Sunday, November 4, 2018

NPC Idiots Trigger Warning: Mark Passio - Duress, Dissidents & Deadly Force

Mark Passio | Oct 31, 2018

This presentation, Duress, Dissidents & Deadly Force, was originally given by Mark Passio in Glendale, AZ on March 10, 2018 as part of the Truth, Mind Reality Conference.

Censored ‘Israel Lobby’ Doc Leaks Out - Fully Exposed

RT | Nov 4, 2018

On The Web:

In California, Home Sales Are Plunging Like It Is 2008 All Over Again

What goes up must eventually come down.  For years, the California housing market was on the cutting edge of “Housing Bubble 2” as we witnessed home prices in the state soar to absolutely absurd levels.  In fact, it got so bad that a burned down house in Silicon Valley sold for $900,000 earlier this year, and a condemned home in Fremont sold for $1.2 million.  But now things have changed in a major way.  The hottest real estate markets in the entire country led the way down during the collapse of “Housing Bubble 1”, and now it looks like the same thing is going to be true for the sequel.

According to CNBC, the number of new and existing homes sold in southern California was down 18 percent in September compared to a year ago…
The number of new and existing houses and condominiums sold during the month plummeted nearly 18 percent compared with September 2017, according to CoreLogic. That was the slowest September pace since 2007, when the national housing and mortgage crisis was hitting.

Sales have been falling on an annual basis for much of this year, but this was the biggest annual drop for any month in almost eight years. It was also more than twice the annual drop seen in August.
Those numbers are staggering.

And it is interesting to note that sales of new homes are being hit even harder than sales of existing homes…
Sales of newly built homes are suffering more than sales of existing homes, likely because fewer are being built compared with historical production levels. Newly built homes also come at a price premium. Sales of newly built homes were 47 percent below the September average dating back to 1988, while sales of existing homes were 22 percent below their long-term average.
At one time, San Diego County was a blazing hot real estate market, but now the market has turned completely around.

In fact, the county just registered the fewest number of home sales in a month since the last financial crisis
A combination of rapid mortgage rate increases and decreased affordability, San Diego County home sales collapsed 17.5% to the lowest level in 11 years last month, in the first meaningful sign that one of the country’s hottest real estate markets could be at a turning point, real estate tracker CoreLogic reported Tuesday.

In September, 2,942 homes were sold in the county, down from 3,568 sales last year. This was the lowest number of sales for the month since the start of the financial crisis when 2,152 sold in September 2007.
And it can be argued that things are plunging even more rapidly in northern California.
In the San Francisco Bay area, sales of new and existing homes were down 19 percent in September on a year over year basis…
Home sales in the San Francisco Bay area have been falling for months, but in September buyers pulled back in an even bigger way.

Sales of both new and existing homes plunged nearly 19 percent compared with September 2017, according to CoreLogic. It marked the slowest September sales pace since 2007 and twice the annual drop seen in August.
If a new real estate crisis is really happening, these are precisely the kinds of numbers that we would expect to see.  If you still need some more convincing, here are even more distressing numbers from the California real estate market that Mish Shedlock recently shared
  • The California housing market posted its largest year-over-year sales decline since March 2014 and remained below the 400,000-level sales benchmark for the second consecutive month in September, indicating that the market is slowing as many potential buyers put their homeownership plans on hold.
  • Existing, single-family home sales totaled 382,550 in September on a seasonally adjusted annualized rate, down 4.3 percent from August and down 12.4 percent from September 2017.
  • September’s statewide median home price was $578,850, down 2.9 percent from August but up 4.2 percent from September 2017.
  • Statewide active listings rose for the sixth consecutive month, increasing 20.4 percent from the previous year.
  • Inventory reached the highest level in 31 months, with the Unsold Inventory Index reaching 4.2 months in September.
  • September year-to-date sales were down 3.3 percent.
Of course a similar thing is happening on the east coast as well.  At this point, things have cooled off so much in New York City that it is being called “a buyer’s market”
New York City’s pricey real estate has become a “buyers market,” new data suggests, characterized by lowball offers and a rise in the number of properties staying on the market for longer.

The latest figures from Warburg Realty
show that among higher-priced homes, New York City is in the throes of a “major shift” that reflects a cooling market, the likes of which hasn’t been seen in almost a decade.

“Offers 20 percent and 25 percent below asking prices began to flow in, a phenomenon last seen in 2009,” wrote Warburg Realty founder and CEO Frederick W. Peters in the report, which surveys real estate conditions around the city.
In the final analysis, it is no mystery how we got to this point.

