November 22, 1963, eight Assassins were paid 50,000 each, to assure our Leader of the free world JFK, CAMELOT, would never survive another day. The meeting the day prior of the plan and the participants who wanted him dead would surprise you. All conspiracy theories, and recent books still do not tell you the truth, as they were also paid by the CIA, since the original patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald story, is proven to not even be possible. This is the true story and explanation to what really took place that day. It’s disturbing, embarrassing, and hurtful our nation, planned his assassination; for money, power, and different political ambitions. This is a non monetized, brief encounter to the JFK Murders explained from the film that is over 3 hours long. “JFK 911 A Rich Mans Game” that I shortened to get to THE POINT of the JFK murders truth, and explains why the other conspiracy theories are NOT TRUE. AND THIS IS THE TRUTH YOU HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR!
The year was 2011, and a freshman in Newton South High School, in Newton, Massachusetts, asked her father if it was true that the “Israeli occupation forces” had “imprisoned, tortured and killed” hundreds of Arabic women who had been “active in the Palestinian resistant movement.” Her father, Tony Pagliuso, asked for the source of this misinformation. It was her 540-page Arab World Studies Notebook, a highly explosive textbook filled with fabrications, shown to contribute, at least in part, to the marked decrease, from 84 to 57 percent, in student sympathy for Israel. In another textbook, The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography, a question reads, “If a Palestinian suicide bomber kills several dozen Israeli teenagers in a Jerusalem restaurant, is that an act of terrorism or wartime retaliation against Israeli government policies and army actions?” These are not unique.
The editor, Audrey Park Shabbas, employed by Arab World and Islamic Resources and School Services, authored the volume to improve the Arab image because the truth is unpalatable in Western society, and the Israeli image is scapegoated in the process, consistent with the 1400-year Islamic war against Jews and Western civilization. Schools also distribute Scholastic’s maps that omit Israel from the modern Middle East.
Other education sources used across America are the Internet’s Flashpoints: Guide to World Conflicts, which identifies Jerusalem as the capital of (the non-existent) Palestine; handouts that omit the numerous and deadly Arab terrorist attacks on Israel; and A Muslim Primer that presents a deceptive, sugar-coated version of the subjugated Muslim woman’s life. Biased textbooks in use throughout America are World History: The Human Odyssey; World History: Human Legacy; World Civilizations: The Global Experience; A Muslim Primer: Beginner’s Guide to Islam, and more. I have personally reviewed four textbooks and written exposés accordingly, and many concerned professionals and members of the public are working hard to combat the manipulation of our youth, but the disinformation continues to proliferate.
More than 10,000 teachers attended Shabbas’s hundreds of three-day teacher-training sessions from 2000 to 2006, and were thus persuaded and made skillful at reaching and indoctrinating more than 25 million students over ten years. Additional corroboration comes from visiting biased speakers, such as the notorious anti-Israel Noam Chomsky, an aficionado of the Iran-supported, world’s most powerful terrorist group/army, Hezbollah, responsible for large-scale bombings and suicide attacks on Americans and Israelis; Linda Sarsour, anti-Semite, jihadi and proponent of FGM (Female Genital Mutiliation); and academia’s Paul Beran, then-director of Harvard University’s Outreach Center, now leader of SHARIAsource, recognized for promoting BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) against Israel to the Presbyterian Church.
It took alert parents and involved citizens and intense investigation and reports by The Massachusetts Board of Education, Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT), the American Jewish Committee and Verité Educate to expose Newton High’s ethical violations and unacceptable practices and to finally have the school admit the Outreach Center’s strong influence. Key criticism was leveled at Harvard International Review’s Hatem Bazian’s fallacious portrayal of Palestinians as the indigenous victims and Jews as the colonialists; at the textbooks for their academic dishonesty through inaccuracies, false information, plagiarism, deceptive editing, and hate-filled, religious-proselytizing websites; assignments designed to prejudice students toward a suicidal one-state solution for Israel/the West Bank/Gaza, revealed in Miriam F. Elman’s “Palestinian Propaganda is Infiltrating US Public Schools”; and biases against Israel and the US while sanitizing Islamic ideology and terrorism, explained by Rafael Medoff in Breaking Christian News.
Examples of other schools across the country that inculcate Islamism and unfairness in the classroom include Bellaire High, in Houston, Texas, cited for extreme claims about Israel’s history; Carlmont High in Belmont, California, which invited Linda Sarsour and other anti-Semites to advocate BDS and tutor radical positions against Israel; and La Plata High, a Maryland public school that forces the children to learn about Islam, memorize the Five Pillars of Islam, and recite the Shahada, the Islamic oath of conversion. By contrast, there is a considerable lack of parallel information being taught about Christianity and Judaism because Islamists precedently announced their aversion and umbrage. This generation of children is being fed an egregiously biased version of an ideology that is incompatible with democracy and corrosive to our beliefs, morals, and ideals. Let us be clear: their ultimate purpose is the conversion of our children.
