Authored by Brett Wilkins via Common Dreams,

After decades of criminalization, Australia’s government said Friday that it will legalize the prescription of MDMA and psilocybin for the treatment of two medical conditions, a historic move hailed by researchers who have studied the therapeutic possibilities of the drugs.

Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) said in a statement that starting July 1, psychiatrists may prescribe MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine), commonly called “Molly” or “ecstasy” by recreational users, to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and psilocybin—the psychedelic prodrug compound in “magic” mushrooms—for treatment-resistant depression.

“These are the only conditions where there is currently sufficient evidence for potential benefits in certain patients,” TGA said, adding that the drugs must be taken “in a controlled medical setting.”

Advocates of MDMA and psilocybin are hopeful that one day doctors could prescribe them to treat a range of conditions, from alcoholism and eating disorders to obsessive-compulsive disorder.

David Caldicott, a clinical senior lecturer in emergency medicine at Australian National University, toldThe Guardian that Friday’s surprise announcement is a “very welcome step away from what has been decades of demonization.”

Caldicott said it is now “abundantly clear” that both MDMA and psilocybin “can have dramatic effects” on hard-to-treat mental health problems, and that “in addition to a clear and evolving therapeutic benefit, [legalization] also offers the chance to catch up on the decades of lost opportunity [of] delving into the inner workings of the human mind, abandoned for so long as part of an ill-conceived, ideological ‘war on drugs.'”

MDMA—which has been criminalized in Australia since 1987—was first patented by German drugmaker Merck in the early 1910s. After World War II the United States military explored possibilities for weaponizing MDMA as a truth serum as part of the MK-ULTRA mind control experiments aimed at creating real-life Manchurian candidates. A crossover from clinical usage in marriage and other therapies in the 1970s and ’80s to recreational consumption—especially in the disco and burgeoning rave scenes—in the latter decade sparked a conservative backlash in the form of emergency bans in countries including Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration classifies MDMA and psilocybin as Schedule I substances, meaning they have “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.”

From 1 July this year, medicines containing the psychedelic substances psilocybin and MDMA can be prescribed by specifically authorised psychiatrists for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder and treatment-resistant depression.

Read more: https://t.co/rJI9dRs3M7 pic.twitter.com/A8fTlWyX0w

— TGA Australia (@TGAgovau) February 3, 2023

Patients who’ve tried MDMA therapy and those who treat them say otherwise. A study published last year by John Hopkins Health found that in a carefully controlled setting, psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy held promise for “significant and durable improvements in depression.”

The California-based Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS)—the world’s premier organization for psychedelic advocacy and research—interviewed Colorado massage therapist Rachael Kaplan about her MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD:

For the majority of my life I prayed to die and fought suicidal urges as I struggled with complex PTSD. This PTSD was born out of chronic severe childhood abuse. Since then, my life has been a journey of searching for healing. I started going to therapy 21 years ago, and since then I have tried every healing modality that I could think of, such as bodywork, energy work, medications, residential treatment, and more. Many of these modalities were beneficial but none of them significantly reduced my trauma symptoms. I was still terrified most of the time…

In my first MDMA-assisted psychotherapy session I was surprised that the MDMA helped me see the world as it was, instead of seeing it through my lens of terror. I thought that the MDMA would alter my perception of reality, but instead, it helped me see… more clearly… The MDMA session was the first time that I was able to stay present, explore, and process what had happened to me. This changed everything… There are no words for the gratitude that I feel.

Jon Lubecky, an American Iraq War combat veteran who tried to kill himself five times, told NBC‘s “Today” in 2021 that MDMA therapy—also with MAPS—enabled him “to talk about things I had never brought up before to anyone.”

“And it was OK. My body did not betray me. I didn’t get panic attacks. I didn’t shut down emotionally or just become so overemotional I couldn’t deal with anything,” he recounted.

“This treatment is the reason my son has a father instead of a folded flag,” Lubecky said in a message to other veterans afflicted with PTSD. “I want all of you to be around in 2023 when this is [U.S. Food and Drug Administration]-approved. I know what your suffering is like. You can make it.”

