Wednesday, December 23, 2015

why it's important to keep an eye on weird politics and science...,


SA |  Robert G. Edwards might not be a household name, but the innovation he pioneered along with Patrick Steptoe certainly is. In vitro fertilization (IVF), the process whereby human eggs are fertilized outside of the body and the resulting embryos implanted in a woman's womb, led to the 1978 birth of Louise Brown—the world's first "test tube baby." To date, an estimated five million children worldwide have been born using this innovation. Edwards received the 2010 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for this remarkable achievement.

Edwards’s passing earlier this year prompted an outpouring of praise. He has been widely described as a maverick researcher disinterested in personal recognition who simply wanted to give babies to those who couldn’t make them on their own. The New York Times quoted Edwards’s former collaborator, Barry Bavister, as saying “Dr. Edwards’s motivation—his passion, in fact—was not fame or fortune but rather helping infertile women.” Bavister continued, “He believed with all his heart that it was the right thing to do.”

But Edwards’s views on the technology he created and the uses to which it should be put may be more complicated than this portrayal. One detail omitted from the obituaries published around the world was that Edwards was a member in good standing of the Eugenics Society in Britain for much of his career. Recently uncovered documents show that Edwards served on the organization’s Council—its leadership body—as a trustee on three separate occasions: from 1968 to 1970, 1971 to 1973 and once again from 1995 to 1997 after the group euphemistically renamed itself  "The Galton Institute" for the founder of the eugenics movement, Francis Galton. As we consider Edwards’s legacy in light of his recent passing, it is important to think critically about the relationship between Edwards’s development of IVF and his participation in an organization that was dedicated to promoting one of the most dangerous ideas in human history: that science should be used to control human reproduction in order to breed preferred types of people.

Coined by Galton in the late 1800s to mean "well-born," eugenics became a dominant aspect of Western intellectual life and social policy during the first half of the 20th century. It started with the seemingly simple proposition that one's social position is rooted in heritable qualities of character and intellect.

Eugenicists of that era also believed that people with what they considered the least desirable traits tend to have the most children, precipitating what they saw as an inevitable decline in a society’s intellectual and physical vigor. Taking their cue from livestock breeders, eugenicists argued that socially disadvantageous characteristics could be bred out of human populations through policies that limited the reproduction of "the unfit"—the "feebleminded," the poor and the weak. Many eugenicists considered these qualities to be more prevalent among racial and ethnic minorities.

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

two kinds of due process in America -- one for overseers and another for the overseen...,

tomdispatch |  In the simplest terms, there is no war on the police. Violent attacks against police officers remain at historic lows, even though approximately 1,000 people have been killed by the police this year nationwide. In just the past few weeks, videos have been released of problematic fatal police shootings in San Francisco and Chicago.
While it’s too soon to tell whether there has been an uptick in violent crime in the post-Ferguson period, no evidence connects any possible increase to the phenomenon of police violence being exposed to the nation. What is taking place and what the police and their supporters are largely reacting to is a modest push for sensible law enforcement reforms from groups as diverse asCampaign Zero, Koch Industries, the Cato Institute, The Leadership Conference, and the ACLU (my employer). Unfortunately, as the rhetoric ratchets up, many police agencies and organizations are increasingly resistant to any reforms, forgetting whom they serve and ignoring constitutional limits on what they can do.
Indeed, a closer look at law enforcement arguments against commonsense reforms like independently investigating police violence, demilitarizing police forces, or ending “for-profit policing” reveals a striking disregard for concerns of just about any sort when it comes to brutality and abuse. What this “debate” has revealed, in fact, is a mainstream policing mindset ready to manufacture fear without evidence and promote the belief that American civil rights and liberties are actually an impediment to public safety. In the end, such law enforcement arguments subvert the very idea that the police are there to serve the community and should be under civilian control.
And that, when you come right down to it, is the logic of the police state.  
Due Process Plus
It’s no mystery why so few police officers are investigated and prosecuted for using excessive force and violating someone’s rights. “Local prosecutors rely on local police departments to gather the evidence and testimony they need to successfully prosecute criminals,” according to Campaign Zero . “This makes it hard for them to investigate and prosecute the same police officers in cases of police violence.”
Since 2005, according to an analysis by theWashington Post and Bowling Green State University, only 54 officers have been prosecuted nationwide, despite the thousands of fatal shootings by police. As Philip M. Stinson, a criminologist at Bowling Green, puts it, “To charge an officer in a fatal shooting, it takes something so egregious, so over the top that it cannot be explained in any rational way. It also has to be a case that prosecutors are willing to hang their reputation on.”

bond market boondoggle this way comes...,


NYTimes |  The fight over the island’s future is stretching from the oceanside neighborhoods of San Juan, where a growing number of wealthy investors and financial professionals have migrated in recent years to exploit generous tax breaks, to Capitol Hill. Their efforts are being closely watched by financial institutions, labor unions and policy makers on the mainland, where many ordinary investors own Puerto Rican bonds through mutual funds.