The Intense focus on Islamic subjects is carefully selected. For example, the status of women is profoundly misrepresented, the origin and purpose of their sharia-compliant clothing falsified and unsupported by scholarship. One author asserts that “Islam and the Quran created major improvements in the status of women,” when the truth is otherwise. The worst conditions for women are concealed, including the practices of genital mutilation and honor killings; accusations of adultery and stoning; their treatment as property and legal inferiority; endorsed beatings by their husbands; the fact that a woman may have no rights to show her face, walk alone, drive a vehicle or attend schools. International speakers and experts who offer genuine facts, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Anni Cyrus, Brigitte Gabriel, and Noni Darwish, are not among the invitees.
The textbooks elevate Islam over Judaism and Christianity, one being John Esposito’s Islam, the Straight Path, in which he declares that revelations given to the Jews and Christians were false. By contrast, he cites as truth, rather than belief, that God sent Muhammad as his final messenger and that God’s sacred language is Arabic. Students write about Moslem pilgrimages, including to Jerusalem as “your homeland,” when Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran. Many textbooks explain the rise and spread of Islam as being a successful acceptance of ideas, rather than the result of persecution and wantonly destructive conquerors who beheaded the non-believers, kidnapped the women for forced conversion and sexual slavery, and enriched themselves with appropriated bounty.
The textbooks’ definition of jihad varies from the benign, the spiritual struggle within oneself against sin, to the traditional, the struggle against the enemies of Islam, but the goal is always the same – that of bringing the whole world under Islamic law, as explained by Bernard Lewis. Omitted is the account of hundreds of members of the Jewish Meccan tribe, the Quarayza, beheaded in 627 AD for rejecting Muhammad as Prophet, and the more than 109 verses in the Quran that decree violence and death to Jews and Christians, and the destruction of Israel.
Not found in textbooks is Israel’s history – not 1948, when five surrounding Arab states declared war on the new state of Israel and lost, or 1967, when the Arabs again attacked Israel and lost, leaving behind Arabs who stayed and accepted Israel citizenship and Arabs who fled and remained as stateless pawns, neglected by their brethren. Mislaid is the number of Jews – between 800,000 and one million – who fled for their lives from Islamic countries, and were absorbed by Israel. Missing are a timeline that would verify Israel’s attacks as retaliatory to the Arab leaders’ calls to annihilate Israel, and a correct definition of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as “religious,” as declared in the Quran, confirming that anti-Semitism is integral to the Moslem culture. The textbooks do not explain Islamic terrorism and radicalism as religious precepts of jihad, or the incitement to hate that permeates Palestinian and Islamic society. Palestinians extol terrorism, praise terrorists as heroes and deceased murderers as martyrs after whom streets, cultural events, and public squares are named, and for which parents are handsomely rewarded – with “humanitarian aid” funded by UN countries. Anti-Semitism is endemic to the Koran, and none of this is mentioned.
The correct definition of Islam, with its religious, legal, political, economic, social and military components is a 100% system of life, and the greatest threat to the world. There are organizations that work to free our schools of Islamic propaganda, but the programs of study have been bought and paid for by the Saudis, and theirs is the agenda. Hence, the lessons are plagued with poor scholarship, revisionism, and blatant anti-Israel bias, and supported by a corrupt media that fuels the skewed perspective.
It is now evident that we are at war, a war that is being waged in the classroom, with its weaponry aimed at our children’s minds. The diligent work, “Indoctrinating our Youth,” by CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, has resulted in the removal of some curriculum materials, but not all. Despite parental rights to know what their children are learning, teaching staff does not provide full disclosure. And, for every school that removes falsehoods, there are a hundred more that are continuing its use, now beginning at 3rd grade level. It is up to us to pursue what must be stopped for the sake of our survival as a republic. Go to www.schoolbias.org or call CAMERA, at 617-377-6911. To quote a popular phrase, “If you see something, say something.”
Tomorrow, January 3rd, is the deadline presented by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes for the FBI to turn over responsive documents, their field agent investigative notes and contact summaries.
The FBI Counterintelligence Division began an official investigation on/around July 15th, 2016. The target of the investigation was the Donald Trump campaign. The FBI has refused to answer questions or allow investigative oversight toward the origin of their endeavor.
