72.2 F
Chicago
Saturday, September 12, 2026
Home Blog Page 3096

Ukraine’s Largest Mobile Network Hit By Major Cyberattack Blamed On Russia

0
Ukraine’s Largest Mobile Network Hit By Major Cyberattack Blamed On Russia

Ukraine has accused Russia of being behind a major cyberattack against the country’s main mobile network Kyivstar, which has left masses of customers without phone or internet access. The outage has reportedly even left one city, Sumy, without its mobile air raid sirens, crucial for warning residents of inbound Russian drones or missiles. 

Kyivstar says it was targeted in a “powerful hacker attack” which Ukraine’s security services are currently investigating. The network is responsible for about 24 million mobile customers and supplying internet access to some one million homes. Businesses too have been impacted. 

“This is definitely a cyberattack and the probability that Russian entities are behind it is very close to 100%,” chief executive officer of Kyivstar, Oleksandr Komarov, said Tuesday. He called it the result of “illegal interference” and linked it to the ongoing Russian invasion. “The war with Russia has many dimensions and one of them is in cyberspace.”

Bloomberg cited him further as saying “It’s the biggest such attack since the Kremlin started its invasion in February, 2022.” Ukraine’s ministry which oversees infrastructure says it is hoping to restore service within hours.

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) is also involved and has pointed the finger at Moscow, describing, “One of the versions currently being investigated by SBU investigators is that the Russian special services may be behind this hacker attack.”

PrivatBank, which is Ukraine’s largest, documented that some ATM machines were not working and could be “unstable” or “have no connection”. Dutch parent company Veon says it’s urgently working with Kyivstar on “additional security measures” to prevent such hacks in the future.

At the same time, Ukraine’s intelligence services have recently owned up to hacking operations targeting Russia, including an operation reportedly targeting Russia’s national tax and financial accounting systems.

While during the opening months of the war especially power and civic infrastructure was heavily targeted by Russian drone and missile attacks, cyber operations have also been a consistent part of the Russian military arsenal. 

But over the past six months as Russian operations have been more focused on the eastern and southern regions, the kind of nation-wide power or telecoms outages seen early in the conflict have become rare. It seems the Kremlin launches broader attacks on civilian infrastructure in instances of retaliation, however, for example in response to major Ukrainian attacks on Crimea or Russian border cities or regions like Belgorod. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 11:25

Harvard Refuses To Fire Gay, Instead Issues Statement In Her Defense

0
Harvard Refuses To Fire Gay, Instead Issues Statement In Her Defense

Harvard minority president Claudine Gay., who checks box in the “Diversity checklist”, will keep her job after a week of calls for her ouster, after 700 faculty members signed a petition urging the school’s leadership to overlook her answers last week to Congress regarding antisemitism on campus, as well as allegations that she’s a prolific plagiarist.

“As members of the Harvard Corporation, we today reaffirm our support for President Gay’s continued leadership of Harvard University,” reads a statement from Harvard’s board signed by all members except for Gay. “Our extensive deliberations affirm our confidence that President Gay is the right leader to help our community heal and to address the very serious societal issues we are facing.”

During Tuesday testimony in front of the US House Education and the Workforce Committee, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), a Harvard grad, asked the presidents of Harvard, Penn, and MIT whether “calling for the genocide of Jews” violates their schools’ code of conduct or constitutes bullying or harassment, referring to calls for “intifada” chanted during several school protests.

Gay, along with the other presidents of said woke colleges, refused to commit to an answer – instead saying that it ‘depends on the context.’

Stefanik responded in a Tuesday post to X, sayig “There have been absolutely no updates to @Harvard’s code of conduct  to condemn the calls for genocide of Jews and protect Jewish students on campus,” adding “The only update to Harvard’s code of conduct is to allow plagiarists as president.”

The board also said it had reviewed allegations of plagiarism by Gay in October, and that an independent review “revealed a few instances of inadequate citation.”

On Sunday, journalists Chris Rufo and Chris Brunet posted evidence on X, including portions of Gay’s Ph.D. thesis.

In response, billionaire investor Bill Ackman penned a scathing open letter to Harvard’s governing board of directors, where he reiterated his call for Claudine Gay to be removed.

“In her short tenure as President, Claudine Gay has done more damage to the reputation of Harvard University than any individual in our nearly 500-year history,” the Harvard alumnus wrote on X, adding that Gay had “catalyzed an explosion of antisemitism and hate on campus that is unprecedented in Harvard’s history.”

Besides focusing on Gay’s handling of on-campus antisemitism, Ackman’s letter also accused her of presiding over “discriminatory hiring practices at Harvard.”

“The faculty have been told in no uncertain terms that candidates that do not meet DEI criteria will not be considered for certain faculty positions,” he wrote.