Some warn that Puerto Rico could be a test case for the rest of the country, paving the way for troubled states like Illinois to escape unsustainable debts.

Stephen J. Spencer, a restructuring expert representing Puerto Rico bondholders including some hedge funds, said letting the government renege on agreements with hedge funds and other investors would set a dangerous precedent, undermining the integrity of the bond market.

“It’s really a wealth transfer from the bondholders to the municipalities,” Mr. Spencer said.

Others fear a different precedent: A handful of wealthy investors, they argue, are trying to rewrite the social contract of an entire United States territory. Puerto Rican officials say they have already cut public services and slashed central government spending by a fifth to keep ahead of payments to the hedge funds and financiers.

“What they are doing, by getting all the resources for themselves, is undermining the viability of Puerto Rico as a commonwealth,” said Joseph E. Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist. “They want their money now, and they want to get the rules set so that they can make money for the next 20 years.”

Monday, December 21, 2015

causally connected to the campus catawampus?


electronicintifada |  During his time as UC president from 2008 to 2013, Yudof ignored a litany of assaults, vandalism and threats against members of Students for Justice in Palestine on UC campuses, but spoke out loudly against alleged “incidents of intolerance” when supporters of Israel were affected.

Yudof admitted he “sought guidance” from the American Jewish Committee, a leading Israel lobby group, following the 2010 divestment initiative at UC Berkeley and the UC Irvine protest by Muslim students during a university-sponsored propaganda event featuring Israeli ambassador Michael Oren.

The students — known as the Irvine 11 — were prosecuted at the instigation of the university administration and eventually convicted in September 2011 of “criminal conspiracy” for their decision to make statements of protest during Oren’s speech. The University of California also suspended the Muslim Student Union at UC Irvine.

Rights groups warned Yudof that the University of California under his administration had “exacerbated” a climate of fear for Arab and Muslim students.

Doubled down
Before he left office, Yudof doubled down on his support for Israel and suppression of speech related to Palestine on UC campuses.

He helped draft a 2012 California State Assembly resolution that conflated criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

In 2013, Yudof participated in a conference organized by Israeli military and political elites — which renowned physicist Stephen Hawking boycotted.

In his talk, Yudof railed against the growing divestment campaigns on college campuses and asserted that the “delegitimization of Israel is an ongoing problem.”

Three years earlier, Yudof had changed the university’s policy to make it much harder to divest. Had his policy been in place a generation ago, it would have prevented the university divesting from apartheid South Africa, as it did in 1986.

Fear
Yudof’s fears about the spread of BDS on campus are shared by the presidents of Israeli universities. They are demanding that the American Anthropological Association not move forward with a referendum to endorse its recent vote to boycott Israeli academic institutions.

Many in Israel already fear that a “silent boycott” is taking hold that is far more threatening to the status quo than even the visible boycott initiatives.

rotflmbao@concrete and unmalleable demands...,

thedailycaller |  Oberlin College students have finally joined dozens of other colleges in releasing a Mizzou-inspired set of demands for their administration, and while the demands come a month late, they make up for it by being very numerous and remarkably extreme.
The list, which bubbled up online over the past three days, is no less than 14 pages in length, and includes a staggering 50 demands, many of which divide into several sub-demands. Not only are the demands numerous, but they are quite severe and are paired with stern rhetoric. The document opens as follows:
Oberlin College and Conservatory is an unethical institution. From capitalizing on massive labor exploitation across campus, to the Conservatory of Music treating Black and other students of color as less than through its everyday running, Oberlin College unapologetically acts as [sic] unethical institution, antithetical to its historical vision. In the 1830s, this school claimed a legacy of supporting its Black students. However, that legacy has amounted to nothing more than a public relations campaign initiated to benefit the image of the institution and not the Africana people it was set out for … [T]his institution functions on the premises of imperialism, white supremacy, capitalism, ableism, and a cissexist heteropatriarchy. Oberlin College and Conservatory uses the limited number of Black and Brown students to color in its brochures, but then erases us from student life on this campus. You profit off of our accomplishments and invisible labor, yet You expect us to produce personal solutions to institutional incompetencies. We as a College-defined “high risk,” “low income,” “disadvantaged” community should not have to carry the burden of deconstructing the white supremacist, patriarchal, capitalist system that we took no part in creating, yet is so deeply embedded in the soil upon which this institution was built.
After continuing in this manner for a while and outlining some broad goals (such as “the eradication hegemony in the curriculum”), the document begins to reel off demands, warning that they are “not polite requests, but concrete and unmalleable demands.” If Oberlin doesn’t capitulate, the document warns of a “full and forceful response,” though, despite the detailed demands, what the “response” would be remains entirely undefined.

