Posted originally on Feb 10, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
The UK Home Office is demanding that Apple provide the government backdoor access to users’ encrypted data. Not only are they interested in accessing data on British citizens, but the government has stated it needs access to ALL encrypted iCloud data worldwide on the premise of national security and public safety.
The Home Secretary’s office believes the U.K. Investigatory Powers Act of 2016 legally authorizes law enforcement to obtain communications data on the premise of collecting evidence, as the government has deemed everyone a potential threat. Governments do not want the people to have end-to-end encryption that they cannot access.
The Advanced Data Protection program launched by Apple in 2022 provides users with the ability to safely keep their data. Users must enable the service, but it prevents even Apple from having backdoor encryption keys. Edward Snowden warned that the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and NSA successfully hacked all iPhones, Androids, and Blackberry devices. The FBI in the United States tried to prevent Apple from launching this program during Trump’s first term, stating it prevented them from properly investigating crimes. The FBI also demanded that Apple provide it with backdoor access back in 2016 after the 2015 release of the iOS 9 that the government could not easily access.
US intelligence cited the San Bernadino mass shooting incident as an example of why the government must have access to user data. One of the shooters owned an iPhone 5C and the FBI and NSA claimed it could not access the device. The US government and Apple battled in court over the FBI’s insistence that Apple create “GovtOS” to override any encryption measures. The government attempted to use the All Writs Act to force Apple into compliance.
The legal battle came to a halt in March 2016 when the FBI stated it found a way to bypass Apple’s encryption. Former FBI Director James Comey confirmed that the government purchased a hacking tool from a third party but offered no details. The government no longer needed Apply to comply. By 2020, it was estimated that law enforcement used said tool to access over 2,000 devices. But Apple continued to improve its encryption measures since then.
Governments everywhere are becoming more authoritarian as sentiment changes and anti-government sentiment grows. Messaging devices, social media, and any platform where people can freely connect must be under government control. The UK is part of the Five Eyes (FVEY) alliance with the US, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. If one gains access to ALL user data, rest assured that the other four will also have access. Snowden warned the public of this back in 2013. There are programs such as TEMPORA that permit UK and US intelligence to intercept communications through undersea fiber-optic cables. There have been ongoing programs aimed at obtaining data access without the need for warrants or surveillance laws. Whether Apple or any tech company complies is not really of concern, as the government can and will find a way to spy on citizens worldwide.
Posted originally on Feb 10, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
The Washington Post reported Friday that the United Kingdom’s deep state has demanded that Apple create a back door for them to retrieve all the content any Apple userworldwide has uploaded to the cloud—what would be an unprecedented erosion of online privacy and civil liberties. This works because once the UK seizes your data, they can hand that to the Feds in the states, and your Constitutional rights are NOT violated because the US government did not illegally seize it without a warrant.
The American Revolution Was Over This Very Issue
And Starmer’s Government is Doing What King George III Did
I store NOTHING in the cloud – EVER!!!!! Why? Because the government can order them to turn over whatever they want without your knowledge. Since they merely store it, they turn it over without blinking an eye. They have NO CONSTITUTIONAL interest in whatever it might be. When they then create laws like they have on child pornography that the mere possession is a crime and they do not need to prove that you actually obtained it or from where, if they claim you had it in the cloud, that would be it. You do not even get to pack your bags or bring a toothbrush.
Under no circumstances ever store ANYTHING in the cloud, for you have no constitutional rights, and they can claim whatever they desire. They can put stud=ff in your account and send you to prison, saying it is yours and no judge will listen to you – EVER! The Washington Post reported that the British government’s undisclosed order was issued last month. It requires Apple to give officials blanket capability to view fully encrypted material. This means that Apple MUST assist British authorities on command. The Post noted that the access sought by the UK “has no known precedent in major democracies.”
The LEFT only cares about themselves, and if you dare to resist, you must be guilty. The Starmer government is destroying civilization, crumbling the very basic foundation of liberty. They want something – how dare you say no!!!!!!!!!!!!! The LEFT is ruthless, and this is how they destroy everything. Biden, when he was president, targeted guns with the end goal of disarming America entirely. He has stated: “No amendment to the Constitution is absolute.” The fundamental objective is to compel everyone to register every gun so they can enter your house without a warrant to seize your weapons.
The Fourth Amendment declares,
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
James Otis (1725-1783)
The entire American Revolution was born over illegal searches by the king. It is very sad that Biden and the Democrats have no respect for the Constitution whatsoever. John Adams, Second President, listened to the four-hour speech of the defense lawyer James Otis (1725-1783), who argued against the king’s Writs of Assistance in February 1761 that allowed the government to search whatever they suspected for any reason arbitrarily. History repeats. This is precisely what the Democrats are arguing before the Supreme Court to eliminate the Fourth Amendment. This is devastating to human rights and the very idea of a free society of “We the People.” It is a terrible day we fac,e and this is why I say republics are the worst form of government. Biden never said anything about these objectives. He gets people to vote for him on a false agenda, no different than a fund manager giving a false report claiming he made 300% last year when he really lost 50%. This is outright FRAUD!
