Wednesday, February 20, 2019

Nuclear Weapons in the South of the Korean Peninsula?

by Konstantin Asmolov, New Eastern Outlook:

Against the backdrop of the sixth nuclear test, calls for “getting ourselves a bomb” are increasingly heard in the RK. This may be alluding to either the resuscitation of its own nuclear project or, going the much easier route, the deployment of US tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula in order to create a strategic balance of power. We have repeatedly written about these sentiments, as a result of which the lawmakers from the conservative party “Free Korea” actually included the call for nuclear weapons for the country on the party’s political agenda, and the “young colonels” among the South Koreans with dreams of seeing the country having its own bombs are very common.

Let us recall that the US withdrew its tactical nuclear weapons from the RK in 1991. The South Koreans attribute this to the fact that at that time, Seoul and Pyongyang had adopted the Joint Declaration of South and North Korea on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. However, in actual fact, the US simply changed its strategy, putting its stakes on more long-range means of delivery, so that the territory of the DPRK remained completely within its nuclear range.

A new round of hype was provoked by the news that on August 30, in Washington, during a meeting of the defense ministers Seung-yon Mu and James Mattis, the representative of the RK raised the issue of the possibility of the redeployment of US tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula. This was immediately noted, as the proposal ran counter to the statements made by the top leadership of Seoul, which constantly stressed the importance of the nuclear-free status of the peninsula.

According to a different version thrown out by the media, when the scandal had already started escalating, Song Young-moo merely noted the corresponding opinion of the South Korean opposition, and Mattis responded by expressing his understanding of the position and accepting the need to ensure the country’s security. However, the comments by the representatives of the MoD of the Republic of Korea in the end amounted to the fact that “the ministers discussed various possible options for responding to the growing threat from the DPRK.”

These explanations did not satisfy anyone, and, commenting on the news, the administration of the President of the Republic of Korea stated, that Seoul respects the global non-proliferation regime and will continue building its policies within its framework. The Foreign Ministry of the Republic of Korea also stated that its official position remains unchanged.

On September 3, 2017, Chief National Security Advisor Chong Yi Yong stated that Seoul and Washington would soon discuss the deployment of “the most powerful tactical weapon in the United States” in South Korea. On September 4, speaking at a meeting of the parliamentary defense committee, Defense Minister Song Young-moo stated that this option was well underway, but that this issue needed to be thoroughly worked out. 

We shall not forget the visit to the United States of a delegation of the opposition party, Free Korea, which discussed this issue with local politicians, calling for nuclear weapons to be sent to the RK.

On September 10, in an interview with CNN, Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services, Republican John McCain, pointed out that the question of the redeployment of United States tactical nuclear weapons to the Korean peninsula “must be seriously considered “in connection with the North Korean threats.

On the same day, an unnamed White House spokesperson informed the American television station NBC that the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in the south of the Korean peninsula was possible if a corresponding request from Seoul were to be received.

Official Seoul responded immediately with a statement that there would be no such request, even though the 27 members of the Free Korea opposition party had decided to send a letter to Donald Trump with the corresponding request.

On September 13, 2017, while visiting Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, where strategic bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles are housed, the Pentagon chief commented on the need to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to the RK. In his own words, it does not matter where the nuclear weapons are located, as part of the power of deterrence is the very factor of uncertainty. Seoul perceived these words to be an indication of a negative stance on the issue of the possible return to the RK of the US TNW. However, the country’s first person did not say anything. As stated by the American broadcaster NBC, the US president does not rule out such an opportunity. According to the television channel, representatives of the administration of the US president conveyed to China that if Beijing does not agree to an oil embargo against Pyongyang and on tightening its approach to the DPRK, the US would refrain from trying to stop Japan and South Korea in their desire to become nuclear.

On September 14, Moon Jae-in once again addressed the nuclear issue. In an interview with CNN, he stressed that he did not agree with the proposals for the redeployment of US tactical nuclear weapons in the country or the development by South Korea of its own nuclear weapons. As he pointed out, the use of nuclear weapons as a deterrent to North Korean provocations is unlikely to preserve peace on the Korean peninsula, and may result in an arms race in Northeast Asia. Instead, the Government of the Republic of Korea shall focus on enhancing the country’s military potential. 

Representatives of the ruling Democratic Party Toburo also hold a similar position. For instance, in a recent parliamentary debate, in response to the proposals by the conservatives for the deployment of American nuclear weapons in the country, Chairman of the Toboro party, Choo Mi-ae, pointed out that there is no such need and, instead, they need to focus on developing the national missile defense system and strengthening the capabilities of the missile forces.

Leader of the parliamentary faction of the ruling Democratic Party Toburo, Woo Won-shik, is also opposed to the TNW. The deployment of US tactical nuclear weapons would mean a de facto recognition of the North as a nuclear power. Moreover, a nuclear Seoul would lose the moral authority to demand that Pyongyang abandon its nuclear programme. Finally, the deployment of nuclear weapons in the Republic of Korea would intensify friction with China and Russia, which would not be happy about the return of US nuclear weapons closer to their borders, and would accelerate the arms race in North-East Asia, which would further destabilize the situation on the Korean peninsula.

Read More @ Journal-NEO.org
 

Confessions of an Islamophobe: What Happens When An Ordinary American Stands Up to the Global Islamic Jihad?

0

by Robert Spencer, Freedom Outpost:

Canada is now discussing criminal penalties for “Islamophobia.”

Facebook’s Vice President went to Pakistan in July to assure the Pakistani government that Facebook would remove content critical of Islam.

American columnists seriously call for the denial of free speech rights to those who warn about the jihad threat.

That call was directed at me, for the crime of“falsely constructing a divide between Islam and the West.”

“Falsely”? Really?

Clearly, there are some very powerful people who are desperately afraid of what they call “Islamophobia,” and are now cracking down on it hard.

For years I have been sounding the alarm about the threat of jihad terror and the human rights abuses that Sharia enables, and increasingly the West, instead of heeding these warnings, is turning against those who have been sounding them.

In my forthcoming book Confessions of an Islamophobe, I make my case.

Is there really a threat to the free world from jihad terror and Sharia oppression, or is such concern all just paranoid fear-mongering, xenophobia, racism, bigotry, paranoia, profiteering — in a word, “Islamophobia”?

I’ve always found such accusations bewildering and baseless, and still do.

I began this work because I was an ordinary American — a believer in the freedom of speech and free society and the equality of rights of all before the law — who saw problems that weren’t being addressed adequately.

In the intervening years, those problems have only gotten worse, although the ruling elites still generally do not admit there are any problems at all.

