly,” a Treasury spokesman said. Mnuchin’s ongoing support for the payments to the U. S. Treasury was first reported by Bloomberg News. The confusion appears to have arisen because of the way Bartiromo worded her question. “There’s a conversation going on on Twitter and it has been for a long time about how President Obama needed money for ObamaCare and would take from all of the agencies and he took from Fannie and Freddie. Is that true?” Bartiromo asked Mnuchin. “It is true. They used the profits of Fannie and Freddie to pay for other parts of the government while they kept taxpayers at risk,” the Treasury Secretary replied. Treasury’s statement Wednesday, however, makes it clear that Mnuchin’s answer was not meant to confirm any particular connection between Obamacare and the profits of Fannie and Freddie. Because money is fungible, Treasury’s receipts of those profits fund everything the federal government does from border patrols and military operations to the National Endowment for the Arts and public television. In the interview with Bartiromo, Mnuchin also shot down the idea that the administration has plans to privatize Fannie and Freddie or return them to shareholder control, specifically rejecting the word “privatized. ” “Let me ask you about Fannie and Freddie, because you’ve talked a lot about the need for these two housing giants to be privatized. Where is that in your priority list?” Bartiromo asked. “Again, I haven’t said they would be privatized. What I’ve said is I’m committed to housing reform, and that we’re committed not to leave them as is for the next four years,” Mnuchin said. Fannie and Freddie provide liquidity to the housing market by buying mortgages from lenders, packaging them into securities whose principal and interest payments they guarantee. Prior to their 2008 collapse, Fannie and Freddie were widely viewed as enjoying an “implicit guarantee” from the U. S. government, enabling them to earn enormous profits because investors viewed their bonds as being safe — or nearly so — as U. S. Treasury bonds, The companies were taken over by the U. S. government in 2008 when officials feared their collapse could further destabilize the housing and financial markets. Treasury provided hundreds of billions of funding while the Federal Housing Finance Agency became their conservator. Under their original agreement with the U. S. Treasury, both companies were supposed to pay a dividend equal to 10% of their taxpayer funding as well as a fee on the hundreds of billions more Treasury had pledged to support them. For years, however, neither company earned enough to pay the dividend, which forced them to draw even more from their bailout funds just to send the money back to Treasury as the dividend. This circular draw, as it came to be called, threatened to put the companies into a death spiral, slowly eating away at the remainder of the Treasury backstop. In Treasury and the FHFA agreed to change the terms of the bailout so that Fannie and Freddie would no longer have a fixed dividend — ending the need for circular draws. Instead, each company would have a flexible dividend obligation that would rise and fall with their profits. Because the new dividend is equal to the positive net worth of each company, less a small capital cushion set to decline each year, it is known as the “net worth sweep. ” At the time the net worth sweep was implemented, Treasury Department officials noted that in addition to ending the circular draws and death spiral, the arrangement would facilitate the eventual wind down of the companies by preventing them from using profits to recapitalize as designed a safe, more stable mortgage finance system. Because every attempt at bipartisan mortgage finance reform legislation stalled out on Capitol Hill, neither company has been . Instead, they have remained in conservatorship and supported by taxpayer backing for more than eight years — a situation that nearly everyone involved in mortgage finance reform regards as undesirable. Hedge funds and other big investors who have purchased shares of Fannie and Freddie, including Perry Capital LLC and the Fairholme Funds, have been attempting to undo the net worth sweep for years. These attempts have included marshaling support of civil rights groups and filing lawsuits in several federal courts. The litigation tactic, however, has largely failed. The cases have been met by dismissal in four federal district courts and a federal appeals court in March largely rejected the bid by investors to reverse one of those decisions. As Breitbart news reported last month, opponents of the net worth sweep have recently turned to the Obamacare conspiracy theory, which appears to lure in conservatives. to bankroll portions of the Affordable Care Act. Specifically, the funds were allegedly used to provide a substitute funding source after a federal court ruled that some subsidies that had been provided to insurers were improper. The trouble is that the changes to Fannie and Freddie’s bailout that net worth sweep in place were made in 2012, while the judge’s ruling on the Obamacare subsidies didn’t come until 2016. What’s more, the judge in the case has allowed the payments to continue pending appeal, which means there still isn’t a budget gap to fill. So this theory lacks even a patina of plausibility. Treasury’s statement rejecting this conspiracy theory is likely to be another source of disappointment for those who hoped they had found an worth sweep ally in Mnuchin.

Sonntagsfrage: Was sagen Sie dazu, dass Angela Merkel wohl noch einmal antreten will?

noreply@blogger.com (Der Postillon)

Sonntag, 20. November 2016 Sonntagsfrage: Was sagen Sie dazu, dass Angela Merkel wohl noch einmal antreten will? Am Sonntagabend wird Angela Merkel vor die Presse treten und eine bisher unbekannte Erklä- ... na gut, eigentlich weiß jeder in Deutschland, was die ewige Kanzlerin zu verkünden hat. Haben Sie sich schon auf Merkel 2017 eingestellt? In dieser Woche will der Merkillon (unterstützt durch Yawn Control ) von Ihnen wissen: Und hier noch die unglaublich spannenden Ergebnisse der letzten Sonntagsfrage (Stimmen gesamt: 84.695): Was sagen Sie dazu, dass Donald Trump tatsächlich gewonnen hat? (Top-3-Antworten) 3. Glück für George W. Bush, der sich schon fast damit abgefunden hat, als schlechtester US-Präsident aller Zeiten in die Geschichte einzugehen. - 17,45% (14.781 Stimmen) 2. Seltsam. Und das, obwohl die Demokraten mit Hillary Clinton eine Kandidatin aufgestellt haben, die all das verkörperte, was die Amerikaner an der Politik hassen. - 17,6% (14.907 Stimmen) 1. Und was macht der Mann als erste Amtshandlung? Nimmt einer schwarzen Familie das Haus weg. Un-mög-lich! - 25,6% (21.686 Stimmen) Foto: Shutterstock

Donald Trump Is the 45th President of the United States · Guardian Liberty Voice

Cathy Milne

After a long night and a hard election, Donald J. Trump was elected as the 45th President of the United States. In the early hours of November 9, 2016, Hillary Clinton conceded the election. Both candidates helped usher in a new political era; she is the first woman to get this far in a presidential election successfully. Whereas, Trump is the first person to be elected to the highest office in the U.S. who never served in the military and never served in a political capacity. When the night culminated with Trump winning well over the required 270 electoral votes, the election was called. The reality star now holds a new title, President Elect Donald J. Trump. His presidency will begin with Republicans holding the majority in both chambers of Congress. President-Elect Trump will be nominating a new Supreme Court Justice to fill the seat vacated when Antonin Scalia died in February. Surprising Night at the Polls On November 8, the polls began to close at 6:00 p.m. ET on the east coast. Whereas on the west coast, the polls closed 11:00 p.m. There were early projections, which made hearts race. The numbers bounced back and forth in many key swing states. That is until eastern state’s tallies began to roll in, then the numbers evened out. Polling Site Glitches Many polling sites experienced technical issues. Trump attempted early in the day to sue Nevada because the polls in Clark County remained open for an hour and a half on Nov. 7. The judge stated there was no fraud since the state’s law indicates if a person is in line before the polling site closes, they must be allowed to cast their ballot. In Durham County, N.C., there was a delay beginning the votes, so the Democratic Party sought to have the time extended to make up for time lost. This was granted, and the polls remained open for 30 of the 45 minutes requested. Donald Trump Needs to Reunite the Country Commentators on CNN Politics agree that the campaign tore through the fabric that makes America great. During the campaigning, citizens became polarized into two drastically divisive and hateful camps. How is President Elect Trump going to heal the wounds he inflicted on Clinton’s supporters, the Muslim community, Latino citizens, and every other group? During Trump’s campaign, he threatened to have Clinton arrested when he won, build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico, close the mosques, and restart stop and search policies. He said he would repeal the Affordable Care Act, and lower the tax ceiling for the richest Americans. His supporters are thrilled, and Clinton’s voters are stunned. There are fear and confusion in the air. Hillary Clinton Concedes Clinton sent out her campaign manager to tell her supporters that it was late and the final tallies were not going to happen soon. She asked them to go home and get some rest. The announcement was made that Clinton would speak in the morning. Within an hour, Trump told his supporters that she had called him and conceded. The President-Elect proffered a simple acceptance. He stated that his was not a campaign but a movement for change. By Cathy Milne Sources: CNN Politics: 2016 Election Results MSNBC: Live 2016 Election Coverage NBC News: Breaking News Alerts Image Courtesy of Gage Skidmore’s Flickr Page – Creative Commons License #CMJournalist , Hillary Clinton , President Elect , spot , Trump , VP Elect

Anonymous

Brilliant!

The Most Interesting Chart In The World – Part 3, The End

Lee Adler

The Most Interesting Chart In The World - Part 3, The End By Lee Adler. In this final installment in this series, I explain how the shrinkage of European banks will impact the US markets, and I show you what could be the most important chart in the world right now.

Drink to Your Health (in Moderation), the Science Says - The New York Times

Aaron E. Carroll

Over the past year, I’ve tried to clear up a lot of the misconceptions on food and drink: about salt, artificial sweeteners, among others, even water. Now let me take on alcohol: wine, beer and cocktails. Although I have written about the dangerous effects of alcohol abuse and misuse, that doesn’t mean it’s always bad. A part of many complex and delicious adult beverages, alcohol is linked to a number of health benefits in medical studies. That doesn’t mean the studies provide only good news, either, or that the evidence in its favor is a slam dunk. You won’t be surprised to hear that, once again, my watchword — moderation — applies. Research into how alcohol consumption affects health has been going on for a long time. A 1990 prospective cohort study included results of more than 275, 000 men followed since 1959. Compared with those who never drank alcohol, those who consumed one to two drinks a day had a significantly reduced mortality rate from both coronary heart disease and “all causes. ” Those who consumed three or more drinks a day still had a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease, but had a higher mortality rate over all. A 2004 study came to similar conclusions. It followed about 6, 600 men and 8, 000 women for five years and found that compared with those who drank about one drink a day on average, those who didn’t drink at all and those who drank more than two drinks a day had higher rates of death. Results like these have been consistent across a number of studies in different populations. Even studies published in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research agree that moderate drinking seems to be associated with a decreased risk of death over all. However, alcohol seems to have different effects on different diseases. Almost all of the major benefits of drinking are seen in cardiovascular illnesses. In fact, with men, even consumption of a surprisingly large amount can seem protective. When it comes to cancer, the picture isn’t as rosy. For instance, a 2007 study involving the Women’s Health Study cohort found that increased alcohol consumption was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. More broadly, a 2014 systematic review of epidemiologic and experimental studies looking at alcohol and breast cancer found that the overall consensus is that each additional drink per day increases the relative risk (comparing the risk in two groups) of breast cancer by a statistically significant, but small, 2 percent — although not the absolute risk. A of colorectal cancer and alcohol found that heavy drinkers, but not light or moderate drinkers, were at increased risk of the disease. No relationship is seen with respect to bladder cancer or ovarian cancer. A study that included all cancers found that light drinking was protective moderate drinking had no effect and heavy drinking was detrimental. Moderate alcohol consumption has been found to be associated with other benefits, though. A cohort of about 6, 000 people followed in Britain found that those who consumed alcohol at least once a week had significantly better cognitive function in middle age than those who did not drink at all. This protective effect on cognition was seen in people who drank up to 30 drinks a week. A 2004 systematic review found that moderate drinking was associated with up to 56 percent lower rates of diabetes compared with nondrinkers. Heavy drinkers, though, had an increased incidence of diabetes. This is where savvy readers should be asking: What about randomized controlled trials? After all, epidemiologic evidence and associations only go so far they cannot get us to causation. Recently, in Annals of Internal Medicine, such a trial was published. Patients with Type 2 diabetes were randomized to drink 150 milliliters of water, white wine or red wine with dinner for two years. The beverages were provided to patients free of charge. They were all placed on a Mediterranean diet with no calorie restrictions. Researchers found that those who drank the wine, most notably red wine, had a reduction in cardiometabolic risk factors, or those for heart disease, diabetes or stroke. This was especially true in patients who had certain genotypes. Further, no one had any significant adverse effects from being randomized to drink the alcohol. In another analysis of that randomized control trial published this year, the most interesting finding was about blood pressure. In this study, some people saw a reduction in systolic blood pressure. Again, the alcohol was not associated with significant adverse effects. This contradicts the findings from systematic reviews of epidemiologic studies that show alcohol intake may be associated with a small but significant increase in blood pressure. Adding further complications was a trial looking at red wine consumption that found it had no effect, positive or negative, on blood pressure in patients with atherosclerosis. A different analysis of that study found that it did result in improved cholesterol levels, even though many patients were already being treated with statins. A 2011 examined 63 controlled trials of wine, beer and spirits, and found that all of those beverages increased levels of HDL cholesterol (the good cholesterol). There was even a with more alcohol consumed having more of an effect. Synthesizing all this, there seems to be a sizable amount of evidence that moderate alcohol consumption is associated with decreased rates of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and death. It also seems to be associated with increased rates, perhaps to a lesser extent, of some cancers, especially breast cancer, as well as some other diseases or conditions. The gains from improved cardiovascular disease deaths seem to outweigh all of the losses in other diseases combined. The most recent report of the U. S. D. A. Scientific Advisory Panel agrees with that assessment. But alcohol isn’t harmless. Many people with certain diseases or disorders, and women who are pregnant, need to avoid it. Others who can’t keep their consumption to acceptable levels need to abstain. Alcohol is very harmful when abused, so much so that it’s difficult for me to tell people to start drinking for their health. That’s rarely the conclusion of any studies about alcohol, no matter how positive the results. Nor is it the advice any doctors I know give. However, the evidence does seem to say that moderate consumption is safe, and that it may even be healthy for many people. If you’re enjoying some drinks this holiday season, it’s nice to know that they may be doing more than just bringing you cheer.

Global Unrest Cycle Elects Evangelical Mayor for Rio

Global Unrest Cycle Elects Evangelical Mayor for Rio October 31, 2016 Global Unrest Cycle Elects Evangelical Mayor for Rio An evangelical bishop was elected mayor of Rio de Janeiro on Sunday in a second round of municipal voting that cemented a rout of the leftist party and allies who dominated Brazil's presidency and major cities for over a decade. Marcelo Crivella, a controversial conservative who is a senator, bishop and nephew of the founder of an evangelical megachurch, defeated a progressive former schoolteacher to runBrazil's second biggest city by a margin of nearly 20 percentage points. The 59-year-old pastor weathered an uproar over past criticism of homosexuality and Catholicism, the dominant religion in Latin America's largest country, by distancing himself from those comments and vowing to govern for Rio's residents, not the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, the influential congregation from which he hails. In a victory speech to supporters in a working-class Rio neighborhood, he promised to "take care of people," echoing campaign vows to improve deficient public services, from health to transport to sanitation, that complicate day-to-day life for the blue-collar voters who supported his candidacy. Crivella's victory, partly fueled by the growing influence of evangelical voters, fortifies a rightward shift in Brazil following the 13-year reign of the leftist Workers Party, which presided over a long economic boom before cratering during the recession and an historic corruption scandal. (BRAZIL) - The elections, which toppled many incumbents in a first round of voting earlier this month, are also a broader renunciation of the status quo, with voters frustrated by a second year of recession and the giant kickback scandal that has led to the arrest dozens of political and corporate chieftains. "It's an important election to change the old way of doing things," said Rafael Mello, a civil servant who voted Sunday morning in Rio. In the first round of voting, just weeks after lawmakers impeached former President Dilma Rousseff because of budget irregularities by her Workers Party government, two-term Rio Mayor Eduardo Paes, a one-time Rousseff ally, failed to secure a place in the runoff for his hand-picked successor candidate. LISTEN MORE: TRUNEWS HOST RICK WILES SPEAKS ABOUT THE 500 YEAR CYLE In São Paulo, Brazil's biggest city and the cradle of the Workers Party, voters ousted Mayor Fernando Haddad, once considered one of the party's rising stars. The Workers Party held onto only one of the state capitals it had previously occupied. EYEING 2018 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Sunday's voting will also influence how some key players at the national level could fare ahead of the 2018 presidential elections. In Belo Horizonte, capital of the rich southeastern state of Minas Gerais, a loss by a candidate from the centrist Brazilian Social Democratic Party is expected to help resolve an ongoing power struggle within the PSDB, as the party is known. The PSDB, which had been the chief opposition to the Workers Party and is increasingly well positioned to retake the presidency after four consecutive defeats, won São Paulo and other important cities in the first round of municipal elections. The victory by wealthy businessman João Doria in São Paulo fortified Geraldo Alckmin, the governor of that state and a possible presidential candidate, who pushed for Doria despite opposition from other PSDB leaders. The loss in Belo Horizonte, to a smaller centrist party, is considered a defeat for Aecio Neves, another PSDB leader who was the party's candidate against Rousseff in 2014. Neves, a senator and former governor of Minas Gerais, failed to win the state in that election and gave his imprimatur to this year's losing mayoral candidate. Crivella, the Rio victor, belongs to the Brazilian Republican Party, a relatively new conservative party. His leftist rival, Marcelo Freixo, represented the Socialism and Liberty Party, which broke away from the Workers Party over a decade ago to focus on human rights, education and social issues. Though Freixo garnered energetic support from celebrities, artists, intellectuals and prosperous Rio leftists, their ballots were easily outnumbered by a populist vote in less affluent parts of the city, traditionally skeptical of progressive platforms. Article by Doc Burkhart , Vice-President, General Manager and co-host of TRUNEWS with Rick Wiles Got a news tip? Email us at Help support the ministry of TRUNEWS with your one-time or monthly gift of financial support. DONATE NOW ! DOWNLOAD THE TRUNEWS MOBILE APP! CLICK HERE! Donate Today! Support TRUNEWS to help build a global news network that provides a credible source for world news We believe Christians need and deserve their own global news network to keep the worldwide Church informed, and to offer Christians a positive alternative to the anti-Christian bigotry of the mainstream news media Top Stories

The Modern History of ‘Rigged’ US Elections

Consortiumnews.com

The Modern History of ‘Rigged’ US Elections October 27, 2016 Special Report: Donald Trump claims the U.S. presidential election is “rigged,” drawing condemnation from the political/media establishment which accuses him of undermining faith in American democracy. But neither side understands the real problem, says Robert Parry. By Robert Parry The United States is so committed to the notion that its electoral process is the world’s “gold standard” that there has been a bipartisan determination to maintain the fiction even when evidence is overwhelming that a U.S. presidential election has been manipulated or stolen. The “wise men” of the system simply insist otherwise. We have seen this behavior when there are serious questions of vote tampering (as in Election 1960) or when a challenger apparently exploits a foreign crisis to create an advantage over the incumbent (as in Elections 1968 and 1980) or when the citizens’ judgment is overturned by judges (as in Election 2000). Presidents Richard Nixon, George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan photographed together in the Oval Office in 1991. (Cropped from a White House photo that also included Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.) Strangely, in such cases, it is not only the party that benefited which refuses to accept the evidence of wrongdoing, but the losing party and the establishment news media as well. Protecting the perceived integrity of the U.S. democratic process is paramount. Americans must continue to believe in the integrity of the system even when that integrity has been violated. The harsh truth is that pursuit of power often trumps the principle of an informed electorate choosing the nation’s leaders, but that truth simply cannot be recognized. Of course, historically, American democracy was far from perfect, excluding millions of people, including African-American slaves and women. The compromises needed to enact the Constitution in 1787 also led to distasteful distortions, such as counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of representation (although obviously slaves couldn’t vote). That unsavory deal enabled Thomas Jefferson to defeat John Adams in the pivotal national election of 1800. In effect, the votes of Southern slave owners like Jefferson counted substantially more than the votes of Northern non-slave owners. Even after the Civil War when the Constitution was amended to give black men voting rights, the reality for black voting, especially in the South, was quite different from the new constitutional mandate. Whites in former Confederate states concocted subterfuges to keep blacks away from the polls to ensure continued white supremacy for almost a century. Women did not gain suffrage until 1920 with the passage of another constitutional amendment, and it took federal legislation in 1965 to clear away legal obstacles that Southern states had created to deny the franchise to blacks. Indeed, the alleged voter fraud in Election 1960, concentrated largely in Texas, a former Confederate state and home to John Kennedy’s vice presidential running mate, Lyndon Johnson, could be viewed as an outgrowth of the South’s heritage of rigging elections in favor of Democrats, the post-Civil War party of white Southerners. However, by pushing through civil rights for blacks in the 1960s, Kennedy and Johnson earned the enmity of many white Southerners who switched their allegiance to the Republican Party via Richard Nixon’s Southern strategy of coded racial messaging. Nixon also harbored resentments over what he viewed as his unjust defeat in the election of 1960. Nixon’s ‘Treason’ So, by 1968, the Democrats’ once solid South was splintering, but Nixon, who was again the Republican presidential nominee, didn’t want to leave his chances of winning what looked to be another close election to chance. Nixon feared that — with the Vietnam War raging and the Democratic Party deeply divided — President Johnson could give the Democratic nominee, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, a decisive boost by reaching a last-minute peace deal with North Vietnam. President Richard Nixon with his then-National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger in 1972. The documentary and testimonial evidence is now clear that to avert a peace deal, Nixon’s campaign went behind Johnson’s back to persuade South Vietnamese President Nguyen van Thieu to torpedo Johnson’s Paris peace talks by refusing to attend. Nixon’s emissaries assured Thieu that a President Nixon would continue the war and guarantee a better outcome for South Vietnam. Though Johnson had strong evidence of what he privately called Nixon’s “treason” — from FBI wiretaps in the days before the 1968 election — he and his top advisers chose to stay silent. In a Nov. 4, 1968 conference call , Secretary of State Dean Rusk, National Security Advisor Walt Rostow and Defense Secretary Clark Clifford – three pillars of the Establishment – expressed that consensus, with Clifford explaining the thinking: “Some elements of the story are so shocking in their nature that I’m wondering whether it would be good for the country to disclose the story and then possibly have a certain individual [Nixon] elected,” Clifford said. “It could cast his whole administration under such doubt that I think it would be inimical to our country’s interests.” Clifford’s words expressed the recurring thinking whenever evidence emerged casting the integrity of America’s electoral system in doubt, especially at the presidential level. The American people were not to know what kind of dirty deeds could affect that process. To this day, the major U.S. news media will not directly address the issue of Nixon’s treachery in 1968, despite the wealth of evidence proving this historical reality now available from declassified records at the Johnson presidential library in Austin, Texas. In a puckish recognition of this ignored history, the library’s archivists call the file on Nixon’s sabotage of the Vietnam peace talks their “X-file.” [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “ LBJ’s ‘X-File’ on Nixon’s ‘Treason. ’”] The evidence also strongly suggests that Nixon’s paranoia about a missing White House file detailing his “treason” – top secret documents that Johnson had entrusted to Rostow at the end of LBJ’s presidency – led to Nixon’s creation of the “plumbers,” a team of burglars whose first assignment was to locate those purloined papers. The existence of the “plumbers” became public in June 1972 when they were caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters at the Watergate in Washington. National Security Adviser Walt Rostow shows President Lyndon Johnson a model of a battle near Khe Sanh in Vietnam. (U.S. Archive Photo) Although the Watergate scandal remains the archetypal case of election-year dirty tricks, the major U.S. news media never acknowledge the link between Watergate and Nixon’s far more egregious dirty trick four years earlier, sinking Johnson’s Vietnam peace talks while 500,000 American soldiers were in the war zone. In part because of Nixon’s sabotage — and his promise to Thieu of a more favorable outcome — the war continued for four more bloody years before being settled along the lines that were available to Johnson in 1968. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “ The Heinous Crime Behind Watergate .”] In effect, Watergate gets walled off as some anomaly that is explained by Nixon’s strange personality. However, even though Nixon resigned in disgrace in 1974, he and his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, who also had a hand in the Paris peace talk caper, reappear as secondary players in the next well-documented case of obstructing a sitting president’s foreign policy to get an edge in the 1980 campaign. Reagan’s ‘October Surprise’ Caper In that case, President Jimmy Carter was seeking reelection and trying to negotiate release of 52 American hostages then held in revolutionary Iran. Ronald Reagan’s campaign feared that Carter might pull off an “October Surprise” by bringing home the hostages just before the election. So, this historical mystery has been: Did Reagan’s team take action to block Carter’s October Surprise? President Ronald Reagan, delivering his Inaugural Address on Jan. 20, 1981, as the 52 U.S. hostages in Iran are simultaneously released. The testimonial and documentary evidence that Reagan’s team did engage in a secret operation to prevent Carter’s October Surprise is now almost as overwhelming as the proof of the 1968 affair regarding Nixon’s Paris peace talk maneuver. That evidence indicates that Reagan’s campaign director William Casey organized a clandestine effort to prevent the hostages’ release before Election Day, after apparently consulting with Nixon and Kissinger and aided by former CIA Director George H.W. Bush, who was Reagan’s vice presidential running mate. By early November 1980, the public’s obsession with Iran’s humiliation of the United States and Carter’s inability to free the hostages helped turn a narrow race into a Reagan landslide. When the hostages were finally let go immediately after Reagan’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 1981, his supporters cited the timing to claim that the Iranians had finally relented out of fear of Reagan. Bolstered by his image as a tough guy, Reagan enacted much of his right-wing agenda, including passing massive tax cuts benefiting the wealthy, weakening unions and creating the circumstances for the rapid erosion of the Great American Middle Class. Behind the scenes, the Reagan administration signed off on secret arms shipments to Iran, mostly through Israel, what a variety of witnesses described as the payoff for Iran’s cooperation in getting Reagan elected and then giving him the extra benefit of timing the hostage release to immediately follow his inauguration. Then-Vice President George H.W. Bush with CIA Director William Casey at the White House on Feb. 11, 1981. (Photo credit: Reagan Library) In summer 1981, when Assistant Secretary of State for the Middle East Nicholas Veliotes learned about the arms shipments to Iran, he checked on their origins and said, later in a PBS interview: “It was clear to me after my conversations with people on high that indeed we had agreed that the Israelis could transship to Iran some American-origin military equipment. … [This operation] seems to have started in earnest in the period probably prior to the election of 1980, as the Israelis had identified who would become the new players in the national security area in the Reagan administration. And I understand some contacts were made at that time.” Those early covert arms shipments to Iran evolved into a later secret set of arms deals that surfaced in fall 1986 as the Iran-Contra Affair, with some of the profits getting recycled back to Reagan’s beloved Nicaraguan Contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua’s leftist government. While many facts of the Iran-Contra scandal were revealed by congressional and special-prosecutor investigations in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the origins of the Reagan-Iran relationship was always kept hazy. The Republicans were determined to stop any revelations about the 1980 contacts, but the Democrats were almost as reluctant to go there. A half-hearted congressional inquiry was launched in 1991 and depended heavily on then-President George H.W. Bush to collect the evidence and arrange interviews for the investigation. In other words, Bush, who was then seeking reelection and who was a chief suspect in the secret dealings with Iran, was entrusted with proving his own guilt. Tired of the Story By the early 1990s, the mainstream U.S. news media was also tired of the complex Iran-Contra scandal and wanted to move on. As a correspondent at Newsweek, I had battled senior editors over their disinterest in getting to the bottom of the scandal before I left the magazine in 1990. I then received an assignment from PBS Frontline to look into the 1980 “October Surprise” question, which led to a documentary on the subject in April 1991. PBS Frontline’s: The Election Held Hostage, co-written by Robert Parry and Robert Ross. However, by fall 1991, just as Congress was agreeing to open an investigation, my ex-bosses at Newsweek, along with The New Republic, then an elite neoconservative publication interested in protecting Israel’s exposure on those early arms deals, went on the attack. They published matching cover stories deeming the 1980 “October Surprise” case a hoax, but their articles were both based on a misreading of documents recording Casey’s attendance at a conference in London in July 1980, which he seemed to have used as a cover for a side trip to Madrid to meet with senior Iranians regarding the hostages. Although the bogus Newsweek/New Republic “London alibi” would eventually be debunked, it created a hostile climate for the investigation. With Bush angrily denying everything and the congressional Republicans determined to protect the President’s flanks, the Democrats mostly just went through the motions of an investigation. Meanwhile, Bush’s State Department and White House counsel’s office saw their jobs as discrediting the investigation, deep-sixing incriminating documents, and helping a key witness dodge a congressional subpoena. Years later, I discovered a document at the Bush presidential library in College Station, Texas, confirming that Casey had taken a mysterious trip to Madrid in 1980. The U.S. Embassy’s confirmation of Casey’s trip was passed along by State Department legal adviser Edwin D. Williamson to Associate White House Counsel Chester Paul Beach Jr. in early November 1991, just as the congressional inquiry was taking shape. Williamson said that among the State Department “material potentially relevant to the October Surprise allegations [was] a cable from the Madrid embassy indicating that Bill Casey was in town, for purposes unknown,” Beach noted in a “ memorandum for record ” dated Nov. 4, 1991. Two days later, on Nov. 6, Beach’s boss, White House counsel C. Boyden Gray, convened an inter-agency strategy session and explained the need to contain the congressional investigation into the October Surprise case. The explicit goal was to ensure the scandal would not hurt President Bush’s reelection hopes in 1992. C. Boyden Gray, White House counsel under President George H.W. Bush. At the meeting, Gray laid out how to thwart the October Surprise inquiry, which was seen as a dangerous expansion of the Iran-Contra investigation. The prospect that the two sets of allegations would merge into a single narrative represented a grave threat to George H.W. Bush’s reelection campaign. As assistant White House counsel Ronald vonLembke, put it , the White House goal in 1991 was to “kill/spike this story.” Gray explained the stakes at the White House strategy session. “Whatever form they ultimately take, the House and Senate ‘October Surprise’ investigations, like Iran-Contra, will involve interagency concerns and be of special interest to the President ,” Gray declared, according to minutes . [Emphasis in original.] Among “touchstones” cited by Gray were “No Surprises to the White House, and Maintain Ability to Respond to Leaks in Real Time. This is Partisan.” White House “talking points” on the October Surprise investigation urged restricting the inquiry to 1979-80 and imposing strict time limits for issuing any findings. Timid Democrats But Bush’s White House really had little to fear because whatever evidence that the congressional investigation received – and a great deal arrived in December 1992 and January 1993 – there was no stomach for actually proving that the 1980 Reagan campaign had conspired with Iranian radicals to extend the captivity of 52 Americans in order to ensure Reagan’s election victory. Former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Indiana. That would have undermined the faith of the American people in their democratic process – and that, as Clark Clifford said in the 1968 context, would not be “good for the country.” In 2014 when I sent a copy of Beach’s memo regarding Casey’s trip to Madrid to former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Indiana, who had chaired the October Surprise inquiry in 1991-93, he told me that it had shaken his confidence in the task force’s dismissive conclusions about the October Surprise issue. “The [Bush-41] White House did not notify us that he [Casey] did make the trip” to Madrid, Hamilton told me. “Should they have passed that on to us? They should have because they knew we were interested in that.” Asked if knowledge that Casey had traveled to Madrid might have changed the task force’s dismissive October Surprise conclusion, Hamilton said yes, because the question of the Madrid trip was key to the task force’s investigation. “If the White House knew that Casey was there, they certainly should have shared it with us,” Hamilton said, adding that “you have to rely on people” in authority to comply with information requests. But that trust was at the heart of the inquiry’s failure. With the money and power of the American presidency at stake, the idea that George H.W. Bush and his team would help an investigation that might implicate him in an act close to treason was naïve in the extreme. Arguably, Hamilton’s timid investigation was worse than no investigation at all because it gave Bush’s team the opportunity to search out incriminating documents and make them disappear. Then, Hamilton’s investigative conclusion reinforced the “group think” dismissing this serious manipulation of democracy as a “conspiracy theory” when it was anything but. In the years since, Hamilton hasn’t done anything to change the public impression that the Reagan campaign was innocent. Still, among the few people who have followed this case, the October Surprise cover-up would slowly crumble with admissions by officials involved in the investigation that its exculpatory conclusions were rushed , that crucial evidence had been hidden or ignored , and that some alibis for key Republicans didn’t make any sense . But the dismissive “group think” remains undisturbed as far as the major U.S. media and mainstream historians are concerned. [For details, see Robert Parry’s America’s Stolen Narrative or Trick or Treason: The 1980 October Surprise Mystery or Consortiumnews.com’s “ Second Thoughts on October Surprise. ”] Past as Prologue Lee Hamilton’s decision to “clear” Reagan and Bush of the 1980 October Surprise suspicions in 1992 was not simply a case of miswriting history. The findings had clear implications for the future as well, since the public impression about George H.W. Bush’s rectitude was an important factor in the support given to his oldest son, George W. Bush, in 2000. President George W. Bush is introduced by his brother Florida Gov. Jeb Bush before delivering remarks at Sun City Center, Florida, on May 9, 2006. (White House photo by Eric Draper) Indeed, if the full truth had been told about the father’s role in the October Surprise and Iran-Contra cases, it’s hard to imagine that his son would have received the Republican nomination, let alone made a serious run for the White House. And, if that history were known, there might have been a stronger determination on the part of Democrats to resist another Bush “stolen election” in 2000. Regarding Election 2000, the evidence is now clear that Vice President Al Gore not only won the national popular vote but received more votes that were legal under Florida law than did George W. Bush. But Bush relied first on the help of officials working for his brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, and then on five Republican justices on the U.S. Supreme Court to thwart a full recount and to award him Florida’s electoral votes and thus the presidency. The reality of Gore’s rightful victory should have finally become clear in November 2001 when a group of news organizations finished their own examination of Florida’s disputed ballots and released their tabulations showing that Gore would have won if all ballots considered legal under Florida law were counted. However, between the disputed election and the release of those numbers, the 9/11 attacks had occurred, so The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and other leading outlets did not want the American people to know that the wrong person was in the White House. Surely, telling the American people that fact amid the 9/11 crisis would not be “good for the country.” So, senior editors at all the top new organizations decided to mislead the public by framing their stories in a deceptive way to obscure the most newsworthy discovery – that the so-called “over-votes” in which voters both checked and wrote in their choices’ names broke heavily for Gore and would have put him over the top regardless of which kinds of chads were considered for the “under-votes” that hadn’t registered on antiquated voting machines. “Over-votes” would be counted under Florida law which bases its standards on “clear intent of the voter.” However, instead of leading with Gore’s rightful victory, the news organizations concocted hypotheticals around partial recounts that still would have given Florida narrowly to Bush. They either left out or buried the obvious lede that a historic injustice had occurred. Former Vice President Al Gore. (Photo credit: algore.com) On Nov. 12, 2001, the day that the news organizations ran those stories, I examined the actual data and quickly detected the evidence of Gore’s victory. In a story that day, I suggested that senior news executives were exercising a misguided sense of patriotism. They had hid the reality for “the good of the country,” much as Johnson’s team had done in 1968 regarding Nixon’s sabotage of the Paris peace talks and Hamilton’s inquiry had done regarding the 1980 “October Surprise” case. Within a couple of hours of my posting the article at Consortiumnews.com, I received an irate phone call from The New York Times media writer Felicity Barringer, who accused me of impugning the journalistic integrity of then-Times executive editor Howell Raines. I got the impression that Barringer had been on the look-out for some deviant story that didn’t accept the Bush-won conventional wisdom. However, this violation of objective and professional journalism – bending the slant of a story to achieve a preferred outcome rather than simply giving the readers the most interesting angle – was not simply about some historical event that had occurred a year earlier. It was about the future. By misleading Americans into thinking that Bush was the rightful winner of Election 2000 – even if the media’s motivation was to maintain national unity following the 9/11 attacks – the major news outlets gave Bush greater latitude to respond to the crisis, including the diversionary invasion of Iraq under false pretenses. The Bush-won headlines of November 2001 also enhanced the chances of his reelection in 2004. [For the details of how a full Florida recount would have given Gore the White House, see Consortiumnews.com’s “ Gore’s Victory ,” “ So Bush Did Steal the White House ,” and “ Bush v. Gore’s Dark American Decade. ”] A Phalanx of Misguided Consensus Looking back on these examples of candidates manipulating democracy, there appears to be one common element: after the “stolen” elections, the media and political establishments quickly line up, shoulder to shoulder, to assure the American people that nothing improper has happened. Graceful “losers” are patted on the back for not complaining that the voters’ will had been ignored or twisted. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Al Gore is praised for graciously accepting the extraordinary ruling by Republican partisans on the Supreme Court, who stopped the counting of ballots in Florida on the grounds, as Justice Antonin Scalia said, that a count that showed Gore winning (when the Court’s majority was already planning to award the White House to Bush) would undermine Bush’s “legitimacy.” Similarly, Rep. Hamilton is regarded as a modern “wise man,” in part, because he conducted investigations that never pushed very hard for the truth but rather reached conclusions that were acceptable to the powers-that-be, that didn’t ruffle too many feathers. But the cumulative effect of all these half-truths, cover-ups and lies – uttered for “the good of the country” – is to corrode the faith of many well-informed Americans about the legitimacy of the entire process. It is the classic parable of the boy who cried wolf too many times, or in this case, assured the townspeople that there never was a wolf and that they should ignore the fact that the livestock had mysteriously disappeared leaving behind only a trail of blood into the forest. So, when Donald Trump shows up in 2016 insisting that the electoral system is rigged against him, many Americans choose to believe his demagogy. But Trump isn’t pressing for the full truth about the elections of 1968 or 1980 or 2000. He actually praises Republicans implicated in those cases and vows to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of the late Antonin Scalia. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. Trump’s complaints about “rigged” elections are more in line with the white Southerners during Jim Crow, suggesting that black and brown people are cheating at the polls and need to have white poll monitors to make sure they don’t succeed at “stealing” the election from white people. There is a racist undertone to Trump’s version of a “rigged” democracy but he is not entirely wrong about the flaws in the process. He’s just not honest about what those flaws are. The hard truth is that the U.S. political process is not democracy’s “gold standard”; it is and has been a severely flawed system that is not made better by a failure to honestly address the unpleasant realities and to impose accountability on politicians who cheat the voters. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).

Celebrities Defend Stephen Colbert’s ’C*ck Holster’ Joke

Daniel Nussbaum

Several Hollywood celebrities came to Stephen Colbert’s defense this week after the Late Show host sparked a social media firestorm when he made what some critics called a homophobic and vitriolic joke about President Donald Trump during a broadcast. [“The only thing your mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin’s c*ck holster,” Colbert said during his monologue on Monday night’s Late Show, during which he also called the president a “ ” and a “ . ” The joke elicited laughs from Colbert’s studio audience but the real reaction came later on social media, as thousands of viewers demanded that CBS penalize the host for what they said was an attack on the president, and the hashtag #FireColbert became a trending topic on Twitter. Still, some celebrities leapt to the host’s defense, including Star Trek actor George Takei, comedian Patton Oswalt, and actress Rosie O’Donnell. “Now the little right wing mushrooms want to #FireColbert because he made fun of the Troll King. Waaaa! It’ll go as well as #BoycottHamilton,” Takei wrote on Twitter Wednesday, appearing to refer to the social media outrage that enveloped the Broadway show Hamilton when the cast lectured Vice President Mike Pence from the stage during a performance in November. Now the little right wing mushrooms want to #FireColbert because he made fun of the Troll King. Waaaa! It’ll go as well as #BoycottHamilton. — George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) May 3, 2017, Meanwhile, Oswalt tweeted that he wished he had thought of the “hilarious” phrase before Colbert did, while O’Donnell used the hashtag “#GiveColbertARaise. ” #CancelColbert for coming up with the hilarious phrase ”cock holster” before I did. — Patton Oswalt (@pattonoswalt) May 3, 2017, cause he is slaying it nightly #giveCOLBERTaRAISE https: . — ROSIE (@Rosie) May 3, 2017, Actor Mark Ruffalo also appeared to lend his support to the embattled host by several messages Wednesday, including one that urged fellow users to make “#GiveColbertARaise” a trending topic. The supportive messages from celebrities come as both Colbert and CBS have remained silent on the controversy and social media campaign. Neither the host nor the network had issued a public statement as of Wednesday evening, and representatives for CBS did not immediately return Breitbart News’ request for comment. On Wednesday, CBS announced that the May 9 episode of The Late Show would reunite the stars of Comedy Central’s Daily Show, on which Colbert got his start. Jon Stewart, Samantha Bee, John Oliver, Rob Corddry and Ed Helms are set as guests for the episode. Follow Daniel Nussbaum on Twitter: @dznussbaum

Last Stand for ISIS?