Founder and Executive Director of @MAPSnews, @RickDoblin Ph.D., discusses a new #psychedelic study that supports MDMA-assisted therapy as a treatment for post traumatic stress disorder (#PTSD) on @FoxBusiness. https://t.co/im1QEz3vdR

— Psychedelic Science (@PsychedelicSci) February 2, 2023

MAPS’ latest clinical research on MDMA—which is aimed at winning FDA approval—is currently in phase three trials. The Biden administration said last year that it “anticipates” MDMA and psilocybin would be approved by the FDA by 2024 and is “exploring the prospect of establishing a federal task force to monitor” therapeutic possibilities of both drugs.

Like MDMA, psilocybin—which occurs naturally in hundreds of fungal species and has been used by humans for medicinal, spiritual, and recreational purposes for millennia—remains illegal at the federal level in the U.S., although several states and municipalities have legalized or decriminalized psychedelic mushrooms, or have moved to do so.

There have also been bipartisan congressional efforts to allow patients access to both drugs. Legislation introduced last year by U.S. Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) would permit therapeutic use of certain Schedule I drugs for terminally ill patients. Meanwhile, Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) passed amendments to the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act providing more funding for psychedelic research and making it easier for veterans and active-duty troops suffering from PTSD to try drug-based treatments.

Authored by Julie Kelly via AmGreatness.com,

As judges hand down one absurd sentence after another, one might be inclined to laugh at the absurdity of it all except, of course, it’s not funny…

The Department of Justice carefully crafted the dramatic moment in court.

A federal prosecutor handed an enclosed paper bag to an FBI agent responsible for investigating members of the Proud Boys, now on trial for seditious conspiracy related to their participation in the events of January 6. The bag contained “evidence of the unlawful entry of the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021 and evidence of the disruption to the certification of the 2020 presidential election,” FBI Special Agent Elizabeth D’Angelo told assistant U.S. Attorney Nadia Moore on Wednesday.

D’Angelo cautiously pulled the evidence out of the bag to present to the jury.

Spectators in D.C. District Court Judge Timothy Kelly’s courtroom were on the edge of their seats. What would the mystery bag reveal?

Would it disclose the group’s intricate but failed plot to overthrow the government? A detailed list of weapons the “seditionists” planned to use in service of their dastardly deed? Names of targeted officials?

A nervous hush fell over the room; sweat beads formed on furrowed brows. Finally, the big moment arrived.

It was—a set of challenge coins.

Moore: Can you give a brief description of what they are?

D’Angelo: They are challenge coins. This one is black and gold—and this package contains four black and gold colored challenge coins.

Moore: Are these the same coins that were seized from Zachary Rehl’s home?

D’Angelo: Yes.

What?

Like many organizations, the Proud Boys produce coins that depict the group’s motto and attitude. When multiple armed FBI agents raided Rehl’s Philadelphia residence in March 2021, terrorizing his pregnant wife and pillaging his home, investigators found not one but several such coins.

Prosecutors, however, didn’t explain how Rehl and his co-defendants—also found in possession of incriminating challenge coins during similar SWAT raids—deployed the dangerous faux currency that day. (One version included an image of a Pokemon character, apparently an insurrectionist himself.)

Did the Proud Boys hurl the trinkets at officers clad in full riot gear outside the Capitol? Did they open locked doors with the coins? Did they use the coins to bribe “election deniers” in Congress?

After all, no weapons were recovered at Rehl’s house. So what gives?

No one knows. Judge Kelly, a Trump appointee, last month insisted the coins were admissible evidence to show a “relationship” among the defendants. 

Welcome to the judicial funhouse formally known as the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse—a maze of distortions created by government clowns and ghouls intended to frighten those trapped within its confines while amusing others behind the scenes. Wednesday’s embarrassing spectacle is only a tiny glimpse into the charade unfolding on a daily basis in the heart of the nation’s capital.

Consider just a few recent events. Last week, relatives of the late Brian Sicknick were allowed to read “victim impact” statements in the sentencing of Julian Khater, the man accused of spraying Sicknick with pepper spray on January 6. Although Sicknick did not die as a result of the spray—the coroner concluded he died of two strokes caused by a blood clot—Sicknick’s immediate family members continue to blame Khater for Sicknick’s passing, disproven claims nonetheless given the court’s imprimatur.

