The final #yegarena post

Well it looks like this may be the day that Edmonton's fancy shmancy arena gets pushed through. Thus I've decided that this will be the last arena post I ever write forever (who could have guessed it would have gone on this long?). The deal itself is ugly, patchy, and the search for money has closely resembled what someone may have to endure putting all the pennies together to ensure it adds up to their monthly rent.

It's now 2013 and I'm just going to say it flat out, as there is more than enough supporting evidence, that while it may appear as though the city's debt capacity can handle this project today this is not so certain for tomorrow. Of course by tomorrow I mean figuratively, sometime in the near-medium time future, certainly much sooner than the expiry of our 30 year payment plan.

First let's talk about the big surprise: $15M fat ones from uncle Katz. Oh boy! Err.. wait, just $15M? it's taken you THIS long to come up with some private money? What about all that whining about how long the deal was taking to complete and more importantly all of the whining about the increased cost of the future? I wonder how many paid hours city council has had to put into figuring exactly what it is you plan to do next between scrounging the debt-couch for money? The money the city put in for land? $15M big ones, that's simply amazing.

The other big development? Instead of leveraging the MSI fund which isn't going to exist for the duration of our loan(s) we're going to leverage the CLR money from developments which don't yet exist, have no profit projections, don't know how expensive the area is going to be nor whether people will be able to afford their establishment. Because arenas don't crap out new people or any sort of meaningful production (they are a service, for consumption) all of the money being predicted for the downtown area will either come from somewhere else or won't exist at all.

Long-term outlook hasn't changed

My long-term economic outlook hasn't changed and so far I think I've been pretty accurate. France "re-entered" recession today (as though any of us ever actually left it). To be quite blunt: Canada, Alberta, and the City of Edmonton are all over-estimating their debt capacity as it is still being based on assumptions that were established as normal before the collapse of 2008 particularly to do with rates of growth. We're basing all of the assumptions around this project on ideological economic theory; theory which under the rules of today no longer applies. There is a reason why major economists and political figures are having trouble estimating the future. We're going to regret this, apparently the vote just passed: 10-3.

In other news we may be supporting a covert war of aggression under false pretense. So.. ya know, there's that.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.

UPDATE-2: Trapped in thought: The Jim Stone story

We talk a lot here about the group-think and cognitive dissonance the status-quo requires but rarely do I cover the same about the other side, the "conspiracy theorist" side.

HEY! Before, you say it I know what you're all about to say, what about this article? What I'm going to be talking about here in this post is not "conspiracy theories" themselves but rather the conspiracy theorists. There are tons of conspiracy theories, if there weren't we wouldn't need "conspiracy" as a crime. They're real, I don't think anyone who reads this blog is going to deny that, but that doesn't mean that they're always real and it doesn't mean that even if the conspiracy as a whole is largely correct that they have the actual details correct.

For instance, I differ from "9/11 Truthers" in that I don't give a fuck whether the towers were brought down by airplanes or explosives, have any of you ever asked why that has to be necessary to have a conspiracy around 9/11? As Mike Ruppert says in his Truth and Lies of 9/11, that's speculation, when there are plenty of facts surrounding the ordeal. We're not going into these here, that's not the point of this post, what I think is important though is that conspiracy theorists get so caught up in the narrative pushed that itself becomes a conspiracy to keep it going.

When I say it needs a conspiracy to keep it going, I mean it. This fellow I discovered yesterday by the name of Jim Stone provides a clear example.

Jim Stone is still convinced that the explosions in Syria were a nuke. Of course, when I had done my post on Syria, I had published it JUST HOURS after I became aware of that video of the attack late at night and was disturbed by it so stayed up all night trying to get people to look at it and tell me. It's now four days later, on top of the expert analysis provided by Michael of the explosion video in question there are also plenty of video of plainclothes people sifting through the rubble, etc. NO NUKE! (UPDATE: Gordon Duff's video has now re-raised the question and I have a lead on soil samples, see UPDATE-6 on Syria) Right? Not for Jim Stone...

Jim Stone now alleges that a cover-up is underway and naturally me ( a guy who hates blogging and is a professional programmer ) is in on it (see Update-5 from my post on Syria).

Here's the best part though, I went to his soapbox forum to try to clear up the story, and do you know what he did? He deleted my post and then made up a story about me! Looking through his "forum" (at budgetcamerareview.com ???) you see plenty of references to "the shill". Watch what I'm going to do here, you'll like this.

Jim Stone's "shill", is no different from the political "terrorist". This guy uses the EXACT same tactics as the "elites" he's "fighting" (and taking donations for, of course). He's built up the same sort of invisible, "they're everywhere" enemy while making arbitrary announcements about the "attacks" (which no one can ever verify because he disposes of all evidence of the "attack" details). A "shill storm". His whole story about how my blog was hacked by shills, etc, etc is not unlike the U.S.'s own "Bin Laden's in the ocean, trust us" crap.

He even has his loyal members acting as the brownshirts, seeking out contrary views and eliminating them. You see, he can accomplish this for the same reasons governments can continue pushing the boundaries of law & order towards terrorism by claiming he's constantly under attack. He uses this also for donations by claiming that "hacks" have had him lose his equipment.

He has his members so sold on the fact that Jim Stone is so heroic (yes, there are many references amongst his work of himself as heroic, for a social parallel think western 'freedom' which the 'terrorists hate') and ground-breaking that governments have sent "shills" 24/7 to disrupt the distribution of his "information", which effectively destroys any real information not pre-approved by Jim Stone. Again, similar to how to "protect freedom" we must destroy it because of terrorists, in Jim Stone's world information must be destroyed to protect the real information from shills.

The moral of the story here is, conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists are two different beasts. Have I ever asked for money? Been dishonest? When I said 'A lockdown in the U.S. appears imminent', was I wrong? Seriously, what are the odds of just guessing that an unprecedented event would happen? I'm not boasting my ego here, I'm just trying to show there's a difference between blind conspiracy faith and using reasonable evidence to build a story, but you have to consider ALL INFORMATION!