Numerous leaks from the FBI imply the leadership is attempting to shape the narrative surrounding the origin. Suspicions are high. Key questions we hope to see answered soon with specific detail are:
1.) who was the FISC judge that signed off on the FISA application?
2.) what was the underlying evidence presented to the FISA court?
.
♦FBI Agent Peter Strzokhas been reassigned to the HR department. ♦FBI Lawyer Lisa Page, personal legal aide to FBI Asst. Director, Andrew “Andy” McCabe, has been returned to the DOJ side. ♦FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker has been relieved of his duties by FBI Director Christopher Wray. ♦FBI Asst Director Andrew McCabe has announced his intent to retire in March.
In October 2016, immediately after the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the FISA application, the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. During his exit John Carlin informed the FISA court the DOJ-NSD frequently provided false information to the court to gain FISA warrants – Read Here.
Chairman Devin Nunes wants answers to the origin of the FBI counterintelligence operation. Back in February 2017 Devin Nunes went to a secure SCIF and saw some of the unmasking reports that stemmed from that operation.
Those who have followed the back-story closely can see clear political outline of the 2016 operation. Here’s the way the entire construct looks in simple outline.
Career officials, managers and staff within the DOJ and FBI wanted to help ensure Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election. Those people were ideologically aligned with President Obama, and held the goal of maintaining progressive advances as part of their motive.
A “small group” was formed within the DOJ and FBI to facilitate this goal. The first goal was to remove Clinton from the burden of the FBI email investigation.
Once that goal was achieved, they moved on to Clinton’s 2016 challenger. By the time the 2016 GOP convention drew near, everyone accepted that challenger would be Donald Trump.
As such the FBI “small group” began monitoring candidate Donald Trump in June/July 2016 as part of a plan toward the benefit of candidate Hillary Clinton.
However, the FBI and DOJ officials also needed an actual basis, a legal justification for their behavior and the time they were spending. The plan to justify that behavior was to create an official counterintelligence operation.
To get the counterintelligence operation going, they needed a reasonable basis for creating one. That basis was the formative seeds of claims of Russian connections to the Trump campaign.
To establish the basis the Russian elements needed for the operation; the DNC and Clinton campaign has earlier paid Fusion GPS (April ’16) to contract Christopher Steele to write a dossier that would form the legal grounding for the counterintelligence operation.
The wife of Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS), Mary B. Jacoby, with years of Russia-angled reporting –including Donald Trump– visits the White House on April 19th 2016.
Fusion GPS (Mary B. Jacoby, and Glenn Simpson) hired DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, who was well versed in counterintelligence operations, CIA operations, and using CIA tradecraft to create illusions.
Nellie Ohr worked with retired British MI6 Agent Christopher Steele to manufacture the Steele Dossier. The dossier would take innocuous connections between Trump and Russian people, enhance them, fabricate some nefarious appearance, and then be turned over to Bruce Ohr’s counterintelligence buddy in the FBI Peter Strzok.
In essence, the Clinton’s created the Russian “angle” out of thin air; and the FBI and DOJ used that creation as the legal underpinning for the counterintelligence operation.
The cointel op was always just a ruse for wiretapping, surveillance and monitoring of Donald Trump campaign officials.
The FBI (Strzok) and DOJ (Ohr) dressed up the Steele Dossier to apply for a FISA warrant (Asst from DOJ/FBI intermediary Lisa Page). The surveillance was happening with or without the FISA approval; but the FISA warrant would make the surveillance legal.
The initial application to the FISA Court was so sketchy (June-2016) it was actually denied. Denials rarely happen. One-in-a-thousand.
The Steele Dossier was dressed up some more. More stuff added, thanks to Christopher Steele and Nellie Ohr, to the second FISA application in Sept./October. That FISA application again submitted by Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page. That warrant was approved.
If Hillary was elected, the entire counterintelligence operation just disappears into the ether. No-one would ever know about it.
But Hillary didn’t win.
Trump did.
Subsequently, the insurance policy is deployed. The entire Trump Counterintelligence Operation (Trump spying) now evolves into “A Russian Probe”. So the team behind the CoIntel scheme, again “the small group”, had to make up the “Russian Interference in The Election” narrative, a larger narrative, as the insurance policy and to cover their tracks.
The manufactured basis for the FISA warrant, ‘Muh Russia’ now REALLY needed to become real; or at least have the IMMEDIATE appearance of being real or justified.
March 2017 …”Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.”…
That’s also why the goofy “Joint Analysis Report on Russian Interference” was created. Brennan (CIA), Clapper (ODNI), and Comey (FBI), and to a much lesser extent the outsider Mike Rogers (NSA). This became the “17 intelligence agencies” blah.. blah… blah.