Eric Margolis

Here's something interesting from The Unz Review... Recipient Name Recipient Email => As a former soldier and war correspondent who has covered 14 conflicts, I look at all the media hoopla over tightening siege of Mosul, Iraq and shake my head. This western-organized “liberation” of Mosul is one of the bigger pieces of political-military theater that I’ve seen. Islamic State(IS), the defender of Mosul, is a paper tiger, blown out of all proportion by western media. IS is, as this writer has been saying for years, an armed mob made up of 20-something malcontents, religious fanatics, and modern-day anarchists. At its top is a cadre of former Iraqi Army officers with military experience. These former officers of Saddam Hussain are bent on revenge for the US destruction of their nation and the lynching of its late leader. But IS rank and file has no military training, little discipline, degraded communications, and ragged logistics. In fact, today’s Islamic State is what the Ottoman Empire used to term, ‘bashi-bazouks,” a collection of irregular cut-throats and scum of the gutter sent to punish and terrorize enemies by means of torture, rapine, looting and arson. What has amazed me about the faux western war against ISIS is its leisurely nature, lack of élan, and hesitancy. In my view, ISIS was mostly created by the US and its allies as a weapon to be used against Syria’s government – just as the Afghan mujahadin were used by the US and the Saudis to overthrow the Soviet-backed Afghan government. Israel tried the same tactics by helping create Hamas in Palestine and Hezbullah in Lebanon. Both were cultivated to split the PLO. ISIS is an ad hoc movement that wants to punish the West and the Saudis for the gross carnage they have inflicted on the Arab world. Western and Kudish auxiliary forces have been sitting 1.5 hours drive from Mosul and the IS town of Raqqa for over a year. Instead, western – mainly US – warplanes have been gingerly bombing around these targets in what may be an effort to convince breakaway ISIS to rejoin US-led forces fight the Damascus regime. Note that ISIS does not appear to have ever attacked Israel though it is playing an important role in the destruction of Syria. Some reports say Israel is providing logistic and medical support for IS. The siege of Mosul is being played up by western media as a heroic second Stalingrad. Don’t be fooled. IS has only 3-5,000 lightly armed fighters in Mosul and Raqqa, maybe even less. The leaders of IS are likely long gone. IS has few heavy weapons, no air cover at all, and poor communications. Its rag-tag fighters will run out of ammunitions and explosives very quickly. Encircling Mosul are at least 50,000 western-led soldiers, backed by heavy artillery, rocket batteries, tanks, armored vehicles and awesome air power The western imperial forces are composed of tough Kurdish pasha merga fighters, Iraqi army and special forces, some Syrian Kurds, Iranian ‘volunteers’ irregular forces and at least 5,000 US combat troops called “advisors”, plus small numbers of French, Canadian and British special forces. Hovering in the background are some thousands of Turkish troops, supported by armor and artillery ready to ‘liberate’ Iraq – which was once part of the Ottoman Empire. For the US, current military operations in Syria and Iraq are the realization of an imperialist’s fondest dream: native troops led by white officers, the model of the old British Indian Raj. Washington arms, trained, equips and financed all its native auxiliaries. The IS is caught in a dangerous dilemma. To be a political movement, it was delighted to control Iraq’s second largest city. But as a guerilla force, it should not have holed up in an urban area where it was highly vulnerable to concentrated air attack and being surrounded. This is what’s happening right now. In the mostly flat Fertile Crescent with too few trees, ground forces are totally vulnerable to air power, as the recent 1967, 1973 Israel-Arab wars and 2003 Iraq wars have shown. Dispersion and guerilla tactics are the only hope for those that lack air cover. IS forces would best advised to disperse across the region and continue their hit-and-run attacks. Otherwise, they risk being destroyed. But being mostly bloody-minded young fanatics, IS may not heed military logic and precedent in favor of making a last stand in the ruins of Mosul and Raqqa. When this happens, western leaders will compete to claim authorship of the faux crusade against the paper tiger of ISIS. (Reprinted from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)

Friday Mailbag: ‘Christian Values,’ the Jewish Sabbath and BuzzFeed - The New York Times

Liz Spayd with Evan Gershkovich

Friday caps a wildly busy week, especially out of Washington. There was Donald Trump’s news conference. There was the dossier on Trump and Russia. And then there were the confirmation hearings for the ’s cabinet nominations. One of the nominees, Jeff Sessions for attorney general, was described in a Times profile leading up to the hearings as having Christian values. “Mr. Sessions,” the profile said, “offers an uncompromising brand of conservatism that combines Christian and values with strains of populism and a willingness to say the unpopular, or even offensive. ” That description drew fire from several readers. The public editor’s take: I contacted the writers, Sharon LaFraniere and Matt Apuzzo, to ask about their intent. Both wanted to assure readers that they were not trying to use Christian values as a for any specific policies. They also said they weren’t trying to assert whether he lives a good Christian life, only that he is a devout Methodist who views his religion a guiding factor. Seems reasonable. I do appreciate, however, that the phrase used in this way could be seen as equating Sessions’ views to those of all Christians. It implies a universality to “Christian values” in a way that might offend Christians who don’t share them. Also in the news this week was that unsubstantiated Trump dossier. We, of course, received a number of emails on the topic, and this office has been looking into it. Here’s one common reader complaint. The public editor’s take: It sounds as if you came upon a rare link here to the BuzzFeed article. I’m told that Times staffers were given clear instructions not to link to it, but it appears one article briefly did so. Given how much of a point The Times made about the dossier being unsubstantiated, it would have been having it both ways to refuse to publish the documents but then link to BuzzFeed. Another reader pointed out that while The Times emphasized that the claims in the dossier were unsubstantiated, it did not go to such lengths in covering Hillary Clinton’s scandals during the presidential election. This week Trump also decided to give his Jared Kushner, a place in his government as a senior White House adviser. The Times covered the decision thoroughly, giving readers a better view into the man’s background. But some readers took issue with his religion being noted often, including in a story noting that Trump and his advisers, a group that included Kushner, had met on a Saturday even though Kushner typically observes the Sabbath strictly. The public editor’s take: The Times guidelines say such references to religion should be used when relevant to the news. In this case, Trump often cites Kushner’s relationships with Israel and his Jewish faith as reasons he would be effective in dealing with Middle East issues. As to Kushner meeting on the Sabbath, the senior editor for standards, Greg Brock, notes that The Times offered similar explanations when Senator Joseph I. Lieberman was running for president. Brock also said, “I can see why a reporter or editor might have included the reference to Kushner’s religion because it is the type of question another reader might very well ask: Why is Kushner attending meetings and not observing the Sabbath? I don’t know that the reference was necessary, but mentioning it seems legitimate. ” The public editor’s take: I agree with Brock. When relevant yes, but that’s not a license to do it without context. Another reader flagged what he thought was a conflict between the business and news side. Kinsey Wilson, executive vice president for product and technology, gave a good explanation of how this happens that applies to advertising generally: Another reader pointed out that The Times accidentally quoted a spoof account in its story on London transportation strikes — and is still using the quote. A rare and refreshing reader note came in last week. The reader wrote in simply to thank Times journalists. We hope you all enjoy the long weekend.

The people voted for a military coup, says Theresa May

The people voted for a military coup, says Theresa May 03-11-16 THE UK has already voted for the overthrow by force of Parliament, the House of Lords and the judiciary, the prime minister has asserted. Speaking from the head of a fleet of tanks driving down the Mall, May said that she has a mandate to shell the House of Commons, send Lords into exile and imprison all judges indefinitely without trial. May said: “In the last vote Britain will ever have, and the only one that counts, I was chosen as the country’s president-for-life with extraordinary and unlimited powers. “Any attempt to claim otherwise, for example by supporting one of the opposition parties made illegal by decree this morning, is an act of revolution.” She added: “Also, I always had this moustache. Can’t be a proper dictator without a moustache.” Save

Questioning Gender Amid a Chaotic East Village Childhood - The New York Times

Alysia Abbott

DARLING DAYSBy iO Tillett WrightIllustrated. 385 pp. Publishers. $26. 99. Those of us who were raised the only child of a single parent know how intense the relationship can be. Different days you may play the role of child, parent, sibling or emotional crutch — some days all at once. As you get through it, you try to find space for yourself, to become someone outside the world that your parent has provided. This is the main struggle driving iO Tillett Wright’s debut memoir, “Darling Days. ” Tillett Wright was raised in the bohemian East Village of the 1980s and ’90s by Rhonna, a sometime model and “glamazon” who preferred spending money on dance classes rather than on bills or groceries. In this household, Tillett Wright knows love but also instability. “Sleep doesn’t happen much in the house, what with the plays and things late at night, plus Ma is in a real bad way,” the child observes. “It’s like she has a night personality and a day personality. ” Tillett Wright grows up skinny and scrappy, able to score meals off neighborhood friends, then shimmy up the side of a building to get into the apartment undetected. Born female, Tillett Wright also grows up identifying as a boy. At 6 he turns to his dad, tells him he’s now a boy and, for the next eight years, dresses and passes as such, avoiding bathrooms and locker rooms for fear of being found out. Neither parent objects to this rewriting of gender. “Ma doesn’t think it’s strange that I live as a boy. Boys have all the fun, girls have tons of restraints,” Tillett Wright observes. But classmates bully him, with one student wrapping a hand around his neck in a stairwell to check for an Adam’s apple. Tillett Wright, an L. G. B. T. activist and host of MTV’s “Suspect,” now identifies as a transgender man. It’s Ma’s benign neglect that is at the source of Tillett Wright’s malnourishment and general malaise, yet she’s the one who fights hardest for her “kitty. ” Their relationship, though later strained by brutal fights, is always close. “We are some kind of twins,” Tillett Wright tells his mother in the letter that prefaces the memoir, “able to see each other in a room of closed eyes, able to hear each other in a world of silence. ” Twins or not, as a child Tillett Wright longed for regular meals and a real bed, not the broken army cot his mother finds for him on Canal Street. He fantasizes about finding a way to live with his “Poppa” in Europe without “stabbing my mother, my best friend, in the throat” by ratting her out to a school counselor. The emotional heart of the book lives within this tension — between taking care of his controlling and needy mother and taking care of himself. In this struggle, Tillett Wright is cleareyed but compassionate. “Darling Days” begins strong. The East Village of Tillett Wright’s childhood is especially vivid: “Our building repels ‘normal’ people. They’d have to love cockroaches, scalding radiators and thin walls . ’u2008. ’u2008. they would have to establish their own niche in the zoo and defend it. ” The menagerie includes an emaciated recluse who collects pianos, a pair of retired porn stars who reign over the building and his mother’s rotating cast of boyfriends “with broken teeth and crooked minds. ” But as we move further into the narrative, and deeper into the trials of Tillet Wright’s adolescence, his perspective narrows. Though passionately felt and described, his struggles can feel overdetailed they’d benefit from the insights of an older, wiser narrator. To make reference to Vivian Gornick, it’s too much situation, not enough story. I sometimes wished Tillett Wright would step back from the roller coaster of new schools and, later, new lovers to give us a broader view on the changes to his city, his community and especially his fallible but fascinating parents. While he was living his life, history was also happening, and the inclusion of that history could enlarge his memoir. Nevertheless, it’s hard not to root for Tillett Wright when he finally comes into his own, and especially as he finds love with women, accepting a queer identity he’d long feared and resisted: “I don’t want to wear my tragedies on my skin, in my teeth, in my walk. I want something different than what I’m inheriting, but I’m going to have to make that happen for myself. ”

$26 Billion Dollars for the Jewish Lobby: Just the Tip of the Iceberg

Staff

30 Views Share: Pre-commentary by Dr. David Duke. An article in the Jewish Daily Forward newspaper has claimed that “Jewish charities” give more money to Israel than they do to education, and that this figure is of the order of $26 billion. As Professor Kevin McDonald points out in this article below, this figure is actually not even the real total—it is considerably more. As he points out, this figure does not include what is collected at synagogues—and then given to Israel—each month, because synagogues, schools and seminaries are not required to file tax returns. This is of real importance for everyone who wishes to understand how the Jewish lobby in America works, and how it uses American money—and taxpayers—to keep the racist Jews-only state of Israel in business. The immense wealth of the Jewish lobby is not the product of “Jewish ingenuity”—it is the product of active discrimination in favor of Jews by other Jews—in the educational system, the economy and in the media. Forward Study of the Jewish Charity Industry By Professor Kevin MacDonald. The $26 billion dollar figure in the title refers to the net assets of the network of explicitly Jewish charitable organizations, which puts it in the same league as a major corporation. Annual revenue is around $12-14 billion. Assuming an American Jewish population of around 6.4 million, this implies assets per capita of over $4000 and per capita annual giving of around half that. Based on an older survey indicating 2.3 persons per Jewish household, annual giving per household would be around $4600. These numbers are certainly not earth shaking, but, when broken down to particular categories, they indicate that Jewish activist organizations are indeed well funded, especially when compared to the financial resources of organizations that oppose Jewish interests (probably well under $1 million for organizations explicitly dedicated to advancing the interests of White Americans). For example, 6% of the $3.7 billion in annual donations for “functional charities” is allocated for “General Advocacy” ($222,000,000 annually), and 38% goes to Israel-related causes ($1.4 billion annually). Advocacy presumably includes the ADL which reported revenue of over $53 million in 2012—enough to fund over $31 million in employee salaries (including Abe Foxman at $688,188 ) and 28 regional offices. That’s a lot of power in opposition to European interests given the virtual non-existence of organizations explicitly dedicated to furthering European identification and interests. These numbers for donations to Jewish charity are underestimates because the IRS doesn’t require synagogues to file tax returns, and the same goes for schools and seminaries. As a result, “the $12 billion to $14 billion in annual revenue, the Forward’s best estimate based on tax filings, is probably billions of dollars short of the network’s actual size.” The other way in which such a report fails to get at the scope of financial support for Jewish ethnic activism is that it does not include organizations that are not explicitly Jewish but are supported by Jews for ethnic reasons. As Norman Podhoretz notes, Jews are the financial engine of the left, but of course the vast majority of charity for leftist causes would not appear in the Forward article because they are not explicitly Jewish organizations. A good example is the SPLC which is largely Jewish-funded but would not be considered a Jewish communal organization. (In 2012 the SPLC reported revenue of over $37 million and salaries of over $16 million.) Or consider the neocon infrastructure, such as the Foundation for Defense of Democracies: All of the identifiable donors are Jews, including a host of well-known Jewish activists like Edgar M. Bronfman ($1,050,000) and Michael Steinhardt ($850,000) who co-founded the Birthright Israel program that brings Jewish young people to Israel for a dose of Jewish patriotism. The same goes for the Republicans and Democrats, where Jewish funding promotes Israel and the liberal/left values of the Jewish community (likely at least 60% of Democrat funding, and at least 40% of Republican). For example, Haim Saban has donated millions to the Democrats, and right now “Republicans who are considering a run for president are courting Sheldon Adelson [who donated more than $100 million to Republicans in the last presidential election cycle] as a preliminary to everything else they must do to prove their worthiness, like kissing babies in Iowa or formulating a position on jobs.” And anyone with a half a brain knows that Adelson’s support begins and ends with what the candidate will do for Israel. Ditto for David Gelfand’s donation of more than $100 million to the Sierra Club on condition that it adopt a view on immigration in sync with the views of the organized Jewish community. (My gloss, but it’s hard to believe that his donation did not reflect the typical Jewish commitment to displacement-level immigration). In other words, a lot of the most destructive Jewish funding is not included in these figures. And even though the donations to the explicitly Jewish organizations covered by the article are only the tip of the iceberg, there is no suggestion that the Jewish community is highly mobilized at this time, as indicated by the per capita data. A crisis in Israel would lead to a huge upsurge of Jewish funding, as it did during the 1967 and 1973 wars — as would any indication that European Americans are beginning to develop a sense of racial identity and beginning to assert their interests by developing explicitly European organizations which have the wherewithal to make a difference.

Hannity: FBI Knows They Are About to Be Exposed By WikiLeaks | EndingFed News Network

Email Print Sean Hannity said on his radio show Friday that he doesn’t believe reports from ‘The New York Times’ that the FBI’s latest investigation into the Clinton Foundation is related to Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner. Instead, Hannity suspects that the FBI is protecting itself because they know that WikiLeaks is about to drop proof that Hillary Clinton should have been indicted in July. SEAN HANNITY: If you believe The New York Times, they have a new story that just broke. “New emails in Clinton case came from Anthony Weiner’s electronic devices. Federal law enforcement officials said Friday that new emails uncovered in closed investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server discovered after the FBI seized electronic devices belonging to Huma Abedin, and aide to Mrs. Clinton, and her husband Anthony Weiner. The FBI told Congress that uncovered new emails.” Let me tell you how. I am going to say something that I know is true. This story is total bull. I don’t believe this for a minute. “Hannity, it’s The New York Times.” I have no doubt the New York Times got on-the-record leaks that this is related to Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin’s emails. I have no doubt — maybe Huma didn’t take a sledgehammer to her devices the way Hillary Clinton did. But this is not what resulted in the reopening of this case. No way, shape, manner, or form. They know Julian Assange — there’s too much in WikiLeaks that is coming, that has tipped them off that they’re dead. That they’re about to be exposed. And that is, more than anything else, this is about preservation now. Because James Comey, and and now we get back to… this this sky Andrew McCabe who was the FBI deputy director supervising the investigation of Clinton not long after Terry McAuliffe through a PAC gave $675,000 dollars to Jo McCabe, the wife of the chief the FBI deputy Director looking into the investigation into Clinton for a long shot bid, and that $675,000 came from Hillary, who went out there and raise money for the Super PACs that McAuliffe coudl give it to her. The wife of the guy doing the key investigation here. Now if that doesn’t impress you, I don’t know what does.. Now let’s go back to Trey Gowdy grilling James Comey. What did he say? Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received classified information over a private email server, is that true? “Comey: Our investigation found there was classified information sent.” Stop right there. Comey is admitting a crime is committed. That raises the question why did Comey then make a determination on his own not to send this to or grand jury or special prosecutor or anybody else? In other words, the statute requires, she doesn’t even have to be negligent. I’m sorry the statute requires negligence or gross negligence, yet Hillary was knowingly, purposefully, and WikiLeaks proves this, in her decisions and actions setting up a server under her control. Here’s the question Comey has to ask: Why did you give all these people immunity?Why did you destroy evidence in the case as part of a proffered deal, why in under any circumstances do you close this case down when the evidence was overwhelming and incontrovertible and had sent numerous other people to jail for a far lesser offenses? That’s called a two-tiered Justice system, that’s a problem… Hillary knowingly and purposely hurt decisions and actions set up a server under her exclusive control and possession in order to control (violate the law) in ordered to control information that was available to the American public and Congress regarding actions as Secretary of State. Furthermore, she took those government-owned communications into our own personal possession after leaving her position, knowingly and willingly attempted to destroy them, by the way that’s obstruction of justice, violation of the law, penalty of which a minor offenses you never get a government position for the rest of your life. And was so nefarious in her actions, could never be known used as evidence… This gets more curious day by day. Now there were reports out today that FBI agents were reportedly close to revolting over the treatment of Clinton, they’re so disgusted, and every FBI special agent I know … nobody has a good answer because they don’t understand why organizes pretty deep New emails tied to discovered– I don’t believe the New York Times, and I think the the FBI did this because they know what is coming. That’s my take. Stay connected by subscribing to our news letter. Click on the button.

How World War III Could Start

Doug Diamond

Source: ConsortiumNews.com The U.S. acts as if its military has an inalienable right to operate close to the borders of other nations and those nations have no right to see these actions as provocative, writes Jonathan Marshall. If humanity ever suffers a Third World War, chances are good it will start in some locale distant from the United States like the Baltic or South China Seas, the Persian Gulf, or Syria, where Washington and its rivals play daily games of “chicken” with lethal air and naval forces. Far from enhancing U.S. security, the aggressive deployment of U.S. armed forces in these and other hot spots around the world may be putting our very survival at risk by continuously testing and prodding other military powers. What our military gains from forward deployment, training exercises, and better intelligence may be more than offset by the unnecessary provocation of hostile responses that could escalate into uncontrollable conflicts. The most obvious example is Russia, which top Pentagon officials like to remind us “poses an existential threat to the United States” by virtue of its huge nuclear arsenal. So it was discomforting to learn a few days ago that U.S. and Russian warplanes are experiencing near misses in Syrian airspace “once every 10 days-ish,” in the words of Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeff Harrigian. The risk of war with Russia would skyrocket , of course, if the United States were to try to impose a “no-fly-zone.” Potentially deadly incidents aren’t confined to Syria. In September , a Russian fighter jet flew within 10 feet of a U.S. Navy spy plane over the Black Sea. Six months ago, reacting to an increase in NATO war games and maneuvers, Russian aircraft buzzed a U.S. Navy destroyer conducting exercises with Poland in the Baltic Sea. Secretary of State John Kerry declared that the United States would have had every right to shoot down the plane. The Russians, noting that the exercises were taking place near the base of their Baltic Fleet, insisted they were simply exercising their rights to fly. A couple of days later, a Russian jet intercepted a U.S. reconnaissance plane in the same region. A Pentagon spokesman condemned the Russian pilot’s “aggressive” and “unprofessional” maneuvers that could “escalate tensions between countries.” A Russian spokesman said its air defense forces had reacted prudently to “an unidentified target rapidly approaching the Russian border.” Indignant over Iran In the Persian Gulf, the U.S. Navy recorded 19 dangerous confrontations with Iranian vessels during the first half of this year, up from 10 in the same period in 2015. Another 11 such confrontations reportedly took place this July and August. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei speaks to a crowd. (Iranian government photo) The most notorious incident, of course, occurred this January, when Iranian gunboats detained 10 U.S. Navy sailors for a day after they strayed into Iranian waters. The Obama administration, which had recently negotiated a nuclear accord with Iran, chose not to inflate the incident. In contrast, a trivial engagement between a U.S. Navy vessel and unarmed Iranian patrol boats in January 2008 fired up President George W. Bush and came perilously close to triggering another Tonkin Gulf Incident. Although Iran is not a nuclear power, it could be a regional menace if drawn into war, with ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel and Saudi oil fields, and mines that could make the Persian Gulf virtually impassable. U.S. air and naval forces also engage in dangerous confrontations every few months with China, a nuclear state and the world’s fastest-rising conventional military power. In late October, China’s Defense Ministry protested an allegedly “illegal” and “intentionally provocative” patrol by the guided missile destroyer USS Decatur, which was sailing close to the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea to protest Chinese maritime claims. The Chinese vowed to increase their own air and maritime patrols to “resolutely defend national sovereignty and security.” This summer, in the space of less than a month, Chinese fighter jets twice intercepted U.S. Air Force RC-135 spy planes off of China’s coast. The Pentagon decried the Chinese response as dangerously “unsafe,” while the Chinese complained that U.S. insistence on carrying out “close reconnaissance activities against China . . . severely undermines China’s maritime security.” Similar confrontations and now commonplace . They offer frightening reminders of the infamous 2001 Hainan Incident, which was triggered when two Chinese fighter jets intercepted a Navy EP-3 spy plane operating near the Paracel Islands and Hainan Island. One Chinese pilot maneuvered too close to the American plane and died when his cockpit was crushed. The damaged EP-3 and its crew managed to make an unauthorized emergency landing on Hainan. The George W. Bush administration brought the crew — but not the spy plane — home only after sending a letter of regret to defuse the international incident. As geopolitical analyst Michael Moran observed at the time, “The drama of this aerial collision underscores an important and little-known post-Cold War reality: America’s surveillance network has grown so vast and formidable that in some respects it is feared as much as U.S. weaponry itself.” Trouble with Aerial Spying Of course, aerial spying first became a cause celèbre during the Cold War when the Soviets shot down Gary Powers and his U-2 spy plane in 1960. The resulting diplomatic crisis derailed a promising international summit on nuclear disarmament. Since then, the tempo of spy flights has dramatically increased , despite the availability of satellites to monitor the world. “On any given day, there are more than a dozen ‘strategic’ reconnaissance flights, supplemented by dozens of shorter range missions by tactical listening aircraft and helicopters,” reported William Arkin after the Hainan Incident. Unlike satellites, intrusive planes trigger their targets’ radar systems, light up their communications networks, and provoke military command responses. That’s why American military leaders value the tactical intelligence they provide. That’s also why countries like China view them with such hostility. The spy flight that triggered the Hainan Incident cost only one life, but history shows the risks can be far greater, especially during times of great political tension. For example, U.S. spy flights along the Soviet Union’s eastern border helped provoke the tragic downing of a Korean Air Lines passenger jet in September 1983, when it strayed into sensitive Soviet airspace over military facilities in the Far East. The loss of 269 lives was terrible enough, but the resulting propaganda barrage from the Reagan administration helped arouse fears in the Kremlin into that war with the United States might be imminent. The two jittery superpowers came dangerously close to nuclear war later that month when Soviet early warning systems falsely reported the launch of U.S. Minuteman missiles. Military professionals in the United States and many of its rivals generally contain these incidents rather than letting them get out of hand. But accidents, miscalculations, and political opportunism pose ever-present risks of escalating small engagements into much larger military confrontations. There’s plenty of blame to go around. But at the end of the day, what’s striking is that virtually every one of these dangerous incidents takes place as a result of U.S. military patrols or exercises near the borders of countries with whom we are ostensibly at peace, not while defending our own borders. Americans raised on a pervasive ideology of “exceptionalism” all too easily assume that our far-flung military presence is simply the natural order of things, and that any challenge to it must be countered. A little reflection, however, should suggest why countries — like Russia, China and Iran — grow hostile and even paranoid as they are tested almost daily by the air and naval forces of a superpower. Even if we do not appreciate their point of view, we should seriously ask whether our military really serves U.S. security interests by provoking new opportunities for deadly confrontations almost daily.

Wikileaks’ Julian Assange at Embassy Balcony: ’I Will Not Forgive And Forget’, Criticises CIA and European Union

Oliver JJ Lane

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange appeared on the Ecuadorian embassy balcony Friday afternoon after Sweden announced they were dropping the investigation into alleged rapes. [Calling today’s development an “important victory” Mr Assange, 45, who has been claiming political asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy since 2012 to escape extradition to the United States where he faces accusations of espionage, slammed the “terrible injustice” that led to his incarceration, and the European Union for creating the situation that allowed it to develop. Speaking to journalists from the balcony, Mr Assange said: “Seven years without charge, while my children grew up without me. That is not something I can forgive, it is not something I can forget. “The inevitable enquiry into what has occurred in this moment of terrible injustice is something that I hope will be just about me and this situation. Because the reality is, detention and extradition without charge has become a feature of the European Union. A feature that has been exploited, yes, in my case, for political reasons, but in other cases has subjected many people to terrible injustice”. Criticising the developing practice of detention without trial and the arrest warrant, to which the United Kingdom is no longer party, Mr Assange continued: “In Sweden, indefinite detention is policy. There is no time limited someone can be detained without charge. “This is now how we expect a civilised state to behave. Similarly, extradition without charge is not something we expect from the rule of law in the United Kingdom. It is a measure that was introduced as part of the European Union system to turn the EU into a federation”. Acknowledging that he still faces arrest by the UK for breaking bail and failing to surrender himself to court while in the embassy, he continued: “The UK has said it will arrest me regardless. “The United States, CIA director Pompeo and the US attorney general have said I and other Wikileaks staff have no rights, no first amendment rights, and our arrest is a priority. That’s not acceptable … My legal staff have contacted the UK authorities and we have to engage in a dialogue about what is the best way forward. “To some extent, the UK has been exploited by the processes from the European Union where it agreed to extradite people without charge. A forced position the UK has been put into and the first part of that is over”. Mr Assange said despite the threats against him the work of Wikileaks would continue, and the pace of leaks published targeting the United States’ CIA organisation would intensify. He also hailed the release of “Chelsea Manning” a U. S. Army soldier and intelligence analyst who was incarcerated at a military prison for leaking cables to Wikileaks. Assange called the release a “very important victory” remarking “we and others have managed to have him released 28 years early from his sentence”.

3 More Reported Held in Bastille Day Truck Attack in Nice - The New York Times

Aurelien Breeden

PARIS — France, still reeling from the attack on Thursday in the southern coastal city of Nice that killed 84 people, observed its second of three days of national mourning on Sunday, as the French police held three more people in connection with the assault, according to news reports. The nation has been left wondering whether the attack, in which a Tunisian man plowed a refrigerated truck through crowds gathered for fireworks on Bastille Day, could have been avoided — or whether it must adjust to a harsh new reality. On Saturday, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the assault, calling the driver, Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, its “soldier. ” But no evidence has emerged so far that Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel, 31, a delivery truck driver living in Nice, was in contact with the Islamic State, or that he was exposed to its propaganda. A man and a woman were arrested Sunday morning, French news media reported, and another man was detained later on Sunday, according to Agence . None were identified, although some reports said that the man and woman were an Albanian couple, and that the man was suspected of providing Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel with the automatic pistol he used on the night of the attack. Four other people had been taken in for questioning on Friday and Saturday. Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel’s estranged wife, who had also been taken in for questioning, was released without charges on Sunday. Her lawyer, Garino, told the BFM TV news channel that Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel was physically violent with her and other members of the family. She eventually threw him out and was no longer in touch with him, Mr. Garino added. Although they have not put forth specific evidence, French officials say Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel appeared to have taken the path to extremism very shortly before the attack. In an interview published on Sunday in the Journal du Dimanche newspaper, the French prime minister, Manuel Valls, said the kind of terrorism seen in Nice was “hard to anticipate,” noting that the killer had “radicalized very quickly. ” “Daesh provides unbalanced individuals with an ideological kit that gives their acts meaning,” Mr. Valls said, using an Arabic acronym for the Islamic State. “The investigation will have to prove it, but that was probably the case for the attack in Nice. ” There were reports on Sunday that Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel had spent time researching his route on the waterfront promenade where the attack unfolded, as he was caught on surveillance cameras driving the truck in the area on Tuesday and Wednesday. Agence and other French news media, quoting anonymous police officials, also reported on Sunday that Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel had sent a text message shortly before the attack in which he appeared to ask for more weapons, but it was unclear whom the message had been for and what exactly it had said. Mr. Lahouaiej Bouhlel used an automatic pistol to shoot at the police officers who tried to stop him on the promenade several fake weapons were also found in his truck after he was fatally shot. On Sunday, people continued to gather in Nice and in many other French cities to hold minutes of silence or to commemorate the victims. In Paris, there was a Mass at the Cathedral of on Sunday evening. The Paris prosecutor’s office said in a statement on Sunday that 49 people hurt in the attack remained in critical condition, 18 of them fighting for their lives. The total number of injured was 256, down from a figure provided on Saturday by the Health Ministry. The prosecutor’s office also said that the French authorities had sped up the process to identify the dead, but that only 35 had been formally identified so far. At least 10 children were killed and 35 hurt. Families and tourists had gathered on the waterfront on Thursday evening to watch fireworks celebrating Bastille Day.

Buchanan Smashes CNN Shill

Andrew Anglin

October 27, 2016 I don't think it's possible that there is a man on DS that hates Smerconish more than I do. I wanted so bad to prove that he's a jew but couldn't find proof. The syphilitic, slimy, whining quintessence of his soul, however, is jewish through and through...

United Airlines, Sean Spicer: Your Tuesday Evening Briefing - The New York Times

Karen Zraick and Sandra Stevenson

(Want to get this briefing by email? Here’s the .) Good evening. Here’s the latest. 1. The White House accused Russia of trying to cover up the Syrian government’s role in last week’s chemical attack. Officials released a declassified report that details the American intelligence on the attack, asserting that the Syrian government was responsible and accusing Russia of using disinformation to obscure the facts. Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson struck a harsh tone at a Group of 7 meeting in Italy, saying that President Bashar ’s reign was “coming to an end. ” Now he’s in Moscow, above, for what will be a closely watched meeting with Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov. The White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, caused outrage when he contrasted Mr. Assad with Hitler and said incorrectly that Hitler didn’t use chemical weapons. Our podcast “The Daily” explores how Mr. Assad went from ophthalmology student to brutal ruler. _____ 2. President Trump aimed his Twitter feed at Beijing, which he said would get a better trade deal if it solved “the North Korean problem. ” Mr. Trump and President Xi Jinping of China met last week at Mr. Trump’s estate in Florida, but there was no announcement about their talks on the North Korean nuclear threat. Above, directing traffic in Pyongyang. In South Korea, conjecture about a American strike on the North is spreading fast. The government tried to tamp down concern, saying there would be no such attack without its consent. In the latest “Right and Left: Partisan Writing You Shouldn’t Miss,” we look at foreign policy doctrine, whether California will secede and whether “humanitarian wars” exist. _____ 3. The White House faces another big test this weekend: pulling off the annual Easter Egg Roll. With key staff positions unfilled and no first lady, the White House is scrambling to organize the most elaborate public event of the year. Last year’s drew 37, 000 people. “This thing is all hands on deck,” said Melinda Bates, who organized eight of them under President Bill Clinton. _____ 4. United Airlines apologized for the forcible removal of a passenger from an overbooked flight after video of the episode caused widespread outrage. Oscar Munoz, the company’s chief executive, said in a statement that United would take “full responsibility” for the situation and that “no one should ever be mistreated this way. ” The company’s stock price had fallen before his statement. The video, in which the passenger is screaming and bloodied as he’s dragged off by security officers, cast a sharp focus on airline overbooking policies. And it was widely shared in China, with many people accusing United of racism (the passenger was Asian). _____ 5. Agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives used a secret, bank account to rent a $21, 000 suite at a Nascar race, travel to Las Vegas and donate to the school of one of the agents’ children, according to records and interviews. The Justice Department is investigating the secret account, which was also used to finance undercover operations around the country. The Times revealed the existence of the bank account, which was connected to an investigation into cigarette smuggling, in February. _____ 6. London, the metropolis that globalization created, may well be the capital of the world. But after the “Brexit” referendum, its future as an international crossroads is far from certain. In a series of stunning photographs and an accompanying essay, we see the city’s iconic locales, and scenes of daily life, through the lens of its current limbo. _____ 7. What looks like an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency may be a product of overuse of a test and misreading of its results. As a consequence, millions of healthy people think they have a deficiency, and some are taking supplemental doses so high they can cause poor appetite, nausea and vomiting. _____ 8. After a long search, a comedian has agreed to perform at this year’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, normally the glittering jewel of Washington’s social calendar. Hasan Minhaj of “The Daily Show” will step up to the plate during a tense year marked by conflict between the new administration and the news media. Mr. Trump is skipping the festivities, the first president to do so since the 1970s, and Vanity Fair and Bloomberg canceled their famed . _____ 9. Finally, in the best of TV: On “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” John Stamos and Bob Saget, the former stars of “Full House,” remembered Don Rickles, the famed insult comedian who died last week. And we looked at how Stephen Colbert has made the “The Late Show” great again. Photographs may appear out of order for some readers. Viewing this version of the briefing should help. Your Evening Briefing is posted at 6 p. m. Eastern. And don’t miss Your Morning Briefing, posted weekdays at 6 a. m. Eastern, and Your Weekend Briefing, posted at 6 a. m. Sundays. Want to look back? Here’s last night’s briefing. What did you like? What do you want to see here? Let us know at briefing@nytimes. com.

