Zerohedge

The Interlocking Of Strategic Paradigms Authored by Alastair Crooke via the Ron Paul Institute, Theodore Postol, Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy at MIT, has provided a forensic analysis of the videos and evidence emerging from Iran’s 13th April swarm drone and missile ‘demonstration’ attack into Israel: A ‘message’, rather than an ‘assault’. The leading Israeli daily, Yediot Ahoronot, has estimated the cost of attempting to down this Iranian flotilla at between $2-3 billion dollars. The implications of this single number are substantial. Professor Postol writes: “This indicates that the cost of defending against waves of attacks of this type is very likely to be unsustainable against an adequately armed and determined adversary”. “The videos show an extremely important fact: All of the targets, whether drones or not, are shot down by air-to-air missiles”, [fired from mostly U.S. aircraft. Some 154 aircraft reportedly were aloft at the time] likely firing AIM-9x Sidewinder air to air missiles. The cost of a single Sidewinder air-to-air missile is about $500,000”. Furthermore: “The fact that a very large number of unengaged ballistic missiles could be seen glowing as they reenter the atmosphere to lower altitudes [an indication of hyper-speed], indicates that whatever the effects of [Israel’s] David’s Sling and the Arrow missile defenses, they were not especially effective. Thus, the evidence at this point shows that essentially all or most of the arriving long-range ballistic missiles were not intercepted by any of the Israeli air and missile-defense systems”. A Tel Aviv demonstrator holds an Israeli flag during a Ukraine-related protest, AFP via Getty Images Postel adds, “I have analyzed the situation, and have concluded that commercially available optical and computational technology is more than capable of being adapted to a cruise missile guidance system to give it very high precision homing capability … it is my conclusion that the Iranians have already developed precision guided cruise missiles and drones”. “The implications of this are clear. The cost of shooting down cruise missiles and drones will be very high and might well be unsustainable unless extremely inexpensive and effective anti-air systems can be implemented. At this time, no one has demonstrated a cost-effective defense system that can intercept ballistic missiles with any reliability”. Just to be clear, Postol is saying that neither the U.S. nor Israel has more than a partial defense to a potential attack of this nature – especially as Iran has dispersed and buried its ballistic missile silos across the entire terrain of Iran under the control of autonomous units which are capable of continuing a war, even were central command and communications to be completely lost. This amounts to paradigm change – clearly for Israel, for one. The huge physical expenditure on air defense ordinance – 2-3 billion dollars worth – will not be repeated willy-nilly by the U.S. Netanyahu will not easily persuade the U.S. to engage with Israel in any joint venture against Iran, given these unsustainable air-defence costs. But also, as a second important implication, these Air Defense assets are not just expensive in dollar terms, they simply are not there: i.e. the store cupboard is near empty! And the U.S. lacks the manufacturing capacity to replace these not particularly effective, high cost platforms speedily. ‘Yes, Ukraine’ … the Middle East paradigm interlinks directly with the Ukraine paradigm where Russia has succeeded in destroying so much of the western supplied, air-defence capabilities in Ukraine, giving Russia near complete air dominance over the skies. Positioning scarce air defense ‘to save Israel’ therefore, exposes Ukraine (and slows the U.S. pivot to China, too). And given the recent passage of the funding Bill for Ukraine in Congress, clearly air defence assets are a priority for sending to Kiev – where the West looks increasingly trapped and rummaging for a way out that does not lead to humiliation. But before leaving the Middle East paradigm shift, the implications for Netanyahu are already evident: He must therefore focus back to the ‘near enemy’ – the Palestinian sphere or to Lebanon – to provide Israel with the ‘Great Victory’ that his government craves. In short, the ‘cost’ for Biden of saving Israel from the Iranian flotilla which had been pre-announced by Iran to be demonstrative and not destructive nor lethal is that the White House must put-up with the corollary – an attack on Rafah. But this implies a different form of cost – an electoral erosion through exacerbating domestic tensions arising from the on-going blatant slaughter of Palestinians. It is not just Israel that bears the weight of the Iranian paradigm shift. Consider the Sunni Arab States that have been working in various forms of collaboration (normalissation) with Israel. In the event of wider conflict embracing Iran, clearly Israel cannot protect them – as Professor Postol so clearly shows. And can they count on the U.S.? The U.S. faces competing demands for its scarce Air Defenses and (for now) Ukraine, and the pivot to China, are higher on the White House priority ladder. In September 2019, the Saudi Abqaiq oil facility was hit by cruise missiles, which Postol notes, “had an effective accuracy of perhaps a few feet, much more precise than could be achieved with GPS guidance (suggesting an optical and computational guidance system, giving a very precise homing capability)”. So, after the Iranian active deterrence paradigm shift, and the subsequent Air Defence depletion paradigm shock, the putative coming western paradigm shift (the Third Paradigm) is similarly interlinked with Ukraine. For the western proxy war with Russia centered on Ukraine has made one thing abundantly clear: this is that the West’s off-shoring of its manufacturing base has left it uncompetitive, both in simple trade terms, and secondly, in limiting western defense manufacturing capacity. It finds (post-13 April) that it does not have the Air Defence assets to go round: ‘saving Israel’; ‘saving Ukraine’ and preparing for war with China. The western maximalization of shareholder returns model has not adapted readily to the logistical needs of the present ‘limited’ Ukraine/Russia war, let alone provided positioning for future wars – with Iran and China. Put plainly, this ‘late stage’ global imperialism has been living a ‘false dawn’: With the economy shifting from manufacturing ‘things’, to the more lucrative sphere of imagining new financial products (such as derivatives) that make a lot of money quickly, but which destabilize society (through increasing disparities