WHAT A JOKE!! State Dept. counts 'bringing peace' to Syria as a 2015 win

Secretary of State John Kerry played a large role in Syrian peace talks. | Getty By ELIZA COLLINS

Updated 12/28/16 02:39 PM EST

The State Department is counting "bringing peace" to Syria as one of its wins in 2015.

A boastful recap of the State Department’s accomplishments, written by spokesman John Kirby, includes the bold subheadline of "Bringing Peace, Security to Syria" above a more modest entry talking about U.S. aid for those affected by the country's turmoil and the U.S. push for a political transition from President Bashar Assad.

While Secretary of State John Kerry has played an integral role in the Syrian peace talks, the country remains embroiled in a nasty civil war and terrorized by the Islamic State.

“The United States and many members of the international community have stepped up to aid the Syrian people during their time of need — the United States has led the world in humanitarian aid contributions since the crisis began in 2011,” Kirby said.

Kirby wrote that the Syrians have “borne a heavy load” but that under Kerry’s stewardship the United Nations passed a U.S.-sponsored resolution to create a road map for Syria going forward.

The apparent declaration of a win echoes comments from President Barack Obama, who has been heavily criticized for calling the Islamic State a "JV team" in a January 2014 article and for calling the group's territorial expansion efforts "contained," just days before the Paris attacks.

Kirby also explicitly touched on the Islamic State, also called ISIL, saying that the U.S. is “winning [the] fight against violent extremists.”

“Although challenges remain, we have made positive strides over the last year, including in our fight against ISIL,” Kirby said. "This forward progress will only continue as more countries pledge resources to the anti-ISIL effort and as citizens around the world increasingly reject ISIL's misguided ideology.”

Kirby cited the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism, hosted in February, which he called “monumental.”

Other things the State Department is counting as wins: re-establishing ties with Cuba, protecting the Arctic, clinching the Iran nuclear agreement, stopping the Ebola outbreak, committing to U.N. development goals, securing a free trade deal, preserving ocean health, and reaching the climate agreement.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/state-department-claims-peace-syria-2015-win-217168#ixzz3veKEi69v

Magnets for murderers - Columbia Daily Tribune | Columbia Missouri: Op-Ed

Magnets for murderers - Columbia Daily Tribune | Columbia Missouri: Op-Ed

By JOHN R. LOTT JR. and MICHAEL R. GORDINIER
Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 12:00 am

Would you post a sign announcing that your home is a gun-free zone? Would you feel safer? Criminals don’t obey these signs. In fact, to criminals, gun-free zones look like easy targets.

In the Tuesday Tribune, Edward Lawlor argued such signs make us safer. He claimed the research of one of the authors here, John Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime,” has been “refuted.” But he ignores that more than two-thirds of the peer-reviewed research by criminologists and economists that look at national data support those findings and that not a single study finds a bad effect on murders, rapes or robberies.

Since at least 1950, all but two public mass shootings in America have taken place where general citizens are banned from carrying guns. In Europe, there have been no exceptions. Every mass public shooting has occurred in a gun-free zone. And Europe is no stranger to mass shootings. It has been host to three of the six worst K-12 school shootings and by far the worst mass public shooting perpetrated by a single individual.

With dozens of cases where permit holders have clearly stopped what would have been mass public shootings, it is understandable that killers avoid places where they can’t kill a large number of people.

What might be surprising is how killers often openly talk about their desire to attack where guns are banned. The Charleston killer’s first choice was to target the College of Charleston, but he chose the church instead because there were armed guards at the college.

Just a few months ago, the diary of the Aurora, Colo., “Batman” movie theater killer, James Holmes, was finally released. He turned down his first choice, an airport, because he was concerned about its “substantial security.” Out of seven theaters showing the Batman movie premiere within 20 minutes of the suspect’s apartment, he attacked the only one that had banned concealed handguns.