Sicknick’s former girlfriend was allowed to participate in the stunt, even though she admitted the couple was on a “break” months before the Capitol protest. Dozens of Capitol Police officers also attended the hearing. The theatrics worked. Judge Thomas Hogan ordered Khater to serve 80 months in prison.

A D.C. jury on January 23 returned all guilty verdicts in the trial of Richard Barnett, the man photographed with his feet on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office that afternoon. It took jurors less than two hours to convict Barnett on eight counts including obstruction and civil disorder. He faces decades in prison.

The same day, four men were found guilty of seditious conspiracy and other serious crimes tied to January 6. Alleged members of the Oath Keepers entered the Capitol an hour after Congress had evacuated the building, carried no weapons, stayed for less than 15 minutes, and vandalized nothing inside—a humiliating failure to overthrow democracy.

Nonetheless, Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia handling every criminal case, bragged about his office’s victory. 

“For the second time in recent months, a jury has found that a group of Americans entered into a seditious conspiracy against the United States,” Graves boasted.

“The goal of this conspiracy was to prevent the execution of our laws that govern the peaceful transfer of power—striking at the very heart of our democracy. We are grateful to the thoughtful, deliberative work of this jury who gave weeks of their lives to carefully consider and deliver justice in this case and in so doing reaffirmed our democratic principles.” 

(A week later, Graves charged a California doctor who attempted to save Ashli Babbitt’s life with four misdemeanors including “parading” in the Capitol.)

The jury over which Graves swooned deliberated less than two days in a case comparable to treason.

“You’re entitled to your political views but not to an insurrection. You were an insurrectionist.”

So said Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly during the February 1 sentencing hearing for Daniel Caldwell, a Marine veteran who pleaded guilty to spraying police officers on January 6. Caldwell spent 19 months in pretrial detention before accepting the government’s plea offer last September. Through tears, according to Politico’s Kyle Cheney, Caldwell begged Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee, for mercy.

She gave none.

Explaining how her harsh sentence must “fortify against the revolutionary fervor that you and others felt on January 6 and may still feel today,” Kollar-Kotelly sentenced Caldwell to 68 months in jail.

“Insurrection is not and cannot ever be warranted,” she lectured a man neither charged with nor convicted of insurrection.

But perhaps no one better represents the warped imagination of the prosecutors and judges overseeing January 6 cases better than Tanya Chutkan. The Obama appointee is known for handing down the stiffest punishment against Trump supporters, ordering nonviolent protesters accused of low level offenses to serve time in jail even when the government recommends none. And she’s on a roll.

Clearly agitated that Russell Alford, an Alabama man charged with the four most common misdemeanors in January 6 cases, chose to go to trial instead of accept the government’s plea offer, Chutkan scolded Alford for his 11-minute peaceful jaunt through the Capitol. “You may have not been breaking any glass, but make no mistake, that wouldn’t have been a mob without you,” Chutkan told Alford, convicted on all four counts last October after the jury spent only a few hours considering his fate. “You helped terrorize the real Patriots trying to fulfill their duty.”

Insisting she was not penalizing Alford for exercising his constitutional right to demand a jury trial—the first jury trial in Chutkan’s courtroom since every other January 6 defendant, clearly aware of her reputation, has accepted plea deals—Chutkan commenced to do so, commenting on the number of lawyers on both sides involved in the trial and the jurors’ time. “The same system you are railing against worked.”

While acknowledging Alford has no criminal record, Chutkan explained her ruling must act as “general deterrence” to warn others that the punishment for future insurrections will be “certain, swift, and serious.”

She then sentenced Alford to 12 months in prison, one month less than the Justice Department suggested. (Prosecutors asked for 13 months and accused Alford of spreading “disinformation” about the killing of Ashli Babbitt.) Her sentence is the longest imposed yet for a Trump supporter found guilty of 4 misdemeanors.

One might be inclined to laugh at the absurdity of it all except, of course, it’s not funny. Lives are being systematically destroyed to the obvious pleasure and gratification of taxpayer-paid lawyers and judges, who are the only ones smiling. Unfortunately for many innocent Americans, this theater of the absurd appears for now to be on an unlimited run.