It was never 17 intel agencies. It was four. Only three pushed it. Mike Rogers said he had low/moderate confidence in the underlying intelligence within the report. The report was created as evidence to enhance the insurance policy. Nothing more.
[My hunch is if you put the Steele Dossier together with the Joint Analysis Report, you will find 90% of the FISA application documentation.]
Additionally, the entire crew, from the Obama Administration and current career people within the DOJ, FBI, etc., who understood the larger scheme, needed ongoing people to continue ensuring the insurance policy was maintained and deployed.
That drove the need for a Special Counsel investigation. Demand-Demand-Demand. Mueller’s investigation was really just another way the players within the original scheme could keep a lid on the events in 2016.
That’s why many of the FBI/DOJ “small group”, the crew who cleared Hillary in the email investigation, were also assigned to the Mueller investigation. Controls were needed.
Inside Mueller’s crew, the “small group” essentially works to watch over what information the Trump officials or congress could possibly be discovering…. under the auspices of investigating ‘Muh Russia’ etc. If the “DOJ/FBI small group” comes across a risky trail being followed, they work to impede, block, delay or deflect anyone from that trail.
That’s the ‘high-level’ summary of the way things look from a researched perspective.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley delivered strong remarks today during a press briefing surrounding U.S. policy toward Pakistan and Iran.
“The administration is withholding $255 million in assistance to Pakistan. There are clear reasons for this. Pakistan has played a double game for years. They work with us at time, and they also harbor the terrorists that attack our troops in Afghanistan. That game is not acceptable to this administration.”
WATCH:
.
Think BIGLY – On a geopolitical level the U.S. relationship with Pakistan is shadowed by a strong Pakistani economic relationship with China. China is Pakistan’s biggest investor. China has also recently been identified as covertly propping up North Korea with smuggled oil shipments: “Very Disappointing“.
The central U.S. Pakistani relationship has always been about our fight against the terrorist networks of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Pakistan has played both sides of that coin. In August of 2017 President Trump warned Pakistan our relationship with them would be different if they did not stop enabling the Taliban.
The U.S. primary goal in Afghanistan is to force the Taliban to enter negotiations with the legitimate Afghanistan government and achieve a peaceful resolution toward a stable, non terrorist/non-extremist, nation. Pakistan’s duplicitous action has become an impediment to that goal.
Knowing that ultimately a decision-point would would be reached with both Pakistan and China, President Trump began constructing the counter-leverage last year via an enhanced economic relationship with India and Prime Minister Modi.
Given the current antagonism by both Pakistan (via Afghanistan) and China (via North Korea), we can anticipate that President Trump will now enter a phase of elevated and open (ie. very public) economic engagement with India. “Indo-Pacific”
Predictable leverage in the ongoing dynamic will remain centered around economics.
In addition to the withdrawal of direct financial support for Pakistan, China will now face increased trade-policy-scrutiny, as well as lesser beneficial economic trade outcomes.
Predictably, the Most Favored Nation (MfN) trade status, a primary driver of U.S./China trade with great benefit toward Xi Jinping, is going to become increasingly leveraged as a negotiation strategy.
U.S. India ties are NOW a key and central component to the approach.
NOT COINCIDENTALLY the following surfaces as an ‘ah-ha moment’ for many:
T-REX […] Prime Minister Modi’s visit in June highlighted the many areas of cooperation that are already underway in this new area of our strategic relationship.
Our defense ties are growing. We are coordinating our counterterrorism efforts more than ever before. And earlier this month, a shipment of American crude oil arrived in India, a tangible illustration of our expanding energy cooperation. The Trump administration is determined to dramatically deepen ways for the United States and India to further this partnership.
For us today, it’s plain to see why this matters. India represents the world’s largest democracy. The driving force of our close relationship rests in the ties between our peoples – our citizens, business leaders, and our scientists.
Nearly 1.2 million American visitors traveled to India last year. More than 166,000 Indian students are studying in the United States. And nearly 4 million Indian Americans call the United States home, contributing to their communities as doctors, engineers, and innovators, and proudly serving their country in uniform.
As our economies grow closer, we find more opportunities for prosperity for our people. More than 600 American companies operate in India. U.S. foreign direct investment has jumped by 500 percent in the past two years alone. And last year, our bilateral trade hit a record of roughly $115 billion, a number we plan to increase.
Together, we have built a sturdy foundation of economic cooperation as we look for more avenues of expansion. The announcement of the first Global Entrepreneurship Summit ever to be hosted in South Asia, to take place in Hyderabad next month, is a clear example of how President Trump and Prime Minister Modi are promoting innovation, expanding job opportunities, and finding new ways to strengthen both of our economies.