what's the matter with all of these children?



thedailybeast  |  University dining halls aren’t exactly famous for serving gourmet dishes, but Oberlin students say their meals aren’t merely bad—they are racially inauthentic, and thus, a form of microaggression.
It’s one thing to quietly gripe about the quality of dorm food (students have likely been doing that for centuries). It’s quite another to accuse the dining room staff of stealing from Asian culture because they didn’t prepare the General Tso’s chicken with the correct sauce.
And yet, here’s what one Oberlin student had to say about the dining hall’s sushi bar:
“When you’re cooking a country’s dish for other people, including ones who have never tried the original dish before, you’re also representing the meaning of the dish as well as its culture,” student Tomoyo Joshi told The Oberlin Review. “So if people not from that heritage take food, modify it and serve it as ‘authentic,’ it is appropriative.”
Cultural appropriation, readers will recall, allegedly occurs when people borrow the traditions of another ethnic or religious group. Liberal students at a Canadian university, for example, recently shut down a free yoga class for disabled students because yoga has its origins in Hinduism, meaning it doesn’t belong to white people and they shouldn’t practice it. This kind of thinking is actually bafflingly illiberal—who’s to say that culture itself belongs to anyone?—and yet it’s usually left-leaning students waging weirdly nativist campaigns of forced isolation on foreign cuisines and customs.
The culinary critics at Oberlin, however, aren’t just mad that the cafeteria has appropriated their culture—they’re mad that it’s been appropriated poorly.
“It was ridiculous,” student Diep Nguyen told The Oberlin Review (the “it,” in question was a Banh Mi sandwich with the wrong bun). “How could they just throw out something completely different and label it as another country’s traditional food?”
For one thing, the Banh Mi sandwich is itself the product of the blurring of cultural boundaries: French and Vietnamese.
For another, there’s something deliciously ironic about Oberlin students—some of the most privileged people in the world, as evidenced by the $50,000 they pay annually in tuition—whining about the bun-thickness of meals prepared by lowly paid cafeteria workers.

Sunday, December 20, 2015

ironic the cathedral's cultural marxist wet dream will be implemented via algorithmic slashdotting...,


blacklistednews |  No regime, however ruthless its leaders, vast its ambitions, or extensive its resources, can tyrannize its subjects without their active cooperation. Every police state ultimately requires the public to regiment themselves--and each other. In the age of social media, successful totalitarians will have to crowd-source state coercion -- and China's new "social credit" system, which will encompass that country's entire population in 2020, is pioneering an approach that, if successful, will inevitably spawn imitators in the West.

"The Chinese government is building an omnipotent `social credit' system that is meant to rate each citizen's trustworthiness," reports the BBC. Note well that this system doesn't merely offer an assessment of creditworthiness -- which is a measure of the relative risks to financial institutions that would lend money to that individual. Instead, an opaque clique of supervisors employs an abstruse algorithm to rate the individual's social "worthiness," as defined by his support for the government, its policies, and its objectives.

"A social credit system is an important component ... of the Socialist market economy system and the social governance system," explained a June 14, 2014 "Planning Outline for the Construction of a Social Credit System" issued by China's State Council. "Accelerating the construction of a social credit system is an important basis for comprehensively implementing the scientific development view and building a harmonious Socialist society [and] an important method to perfect the Socialist market economy system."

The chief objective of this system is to "strengthen sincerity in government affairs, commercial sincerity, social sincerity and judicial credibility construction," continues the Planning Outline. "Sincerity" in this context means much the same thing as "worthiness" -- that is, deference to the country's ruling elite, and at least a public display of enthusiasm for its schemes. Building "sincerity" is an important consideration during what the Chinese government calls "the assault phase of deepening economic structural reform and perfecting the Socialist market economy system."

How can a comparatively minuscule ruling elite like the Chinese Communist Party exert control over hundreds of billions of consumers in a decentralized cyber-economy? In an essay for CNN, Rogier Creemers of Oxford University explains that China's ruling elite "seeks to leverage the explosion in personal data generated through smartphones, apps and online transactions in order to improve citizens' behavior" by expanding the concept of a "credit score" into an index of social "worthiness."

