investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Is Headline CPI Inflation “Fake News”?

Is Headline CPI Inflation “Fake News”?

The Federal Reserve just tweaked how it thinks about inflation , and this could have a huge impact on gold and gold mining stocks .
Speaking at Jackson Hole last week , Fed Chair Jerome Powell unveiled an adjustment in U.S. monetary policy that would allow inflation to average 2 percent over a period of time .
The implication is that the Fed would let increases in consumer prices overshoot the 2 percent target rate , which the U.S. has rarely touched since 2012 ( if we ’ re going by the headline consumer price index ( CPI ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ below ) .
To support this reframing of inflation , Powell says interest rates are likely to remain at near zero for some time longer , possibly for another five years .
This policy change could be constructive for gold prices and , consequently , gold producers .
This is something I ’ ve written and spoken about many times before .
According to the World Gold Council ( WGC ) , in years when the rate of annual inflation was greater than 3 percent , the price of gold increased 15 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 10 percentage points higher than the increase that gold prices saw on average in years when inflation was 3 percent or lower .
As of Friday morning , spot gold was trading near $ 1,970 an ounce , down about $ 1,000 from its all-time high .
There could be even greater upside potential if inflation is allowed to expand at a higher rate .
But Are We Even Measuring Inflation Accurately ?
Besides signaling possible gains in the price of gold , Powell ’ s speech raises the question yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inflation accurately in the U.S. As you may be aware , the official CPI is controversial among some investors , academics and economists for a number of reasons .
Many people believe that it doesn ’ t reflect the real changes in prices they ’ re seeing every day .
For the month of July , for instance , the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS ) reported that prices for all urban consumers rose only 1 percent year-over-year .
Even when we remove core items like food and energy , the increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Everything , it seems , is up right now .
Stock indices are at record highs .
With bond yields at record lows , even before inflation takes its cut , investors are chasing dividend-paying stocks .
Gas prices have creeped up to pre-pandemic highs .
Nearly every metropolitan area ( 96 percent ) in the U.S. saw an annual increase in home prices in the second quarter , according to the National Association of Realtors ( NAR ) , with the median price climbing 4.2 percent to $ 291,300 .
Here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of living is typically lower than the national average , median home prices rose 9 percent in July to $ 260,700 .
The average price exceeded $ 300,000 in July , up 10 percent from the same month in 2019 .
And look at lumber prices .
From the start of the year , the wood has soared 190 percent as lumber demand has surged on an increase in home renovations during coronavirus lockdowns and supply was constrained by closed mills .
On Friday , lumber hit a new record high of $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times higher than the 10-year average of $ 338 .
This has helped support share prices of home improvement retailers like Home Depot , up 33 percent year-to-date , and Lowe ’ s , up 40 percent .
So is there a more accurate gauge of inflation than the CPI ?
I ’ m a fan of the site Shadow Government Statistics , or ShadowStats , which provides , among other things , alternate inflation data that uses the 1980 CPI methodology .
For what it ’ s worth , if we use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually rose 8.6 percent in July , not 1 percent , a not insignificant difference of 760 basis points .
Want to learn more about the relationship between inflation and gold ?
Watch the video below , and be sure to like it and subscribe to our channel !
If you believe this—if you believe the headline CPI understates the impact of inflation—why wouldn ’ t you invest in gold ?
I don ’ t think it ’ s a coincidence that institutional investors are starting to add gold to their portfolios at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learned that the $ 16 billion Ohio Police & Fire Fund will be taking a 5 percent position in the yellow metal as a hedge against inflation .
If you recall , Texas became the first state in the U.S. to have its own gold depository when it opened the Texas Bullion Depository two years ago .
At the time , I said that it might encourage other states to follow suit , and I ’ m pleased to see Ohio money managers realize that a 5 percent to 10 percent allocation to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Earlier in the month I shared with you that manufacturing activity is improving around the world , as measured by the purchasing manager ’ s index ( PMI ) .
Factories in both China and the U.S. , representing 40 percent of global economic output , are currently in expansion mode , with the official China PMI up for the past five straight months .
Later this week we ’ ll see the PMI numbers for August , and I ’ m expecting them to have ticked up even higher .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ orders means greater demand for metals , energy and other commodities and raw materials , and this has the effect of pushing prices up .
This is why we ’ ve seen the copper price rise steadily off its pandemic low .
Sometimes referred to as “ Doctor Copper ” for its role as an economic bellwether , the red metal is universally used in electrical wiring , construction , industrial machinery and more .
It ’ s not just asset prices that drive up inflation , of course .
There ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economies that produce much of the world ’ s goods , especially those in Asia , wages are on the rise .
Of the countries featured above , China remains the most expensive to manufacture goods in based on a monthly base salary of $ 493 , but according to CLSA , Indonesia and Thailand both saw relatively high wage increases in 2019 .
You can see why many companies , including Apple , Samsung , Nintendo and GoPro , are moving out of China and relocating to Vietnam and other lower-wage economies @

by Frank Holmes, CEO, U.S. Global Investors
The Federal Reserve just tweaked how it thinks about inflation, and this could have a huge impact on gold and gold mining stocks.
Speaking at Jackson Hole last week, Fed Chair Jerome Powell unveiled an adjustment in U.S. monetary policy that would allow inflation to average 2 percent over a period of time. The implication is that the Fed would let increases in consumer prices overshoot the 2 percent target rate, which the U.S. has rarely touched since 2012 (if we’re going by the headline consumer price index (CPI), which I’ll talk more about below).
To support this reframing of inflation, Powell says interest rates are likely to remain at near zero for some time longer, possibly for another five years.
This policy change could be constructive for gold prices and, consequently, gold producers. This is something I’ve written and spoken about many times before. According to the World Gold Council (WGC), in years when the rate of annual inflation was greater than 3 percent, the price of gold increased 15 percent on average in nominal terms. That’s 10 percentage points higher than the increase that gold prices saw on average in years when inflation was 3 percent or lower.
click to enlarge
As of Friday morning, spot gold was trading near $1,970 an ounce, down about $1,000 from its all-time high. There could be even greater upside potential if inflation is allowed to expand at a higher rate.
But Are We Even Measuring Inflation Accurately?
Besides signaling possible gains in the price of gold, Powell’s speech raises the question yet again if we’re even measuring inflation accurately in the U.S. As you may be aware, the official CPI is controversial among some investors, academics and economists for a number of reasons. Many people believe that it doesn’t reflect the real changes in prices they’re seeing every day.
For the month of July, for instance, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that prices for all urban consumers rose only 1 percent year-over-year. Even when we remove core items like food and energy, the increase was a paltry 1.6 percent.
Really? Everything, it seems, is up right now. Stock indices are at record highs. With bond yields at record lows, even before inflation takes its cut, investors are chasing dividend-paying stocks. Gas prices have creeped up to pre-pandemic highs. Nearly every metropolitan area (96 percent) in the U.S. saw an annual increase in home prices in the second quarter, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR), with the median price climbing 4.2 percent to $291,300.
click to enlarge
Here in San Antonio, where the cost of living is typically lower than the national average, median home prices rose 9 percent in July to $260,700. The average price exceeded $300,000 in July, up 10 percent from the same month in 2019.
And look at lumber prices. From the start of the year, the wood has soared 190 percent as lumber demand has surged on an increase in home renovations during coronavirus lockdowns and supply was constrained by closed mills. On Friday, lumber hit a new record high of $916.30 per board foot, almost three times higher than the 10-year average of $338. This has helped support share prices of home improvement retailers like Home Depot, up 33 percent year-to-date, and Lowe’s, up 40 percent.
click to enlarge
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
So is there a more accurate gauge of inflation than the CPI? I’m a fan of the site Shadow Government Statistics, or ShadowStats, which provides, among other things, alternate inflation data that uses the 1980 CPI methodology. For what it’s worth, if we use this definition of inflation, consumer prices actually rose 8.6 percent in July, not 1 percent, a not insignificant difference of 760 basis points.
click to enlarge
Want to learn more about the relationship between inflation and gold? Watch the video below, and be sure to like it and subscribe to our channel!
Ohio Fund Adds Gold to Hedge Against Inflation
If you believe this—if you believe the headline CPI understates the impact of inflation—why wouldn’t you invest in gold?
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that institutional investors are starting to add gold to their portfolios at this time. Last week, we learned that the $16 billion Ohio Police & Fire Fund will be taking a 5 percent position in the yellow metal as a hedge against inflation.
If you recall, Texas became the first state in the U.S. to have its own gold depository when it opened the Texas Bullion Depository two years ago. At the time, I said that it might encourage other states to follow suit, and I’m pleased to see Ohio money managers realize that a 5 percent to 10 percent allocation to the precious metal is wise and prudent.
Improved Manufacturing Activity Is Also Inflationary
Earlier in the month I shared with you that manufacturing activity is improving around the world, as measured by the purchasing manager’s index (PMI). Factories in both China and the U.S., representing 40 percent of global economic output, are currently in expansion mode, with the official China PMI up for the past five straight months. Later this week we’ll see the PMI numbers for August, and I’m expecting them to have ticked up even higher.
This type of activity is inflationary. New orders means greater demand for metals, energy and other commodities and raw materials, and this has the effect of pushing prices up.
This is why we’ve seen the copper price rise steadily off its pandemic low. Sometimes referred to as “Doctor Copper” for its role as an economic bellwether, the red metal is universally used in electrical wiring, construction, industrial machinery and more.
click to enlarge
It’s not just asset prices that drive up inflation, of course. There’s also wage growth, and in many economies that produce much of the world’s goods, especially those in Asia, wages are on the rise.
click to enlarge
Of the countries featured above, China remains the most expensive to manufacture goods in based on a monthly base salary of $493, but according to CLSA, Indonesia and Thailand both saw relatively high wage increases in 2019. You can see why many companies, including Apple, Samsung, Nintendo and GoPro, are moving out of China and relocating to Vietnam and other lower-wage economies.