Previous constant headlines of the Ukraine-Russia war were put on pause Friday into Saturday as the American public’s attention and discourse got temporarily consumed by the bizarre Chinese ‘spy balloon’ saga, which grew more dramatic by the hour until it was shot down by the Pentagon over the Atlantic Ocean.

But few are currently asking the necessary deeper questions related to the timing. Given the last major balloon crisis to take over 24/7 network news coverage ended up being a complete hoax (remember the “balloon boy” stunt of 2009 which had the world breathless and on edge for a full news cycle?), the current context to the Chinese balloon story and the question of cui bono is worth a deeper dive…

Entrepreneur and geopolitical commentator Arnaud Bertrand, who as a Westerner has spent many years living in China and frequently attempts to correct the often misleading analysis of mainstream press reports, offers an ‘alternative view’ of what’s fast unfolding below [emphasis ZH’s)…

* * *

“I took a bit of time to dissect the “spy balloon” story – both how it is portrayed in the US and China’s response,” Bertrand begins a lengthy thread. As you’ll see, the more you think about it, the more stunned you get at the sheer absurdity of the whole thing.”

I took a bit of time to dissect the “spy balloon” story – both how it is portrayed in the US and China’s response.

As you’ll see, the more you think about it, the more stunned you get at the sheer absurdity of the whole thing.

A small 🧵

— Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) February 4, 2023

First, the US story.

China sent a “spy balloon” over highly strategic US sites. It chose to spy on these sites with a big visible balloon (reported as being “as big as multiple school buses”), that anyone can see with the naked eye from the ground, to “demonstrate it had the capability”, despite having a plethora of other more discreet ways to spy like satellites or stealth drones.

Unclear that anyone doubted China had mastered the technology of *check notes* hot air balloons and why it therefore needed to demonstrate this capability… China chose to do so on the eve of Secretary of States Blinken’s visit to China, where he was invited, and hours after signaling Blinken would also be meeting with Xi during his visit, a high-level meeting not granted to any US Secretary of States in years.

The story therefore being that China chose to disrupt a meeting with its own president and to sabotage its own efforts at détente in the US-China conflict… The Pentagon said it had been “tracking the balloon for quite some time” and that it wasn’t the first time such an incident occurred, but this time – for unclear reasons – it chose to do a public announcement. As a result, Blinken announced he was postponing his China trip.

Now the story from the Chinese side.

To them this is a fluke accident, the balloon being “a civilian airship used for research, mainly meteorological, purposes” that “deviated far from its planned course” because of strong “Westerlies” (wind that flows west to east) and “limited self-steering capability”, the main characteristic of a balloon being of course that it can only go up or down.

A piece in WaPo seems to confirm this, quoting “experts in national security and aerospace [who] said the craft appears to share characteristics with high-altitude balloons used by developed countries around the world for weather forecasting.”

(Source: washingtonpost.com/world/2023/02/… )

The Pentagon itself said that “the payload wouldn’t offer much in the way of surveillance that China couldn’t collect through spy satellites” and that “the balloon posed no serious physical or intelligence threat”. 

I.e. the Pentagon themselves say it would make zero sense for China to use a balloon like this for intelligence purposes when it has satellites. Kind of begs the question why they decided to make a big deal out of it in the first place… 

I’ll let you decide for yourself which story makes more sense… The sheer ridiculousness of this Nth “red scare” episode is absolutely obvious to anyone with an iota of common sense. Except, sadly, common sense seems to be in critically short supply nowadays. 

Also, as often, the real story is probably why this story became a story in the first place.

And the important context here is of course Blinken’s visit to China, which could – one can always dream – have been a step towards some form of de-escalation in China-US rapports. It was quite easily foreseeable that a story like this one on the eve of the trip would have made it politically very difficult for Blinken to go.

So a plausible hypothesis is that this whole episode is an attempt by internal US forces to prevent any US-China détente. One alternative hypothesis, much less likely, is that it’s internal Chinese forces trying to do the same thing by sending this big balloon.

Unlikely because:

a) China has time on its side so it gains from reduced tensions with the US and there isn’t any obvious “faction” in China who believe the contrary

b) it’d be immensely risky for anyone in China to do something like this as it’d undoubtedly be seen as an act of high treason with grave consequences for themselves

c) again, balloons like this particular one basically can’t be steered so… 

To plan sending a balloon like this from China to a place over US land isn’t even doable in the first place. The last hypothesis, which I guess is also somewhat likely, is that this is a series of unfortunate events without any malice on either side.