"Individuals and businesses will be scored on various aspects of their conduct -- where you go, what you buy and who you know -- and these scores will be integrated within a comprehensive database that not only links into government information, but also to data collective by private businesses," Creemers elaborates.

Global Universal Temporary Solution For Unlimited Living


alasbabylon |  The televisions, radios, and computer screens around the world went briefly blank, then a news commentator appeared on television and somehow through the magic tricks of government agencies, the same commentator appeared on each and every computer screen everywhere.  The commentator greeted with voice only for radio, but in all screens around the world, booming and confident, announced what follows:

"As news coordinator, I am delighted to bring you the end of the year speech by the President of the United States of America.  The President called for this meeting - with all the media from around the globe, just one hour ago, saying that it would be the most important speech of his tenure in office.  Thanks to various government agencies, we are bringing this to you direct and live."  The television and computer screens then briefly blared with somber but presidential music, then the obviously distressed image of the President of the United States of America appeared. 

Around the world, people stopped what they were doing, listened and watched.


The address by the President -

"Good evening.  As each and every one of you know, the worlds population exceeds the world's resources.  I have devoted countless days and weeks and months, working day and night, with leadership groups from around the world to solve these problems.  We and scientists, decision makers, leaders, military officials, and others have considered each and every possibility, with a goal of answers for the year 2050.  However, we have an increasingly urgent situation, and we have determined that there is only one way to handle this situation.  Further, there is only now when action must be taken, as you and I know the problems are multiplying and combining.  Next month and next year will be too late.  Consequently, I and the other leaders of the world have agreed upon a compact that is global, universal and temporary, until a balance has been reached between resources and population.  This agreement will offer a long term and satisfactory solution for unlimited living in the future, a goal that all of us support and encourage.

By proclamation, I am bringing forward the planned program, Global Universal Temporary Solution For Unlimited Longterm Living (GUTSFULL), from 2050 to the immediate present.  As it is now 2029 and tomorrow will usher in the new year, the program GUTSFULL, will begin precisely at 1 minute after the New Year of 2030 begins, as a way to assure a healthy life for our planet and all its beings.  Every country, every corporation, every religious leader, every major association, every important scientist, around the globe, has agreed upon this new plan, this temporary solution to build a better and stronger and more stable planet for the future. 

I assure you that those who can contribute to the quality of life on earth will be safe and should have no worries.  Those who cannot meet the criteria will be reviewed quickly, thoroughly and with the best interests of all of the people of the planet in mind.  Some who are deemed unable to contribute will be selected for termination.  Euthanasia will be painless, quick, and all costs will be covered by the state and federal governments and national and international corporations.  If you happen to be selected, you won't have to pay for anything.

You will be pleased to learn that decisions made will be by community based teams, composed of a local councillor or political leader, a local and certified member of the ministry, a local registered medical professional or health practitioner, a local legally entitled financial manager, and a sworn deputy or officer of the law.  That process will assure virtually complete local control and effective management, so that no federal or state official will impinge in any way on anyone, not you and your family and neighbours.  Your rights will be preserved.  Your dignity will be respected.

These teams will be charged with making decisions based on each individual's past and potential future contributions to the community, their religious beliefs, their health considerations, their ability to contribute financially to the community, and any and all legal records.  Thus no one will be subject to arbitrary or capricious decisions and subsequent termination.  Scientists will rate and continually monitor the past contributions and potential contributions of each individual, so that the best solutions for all will be assured.  Local administration will assure the best and fairest outcome too.

Encouragement will be available, for if a person otherwise not selected for the program, decides to opt for euthanasia on a voluntary basis, they will be entitled to assure that another person of their choosing will be guaranteed life for another year.  Further, if any person can contribute significantly to the community, they will be guaranteed life for another year.   If they can contribute to the costs of government and program operation financially, and if their legal record is clear, they should have no worries.  Even better for many of you, if you have contributed by turning in those who were or are dissidents, free thinkers, radicals, or feeble minded, you will receive extra points towards prolonging your own life.  These points, if you so choose, can transfer to another person of your choosing, if you volunteer for euthanasia.  Those with religious beliefs, and there are many, will be offered an opportunity to demonstrate the strength of their beliefs and commitment to life in the hereafter, by volunteering regardless of their being otherwise selected.  Again, they will be entitled to designate another person for a guaranteed additional year of life.

I assure you that only those who cannot contribute to the community will be terminated, thus freeing up opportunities for those not selected for the program.  And a large number of jobs will be created to operate this program, thus employing many people who otherwise would not have a responsible role in the community.  This will give many people opportunity and security, as they contribute to the long term, sustainable, and overall well being of their communities.