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Escalation of Force: How to Choose the Appropriate Response to Potential Violence

“ I ’ ll just pull out my Glock/HK/Ruger and deal with those punks .
Once they see their buddies drop , they ’ ll back off soon enough.
” “ We could end this by just killing anyone who sets foot on our block.
” “ All good Americans need to do is start mowing down protesters with their cars if the roads get blocked.
” Chances are , if you ever read the comments or visit any type of social media outlet online , you ’ ve read some comments pretty similar to the ones above .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the free , home of the brave .
It ’ s up to all good patriots to defend our property and our country from scumbags with deadly force .
But not so fast .
Things are never as cut and dried as people with 3-second solutions like to make it seem in the comments .
You can ’ t escalate directly to lethal force in every situation .
Let ’ s take a look at the situation Terry Trahan wrote about the other day , where the lady was sitting in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by an unruly mob who insisted she raise her fist in the air in support of a group of activists .
The comments section is filled with people who are apparently ready to open fire on a city street into a crowd of people .
Is that really the appropriate response ?
While I absolutely agree that the behavior of that mob is horrible and that these things shouldn ’ t happen , is this a moment that requires the use of uncensored deadly force ?
Have any of these folks stopped to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fire ?
Because I can tell you what is very likely to occur if you unload a magazine in a public space in the middle of downtown Washington DC .
At best , you will be arrested and charged with brandishing a weapon or illegal discharge of a weapon .
At worst , one of your bullets will go through its intended target and hit an innocent bystander – maybe a child – maybe even your own child who is making his way back from the bathroom .
Or you ’ ll kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone will take the gun away and turn it on you and you ’ ll be dead .
Or you ’ ll valiantly take down three attackers and find yourself awaiting trial for homicide , among other charges .
And you know what else ?
Every idiotic off-hand comment you ever made online about blowing people away will come back to haunt you in court .
If you think you ’ re anonymous online , I assure you that you are not .
Even when you use a VPN , your actual IP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
Choosing how you escalate your response We ’ ve all heard the saying , “ When your only tool is a hammer , you treat everything like it ’ s a nail.
” The same is true when your only tool is deadly force .
Obviously there are life and death situations in which deadly force is the only possible response if you want to live .
When someone bursts into your home waving a gun screaming that they ’ re going to kill you , when someone in a mask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ van with dark-tinted windows , when someone is clearly intent on beating the crap out of you until you ’ re dead – all of these things are situations in which your use of a lethal response is entirely justified .
But… a lot of situations require more finesse unless you want to risk a ) spending the rest of your life in prison and praying you don ’ t drop the soap or b ) vengeance from your adversary ’ s friends or family or c ) criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You need to have an understanding of the appropriate escalation of force .
A book I read last year has a place on everyone ’ s shelf during these times in which a conflict can arise for just about anyone , just about anywhere .
That book is Scaling Force : Dynamic Decision Making Under Threat of Violence and it ’ s by Rory Miller .
If you ’ ve been around here for a while , you may have seen my review of another of Miller ’ s books , and you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trahan reference him as well .
That ’ s because , in my opinion , nobody knows more about the science of violence than Miller .
As well , he spent years working in law enforcement settings , so he knows a lot about what happens after the violence takes place .
Identify what the threat actually is .
If you are in a situation in which you may have to defend yourself , it ’ s important that you understand what the threat really is .
• Are you just being yelled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just trying to intimidate or embarrass you ?
• Are they trying to have an actual discussion or just shout over you ?
• Are they threatening to physically attack you ?
• Are they capable of physically attacking you ?
• Are they armed with firearms , items that could be used as bludgeons , or knives ?
While all of these things may make you angry , if you are not in physical danger , you have to temper your response accordingly .
Part of the book is a detailed description @ @ @ @ @ @ @ identify a potentially violent encounter before it happens .
This goes a long way toward reducing the likelihood of you being injured , killed , or imprisoned due to your response .
Here are some key steps to take during a potentially violent encounter .
In Miller ’ s book – which I strongly recommend – he suggests a pattern that begins with simply leaving the situation , to verbal de-escalation when you are not in imminent danger , with other steps all the way up to and including lethal force .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your situation to see where you should start .
You can find these steps on the internet but they ’ re not detailed .
You should truly read the book to get a deep understanding of them – and you need that now more than ever .
This is my personal take on what he wrote .
Any mistakes or misinterpretations are mine alone .
Presence : The encounter requires your presence and there are two components to this .
First , is , don ’ t be there .
Any time you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do in a dangerous situation , their immediate response is “ don ’ t be there.
” And that is true of many of the things happening right now .
Going to a protest , for example , is automatically putting you at high risk of being involved in a violent encounter .
Your second option is to leave the situation .
If you find yourself in a scenario in which you could be embroiled in a violent encounter , leave .
This is like “ don ’ t be there ” but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a crowd gathering up ahead chanting and raising their fists in the air , turn around and go a different way .
If you are in a setting in which someone makes you feel uncomfortable , trust your instincts and leave .
Don ’ t talk yourself out of listening to your gut .
You ’ re not being silly .
( This is especially true for women . )
Use your voice .
First , you can try to de-escalate the situation .
If you can ’ t avoid it and you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is your next best bet .
This depends heavily upon your understanding of psychology .
You want to calm the situation down and one of the best ways to do that is setting up what Miller refers to as a “ face-saving exit.
” If you are dealing with one member of a crowd , that person will have a lot of personal investment in not being embarrassed in front of his or her friends .
You ’ ll want to think of a way to defuse things while sparing the person from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , sucks , because we all want to kick the butts of someone who is treating us unreasonably .
However , your goal is to get away from this encounter without being hurt or killed .
If you are alive and uninjured , you ’ ve won .
Your other voice option is a sharp command if you seem like the kind of person who can back this up .
Take me , for example , a middle-aged mama .
A command from me is unlikely to have a huge effect on an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from me backed up by a gun in my hand would be a lot more convincing .
( This is something that has actually happened to me – you can read about it here . )
Touch .
In some situations , touch can be used to de-escalate a conflict .
Touch can be soothing , it can help to distract someone fixated on potentially hurting you , and it can help to defuse situations that haven ’ t gone too far .
If you are not stronger than your potential opponent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as touching them puts you within their reach as well .
For many women , this is not going to be a viable option .
Physical control .
This is another thing that won ’ t work for everyone .
But if it is within your wheelhouse , you might be able to prevent the violence from escalating by physically controlling the attacker .
This prevents them from harming you or anyone else around you .
At this point , you ’ re beginning to get into territory that could have legal consequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not be particularly viable for women against a male assailant .
Use less than lethal force .
The next step up the ladder is less than lethal force .
This might mean pepper spray , a taser , or a physical blow , to name a few options .
This can be a defensive preventative that will work in some cases .
If you are able to stun your attacker , it can be the thing that allows you to move back down the ladder to step one – not being there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them to the extent they can no longer hurt you is an option but , again , you ’ ll very likely face legal consequences unless it is well-witnessed or provable that you had no less violent options .
Use lethal force .
The final solution in this hierarchy is lethal force .
This should not be your first choice unless your life is in imminent danger .
You can ’ t just shoot someone because you decide they “ deserve ” it or because you feel they ’ re inflicting an injustice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but you can also expect a trial that will empty out your bank accounts and cause your family to potentially lose their home and any other assets while you finance your defense .
Then , if you win , you get to start all over again economically .
If you lose , you spend five years to the rest of your life in prison .
Lethal force must be legally justified and even then , you can end up suffering immensely for having used it .
Again – I strongly recommend you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this topic , as it is far more detailed than I can be in a quick article and filled with personal anecdotes that make it a very interesting read .
You really do have far more options than just killing someone and most of the time , the other options will be better for your future as well as the future of your family .
How do you plan to respond to the threat of violence ?
We ’ re living in a world where unruly groups of people are spending their evenings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel “ deserve ” it , without actually knowing anything about their targets .
Any of us could become a target .
Understand that I sincerely believe in the right to armed self-defense .
It is our basic human right to protect ourselves , our families , and our property .
But I urge you to use temperance when making rapid decisions that could have long-term consequences .
These aren ’ t problems with three-second solutions , and to look at them that way is both ignorant and short-sighted .
Have you considered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of violence ?
To intimidation by an angry mob ?
To the looting of your property ?
It ’ s good to think these things through ahead of time and consider what your own options are .
You ’ ll need to weigh your personal abilities and limitations against these steps .
Remember that your response to potential violence can affect the rest of your life and make your decisions with this in mind .

