pricestar8

Im looking forward to the RV but how will we get to the banks in ——- you know where? Down South America way?

I think theve got there *** in a ringer and its starting to hurt. At 20 $ a barrel they might get loans from there bank but what will they do when that's gone. If they cut back on production to raise the price the US producers will step in and take there customers. Can they hold out for 3 or 4 months i don't think so but we will see.

. I’d like to share some more encouraging news concerning COVID-19. Research was just released by MIT concerning the effect of temperatures on COVID-19 transmissions. The data shows that the maximum number of transmissions occurred in regions that had temperatures between 3 degrees and 13 degrees Celsius (37.4–55.4 degrees Fahrenheit). The data also shows that countries with mean temperatures above 18 degrees Celsius (64.4 degrees Fahrenheit) have seen less than 5% of the total number of cases. The researchers at MIT also determined that this data is consistent with the data seen in the United States. Specifically, the southern, warmer states have seen dramatically less growth in the outbreak than the cooler northern states. The research from MIT is also consistent with work released Monday from Europe. That research determined that 95% of all cases globally took place in a temperature range of −2 degrees and 10 degrees Celsius (28.4–50 degrees Fahrenheit). What does this all mean? As we quickly move into spring weather in the northern hemisphere (with temperatures in the 60s and above in Fahrenheit), we are going to see the number of new cases fall dramatically. And even more encouraging is new data out of Norway demonstrating that mortality rates are only 0.38% and dropping as more people are tested. This is on par with a strong seasonal flu. The reason that these numbers seem so low is that most countries are not testing their population for those who are asymptomatic – those that are producing or showing no symptoms of COVID-19 even though they contracted it. We will see numbers even lower than this in the United States as the 400,000 tests a week that Roche is providing are utilized for testing. Data is the source of truth… not the mainstream media. We have a lot to look forward to in the coming weeks… not only a return to more normal school and work conditions but also a recovery in the equity markets.

I read a article about how the chinese Wuhan virus was started by low level staff at the near by lab that does tests on animals. After testing Instead taking the animals to the incinerator to be burnt up they took them to the wet market and sold them. There is one person who is in a chinese jail now for 6 years for doing this in the past.

I think there going to wait till they have no other options, but to raise the value. There are people in places of power that will try to take advantage of whats going on to get as much money in there hands as they can. Looks like its around 35 dollars today, lets see what happens when it gets to 25.

Saudi Arabia Starts All-Out Oil War: MbS Destroys OPEC By Flooding Market, Slashing Oil Prices check drudge

So Come out at ten cents and the bank make money on the spread as the value increases.

There is a over supply of oil now and the price is going down. Iraq knows it US and Russia have reported it. Its a widely written about. Iraq doesnt have two or three years to wait for outside investments, We will have to wait and see.

I checked and oil is at 54.175 and falling, They will have to find some way to replace the income from oil with something else. We all know what that could be. It might take a while but the US is producing alot and if if south america comes on line prices will go lower JMO