I pledge to you that this is the only way to bring our global population into line with the available and projected resources.  And all of us, including me, will be subject to this plan, beginning 1 January 2030, just a few minutes from now.  Each country, and each corporation, will ensure the process is painless and in the best interests of all.  Thank you for your attention and cooperation.  God bless us all."

The President, looking serious and with tears running, then blinked and smiled, as if a weighty decision had been made.  Perhaps the prepared script was no longer being played.  He began again, looking directly at his audiences: 

"On one last and final personal note, I, as Commander in Chief, as your President, have worked day and night on this project to the point of utter exhaustion.  Accordingly, I have designated the Vice President to take over the role of President of the United States, at 1 minute after midnight, that is, in just hours at the end of tonight.   At the suggestion of the Cabinet and the team who created this project, I am proud to be the first person to volunteer for GUTSFULL and I will fulfil my duty and obligations with pride.  With a joyous and happy frame of mind, I bid you all a very good evening and a Happy New Year."

The President, by now looking ashen and grave, somber and serious, stopped speaking and promptly began walking off the podium.  Armed soldiers dressed in battle uniform, could be briefly seen in the background and joined him as he departed.  The light faded.

There were no cheers or applause, rather stunned silence, by people around the globe. 

Immediately however, some panic stricken citizens began organising.  Some within a few minutes, committed suicide on the spot without waiting for the awarding of merit points to others, unfortunately, thereby losing opportunities for their families and friends.  Other reactions were many and swift, particularly noted was the mobilisation of police, military, and emergency services, and then subsequently, seemingly in minutes, the positive commentaries came forth from all sides.  It seems that the response had been prepared for some time.  The media strongly approved, claiming that finally, something positive was being done to deal with the many urgent problems - pollution, corruption, climate change, global warming, overpopulation, and resource deficiencies. 

A few critiques  or angry fights emerged, but those who offered such critiques or who fought with each other, were quickly identified, taken into custody, and awarded demerit points, assuring that those who pointed them out were given merits.  A few minority groups, some organisations of senior and elderly citizens, and a number of disability rights group objected strongly, earning themselves the name or label - "the first to go", according to the news sources.  However, the President at the end of the speech, took that noble place of honour. 

The next morning the mortuaries and funeral parlour operators were overjoyed at the remarkable rise in their value on the stock markets of the world.  And the rest of the world joined in with vigour and energy to spare.

cathedralized WEIRD-ness will shape the algorithmic baselines for normalcy



telegraph |  Yes, we now live in a world where your phone might observe you to help assess your mental health. If you don’t find that prospect disturbing, you’re either fantastically trusting of companies and governments or you haven’t thought about it enough.

But that feeling of unease should not determine our response to technology in mental health. In fact, we should embrace and encourage the tech giants as they seek to chart the mind and its frailties, albeit on the condition that we can overcome the enormous challenge of devising rules and regulations protecting privacy and consent.

Because, simply, existing healthcare systems are failing and will continue to fail on mental health. Even if the current model of funding the NHS was sustainable, the stigma that prevents us discussing mental health problems would ensure their prevention and treatment got a disproportionately small slice of the pie.

We pour ever more billions into dealing with the worst problems of physical health, and with considerable success. Death rates from cancer and heart disease have fallen markedly over the last 40 years. Over the same period, suicide rates have gone up. 

Even as the NHS budget grows, NHS trusts’ spending on mental health is falling. If someone with cancer went untreated, we’d say it was a scandal. Some estimates suggest one in five people who need “talking therapies” don’t get them. In a rare bit of enlightened thinking, some NHS trusts are supporting Big White Wall, an online service where people can anonymously report stress, anxiety and depression, take simple clinical tests and talk to therapists.

Technology will never be a panacea for mental illnesses, or our social failure to face up to them. But anything that makes them cheaper and easier and more mundane to deal with should be encouraged.

If you think the idea of Google assessing your state of mind and your phone monitoring you for depression is worrying, you’re right. But what’s more worrying is that allowing these things is the least bad option on mental health. Fist tap Arnach.

Saturday, December 19, 2015

weird governance is no governance at all...,


msnbc |  Rachel Maddow reports on the poisoning of Flint, Michigan residents when their water supply was switched, and shows explicitly how responsibility for the tragedy falls to Governor Rick Snyder and his radical, anti-democratic policies.



weird science is no science at all...,


Cambridge | Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers – often implicitly – assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these “standard subjects” are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species – frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior – hence, there are no obvious grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

Friday, December 18, 2015

valodya and scot free have a lot in common..,


CNN |  Vladimir Putin has his man in the U.S. presidential race: Donald Trump. On Thursday, the Russian president reportedly declared Trump to be the "absolute leader" of the race.