by Daisy Luther
“I’ll just pull out my Glock/HK/Ruger and deal with those punks. Once they see their buddies drop, they’ll back off soon enough.”
“We could end this by just killing anyone who sets foot on our block.”
“All good Americans need to do is start mowing down protesters with their cars if the roads get blocked.”
Chances are, if you ever read the comments or visit any type of social media outlet online, you’ve read some comments pretty similar to the ones above. After all, this is America, land of the free, home of the brave. It’s up to all good patriots to defend our property and our country from scumbags with deadly force.
But not so fast.
Things are never as cut and dried as people with 3-second solutions like to make it seem in the comments.
You can’t escalate directly to lethal force in every situation.
Let’s take a look at the situation Terry Trahan wrote about the other day, where the lady was sitting in a restaurant having dinner when she got surrounded by an unruly mob who insisted she raise her fist in the air in support of a group of activists. The comments section is filled with people who are apparently ready to open fire on a city street into a crowd of people.
Is that really the appropriate response? While I absolutely agree that the behavior of that mob is horrible and that these things shouldn’t happen, is this a moment that requires the use of uncensored deadly force?
Have any of these folks stopped to think about what happens after they open fire?
Because I can tell you what is very likely to occur if you unload a magazine in a public space in the middle of downtown Washington DC. At best, you will be arrested and charged with brandishing a weapon or illegal discharge of a weapon. At worst, one of your bullets will go through its intended target and hit an innocent bystander – maybe a child – maybe even your own child who is making his way back from the bathroom. Or you’ll kill a member of the angry mob and someone will take the gun away and turn it on you and you’ll be dead. Or you’ll valiantly take down three attackers and find yourself awaiting trial for homicide, among other charges.
And you know what else? Every idiotic off-hand comment you ever made online about blowing people away will come back to haunt you in court. If you think you’re anonymous online, I assure you that you are not. Even when you use a VPN, your actual IP can be traced given enough resources and time.
Choosing how you escalate your response
We’ve all heard the saying, “When your only tool is a hammer, you treat everything like it’s a nail.” The same is true when your only tool is deadly force.
Obviously there are life and death situations in which deadly force is the only possible response if you want to live. When someone bursts into your home waving a gun screaming that they’re going to kill you, when someone in a mask is trying to drag you into a van with dark-tinted windows, when someone is clearly intent on beating the crap out of you until you’re dead – all of these things are situations in which your use of a lethal response is entirely justified.
But… a lot of situations require more finesse unless you want to risk a) spending the rest of your life in prison and praying you don’t drop the soap or b) vengeance from your adversary’s friends or family or c) criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits forever and ever until you die.
You need to have an understanding of the appropriate escalation of force.
A book I read last year has a place on everyone’s shelf during these times in which a conflict can arise for just about anyone, just about anywhere. That book is Scaling Force: Dynamic Decision Making Under Threat of Violence and it’s by Rory Miller. If you’ve been around here for a while, you may have seen my review of another of Miller’s books, and you may have seen Toby Cowern and Terry Trahan reference him as well. That’s because, in my opinion, nobody knows more about the science of violence than Miller. As well, he spent years working in law enforcement settings, so he knows a lot about what happens after the violence takes place.
Identify what the threat actually is.
If you are in a situation in which you may have to defend yourself, it’s important that you understand what the threat really is.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Are you just being yelled at or mocked?
Are people just trying to intimidate or embarrass you?
Are they trying to have an actual discussion or just shout over you?
Are you outnumbered?
Are they threatening to physically attack you?
Are they capable of physically attacking you?
Are they armed with firearms, items that could be used as bludgeons, or knives?
While all of these things may make you angry, if you are not in physical danger, you have to temper your response accordingly.
Part of the book is a detailed description of pre-assault indicators that can help you identify a potentially violent encounter before it happens. This goes a long way toward reducing the likelihood of you being injured, killed, or imprisoned due to your response.
Here are some key steps to take during a potentially violent encounter.
In Miller’s book – which I strongly recommend – he suggests a pattern that begins with simply leaving the situation, to verbal de-escalation when you are not in imminent danger, with other steps all the way up to and including lethal force. He discusses in detail how to rapidly assess your situation to see where you should start. You can find these steps on the internet but they’re not detailed. You should truly read the book to get a deep understanding of them – and you need that now more than ever.
This is my personal take on what he wrote. Any mistakes or misinterpretations are mine alone.
Presence: The encounter requires your presence and there are two components to this. First, is, don’t be there. Any time you ask Selco and Toby what you should do in a dangerous situation, their immediate response is “don’t be there.” And that is true of many of the things happening right now. Going to a protest, for example, is automatically putting you at high risk of being involved in a violent encounter.
Your second option is to leave the situation. If you find yourself in a scenario in which you could be embroiled in a violent encounter, leave. This is like “don’t be there” but in action form. If you see a crowd gathering up ahead chanting and raising their fists in the air, turn around and go a different way. If you are in a setting in which someone makes you feel uncomfortable, trust your instincts and leave. Don’t talk yourself out of listening to your gut. You’re not being silly. (This is especially true for women.)
Use your voice. First, you can try to de-escalate the situation. If you can’t avoid it and you can’t leave, verbal de-escalation is your next best bet. This depends heavily upon your understanding of psychology. You want to calm the situation down and one of the best ways to do that is setting up what Miller refers to as a “face-saving exit.” If you are dealing with one member of a crowd, that person will have a lot of personal investment in not being embarrassed in front of his or her friends. You’ll want to think of a way to defuse things while sparing the person from that humiliation. This, of course, sucks, because we all want to kick the butts of someone who is treating us unreasonably. However, your goal is to get away from this encounter without being hurt or killed. If you are alive and uninjured, you’ve won.
Your other voice option is a sharp command if you seem like the kind of person who can back this up. Take me, for example, a middle-aged mama. A command from me is unlikely to have a huge effect on an angry group. However, a command from me backed up by a gun in my hand would be a lot more convincing. (This is something that has actually happened to me – you can read about it here.)
Touch. In some situations, touch can be used to de-escalate a conflict. Touch can be soothing, it can help to distract someone fixated on potentially hurting you, and it can help to defuse situations that haven’t gone too far. If you are not stronger than your potential opponent, this should be used very cautiously, as touching them puts you within their reach as well. For many women, this is not going to be a viable option.
Physical control. This is another thing that won’t work for everyone. But if it is within your wheelhouse, you might be able to prevent the violence from escalating by physically controlling the attacker. This prevents them from harming you or anyone else around you. At this point, you’re beginning to get into territory that could have legal consequences. This is also another thing that may not be particularly viable for women against a male assailant.
Use less than lethal force. The next step up the ladder is less than lethal force. This might mean pepper spray, a taser, or a physical blow, to name a few options. This can be a defensive preventative that will work in some cases. If you are able to stun your attacker, it can be the thing that allows you to move back down the ladder to step one – not being there. Physically overpowering an assailant and injuring them to the extent they can no longer hurt you is an option but, again, you’ll very likely face legal consequences unless it is well-witnessed or provable that you had no less violent options.
Use lethal force. The final solution in this hierarchy is lethal force. This should not be your first choice unless your life is in imminent danger. You can’t just shoot someone because you decide they “deserve” it or because you feel they’re inflicting an injustice upon you. Well, you can, but you can also expect a trial that will empty out your bank accounts and cause your family to potentially lose their home and any other assets while you finance your defense. Then, if you win, you get to start all over again economically. If you lose, you spend five years to the rest of your life in prison. Lethal force must be legally justified and even then, you can end up suffering immensely for having used it.
Again – I strongly recommend you read Rory Miller’s book on this topic, as it is far more detailed than I can be in a quick article and filled with personal anecdotes that make it a very interesting read. You really do have far more options than just killing someone and most of the time, the other options will be better for your future as well as the future of your family.
How do you plan to respond to the threat of violence?
We’re living in a world where unruly groups of people are spending their evenings out trying to intimidate people who they feel “deserve” it, without actually knowing anything about their targets. Any of us could become a target.
Understand that I sincerely believe in the right to armed self-defense. It is our basic human right to protect ourselves, our families, and our property. But I urge you to use temperance when making rapid decisions that could have long-term consequences. These aren’t problems with three-second solutions, and to look at them that way is both ignorant and short-sighted.
Have you considered how you would respond to the threat of violence? To intimidation by an angry mob? To the looting of your property?
It’s good to think these things through ahead of time and consider what your own options are. You’ll need to weigh your personal abilities and limitations against these steps. Remember that your response to potential violence can affect the rest of your life and make your decisions with this in mind.


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Rationalization: Low Rates Justify High Valuations