Or take a couple of cases from last year. Elliot Rodger, who shot to death three people in Santa Barbara, Calif., explained his own choice. In his 141-page “Manifesto,” Rodger turned down targets because he worried that someone with a gun would cut short his killing spree. Justin Bourque shot to death three people in Canada. His Facebook page made fun of gun bans, with pictures of defenseless victims explaining to killers that they weren’t allowed to have their guns.

Lawlor puts emphasis on polls of people who have no expertise in the area. Policeone, the country’s largest private organization of police, with 450,000 members, found that 80 percent of their surveyed members thought that letting permit holders carry at schools would likely reduce casualties.

In late 2013, Ron Noble, the secretary general of Interpol, noted two means of protecting people from mass shootings: “One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves [should be] so secure that in order to get into the soft target, you’re going to have to pass through extraordinary security.”

But Noble now realizes it was virtually impossible to stop killers from getting weapons.

There is extensive evidence to back this up. I joined University of Chicago economist Bill Landes in studying the effects of 13 types of gun control laws on public mass shootings from 1977 to 1999. Permitted concealed handgun laws were the only effective measures in preventing or reducing the harm caused by these attacks. Attacks occurred in those tiny areas where victims weren’t able to protect themselves.

Today, 12 states mandate that permit holders are allowed to carry guns on public college campuses. An additional 21 states leave it up to the universities. But these legal restrictions didn’t exist before the early 1990s.

Lawlor fears that students with permits will lash out violently at others, but he can’t point to one time that has happened at schools where permits have been allowed. Despite Lawlor’s concerns, there has never been a case where a student with a permit has threatened a professor over grades or anything else. The same concerns were raised for permit holders generally before Missouri enacted concealed-carry in 2004; after 10 years of experience, permit holders have proved to be extremely law-abiding.

Indeed, a study this past year by the Crime Prevention Research Center found that college-age permit holders in Michigan, Nevada and Texas (three states that break down revocation data by age) are at least as responsible as older permit holders.

Accidents over the decades are exceedingly rare. There were four accidental discharges by teachers or staff — one each at universities in Colorado, Idaho, Mississippi and Utah. All cases involved very minor injuries. None involved others getting a hold of the guns.

Gun-free zones are a magnet for murderers. But a year after permit holders are allowed to defend themselves and others, everyone will wonder what all the concerns were about.

John Lott is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, and Michael Gordinier is a senior lecture at the Washington University Business School.



© 2015 Columbia Daily Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



Posted in Oped on Sunday, December 27, 2015 12:00 am.

Americans! This Better Piss You Off! | TERrafirmaUSA

Americans! This Better Piss You Off! | TERrafirmaUSA


Unless you want to bury everything America stands for, unless you are for RE-enslaving women and your daughters, unless you believe the punishment for rape and homosexuality are death, and unless you believe that civilized men should return to the dark ages you better STAND UP! Your world is about to be rocked! The enemy is within the White House, your government, your communities and within the conditioning you receive on a daily basis. Turn off their mouthpiece: the television; the radio; the buy or meme of the day!!!! They would rather you stay asleep and do nothing than to right this injustice being inflicted upon us. They would rather have you comply and bowing on bent knee than standing to fight! Your way of life is about to become extinct if you let it!! DO NOT COMPLY! SPEAK YOUR VOICE! Stand up to tyranny and to those who do not represent the greater good. There is a clash of cultures coming, will you be ready?

#DoYourHomework

What is Sharia-Ism

Brief Islamic History From 622 A.D. to Now

‘Diabolical’ Obama Actions Lead to Weakening of America – US Media | TERrafirmaUSA

‘Diabolical’ Obama Actions Lead to Weakening of America – US Media | TERrafirmaUSA

Putin Shares His View on Russia's Role in Emerging World Order

Putin Shares His View on Russia's Role in Emerging World Order
20:12 20.12.2015(updated 20:19 20.12.2015)

The new documentary film “World Order” was aired on Rossiya 1 television channel Sunday. Vladimir Putin was among those interviewed for the documentary. For your convenience Sputnik compiled best bits and pieces of the interview with the Russian president.



Putin emphasized the importance of being careful when it comes to nuclear weapons, stating that although Russia has its nukes ready, it "never either swung or would never swing its nuclear club at others."