This site isn't about conspiracy theories, it's about critical thinking wherever that takes us. Wherever it takes us, I'd rather be proven rightly wrong than have people blindly believe I'm wrongly right.

Update-1

Of course if I write about someone directly I always ensure they're aware of it. Jim Stone has declined to come here himself however, he did send me this email in response to me notifying him of the story:

On May 9, 2013 10:31 PM, <james@jimstonefreelance.com> wrote:

We will see how many hits that gets, I am keeping track.

When you establish an active community of people and your rating states that your web site visitors are age 40-50 males who are college educated, then you will have room for comment, for now I see a phoney blogger page set up by someone who probably works for one govern[m]ent or another,

this ALWAYS happens when I NAIL IT,

Thanks for the confirmation - why would you care if I was right or not if you had nothing to lose by me being wrong?

I am not so thin skinned, please go burn a tinfoil hat and liberate your mind like a good little shill,

Yours truly,

Jim Stone

Oh Jim, I don't care about your silly theories, and like I said I'm happy with my small community here. I care that you decided the correct thing to do in response to being challenged on your beliefs was invent a story about me.

This is Richard, government agent, signing off!

Update-2

Jim Stone now believes he is under "direct physical threat" because he's posted the moment of criticality and "broke" the story. Here is proof that the only searches blogger was recording at the time from people were about nukes on Syria. Note this tweet was on May 6th. Here is proof that I also posted it, again, note the date. You'll notice that my post on Syria is dated the 5th!

admin 5:54PM

This is spot on, and is why I deleted that thread you mentioned, if we are going to overcome the monster we have to stay focused. And I have to agree, Innadiated and his other names (the one who set up the blog) is a shill so high in his expertise that he is beyond professional, he could be one of the best, if not the best one out there. There is no doubt that because this site broke the nuke story and posted the moment of criticality and did not back down, on top of it being a relatively large site (with over 2 million hits to the main site and this forum combined just through may 10 this month) they would want to do everything they can to destroy this forum.

And by the way, I have not mentioned it much, but some really flaky things are going on with regard to the nuke story, including threats against this web site, damage to hardware, and attempts to deface this site all of which failed. Ok, I am going to cut to the chase here -

I have a very good reason to believe (that goes beyond what I posted above) that I am under direct physical threat at this time SO, FOR THE RECORD:

1. I am not sick and have ABSOLUTELY no health issues at all, not even a sore toe. My condition is athletic though I do have a (slight , very slight) tummy, and I have no pains or sickness ANYWHERE. So I am not going to die from a health related issue.

2. I am not suicidal in any way whatsoever and have a large network of friends here now that like me very much.

3. This web site, all backups as well, are not behind on anything or in any danger of being shut down for any reason other than direct force

4. I am not sick of doing this, though I wish I did not have to. But as long as there is filth to clean, I intend to clean it.

5. I am extremely careful with traffic and won´t get run over unless someone drives on the sidewalk

6. My neighborhood is safe, there is zero drug or gang activity here, so I won´t get shot being robbed or get caught in any crossfire.

7. There is no extemperaneous reason for me to vanish or for the site to go offline whatsoever. ALL CLEAR, unless I get bumped by the Jewish community or one of their paid goons over stating things AS THEY ARE and not backing down. I have seen WAY TOO MANY PLANE CRASHES AND SUICIDES LATELY, and there is absolutely no reason for me to reach a similar fate outside of direct intent by those who would wish to shut me down.

The severe shillage on this forum proves beyond all doubt that WE hit the nail on the head. It was not just me, I depend upon everyone's work here to help push things forward and help uncover things I missed, and for that I can state that there could not possibly be a better group of people who can get to the bottom of things on the web than this forum, you have all made it an information gold mine,

thank you.

Of course, Jim Stone is under no "physical threat" from me unless he doesn't like my words slapping him across the face. This was in response to:

In a forum like this one where the very foundation is based on critical and analytical thinking, it is critical that the trolls and shills prevent this in any way they can.

Here's why:

When a person is thinking critically, they are using and developing the area of their brains that allow for that type of thinking. The more you think this way, the more refined and astute that ara of the brain becomes. And in a world where critical thinking is the enemy of the control structure of the elites, they and their minions will do anything to make sure the critical thinking portion of the brain gets as little use as possible.

When a troll injects religion into the forum, they bring the reader's brain out of critical thinking mode and into reflective, belief or creative mode. Now that the brain is in this mode, it's nearly incapable of the critical thinking part because it's busy elsewhere.

Slinging personal insults puts the brain into defensive emotional mode where critical thought is overpowered with emotion.

Calling things into doubt puts the brain into cognitive dissonance mode where the reader struggles with him/her self.

Trying to suck the reader or target into an argument by challenging them to a dispute or moving them into an adversarial stance means the person is in competitive mode rather than critical thinking mode.

Just about anything that pulls the reader into any other mode of thinking can be used in the same way.

The above methods of thinking obviously serve their own purposes, but the key to knowing when someone is trying to use these natural emotions and responses is, well, one is to look at the nature of the purpose of this forum. Is it a religious forum? Is it a place to argue? Is the shill trying to draw your attention away from the purpose of this forum in any way?

If so, they're using subtle and highly refined forms of mind control to keep you from developing that critical thinking part of your brain by keeping it busy with other stuff.

We're all human here and we all have beliefs and emotions. Please don't let shills use this forum to draw those out of you here.

Edited to add: The experience I just had here with a troll trying to suck me into a debate is the perfect example. He used everything from trying to insult my intelligence, to personal attacks, to calling me out directly in the thread title to saying I was Jim's b**ch. He tried everything, including using the same words I used in other posts to try and suck me in with familiarity but I just kept deleting his crap because I recognized it as him targeting me because he sees me as a prominent or influential member here and he tried to sway me or get me to loose it. I simply did what I'm committed to doing here - keeping this place as troll and shill free as possible while contributing as much as I can. Hence, this post.