The “ rationalization ” that low rates justify high valuations is but one of several arguments used to justify overpaying for value in a late-stage bull market .
As discussed previously , one of the “ bullish spins ” for the market has been that “ earnings are cheap ” based on 2- and even 3-year forward estimates .
As noted in “ Is It Justifiable Bullishness : ” Such is also why there is the most significant disparity between growth and value on record .
This Time Is Different The belief this time is different from the past has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for investors .
However , this is where participants exist today .
While it is true the excessive monetary liquidity has certainly changed short-term market dynamics ; there is no evidence it has mitigated long-term consequences .
Moreover , investors are also relying on the belief that low interest rates justify overpaying for earnings and sales .
The basic premise of the interest rate/valuation argument has its roots in the “ Fed Model ” as promoted by Alan Greenspan during his tenure as Federal Reserve Chairman .
The Fed Model states that when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divided by price ) is higher than the Treasury yield , you invest in stocks and vice-versa .
In other words , disregard valuations and buy yield .
There is a critical disconnect that needs to be understood .
You receive the income from owning a Treasury bond .
However , there is NO tangible return from the earnings yield .
For example , if I own a Treasury bond with a 1 % coupon and a stock with a 2 % earnings yield , if the price of both assets doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ net return on the bond is 1 % while the net return on the stock is 0 % .
Which one had the better return from 2000-present ?
Yet , analysts keep trotting out this broken model to entice investors to chase an asset class with substantially higher volatility risk and lower returns .
An offshoot of the Fed Model to rationalize overpaying for assets is that low interest rates justify high valuations .
However , is the recent decline in interest rates , driven by massive global Central Bank interventions , really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that cheaper borrowing costs boost bottom-line earnings .
The problem is that over the last decade , low rates have led to a deterioration in economic growth and prosperity .
The chart below takes the interest rate argument from a little different angle .
I have capped interest rates from their “ low point ” of each interest rate cycle to the next “ high point ” and then compared it to the S & P 500 index .
( The vertical dashed lines mark the peaks in the S & P 500 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the market tends to peak between the low point interest rates for each cycle and the next high point .
In other words , a period of steadily rising interest rates is not conducive to higher equity prices .
The primary argument is that when inflation or interest rates fall , the present value of future cash flows from equities rises , and subsequently , so should their valuation .
While true , assuming all else is equal , a falling discount rate does suggest a higher valuation .
However , when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from equities also falls , this can offset the effect of lower discount rates .
Lower discount rates are applied to lower expected cash flows .
In other words , without adjusting for inflation and , in no small degree , economic growth , suggesting low rates justify overpaying for cash flows is a very flawed premise .
Historically , when interest rates or inflation are low , the stock market ’ s E/P is also low , as shown in the chart above .
But when isolating the times when interest rates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; in the 1940s and currently .
In the 1940s , stock valuations were low , along with interest rates .
Therefore , the statement that low interest rates cause high valuations is a .500 batting average , which is the equivalent of a coin-flip .
• Exceptionally high-interest rates , which have occurred twice , coincided with low stock market valuations .
This fact does not prove that high-interest rates “ cause ” low stock valuations .
But at least the historical record is consistent with such a statement .
• Extremely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ twice , have coincided with high stock market valuations only once ; today .
The historical record ( 1/2 probability ) does not validate the highly-confident mainstream narrative that low interest rates “ cause ” or extremely high stock market valuations .
• Extremely high stock valuations have occurred three times .
Only once ( 1/3 probability ) did high stock valuations coincide with low interest rates ; today .
• If extremely low interest rates do not cause extremely high stock market valuations , then a rise in rates should not necessarily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , the historical record does not support the near-certain mainstream narrative that an increase in rates will torpedo stock prices .
• To demonstrate the ability of a consensus narrative to overwhelm analysis of historical facts and even current reality , consider that the Fed has hiked short-term interest rates five times since December 2015 .
Also , long-term rates bottomed in mid-2016 and have moved more than a full percent higher .
Yet the S & P 500 index has risen more than 30 % since the lows in short-term and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why This Isn ’ t 1920 , ” the highest correlation between stock prices and future returns comes from valuations .
There is little support for the statement that low rates support high valuations , as noted by Cliff Asness previously .
The last point is crucially important .
The chart below , which compares earnings yield ( inverted scale ) to forward 5-year real returns .
When E/Y has been near current levels , the performance over the next 5-years has been quite dismal .
It is imperative to remember valuations are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investment process .
However , they are horrible timing indicators .
Beware the investment advisor , pundit , or superstar investor who is sure that extremely low rates cause incredibly high stock valuations .
Or , that a rise in rates from extremely low levels will cause a decline in stock prices .
Stocks may fall , and interest rates may rise , but the historical record disagrees that one causes the other .
There is much to debate about the current level of interest rates and future stock market returns .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline in rates did not mitigate two extremely nasty bear markets since 1998 , just as falling rates did not mitigate the crash in 1929 and the subsequent depression .

by Lance Roberts
The “rationalization” that low rates justify high valuations is but one of several arguments used to justify overpaying for value in a late-stage bull market.
As discussed previously, one of the “bullish spins” for the market has been that “earnings are cheap” based on 2- and even 3-year forward estimates. As noted in “Is It Justifiable Bullishness:”
“In 2020, investors are again chasing “growth at any price” and rationalizing overpaying for growth. Such makes the mantra of using 24-month estimates to justify paying exceedingly high valuations today, even riskier.”
Such is also why there is the most significant disparity between growth and value on record.
This Time Is Different
The belief this time is different from the past has always been the most dangerous of phrases for investors. However, this is where participants exist today. While it is true the excessive monetary liquidity has certainly changed short-term market dynamics; there is no evidence it has mitigated long-term consequences.
Moreover, investors are also relying on the belief that low interest rates justify overpaying for earnings and sales.
“Valuations don’t matter as much as they did in the past because ‘this time is different’ in that interest rates are so low.”
The basic premise of the interest rate/valuation argument has its roots in the “Fed Model” as promoted by Alan Greenspan during his tenure as Federal Reserve Chairman.
The Fed Model states that when the earnings yield on stocks (earnings divided by price) is higher than the Treasury yield, you invest in stocks and vice-versa. In other words, disregard valuations and buy yield.
There is a critical disconnect that needs to be understood.
Earnings Yield
You receive the income from owning a Treasury bond. However, there is NO tangible return from the earnings yield.
For example, if I own a Treasury bond with a 1% coupon and a stock with a 2% earnings yield, if the price of both assets doesn’t move for one year – my net return on the bond is 1% while the net return on the stock is 0%.
Which one had the better return from 2000-present?
Yet, analysts keep trotting out this broken model to entice investors to chase an asset class with substantially higher volatility risk and lower returns.
Low Rates Don’t Justify High Valuations
An offshoot of the Fed Model to rationalize overpaying for assets is that low interest rates justify high valuations.
However, is the recent decline in interest rates, driven by massive global Central Bank interventions, really providing valuation support? The premise is that cheaper borrowing costs boost bottom-line earnings. The problem is that over the last decade, low rates have led to a deterioration in economic growth and prosperity.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
The chart below takes the interest rate argument from a little different angle. I have capped interest rates from their “low point” of each interest rate cycle to the next “high point” and then compared it to the S&P 500 index. (The vertical dashed lines mark the peaks in the S&P 500 Index)
In the majority of cases, the market tends to peak between the low point interest rates for each cycle and the next high point. In other words, a period of steadily rising interest rates is not conducive to higher equity prices.
Discounting The Discount
The primary argument is that when inflation or interest rates fall, the present value of future cash flows from equities rises, and subsequently, so should their valuation. While true, assuming all else is equal, a falling discount rate does suggest a higher valuation. However, when inflation declines, future nominal cash flow from equities also falls, this can offset the effect of lower discount rates. Lower discount rates are applied to lower expected cash flows.
In other words, without adjusting for inflation and, in no small degree, economic growth, suggesting low rates justify overpaying for cash flows is a very flawed premise.
“Instead of regarding stocks as a fixed-rate bond with known nominal coupons, one must think of stocks as a floating-rate bond whose coupons will float with nominal earnings growth. In this analogy, the stock market’s P/E is like the price of a floating-rate bond. In most cases, despite moves in interest rates, the price of a floating-rate bond changes little, and likewise the rational P/E for the stock market moves little.” – Cliff Asness
Historically, when interest rates or inflation are low, the stock market’s E/P is also low, as shown in the chart above.
But when isolating the times when interest rates were meager, that has occurred twice; in the 1940s and currently. In the 1940s, stock valuations were low, along with interest rates. Therefore, the statement that low interest rates cause high valuations is a .500 batting average, which is the equivalent of a coin-flip.
Analysis
Exceptionally high-interest rates, which have occurred twice, coincided with low stock market valuations. This fact does not prove that high-interest rates “cause” low stock valuations. But at least the historical record is consistent with such a statement.
Extremely low interest rates, which have occurred twice, have coincided with high stock market valuations only once; today. The historical record (1/2 probability) does not validate the highly-confident mainstream narrative that low interest rates “cause” or extremely high stock market valuations.
The historical record (1/2 probability) does not validate the highly-confident mainstream narrative that low interest rates “cause” or extremely high stock market valuations. Extremely high stock valuations have occurred three times. Only once (1/3 probability) did high stock valuations coincide with low interest rates; today.
If extremely low interest rates do not cause extremely high stock market valuations, then a rise in rates should not necessarily cause a decline in stocks. That is, the historical record does not support the near-certain mainstream narrative that an increase in rates will torpedo stock prices.
That is, the historical record does not support the near-certain mainstream narrative that an increase in rates will torpedo stock prices. To demonstrate the ability of a consensus narrative to overwhelm analysis of historical facts and even current reality, consider that the Fed has hiked short-term interest rates five times since December 2015. Also, long-term rates bottomed in mid-2016 and have moved more than a full percent higher. Yet the S&P 500 index has risen more than 30% since the lows in short-term and long-term rates.
As noted in “Why This Isn’t 1920,” the highest correlation between stock prices and future returns comes from valuations.
Forward Returns Suffer
There is little support for the statement that low rates support high valuations, as noted by Cliff Asness previously.
So, when pundits say it is a good time for long-term investors to buy stocks because interest rates are low, and then show you something like chart above to prove their point, please watch the tense of what they say, as what they often really mean is that it WAS a good time to buy stocks ten years ago, as investors are now paying a very high P/E for the stock market (perhaps fooled into doing so by low interest rates as I contend), and the story going forward may be painfully different.” – Cliff Asness
The last point is crucially important. The chart below, which compares earnings yield (inverted scale) to forward 5-year real returns. When E/Y has been near current levels, the performance over the next 5-years has been quite dismal.
Conclusion
It is imperative to remember valuations are very predictive of long-term returns from the investment process. However, they are horrible timing indicators.
Beware the investment advisor, pundit, or superstar investor who is sure that extremely low rates cause incredibly high stock valuations. Or, that a rise in rates from extremely low levels will cause a decline in stock prices. Stocks may fall, and interest rates may rise, but the historical record disagrees that one causes the other.
There is much to debate about the current level of interest rates and future stock market returns. However, what is clear is the 40-year decline in rates did not mitigate two extremely nasty bear markets since 1998, just as falling rates did not mitigate the crash in 1929 and the subsequent depression.
Do low-interest rates justify high valuations?
History suggests they don’t.