"I hope no person is insane enough on Planet Earth who would dare to use nuclear weapons," Putin said.


On the issue of foreign interference into internal affairs of countries, the Russian president said a national government's drawbacks shouldn't be a reason for an intervention.


"The most important thing is not to undermine legitimate governments, not to destroy their statehood even if it appears to be imperfect," the president said.


"I think that no one should ever impose any values, which he/she considers to be correct, on others. We [Russia] have our own values and our own ideas about justice," Putin explained.


Some countries out there have "lost a sense of reality" thinking that they could tell Russia how to conduct its politics. That isn't going to happen, according to Putin.






© AP PHOTO/ ALIK KEPLICZ


Putin: West Continues Cold War Approach Despite Bipolar System Collapse

"I guess that political nouveaux riches have lost a sense of reality… There are some countries and nations that will never accept a secondary role, a role of an occupied country or some kind of a vassal. It will end sooner or later. Soon enough, I guess," Putin said



Geopolitics is an important issue the world has always faced. Putin thinks if the geopolitical struggle cannot be avoided, then it should at least be civilized, with its principles uniformly understood and supervised.


"It is essential for future development to build relations of the so-called geopolitical struggle. The fight is inevitable and it is normal. It is only necessary to conduct it in compliance with the civilized rules," Putin said.


Obviously, Ukraine was also on Putin's mind.


"In relation to Ukraine and the post-Soviet countries in general, I am convinced that the position of our Western partners — Europe and the US — is not to do with the protection of Ukraine's interests, but with attempts to prevent the re-creation of the Soviet Union. And nobody wants to believe us that Russia doesn't aim to re-create the Soviet Union," the president said.






© AP PHOTO/ DUSAN VRANIC


Russia's Stance on Syria Not Changed: Syrian People Will Decide Their Fate

According to Putin, the West has now realized that it made a mistake by supporting an anti-government coup in Ukraine. However, now the West isn't willing to admit it.



"You cannot improve anything by organizing a coup. Has anything improved in the country? The power is in the hands of oligarchs," Putin said.


"Nobody wants to financially support Ukraine… At the same time, they [the West] want to shift the financial burden to Russia… Let's share the risks, we said. We are ready to restructure Ukraine's debt to us… They do not want to share this risk."


Putin also touched upon his neighbors on the European continent, stating that "Europe's problem is that it doesn't have independent foreign policy. At all."


"The role of Germany, which can and should act at international stage, cannot be ignored in order to change the existing international climate to increase stability," Putin said.


Related: Putin: Eastern Europeans Using Anti-Russia Propaganda in Politics As Putin Extends Olive Branch, Will the West Grasp it? Russia Identifies Over 320 Foreign Agents in 2015 – Putin US in Syria: ‘America Surrenders and Putin Wins Again’

Tags:

foreign intervention, documentary, interview, Syrian crisis, Ukrainian crisis, Vladimir Putin, World, Russia

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/politics/20151220/1032059345/putin-documentary-world-order-interview-highlights.html#ixzz3usykWvLd

Obama Abruptly Waives 1980 Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act | Zero Hedge

Obama Abruptly Waives 1980 Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act | Zero Hedge



Obama selling out America to the highest "Foreign" buyer. There goes the rug!!!

Submitted by Gordon T. Long of the Financial Repression Authority

Obama Abruptly Waives 1980 Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act

The Financial Repression Authority has consistently shown that Regulatory changes which “Ring Fence” US investors choices is a cornerstone of the Macro-Prudential Policy of “Financial Repression”. Through stealth programs like FATCA and PFIC the US government has steadily and quietly limited Americans ability to take cash out of the country and to invest abroad, other than through profitable public exchange traded products sold by the financial industry.  However, it is one thing to shut the doors to American investing abroad but it is quite another to fully open the doors to foreigners! It begs the question why, why now and why the change needed to happen so urgently?