Gay apologized for her statements last week during the House Education and the Workforce Committee hearing, which however did not help her equal at UPenn, Liz Magill, who resigned over the weekend for exactly the same comments. Perhaps Magill wasn’t black enough, or didn’t have sufficiently diverse glasses?

As an aside, according to Bill Ackman – who tends to see everything in a self-reflexive light – he was a factor in Harvard’s decision.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 09:30

“No Warnings, No Strikes”: David Sacks’ All-In Fan Account Banned On Instagram

0
“No Warnings, No Strikes”: David Sacks’ All-In Fan Account Banned On Instagram

The fan account of the ‘All-In’ podcast, featuring Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, David Sacks & David Friedberg, was banned from Meta’s Instagram on Monday for allegedly violating “Community Guidelines.” 

“Our All-in fan account just got banned on Instagram. 😭 No strikes. No warnings. Just a message saying we violated “Community Guidelines,”” the All-In X account wrote. 

All-In continued, “We appealed and we were rejected within 10 minutes. Does anyone know anyone at @meta who could help? After two years, we had 22k followers and we were reaching 500k people a month. We love what we do and want to keep going for @theallinpod fans on IG! 💪” 

All-In’s host David Sacks posted on X “Why” in response to his podcast’s Instagram fan account being banned with zero notice. 

Elon Musk responded to the unofficial clip X account of All-Ins with “!!”

One can only suspect that recent interviews with Tucker Carlson and Robert Kenedy Jr., among others, discussing non-government-approved narratives might be the reason why Instagram decided to de-platform All-In. 

One X user said:

“What do you mean why? @DavidSacks , you guys know the agenda. @theallinpod is all about “misinformation”… you talk to @TuckerCarlson @jaredkushner @RobertKennedyJr And let’s not forget @chamath called the Covid boosters “a money grab”…” 

“They can’t handle the truth. God bless @elonmusk and @X Like Tucker said- we have to fight behind Elon to make sure they don’t destroy this platform.” 

Others said:

And just days ago, Glenn Greenwald’s TikTok show was banned without notice. 

All of this is just another example of the globalists’ censorship-industrial complex at work, silencing their opponents. These elites also freaked out on Sunday when Alex Jones was reinstated on X

Additionally, as the censorship-industrial complex increasingly targets those who challenge official government narratives, X’s prominence is set to rise ahead of the 2024 presidential election. It’s gaining a reputation as the top ‘free speech’ platform globally, in stark contrast to Meta’s Threads, which has imploded. Threads users dumped the platform because of censorship

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 09:15

The Markets Are Front-Running The First Rate-Cut

0
The Markets Are Front-Running The First Rate-Cut

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

In October, the markets were down 10% from the July high, bond yields were touching 5%, and talk of a coming recession was rampant. What happened?

Interestingly, a Wall Street axiom says, “Sell the last Fed rate hike.” The reason is that when the Fed starts cutting rates, it is due to the onset of a recession, a bear market, or a financial event. At that point, as shown below, the markets are repricing for lower expectations of earnings growth rates and profitability.

As Michael Lebowitz noted previously in “Federal Reserve Pivots Are Not Bullish:”

“Since 1970, there have been nine instances in which the Fed significantly cut the Fed Funds rate. The average maximum drawdown from the start of each rate reduction period to the market trough was 27.25%.

The three most recent episodes saw larger-than-average drawdowns. Of the six other experiences, only one, 1974-1977, saw a drawdown worse than the average.”

Given that historical perspective, it certainly seems apparent that investors should NOT be anticipating a Fed rate-cutting cycle. Such should, in theory, coincide with the Fed working to counter a deflationary economic cycle or financial event.

Yet, since the beginning of November, the markets have risen sharply in anticipation of the Fed cutting rates as soon as the first quarter of 2024. More interestingly, the worse the economic data is, the more bullish investors have become looking for that policy reversal. Of course, in reality, weaker economic growth and lower inflation, which would coincide with a rate-cutting cycle, do not support currently optimistic earnings estimates or valuations that remain well deviated above long-term trends.

Of course, that deviation of valuations has been the direct result of more than $43 Trillion in monetary interventions since 2008, which has trained investors to ignore the fundamental factors.

Has Pavlov’s Experiment Trained Investors

Classical conditioning (also known as Pavlovian or respondent conditioning) refers to a learning procedure in which a potent stimulus (e.g., food) is paired with a previously neutral stimulus (e.g., a bell). Pavlov discovered that when the neutral stimulus was introduced, the dogs would begin to salivate in anticipation of the potent stimulus, even though it was not currently present. This learning process results from the psychological “pairing” of the stimuli.

In 2010, then Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke introduced the “neutral stimulus” to the financial markets by adding a “third mandate” to the Fed’s responsibilities – the creation of the “wealth effect.”