So: are they right, or am I? You be the judge: in Confessions of an Islamophobe, I discuss the real threat women, homosexuals, Jews, Christians, secular liberals and secular Muslims face, and reveal what happens to those ordinary citizens who dare to tell the truth about that threat.

Read More @ FreedomOutpost.com

Jurists Protect the State and Ignore the Constitution

0

from BATR:

When it comes to the meaning of language, the courts are the greatest purveyor of trickery, distortion and perverted interpretation. These illegitimate gatekeepers for corrupt government, are authorized assassins, appointed to bring legal cover to Just Us; namely the State. Justice for the people is more than collateral damage for the few; it is systematic denial for the many. The recent Court of Appeals decision that shreds the NYS Constitution in the Pork Lawsuit proves that the rule of law is a charade. The court’s codified endorsement for official money laundering, demonstrates that the practice of the law is nothing more than enabling the criminal syndicate of the political class.

The actual words from the Court of Appeals decision, proves the relevance of this assessment.

The majority five jurist’s opinion stated.

In 1846, the voters of the State of New York amended the Constitution to prevent the giving or lending of the State’s credit to private corporations (see Wein, 39 NY2d at 143-144; see also People v Ohrenstein, 77 NY2d 38, 50 1990]). The 1846 Constitution, however, did not bar gifts of State money because, as this Court recognized over a century later, the granting of state money was a one-time event that “does not bind future generations or create the same dangers of collapse, insolvency and crisis associated with the abuse of credit” (Schulz I, 84 NY2d at 246).

Nevertheless, the constitutional prohibition was later expanded in the 1874 Constitution to preclude the giving and lending of public money to aid any private entity or undertaking (see Ohrenstein, 77 NY2d at 50 [“Neither the credit nor the money of the State shall be given or loaned to aid or in aid of any association, corporation or private undertaking”] [former art VII, § 9]). The purpose of that amendment was to prevent the State’s practice of freely granting “public funds to railroads and to charitable associations” (People v Westchester County Natl. Bank of Peekskill, N.Y, 231 NY 465, 474 [1921])

More than 60 years later, the Constitutional Convention of 1938 combined the two separate provisions dealing with gifts or loans of State money and credit into article VII, § 8(1). The 1938 Constitution also amended the scope of the prohibition against giving or lending the State’s credit, for the first time making it applicable to public corporations (see Wein, 39 NY2d at 144 [explaining that the newly broadened credit provision “was intended to protect the State from the uncertain and possibly disastrous consequences of incurring future contingent liabilities easy for a current generation to project but a burden on future generations”]). The 1938 Constitution, however, did not extend the prohibition against the giving or loaning of the State’s money, which continues to apply only to private recipients.

Article VII, § 8(1) of the State Constitution broadly declares, in relevant part, “[t]he money of the state shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking; nor shall the credit of the state be given or loaned to or in aid of any individual, or public or private corporation or association, or private undertaking.” This provision contains two separate prohibitions:

First, it precludes the State from giving or loaning “money” to private recipients and,

Second, it more broadly forbids the State from giving or lending its “credit” to private recipients or public corporations. Hence, while the State may not lend its credit to a public corporation, such as the UDC, nothing in article VII, § 8(1) prohibits the State from adopting appropriations directed to such public entities.

With an apparent goal to “insulate the State from the burden of long-term debt,” the Legislature, beginning in 1921, created “legally separate public benefit corporations, known as public authorities, to discharge particular functions” (Schulz I, 84 NY2d at 244).

It is well settled that “public benefit corporations exist independently of the State” (Schulz I, 84 NY2d at 246).

Concurrent with their status as entities separate from the State, the ability of public authorities and public benefit corporations to receive public funds was acknowledged in Matter of Dormitory Auth. of State of N.Y. (Span Elect. Corp.) (18 NY2d 114 [1966]).

The two brave jurists that denounce this ruling deserve your respect.

Eugene F. Pigott, Jr. (dissenting):

Unconstitutional acts do not become constitutional by virtue of repetition, custom or passage of time. But that is what the majority opinion holds today. The arguments made by these defendants are precisely the kind of claims that sully taxpayers’ view of our State government. It is unfortunate that the majority gives credence to those arguments and, as a result, deprives these plaintiffs – 50 New York State taxpayers who are attempting to exercise their right to air their grievances – of an opportunity to conduct the most basic discovery to support their claims.

Far from being complex, article VII, § 8 (1) of the State Constitution (the Gift Clause) explicitly forbids what plaintiffs claim the State defendants are doing in this case. It states:

“1. The money of the state shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking;” (emphasis supplied).

In 1967, the voters rejected a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would have allowed the distribution of funds to private businesses for the purpose of economic development in the same manner the ESDC is distributing funds now.

The proposed (and subsequently rejected) amendment stated as follows:

“The state, any local government and any other public corporation may grant to any person, association or private corporation in any year or periodically by contract, or loan its money for economic and community development purposes,2 but the proceeds of indebtedness contracted for any such purpose shall be used only for loans for capital construction . . .” (Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of New York, Vol XII, at 31 [1967] [emphasis supplied] quoting Proposed Amendment Article X, § 12[b]).

The rejection of this amendment did nothing to deter the State’s current practice of distributing taxpayer funds to foster the growth of private industry, which defendants call “economic development.” Defendants make the specious assertion that the appropriations here do not violate the Gift Clause because the monies are not made “directly” to private companies but, rather, are first funneled though public corporations, which then distribute the funds to private entities. In other words, because the state distributes taxpayer funds through an intermediary like the ESDC, it is not the state that is loaning money to a private corporation or undertaking, but rather a public corporation that is loaning money to private enterprise.

Robert S. Smith (dissenting):

It is an illusion — one that seems to have the persistence of original sin — that prosperity can be attained by taking money from taxpayers and handing it to favored businesses.

Read More @ BATR.org

The Silencing of Dissent

by Chris Hedges, Truth Dig:

The ruling elites, who grasp that the reigning ideology of global corporate capitalism and imperial expansion no longer has moral or intellectual credibility, have mounted a campaign to shut down the platforms given to their critics. The attacks within this campaign include blacklisting, censorship and slandering dissidents as foreign agents for Russia and purveyors of “fake news.”

No dominant class can long retain control when the credibility of the ideas that justify its existence evaporates. It is forced, at that point, to resort to crude forms of coercion, intimidation and censorship. This ideological collapse in the United States has transformed those of us who attack the corporate state into a potent threat, not because we reach large numbers of people, and certainly not because we spread Russian propaganda, but because the elites no longer have a plausible counterargument.