1) Balloon deviates from course and gets in US airspace,

2) people see it and Pentagon feels it has to communicate about it

3) the media, wearing their usual “China bad” hat, decide to go all-in on the scare-mongering,

4) political opposition and China hawks jump on the bandwagon,

5) administration feels it has no other choice than to cancel the trip and doesn’t have the political courage to say “this is just a balloon that drifted off course”.

If Putin doesn’t do anything this month, then the biggest story of February 2023 would be a balloon.

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) February 4, 2023

Well I guess in this scenario there is in fact malice on the media’s part and that of politicians and wider members of the blob but it’s “organic malice”, so to speak, jumping at a golden opportunity to scare-monger. 

Conclusion: however you see it, this story is absolutely shameful and a sad reflection of the insane times we live in, when rather than take the time to carefully consider facts, apply reason and common sense, we instead choose as a society to incite fear and hostility.

Fears over the virus pandemic and social unrest in the last several years ignited demand for guns to unprecedented levels. Back then, the FBI’s monthly background checks, part of the process to purchase a firearm, soared to new monthly highs. Now the latest background check data shows the gun-buying craze wanes, though it remains elevated. 

According to data from the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), unadjusted criminal background checks slid 12% to 2.67 million in January. Compared with 2022 figures, background checks increased by 3.2% from 2.59 million. However, NICS checks were down 43% from 4.69 million (a record high) in March 2021. 

For this time of year, the 2.67 million figure is the third highest January ever. The only other times the FBI ran this many background checks on people who wanted to purchase firearms for the month of January was in 2020 and 2021. 

Recall NICS background check data is a proxy for gun sales because there is no national database tracking firearms purchases. The data continues to confirm the mania phase of gun buying has subsided though interest in guns is above average. 

Gun buying might be elevated because of out-of-control crime in liberal metro areas or President Biden threatening to ban semi-automatic rifles. 

Meanwhile, Smith & Wesson Brands, one of the country’s largest firearms manufacturers, has seen shares tumble 50% since the blowoff top in the gun mania phase in mid-2021. 

Data from Ammo Prices Now shows the most popular caliber for home defense has plunged since the mania a few years ago. 

So what (or who) will cause the next panic buying of firearms? Will it be Biden?

Apple’s Crash Detection feature is causing severe headaches for emergency dispatchers around ski resort areas. 

Skiers and snowboarders, with supported iPhone and Watch models, have been hitting the slopes this season and occasionally take a tumble. Their devices, packed with high-tech sensors, like the accelerometer and gyroscope, as well as advanced motion algorithms, mistakenly believe the user has been in an automobile crash. 

Suppose skiers and snowboarders don’t respond to the cash notification within 20 seconds. In that case, the devices will automatically call 911 with an automated message that indicates, “The owner of this iPhone was in a severe car crash.” 

A report from NYT said emergency dispatchers in Colorado had been inundated with false distress calls due to the crash detection feature. 

Lately, emergency call centers in some ski regions have been inundated with inadvertent, automated calls, dozens or more a week. Phone operators often must put other calls, including real emergencies, on hold to clarify whether the latest siren has been prompted by a human at risk or an overzealous device.

“My whole day is managing crash notifications,” said Trina Dummer, interim director of Summit County’s emergency services, which received 185 such calls in the week from Jan. 13 to Jan. 22. (In winters past, the typical call volume on a busy day was roughly half that.) Ms. Dummer said that the onslaught was threatening to desensitize dispatchers and divert limited resources from true emergencies. -NYT 

Last year, Apple introduced Crash Detection for iPhone 14 models and Watch Series 8. False alerts started popping up at theme parks last summer when the devices thought people on rollercoasters experienced a car crash. And the same thing happened: The devices flooded 911 operators with false alerts. 

Apple needs to get a handle on this mishap or have its own call center if they want to continue with this feature. Bogging down emergency dispatchers with false alerts is a significant problem that needs to be fixed immediately. How did Apple technicians miss this? 