“This approach eased financial conditions in the past and, so far, looks to be effective again. Stock prices rose, and long-term interest rates fell when investors began to anticipate this additional action. Easier financial conditions will promote economic growth. For example, lower mortgage rates will make housing more affordable and allow more homeowners to refinance. Lower corporate bond rates will encourage investment. And higher stock prices will boost consumer wealth and help increase confidence, which can also spur spending. Increased spending will lead to higher incomes and profits that, in a virtuous circle, will further support economic expansion.”

– Ben Bernanke, Washington Post Op-Ed, November, 2010.

Importantly, for conditioning to work, the “neutral stimulus,” when introduced, must be followed by the “potent stimulus” for the “pairing” to be completed. For investors, as each round of “Quantitative Easing” was introduced, the “neutral stimulus,” the stock market rose, the “potent stimulus.” 

While there has been previous debate on the impact of the Fed’s balance sheet changes on the markets, there is a very high correlation between the two, suggesting it is more than just a coincidence.

Notably, before 2008, there was clear evidence that markets repriced lower when the Fed began a rate-cutting cycle. Such was because the realization of a financial event created selling pressure in the market. Stocks historically fell until that rate-cutting cycle was over and the catalyzing event was resolved.

However, since 2008, the Fed has trained investors. Any financial or recessionary event jeopardizing the markets would be met with rate cuts and accommodative policy. That training was completed with the Fed’s response to the “pandemic-era shutdown” that led to massive monetary and fiscal interventions.

There is currently a large contingent of investors who have never seen an actual “bear market.” For many investors in the markets today, their entire investing experience consists of continual interventions by the Federal Reserve. Therefore, it is unsurprising investors are fully trained to “fear of missing out” on the next round of Fed support.

Are Investors Front-Running The Fed?

We have previously discussed the many economic indicators suggesting a recession is possible. However, one has yet to manifest itself, and economic growth has continued to defy tight monetary policy. Subsequently, investors have now concluded that a recession will be avoided, the Fed will cut rates, and stocks will rise.

The market’s increase since November has the knock-off effect of boosting consumer confidence. As noted in Ben Bernanke’s quote, the result should be increased economic activity to keep the economy out of recession. The chart below is the consumer confidence composite index as compared to GDP.

Note the increase in consumer confidence since the lows of October 2022. The question becomes, has the expected market decline from a Fed rate hiking cycle already completed? In the linked article above, Michael Lebowitz tackled that question. He used a Wicksellian model to estimate the expected percentage drawdown during a Fed rate hiking cycle. To wit:

“The graph below shows the maximum drawdown from the beginning of rate hiking cycles. The average drawdown during rate hiking cycles is 11.50%. The S&P 500 experienced a nearly 25% drawdown during the current cycle.”

That estimate of a 24% drawdown was not far off the market’s 20% nominal drawdown in 2022. This poses an interesting question to investors who are currently expecting a further drawdown in 2024.

Since the market experienced a decent drawdown during the rate hike cycle starting in March 2022, might a good chunk of the rate drawdown associated with a rate cut have already occurred?

A Range Of Possibilities

Let me clearly state that I do NOT have a crystal ball for 2024. Even my “Crazy Eight Ball” replied with “outlook uncertain.”

However, there are three primary possibilities for the markets we must consider.

  1. The Fed cuts rates and navigates a soft landing, stabilizing earnings growth, and the markets price higher on easier monetary policy and reversing “Quantitative Tightening” or “QT.”

  2. Due to increased asset prices and consumer confidence, economic activity picks up, and the Fed remains on hold over concerns about a resurgence of inflationary pressures. The markets reprice modestly to accommodate for a drag on economic growth, but recession fears are dismissed.

  3. A financial event and a recession occur due to the current restrictive level of monetary policy, and even though the Fed drastically cuts rates and reverses QT, stocks reprice lower due to a drop in earnings growth.

These possibilities are the drivers behind the range of potential outcomes discussed last week.

Using history as a guide, the many voices suggesting more bearish outcomes for 2024 seem logical. However, we must consider the impact of the Fed’s decade-long training of investors to “buy monetary policy changes.”

It may not make logical or fundamental sense. However, we must remain open to the possibility that markets are front-running the eventual Fed’s “ringing of the bell.”