The elites face an unpleasant choice. They could impose harsh controls to protect the status quo or veer leftward toward socialism to ameliorate the mounting economic and political injustices endured by most of the population. But a move leftward, essentially reinstating and expanding the New Deal programs they have destroyed, would impede corporate power and corporate profits. So instead the elites, including the Democratic Party leadership, have decided to quash public debate. The tactic they are using is as old as the nation-state—smearing critics as traitors who are in the service of a hostile foreign power. Tens of thousands of people of conscience were blacklisted in this way during the Red Scares of the 1920s and 1950s. The current hyperbolic and relentless focus on Russia, embraced with gusto by “liberal” media outlets such as The New York Times and MSNBC, has unleashed what some have called a virulent “New McCarthyism.”

The corporate elites do not fear Russia. There is no publicly disclosed evidence that Russia swung the election to Donald Trump. Nor does Russia appear to be intent on a military confrontation with the United States. I am certain Russia tries to meddle in U.S. affairs to its advantage, as we do and did in Russia—including our clandestine bankrolling of Boris Yeltsin, whose successful 1996 campaign for re-election as president is estimated to have cost up to $2.5 billion, much of that money coming indirectly from the American government. In today’s media environment Russia is the foil. The corporate state is unnerved by the media outlets that give a voice to critics of corporate capitalism, the security and surveillance state and imperialism, including the network RT America.

My show on RT America, “On Contact,” like my columns at Truthdig, amplifies the voices of these dissidents—Tariq Ali, Kshama Sawant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Medea Benjamin, Ajamu Baraka, Noam Chomsky, Dr. Margaret Flowers, Rania Khalek, Amira Hass, Miko Peled, Abby Martin, Glen Ford, Max Blumenthal, Pam Africa, Linh Dinh, Ben Norton, Eugene Puryear, Allan Nairn, Jill Stein, Kevin Zeese and others. These dissidents, if we had a functioning public broadcasting system or a commercial press free of corporate control, would be included in the mainstream discourse. They are not bought and paid for. They have integrity, courage and often brilliance. They are honest. For these reasons, in the eyes of the corporate state, they are very dangerous.

The first and deadliest salvo in the war on dissent came in 1971 when Lewis Powell, a corporate attorney and later a Supreme Court justice, wrote and circulated a memo among business leaders called “Attack on American Free Enterprise System.” It became the blueprint for the corporate coup d’état. Corporations, as Powell recommended in the document, poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the assault, financing pro-business political candidates, mounting campaigns against the liberal wing of the Democratic Party and the press and creating institutions such as the Business Roundtable, The Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Federalist Society and Accuracy in Academia. The memo argued that corporations had to fund sustained campaigns to marginalize or silence those who in “the college campus, the pulpit, the media, and the intellectual and literary journals” were hostile to corporate interests.

Powell attacked Ralph Nader by name. Lobbyists flooded Washington and state capitals. Regulatory controls were abolished. Massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy were implemented, culminating in a de facto tax boycott. Trade barriers were lifted and the country’s manufacturing base was destroyed. Social programs were slashed and funds for infrastructure, from roads and bridges to public libraries and schools, were cut. Protections for workers were gutted. Wages declined or stagnated. The military budget, along with the organs of internal security, became ever more bloated. A de facto blacklist, especially in universities and the press, was used to discredit intellectuals, radicals and activists who decried the idea of the nation prostrating itself before the dictates of the marketplace and condemned the crimes of imperialism, some of the best known being Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Sheldon Wolin, Ward Churchill, Nader, Angela Davis and Edward Said. These critics were permitted to exist only on the margins of society, often outside of institutions, and many had trouble making a living.

The financial meltdown of 2008 not only devastated the global economy, it exposed the lies propagated by those advocating globalization. Among these lies: that salaries of workers would rise, democracy would spread across the globe, the tech industry would replace manufacturing as a source of worker income, the middle class would flourish, and global communities would prosper. After 2008 it became clear that the “free market” is a scam, a zombie ideology by which workers and communities are ravaged by predatory capitalists and assets are funneled upward into the hands of the global 1 percent. The endless wars, fought largely to enrich the arms industry and swell the power of the military, are futile and counterproductive to national interests. Deindustrialization and austerity programs have impoverished the working class and fatally damaged the economy.

The establishment politicians in the two leading parties, each in service to corporate power and responsible for the assault on civil liberties and impoverishment of the country, are no longer able to use identity politics and the culture wars to whip up support. This led in the last presidential campaign to an insurgency by Bernie Sanders, which the Democratic Party crushed, and the election of Donald Trump.

Barack Obama rode a wave of bipartisan resentment into office in 2008, then spent eight years betraying the public. Obama’s assault on civil liberties, including his use of the Espionage Act to prosecute whistleblowers, was worse than those carried out by George W. Bush. He accelerated the war on public education by privatizing schools, expanded the wars in the Middle East, including the use of militarized drone attacks, provided little meaningful environmental reform, ignored the plight of the working class, deported more undocumented people than any other president, imposed a corporate-sponsored health care program that was the brainchild of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, and prohibited the Justice Department from prosecuting the bankers and financial firms that carried out derivatives scams and inflated the housing and real estate market, a condition that led to the 2008 financial meltdown. He epitomized, like Bill Clinton, the bankruptcy of the Democratic Party. Clinton, outdoing Obama’s later actions, gave us the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the dismantling of the welfare system, the deregulation of the financial services industry and the huge expansion of mass incarceration. Clinton also oversaw deregulation of the Federal Communications Commission, a change that allowed a handful of corporations to buy up the airwaves.

The corporate state was in crisis at the end of the Obama presidency. It was widely hated. It became vulnerable to attacks by the critics it had pushed to the fringes. Most vulnerable was the Democratic Party establishment, which claims to defend the rights of working men and women and protect civil liberties. This is why the Democratic Party is so zealous in its efforts to discredit its critics as stooges for Moscow and to charge that Russian interference caused its election defeat.

In January there was a report on Russia by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The report devoted seven of its 25 pages to RT America and its influence on the presidential election. It claimed “Russian media made increasingly favorable comments about President-elect Trump as the 2016 US general and primary election campaigns progressed while consistently offering negative coverage of Secretary [Hillary] Clinton.” This might seem true if you did not watch my RT broadcasts, which relentlessly attacked Trump as well as Clinton, or watch Ed Schultz, who now has a program on RT after having been the host of an MSNBC commentary program. The report also attempted to present RT America as having a vast media footprint and influence it does not possess.