Authored by Kyle Anzalone & Connor Freeman via The Libertarian Institute,

Washington and Manila are close to inking an agreement that would see four new American installations opened in the Philippines. The new sites are part of a US military buildup in the Indo-Pacific to prepare for war with China.

According to the Washington Post, negotiations are ongoing but a deal between Manila and Washington is nearing completion. Once inked, American forces are expected to have new sites at four Philippines bases.

Two of the new facilities will be located in Luzon, in the northern half of the country. The military sites are expected to be used in a future war between Washington and Beijing, and “could give US forces a strategic position from which to mount operations in the event of a conflict in Taiwan or the South China Sea,” the Post reported.

In 2012, then-President Barack Obama adopted a more aggressive policy toward China – dubbed the “pivot to Asia,” the largest military buildup since World War II. Under the strategy, Washington has authorized billions of dollars for new bases, ships and weapons to be deployed to the Asia Pacific. The Pentagon aims to encircle China with two-thirds of all US air and naval forces.

The increased military activity has led to a string of deadly accidents in the region. A series of US warships have collided with civilian vessels, resulting in dozens of casualties. In 2018, an F-18 collided with a refueling aircraft off the coast of Japan, killing six.

The Joe Biden administration has accelerated the military buildup in the Pacific. Last week, the Department of Defense opened a new base in Guam. At the end of the year, the Pentagon awarded contracts to begin work on a new radar installation in Palau.

The relationship between Manila and Washington has strengthened since Ferdinand Marcos Jr. became president in June. The previous leader of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, threatened to end the Visiting Forces Agreement with the US and suggested Manila could increase ties with Beijing.

Manila and Washington’s converging views of the region has facilitated agreement regarding the new military bases. The United States sees Beijing’s territorial claims in the South China Sea and over Taiwan as crucial threats to the US-enforced international world order. Marcos “realizes the dynamics of the region at the moment and that the Philippines really needs to step up,” a Philippine official told the Post. The official added that Marcos has been monitoring developments in the Taiwan Strait and in the West Philippine Sea.

The Biden administration has repeatedly promised the US military will come to the Philippines’ defense in the event of a violent conflict with China, including in the South China Sea, potentially over the disputed Whitson Reef.

In a recently obtained memo, a four star Air Force general warned officers in his command that he believes the US “will fight [China] in 2025.”

In an internal memo posted on Thursday, JPMorgan warned that Israel presents a greater investment risk due to recent developments associated with the ascent of Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government.  

“Israel’s local markets have seen a flareup in idiosyncratic risk, as increased geopolitical tensions were added to investor concerns over plans for judicial reforms,” said JPMorgan in a memo first reported by Israel’s Channel 12. 

The in-depth and negative analysis from the major multinational firm comes just days after Netanyahu claimed JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs weren’t concerned about the effect of the judicial proposals.

פרסום ראשון – בנק ההשקעות ג׳יי פי מורגן, הפעם בדוח רשמי של מחלקת המחקר: הסיכון להשקעות בישראל עולה עקב התכנית המשפטית.
המסמך כולל השוואה למצב בפולין, והתראה על חשש מפגיעה בדירוג האשראי.
הדוח נשלח הלילה למשקיעים ולקוחות ברחבי העולם עם הבהרה שזו העמדה הרשמית של הבנק pic.twitter.com/2thbpXDRyQ

— עמליה דואק (@AmalyaDuek) February 3, 2023

“Markets probably need to consider a risk of more persistently elevated risk premia given the less centrist tilt of the current government,” JPMorgan’s Europe Emerging Markets Research desk wrote. 

Of course, saying the new Netanyahu government has a “less centrist tilt” is a huge understatement. It’s widely considered to be the most right-wing government in the country’s history, with critical positions controlled by members of ultranationalist and ultra-religious parties who are prone to both domestic and international provocations. 

In its apparent own similar warning posted internally on Thursday and then circulated on Twitter on Friday, Barclays was more candid, called it a “heavily right-wing coalition.” (ZeroHedge can’t independently authenticate the memo.) Goldman Sachs has expressed its own “growing concern over domestic political developments.” 

Netanyahu’s government has proposed a package of judicial reforms that would weaken the country’s High Court. One reform would allow the Knesset — Israel’s unicameral legislature — to override High Court decisions with a simple majority vote. Others would end the court’s practice of applying a “reasonableness” test when evaluating laws and government actions. 