America Turns the Corner at Last by Conrad Black National Review January 24, 2020 http://www.conradmblack.com/1496/america-turns-the-corner-at-last Leah Millis/Reuters As the election year progresses, more attention will be paid to the substantial settling of two of the greatest public-policy failings in the United States since the official end of racial segregation. For more than 70 years the U.S. was a sizeable importer of foreign oil, and for more than 25 years it was inundated with almost unsustainable numbers of mostly unskilled illegal immigrants, ultimately totaling more than 20 million people. President Eisenhower lamented that the United States was importing 10 percent of its oil in the 1950s. He became so concerned at the time of the Suez crisis in 1956 — when Britain, France, and Israel, in one of the most insane enterprises in the history of each of them, set out to take the canal back from Egypt — that Eisenhower envisioned rationing oil and gasoline in the United States to provide emergency supplies to Europe and planned for the swift construction of super-tankers to circumvent the Suez Canal, which he imagined might be closed indefinitely. (The British and French had pre-agreed to Israel's invasion of Sinai and pre-positioned forces in Cyprus, which then invaded Egypt after the Israeli attack, proclaiming they were "peace-keeping," all without any consultation with Washington. The Israelis did their part well, but the rest of it fell apart very quickly.) Eisenhower's concerns were vastly exaggerated. There was no oil boycott or embargo, and the canal was closed for only a few weeks. But nearly 20 years later, when there was an Arab oil embargo and sharp price increases following the Arab–Israeli (Yom Kippur) War of 1973, the U.S. suffered serious inflationary pressures and hovered on the verge of gasoline rationing for two years. President Nixon announced "Operation Independence" to reduce reliance on foreign oil as a matter of national-security necessity. But nothing happened: Oil imports continued to rise, and by the mid-Clinton years they had reached 15 million barrels a day, 60 percent of American supply. Whenever Washington appeared to be seriously purposeful, OPEC (the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) lowered the world oil price until the U.S. resolve evaporated and the country flopped back to maximum oil imports. President Carter wore a cardigan for some television addresses and advised Americans to turn down their thermostats. But conservation measures were tokens, and there was no political will to raise gasoline prices to reduce demand. It was debilitating to the country's balance of payments and made the United States appear flabby and irresolute to countries that did not wish it well, despite its overwhelming and almost bloodless victory in the Cold War. There was a further dimension to the problem in the application of a substantial share of oil revenue by some OPEC countries to fund terrorism and other hostile and dangerous political activities (including large direct payments by Saudi Arabia to the extremist Wahhabi sect), particularly after the shah of Iran was replaced by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his Islamist theocracy, partially thanks to the Carter administration. In this century there has been steady bipartisan progress back toward American energy self-sufficiency. American oil imports declined from 15 million barrels a day under Clinton to 10 million a day under President George W. Bush and 5 million under President Obama, and the United States is now an oil exporter. It has been late in coming, but it is an admirable elimination of a strategic vulnerability; America has added more than a cubit to its geopolitical stature. The saga of illegal immigration across the southern border is even sorrier and is fraught with a great deal more human suffering. As is now notorious, lengthy sections of the U.S.–Mexican border are in rough country with minimal obstacles and surveillance. The natural flow from Central America and Mexico to the United States of people seeking a better life and the ability to send hard currency home is a longstanding phenomenon. For most of the time since the Mexican-American War (1846–48), it has been generally indulged, as some cheap labor has been welcome in the United States to do menial work and relieve some socioeconomic pressure in Mexico. However, illegal immigration of more than a million unskilled and destitute people per year eventually put intolerable strain on the medical, public-health, education, and law-enforcement systems pf the southwestern states. The Democrats welcomed the votes, which they effortlessly harvested (ignoring the constitutional requirement of citizenship to vote), and the mainly Republican employers were happy to have the cheap labor, especially in the so-called hospitality industry. As has finally been adequately publicized, the political influence of these many millions of illegal residents became so great that many of the country's leading cities have declared themselves to be sanctuaries and local police have been ordered to ignore federal immigration laws. The whole legitimate basis of citizenship and statutory government has been undermined, and a veritable insurrection has been building for many years with the connivance of both parties and all branches of government. Candidate Trump in 2016 in effect denounced this policy of unctuous neglect as a conspiracy against the nation. The Democrats have fought the Trump administration tooth and nail as it has sought to endow the country with a southern border. House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi opposed spending even one cent to strengthen the border, declared any wall there to be "an abomination," and compared the border detention centers (which were set up in the Obama administration) to Nazi death camps. President Trump has managed to build substantial parts of the wall he promised his supporters, and has asserted such pressure on the government of Mexico that 27,000 soldiers of the Mexican army have been deployed in the approaches to the border, and the practice of Mexico facilitating the passage of large convoys of migrants from Central America through Mexico to the U.S. has stopped. For decades American politicians of both parties piously referred to "comprehensive immigration reform," but this was just a euphemism for doing nothing. The Democrats have tried to prevent census takers from asking if American residents were citizens (in violation of the Constitution), and the big losers were the Democrats' former constituents in the lower ranges of the urban and rural working classes. The pressure of illegal cheap labor stalled their standard of living near or beneath the poverty line for decades. They are now starting to thrive. The reduction, under this president, of illegal immigration by 75 percent has effectively ended a scandalous and cynical collusion of the bipartisan political leadership, which operated to the detriment of America's national interest and penalized America's most economically vulnerable citizens. It was a disgrace and a human tragedy and it is finally ending, after many years of ineffectual official flim-flam. In this contestatious election year, these immense advances in national security and well-being will be appropriately recognized, on the hustings and in the voting booths.