This week, as the BOJ, ECB and PBOC all continued to aggressively expand credit  the Federal Reserve was “full ahead” in the process of withdrawing approximately $1 Trillion of liquidity to achieve its December FOMC decision to increase the Fed Funds rate by 0.25%. To counteract this policy initiative and the alarming collapse in the HY & IG bond market, the US government immediately opened the floodgates to easy foreign credit in a major policy reversal. A policy decision which was rushed through congress with almost no time for congressional debate. Obviously what was not lost on the White House was the fact that the now troubled $2.2 Trillion of High Yield bonds peddled to yield starved investors since the financial crisis matches 2/3’s of the $3.5 Trillion increase in the Federal Reserves balance sheet during the same period.

FIRPTA was implemented during a better era for Americans in response to international investors in the late 1980s and early 1990s buying U.S. farmland, as well as the more publicly visible buying of trophy U.S. property by the Japanese.  The US government has now expediently waived FIRPTA.

Bloomberg reports:

President Barack Obama signed into law a measure easing a 35-year-old tax on foreign investment in U.S. real estate, potentially opening the door to greater purchases by overseas investors, a major source of capital since the financial crisis.

Contained in the $1.1 trillion spending measure that was passed to avoid a government shutdown is a provision that treats foreign pension funds the same as their U.S. counterparts for real estate investments. The provision waives the tax imposed on such investors under the 1980 Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act, known as FIRPTA.

“FIRPTA has historically made direct investment in U.S. property a non-starter for trillions of dollars worth of foreign pensions,” said James Corl, a managing director at private equity firm Siguler Guff & Co. “This tax-law modification is a game changer” that could result in hundreds of billions of new capital flows into U.S. real estate.

Foreign investors have flocked to U.S. real estate since the global economic meltdown, drawn by the relative yields and perceived safety of assets from office towers and shopping centers to apartments and warehouses. The demand has helped drive commercial real estate prices to record highs. Many foreign investors structured their purchases to make themselves minority investors and bypass FIRPTA.

REIT Purchases

The new law also allows foreign pensions to buy as much as 10 percent of a U.S. publicly traded real estate investment trust without triggering FIRPTA liability, up from 5 percent previously.

“By breaking down outdated tax barriers to inbound investment, the FIRPTA relief will help mobilize private capital for real estate and infrastructure projects,” Jeffrey DeBoer, president and chief executive officer of the Real Estate Roundtable, an industry lobbying group, said in a statement.

Cross-border investment in U.S. real estate has totaled about $78.4 billion this year, or 16 percent of the total $483 billion investment in U.S. property, according to Real Capital Analytics Inc. Pension funds accounted for about $7.5 billion, or almost 10 percent, of the foreign total, according to the New York-based property research firm.

“Foreign pensions are such a low percentage of foreign investment in U.S. real estate because of FIRPTA,” Corl said.

Investment Surges

Foreign investment has surged from just $4.7 billion in 2009, according to Real Capital. Foreign buying this year as a percentage of total investment in U.S. real estate is about double the 8.1 percent average in the 10 years through 2012.

Despite a perception that FIRPTA was a response to the wave of Japanese buying of trophy U.S. property in the late 1980s and early 1990s, including Rockefeller Center and Pebble Beach, the act was actually passed in 1980 in response to international investors buying U.S. farmland. Under old rules, foreign majority sellers had to pay 10 percent of gross proceeds from the sale of U.S. real estate as well as additional federal, state and local levies that could increase the total tax burden to as much as 60 percent, according to the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts.

The change “is a huge deal,” said Jim Fetgatter, chief executive of the Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate. “There’s no question” it will increase the amount of foreign investment in U.S. property, he said.

Warning

The FRA predicts that Americans will face significant increases in US property taxes over the next five years starting in 2016. With the change in FIRPTA Americans should additionally expect property values to increase in 2016-2017.

Clearly, foreigners, the “1%” and property owners will all gain from this, but most Americans will simply face significantly increasing property taxes on elevated asset values to fund the ever increasing government debt burden.