Otis argued that the Writs of Assistance, which required no probable cause, placed “the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer.” This was in February 1761 in Boston, and the famous debate in which it occurred was perhaps the most prominent event, which inaugurated the resistance of the colonies to the oppressions of the mother country. “Then and there,” said John Adams, “then and there was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great Britain. Then and there, the child Independence was born.” History indeed repeats. The tyranny of the Biden Administration is unfolding, as was the case under King George III.
Here are a few excerpts from that famous speech of James Otis that so moved John Adams and inspired the birth of the American Revolution.
I will to my dying day oppose, with all the powers and faculties God has given me, all such instruments of slavery on the one hand and villainy on the other as this Writ of Assistance is. It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law, that ever was found in an English law-book…
The writ prayed for in this petition, being general, is illegal. It is a power that places the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer. I say I admit that special Writs of Assistance, to search special places, may be granted to certain persons on oath. But I deny that the writ now prayed for can be granted…
In the first place, the writ is universal, being directed “to all and singular justices, sheriffs, constables, and all other officers and subjects”; so that, in short, it is directed to every subject in the King’s dominions. Everyone with this writ may be a tyrant; if this commission be legal, a tyrant in a legal manner, also, may control, imprison, or murder any one within the realm. In the next place, it is perpetual; there is no return. A man is accountable to no person for his doings. Every man may reign secure in his petty tyranny, and spread terror and desolation around him, until the trump of the Archangel shall excite different emotions in his soul. In the third place, a person with this writ, in the daytime, may enter all houses, shops, etc., at will, and command all to assist him. Fourthly, by this writ not only deputies, etc., but even their menial servants, are allowed to lord it over us…
One of the most essential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one’s house. A man’s house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his castle. This writ, if it should be declared legal, would totally annihilate this privilege. Custom-house officers may enter our houses when they please; we are commanded to permit their entry. Their menial servants may enter, may break locks, bars, and everything in their way; and whether they break through malice or revenge, no man, no court can inquire. Bare suspicion without oath is sufficient.
Let me make something VERY clear. To enter your home without a warrant means they do not have to claim there is probable cause that you even have anything. What Starmer has decreed is precisely what started the American Revolution. The LEFT is always ruthless, for they constantly claim they are the victims of anyone who has more than they do,
Posted originally on Feb 7, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
China is hitting back with 15% tariffs on US coal. America sent 11.6 million tons of coal to China, with 6.46% of all US coal imports flowing into China. Climate zealots are cheering the move, and those on the far left are pleased that this will disproportionately hurt red states.
The majority of the coal exported to China from the US came from West Virgina (6 million tons). West Virginia generated 14% of all coal production in the nation, but sends a larger share to China. Wyoming is the leading coal producing state, accounting for 41.2% of production. Pennsylvania accounts for 6.7%, and Illinois, while not a red state, generated 6.3%. Kentucky is another mass producer, accounting for 5% of all US coal.
Could China be targeting red states specifically? Perhaps. Canada outright intended to do so to hurt Trump’s supporters. China does not heavily rely on the US for coal as it purchases most of its coal from Australia, Indonesia, Russia, and Mongolia. Australia is the world’s leading supplier of coal coming in at 33.7%, while America only produces about 7%.
The largest importer of US coal is none other than India. India has been the main middleman in these sanctions and tariff battles from Russia to China. India received 28.2 mnth in the first 11 months of 2024, marking an 8% annual increase. China upped their purchases of coal from India by 54% last year on an annual basis.
These tariffs and sanctions are completely counterproductive. China and the US were strong trade partners and, more important than goods, the US could rely on China to buy its debt. Those days are long gone as the two have become economic enemies.
Posted originally on Feb 7, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
In the latest piece of common sense legislation, Donald Trump signed the “No Men in Women’s Sports” executive order in what should be hailed as a victory for women’s rights. Naturally, the left is not cheering this move as a milestone for female athletes who have been forced to compete with biological males. “The war on women’s sports is over,” the president declared to the nation.
The Biden Administration attempted to dismantle Title IX and force women to compete with biological males who began to dominate them in every field.
Men have 10X the testosterone of women. Those who are taking estrogen still have an advantage. A male athlete has more muscle mass than a female athlete, allowing them to have a higher capacity for hypertrophy. Men have a higher basal metabolic rate as well, allowing them to lose weight quicker and that muscle mass to body weight ratio enables them to be faster on their feet. Male athletes have 4% to 12% body fat, compared to female athletes, who have 12% to 23%. Women have smaller hearts (physically) than men, and their hearts must pump faster during exercise. Women also have fewer red blood cells than men, enabling them to absorb oxygen at a higher rate. Men are larger overall, with wider chests and longer limbs. Male athletes clearly have an advantage, which is why no one expected women to compete against men until the trans agenda exploded in our faces.