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 08:55

SuperCore CPI Jumps Back Above 4.00%; Used-Cars & Shelter Dominate Price-Rises

0
SuperCore CPI Jumps Back Above 4.00%; Used-Cars & Shelter Dominate Price-Rises

Having slowed to unch MoM in October, November’s headline CPI was also expected to be flat MoM, but it printed modestly hotter than expected +0.1% MoM, which dragged the YoY CPI change down to 3.1% (as expected) from 3.2% in October. That is still above June’s 3.1% YoY low print…

Source: Bloomberg

Core CPI accelerated modestly MoM (as expected), rising 0.3% (from +0.2%) with Core CPI YoY flat at 4.0% from October…

Source: Bloomberg

Most problematically for The Fed (and the ‘rate-cut-hypers’) is the fact that Core CPI Services Ex-Shelter (SuperCore) rose 0.5% MoM (hot) and 4.08% YoY (back above the Maginot Line of 4%)…

Source: Bloomberg

Transportation Services led the unexpected resurgence…

Under the hood, Energy declined considerably but Used Car prices rose…

The shelter index was the largest factor in the monthly increase in the index for all items less food and energy. 

The shelter index increased 0.4 percent in November, after rising 0.3 percent the previous month. 

The index for rent rose 0.5 percent in November, as did the index for owners’ equivalent rent. 

The lodging away from home index decreased 0.9 percent in November. 

The slowdown in Shelter/Rent inflation is starting to accelerate…

  • Shelter inflation: 6.51%, down from 6.72% and lowest since August 2022

  • Rent inflation: 6.87% down from 7.18%, first sub 7% print since August 2022

But, real-time rent inflation is already far, far lower (suggesting CPI is set to tumble further next year)…

The used cars and trucks index rose 1.6 percent in November, ending a string of five consecutive monthly decreases in that index. 

Among the other indexes that rose in November was the index for motor vehicle insurance, which increased 1.0 percent after rising 1.9 percent the preceding month. 

The medical care index rose 0.6 percent in November, after rising 0.3 percent in October. The index for physicians’ services increased 0.6 percent over the month, and the index for prescription drugs rose 0.5 percent. The hospital services index rose 0.1 percent in November.

The index for apparel fell 1.3 percent in November, after rising 0.1 percent the previous month. 

The index for household furnishings and operations declined 0.4 percent over the month, and the index for communication decreased 0.6 percent in November. 

Other indexes which declined in November include recreation, airline fares, and new vehicles.

The shelter index increased 6.5 percent over the last year, accounting for nearly 70 percent of the total increase in the all items less food and energy index.

Other indexes with notable increases over the last year include motor vehicle insurance (+19.2 percent), recreation (+2.5 percent), personal care (+5.2 percent), and new vehicles (+1.3 percent).

3m and 6m annualized rates are down one-tenth and three-tenths respectively to 3.3% and 2.8%. This is the first time that the 6m measure has been below 3% for since March 2021.

The actual index of consumer prices hit a new record high this month – and is up 17.5% since President Biden’s term began (it was up 8% over President Trump’s full four year term)…

Source: Bloomberg

On the bright side, real average hourly earnings rose 0.5% YoY in November…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, we bring your attention to a chart we posted one year ago, showing the correlation between M2 and CPI, when we predicted that CPI was about to collapse.

One year later we were right, and there is much, much more to go.

So, what happens next?

Goldilocks? Or does this mean Powell will have to push back harder against the exuberance in the market for rate-cuts?

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 08:38

Google Loses On Every Count In Play Store Antitrust Case With Epic Games

0
Google Loses On Every Count In Play Store Antitrust Case With Epic Games

Authored by Matt Stoller via The BigNewsletter.com,

Google just lost its first antitrust trial, as a San Francisco jury returned a decision that Google harmed rival Epic Games, maker of the popular video game Fortnite, in the $48 billion dollar app store Android market. Google is facing multiple antitrust cases in different parts of its business, this is the first trial to reach a decision. So what happened? And what does it mean going forward?

Three years ago, Epic’s CEO Tim Sweeney launched a dramatic legal assault against Apple and Google for monopolizing the on-ramp to the phone. This case didn’t come from the left or right, but from the commercial world. It was part of what I called a civil war in American business, as smaller companies across the economy began marshaling against dominant big tech goliaths.

Epic sued both Apple and Google to break their ironclad control over app stores. Here’s the Wall Street Journal summarizing the case:

Epic’s case centered on Google’s dominant position in the market for apps on mobile devices running the company’s Android software, and the fees it charges for developers on its Play Store.

The game developer in 2020 began encouraging Fortnite players to pay Epic directly for purchases of in-game items, rather than using systems developed by Google and Apple. Both tech giants kicked Fortnite out of their app stores…

It became clear during the trial that Google’s goal was to maintain its dominance by preventing the emergence of other app stores.

Google worried about a “contagion effect” with other gaming companies if Epic were to move its flagship title Fortnite away from the Play Store, according to company documents the developer presented at trial. 

The tech giant paid $360 million to Activision Blizzard and millions of dollars to 19 other game developers as part of an initiative called Project Hug, an initiative Epic argued was aimed at discouraging them from developing rival app stores. The search company argued the payments encouraged gaming companies to make their titles available in the Play Store.