“The proposed judicial reforms have triggered significant local protests at various levels, with concerns over the institutional strength in the country and the potential negative impact on investment flows and growth,” writes JPMorgan. 

Looking for an example of the potential fallout from judicial reforms, the JPMorgan authors point to Poland. “Following the judicial reforms in Poland, S&P Ratings downgraded its sovereign credit rating in Jan-16 to BBB+ (from A-).” Noting that Israel’s credit rating “stands comfortably in the investment grade bucket,” the memo says the reaction to an Israeli enactment of the proposed reforms should be “modest.” 

The firm also highlights medium-term risk to investment flows to Israel: “Recent reports suggest that some foreign institutions have already started to move funds out of Israel over concerns over the judicial reform plans. The tech sector has been relatively vocal in voicing its opposition.” 

The risks aren’t just associated with Israel’s legal system. JPMorgan also cites an increase in “geopolitical hostilities.” The Barclays Macro Research memo elaborates on that theme:

“The reiteration of Israel’s strategy to ‘openly’ oppose any attempts by Iran to develop its nuclear programme, recent alleged drone strikes on Iran’s military facilities and discussions with the US on joint efforts against Iran’s nuclear deal …In addition, the recent re-escalation of Israel-Palestine issues, including the politics of the right-wing government in the West Bank, increase geopolitical instability in the region.” 

In France, Netanyahu claimed he met with 60 French business people who told him, “What they’re saying about investors running away is nonsense. We want to increase our investments in Israel.” 

Indian billionaire oligarch Gautam Adani is facing a huge scandal over credible allegations of fraud and money laundering.

In the middle of this scandal, he had a friendly meeting with apartheid Israel’s far-right leader Netanyahu — who has also faced many corruption charges https://t.co/9nqHj3Qc1P

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) February 3, 2023

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called for a new election in Harris County, Texas, after ballot issues were more widespread than officials had estimated them to be.

In response to an analysis that found there was a ballot paper shortage that was far larger than previously reported, the governor said that “it’s so big it may have altered the outcome of elections.

“It may necessitate new elections,” Abbott also wrote. “It WILL necessitate new LAWS that prevent Harris Co. from ever doing this again.”

Abbott, a Republican, was responding to a KHOU-11 analysis suggesting that Harris County allotted ballot paper packets that were enough for 600 ballots to each of the county’s 121 voting centers. However, the analysis found that the total votes that were cast exceeded that amount by upwards of hundreds of ballots in some instances.

Previously, Harris County had said that 46 to 68 centers ran out of their allotted ballot paper. The county’s elections administration released a report last month that had admitted there were problems during the Nov. 8 midterms, but it said that a full report will take months to complete.

Harris County Elections Administrator Clifford Tatum, responding to KHOU on Tuesday, said that “the implications of your article cast the cloud into the community that those locations ran out of paper.”

“There were over 4 million sheets of paper in the street on election day,” he also remarked to the station, suggesting there was no shortage.

Harris County Refutes Governor

A spokesperson for Harris County’s elections agency, Nadia A. Hakim, told The Epoch Times on Friday that the KHOU news story “is, at best, misleading” and disputed Abbott’s assertion.

“One of several glaring failures of the story is that it compares turnout numbers at individual voting locations from 2018 (before countywide voting was implemented) to this past November’s election (when voters could vote at any location in the county),” Hakim added. “This apples to kale comparison never clarifies whether any site requested or received any additional paper. Precinct-level turnout in 2018 is not comparable to countywide voting centers in 2022. This is a critical mistake in analysis.”

For the 2022 midterms, Harris County had nearly 5 million sheets of ballot paper and more than “3 million sheets of ballot paper were returned to the Elections Office after the conclusion of voting,” Hakim said. “There is no question that the supply of paper was more than sufficient for the 350,000 in-person voters who cast a two-page ballot on Election Day.”

Other Details

In November’s report, officials in the county—which includes Houston—some 170 of 782 locations weren’t able to complete their planned setups on Nov. 7 due to the Houston Astros World Series parade that was held the day before. The report did not specify which locations were impacted by the parade.