“In an effort to highlight the alleged ‘lack of democracy’ in the United States, RT broadcast, hosted, and advertised third party candidate debates and ran reporting supportive of the political agenda of these candidates,” the report read, correctly summing up themes on my show. “The RT hosts asserted that the US two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population and is a ‘sham.’ ”

Read More @ TruthDig.com

Vicious Ugly Face of Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria

by Richard Sauder, Event Horizon Chronicle:

The theme of my blog is the Event Horizon, the point at which the pace of events and change quickens and gets faster and faster and faster, until things get so cockeyed that you hardly know which end is up, the world is spinning and whirling all around you, left becomes right, up is down, black is white– and things become so furious, the crescendo of insanity howls and shrieks all around you, the world seems to lose all normal sense, people act out in all sorts of strange and bizarre ways, there are more and more abnormal weather events, earthquakes, wars, rumors of wars, floods, economic crises, and more — there may even by mind-numbing mass mortality events.

It seems more than you can take in or bear, and still it keeps coming.

Well, my friends, I think we re now entering into the outer bands of the Event Horizon.  The ride is likely to get bumpier from here on, for at least the next few years.

The recent hurricanes in the USSA and the Caribbean islands, along with the recent spate of major earthquakes in Mexico, and elsewhere along the Ring of Fire, suggest that we have crossed over the threshold into the beginning of the Event Horizon.

I won’t even get into the growing likelihood of nuclear warfare between the USSA and North Korea (and perhaps other countries, as well) and the increasingly bizarre, erratic behavior of the so-called “President” of the USSA, Donald Trump. The man is a blithering idiot, and please, don’t even try to tell me that he is playing 3-D political chess.  At this point I doubt that he is even competent to play with Tinker toys or play dough.

What’s Going On In Texas? (and Florida, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands?)

Over the last few days and weeks, many of the Caribbean islands and also the Texas Gulf Coast and nearby inland regions of Texas, most of the state of Florida  and the USSA Territories of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (in the Caribbean) have been slammed, even devastated by hurricanes, Harvey, Irma and Maria.

Let’s look at Houston. Hurricane Harvey destroyed up to one million cars in its rampage in Texas. There is no meaningful public transport in Houston, which is a stereotypical car town, so how are people getting to work? Arethey getting to work? Does their place of work still exist, or is their workplace usable or safe?

The Houston business press reports that 134,500 residences were damaged or destroyed by Hurricane Harvey (while not mentioning how many businesses were destroyed or damaged). Let’s arbitrarily say that the average household contains 3 people (some will have one person, some will have four or five) — so a back of the envelope guesstimate suggests that about half a million people (or more?) were forced out of their houses and apartments because their domicile was either destroyed or badly damaged by water and wind and they temporarily had to relocate due to mud, mold, mildew, ripped off roof, etc. and emergency repairs underway until the residence is once again habitable, if it is repairable.

Where are these several hundreds of thousands of people now? Where are they living? What are they doing? It’s a very large number of people.

They have lost their cars. They have lost their apartments or houses. Many have lost their employment. Are half a million people in camps? Have they been disappeared? Are they living under plastic sheets by the side of the road and sleeping on cardboard? Without a car and a house how do they survive in a car-necessary-city? There is a yawning silence about these questions from the mainstream news media in the USSA.

But here is one example from the British press — note well — the British press, not the USSA press. A five member family had to flee their apartment due to flooding, but are nevertheless being required to pay rent — and late fees! — for an apartment they cannot live in. The husband cannot work because of flooding and they have few options. Indeed, the article says that 180,000 Houston-area homes have been badly damaged. I get the feeling that the situation in Houston and the surrounding area is far worse than the USSA government is admitting. That family can probably be multiplied by 100,000 fold. My guesstimate of half a million victims of the storm and flooding in Texas may even be far too low.
 
Watch the following YouTube videos about recent hurricane related events in coastal Texas. The report of armed, rogue “contractors” and federal agents intentionally flooding Houston neighborhoods without first evacuating the inhabitants is most troubling, as is the report about flushing the many dead bodies in the flood waters (some with bullet wounds) out to sea, as is the report of FEMA prison barges being brought into the Port Arthur area, just to the east of Houston. Watch the video about the FEMA barge and note the view of the interior. It is clearly a large, maximum security jail.

It appears that extremely ugly events are going down in Texas about which the USSA government and its partners in crime, the mainstream news media, are silent.

FEMA CIA, DEA, FBI Hunting- MURDERING PEOPLE !!! WITNESS !!!

My Time At Hurricane Harvey
 

FEMA BARGES In TEXAS Are JAILS!! (watch it — look inside)

Similarly, we are hearing very little out of Florida, though a week and a half ago, there were reports that 90{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the homes in the Florida Keys were “destroyed” or suffered “major damage.” Given that 10,000 people reportedly defied evacuation orders to remain in the Florida Keys, 90{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of them would have had their homes totally destroyed or heavily damaged, while they were in them. So what was the real death toll in the Keys? Obviously, your odds of physical survival are extremely problematic if your house is totally destroyed or heavily damaged while you are in it. I’ve got questions which neither the news media nor government are answering. 

I have been unable to find hard numbers, or any numbers at all, for the total numbers of damaged and destroyed houses in Florida due to Irma, though many houses were reported under water in Naples, and there was heavy damage in Saint Augustine and record flooding in Jacksonville. It is as if there were a hard news vacuum on what really happened in Florida.

And what is going on in Puerto Rico? We know very little, other than that the entire island of 3.5 million people has completely lost electrical power in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria, and that the electrical grid will not be restored for weeks, or even months.

Read the rest of the article @ EventHorizonChronicle

The war between de-centralized cryptocurrencies and sovereign governments may be about to get underway

by Kenneth Schortgen, The Daily Economist:

Up until now most governments have treated cryptocurrencies as little more than a nuisance as their market cap has not been enough to be seen as a threat to primary markets, and their acceptance by the public has been sparse at best.  However with the advent of China beginning to crack down on the facilities that make the trading of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies quite easy for investors, the war between de-centralized currencies and sovereign government controls may be on the cusp of getting underway.

Over the past two days two well known Captains of Industry in the United States have both mentioned the Damocles Sword that hangs over the heads of the world’s nearly 1000 cryptocurrencies, and are intimating that should these digital currencies become too great a threat then governments will be more than willing to focus their power on ending them as a medium of exchange, the same way that the U.S. uses sanctions and the barrel of a gun against leaders and nations that threaten dollar hegemony as the global reserve currency.

The battle lines have been drawn between sovereign governments and the legitimacy of cryptocurrencies, warned anti virus software pioneer John McAfee during the first global blockchain technology event in Hong Kong since China imposed a ban on cryptocurrency sales and trading on exchanges earlier this month.  

Among core issues in the US$150 billion industry are how nations can apply taxation to cryptocurrency transactions and whether there should be curbs on the ability for bitcoin and other virtual currencies to facilitate global fund flows.  

“Today will go down in history as the beginning of the war between the proponents of cryptocurrency and the world governments,” McAfee told the South China Morning Post of the growing conflict between governments and the “fugitives” subculture who back the development of virtual currencies. 