of wealth); and which ultimately, de-stabilise the global system itself (as the World Majority states recoil from the loss of sovereignty and autonomy that financialism entails). More broadly, the global system is close to massive structural change. As the Financial Times warns, “the U.S. and EU cannot embrace national-security “infant industry” arguments, seize key value chains to narrow inequality, and break the fiscal and monetary ‘rules’, while also using the IMF and World Bank – and the economics profession– to preach free-market best practice to EM ex-China. And China can’t expect others not to copy what it does”. As the FT concludes, “the shift to a new economic paradigm has begun. Where it will end is very much up for grabs.” ‘Up for grabs’: Well, for the FT the answer may be opaque, but for the Global Majority is plain enough – “We’re going back to basics”: A simpler, largely national economy, protected from foreign competition by customs barriers. Call it ‘old- fashioned’ (the concepts have been written about for the last 200 years); yet it is nothing extreme. The notions simply reflect the flip side of the coin to Adam Smith’s doctrines, and that which Friedrich List advanced in his critique of the laissez-faire individualist approach of the Anglo-Americans. ‘European leaders’, however, see the economic paradigm solution differently: “The ECB’s Panetta gave a speech echoing Mario Draghi’s call for “radical change”: He stated for the EU to thrive it needs a de facto national-security focused POLITICAL economy centered around: reducing dependence on foreign demand; enhancing energy security (green protectionism); advancing production of technology (industrial policy); rethinking participation in global value chains (tariffs/subsidies); governing migration flows (so higher labour costs); enhancing external security (huge funds for defence); and joint investments in European public goods (via Eurobonds … to be bought by ECB QE)”. The ‘false dawn’ boom in U.S. financial services began as its industrial base was rotting away, and as new wars began to be promoted. It is easy to see that the U.S. economy now needs structural change. Its real economy has become globally uncompetitive – hence Yellen’s call on China to curb its over-capacity which is hurting western economies. But is it realistic to think that Europe can manage a relaunch as a ‘defense and national security-led political economy’, as Draghi and Panetta advocate as a continuation of war with Russia? Launched from near ground zero? Is it realistic to think that the American Security State will allow Europe to do this, having deliberately reduced Europe to economic vassalage through causing it to abandon its prior business model based on cheap energy and selling high-end engineering products to China? This Draghi-ECB plan represents a huge structural change; one that would take a decade or two to implement and would cost trillions. It would occur too, at a time of inevitable European fiscal austerity. Is there evidence that ordinary Europeans support such radical structural change? Why then is Europe pursuing a path that embraces huge risks – one that potentially could drag Europe into a whirlpool of tensions ending in war with Russia? For one main reason: The EU leadership held hubristic ambitions to turn the EU into a ‘geo-political’ empire – a global actor with the heft to join the U.S. at Top Table. To this end, the EU unreservedly offered itself as the auxiliary of the White House Team for their Ukraine project, and acquiesced to the entry price of emptying their armories and sanctioning the cheap energy on which the economy depended. It was this decision that has been de-industrializing Europe; that has made what remains of a real economy uncompetitive and triggered the inflation that is undermining living standards. Falling into line with Washington’s failing Ukraine project has released a cascade of disastrous decisions by the EU. Were this policy line to change, Europe could revert to what it was: a trading association formed of diverse sovereign states. Many Europeans would settle for that: Placing the focus on making Europe competitive again; making Europe a diplomatic actor, rather than as a military actor. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 23:20

Russia Stepping Up 'Decapitation Strikes' - Belatedly Adds Zelensky to Criminal 'Wanted' List Days ago, for the first time Russian forces mounted a major air attack on the Ukrainian command's southern headquarters in the port city of Odessa. This suggests Moscow is increasingly targeting Ukraine's top command and control centers. There's been another key development late in the week suggesting Russia is escalating in response to more and more weapons and billions pouring into Kiev from the West: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has just been added to a Russian government most-wanted list of criminals. Getty Images It was revealed Saturday that Zelensky's name is now on the Russian Interior Ministry's "wanted" list, which is an important online database.  The database lists Zelensky as wanted "under an article of the criminal code" but provides no other specifics or details. This designation comes after well over two years of war, so the question is: why now? It seems the Kremlin is signaling a new escalation which could focus on 'decapitation strikes' targeting Ukraine's top leadership. Or else, is Russia establishing a legal ground for arresting him in some future scenario? While command and intelligence HQ's have been hit by Russian airpower in the past, strikes have yet to directly target top-ranking civilian and military leadership. But it seems this is about to change. President Putin has for years demonstrated that he is very law-oriented and 'by the book' - that is, he must have a legal basis or rationale for acting. So Zelensky now personally being designated as 'wanted' perhaps provides the 'rationale' in a sense, from the Kremlin's perspective. The anti-Kremlin independent news outlet Moscow Times suggests this sets the stage for new plots to try and assassinate Zelensky:  The Ukrainian President said last year he was aware that at least "five or six" assassination attempts against him had been foiled. The day after sending troops into Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin gave an address to the nation in which he called on the Ukrainian army to overthrow Zelensky. Russia has placed several foreign politicians and public figures on its wanted list, which has tens of thousands of entries. As for Russia's unrelenting and recently stepped-up aerial campaign, it has continued to pummel and degrade Ukraine's energy infrastructure. This appears a tit-for-tat retaliation for Ukraine's own devastating cross-border attacks on Russian oil depots and refineries.  