Trump Sealed Carrier Deal With Mix of Threat and Incentive - The New York Times

Nelson D. Schwartz

INDIANAPOLIS — The call from Donald J. Trump to the heating and cooling giant Carrier came early one morning about a week after the election, when he unexpectedly won the industrial heartland. The warned Gregory Hayes, the chief executive of Carrier’s parent, United Technologies, that he had to find a way to save a substantial share of the jobs it had vowed to move to Mexico, or he would face the wrath of the incoming administration. On Thursday, as he toured the factory floor here to take credit for saving roughly half of the 2, 000 jobs Indiana stood to lose, Mr. Trump sent a message to other businesses as well that he intended to follow through on his pledges to impose stiff tariffs on imports from companies that move production overseas and ship their products back to the United States. “This is the way it’s going to be,” Mr. Trump said in an interview with The New York Times. “Corporate America is going to have to understand that we have to take care of our workers also. ” Mr. Trump was accompanied by his vice Mike Pence, who is currently Indiana’s governor. He was in the room at Trump Tower when the placed his initial call to Mr. Hayes, and he was the one who sealed the deal with the chief executive with a handshake in the building on Monday. “I don’t want them moving out of the country without consequences,” Mr. Trump said, even if that means angering the Republicans he beat in the primaries but will have to work with on Capitol Hill. “The free market has been sorting it out and America’s been losing,” Mr. Pence added, as Mr. Trump interjected, “Every time, every time. ” But since the pact was disclosed on Tuesday, critics have pounced on Carrier’s receipt of $7 million in incentives from the state of Indiana — just the kind of corporate giveaways Mr. Trump knocked as he slammed Carrier on the campaign trail last spring. Others have pointed out that cutting individual deals with different companies is a costly and ineffective way to stem the powerful forces that impel business to move factories and jobs in a highly competitive global and national economy. “He has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for tax benefits and incentives,” Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont wrote in an on Thursday for The Washington Post. In Washington, Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, suggested that Carrier’s decision, while “good news,” was only a drop in the bucket. “Mr. Trump would have to make 804 more announcements just like that to equal the standard of jobs in the manufacturing sector that were created in this country under President Obama’s watch,” Mr. Earnest said. “So this is good news, but the incoming president has a high bar to meet when it comes to putting in place the kind of economic policies that would benefit American workers. ” Still, Mr. Trump’s appeal is likely to lead to a more fundamental shift in the way Washington approaches dealing with corporate decisions on where to locate jobs. “Contrary to early reactions from the left and the right, the Carrier deal opens the door to a new approach to U. S. economic growth policy that is sorely needed,” the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a research and advocacy group, said in a statement. “It sets the precedent that growing, attracting and retaining globally traded, industries that are both and pay high wages is central to U. S. economic growth. ” Despite the cheers Mr. Trump received as he walked around the factory floor, where the lines continued to run and he had to shout at times to be heard, another 1, 000 workers for the company in Indiana will be losing their jobs. This includes 700 at a United Technologies factory in nearby Huntington, as well as several hundred here. The 800 or so jobs that are being preserved are mostly on the lines that build and gas furnaces. Not long after Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence departed for the airport and to another rally in Ohio to celebrate his victory, workers coming in for the night shift received a letter titled “Company Update on Indianapolis Operations. ” “While this announcement is good news for many, we recognize it is not good news for everyone,” the letter stated. “We are moving forward with previously announced plans to relocate the fan coil manufacturing lines, with the expected completion by the end of 2017. ” United Technologies, Carrier’s parent, saw the writing on the wall as soon as Mr. Trump declared victory last month. Offering to preserve jobs, even at the cost of some of the $65 million savings the company expected from the move, could serve its larger corporate interests. “Every penny counts, but if we step back and I’m looking at earnings of $6. 60 per share this year, 2 cents is an easy concession if the listens to some of the company’s bigger concerns,” said Howard Rubel, a senior equity analyst with Jefferies, an investment banking firm in New York. And Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence, while providing a carrot through the state incentives and promises of future business tax cuts, held an implicit stick: the threat of pulling federal contracts from Carrier’s parent, United Technologies. Mr. Trump and his team were well aware that the amount United Technologies stood to lose in those contracts dwarfed the savings from moving some of its operations to Monterrey from Indiana. Despite only accomplishing half of what had been promised in the campaign, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence predicted that the number of jobs ultimately preserved could rise as Carrier follows through on its promise to invest more than $16 million in the state. That provision, plus the incentives, were worked out between Carrier and officials from the state of Indiana’s economic development office, with Mr. Pence overseeing the process. The vice insisted that the incentives did not represent a giveaway on Mr. Trump’s part, and claimed United Technologies had turned down a package of breaks in March. What made the difference, he said, was Mr. Trump’s public pressure, as well his promise to cut corporate taxes and ease regulation. “These jobs were gone,” Mr. Pence said. “I sat the executives down in my governor’s office in the statehouse in early March. They said we aren’t in a position to reconsider this in any way, shape or form. ” Mr. Trump, too, played down the role of the incentives. And he said he did not directly raise the $5 billion to $6 billion in federal contracts United Technologies receives, much of it from the Pentagon. But company officials are acutely aware that its Pratt Whitney unit, among other things, supplies jet engines to the Air Force’s most advanced fighter and many other planes, making it much more vulnerable to political pressure than other, manufacturers that have been steadily closing shop in the Midwest and moving production south of the border. “It may have a played a role in their equation,” Mr. Trump allowed. “I never mentioned it. I didn’t feel I had to. ” What about the fact that Mr. Trump frequently sourced products for his properties overseas, along with some popular merchandise? Will he lead by example and buy more goods made in the U. S. A.? “I buy thousands and thousands of TVs,” he said. “I would like to, but they essentially don’t make them in the U. S. You know the hats I do? It took us forever to find a company that can make a hat in the U. S. ”

The US Threatens Irish Neutrality

stclair

“We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible.” –Proclamation of Easter Week 1916 Controlling their own destiny has always been a bit of a preoccupation for the Irish, in large part because for 735 years someone else was in charge. From the Norman invasion in 1169 to the establishment of the Free State in 1922, Ireland’s political and economic life was not its own to determine. Its young men were shipped off to fight England’s colonial battles half a world away, at Isandlwana, Dum Dum, Omdurman and Kut. Almost 50,000 died in World War I, choking on gas at Ypres, clinging desperately to a beachhead at Gallipoli, or marching into German machine guns at the Somme. When the Irish finally cast off their colonial yoke, they pledged never again to be cannon fodder in other nation’s wars, a pledge that has now been undermined by the U.S. Once again, a powerful nation—with the acquiescence of the Dublin government—has put the Irish in harm’s way. The flashpoint for this is Shannon Airport, located in County Clare on Ireland’s west coast. Since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack on Washington and New York, some 2.5 million U.S. troops have passed through the airport on their way to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. The Shannon hub has become so important to the U.S. that it hosts a permanent U.S. staff officer to direct traffic. It is, in the words of the peace organization Shannonwatch , “a US forward operating base.” The airport has also been tied to dozens of CIA “rendition” flights, where prisoners seized in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan were shipped to various “black sites” in Europe, Asia, and Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Irish peace activists and members of the Irish parliament, or Oireachtas Elreann, charge that an agreement between the Irish government and Washington to allow the transiting of troops and aircraft through Shannon not only violates Irish neutrality it violates international law. “The logistical support for the U.S. military and CIA at Shannon is a contravention of Ireland’s neutrality,” says John Lannon of the peace group Shannonwatch, and has “contributed to death, torture, starvation, forced displacement and a range of other human rights abuses.” Ireland is not a member of NATO, and it is considered officially neutral. But “neutral” in Ireland can be a slippery term. The government claims that Ireland is “militarily neutral”—it doesn’t belong to any military alliances—but not “politically neutral.” But the term militarily neutral “does not exist in international law,” says Karen Devine, an expert on neutrality at the City of Dublin’s School of Law & Government. “The decision to aid belligerents in war is…incompatible with Article 2 of the Fifth Hague Convention on the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land.” Devine argues that “the Irish government’s decision to permit the transit of hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers through Shannon Airport on their way to the Iraq War in 2003 violated international law on neutrality and set it apart from European neutrals who refused such permission.” Article 2 of the Convention states, “Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of either munitions or war supplies across the territory of a neutral power.” Ireland has not ratified the Hague Convention but according to British international law expert Iain Scobbie, the country is still bound by international law because Article 29 of the Irish Constitution states, “Ireland accepts the generally recognized principle of international law as its rule of conduct in relations with other states.” The UN Security Council did not endorse the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq, making both conflicts technically illegal. Then UN General Secretary Kofi Annan said that the invasions “were not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the Charter’s point of view,” the invasions were “illegal.” Shannonwatch’s Lannon says the agreement also violates the 1952 Air Navigation Foreign Military Aircraft Order that requires that “aircraft must be unarmed, carry no arms, ammunition and explosives, and must not engage in intelligence gathering and that the flights in question must not form part of a military exercises or operations.” The Dublin government claims all US aircraft adhere to the 1952 order, although it refuses to inspect aircraft or allow any independent inspection. According to retired Irish Army Captain Tom Clonan, the Irish Times security analyst, the soldiers are armed but leave their weapons on board the transports—generally Hercules C-130s—while they stretch their legs after the long cross Atlantic flight. Airport employees have also seen soldiers with their weapons. The Irish government also says that it has been assured that no rendition flights have flown through Shannon, but Shannonwatch activists have tracked flights in and out of the airport. As for “assurances,” Washington “assured” the British government that no rendition flights used British airports, but in 2008 then Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband told Parliament that such flights did use the United Kingdom controlled island of Diego Garcia. Investigative journalist’s Mark Danner’s book Spiral: Trapped in the Forever War chronicles the grotesque nature of some of the “enhanced interrogation” techniques inflicted on those prisoners. The rendition program violated the 1987 UN Convention Against Torture, which Ireland is a party to. Roslyn Fuller , Dublin-based scholar and author of Beasts and Gods: How Democracy Changed Its Meaning And Lost Its Way , says terror suspects were taken to sites where “in an appalling re-run of the Spanish Inquisition tactics, [they were] routinely tortured and mistreated in an attempt to obtain confessions and other information.” Fuller points out that Article 11 of the Hague Convention requires that troops belonging to a “belligerent” army must be interned. “In other words, any country that would like to call itself neutral is obligated to prevent warring parties from moving troops though its territory and to gently scoop up anyone attempting to contravene this principle.” Besides violating international law, Ireland is harvesting “the bitter fruits of the Iraq and Afghan wars” and NATO’s military intervention in Libya, charges MP Richard Boyd Barrett of the People Before Profit Party and chair of the Irish Anti-War Movement. “The grotesque images of children and families washed up on Europe’s shores, desperate refugees, risking and losing their lives,” he says, “are the direct result of disastrous wars waged by the US, the UK and other major western powers over the last 12 years.” The Irish government, says Barrett, has “colluded with war crimes and actions for which we are now witnessing the most terrible consequences.” The government has waived all traffic control costs on military flights, costing Dublin about $45 million from 2003 to 2015. Ireland is currently running one of the highest per capita debts in Europe and has applied austerity measures that have reduced pensions and severely cut social services, health programs and education. Other neutral European countries, like Finland, Austria and Switzerland charge the US military fees for using their airspace. Shannon might also make Ireland collateral damage in the war on terror, according to the Irish Times’ Clonan. Irish citizens are now seen as a “hostile party,” and British Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary has named Shannon a “legitimate target,” according to Irish journalist Danielle Ryan. The Dublin government has generally avoided open discussion of the issue, and when it comes up, ministers tend to get evasive. In response to the charge that Shannon hosted rendition flights, then Minister of Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern said, “If anyone has evidence of any of these flights please give me a call and I will have it investigated.” But even though Amnesty International produced flights logs for 50 rendition landings at Shannon, the government did nothing. Investigations by the Council on Europe and European Parliament also confirmed rendition flights through Shannon. Peace activists charge that attempts to raise the issue in the Irish parliament have met with a combination of stonewalling and half-truths. Apparently kissing the Blarney Stone is not just for tourists. The government’s position finds little support among the electorate. Depending on how the questions are asked, polls indicate that between 55 and 58 percent of the Irish oppose allowing US transports to land at Shannon, and between 57 to 76 percent want to add a neutrality clause to the constitution. The “forward base” status of Shannon puts the west of Ireland in the crosshairs in the event of a war with Russia. While that might seem far-fetched, in 2015 NATO held 14 military maneuvers directed at Russia, and relations between NATO, the US and Moscow are at their lowest point since the height of the Cold War. Of course Ireland is not alone in putting itself in harm’s way. The US has more than 800 bases worldwide, bases that might well be targeted in a nuclear war with China or Russia. Local populations have little say over the construction of these bases, but they would be the first casualties in a conflict. For centuries Ireland was colonialism’s laboratory. The policies used to enchain its people—religious division and ethnic hatred— were tested out and then shipped off to India, Kenya, South Africa, Nigeria and Guyana, and Irish soldiers populate colonial graveyards on all four continents, now, once again, Ireland has been drawn into a conflict that is has no stake in. Not that the Irish have taken this lying down. Scores of activists have invaded Shannon to block military flights and, on occasion, to attack aircraft with axes and hammers. “Pit stop of death” was one slogan peace demonstrators painted on a hanger at the airport. That resistance harkens back to the 1916 Easter Rebellion’s proclamation that ends with the words that ring as true today as they did a century ago: “In this supreme hour the Irish nation must, by its valor and discipline and by the readiness of its children to sacrifice themselves for the common good, prove itself worthy of the august destiny to which it is called.”

In Japan’s Slow Economy, Rare Price Rise Prompts Surplus of Remorse - The New York Times

Jonathan Soble

TOKYO — One of the most television commercials in Japan this year advertises an unusual product: contrition. The ad shows a group of workers and executives from an ice cream company lined up in neat rows in front of their suburban Tokyo factory. As gentle folk music plays, they bow in apology. The company’s transgression? Adding 10 yen, or about 9 cents, to the price of a hugely popular ice cream bar. About 500 million of the bright blue snacks are consumed every year, mostly by children. Increasing prices are a big deal in Japan. The country’s sluggish economy means that the cost of most things has not risen in 20 years, and almost any increase makes headlines. Consumer prices are a painful economic headache for Japan. The country’s officials have been trying to break this stubborn pattern of deflation by pumping money into the economy and bolstering public spending. Japan’s economy, which has been oscillating between growth and contraction for years, picked up speed in the first quarter, according to government data released on Wednesday. But the price increases that do go through — like the cost of the ice cream bar rising to ¥70, from ¥60 — do not reflect a more vibrant economy or a stronger consumer. They usually mean a company is facing higher costs cutting into its profit. The deflationary trends are still firmly in place. And wages are under more pressure than prices, so buying power for most Japanese has declined compared with a generation ago. “ is meant to be something kids can easily buy with their allowance,” said Fumio Hagiwara, a marketing executive at Akagi Nyugyo, the maker of the ice cream bar. “Even have less pocket money these days. ” Akagi last increased prices a quarter of a century ago, and it debated the recent rise for seven or eight years, Mr. Hagiwara said. The rising cost of raw materials finally forced Akagi’s hand, he said. Tighter logging restrictions in China, for instance, meant it had to use more expensive Russian lumber for ice cream sticks. In stronger economic circumstances, Akagi’s price increase would not stand out. Companies in other places routinely pass on higher costs to consumers. But in Japan, businesses that face rising costs feel they have less ability to do so because wages are flat. Instead, they take a hit to their profits or cut back rather than alienate consumers. “We don’t have any more income, but taxes are rising,” said Kazuko Ida, 65, who lives in Tokyo. As a result, she said, she is especially reluctant to spend more. “It’s one thing if luxury items are expensive, but if cheap things aren’t cheap anymore, it’s a real problem. ” Japanese policy makers have long identified deflation as enemy No. 1 for the economy. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe won power four years ago on a promise to stamp it out. The central bank has been flooding financial markets with cheap money, and it has gone so far as to cut its benchmark interest rate below zero, a policy that has been tried in only a few other developed countries. But the results officials have been seeking — robust increases in borrowing and spending, and a sustained rise in prices — have been elusive. The Consumer Price Index is back below zero, after an upswing during Mr. Abe’s first two years in office. Wholesale prices tumbled 4. 2 percent in April, their sharpest decline in more than six years. A recent rise in the value of the yen, after several years of weakness under Mr. Abe, has made beating deflation harder. A weak yen means costlier imports, which helps drive overall inflation. But now imports on the whole are getting cheaper again. The economic report on Wednesday showed that Japan’s economy expanded 1. 7 percent in annualized, terms in the quarter that ended in March. That was significantly faster than forecasts. Still, economists urged caution: Spending by households and businesses was down, and so were exports — all crucial pillars of growth. Rather than rely on those, the economy benefited from higher government spending and a decline in imports. The extra day in February because of the leap year also helped, specialists said. “Reasons for the upside surprise were not encouraging,” said Masamichi Adachi, chief Japan economist at JPMorgan Chase. He said the economy was likely to remain stagnant. Since Mr. Abe’s conservative coalition was elected in December 2012, the economy has expanded in eight quarters and shrunk in five. Newspaper opinion surveys suggest that about half of voters are dissatisfied with his economic program, known as Abenomics. A disorganized political opposition has offered little in the way of alternatives, but an election for the upper house of Parliament in July is adding to pressure to turn things around. Mr. Abe is looking at ways to restore momentum. The government is drafting a supplementary stimulus budget and is considering delaying an increase in the national sales tax planned for April 2017. The two percentage point tax increase, the second of two planned rises, has already been put off once. Supporters say it is needed to reduce Japan’s large budget deficit. But the first increase, in 2014, hurt consumers and was blamed for pushing the economy into recession. In the ice cream business, Mr. Hagiwara said Akagi had calculated that ’s sales volume would drop by 7 percent as a result of raising prices. The sales hit, the company believed, would be more than counterbalanced by the higher price. But it appears that for his company, at least, an apology is an effective way to deal with the pain. Mr. Hagiwara said sales jumped by about 10 percent in the first month or so after the price increase in March, though they have since begun to fall back. “We figure it will take another year before we know how consumers really take to it,” he said.

Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security - The New York Times

Jad Mouawad

Security lines at airports are getting longer — much longer — and wait times could reach epidemic levels when air travel peaks this summer, according to airlines, airports and federal officials. A combination of fewer Transportation Security Administration screeners, tighter budgets, new checkpoint procedures and growing numbers of passengers is already creating a mess at airports around the country. While federal security officials say they are hiring and training hundreds of additional screening officers, matters are not expected to improve anytime soon. Airline and airport officials have said they fear that the current slowdown will last through the year, and could cause a summer travel meltdown when more than 220 million passengers are expected to fly during the peak travel months of July and August. “This is going to be a rough summer there is no doubt about it,” said Gary Rasicot, who was recently appointed to a newly created position as the T. S. A. ’s chief of operations. “We are probably not at the staffing level we would like to be to address the volume. This is why we are talking about people getting to the airport a little earlier than planned. ” To deal with the expected crowds, Mr. Rasicot said the agency planned to assign 768 new officers to the busiest airports by June 15. The agency is also allocating an extra $26 million for overtime pay, and is looking for ways to move its dogs where they will have the most effect on reducing wait times. Already, passengers have reported epic lines. Travelers have seen lines stretching to the curb, snaking to other terminal levels or even extending into different concourses. Some have managed to handle the situation with humor. Others have not been quite as forgiving. At Charlotte Douglas International Airport in North Carolina, about 600 passengers missed their flights on March 25 because an inadequate number of screeners led to waits exceeding three hours, airport officials said. Brent D. Cagle, the airport’s interim director of aviation, complained to the T. S. A. calling the episode a “fiasco. ” “This situation could have been avoided, had the T. S. A. had the proper staffing (or overtime budget necessary) to meet customer demand,” Mr. Cagle wrote in a letter to the security agency. (T. S. A. officials denied that the wait had ever been that long, telling local reporters that it had been 75 minutes for a short time.) This was far from an isolated incident. Airports in Atlanta, Miami, New York, Seattle, Denver and Chicago, among others, have all experienced similar problems in recent months. Last month, Denver Airport advised travelers to get to the airport as much as three hours before their flights. Still, people waited for more than an hour and a half to clear security. Airport workers walked up and down the line with therapy dogs and handed out bottled water and candy to travelers, according to one report. The airport accused the T. S. A. of providing an inadequate number of screeners on what was an average Saturday. T. S. A. officials say the main reason for the longer lines is an increase in the number of travelers this year. “Where it starts is actually a volume issue,” said Mr. Rasicot, who was previously a senior official with the United States Coast Guard, as was the T. S. A. ’s administrator, Peter V. Neffenger. “It’s really a story. The economy is doing well, Americans are traveling more, and this equates with record numbers at our checkpoints. ” At the same time, he said, the number of T. S. A. screeners has declined by about 5, 800 because of tighter budgets. The agency currently has 42, 350 agents assigned for security checks. “We need to stop losing people and we need to add more,” he said. He said some airlines were helping by assigning their own employees to perform some tasks, like helping direct passengers to the right lanes or advising them on when to take off their shoes. Still, many passengers complained that the agency seemed ill prepared to handle the crowds. Ben Cheever, a support engineer for a cybersecurity firm, recently missed a flight in Seattle despite getting to the airport two hours ahead of his 6 p. m. departure to San Diego. Two lines spilled into the airport lobby, he said. A third was reserved for passengers who had signed up to a trusted traveler program called T. S. A. PreCheck that allowed them speedier access. After 90 minutes, the T. S. A. opened a couple of extra lanes, but he still missed his flight. “It was too little, too late,” he said. The next day, he showed up three hours ahead of time. “It was the most miserable business trip I’ve ever had. ” American Airlines said that the slower security lines had forced it to delay flights and rebook passengers who had missed connections. For instance, in a period in the airline said, about 6, 800 of its passengers missed their flights after being stuck in T. S. A. lines too long. “T. S. A. lines at checkpoints nationwide have become unacceptable,” said Ross Feinstein, a spokesman for American Airlines. “Lines grew in January, February and March, and now in April, too. We are really concerned about what happens in the summer. ” Another factor that lengthens wait times is that passengers are carrying more bags on board to avoid paying fees for checked luggage. But there’s not much airlines can do, except warn passengers to show up three hours before takeoff for international flights and as much as two hours ahead of their flights for domestic travel. There are other factors at play as well. Last year, the agency vowed to make changes to security and screening procedures to address widespread safety lapses that had been uncovered by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general. The audit found that agents had failed to spot weapons and explosives in 95 percent of the undercover tests. The findings prompted criticism by some former and current T. S. A. employees, who claimed that the agency was keen to keep passengers moving quickly through the lines. In response, the T. S. A. stopped randomly processing some passengers who had not enrolled in a prescreening program to go through its expedited PreCheck lanes. It eliminated a program known as Managed Inclusion II, which let officers trained in behavior detection direct some passengers through the faster PreCheck lanes after checking them for explosives using trace detection samplings. Now, T. S. A. agents send unvetted passengers through the PreCheck lanes only if they have been checked by dogs while waiting in line. (That policy is called Managed Inclusion I.) Meanwhile, T. S. A. agents have been finding record numbers of guns and other weapons that passengers are barred from carrying on the plane. Both the airlines and the T. S. A. said that one way to alleviate the longer wait is to sign up for PreCheck, which allows eligible passengers to go through the speedier lanes without having to take off their shoes and belts or remove laptops and other electronic devices from their bags. So far, seven million people have enrolled in one of several trusted traveler programs, including 2. 5 million in the T. S. A. PreCheck program and 2. 5 million in Global Entry, a program run by Customs and Border Protection. There is an $85 application fee for the T. S. A. program, and a $100 fee for Global Entry. Both are valid for five years. The T. S. A. has added more PreCheck lanes, but the number of people enrolled still falls well short of the 25 million the T. S. A. would like to sign up. Even passengers with PreCheck have had close calls. Anne Marie Harrison, a wine saleswoman who has signed up for PreCheck and who flies out of Newark Liberty International Airport about twice a month, said she nearly missed her flight after waiting more than an hour recently. That day, the security line started downstairs, in the baggage area. That was odd, she said, especially for a Sunday morning when the airport was usually empty. “Something needs to be done,” she said. “It is just crazy. ” Still, not everyone is complaining.

3 States Approve Recreational Marijuana; Nationwide Is Next

Lance Schuttler

3 States Approve Recreational Marijuana; Nationwide Is Next Nov 9, 2016 2 0 As we reported last night , three states have approved the legalization of marijuana for recreational use, which includes California, Nevada and Massachusetts. As of the morning of November 9th, Maine is reportedly close to also approving the legalization, with 91% of the votes counted and a “yes” vote currently being the favorite. In addition to the three and possibly four states legalizing recreational use of marijuana, three states have approved the legalization of medical marijuana, which includes Florida, Arkansas and North Dakota. Marijuana States of America With California, Massachusetts and Nevada and possibly Maine approving recreational marijuana, they join Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska as states who have already approved the same laws. With this in mind, we now have 7 states having approved the full legalization of marijuana. What is now to stop the rest of the country? Most likely nothing. There is a saying that “as California goes, so goes the nation.” California has led the way in marijuana laws for the past 20 years and this latest step is yet another sign that the nation is quickly heading in the same direction. Undoubtedly, this will be a big topic for many legislators in the days and weeks to come. With 7 states now approved for recreational use, the people have gained even more leverage in the push for a nationwide approval. The arguments for those against be facing a tough situation as it will soon be very well known that a full 7 states have approved this measure, with many others with medical approval. Times are quickly changing. Many see this as a positive sign in the awakening of humanity for a couple different reasons. First is that marijuana has been reported by millions to have helped them to “wake up” and see through different distractions and illusions that society has put forth, through education, media, the medical system and politics itself. To some, this is direct evidence that the Elite has lost control and that the global awakening of humanity is spreading even quicker now. The other reason is that this will now allow for an even greater push for the legalization of industrial hemp to be grown in all 50 states once again. As many know, hemp is an excellent resource which can be made into clothing, food, medicine, shelter and many other things, as well as create new jobs. Even the Establishment sees the writing on the wall. In a recent interview with Bill Maher , President Obama said that passage of the legalization measures on Tuesday could make the current federal approach to the drug “untenable.” In other words, what has just happened has made nationwide legalization unstoppable. Spread the good news! Lance Schuttler graduated from the University of Iowa with a degree in Health Science-Health Coaching and offers health coaching services through his website Orgonlight Health. You can follow the Orgonlight Health Facebook page or visit the website for more information on how to receive health coaching for yourself, your friend or family member as well as view other inspiring articles.

EXCLUSIVE: Carnival Corporation’s Alleged Outsourcing Plan Sends Jobs to India, Europe

John Binder

Carnival Corporation, with the help of an outsourcing firm, is set to offshore hundreds of American jobs overseas to India and Eastern Europe, according to an alleged leaked document obtained by Breitbart Texas. [The document depicts a map showing the American positions which the company will purportedly outsource to two foreign regions, leaving hundreds of American workers jobless. Positions listed as moving from the U. S. to India, according to the alleged internal document, include a mix of high and jobs involving: Meanwhile the jobs allegedly being offshored to Poland and Romania include: The only jobs listed to be allegedly remaining in the U. S. within the company’s IT department involve account, operational, and compliance management and support, among others. A source close to Breitbart Texas said earlier this year in February, Carnival Corporation began executing the outsourcing plan led by Capgemini, telling Americans to either take jobs with the outsourcing firm and risk being fired six months later or leave the company altogether. Carnival Corporation teamed up with Capgemini, a French outsourcing firm, to allegedly mass the American IT workers remaining at the company who had yet to be replaced by cheaper, foreign workers. In a statement to Breitbart Texas regarding the allegations of offshoring, Carnival Corporation Spokesman Roger Frizzell said: This is a relatively small group of employees within the company — roughly 130 people within our IT organization — that moved over several months ago to Capgemini, which has offices in Miami and throughout the U. S. A vast majority of these individuals — 100 or so — will continue in their existing IT roles to support Carnival Corporation at their existing Carnival office locations (and existing salaries). Discussions are underway with the remaining 30 employees, who are being considered for other positions in the U. S. within Capgemini. It also important to note that every Carnival employee within this IT group was offered employment several months ago with Capgemini as they evaluated the needs of our business. As I mentioned, more than 100 of these individuals are continuing in their existing roles in support of Carnival Corporation in the same Carnival Corporation office location. … Based on the latest update from Capgemini, it looks as if they are optimistic that new positions and opportunities will be found for the other 30 employees. A source familiar with Carnival’s alleged outsourcing plan said they “doubted” the company’s claim that only 130 employees were impacted by the changes, saying at the original group of employees impacted was likely closer to about 250. “We were forced to take the Capgemini jobs,” the source told Breitbart Texas. “They forced me into Capgemini and because I didn’t take it, they said I resigned, but I didn’t. I wasn’t given a choice. ” The source also said that although many employees did take jobs at Capgemini originally, some eventually left their new positions because they understood that their job would eventually be overseas. Capgemini, like other outsourcing firms such as Infosys and Tata Consulting, is known for contracting with major U. S. corporations to replace Americans through the visa. After they are replaced with foreign workers, the jobs are eventually offshored altogether. As reported by Breitbart Texas, domestic companies have been able to get away with importing foreign workers by hiding visa applications behind the outsourcing firms they partner with. In Carnival Corporation’s case, the company has the potential to deny any such offshoring and of Americans, as Capgemini is technically handling the operation. John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart Texas. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

11 very depressing economic realities that Donald Trump will inherit

Michael Snyder

11 very depressing economic realities that Donald Trump will inherit There will be tremendous pressure to maintain the status quo By Michael Snyder - Friday, November 18, 2016 9:16 AM EST It would be a grave mistake to understate the amount of damage that has been done to the U.S. economy over the past eight years. In this article, I am going to share some economic numbers with you that are extremely sobering. Anyone that takes a cold, hard, honest look at the numbers should be able to see that our economy is in terrible shape. Unfortunately, the way that we see things is often clouded by our political views. Up until the election, Democrats were far more likely then Republicans to believe that the economy was improving, but now that is in the process of completely reversing. According to Gallup , only 16 percent of Republicans believed that the economy was getting better before the election, but that number has suddenly jumped to 49 percent after Trump’s election victory. And the percentage of Democrats that believe that the economy is getting better fell from 61 percent to 46 percent after the election. Here are some additional details from Gallup … After Trump won last week’s election, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents now have a much more optimistic view of the U.S. economy’s outlook than they did before the election. Just 16% of Republicans said the economy was getting better in the week before the election, while 81% said it was getting worse. Since the election, 49% say it is getting better and 44% worse. Conversely, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents’ confidence in the economy plummeted after the election. Before the election, 61% of Democrats said the economy was getting better and 35% worse. Now, Democrats are evenly divided, with 46% saying it is getting better and 47% saying it is getting worse. The truth, of course, is that the result of the election did not somehow magically alter the outlook for the U.S. economy. We still have a giant mess on our hands, and the following are 11 very depressing economic realities that Donald Trump will inherit from Barack Obama… #1 Nearly 7 out of every 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in savings . That means that about two-thirds of the country is essentially living paycheck to paycheck at this moment. #2 Reuters is reporting that U.S. mall investors are poised to lose “billions” of dollars as the “ retail apocalypse ” in this nation deepens. #3 Credit card delinquencies have hit the highest level that we have seen since 2012 . #4 Approximately 35 percent of all Americans have a debt that is at least 180 days past due. #5 The rate of homeownership has fallen for eight years in a row and is now hovering near a 50 year low . #6 The total number of government employees now outnumbers the total number of manufacturing employees in this country by almost 10 million . #7 The number of homeless people in New York City (where Donald Trump is from) has hit a brand new record high . #8 About 20 percent of all young adults are currently living with their parents . #9 Total household debt in the United States has now reached a grand total of 12.3 trillion dollars . #10 The total amount of corporate debt in the U.S. has nearly doubled since the end of 2007. #11 When Barack Obama entered the White House, the U.S. government was 10.6 trillion dollars in debt. Today, the U.S. national debt is currently sitting at a staggering total of $19,842,173,949,869.58 . Despite nearly doubling the national debt during his eight years in the White House, Barack Obama is going to be the only president in United States history to never have a single year when U.S. GDP grew by at least three percent. So will Donald Trump waltz in and suddenly turn everything around? Just like when George W. Bush was elected, there is a lot of optimism about the future right now among Republicans. And in 2017, Republicans are going to have control of the Senate and the House in addition to being in control of the White House. But does that mean that they will actually get anything done? For a moment, let’s review what didn’t happen the last time the Republicans were in this position. The following is an extended excerpt from an article by author Devvy Kidd … —– The Republicans had control of both houses of Congress part of the time during Bush, Jr.’s two terms. Did they lock down our borders? NO. Did they pass legislation to stop ALL funding for illegals which would self-deport millions of liars, cheats and thieves? NO. (READ, please: How to Self-Deport Millions of Illegals ) Did they stop trillions in unconstitutional spending? NO. Did they get rid of any of Clinton’s unconstitutional Executive Orders? One or two but otherwise let Comrade Bill Clinton crap in our faces. Did they get rid of one unconstitutional cabinet like HHS, Department of Education and EPA? NO. Did they stop the unconstitutional foreign aid? NO. Did they stop unconstitutional spending for Planned Parenthood? NO. Congress just continues to use borrowed money to spend more debt. Did they stop unconstitutional spending for the gigantic hoax called global warming or climate change? NO. Trump: The Left Just Lost The War On Climate Change Did Bush, Jr., get us out of all the destructive trade treaties killing American jobs? NO. Did they crack down on visas bringing in tens of thousands of foreign workers when American workers who want to work are left in the unemployment line? NO. Did they stop more and more federal regulations strangling America’s businesses? NO. Did they impeach one single activist judge destroying our freedom and liberty? NO. A Republican controlled Congress with a Republican in the White House and they did virtually NOTHING to restore America to a constitutional republic and constitutional spending. —– So will things be any different under a Trump administration? We shall see. There will be tremendous pressure to maintain the status quo in many instances, because the process of fixing things would undoubtedly make conditions worse in the short-term. A great example of this is the national debt. As I discussed yesterday , the only reason why we are able to enjoy such a massively inflated standard of living in this country is because we have been able to borrow trillions upon trillions of dollars from the rest of the world at ultra-low interest rates. If the federal government started spending only the money that it brought in through taxes, our ridiculous debt-fueled standard of living would begin collapsing immediately. We consume far more wealth than we produce, and the only way that we are able to do this is by borrowing insane amounts of money. Either Donald Trump will continue to borrow money recklessly, or we will go into a major league economic downturn. It really is that simple. But when our politicians borrow money, they are literally destroying the future of this country. So the choice is pain in the short-term or greater pain in the long-term. There is a way out, and that would involve shutting down the Federal Reserve and going to a completely debt-free form of money, but that is a topic for another article. And unfortunately that is not something that is even on Donald Trump’s radar at this point. No matter who won the election, the next president was going to be faced with some very harsh economic realities. There are many out there that have faith that Donald Trump can pull off an unprecedented economic miracle, but there are others that are deeply skeptical. Let us hope for the best, but let us also keep preparing for the worst.

BREAKING: PUTIN JUST GAVE OBAMA 24 HOURS OR HIS SHIPS WILL OPEN FIRE

admin

BREAKING: PUTIN JUST GAVE OBAMA 24 HOURS OR HIS SHIPS WILL OPEN FIRE Oct 26, 2016 Previous post Russia and the United States have never been allies. One easily remembers how tense and long-lasting the Cold War was, and it left Russia very angry that they suffered such a demoralizing defeat as a world power. While the United States should not become Vladimir Putin’s best friend, we also have to realize that Russia is a super power in this world and we must take them seriously. Hillary and Obama dislike Putin because he only answers to strength and toughness, which is exactly why it is evident he likes Donald Trump. As a way to project strength, Obama and Hillary continue to call Putin every name in the book while blaming him for cyber attacks and WikiLeaks. On Friday, October 21, Putin issued a global message that if Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama continue to slander Russia, he was going to shoot down U.S. jets in the FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK LINK

Watch: Police and Journalists Attacked During Swedish School Riot

Chris Tomlinson

Eleven “youths” have been arrested after a riot broke out at a school in Sweden that saw both police and TV journalists attacked with rocks by an angry mob. [The riot occurred at the Alléskolan school in the town of Hallsberg on Monday afternoon. According to police, glass bottles and rocks were thrown at them, as well as at journalists. Officers say they have arrested 11 young men in connection with the riots and said they have no idea what started the conflict which escalated rapidly, Swedish broadcaster SVT reports. The SVT team, headed by reporter Anders Nord, were on the scene for the riot and were also attacked by the young men. Mr. Nord said that while police had arrested some of the youths, “another group of masked youths, a little further away, shouted at police and threw stones. The scene commander then gave the order to police to put on helmets and approached the youth, who then ran from the scene. ” In total, police say around 30 individuals participated in the riot, though there were no reports of any serious injuries on the scene. The youths aren’t thought to be students at the school, but outsiders according to policeman Mats Öhman. “They came to the school from what I understand was a continuation of a fight that was from last Friday,” he said. Öhman described how the events unfolded saying: “It was pretty uncomfortable. It happened before we got on our helmets and the attack came as a bolt from the blue. Had anyone got hit in the head it would have been bad. ” The fight that took place on Friday, which authorities say led to the Monday riot, is also mentioned on the Swedish police website with the police describing it as “messy” and saying that two factions of young men fought with each other. Police did not identify the origins of the suspects involved on Friday or Monday, through video footage obtained by Swedish paper Nerikes Allehanda shows men who look to be of a foreign background. Attacks on police in Sweden have become increasingly more common and along with other issues have led to many officers quitting the force entirely. The main areas of danger for police have been the 55 or so No Go Zones across the country which are mostly populated by migrants. Even ambulance drivers have requested helmets and other equipment to protect themselves from attack. Journalists in Sweden have also been attacked by “youths” in the last year. Most recently, a photographer for Swedish Newspaper Dagens Nyheter was attacked during the recent riots in the no go area of Rinkeby and last year an Australian TV crew was attacked in the same area. Follow Chris Tomlinson on Twitter at @TomlinsonCJ or email at ctomlinson@breitbart. com

Supreme Court Rules Priests DO NOT Have to Report Child Abuse

The Conservative Millennial

In a highly controversial decision, the Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled that Catholic priests are not “mandatory reporters” of child abuse they are made privy to as a result of administering sacramental confessions. According to Patheos , the ruling references article 609 A(1) of the Louisiana Children’s Code: With respect to mandatory reporters: Notwithstanding any claim of privileged communication, any mandatory reporter who has cause to believe that a child’s physical or mental health or welfare is endangered as a result of abuse or neglect or that abuse or neglect was a contributing factor in a child’s death shall report in accordance with Article 610. The Oct. 28 ruling states in part: … any communication made to a priest privately in the sacrament of confession for the purpose of confession, repentance, and absolution is a confidential communication under La. Code Evid. 511, and the priest is exempt from mandatory reporter status in such circumstances by operation of La. Child. Code art. 603, because “under the … tenets of the [Roman Catholic] church” he has an inviolable “duty to keep such communications confidential.” The case which originally brought this issue before the court was that of a young woman who told a Baton Rouge-area Catholic priest that a longtime parishioner had sexually assaulted her when she was 14-years-old. The priest in turn did not report the abuse. Tell us what you think of this controversial ruling in the comments section.

Report: NSA Spied on Americans Using Blimp - Breitbart

Charlie Nash

An NSA spy blimp known as the Hover Hammer, which can eavesdrop on civilians from above, was active in Maryland, according to a report by The Intercept. [“To residents of Maryland, catching an occasional glimpse of a huge white blimp floating in the sky is not unusual,” proclaimed The Intercept’s Ryan Gallagher on Monday. “But less known is that the test flights have sometimes served a more secretive purpose involving National Security Agency surveillance. ” “Back in 2004, a division of the NSA called the National Tactical Integration Office fitted a diameter airship called the Hover Hammer with an eavesdropping device,” he continued, adding that “The agency launched the airship at an airfield near Solomons Island, Maryland. ” The blimp was reportedly referred to publicly as an “antenna mounting platform,” and comprises of a “ sphere inside another sphere, constructed of Spectra, the same material used to make vests. ” “From there, the blimp was able to vacuum up ‘international shipping data emanating from the Long Island, New York area,’” Gallagher explained, citing a classified document published on Monday. “The spy equipment on the airship was called Digital Receiver Technology — a proprietary system manufactured by a company of the same name — which can intercept wireless communications, including cellphone calls. ” In his report, Gallagher notes that, “Unsurprisingly, privacy groups have expressed concerns about the prospect of the blimps being used domestically to spy on Americans. However, military officials have often been quick to dismiss such fears. ” “In August 2015, Lt. Shane Glass told Baltimore broadcaster WBAL that the JLENS blimps being tested in Maryland were not equipped with cameras or eavesdropping devices,” he stated, before concluding that “The same cannot be said, it seems, of the NSA’s Hover Hammer. ” Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington or like his page at Facebook.