I've edited the paragraph above a number of times to add things. So if you see changes it's me doing it and not the holonet :)

Isn't that cute?

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.

RE: Fuel Freedom, Ending our oil addiction

A video was sent to me by an organization 'Fuel Freedom' which seems like a worthy initiative to break the hold on the oil monopoly. However, in the interest of that actually being successful I have some points I'd like to add, and a couple places I take issue with. Oil is particularly ingrained in our society and the complex after effects of any major change in our energy situation should be discussed thoroughly I think.

First, check out the video for yourself.

 

I like that they cover peak oil, although without calling it peak oil. I think what's important to keep in mind though is it's not just peak oil, it's peak everything.

 

For this reason I don't think that stopping at fuel is enough, let me explain.

 

Oil isn't just a fuel, it's pretty well in everything. For instance, in the video garbage is talked about as being a possible replacement as the United States has a lot of it, which it does, unfortunately that garbage is itself mostly produced with oil. It's not really an alternative, it might work to help with any transitory attempt but investing in significant long-term infrastructure (which itself requires oil to build) so that we can turn garbage into oil doesn't make a lot of sense in the long run if the ultimate goal is to break the oil addiction. The bottom-line of this is if the oil addiction is successfully broken then it is axiomatic that the amount of garbage will reduce as consumption of oil-based products also needs to reduce. The further we got away from oil, the less "fuel" there would be available, only compounding the effect.

 

Another problem with focusing on fuel purely is that it ignores the increasing costs of the infrastructure that make that fuel useful. This year my city had a major problem with potholes, the roads are falling apart, and are getting ever more expensive to maintain. The manufacturing of roads and cars themselves involves incredible amounts of fuel. Personal transport amongst sprawling cities (encouraged by housing starts which are needed to keep the loan based GDP flowing) add to the strain. We can't just be smarter about the type of fuel we use, we must be smarter about how much we consume so living in that suburb miles from work isn't all that great.

 

The video makes a great call though by saying the base price of oil is $80 which is required (and manipulated) to keep oil production flowing. They are correct, if oil price drops below $80 for any significant amount of time production will stop. You'll all remember I made the same call last year. What I don't think they are accounting for however is the subsidy that oil itself plays towards the alternative (correct term is derivative) energies. The reason is that the infrastructure necessary to implement them itself relies on oil thus the $50 price given for these alternative energies is not accounting for the fact that the energy currently being provided by oil which is of much higher quality than any of the other energy listed is helping to reduce the price of the derivatives however the moment any significant swing moves towards those derivatives the stability of the oil production will be thrown out of whack thus hurting the financial viability of any derivative. The worst part being that if the price of oil collapses which it would inevitably do after the initial spike the incentive would be once again to use oil. Perpetuating the cycle. You'll all remember we covered this before also.

 

The biggest issue here is we're not just addicted to oil, we're addicted to cheap money and growth and we won't be able to address the fuel addiction so long as burning those fossil fuels are needed to pay off banker debts and "maintain growth". Of course, Chris Martenson describes all of this best:

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.

The coming generational fiscal cliff

In the latest example of the pre-2008 economic fumes masquerading as growth the shape of what depleting credit looks like is beginning to form, and I don't think it's going to be pretty.

Boomers feeling financial strain of 'boomrang' kids: survey

This topic has been a recurring theme on this blog but in combination with the temporary foreign worker issue with whom the younger generations are competing for work it's about to become very visible. Yes, there's the pension cliff, there's the issue with the flood of retiring boomers, rising health care costs, etc. We all know about that, but when you add up student loans, the increase in fees for students, the massive public debts being put on their backs, the no-interest - high fee bank accounts they have to use, the inability to build real assets, who exactly do you think will be paying for all of the boomer problems?

The youth are screwed six-ways from Sunday today, otherwise the Boomers wouldn't continue having to support them. The boomers in their time collected a lot of wealth and that wealth may for the moment be seeing the younger generations along but it can't last forever.

This presents an even larger problem than I think many people are considering. Today much of Canada's growth resides upon the overpriced housing market and consumer spending and I think because much of the younger generation's costs and spending are subsidized by the older generation we are underestimating the drop off in spending that is going to occur when those subsidies are no longer available, and even worse there will never be any subsidies for the up and coming generation.

Let's not act dumb about where these increased costs have come from, the generation running the show today, privatizing all of the assets that were public for them, speculating in an electronic market at high-frequency speeds which never existed when they used investment to gain their wealth. The reason you're having to pay for your children's lives is really simple, you took too much to begin with and you're continuing to take too much today. Who is in government supporting the temporary foreign workers that our generation competes with? Baby Boomers. Who are at the top of the largest corporations utilizing such workers? Baby Boomers. Who holds the majority of shares in those companies? Baby Boomers. Who has the assets and resources to influence politics? Baby Boomers. Who has the most to gain from low interest rates? Baby Boomers. Who is responsible for the collapse of 2008 in the first place? Boomers. You're in control Boomers and look what you've done with it.

It all probably wouldn't bother me so much if Boomer's didn't then go on and on about how irresponsible and lazy and yada yada the younger generation is, as if their fraudulent debt schemes are "hard work", while pumping more and more of their money into crap like Hollywood and never taking responsibility for the culture they built. This is your culture Boomers, bask in it.

Want to help our generation out? Stop co-signing for loans and start lobbying for a higher interest rate so we can finally save a penny (or is that a nickel now in our worthless currency?). Fight for policies which benefit our economy, not your economy, not your pensions. There won't be any money for your pensions for one simple reason: You took it all already.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.

UPDATE-21: Did Israel just nuke Syria?

(Now that I am no longer a top result on Google I am returning the original post, updates 1 and 2)

Notice the flash which fills the entire scene at 0:21.

 

Update-1

For comparison, here is a recreation of Hiroshima. Keep in mind that technology has advanced significantly since these first two nukes were used, now capable of smaller and more precise targeting (tactical nuke).