America Turns the Corner at Last by Conrad Black National Review January 24, 2020 http://www.conradmblack.com/1496/america-turns-the-corner-at-last Leah Millis/Reuters As the election year progresses, more attention will be paid to the substantial settling of two of the greatest public-policy failings in the United States since the official end of racial segregation. For more than 70 years the U.S. was a sizeable importer of foreign oil, and for more than 25 years it was inundated with almost unsustainable numbers of mostly unskilled illegal immigrants, ultimately totaling more than 20 million people. President Eisenhower lamented that the United States was importing 10 percent of its oil in the 1950s. He became so concerned at the time of the Suez crisis in 1956 — when Britain, France, and Israel, in one of the most insane enterprises in the history of each of them, set out to take the canal back from Egypt — that Eisenhower envisioned rationing oil and gasoline in the United States to provide emergency supplies to Europe and planned for the swift construction of super-tankers to circumvent the Suez Canal, which he imagined might be closed indefinitely. (The British and French had pre-agreed to Israel's invasion of Sinai and pre-positioned forces in Cyprus, which then invaded Egypt after the Israeli attack, proclaiming they were "peace-keeping," all without any consultation with Washington. The Israelis did their part well, but the rest of it fell apart very quickly.) Eisenhower's concerns were vastly exaggerated. There was no oil boycott or embargo, and the canal was closed for only a few weeks. But nearly 20 years later, when there was an Arab oil embargo and sharp price increases following the Arab–Israeli (Yom Kippur) War of 1973, the U.S. suffered serious inflationary pressures and hovered on the verge of gasoline rationing for two years. President Nixon announced "Operation Independence" to reduce reliance on foreign oil as a matter of national-security necessity. But nothing happened: Oil imports continued to rise, and by the mid-Clinton years they had reached 15 million barrels a day, 60 percent of American supply. Whenever Washington appeared to be seriously purposeful, OPEC (the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) lowered the world oil price until the U.S. resolve evaporated and the country flopped back to maximum oil imports. President Carter wore a cardigan for some television addresses and advised Americans to turn down their thermostats. But conservation measures were tokens, and there was no political will to raise gasoline prices to reduce demand. It was debilitating to the country's balance of payments and made the United States appear flabby and irresolute to countries that did not wish it well, despite its overwhelming and almost bloodless victory in the Cold War. There was a further dimension to the problem in the application of a substantial share of oil revenue by some OPEC countries to fund terrorism and other hostile and dangerous political activities (including large direct payments by Saudi Arabia to the extremist Wahhabi sect), particularly after the shah of Iran was replaced by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his Islamist theocracy, partially thanks to the Carter administration. In this century there has been steady bipartisan progress back toward American energy self-sufficiency. American oil imports declined from 15 million barrels a day under Clinton to 10 million a day under President George W. Bush and 5 million under President Obama, and the United States is now an oil exporter. It has been late in coming, but it is an admirable elimination of a strategic vulnerability; America has added more than a cubit to its geopolitical stature. The saga of illegal immigration across the southern border is even sorrier and is fraught with a great deal more human suffering. As is now notorious, lengthy sections of the U.S.–Mexican border are in rough country with minimal obstacles and surveillance. The natural flow from Central America and Mexico to the United States of people seeking a better life and the ability to send hard currency home is a longstanding phenomenon. For most of the time since the Mexican-American War (1846–48), it has been generally indulged, as some cheap labor has been welcome in the United States to do menial work and relieve some socioeconomic pressure in Mexico. However, illegal immigration of more than a million unskilled and destitute people per year eventually put intolerable strain on the medical, public-health, education, and law-enforcement systems pf the southwestern states. The Democrats welcomed the votes, which they effortlessly harvested (ignoring the constitutional requirement of citizenship to vote), and the mainly Republican employers were happy to have the cheap labor, especially in the so-called hospitality industry. As has finally been adequately publicized, the political influence of these many millions of illegal residents became so great that many of the country's leading cities have declared themselves to be sanctuaries and local police have been ordered to ignore federal immigration laws. The whole legitimate basis of citizenship and statutory government has been undermined, and a veritable insurrection has been building for many years with the connivance of both parties and all branches of government. Candidate Trump in 2016 in effect denounced this policy of unctuous neglect as a conspiracy against the nation. The Democrats have fought the Trump administration tooth and nail as it has sought to endow the country with a southern border. House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi opposed spending even one cent to strengthen the border, declared any wall there to be "an abomination," and compared the border detention centers (which were set up in the Obama administration) to Nazi death camps. President Trump has managed to build substantial parts of the wall he promised his supporters, and has asserted such pressure on the government of Mexico that 27,000 soldiers of the Mexican army have been deployed in the approaches to the border, and the practice of Mexico facilitating the passage of large convoys of migrants from Central America through Mexico to the U.S. has stopped. For decades American politicians of both parties piously referred to "comprehensive immigration reform," but this was just a euphemism for doing nothing. The Democrats have tried to prevent census takers from asking if American residents were citizens (in violation of the Constitution), and the big losers were the Democrats' former constituents in the lower ranges of the urban and rural working classes. The pressure of illegal cheap labor stalled their standard of living near or beneath the poverty line for decades. They are now starting to thrive. The reduction, under this president, of illegal immigration by 75 percent has effectively ended a scandalous and cynical collusion of the bipartisan political leadership, which operated to the detriment of America's national interest and penalized America's most economically vulnerable citizens. It was a disgrace and a human tragedy and it is finally ending, after many years of ineffectual official flim-flam. In this contestatious election year, these immense advances in national security and well-being will be appropriately recognized, on the hustings and in the voting booths.