Normal V Abnormal

Just in case you were wondering .

NORMAL
ABNORMAL
Just in case you were wondering.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
NOW THE CONVERSATION
h/t Pinkorchid


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--NEVER FORGET! – We Have Proof The (Media) Conspired Industry Wide To Push A Coordinated False Narrat

NEVER FORGET! – We Have Proof The (Media) Conspired Industry Wide To Push A Coordinated False Narrative For Over 4 Years.

This is Extremely Dangerous to Our Democracy
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Seattle Protesters Tried Using Quick-Dry Cement To Seal Precinct Door

They ’ re going to run out of jail cells for these nut-jobs .
Luckily they ’ re idiots .
@ @ @ @ @ has been formally charged in connection with an incident earlier this week in which protesters @ @ @ @ @ the Seattle Police Department ’ s East Precinct building after using a fast drying concrete @ @ @ @ @ the building ’ s occupants inside .
Desmond David-Pitts , 19 , was charged with @ @ @ @ @ federal court in which he appeared via video conferencing .
The judge appointed a public @ @ @ @ @ who is facing a prison sentence of up to 20 years and a fine of @ @ @ @ @

They’re going to run out of jail cells for these nut-jobs. Luckily they’re idiots.
SEATTLE — An Alaska man has been formally charged in connection with an incident earlier this week in which protesters tried to set fire to the Seattle Police Department’s East Precinct building after using a fast drying concrete compound to try and lock the building’s occupants inside.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Desmond David-Pitts, 19, was charged with arson during a hearing in federal court in which he appeared via video conferencing. The judge appointed a public defender to represent David-Pitts, who is facing a prison sentence of up to 20 years and a fine of up to $250,000.
komonews.com/news/local/suspect-charged-with-arson-in-attack-on-seattle-police-departments-east-precinct


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--China’s mega banks lost billions of dollars in profit as bad loans rise during coronavirus pandemic

Chinese banks , among the world ’ s largest by assets , have been placed at the front line of @ @ @ @ @ economic blow on households and businesses .
As a result , the five largest Chinese @ @ @ @ @ % year-on-year declines in profit for the first half of 2020 as they set aside @ @ @ @ @ losses in the coming months .
The five lenders — Industrial and Commercial Bank of @ @ @ @ @ , Agricultural Bank of China , Bank of China and Bank of Communications — released @ @ @ @ @ last week .

www.cnbc.com/2020/08/31/profit-declines-for-chinas-big-banks-in-first-half-of-2020-due-to-bad-loans-during-coronavirus.html
Chinese banks, among the world’s largest by assets, have been placed at the front line of government effort to soften the economic blow on households and businesses.
As a result, the five largest Chinese banks posted at least 10% year-on-year declines in profit for the first half of 2020 as they set aside more funds for potential loan losses in the coming months.
The five lenders — Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China and Bank of Communications — released their latest financial report cards last week.


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--The stock market could drop 80% due to prolonged economic damages. Gold could hit $2,300 an ounce th

The stock market could drop 80% due to prolonged economic damages. Gold could hit $2,300 an ounce this year and $10,000 by the end of the decade.

• Both the S & P 500 and gold are hitting new highs .
• The stock market could drop by 80 % as the economy struggles to emerge from the pandemic .
Gold could hit $ 2,300 this year .
• We shouldn ’ t expect a vaccine to be the cure to all the economy ’ s problems .
The U.S. stock market keeps rising despite rising virus cases and a sloppy recovery .
The S & P 500 has rallied by more than 45 % since hitting bottom on March 23 .
We ’ re In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the chief macro strategist at Contrarian Macro Advisors , believes that the economy is in the midst of a massive “ bust ” consisting of two phases .
We are now in the first phase , which consists of the initial bear market and short-lived recovery .
The second phase of the bust , which Hunter expects to take place in late 2020 or early 2021 , will see a much steeper downturn than the first phase .
Stimulus measures have failed to support many sectors of the economy that need help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the lockdowns .
Hunter predicts we ’ ll see much more insolvency in the second phase .

Both the S&P 500 and gold are hitting new highs.
The stock market could drop by 80% as the economy struggles to emerge from the pandemic. Gold could hit $2,300 this year.
We shouldn’t expect a vaccine to be the cure to all the economy’s problems.
The U.S. stock market keeps rising despite rising virus cases and a sloppy recovery. The S&P 500 has rallied by more than 45% since hitting bottom on March 23.
…
We’re In the Midst of a Massive Bust
David Hunter, the chief macro strategist at Contrarian Macro Advisors, believes that the economy is in the midst of a massive “bust” consisting of two phases.
We are now in the first phase, which consists of the initial bear market and short-lived recovery.
The second phase of the bust, which Hunter expects to take place in late 2020 or early 2021, will see a much steeper downturn than the first phase.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Stimulus measures have failed to support many sectors of the economy that need help.
Many businesses have gone bankrupt because of the lockdowns. Hunter predicts we’ll see much more insolvency in the second phase.
…
www.ccn.com/prepare-massive-stock-market-meltdown-explosive-gold-rally/


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--This is civil war now. Democrats are fine with conservatives being murdered for wearing a hat they d

This is civil war now. Democrats are fine with conservatives being murdered for wearing a hat they don’t like – James Woods

This just starts with Trump .
This will be extended to any republican voter .
And then to anyone who @ @ @ @ @ knee .
And then to Catholics .
They want to the defund the police so @ @ @ @ @ justice and can silence the ones not aligned .
True fascism

This just starts with Trump. This will be extended to any republican voter. And then to anyone who won’t take a knee. And then to Catholics. They want to the defund the police so they can have their own justice and can silence the ones not aligned. True fascism
— Dadah Umpah (@UmpahDadah) August 30, 2020


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Ultra-Rich Investor Group Panic Hoards Cash Ahead Of Potential Growth Scare

In an upside-down world of activist central banks jawboning main equity indexes to record highs with terrible market breadth , and the Trump administration finding all sorts of creative headlines ( vaccine headlines , trade optimism , stimulus news , etc… ) to maintain upside momentum .
There ’ s one group of savvy investors , spooked by the continuing virus-induced downturn , panic hoarding an “ unprecedented ” amount of cash , reported Bloomberg .
Tiger 21 , an investor club of 800 high net worth investors founded in 1999 by Michael Sonnenfeldt , raised cash holdings to 19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is up from 12 % at the start of the pandemic .
The investor group believes market turbulence could persist until June 2021 .
“ This rise in cash is an extraordinary change — statistically , this is the largest , fastest change in asset allocation Tiger 21 has seen , ” Sonnenfeldt said , adding that each member typically has more than $ 100 million in assets .
Sonnenfeldt said , “ in trying to build resources prudently , members have gained liquidity and will not immediately reinvest in those areas in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record cash hoarding by this group of centimillionaires comes as market breadth is horrible , and a growth scare could rear its ugly head in the near term and trigger a stock market correction .
The cause behind dismal breadth , as readers may know , is shown on the following Goldman chart of the market cap of the five largest S & P companies ( FAAMG ) , accounting for about a quarter of the market cap of the S & P500 .

In an upside-down world of activist central banks jawboning main equity indexes to record highs with terrible market breadth, and the Trump administration finding all sorts of creative headlines (vaccine headlines, trade optimism, stimulus news, etc…) to maintain upside momentum. There’s one group of savvy investors, spooked by the continuing virus-induced downturn, panic hoarding an “unprecedented” amount of cash, reported Bloomberg.
Tiger 21, an investor club of 800 high net worth investors founded in 1999 by Michael Sonnenfeldt, raised cash holdings to 19% of their total assets, which is up from 12% at the start of the pandemic.
The investor group believes market turbulence could persist until June 2021.
“This rise in cash is an extraordinary change — statistically, this is the largest, fastest change in asset allocation Tiger 21 has seen,” Sonnenfeldt said, adding that each member typically has more than $100 million in assets.
Sonnenfeldt said, “in trying to build resources prudently, members have gained liquidity and will not immediately reinvest in those areas in order to keep and build cash to weather this storm .”
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
The record cash hoarding by this group of centimillionaires comes as market breadth is horrible, and a growth scare could rear its ugly head in the near term and trigger a stock market correction.
The cause behind dismal breadth, as readers may know, is shown on the following Goldman chart of the market cap of the five largest S&P companies (FAAMG), accounting for about a quarter of the market cap of the S&P500.
www.zerohedge.com/markets/ultra-rich-panic-hoard-cash-growth-scare-could-trigger-stock-correction


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--EXPLOSIVE: Copper-bottomed proof that the UK State no longer works for Us.