 

 

Notice the bright flash, the resulting explosion and mushroom cloud, and the shockwave. There have also been reports (either from Israel or Syria, not sure) that the "ammunition used was unconventional which may have included depleted uranium".

Update-2

Iran is now claiming Israel used depleted uranium.

Update-3

I am doing something I've never done before and re-writing my entire post on the Syria explosion, without providing the original. Why? You might be asking.

This blog doesn't have a large audience, and I'm really happy with that. Occasionally, when I come across something puzzling in which my Google searches are coming up with crap, or I simply feel as though I don't know enough about what it is I will ask on my blog. For instance, I never did get an answer on what those weird sounds were...

I started asking about Syria because I came across that video and had read a few scattered reports of "nukes" and there was very little information available. I felt it was important enough that it deserved an answer, so I posted it, expecting the same thing to happen which happened every time I've done something similar, it gets passed around a bit and dies off.

Well, it seems lots of people are asking, and very few are answering and the spike in traffic to this blog has been.. unexpected, as a result. I've changed the title and tried to make the content a little less relevant of this post so I hopefully start getting filtered out of the Google searches as pretty well everyone seems to be ending up here.

Now, let's get down and dirty, did Israel nuke Syria? In the words of one of my followers who has extensive background in the area, Michael:

Richard, in response to you request for a review of the video. I just finished typing for 20 minutes and hit preview button and lost everything.

I'm not going to start all over again so here's a recap:

a. not a nuclear device;

b. either air/fuel devise 80% probability. Note event appears to be above ground, or direct hit on munitions storage area. Sparks in explosive cloud suggest hot metal, as in ground event. Or it could be a combination of the two;

c. we know source of Israels fissionable material and source can be traced back to its origin;

d. notwithstanding nuclear fall out stretching out hundreds of miles, a nuclear devise leaves a very large traceable foot print; and finally d. you must ask yourself what the risk are to Israels economy should it be discovered they attack another nation with nuclear weapon. Would they be willing to have more than half the world put a trade embargo on them? Would they be willing to loose the support of their current friends?

Bottom line, the probability of this event being nuclear is very close to zero.

I hate Blogger's comment boxes. Before I thought of asking Michael (sometimes I forget things) I had put out a request to Jesse Columbo for his opinion or to see if he could get an opinion. Several informed tweeters replied with nearly identical information as Michael's.

So I think we can safely say the answer is no. Hopefully you all understand why I had to ask.

Update-4 (Situation updates resume at Update-6)

Seems a few people believe I changed my post not to get out of Google searches but rather to "cover up" the event. I assure you that's not the case and that I have good reason to not want attention.

Update-5

Ok, now this is just ridiculous. Check this out:

admin 3:06PM

This particular idiot (innadiated [Editor's note: that's me]) had the audacity to link to a censored blogger account, that really was set up by an explosives expert WHO ORIGINALLY SAID IT WAS A NUKE.

No, I've provided the analysis of an explosive's expert. I am not such an expert. I also never said it was absolutely a nuke. I showed the video, the aspect I believed was reminiscent of a nuclear blast, and then put the question out there for all to answer. On top of pursuing expert opinion privately. When initially linking my blogs on third party sites I always used present tense terms, such as "for the moment I believe it's a nuclear explosion". I was never sold and convinced of that, it didn't make sense, which is why I wanted a solid answer.

But his post was hacked to say it was a fuel air MOAB.

Nothing has been hacked.

But the comments below were nothing but ridicule for the weapons expert saying it was a nuke.

There were only two comments by other people, and Michaels. None of them were ridiculing except the first although I believe that was an honest mistake of him thinking I was trying to say it was a nuke rather than trying to get an informed opinion. Nobody has ridiculed Michael, the explosives expert.

THEREFORE, a weapons expert said it was a nuke, got shilled for it, had his original post replaced with Moab bullshit, and the shill comments below were intact, ridiculing him for saying it was a nuke.

ENTER INNADIATED, who then linked the bullshit moab report, claimed to be in contact with this weapons expert, and then proceeded to push the Moab B.S. line.

I am Innadiated, it's my report. What may be extra funny about this is it's very likely he is talking about my own comments trying to find youtube videos of devices with similar capability. Ridiculing myself?

SO, now, we know how they are going to shill this, that they will flatulently lie, and you cannot trust anything. This alone says IT WAS NOT A MOAB.

Furthermore, a Moab could not have filled even the zoomed in frame from 3.8 kilometers away with even a yellow flame, Moabs ARE NOT FING WHITE WHEN THEY GO OFF, THEY ARE ORANGE YELLOW. They won't even clip the sky to white let alone clip the ground and even the shadows to white, and at that from 3.8 KM away?. There were plenty of bombs going off on the hillside nearby before the nuke went off, and all they do is flash a tiny fraction of the frame immediately where they are, not even close to maxing the sensor. We have all seen bomb videos, and NOTHING EVER clips the entire frame to white, nothing ever clips even 5 percent of the frame to white, it is so obviously a nuke blast that I don't even know why I bothered with engaging this troll AT ALL

We axed mister religion, now we need to axe zionist murdering supporter.

This is the difference between you and me. I'm interested in truth and accuracy. You're interested in superstition.

 

It doesn't seem to end here though so for Chapter 2 in this saga of what I shall dub the 'Canadian Trends nuclear conspiracy' I present: The Jim Stone story.

Update-6



 

 

Gordon Duff's review of the mushroom cloud video specifically  has concluded that it was nuclear. Until I get some confirming information though I am still on the "probably not" side. Syrian Commando has told me that he is having soil samples taken and that he will send me the link as soon as the results are available.

Update-7

After reading Gordon Duff's full report I've noticed something of interest, particularly the method of delivery:

The other problem with the GBU 57 is delivery. Only two aircraft are capable of delivering this weapon, the B-52 and B-2 Stealth Bomber.

Israel does not have these aircraft.

Collapse of US Air Force Command Structure,

Again Thus, if a MOP where used, it could have only been delivered by the United States Air Force, an organization reeling from recent disasters within its own ranks after a second lapse in nuclear weapons security in a five-year period was discovered at Minot Air Force Base in South Dakota.