A fresh Russian Defense Ministry (MoD) statement has outlined that "In the past 7 days, the Russian Armed Forces carried out 25 group strikes via precision weapons and drones, hitting Ukrainian energy and transportation infrastructure facilities and Ukrainian military-industrial complex enterprises." Zelensky is now officially WANTED by Russia! At least that's what the database for Russia's MVD (Ministry of Internal Affairs--basically, police) states: Zelensky is wanted under an undisclosed article of the Russian criminal code. An interesting development to say the least.… pic.twitter.com/FS8tdWAJxt — Nina 🐙 Byzantina (@NinaByzantina) May 4, 2024 "Between April 28 and May 4, in response to the Kiev regime’s attempts to inflict damage to Russian energy and industrial facilities, the Russian Armed Forces carried out 25 group strikes via precision weapons and drones, hitting Ukrainian energy and transportation infrastructure facilities, military-industrial complex enterprises, missile and ammunition storage areas, as well as unmanned speedboats and drone manufacturing workshops," the ministry said. The MoD has also warned that any "mercenary" positions and also foreign military equipment will be specifically targeted. There are reports that Ukraine has had to pull back it US-supplied M1 Abrams tanks precisely because they make for such an attractive target. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 21:35

Bitcoin Vs. Gold: Who Won The ZeroHedge Debate? Friday night’s ZeroHedge Debate explored which is the superior asset: Gold or Bitcoin. Arguing in favor of Gold were investor Peter Schiff and NYU economist Nouriel Roubini, who went toe-to-toe with crypto proponents Erik Voorhees, a cryptocurrency entrepreneur and wealth manager Anthony Scaramucci. Schiff made the case that Bitcoin cannot be a viable currency because “money needs to be a commodity” and that Bitcoin has no inherent value. “It’s not just a unit of account and a medium of exchange. It needs to be a store of value,” he added. “[Bitcoin] is no more ‘digital gold’ than if I create an image of a hamburger on a computer screen. That’s not digital food.” Does Bitcoin’s transferability give it value? Voorhees argued that Bitcoin’s ability to seamlessly cross borders is an example of inherent value. “I can send $1 million to Europe in five minutes from my phone.” As things heated up, Roubini echoed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), suggesting that crypto could be exchanged between a “criminal and a terrorist” and that Bitcoin’s transferability allows for the subversion of Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know-Your-Customer (KYC) laws. He blasted Voorhees for being too idealistic. “Live in your Libertarian cave! That’s not the world we live in.” Voorhees then gave his best impression of Socrates, attempting to dissect Roubini’s argument that Bitcoin is not "decentralized." Roubini, meanwhile, made the case that Bitcoin mining is controlled by an oligopoly, and that "The Gini coefficient of Bitcoin is worse than North Korea," - a point he's made in the past, suggesting that Bitcoin contributes to income inequality, rather than reducing it. One topic the panelists agreed on: inflation is crushing the work class. According to Schiff, “there’s only one source of inflation and that’s government.” So, who do you think won? If you would like to protect yourself from rising inflation, consider checking out this debate's sponsors: Preserve Gold and Bitlayer Labs. ZeroHedge would like to offer a special thank you to each of them for helping to facilitate free speech and open debate. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 20:33

California Bill Would Give Black Applicants An Edge In Getting Occupational Licenses Authored by Sophie Li via The Epoch Times, California lawmakers are considering a bill that would give preference to African American applicants seeking occupational licenses, for such professions as teaching, nursing, counseling, electrical work and others, especially those who are descendants of slaves. Assemblyman Mike Gipson, author of AB 2862, said the state’s licensing process poses barriers for African Americans seeking employment, particularly in terms of wage disparities and access to leadership or managerial positions. “There has been historical longstanding deficiencies and internal barriers … [for] African Americans seeking professional work, and by prioritizing their applications, we are bridging the gap of professional inequities of under representation and under compensation,” Mr. Gipson said in a bill analysis. Under current law, only veterans are eligible for such prioritization. Mr. Gipson argued in the analysis that if such priority can be granted to veterans, similar standards should be applicable to African-American applicants. “If expediting licensure for veterans does not discriminate, then perhaps prioritizing African American applicants also is not discriminatory,” his statement reads. “Nor would a preference for African American applicants violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution any more than the existing preference for veterans.” Supporters of the bill, including the Greater Sacramento Urban League and the California African American Chamber of Commerce, said the legislation addresses historical injustices and “promotes equity and provides opportunities for economic advancement within our community.” However, opponents say it is “unconstitutional” and lacks legal backing. The Pacific Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm, argues in a statement that both the U.S. and California Constitutions guarantee citizens equal protection under the law, prohibiting the government from treating citizens differently based on race, ancestry, or other protected categories. The law firm suggested if the bill were to become law, it would probably not hold up against legal challenges, referencing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard last summer. The court deemed the consideration of an applicant’s race as a factor in admissions decisions unconstitutional. They argued that while the constitution allows the government to use race to remedy instances of past discrimination, the bill doesn’t cite any specific California laws that exclude African Americans or that were drafted with the intention of excluding workers needing redress. Additionally, they said that introducing race as a factor in the licensing process would exacerbate barriers for many Californians seeking to enter the workforce, particularly low-income workers, who already face numerous challenges. The law firm also pointed out that the representation of minority groups within industries often varies, suggesting that prioritizing one group over others would fail to address the root of the problem. They argued that if the state were to do so, it should reduce barriers to licensure for all Californians. The bill, which will now be heard in the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee, passed the Assembly’s Business and Professions Committee on a 13–2 vote last week. If ultimately passed, it would go into effect on Jan. 1, 2029. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 19:50