During the Obama era, the Federal Reserve pushed interest rates all the way to the floor for years, and this caused “Housing Bubble 2” to become even larger than the original housing bubble.

Now the Federal Reserve has been aggressively raising interest rates, and this is now busting the bubble that they created in the first place.

So if you want to blame someone for this mess, blame the Federal Reserve.  The Federal Reserve has created huge “booms” and “busts” ever since it was created in 1913, and hopefully the American people will be outraged enough following this next “bust” to start calling for real change.

I have been calling for the abolition of the Federal Reserve for years, and there are many others out there that also want to return to a free market financial system.

History has shown that free markets work exceedingly well once you take the shackles off, and as a nation we desperately need to return to the values and principles that this nation was founded upon.

About the author: Michael Snyder is a nationally syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is publisher of The Most Important News and the author of four books including The Beginning Of The End and Living A Life That Really Matters.

The Empire Strikes Back: Experts Claim Doubts About Statins Perpetrated by Dangerous 'Cholesterol Deniers'

SOTT | Nov 3, 2018 | Doug DiPasquale

 Darth: Question the veracity of the lipid hypothesis and suffer my vicious name-calling, Luke!
Luke: I'll never join you! I'd rather be ejected into space than attempt medical interventions
based on faulty premises counter to overwhelming evidence!

If there's one thing I can be thankful for, it's the fact that the Guardian keeps publishing BS dietary and medical propaganda in massive quantities so that I never run out of things to write about. Another piece just hit the internet this week decrying the rise of the dangerous "cholesterol sceptics". Titled "Butter nonsense: the rise of the cholesterol deniers", by Sarah Boseley, it's yet another appeal to the authority of 'experts' to prop up the woefully outdated mainstream cholesterol hypothesis in the face of mounting evidence challenging its position. It reads like a typical hatchet job, full of projection, lacking in actual evidence and bolstering the 'official position' over dissenting voices.

The use of the term 'deniers' is, no doubt, a calculated one. Much as with the term 'climate-change denier' in regards to those who dare to question the orthodoxy of the AGW position, the term is used to bring an association with holocaust deniers, a term steeped in racism, conspiracy theory and a favoring of hate over logic. It's a hell of a thing to associate someone with, especially if their position is relying on logic, research and bravely stepping away from a position that is popular to one that is potentially career-ending, because it's closer to the truth. It's also ridiculously hyperbolic, reminiscent of the NPC command-line response "everyone who disagrees with me is a Nazi". At this point, if you see the loaded term 'denier' in a headline, you can be sure that anything that follows is a smear intended to shut down legitimate criticism.

The Guardian article is, more or less, Big Pharma propaganda, framing the debate on the use and effectiveness of statin medications, and the entire cholesterol hypothesis, as the established 'settled science' fighting off renegade "dissident scientists" who refuse to look at the evidence. Talk about projection (it's rather interesting that narcissists and psychopaths are rather adept at accusing others of exactly what they themselves are doing, i.e. projection). They quote Dermot Neely, a consultant in clinical biochemistry and metabolic medicine and a founder trustee of the Heart UK charity:
"My belief about the cholesterol sceptics is that they are a bit like religious fundamentalists," said Neely. "They are not open to argument. Whatever argument you present, they will find another argument because this basically defines who they are."
What guile! Scientists and journalists who are digging into the studies with a critical eye and pointing out their shortfalls are accused of not looking at the evidence while the old boys club sticking to the outdated orthodoxy are the ones who are 'open to counter-arguments'. Welcome to bizarro world. 

Read more at SOTT..

Caravan exposes Democrat's contempt for American middle class

The Duran | Apr 6, 2018

RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou take a quick look at the insanity surrounding the migrant caravan, that is racing towards the US southern border, and how all of this is simply more theater organized by an unhinged liberal left, that is hell bent on damaging Trump and Trump's American vision before midterm elections.

Sunday, October 28, 2018

US military forces are only “threatened” because its forces are in everyone’s face in far-flung corners of the planet

RT | Oct 26, 2018 | Finian Cunningham

So the United States is pulling out of a key arms-control agreement, complaining it is the only party in compliance, and therefore it wants to have the right to deploy short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.

John Bolton, the national-security adviser to President Trump, was in Moscow this week meeting Russian leader Vladimir Putin and other senior Kremlin officials. Bolton huffed that the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty was obsolete from the US point of view.