Police clashed with protesters in Baghdad on Monday after a few comparatively quiet days, resulting in 14 security troops suffering injuries from thrown rocks and complaints of excessive force leveled against police by the protesters. As with several other protest movements around the world, the conflict appears to have begun when the protesters erected roadblocks in Baghdad and several other cities, and the police moved in to clear them away. “A group of outlaw young people blocked the Muhammad al-Qasim highway on Monday at 8:30 am. Security forces reopened the highway, detained the group and transferred them to face justice,” said the authorities. Breitbart TV Play Video CLICK TO PLAY Donald Trump: I Demanded Troops Go to Baghdad Embassy Immediately -- 'the Anti-Benghazi' “A group of violent hooligans started to throw rocks at the security members who were stationed near Tahrir Square to protect the peaceful protesters,” the media arm of Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) said when a battle broke out in the square at the heart of Baghdad. According to the statement, several security troops were struck in the head by thrown rocks, while an officer was wounded in the leg. The United Nations sounded doubtful of ISF claims that it was attempting to protect “peaceful protesters” in Tahrir Square when it was attacked by “hooligans” and obliged to defend itself. “Violent suppression of peaceful protesters is intolerable and must be avoided at all costs. Nothing is more damaging than a climate of fear. Accountability and justice for victims is critical to building trust, legitimacy, and resilience,” said a statement from the United Nations Assistance Mission to Iraq (UNAMI) on Monday. U.N. Special Representative Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert expressed her agency’s concern about “ongoing human rights violations” in Iraq. “While there was public acknowledgment by all actors that urgent reform is needed, it is now high time to put these words into action and to avoid further derailing of these protests by those pursuing their own objectives, not wishing well for this country and its people,” Hennis-Plasschaert said in a statement that strongly sided with protesters against Iraq’s political and military elite. Al Jazeera published unconfirmed reports that five protesters were killed on Monday in three different Iraqi cities. According to these reports, two of the deaths were caused by live ammunition in Baghdad. “For months no one has listened to our demands. They are killing us. It’s just bloodshed,” one protester told Al Jazeera. Protest leaders stated their intention to use more roadblocks as a method of getting the attention of Iraqi politicians, who missed a Monday deadline set by the protesters to begin implementing fundamental reforms. “We demand the central government go to early elections and the nomination of a new independent prime minister. If that doesn’t happen, we will escalate and block all the highways and centres of the city,” a Baghdad demonstrator vowed. “This is only the first escalation. We want to send a message to the government: Stop procrastinating. The people know what you’re doing,” another demonstrator told AFP as a wall of burning tires was erected across a major Baghdad bridge.