When our militaries conduct joint exercises, we send a powerful message as to our commitment to protecting the global commons and defending our people. This year’s Malabar exercise was our most complex to date. The largest vessels from American, Indian, and Japanese navies demonstrated their power together in the Indian Ocean for the first time, setting a clear example of the combined strength of the three Indo-Pacific democracies. We hope to add others in coming years.
In keeping with India’s status as a Major Defense Partner – a status overwhelmingly endorsed last year by the U.S. Congress – and our mutual interest in expanding maritime cooperation, the Trump administration has offered a menu of defense options for India’s consideration, including the Guardian UAV. We value the role India can play in global security and stability and are prepared to ensure they have even greater capabilities.
And over the past decade, our counterterrorism cooperation has expanded significantly. Thousands of Indian security personnel have trained with American counterparts to enhance their capacity. The United States and India are cross-screening known and suspected terrorists, and later this year we will convene a new dialogue on terrorist designations.
In July, I signed the designation of Hizbul Mujahideen as a Foreign Terrorist Organization because the United States and India stand shoulder-to-shoulder against terrorism. States that use terror as an instrument of policy will only see their international reputation and standing diminish. It is the obligation, not the choice, of every civilized nation to combat the scourge of terrorism. The United States and India are leading this effort in that region.
But another more profound transformation that’s taking place, one that will have far-reaching implications for the next 100 years: The United States and India are increasingly global partners with growing strategic convergence. (more)
The rally in BitCoin was a perfect 13 weeks up from the last strategic low. It peaked with the Weekly Array the week of 12/18 which was both a Panic Cycle and a Directional Change. However, with the impending ban in South Korea on trading cryptocurrencies, the high of December appears to be at least an important temporary high. A weekly closing back below 9425 will ten to confirm the end of the bull market for now.
South Korean plans to restrict cryptocurrency trading. Bitcoin investors saw the collapse to $13,600 from the previous day trading at $16,500 dollars. South Korea, one of the world’s most important countries for virtual currency trading, wants to ban the opening of anonymous accounts for cyber currencies, among other things. There will also be a new law that will allow regulators to close stock exchanges where Bitcoin & Co. is traded under certain circumstances. “We share the view that cryptocurrency trading is irrationally overheating,” the government said. “We can no longer tolerate this abnormal speculation.”
Nearly a million people are estimated to own Bitcoin. South Korea is very important because it represents around one-fifth of Bitcoin’s global trade. Regulation by South Korea is extremely important. Even the German financial supervision warns that the risk is total loss for investors. Many view this as if it were the Dutch Tulip Bubble since BitCoin cannot be used in the economy in a fair and orderly manner.
COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong; I really do not think the world respects your work. I read on your blog there was going to be a bad flu from Australia that would hit Britain. Then a few days later, the headline here is all about what you forecast. You really have to go public and let people support your work in a meaningful way. The world really does need to listen.
All the best from your former home.
EB
REPLY: I understand. I get a lot of emails on this subject. The world is not ready to understand cycles. All the methods of analysis are generally wrong. All the analysts who try to compete with me do so on an OPINION basis, not methodology. They offer their OPINION and pound their chest. This is not about OPINION. This is about global correlation. We all have opinions and they are never 100% perfect. There have been times my personal “opinion” has been proven wrong by Socrates. This is why I always try to make sure “opinion” is separates from a forecast.
How many times have we heard some food is bad for you and then they reverse it a decade later? The standard method of analysis is always trying to reduce everything to a single cause of action. That methodology is lethal to knowledge and the future. It blocks our advancement in every field of science like Global Warming. Let’s see, it has gotten warmer in the past 25 years so that must be because of cars. They start with that assumption and never test the data before 1850 because there were no cars then. Why bother? We know the cause is cars, they say. So look for data to prove the assumption.
This to me is absurd. You can also say everyone who has ever eaten a carrot had eventually died and that means carrots must be long-term deadly. It was assumed that illness was in the blood. So the logical conclusion was to bleed people. If they died, it was never because they took too much blood, but they did not bleed them soon enough.
I just am tired of beating my head against a brick wall. Society has to break and only then will we look to new dynamic interconnectivity that is the path to understanding. There are those in New York City who just cannot stand what I do. They refuse to consider there is a methodology at issue here and prefer to blame me the messenger claiming I have too much “influence” and that is why they are wrong. They would try to kill me if they could since they tried that one before but I survived. Why admit you may be wrong when you can blame someone else for your failures? That, unfortunately, infects a large part of humanity.