What’s more, bitcoin’s status varies in different jurisdictions. Australia said it would remove the double taxation on transactions involving cryptocurrencies like bitcoin, while China has yet to define the legal status of virtual currencies. 

“If governments aren’t able to know what the movement is they will be unable to collect revenues. That’s going to cause panic in some countries. China sees it already,” McAfee said. – South China Morning Post

 

The irony of course with McAfee’s view here is that he is a extremely strong proponent of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, but as a corporate CEO he has the pragmatism to realize that governments will not stand idly by should de-centralized currencies threaten their authority and hegemony.

Then there is the two-faced CEO of J.P. Morgan Chase Jamie Dimon, who not only recently lambasted Bitcoin in a public interview, but did so hypocritically when information emerged that his bank’s own brokers were profiting on the trade.

Yet with that being said, Dimon has a trump card up his sleeve as his connections to government give him the confidence that at any time the U.S. will crack down on cryptocurrencies the same way they do with any other un-controlled form of currency.

“Right now these crypto things are kind of a novelty. People think they’re kind of neat. But the bigger they get, the more governments are going to close them down,” Dimon said during an interview with CNBC-TV18 in New Delhi, India, on Friday. 

Dimon was concerned that with bitcoin, ethereum and various Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), there are now cryptocurrencies everywhere. 

“It’s creating something out of nothing that to me is worth nothing,” he said. “It will end badly.” 

Dimon warned that governments will eventually crack down on cryptocurrencies and will attempt to control it by threatening anyone who buys or sells bitcoin with imprisonment, which would force digital currencies into becoming a black market. – CNBC

Read More @ TheDailyEconomist.com

Mueller Investigation Desperate As More Information About Obama’s Illegal Spying Is Uncovered

0

by Joe Hoft, The Gateway Pundit:

The Mueller Investigation is Getting Desperate to Find A Crime, Any Crime.

As more information comes out about the illegal spying by the Obama Administration, Mueller is under more and more pressure to find or make up a crime related to President Trump.

It is time to deal with the corruption and criminal conduct in the Department of Justice, Criminal Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and shut down the criminal and corrupt Mueller investigation.

Americans during the election demanded the future President deal with the corruption and criminal conduct in Washington DC. President Trump’s rally participants chanted : “Drain the Swamp” at nearly every rally.

and “Lock Her Up” –

It’s amazing that the most important and emotional demands that Americans wanted from this President when he was campaigning were captured in these two slogans!

All Americans knew that Hillary Clinton was given a pass by the MSM, FBI and DOJ for receiving money for providing uranium to Russia.  She was guilty of mishandling emails and destroying evidence related to her illegal email account.  And now we know that President Obama helped her campaign by spying on the Trump team during the election and after his election win.  Obama’s years in office boiled over with corruption.

Read More @ TheGatewatPundit.com

WATCH: Crowd Chants ‘Lock Her Up’ — Trump Tells Them How To Make It Happen

0

by Ryan Saavedra, The Daily Wire:

President Donald Trump told an energized crowd what they needed to do if they wanted to see Hillary Clinton prosecuted for her alleged crimes while speaking in Alabama on Friday night.

Trump told the packed crowd that if “Crooked Hillary” had won the election, they “would not have a Second Amendment.”

“You’d be handing in your rifles,” Trump said. “You’d be turning over your rifles.”

Trump’s comments were met with instant chants of “lock her up” from the crowd — the same chants that were routine at his campaign rallies during the 2016 election.

Trump replied to the chants by saying, “You got to speak to Jeff Sessions about that.”

This is not the first time the president has publicly criticized his attorney general for softness on prosecuting Hillary Clinton.

In late July, Trump tweeted:

Read More @ TheDailyWire.com

A2A with John Butler, author of “The Golden Revolution, Revisited”

by Turd Ferguson, TF Metals:

On Wednesday, author John Butler stopped by to discuss his new book, “The Golden Revolution, Revisited“. John has many thoughts on the coming remonetization of gold so you will likely find this discussion to be very informative.

We’ve known John since his first book, “The Golden Revolution”, debuted back in 2012. The five years since have only served to reinforce his ideas and hasten the dawn of a new global financial paradigm, thus this updated and extended release.

Please make the time to give this audio a thorough listen and then do yourself a favor and buy John’s book. After you read it, you should pass it along to a friend or family member that needs some advice, counsel and warning about what almost certainly lies ahead.

TF

Click HERE to listen.

Read More @ TFMetals.com

FLASHBACK: Son’s words expose the real agenda being the farce that is Donald Trump’s candidacy

by Ian GreenhalghVeteran’s Today:

The pieces of the puzzle are all falling into place now and we can get a clear picture of just what and whom is behind the election campaign of Donald Trump. We knew Trump was being financed and heavily supported by the Zionists when Sheldon Adelson spoke out in support and gave Trump a huge campaign donation. Now his son has made it even clearer that Trump is working for the Zionists by telling us that it was the Iran nuke deal that spurred his orange buffoon of a father to start his most farcical of presidential candidacies. Israel and the Zionists were absolutely furious when the Iran deal was signed, Netanyahu almost went berserk, spewing all kinds of insane rhetoric.

nable to stop the deal, it now looks like the Zionists are trying to destroy it by injecting Trump into US politics; when Trump says things like “my number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran” he is really saying ‘the number one task I have been given by my Zionist controllers is to act in Israel’s best interests by destroying the Iranian nuke deal’.

Trump needs to end this election campaign not in the oval office, but in a cell along with all the other treasonous servants of Israel such as his financial backer Adelson and Rita Katz, the arch liar of the ISIS war. Hey, here’s a thought – why not make a reality TV show out of it, Trump would love that!

__________
Arutz Sheva
Trump launched presidential campaign to fight Iran deal

Republican candidate’s son reveals nuke deal was a ‘game-changer’ for him, which made him finally say ‘I’m going to give this a real shot.’

Real estate mogul Donald Trump, who currently is the Republican presidential nominee, decided to launch his campaign due to the controversial Iran nuclear deal sealed last July, according to his son Eric.

“I think, honestly, the Iran nuclear deal was one of the things that made him jump into the race,” Eric Trump told the “Cats Roundtable” radio program on AM 970 in New York on Sunday, reports the Jewish Insider.

“I think that was a game-changer for him,” Trump told the show host John Catsimatidis. “That is when he finally said, ‘Kids, I am going to do it. I am going to give this a real shot.’”

Trump has repeatedly condemned US President Barack Obama for signing the nuclear deal, and that condemnation was also heard in his speech on June 16, 2015 kicking off his campaign.

“If he makes that deal, Israel maybe won’t exist very long. We have to protect Israel,” Trump stated then less than a month before the deal was made, noting on Tehran’s open threats to wipe the Jewish state off the map.