The Humiliating Practice of Sex-Testing Female Athletes - The New York Times

Ruth Padawer

One day in June 2014, Dutee Chand was cooling down after a set of sprints when she received a call from the director of the Athletics Federation of India, asking her to meet him in Delhi. Chand, then 18 and one of India’s fastest runners, was preparing for the coming Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, her first big international event as an adult. Earlier that month, Chand won gold in both the sprint and the relay at the Asian Junior Athletics Championships in Taipei, Taiwan, so her hopes for Scotland were high. Chand was raised in Gopalpur, a rural village in eastern India with only intermittent electricity. The family home was a small mud hut, with no running water or toilet. Her parents, weavers who earned less than $8 a week laboring on a loom, were illiterate. They had not imagined a different life for their seven children, but Chand had other ideas. Now, as she took the bus ride to Delhi from a training center in Punjab, she thought about her impending move to Bangalore for a new training program. She wondered if she would make friends, and how she’d manage there without her beloved coach, who had long been by her side, strategizing about how best to run each race and joking to help her relax whenever she was nervous. She thought little of the meeting in Delhi, because she assumed it was for a doping test. But when Chand arrived in Delhi, she says, she was sent to a clinic to meet a doctor from the Athletics Federation of India — the Indian affiliate of the International Association of Athletics Federations (I. A. A. F.) which governs track and field. He told her he would forgo the usual urine and blood tests because no nurse was available, and would order an ultrasound instead. That confused Chand, but when she asked him about it, she recalls, he said it was routine. Chand had no idea that her extraordinary showing in Taipei and at a national championship earlier that month had prompted competitors and coaches to tell the federation that her physique seemed suspiciously masculine: Her muscles were too pronounced, her stride was too impressive for someone who was only five feet tall. The doctor would later deny that the ultrasound was a response to those reports, saying he ordered the scan only because Chand had previously complained of chronic abdominal pain. She contends she never had any such pain. Three days after the ultrasound, the federation sent a letter titled “Subject: Gender Verification Issue” to the Indian government’s sports author ity. “It has been brought to the notice of the undersigned that there are definite doubts regarding the gender of an Athlete Ms. Dutee Chand,” the letter read. It also noted that in the past, such cases “have brought embarrassment to the fair name of sports in India. ” The letter requested the author ities perform a “gender verification test” on Chand. Shortly after, Chand says, she was sent to a private hospital in Bangalore, where a curt woman drew her blood to measure her level of natural testosterone, though Chand had no idea that was what was being measured. Chand also underwent a chromosome analysis, an M. R. I. and a gynecological exam that she found mortifying. To evaluate the effects of high testosterone, the international athletic association’s protocol involves measuring and palpating the clitoris, vagina and labia, as well as evaluating breast size and pubic hair scored on an illustrated scale. The tests were meant to identify competitors whose chromosomes, hormones, genitalia, reproductive organs or secondary sex characteristics don’t develop or align in the typical way. The word “hermaphrodite” is considered stigmatizing, so physicians and advocates instead use the term “intersex” or refer to the condition as D. S. D. which stands for either a disorder or a difference of sex development. Estimates of the number of intersex people vary widely, ranging from one in 5, 000 to one in 60, because experts dispute which of the myriad conditions to include and how to tally them accurately. Some intersex women, for instance, have XX chromosomes and ovaries, but because of a genetic quirk are born with ambiguous genitalia, neither male nor female. Others have XY chromosomes and undescended testes, but a mutation affecting a key enzyme makes them appear female at birth they’re raised as girls, though at puberty, rising testosterone levels spur a deeper voice, an elongated clitoris and increased muscle mass. Still other intersex women have XY chromosomes and internal testes but appear female their whole lives, developing rounded hips and breasts, because their cells are insensitive to testosterone. They, like others, may never know their sex development was unusual, unless they’re tested for infertility — or to compete in sports. When Chand’s results came in a few days later, the doctor said her “male hormone” levels were too high, meaning she produced more androgens, mostly testosterone, than most women did. The typical female range is roughly 1. 0 to 3. 3 nanomoles of testosterone per liter of blood, about that of typical males. Chand’s level is not publicly known, but it was above the threshold that the I. A. A. F. set for female competitors because that level is within the “male range. ” As a result, officials said, she could no longer race. In the two years since, Chand has been at the center of a legal case that contests not only her disqualification but also the international policy her lawyers say discriminates against athletes with atypical sex development. For Chand, who had never heard the words “testosterone” or “intersex,” it has been a slow and painful education. When she was first told she was being barred because of her testosterone level, she didn’t understand anything the officials were saying. “I said, ‘What have I done that is wrong? ’’u2009” she told me by phone in May through a Hindi translator. “Then the media got my phone number and started calling me and asking about an androgen test, and I had no idea what an androgen test was. The media asked, ‘Did you have a gender test?’ And I said, ‘What is a gender test? ’’u2009” No governing body has so tenaciously tried to determine who counts as a woman for the purpose of sports as the I. A. A. F. and the International Olympic Committee (I. O. C. ). Those two influential organizations have spent a vigorously policing gender boundaries. Their rationale for decades was to catch male athletes masquerading as women, though they never once discovered an impostor. Instead, the athletes snagged in those efforts have been intersex women — scores of them. The treatment of female athletes, and intersex women in particular, has a long and sordid his tory. For centuries, sport was the exclusive province of males, the competitive arena where masculinity was cultivated and proven. Sport endowed men with the physical and psychological strength that “manhood” required. As women in the late 19th century encroached on explicitly male domains — sport, education, paid labor — many in society became increasingly anxious if a woman’s place wasn’t immutable, maybe a man’s role, and the power it entailed, were not secure either. Well into the 20th century, women were discouraged from participating in sports. Some medical experts claimed that vigorous exercise would damage women’s reproductive capacity and their fragile emotional state and would make them muscular, “mannish” and unattractive to men. Critics fretted that athletics would unbind women from femininity’s modesty and . As women athletes’ strength and confidence grew, some observers began to wonder if fast, powerful athletes could even be women. In the 1936 Berlin Olympics, the runners Stella Walsh of Poland and Helen Stephens of the United States were rumored to be male impostors because of their remarkable athleticism, “ ” muscles and angular faces. After Stephens narrowly beat Walsh in the dash and posted a world record, Stephens was publicly accused of being a man, by Walsh or Polish journalists — accounts vary. German Olympics officials had examined Stephens’s genitals before the event and declared her female. Four decades later, in an unexpected twist, an autopsy of Walsh revealed she had ambiguous genitalia. In 1938, the gender of an athlete was again in dispute. The German Dora Ratjen, a former Olympian who won a gold medal at the European Athletics Championship, was suddenly identified as male, prompting Germany to quietly return the medal. When Ratjen’s case became public years later — he claimed that the Nazis pressured him to pose as a woman for three years — it vali dated the growing anxiety about gender fraud in athletics. But in 2009, the magazine Der Spiegel investigated medical and police records and found Ratjen had been born with ambiguous genitals but, at the midwife’s suggestion, was raised as a girl, dressed in girls’ clothes and sent to girls’ schools. Dora lived as a female until two years after the 1936 Olympics, when police were alerted to a train traveler in women’s clothes who looked suspiciously masculine. With relief so apparent that the police noted it in their report, Ratjen told them that despite his parents’ claims, he had long suspected he was male. A police physician examined him and agreed, but reported that Ratjen’s genitals were atypical. Ratjen changed his first name from Dora to Heinrich. But those details were unknown until recently, so for decades, Ratjen was considered a gender cheat. By the international sports administrators began requiring female competitors to bring medical “femininity certificates” to verify their sex. In the 1950s, many Olympics officials were so uneasy about women’s participation that Prince Franz Josef of Liechtenstein, a member of the International Olympic Committee, spoke for many when he said he wanted to “be spared the unesthetic spectacle of women trying to look and act like men,” writes Susan K. Cahn, a his tory professor at the University at Buffalo, in her book “Coming On Strong: Gender and Sexuality in Women’s Sports. ” Others were particularly bothered by women in track and field because of the strained expressions on their faces during competition. Such female exertion violated the white ideal of femininity, as did the athletes’ “masculinized” physiques, prompting Olympic leaders to consider eliminating those events for women. In 1952, the Soviet Union joined the Olympics, stunning the world with the success and brawn of its female athletes. That year, women accounted for 23 of the Soviet Union’s 71 medals, compared with eight of America’s 76 medals. As the Olympics became another front in the Cold War, rumors spread in the 1960s that female athletes were men who bound their genitals to rake in more wins. Though those claims were never substantiated, in 1966 international sports officials decided they couldn’t trust individual nations to certify femininity, and instead implemented a mandatory genital check of every woman competing at international games. In some cases, this involved what came to be called the “nude parade,” as each woman appeared, underpants down, before a panel of doctors in others, it involved women’s lying on their backs and pulling their knees to their chest for closer inspection. Several Soviet women who had dominated international athletics abruptly dropped out, cementing popular conviction that the Soviets had been tricking authorities. (More recently, some researchers have speculated that those athletes may have been intersex.) Amid complaints about the genital checks, the I. A. A. F. and the I. O. C. introduced a new “gender verification” strategy in the late ’60s: a chromosome test. Officials considered that a more dignified, objective way to root out not only impostors but also intersex athletes, who, Olympic officials said, needed to be barred to ensure fair play. Ewa Klobukowska, a Polish sprinter, was among the first to be ousted because of that test she was reportedly found to have both XX and XXY chromosomes. An editorial in the I. O. C. magazine in 1968 insisted the chromosome test “indicates quite definitely the sex of a person,” but many geneticists and endocrinologists disagreed, pointing out that sex was determined by a confluence of genetic, hormonal and physiological factors, not any one alone. Relying on science to arbitrate the divide in sports is fruitless, they said, because science could not draw a line that nature itself refused to draw. They also argued that the tests discriminated against those whose anomalies provided little or no competitive edge and traumatized women who had spent their whole lives certain they were female, only to be told they were not female enough to participate. One of those competitors was Maria José Martínez Patiño, a Spanish hurdler who was to run at the 1985 World University Games in Japan. The night before the race, a team official told her that her chromosome test results were abnormal. A more detailed investigation showed that although the outside of her body was fully female, Patiño had XY chromosomes and internal testes. But because of a genetic mutation, her cells completely resisted the testosterone she produced, so her body actually had access to less testosterone than a typical woman. Just before the Spanish national championships began, Spanish athletic officials told her she should feign an injury and withdraw from athletics permanently and without fuss. She refused. Instead, she ran the hurdles and won, at which point someone leaked her test results to the press. Patiño was thrown off the national team, expelled from the athletes’ resi dence and denied her scholarship. Her boyfriend and many friends and fellow athletes abandoned her. Her medals and records were revoked. Patiño became the first athlete to formally protest the chromosome test and to argue that disqualification was unjustified. After nearly three years, the I. A. A. F. agreed that without being able to use testosterone, her body had no advantage, and it reinstated Patiño. But by then, her hopes for making the Olympics were dashed. Dutee Chand was only 4 when she started running, tagging along with her sister, Saraswati, a competitive runner who liked to practice sprints along the local Brahmani River. Saraswati found training boring, so she recruited Dutee, 10 years her junior, to keep her company. For years, Dutee ran in bare feet — even on the village’s streets — because she had to protect the only shoes she owned: flimsy rubber that she knew her parents could not afford to replace. When Dutee was about 7, her parents pressed her to stop running and learn to weave instead. But Saraswati argued that with Dutee’s speed, she could earn more as a sprinter. Saraswati, who has since become a police officer, reminded her parents of the benefits her own running had brought to the family. Once the district government realized Saraswati’s athletic potential, she, like other athletes, was given meat and chicken and eggs, food her family had not been able to afford. And she reminded them of the prize money she brought home whenever she did well in marathons. They agreed to let Dutee run. Not long after, Saraswati used a string to measure Dutee’s foot and took a bus to the nearest city, about 60 miles away, to find an affordable pair of sturdy sneakers for her sister. The ride took three hours, frequently picking up passengers carrying goats or chickens and large bundles. When Saraswati gave Dutee the sneakers the next morning, Saraswati told me over the phone through a translator, Dutee yelped. “She asked me what can happen if she runs wholeheartedly. She asked if she would go abroad like me, and said she had never sat in a bus or a train, and asked where the money will come from for her to go abroad. I said that ‘if, with these shoes, you run well, you will be sent abroad from the money that will come to you, and not just that, but you’ll also get a tracksuit. So run! ’’u2009” In 2006, Dutee was accepted into a sports program more than two hours from the family’s home. Food, lodging and training were covered. She missed home but appreciated the dorm’s electricity, running water and indoor toilets. And she was happy she could send prize money to her parents. That same year, though Dutee didn’t know it, a catastrophe was unfolding for another Indian sprinter. Santhi Soundarajan, a from southern India, finished second in the 800 meters at the 2006 Asian Games in Doha, Qatar, all the more impressive given her roots as a member of India’s impoverished “untouchable” caste. The previous decade, the I. O. C. and I. A. A. F. yielded to pressure by the medical and scientific community and stopped every female athlete. But the groups retained the right to test an athlete’s chromosomes when questions about her sex arose and to follow that with a hormone test, a gynecological exam and a psychological evaluation. In Soundarajan’s case, the media noted that she wasn’t just fast she also had a deep voice and a flat chest. The day after Soundarajan’s race, the Athletics Federation of India drew her blood and examined her body. Some of her results were leaked to the media. Shortly after, Soundarajan was watching TV when she saw a news report that she had “failed” a sex test. Rejected by the local sports federations, stripped of her silver medal, tormented by ongoing scrutiny and unbearably embarrassed, she attempted suicide, reportedly by swallowing poison. As Chand began competing in national athletics, another runner from a poor rural village, this time in South Africa, burst onto the interna tional athletic stage. When Caster Semenya blew by her opponents in the race at the 2009 African Junior Championships, her performance raised suspicions. Shortly after, sports officials tested her as she prepared for the World Athletics Championship. Unconcerned — she assumed the investigation was for doping — Semenya won gold again. Almost immediately, the fact that Semenya had been was leaked to the press. Instead of attending what is normally the celebratory news conference, Semenya went into hiding. The I. A. A. F. spokesman Nick Davies announced that if Semenya was an impostor, she could be stripped of her medal. He added: “However, if it’s a natural thing, and the athlete has always thought she’s a woman or been a woman, it’s not exactly cheating. ” Fellow athletes, the press and commenters on social media scrutinized Semenya’s body and made much of her supposed gender transgressions: her muscular physique, her deep voice, her pose, her unshaved armpits, the long shorts she ran in instead of bikini shorts, in addition to her extraordinary speed. A story on Time magazine’s website was headlined “Could This Women’s World Champ Be a Man?” One of Semenya’s competitors, Elisa Cusma of Italy, who came in sixth, said: “These kind of people should not run with us. For me, she is not a woman. She is a man. ” The Russian star runner Mariya Savinova reportedly sneered, “Just look at her. ” (The World Agency would later accuse Savinova of using drugs and recommend a lifetime ban.) The I. A. A. F. general secretary, Pierre Weiss, said of Semenya, “She is a woman, but maybe not 100 percent. ” Unlike India, South Africa filed a human rights complaint with the United Nations arguing that the I. A. A. F.’s testing of Semenya was “both sexist and racist. ” Semenya herself would later write in a statement, “I have been subjected to unwarranted and invasive scrutiny of the most intimate and private details of my being. ” After nearly a year of negotiations (the details of which are not public) the I. A. A. F. cleared Semenya to run in 2010, and she went on to win the silver medal in the 2012 Olympics. She will be running in Rio. But the federation still faced condemnation over leaks, public smears and the very idea of a sex test. The I. A. A. F. maintained it was obliged to protect female athletes from having “to compete against athletes with performance advantages commonly associated with men. ” In 2011, the association announced that it would abandon all references to “gender verification” or “gender policy. ” Instead, it would institute a test for “hyperandrogenism” (high testosterone) when there are “reasonable grounds for believing” that a woman may have the condition. Women whose testosterone level was “within the male range” would be barred. There were two exceptions: If a woman like Maria Patiño was resistant to testosterone’s effects — or if a woman reduced her testosterone. This entails having her undescended testes surgically removed or taking drugs. Not long after the policy went into effect, sports officials referred four female athletes from “rural or mountainous regions of developing countries” to a French hospital to reduce their high testosterone, according to a 2013 article in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology Metabolism. The authors, many of whom were physicians who treated the women, describe telling them that leaving in their internal testes “carries no health risk,” but that removing them would allow the athletes to resume competition, though possibly hurt their performance. The women, who were between 18 and 21, agreed to the procedure. The physicians treating them also recommended surgically reducing their large clitorises to make them look more typical. The article doesn’t mention whether they told their patients that altering their clitorises might impair sexual sensation, but it does say the women agreed to that surgery too. Chand was unaware of any controversy surrounding Semenya or other intersex athletes. Her gender concerns were much more immediate: She saw other girls becoming curvier and heard them talk about getting their periods. She asked her mother why her body wasn’t doing the same thing, and trusted her answer: Chand’s body would change when it was good and ready. In 2012, Chand advanced to a athletic training program, which in addition to food and lodging provided a stipend. At 16, she also became a national champion in the category, winning the 100 meters in 11. 8 seconds. The next year, she won gold in the 100 meters and the 200 meters. In June 2014, she won gold yet again at the Asian championships in Taipei. Not long after that, she received the call to go to Delhi and was tested. After her results came in, officials told her she could return to the national team only if she reduced her testosterone level — and that she wouldn’t be allowed to compete for a year. The particulars of her results were not made public, but the media learned, and announced, that Chand had “failed” a “gender test” and wasn’t a “normal” woman. For days, Chand cried inconsolably and refused to eat or drink. “Some in the news were saying I was a boy, and some said that maybe I was a transsexual,” Chand told me. “I felt naked. I am a human being, but I felt I was an animal. I wondered how I would live with so much humiliation. ” As news spread that Chand had been dropped from the national team, advocates encouraged her to fight back. Payoshni Mitra, an Indian researcher with a doctorate in gender issues in sport who had advocated on behalf of other intersex athletes, suggested Chand send a letter to the Athletics Federation of India, requesting her disqualification be reversed. “I have not doped or cheated,” Chand said in Hindi, and Mitra, who would become Chand’s adviser, translated to English. “I am unable to understand why I am asked to fix my body in a certain way simply for participation as a woman. I was born a woman, reared up as a woman, I identify as a woman and I believe I should be allowed to compete with other women, many of whom are either taller than me or come from more privileged backgrounds, things that most certainly give them an edge over me. ” Mitra and others also urged Chand to take her case to the international Court of Arbitration for Sport — the Supreme Court for sports disputes — arguing that the I. A. A. F.’s testosterone policy was discriminatory and should be rescinded. She agreed. Over four days in March 2015, a panel heard Chand’s appeal, as a total of 16 witnesses, including scientists, sports officials and athletes, testified. Female athletes, intersex and not, wondered just how this case would affect their lives. At the hearing, Paula Radcliffe, the British runner who holds the women’s world record for the marathon, testified for the I. A. A. F. saying elevated testosterone levels “make the competition unequal in a way greater than simple natural talent and dedication. ” She added, “The concern remains that their bodies respond in different, stronger ways to training and racing than women with normal testosterone levels, and that this renders the competition fundamentally unfair. ” Madeleine Pape, a 2008 Olympian from Aus tra lia, testified for Chand. Pape lost to Caster Semenya in the 2009 World Championships, Semenya’s last race before her results were made public. Pape had heard runners complain that Semenya was a man or had advantages, and she was angry that Semenya seemed to win so easily. “At the time, I felt that people like Caster shouldn’t be allowed to compete,” Pape told me. But in 2012, Pape began work on a sociology Ph. D. focusing on women in sport. “With my running days behind me, I had the space to think more critically about all that,” she says. “Until that point, I had no idea that the science of sex differences is extremely contested and has shifted over time, as have the regulations in sports, which change but don’t improve as they try to get at the same questions. ” Just what role testosterone plays in improving athletic performance is still being debated. At the hearing, both sides agreed that synthetic testosterone — doping with anabolic steroids — does ramp up performance, helping male and female athletes jump higher and run faster. But they disagreed vehemently about whether the body’s own testosterone has the same effect. I. A. A. F. witnesses testified that logic suggests that natural testosterone is likely to work the way its synthetic twin does. They pointed to decades of I. A. A. F. and I. O. C. testing showing that a disproportionate number of elite female athletes, particularly in track and field, have XY chromosomes by their estimates, the presence of the Y chromosome in this group is more than 140 times higher than it is among the general female population. Surely, witnesses for the I. A. A. F. argued, that overrepresentation indicated that natural testosterone has an outsize influence on athletic prowess. Chand’s witnesses countered that even if natural testosterone turns out to play a role in improving performance, testosterone alone can’t explain the overrepresentation of intersex elite athletes after all, many of those XY female athletes had low testosterone or had cells that lacked androgen receptors. At the Atlanta Games in 1996, one of the few times the I. O. C. allowed detailed data to be released, seven of the eight women who were found to have a Y chromosome turned out to be androgen insensitive: Their bodies couldn’t use the testosterone they made. Some geneticists speculate that the overrepresentation might be because of a gene on the Y chromosome that increases stature height is clearly beneficial in several sports, though that certainly isn’t a factor for Chand. In court, the I. A. A. F. acknowledged that men’s natural testosterone levels, no matter how high, were not regulated the rationale, it said, was that there was no evidence that men with exceptionally high testosterone have a competitive advantage. Pressed by Chand’s lawyer, the I. A. A. F. also conceded that no research had actually proved that unusually high levels of natural testosterone lead to unusually impressive sports performance in women either. Nor has any study proved that natural testosterone in the “male range” provides women with a competitive advantage commensurate with the 10 to 12 percent advantage that elite male athletes typically have over elite female athletes in comparable events. In fact, the I. A. A. F.’s own witnesses estimated the performance advantage of women with high testosterone to be between 1 and 3 percent, and the court played down the 3 percent figure, because it was based on limited, unpublished data. Chand’s witnesses also pointed out that researchers had identified more than 200 biological abnormalities that offer specific competitive advantages, among them increased aerobic capacity, resistance to fatigue, exceptionally long limbs, flexible joints, large hands and feet and increased numbers of muscle fibers — all of which make the idea of a level playing field illusory, and not one of which is regulated if it is innate. Bruce Kidd, a former Olympic runner, told me in May that Olympians themselves sometimes joke that they’re all freaks of nature, with one or another genetic abnormality that makes them great at what they do. Kidd, a Canadian who has long pushed for gender equity in sports, noted that there are also many external variables that influence performance: access to excellent coaching, training facilities, healthy nutrition and so on. “If athletic officials really want to address the significant factors affecting advantage, they should require all athletes to live in the same place, in the same level of wealth, with access to the same resources,” he says. “Boy, oh, boy, there are so many unfair advantages many Olympians have, starting with who their parents are. ” But the I. A. A. F. argued that testosterone is different from other factors, because it is responsible for the performance gap between the sexes. That gap is the very reason sports is divided by sex, the I. A. A. F. says, so regulating testosterone is therefore justified. Chand’s hearing, though, was about more than just testosterone. Implicitly, it questioned the decades of relentless scrutiny of female athletes — especially the most successful ones. Veronica Brenner, a Canadian who won a silver medal in freestyle skiing in 2002, told me she first learned that female Olympians had to pass a sex test when she arrived at the ’98 Games in Nagano, Japan. “I said: ‘Are you kidding?’ I’d been competing my whole life, and my gender has never been questioned!” Brenner’s test confirmed that she had XX chromosomes, and she was given what was commonly called a “femininity card” to prove she was the gender she claimed to be. But she was irked that despite the many advances of female athletes in the last powerful male athletes are celebrated and powerful female ones are suspect. “We’d hear comments all the time: ‘She’s really strong — she must be part guy. ’’u2009” Other critics see testosterone testing as simply the old “gender verification,” the latest effort to keep out women who don’t adhere to gender norms or have a standard female body. Katrina Karkazis, a bioethicist at Stanford University who is a leader of the international campaign against banning intersex athletes and who testified in Chand’s case, says that if an athlete’s androgen test shows she has high testosterone, she must undergo the same gynecological exam that has existed for decades. “The rationale behind the I. A. A. F.’s ‘hyperandrogenism regulation’ is to make it sound more scientifically justifiable and less discriminatory, but nothing in those exams has changed from the old policy except the name,” she says. “It’s still based on very rigid binary ideas about sex and gender. ” Critics of the I. A. A. F. policy argue that if sports officials were truly concerned about fairness, they would quit policing a handful of women with naturally high testosterone and instead rigorously investigate athletes suspected of taking drugs that indisputably enhance performance. They note that in the last year, the I. A. A. F. has faced bribery and blackmail charges and widespread allegations that it intentionally ignored hundreds of suspicious blood tests. Stéphane Bermon, an I. A. A. F. witness who took part in the efforts to identify females with high testosterone, acknowledged that doping was a significant threat to fairness but said that didn’t negate the need to also regulate the participation of women with naturally high testosterone who may have an advantage. He offered an analogy: “Air pollution, like tobacco smoking, contributes to lung cancer, but one should never have to choose between these two before implementing prevention measures,” he wrote in an email. “As a governing body, I. A. A. F. has to do its best to ensure a level playing field. . .. These two topics are different but can lead to the same consequence, which is the impossibility for a dedi cated athlete to compete and succeed against an opponent who benefits from an unfair advantage. ” Last July, the Court of Arbitration for Sport issued its ruling in Dutee Chand’s case. The panel concluded that although natural testosterone may play some role in athleticism, just what that role is, and how influential it is, remains unknown. As a result, the judges said that the I. A. A. F.’s policy was not justified by current scien tific research: “While the evidence indicates that higher levels of naturally occurring testosterone may increase athletic performance, the Panel is not satisfied that the degree of that advantage is more significant than the advantage derived from the numerous other variables which the parties acknowledge also affect female athletic performance: for example, nutrition, access to specialist training facilities and coaching and other genetic and biological variations. ” The judges concluded that requiring women like Chand to change their bodies in order to compete was unjustifiably discriminatory. The panel sus pended the policy until July 2017 to give the I. A. A. F. time to prove that the degree of competitive advantage conferred by naturally high testosterone in women was comparable to men’s advantage. If the I. A. A. F. doesn’t supply that evidence, the court said, the regulation “shall be declared void. ” It was the first time the court had ever overruled a body’s entire policy. Chand was thrilled. “This wasn’t just about me,” she said, “but about all women like me, who come from difficult backgrounds. It is mostly people from poor backgrounds who come into running — people who know they will get food, housing, a job, if they run well. Richer people can pay their way to become doctors, engineers poor people don’t even know about their own medical challenges. ” Chand hoped that the ruling would prompt the I. O. C. to suspend its testosterone policy, too, so she would be eligible to try to qualify for the Rio Games. After all, the I. O. C. policy — which also called on national Olympic committees to “investigate any perceived deviation in sex characteristics” — was based on the same science that the court deemed inadequate. In November 2015, the I. O. C. established new parameters for dealing with gender. But it never actually addressed whether it would suspend its testosterone policy, as the I. A. A. F. was forced to do. That ambiguity left intersex athletes in limbo. Finally, in late February, the I. O. C. said it would not regulate women’s natural testosterone levels “until the issues of the case are resolved. ” It urged the I. A. A. F. to come up with the evidence by the court’s deadline so the suspended policy could be resurrected. It also said that to avoid discrimination, women who are ineligible to compete against women should be eligible to compete against men. Advocates for intersex women were dismayed. “It’s ridiculous,” says Payoshni Mitra, the Indian researcher. “They say the policy is not for testing gender — but saying that a hyperandrogenic woman can compete as a man, not a woman, inherently means they think she really is a man, not a woman. It brings back the debate around an athlete’s gender, publicly humiliating her in the process. ” Emmanuelle Moreau, head of media relations for the I. O. C. disagreed, writing in an email, “It is a question of eligibility, not gender or (biological) sex. ” A separate section of the I. O. C. gender guidelines addressed a different group of atypical women (and atypical men): transgender athletes. Unlike the intersex section, the transgender section stresses the importance of human rights, nondiscrimination and inclusion. It eschews most of the I. O. C. ’s former requirements, including that trans competitors have their ovaries or testicles removed and undergo surgery so their external genitalia matches their gender identity. In the new guidelines, athletes face no restrictions of any kind athletes have some restrictions, including suppressing their testosterone levels below the typi cal male range. And once they’ve declared their gender as female, they can’t change it again for four years if they want to compete in sports. Reactions among trans advocates ran the gamut. Many trans advocates viewed the liberalized regulations as a victory. But some trans women athletes who long ago had their testicles removed (and as a result, make virtually no testosterone) were unhappy with the policy they argued that lifting the surgery requirement gave transwomen who still had testicles an unfair advantage over trans women who didn’t. And still other advocates said that requiring transwomen to suppress their testosterone below 10 nanomoles is premised on the very same claim about testosterone that the court rejected — that naturally made testosterone is the primary cause of men’s competitive advantage over women. Without evidence that “male range” testosterone levels really do provide that advantage, some say it’s premature to base a policy on speculation — especially one that requires people to transform their bodies. In May, the Canadian Center for Ethics in Sports, which manages the country’s antidoping program and recommends ethics standards, issued guidelines for all Canadian sports organizations. The statement says policies that regulate eligibility, like those related to hormones, should be backed by defensible science. It adds, “There is simply not the evidence to suggest whether, or to what degree, hormone levels consistently confer competitive advantage. ” And yet it’s hard to imagine that many female athletes would easily accept the idea of competing against transwomen athletes without those regulations in place. Those debates are far from Chand’s thoughts. Her focus now is on making the most of the window the ruling provides: allowing her to try to qualify for next month’s Olympics without having to change her body. In the miserable months after her test results were revealed, Chand’s training time and concentration were interrupted, and her hope of ever competing seemed out of reach. Once the ruling was issued, though, she returned to the Indian national team, and intensified her training for the 100 meters, the 200 meters and the relay. In addition to working out six hours a day, she tries to relax with naps and Facebook. She has made frequent trips to nations holding qualifying competitions. In May, she competed in India, China and Taiwan in June, in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. She has until July 11 to meet the I. O. C. time requirement. She is painfully aware that if she doesn’t make this summer’s Olympics, she may not have an other chance. The I. A. A. F. may still come up with evidence that satisfies the court and would exclude women like her from competing without altering their bodies. Chand’s best shot to qualify for Rio is in the 100 meters, which she must complete in 11. 32 seconds or less. She remains of a second short. Note: On June 25, Dutee Chand qualified for the Rio Olympics, running the 100 meters in 11. 30 seconds in Almaty, Kazakhstan, and breaking a national record for India. Later that day, she posted an even faster time of 11. 24 seconds. She will be the first Indian woman to run the 100 meters in the Olympics since 1980.

Hillary's Castro Endorsement

Humberto Fontova

When Stalinist monsters bestow their blessing. November 3, 2016 Humberto Fontova “It’s Hillary’s hour!...The only hope of defeating Donald Trump is Hillary Clinton…the difference between the two candidates is vast. Barack Obama did not exaggerate when he claimed that she was better prepared to be a U.S. President than even he was—or was her husband Bill Clinton.” (Stalinist Cuba’s KGB-founded and mentored media organ Cubadebate, Oct. 15, 2016.) There was a day when winning a ringing endorsement from communist mass-murdering, terror -sponsors who craved (and came within a whisker) of nuking your nation would NOT be considered an asset for a U.S. Presidential candidate. “ In any nation of the world–and even in the U.S. during normal times–Donald Trump would find himself either in prison or in a mental institution!” There was a day when being threatened with prison and torture (even figuratively) by an enemy Stalinist regime that jailed and tortured political prisoners (many of them U.S. citizens) at a higher rate than Stalin during the Great Terror would be considered an enormous asset for a U.S. Presidential candidate. But the ringing communist endorsement for Hillary Clinton gets even “better:” “ Hillary Clinton is our only hope of detaining barbarism!” So warns the eunuch scribe for a totalitarian regime that murdered more Cubans in its first three years in power than Hitler murdered Germans during his first six– and in the process converted a highly-civilized, immigrant-swamped nation into a slum/sewer with the Hemisphere’s highest suicide rate, which is ravaged by tropical diseases, where tens of thousands have died trying to escape, where alley cats constitute a delicacy and where ox-carts represent luxury transportation. “On a few occasions Trump has even suggested the assassination of Hillary Clinton!” So warn the notorious assassins of suddenly inconvenient colleagues ranging from Camilo Cienfuegos to Tony De la Guardia to Manuel “Barbarroja’ Pineiro. Yes, the Castro regime “devoured its own children” even more voraciously than even Lenin and Stalin’s. “The news are dominated by revelations—some on video—showing Trump’s obscenity and male chauvinist conduct—along with his treatment of women as sex objects!” So warns the Stalinist regime that jailed and tortured 35,150 Cuban women for political crimes, a totalitarian horror utterly unknown in the Western Hemisphere until the Castro brothers and Che Guevara took power. Some of these Cuban ladies suffered twice as long in Castro’s Gulag as Alexander Solzhenitsyn suffered in Stalin’s. Their prison conditions were described by former political prisoner Maritza Lugo. “The punishment cells measure 3 feet wide by 6 feet long. The toilet consists of an 8 inch hole in the ground through which cockroaches and rats enter, especially in cool temperatures the rat come inside to seek the warmth of our bodies and we were often bitten. The suicide rate among women prisoners was very high.” On Christmas Eve of 1961 a Cuban woman named Juana Diaz Figueroa spat in the face of the executioners who were binding and gagging her. Castro and Che Guevara's KGB-trained secret police had found her guilty of feeding and hiding “bandits” (Cuban rednecks who took up arms to fight the Stalinist theft of their land to build Soviet–style Kolkhozes.) When the blast from Castroite firing squad demolished her face and torso Juana was six months pregnant. “They started by beating us with twisted coils of electric cable,” recalls former Cuba political prisoner Ezperanza Pena from exile today. “I remember Teresita on the ground with all her lower ribs broken. Gladys had both her arms broken. Doris had her face cut up so badly from the beatings that when she tried to drink, water would pour out of her lacerated cheeks.” “On Mother’s Day they allowed family visits,” recalls Manuela Calvo from exile today.” But as our mothers and sons and daughters were watching, we were beaten with rubber hoses and high-pressure hoses were turned on us, knocking all of us the ground floor and rolling us around as the guards laughed and our loved-ones screamed helplessly.” “When female guards couldn’t handle us male guards were called in for more brutal beatings. I saw teen-aged girls beaten savagely, their bones broken, their mouths bleeding ,” recalls Polita Grau. Thousands upon thousands of Cuban women have also drowned, died of thirst or have been eaten alive by sharks attempting to flee the regime founded by the folks who recently endorsed Hillary Clinton. This from a nation formerly richer than half the nations of Europe and deluged by immigrants from same. Remember how Donald Trump was taken greatly to task by the media for not quickly repudiating David Duke’s (so-called) endorsement? Well, we certainly look for the media to take Hillary Clinton similarly to task for not instantly repudiating the endorsement of mass-jailing, mass-torturing, mass-murdering Stalinists. After all, recalling the “sticks and stones can break my bones” riddle of our childhood, David Duke’s crimes” consist of words (“hate-speech.”) Whereas the (literal) sticks, stones--and chains, manacles, bullwhips and bullets--of the fine folks so enthusiastically endorsing Hillary Clinton have caused untold suffering to hundreds of thousands of people.

Wigan’s Road to ‘Brexit’: Anger, Loss and Class Resentments - The New York Times

Andrew Higgins

WIGAN, England — After jobs as a garbage man, a bakery worker and now a packer at a canned food factory, Colin Hewlett, like most people in Wigan, a gritty northern English town, takes great pride in his credentials. He plays snooker and drinks pints at the Working Men’s Club across the road from his red brick rowhouse, and at every election that he can remember, he has voted, like his father before him, for the Labour Party. The governing Conservative Party, which last won a parliamentary election in Wigan in 1910, is “for rich sods and second raters on the make,” he explained. On June 23, however, Mr. Hewlett broke with the habits of a lifetime and bucked the Labour Party line. Ignoring its stand that the European Union is good for Britain, he voted to bolt from the European bloc, along with 64 percent of the population in a town that, according to Will Patterson, a local Green Party activist, would normally “vote for a cow if Labour put one up for election. ” The overwhelming vote here in favor of “Brexit” — much higher than the 52 percent who voted to leave nationwide — delivered a stinging rebuke not only to the Labour Party leadership in London but also to the party’s local politicians. They hold 65 of the 75 seats on the Borough Council and campaigned, albeit with little zeal, for the Remain camp. The Conservative Party, whose leader, Prime Minister David Cameron, also campaigned for Britain to stay in Europe, got kicked in the teeth, too, as did President Obama and legions of other prominent figures in Britain and abroad who urged voters like Mr. Hewlett not to rock the boat. But rocking the boat, no matter what the risks, was precisely what he and millions of other Britons — who, regardless of their real economic situation, see themselves as members of a downtrodden “working class” — wanted to do. To them, it was a last, desperate effort to restore a lost world of secure jobs and communities that was far harsher in reality than it is in recollection. Their votes were stark evidence of how resentments, driven by feelings of being ignored and left unmoored in a rapidly changing world, are feeding nationalism and other efforts to reclaim a sense of identity, upending ideological assumptions and straining ties to political parties and other institutions. Indeed, the demise of traditional jobs in Wigan and the rest of Britain has not ended people’s attachment to the idea that they belong to a proletariat. A survey of social attitudes released last week by NatCen Social Research, a British research group, found that while only 25 percent of Britons had jobs that involved routine or manual labor, the traditional markers of membership, 60 percent of British people viewed themselves as working class. This disconnect between the jobs people hold and their class allegiance is a phenomenon that the researchers called “working class of the mind. ” It helps explain that while only a small minority of Britons share the real insecurity and poverty of workers like Mr. Hewlett, many others feel they are getting a raw deal — and want to stick it to those in power, whether in Brussels or London. “I don’t think a lot will change. But we have to give it a chance,” said Mr. Hewlett, 61, sitting next to his wife, who has Alzheimer’s disease, in a cluttered front room, its faded walls plastered with photographs of their six children and 14 grandchildren. Life, he said, has “gone to the dogs,” and meddling from outside is to blame. “I don’t like people telling us what to do from miles away. ” In just three years, Mr. Hewlett explained, his pay had crashed from more than $665 a week to just $318. Worse, he added, is that his previously secure employment contract has morphed into a “zero hours contract,” under which his employer decides how much he works and how much it pays him depending on what it needs on any particular day. “It is basically slave labor,” Mr. Hewlett said. He complained that an influx of eager workers from poorer, formerly communist parts of the European Union meant that employers now had no incentive to offer a fixed contract or more than the minimum wage for menial work. The real number of immigrants living and working in Wigan is tiny, with only 2. 9 percent of the population born outside Britain, compared with a nationwide figure of 11. 5 percent, the Office of National Statistics says. Only 1. 7 percent of those living in Wigan were born in European Union countries other than Britain. The unemployment rate, the local council says, is only 5 percent, slightly below the national level and half the rate in European countries that use the euro. But this has not stopped even some of Wigan’s immigrants from complaining about there being too many foreigners, particularly Poles, in the area. Abdul Rao, a longtime immigrant from Pakistan with three children born in Wigan, said he had voted for Brexit because he did not want new immigrants spoiling his children’s job prospects. Justyna Kolenda, a Polish immigrant who works in a clothing store, complained that too many Poles and other newcomers did not speak English and mixed only with one another. “There should be more controls,” she said, strolling with her English boyfriend down a pretty shopping street bedecked with British flags in memory of the bloody 1916 Battle of the Somme. advocates hail labor flexibility, ensured by zero hour contracts and other devices, as one of the main reasons for Britain’s robust economy compared with the sluggish or shrinking economies of the Continent. Yet, for workers like Mr. Hewlett, who has no special skills and is not in a position to acquire any, this flexibility is a curse — and one of the reasons that poorer, Britons voted heavily to quit the European Union. That the faceless bureaucrats in Brussels played no role in shaping Britain’s labor market — that was done by elected policy makers in London as Britain fought to retain its competitiveness amid the pressures of globalization — did nothing to dent a widespread view here in Wigan: that leaving the European Union might somehow jolt the country onto another track, preferably one that recovers the lost security and sense of belonging of the past. Mr. Patterson, the Green Party activist, recalled how he had struggled in vain during the referendum campaign to convince Wigan voters that their interests were aligned with those of “workers in Stuttgart and Gdansk,” and that they needed to make common cause with them against governments across Europe pushing austerity and labor policies. When he put this argument forward at a debate in Wigan, he recalled, a woman jumped to her feet and shouted: “I am not interested in Stuttgart. I am only interested in Wigan. ” Britain’s feeling of remoteness from Europe is often attributed to its as what Shakespeare called “this sceptered isle. ” But the country is not just one island — or two when Northern Ireland is included — but a host of largely islets, each with its own history, its own accent and its own proud sense of splendid isolation. “Wigan is a very insular society. When the chips are down, the population here is very loyal to itself,” said David Molyneux, the Labour Party’s deputy leader of the Borough Council. After years of deep cuts in funding from London, which has slashed the local budget by 40 percent since 2010, Wigan voted not so much to grab power back from Brussels, but from London. Local pride, particularly strong in a town that resents George Orwell for portraying it as a sinkhole of misery in “The Road to Wigan Pier,” sometimes swerves toward xenophobia, though overt racism is mostly limited to a tiny fringe. Yet, in many ways, Britain’s referendum result was less a revolt against the European Union than against political and economic forces that are blurring not only boundaries between countries but also smaller, narrower frontiers that once clearly defined who was and was not “local,” and who belongs where in that most enduring feature of British life, the class hierarchy. Mark Bradley, the leader of the Wigan branch of the U. K. Independence Party, or UKIP, the driving force behind the Brexit campaign, complained that the area’s Labour Party member of Parliament, Lisa Nandy, was out of touch with her constituents and their desire to leave Europe because she “is not even from Wigan. ” She grew up in Bury, a town barely 15 miles away. “She is definitely not local,” Mr. Bradley said. Owen Jones, a columnist for the newspaper The Guardian, described the shocking referendum result as being “above all else a revolt,” a cry for help by the downtrodden whose travails and desperation Orwell chronicled 80 years ago. When Orwell visited Wigan, however, the working class existed as a clear socioeconomic category defined by backbreaking work for wages in coal mines and factories. Today, the mines and cotton mills are all gone, extinguished by forces set in motion long before Britain joined the European Economic Community, the predecessor to the European Union, in 1973, or reaffirmed its membership in a 1975 referendum. Mr. Molyneux, the deputy council chief, said the area had changed markedly for the better since 1975, with large areas of slums and derelict factories cleared away. But, he added, “memories are clouded of what life was really like,” and many people hark back to a lost, albeit mostly imaginary, era of secure, tightknit communities built around coal mines and manufacturing. Mr. Bradley, of UKIP, lamented the decline of locally owned pubs, shops and other businesses in the face of competition from corporate chains. “There is a longing for a better time,” he said. Like a phantom limb, the lost era still twitches, with fading, memories kept alive in places like the Leigh Miners Welfare Institute, a bar and social club on the edge of the borough. Taking a break from a game of bowls on the club’s manicured bowling green, Raymond Gorton, an former coal miner, showed off a mangled finger smashed by a mine accident in the 1950s and recalled how he had almost been killed in a 1965 accident that shattered his neck. All the same, he had fond memories of the camaraderie of a lost world that revolved around the pit. Forced to give up mining decades ago because of his injuries, Mr. Gorton said he still wakes each morning at 5, a routine left from his time on the early shift at the Wood End Pit. “It is very hard to break old habits,” he said. He, too, voted to leave the European Union, not because it had interfered with his life in any concrete way but because he did not like the idea of “taking orders from outsiders. ” He had also been impressed by the claim — entirely false — put forward by Brexit campaigners that leaving would save Britain 350 million pounds a week that could be better spent on the National Health Service. He volunteered that he did not mind immigrants, noting that he got on well with two Polish families living on his street, but nonetheless thought that “we need to start thinking more about our own people. ” Clinching the argument for Brexit was the memory of his father, who he said had served with the Royal Air Force and been killed by the Germans in 1940. Britain, he said, should not be part of a European bloc dominated by Germany. But it is not just German power that bothers him. He is more uneasy over a local imbalance of power that has left his own hometown, Leigh, controlled by the Borough Council in Wigan after the merging of several districts in 1974. That amalgamation, which had nothing to do with Brussels, has left many in Leigh resentful of Wigan, which is only five miles away but which they see as an alien and bullying force. “We feel pushed around,” Mr. Gorton said.

Clinton emails: FBI director ignored Attorney General's advice not to 'take action that could influence election'

Trending Articles: Trending Articles: Clinton emails: FBI director ignored Attorney General's advice not to 'take action that could influence election' Source: The Independent FBI director James Comey reportedly ignored the advice of Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who urged him not to thrust the controversy over Hillary Clinton’s emails back into headlines less than a fortnight from election day. US Department of Justice officials, Democrats and even some Republicans were said to be aghast at the timing of the FBI’s announcement, on Friday, that it was reviewing a fresh cache of emails, which Mr Comey said may be “pertinent” to the investigation into Ms Clinton’s use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State. According to a report from the New Yorker , Ms Lynch “expressed her preference” that Mr Comey uphold the Justice Department's “longstanding practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations, and not taking any action that could influence the outcome of an election.” The FBI director, however, “said that he felt compelled to do otherwise.” Writing in the Washington Post , former Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Mr Comey’s decision was a “troubling violation of long-standing Justice Department rules or precedent, conduct that raises serious questions about his judgment and ability to serve as the nation’s chief investigative official.” The emails were discovered “in connection with an unrelated case,” the FBI director wrote in a letter to Republican congressional committee chairs on Friday. That separate case, it later emerged, concerns disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner , who is under investigation for allegedly sending explicit messages to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina. Mr Weiner is the estranged husband of Ms Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin , and the emails were found on one or more electronic devices belonging to the couple, which had been seized as part of the Weiner probe. The FBI is now investigating whether those emails contained any classified information.