The judge also ruled that Google had destroyed relevant trial evidence, and told the jury to weigh that behavior in its decision. Here’s Sean Hollister in the Verge on what happened after the jury heard the testimony and judicial instructions:

After just a few hours of deliberation, the jury unanimously answered yes to every question put before them — that Google has monopoly power in the Android app distribution markets and in-app billing services markets, that Google did anticompetitive things in those markets, and that Epic was injured by that behavior. They decided Google has an illegal tie between its Google Play app store and its Google Play Billing payment services, too, and that its distribution agreement, Project Hug deals with game developers and deals with OEMs were all anticompetitive.

It’s a long and winding road for Epic. The firm lost the Apple case, which is on appeal, but got the Google case to a jury, along with several other plaintiffs. Nearly every other firm challenging Google gradually dropped out of the case, getting special deals from the search giant in return for abandoning their claims. But Sweeney was righteous, and believed that Google helped ruined the internet. He didn’t ask for money or a special deal, instead seeking to have Judge James Donato force Google to make good on its “broken promise,” which he characterized as “an open, competitive Android ecosystem for all users and industry participants.”

Specifically, Sweeney asked for the right for firms to have their own app stores, and the ability to use their own billing systems. Basically, he wants to crush Google’s control over the Android phone system. And I suspect he just did. You can read the verdict here. Here’s part of the jury form.

So what happens now?

In this case, the judge will come up with remedies next year. The order could be broad, and will likely loosen Google’s control over the mobile app ecosystem. Google has already announced that it will appeal, so the case isn’t over.

That said, Google is likely to be in trouble now, because it is facing multiple antitrust cases, and these kinds of decisions have a bandwagon effect. The precedent is set, in every case going forward the firm will now be seen as presumed guilty, since a jury found Google has violated antitrust laws. Judges are cautious, and are generally afraid of being the first to make a precedent-setting decision. Now they won’t have to. In fact, judges and juries will now have to find a reason to rule for Google. If, say, Judge Amit Mehta in D.C., facing a very similar fact-pattern, chooses to let Google off the hook, well, he’ll look pretty bad.

There are a few important take-aways.

First, this one didn’t come from the government, it was a private case by a video game maker that sued Google over its terms for getting access to the Google Play app store for Android, decided not by a fancy judge with an Ivy League degree but by a jury of ordinary people in San Francisco. In other words, private litigation, the ‘ambulance-chasing’ lawyers, are vital parts of our justice system.

Second, juries matter, even if they are riskier for everyone involved. It’s kind of like a mini poll, and the culture is ahead of the cautious legal profession. This quick decision is a sharp contrast with the 6-month delay to an opinion in the search case that Judge Mehta sought in the D.C. trial.

Third, tying claims, which is a specific antitrust violation, are good law. Tying means forcing someone to buy an unrelated product in order to access the actual product they want to buy. The specific legal claim here was about how Google forced firms relying on its Google Play app store to also use its Google Play billing service, which charges an inflated price of 30% of the price of an app. Tying is pervasive throughout the economy, so you can expect more suits along these lines.

And finally, big tech is not above the law. This loss isn’t just the first antitrust failure for Google, it’s the first antitrust loss for any big tech firm. I hear a lot from skeptics that the fix is in, that the powerful will always win, that justice in our system is a mirage. But that just isn’t true. A jury of our peers just made that clear.

*  *  *

Thanks for reading! Your tips make this newsletter what it is, so please send me tips on weird monopolies, stories I’ve missed, or other thoughts. And if you liked this issue of BIG, you can sign up here for more issues, a newsletter on how to restore fair commerce, innovation and democracy. And consider becoming a paying subscriber to support this work, or if you are a paying subscriber, giving a gift subscription to a friend, colleague, or family member.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 08:25

Chaos Christmas Travel? AAA Expects Record Number Of Americans At Airports 

0
Chaos Christmas Travel? AAA Expects Record Number Of Americans At Airports 

The latest report from the American Automobile Association forecasts a record number of Americans will be flying during the upcoming 10-day holiday stretch spanning from December 23 to December 28.

“Airports are expected to be the busiest they’ve ever been over the Christmas and New Year’s travel period,” AAA wrote in the report

AAA expects 7.5 million air travelers this holiday season, exceeding the 2019 level of 7.3 million. This figure is set to surpass AAA’s record for the period, with data going back to 2000. 

According to AAA booking data, average ticket prices are slightly down from last year:

“The average price for a roundtrip ticket to Orlando this holiday season is $613, down from $735 last year. A roundtrip ticket to Las Vegas is $508 now compared to $705 in 2022.” 

“It depends on your desired route and destination. There are last-minute deals to be found, but if your preference is a nonstop flight with seat selection, AAA recommends booking well in advance and protecting your investment with travel insurance,” said Paula Twidale, Senior Vice President of AAA. 