Last Friday afternoon , the fine men of Whiteminster ever so quietly put a “ consultation ” document about Covid19 ‘ vaccination roll-out ’ onto a rarely-visited page of the Gov.UK website Above is the offensive weapon to which I refer .
Several of the UK press titles have spotted it .
This isn ’ t an “ exclusive ” scoop – far from it : but the mainstream media being a cross between niggly political bias and mendacious “ it ’ s only ” understatement these days , I ’ ve yet to see anything halfway sensible out there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclude that Britain now is a country in cultural crisis .
The Guardian huffs and puffs about ‘ all power and no responsibility ’ as if Keir Starmer would be in any way better than Boris Johnson at putting people before political catechism .
True to form , The Times ignored it .
I suppose if you ’ ve hacked a million mobile phones and got away with it , the future of English liberty isn ’ t of much interest to you .
It is nowhere to be found at the Telegraph @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surprised me ) .
And so as usual , it ’ s down to online contrarians to alert those who understand a thick end of a wedge when they see one .
‘ Thousands gather in Trafalgar Square to promote Coronavirus conspiracy theories ’ was the truly bizarre headline in the Evening Standard last Saturday as regards the entirely peaceful London demonstration ( to oppose the Government ’ s Pharmacentric Covid19 “ strategy ” - and thus oppose any mad ideas the Johnson administration might have about sweeping vaccination powers against an insipid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the more than 50,000 protesters didn ’ t realise was that , the previous afternoon – as most people were switching off for the weekend – the Government ( and let ’ s call a spade a spade , what we really mean is the ever more tentacular State ) had released a consultation invitation that ( a ) didn ’ t include the ordinary citizen ( b ) began and continued with a series of lies about what Covid19 really is and ( c ) with blasé insouciance , introduced a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ government ” to force-feed all of us with so-called science that is already well on the way to ensuring UK bankruptcy .
So being a wacky sort of bloke , I felt a deconstruction of this Emergency Powers Act might be in order .
I ’ m going to look at the exact prose of this carte blanche , and use my own emphases in red bold ( and italic commeentary in blue ) to zero in on any ideas dingbats might have about this being “ only ” the Queue for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 is the biggest threat this country has faced in peacetime history , which is why the UK government is working to a scientifically led , step-by-step action plan for tackling the pandemic – taking the right measures at the right time.
’ IABATO : The 1919 Flu epidemic , the 1926 General Strike , the British Union of Fascists after 1934 , the 1940 Cabinet attempt to unseat Churchill , and the nuclear threat from 1950 onwards were all vastly largely than a virus that will kill 0.0064 % of the global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government ’ s actions are by by bad , fiddled and manipulated advice that favours the Global Pharma agenda .
That opening para is propaganda , not guidance .
‘ Effective COVID-19 vaccines will be the best way to deal with the pandemic .
Any vaccine must first go through the usual rigorous testing and development process and be shown to meet the expected high standards of safety , quality and efficacy before it can be deployed ’ .
IABATO : The chances of finding an effective virus for all time are close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus will die out of its own accord through a judicious mixture of Herd immunity , protection of the vulnerable , and management of infected persons .
This para too is neat , undiluted Pharma sector claptrap .
‘ The independent Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation ( JCVI ) will advise the UK government on which COVID-19 vaccine/s the UK should use , and on the priority groups to receive the vaccine based on the best available clinical , modelling and epidemiological data .
This will depend on the properties of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including health and care workers ) and the particular medical circumstances of individuals.
’ IABATO : It is almost wholly connected to Global Pharma research funds and lobbying .
‘ The preferred route to enable deployment of a new vaccine for COVID-19 is through the usual marketing authorisation ( product licensing ) process .
If a suitable COVID-19 vaccine candidate , with strong supporting evidence of safety , quality and efficacy , becomes available , we will seek to license that vaccine through the usual route .
Until the end of December 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which would include candidate COVID-19 vaccines ) to be authorised via the European Medicines Agency , and a marketing authorisation granted by them would automatically be valid in the UK .
From January 2021 , the UK ’ s licensing authority will have new powers to license all medicines , including vaccines .
However , if there is a compelling case , on public health grounds , for using a vaccine before it is given a product licence , given the nature of the threat we face , the JCVI may take the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government to use a tested , unlicensed vaccine against COVID-19 , and we need to make sure that the right legislative measures are in place to deal with that scenario ’ .
‘ Preferred ’ – surely ‘ only ’ is the word they seek ?
‘ a compelling case ’ – there isn ’ t one for something as peripheral as Covid19 .
At was at this point I became certain that the British State and its élites have been possessed , and that we have dire need of an exorcist along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ A temporary authorisation of the supply of an unlicensed vaccine could be given by the UK ’ s licensing authority under regulation 174 of the Human Medicines Regulations ( see below ) .
A COVID-19 vaccine would only be authorised in this way if the UK ’ s licensing authority was satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the safety , quality and efficacy of the vaccine .
‘ Unlicensed ’ does not mean ‘ untested ’ : this temporary authorisation process exists to address the possibility that , in certain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ licensing authority may consider that the balance of risk and benefit to patients justifies the temporary supply of the relevant vaccine pending the issue of a product licence .
Regulation 345 of the Human Medicine Regulations transposes into UK law a requirement of EU law that key actors in the medicines supply chain can not generally be sued in the civil courts for the consequences resulting from the use of an unlicensed product , or a new use of a licensed product , that a national licensing authority is recommending in order to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Sorry , make that 50 specially imported exorcists with a Papal black belt in Devil expulsion , and and Holy Water obtained from Calvary .
Note unsubtle attempt to blame immunity for Pharma on the EU…a bit rich when you consider that the Governments of US , UK and EU have already made it clear they will grant immunity .
‘ The UK government is seeking views on proposals to make changes , in conjunction with the Minister of Health in Northern Ireland , to the Human Medicine Regulations 2012 .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a COVID-19 vaccine and the upscaling of influenza ( flu ) vaccination programme in the UK .
It is important to emphasise , however , that although some of the measures specifically reference COVID-19 and flu vaccines , the proposed changes will also facilitate the efficient mass distribution of treatments for COVID-19 , or for any other disease that poses a serious risk to public health.
‘ Or put another way , ‘ payday for Pharma in perpetuity ’ .
‘ The main policy objectives of these proposals are to : In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the supply chain , clarify our approach to a pre-existing provision ( regulation 174 ) in the HMRs , that enables the licensing authority to temporarily authorise the supply of an unlicensed medicinal product for use in response to certain specific types of public health threat , including the suspected spread of pathogens.
’ The State is uncertain about the certainty of which certain types apply here , and equally , non-specific on the specifics , but which shall include any pathogen that spreads .
“ Wider still and wider….
” Let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like a sing-song to get us through the Blitz… .
The Government also proposes to : ‘ Clarify the scope of immunity from civil liability which regulation 345 of the HMRs puts in place for certain products whose unlicensed use is recommended by the licensing authority in response to certain specific types of public health threat , so that it clearly applies not just to manufacturers and healthcare professionals but also to the company placing an unlicensed medicine such as a vaccine on the market with the approval of the licensing authority – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , should there be a breach of the conditions imposed by the licensing authority.
’ Very well clarified there , Sir Humphrey .
I wonder if you might just repeat the clarification , as some of those present seem a tad confused about whatTF you ’ re on about ?
Like this chappy on our left , for example .
‘ Nature of the consultation It is important to explain at the outset the relatively limited nature of this consultation exercise .
Therefore , the limitations should be borne in mind : ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whole thing in secret ” ‘ However , having to move quickly means having less time than we would like to consult on these proposals – indeed , we are asking for comments by the end of Friday 18 September 2020 ‘ .
That ’ s just under three weeks away .
Can you give us some solid evidence , please , ( not models ) as to why urgency is so important ?
‘ ‘ Even though we are happy to receive comments from anyone , the purpose of this consultation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stakeholders that we have identified .
The UK government will be holding discussions with those stakeholders , at which it will be going into further detail about the proposals .
This consultation document has been produced to support those discussions ’ .
Translation : “ You the public are not stakeholders , you are guinea pigs .
Guinea pigs do not have the vote .
Now shove off.
” ‘ What that means , in practice , is that the consultees to whom this document is addressed are a specialist audience , made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would expect have a detailed knowledge of the legislative and practical context in which these proposals sit – and also of the likely impact of the measures .
It is also an audience generally used to discussing draft legislation without having all of the detail explained.
’ ‘ You ’ re all too stupid to contribute , so we ’ re going to stick with the Leftie onanists who got us into this mess ” I ’ ve used a light touch in ridiculing , deconfusing and tearing apart this blatant takeover of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employed by Whitewash , sorry , Whitehall .
But that shouldn ’ t hide the apoplectic rage I felt on reading the contents for the first time .
For the hard of understanding anything beyond endlessly bleating “ silly conspiracy ideas ” let me just summarise the track record of this cabal which is – given the total victory by the forces of superiority complex and muunnneee – in no way at all a government of the People .
• The size of Lockdown was insane • The elderly in retirement homes were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lied about the death rates • Funeral directors say the death total is still faked • All but one of the advisors have ties to or are funded by Pharma • Peter Horby fiddled the HCQ drug trials , but is still in post • A sizeable majority of expert frontline opinion DOES NOT see a vaccine as either necessary or possible .
What we are seeing here is the third attempt in four years by Whitehall and its corporate mates to subvert the power of an elected Government .
I need hardly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Cabinet ( and MPs in general ) has in recent years been the main catalyst for the steady advance of Bureaucratic Corporatism .
In the final analysis , Boris Johnson has reverted to type , and joined in with what is clearly part of a much bigger ‘ reset ’ of the controls over our money , our wellbeing , and our liberties .
Freedom is being full-frontally attacked by technocracy , and stabbed in the back by mediocre legislative whores .
And if you can ’ t see that , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ site for you ; and secondly , you really are in the way .
Follow me on Facebook , Gab and Parler .
Follow @ IABATO2 at Twitter , and he will give you notice of every post I make…..Jack Dorsey willing .