Sundance Horror Hit Casts ’Liberal Elite’ as the Monster

Jerome Hudson

Comedian Jordan Peele debuted his new horror film, Get Out, this week at the Sundance Film Festival, and the most shocking thing about the film is its bad guy: white liberal racism. [“It was very important to me for this not to be about a black guy going to the South and going to this red state where the presumption for a lot of people is everybody’s racist there,” Peele told the audience after the film’s midnight screening. “This was meant to take a stab at the liberal elite that tends to believe that ‘We’re above these things. ’” Get Out follows the events that unfold when a young black man Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) meets the wealthy liberal parents of his white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams) who are carrying out an evil plan to imprison their suburb’s few black residents. The idea for Get Out — a film which Peele thought “was never going to get made” — came during the 2008 presidential primary battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. “All of a sudden the country was kind of focused on black civil rights and women’s civil rights movements and where they intersect, and there was kind of this question of, who deserves to be president more?” Peele explained. “Who’s waited long enough? Which is an absurd thing — that civil rights are even divided. ” Drawing from The Stepford Wives, Peele’s favorite film, the comic was able to develop a plot that exposed what he called the “ lie” that “we’re past” this “monster of racism” — a lie that Peele admits doesn’t flow from “red states. ” One example of this “ lie” in the film is evident when Chris’s girlfriend fails to mention to her neurosurgeon father (Bradley Whitford) that her new boyfriend is black. Rose’s father constantly calls Chris “my man,” admits that he would have voted for Obama for a third term, and said his father lost at the Olympics to Jesse Owens and has affinity for the Nazis. It all feels like soft bigotry, Peele explains to the audience. “That is how we experience racism. The monster of racism lurks underneath that conversation. ” Get Out, Peele says, is “coming out in a very different America” than the one in which he wrote the script for the film. “It’s more important and interesting now,” he says, in the era of President Trump. Peele is perhaps best known for his starring role on the hit Comedy Central series Key and Peele, where his portrayal of a President Obama became an Internet sensation. The comedian recently reprised the role on Comedy Central’s The Daily Show for one final time alongside Key, who played President Obama’s “anger translator” Luther. Get Out opens in theaters on February 24. Follow Jerome Hudson on Twitter: @jeromeehudson

Thailand Looks to Likely Future King With Apprehension - The New York Times

Alison Smale and Thomas Fuller

TUTZING, Germany — For more than two years, the king of Thailand lay ill in a Bangkok hospital. During much of that time, his son, the heir to Thailand’s throne, was far from the kingdom, flying around Europe in his Boeing 737 and ensconced in luxury villas and hotels amid the misty lakes and mountains of southern Germany and Austria. The lavish European lifestyle of the son, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, and his tastes for airplanes, fast cars, women and the high life have caused great anxiety in the kingdom for decades. Now he is on the cusp of ascending the throne. The death of the beloved King Bhumibol Adulyadej on Thursday has set in motion a succession that many Thais say they wish they could avoid. King Bhumibol had been a unifying figure in a country that is torn by deep divisions of class and politics and is currently ruled by a military junta. The issue is whether the prince, seen by many Thais as lacking the deep public devotion that his father enjoyed, can hold the country together. The prince’s ascension also raises questions about the future of the monarchy, as a king could give strength to a republican movement that has gained a foothold in recent years. Among the issues at stake is control over one of the world’s great royal fortunes, an estimated $31 billion in real estate holdings alone. Succession may force the consideration of an unresolved and rarely discussed question of whether those assets and others are the property of the royal family or of the Thai public. The crown prince, 64, has led a stormy life of byzantine quarrels and breakups with various lovers that were rarely fully elucidated in public. To his critics, his romantic liaisons have been more than just a royal soap opera they have raised questions about whether his character suits the institution he is about to lead. Having multiple lovers is a dynastic tradition — his King Rama V had more than 150 wives and consorts — but the prince’s former partners have endured spiteful separations and the purged members of his entourage have died under suspicious circumstances. His three divorces, and the brusque ways they were handled, turned many Thais against him and left a trail of broken families, including four children in the United States with whom he has cut ties. The crown prince returned to Thailand in time to be present for his father’s death on Thursday. But the timing of his accession remains in question. Gen. Prayuth the prime minister, surprised the nation on Thursday when he told reporters that the prince had decided to wait until the “appropriate time” to ascend the throne, which is still replete with the ancient pageantry and extreme formality made famous by the musical “The King and I. ” What details are known of the crown prince’s life are whispered and passed along furtively on social media in Thailand, where the military government, enforcing a strict law, has sentenced dozens of people to long prison terms for offending the monarchy. The law has been interpreted broadly, stifling most public discussion of anything related to the royal family. But the few details that have emerged in public records, leaked documents and videos, and in publications from abroad offer a glimpse into the man who stands to be Thailand’s next king. The prince was still married to his first wife, his cousin Soamsawali Kitiyakara, in the 1970s and ’80s when he fathered five children with another woman, according to Thai news accounts at the time. The other woman, an aspiring actress and a commoner, Sujarinee Vivacharawongse, would become his second wife. That second marriage ended in the late 1990s in such acrimony that a public notice was posted at the prince’s palace accusing Ms. Sujarinee of corruption and infidelity with a soldier. The prince cut off communication with four of the five children from the marriage, stripped them of their royal titles and diplomatic passports, and wrote letters, since posted online by an exiled academic, to their British boarding schools informing them that he would no longer pay their tuition. They now live in the United States, as does their mother. His third marriage, also to a commoner, Srirasmi Suwadee, in 2001, produced the boy who is considered the next heir to the throne, Prince Dipangkorn Rasmijoti, 11, who lives in Bavaria with his father. Thais got a rare insight into the third marriage when a video clip of an elaborate poolside birthday party circulated widely on computer discs and on the internet. The video, which showed the princess topless with a string bikini bottom being attended to by submissive palace staff, scandalized a public accustomed to perceiving the monarchy as a paragon of virtue. It was never clear how the video had been leaked but some suggested that the prince’s enemies had spread it to promote the possibility that his sister Princess Sirindhorn, beloved by the public for her devotion to charitable causes, could become monarch in his stead. The footage of the party was never publicly discussed in Thailand’s news media. The crown prince’s marriage to Ms. Srirasmi blew up spectacularly in 2014, when members of her family were suddenly swept up by the police, charged and brought to trial. At least three of Ms. Srirasmi’s siblings were sent to prison for crimes including illegal possession of firearms and insulting the monarchy, according to police statements. Her mother and father were sentenced to prison for insulting the monarchy. Her uncle Pongpat Chayapan, a police officer, was convicted of running illegal casinos, oil smuggling, money laundering and other crimes. Ms. Srirasmi gave up her royally bestowed name, according to an entry in The Royal Gazette, but she was given a stipend of more than $5 million of government funds from the Crown Property Bureau, a payment made public in a letter signed by the junta chief. The purge reinforced fears of an ominous, violent side in the prince’s entourage. One of a handful of police officers purged in the 2014 separation, Akkharawit Limrat, died under mysterious circumstances, his body hastily cremated, according to a funeral certificate published in the Thai news media. The police, calling the matter “sensitive,” gave only scant details. Lt. Gen. Prawut Thavornsiri, then the police spokesman, described the death this way: “He got stressed out. So he jumped out of the building and died. ” A separate purge last year of aides to the crown prince had a similar outcome. Two of the three men arrested died in custody in military barracks. The purges have somewhat overshadowed recent efforts by the government to rehabilitate the prince’s image, including broadcasts of his riding in bicycle tours to celebrate the king and queen and the release of a video showing him caring for his son Dipangkorn in Germany. Critics said that after the purge of his third wife, those images sought to present him as a healthy, responsible father. The efforts suggested that the military had cast its lot with the prince, trying to forge the same kind of mutually beneficial alliance it had with his father. The king heads the armed forces and must approve all governments, while the military draws its legitimacy from the monarch’s blessing. Then there’s the matter of who will be the new queen. Like so many other parts of the crown prince’s life, the answer is shrouded in secrecy. A former flight attendant, Suthida Vajiralongkorn na Ayudhaya, has appeared by the prince’s side on the official royal broadcasts and has been bestowed the military rank of lieutenant general. Kasit Piromya, a former foreign minister, said he met Ms. Suthida many times when he was in government. “She’s an air hostess, very lively, highly intelligent,” he said. “She can ski, she can bike. She loves music. She knows what is good wine in Italy. ” Ms. Suthida appears to live with the crown prince in Bavaria. Bild, the German tabloid, published a photograph in July of the crown prince on an airport runway in jeans, with what appeared to be tattoos covering his back and arms. The prince’s companion, possibly Ms. Suthida, is wearing stiletto heels and a tight shirt, midriff exposed, an outfit that might not raise eyebrows in Europe but would disqualify any tourist from entering the Grand Palace in Bangkok. The prince bought two villas in southern Germany last year, one on the exclusive Lake Starnberg for an estimated $13 million, and another, said to have cost some $5. 5 million, in the adjacent community of Feldafing. When Andreas Botas, a real estate agent in Tutzing, showed the prince and his entourage a property there last year, three black Mercedes vans, a white Porsche and three more vans arrived for the appointment. The driver of the Porsche turned out to be the prince, “dressed in a skimpy and jeans but very good shoes,” Mr. Botas said. The prince looked carefully at the villa’s 12 main rooms as servants lay prostrate or knelt on the ground ready to start the white Porsche and open the driver and passenger doors. Ultimately, Mr. Botas said, the prince bought the other villas. Bavaria offers the crown prince the privacy that he appears to crave. In Tutzing, the prince’s villa is defended from prying eyes by a fence and hedge more than six feet tall. In Feldafing, few locals seem to know the prince, but neighbors said they heard parties around the private pool late into the night last summer. Occasional public appearances sometimes make news in the German and Austrian news media. The crown prince’s entourage, they reported, has visited a pumpkin farm, picked strawberries and toured parts of Bavaria on mountain bikes. In the Austrian ski resort of Zell am Ziller, the prince’s entourage in 2014 rented 70 rooms in a spa hotel and demanded the installation of a kitchen where the prince’s own cook prepared his food, according to an article in the Innsbruck newspaper Tiroler Tageszeitung. But for the most part, this community shelters its wealthy residents with discreet propriety. The deputy mayor of Tutzing, Elisabeth Dörrenberg, said only that her community of some 10, 000 welcomed wealthy and prominent people, but said nothing specifically about the prince. The town does not show off its wealth there is no hotel or restaurant. The mayor of Feldafing, Bernhard Sontheim, was equally reticent. The prince’s entourage showed up at his office in July, the mayor said, and spent half an hour chatting about generalities. The prince, he said, “is now a resident of Feldafing, he lives here and that is that. ”

BREAKING: WikiLeaks Just Released Full ISIS Donor List With Names | Conservative Daily Post

Martin Walsh

Posted by Martin Walsh | Oct 28, 2016 | Breaking News Julian Assange Can No Longer Remain Quiet Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton are the founders of ISIS. We have proven that through emails and documents leaked from WikiLeaks, but liberal media outlets still refuse to cover it. After all, they are still more focused on what Trump said eleven years ago than what Hillary has actually done. Because of brave patriots like Julian Assange, we have been given more evidence that Hillary Clinton is more connected to ISIS than we originally believed. An email was leaked between Clinton and John Podesta indicating that: “Western intelligence, US intelligence and sources in the region” to accuse Qatar and Saudi Arabia of “providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL [or ISIS] and other radical Sunni groups in the region.” Citing the need to “use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets,” said Hillary to Podesta while arguing the current developments in the Middle East were “important to the U.S. for reasons that often differ from country to country.” Odd that Clinton argues Saudi Arabia and Qatar are helping fund ISIS when Hillary’s largest donations come from those two countries. She Is Funded By Nations That Fund ISIS. Coincidence? In another correspondence from 2012, the Director of Foreign Policy at the Clinton Foundation, Amitabh Desai , set up a meeting with Bill Clinton for five minutes in exchange for a $1,000,000 “birthday check.” The email adds that the small but rich nation occupying the Qatar Peninsula would “welcome [the Clinton Foundation’s] suggestions for investments in Haiti — particularly on education and health.” Desai added that while Qatar had already “allocated most of their $20 million … [they were] happy to consider projects we suggest.” Bill Clinton gets $1M from Qatar for his birthday. FYI: It's legal and common practice in Qatar for husbands to beat and rape their wives. pic.twitter.com/oGM2Z9JrVl — Martin Walsh (@mrwalsh8) October 13, 2016 We now see two more examples of the Clinton’s acting corrupt and being intertwined with nations that fund ISIS. For those that do not see where the dots connect, let’s simplify how this all worked for Hillary. Hillary, as Secretary of State, would sell terrorist nations large weapons deals only after they gave her a very generous donation to her “foundation.” These weapons, provided by Hillary and her State Department, then filtered down from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Libya, and so on to create, supply, and bolster terrorist groups. That is exactly how ISIS was created. But instead of blowing them up with an air assault, Hillary and Obama decided to leave ISIS alone. Why? Because ISIS being in the Middle East allows the Obama/Clinton machine to make millions in personal profits from these nations in a repetitive cycle of selling weapons. They are choosing personal gain over eliminating a terrorist group. Let that sink in. Why else have they not arrested Hillary for all of these crimes? The FBI would arrest you in a heartbeat if you went to Facebook right now to praise Allah and ISIS. It also speaks volumes as to why they are trying so hard to silence Julian Assange. If Julian Assange is lying, why are they trying so hard to silence him? — Martin Walsh (@mrwalsh8) October 23, 2016 The media remains silent on all of this. This would be plastered all over the news for months if a President Trump was exposed for this. Ignorant politicians are not the problem. The problem is that ignorant people keep voting for them every election. This is the exact reason we desperately need change in this country, and it starts with Donald Trump. People like Julian Assange have given up their lives to expose corruption in government and allowing Hillary Clinton to win this election makes all of his sacrifices meaningless. He has offered us a chance to revolt against our tyrannical government. Chances likes this do not occur often, and if we do not seize the opportunity, we will suffer another four years of suppression from our corrupt leaders. Vote Trump, so that we can save America and he can pardon Julian Assange.

Will the Media Reset After the Election or Are We Stuck With This Tabloid Stuff?

Peter Van Buren

Written by Peter Van Buren venerable New York Times ran a story saying Donald Trump lies about the height of his buildings.For no apparent reason, the Times resurrected some information from 1979 saying Trump insisted on counting the basement levels of his signature Trump Tower in the overall count of how many floors the building has. The Times compares this lie to “reports” that Trump adds an inch to his actual body height in his bio materials, and also repeated the gag line that he boasted about how long his penis is (no word on whether it is or is not actually longer than expected.)You have to wade down to paragraph 12 to learn other New York developers use the same count-the-basements levels gimmick to be able to advertise their buildings as taller. There is absolutely no news. The Russians Head over to Slate , which published an “investigative piece” alleging a Trump computer server was secretly communicating with a Russian bank. The story had previously been debunked by the New York Times and The Intercept, but Slate ran it as if they had uncovered the smoking gun proving Trump is under the control of the Russians.At Mother Jones , another article alleged that an anonymous, former intelligence officer provided the FBI with information on a Russian scheme to help Trump win the presidency.“There’s no way to tell whether the FBI has confirmed or debunked any of the allegations contained in the former spy’s memos,” the story said. “But a Russian intelligence attempt to co-opt or cultivate a presidential candidate would mark an even more serious operation than the hacking.”One more example, from Vox , which wrote without even bothering to source it at all “There is basically conclusive evidence that Russia is interfering in the US election, and that this interference has been designed to damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. There is strong evidence linking Trump’s foreign policy advisers to Russia, and Trump’s stated policy ideas are extremely favorable to Russian interests.” Journalism Much? I’ve chosen these examples because they are from publications that have in the past enjoyed decent reputations for reporting, and because these stories were run as “news,” not opinion columns, where the standards go right through the floor. Even Mother Jones, which clearly works left-of-center, used to do so with some solid journalism.Not any more.These places (never find fringe publications) are now working with the same standards once reserved for reporting on aliens at Roswell, Elvis sightings and the Illuminati New World Order. It is apparently now within the bounds of mainstream journalism to build a story out of, well, nothing, such as a factoid from 1979, or essentially accuse a presidential candidate of treason based on a single, anonymous source, or claim the Russians have taken over our electoral process based on no sources at all. And Clinton… On the other side, reporting on Clinton by many of these same publications swerves between hagiography and poo-pooing away anything unfavorable. Emails? Who cares! Questions about what her accomplishments as Secretary of State really were? If you ask, you hate women. Pay-for-Play with the Clinton Foundation? Hah, everybody does it, it doesn’t matter. The standard seems to be absent a notarized receipt for a donation matching an arms sale, or a criminal conviction, nothing matters. Next? So be it. The media has fully sh*t the bed this election. That’s where we find ourselves.But what’s next? Will the media reset itself after November 8, or will they run President Trump is Putin’s dog stories for the full term? Will President Clinton be given a pass on, well, everything, for four years, with apologists and explainers on the front page of the Times, never mind in editorials?At what point will the media dig themselves out of this and start real reporting again? Reprinted with permission from WeMeantWell.com . Related

Merkel Will Pay Migrants Millions To Leave Germany

Jack Montgomery

Chancellor Angela Merkel is setting aside €90m (£76m) in taxpayers’ money to create a fund which will pay migrants to withdraw their asylum applications and leave Germany voluntarily. [The handouts will form part of a plan to speed up the removal of rejected asylum seekers, after Tunisian migrant Anis Amri murdered a Polish lorry driver, hijacked his vehicle and drove it into a Christmas market in Berlin while awaiting deportation. U. S. president Donald Trump told The Times that Merkel made a “catastrophic mistake” when she opened the doors to an unlimited number of migrants in 2015. Her Sigmar Gabriel, later admitted that his superior had underestimated how difficult it would be to integrate migrants on such a grand scale, and that Germany had been plunged into a kulturkampf, or “cultural war” as a result. Germany rejected 170, 000 asylum claims in 2016 but, according to the Mail, just 26, 000 were repatriated. 55, 000 more decided to leave voluntarily — apparently leaving 81, 000 bogus applicants unaccounted for. “We rely heavily on voluntary departures,” admitted Chancellor Merkel, who was announcing the package after falling behind the Social Democrats in polls for Germany’s upcoming elections. Martin Schulz, the former President of the European Parliament who has been nominated as the Social Democrat challenger to Merkel, said he backed the proposals to speed up deportations. Schulz has previously insisted that “the people who are arriving [in Europe] are refugees who have been threatened [and] we should welcome them” — a statement which is at odds with the of the European Commission’s admission that at least 60 per cent are economic migrants. As a leading figure in the European Union, Schulz was a strong supporter of the compulsory migrant quotas. These were forced through by the bloc despite strong opposition from central and eastern European which did not agree with Germany’s unilateral decision to throw open the borders. Schulz hit out strongly at these countries in 2015, accusing them of “national egotism in its purest form”. Polish interior minister Mariusz Blaszczak described at Schulz’s words as “an example of German arrogance”.

I BRICS resistono alla guerra finanziaria degli Stati Uniti, di Ariel Noyola Rodríguez

Ariel Noyola Rodríguez

I BRICS resistono alla guerra finanziaria degli Stati Uniti di Ariel Noyola Rodríguez Per affrontare la guerra finanziaria degli Stati Uniti è urgente che i Paesi BRICS rafforzino la cooperazione nell’economia e nella finanza. La Nuova banca di sviluppo dei Paesi BRICS dovrebbe aumentare il volume dei prestiti, ed anche l’Accordo sul contingente di riserva. Inoltre, i Paesi BRICS dovrebbero avviare al più presto possibile la propria agenzia di rating. Per intensificare la coesione economica e realizzare un’area di libero scambio si dovranno abbattere le barriere tariffarie ed aumentare notevolmente il commercio. In breve, se non vengono prese al più presto le misure del caso, i Paesi BRICS rischiano il naufragio nel prossimo uragano finanziario. Rete Voltaire | Città del Messico (Messico) | 27 ottobre 2016 français русский Español Il 15 e 16 ottobre si teneva nello Stato di Goa (India) l’ottavo vertice dei BRICS, sigla per Brasile, Russia, India, Cina e Sud Africa. Va riconosciuto che l’incontro avveniva in una situazione profondamente critica per l’economia mondiale. Tuttavia, i BRICS hanno mostrato, ancora una volta, la straordinaria capacità di trasformare un brutto momento in un’opportunità per approfondire i legami dal punto di vista strategico. Dopo che le economie BRICS hanno goduto di un ‘età dell’oro’, negli ultimi anni i tassi di crescita hanno subito un drastico rallentamento. Di fronte a questa situazione difficile, ora più che mai i BRICS devono attingere alle istituzioni finanziarie presentate al mondo un paio di anni prima a Fortaleza (Brasile) al sesto vertice [ 1 ]. Lo scorso aprile, la Nuova Banca di Sviluppo effettuava il primo prestito [ 2 ] per più di 800 milioni di dollari, e dal 2017 si stima che i prestiti possano raggiungere i 2500 milioni [ 3 ]. Inoltre, l’istituto finanziario a luglio emetteva per la prima volta “obbligazioni verdi” in yuan per un importo pari a 450 milioni di dollari [ 4 ]. Questi strumenti finanziari, se aumentano l’influenza globale della moneta cinese, finanziano grandi progetti d’investimento. Nel frattempo, l’Accordo sul contingente di riserva (CRA, nell’acronimo in inglese) dal valore di 100 miliardi di dollari, è pronto a concedere le prime linee di credito per stabilizzare la bilancia dei pagamenti dei Paesi BRICS, come annunciato dal Ministro delle Finanze indiano Arun Jaitley [ 5 ]. Ogni volta che la Federal Reserve (FED) degli Stati Uniti minaccia di aumentare il tasso d’interesse dei fondi federali, innescando una nuova crisi finanziaria mondiale, è necessario che i Paesi BRICS aumentino al più presto le risorse monetarie del fondo di stabilizzazione perché, in caso contrario, rischiano gravi danni per via delle speculazioni delle grandi banche d’investimento. Allo stesso tempo, i Paesi BRICS devono aprire nuovi fronti sfidando apertamente l’egemonia degli Stati Uniti e del dollaro nel sistema finanziario globale [ 6 ], non solo attraverso lo scambio in valuta locale ma, per esempio, attraverso l’accumulo di riserve in yuan tra le banche centrali, soprattutto dopo che la ‘moneta del popolo’ (‘renminbi‘ in cinese) è stata ammessa ufficialmente, il 1° ottobre 2015, tra i Diritti Speciali di Prelievo, il paniere delle monete d’élite creato dal Fondo monetario internazionale (FMI) alla fine degli anni 60 [ 7 ]. Inoltre, i Paesi BRICS possono articolare un’alleanza finanziaria dai forti legami geopolitici tra America Latina, Asia, Africa e Medio Oriente. Le banche di sviluppo regionali, formate per lo più da Paesi periferici, potrebbero servire allo scopo: la Banca d’investimento infrastrutturale asiatica (AIIB, nell’acronimo in inglese), Banca dell’ALBA (Alleanza Bolivariana per i Popoli della nostra America) e anche la Banca del Sud che finalmente aprirà alla fine dell’anno. È un requisito urgente per i BRICS realizzare una propria agenzia di rating che spezzi il dominio delle statunitensi Fitch, Moody’s e Standard & Poor’s [ 8 ]. Tali agenzie di rating piuttosto che effettuare valutazioni con criteri tecnici, agiscono su impulso di natura politica; cioè da autentiche macchine da guerra: degradano le note delle obbligazioni sovrane e di conseguenza aumentano drasticamente gli oneri finanziari di Paesi come Grecia, Russia o Venezuela. La coesione economica è un’altra sfida importante, anche se è chiaro che si è progredito sostanzialmente molto negli ultimi anni: tra il 2001 e il 2015, il commercio tra i Paesi BRICS, nell’ambito del commercio totale, è raddoppiato dal 6 al 12% [ 9 ]. La Cina è di gran lunga l’economia più integrata nei Paesi BRICS. Al contrario, i legami tra India e Sud Africa sono marginali. Lo stesso tra Brasile e Russia. E’ quindi molto importante la prossima creazione di una zona di libero scambio tra i BRICS [ 10 ]. Tuttavia, oltre ad abbattere le barriere commerciali, i Paesi BRICS devono promuovere la costruzione congiunta dei valori; cioè, integrare i propri sistemi di produzione per incoraggiare l’industrializzazione delle economie meno avvantaggiate. In conclusione, vi sono molte sfide all’orizzonte per le cinque potenze emergenti. Sono convinto che, perciò, il successo dei BRICS dipenda dalla capacità di reinventarsi e dalla creatività nell’articolare nuove dimensioni della cooperazione, affrontando obiettivi a lungo termine. Di fronte alla nuova guerra finanziaria che preparano gli USA, è tempo per i BRICS di procedere…

Kellyanne Conway LOSES IT On Jake Tapper When He Calls Out Trump’s Bigoted Fans (VIDEO)

on October 30, 2016 2:24 pm · One thing that has continuously dogged the Donald Trump for president campaign is the fact that racists, anti-semites, xenophobes, misogynists, and various other bigots have stuck with the bombastic real estate mogul since he first launched his travesty of a campaign. No matter how much Trump’s people try to say he doesn’t want the support of such folks, the candidate himself refuses to take the fact that there is anything about the campaign he has been running that attracts these people seriously. So, naturally, when Trump’s campaign manager Kellyanne Conway sat down with an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday , that particular issue came up again. Of course, Conway was not happy. Tapper began: “There are a lot of anti-Semites and racists and misogynists who support the Trump candidacy.” Conway immediately went on defense, saying, “wow.” Tapper went on to reference a man who was shouting ‘JEW-S-A’ at the press pen at a recent Trump rally, and directly asked Conway if she would refer to such people as ‘deplorable.’ She responded: “Yes, I would. Wow, I have to push back on some of the adjectives you just used to describe — I hope you’ve been to Trump rallies and I hope that you’ve seen the tens of thousands. I mean, he’s had over half a million people easily, I think in excess of that. These are U.S.A.-loving Americans.” Tapper went on to say that no, he isn’t putting all Trump supporters into that camp, but went on to force Conway’s hand on this one: “But without question, people who are experts on hate groups say that there has been a comfort level that has been offered to people who are anti-Semitic that has been offered to people who are anti-Semitic and racists and on and on. And these people are comfortable coming out in the open and supporting Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump has refused to condemn in a very serious way his racist and anti-Semitic fans,” Tapper continued. “He just has. He says things like, “Oh, sure, I disavow, I disavow.’ But he has never serious said, ‘I don’t want the support of those people, they are reprehensible, they have nothing to do with me.’ He has never seriously done it.” Conway used the pushing to pivot back to the idea that the Trump campaign is winning, saying: “I think this exchange is frankly the best piece of evidence I have that we’re actually going to win in nine days because the idea that we’re going to shift away from the pattern of corruption the cloud of ethical stain that Hillary Clinton would bring to the Oval Office in such an important week.” No, Kellyanne, it’s not a sign that Trump is winning. It’s pointing something out that has been true since this whole fiasco began: That Donald Trump is a raging bigot, and he has been so openly. Dog whistles have turned into fog horns this election cycle, and it’s all because of Donald Trump. He embraces these bigots because he’s one of them. The quicker you learn that, the better. Watch the exchange below: Featured image via video screen capture Share this Article! Share on Facebook Author: Shannon Barber Shannon Barber is a self- described queer feminist and activist for racial equality, LGBT rights, women’s rights, and secular rights in America. She is a lifelong lover of words, though her educational background is in computer science. She currently writes for 2 liberal websites, and keeps her own humor blog for lesbians. She hopes to change the world, one mind at a time. Search

Attack on Coptic Cathedral in Cairo Kills Dozens - The New York Times

Declan Walsh and Nour Youssef

CAIRO — A bomb ripped through a section reserved for women at Cairo’s main Coptic cathedral during Sunday morning Mass, killing at least 25 people and wounding 49, mostly women and children, Egyptian state media said. The attack was the deadliest against Egypt’s Christian minority in years. Video from the blast site circulating on social media showed floors and shattered pews among the marble pillars at St. Mark’s Coptic Orthodox Cathedral, the seat of Egypt’s Orthodox Christian Church, where the blast occurred in a chapel adjacent to the main building. As security officials arrived to secure the site, angry churchgoers gathered outside and hurled insults, accusing them of negligence. “There was no security at the gate,” one woman told reporters. “They were all having breakfast inside their van. ” A man asked, “You’re coming now after everything was destroyed?” There was no immediate claim of responsibility, although the attack bore the hallmark of Islamist militants fighting President Abdel Fattah who have previously targeted minority Christians over their perceived support for his government. It was the second major attack in the Egyptian capital in three days, marking a jarring return to violence after months of relative calm. An Islamist militant group claimed responsibility for an explosion at a security check post on Friday that killed six police officers. Mr. Sisi’s strongman rule has come under economic pressure in recent months amid high inflation and a sharp drop in the value of the Egyptian pound. Threatened street protests last month did not materialize, but the surging attacks may be an attempt to stoke opposition through violence. Egyptian security officials, quoted by state media, said that an explosive device containing about 26 pounds of TNT had been placed in the chapel. It went off during Mass around 10 a. m. Most of the dead and wounded were women and children, Sherief Wadee, an assistant minister for health, said in a television interview. Mr. Sisi declared three days of mourning, state media said. Hours later, hundreds of angry worshipers gathered at the church gates to register their anger. “We either avenge them or die like them,” they chanted. Tarek Attiya, a police spokesman, denied accusations of lax security at the church, and said the police had been operating a metal detector at the church entrance as normal. A current of fury and frustration ran through the crowd gathered at the church gates, much of it directed at Mr. Sisi and his supporters and expressed in unusually strong terms. At one point the crowd broke into chants of “the people demand the downfall of the regime,” the signature call of the mass uprising in 2011 that led to the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. The crowd pushed out three prominent television presenters seen as sympathetic to Mr. Sisi — chanting, “Leave! Leave!” — and called for the resignation of the interior minister, Magdy . Many Egyptians reported that TV stations broadcasting pictures of the crowd had cut out audio feeds that carried the antigovernment chants. Such public anger toward the government has become rare under Mr. Sisi, who has imprisoned thousands of opposition figures, cracked down on civil society and demonstrated little tolerance for the mildest street protests. The blast coincided with a national holiday marking the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad. Shrapnel pockmarked religious icons and stone walls inside the church, where witnesses gave graphic accounts of bloodied bodies strewn across the broken pews. Hundreds of people streamed into nearby hospitals, frantically seeking news of the wounded. Officials said at least six children were among the dead. Egypt’s beleaguered Coptic minority, which makes up about of the country’s roughly 90 million people, has been discriminated against for decades, and has come under violent attack since the uprising that toppled Mr. Mubarak. The leadership of the Coptic Church, under Pope Tawadros II, has been a vocal supporter of Mr. Sisi, who came to power in 2013. But that support has also made Copts a target for elements of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood. Islamists attacked hundreds of Coptic churches and homes in 2013, in a backlash after the security forces killed hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood demonstrators in central Cairo in August of that year. The violence smacks of sectarian prejudice because Mr. Sisi’s support stems from Egypt’s Muslim majority. Tensions between Christians and Muslims are highest in Minya, the province in upper Egypt that saw the worst attacks on Copts in 2013. Coptic officials in Minya have counted at least 37 attacks in the past three years, including episodes of houses set on fire and Copts being assaulted on the streets. “Once again the lives of Egypt’s Christian minority are dispensed with as objects within Egypt’s violent and cynical battle over power,” said Timothy E. Kaldas, a nonresident fellow at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy. After the blast on Sunday, dozens of anguished Christians, some wearing black, waited for news of the wounded and the dead outside El Demerdash Hospital. Noureen Grace, her face streaked with tears, waited for the remains of her Madeline Michelle. “She was completely destroyed,” Ms. Grace said, describing the trauma of witnessing the mutilated body. “I spoke to her only yesterday. We spoke every day. ” Moments later a woman, still heaving with grief, walked past. “They are all dead,” she said, declining to give her name. “They were all my friends. ”

The Satanic Nature of Modern Cult-ure

noreply@blogger.com (Alexander Light)

The Satanic Nature of Modern Cult-ure Under the guise of "secularism," society has been inducted into a satanic cult, Cabalism. ... Print Email http://humansarefree.com/2016/11/the-satanic-nature-of-modern-cult-ure.html Under the guise of "secularism," society has been inducted into a satanic cult, Cabalism. The goal is to deny man's soul connection to the Divine and reduce him to a domestic animal. "The purpose of modern art, literature and music must be to destroy the uplifting potential of art, literature and music..."There should be a POISON symbol over the doors of our universities, theatres and art galleries. A similar warning should appear on our TV programs, music and videos.In the 1920's, the Comintern decided that the West could be conquered by first subverting its cultural institutions--family, education, religion, art, mass media and government.They have largely succeeded. While maintaining their familiar format, they have subtly changed the content. It's like lacing a bottle of aspirin with arsenic. We are noticing that our political and cultural leaders are mostly cowards, dupes, traitors, crooks, opportunists and impostors.Our failure to combat Communism is due to misunderstanding its real nature. Communism is a facade for a satanic cult ( Cabalism , Freemasonry ) empowered by Masonic Jewish international bankers. It is designed to absorb the world's wealth, and eventually to reduce and enslave the human race. The 5-pointed Red Star of Communism is also the symbol of Satanism .A demonic virus, Communism has morphed into countless forms, hoodwinking more people than ever.Western Civilization is built on Christianity, the premise that God is real, indeed the Ultimate Reality, spiritual in character. Through man's Divine soul, an individual can discern the God's Will without mediation from a worldly authority. This is why the bankers hate Christianity.God is the Truth, Love, Beauty and Goodness to which we all aspire. An immanent Moral Order precludes a small clique monopolizing the world's wealth and enslaving its population. So, the bankers must destroy our belief in God by promoting Darwinism, Existentialism etc. They create war, depression and terror so we will accept their New World Order . THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL In his brilliant essay, " The Frankfurt School and Political Correctness " Michael Minnichino reveals that most of the fashionable intellectual and artistic movements in the 20th century, still in vogue today, were actually inspired by thinkers who were Comintern (Communist International) agents financed by the central bankers. Some of them actually worked for Soviet Intelligence (NKVD) right into the 1960's.He writes: "The task [of the Frankfurt School] was first to undermine the Judeo-Christian legacy through an "abolition of culture" ...and second, to determine new cultural forms which would increase the alienation of the population, thus creating a "new barbarism." "... The purpose of modern art, literature and music must be to destroy the uplifting potential of art, literature and music... "Funds came from "various German and American universities, the Rockefeller Foundation , the American Jewish Committee, several American intelligence services..."This subversive movement "represents almost the entire theoretical basis of all the politically correct aesthetic trends which now plague our universities." They are associated with Post Modernism, Feminism, Cultural Studies, Deconstructionism, Semiotics, etc.Their net effect is to divorce us from truth, social cohesion and our cultural heritage. They assert that reality is unknowable and that writers and artists are just depicting their own subjective reality. For example, postmodernist Hayden White writes, "historical narratives are verbal fictions, the contents of which are more invented than found...truth and reality are primarily authoritarian weapons of our times." In other words, we cannot know what happened in the past (which is exactly what they want.)Postmodernism is part of the authoritarian agenda. Similarly the Frankfurt School championed the notion that "authoritarianism" is caused by religion, male leadership, marriage and family, when these things actually uphold society.As far as the humanities are concerned, universities are enemy territory and professors usually are obstacles to genuine learning. THE ANCIENT CONSPIRACY Communism manifests an ancient Luciferian Jewish revolt against God and man. The Jewish Pharisees rejected Christ because he taught that God is Love and all men are equal in the sight of God."The advent of Christ was a national catastrophe for the Jewish people, especially for the leaders," Leon de Poncins writes. "Until then they alone had been the Sons of the Covenant; they had been its sole high priests and beneficiaries...."He continues: "The irreducible antagonism with which Judaism has opposed Christianity for 2000 years is the key and mainspring of modern subversion... [The Jew] championed reason against the mythical world of the spirit ...he was the doctor of unbelief; all those who were mentally in revolt came to him either secretly or in broad daylight..." (Judaism and the Vatican, pp.111-113.)In addition to Jewish Cabalism, Freemasonry has been the bankers' tool. It was instrumental in the destruction of the Christian monarchies in Germany, Austria and Russia and the decline of the Catholic Church. This is also the view revealed in The Red Symphony .In his Encyclical Humanum Genus (1884) Pope Leo XIII wrote that the ultimate aim of Freemasonry is "to uproot completely the whole religious and moral order of the world, which has been brought into existence by Christianity... This will mean that the foundation and the laws of the new structure of society will be drawn from pure naturalism."Again Pope Leo XIII said: "Freemasonry is the permanent personification of the Revolution; it constitutes a sort of society in reverse whose aim is to exercise an occult overlordship upon society as we know it, and whose sole raison d'etre consists of waging war against God and his Church." (De Poncins, Freemasonry and the Vatican , p. 45)De Poncins cites an article that appeared in 1861 in a Parisian Jewish Review La Verite Israelite: "But the spirit of Freemasonry is that of Judaism in its most fundamental beliefs; its ideas are Judaic, its language is Judaic, its very organization, almost, is Judaic... "De Poncins writes that the goal of both Freemasonry and Judaism is the unification of the world under Jewish law. ( Freemasonry and the Vatican , p. 76) CONCLUSION Just as we need healthy food and exercise, our mind and soul needs to be nourished by truth and beauty. We need to see life portrayed honestly, with the real forces identified. Instead, we are deliberately deceived and degraded by a small financial elite with a diabolical plan. White stallions (our souls) are fed a diet of sawdust.Whether it's school or mass media, we are bombarded with propaganda designed to produce alienation and dysfunction. We must protect ourselves from this poison before it is too late.The good news is that modern culture has been exposed as a long-term Illuminati psy-op designed to demoralize us. It will fail. By Henry Makow Ph.D. Dear Friends, HumansAreFree is and will always be free to access and use. If you appreciate my work, please help me continue. Stay updated via Email Newsletter: Related

Roy Cooper Holds Thin Lead Over Gov. Pat McCrory in North Carolina - The New York Times

Richard Fausset

RALEIGH, N. C. — Roy Cooper, a Democrat, held a lead on Thursday in North Carolina’s bitterly contested race for governor. If it holds, it would be a rare bright spot for his party this week, one that has much to do with Mr. Cooper’s call for repealing a state law limiting transgender bathroom access that has subjected North Carolina to a gale of international criticism, boycotts and cancellations. Yet many here are now predicting that the contentious law, which catalyzed a national debate over lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights, is unlikely to be repealed even if Mr. Cooper becomes governor. On Thursday, State Representative Rodney W. Moore was one of a number of Democratic lawmakers who predicted that Republicans here in the capitol would have little reason to dump the law, commonly known as House Bill 2, or H. B. 2, even if Mr. Cooper were elected. Gov. Pat McCrory, a Republican seeking his second term, has refused to concede until thousands of and provisional ballots are counted by elections boards in each of the state’s 100 counties. That process is set to conclude on Nov. 18. Mr. McCrory was widely criticized for having signed the law. Mr. Moore noted that Donald J. Trump, the Republican won North Carolina by nearly four percentage points in Tuesday’s election. Senator Richard M. Burr, a Republican, cruised to by an even greater margin, in a race against a Democratic challenger, Deborah Ross, that had been billed as one of the nation’s closest. And Republican legislators on Tuesday maintained their supermajorities in the State House and Senate. “They’re going to feel empowered that their agenda is working, so it’s going to be very hard to imagine them taking up H. B. 2 to overturn it or modify it,” Mr. Moore said of Republicans on Thursday. “I don’t see them chomping at the bit or singing kumbaya to change it. ” Republican leaders of the state legislature could not be reached for comment. Mr. Cooper, North Carolina’s attorney general, declared victory early Wednesday morning, when tallies from the state’s 2, 704 precincts showed him leading by just less than 5, 000 votes. For now, the only thing certain about the outcome is that lawyers from both sides will be closely monitoring the county boards as they determine which of the more than 50, 000 provisional ballots should be deemed legitimate. Mr. McCrory’s campaign announced on Wednesday that it was establishing a fund in preparation for an “ongoing legal battle” over the vote tally. “No one knows for sure the outcome of the election, and tens of thousands of ballots remain outstanding and not yet counted,” Jason Torchinsky, the fund’s chief lawyer, said in a statement. Chris LaCivita, the McCrory campaign’s strategist, said in a separate statement that the campaign also had “grave concerns over potential irregularities” regarding 90, 000 votes in Durham County. Still, a number of political observers here said that Mr. Cooper had the better chance of winning. absentee voters traditionally tend to be Republicans, while voters who file provisional ballots tend to be Democrats. And though the exact number of ballots was not yet known, they were expected to be outnumbered by provisional ballots. “I would not be surprised that Cooper keeps the lead, or has some extra cushion built into it” at the conclusion of the process, said J. Michael Bitzer, a political scientist at Catawba College in Salisbury, N. C. If either man is trailing by fewer than 10, 000 votes after Nov. 18, he may demand a recount. Whether Mr. Cooper wins or not, his showing was exceptional, given the shellacking other Democrats received on Tuesday, both in North Carolina and nationally. The outcry over H. B. 2 was widely considered to be one of the main reasons for his success. The law, signed by Mr. McCrory in March, prohibits local governments from passing protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, and it requires that people in government buildings use the restrooms that correspond with their gender at birth. Mr. McCrory has argued that the law was necessary to ensure privacy, and others said it would protect innocent people from sexual predators. Gay rights advocates saw the bathroom provision as an attack on transgender people. As part of the backlash against the law, planned job expansions, concerts and major sporting events have been canceled. During the campaign, Mr. Cooper argued that Mr. McCrory had harmed the state’s reputation and economy by signing the bill. It was a message that was embraced even by some Trump supporters, and it was a likely reason Mr. Cooper and Mr. Trump found success in some of the same parts of North Carolina. One was coastal New Hanover County, home to the city of Wilmington. The area has seen a dip in its film industry recently, a likely result of the legislature’s decision not to renew a state tax credit for film, television and commercial production. But there is also a suspicion in Wilmington that Hollywood has grown leery of North Carolina because of H. B. 2. Jason Rosin, a business agent with Local 491 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, the union representing film workers in Wilmington, said that some of his members were motivated to vote for Mr. Cooper out of concerns about H. B. 2’s effect on the industry — even as they voted for Mr. Trump. “I believe that in the Cooper race, they voted for their economic ” Mr. Rosin said.