AAA’s forecast comes after the Transportation Security Administration announced that the Sunday (November 26) after Thanksgiving was the busiest day for air travel ever. 

Data via Bloomberg shows the number of people passing through TSA security checkpoints that Sunday reached 2.9 million, surpassing pre-Covid levels (2019) and hitting a record high. Checkpoint data has since fallen but is expected to begin ramping up mid-next week. 

Despite the ramp-up in air travel, airline stocks have failed to rally and remain at Covid lows. This lackluster performance is mainly attributed to waning ‘revenge travel’ and increased fuel costs, squeezing airline profit margins. 

So far, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has managed not to screw up this holiday season. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 05:45

Biden Administration Destabilized Middle-East Peace

0
Biden Administration Destabilized Middle-East Peace

Authored by Ben Weingarten via RealClearPolitics.com,

In the fog of war, it can be easy to lose sight of the most fundamental question any country must ask of itself: What does the national interest demand?

One group has sought to cut through the fog of the Israel-Hamas war by providing an extensive but accessible report on the critical events and crucial questions that have arisen since the conflict began. It sheds light on what Americans should demand of our leaders on Middle East policy in general, and our approach to this war in particular.

The first-of-its-kind report, published on Dec. 1, comes from the nonpartisan Council for a Secure America, an organization “dedicated to promoting United States energy independence” as an imperative for ensuring our national security, and a proponent of U.S.-Israel relations and the Abraham Accords in connection therewith.

The report examines “the geopolitics that led to October 7, what happened on October 7, and a phase-by-phase analysis of Israel’s military response,” in part through the lens of the historic pact between Israel and its Sunni Arab neighbors. It succeeds in synthesizing a wealth of critical information in a reference useful to all, from lawmakers to laymen.

Logically, and in my view correctly, it begins by placing the Hamas massacre in its proper context:

that this was an Iran-backed intifada-in-a-day, perpetrated by a genocidal jihadist group supported by three-quarters of Palestinian Arabs from Gaza and the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority – and staged from land that Israel had ceded them.

These points have been lost as the Biden administration presses for “peace” after the fighting is over, a goal somehow to be achieved with a Hamas-lite-controlled Palestinian state consisting of a populace overwhelmingly desirous of war against Israel.

The report homes in on how oil revenue is the lifeblood of the Iranian mullahcracy and indicates that unenforced oil sanctions on Iran in recent years have been pivotal to refilling the mullahcracy’s coffers. This, in turn, has helped the regime finance its proxy Hamas’ operations, culminating in the mass murder, mutilation, rape, and hostage-taking of Oct. 7.

This speaks in part to the means for Hamas’ attack. But what of the motive?

The report emphasizes that burgeoning relations between Israel, Egypt, and several Gulf States – lubricated in part by the Jewish state’s growing natural gas industry – and increasing momentum toward Israel-Saudi normalization was a major driver of the Hamas attack.

Another was that Iran was “emboldened” by the September 2023 prisoner swap with the United States, including the unfreezing of $6 billion for Tehran.

Implicit in these points is the Biden administration’s culpability in Hamas’ attack.

The Biden White House has sought to upend the Trump administration’s Middle East policy that had fostered the warming Israeli-Arab relations codified in the Abraham Accords; imperiled Iran’s mullahcracy through a maximum pressure campaign of which the Abraham Accords were one part, and overwhelming force, prudently applied, was another; and stood with the Jewish state against hostile and recalcitrant Palestinian Arab forces. The Trump administration rejected the idea that the conflict between the two sides was the key regional irritant, and that coddling the Palestinians while cudgeling the Israelis would produce peace.

The end result was that Iran and its proxies were deterred. There was regional stability. The benefits redounded to America’s national interest.

The billions in oil sales that Iran has raked in due to the Biden administration’s unwillingness to enforce sanctions, and the reward that it has provided the mullahs for their hostage-taking in still-more unfrozen billions, are but two indicators of a disastrous reversal in policy.

The administration has further empowered and emboldened Iran and its proxies through letting missile and drone sanctions lapse; de-designating the Houthis as a terrorist group; and lavishing hundreds of millions of dollars on Lebanese security forces flowing to Hezbollah, and to the Palestinian Authority and United Nations agencies like UNRWA – a portion of which flow, directly or indirectly, to Hamas in Gaza.

This is to say nothing of the Biden administration’s tapping of Qatar, which harbors Hamas’ leaders in luxury in Doha, as a major non-NATO ally, on par with Israel.

The Biden administration has lavished funds on, or partially supported, virtually all of the key actors whom the report cites as having contributed to Hamas’ attack.

These policies, which flow naturally from the administration’s radical national security and foreign policy personnel, are linked to its overarching ambition: to reprise the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a.k.a. the Iran nuclear deal, from which the Trump administration had withdrawn.