Americans owning a house can be expected to initially focus on their net worth being higher, and not that they once again will have even less disposable income. Some will learn painfully why the number one killer of small business is cash flow, not profits..

VACCINE VICTORY: Parents Stop State's Unethical HPV Vaccine Push - Jefferey Jaxen

#‎Victory‬
There is nothing more terrifying than an informed public. For those of you
touting vaccines are safe, you are half right. If you mean clean vaccines with
one virus and no mercury (don't kid yourself into thinking that they don't still
administer mercury to unsuspecting victims), it would be ideal. But vaccines are
meant to be applied when there is a threat to the greater population, which
there has never been. They are not to be applied as a mandated daily, weekly,
yearly or newborn requirement! The public needs to do the real research, even
the CDC has proved a direct correlation to Autism from vaccines. You are fools
to trust your doctors and not trust your better logic. If you choose to
vaccinate, THAT IS YOUR CHOICE - but do not lecture the rest of the higher
thinking individuals who maintain the right to choose what they put in their
bodies. You cannot force people to take tainted medicine and you certainly
should not buy into the pharmaceutical companies' ploy to use you AND YOUR
CHILDREN as guinea pigs! Grow up! Take charge of your own health. You cannot
afford to trust misinformed and paid proponents of bad medicine. If you really
have researched you didn't read this far, so I would suggest to those of you
still reading, follow the links and prove me wrong.

VACCINE
VICTORY: PARENTS STOP STATE'S UNETHICAL HPV VACCINE PUSH

11/8/2015





It took exactly one month to the day for an activated Indiana population to
turn back efforts by their state’s health department to coerce and pressure
parents, outside of law, into having their children receive the potentially
dangerous human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV). Independent health journalist,
Jefferey Jaxen, was contacted by two separate families telling of letters they
received by their state’s health departments regarding their child’s HPV vaccine
status. An article chronicling
the incidents was immediately published to raise awareness on October 5th,
2015.
​
Investigation revealed that the official health department letters
received did not state whether or not the HPV vaccine was mandatory. This grey
area created confusion and anger as many
states are currently moving to pass mandatory vaccination laws with
potentially severe
penalties. What was more striking was the fact that the children, who were
named in the official state letters, were found because of their inclusion into
a vaccine tracking list. The problem was that the parents never knowingly
consented to their child’s participation and inclusion onto this list.
Investigations revealed that every state has a vaccine tracking list, or
immunization information system, for children. With each step to coerce parents,
omit vital information, and unethically push vaccines on children, states are
losing major integrity.
Activated Communities are
Unstoppable
Indiana parents, along with the American Family Association of Indiana, sent
letters, emails, and made phone calls protesting the intrusion by the State's
government into private affairs along with other vaccine related concerns
prompted by the letter. After one month, obtuse officials caved and were forced
to comply with the will of its citizens. The
(Fort Wayne) Journal Gazette reported on November 6th, 2015 that the Indiana
State Department of Health has revised a letter sent to about 305,000 parents of
Indiana children with no record of having started the three-dose vaccine for
human papillomavirus, or HPV. The revised letter now truthfully states that the
HPV vaccine is not required by the State of Indiana, information that was
previously omitted. The new letter also prominently points out that the Indiana
State Department of Health regularly reviews immunization records reported to
the state’s Children and Hoosier Immunization Registry Program, or CHIRP, andincludes a link to have a child’s
information permanently removed from the registry. Commenting on state
intrusion into a parent’s medical choice Indiana Governor Mike Pence commented,
“I think it is a decision that's best left to parents in consultation with
their doctors.”
The Greater Good for Who?
It should
always be remember that the HPV vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, are private
products of a corporation. Glaxo Smith Kline, the makers of Cervarix, have paid
out more that $9.1 billion in a variety of lawsuits and major convictions
since 2003. Worldwide, the damage and efficacy of Gardasil and Cervarix is being
reviewed by many regulatory health agencies and oversight bodies. In addition,
the vaccine has been the center of countless lawsuits and legal actions
worldwide. The European Union’s European Medicines Agency (EMA) has recently
convened a Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) in response to mounting HPV
vaccine damage among European Union teenagers. The SAC is looking at 13,915
cases of HPV related damage. In 2013, the Japanese Health Ministry rescinded its
recommendation for the use of HPV vaccines Gardasil and Cervarix. The removal of
these shots was prompted after mounting evidence of serious adverse side effects
and incongruent science. Japan has refused to add the shot back to the schedule
to date. A report in 2014 by
the U.S. Government Accountability Office looking at the Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program, which has paid out well over $3 billion in vaccine
damages, stated:

• “11 percent of claims filed since fiscal year 1999 were still in process
  (pending) as of March 31, 2014…”
  
• “In some instances, however, a vaccine can have severe side effects,
  including death or an injury requiring lifetime medical care.”

For
those unaware of the current battle to turn back mandatory vaccination and
secure medical choice in the United States, this move by the Indiana State
Department of Health is a major victory. It represents a previously rare
acknowledgement from a governmental body to the demands and concerns around
vaccines raised by parents. In addition, this is a win for independent
journalists and the alternative media who represents the true voice of the
people and the free expression of ideas.
Sources and
References
Article:
Removing Your Child From A Vaccine Tracking System
U.S.
States Attempting Vaccine Legislation
CA
Vaccine Refusers to get "Court Order" or "CPS visit"
HPV
Vaccine Voluntary, State Clarifies in Letter
GlaxoSmithKline
$9.1 Billion in Lawsuits Paid Out Since 2003
U.S. Government 2014 Vaccine
Injury Report


***

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/cdcs-own-data-vaccine-infant-death-link


http://www.thedailysheeple.com/government-has-paid-out-3-billion-to-vaccine-injured-americans-since-1989_022015


http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/u-s-media-blackout-italian-courts-rule-vaccines-cause-autism/


http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/british-court-throws-out-conviction-of-autismvaccine-md-andrew-wakefields-co-author-completely-exonerated/


Measles
Police State: ''Parents who do not vaccinate their children should go to
jail''


http://thegovernmentrag.com/vaccine-apocalypse-now.html


http://www.ageofautism.com/2015/01/recent-italian-court-decisions-on-vaccines-and-autism.html


http://www.prisonplanet.com/two-people-contract-mumps-after-receiving-mumps-vaccine.html


http://www.infowars.com/big-pharma-pushes-child-killing-vaccines/


http://www.infowars.com/90-of-big-pharma-spent-more-on-marketing-than-research-in-2013-alone/


http://www.infowars.com/big-pharma-microchip-to-force-drugging/


http://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/blog/vaccine-victory-parents-stop-states-unethical-hpv-vaccine-push




http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/24/hpv-vaccine-victim-sues-merck.aspx

VACCINE VICTORY: Parents Stop State's Unethical HPV Vaccine Push - Jefferey Jaxen

The Market Has Spoken: The Fed Made A Policy Mistake And "Quantitative Failure" Looms - What Comes Next | Zero Hedge

The Market Has Spoken: The Fed Made A Policy Mistake And "Quantitative Failure" Looms - What Comes Next | Zero Hedge

Now that the Fed's rate hike is in the history books and Yellen is eager to demonstrate that the Fed is confident enough in the US economy by unleashing the first tightening cycle in nearly a decade, market participants are dramatically shifting their attention, from the rate hike as a bullish key catalyst in the "renormalization" timeline ("buy stocks" because the Fed wouldn't risk recession if it wasn't confident in the economy), to the actual consequences of the Fed's dramatically changed reaction function, which as we explained previously, was far more hawkish than the market initially expected. 

Most important however, as we have repeatedly discussed ever since August, is the market's obsession with whether the Fed just made a critical "policy mistake." As Bank of America's Michael Hartnett, one of the foremost skeptics that the Fed is doing the right thing, explained previosly, "the “tail risks” to “deflationary expansion” are high. Like a game of Jenga, a bull market built by central banks can collapse if further BoJ/ECB QE and Fed hikes engender US dollar spikes & US EPS & EM/commodity swoons, FX-wars & volatility rather than a fullblown recovery."