Going public is the only way to preserve this research and push it forward for posterity. I have not changed my mind. We were granted our business license in China. It took three years of investigation and that is by no means an easy accomplishment. So we now have the seal of approval from China and that will be the biggest market the other side of 2032. Now we are getting closer to going public
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Did AIG use the Black-Scholes Model and that is what created the crisis again in 2007?
WJ
ANSWER: No. It’s my understanding that AIG developed different models, they called a “Value-at-Risk Model,” (VaR) which used a binomial-expansion-technique to start valuing their positions. I believe the original model was developed at Moody’s. However, like the Black-Scholes Model, it too lacked depth. In model development, it is extremely complex.
Virtually every model created tends to be predominately flat with a minimum of dynamic variables lacking understanding of TIME. Then the testing period lacks the database reflecting all conditions. In the case of Black-Scholes, they back-tested only with data to 1971. If I created a model with only data from 2009 forward, then it would be biased to presume a bull market is normal in the stock market.
The Value at risk (VaR) model is a measure of the risk of investments. It estimates how much a set of investments might lose, given normal market conditions, in a set time period such as a day. VaR is typically used by firms and regulators in the financial industry to gauge the number of assets needed to cover possible losses. It obviously failed in 2007-2009 because once again it was not a “normal market condition” for it fails utterly to understand CONTAGION when sound assets are sold to raise cash for other assets that collapse. The assumption of the model is its own nemesis.
For example, if a portfolio of stocks has a one-day 5% VaR of $10 million, this actually means that there is a 5% probability that the portfolio will fall in value by more than $1o million over a one-day period if there is no trading. Therefore, a loss of $1o million or more on this portfolio would be expected on 1 day out of 20 days given a 5% probability. A loss which exceeds the VaR threshold is termed a “VaR breach“.
So you can see, such models are incapable of determining TIME and as a result, they will always fail during a CONTAGION that they cannot see coming.
This is why the bulk of portfolio models fails during a financial crisis. This is also why some of the top Institutional portfolios come to our firm because they have realized that only TIME determines the success of any model and making broad assumptions of probability have ALWAYS failed. If you cannot model TIME and CONTAGION, you will be wiped out during a crisis and VaR will fail just as Black-Sholes.
On August 21st, 2017, President Trump began a very familiar process toward Pakistan within the geopolitical strategy known to us as The Trump Doctrine: ‘the accurate assignment of responsibility’, by honestly calling out the historic nature of the relationship.
In a remarkable speech on Afghanistan policy, President Trump addressed the nation and stated the continued Pakistani support of the Taliban extremists was only impeding the quest for peace.
The Trump policy goal was not Pakistan eliminating the Taliban, but rather outlining how the Afghanistan solution begins with the Taliban entering negotiations with the Afghan government. Pakistan -supporting the Taliban- continues to undermine that goal.
With little change since August, today President Trump calls out Pakistan:
AUGUST 2017 […] “The next pillar of our new strategy is to change the approach in how to deal with Pakistan. We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban, and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.
“Pakistan has much to gain from partnering with our effort in Afghanistan. It has much to lose by continuing to harbor criminals and terrorists. In the past, Pakistan has been a valued partner. Our militaries have worked together against common enemies.
“The Pakistani people have suffered greatly from terrorism and extremism. We recognize those contributions and those sacrifices, but Pakistan has also sheltered the same organizations that try every single day to kill our people. We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars, at the same time they are housing the same terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change. And that will change immediately.
“No partnership can survive a country’s harboring of militants and terrorists who target U.S. service members and officials. It is time for Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace. (transcript link)
President Trump states truth boldly. If anything President Trump stated was not the truth the Trump Doctrine -placement of strategic ownership- would not work. However, the entire international community knows that Pakistan, including their intelligence service ISI, has a great deal of hidden sympathy toward Islamic extremists within Afghanistan.
Never was that reality more stark than when the international community realized that 9/11 terrorist Osama Bin Laden held refuge inside Pakistan for almost a decade. Within the governing systems inside Pakistan there is a large contingent of Taliban sympathy. This reality has been the 800lb gorilla amid public discussions of international national security for several years.
August 2017 was the first time a U.S. President called it out, publicly.
This is where those who follow Trump closely will note a familiar pattern emerging.
The Taliban in Afghanistan are to Pakistan, as the DPRK is to China.
Remember, the solution to the threat that is Kim Jong-un is to assign direct responsibility toward Beijing. In a similar approach, the solution toward eliminating the threat of extremist violence from the Taliban is to assign direct responsibility toward Pakistan. President Trump began that process in August.