“Overall, while the initial media reports suggested a problem more extensive than what the [Election Administrator Office] has been able to confirm, the EAO will continue reviewing the processes and will implement systems to ensure this type of challenge is never encountered in the future,” the report said.

The report noted that paper ballot jams and inaccurate wait time updates caused issues at some polling locations.

“Our investigation has not yet revealed how many of these [voting centers] had to turn voters away due to a paper shortage,” the report stated. “Media reports claimed that a total of 24 VCs (3.1 percent) ran out of paper and had to turn voters away.”

But it claimed that “the judges at the VCs indicated that they did receive supplemental paper deliveries, and two of these [presiding judges] from these VCs reported they did not run out of paper at all.”

Harris County’s elections divisions did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read more here…

Aggravated by the holdouts who keep wearing face masks despite mounting evidence that they’re essentially useless against Covid-19? Maybe you should be a little grateful. 

According to findings published at Frontiers in Psychology, people who consider themselves less attractive are more likely to continue wearing face masks. 

“Our findings suggest that mask-wearing can shift from being a self-protection measure during the COVID-19 pandemic to a self-presentation tactic in the post-pandemic era.”

The findings spring from a trio of studies using American subjects, conducted by researchers at Korea’s Seoul National University. The studies found that people with high self-perceived attractiveness are less willing to wear a mask, and vice versa.

They also found that each groups’ respective anti- and pro-mask inclinations are intensified in situations where their attractiveness is important — such as a job interview, versus simply walking a dog. That is, someone who considers themselves relatively unattractive is more likely to mask up at the interview.  

Earlier studies found that unattractive people are indeed considered more attractive when wearing masks, while the good-looking crowd is perceived as less attractive, the researchers noted. 

Koreans have coined a slang term for less-attractive people who wear a mask to benefit from letting others give them the benefit of the doubt about what’s under it: “ma-gi-kkun.” In the United States, the term “mask-fishing” was popularized on TikTok, and has some traction in the school-age cohort. As the New York Times noted last year, masks “obscured all kinds of transformations teenagers may feel inclined to hide: braces, pimples, acne scars, the first growths of facial hair.”

Meanwhile, the medical case for mask-wearing — which was rightfully doubted even in the early months — now lies in complete shambles. Most recently, a study-of-studies published in the peer-reviewed Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews concluded that, in the words of one author, “wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome.”

Apparently, the only outcomes masks affect are the ones related to how others perceive us. While the latest research focused on attractiveness, in 2023, masks are increasingly sending signals about the wearers’ psychological health and intelligence.  

I’m not going to spread that ridiculous article, but I’d wager that it’s less “ugly people wear masks” & more “people that are used to leveraging their adherence to beauty standards for social capital are more likely to refuse to wear masks”

— COVID isn’t over just bc you’re over it (@STLMasking) February 2, 2023

Amid calls from Ukrainian officials to ban all Russian and Belarusian athletes from the upcoming Paris 2024 Olympic summer games, the White House has issued a statement saying it agrees with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) policy of allowing the two countries to compete under a neutral flag.

“In cases where sports organizations and event organizers, such as the International Olympics Committee, choose to permit athletes from Russia and Belarus to participate in sporting events, they should be absolutely clear that they are not representing the Russian or Belarus states,” Biden press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Thursday.

She added that “the use of official state Russia and Belarus flags… should be prohibited as well.” The IOC last week had ruled that this will be the policy moving forward due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

But Kiev has consistently demanded that it’s for Russia to suffer “complete isolation” on the world stage, including at international sporting events. President Zelensky in a December phone call with IOC president Thomas Bach requested that Russia not even be able to participate as a neutral team.

“Since February, 184 Ukrainian athletes have died as a result of Russia’s actions,” Zelensky said in the call. “One cannot try to be neutral when the foundations of peaceful life are being destroyed and universal human values are being ignored.”

Bach had defended the committee’s the position that “Athletes cannot be punished for acts of their government as long as they do not contribute or support it.” He explained, “What we never did and we never want to do is prohibiting athletes from participating in sports only because of their passport.”

Based on the latest IOC ruling, neither Russian nor Belarusian officials will be allowed to attend the games, and essentially all Russian or Belarusian national displays will be banned.