The nuclear deal is seen as essential to making Iran the regional strong horse. Foreign policy analyst Michael Doran persuasively argues that the Israel-Saudi normalization that the Biden administration was pushing was designed to fail – it was a ruse aimed at boxing in Israel. Pursuing it in earnest would directly contradict the administration’s Iran policy. Meanwhile, from its start, the administration has shown itself to be hostile to the Abraham Accords.

This brings us to the White House’s hostility toward the Benjamin Netanyahu-led government in Israel. This can be seen not only in President Biden’s personal snubs of the prime minister, or his funding of and support for the adversarial Palestinian Authority and associated United Nations agencies that had been curtailed under Trump, but also in his efforts to delegitimize the Netanyahu government over its favored judicial reforms and other policies, while supporting the left-wing opposition.

Israel was internally destabilized, and, as the Council for a Secure America report documents, lulled into a false sense of security based on a belief in its technological superiority, intelligence prowess, and belief that Hamas was more focused on lording over Gaza than destroying the Jewish state.

Considering all these factors, plus the potential that Iran and its proxies could be facing down a Trump administration in 2025, this was perhaps the most auspicious time of all for Iran and its proxies to strike. The report proceeds to chronicle how Hamas conducted its attack, the scale and nature of the carnage it inflicted, and how Israel has responded to it. It covers critical points regarding the information warfare that has ensued, Hamas’ sinister tactics, and hostage negotiations.

And it asks critical questions regarding whether jihadist attacks will spill over to the U.S., the durability of the Abraham Accords – which, the report suggests, have held despite the pro-Palestinian rhetorical posture of several Sunni Arab states – how the war will conclude, and what the “day after” will look like.

The most important underlying question the report asks is: What does America’s national interest demand?

To that end, it calls for sanctioning Iran’s oil sales, maintaining American military force posture in the region, and supporting Israel’s right to defend itself, among other policies.

The evidence suggests that the Biden administration has done little if anything to halt Iran’s booming oil business – nor otherwise to significantly punish the regime and its allies for their malevolence. And as it is currently operating, America’s military is clearly not deterring Iranian aggression.

The administration, especially in the early days of the conflict, provided rhetorical support for Israel’s right to do what it must to defend its people. It has continued to supply Israel with the vital munitions that it needs.

But by the same token, it has micromanaged and impeded Israel’s response in material ways, essentially subjecting it to crippling rules of engagement – largely to Hamas’ benefit – while initiating an apparent whisper campaign suggesting that Netanyahu’s days are numbered, and again, seeking to pre-dictate a likely untenable “peace” in Gaza.

Some Democrats, including the president, have indicated an openness in recent days to conditioning U.S. military assistance on progressive-favored terms. The Biden administration apparently remains committed to its policy of prioritizing Iran in the Middle East, while putting the screws to Israel to the maximum extent politically possible in a country that overwhelmingly favors the Jewish state’s right to defend itself.

A final question we might ask: Whose interest is the Biden administration pursuing?

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 05:00

Canadian Human Rights Commission Labels Christmas Celebration “Discrimination Grounded In Colonialism”

0
Canadian Human Rights Commission Labels Christmas Celebration “Discrimination Grounded In Colonialism”

The cancerous spread of woke ideology into every facet of society and government is more obvious in some places compared to others, but every so often the movement crosses a line and sparks considerable opposition.  In the US, the social justice movement seems to have hit a few snags; numerous companies adopting and promoting ESG related propaganda have been pummeled with successful boycotts, losing billions in profits and in stock value.  Overall public sentiment is quickly turning against major universities as a root source of woke beliefs.  And, government officials pandering to the extreme left are confronted with increasing vitriol from the populace.

It would seem that Canadians are also hitting their limit these days when it comes to the far-left, and it took a thinly veiled attack on Christmas to do it.

Part of the ongoing invasion of the woke movement involves regular attempts to undermine Christian holidays as “problematic” and archaic.  Leftists argue that increasing diversity (mostly through open border policies or illegal immigration) requires increasing inclusion at the national level.  Meaning, it is not for immigrants to adapt to the west, the west must adapt to them.  National celebrations like Christmas are therefore a representation of “discrimination” because they are being given preference over minority holidays.

This was the message given by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) in a paper published under the radar in October.  The treatise on “Religious Intolerance” was then condemned in a motion unanimously adopted on Nov. 30 by the House of Commons, the lower chamber of the Canadian Parliament.  The paper cited Christianity’s two biggest holy days (Christmas and Easter) as examples of “present-day systemic religious discrimination” linked to colonialism because they are statutory holidays in Canada.