This is interesting, because "officially" The U.S. had "no early warning".

The United States was not given any warning before air strikes in Syria against what Western and Israeli officials say were weapons headed for Hezbollah militants, a U.S. intelligence official said on Sunday.

Without confirming that Israel was behind the attacks, the intelligence official said that the United States was essentially told of the air raids "after the fact" and was notified as the bombs went off.

But I then remembered an earlier report I had read:

"The Israelis are justifiably concerned about the threat posed by Hezbollah obtaining advanced weapons systems, including some long-range missiles," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. He said the U.S. was in "close coordination" with Israel but would not elaborate.

Close coordination? No early warning, but close coordination. Did the U.S change their story to cover for their involvement?

Ugh. I'm back to 50/50.

Update-8

Seems there is a lot of confusion as to the extent of what coordination is and when the intelligence about the attack occurred.

On May 5th, The White House Press released:

Q    What’s the expectation within the administration on how much information you guys have, should Israel take action, beforehand?  Is there an expectation that you guys are being looped in before they would have an attack?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I can tell you that the United States, and this administration, in particular, is in very close contact and is closely coordinating with the Israeli government on a range of issues, including important national security priorities.  So there are conversations and communications that are happening all the time between senior members of this administration and their counterparts in Israel. 

But in terms of the details of those conversations, I'm obviously not in a position to read those out.  But the close coordination between the Obama administration and the United States of America is ongoing with the Israeli government.

On May 6th, The White House Press released:

Q    I wouldn't even say Israel.  I would just say did you guys know that something was going to happen?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can tell you is that we are in close coordination as a matter of course with the Israelis, and continue to be.  But I'm not going to comment specifically on actions that the Israelis may or may not have taken.  I would certainly refer those questions to the Israeli government.

Then there is the 'no early warning' story. Which seems completely contradictory but grabbed some of the biggest headlines. I find it hard to believe they had no idea, especially considering on May 2nd:

So while Western governments debate what they might do, Israel is strengthening its defenses on the Golan Heights -- on a border with Syria that has been mostly quiet for 40 years -- because the red lines being talked about now in Washington appear to lead straight to Israel's borders.

Palestinians, Syrians form units to fight for Golan - May 11th
Syria asserts right to enter Golan, occupied by Israel - May13th

Update-9

Israel Was Right Not To Return Golan Heights to Syria - May 3rd

That last one is very interesting, as it would seem to support the U.S. story of not being informed of the attacks.

Here’s the beginning of one newspaper article about Syria that you didn’t read this week: “Israel Weighs Golan Invasion.” “U.S. Warns It Not To Act.”

So it could be one of two ways:

A) Israel is really acting on it's own without U.S. consent or military support. This wouldn't fit Gordon Duff's analysis, and from this perspective one has to then wonder with the recent capture of U.N. peacekeepers in Golan why the U.S. would continue to fund the Al-Qaeda/FSA? Are the warnings hollow?

B) The opposite is true, in which the strike had full U.S. support and the warnings to Israel as well as the "no early warning" story are for plausible deniability.

EDIT: This author writes strangely in sort of a Star Trek alternative universe way. U.S. gave no warnings to Israel - that's in his alternative universe. What is perhaps ironic though now is that war is brewing in Golan and the reason given in all references are the Israeli airstrike.

(BTW, welcome to the inner workings of my mind. Usually this stuff happens behind the scenes.)

Philippines may Pull Out 300 UN Peacekeepers from Golan Heights - May 10th

Update-10

Now we're cookin' - Feb 24th

For Israel to grant a US company (Genie Energy) the license to explore for oil in the occupied Golan Heights is signaling to the world that the occupied Golan Heights fully belongs to Israel. The New York-based company that was granted the license includes Jacob Rothschild, Rupert Murdoch, and Dick Cheney among its shareholders. Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights has not been recognized under international law.

Alright, so where are we at now? We have established the U.S. has a direct vested interest in the Golan heights. That prior to the airstrike Israel mobilized it's defenses in the area which we can only assume if some news outlet knew, the U.S. knew. Starting a new war in the region (which appears to be exactly what's happening) would certainly call their attention thus I find it near impossible that they didn't know about it with their own interests at stake.

Syria ready for Israel talks on basis of Golan pullout - Mar 2nd

I would say it's not unreasonable to assume that they would have offered direct aid in these airstrikes and must be involved fully for Israel to put their own interests at risk. Does that mean by supplying B-52/B-2 bombers?

After thought: Maybe their interests were already at stake?
After-After thought: Fucking Cheney.

Update-11

Truthout has just put out a good summary of U.S. relations and Golan. While it makes no mention of the oil licenses one paragraph did catch my eye:

The Jerusalem Post reported that during the 2006 war between Israeli and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, President Bush pushed Israel to expand the war beyond Lebanon, with Israeli military officials "receiving indications from the US that America would be interested in seeing Israel attack Syria." In the early days of the fighting, US Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams reportedly met with a very senior Israeli official to underscore Washington's support for extending the war to Syria, but Israeli officials described the idea as "nuts" and decided to limit their military operations to Lebanon. Haaretz noted that some in Washington were "disappointed by Israel's decision not to attack Syria at the same time." Meyrav Wurmser, head of the Center for Middle East Policy at the conservative Hudson Institute and wife of the principal Middle East adviser for Vice President Cheney, went further, declaring that there was "a lot of anger" in Washington that Israel did not attack Syria, which, she argued, would have served "US objectives." US officials also hoped that an Israeli invasion of Lebanon might lead Syrian troops to re-enter Lebanon to defend the country from the Israeli invasion, which could then be used as an excuse to expand the war to Syria itself. 

It goes on

With the Syrian government distracted by its civil war and with Israel under a far right-wing government unwilling to end its occupation of the Golan even in return for strict security guarantees, the opportunity for Israeli-Syrian peace may have passed.