by John Ward
Last Friday afternoon, the fine men of Whiteminster ever so quietly put a “consultation” document about Covid19 ‘vaccination roll-out’ onto a rarely-visited page of the Gov.UK website
The content is scandalous
Above is the offensive weapon to which I refer. Several of the UK press titles have spotted it. This isn’t an “exclusive” scoop – far from it: but the mainstream media being a cross between niggly political bias and mendacious “it’s only” understatement these days, I’ve yet to see anything halfway sensible out there that rises above Party point scoring to conclude that Britain now is a country in cultural crisis. The Guardian huffs and puffs about ‘all power and no responsibility’ as if Keir Starmer would be in any way better than Boris Johnson at putting people before political catechism.
True to form, The Times ignored it. I suppose if you’ve hacked a million mobile phones and got away with it, the future of English liberty isn’t of much interest to you. It is nowhere to be found at the Telegraph (which, I must confess, surprised me).
And so as usual, it’s down to online contrarians to alert those who understand a thick end of a wedge when they see one.
‘Thousands gather in Trafalgar Square to promote Coronavirus conspiracy theories’ was the truly bizarre headline in the Evening Standard last Saturday as regards the entirely peaceful London demonstration (to oppose the Government’s Pharmacentric Covid19 “strategy”- and thus oppose any mad ideas the Johnson administration might have about sweeping vaccination powers against an insipid Coronavirus pandemic).
But what most of the more than 50,000 protesters didn’t realise was that, the previous afternoon – as most people were switching off for the weekend – the Government (and let’s call a spade a spade, what we really mean is the ever more tentacular State) had released a consultation invitation that (a) didn’t include the ordinary citizen (b) began and continued with a series of lies about what Covid19 really is and (c) with blasé insouciance, introduced a carte blanche for this or any future “government” to force-feed all of us with so-called science that is already well on the way to ensuring UK bankruptcy.
So being a wacky sort of bloke, I felt a deconstruction of this Emergency Powers Act might be in order.
I’m going to look at the exact prose of this carte blanche, and use my own emphases in red bold (and italic commeentary in blue) to zero in on any ideas dingbats might have about this being “only” the Queue for the Showers. It begins:
‘COVID-19 is the biggest threat this country has faced in peacetime history, which is why the UK government is working to a scientifically led, step-by-step action plan for tackling the pandemic – taking the right measures at the right time.’
IABATO: The 1919 Flu epidemic, the 1926 General Strike, the British Union of Fascists after 1934, the 1940 Cabinet attempt to unseat Churchill, and the nuclear threat from 1950 onwards were all vastly largely than a virus that will kill 0.0064% of the global population at most.
IABATO: the Government’s actions are by by bad, fiddled and manipulated advice that favours the Global Pharma agenda.
That opening para is propaganda, not guidance.
‘Effective COVID-19 vaccines will be the best way to deal with the pandemic. Any vaccine must first go through the usual rigorous testing and development process and be shown to meet the expected high standards of safety, quality and efficacy before it can be deployed’.
IABATO: The chances of finding an effective virus for all time are close to nil, and unnecessary. The virus will die out of its own accord through a judicious mixture of Herd immunity, protection of the vulnerable, and management of infected persons.
This para too is neat, undiluted Pharma sector claptrap.
‘The independent Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) will advise the UK government on which COVID-19 vaccine/s the UK should use, and on the priority groups to receive the vaccine based on the best available clinical, modelling and epidemiological data. This will depend on the properties of the vaccine, those most at need (including health and care workers) and the particular medical circumstances of individuals.’
IABATO: It is almost wholly connected to Global Pharma research funds and lobbying.
‘The preferred route to enable deployment of a new vaccine for COVID-19 is through the usual marketing authorisation (product licensing) process. If a suitable COVID-19 vaccine candidate, with strong supporting evidence of safety, quality and efficacy, becomes available, we will seek to license that vaccine through the usual route. Until the end of December 2020, EU legislation requires biotechnological medicines (which would include candidate COVID-19 vaccines) to be authorised via the European Medicines Agency, and a marketing authorisation granted by them would automatically be valid in the UK. From January 2021, the UK’s licensing authority will have new powers to license all medicines, including vaccines. However, if there is a compelling case, on public health grounds, for using a vaccine before it is given a product licence, given the nature of the threat we face, the JCVI may take the very unusual step of advising the UK government to use a tested, unlicensed vaccine against COVID-19, and we need to make sure that the right legislative measures are in place to deal with that scenario’.
‘Preferred’ – surely ‘only’ is the word they seek?
‘a compelling case’ – there isn’t one for something as peripheral as Covid19.
At was at this point I became certain that the British State and its élites have been possessed, and that we have dire need of an exorcist along with properly tested and regulated crucifixes.
‘A temporary authorisation of the supply of an unlicensed vaccine could be given by the UK’s licensing authority under regulation 174 of the Human Medicines Regulations (see below). A COVID-19 vaccine would only be authorised in this way if the UK’s licensing authority was satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the safety, quality and efficacy of the vaccine. ‘Unlicensed’ does not mean ‘untested’: this temporary authorisation process exists to address the possibility that, in certain situations of public health need, the licensing authority may consider that the balance of risk and benefit to patients justifies the temporary supply of the relevant vaccine pending the issue of a product licence. Regulation 345 of the Human Medicine Regulations transposes into UK law a requirement of EU law that key actors in the medicines supply chain cannot generally be sued in the civil courts for the consequences resulting from the use of an unlicensed product, or a new use of a licensed product, that a national licensing authority is recommending in order to deal with certain specific health threats’.
Sorry, make that 50 specially imported exorcists with a Papal black belt in Devil expulsion, and and Holy Water obtained from Calvary.
Define ‘sufficient evidence’. Who decides – Peter Horby?
Note unsubtle attempt to blame immunity for Pharma on the EU…a bit rich when you consider that the Governments of US, UK and EU have already made it clear they will grant immunity.
‘The UK government is seeking views on proposals to make changes, in conjunction with the Minister of Health in Northern Ireland, to the Human Medicine Regulations 2012. These changes will support the effective rollout of a COVID-19 vaccine and the upscaling of influenza (flu) vaccination programme in the UK. It is important to emphasise, however, that although some of the measures specifically reference COVID-19 and flu vaccines, the proposed changes will also facilitate the efficient mass distribution of treatments for COVID-19, or for any other disease that poses a serious risk to public health.‘
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Or put another way, ‘payday for Pharma in perpetuity’.
(Just thought I’d warn you, by the way, that this is all wild speculation and conspiracy theory….given temporary authorisation by Hobgoblins and other foul fiends.)
‘The main policy objectives of these proposals are to:
In the interests of patient safety and providing clarity to the supply chain, clarify our approach to a pre-existing provision (regulation 174) in the HMRs, that enables the licensing authority to temporarily authorise the supply of an unlicensed medicinal product for use in response to certain specific types of public health threat, including the suspected spread of pathogens.’
The State is uncertain about the certainty of which certain types apply here, and equally, non-specific on the specifics, but which shall include any pathogen that spreads.
“Wider still and wider….” Let’s all join in. Nothing like a sing-song to get us through the Blitz….
The Government also proposes to:
‘Clarify the scope of immunity from civil liability which regulation 345 of the HMRs puts in place for certain products whose unlicensed use is recommended by the licensing authority in response to certain specific types of public health threat, so that it clearly applies not just to manufacturers and healthcare professionals but also to the company placing an unlicensed medicine such as a vaccine on the market with the approval of the licensing authority – and to clarify the consequences on immunity, should there be a breach of the conditions imposed by the licensing authority.’
Very well clarified there, Sir Humphrey.
I wonder if you might just repeat the clarification, as some of those present seem a tad confused about whatTF you’re on about?
Like this chappy on our left, for example.
‘Nature of the consultation
It is important to explain at the outset the relatively limited nature of this consultation exercise. Therefore, the limitations should be borne in mind:’
Translation: “We going to do the whole thing in secret”
‘However, having to move quickly means having less time than we would like to consult on these proposals – indeed, we are asking for comments by the end of Friday 18 September 2020‘.
That’s just under three weeks away. Can you give us some solid evidence, please, (not models) as to why urgency is so important?‘
‘Even though we are happy to receive comments from anyone, the purpose of this consultation exercise is to engage directly with specific stakeholders that we have identified. The UK government will be holding discussions with those stakeholders, at which it will be going into further detail about the proposals. This consultation document has been produced to support those discussions’.
Translation: “You the public are not stakeholders, you are guinea pigs. Guinea pigs do not have the vote. Now shove off.”
..yellow tinfoil hats are obligatory in all cages at all times
‘What that means, in practice, is that the consultees to whom this document is addressed are a specialist audience, made up of people and organisations that we would expect have a detailed knowledge of the legislative and practical context in which these proposals sit – and also of the likely impact of the measures. It is also an audience generally used to discussing draft legislation without having all of the detail explained.’
‘You’re all too stupid to contribute, so we’re going to stick with the Leftie onanists who got us into this mess”
I’ve used a light touch in ridiculing, deconfusing and tearing apart this blatant takeover of public health decisions by the tame Pharma-junkies employed by Whitewash, sorry, Whitehall. But that shouldn’t hide the apoplectic rage I felt on reading the contents for the first time.
For the hard of understanding anything beyond endlessly bleating “silly conspiracy ideas” let me just summarise the track record of this cabal which is – given the total victory by the forces of superiority complex and muunnneee – in no way at all a government of the People.
Ferguson was wrong
The size of Lockdown was insane
The elderly in retirement homes were not protected
PHE overstated the deaths by 20+%
The media have consistently lied about the death rates
Funeral directors say the death total is still faked
All but one of the advisors have ties to or are funded by Pharma
Peter Horby fiddled the HCQ drug trials , but is still in post
, A sizeable majority of expert frontline opinion DOES NOT see a vaccine as either necessary or possible.
What we are seeing here is the third attempt in four years by Whitehall and its corporate mates to subvert the power of an elected Government.
I need hardly add that the woefully narrow-minded ignorance of the Cabinet (and MPs in general) has in recent years been the main catalyst for the steady advance of Bureaucratic Corporatism.
In the final analysis, Boris Johnson has reverted to type, and joined in with what is clearly part of a much bigger ‘reset’ of the controls over our money, our wellbeing, and our liberties.
Freedom is being full-frontally attacked by technocracy, and stabbed in the back by mediocre legislative whores.
And if you can’t see that, then firstly, this isn’t the site for you; and secondly, you really are in the way.
Follow me on Facebook, Gab and Parler. Follow @IABATO2 at Twitter, and he will give you notice of every post I make…..Jack Dorsey willing.