The CHRC was established by the Canadian government in 1977 and claims to be an “independent” watchdog.  It is empowered under the Canadian Human Rights Act to investigate and to settle complaints of discrimination in employment and in the provision of services within federal jurisdiction.  The group is similar to the ACLU in that its momentum is ever to the deepest reaches of the political left.  Their ideological positions carry weight in the higher echelons of government; for example, their paper attacking Christmas has since been avidly defended by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The woke all-or-nothing argument against state recognized religious holidays is built on a host of illogical demands.  First and foremost, Canada is a majority Christian nation, with 53.3% of the population identifying as Christian, 34.6% identifying as non-affiliated, and around 12% identifying with several other faiths.  The next largest religious group in Canada is Muslim, representing only 5% of the religious population.  

But what about that 34% of people who are non-affiliated?  Do they feel discriminated against by national Christmas celebrations?  No, not really.

Surveys show the vast majority of Canadians have no ill feelings towards Christmas revelry.  In a poll asking average Canadians if seasons greetings of “Merry Christmas” bother them during the holidays or if people should use the more inclusive “Happy Holidays”, 52% said they don’t care either way.  Over 32% said they prefer Merry Christmas, while only 16% of the public preferred the progressive “Happy Holidays.”

Why should a majority Christian country worry about adopting every single minority celebration as a national holiday?  No Muslim nation does this.  No Hindu nation does this.  No Buddhist nation does this.  Israel doesn’t do it.  Why should western nations be expected to do it?   

    

The woke establishment effort to gratify minority concerns over all others stems from the illusion of equity – The false narrative that equal opportunity is not enough, and that equal outcomes must be codified.  However, in any society where certain belief systems are the norm and have been since the the society was founded, it is not only naive to expect that country to bend to minority beliefs, it’s dangerously delusional.  

Religious freedom does not mean religious equity – There simply is no such thing.  But the CHRC doesn’t see it that way.  They suggest that the existence of a western religious majority is in itself a form of racism.  In other words, they expect western systems to self destruct so that foreign and minority philosophies can be accommodated.  If the roles were reversed and Muslims were the majority in Canada with widely recognized Muslim holidays, it’s unlikely the commission would be making the same argument.  And, it is this double standard, the pervasive bias against the west just under the surface, that makes the public not trust woke ideologues.          

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 04:15

US-Made Munitions Used In Israel’s White Phosphorous Attacks On Lebanon; WaPo

0
US-Made Munitions Used In Israel’s White Phosphorous Attacks On Lebanon; WaPo

Via The Cradle,

The Israeli army used US-manufactured white phosphorous shells in a brutal attack on south Lebanon in October, the Washington Post reported Monday, citing an analysis of shell fragments found in the southern Lebanese village of Al-Dhahira. 

Washington Post journalist came across the remnants of three 155-millimeter artillery shells near the border. Production codes found on the shells indicate that they were made by ammunition depots in Louisiana and Arkansas in 1989 and 1992.

White phosphorus fired by Israeli army on Nov.12. via Reuters

Residents told the journalist that the shells in question “incinerated at least four homes.” Nine people were injured in the white phosphorous attack, which reportedly took place on October 16, including three who were hospitalized. 

Photos and videos verified by Amnesty International show the white phosphorus falling on Al-Dhahira on October 16.  “Israeli forces continued to shell the town with white phosphorus munitions for hours,” trapping residents in their homes until 7:00 AM the next day, locals told the Washington Post, adding that they now refer to that evening as the “black night.”

Israel has used white phosphorous on southern Lebanon over 60 times since the war began in October, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED). “The Israeli army fired artillery shells containing white phosphorus, an incendiary weapon, in military operations along Lebanon’s southern border between 10 and 16 October 2023,” Amnesty International said on October 31st, adding that the October 16 attack must be immediately investigated as a war crime.

Israel claimed its use of the banned munitions was in line with international law, given that they used them to create “smokescreens” and not for targeting, according to an army statement.

 However, the October 16 white phosphorous attack took place at night, when “smoke would have little practical use … and [when] there were no Israeli troops on the Lebanese side of the border to mask with smokescreens,” Washington Post said. 

“Residents speculated that the phosphorus was meant to displace them from the village and to clear the way for future Israeli military activity in the area,” it added. 

White phosphorous burns at extremely high temperatures and can stick to the skin, posing a potentially lethal threat. Residents of Al-Dhahira reported that remnants of the banned weapon would combust upon contact in the days following the attack. Israel also used white phosphorous in its current war on Gaza, as well as in previous wars in both Gaza and Lebanon

Crossfire has intensified recently on the Lebanese border. Hezbollah has stepped up its attacks on Israeli military sites and widened its range of targets in response to intense and violent air strikes on southern Lebanese villages and in response to Israeli massacres in the Gaza Strip. Recent Israeli strikes on Lebanon have resulted in several civilian casualties. 

Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/12/2023 – 03:30