IDF chief: Era of quiet on Golan border is ended   - Apr18th

One of the signs that things are changing on the Golan - for decades Israel's quietest border - is the behavior of the UN forces stationed there since the Yom Kippur War as observers and peace keepers. Following several assaults on UN personnel, the world body is ready to pull its people out, rather than do their job preventing a border flare-up.

Meanwhile, Israel is preparing for the day after the fall of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, with the expected eruption of chaos and the likely withdrawal of the international force meant to separate warring Syrian factions from the Israeli army.
This situation together with ongoing instability in Egypt means Israel is facing a strategic shift in the Middle East, and both Ya'alon and Gantz emphasized that Israel is preparing for the worst.

This is starting to look like a nuclear sized conspiracy...

Update-12

For some added context the Guardian has put out a great piece.

Peak oil, climate change and pipeline geopolitics driving Syria conflict

Update-13

The B-2 Stealth Bomber Will Deliver Nuclear Cruise Missiles Anywhere In The World - Apr 22nd

The Long-Range Standoff Weapon (LRSO) has been testing well for months. It should be, considering the best minds at Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northropp Grumman, and Raytheon have been working together to perfect the LRSO. Even DARPA had its hand in the plan for a missile like this to be fielded sometime over the next few years.

Pentagon Eyes More Than $800 Million for New Nuclear Cruise Missile

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Air Force plans to spend more than $800 million to build a new nuclear-armed cruise missile for its bomber aircraft, according to little-noticed details buried inside the Obama administration's fiscal 2011 budget request delivered last month to Capitol Hill (see GSN, Dec. 16, 2009).

A "Follow-on Long-Range Stand-off Vehicle," or LRSO for short, would replace 375 aging AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missiles, expected to retire from the fleet by 2030. The Defense Department has estimated the new effort could cost a total $1.3 billion, Global Security Newswire has learned.

Update-14

Syrian Commando has informed me no soil samples are coming and that the blast site has been locked down. He reasons this is likely do to the seriousness of the situation and likely for Syria's own safety. With the story unfolding here, this is very plausible.

Update-15

More info on this new cruise missile.

Cruise Missile Warhead Pick Coming

Air Force nuclear deterrence planners are building the requirements for the service's future air-launched nuclear cruise missile and will likely choose which warhead will go on the weapon this spring, said Billy Mullins, associate director of strategic deterrence and nuclear integration on the Air Staff. In a Jan. 16 interview, Mullins said there are three warhead candidates for the Long Range Standoff vehicle, or LRSO: the W80 warhead currently used on the AGM-86 Air Launched Cruise Missile that LRSO is meant to replace; the B61 nuclear bomb warhead; and the W84, the design formerly integrated on the now-retired BGM-109G Ground Launched Cruise Missile. LRSO is part of the Air Force's notional future "long-range strike family of systems" that will be centered on a new nuclear-capable bomber, dubbed LRS-B. "We don't see any reason why we won't need an air delivery system" as part of the LRS family, said Mullins. Regardless of the warhead chosen, the future bomber will carry LRSO, as will the B-52 fleet, and the service's B-2s, he said. In the case of the latter, LRSO will give the stealth bombers a nuclear standoff capability to carry out missions in heavy air defense environments, he noted. (See also Streamlining the Nuclear Stockpile for more from Mullins' interview.)

B61 nuclear bomb

The B61 nuclear bomb is one of the primary thermonuclear weapons in the U.S. Enduring Stockpile following the end of the Cold War. It is an intermediate yield strategic and tactical nuclear weapon featuring a two-stage radiation implosion design.[1]

The B61 is a variable yield bomb (0.3 to 340 kiloton yield in various versions and settings) designed for carriage by high-speed aircraft. It has a streamlined casing capable of withstanding supersonic flight speeds. The weapon is 11 ft 8 in (3.58 m) long, with a diameter of about 13 in (33 cm). Basic weight is about 700 lb (320 kg), although the weights of individual weapons may vary depending on version and fuze/retardation configuration.

The newest variant is the B61 Mod 11, a hardened penetration bomb with a reinforced casing (according to some sources, containing depleted uranium) and a delayed-action fuze, allowing it to penetrate several metres into the ground before detonating, damaging fortified structures further underground.^[7] The Mod 11 weighs about 1,200 lb (540 kg). Developed from 1994, the Mod 11 went into service in 1997 replacing the older megaton-yield B53 bomb, a limited number of which had been retained for anti-fortification use. About 50 Mod 11 bombs have been produced, their warheads converted from Mod 7 bombs. At present, the primary carrier for the B61 Mod 11 is the B-2 Spirit.

It's been a lingering question how crippled the Syrian air defense systems really were. I've noticed many people commenting that they seemed extremely in-effective. Could this cruise missile be the method of delivery? Keep in mind that Gordon Duff fingers the rest of the attack not on airstrikes but rather on artillery.

Update-16

I had overlooked this, but now that I'm thinking about this cruise missile this report may make some more sense.

Israel used "a new type of weapon", a senior official at the Syrian military facility that came under attack from the Israeli Air Force told RT.

“When the explosion happened it felt like an earthquake,” said the source, who was present near the attack site on the outskirts of Damascus on Sunday morning.

The rest of the article talks about depleted uranium shells, but depleted uranium isn't 'a new type of weapon'. Are these cruise missiles the 'new type of weapon'?

(btw.. great tune.. )

Update-17

Israel carries out second air strike in Syria

Hezbollah's al-Manar TV said the Jamraya facility was not hit and that it was an army supply centre which had been targeted. The station quoted Syrian security officials as saying three sites, including military barracks, arms depots and air defence infrastructure, were targeted. Amateur video footage said to have been shot early on Sunday in the Damascus area showed fire lighting up the night sky.

"In last night's attack, as in the previous one, what was attacked were stores of Fateh-110 missiles that were in transit from Iran to Hezbollah," Reuters quoted a "western intelligence source" as saying. There was no way to verify the claim.

Why does it always feel like the "intelligence source" is trying to misdirect you?