Putin -- a natural if brawny showman who has posed fishing shirtless, shooting shirtless and horseback riding shirtless -- also said of Trump: "He's a very lively man, talented without doubt."

Thus did the man who embodies the parody of homoeroticism from the 1970s endorse one who embodies the parody of a blow-hard executive from the 1980s. But while Moscow has long been interested in American politics, what inspired the man who has essentially run Russia since 2000 to take the unusual step of commenting on the election process of an adversary?

Two things: empathy and desire.

Whether he knows it or not, Putin practices a key tenet of statecraft identified by Mel Brooks. His darkly comical musical "The Producers" features the number "Heil Myself!" (also known as "Springtime for Hitler"), in which a campy rendition of the German dictator sings, "It ain't no mystery, if it's politics or history, the thing you gotta know is, everything is showbiz."

The line could be the leitmotif of the reality show that is Trump's campaign.

The Donald's approach to politics likely reminds Putin of himself and he empathizes. Not only do the two men share a love for spectacle and an appreciation of its ability to move low-information voters, but Putin also sees Trump's self-reference as something Moscow can exploit.

if you want to go to war, valodya will take you to war...,


ICH |  “Tense” does not even begin to describe the current Russia-Turkey geopolitical tension, which shows no sign of abating. The Empire of Chaos lavishly profits from it as a privileged spectator; as long as the tension lasts, prospects of Eurasia integration are hampered.

Russian intel has certainly played all possible scenarios involving a  NATO Turkish army on the Turkish-Syrian border as well as the possibility of Ankara closing the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles for the Russian “Syria Express”. Erdogan may not be foolish enough to offer Russia yet another casus belli. But Moscow is taking no chances.

Russia has placed ships and submarines capable of launching nuclear missiles in case Turkey under the cover of NATO decides to strike out against the Russian position. President Putin has been clear; Russia will use nuclear weapons if necessary if conventional forces are threatened.
If Ankara opts for a suicide mission of knocking out yet another Su-24, or Su-34, Russia will simply clear the airspace all across the border via the S-400s. If Ankara under the cover of NATO responds by launching the Turkish Army on Russian positions, Russia will use nuclear missiles, drawing NATO into war not only in Syria but potentially also in Europe. And this would include using nuclear missiles to keep Russian strategic use of the Bosphorus open.

That’s how we can draw a parallel of Syria today as the equivalent of Sarajevo 1914.

Since mid-2014 the Pentagon has run all manner of war games – as  many as 16 times, under different scenarios – pitting NATO against Russia. All scenarios were favorable to NATO. All simulations yielded the same victor: Russia.

And that’s why Erdogan’s erratic behavior actually terrifies quite a few real players from Washington to Brussels. 

Let Me Take You on a Missile Cruise

The Pentagon is very much aware of the tremendous heavy metal Russia may unleash if provoked to the limit by someone like Erdogan. Let's roll out an abridged list.

Russia can use the mighty SS-18 – which NATO codenames “Satan”; each “Satan” carries 10 warheads, with a yield of 750 to 1000 kilotons each, enough to destroy an area the size of New York state.

The Topol M ICBM is the world's fastest missile at 21 Mach (16,000 miles an hour); against it, there’s no defense. Launched from Moscow, it hits New York City in 18 minutes, and L.A. in 22.8 minutes.

Russian submarines – as well as Chinese submarines – are able to launch offshore the US, striking coastal targets within a minute. Chinese submarines have surfaced next to US aircraft carriers undetected, and Russian submarines can do the same.

The S-500 anti-missile system is capable of sealing Russia off from ICBMs and cruise missiles. (Moscow will only admit on the record that the S-500s will be rolled out in 2016; but the fact the S-400s will soon be delivered to China implies the S-500s may be already   operational.)
The S-500 makes the Patriot missile look like a V-2 from WWII.

Here, a former adviser to the US Chief of Naval Operations essentially goes on the record saying the whole US missile defense apparatus is worthless.

russia perfected its kung fu while uhmurkah uselessly shot its wad in the desert...,


fp |  It comes at different times, and in different forms. But as they have charted the war in southeast Ukraine over the past year, drones flown by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe have run into the same problem: Russian troops on the ground are jamming them into virtual blindness.

It’s just one part of a sophisticated Russian electronic warfare (EW) effort in Ukraine that has proved a sobering experience for the U.S. Army. Faced with how the newly modernized Russian army is operating in Ukraine and Syria — using equipment like the Krasukha-4, which jams radar and aircraft —American military officials are being forced to admit they’re scrambling to catch up.

Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commander of U.S. Army units in Europe, hasdescribed Russian EW capabilities in Ukraine as “eye-watering.” Ronald Pontius, deputy to Army Cyber Command’s chief, Lt. Gen. Edward Cardon, told a conference this month that “you can’t but come to the conclusion that we’re not making progress at the pace the threat demands.”

The electronic war was on display from the start of the Russian incursion into Crimea in the spring of 2014. Not long after Russian EW equipment began rolling into the region, Ukrainian troops began to find that their radios and phones were unusable for hours at a time. Meanwhile, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, an international conflict-monitoring group, has consistently reported that its drones watching the conflict in eastern Ukraine have been subject to military-grade GPS jamming,” forcing monitors to scrub missions taking stock of the war below.

At the forefront of the push to get the U.S. Army up to speed is Col. Jeffrey Church, the Army’s chief of electronic warfare. But it won’t be easy. Dealing with falling budgets, a lack of EW equipment, and a force that is shrinking by tens of thousands of troops, Church says that he has managed to train only a few hundred soldiers — a fraction of the EW forces that are fielded by potential adversaries like Russia and China.

“They have companies, they have battalions, they have brigades that are dedicated to the electronic warfare mission,” Church said in an interview with Foreign Policy. Those units are deploying “with specific electronic warfare equipment, with specific electronic warfare chains of command,” he said.

Currently, 813 soldiers make up the Army’s EW mission, for which just over 1,000 positions have been authorized. And other Army units are guarding against Church’s attempts to peel away soldiers from their ranks to join his. The staffing squeeze is only expected to get worse as the overall Army contracts: At its peak during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army had about 570,000 soldiers; it is on pace to be down to 450,000 by the end of 2017. That number could slide even further, to 420,000 over the next several years, if Washington deadlocks over a long-term budget deal in the coming months.

At the moment, U.S. Army battalions typically assign two soldiers to the EW mission, and they will “have to do 24-hour operations” in battle against sophisticated enemies, Church said. That includes planning and coordinating with other battalion units as well as ensuring that their own jammers and advanced communications tools are working. “There’s too much to do for those guys in a battalion,” Church said. “So how do you maintain in a high-intensity environment against a peer enemy?”

war is a racket



thedailybeast |  Turkey’s relationship with with ISIS is… complicated. Critics have accused the Turkish government of allowing, if not encouraging, the terror group’s activities along Turkey’s border.

On Nov. 24, a Turkish warplane shot down a Russian attack plane that apparently briefly strayed into Turkey’s airspace. One Russian crew member died. Moscow retaliated with economic sanctions and, in early December, accused Turkey of facilitating ISIS’s illicit oil exports, which reportedly account for half of the terror group’s revenue.

On Dec. 3, the Russian defense ministry released imagery—apparently provided by the Persona or Resurs-P2 satellites—that allegedly depict thousands of ISIS oil tankers headed for a Turkish port. At least, that was the Russian claim. Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, denied the allegation in no uncertain terms. “Shame on you—those who claim we buy oil from Daesh are obliged to prove it,” Erdogan said, using a slang term for ISIS. “If not, you are a slanderer.”

Whatever the truth, the imagery is a stark reminder that Russia’s campaign in Syria isn’t just an air, ground, and sea war. Moscow’s Middle East intervention also extends hundreds of miles into space.

Thursday, December 17, 2015

mr. miracle vs. the cephalopod molluscan establishment


Whenever there is an economic contraction, the victims of that contraction are prone to seize upon the nearest and weakest visible minority - and blame that minority for their plight. (Killer-ape ethology 101) In the U.S., the nearest, weakest, and most at-risk minorities are illegal mexicans and enemy muslims. It's really as simple as that.

The economic contraction is very far from over. Prospects for the white, poorly educated worker in the US are bleak at best. "Beneath the latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we can see further contraction just around that signpost up ahead. Over the next decade, the service sector will provide 95% of all the new jobs. Manufacturing, which shed more than two million jobs between 2004 and 2014, will shrink by an additional 800,000, to only 7% of the workforce. Of the 15 occupations with the most projected job growth, only four ask for a bachelor’s degree; eight require no formal education credentials; nine offer median annual wages under $30,000.

Trump is the only candidate that has spoken consistently about jobs. While he has yet to spell out how he'll accomplish creating some, people are hanging on his words of promise. Because he's not beholden to elite corporate donors, from either the vampire squid parasite camp, or, the kochtopus extractive wealth camp - the poor, white, and pissed sense that he might at least try to keep his word.