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Why The Federal Reserve Chose Trump Over Hillary In 2016

Admittedly , this was difficult for me and many others to come to terms with .
But we don ’ t choose the president , they are selected by the Federal Reserve , and there are reasons why Donald Trump was chosen over Hillary in 2016 , and one that should be obvious by now .
It does us no good to reject truth just because we don ’ t like it .
Politicians are puppets to the central banks .
The system is rigged , and there ’ s no way the Federal Reserve would have “ allowed ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t already know they could control him .
Like it or not , he ’ s destroyed the dollar , which ironically , is the goal of the Federal Reserve since it was created over a century ago .
Their goal is economic destruction so they can usher in a fully centralized slave system of an unbacked digital dollar .
But that ’ s just one reason the Fed made sure Trump won .
He wouldn ’ t have gotten the nomination if he wasn ’ t going to play into the hands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have done this as well , and maybe more effectively .
But the real reason Trump won will likely trigger a lot of people : Trump won to pacify those getting upset with Barack Obama .
This neutered any resistance to the Fed ’ s plans by making people believe that Trump was going to be their savior .
Not many so-called Patriots are fighting the tyranny right now because they are waiting for the all mighty Trump to save them .
Again , facts are facts even if you dislike them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is far more tyrannical under Trump than it ever was under Obama .
Does that mean I support Obama ?
Nope .
Does that mean I think Biden is better than Trump ?
Nope .
Don ’ t put words in my mouth or make assumptions .
It means the system is rigged and I am no longer participating in it as a pawn in the elitists ’ games .
A great video putting most of this together was done by Richie From Boston .
If you get triggered by facts about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watch this video .
( It starts at 2:05 after Richie explains his giveaway . )
If you want to know the truth , here it is : The evidence is there if you are willing to see it .
Those still asleep may not wake up in time , however .
Things are going to get ugly over this election , it ’ s already been promised to us by the elites .
They have made sure that by Trump ’ s election in 2016 , there ’ s no resistance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instituting the totalitarianism .
Everyone who used to voice that they wanted real true freedom has silenced themselves since Trump ’ s election .
That ’ s not a coincidence and not an accident .
“ In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
” It ’ s extremely difficult to wake up and realize you have been lied to and manipulated for your entire life .
But it ’ s imperative if you ever expect to experience freedom .

by Mac Slavo of SHTFplan
Admittedly, this was difficult for me and many others to come to terms with. But we don’t choose the president, they are selected by the Federal Reserve, and there are reasons why Donald Trump was chosen over Hillary in 2016, and one that should be obvious by now.
It does us no good to reject truth just because we don’t like it. Politicians are puppets to the central banks. The system is rigged, and there’s no way the Federal Reserve would have “allowed” Trump to win if they didn’t already know they could control him. Like it or not, he’s destroyed the dollar, which ironically, is the goal of the Federal Reserve since it was created over a century ago. Their goal is economic destruction so they can usher in a fully centralized slave system of an unbacked digital dollar.
But that’s just one reason the Fed made sure Trump won. He wouldn’t have gotten the nomination if he wasn’t going to play into the hands of the Federal Reserve. Hillary would have done this as well, and maybe more effectively. But the real reason Trump won will likely trigger a lot of people:
Trump won to pacify those getting upset with Barack Obama. This neutered any resistance to the Fed’s plans by making people believe that Trump was going to be their savior. Not many so-called Patriots are fighting the tyranny right now because they are waiting for the all mighty Trump to save them.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
Again, facts are facts even if you dislike them. And the fact is, this country is far more tyrannical under Trump than it ever was under Obama. Does that mean I support Obama? Nope. Does that mean I think Biden is better than Trump? Nope. Don’t put words in my mouth or make assumptions. It means the system is rigged and I am no longer participating in it as a pawn in the elitists’ games.
A great video putting most of this together was done by Richie From Boston. If you get triggered by facts about the left/right paradigm easily, don’t watch this video. (It starts at 2:05 after Richie explains his giveaway.) If you want to know the truth, here it is:
The evidence is there if you are willing to see it. Those still asleep may not wake up in time, however. Things are going to get ugly over this election, it’s already been promised to us by the elites.
They have made sure that by Trump’s election in 2016, there’s no resistance to their plans because Trump is the one instituting the totalitarianism. Everyone who used to voice that they wanted real true freedom has silenced themselves since Trump’s election. That’s not a coincidence and not an accident.
“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” It’s extremely difficult to wake up and realize you have been lied to and manipulated for your entire life. But it’s imperative if you ever expect to experience freedom.


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Breaking explosions – in Dubai and Abu Dhabi – possibly 4 killed – restaurants targeted – first ever

Breaking explosions – in Dubai and Abu Dhabi – possibly 4 killed – restaurants targeted – first ever flight from Israel arrives today

As EL AL flight from Tel Aviv is about to land 3 people killed and several others injured in two @ @ @ @ @ Abu Dhabi and tourism hub Dubai ahead of US-led Israeli delegation ’ s visit to @ @ @ @ @ I live in UAE and this month we saw a explosion in Ajman and now @ @ @ @ @ Dhabi and Dubai on the same day right after uae and Israel peace deal

3 people were killed and several others were injured today in two separate explosions in the #UnitedArabEmirates’ capital #AbuDhabi (the @kfc and @Hardees restaurants ) and its tourism hub #Dubai ! — Tamer Yazar (@tameryazar) August 31, 2020
gulfnews.com/uae/fire-in-dubai-restaurant-one-person-dies-1.73537308
1.Explosion in Dubai
2. Explosion in Abu Dhabi
3. Explosion fire Dubai
As EL AL flight from Tel Aviv is about to land
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
3 people killed and several others injured in two separate explosions in UAE capital Abu Dhabi and tourism hub Dubai ahead of US-led Israeli delegation’s visit to the country
This is scary I live in UAE and this month we saw a explosion in Ajman and now 2 seperate explosions in Abu Dhabi and Dubai on the same day right after uae and Israel peace deal
This is scary I live in UAE and this month we saw a explosion in Ajman and now 2 seperate explosions in Abu Dhabi and Dubai on the same day right after uae and Israel peace deal — A.krishnan (@AniK72000) August 31, 2020
Unconfirmed reports: 3 people killed in two separate explosions in #UAE today (in #Abudhabi and in Dubai); some locals see Iran connection as #Israeli flight is due in UAE today; earlier, officials claimed gas leak to blame. Timing of incidents suspicious… — Israel Radar (@IsraelRadar_com) August 31, 2020
#JustIN One person was killed and several people were injured on Monday in two separate explosions in the UAE capital Abu Dhabi and its tourism hub Dubai, the police and local media said. A gas cylinder exploded in a Dubai restaurant early on Monday and killed one person. pic.twitter.com/4CUHFvojUe — MDWLive! News (@MDWLiveFeed) August 31, 2020
Two explosions reported in UAE, Several injured, four killed! — Ali Haider (@Turan_Fy) August 31, 2020
h/t Hephaestus


investmentwatchblog--2020-08-31--Suspected Murderer of Trump Supporter in Portland Turned Into Police by His Sister

Reinoehl ’ s 36-year-old sister said she was awakened just before 8 a.m. Sunday by a threatening phone call from @ @ @ @ @ “ our whole family was in danger unless we turned him over.
” “ That @ @ @ @ @ out , ” that her brother was allegedly involved , she told The Oregonian/OregonLive .
@ @ @ @ @ report the threat , she said .
Once she looked online and saw screenshots of @ @ @ @ @ , she said she called Portland detectives .
“ We reached out to police and @ @ @ @ @ in the screenshots , ” she said .
She asked that her name not be @ @ @ @ @ .

Reinoehl’s 36-year-old sister said she was awakened just
before 8 a.m. Sunday by a threatening phone call from
someone who told her that “our whole family was in danger
unless we turned him over.”
“That’s how I found out,” that her brother was allegedly
involved, she told The Oregonian/OregonLive.
She called Sandy police to report the threat, she said. Once
she looked online and saw screenshots of her brother’s
photo, she said she called Portland detectives.
We are primarily funded by readers. Please subscribe and donate to support us!
“We reached out to police and confirmed that we recognized
Michael in the screenshots,” she said. She asked that her
name not be used because of the threats.
www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/08/man-under-investigation-in-fatal-shooting-after-pro-trump-rally-allegedly-took-loaded-gun-to-earlier-portland-protest.html