Women simply cannot compete against men. We have seen boxing matches even where biological men brutally beat women and claimed a victory. We have seen biological males compete at the bottom of their sport only to reach the top when competing as women. These biological men have shattered records and taken over women’s sports. Female athletes have been prohibited from speaking out or voicing concerns for fear of being canceled by the woke mob. There were no checks and balances or consideration for WOMEN athletes.
The Senate must still vote on the Protection of Women and Girls Sports Act to prevent biological males from competing against young girls in school. This is outright dangerous and shameful.
Women exist! We finally live under an administration that permits the existence of WOMEN. XX or XY – there should be no controversy over the truth.
Posted originally on Feb 7, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
President Javier Milei of Argentina was the first world leader to speak out against the globalist agenda. Milei took the stage of Davos last year to explain the true cost of socialism. He showed by example how swiftly a nation in economic despair could recover by diminishing the public sector, embracing free trade, and permitting the business cycle to operate without blocks. Milei has now announced that Argentina will leave the World Health Organization.
Let us not forget that the World Health Organization (WHO) was seen as the Vatican of public health a few short years ago when we enabled it act as a leader in the pandemic response. Milei declared that the WHO caused significant economic damage by encouraging “endless quarantines,” and is encouraging other world leaders to rethink their place in the organization. “It is urgent to rethink from the international community why supranational organizations exist, funded by all, that do not meet the objectives for which they were created, engage in international politics, and seek to impose themselves above member countries,” his official press release states.
Argentina does not receive funding from the WHO. Yet, they were helping to fund the $6.9 billion agency and paid out between $8 million and $9 million annually. Argentina’s exit has far less of an impact than America’s. The money is less of a factor than the CONTROL that the WHO, and its sole leading philanthropist donor, has over members.
The United Nations and WHO are global conglomerates composed of unelected authoritarians who want to push a single agenda throughout the world. They use the premise of health and public safety to enact universal rules everyone must abide by. The agency has even declared the need for a global tax to help their causes. Milei stated that leaving the who “reaffirms our path towards a country with sovereignty also in health matters.”
Will other nations wake up? Italy’s deputy prime minister, Matteo Salvini, proposed leaving the WHO, but President Giorgia Meloni has yet to comment. Perhaps when more information comes out about the true nature of COVID-19 and the accompanying regulations, other nations will realize that the WHO serves no purpose but to meddle in democracy on the premise of health.
Posted originally on Feb 6, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
Distributive bargaining is a competitive negotiation approach where one party aims to maximize its share from a limited pool of resources. This strategy is often called zero-sum negotiation, as the total amount of resources available remains constant. Some call this the win-lose method, as compromise is not the goal. David Honig, an attorney and adjunct professor at Indiana University, has spoken out about distributive bargaining and his belief that this is Donald Trump’s preferred negotiation style.
While I do not believe Trump is ill-prepared for the job at hand, I do believe his past experience in business has played a role in the viewpoint that America loses if there is a compromise. Integrative bargaining is a negotiation strategy that focuses on creating win-win situations where all parties feel that they are gaining something of value.
When world leaders negotiate trade agreements, international treaties, or economic policies, integrative bargaining is crucial because it encourages cooperation rather than competition. Healthy competition is what we want to see. Everyone wants a leader who fights for domestic interests first. But it is important to realize that international interests often spill over to the domestic side when we are speaking of economic matters. We cannot view the economy through purely domestic lenses.
Economies are highly interconnected through global supply chains, international trade, and cross-border investments. Disrupting these connections can and will cause significant economic instability. One cannot use distributive bargaining in economic matters since everything is connected. Tariffs on Mexico and Canada will result in an initial loss for those nations that will spread to America and elsewhere.
Below is Professor Honig’s interpretation that has been circulating online:
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University – Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.
Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”
Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.
The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.
The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.
One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.
There isn’t another Canada.
So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.
Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM – HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.
Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.
For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.
Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.
From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”
Posted originally on Feb 6, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
Three years into the war and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has finally stated he is willing to TALK to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Both Putin and Zelensky would like Trump to assist in negotiating a peace deal. Zelensky firmly said “at the negotiation table there must be the United States, Europe, Ukraine and Russia.” But that did not go well for Russia last time.
The last time European leaders sat down to mitigate Russia-Ukraine relations, they presented Moscow with the false Minsk Agreement. As German Chancellor Angela Merkel later revealed, the agreement was a complete hoax intended to buy time for Ukraine to build up its military. Putin may distrust Europe but has held out hope that Donald Trump could present a solution.