David Stockman On The $1.3 Trillion Elephant In The Room Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com, These people have to be stopped! We are talking about the nation’s unhinged monetary politburo domiciled in the Eccles Building, of course. It is bad enough that their relentless inflation of financial assets has showered the 1% with untold trillions of windfall gains, but their ultimate crime is that they lured the nation’s elected politician into a veritable fiscal trance. Consequently, future generations will be lugging the service costs on insuperable public debts for years to come. For more than two decades these foolish PhDs and monetary apparatchiks drove the entire Treasury yield curve to rock bottom, even as public debt erupted skyward. In this context, the single biggest chunk of the Treasury debt lies in the 90-day T-bill sector, but between December 2007 and June 2023 the inflation-adjusted yield on this workhorse debt security was negative 95% of the time. That’s right. During that 187-month span, the interest rate exceeded the running (LTM) inflation rate during only nine months, as depicted by the purple area picking above the zero bound in the chart, and even then by just a tad. All the rest of the time, Uncle Sam was happily taxing the inflationary rise in nominal incomes, even as his debt service payments were dramatically lagging the 78% rise of CPI during that period. Inflation-Adjusted Yield On 90-Day T-bills, 2007 to 2022 The above was the fiscal equivalent of Novocain. It enabled the elected politicians to merrily jig up and down Pennsylvania Avenue and stroll the K-Street corridors dispensing bountiful goodies left and right, while experiencing nary a moment of pain from the massive debt burden they were piling on the main street economy. Accordingly, during the quarter-century between Q4 1997 and Q1 2022 the public debt soared from $5.5 trillion to $30.4 trillion or by 453%. In any rational world a commensurate rise in Federal interest expense would have surely awakened at least some of the revilers. But not in Fed World. As it happened, Uncle Sam’s interest expense only increased by 73%, rising from $368 billion to $635 billion per year during the same period.  By contrast, had interest rates remained at the not unreasonable levels posted in late 1997, the interest expense level by Q1 2022, when the Fed finally awakened to the inflationary monster it had fostered, would have been $2.03 trillion per annum. In short, the Fed reckless and relentless repression of interest rates during that quarter century fostered an elephant in the room that was one for the ages. Annualized Federal interest expense was fully $1.3 trillion lower than would have been the case at the yield curve in place in Q4 1997. Alas, the missing interest expense amounted to the equivalent of the entire social security budget! So, we’d guess the politicians might have been aroused from their slumber had interest expense reflected market rates. Instead, they were actually getting dreadfully wrong price signals and the present fiscal catastrophe is the consequence. Index Of Public Debt Versus Federal Interest Expense, Q4 1997-Q1 2022 Needless to say, the US economy was not wallowing in failure or under-performance at the rates which prevailed in 1997. In fact, during that year real GDP growth was +4.5%, inflation posted at just 1.7%, real median family income rose by 3.2%, job growth was 2.8% and the real interest rates on the 10-year UST was +4.0%. In short, 1997 generated one of the strongest macroeconomic performances in recent decades—even with inflation-adjusted yields on the 10-year UST of +4.0%. So there was no compelling reason for a massive compression of interest rates, but that is exactly what the Fed engineered over the next two decades. As shown in the graph below, rates were systematically pushed lower by 300 to 500 basis points across the curve by the bottom in 2020-2021. Current yields are higher by 300 to 400 basis points from this recent bottom, but here’s the thing: They are only back to nominal levels prevalent at the beginning of the period in 1997, even as inflation is running at 3-4% Y/Y increases, or double the levels of 1997. US Treasury Yields, 1997 to 2024 Unfortunately, even as the Fed has tepidly moved toward normalization of yields as shown in the graph above, Wall Street is bringing unrelenting pressure for a new round of rates cuts, which would result in yet another spree of the deep interest rate repression and distortion that has fueled Washington’s fiscal binge since the turn of the century. As it is, the public debt is already growing at an accelerating clip, even before the US economy succumbs to the recession that is now gathering force. And we do mean accelerating. The public debt has recently been increasing by $1 trillion every 100 days. That’s $10 billion per day, $416 million per hour. In fact, Uncle Sam’s debt has risen by $470 billion in the first two months of this year to $34.5 trillion and is on pace to surpass $35 trillion in a little over a month, $37 trillion well before year’s end, and $40 trillion some time in 2025. That’s about two years ahead of the current CBO (Congressional Budget Office) forecast. On the current path, moreover, the public debt will reach $60 trillion by the end of the 10-year budget window. But even that depends upon the CBO’s latest iteration of Rosy Scenario, which envisions no recession ever again, just 2% inflation as far as the eye can see and real interest rates of barely 1%. And that’s to say nothing of the trillions in phony spending cuts and out-year tax increases that are built into the CBO baseline but which Congress will never actually allow to materialize. What is worse, even with partial normalization of rates, a veritable tsunami of Federal interest expense is now gathering steam. That is because the ultra-low yields of 2007 to 2022 are now rolling over into the current market rates shown above—at the same time that the amount of public debt outstanding