“There’s a new strategic reality out there,” said the American official. The INF, signed in 1987, is “a bilateral treaty in a multipolar ballistic missile world.

He was referring to countries like China, Iran and North Korea, which the US claims have built up arsenals of ballistic missiles prohibited by the INF. Those countries are not in violation of the said treaty because the INF was an agreement signed only by the US and the Soviet Union, later becoming the Russian Federation.

The INF banned ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of between 500km and 5,500km.

By quitting the treaty, the US would, in theory, be free to deploy medium-range nuclear and non-nuclear ballistic missiles on the territories of European NATO members. That is, return to the situation of the early 1980s before the INF was agreed by then-president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. The US would also be free to make similar deployments in its Pacific bases and allied countries, such as Japan and South Korea.

However, it is doubtful if Washington would be able to do this without causing major political problems with its allies. This week, European leaders strongly protested against the US plan to withdraw from the INF. Even the usually obliging Norwegian head of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, said European countries would not welcome the return of American nuclear missiles on their soil.

Washington for several years now has been accusing Russia of violating the INF, for allegedly developing a ground-based cruise missile. Moscow has repeatedly denied the claim, pointing out that the US has not presented any evidence to support its accusation.

For its part, Moscow says the US is the party that is in violation of the treaty from its installation of Aegis Ashore missile systems in Romania and Poland.

What could be the real cause of American concern is Russia’s new Kalibr cruise missiles that are launched from navy ships. The missile was used with devastating success against militant groups in Syria, launched from the Caspian Sea, and covering a distance of over 1,000km. Sea-launched missiles are not banned by the INF.

In any case, the missiles pertinent to the INF, whether belonging to Russia, China or some other nation, are only a threat to US forces because American military power is increasingly deployed closer to those countries.

The US military has troops in an estimated 150 countries around the world. That’s a global military footprint covering nearly 80 percent of all nations on the planet. Given that inordinate spread of US military, it is easy to see why American officials perceive “threats.” It’s a bit like a thief marauding outside homes and then complaining that the homeowners are installing “threatening” burglar protection systems.

By contrast, Russian and Chinese military forces are predominantly confined to their respective national territories. Last month, when Russia conducted its Vostok-2018 war maneuvers in Siberia and the Far East, they were described as the largest-ever military mobilization by Moscow since the end of the Cold War. But let’s not forget, Russia’s war drills are always held within its territory.

This week, the US-led NATO alliance is conducting its biggest-ever war drills since the Cold War in the North Atlantic, Scandinavia and Baltic Sea. More than 30 nations are participating with a total of 50,000 troops and hundreds of aircraft and warships. The Trident Juncture mobilization will be held for the next four weeks and comes within 500km of Russian territory.

The anomalous imbalance should be glaringly obvious. Russia conducts its war drills within its own borders, which is its sovereign right; while American and allied forces are conducting simulated offensive actions on Russia’s doorstep.

The same double-think applies to the Trump administration’s complaint that Russia and others are in breach of the INF. If American forces were not encroaching on the territory of Russia and China, then they wouldn’t have cause for perceiving threats.

The distance between Beijing and San Francisco on the US west coast is nearly 10,000km. At its closest, the American state of Alaska is about 6,000km from Beijing. Those ranges are beyond the 5,500km upper limit of the INF. The point is that INF-type missiles from China or North Korea do not threaten US mainland territory. The only reason why US interests are “threatened” is because American forces are deployed in the vicinity of these countries, such as in the South China Sea, or in South Korea and Japan.

The next category of missile up is the Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICMBs). They are covered by the New START treaty. American officials, including John Bolton, are showing a tepid regard about renewing START when it expires in 2021. Many observers, including Americans, are concerned that with the scrapping of the INF by the US, then the last remaining arms-control treaty will also be abandoned. That then could unleash a new global arms race and greatly increase the risk of a nuclear war.

Lamentably, the US is tearing up the INF, as it did previously with the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, based on irrational arguments.

US military forces are only “threatened” because its forces are in everyone’s face in far-flung corners of the planet. Short- and medium-range “threats” would not be threats if America kept its troops and war machines within its own borders.

Donald Trump was elected partly on the promise to scale back US overseas militarism. It has turned out to be an empty and futile promise. That’s because American militarism is a vital, incorrigible function of its ambitions for domination of the planet. Ripping up arms-controls treaties is the corollary of such a monstrous military machine. Ironically, the treaties are trashed because the poor little American monster says it is being “threatened.”