“Putin is ready. We are waiting for signals (from Washington). Everyone is ready. It is difficult to read the coffee grounds here. As soon as there is something, if there is something, we will inform you,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said weeks after Trump was elected. Putin has been asking to speak with Zelensky for many years, long before the war began. He may have held out some hope for discussions with Trump, but the Russian leader believes Zelensky’s recent statements are “empty words.” In fact, Putin no longer wants to speak with Zelensky as he does not consider him the official ruler of Ukraine. Zelensky declared himself the ruler of Ukraine without hosting a proper election, citing the war as the reason he must retain power.
Zelensky also signed a decree in 2022 that said he would not speak with Putin directly. It does not give much confidence when a leader refuses to sit down and speak with a foe. Zelensky is afraid to speak with Putin directly. Putin has been deeply engaged in politics for a lifetime while Zelensky is trained comedian and actor. He is not qualified to hold a discussion on his own.
“We will be speaking with Putin. Don’t we make too many compromises? Even the conversation with Putin is already a compromise,” Zelensky said. “Nobody knows how this conversation will start and how it will end. Nobody knows, but we believe that President Trump wants to succeed in this situation.”
Neither party has said that they would end the war without massive compromises. Ukraine is now seeking nuclear arms from the West as an alternative to NATO membership. Putin has been quite clear about what he wants. It is more likely than not that Zelensky became wrapped up in the moment of a live interview but likely does not have true intentions to negotiate peace.
Posted originally on Feb 6, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
President Trump announced that the US will be taking over the Gaza strip after a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump envisions transforming Gaza into an international economic hub for the Middle East. “He sees a different future for that piece of land,” Netanyahu said. “I envision the world people living there, the world’s people. You’ll make that into an international unbelievable place. I think the potential in the Gaza strip is unbelievable,” and it could be “the riviera of the Middle East,” Trump said.
As for the nearly 2 million inhabitants, well, they have been asked to leave. Gaza is not a place for people to be living. The only reason they want to go back, and I believe this strongly, is they have no alternative. What’s the alternative? Go where? If they had an alternative, they’d much rather not go back to Gaza and live in a beautiful alternative that’s safe,” he said. Arab nations have already stated that they will not accept Palestinians, but Trump said he plans to open negotiations with the likes of Egypt, Jordan, and other nearby nations.
Discussions of redeveloping Gaza began long before the war. Trump is a notorious real estate mogul. He discussed plans for redeveloping portions of Palestine in his 2020 peace plan, backed by his Jewish son-in-law and real estate developer Jared Kushner.
Real estate developers have been eyeing Gaza and have proposed numerous construction projects for Gaza. Harey Zahav, an Israeli real estate firm, created blueprints for luxury settlements along the West Bank. The company envisions beachfront homes build upon demolished land. Some say that the company was trolling but there indeed are now plans to turn this strip of land into the next Dubai. “You build really good quality housing, like a beautiful town, like some place where they can live and not die, because Gaza is a guarantee that they’re going to end up dying,” Trump told reporters.
“We consider it a recipe for creating chaos and tension in the region,” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told the press. “Our people in the Gaza Strip will not allow these plans to pass, and what is required is to end the occupation and aggression against our people, not expel them from their land.” A senior Palestinian official wrote to Senator of State Marco Rubio, pleasing that his people do not want to leave their land. Rather, the people want to “live in their land and help rebuild it.”
As the Panama Canal has recently come under fire, let us not forget the Ben Gurion Canal Project. The US and Israel have been discussing plans to build a canal to rival the Suez Canal for over 50 years. The West can no longer count on the Suez Canal controlled by Egypt as tensions continue to rise with Egypt supporting Russia in its war. Yet, 20% of ALL world trade moved through the canal. The Ben Gurion Canal Project, as indicated by the declassified documents, would create an Israeli Canal to rival the Suez.
The document notes that 130 of the 160 miles dedicated to the canal are “virtually unpopulated desert wasteland,” but the primary issue would be relocating those from the Gaza Strip. “Another problem which has not been considered is that of political feasibility, as it is likely that the Arab countries surrounding Israel would object strongly to the construction of such a canal,” the declassified papers show. So, US intelligence has been looking to claim Gaza for some time now. It certainly did not begin with Trump.
Gaza must be annexed before it can be redeveloped. Trump foresees the US in a “long-term ownership position.” Hours earlier, Trump warned that Iran will be obliterated if it attempts to assassinate him. Saudi Arabia came out and said it will not establish relations with Israel without the presence of a Palestinian state. There is bipartisan distaste in the US for sending American troops back to the Middle East. No nation in the Middle East, aside from Israel, wants to see American presence in the region and there is no way that the US can simply walk in and take over a foreign land without bloodshed
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 