www.thelibertydaily.com

As Iraqis protest against state, tribes make a comeback Issued on: 10/12/2019 - 02:56 Modified: 10/12/2019 - 02:54 Baghdad (AFP) Iraqi protesters have clashed with police and torched government offices, a premier has resigned and precious blood spilt. As modern institutions collapse, a centuries-old force is making a comeback: Iraq's tribes. With their own hierarchies, moral and justice codes, not to mention huge arms caches, tribes have once again become among the most powerful actors in Iraq's rural and oil-rich south. They have a history of revolt, turning against the British colonising forces in a major boost to the 1920 uprising that led to the country's independence. A century later, revolution has hit Iraq again. Baghdad and the Shiite-majority region have been rocked by two months of the worst unrest since the 2003 US-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. Anti-regime protesters have burned state headquarters and party offices in outrage at corruption, poor public services and Iran's perceived political interference. It has been the perfect storm in which Iraq's tribes could reassert their leadership, said Phillip Smyth of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. In recent years, many Shiites had "become more urbanised and have loosened up their identity when it comes to being tribal," he said. Youth, which make up 60 percent of Iraq's 40 million people, were particularly prone to look outward and shed their tribal identities. "But the reason the tribes have a lot more strength now is that you have a very weak central government and an outside power -- the Iranians -- that is viewed as being complicit with this government," Smyth told AFP. "These guys are looking at this and saying, let's revert back to sources of power that we know," he added. - Trusting the tribes - Nasiriyah in southern Iraq is a prime example. Authorities dispatched commander Jamil al-Shammary late last month to snuff out widespread rallies in the city. But tribal fighters then came out in force, cutting off roads to prevent troops from reaching Nasiriyah. They negotiated a halt to the bloodshed, which had already cost 97 lives since protests erupted in October. "It was the tribes that found a solution to the crisis while the politicians did nothing," said Qaysar al-Husseinawi, a leading figure in Nasiriyah's Husseinat tribe. Their role did not stop there: the clans are also seeking justice for around 100 families pursuing legal cases against Shammary, himself a member of a powerful tribe. Shammary's clan has excommunicated him over the crackdown. Tribal tradition dictates that "blood money" must be paid to the victims' families -- otherwise they have the right to seek equally violent vengeance. - Tribal law - Influential clan structures have so far intervened to end bloodshed but if they choose to take up arms, many in the south expect full-blown conflict. One police officer told AFP he'd rather desert than fight them. "The state could never protect its own men against tribal law," he said. Indeed, tribal tradition often trumps state law in Iraq, with accused criminals being released after tribal talks and even marital disputes resolved by mediators. The tribes blend modern life and centuries-old tradition, with sheikhs juggling two iPhones while ordering wave after wave of sugary tea be served to their guests. In the southernmost province of Basra, armed tribe members have often shut the streets outside national or even international oil companies to demand well-paid jobs there. "The social bargain of any tribe is that the sheikh is a river to his people," providing them with work, justice and stability, said Nicholas Heras of the Center for a New American Security, a think-tank in Washington. So naturally, the widespread upheaval in recent weeks over unemployment and poor services touched tribes, too. "Tribal anger is directed at leaders in Baghdad that are viewed as having not kept their part of the social bargain," Heras told AFP. - 'Bridges burned' - The British colonising forces had a tribal revolt on their hands in the early 1900s after they arrested a tribal sheikh over a tax issue. Nearly a century later, tribal support for the anti-government movement can also be linked to a push-back against central government authority in distant Baghdad. But resolving the dispute won't be so simple. "A lot of bridges have been burned," said Smyth. "If you have people fundamentally angry at how institutions are corrupt, mismanaged and just bad, you won't just get bought off with a job," he added. The government may seek to appease tribes with offers of more jobs or services, but there is no guarantee they could keep their support for long. "You can never buy tribal groupings," said Smyth, pointing to their often shifting tactical allegiances. "They're for rent." https://www.france24.com/en/20191210-as-iraqis-protest-against-state-tribes-make-a-comeback