The threat, therefore, is that after "Quantitative Success" pushed up stocks from 666 to over 2,100 in 6 years, the opposite may be on deck now, hence the neo-narrative of Quantitative Failure and the dual risk that:

• Fresh attempts at QE in Japan & Europe are met with investor rebellion in the absence of clear signs of economic improvement.
• Fed tightening into a “deflationary expansion” proves a “policy mistake” by causing harmful US dollar appreciation.

For signs of the first look no further than the market's profound disappointment with the BOJ announcement on Friday morning, which sent the Japanese Yen plunging at first, only for the carry currency to soar once the market realized that the BOJ's ability to intervene in markets may be far more constrained than had been anticipated, as we showed yesterday...

... and of course, the ECB's historic disappointment on December 3 when Mario Draghi promised the sun, moon and stars and delivered... almost nothing, likewise sending the EUR soaring and crushing countless macro hedge funds.

But how to determine if the Fed made a mistake, and more importantly if the market thinks the Fed made a mistake? We presented Hartnett's answer to that key question as well, saying that upon a rate hike:

• Watch the long-end
• If the long-end concurs with the Fed’s view of economic recovery, then banks, cyclicals and value stocks will receive a bid. Asset allocation toward “strong
  dollar” & “Fed tightening plays” will harden, with the exception that value will likely outperform growth
• If the long-end rallies, signaling a policy mistake, then cash, volatility, gold & defensive growth will be the way to go.

So what happened since the Fed hike? Well, after a one-day kneejerk rebound in risk, coupled with a drop in vol, gold and virtually no reaction in the long-end, the result, as shown below, has been a very disturbing one for the Fed. 

As can be clearly seen, the market has responded not only by endorsing a deflationary outcome with the 30Y jumping, WTI sliding, but also stocks tumbling, with the Thursday and Friday drop in the S&P matching the worst plunge in the market since the ETFlash crash of August 24.

In short, the market has spoken: this is a "policy mistake", or as Bank of America - which also explained recently in 8 very charts why the Fed just launched the next Bear Market - called it "Quantitative Failure."

The question then becomes: what happens next when the "boxed in" Fed realizes it has erred, and scrambles to undo the damage, any last trace credibility be damned? Here is Hartnett's answer to that as well:

Since the risk of Quantitative Failure brings with it the risk of more extreme policies/politics in 2016, the natural hedges are gold & volatility. Gold in particular will be interesting to watch in coming months. The Fed’s determination to raise rates means gold prices should fall. If in contrast gold rises with Fed hikes that’s a clear sign of a “policy mistake” and investors anticipating the need for more inflationary policies next year.

In other words, as we have said for the past 2 years, since the Fed does not ever have the option of waving the white flag of surrender and admitting defeat (at least as long as there is fiat currency left for its to print and debase) it will have no choice but to unleash even more violent, "unorthodox", inflation-stimulating policies in the coming months (such as the monetary paradrops we discussed here in September and October). When that happens, the biggest winner will be the one asset class that as of this moment has never been more hated, the one whose hedge fund net short position has never been greater: Gold.

Gold rose 1.5% on Friday while risk was turmoiling, but is still below the FOMC announcement price. That means that while risk assets have started pricing in the Fed's misstep, gold and its record hedge funds shorts are still mostly unaware.

The Truth About The Crusades

As lawmakers clash over refugees, Syrian immigration quietly tops 100,000 since 2012 | Fox News

As lawmakers clash over refugees, Syrian immigration quietly tops 100,000 since 2012 | Fox News





A proposal to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees to the United States has ignited a bitter debate in Washington, but more than 10 times that number of people from the embattled country have quietly come to America since 2012, according to figures obtained by FoxNews.com.


Some 102,313 Syrians were granted admission to the U.S. as legal permanent residents or through programs including work, study and tourist visas from 2012 through August of this year, a period which roughly coincides with the devastating civil war that still engulfs the Middle Eastern country. Experts say any fears that terrorists might infiltrate the proposed wave of refugees from United Nations-run camps should be dwarfed by the potential danger already here.