The Republican candidate also spoke about the deal in a rally in Wisconsin last month, when he said the Iranians abused US Secretary of State John Kerry “mentally” in the nuclear deal talks, quipping that they treated him “like a child.”

“They took advantage of him like he was a baby,” he added.

Trump also made clear the Iran deal was a key priority of his during a speech at AIPAC in march, when he said, “my number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.”

Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State for Obama, has for her part promised to maintain the Iran nuclear deal.

Why is the deal bad?

There has been great criticism over the nuclear deal for a variety of issues, with many noting that a similar deal sealed by former President Bill Clinton with North Korea in 1994 paved the regime’s path to a nuclear arsenal. The country’s first nuclear test took place in 2006.

The deal allows Iran to wait until limitations on its nuclear program expire in 15 years, at which point it could race to building a nuclear arsenal.

Read More @ VeteransToday.com

Trump Speech A Goldmine Of Hypocrisy, Propaganda And Outrageous Lies

0

by Patrick J McShay, Operation Disclosure:

“If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and the Middle East, but for all mankind”, adding that “the deadline for attaining this goal is extremely close”. – Israeli Prime Minister-Bibi Netanyahu -1996

“If the United States is forced to defend itself or its allies we will have no choice but to destroy North Korea” – President Donald J. Trump
 

“Trump is hostage to hawkish generals running his administration’s geopolitical agenda. Instead of being a peace and stability President, he’s another in a long line of US warrior presidents- At war in multiple theaters, threatening more conflicts, risking possible nuclear confrontation with North Korea, Russia, and China”. – Stephen Lendman, Journalist

Was Donald Trump’s speech to the UN optimistic realism, Trumpian populism or a just a goldmine of hypocrisy, propaganda and outrageous lies? Trump’s meeting with Bibi Netanyahu yesterday no doubt influenced this jingoistic and threatening speech. It sounded like Bibi wrote it for him. Bibi has been crying wolf about Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program for over 20 years. This kind of speech always worked really well before the advent of the internet. In the past, the mainstream media effectively kept us in the dark about what was really going on in the rest of the world so this kind of speech was readily accepted by the ignorant proles.

Now, with a few clicks of the mouse on a computer, just about everything he said is quickly exposed as no more than ludicrous propaganda and the raving of a clueless madman pushing another country’s agenda. I’m sure this was obvious to everyone in that room. This speech was for the dimwitted Fox News crowd, the NeoCons, and Israeli firsters behind the new $700 billion defense spending bill and the defense contractors who will benefit the most. It was not for a room full of serious foreign diplomats. Rocketman indeed. Republicans will, no doubt, praise the speech. The Democrats can’t be too critical because they are complicit and willing partners in most of these big lies, especially if a war for Israel is the end result. Think 911.

Trump proclaimed, “Terrorists and extremists have spread to every corner of the world and rogue regimes in this body support these networks.” What the President fails to mention is that The US and many of our allies including England, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and other NATO countries have been arming and funding a number of terrorist organizations in the Middle East including Al Queda, the Al Nusra Front, and ISIS. You can’t talk seriously about stamping out purveyors of terror while holding hands with Israel and Saudi Arabia, Mr. President. You can’t preach to Syria about being a good neighbor when everyone in the room knows that Israel just bombed Syria again last week.

Trump laughably referred to Israel as a “peaceful neighbor”. This no doubt elicited some big laughs from those in attendance. No doubt more laughs were heard when he said, “In America, we don’t impose our way of life on anyone.” Isn’t that precisely what America does? You can’t pretend that Iran is the biggest threat to the Middle East when everyone in the room knows that the US provided weapons and continue to support the Saudis’ ongoing war and abhorrent bombing campaign against a largely defenseless Yemen. So why would Trump choose to back out of the nuclear deal with Iran now? Because Iran is the next war our Israeli controllers want the American military to fight for them. Especially since their terrorist army has been soundly defeated in Syria.

Iran stands in the way of the “Greater Israel Project”, Israel’s scheme to attain full spectrum dominance over the region. Nothing the US does in the Middle East is done without approval from Tel Aviv. According to US grand strategy, as defined by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski in 2001, all of the greater Middle East must be destroyed except for Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon. This is what has been playing out in the region ever since. The always excellent journalist Stephen Lendman pointed out that “North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela are sovereign independent states threatening no one. America’s geopolitical strategy needs enemies to justify unprecedented militarism and war-making. None exist, so they’re invented.”

The US isn’t so much down on terrorists. They just have a problem with the terrorists that aren’t working for them. It’s like how the government only goes after the drug cartels who don’t work for the CIA. Does anyone really believe that we are really fighting terror in Afghanistan after 16 long years in that country? Prior to the invasion, the Taliban was in the process of stamping out Opium production in Afghanistan. FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds reported that In 2001, prior to the invasion, there were 189,000 heroin users in the US. By 2016 there were estimated to be 4.5 million addicts in our country. So when our government announced that they would eradicate Afghani poppy production, they neglected to tell us that US poppy production would flourish.

For instance, in 2001, poppy fields went from 7600 hectares (2.5 acres per) to 224,000 hectares in 2016. How is it possible for poppy production to increase so substantially after George Bush the Dumber said we would eradicate these crops? Heroin deaths shot from 1779 in 2001 to just under 11,000 in 2016. Heroin is a trillion dollar a year business and the US controls it. Most of the world’s major banks have been caught laundering drug money and it won’t stop anytime soon. Sadly the US so-called Heroin Eradication Program has cost the American taxpayers $8.5 billion. Not long ago most Americans thought that accusations of government-sponsored cocaine smuggling were a conspiracy theory. Today, they are making movies and TV shows about the very real history of American sponsored drug smuggling.

Barack Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who was caught lying to Congress not long ago, has been caught lying again. A few months ago Donald Trump accused the Obama Administration of wiretapping he and members of his team at Trump Tower and the mainstream media had a field day ridiculing him over his accusations. Clapper went on Meet The Press and told Chuck Todd that “there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the President or his campaign before or after the election”. Well, it looks like Trump was right again.

The bigger question is what else has this traitor lied about? Clapper is a smug globalist who never thought Trump would win. Were the Russian collusion lies used by Obama’s henchmen to order FISA warrants on Trump’s team that would have otherwise been illegal? Jeff Sessions is surrounded by criminals with enough evidence to indict a half dozen people right away. This should be a special prosecutor’s dream. Prosecuting Obama’s minions are what most Americans want to see. It’s what this country needs, not globalist shill Robert Mueller’s Russian witch hunt. We should be hearing about multiple investigations. Where are the grand juries, Jeff? Sessions is an embarrassment who spent 9 months attempting to expand the unconstitutional and terribly flawed asset forfeiture program to steal American’s assets and is still fantasizing about imprisoning Medical Marijuana patients. If he won’t resign Trump needs to fire him immediately!