Syria's Uncertain Air Defenses

Update-18

SYRIA - [PUBLIC] Analysis of where air strikes blamed on Israel hit - May 05 - Been looking for this.

Side thought: Field Testing one of their new cruise missiles would also add fabulously to plausible deniability.

Update-19

This investigation will continue, but at this point I have to say that there is enough reason to pause and debate any further actions against Syria at the government level. During Libya I contacted Elizabeth May about the presence of Al-Qaeda in the rebels, she listened. Nothing that's going on here is in anyone's best interest but the benefactors. The Israeli's are being used, we're being used, and the Syrians are being destroyed.

I've sent this in it's current form to Elizabeth May via Twitter (it's how I got thru to her directly before). I'll send it a couple more times if I don't get a reply but I'm sure she'd take this more seriously with a few other people that are concerned of any possible future involvement of Canada (or perhaps your own country). If you believe your MP will listen talk to them. I'm putting this request out now as it's starting to look a lot less like Israeli's strike was defensive, but rather was a direct first strike offensive which is likely a prelude to all out war. In short, I don't think there's much time left before all out war. Syrian Commando reported today that another U.N. abduction attempt was thwarted. We don't have all the answers yet, but I think we have enough answers to start raising serious questions.

Your help would be greatly appreciated. You can reproduce anything on this blog according to the lack of guidelines as stated here.

Update-20

Israel Hints at New Strikes, Warning Syria Not to Hit Back - May 15th

Update-21

It's been a very busy May long weekend so I haven't had a lot of time to put into back research, but a few headlines that I noticed pop up are really beginning to paint a good picture of what's really going on with the back story already uncovered.

Syria: Civilians Come Under Fire From Rebels - May 15th

It's clearly becoming increasingly difficult to manage favorable P.R. for the "rebels".

Israel to continue preventing transfer of arms to Hezbollah: PM - May 20th

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday that his government remains committed to preventing the transfer of the advanced weaponry to Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, local media reported.

"We are acting in accordance with the policy we had set to prevent as much as possible the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah and terror elements," Army Radio quoted Netanyahu as saying.

"The Israeli government is operating in a responsible, determined and level-headed manner in order to ensure the supreme interest of the country, which is the safety of its citizens," he said, vowing to continue "guaranteeing Israel's security interests."

I think it's now safe to say statements such as these should be considered to be complete propaganda primarily aimed towards citizens of the anti-Assad side. Being that the public analysis of the targets previously hit seem to confirm the story as described by the Hezbollah official we can read into Israel's continued promises to intervene in that they are looking to systematically disable Syria's military infrastructure before the war begins using these stories of self defense as cover. Consider that if these videos hadn't gotten out the only information we'd know about this action would be via given reports.

Israel's self defense line makes no sense in light of the other evidence as their direct support of the Syrian "rebels" is putting them at risk as it is the Syrian rebels, funded by the U.S. and it's allies, who are abducting U.N. officials, as is their refusal to return the Golan Heights.

It's no wonder why Israel is becoming more overt and direct:

Syrian army, fighting alongside Hezbollah guerrillas, launch assault on rebel stronghold - May 18th

The rebels are not only losing the P.R. war, they're losing the hot war too.

This one is very blunt - May 19th

But there is a difference in the war here today, from when I last visited four months ago.

Assad's men appear to be winning, in Damascus at least. 

Israel caught in the middle as U.S. and Russia clash over Syria's future - May 18th

This also is a very telling post about the given situation and fits perfectly with the peak oil post put out by the Guardian, though in place of "energy security" they put "Iran's nuclear program". WMDs! That old chestnut again...

Turkey-Kurd Deal On Oil Riles Iraq - May 14th

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.

How do you put a price on insanity, exactly?

There's an article put out by The Economist a couple of days ago which is causing all kinds of debate. It raises the question of what's seen as a bit of a contradiction, that either government's are not serious about climate change or that the oil companies which continue to value themselves based on their recoverable reserves must be overvalued.

This premise derives from the idea that if governments and oil companies were serious about climate change then energy companies would be valued accordingly by not including reserves which would not be burned.

I'd like to weigh in on this debate as it's both important unto itself and also provides plenty of places of entry into other incredibly important and undeniably linked issues.

First of all I'll state my position, the entire argument is flawed and perhaps more importantly exists within a bubble inflated with ideology about the free market which doesn't exist, and the supposed 'duty' people feel oil companies will service regardless of cost. I've explained once before why even if we did have a "free market" that it is impossible that the free market could facilitate some sort of voluntary energy transition.

I would assert that both claims are true, it is not an either/or situation, but rather both are true at the same time. Even stranger though, I would also assert that both claims are false - also at the same time. We'll address these points directly before tying it all in to the bigger picture.

Governments are not serious about climate change
Governments are serious about climate change

How can this both be true and false at the same time? I guess it depends on your definition of "serious". For instance, from the 2012 budget I noted:

A few other paragraphs confirm for me that the government believes fully in climate change and that it is occurring now and is inevitable as earlier signs have indicated.

Canada’s Economic Action Plan laid the groundwork to establish a world-class research station in the North. As announced by the Prime Minister in August 2010, the station will be located in Cambridge Bay. Once established, the station will provide a year-round presence in the region and anchor the network of research infrastructure across Canada’s North, making a significant contribution towards the Government’s Northern Strategy. The Government will be announcing next steps in the establishment of the Canadian High Arctic Research Station in the coming months.

Combine the link, the "research station", and the explicit mission we have for research directly from section 3.1:

The Government’s science and technology strategy, Mobilizing Science and Technology to Canada’s Advantage, emphasizes the importance of ensuring that federally supported research contributes to the commercialization of new products, processes and services that create high-value jobs and economic growth. Guided by this strategy, the Government provides significant resources to support research, development and technology.