is heading skyward. As a result, the annualized run rate of Federal interest expense hit $1.1 trillion in February and is heading for $1.6 trillion by the end of the current fiscal year in September. Finally, even as the run-rate of interest expense has been soaring, the bureaucrats at the US Treasury have been drastically shortening the maturity of the outstanding debt, as it rolls over. Accordingly, more than $21 trillion of Treasury paper has been refinanced in the under one-year T-bill market, thereby lowering the weighted-average maturity of the public debt to less than five- years. The apparent bet is that the Fed will be cutting rates soon. As is becoming more apparent by the day, however, that’s just not in the cards: No matter how you slice it, the running level of inflation has remained exceedingly sticky and shows no signs of dropping below its current 3-4% range any time soon. What is also becoming more apparent by the day is that the money-printers at the Fed have led Washington into a massive fiscal calamity. It is only a matter of time, therefore, until the brown stuff hits the fan like never before. *  *  * The truth is, we’re on the cusp of an economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. And most people won’t be prepared for what’s coming. That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse. Click here to download the PDF now. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 18:40

US Demands Qatar Expel Hamas If Group Rejects Israeli Truce Deal Via The Cradle US officials have told Qatar to expel Hamas’ political leadership if the Palestinian militant group rejects the latest proposal for a ceasefire with Israel, The Washington Post reports Saturday. A US official speaking on the condition of anonymity with The Post said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken delivered the message to Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani in April. Three diplomats familiar with the matter said Qatari officials have expected the request for months, as ceasefire talks mediated by Qatari and Egyptian officials have repeatedly failed. Qatari officials have advised Hamas officials to prepare to depart for another country should they be forced to leave, one of the diplomats told The Post. Some have speculated that Turkiye may be a possible future host of the group. Emir Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani (R) in a meeting with Hamas official Khaled Mashal in Doha, Qatar govt handout Doha has hosted Hamas’ political leadership, including Ismail Haniyeh, at the US’ request since 2012 and provided billions in cash to the Hamas authorities governing Gaza in recent years with the approval of the US and Israel.  However, Qatar has come under criticism from US and Israeli officials since Hamas launched Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October. During the operation, Hamas attacked Israeli military bases and settlements to break the 17-year siege on Gaza. Some 1,200 Israeli civilians and soldiers were killed, including some by Hamas and others by Israeli forces, which used attack helicopters, tanks, and drones in their own settlements (kibbutzim) to respond to the operation. Hamas also took some 240 Israelis captive, of which roughly 100 remain alive in Gaza, to exchange for some of the thousands of Palestinians held captive in Israeli jails.  The White House has sought to use the threat of expelling Hamas from Qatar as leverage in ceasefire negotiations. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants the return of the Israeli captives without offering a permanent end to the war in return.  Netanyahu has long insisted that Israel only agree to a temporary ceasefire in exchange for the return of the Israeli captives, after which the army would be allowed to resume the war on Gaza, which he claims is meant to eliminate Hamas. Hamas has rejected the idea of a temporary ceasefire in hopes of ending the war permanently and winning the return of displaced Palestinians from northern Gaza to their homes, though many have been destroyed by Israeli bombing. After seven months of war, the Israeli army has succeeded in killing a reported over 34,000 Palestinians, including over 14,000 children according to Gaza Health Ministry casualties, and has laid waste to large swathes of Gaza’s cities and farmland. However, the army has not defeated Hamas, whose fighters continue to carry out operations against occupying Israeli troops.  Netanyahu has also used the threat of an all-out invasion of Rafah, the city on the Egypt border where over 1 million displaced Palestinians are sheltering, as leverage to force Hamas to agree to a ceasefire and prisoner exchange on Israel’s terms.  Blinken returned to Israel this week in hopes of pressuring Hamas to agree to the latest Israeli proposal. "We are determined to get a ceasefire that brings the hostages home and to get it now, and the only reason that wouldn’t be achieved is because of Hamas," Blinken said Wednesday in Tel Aviv. "There is a proposal on the table, and as we’ve said: no delays, no excuses. The time is now." A Hamas delegation is expected to visit Cairo this weekend, potentially to respond in writing to Israel’s latest proposal, Reuters reported Friday. Major Israeli strike have continued to rock Gaza this week: BREAKING: MAJOR ISRAELI AIRSTRIKES ON NORTHERN GAZA RIGHT NOW pic.twitter.com/pxoc2eFhqb — Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) May 3, 2024 As negotiations have dragged on, US officials and lawmakers have blamed Qatar for its failure to force Hamas to agree to a deal. Some US lawmakers have called on the White House to force Qatar to not only expel the Hamas leadership but to cut ties with the group entirely. However, some analysts say expelling Hamas from Qatar will not assist Israel. "Applying pressure to Hamas in Doha is ineffective pressure," an official briefed on the talks said. "The problem is the guys making the decisions are in Gaza, and they don’t care where the political office is located," this person said. Patrick Theros, a former US ambassador to Qatar, told The Post that kicking Hamas out of Qatar would simply sabotage the current talks further. "We’d be cutting off our nose to spite our face," he said. Qatari officials have expressed frustration for the criticism they are receiving, simply for doing what the US had requested of them. "We did not enter into a relationship with Hamas because we wanted to. We were asked by the U.S.," Majed al-Ansari, adviser to the Qatari prime minister and spokesperson for Qatar’s Foreign Ministry, stated last week to Israeli media. "Qatar is being used as a political punching bag for those who are looking either to safeguard their political futures or to find more votes in the next elections," he said in response to US and Israeli criticism. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 17:30