Man in Freddy Krueger Costume Crashes Halloween Party and Shoots 5 People

Alex Ansary

Man in Freddy Krueger Costume Crashes Halloween Party and Shoots 5 People 10/31/2016 TIME A man wearing a Freddy Krueger costume opened fire at a Halloween party in Texas on Sunday, injuring five people , police said. The man, dressed as the villain from the Nightmare on Elm Street horror film series, arrived at the San Antonio house party uninvited and with several other men, KENS 5 reports. Violence erupted about 5 a.m. when partygoers tried kicking out the unwelcome guests. The unidentified man dressed as Freddy Krueger whipped out a gun from his costume and fired, striking four men and one woman, authorities said. All of the suspects fled, and those injured were taken to the hospital, according to the San Antonio Express-News . Their conditions were unclear Monday. The incident is under investigation.

Shia vs. Sunni: The Schism Western Politicians Don’t Understand and Won’t Discuss - Breitbart

John Hayward

Western politicians rarely acknowledge the schism between Shia and Sunni Islam. There is nothing remotely comparable to this schism in any other religion in the modern world. [The conflict defines the political structure of the Middle East, from the international rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia to the internal politics of Muslim nations. And yet, Western politicians, eager to portray Islam as a “religion of peace,” speak of Muslims as homogenous. At the hard core of political correctness, Islam is treated more like a race than a religion, a monolithic ethnic bloc like “Hispanics” or “Asians. ” Both of those groups are, in turn, diverse populations absurdly squeezed into monoliths for the convenience of political strategists. In truth, there are Shiite Muslims who do not think Sunnis count as Muslim at all, and vice versa. Adherents of the more extreme sects within the Sunni and Shia schools view moderate followers of the same basic tradition as apostates. The Divide, Few Western politicians know the first thing about the rift, which flows from a doctrinal dispute that might seem trivial to modern outsiders. When Mohammed died in the 7th Century, there was a profound disagreement among the early followers of Islam about who should succeed him as leader. The heart of the conflict is that the Sunnis thought the new leader or “caliph” should be elected and chose Mohammed’s close friend Abu Bakr. The leader of the Islamic State, who styles himself as “caliph” or ruler of all true Muslims, calls himself “Abu Bakr ” in homage to the first caliph. His real name is Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim . The dissident group we now know as Shiites insisted that only a blood relative of Mohammed was fit to lead, rallying behind Ali bin Abu Talib, who was both Mohammed’s cousin and . Ali actually took a turn as caliph after Abu Bakr died, so it would be more precise to say the enduring rift within Islam was caused by Ali’s assumption of leadership and the argument over his successor. A great deal of tribal politics swirled around this conflict, making it more complex than any brief summary could capture. Among other factors, there was Islam’s development into a warrior religion, leading to clan rivalries and vicious arguments over plunder. Personal loyalties to Ali or his rivals played a role as well. But this is a religious schism, not a matter of stimulating debate between historians. Shiites believe stealing leadership away from the lineal descendants of Mohammed was apostasy, a sin against the true faith. Ali was assassinated, stabbed in the forehead with a poison sword while praying. Modern Shiites still make a pilgrimage to the mosque where they believe he died and is entombed, located in what is now Iraq. The city where it is located, Najaf, has been the scene of much sectarian bloodshed. The Sunni government of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein enraged a generation of Shiites by abusing the Imam Ali mosque. Ali did not win the title of “caliph” in an election, either. Abu Bakr only reigned for a few years before he died. Ali got the job after Abu Bakr’s second successor, Caliph Uthman, was killed by his own troops in the Muslim holy city of Medina. One reason the divide is so bitter is that Sunnis of the time were furious at Ali for accepting the title of caliph instead of punishing Uthman’s killers. Followers of Uthman thought Ali committed acts of blasphemy and arrogance against true Islam, and Ali’s followers felt the same way about the Sunni elite. A major point of contention was, and remains, whether Ali swore and broke a binding oath of loyalty to the Sunni hierarchy and the caliphs that came before him. This is not a minor dispute over the life and times of a historical personage, but a profound question of religious legitimacy. Iran still believes its theocracy has rightful authority over Islam under the Shiite model of descent from Mohammed, for example. One of the candidates in the recent Iranian presidential election, cleric Ebrahim Raisi, wears a black turban to signify he is a sayed, a descendant of Mohammed. Raisi choose green as his campaign color because he wanted to take the color back from the secular “Green Movement” demonstrators and restore its “real meaning” as the color of “the revolutionary grandsons of the Prophet. ” Those grandsons attempted a revolution against the early Sunni caliphs. They did not die of old age. Sunni and Shia share many essential beliefs, but even their shared beliefs can be sources of tension. Both Sunnis and Shiites make pilgrimages to the holy cities in Saudi Arabia. Iran frequently castigates the Sunni Saudis over their management of the hajj pilgrimage, alleging discrimination against Shiites along with poor event management. The Saudis supply plenty of poor event management to complain about. The royal family of Jordan is seen by some analysts as key to bridging the divide, because the Hashemite ruling dynasty of Sunni Jordan claims direct descent from Mohammed’s family, satisfying the Shiite criteria for authentic leadership of Islam. Unfortunately, this also means the Jordanian regime gets to enjoy the violent hatred of both Sunni and Shiite extremists. The Sunni Islamic State infamously burned a captured Jordanian pilot alive in a cage and spread the image across the Internet as one of its favorite propaganda videos. Jordanian officials have nevertheless said they regard the Islamic Republic of Iran as a greater threat to their security than ISIS or other Sunni extremists. Minorities, Syria’s dictator, Bashar Assad, is a member of the small Alawite subsect of Shia Islam. Alawites only make up about ten percent of Syria’s population, but the Assad regime, under both Bashar and his father Hafez, consolidated power by appointing Alawites to high government positions. The vast majority of the Syrian population is not Alawite, or even Shiite, but Sunni. Bashar Assad frequently responds to criticism of his brutality by pointing to his history of protecting Syrian religious minorities, including Christians, and noting he belongs to a minority himself. What is the difference between an Alawite and a Shiite? There are many minor differences in custom and tradition, but the major difference concerns Imam Ali. Recall that Shiites revere Ali as the rightful leader of Islam who should have succeeded Mohammed, and was divinely martyred in death, while Sunnis regard him as a traitor. The Alawites believe he was God incarnate. Some Sunni religious leaders consider them “worse infidels than Christians and Jews,” as one prominent cleric of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood put it in 2013 when calling for a Sunni jihad against them. Another branch of Islam that often suffers discrimination and violence from other Muslims is the Sufi sect. The Sufis are neither Sunni nor Shiite — or they might say they are both, since both Sunni and Shiite Islam have Sufi chapters. This makes them an abused minority in both Shiite nations like Iran and Sunni countries like Egypt. Sufism is more defined by its approach than specific doctrines, unlike the way Sunni and Shia or Shia and Alawite are distinguished. Modern Sufi have a reputation for gentleness and moderation, although they were a formidable military force in the past. The famed “whirling dervish” swordsmen of antiquity were a Sufi invention. Dervishes still whirl, but now the practice is seen as performance art or a form of moving meditation, like tai chi. Sufi are generally less interested in strict interpretations of the Koran and Islamic sharia law, which makes them despised by hardcore Islamist sects. They are sometimes accused of diluting pure Islam with mystical or serving as agents for Western powers, seeking to subvert and “tame” true Islam as part of a Western imperialist agenda. None of these branches of Islam are themselves homogeneous. There are dozens of different Sufi orders, for instance. Some of them are militant or political in nature, contrary to the general impression of Sufis as peaceable mystics. Sunni Minorities, A school of Sunni Islam that has become increasingly important to American and European politics is Hizmet, a highly organized group founded and led by an imam named Fethullah Gulen. The government of Turkey sees Hizmet as far too organized, prosecuting it (literally) as a vast criminal conspiracy that attempted to overthrow President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year. The Turkish government refers to Hizmet as “FETO,” an acronym for “Fethullah Terrorist Organization. ” Turkey’s diplomatic relations with both Europe and the United States have been rocked by its pursuit of Hizmet and Gulen, who lives in Pennsylvania. Sunni Islam also includes a movement known as the Salafi, the Islamic fundamentalists. Salafists believe Mohammed, and to a lesser extent his first two generations of descendants, were perfect human beings who should be emulated in every way, including dress and personal hygiene. Salafism includes its own, even more primitive and regressive including the Wahabbi Islam promoted by Saudi Arabia and the Islamic State’s apocalyptic belief system. “Primitive” is not a pejorative term — Wahabbi Muslims literally embrace the primitive lifestyle of the 7th Century, when Mohammed lived. Their hostility to modernity is one of their defining attributes. Another is their hostility to all other variations of Islam, most definitely including Shiites. The rapid spread of Salafist beliefs through overt and covert networks — Salafist madrassas, and agents of influence sent to infiltrate more moderate Islamic schools — is one of the major security concerns of our age, for those analysts and officers who have not been intimidated out of discussing it. Islam and the West, That brings us back to the problem of sterilizing Islam by treating it as homogenous. The Sunni Muslim Brotherhood has been considered for designation as a terrorist organization by the U. S. government, but its defenders say not even the Brotherhood is a single entity. They insist it has many chapters, many of which cannot be fairly regarded as extremists or terrorists. To be sure, not all Muslims feel any of this doctrinal animosity. It would be a fool’s game to say “most do” or “most don’t,” given the size of the global Muslim population, the differences between Muslims of different nationalities and ethnic backgrounds, and the effects of emigration and assimilation. In his speech in Saudi Arabia, President Trump observed that Muslims are often the victims of Islamic terrorism: In sheer numbers, the deadliest toll has been exacted on the innocent people of Arab, Muslim and Middle Eastern nations. They have borne the brunt of the killings and the worst of the destruction in this wave of fanatical violence. Some estimates hold that more than 95 percent of the victims of terrorism are themselves Muslim. This is true, but also an incomplete picture of the problem. Muslims abuse and kill each other over doctrinal conflicts on a horrifying scale. Most of that violence and oppression is not “terrorism. ” It comes from military conflicts and government crackdowns on religious minorities. Sectarian strife is one of the reasons why so many Syrian rebel groups viewed favorably by the West are willing to ally with and other terrorist organizations. In Iraq, there are Sunnis living in territory captured by ISIS that openly welcomed their ghastly conquerors, or were at least reluctant to work with the Iraqi government, because they distrusted the Iraqi government, and were terrified of the Shiite militias operating in the region. In Bahrain, the government is under fire for suppressing the Shiite majority in its population, with five dead in a recent police raid against a Shiite community. The Bahraini monarchy, in turn, credibly accuses Iran of seeking to destabilize the country by exacerbating tensions. Bahrain’s Sunnis fear they would be brutalized on an epic scale if Shiites overthrow the government. This all becomes America’s problem because our national interests in the Middle East are tangled inexorably with the schism. Bahrain, for example, is the strategically vital home to the U. S. 5th Fleet. Shiites resent America for supporting the Sunni monarchy. American military planners are understandably nervous about the prospect of renting a base for the 5th Fleet from a Bahrain that would be a Shiite satellite of Iran, to say nothing of the cascade effect such a religious war would have on other Sunni allies in the region.

Diabetes and Your Diet: The Low-Carb Debate - The New York Times

Gina Kolata

A few years ago, Richard Kahn, the chief scientific and medical officer of the American Diabetes Association, was charged with organizing a committee to prescribe a diet plan for people with diabetes. He began by looking at the evidence for different diets, asking which, if any, best controlled diabetes. “When you look at the literature, whoa is it weak. It is so weak,” Dr. Kahn said in a recent interview. Studies tended to be short term, diets unsustainable, differences among them clinically insignificant. The only thing that really seemed to help people with diabetes was weight loss — and for weight loss, there is no magic diet. But people want diet advice, Dr. Kahn reasoned, and the association really should say something about diets. So it, like the National Institutes of Health, went with the Department of Agriculture’s food pyramid. Why? “It’s a diet for all America,” Dr. Kahn said. “It has lots of fruits and vegetables and a reasonable amount of fat. ” That advice, though, recently came under attack in a New York Times commentary written by Sarah Hallberg, an osteopath at a weight loss clinic in Indiana, and Osama Hamdy, the medical director of the obesity weight loss program at the Joslin Diabetes Center at Harvard Medical School. There is a diet that helps with diabetes, the two doctors said: one that restricts — or, according to Dr. Hallberg, severely restricts — carbohydrates. “If the goal is to get patients off their medications, including insulin, and resolve rather than just control their diabetes, significant carb restriction is by far the best nutrition plan,” Dr. Hallberg said in an email. “This would include elimination of grains, potatoes and sugars and all processed foods. There is a significant and ever growing body of literature that supports this method. ” She is in private practice at Indiana University Health Arnett Hospital and is medical director of a developing medical interventions. But there are no large and rigorous studies showing that diets offer an advantage, and, in fact, there is not even a consensus on the definition of a diet — it can vary from doctor to doctor. “There have been debates for literally the whole history of diabetes about which kind of diet is best,” said Dr. C. Ronald Kahn, chief academic officer at Joslin, and no relation to Dr. Richard Kahn. But, he said, “the answer isn’t so straightforward. ” In support of a diet like Dr. Hallberg’s, there is one recent study, by Kevin Hall of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and his colleagues, involving 17 overweight and obese men, none of whom had diabetes. They stayed in a clinical center where they ate carefully controlled diets. The researchers asked what would happen if calories were kept constant but the carbohydrate composition of a diet varied from high to very low. The answer was that insulin secretion dropped 50 percent with the very low carbohydrate diet, meaning that much less insulin was required to maintain normal blood glucose levels. “Since diabetes results when the body can’t produce enough insulin, perhaps it is a good idea to reduce the amount of insulin it needs by eating diets,” Dr. Hall said. Some studies, though, failed to show that diets benefited glucose control. Even if diets are effective in the short term, Dr. Hall said, “the difficulty is adhering to the diet over the long term. ” In an analysis of weight loss diets (not specifically for diabetics) published this summer, he and Yoni Freedhoff of the University of Ottawa wrote: “Diet adherence is so challenging that it is poor even in studies where all food is provided. When diets are prescribed, adherence is likely to diminish over the long term despite to the contrary. ” But studies of just a few weeks, which constitute the bulk of the diet studies, can be misleading, said Dr. C. Ronald Kahn. “In the short term, the diet sometimes does better on glycemic control,” he said. “But as time progresses, the difference mostly disappears. What counts is which diet helps most with weight loss. ” The reason the advantage sometimes seen with a diet tends to vanish, Dr. C. Ronald Kahn added, is probably a mix of people failing to adhere to the diets and their bodies’ adjusting to them. Another issue with diets, researchers said, is the question of what will happen to overall health if diabetics actually follow the diet for years or decades. (Heart attacks are the major killer of people with diabetes.) Insulin levels may be better, but, said Dr. Rudolph Leibel, a director of Columbia University’s Naomi Berrie Diabetes Center, “effects of a diet on lipoproteins and vascular biology could offset such a ‘benefit. ’” In other words, it is not clear if a lower insulin level would translate into fewer heart attacks. Dr. Hamdy, whose recommended diet is less restrictive than the one Dr. Hallberg suggests, reports that many patients in his clinic have been able to stay with the diet for as long as five years, losing weight and keeping it off. He presented his study at the 2015 annual conference of the American Diabetes Association and has submitted it for publication. It involved 129 patients. Half were able to lose weight and keep it off, and those who did maintained an average weight loss of 9. 5 percent. Their diabetes was much improved. It is impossible, Dr. Hamdy said, to separate weight loss from the diet’s effects on diabetes because people following such a diet — which limits but does not forbid things like breads, pasta and rice — also lose weight. But multiple studies have found that when it comes to weight loss — the only proven way to help with blood sugar control over the long term — there is no difference among diets that restrict calories, fat or carbohydrates. Experts like Dr. David Nathan, the director of the diabetes center and clinical research center at Massachusetts General Hospital and a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, advise dieting for people with diabetes. But, he said, “when we advise people to be on diets, the major goal is to lose weight. ” What matters the most for controlling diabetes, Dr. Nathan said, “is how much weight you lose. ”

Ever a Showman, Donald Trump Keeps Washington Guessing - The New York Times

Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman

WASHINGTON — The speech was written, the rollout strategy was set. And then President Trump began talking and the plan went out the window. Unless that was the plan all along. When Mr. Trump sat down with television anchors at the White House for an lunch on Tuesday, he was supposed to preview his first address to Congress. Instead, he suddenly opened the door to an immigration bill that would potentially let millions of undocumented immigrants stay in the country legally. Such legislation from the “build the wall” president would roil politics in the capital, and Mr. Trump told the anchors that nothing like that was actually in the speech as it was then drafted. But he turned to aides and suggested that maybe they should include it. After the lunch was over, aides rushed off to alert their colleagues, including Stephen K. Bannon and Stephen Miller, the architects of the president’s immigration crackdown. Once again, the unlikeliest of presidents had torn up the script and thrown his young administration into upheaval. Once again, Washington was left trying to fathom what his strategy was. Was it mad genius, an improvisational leader proposing a move to overhaul immigration after making a point of deporting “bad hombres”? Or was it simply madness, an undisciplined political amateur unable to resist telling guests what he thinks they want to hear even at the expense of his own political base? In the end, he did not include it in the speech. And yet, rising to the occasion, Mr. Trump on Tuesday night sounded as presidential as he ever has since taking office. He invoked Abraham Lincoln and Dwight D. Eisenhower, heralded Black History Month, condemned vandalism, celebrated American entrepreneurs like Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison, and promised a “renewal of the American spirit. ” He followed the written text on the teleprompters more closely than any major speech of his presidency. Still, the paradox remained. He called for working “past the differences of party,” just hours after he called Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader from California, “incompetent. ” He declared that “the time for trivial fights is behind us” just weeks after engaging in a public Twitter war with Arnold Schwarzenegger over the ratings for “Celebrity Apprentice. ” And then there was that immigration trial balloon. If nothing else, Donald Trump the showman kept the attention right where he wanted it — squarely on himself. By the time he took the rostrum in the House chamber on Tuesday night for the functional equivalent of a State of the Union address, he had generated considerable suspense around what he would actually say and how it would be received. He boasted of deporting “gang members, drug dealers and criminals,” saying that “bad ones are going out as I speak. ” He introduced guests in the first lady’s box whose families had suffered at the hands of criminals in the country illegally. But he talked about “reforming our system of legal immigration,” saying as he has before that the United States should base its admission of foreigners on merit. “I believe that real and positive immigration reform is possible as long as we focus on the following goals,” he added, “to improve jobs and wages for Americans, to strengthen our nation’s security and to restore respect for our laws. ” Whether this was all an intentional distraction remained unclear by the time he wrapped up and headed back down Pennsylvania Avenue. This is, after all, a White House that revels in what its current occupants refer to as the “head fake,” where the president gives the impression of moving one way when he is really moving in a completely different direction, even diverting attention from one controversy by creating another. That leaves allies and adversaries alike scratching their heads about what Mr. Trump really believes. In private discussions since the inauguration, a mystified Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican majority leader from Kentucky, has said that Mr. Trump appears uncertain of precisely where he stands on a number of critical issues. Thus, aides, activists, lobbyists and lawmakers search for ways to influence a malleable president, who sometimes plays along with his team’s desire to confuse and distract, but who is also prone to spouting out ideas depending on his audience. Mr. Trump’s advisers have said privately that they wanted this opening speech to Congress to be more optimistic than the address he delivered at his inauguration in January, an jeremiad against what he called “American carnage” and the establishment he blamed for it. Mr. Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump has privately expressed concern about the harsh tone of some of her father’s rhetoric over many months. No president in modern times had shown up for his first speech to Congress with approval ratings so low — just 42 percent in the latest Gallup poll. His 40 days of careening from one crisis to another, many of them had sowed deep doubts about his leadership not only among Democrats and independents but even among many Republicans. His challenge for this address was to move beyond these moments and establish himself as a president. Immigration has been one area where he was evidently still trying to calibrate. After all, Mr. Trump was not always so strident on the issue. After the 2012 election, he denounced Mitt Romney for supporting what he called “” calling it “a crazy policy” that cost Mr. Romney the Hispanic vote. The Democrats, he said then, did not have a policy “but what they did have going for them is they weren’t meanspirited about it. ” The session with the television anchors started out as a nod to tradition by a president who has broken so many. Like his predecessors on the day of a State of the Union address, Mr. Trump hosted the journalists for what was supposed to be an unrecorded lunch to give them a sense of what he would tell Congress. But the conversation took a surprising turn when some of the anchors asked about his efforts to deport many of the estimated 11 million immigrants in the country illegally. Without being prompted, Mr. Trump then raised the idea of legislation, noting that there had not been any comprehensive law passed by Congress on the subject since Ronald Reagan’s amnesty program in the 1980s. He told the anchors it was time for a bill that would grant legal status to many of those in the country illegally as long as both sides compromised, similar to the legislation sought but never passed by George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Mr. Trump said he recognized that it would cause him political problems with his conservative base voters, according to people in the room, but added that he thought he could keep them happy since they had stuck with him throughout last year’s Republican primaries. When Mr. Trump offered the idea, he let the word “compromise” hang in the air, gauging the reaction. He then turned to Hope Hicks, his director of strategic communications, and suggested that the thought could be added to his speech. As Mr. Trump’s words settled over the State Dining Room, the president’s aides glanced at one another. They moved quickly to alert Mr. Bannon and Mr. Miller, two of the main keepers of Mr. Trump’s address before Congress. That the proposal did not ultimately make it into the speech may speak to the influence of Mr. Bannon’s wing. But the town was confused and off balance, just the way Mr. Trump likes it.

David Letterman: Trump ’Insulting to America’

Daniel Nussbaum

Former host David Letterman took aim at President Donald Trump and the members of his administration in a lengthy interview with New York magazine this week, explaining that he’d still love to interview the real estate one final time. [The former Late Night host, who retired in 2015, said that today’s shows have an “obligation” to challenge the president, and described how he would interview Trump if he could get one final shot at him. advertisement

India's Stonehenge: 7,000-Year-Old Megalithic Site is Oldest Observatory in South Asia

noreply@blogger.com (Alexander Light)

Print Email http://humansarefree.com/2016/10/indias-stonehenge-7000-year-old.html A remarkable 7,000-year-old megalithic site that served as an astronomical observatory has been found in Muduma village in Telangana, India. The discovery has been hailed as one of the most significant archaeological findings in India over the last few decades.According to Times of India , the team of archeologists described it as "the only megalithic site in India, where a depiction of a star constellation has been identified." The ancient observatory dates to 5,000 BC and the researchers believe that it is the earliest astronomical observatory discovered in India and perhaps even in the whole of South Asia.The site consists of around 80 huge menhirs (standing stones), which are 3.5 – 4 meters tall. There are also about 2000 alignment stones, which are 30-60cm tall.According to experts, no other excavation site in India has so many menhirs concentrated in such a small area. The maximum concentration of menhirs is located in the central portion of the monument.One of the surprising details discovered at the site is a depiction of the constellation known as Ursa Major, which is formed from small cup-sized pits carved into a standing stone. The group of about 30 cup-marks were arranged in the same shape in which Ursa Major can be observed in the night sky with the naked eye. The carving depicts not only the prominent seven starts, but also the peripheral stars too. The large standing stones that form an observatory in Telangana, India ( Satya Vijayi ) Moreover, as ArcheoFeed.com reported: an "imaginary line drawn through the top two stars point to pole star or the North Star."Researchers believe that the site still holds many secrets. The next planned research will take a place in December led by archeologists from Korea.Numerous prehistoric observatories have already been discovered around the world, including Peru, Britain and Armenia. Thousands of years ago people were trying to understand the sky and were often using their observations to make predictions for agricultural and ceremonial purposes. The site Zorats Karer from Armenia dates back to the same period as the observatory from India. The constellation Ursa Major as it can be seen by the unaided eye ( public domain ) As Natalia Klimczak from Ancient Origins wrote :“Zorats Karer is also known as Carahunge, Karahunj, Qarahunj. It is located in an area of around 7 hectares and covers the site nearby the Dar river canyon, close to the city of Sisan. The ancient site is often called the "A rmenian Stonehenge ," but the truth of what it is may be even more fascinating. Related: Stonehenge is 5,000 Years Older Than Previously Thought According to researchers, Zorats Karer could be among the world's oldest astronomical observatories, and is at least 3,500 years older than British Stonehenge. The site was rediscovered in 1984 by a team led by researcher Onik Khnkikyan. After a few months of work, Khnkikyan concluded that the site of Zorats Karer must have been an observatory. Moreover, with time, Armenian archeologists, astronomers and astrophysicists found that there were at least two other ancient sites important for prehistoric astronomy in the vicinity: Angeghakot and Metzamor. A general view of the Karahunj site near Sisian, Southern Armenia. ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) In 1994, Zorats Karer was extensively analyzed by Professor Paris Herouni, a member of the Armenian National Academy of Science and President of the Radio Physics Research Institute in Yerevan. His expeditions revealed a great deal of fascinating information about the site. First of all, his team counted 223 stones, of which 84 were found to have holes.They measured the longitude, latitude and the magnetic deviation of the site. The researchers also created a topographical map of the monumental megalithic construction, which became the basis of further work. Finally, the main treasure of the site was unearthed – a collection of many impressive and unique astronomical objects. The researchers realized that several stones were used to make observations of the sun, moon and stars. They were located according to knowledge about the rising, culmination moments, and setting of the sun, moon and specific stars. The stones are basalt, somewhat protected by moss but smoothed by the rain and wind and full of holes and erosion. Many of the stones were damaged over time.In ancient times, the stones were shaped and arranged in what are known as the north and south arms, the central circle, the north-eastern alley, the separate standing system of circles and the chord. The stones are between 0.5 and 3 meters tall and weigh up to 10 tons. Some of them are related to burial cists." By Natalia Klimzcak, Ancient Origins / Cover image: Main: The Ursa Major constellation (Fotlia). Inset: The megalithic site in Telangana, India ( Bangalore Mirror ) This article was originally published on Ancient Origins and has been republished with permission. Dear Friends, HumansAreFree is and will always be free to access and use. If you appreciate my work, please help me continue. Stay updated via Email Newsletter: Related

Report: Michigan State Bans Whiteboards to Prevent Spread of Racist Messages - Breitbart

Tom Ciccotta

Administrators at Michigan State University have introduced a policy which will prevent students from hanging white boards outside of their dorm rooms in an effort to prevent racist messages from appearing on dormitory walls. [The new policy, which will go into effect in Fall 2017, will prevent students from putting up white boards outside of their dorm rooms in an effort to curb issues with bullying on campus. “In any given month, there are several incidents like this. There was no one incident that was the straw that broke the camel’s back,” said Kat Cooper, director of University Residential Services Communications. “Sometimes these things are racial, sometimes they’re sexual in nature. There are all sorts of things that happen. ” Cooper argued that the increasing amount of inappropriate messages written on white boards was enough for the school to rethink their policy on their usage in dormitory hallways. “Their utility as a communication tool no longer outweighed the attractive nuisance that they are,” Kat Cooper said. Other students aren’t thrilled about the new policy. Michigan State sophomore Brad Kain claimed that it is unfair to the students who “use them on their doors” as a way to “brighten up people’s day. ” “We’re all adults,” Kain said. “I think they should find another way of handling the problem,” Johnson said.

Pope Francis Takes Backhanded Swipe At Trump, & Those Who 'Raise Walls, & Label People'

Natalie Thongrit

0 129 On Saturday, during a ceremony welcoming 17 new cardinals into the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Francis warned attendees about the divisiveness that he feels is spreading throughout the church. The Associated Press reports that Pope Francis cautioned against the “virus of polarization,” telling the new group of cardinals, “we are not immune from this.” During his speech, Pope Francis specifically issued a warning about “our pitiful hearts that tend to judge, divide, oppose, and condemn” and those who “raise walls, build barriers, and label people.” He also encouraged those in attendance to not be so quick to deem those who are different from them an enemy or a threat. ‘We see, for example, how quickly those among us with the status of the stranger, an immigrant, or a refugee, become a threat, take on the status of an enemy. An enemy because they come from a distant country, or have different customs. ‘The virus of polarization and animosity permeates our way of thinking, feeling and acting.’ Pope Francis never called out Donald Trump by name; however, it seems to be more than a mere coincidence that he delivered a speech about accepting immigrants shortly after the United States electorate chose as their leader for the next four years a man who has proposed mass deportation and the construction of a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. This is not the first time that the Pope has spoken out against Donald Trump and his campaign promises, either. In February of this year, when asked about Trump’s proposed border wall, he said , “a person who only thinks about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.” At least one of the newly appointed cardinals has views similar to Pope Francis’s when it comes to immigration. Indianapolis Archbishop Joseph Tobin, who was in the news recently for helping to resettle Syrian refugees despite now vice president-elect Mike Pence’s best efforts to block aid to and limit the number of Syrian refugees in Indiana. Tobin recently addressed Trump’s victory, saying that, under him, the priority of settling immigrants and refugees “is going to be challenging.” He added, though, that he believes “the ethical reflection of a nation isn’t reduced to the government” and said that he has “a lot of faith in the American people.” Watch a clip from today’s ceremony, which includes Pope Francis’s remarks, below, via YouTube : Featured image via Franco Origlia/Getty Images Share this Article!

Trump: ’100%’ Willing to Testify Under Oath - Breitbart

Pam Key

Pres. Trump would “100%” be willing to say under oath that he didn’t ask Comey to let Flynn investigation ”go” didn’t say “I need loyalty.” pic. twitter. During his joint press conference with Romanian President Klaus Iohannis, President Donald Trump said he would be “100 percent” be willing to testify under oath about his conversations with former FBI Director James Comey. Partial transcript as follows: ABC’s JON KARL: I want to get back to James Comey’s testimony. You suggested he didn’t tell the truth in everything he said. He did say under oath that you told him to let the Flynn — you said you hoped you could let the Flynn investigation go. TRUMP: I didn’t say that. KARL: So he lied about that? TRUMP: Well, I didn’t say that. I will tell you. I didn’t say that. KARL: And did you ask you to pledge loyalty? TRUMP: And there would be nothing wrong if I did say it read today but I did not say that. KARL: And did he ask you for a pledge of loyalty from you? TRUMP: No, he did not. KARL: So he said those things under oath. Would you be willing to speak under oath and give your version of those events? TRUMP: 100%. I hardly know the man. I’m not going to say I want you to pledge allegiance. What would do that? Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance under oath? Think of that. I hardly know the man. It doesn’t make sense. No, I didn’t say that, and I didn’t say the other. Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

New Climate-Friendlier Coolant Has a Catch: It’s Flammable - The New York Times

Danny Hakim

LONDON — Rajiv Singh started thinking about how to do his part to fight global warming 15 years ago. Dr. Singh, a scientist at Honeywell’s lab in Buffalo, began running computer models of tens of thousands of molecular combinations. He was seeking a better refrigerant, one of the most vexing chemicals for the environment. Refrigerants cool homes, cars and buildings but also warm the planet at a far higher rate than carbon dioxide. Dr. Singh was searching for one stable enough to be useful but that degraded quickly so it did not linger to trap heat in the atmosphere. “You have to hit the chemistry books,” he said in a recent interview. As product names go, the refrigerant he played a crucial role in developing, does not roll off the tongue. But it is one of the most important alternatives to hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, which have long been used in and refrigerators and which contribute greatly to climate change. On Oct. 15, in Kigali, Rwanda, more than 170 countries reached an agreement as part of the Montreal Protocol to curb the use of HFCs. But Dr. Singh’s new coolant is also controversial, with critics questioning its safety and viewing it as the latest attempt by large chemical companies to play the regulatory system to their advantage. is already becoming standard in many new cars sold in the European Union and the United States by all the major automakers, in large part because its developers, Honeywell and Chemours, have automakers over a barrel. Their refrigerant is one of the few options that automakers have to comply with new regulations and the Kigali agreement. It has its detractors. The new refrigerant is at least 10 times as costly as the one it replaces. A number of rival manufacturers have filed suits to challenge the patent. Officials in India, which has a car market, are deliberating over whether to grant patent protection. And then there is the safety issue. Daimler began raising red flags in 2012. A video the company made public was stark. It showed a hatchback catching fire under the hood after 1234yf refrigerant leaked during a company simulation. Daimler eventually relented and went along with the rest of the industry, installing 1234yf in many of its new cars. But the company has developed an alternative using carbon dioxide that is being introduced in its cars and some models, with an eye toward further expansion. In a statement, Sandra Gödde, a spokeswoman for Daimler, said 1234yf had “different flammability properties” than the HFC coolant it was replacing, which is considered to be nonflammable. The company has developed “specific measures in order to guarantee our high safety standards,” she added, including “a specially developed protective system. ” Some engineers and environmentalists, however, say 1234yf is not a good option. “None of the people in the car industry I know want to use it,” said Axel Friedrich, the former head of the transportation and noise division at the Umweltbundesamt, the German equivalent of the Environmental Protection Agency. He added that he opposed having another “product in the front of the car which is flammable. ” Dr. Friedrich, an engineer and a chemist, is also a member of the scientific advisory council of the International Council on Clean Transportation, the group that commissioned the tests that exposed Volkswagen’s cheating on diesel emissions. He collaborated on tests of 1234yf with Deutsche Umwelthilfe, a German environmental group, which also raised fire concerns. While cars, obviously, contain other flammable materials, he was specifically worried that at high temperatures 1234yf emitted hydrogen fluoride, which is dangerous if inhaled or touched. “I wouldn’t like to use it as a car owner, because it gives me a higher risk and higher cost,” Dr. Friedrich said. “It’s a really unfair solution by the car industry. This is not what government and society should have accepted. ” Honeywell and Chemours (which until last year was a unit of DuPont) have been adamant that the product is safe, and they are not alone. After the Daimler issue emerged, SAE International, an engineering consortium that includes all of the major automakers, said 1234yf was “highly unlikely to ignite,” though the issue led to a brief split with German automakers. The Joint Research Center of the European Union has also said there was “no evidence of a serious risk. ” It is being used across the auto industry and has gained approval from regulators in the United States and Europe. “Daimler was the only manufacturer that cited an issue,” said Ken Gayer, vice president and general manager of Honeywell Fluorine Products. “All other car manufacturers at the time had incorporated 1234yf, which is mildly flammable, into their designs, with modest design changes, and proven to themselves conclusively that they could safely use the product,” he said. Daimler’s concerns led to a reassessment. “The entire industry stepped back and said, ‘Could we possibly have missed something? ’” Mr. Gayer said. “We reviewed all the work we did, and we also ran new tests to try to understand better what Daimler’s issue was. ” At the end of that process, automakers and regulators “proved to themselves conclusively once again that 1234yf was safe for use in cars, and then finally in 2015 Daimler announced publicly that they would use the product,” Mr. Gayer said. Chemours said in a statement that the additional testing proved any “concerns to be unfounded. ” It added, “Today, all major global automakers around the world are using . ” One thing is not in dispute. The new coolant is superior to the HFC it is replacing in its impact on global warming. Hydrofluorocarbons have roughly 1, 400 times the impact of carbon dioxide, the baseline used to measure such chemicals. By contrast, studies of 1234yf have ranged from four times carbon dioxide to a recent assessment showing it has an even lower impact. Because of that, perhaps no single chemical is better positioned to take advantage of the Kigali agreement. While Honeywell and Chemours, when it was part of DuPont, lobbied to weaken and stall HFC regulations in the past, this time they were poised to profit from a product that had fresh patent protection, and they largely embraced the agreement. Though Honeywell would not give specific profit or revenue figures for 1234yf, sales of its HFC alternatives have helped the company raise annual revenue from its wider fluorine business by percentages in the last few years to more than $1 billion. The companies, which sell products under different brand names, have “almost a monopoly,” said Stephen O. Andersen, a former E. P. A. official who has been a representative to the Montreal Protocol and works for the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, an advocacy group. “The price of the product is very high, about $80 a kilogram, and so that adds up to about $50 to $75 per car, which is a lot of money compared to the HFC they were using,” which he said was about $4 to $6 a car. “So it’s a big shock, and it’s been a lot of controversy. ” David Doniger, director of the Climate and Clean Air Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, “The safety concern is bogus. ” “The main concern is its high price,” Mr. Doniger said. “While a small part of the price of a car, this could be concerning when repairs are needed. ” He said the price would decline after the patents expired, though that will take years. The conundrums and controversies highlight the complexities of refrigerants and the inherent in the fight to curb global warming. In the 1980s, the Montreal Protocol led to the ban on chlorofluorocarbons, CFCs, because of hazards to the ozone layer. They were replaced by HFCs, which are being curbed because of their effects on the climate. Will 1234yf be an equally transitory fix? “Nothing lasts forever,” Dr. Singh, the Honeywell chemist, said. “At least a couple generations. ” Dorothee Saar, head of the transport and clean air team at Deutsche Umwelthilfe, the environmental group, said the new refrigerant presented considerable safety risks. She has her own solution. Ms. Saar, who lives in Berlin, has an old Volkswagen Golf without . “I can always open a window,” she said.