However, those who have followed closely will note there’s additional references.
♦When the threat is Sunni Extremism, the problem was/is the Muslim Brotherhood and the enabling of Qatar. Trump assigned responsibility for solving that issue to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council. It is the GCC who are confronting Qatar, not the United States.
♦When the threat is Syria’s chemical weapon, the problem was/is the Assad regime and ISIS. Trump assigned responsibility for solving that issue to Russia; Russia initially refused to solve it, so Trump bombed the shit out of Assad – Russia/Assad took ownership, the chemical weapon use stopped; further action was not needed by the United States.
♦When the threat is DPRK’s nuclear weapons, the problem was/is Kim Jong-un and the enabling China. Trump assigned responsibility for solving that immediate threat to China. It is Beijing who can force Kim Jong-un to stand down, without war – Not the United States.
See the pattern? In each example President Trump assigns responsibility. However, the important element is the underlying ownership must be based entirely on truth. In each of the examples the truth was/is that Gulf States/Qatar, Assad/Russia, and China/Beijing were manipulating and enabling the problem behavior. By calling out that truth, each enabler was forced to take ownership and corrective action.
The same approach extends here with Afghanistan. However, the solution is not Pakistan eliminating the Taliban per se’; the solution lies in leveraging Pakistan to force the Taliban into negotiations with the legitimate Afghan government. Like the previous examples of Saudi Arabia and China, Trump has now assigned ownership of this objective to Pakistan.
“He is remembered for publicly stating that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth.”
Although he is indeed remembered in the West for ‘saying’ that, the truth is that phrase was a gross mis-translation of what he did say in Farsi. Just a simple lie. I don’t think you should be party to the perpetuation of a lie.
And, with Pahlevi, his ‘claim’ to the throne was problematic. His father was not an aristocrat and in fact was installed by the British. Real granular knowledge of history is useful, don’t you think?
REPLY: My piece on Iran does not support either side. I am fully aware that I am well read in Iran. The question was simply about the cycle of political change. That does not endorse the claim to the Throne under Mohammad Reza’s reign, marked the anniversary of 2,500 years of continuous Persian monarchy since the founding of the Achaemenid Empire by Cyrus the Great. That took place on the 12–16 of October back in 1971.
He revised the calendar making the benchmark the beginning of the First Persian Empire, measured from Cyrus the Great’s coronation. He introduced the White Revolution, which a series of economic, social and political reforms designed to transform Iran into a modern global power. He offended the religious conservatives by granting women suffrage.
I fully appreciate his claim to the throne is disputed and he was only the second of the House of Pahlavi and thus the conservatives dispute his heritage to the throne. That is not my concern. Like Trump, our model forecast the 2016 election back in 1985. Trump appeared and read the people’s discontent and beat 17 Republicans to their shock. It was not Trump the person, it was just being there at the right time. If it was not Trump, it would have been someone else. The cycle was turning – plain and simple.
There is a 26-year cycle that is quite dominant throughout Iranian history. There have been many revolutions that have often centered even on religion. The Sassanid Shâhs (Great Kings), 223/4-651 AD is a classic example. The Sassanids replaced the Hellenophile Parthian dynasty, with the program of deliberately reviving the Zoroastrian Achaemenid Persian Empire, aspiring to recover all the former provinces of the Achaemenids (Egypt, Syria, Anatolia). Zoroaster was the predecessor to Christianity and the source of the story of the Three Wise Men.
Zoroaster was a prophet whose teachings were the religious foundation of ancient Iranian-speaking peoples. This became the religion of Zoroastrianism, which is often considered to be the first world religion. It is still practiced by a tiny population. There are approximately 11,000 Zoroastrians who live in the United States, 6,000 in Canada, 5,000 in England, 2,700 in Australia and 2,200 in the Middle East. Mumbai, formerly known as Bombay, was actually the world capital of Zoroastrianism. The Sasanian Revolution was all about restoring the old religion. The 1979 Islamic Revolution was similar in overthrowing the Shah to reestatlish an Islamic State.
From that birth of the Sasanian Kingdom in 223/224BC, the 26-year cycle brings us precisely to 2017/2018 (cycle #69 from that revolution). Hence, I am looking at this less from a political standpoint of supporting either side in Iran, where we have a lot of readers I know, but from a purely cyclical viewpoint.
I have no interest in promoting any religion for that to me is a personal choice
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
Let us be clear on what the “insurance policy” was. The insurance policy was, in totality, the entire fraudulent Russian Conspiracy Narrative; and all of the accompanying –and subsequent– FBI and DOJ collaborative actions that were taken, under the auspices of an FBI counterintelligence operation, in order to generate an entirely false premise. The goal of using the “insurance policy” was to destroy, and possibly impeach, President Trump.