Governments Cause Inflation And Hurt Bond Investors Authored by Daniel Lacalle, The Fed’s preferred inflation measure rose 2.8% in March from a year ago. This is the core personal consumption expenditures price index, excluding food and energy, which should be less volatile than the consumer price index and a better indicator of the real process of disinflation. This figure is not only concerning, considering the propaganda that repeats that the fight against inflation is nearing its conclusion, but it becomes even more so when we observe the upward trend over the last three and six months. Inflation has accelerated on a quarterly and half-year basis. As E.J. Anthony, PhD economist, points out, “there was never any indication we were heading to the 2.0% inflation target, let alone the pre-pandemic 1.8% average; we’ve arrived at 3%+ with no indication we’re going significantly lower anytime soon, not with the current levels of Treasury borrowing and Fed allowing money supply growth.” We need to understand why inflation is not falling as promised and announced. There is no such thing as cost-push inflation Fiscal policy has been reckless, and enormous deficit spending is fueling inflationary pressures through unnecessary government consumption of newly created currency. Government spending is printing new units of currency and inflation is caused by issuing more than what the private sector demands, thus making the purchasing power of money decline. There is no such thing as cost-push inflation, greedflation, or commodity inflation. None of those factors can make aggregate prices rise, consolidate, and continue increasing on an annualized level. Furthermore, if cost-push or supply chain disruptions were the cause of inflation, we would have deflation today, not rising aggregate prices every month. Governments created the inflation burst of 2021 and have not only ignored fiscal responsibility but, in the case of the United States, maintained a completely unhealthy and unrequired budget deficit Governments are destroying the purchasing power of money and perpetuating inflation. They created the inflation burst of 2021 and have not only ignored fiscal responsibility but, in the case of the United States, maintained a completely unhealthy and unrequired budget deficit. “An upsurge in money growth preceded the inflation flare-up, and countries with stronger money growth saw markedly higher inflation,” concluded Claudio Borio in a scholar paper in 2023 (“Does money growth help explain the recent inflation surge?”, BIS Bulletin No. 67, January 26, 2023). Doctors Juan Castañeda and Tim Congdon already warned as early as June 2020 that “the policy reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic will increase budget deficits massively in the world’s leading countries. The deficits will largely be monetized, with heavy state borrowing from both national central banks and commercial banks. The monetization of budget deficits, combined with official support for emergency bank lending to cash-strained corporates, is leading to extremely high growth rates of the quantity of money,” and these “will instigate an inflationary boom” (Inflation: The Next Threat? Institute of Economic Affairs, Briefing 7, June 2020). Inflation is a policy Inflation is not a coincidence or a fatality; it is a policy. Governments tend to announce large-scale spending programs to combat inflation. These policies accelerate money velocity in a recovery, particularly after a shutdown like the one of 2020, as well as the quantity of money in the system. Thus, inflation rises rapidly. The only way to contain the inflation burst is to cut spending and reduce the quantity and growth of money. However, although central banks have announced so-called restrictive policies, reality has shown the opposite. The quantity of money in the system has not been reduced. Money supply measured as M2 has declined, and the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve has diminished, but these forces have been entirely offset by net liquidity and money market funds. As government spending and deficit have not fallen at all, but rather the opposite, the economy has been flooded with the post-waves of the first money growth impact (2020), its market and net liquidity effect, and rising public expenditure with annual deficits close to $2 trillion. The quantity of money has not been reduced The Federal Reserve has increased rates, but that only helps moderate the growth of money, not eliminate inflationary pressures. Furthermore, as markets immediately discounted large rate cuts in 2024, the real effect on money growth has been just to postpone the inevitable future monetization of such enormous deficits. It has become a Call option on a forthcoming new quantitative easing program. We cannot forget that the quantity of money has not been reduced due to another relevant factor. The Federal Reserve has multiplied its support for the troubled banking sector via the discount window, which offsets the modest reduction in the Fed balance sheet. Instead of attacking inflation, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” has perpetuated the destruction of the value of the currency issued By purchasing the sovereign bonds in the banks’ balance sheets at par despite the collapse in price, the Fed was inadvertently printing new money and sabotaging its own restrictive measures. The misguided Keynesian policies implemented by the US government have cancelled out the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet reduction and rate hike efforts. The Treasury injected more than $2 trillion per annum in liquidity, creating new money, counteracting the net $1.6 trillion that the Fed retired in three years from its balance sheet. Therefore, the impact on the purchasing power of the currency through inflation has been negative. Instead of attacking inflation, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” has perpetuated the destruction of the value of the currency issued. The impact on markets The impact on markets has been phenomenal. The yen, once a stable currency perceived as a haven for investors, has fallen to a 35-year low versus the US dollar. The Bloomberg index of globally expanded major currencies and the emerging markets indicator have both fallen. The result of the 2020–2024 “free money” wave was a very expensive destruction of real wages and deposit savings. Furthermore, bonds have been obliterated and the latest data shows