Can Trump Save America Like Putin Saved Russia? — The Saker

pcr3

Dear Friends, in the article below The Saker explains how Vladimir Putin wrest the sovereignty of Russia away from the Anglo-Zionist Empire. He hopes that Donald Trump can rescue America. His article is republished with his permission. Can Trump Save America Like Putin Saved Russia? The Saker October 22, 2016 A crisis faces America: Option one: Hillary wins. That’s Obama on steroids, only worse. Remember that Obama himself was Dubya, only worse. Of course, Dubya was just Clinton, only worse. Now the circle is closed. Back to Clinton. Except this time around, we have a woman who is deeply insecure, who failed at every single thing that she every tried to do, and who now has a 3 decades long record of disasters and failures. Even when she had no authority to start a war, she started one (told Bill to bomb the Serbs). Now she might have that authority. And she had to stand there, in front of millions of people, and hear Trump tell her “Putin outsmarted you at every step of the way.” Did you see her frozen face when he said that? Trump is right, Putin did outsmart her and Obama at every step. The problem is that now, after having a President with an inferiority complex towards Putin (Obama) we will have a President with the very same inferiority complex and a morbid determination to impose a no-fly zone over Russian forces in Syria. Looking at Hillary, with her ugly short hair and ridiculous pants, I thought to myself “this is a woman who is trying hard to prove that she is every bit as tough and any man” – except of course that she ain’t. Her record also shows her as being weak, cowardly and with a sense of total impunity. And now, that evil messianic lunatic (http://thesaker.is/the-messianic-lunatic-in-her-own-words/) with a deep-seated inferiority complex might become Commander in Chief?! God help us all! Option two: Trump wins. Problem: he will be completely alone. The Neocons have a total, repeat total, control of the Congress, the media, banking and finance, and the courts. From Clinton to Clinton they have deeply infiltrated the Pentagon, Foggy Bottom, and the three letter agencies. The Fed is their stronghold. How in the world will Trump deal with these rabid “ crazies in the basement”? http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_donald_a_080423_leo_strauss_and_the_.htm Consider the vicious hate campaign which all these “personalities” (from actors, to politicians to reporters) have unleashed against Trump – they have burned their bridges, they know that they will lose it all if Trump wins (and, if he proves to be an easy pushover his election will make no difference anyway). The Neocons have nothing to lose and they will fight to the very last one. What could Trump possibly do to get anything done if he is surrounded by Neocons and their agents of influence? Bring in an entirely different team? How is he going to vet them? His first choice was to take Pence as a VP – a disaster (he is already sabotaging Trump on Syria and the elections outcome). I *dread* to hear whom Trump will appoint as a White House Chief of Staff as I am afraid that just to appease the Neocons he will appoint some new version of the infamous Rahm Emanuel… And should Trump prove that he has both principles and courage, the Neocons can always “Dallas” him and replace him with Pence. Et voilà! I see only one way out: How Putin Rescued Russia When Putin came to power he inherited a Kremlin every bit as corrupt and traitor-infested as the White House nowadays. As for Russia, she was in pretty much the same sorry shape as the Independent Nazi-run Ukraine. Russia was also run by bankers and AngloZionist puppets and most Russians led miserable lives. The big difference is that, unlike what is happening with Trump, the Russian version of the US Neocons never saw the danger coming from Putin. He was selected by the ruling elites as the representative of the security services to serve along a representative of the big corporate money, Medvedev. This was a compromise solution between the only two parts of the Russian society which were still functioning, the security services and oil/gas money. Putin looked like a petty bureaucrat in an ill fitting suit, a shy and somewhat awkward little guy who would present no threat to the powerful oligarchs of the the Seven Bankers running Russia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semibankirschina ). Except that he turned out to be one of the most formidable rulers in Russia history. Here is what Putin did as soon as he came to power: First, he re-established the credibility of the Kremlin with the armed forces and security services by rapidly and effectively crushing the Wahabi insurgency in Chechnia. This established his personal credibility with the people he would have to rely on to deal with the oligarchs. Second, he used the fact that everybody, every single businessman and corporation in Russia, did more or less break the law during the 1990s, if only because there really was no law. Instead of cracking down on the likes of Berezovski or Khodorkovski for their political activities, he crushed them with (absolutely true) charges of corruption. Crucially, he did that very publicly, sending a clear message to the other arch-enemy: the media. Third, contrary to the hallucinations of the western human rights agencies and Russian liberals, Putin never directly suppressed any dissent, or cracked down on the media or, even less so, ordered the murder of anybody. He did something much smarter. Remember that modern journalists are first and foremost presstitutes, right? By mercilessly cracking down on the oligarchs Putin deprived the presstitutes of their source of income and political support. Some emigrated to the Ukraine, others simply resigned, and a few were left like on a reservation or a zoo on a few very clearly identifiable media outlets such as Dozhd TV, Ekho Moskvy Radio or the newspaper Kommersant. Those who emigrated became irrelevant, as for those who stayed in the “liberal zoo” – they were harmless as they had no credibility left. Crucially, everybody else “got the message”. After that, all it took is the appointment a few real patriots (such as Dmitri Kiselev, Margarita Simonian and others) in key positions and everybody quickly understood that the winds of fortune had now turned. Fourth, once the main media outlets were returned back to sanity it did not take too long for the “liberal” (in the Russian sense, meaning pro-USA) parties to enter into a death-spiral from which they have never recovered. That, in turn, resulted in the ejection of all “liberals” from the Duma which now has only 4 parties, all of them more or less “patriotic”. That’s the part of Putin’s strategy that worked. So far, Putin has failed to eject the 5th columnists, whom I call the “Atlantic Integrationists” (see http://thesaker.is/putins-biggest-failure/ ) from the government itself. What is certain is that Putin has not tackled the 5th columnists in the banking/finance sector and that the latter are being very careful not to give him a pretext to take action against them. Russia and the USA are very different countries, and no recipe can be simply copied from one to another. Still, there are valuable lessons from the “Putin model” for Trump, not the least of which that his most formidable enemies probably are sitting in the Fed and in the banks that control the Fed. What is sure is that for the time being the image of the USA will continue to be that of homeless veterans abandoned by the US government wrapping themselves in the American flag and asking for coins in a cup. Hillary thinks that Ameria’s wars are a stunning success. Trump thinks that they are a disgrace. I submit that the choice between these two is really very simple. To those who are saying that there cannot be a schism in the AngloZionist elites, I reply that the example of the conspiracy to prevent Dominique Strauss-Kahn from becoming the next French president ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_v._Strauss-Kahn ) shows that, just like hyenas, AngloZionist leaders do sometimes turn on each other. That happens in all regimes, regardless of their political ideology (think SS against SA in Nazi Germany or Trotskists against Stalinists in Boshevik USSR). An Iron Broom Leon Trotsky used to say the Soviet Russia needed to be cleansed from anarchists and noblemen with an “iron broom”. He even wrote an article in the Pravda entitled “We need an iron broom”. Another genocidal manic, Felix Derzhinskii, founder of the notorious ChK secret police, used to say that a secret police officer must have a “burning heart, a cool head and clean hands”. One would seek weakness, or even compassion, in vain from folks like these. These are ideology-driven “true believers”, sociopaths with no sense of empathy, profoundly evil people with a genocidal hatred of anybody standing in their way. Hillary Clinton and her gang of Neocons are the spiritual (and sometimes even physical) successors of the Soviet Bolsheviks and they, just like their Bolshevik forefathers, will not hesitate for a second to crush their enemies. Donald Trump – assuming he is for real and actually means what he says – has to understand that and do what Putin did: strike first and strike hard. Stalin, by the way, also did exactly that, and the Trotskyists were crushed. I think that the jury is still out on whether Putin will succeed in finally removing the 5th columnists from power. What is sure is that Russia is at least semi-free from the control of the Anglo-Zionists and that the US is their last bastion right now. Their maniacal hatred of Trump can in part be explained by the sense of danger these folks feel, being threatened for the first time in what they see as their homeland (I don’t mean that in a patriotic sense – but rather like a parasite’s care for “his” host). And maybe they have some good reason to fear. I sure hope that they do. I am rather encouraged by the way Trump handled the latest attempt to make him cower in fear. Yesterday Trump dared to declare that since the election might be rigged or stolen he does not pledge to recognize the outcome. And even though every semi-literate person knows that elections in the USA have been rigged and stolen in the past, including Presidential ones, by saying that Trump committed a major case of crimethink. The Ziomedia pounced on him with self-righteous outrage and put immense pressure on him to retract his statement. Instead of rolling over and recanting his “crime”, Trump replied that he will respect the election results if he wins. Beautiful no? Let’s hope he continues to show the same courage. Trump is doing now what Jean-Marie Le Pen did in France: he is showing the Neocons that be that he dares to openly defy them, that he refuses to play by their rules, that their outrage has no effect on him and that they don’t get to censor or, even less so, silence him. That is also what he did when, yet again, he refused to accuse the Russians of cyber-attacks and, instead, repeated that it would be a good thing for Russia and the USA to be friends. Again, I am not sure that how long he will be able to hold that line, but for the time being there is no denying that he is openly defying the AngloZionist deep state and Empire. Conclusion: The United States are about to enter what might possibly be the deepest and most dangerous crisis of their history. If Trump is elected, he will have to immediately launch a well-planned attack against his opponents without giving them any pretext to accuse him of politically motivated repressions. In Russia, Putin could count on the support of the military and the security services. I don’t know whom Trump can count on, but I am fairly confident that there are still true patriots in the US armed forces. If Trump gets the right person to head the FBI, he might also use that agency to clean house and deliver a steady streams of indictments for corruption, conspiracy to (fill the blank), abuse of authority, obstruction of justice and dereliction of duty, etc. Since such crimes are widespread in the current circles of power, they are also easy to prove, and cracking down on corruption would get Trump a standing ovation from the American people. Next, just as Putin did in Russia, Trump will have to deal with the media. How exactly, I don’t know. But he will have to face this beast and defeat it. At every step in this process he will have to get the proactive support of the people, just like Putin does. Can Trump do it? I don’t know. I would argue that to overthrow the deep state and restore the power of the people is even harder in the USA than it was in Russia. I have always believed that the AngloZionist Empire will have to be brought down from the outside, most probably by a combination of military and economic defeats. I still believe that. However, I might be wrong – in fact, I hope that I am – and maybe Trump will be the guy to bring down the Empire in order to save the United States. If there is such a possibility, however slim, I think that we have to believe in it and act on it as all the alternatives are far worse. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West , How America Was Lost , and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order . Newsletter Notifications Signup Form

Doc Chaos

All true, except... We see outrageous things printed and sworn to that are indeed outright lies. That's propaganda and we've had plenty. Being held accountable about allegations would certainly help eliminate a lot of it. We need and we seek the truth. Influence peddlers pay out lots of cash to trolls from the top down. Do you give one ounce of credibility to the main stream media anymore? What if they had to research and prove all the things they allege and have to eat their headlines if untrue? See, that's what missing, an honest 4th Estate. Our news is owned by influence peddlers and they should be held liable.

Highlights From Judge Gorsuch’s Confirmation Hearing - The New York Times

Adam Liptak, Charlie Savage, Matt Flegenheimer and Carl Hulse

Here are highlights from Judge Neil M. Gorsuch’s third day at his Senate confirmation hearings: ■ Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, asked Judge Gorsuch why, when he was a Bush administration Justice Department official in 2005, he had scribbled “yes” on a document beside a question about whether C. I. A. torture of terrorism suspects had yielded valuable intelligence. He said was merely acting as a lawyer. ■ Senator Patrick J. Leahy, a Democrat, pushed Judge Gorsuch to say whether a president has constitutional powers to lawfully override torture and wiretap statutes. Judge Gorsuch said he would approach such a case using analysis set out when President Harry S. Truman tried to seize steel mills. ■ Mr. Leahy also pressed Judge Gorsuch to say whether he would recuse himself from Supreme Court cases involving the Colorado billionaire Philip Anschutz, who was a former client and helped get him appointed to the appeals court. Judge Gorsuch did not answer directly. ■ The nominee would not discuss whether President Trump’s business dealings with foreign governments might run afoul of the Emoluments Clause, an obscure constitutional provision that the judge said “has sat in a rather dusty corner” until recently. ■ Judge Gorsuch defended his originalist judicial philosophy, assuring skeptics that “no one is looking to return us to the days. ” ■ When asked about his views on cameras recording Supreme Court proceedings, Judge Gorsuch would say only that he would keep an open mind. ■ The energy level in the hearing room in the Hart Senate Office Building was noticeably diminished from the previous two days. There was a clear sense that the proceedings were winding down. ■ Byron White’s Supreme Court hearing took only 90 minutes. Judge Gorsuch’s is in its third day. Here are some highlights so far: Senator Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, pressed Judge Gorsuch about a document from his time as a senior Justice Department official in . It was a set of questions about the C. I. A. program, including: “Have the aggressive interrogation techniques employed by the administration yielded any valuable intelligence? Have they ever stopped a terrorist incident? Examples?” In the margin next to this, Judge Gorsuch had scribbled, “Yes. ” Ms. Feinstein, who was the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee when it conducted an investigation into the torture program that concluded otherwise — asked Judge Gorsuch what information he had received that led him to write “yes. ” He replied: “My recollection of 12 years ago is that that was the position that the clients were telling us. I was a lawyer. My job was as an advocate, and we were dealing with detainee litigation. That was my job. ” Senator Leahy, of Vermont, also returned to the question of whether Judge Gorsuch believed in the Bush administration’s theory that the president, as could override torture and surveillance laws. Asked about that on Tuesday, Judge Gorsuch had repeatedly said the president was not “above the law. ” Mr. Leahy pointed out that Mr. Bush’s legal team did not argue that he was “above the law,” but rather that “the law” meant the Constitution gave presidents inherent authority to lawfully bypass such statutes. The senator pressed Judge Gorsuch to be more specific. He replied that “presidents make all sorts of arguments about inherent authority — they do — and that is why we have courts, to decide. ” Mr. Leahy followed up, asking whether Judge Gorsuch could think of a case in which a court decided that a president could override a statute. Judge Gorsuch said he could not think of one, and Mr. Leahy agreed. This was almost certainly the first confirmation hearing to feature questions on the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which may bar President Trump’s businesses from doing business with companies controlled by foreign governments. The clause says that “no person holding any office of profit or trust” shall “accept of any present, emolument, office or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince or foreign state” unless Congress consents. The word emolument means compensation for labor or services. Asked about the clause by Senator Leahy, Judge Gorsuch said “the Emoluments Clause has sat in a rather dusty corner” and “is not a clause that has attracted a lot of attention until recently. ” But Judge Gorsuch would say no more given what he said was at least potential litigation on the subject. Lawsuits have been filed against President Trump, claiming he has violated the clause. “I have to be very careful about expressing any views,” Judge Gorsuch said. Senator Leahy also asked Judge Gorsuch to say whether he would continue on the Supreme Court to recuse himself from cases involving the Colorado billionaire Philip Anschutz, with whom he has various ties. Among those ties: Mr. Anschutz was Judge Gorsuch’s former client and in 2006, he successfully lobbied the Bush White House to appoint Mr. Gorsuch to the appeals court. Mr. Leahy noted that Judge Gorsuch had left the door open to changing his appeals court practice and participating in cases involving Mr. Anschutz’s interests on the Supreme Court. Judge Gorsuch did not answer directly, saying he would study the law and the practices of his colleagues and the facts before making a decision. But Mr. Leahy pointed out that the law was the same for both appeals court judges and Supreme Court justices, except that justices’ decisions not to recuse themselves cannot be appealed to anyone. There is scant precedent about how justices have interpreted whether cases involving former clients raise an actual or apparent conflict of interest because few modern justices had extensive backgrounds in private practice. But Justice Clarence Thomas, who worked as counsel for Monsanto from 1977 to 1979, has participated in cases involving that company. Judge Gorsuch echoed earlier Republican Supreme Court nominees when he said American courts should not look to foreign and international law in interpreting the Constitution. “As a general matter I’d say it’s improper to look abroad when interpreting our Constitution,” Judge Gorsuch said. In his 2005 confirmation hearing, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said something similar. “Foreign law, you can find anything you want,” Chief Justice Roberts said. “Looking at foreign law for support is like looking out over a crowd and picking out your friends. ” But the Supreme Court has consulted foreign sources in cases on gay rights and the death penalty, and its more liberal justices say it is proper to take account of wisdom from abroad. “Foreign opinions are not authoritative they set no binding precedent for the U. S. judge,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in a 2006 address to the Constitutional Court of South Africa. “But they can add to the story of knowledge relevant to the solution of trying questions. ” Judge Gorsuch said foreign courts do consider American law. “Everybody else looks to us,” he said. Democrats have struggled to find an attack line that sticks against Judge Gorsuch. But they appeared to sense a potential opening outside the hearing room: a Supreme Court decision on Wednesday that lawmakers sought to frame as a rebuke of the nominee. Not long after he started his testimony on Wednesday, Judge Gorsuch defended an opinion he had written that ruled against an autistic student whose parents had sought reimbursement for his education under a federal law, the Individuals with Disability Education Act. Judge Gorsuch said he had merely applied a standard set out in a Supreme Court decision as interpreted by an earlier decision of his court, the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver. At about the same time Wednesday, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision saying the 10th Circuit had been wrong. All that was required from public school systems, the 10th Circuit had said, was a “more than de minimis” benefit. Writing for the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. disagreed. “When all is said and done, a student offered an educational program providing ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all. ” Asked about the Supreme Court decision later on Wednesday, Judge Gorsuch said he had been bound by precedents from the Supreme Court and from the 10th Circuit in the opinion he had written. Still, Democrats quickly pounced. “President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, was unanimously rebuked today by the Supreme Court,” said Senator Chuck Schumer of New York and the Democrats’ leader. He also said the case reinforced “a continued, troubling pattern of Judge Gorsuch deciding against everyday Americans — even children who require special assistance at school. Fortunately, in this case, every single justice on the court agreed that Judge Gorsuch was wrong. ” Republican aides, for perhaps the first time all week, appeared on the defensive, sending out talking points that Judge Gorsuch was not on the panel in the case and did not invent the relevant legal test. He was merely adhering to binding precedent, they said. It has been the custom of Supreme Court nominees to endorse video coverage of arguments in the court during their confirmation hearings — only to retreat later on. Judge Gorsuch would not even go that far. Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked Judge Gorsuch on Wednesday morning to keep an open mind on the topic. The judge agreed to do that much. On Tuesday, Judge Gorsuch said cameras in the courtroom were “not a question that I confess I’ve given a great deal of thought to,” adding that, “I’ve experienced more cameras in the last few weeks than I have in my whole lifetime by a long, long way. ” The last two successful Supreme Court nominees, Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, endorsed camera coverage at their hearings. “I have had positive experiences with cameras,” Justice Sotomayor said in 2009. In 2010, Justice Kagan said video coverage “would be a great thing for the institution, and more important, I think it would be a great thing for the American people. ” After joining the court, the two justices started expressing doubts about the value of letting citizens see their government at work.

Major Voter Fraud Already Running Rampant Against Republicans

The European Union Times

We have compiled a huge list of voter fraud incidents which were caught in the early voting process, all of it done by Hillary Clinton’s supporters against Republican candidate Donald Trump. So far there hasn’t been a single case where Republicans were caught doing voter fraud for Donald Trump. Remember the following list is a compilation of CAUGHT cases. Imagine how many more there might be out there uncaught. NEVADA – CAUGHT ON VIDEO Hillary Supporters Commit Voter Fraud in Las Vegas — Again! INDIANA – More Crooked Democrats : Police Raid Offices of Indiana Voter Registration Project in Voter Fraud Case NORTH CAROLINA -North Carolina Hillary Supporter Brags on Facebook About Voting Multiple Times PENNSYLVANIA – BREAKING: PA STATE POLICE RAID Democrat Group For Evidence Of Voter Fraud FLORIDA – GOP Alleges VOTER FRAUD in Broward County – Democrats Opened TENS OF THOUSANDS of Ballots TEXAS -Texas Woman – Who Is Not a US Citizen – BUSTED for Voting 5 Times in Texas CALIFORNIA – Voter Fraud: 83 Ballots , With 83 Different Names, Sent to One Address in LA County NATIONWIDE – Election “results” have already been shown in advance, in error, on multiple major news outlets such as CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC. – Third-party Voters Are “Trading Votes” With Clinton Voters To Defeat Trump – Democrats are suing Roger Stone on bogus charges of “voter intimidation” for only wanting to conduct AFTER -voting exit polling! Exit polling is not only legal but its something done in all civilized countries in the world. Democrats want to steal and prevent anyone from exposing their thievery. Exit polling provides perfectly accurate results and if in some state GOP gets for example 55% in exit polls and then 40% or whatever in final results, then we know there was fraud involved in that state. The usual accepted error between actual final results and exit polling can’t be bigger than 2%.

WATCH – Video Leaked From Obama’s 2008 Campaign Is Every Trump Hater’s Worst Nightmare

Home / News / WATCH – Video Leaked From Obama’s 2008 Campaign Is Every Trump Hater’s Worst Nightmare WATCH – Video Leaked From Obama’s 2008 Campaign Is Every Trump Hater’s Worst Nightmare fisher 6 mins ago News , USA , World Comments Off on WATCH – Video Leaked From Obama’s 2008 Campaign Is Every Trump Hater’s Worst Nightmare WATCH – Video Leaked From Obama ’s 2008 Campaign Is Every Trump Hater’s Worst Nightmare These days it has most certainly become chic for the modern liberal to throw about accusations of racism. Although this type of race-baiting has been going on for a number of years now, it became more noticeable during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. When these liberals accuse Donald Trump of being racist, they had better be careful for one specific reason: A leaked video from 2008 shows that during President Obama ’s first campaign, he was also concerned about border security, and he even suggested a wall! Now, there is just one dominant question anti- Trump individuals need to digest: Is Obama a racist too? Because he was talking about some things you could easily accuse Trump of. Let’s play a quick game. If you didn’t know who said this, would you think it was Donald Trump in 2016 or Barack Obama in 2008? This man’s core goal was to “preserve the integrity of our borders to reduce illegal immigration.” Does this sound like Trump or Obama ? How about this one? This man said, “additional fencing could help get our border under control.” Definitely sounds more like a GOP candidate than a Democrat one, that’s for sure. Finally, this man also supported “additional personnel, infrastructure, and technology on our border and at ports of entry.” Liberals would love to claim these quotes came from Donald J. Trump , especially considering he is the villain du jour in their lives at the moment. I hate to steal their thunder, but these quotes did indeed come from a young Barack Obama in 2008. Even he understood the need for a controlled border before the special interests in this country got to him. So, it is one thing when leaked videos show Hillary Clinton believed border security was important. It was entirely another when they showed that her husband thought it was important, but when liberal idol Barack Obama says it? Say it isn’t so! Liberals just can’t handle that. But anyway, folks, it is all about platforms. I’m sure you have learned by now that Donald Trump doesn’t get the free pass other politicians in this country enjoy. First of all, he is a conservative, so he is already someone every liberal loves to hate. Republicans have been so badly demonized in this country simply for desiring to get it under control. Luckily, people saw through the propaganda and decided that Obama ’s brand was simply not working any longer. People are fed up with politicians who say one thing and do another. If you are looking for a reason why Donald Trump is the new president and not Hillary Clinton, there you go.

Enjoykin4

A leading US senator: US Supporting War in Syria A leading US senator said the war in Syria would have been over by now if the US had put an end to its intervention when Russia entered the war-ravaged country. “If the United States had just stayed out of it at that point, the war would be over by now; people would be rebuilding, refugees would be returning back to Syria, but the United States rushed anti-Tank missiles, and we used these so-called moderate rebels as a conduit to supply al-Nusra Front (also known as Fatah al-Sham Front), which is al-Qaeda in Syria,” republican member of the Virginia State in US Senate, Richard Hayden Black said in an exclusive interview with Press TV. “If we were not supporting the war in Syria, I believe that the Syrians, combined with their allied forces from Iran, Lebanon and Russia… would move very steadily and restore the borders of Syria.” The senate member, who visited Syria in April, refused to distinguish between militants and terrorists fighting the government of President Bashar al-Assad, saying, the two are “thoroughly integrated.” “They really are one and the same, they’re part of the same army,” he said, citing a US defense intelligence agency’s investigation in 2013, which showed Washington’s ties with the terror group. The outspoken state senator referred to plans by the CIA to transfer arms from Libya to Turkey and from there to Syria to supply the militants, noting that the move “evolved into an indiscriminate program of supplying all militant groups, including specifically ISIL and al-Qaeda.” “We do it indirectly because it’s unlawful to do it directly,” he said, adding that the US keeps “extremely violent organizations… off the terrorist watch list because these are the agents that take our weapons and then distribute them to ISIL and al-Qaeda.” In response to a question on why Iran and Russia are portrayed as the “bad guys,” while they are the ones really fighting terrorism there, as put recently by GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, Black said the Republican candidate has a “clear understanding of what’s happening over there.” “Sometimes, his rhetoric has to match the political mood of the moment… but I know a number of his advisers and they believe that our determination to topple the government in Syria is suicidal, that it threatens not only the entire Middle East but literally the entire world.” He further warned that the US itself could be “threatened,” arguing that, “if Syria falls, it will be dominated by some al-Qaeda-related organization; Lebanon will fall; Jordan will fall and the entire area will be destabilized.” The Vietnam war veteran also elaborated on his personal definition of the Middle East “axis of evil,” naming Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and “particularly” Turkey over their support for terrorism. “Probably, three quarters of the rebels are not Syrian at all, they are mercenaries recruited by Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia,” he asserted, describing the three countries as “the primary force behind the terrorist movement.” “Turkey has invaded Iraq and Syria with heavy military forces. Turkey has really become a rogue nation,” he added, referring to a 1923 treaty that set the border between Turkey and Greece, saying that was even being questioned by President Rececp Tayyip Erdogan. “And now you see this emerging threat against Western Europe by Turkey,” he noted, further adding that Erdogan “has made it clear that he looks to resurrection of the Ottoman Empire.” “He has become more and more aggressive; he’s crushed the military, the free press; every powerful institution of the Turkish government has come under his iron fist and he’s now a total dictator. He’s a man who has said that he wants the constitution amended so that he will have power similar to those of Adolf Hilter… This is our great ally; we’re allied with a man who would be Hitler.” He also blasted Washington’s alliance with Saudi Arabia, “where women are not allowed to walk out in the front yard to pick up the newspaper without a man’s permission; they can’t drive a car!” “Somehow, this is part of the liberalization that we seek to impose on the Middle East,” he said ironically, calling it “bizarre.” He also praised the resistance against the Saudi aggression by the people of Yemen, saying, “God bless them! The Yemenis are giving the Saudis a bloody nose,” despite being a “tiny little, poor nation.” “I think the world recognizes that Saudi Arabia has just embarked in massive war crimes in Yemen,” he said, voicing regret over the US support for the monarchy. “We don’t pay too much attention to them while engaged in war crimes because they’re our good allies,” he said, concluding that Washington is on a “suicidal course of action.” “Saudi money pays the very top politicians in many Western nations. And they really have co-opted the American military into acting as mercenaries for Wahhabism.”Black referred to the Western media’s portrayal of Iran as a supporter of terrorism, saying, “The fact of the matter is that if you really look at global terrorism, it all emanates from Saudi Arabia.” He exemplified various terrorists attack, including the 9/11, the Boston bombing, and the Brussels attacks, noting that they are all a “reflection of the Wahhabi philosophy.”

Another Baltimore Police Officer Acquitted in Freddie Gray Case - The New York Times

Jess Bidgood

BALTIMORE — It was the third straight acquittal, by the same judge, on the same set of facts: On Monday, Lt. Brian Rice, the Baltimore police officer charged in the death of Freddie Gray, was found not guilty of three charges, including involuntary manslaughter. And a question that has been simmering among some legal observers ever since acquittals began piling up in the prosecution immediately turned to a full boil: With no convictions to show in four trials related to the death of Mr. Gray, a black man who sustained a fatal spinal cord injury during an arrest in which he rode unsecured in a police van, should prosecutors drop a retrial and the two others that remain? “It would seem at this point the state has exhausted all of its possible theories, and should give real consideration to ending these prosecutions,” said Warren Alperstein, a defense lawyer in Baltimore who has been closely following the trials. “There are many that would argue it’s time to cut the losses. ” Another local defense lawyer, Warren A. Brown, put it differently as he reflected on the fact that Judge Barry G. Williams had again determined that prosecutors did not present enough evidence to prove that the officer on trial had committed a crime. “The facts are the same in all the cases,” Mr. Brown said. “If you keep going to the store with 89 cents, and they keep telling you you need a dollar, why are you going to keep going back?” Defense lawyers are, by definition, apt to scrutinize prosecutors, and there has been no indication that prosecutors plan to drop the cases. Other observers have praised the trials for raising important issues. But the questions underscore the challenges as they press ahead. Two of the three previous trials, of Officers Edward M. Nero and Caesar R. Goodson Jr. ended in acquittals. The trial of Officer William G. Porter was declared a mistrial. The death of Mr. Gray in April 2015 shook this city to its core, spurring violent protests, and became a grim fixture of the reckoning over how police officers use force against minorities, particularly black men. In May of last year, the city’s top prosecutor, Marilyn J. Mosby, announced charges against six police officers in Mr. Gray’s death, prompting cheers from activists and quelling the nightly unrest that had gripped parts of the city. It was not expected to be easy it is rare to charge police officers with crimes, and rarer still for them to be convicted. Since then, cases of shootings by the police in Baton Rouge, La. and Falcon Heights, Minn. have outraged activists anew, and the country has been shaken by the deaths of eight police officers in two attacks, in Dallas and Baton Rouge. And in Baltimore, prosecutors have scrutinized the same narrative in trial after trial, bringing little resolution to lingering questions about the death of Mr. Gray and failing to secure a single conviction against any of the officers. The outcomes have fueled criticism that Ms. Mosby’s charges were too ambitious or politically motivated, and have eroded the confidence, even among supporters of the trials, that a conviction can ever be secured. “She put her job on the line — she put her life on the line to do the right thing, but where it happened and where it got lost, I don’t know,” said Tawanda Jones, who stood with a small group of demonstrators outside the downtown courthouse after the verdict was announced Monday. “I’m convinced that we will absolutely get no convictions. ” Ms. Jones then headed to a news conference to mark the three years that have passed since the death of her brother, Tyrone West, after a struggle with the police. Judge Williams, a former federal prosecutor who built winning cases against officers himself, read his verdict from the bench and began with a warning: “At this time, and all times, it is critical for this court not to base any decision on public opinion or emotion,” he said before methodically dismantling the case against Lieutenant Rice, who was the officer who first called in the foot chase of Mr. Gray in downtrodden West Baltimore. And, prosecutors said, he climbed into the van with Mr. Gray but failed to secure him with a seatbelt, which they said had set in motion a chain of events that led to Mr. Gray’s death. But Judge Williams said they had not proved that Lieutenant Rice was grossly negligent in failing to use a seatbelt on Mr. Gray or, indeed, that his failure to do so had led to Mr. Gray’s death. “This court does not find that the state has proven that the defendant was aware that the failure to seatbelt created a risk of death or serious physical injury to Mr. Gray under the facts presented,” he said. As the judge concluded his ruling, supporters of Lieutenant Rice pressed in to congratulate him. They included Officers Nero and Goodson and another officer, Garrett E. Miller, who is set to be tried this month. Ms. Mosby was not in the courtroom. In addition to Officer Miller, Sgt. Alicia D. White and Officer Porter, who faces a retrial, are still set to have their day in court. Officers Miller and Porter will have to be tried by a new team of prosecutors, because they have already been questioned on the stand by the main prosecutors on the case. “An office that believes a crime occurred can see benefits in making a statement that criminal activity will not be tolerated by their office and that they value the lives of every member of the community, and that can justify pursuing cases,” said David Jaros, an assistant professor of law at the University of Baltimore. But, Professor Jaros added, “there’s no question that after today, the hurdles seem as high as they’ve ever been. ”

[Vidéo] Que trouve-t-on dans « Le Gorafi de l’Année 2017 » ? >> Le Gorafi

2:00PM Water Cooler 10/27/2016

Lambert Strether

by Lambert Strether I’m about to take down the thermometers from the 2016 Fundraiser. Thank you, readers, for helping us to exceed our goals! However, if you somehow missed out, you can visit our fundraiser page to see how to contribute by check, credit or debit card, or PayPal . And thanks again for all your support! By Lambert Strether of Corrente . TTP, TTIP, TISA CETA: “EU’s Canada free-trade CETA deal could be back on as Walloons agree to last-minute deal” [ Telegraph ]. “Belgium’s Prime Minister Charles Michel said that Wallonia was now in agreement, and the regional parliaments may now agree to CETA by the end of Friday night, opening the door to the deal being signed. Mr Tusk said that once the regional votes had taken place, he will inform Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Any extra concessions given to Wallonia may mean other countries will want to look again at the deal, however.” (The BBC’s headline, then — “EU-Canada trade deal: Belgians break Ceta deadlock” — is quite irresponsible. As is– CETA: “Belgium breaks Ceta deadlock” [ EUObserver ]. Not quite: Belgium’s political entities agreed to a declaration on Thursday (26 October), which gives their government a green light to sign Ceta, the EU-Canada trade pact. The agreement was promptly sent to EU ambassadors in Brussels, to be discussed later in the afternoon. After a week of marathon negotiations, Belgian prime minister Charles Michel said that Thursday’s talks had calmed “outstanding concerns”. As part of the trade-off, Belgium will ask the European Court of Justice to clarify the proposed investment court system, which was one of the most controversial elements of the trade deal. Ceta was due to be signed off by EU leaders and Canada’s prime minister Justin Trudeau at a summit in Brussels on Thursday. Trudeau cancelled the trip during the night as no agreement had been reached in Brussels. It’s not known when the summit will take place, or whether the Belgian go-ahead was the last hurdle. The other 27 EU countries must first accept the Belgian deal. At their meeting on Thursday, EU ambassadors will be accompanied by lawyers and representatives of the EU institutions, who will examine the legality and consequences of the text. The Walloon parliament will vote on the agreement on Friday. Still, how do we slay these undead deals? The same thing happened with TPP. CETA: “The great CETA swindle” [ Corporate Europe Observatory ]. “The latest PR move is a “joint interpretative declaration” on the trade deal hammered out by Ottawa and Brussels and published by investigative journalist collective Correctiv last Friday. It is designed to alleviate public concerns but in fact does nothing to fix CETA’s flaws. In September, Canada’s Trade Minister, Chrystia Freeland, and her German counterpart, Sigmar Gabriel, had announced such a text to appease Social Democrats, trade unions and the wider public who fear that CETA would threaten public services, labour and environmental standards and undermine governments’ right to regulate in the public interest. Several governments, notably Austria, had linked their ‘yes’ to CETA to the declaration. [But] According to environmental group Greenpeace, the declaration therefore has the ‘legal weight of a holiday brochure’.” Legal experts have also warned that the declaration “could be misleading for non-lawyers, who might think that the Declaration will alter or override the CETA”. But it does not change CETA’s legal terms – and it is these terms which have raised concerns. As Canadian law Professor Gus van Harten explains: “Based on principles of treaty interpretation, the CETA will be interpreted primarily according to the text of its relevant provisions…. The Declaration would play a subsidiary role, if any, in this interpretative process.” In other words, legally (and thus politically), the CETA text is far more important than the declaration – and the former could prevail over the latter in case of a conflictive interpretation. The post then goes on to analyze the provisions of the declaration in detail, comparing them to the text. (Readers may remember that TPP advocates have made the same sort of claim for the TPP Preamble, which the text also over-rides . So, the Belgians are smart to get a court ruling on this. And we might also expect the adminsitration to use similar tactics to (the toothless distraction of) the CETA “resolution” in the upcoming attempt to pass the TPP. “Belgian officials were discussing a working document aimed at addressing Wallonia’s concerns on the trade deal. The document, published by Belgian state media RTBF, shows that Belgium is moving toward requesting additional safeguards for the agricultural sector ‘in cases of market turbulence.’ It also puts forward a number of requests regarding the investor court system, including ‘progressing towards hiring judges on a permanent basis'” [ Politico ]. This seems to be a different document from the “declaration”; it was leaked by a different source. Here is is; it’s in French . TPP: “Eight major financial services industry associations made an appeal to congressional leaders to support passage of the TPP this year, arguing that the deal is ‘vital to ensuring that the U.S. financial services sector remains a vibrant engine for domestic and global growth'” [ Politico ]. What the heck is a “vibrant engine”? Maybe a screw loose or something? Needs a tightening to stop the shaking and shimmying? TPP: “Health, labor and consumer groups are warning President Barack Obama to refrain from including a 12-year monopoly period for biological drugs in legislation to implement the TPP as a means for addressing congressional concerns over the pact. The groups argue that such a move could undermine future efforts to shorten that protection period under U.S. law” [ Politico ]. “The letter, signed by Doctors Without Borders, the AFL-CIO, AARP, Oxfam and Consumers Union, also expresses concern over reports that the administration is prepared to negotiate side letters with TPP countries to reinforce U.S. lawmaker demands that countries respect a 12-year protection period, which reflects U.S. law.” “The case against free trade – Part 1” [ Bill Mitchell ]. 2016 Days until: 11. That’s only one more than ten days! Corruption “As a longtime Bill Clinton adviser came under fire several years ago for alleged conflicts of interest involving a private consulting firm and the Clinton Foundation, he mounted an audacious defense: Bill Clinton’s doing it, too” [ Politico ]. “The unusual and brash rejoinder from veteran Clinton aide and Teneo Consulting co-founder Doug Band is scattered across the thousands of hacked emails published by WikiLeaks, but a memo released Wednesday provides the most detailed look to date at the intertwined worlds of nonprofit, for-profit, official and political activities involving Clinton and many of his top aides. The memo at one point refers bluntly to the money-making part of Clinton’s life as ‘Bill Clinton Inc.’ and notes that in at least one case a company — global education firm Laureate International Universities — began paying Clinton personally after first being a donor to the Clinton Foundation. I think it’s important for young women and girls to see that a corrupt dynasty can occupy the White House a second time. “Inside ‘Bill Clinton Inc.’: Hacked memo reveals intersection of charity and personal income” [ WaPo ]. Gives “intersectionality” a new twist, eh? Rather a lot of detail in this; well worth a read. War Drums “Societies Under Siege is a sophisticated account of how, and why, economic sanctions applied in recent years to South Africa, Iraq and Myanmar affected the politics of those three countries without achieving the goals that the Western politicians which dictated them intended” [ Asian Affairs ]. The Voters “Goldman Sachs: Election Won’t End Like Brexit” [Barrons, via Across the Curve ]. “We think that the upcoming U.S. election won’t end up as another Brexit-styled surprise for for two reasons.” First, and most importantly, whole both situations represented an opportunity for voters to endorse a change in the status quo, voters in the UK were asked to decide on an idea whereas in the US they are being asked to decide on a person. The distinction is illustrated in US polling by the difference between the small share of Americans who believe the country is moving in the right direction (29%) and majority who approve of the job President Obama is doing (52%). Second. While the polls conducted on the eve of the referendum vote showed “remain” with a 4.6pp lead, in contrast to the 3.8pp actual vote margin in favor of “leave”, an average of polls published by the Economist magazine the day before the election showed a tied race, and showed “leave” leading for much of the prior month. As much as 10% of the public in many of these surveys was also undecided. By contrast, Sec. Clinton has led the average of presidential polls consistently for more than a year, with the exception of one week in late July following the Republican convention, and for most of the last year her lead has been substantial, averaging 4pp since the last primary elections were held. Includes a wrap-up of polling methodologies as well. The Trail “Win or lose, the Republican candidate and his inner circle have built a direct marketing operation that could power a TV network—or finish off the GOP” [ Bloomberg ]. Fascinating article. Son of Berlusconi? Realignment “For decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been making steady gains among upper income whites and whites with college and postgraduate degrees. This year, however, is the first time in at least six decades that the Democratic nominee is positioned to win a majority of these upscale voters” [ New York Times ]. “What these figures suggest is that the 2016 election will represent a complete inversion of the New Deal order among white voters. From the 1930s into the 1980s and early 1990s, majorities of downscale whites voted Democratic and upscale whites voted Republican. Now, looking at combined male and female vote totals, the opposite is true.” “Elizabeth Warren, the Democrats’ Madame Defarge, and Bernie Sanders, winner of 22 millennial-fueled primaries, are going to guarantee the revolution’s purity in any Clinton presidency” [ Wall Street Journal , “The Warren-Sanders Presidency”]. “For starters, they have a list. Politico reported in early September that Sen. Warren and progressive policy groups such as the Roosevelt Institute are ‘developing a hit list of the types of people they’ll oppose—what one source called ‘hell no’ appointments—in a Clinton administration.'” Well, we can but hope that the Roosevelt Institute has improved since 2011 . Readers? Democrat Email Hairball Stats Watch Durable Goods Orders, September 2016: “Flat is the takeaway from the September durable goods report” [ Econoday ]. “Capital goods data are mixed. The good news is a 0.3 percent rise in core shipments (nondefense ex-aircraft) and an upward revision to August which is now unchanged. These results should give a boost to the business investment component of tomorrow’s third-quarter GDP report. But the bad news is the indication on future core shipments as orders fell a very steep 1.2 percent. … A concern in the report is continuing contraction in unfilled orders….” But: “This series has wide swings monthly so our primary metric is the three month rolling average which improved but remains in contracton. The real issue here is that inflation is starting to grab in this sector making real growth much less than appears at face value” [ Econintersect ]. And but: “This should have been doing better by now, indicating that, in general, unspent income is still not being sufficiently offset by deficit spending, public or private” [ Mosler Economics ]. Jobless Claims, week of October 22, 2016: “Initial jobless claims fell” [ Econoday ]. “All of the data in this report are at or near historic lows. Employers are holding onto their employees even as employment growth has slowed this year.” But: “The trend of the 4 week moving average is continuing to marginally worsened. The trend of year-over-year improvement of initial unemployment claims is moderating – and this trend historically indicates a weakening GDP” [ Econintersect ]. Kansas City Fed Manufacturing Index, October 2016: “A year-and-a-half of unrelenting contraction makes for easy comparisons, a factor behind what is now a rising trend for Kansas City manufacturing” [ Econoday ]. “Not all the early indications on this month’s factory activity are positive but the data in this report, along with the Philly Fed and national PMI flash, are definitely positive and are pointing to a fast start for the fourth quarter.” And: “̌ The Kansas City region was hit hard by the decline in oil prices, and it appears activity is starting to expand again” [ Calculated Risk ]. Pending Home Sales Index, September 2016: “Final sales of existing homes picked up sharply in September as did contract signings. Pending sales rose 1.5 percent in the month for the best showing since April” [ Econoday ]. And: “[A]bove expectations” [ Calculated Risk ]. But: “The unadjusted data shows the rate of year-over-year growth slowed this month. Even though I view the minutiae of the data differently, I agree with the [National Association of Realtors’] bottom line. There is not enough inventory – and this is slowing sales volumes all whilst creating a price bubble.” (The Econoday summary does not mention the NAR bottom line.) Bloomberg Consumer Comfort Index, week of October 23, 2016: “[U]p an outsized 2.6 points” (but volatile) [ Econoday ]. Household Income: “The September 2016 median is not significantly different than the median of $57,403 in December 2007, the beginning month of the recession that occurred more than eight years ago” [ Econintersect ]. “And the September 2016 median is now 0.8 percent lower than the median of $58,085 in January 2000, the beginning of this statistical series.” Thanks, Obama! Shipping: “[UPS] company said average daily shipments in the U.S. increased 5.7% in its latest quarter” [ Wall Street Journal , “UPS’s Revenue Tops Views”]. Hmm. Stuff is moving. Shipping: “Drewry estimates that [shipping container] revenue for 2016 may reach $143 billion, although this means a negative trend when compared to $218 billion earned in 2012” [ Guardian Nigeria ]. “We forecast industry profitability to recover next year, thanks to improving freight rates and slightly higher cargo volumes, and so record a modest operating profit of $2.5 billion in 2017,’ it said. …‘The fact that the order book is at a virtual standstill is a major positive as is rapidly increased scrapping. But even so, the next two years will still be very challenging on the supply side with annual fleet growth of between 5 per cent and 6 per cent and many more ultra large container vessels (ULCVs) to be delivered,’ Drewry said.” Rail: “Norfolk Southern felt the ongoing decline in commodities business, with revenue from coal and chemicals off by double digits. But the railroad is also slashing costs and says it’s on its way to productivity savings of more than $650 million. That could bring a big boost in profits if demand heats up” [ Wall Street Journal ]. Today’s Fear & Greed Index: 45 Neutral (previous close: 43, Fear) [ CNN ]. One week ago: 38 (Fear). (0 is Extreme Fear; 100 is Extreme Greed). Last updated Oct 27 at 11:21am. It’s like the kids don’t want to go into the haunted house, even if it is starting to rain. Heatlh Care “Health Law Tax Penalty? I’ll Take It, Millions Say” [ New York Times ]. “Some consumers who buy insurance on the exchanges still feel vulnerable. Deductibles are so high, they say, that the insurance seems useless. So some think that whether they send hundreds of dollars to the I.R.S. or thousands to an insurance company, they are essentially paying something for nothing.” “An expert explains what is broken with Obamacare — and how to fix it” [ Vox ]. Larry Levitt, expert: “I think of the mandate as going hand in hand with the subsidies. It is entirely possible that both the mandate penalty and the premium subsidy are too small to make coverage affordable and convince enough people that they should buy it.” Because markets. And shame, shame on Sarah Kliff for letting Levitt leave single payer off the table. “Drug maker thwarted plan to limit OxyContin prescriptions at dawn of opioid epidemic” [ Stat ]. You can fit the players right into this post: “Credentialism and Corruption: The Opioid Epidemic and ‘the Looting Professional Class.'” Our Famously Free Press “Facebook’s Trending Algorithm Can’t Stop Fake News, Computer Scientists Say” [ Buzzfeed ]. By scaling internationally, Facebook is creating a situation whereby future Trending failures will potentially occur at a scale unheard of in the history of human communication. Fake stories and other dubious content could reach far more people faster than ever before. For Trending to become a reliable, global product, it will need to account for the biases, bad actors, and other challenges that are endemic to Facebook and the news media. Put another way, in order to succeed, the Trending algorithm needs to be better than the very platform that spawned it. That’s because fake news is already polluting the platform’s News Feed organically. A recent BuzzFeed News analysis of giant hyperpartisan Facebook pages found that 38% of posts on conservative pages and 19% of posts on liberal pages featured false or misleading content Imperial Collapse Watch “Rise of the American Mercenary” [ The American Conservative ]. ” [T]he rise of the contractor to wage America’s military operations is Obama’s silent national-security legacy, with more dead contractors on his watch (1,540 as of March) and little or no transparency about who these contractors are and what they do. [Foreign Policy writer Micah Zenko] scoffed at Obama’s insistence that he has pursued a ‘fight U.S. footprint’ across these lonflict zones. “Were it not for these contractors, Obama’s ‘light footprint’ would suddenly be two or three times as large,’ Zenko wrote.” Gaia ” Globalization has greased the slippery slope from factory to landfill by enabling the global distribution of defective parts. Whether they are pirated, designed to fail or just the result of slipshod quality control, the flood of defective parts guarantee that the entire assembly they are installed in–stoves, vacuum cleaners, transmissions, electronics, you name it–will soon fail and be shipped directly to the landfill, as repairing stuff is far costlier than buying a new replacement” [ Of Two Minds ]. “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was slated to hold four days of public meetings, Oct. 18-21, focused on essentially one question: Is glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, safe?” [ Alternet ]. “However, the EPA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) meetings were ‘postponed,’ just four days before they were suppose to meet, after intense lobbying by the agrichemical industry, including Monsanto. ” Class Warfare “Iowans on their wages: ‘I’m not stupid or lazy. It’s just not there'” [ Des Moines Register ]. News of the Wired “Ig Nobel perception prize winner Atsuki Higashiyama: ‘Psychology teaches us to be scientific and skeptical'” [ Japan Times ]. “HIV’s Patient Zero exonerated” [ Nature ]. “A study clarifies when HIV entered the United States and dispels the myth that one man instigated the AIDS epidemic in North America.” “I’m home! Now I will fumble for my phone in my bag, open up my Home app, find the light function, switch it on and voila! Illumination. I remember when I used to have to lift my finger and flip the switch. Ha! Losing those 10 seconds is worth feeling like I’m in the future! This is some cutting-edge shit. It’s too bad these smart lightbulbs helped take down the internet last week” [ Medium ]. Yeah, basically. “IoT Growing Faster Than the Ability to Defend It” [ Scientific American ]. “[C]onsumers will likely start paying more attention when they realize that someone could spy on them by hacking into their home’s Web cameras.” * * * Readers, feel free to contact me with (a) links, and even better (b) sources I should curate regularly, and (c) to find out how to send me images of plants. Vegetables are fine! Fungi are deemed to be honorary plants! See the previous Water Cooler (with plant) here . And here’s today’s plant (Rainbow Girl): Rainbow Girl: “Honies and Russolas.. Just picked … And then sauteed (garlic, olive oil, butter)… with prosciutto & raviolis!” Yum! 0 0 0 0 0 0