What's most fascinating about Trump to me is, how he's attracting malcontents of all economic backgrounds, and, his rhetorical and strategic emphasis on maintaining good relations with working and working class black folks. Trump is in fact "the least racist candidate" we're ever likely to see, nothwithstanding his red meat overtures to the poor, white, and pissed.  The Hon.Bro.Preznit had amoment in 2008 when he pretended to himself and to others that he could hold his nose and engage with the unwashed. Sadly, the interpersonal skills and psychological skills required to engage this portion of the electorate were not present in his tool kit. To add injury to that insult, those in the teatardic GOP pretending to speak for the unwashed - further compounded the challenge/complexity required to so engage. As a practical matter, they made it impossible for him to carry through on this part of his agenda without infuriating his own deeply cathedralized electoral base.

The GOP has capitalized on the holes in the Hon.Bro.Preznit's interpersonal bucket. Since Reagan, the GOP establishment has had a thirty five year run of hollowing out both the middle and the working classes by redistributing wealth up. This took a lot of bait and switch and divide and conquer. The problem with bait and switch and divide and conquer is that you can only fool people for just so long.

The poor, white and pissed are well aware they've been handed a bad bill of goods by the GOP establishment and by the recent kochtopus teatardic fork off the same. As a life long democrat and experienced donor who has repeatedly bought and paid for various and sundry political trash including Clintons, Trump early on clearly demonstrated that he doesn't give a damn about the democrat donor class or its lying democrat trash politicians.  Yet more fascinating given his run as a nominal republican, Trump doesn't have a rat's ass stashed in his kit bag for either one of the lying and conniving wings of the GOP or its clown-car cavalcade of buffoons it's down to fielding.

As in business, so in politics for Trump. Trump is not a businessman. Trump is a business, man. Politically Trump is building his own brand. He's already shown his contempt for the democrats and their lame-duck figurehead, and despite running as one, he absolutely, positively, doesn't give a damn about the GOP's lying, conniving, and increasingly tenuous big-lie brand either.

No matter how far Trump goes with this fascinating political gambit, he wins.

Politics is all about self-interest. La Raza and CAIR are no friends of mine, we have no coalitional interests in common, and I fully and fundamentally understand and accept killer-ape ethology as the collective order of your species present day. With regard to all the pearl-clutching, vapor-catching, and hand-wringing about Trump's purported racism - phukkum.Muslims aren't a race, and neither last time I checked are Mexicans.

That said, I'm a non-muslim American and I have interests in common with the poor, working, and pissed in America. I have an economic interest in preventing illegal workers from depressing wages and I have an economic and nationalist interest in thwarting the reconquista. Years ago it may have been true that illegal immigrants were mainly doing jobs that Americans wouldn't (e.g., agriculture), but now the number of illegal workers has mushroomed and made huge inroads into core working-class jobs, especially construction-related. To add insult to injury, the working-class pays for Medicaid, Food Stamps, and other programs immigrants are eligible for, as well as higher property taxes due to the high cost of ESL services provided to the children of illegal immigrants.

Illegal immigration has pushed up the cost of living for many middle-and-lower-middle class Americans, by significantly increasing the demand for affordable housing at a moment when little is being built. In the game of musical chairs on the deck of the Titanic (continuing economic contraction) the NAFTA/TPP globalization that both democrat and republican elites have embraced, the cost of housing is easily any working person's greatest expense. In cities all across America, landlords are happy to rent out apartments designed to house, at most, a 3-to-4 people, and allow 8-10 immigrants to live in them - despite the toil this takes on the tenants living below or next door to them.

Both partisan camps of the now fully and embarrassingly feminized establisment have done nothing but call Trump and his working-class followers names - without a minute of thought as to the economic reality of their lives. Both democrat and GOP establishment (2parties1ideology) have been so busy with their anti-Trump pearl-clutching that they failed to notice that Trump's key policies (e.g., higher taxes for the rich, protect social security, rein-in Wall Street excesses, etc.) are closer to Bernie Sander's than to Granny Goodness.

As I pointed out years ago, the only way to beat the establishment oligarchs is to unite the working classes and the left of center masses against them.  But driven by the classist Cathedralized arrogance of the democrat elites, embodied in the uppity Hon.Bro.Preznit, the democrat party has blown its opportunity to accomplish that aim. 

It's a unique moment in America to see a largely populist movement exploited by a billionaire no less, to counter the oligarchic establishment donor class.

Trump has moved people from pure ideology to practicality with his rhetoric: underneath all the 'get rid of immigrants and refugees" talk is a subtext that says, "more of the pie for you."  That's keeping it 100% with killer-apes. Everything else is empty and mendacious political conversation...,

Chipocalypse Now - I Love The Smell Of Deportations In The Morning

sky |   Donald Trump has signalled his intention to send troops to Chicago to ramp up the deportation of illegal immigrants - by posting a...