Will Trump take steps to ensure that these agencies don’t go rogue in the future? Has he identified Obama holdovers who may be in a position to harm his presidency? We were told that these Intelligence Agencies were nonpartisan and this sort of thing couldn’t happen. Juan Williams was still insisting today, with a straight face, that the Intelligence Agencies are non-political. Right now, what the Trump Administration needs is an Attorney General that is a Pit Bull, not a lap dog. That’s why Sessions needs to be given his walking papers. It seems clear that Comey is dirty. So is Susan Rice, and Samantha Powers. And what about Obama? Did he order illegal wiretaps? I believe he did. The American people deserve to know the truth. Trump’s win had the globalist rats scurrying but any attack on Iran helps put their agenda back on track. Any plan that has John McCain and Lindsey Graham’s approval is guaranteed to be bad for America.

Read More @ OperationDisclosure.co.uk

Trump, We Hardly Knew Ye

0

by Donald Jeffries, Lew Rockwell:

It was probably pretty naive to ever suspect that a billionaire reality television star could actually be any kind of populist. Before his 2016 presidential campaign, I felt the same way about Donald Trump that I feel about every billionaire, and was repelled by his sleazy, arrogant public persona.

But candidate Trump said some things that no other presidential candidate ever has. He criticized the embarrassing state of our crumbling infrastructure. He called out the media for its blatant dishonesty, and made the term “fake news” a national sensation. He was the first politician since before World War II to declare that we should take care of America’s many problems first. He lambasted a foreign policy bent on nation building and lamented the waste of trillions of dollars on senseless wars.

Trump became the first presidential candidate in any party, major or minor, to make illegal immigration one of the centerpieces of his platform. He spoke out on behalf of families who’d lost loved ones to illegal immigrant criminals that were somehow permitted to remain in this country despite a slew of violent crimes. He promised to end the diabolical H 1-B Visa worker program. Creating a masterful symbol for crowds to rally around, Trump promised to build a wall, and that Mexico would pay for it.

Trump brought up the clear and obvious connections between vaccines and autism, and stories broke early into his administration that he was forming a special commission to investigate these connections, chaired by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. He even promised to audit the Federal Reserve, and apparently mentioned the collapse of Building 7, which was a primary signal to those in the know that he harbored at least some “truther” sentiments.

Time to buy old US gold coins

What really appealed to me, and many others, was Trump’s willingness to boldly call out corrupt public officials for what they are. His references to “crooked Hillary” resulted in loud cries of “lock her up” wherever he spoke. And perhaps the central theme of Trump’s campaign was his promise to “drain the swamp.”

Now, some ten months after his shocking election, President Trump appears to be a pathetic shell of the man he was. His waffling on every issue finally forced his supporters to recently begin burning their “Make America Great” hats in protest of his seeming consideration of amnesty for Obama’s unconstitutional DACA program, designed to protect the “dreamer” children of illegal immigrants.

I certainly was skeptical about Trump even after he said some of the most radical things any major presidential candidate has said in my lifetime. This was because, in the next breath, he’d talk about instituting national “stop and frisk” procedures, and continued to stress how we needed to build up our already gargantuan, bloated military. When he picked a typical mainstream neocon, Mike Pence, as his vice president, many of us could still rationalize that he was trying to shore up a wing of his party, much as John F. Kennedy had tried to do by choosing Lyndon Johnson.

When Trump gave a rousing, truly historical inaugural address, many of us remained hopeful that perhaps finally someone was going to drain this odious, corrupt swamp. But then he disappointed all those supporters still shouting “lock her up” by calling Hillary Clinton a “good person,” and actually quieting those who continued to chant this mantra with “we don’t need that now.” Not long after that, the man who’d derided “globalism” over and over again, claimed that he was now both a nationalist and a globalist.

From there, things just kept unraveling. Trump, who’d blasted NATO, now claimed that it was a good thing. The candidate who’d dared to point out the bogus nature of official unemployment figures, began to brag about them and claimed they revealed that his administration was creating a multitude of new jobs. His appointments were putrid, neocon types that would have fit perfectly into a Jeb Bush cabinet, except for General Mike Flynn, who was unceremoniously and unfairly forced out before he could do anything, because his son was a high profile “conspiracy theorist.”

Trump opened the door for his justice department to prosecute Julian Assange, the courageous whistleblower in exile, whose leaks had played an instrumental part in getting him elected. He defended Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ antiquated and politically stupid emphasis on cracking down on marijuana users, and supported his campaign to actually strengthen law enforcement’s criminal abuse of asset forfeiture laws. Later, he would characteristically begin publicly criticizing Sessions, as if he himself hadn’t approved of all his actions and non-actions.

Because of the undeniable fact that Trump surrounded himself with not only those who hadn’t supported him, but actually a large number of vocal “Never Trumpers,” his promise to “drain the swamp” became truly laughable. Trump never even tried to get a single outsider nominated to any position in his cabinet. Instead, he remained glued to his keyboard, as the tweeter-in-chief, producing one 140 character or less tweet after another, often in an astonishingly juvenile manner.

But the greatest disappointment came when Trump bombed Syria for absolutely no reason at all. He then bombed Afghanistan for good measure, again for no logical reason. Spurred on by his Never Trump United Nations Ambassador, the loud war monger Nikki Haley, he began an unprecedented bit of frightening saber rattling with North Korea. Never before had an American president directly threatened to nuke another nation. Predictably, when Trump bombed Syria, he received the first positive press of his presidency. Everyone in the swamp loves war.

Trump has unfortunately proven to be exactly what his detractors claimed he was; immature, egotistical, unprincipled, vain, elitist. This certainly doesn’t make most of his critics any less offensive than they are. Indeed, that is the lone redeeming value of Trump’s administration; he continues to have all the right enemies. The threats of violence, even assassination, from every pillar of the establishment almost make one want to continue to defend him. Almost.