Note to America: Don’t Be So Sure You’ve Put Trump Behind You : Information

Gary Younge

Note to America: Don’t Be So Sure You’ve Put Trump Behind You Take it from a Brit, right-wing populism will thrive until you deal with it genuinely. By Gary Younge October 31, 2016 " Information Clearing House " - " The Nation " - A I ’ve been living in Britain for the last year and have returned to the United States to cover the election from a small town in Indiana—with the experience of Brexit on my mind. On June 24, a significant proportion of the British electorate woke up and thought they were living in a different country. Britain narrowly voted to leave the European Union. It felt like the politics of fear, isolation, and xenophobia had delivered an utterly devastating and enduring blow to the body politic. There are many lessons from that night, and indeed we in Britain are only just beginning to learn them. But as it relates to the American elections, I want to dwell on just three. The fact that the messenger is deranged doesn’t mean the message itself contains no significant truths. First, don’t let the polls guide your strategic decisions about voting. If you want Hillary Clinton to win, vote for her. If you favor Jill Stein, vote for her. Don’t cast your vote thinking you’re compensating for a result that has not been declared but that you think you’ve factored in. You don’t know. The Brexit result caught the currency traders, pollsters, betting agencies, and commentators off guard. One of the leading voices of the Leave campaign, Nigel Farage of the UK Independence Party, conceded defeat at 10 pm the night of the election; less than six hours later he claimed victory. As I write, polls suggest a runaway victory for Clinton. They could be right. But politics is in a very volatile state—they could also be wrong. And the only way you’ll know for sure will be when it’s too late to do anything about it. Second, the fact that the messenger is deranged doesn’t mean the message itself contains no significant truths. Before the Brexit referendum, liberals broadly dismissed Leave voters as ignorant, angry, and bigoted. Some of them were undoubtedly all three. But that’s not primarily what was driving many of them. It took the Brexit result for the nation to pay attention to communities devastated by neoliberal globalization. Had Remain won, those who were forgotten would have remained forgotten. True, politicians have drawn mostly the wrong conclusions: condemning the free movement of people rather than the free movement of capital. Nonetheless, regions long ignored, accents rarely heard, and issues seldom raised are traveling from the margins to the mainstream of British politics. Similarly, if Hillary Clinton wins, that should not blind us to some of the themes that have made Trump’s candidacy viable. In Muncie, Indiana, where I have spent most of this election season, huge manufacturing plants have closed since the passage of NAFTA, leaving one-third of the town in poverty. And while Trump’s base is not particularly poor, a significant portion of the nation is desperate. It’s not difficult to see why. The price of everything apart from labor has shot up in the past 40 years, while inequality has grown and social mobility has slumped. Trump’s original Brexit strategy of targeting Rust Belt towns in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin may not have worked electorally, but what he identified remains a politically salient fault line that doesn’t just go away if Clinton wins. If these problems are not tended to, a less erratic and more focused right-wing populist than Trump could easily exploit them. Which brings us to the third lesson. Trump is deluded about many things, but he’s right to insist that the media and political classes are out of touch with the population. They exist in a fetid ideological comfort zone where radical change is considered apostasy at precisely the moment when radical change is both necessary and popular. Leading up to the Brexit vote, leaders of the Remain campaign preferred to caricature those in the opposing camp rather than engage them. They de­rided not only the leaders of the Leave campaign but its followers. You cannot convince people they are doing well when they are not. Yet throughout the Brexit campaign, Remain advocates lectured voters on all the advantages they derived from the European Union and how much worse things would be if they left. From Tony Blair to David Cameron, people who had stiffed working people in a range of ways now insisted they alone could save them from themselves. People just weren’t buying it. Similarly, people in Muncie and elsewhere are aware that some of the worst things to come out of Washington—­including NAFTA, financial deregulation, and the Iraq War—were bipartisan efforts in which the mainstream media acted as cheerleaders. That is why, I assume, Delaware County, where Muncie resides, voted for both Trump and Bernie Sanders in the primaries. When Democrats wheel out high-ranking Republicans who now disown Trump, they don’t realize they are making Trump’s point for him: The establishment that has done nothing for you hates me—I must be doing something right . Brexit and the US elections are not synonymous. But there is plenty of overlap in the nationalist nostalgia, xenophobia, political dislocation, and class grievance that they draw upon. Time and again in Muncie, Trump supporters, some of whom voted for Obama, say they really just want to “shake things up.” They are not alone. “The Democratic establishment is very, very happy with incremental change,” says Dave Ring, who backed Bernie and runs an organic farm and food store in Muncie called the Downtown Farm Stand. “And the rest of the public is out here like, ‘We don’t have time for incremental change. We don’t have time for that. Why would we want to wait?’” This sense of urgency will not go away if Hillary wins, any more than a Remain vote would have signaled that all was well with British society. We didn’t wake up in a different country on June 24; it was simply a country we had ceased to recognize. A defeat for Trump, regardless of its magnitude, should not be misunderstood as an endorsement of the status quo. Just because you haven’t descended into the abyss, as Britain did, doesn’t mean you’re not standing dangerously close to its edge. Š 2015 The Nation FBI in Internal Feud Over Hillary Clinton Probe: The surprise disclosure that agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation are taking a new look at Hillary Clinton’s email use lays bare, just days before the election, tensions inside the bureau and the Justice Department over how to investigate the Democratic presidential nominee. Former FBI Official: FBI Has An ‘Intensive Investigation’ Ongoing Into Clinton Foundation [VIDEO] : “The FBI has an intensive investigation ongoing into the Clinton Foundation,” Fuentes said Saturday, citing current and former senior FBI officials as sources. Ex-FBI assistant director calls the Clintons a 'crime family' and claims their 'foundation is a cesspool': A former FBI official described the Clintons as a 'crime family' days after the bureau reopened its investigation into Hillary's personal email server. Hillary's emails matter: A retired CIA officer explains why: Apparently while investigating disgraced ex-Congressman Anthony Weiner’s transmission of sexually explicit images to a fifteen-year-old girl, the FBI discovered more emails relevant to Hillary Clinton’s own infamous case. Hillary's exiled aide pleads ignorance over emails on her sexting husband's laptop, but faces JAIL if it's proved she lied to FBI : Questions are mounting over right-hand woman Abedin's future on the Clinton campaign as she was pictured in New York today at campaign HQ while her boss was in Florida. Yahoo holds key to FBI probe of Hillary-Huma emails: Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton may have violated national-security laws with emails that Huma forwarded to herself at humamabedin@yahoo.com, which ended up on a laptop owned by her husband, former Congressman Anthony Weiner. Clinton’s unfavorable rating hits new high in poll | Trump targets Democratic states in final sprint: Sixty percent of voters view Hillary Clinton unfavorably, according to a ABC News/Washington Post poll released Monday morning, the highest level of unpopularity yet for the Democratic presidential nominee

Calling on Angels While Enduring the Trials of Job - The New York Times

Andy Newman

Angels are everywhere in the Muñiz family’s apartment in the Bronx: paintings of angels on the wall, ceramic angels flanking the ancient VCR, angels strumming lyres or blowing little golden trumpets on the bathroom shelves. As José and Zoraida Muñiz and their children have struggled to deal with a series of trials and setbacks, including cancer, debilitating epilepsy, deep depression and near eviction, it has sometimes seemed as if angels and love were the only forces holding things together. Zoraida’s early life in Puerto Rico was like something from a tropical Dickens novel. She and her siblings and mother built a house by hand after a hurricane ravaged their home and the children’s father withdrew support. Then Zoraida’s grandfather — the father of her absent father — destroyed the house in a rage. She was barely a teenager when she met José, a Vietnam War veteran. With permission from her uncle, a judge, they were married. She was 14. He was 29. They moved to New York in 1983 and started a new life. He built boilers. She worked in construction, using skills she learned as a child, and in a clothing store. But in 1987, Mr. Muñiz began having violent seizures — eight or 10 a day. They did not respond to medication. He could no longer work. She stopped working to take care of him. Still determined to live something like a normal life, they started a family. Their first child, José Jr. had a heart defect. By the time he was 2 he had had six operations. That’s where the angels came in — the first one was a painting, a gift from a cousin. “When they operated on my son, they told me he was an angel, because he was supposed to die,” Ms. Muñiz, 50, said. “From there I figured that angels are taking care of me and protecting me and my family. ” All the angels are gifts from friends and relatives, or picked up off the street, just like all the furniture in the Muñizes’ overstuffed apartment in a complex on Westchester Avenue in the Bronx, much of it restored by Ms. Muñiz. “So many people throw away things, so I don’t have to buy,” she said. A second son, Jesus, became epileptic at 3. A girl, Maria, completed the family. In 2007, Mr. Muñiz had what felt like a horrible, stubborn toothache. It turned out to be cancer of the lower jaw. Ms. Muñiz stayed in the room with her husband while he received radiation treatment. “I’m willing to take anything with him,” she said. “I never left him alone, and I never will. ” Radiation did not work. To save Mr. Muñiz’s life, surgeons removed his tongue and his lower jaw and cut a hole through his esophagus. Disfigured, depressed and unable to speak, he can consume nothing thicker than milk and needs care. This is the household where the Muñiz children grew up. “We’ve been through every craziness,” said José Jr. 24, who has suffered depression so severe that he dropped out of college and confined himself to the apartment, “every up and down. ” For years at a time, the family held on, seemingly by a thread. Over the summer, the younger son, Jesus, 22, got a job at a Zaro’s Bakery in Manhattan’s financial district. Because the family’s rent is tied to income, the rent tripled in August, to about $770 a month from $245. But Jesus had school bills to pay, and the family paid some of the funeral expenses for José Sr. ’s mother, who died over the summer, and things began to unravel. They fell behind on the rent and utilities. Food was often scarce. The family regularly skipped meals. It was around this time that Ms. Muñiz got in touch with Catholic Charities Archdiocese of New York, one of the eight organizations supported by The New York Times’s Neediest Cases Fund. It covered their back rent, got them warm coats and blankets and helped them apply for food stamps for the first time. And with $600 from the Neediest Cases Fund, the family paid its electric bill. Things are looking up in some ways. Jesus is returning to college, where he is on a track and wants to be a paramedic. Maria graduated in December from a nursing program. Thinking of her father and his illness, she wants to be an oncologist. José Jr. was just accepted to the New York Film Academy’s photography program. But José Sr. continues to battle cancer. Zoraida is severely depressed. What keeps her going? she was asked. She gestured toward her family, sitting beside her beneath the painted angels. “They give me my strength, even if I have times I collapse,” she said. José Jr. agreed. “I use my parents and siblings as my motivation,” he said. “We’re all there for each other,” Ms. Muñiz said.

In Europe, Is Uber a Transportation Service or a Digital Platform? - The New York Times

Mark Scott

Ever since Uber showed up in Europe in late 2011, the American service has faced vocal opposition. Some of its drivers have been attacked by angry taxi drivers in Paris. Two of the company’s most senior European executives have stood trial on charges of running an illegal transportation service in France. And taxi associations from London to Frankfurt have accused Uber of flouting local rules and undermining European rivals. The company denies the accusations. These heated battles will culminate on Tuesday in arguments before the European Court of Justice, the region’s highest court, which will most likely determine how Uber can operate across the European Union, one of the company’s largest international markets. At stake is the service’s often aggressive worldwide expansion. Uber has opened in more than 300 cities on six continents. That has helped the American tech company reach an valuation of $68 billion, making it one of the most successful ever to come out of Silicon Valley. Such rapid growth has often pitted Uber against traditional taxi services and local labor unions, which have accused the company of disregarding working standards and transportation rules. “We will fight against Uber in Germany and across Europe,” said Hermann Waldner, the head of a taxi dispatch center in Berlin. “We will try to do what we can to defend ourselves through the law. ” But as people increasingly turn to services like Uber and rivals like Lyft, policy makers worldwide are starting to question how such businesses in the sharing economy should be governed. “Our role is to encourage a regulatory environment that allows new business models to develop,” Jyrki Katainen, the European Commission vice president for jobs, growth investment and competitiveness said this year, before adding that a critical priority was “protecting consumers and ensuring fair taxation and employment conditions. ” For Uber and its rivals in Europe, the court case represents a watershed moment for how companies will be able to operate in the region. The hearing relates to a standoff between Uber and a Spanish taxi association, which filed legal proceedings in 2014, claiming unfair competition. Later that year, Uber suspended its services in the country, including its UberPop offering, which had allowed almost anyone — after some basic security checks — to use the company’s platform to pick up passengers. Uber recently returned to Spain, this time in partnership with licensed taxi drivers. In July 2015, a judge in Barcelona referred the case to the European Court of Justice, asking the court to determine whether Uber should be treated as a transportation service or merely as a digital platform. If the court decides that Uber is a transportation service, the company will have to obey Europe’s often onerous labor and safety rules, and comply with rules that apply to traditional taxi associations. Though Uber already fulfills such requirements in many European countries, the ruling could hamper its expansion plans. But if the judges rule that Uber is an “information society service,” or an online platform that merely matches independent drivers with potential passengers, then the company will have greater scope to offer products like UberPop and other services that have been banned in many parts of Europe. “This case should show that European laws fully support the development of a digital single market,” Gareth Mead, an Uber spokesman, said in a statement, referring to efforts to reduce barriers that currently restrict the access Europeans have to digital content, products and other online services. Asociación Profesional Élite Taxi, the Spanish group that brought the case, did not respond to repeated requests for comment. A ruling is not expected before March at the earliest. The judges may decide to consider Uber a transportation service, an online platform, or a combination of the two, further complicating the legal standoff. Other European taxi associations are keeping a close eye on the outcome, which will apply across the bloc. “Uber is appealing to Europe at the very moment when Europe is starting to seize upon problems linked to the web,” said Séverine Bourlier, secretary general of the National Taxi Union in France. “You can sense that countries are worried, so I think Europe is starting to think about this problem and ways to regulate it. ” The future of Uber’s European operations has become increasingly important for the company since it sold its Chinese unit this year to Didi Chuxing, a local rival, after a lengthy price war between the two companies. While Travis Kalanick, Uber’s chief executive, had targeted China for major expansion, the company settled for a minority stake in a combined Chinese operation with Didi Chuxing that is valued at roughly $35 billion. As Uber has grown beyond San Francisco, where it was founded in 2009, it has become embroiled in a number of legal disputes around the world that have challenged its business model and some of its working practices. Last month, for instance, New York State regulators ruled that two former Uber drivers were eligible for unemployment payments, finding that they should be treated as employees rather than independent contractors, as the service had maintained. A British court also recently made a similar ruling, saying that Uber drivers should receive a minimum wage and vacation pay. Mr. Kalanick has been charged in South Korea with running an illegal taxi service, an accusation the company denies, while in India, a former Uber driver was sentenced last year to life in prison for the rape of a passenger. Other businesses like Airbnb, the vacation rental site, have also been targeted for legal action, particularly in Europe, where traditional hotels have viewed such competition with skepticism. Last week, the city government in Barcelona — one of Airbnb’s largest markets — fined the company and its rival, HomeAway, a combined $1. 2 million for advertising and operating vacation rentals without appropriate licenses. BlaBlaCar, a French service, also was ordered to pay almost $10, 000 to Madrid’s regional authorities for operating without required authorization. The companies deny the allegations. Uber’s European legal woes have often set governments against one another, as countries have taken opposing views on how the company should operate. The European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, and countries like Finland and Portugal have supported such new digital services, often proposing new legislation to help them grow locally. But in other countries, notably France and Germany, national politicians have favored rules that have either banned some of Uber’s services or required the company to operate within existing transportation rules. “We’re focused on working within the regulatory environment,” said Andrew Pinnington, chief executive of MyTaxi, an Uber rival owned by Daimler, the German automaker. “We want to be seen as a constructive disrupter of the industry, not a destroyer of it. ”

Fearing Drugs’ Rare Side Effects, Millions Take Their Chances With Osteoporosis - The New York Times

Gina Kolata

Millions of Americans are missing out on a chance to avoid debilitating fractures from weakened bones, researchers say, because they are terrified of exceedingly rare side effects from drugs that can help them. Reports of the drugs’ causing jawbones to rot and thighbones to snap in two have shaken many osteoporosis patients so much that they say they would rather take their chances with the disease. Use of the most commonly prescribed osteoporosis drugs fell by 50 percent from 2008 to 2012, according to a recent paper, and doctors say the trend is continuing. Last month, three professional groups — the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, the National Osteoporosis Foundation and the National Bone Health Alliance — put out an urgent call for doctors to be more aggressive in treating patients at high risk, and for patients to be more aware of the need for treatment. It followed a flurry of recent articles in medical journals documenting and bemoaning patients’ abandonment of traditional osteoporosis drugs. But osteoporosis experts are afraid their efforts will do little to change minds. “Ninety percent of patients, when you talk to them about starting one of these drugs, won’t go on,” said Dr. Paul D. Miller, medical director of the Colorado Center for Bone Research, a medical practice in Lakewood. “Ninety percent who are on the drugs want to come off. The fear factor is huge. ” Half of those who start taking the drugs stop within a year. Even patients who just broke a hip, which makes another hip fracture extremely likely, are refusing them. In 2011, only 20 percent of patients discharged from a hospital with a broken hip had a prescription for one of the drugs, compared with 50 percent in 2002. There is little question that fractures caused by fragile bones are a real problem, particularly for women. A woman has a 50 percent chance of having an osteoporotic fracture in her remaining years. The drugs, meant to be started when bone density falls very low and the chance of a fracture soars, can reduce that risk by half, studies show. But to many, it matters little that the drugs’ frightening side effects are extremely rare. Estimates are that 10 to 40 in 100, 000 osteoporosis patients taking the drugs — including alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate and zoledronate — have sustained broken thighbones. Fewer than one in 100, 000 have had the jawbone problem. “You only need to treat 50 people to prevent a fracture, but you need to treat 40, 000 to see an atypical fracture,” said Dr. Clifford J. Rosen, a professor of medicine at Tufts University who has no association with the makers of the drugs. Lawsuits over the rare side effects resulted in large jury awards and drew widespread attention. And after reports of these problems began to surface, the Food and Drug Administration requested that the drugs’ labels include a warning about the association. Doctors had hoped that a new class of medications might avoid the rare side effects, but their hopes were dashed when Amgen announced the same problems in a clinical trial of a drug called romosozumab: a sudden shattering of a thigh bone in one patient and an area of jawbone that inexplicably rotted in two. “This was the new miracle drug,” Dr. Rosen said. “It means these effects might occur with any of the newer drugs for osteoporosis. ” Some patients say that even though their doctors have explained the relative risks to them, the specter of those side effects frightens them. That is what happened with Mildred Canipe, 79, who lives in Charlotte, N. C. She had a spine fracture two years ago and now lives with continual back pain. She worries about another spine fracture or, even worse, a fractured hip. But she resists taking osteoporosis drugs, she said, because she tends to have side effects with almost any drug, and that makes her think that if anyone will suffer an atypical fracture from the medicine, it is she. “Of course I am worried about my bones,” Mrs. Canipe said. “Who wouldn’t be? But I am between a rock and a hard place. ” She is right to worry about a hip fracture, doctors say. Those injuries are often the start of a downward spiral for older adults. Many never walk normally again. Many end up in nursing homes, unable to care for themselves. “You see someone go from being a mobile elderly person to someone gripping a walker, afraid to move,” said Joan A. McGowan, who directs the division of musculoskeletal diseases at the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. “And the less they walk, the more frail they become. ” Dr. McGowan has no associations with makers of osteoporosis drugs. The pain from spine fractures may improve, but physical disfigurement does not. Many patients with osteoporosis have multiple fractures of their spines. They become hunched and have trouble breathing. Their posture makes it hard for their hearts to pump blood, Dr. McGowan said, adding, “It’s not pretty. ” Yet it is an uphill battle trying to persuade people to take the drugs, said Dr. Steven T. Harris, an osteoporosis specialist at the University of California, San Francisco. “I have that discussion all day every day with my patients,” he said. One issue, Dr. Harris said, is the relentless promotion of diet and exercise for patients with fragile bones, which, he said, is insufficient to protect them from fractures. It gives people a false sense that they can control their risk. Another, said Dr. Ethel S. Siris, an osteoporosis expert at Columbia, is that with the drugs off patent, there is no longer an aggressive advertising push to make people aware of them. Their cost ranges from less than $10 a month for alendronate pills to about $1, 200 for a infusion of zoledronate. Doctors who have seen one of the rare patients who have an atypical fracture are shaken by the experience and have to remind themselves of the power of the data showing that the drugs’ benefits far outweigh their risks. Dr. Elaine Carlson, who until her recent retirement practiced internal medicine in Kennebunk, Me. had a patient who sustained two such fractures. The patient, 89, who asked that her name not be used to protect her privacy, said her left leg had broken suddenly when she was walking across her kitchen floor. A surgeon put in a rod and three screws, and it healed. Then, she said, her right thigh began to hurt six months later. She called Dr. Carlson’s office and was talking to her nurse practitioner when suddenly her right leg broke. She saw three doctors and had two operations before it healed, but she still cannot walk normally and can no longer do the gardening she loves. “I hobble around on a cane,” she said. “I am a cripple. ” She called the drug she took for osteoporosis “that wretched, dreadful stuff. ” Having that happen to her patient was “very tough, very tough,” Dr. Carlson said. And when the next osteoporosis patient came to her office? “Yeah, you do hesitate,” she said. “Your job is ‘do no harm. ’” But Dr. Carlson said she had continued to prescribe the drugs. “You do have to stick with the science,” she said.

A Car Accident Throws a Productive Life Into Turmoil - The New York Times

John Otis

Fresh from a promising meeting with a real estate agent, David Nublett was on his way to treat himself to a new pair of shoes when he started to walk across Westchester Avenue in the Bronx. That is the last thing he remembers. Mr. Nublett later woke up in a state of delirium at a hospital. Tubes were inside him. A doctor was snapping his left shoulder back into joint another told him if they did not perform emergency surgery to remove his spleen, he could die. “You wake up and they’re ready to cut you open,” Mr. Nublett recalled, his voice strained. “It’s like ‘The Twilight Zone. ’” He was struck by a car that morning in February 2012. He spent the next two months at Jacobi Medical Center in the Bronx. Years later, after multiple surgeries, Mr. Nublett, 57, still has five pins in his shoulder, a metal plate in his ribs and a shattered left knee. He struggles to walk. He has developed high blood pressure, diabetes and severe anxiety. “I shouldn’t be here,” Mr. Nublett said, an anguished refrain he often repeated. Before the accident, Mr. Nublett worked two jobs, in maintenance and in security. He was and frugal. Now he cannot work at all. Mr. Nublett said the driver’s liability insurance covered his medical bills, but left him with no compensation to make up for what has become years of lost wages. The catastrophe not only stripped him of his mobility and independence, but also decimated his life savings. “I have to start all over again, like a baby,” he said. His monthly income consists of $987 a month in Social Security disability, enough to cover the rent for his Bronx apartment. He also receives $194 in food stamps. Desperation compelled him to beg strangers for help. “You feel less than a man when you do this,” he said. “When you ask people for change, you feel less than a man. ” After falling $3, 589. 40 behind in rent, he turned to Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of New York, one of the eight organizations supported by The New York Times’s Neediest Cases Fund. Catholic Charities worked with other groups to cover his arrears. They used $347 in Neediest Cases money to buy Mr. Nublett a kitchen table, chairs, a dresser and a medicine cabinet to help him organize and thrive in his apartment, which he can rarely leave. Mr. Nublett, who uses a wheelchair, a walker and a cane to get around, lives in a apartment. Venturing outside is an exhausting, painstaking process. He does so only to see doctors or physical therapists. “I got to sit here and watch TV all day with a pillow behind my head like some old dude,” he said. Catholic Charities has applied for a exemption and is trying to secure him a apartment in his building. Mr. Nublett’s physical ailments keep him inside, which only worsens the psychological pain of confinement, he said. He has few ways to keep from dwelling on his misfortune and the inequity of having his life change so radically. Conventional forms of escapism do nothing for him. “Music soothes the savage beast or whatever,” Mr. Nublett said. “But when you listen, you just think about what you’re going through. ” Friends have fallen away, visiting much less and looking at him with pity when they do, he said. No family members live in New York State. Other close family members are deceased. His neighbors are friendly, he said, but have not helped him navigate his new life. His only consistent companion is his home health care aide. The medication Mr. Nublett sometimes takes for his anxiety makes him drowsy. He has grown accustomed to that state of consciousness at times, mentally drifting away and pondering the unanswerable question, “Why me?” “The only bad things I did was curse, and we all do that when the game comes on,” Mr. Nublett said. He has always followed rules and adhered to a rigid code of right and wrong, taught to him by his mother and his faith. But now, Mr. Nublett struggles to understand the feeling of being inexplicably punished. “I shouldn’t be here,” he said. “What about the bad guys that walk around the streets? There are guys out there who are worse. These guys are still walking the streets, they’re still walking. ” Additional surgeries are pending, including for a replacement for his left knee. Mr. Nublett is praying that he will be able to get back on his feet at long last. “I want to go back outside again and cross the street,” Mr. Nublett said. “I want to catch a train again, sit down and have a bite to eat. Go to work like everybody else. ” That is where he should be, he said. Not taking pills, receiving injections and fending off panic attacks. Not fighting loneliness and despair, as he spends every day on the couch. He should not be here.

What to Know About Trump’s Order to Dismantle the Clean Power Plan - The New York Times

Tatiana Schlossberg

President Trump signed an executive order Tuesday that calls on Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to take steps to dismantle the Clean Power Plan, a set of rules regulating energy plants powered by fossil fuels. The plan, which would have regulated carbon dioxide emissions from existing fossil electricity plants, has been tied up in courts for more than a year, after more two dozen states, industry representatives and others sued the E. P. A. They claimed that the plan was unconstitutional, and it hadn’t yet taken effect because the Supreme Court had said the plan could not be carried out while it was being argued before a lower federal court. Mr. Trump criticized the Clean Power Plan during the campaign and promised to bring back coal mining jobs and create new jobs in the fossil fuel industry the rules would have made that more difficult. Mr. Pruitt, as Oklahoma’s attorney general, sued the E. P. A. 14 times over environmental regulations, including the Clean Power Plan. The problem for Mr. Trump and Mr. Pruitt is that, if they get rid of this plan, they are legally required to come up with another one. Plus, in order to repeal regulations, federal agencies have to follow the same system (requiring periods of public notice and comment) used to create regulations, which can take about a year. Keep in mind that 18 state attorneys general and several environmental advocacy groups had previously moved to defend the rule, and they may challenge whatever alternative Mr. Pruitt might devise. Some of the arguments against the Clean Power Plan have come from the fossil fuel industries — specifically the coal industry, since power plants are the main target of the rules. They have argued that the plan is overly punitive toward them. However, the proliferation of cheap natural gas and a rise in renewable energy sources have made coal less financially sustainable. Removing regulations on power plants wouldn’t necessarily bring back a lot of coal jobs. Most coal mining, especially mountaintop removal mining, is done by machines, so it would be hard to bring back the thousands of jobs that have been lost as coal becomes less and less profitable. And opening up more federal lands and waters to fossil fuel extraction might lead to a glut of coal in the market, which could make it even less financially viable than it is now. The Obama administration used the creation of the Clean Power Plan to show other countries that the United States was serious about taking meaningful action on climate change during the Paris climate talks in late 2015. The plan is the most significant part of the strategy to cut emissions by the amount specified in the Paris agreement. Even with the Clean Power Plan in effect, it would have been tough for the United States to meet its Paris agreement targets. Without the plan or another one at least as stringent on greenhouse gases, it will be nearly impossible, experts say. If the rule is completely abandoned and no comparable alternative is offered, it might signal to the rest of the world that the United States isn’t serious about its obligations under the Paris agreement (which Mr. Trump has also said he would “cancel,” though there is disagreement about that in his cabinet). That might make other countries feel less bound by the terms of the agreement, too.

NAACP’s Barber: Rep John Lewis ’Stands in the Tradition’ of the Prophets and Jesus - Breitbart

Trent Baker

North Carolina NAACP President Rev. William Barber weighed in on the brewing feud between Rep. John Lewis ( ) and Donald Trump after Lewis said Trump was not a “legitimate president” and Trump fired back with criticisms of Lewis for his work in Georgia. Barber praised Lewis, saying he “stands in the tradition” of the prophets, Jesus and Martin Luther King Jr. “There’s a great deal of illegitimacy to [Trump]. I can tell you lastly, Joy, over 10, 000 clergy and activists, we wrote him and asked to meet with him to discuss things with him and they still have not responded. So, I stand with John Lewis as he stands in the tradition of the prophets, the tradition of Jesus and the tradition of Martin Luther King to say what is right even when people may not want to hear it,” Barber said. Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent

Rush Limbaugh on Obamacare 2.0: ’Why Do the Republicans Want to Hurt Trump’s Base?’ - Breitbart

Breitbart News

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh questioned why Congressional Republicans seem determined to inflict pain on Trump’s base with their healthcare bill on Friday: Well, here’s the Breitbart piece, ladies and gentlemen. And measured against my plan, this is hieroglyphics. Measured against my plan, this is like trying to learn a foreign language. And not just learn the language, but then learn all of the dialects and all the hidden meaning with the use of slang and so forth. It’s impossible. “Seven Reasons Why Obamacare 2. 0 Is All But Guaranteed to Impose Crushing Costs on Voters, Hurt Trump’s Base, and Hand Power Back to the Democrats. ” Okay, that’s the headline of the Breitbart piece. Let me ask you a question. I mean, the way I react when I see a headline like this, if it’s this bad, how in the world can the people in charge of it not know it’s this bad? If it is this bad, then why do the Republicans want to hand power back to the Democrats? Why do the Republicans want to hurt Trump’s base? Now, that I can answer. Why do Republicans want to impose crushing costs on voters? Does any of this make sense? And why do Republicans want to hand power back to the Democrats? And why does Trump want to do that? Trump supposedly signed on to this. Okay, so let’s take this incrementally. Now, at the bottom of this piece is perhaps the most important aspect of story with nothing to do with health care. “Sixty percent of adults are ‘hopeful and optimistic’ about America’s future. ” As asserted in this story, that’s from polling data. Sixty percent of adults are hopeful and optimistic? Now, as the Breitbart writer, Katie McHugh is her name, writer of the story. She says, “That’s a precious opportunity, one that shouldn’t be wasted. ” “‘The issue now is about Americans looking to not get f — ed over. If we deliver, we’ll get 60 percent of the white vote, and 40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote and we’ll govern for 50 years,’ White House Chief strategist Steve Bannon said during a November interview. ‘That’s what the Democrats missed … They lost sight of what the world is about. ’” Bannon, chief strategist for Trump … So Breitbart claims here that this Obamacare repeal and replacement bill actually targets senior citizens in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin and makes their tax credits less effective and raises their health care costs. Those are three blue states that Trump won. Why would the Republicans do that? Do you believe that they have? Do you think that’s in the bill? The Washington Post says it is, and Breitbart’s accepting it. Read Rush’s transcript here. LISTEN:

California Official Says Trump’s Claim of Voter Fraud Is ‘Absurd’ - The New York Times

Adam Nagourney

LOS ANGELES — When Donald J. Trump claimed on Twitter that he was losing the popular vote because of major fraud by millions of voters, one of the states he pointed to was California, where the latest voting returns showed Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, crushing Mr. Trump. But Mr. Trump’s baseless claim led to a furious reaction from California’s top election official, Alex Padilla, the secretary of state, this weekend. Mr. Padilla asserted that there was no evidence for the claim by the and denounced Mr. Trump for what he said was unpresidential behavior. “His unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud in California and elsewhere are absurd,” Mr. Padilla posted on Twitter. “His reckless tweets are inappropriate and unbecoming of a . ” This state has historically been slow to count ballots, a reflection of both its vast size and inefficiencies in many county voting operations. Given the fact that this is an overwhelmingly Democratic state, that has meant that Mrs. Clinton’s total vote count has grown steadily as ballots were tallied, adding to a national lead of close to two million votes. As of Saturday, Mrs. Clinton had 8. 1 million votes in California, compared with 4. 2 million for Mr. Trump, according to the secretary of state’s office. It was not clear when the vote count might be concluded. The count, and outcome, has been no surprise to anyone in a state with a history of slow . Officials in both parties had predicted this would happen as early as election night. Given California’s long Democratic history, it was never in play during this presidential election. But as the nation’s most populated state, it tends to have a significant influence on final national voting margins, as is apparently the case this year. Mr. Trump signaled out three states in his post of Twitter on “serious voter fraud” — Virginia, New Hampshire and California. He offered no evidence to back up the claim. His remarks came as he denounced calls for a recount in three states that he won by relatively small margins: Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Jill Stein, who was the Green Party candidate for president, said that she would move for a recount. Aides to Mrs. Clinton said they would cooperate with the effort, even as they made it clear they thought it would not change the outcome. Mr. Padilla is the Latino elected to state office in California. Mr. Trump’s poor showing here, many Democrats and Republicans said, came in no small part because of his attacks on what he described as the threat of illegal immigration — particularly by Mexicans. About 40 percent of California’s population is Latino. “It appears that Mr. Trump is troubled by the fact that a growing majority of Americans did not vote for him,” Mr. Padilla said.