that the aggregate US and euro area bond indices have not recovered from the past years’ slump, and even going back to 2020, the indices are showing negative returns. Only the high yield index has shown a positive performance in the past four years, albeit a meager 4.5%. Governments are destroying the currency that they issue in all possible ways. Through persistent inflation, making wage earners and middle-class deposit savers poorer, with rising taxes to try to reduce a budget deficit that was bloated by unnecessary spending in a recovery, and through the destruction of the safest asset, bonds, that have become a bad investment for the most conservative investors, pension funds. The only way in which inflation will be reduced will be if the Federal Reserve abandons its decision to cut rates and starts to take measures that drain net liquidity. Without the support of the Treasury, this is impossible because it floods the market with new money even if monetary policy is restrictive and investors simply discounts that all those newly issued currency units will be monetized somehow in the future. It does not matter if Powell promises restraint when Yellen pushes excess. The most conservative bondholders will only start to see positive returns when the Treasury stops destroying the currency’s value. It does not seem likely anytime soon. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 16:20

Biden Spends All Afternoon Awarding Medals To Other Democrats Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news, Despite the fact that the world is teetering on the edge of global conflict, US college campuses being trashed by radical occupiers, and criminal illegals are still overwhelming the border, Joe Biden spent Friday afternoon awarding other Democrats medals. Biden, who was incapable of saying ‘Presidential Medal of Freedom,’ awarded one each to Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Al Gore, Michael Bloomberg, and Rep. Jim Clyburn. Crooked Joe's brain is friedhttps://t.co/8TGrYdQFd0 — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) May 3, 2024 It was just a big back-patting session for Democrats. Old Joe Biden is so confused he thought he was supposed to nominate the most financially successful politicians. Or something. Hard to believe some of these folks deserve a medal of any kind. Al Gore, Climate Grifter, John Kerry, Climate Grifter, Nancy Pelosi, Stock Market… https://t.co/mhz8CAIA81 — Brother Eric (@01IOTA) May 3, 2024 Al Gore and John Kerry were seemingly given medals for losing elections, with Biden stating that Gore “accepted the outcome of a disputed presidential election for the sake of our unity.” These Democrats like standing behind each other. — Jungle Ball (@JungleBall_) May 3, 2024 While Pelosi was given a medal for her actions on January 6th, which amounted to locking herself in a room, threatening to punch Donald Trump, and calling it an insurrection. Freedom to make over $150,000,000.00 in insider trading while in congress. — Nick Koutrakos (@NickKoutrakos) May 3, 2024 Is that Medal for facilitating the setup for January 6th or assisting the in Committee in disposing of evidence? pic.twitter.com/5EsUUci2Pb — Bennetta Elliott (@belliott123) May 4, 2024 Bloomberg and Clyburn got medals for…something or other, but being pivotal in Biden’s election campaign was just pure coincidence. BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. pic.twitter.com/uA1LUPuy0d — The Pink Elephant in the Room (@PEITRblog) May 4, 2024 I want to congratulate one of our own, Mike Bloomberg, on receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom! Although he wasn’t as great a mayor as DeBlasio and Adams, he was fiercely opposed to guns and sugary drinks. Thank you President Biden. We in New York are celebrating today. pic.twitter.com/BXstjq4NkK — Kathy Hochul Press Release (Parody) (@NY_Gov_PR) May 3, 2024 Hahaha of course you woke joke snowflakes think only democrats should get participation trophies 🏆 😆 — Doug Osborne (@DougOsb70438101) May 4, 2024 *  *  * Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 15:10

Hamas-Israel Truce To Free Hostages Said To Be Closer Than Ever Rumors are flying Saturday that Hamas and Israel are closer than ever to finally reaching a truce deal that would center of the release of more Israeli hostages, and the freeing of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. "Negotiations for a potential hostage deal and truce in Gaza appeared to reach a critical moment Saturday, with Hamas set to offer its response to the latest proposal, and Israel indicating an offensive in the city of Rafah could be imminent if no agreement is reached," Times of Israel reports. Separately Haaretz is reporting based on regional Arab sources that Hamas has in essence already accepted a deal. The last hours of Egyptian and Qatari mediated talks have reportedly seen significant progress. However, this key caveat could make all of the current Saturday headlines premature:  An Israeli official told Haaretz that 'Israel will, under no circumstances, agree to end the war as part of a deal' and is determined to enter Rafah. But Haaretz is also saying that "Hamas was guaranteed by the U.S. for a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and that Israeli forces will not continue fighting once the hostages are released." Picture Alliance via Getty Images The problem with this is that given PM Netanyahu's latest and consistent rhetoric vowing to not halt the operation until Palestinian terrorists in the Strip are eradicated, a full IDF withdrawal still seems unrealistic. Starting Friday Israeli leaders said they were giving Hamas one week to agree to the deal on the table or else a full-scale assault of Rafah will begin.  Less than 40 hostages are expected to be freed as part of the deal - it would focus on the remaining children, elderly, and the sick. One Israeli official told Haaretz that the government is "waiting anxiously to see Hamas' final position." But the source cautioned, "The information has not yet arrived, but in light of past experience, even if Hamas says it's following the suggested framework, the small details and reservations it'll eventually present may dissolve the whole deal." This is precisely what has happened to prior rounds of negotiations which were believed to be at the finish line. They blew up at the last moment over specific details, typically involving wrangling over the names on the hostage release list. Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 14:00