Read More @ LewRockwell.com

SENATOR MCCAIN DITCHES LAST ATTEMPT AT REAP OF OBAMACARE AND THAT SENDS GOLD AND SILVER HIGHER

0

by Harvey Organ Blog, Harvey Organ Blog:

GOLD ENDS THE DAY UP $1.70 BUT SILVER DOWN 5 CENTS/ BOTH GOLD AND SILVER COT IS GOOD FOR A REBOUND IN PRICING COME THIS WEEK/KIM JONG UN THREATENS THE WEST WITH A HYDROGEN BOMB TEST

GOLD: $1294.45 UP   $1.70

Silver: $16.95  DOWN 5 CENT(S)

Closing access prices:

Gold $1297.50

silver: $17.02

SHANGHAI GOLD FIX:  FIRST FIX  10 15 PM EST  (2:15 SHANGHAI LOCAL TIME)

SECOND FIX:  2:15 AM EST  (6:15 SHANGHAI LOCAL TIME)

SHANGHAI FIRST GOLD FIX: $1303.72 DOLLARS PER OZ

NY PRICE OF GOLD AT EXACT SAME TIME:  $1295.85

PREMIUM FIRST FIX:  $7.87  (premiums getting larger)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

SECOND SHANGHAI GOLD FIX: $1306.41

NY GOLD PRICE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME: $1296.60

Premium of Shanghai 2nd fix/NY:$9.81  (premiums getting larger)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LONDON FIRST GOLD FIX:  5:30 am est  $1297.00

NY PRICING AT THE EXACT SAME TIME: $1296.80

LONDON SECOND GOLD FIX  10 AM: $1291.80

NY PRICING AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. 1291.80

For comex gold:

SEPTEMBER/

NOTICES FILINGS TODAY FOR SEPT CONTRACT MONTH: 0 NOTICE(S) FOR  NIL  OZ.

TOTAL NOTICES SO FAR: 83 FOR 8300 OZ  (0.2581 TONNES)

For silver:

SEPTEMBER

 

 130 NOTICES FILED TODAY FOR

 

650,000  OZ/

Total number of notices filed so far this month: 6,236 for 31,180,000 oz

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

end

 Today the GLD rose again by 6.21 tonnes despite being up only by one dollar.  The trend for GLD inventory is on a rise and this bodes well for our gold metal.

John McCain has decided not to cast his vote in the affirmative for the repeal of Obamacare. Gold and silver caught immediate bids as it will be very difficult for Trump to pass any legislation.

Let us have a look at the data for today

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In silver, the total open interest FELL BY A RATHER SMALL 2286 contracts from  192,251 DOWN TO 189,965 WITH THE CONSIDERABLE FALL IN PRICE THAT SILVER UNDERTOOK IN YESTERDAY’S TRADING (DOWN 29 CENTS ). THE RAID INITIATED AFTER THE COMEX CLOSED ON WEDNESDAY CONTINUED INTO THURSDAY.  THE CONSTANT TORMENT FOR 9 STRAIGHT DAYS, COULD NOT KNOCK OFF ANY APPRECIABLE SILVER LEAVES FROM THE SILVER TREE.

RESULT: A SMALL FALL IN OI COMEX  DESPITE THE 29 CENT PRICE FALL.  THE BANKERS WERE AGAIN UNSUCCESSFUL IN THEIR ATTEMPT TO FORCE SILVER LONGS TO DEPART THE COMEX.

 In ounces, the OI is still represented by just UNDER 1 BILLION oz i.e.  0.9505 BILLION TO BE EXACT or 135{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of annual global silver production (ex Russia & ex China).

FOR THE NEW FRONT MAY MONTH/ THEY FILED: 225 NOTICE(S) FOR 1,125,000OZ OF SILVER

In gold, the open interest FELL BY A LESS THAN EXPECTED 13,149 CONTRACTS WITH THE  HUGE FALL  in price of gold ($19.95 LOSS WITH YESTERDAY’S COMEX TRADING/ GOLD DROPPED BADLY ALSO IN THE ACCESS MARKET TRADING/WEDNESDAY).  The new OI for the gold complex rests at 561,275. AFTER 9 CONSECUTIVE TRADING DAYS THE BANKERS HAD A MILD SUCCESS IN CAUSING GOLD OPEN INTEREST TO DEPART THE COMEX BUT THE FAILED AGAIN IN SILVER. 

Result: A MEDIOCRE DECREASE IN OI WITH THE  HUGE FALL IN PRICE IN GOLD ($19.95). BANKERS HAVE A SMALL SUCCESS IN CAUSING GOLD OPEN INTEREST TO LEAVE THE GOLD CASINO BUT FAILED MISERABLY IN SILVER.

we had: 0 notice(s) filed upon for NIL oz of gold.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

With respect to our two criminal funds, the GLD and the SLV:

GLD:

Tonight , we got this huge news: we had a  change in gold inventory:

a monstrous deposit of 6.21 tonnes. this came with gold up only $1.00 on the day..great sign that the bankers are in trouble

Inventory rests tonight: 852.24 tonnes

SLV

Today: no changes in inventory.

INVENTORY RESTS AT 324.915 MILLION OZ

 

end

.

First, here is an outline of what will be discussed tonight:

1. Today, we had the open interest in silver FELL BY A SMALL 2286 contracts from 192,251  DOWN TO 189,965 (AND now A LITTLE FURTHER FROM THE NEW COMEX RECORD SET ON FRIDAY/APRIL 21/2017 AT 234,787) DESPITE YESTERDAY’S 29 CENT LOSS IN TRADING.AFTER 9 CONSECUTIVE TRADING DAYS OF TORMENT, OUR BANKERS FAILED IN THEIR ATTEMPT TO CAUSE A MAJOR OUTFLOW OF SILVER OPEN INTEREST.

RESULT:  A SMALL SIZED DROP IN SILVER OI  AT THE COMEX DESPITE THE LARGE LOSS IN PRICE OF 29 CENTS IN YESTERDAY’S TRADING. 

(report Harvey)

.

2.a) The Shanghai and London gold fix report

(Harvey)

 

2 b) Gold/silver trading overnight Europe, Goldcore

(Mark O’Byrne/zerohedge

and in NY:  Bloomberg

3. ASIAN AFFAIRS

i)Late THURSDAY night/FRIDAY morning: Shanghai closed DOWN 5.28 POINTS OR 0.16{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}   / /Hang Sang CLOSED DOWN 229.80 POINTS OR 0.82{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/ The Nikkei closed DOWN 51.03 POINTS OR 0.25{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/Australia’s all ordinaires CLOSED UP 0.42{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/Chinese yuan (ONSHORE) closed  DOWN at 6.5920/Oil UP to 50.46 dollars per barrel for WTI and 56.45 for Brent. Stocks in Europe OPENED ALL GREEN . Offshore yuan trades  6.5741 yuan to the dollar vs 6.5920 for onshore yuan. NOW THE OFFSHORE MOVED MUCH STRONGER  TO THE ONSHORE YUAN/ ONSHORE YUAN SLIGHTLY WEAKER (TO THE DOLLAR)  AND THE OFFSHORE YUAN IS STRONGER TO THE DOLLAR AND THIS IS COUPLED WITH THE WEAKER  DOLLAR. CHINA IS HAPPY TODAY

Read More @ HarveyOrganBlog.com