All of these FBI personnel moves are a preliminary outcomes of the still ongoing Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigation. All of this has been reported. None of these moves are speculative. However, this is just one side of the Trump operation, the FBI investigative Counterintelligence Division side.
The legal side of the Trump operation, stems from the National Security Division of the DOJ. A FISA application is submitted from the DOJ-NSD side for use by the FBI Counterintelligence team. That’s the side the current New York Times Papadopoulos story is intended to protect. CTH anticipated that maneuver was coming; that’s why we wrote an outline about the DOJ-NSD collaboration two days before the NYT silly defense article.
In October 2016, immediately after the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the FISA application, the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. During his exit John Carlin informed the FISA court the DOJ-NSD frequently provided false information to the court to gain FISA warrants – Read Here.
The New York Times never wrote about the admission by the Obama DOJ to the FISA court. The court itself declassified their opinion of the DOJ conduct, in May of 2017, and that’s the way the public discovered the 2016 admissions by the DOJ National Security Division.
New York Times Reporter – Maggie Haberman
WATCH THIS and remind yourself of what was openly visible at the time in 2016:
.
The 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation was surveillance on the Trump Campaign and was thinly disguised under the fraudulent auspices of a DOJ National Security Division FISA warrant; the justification was later sold as a defense of U.S. democracy from Russia, which permitted wiretaps, surveillance and the ammunition to build a false narrative.
…“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”…
The false ‘Russian Conspiracy’ narrative was the insurance policy. If Hillary Clinton won, the insurance policy would never have been used, Russia would never have been accused of interfering in the election, and all prior activity just disappears. It’s that simple.
♦Constructing the Insurance Policy – The specific responsibility of the DOJ-NSD involvement surrounds legal arguments, processing of FISA applications, and use of the legal system, to support the FBI counterintelligence operation with actionable legal tools against Trump. The DOJ National Security Division carried out that collaboration with the FBI.
Responding to a 2015 request by the DOJ Office of Inspector General, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told the internal watchdog they cannot investigate the National Security Division. That’s right, there was essentially no oversight on any activity happening inside the NSD.
In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
The Department of Justice’s own Inspector General (currently Michael Horowitz who opened a January 2017 investigation into the 2016 politicization of the FBI and DOJ) was not allowed to investigate anything that happened within the NSD branch of the Department of Justice until Jeff Sessions was confirmed.
The former head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, admitting their intentional misuse of the FISA court process is actual evidence of why Sally Yates kept the NSD operating without oversight.
Post election, the legal aides, career bureaucrats, investigators and agents within the entire ideological operation of the FBI and DOJ-NSD then transferred to the Robert Mueller investigation so they could keep a lid on any of their risk exposure and simultaneously maintain the entire false premise behind the Russian Collusion Narrative.
How did they get in the Mueller investigation? Through the assignment, advice and assistance of FBI Chief Legal Counsel, James Baker – who would be the point person assigning people to assist his long-time friend, Robert Mueller.
See? That’s where James Baker becomes exposed.
When the IG (Horowitz) exposed Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Bruce Ohr, immediate and critical eyes were on Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Why did Mueller hire them? At first no-one was paying attention to FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker. It was only after Baker was removed from his Chief FBI role that things added up.
Mueller’s entire Russia Conspiracy investigation was really just another way the players within the original scheme could keep a lid on the events in 2016 and still retain the insurance policy. That’s why many of the FBI/DOJ “small group”, the crew who cleared Hillary in the email investigation, were part of the Trump Operation, and later also assigned to the Mueller investigation. Controls were/are needed.
Inside Mueller’s crew, the “small group” essentially works to watch over what information the Trump officials or congress could possibly be discovering…. under the auspices of investigating ‘Muh Russia’ etc. If the “small group” comes across a risky trail being followed, they work to impede, block, delay or deflect anyone from that trail, including congress.
However, the back-story to the FISA warrant is the FBI and NSD collaboration. The back-story to the FISA warrant is the cornerstone to expose this entire charade. The back-story to the FISA warrant contains action by the FBI and the DOJ upper-management and leadership. The back-story to the FISA warrant outlines the conspiracy and the nature of the relationships amid all the conspirators.
Expose the FISA back-story and the entire ‘muh Russia’ conspiracy fraud, aka ‘the insurance policy‘, collapses under the weight of sunlight, becomes useless, and all of the co-conspirators are discovered.
That’s why the NYT was used to create chaff and countermeasures; to get people to take their eyes away from the FISA application and use thereof.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 