It's not unreasonable to assume the research station will be heavily involved in arctic mining research as that's one of few products, services, or processes that can be commercialized. This compliments another paragraph in regards to climate change (from the section on GMO research):

•Increasing the competitiveness of the forest industry. Spruce trees are the most widely used species in Canada’s forest plantations. Researchers at Université Laval are working to develop tools and protocols that make it possible to select high-performance spruce trees with better quality wood and high potential to adapt to climate change. Government and industry have partnered to transfer molecular breeding technology to commercial application across a broader range of tree species, to increase the competitiveness of the Canadian forest industry.

I'm more convinced than ever now that the government's climate change strategy is adaptation and not prevention (indeed I believe they believe it is now impossible to prevent). Take note of the wording "better quality wood with high potential to adapt to climate change". It's current tense and matter-of-fact. I anticipate most policy will be geared towards adaptation with climate change simply becoming a reality.

The government is very "serious" about climate change, they also are very "serious" about economic development and growth. Being serious doesn't mean there are plans to address it (as in a solution), it can just as easily mean their plans are to address it are to adapt to it.

Energy companies are over-valued
Energy companies are under-valued

The fundamental flaw here is that we are "valuing" energy based on supply and demand, which when it comes to energy over-simplifies a very complex resource.

In example: Let's say that you lived 500 years ago and you had a cart that weighed roughly the same as a car. You need to push that cart 10km to get your water, or food, or something from town. Now let's say you're a person living today, who has to drive a car 10km to get the modern equivalent of those items. Has the value of your trip changed?

You can accomplish things today it would take Kings to accomplish in the past. 500 years ago you'd need slaves, horses, etc, to accomplish 1/100th of what we've accomplished today and yet our value of energy is only of the day. So how can energy companies both be undervalued and overvalued at the same time?

For the "overvalued" we will look at Alberta's oilsands and the so-called "bitumen bubble". Up until the "bitumen bubble" the value of Albertan bitumen (which is very expensive to produce) was very high. This was caused by energy demand in the U.S. but ever since their so-called fracking revolution the value in our bitumen has dropped significantly because it is perhaps the most expensive energy to produce and has little added return. However with tight energy supplies that small return is incredibly invaluable. The moment however that a (what is claimed to be) cheaper supply comes online, the value evaporated. Was the value even there to begin with?

For the under-valued argument we will actually look at the so-called fracking revolution.

Crude Falls as U.S. Supplies Climb to 82-Year High

The price of crude is (for the moment) collapsing due to the sudden rush for fracking profit. However, do you believe this price represents the value of crude? Keep in mind that they are fracking a finite resource. What do you think that barrel of crude will be worth 50 years from now? What is the value of the current temporary over-supply to the generations of the future? We are using the rules of the past to buoy the present at the cost of the future. The 82year energy surplus record exists only because we've taken this energy from the future generations. This should be invaluable, priceless, but because of the way our modern economics works with growth as the be-all, end-all" of prosperity this over-supply has resulted in the depressed price of a resource generations in the future may well be rioting over.

The fracking boom's "monkey-see, monkey-do, follow the leader" gold rush is really to our own detriment, taking from the future at the costs of the present is absolute insanity.

Coming back to climate change, the insanity of our need for growth and reflex-action markets extends also to our "seriousness" about climate change. We are very serious about adapting because we will not be changing. We won't be changing for the same reason we won't leave the resources in the ground for future generations.

EVERYTHING we are doing to "sustain growth" right now is at the expense of the future and when you see your energy and poverty stricken children in the future just remember all the good times that consumer debt bought.

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.

In the future there will be no law and order (only corporate policy and terrorism)

Hey folks, don't worry about that "bail-in" clause, Mark Carnage says. Your deposits are safe! they're insured! We'll never need it, which is exactly why we've added it. As we all know the CDIC is in a perfectly sound position to protect Canadian deposits, don't we?

According to the CDIC's 2010 Annual Report, CDIC protects $590 billion CAD in total eligible deposits, and has $1.95 billion CAD in assets to meet insurance claims.^[4] This amount represents 0.33% of total eligible deposits. The CDIC is also authorized to borrow up to $17 billion if necessary from the federal government or the financial markets, and may request further funds from Parliament.

That's also alright, as we'll never need it. That's also exactly why it exists. In fact, there is a global bank "bail-in" regime being put in place to prevent the failure of big banks. Oh goodie! Now that the "Too Bigs" have all the taxpayer cash on a global scale, your personal cash is being put up for collateral on their next losing bets. Global regimes, but don't worry folks there's no "global government", that's a conspiracy theory.

And all while this is happening without a whimper, due process has been destroyed without the batting of an eye-lash. More and more the "terrorists" and "criminals" are becoming one and the same. The very definition of the rule of law, the due process which we so proudly proclaim separates "us" and "them", is gone. There is no separation, we are them, they are us. Infatuated cultures, so high on their own bullshit they can't see the path they're heading down.

Pre-Crime? Guilt by association? Criminal or terrorist? the line is now arbitrary. It's whatever the state decides, you might get due process, and you might not. Sure, all of the "terrorists" as advertised will be absolutely despicable people, just as them Ah-Rabs were depicted. But slowly and surely, the "terrorist" is moving from being of another religion, another culture, another world and now might just be your neighbor! Better shut down the city, Am-I-Right?

Every day we read about the Quebec police utilizing tactics which were denounced as illegal and used only in police states. They are still in use, we are a police state. For now it's a "soft" police state, but I think you all might be surprised just how fast it becomes the normal.

Two days ago I was strolling Whyte Avenue and just happened to be in the right spot at the right time to catch the Mayday parade passing by. The crowd shouted something about politics being "fucked up" as their police escorted march slowly made its way down the avenue. It was at this moment it dawned on me how far down the fucking rabbit hole we are right now. How far we've fallen as a society. You think your shouting and marching is going to stop a global fascist regime? You're bringing a BB gun to the war. The people running the show are playing an elaborate game of chess while the people play checkers, democracy edition. We've gone so far past the point of no return that the sign marking it can't even be seen off in the distance anymore.

My best advice for you at this point is expect the unexpected, and nothing is off the table.

Maybe we just don't want to get away...

---

Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.