“The sheer number of people arriving on all kinds of visas and with green cards, and possibly U.S. citizenship, makes it impossible for our counterterrorism authorities to keep track of them all, much less prevent them from carrying out attacks or belatedly try to deport them,” said Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies.


“I think it’s reasonable to assume that the U.S. Government ran the minimum intelligence traces required at the time of entry.”


– Fred Burton, Stratfor



Numbers obtained from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection show 60,010 Syrian visa holders have entered the U.S. since 2012, including 16,245 this year through August. Additional numbers provided by a Congressional source showed another 42,303 Syrians were granted citizenship or green cards during the same period.


“It is highly unlikely that the 102,313 Syrians who were admitted over the past three years were effectively vetted,” said spokesman Ira Mehlman, of the Federation for American Immigration Reform. “Even in countries where we have a strong diplomatic presence, the sheer volume of background checks being carried out precludes the kind of thorough vetting that is necessary.”


The Syrians being admitted are coming directly from their homeland, usually through the U.S. visa program, as opposed to the refugees President Obama is seeking to take in through U.N.-run refugee camps. Most have secured legal entry before they arrive.


“Refugees are part of the admitted category,” said Jaime Ruiz, spokesman for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Their cases are approved prior to arriving into the U.S.”


Those who escaped Syria’s grinding civil war, which has killed an estimated 300,000, and made it to the U.S. are more likely to be those with the money and means to access the U.S. immigration bureaucracy, say experts. But even that system is susceptible to fraud.

Related Image


Expand / Contract


Syrian refugees wait for mattresses, blankets and other supplies, and to be assigned to tents at the Zaatari Syrian refugees camp in Mafraq, near the Syrian border with Jordan. (AP)


President Obama’s proposal raised immediate concerns that ISIS, which vowed to infiltrate refugee camps, could use forged documents to enter the U.S. White House assurances that refugees would be carefully screened met with renewed skepticism after it was revealed that terrorist Tashfeen Malik obtained a fiancée visa despite notable red flags. Malik, who together with her husband killed 14 and wounded 21 in a terror attack in San Bernardino, Calif., Dec. 2, listed a phony Pakistani address and reportedly had a history of posting jihadist messages on social media platforms – although FBI Director James Comey disputed that on Wednesday.


Malik’s entry into the U.S., combined with so many Syrians already here, is even more concerning than the proposed refugees, according to Fred Burton, of the global intelligence firm Stratfor.


“I’m more fearful of those currently inside the U.S. predisposed to strike locally as with the San Bernardino model,” Burton said. “I think it’s reasonable to assume that the U.S. government ran the minimum intelligence traces required at the time of entry.”


Mehlman said the same concerns raised in regard to the refugees – mainly that no reliable documents can be issued in a country in complete meltdown – apply to the Syrians already here.


“All civil order has collapsed, and meaningful background checks are impossible,” Mehlman said. “Instead, we rely on cross-checking databases. However, many people with ties to terrorist groups are not in any databases, which means there is no way we can identify them before they arrive here.”


A government official who expressed astonishment at such large immigration numbers from a relatively small country, said approximately half are legal permanent residents and the remainder came here on visas, the latter of which remains a point of contentious concern.


Screening of all immigrants and refugees must be tightened, said Rep. Mike McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.


“This administration has forbid our front line security professionals from more broadly incorporating social media information into the visa application process, something that might have kept this attacker out of our country,” said McCaul, R-Texas. “We need more robust vetting and screening of all visa applicants.”


Additional data obtained from CBP found that while five Syrians have been apprehended in 2014 and another five in 2015 attempting to cross over the southern border from Mexico, the northern border escapes public and political scrutiny. In 2014 eight Syrians were apprehended by Border Patrol attempting to cross into the U.S. from Canada. Since 2011, 1,229 Syrians have been granted entry from Canada.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/16/as-lawmakers-clash-over-refugees-syrian-immigration-quietly-tops-100000-since/