"Stunning On Multiple Levels": DOJ Admits To Evidence Tampering In Trump Classified Docs Case Special Counsel Jack Smith's team admitted on Friday that key evidence in Trump's classified documents case was altered or manipulated - leaving two different chronologies; one that was digitally scanned vs. what's in the actual boxes. Smith also misled the court, after originally telling U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that the boxes remained "in their original, intact form as seized," when in a footnote they conceded that they removed classified documents and left placeholder sheets, which prosecutors acknowledged has created an "inconsistent" record - in which some of the documents are no longer in the same order as they appear in digital scans made in the fall of 2022. "The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court," the footnote reads, according to Just the News. The finding comes after Cannon ordered a review into whether the FBI may have seized legally privileged records in response to a request from Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta. "Since the boxes were seized and stored, appropriate personnel have had access to the boxes for several reasons, including to comply with orders issued by this Court in the civil proceedings noted above, for investigative purposes, and to facilitate the defendants' review of the boxes," wrote Smith's team in the Friday filing. "There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans," the filing continues. The organization of the documents in storage boxes at Mar-a-Lago is likely to be an important part of Trump‘s defense. His team is expected to argue the documents were stored in the White House in chronological order on the days that Trump received them, and that staff simply boxed them up and sent them to his home without him accessing them or knowing they contained classified information. Smith’s team tried to downplay the problem and argued it’s not a reason for a delay in Trump’s case. But several legal experts told Just the News the court filing essentially is an admission of evidence tampering, and could be problematic. -Just the News "Prosecutors and investigators should never tamper with or alter evidence in their possession, including the order of documents in a box because one never knows what may become relevant or crucial to a court or jury later in a case," Alan Dershowitz told Just the News. Jack Smith confessed as much in yesterday's filing. He would not have but for Nauta's attorney busting DOJ for tampering with evidence. Defense building evidence to support motion to dismiss on prosecutorial misconduct--which is pending before Cannon. pic.twitter.com/Igjh0VBmBj — Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 4, 2024 "This admission is stunning on multiple levels," said defense attorney Tim Parlatore, who worked on Trump’s team earlier in the classified documents case but no longer is involved, adding that the revelation "reinforces the incompetence" of prosecutors "in conducting basic criminal investigations and prosecutions that I observed when I was on the team. "But at a deeper level, the loss of specific document locations is a destruction of exculpatory evidence," Parlatore added. "I went through all of the boxes at NARA and the document order was important because it was clear to us that the boxes had been untouched since leaving the White House. "For prosecutors who are trying to prove that the defendants knowingly possessed these documents to then destroy the evidence that would undermine that claim is a very serious violation," he said. In response to the filing, Trump said on Truth Social that "Deranged Jack has admitted in a filing in front of Judge Cannon to what I have been saying happened since the Illegal RAID on my home ... that he and his team committed blatant Evidence Tampering by mishandling the very Boxes they used as a pretext to bring this Fake Case." Smith's Excuses The prosecution offered several explanations for the manipulated evidence. "There are several possible explanations, including the above-described instances in which the boxes were accessed, as well as the size and shape of certain items in the boxes possibly leading to movement of items," reads the filing. "For example, the boxes contain items smaller than standard paper such as index cards, books, and stationary, which shift easily when the boxes are carried, especially because many of the boxes are not full." This is an answer to defense accusations that incriminating files do not correspond with FBI index of evidence. And look at that FBI slip sheet--what a shoddy operation conducted by sloppy investigators bc they have zero accountability. pic.twitter.com/IjDwmfMXO1 — Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 4, 2024 That said, Just the News also notes that altered evidence has featured prominently in previous political scandals. Erasure of an 18 1/2 minute segment of Richard Nixon’s White House tapes became a very important aspect of the Watergate scandal. The Iran-Contra scandal exploded during the Reagan years with the revelation that documents were shredded before they could be obtained by investigators. The Hillary Clinton classified email scandal became more complicated in 2015 with the revelation that her team used a "Bleach Bit" program to erase emails on her secret computer server, and had email devices destroyed.  As Judicial Watch's Tom Fitton suggests, this is "Yet more reason to throw out this sham prosecution." EVIDENCE TAMPERING? Biden DOJ/Jack Smith just admitted they messed with boxes supposedly containing "classified" documents they seized from Trump and can't be sure the order or placement of the documents as originally found has been maintained -- which is contrary to what they… — Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) May 3, 2024 And as the Epoch Times notes, the case was brought against President Trump and others over their alleged violation of federal law in handling documents marked classified. Defendants have pleaded not guilty. Neither Mr. Nauta nor other defendants in the case have responded yet to the new filing. Mr. Nauta’s request for an extension is one of many documents that are under seal, or unavailable for perusal. In another recent filing, President Trump’s team said that the case should be dismissed because prosecutors are motivated by “improper political animus,” pointing in part to how White House lawyers worked with the National Archives and Records Administration on its referral to the Department of Justice and how President Joe Biden has said that he was “making sure” President Trump “does not become the next president again.” Prosecutors opposed the dismissal request but their opposition was filed under seal. Read the filing below (via Just the News):  Tyler Durden Sat, 05/04/2024 - 12:15