Saturday, July 22, 2017

Coming Soon: The Most Unusual (And Significant?) Solar Eclipse In U.S. History

Coming Soon: The Most Unusual (And Significant?) Solar Eclipse In U.S. History

News Image By Michael Snyder/End Of The American Dream July 14, 2017 Share this article:

August 21st is the date of "the Great American Eclipse", and the hype around it is already starting to reach a fever pitch. 

It is being called "the Great American Eclipse" because this will be the first total solar eclipse ever that is only visible in the United States. 

In other words, since the United States became a nation there has never been a total eclipse that was only visible here and nowhere else. 

And this will be the first total solar eclipse to cross from the west coast to the east coast in 99 years. So for those that love astronomy, this is bigger than the Super Bowl.
 
Close to 200 million people live within a day's drive of "the totality zone", and many are projecting that this will be the most-viewed eclipse ever. 

In fact, many hotels and campsites along the path of the eclipse are already completely booked. So if you want to see it live, you better make your arrangements quickly.

Of course the "main event" will not last for very long. Depending on the location, the total eclipse will only last for about two or three minutes.
But if you count from the time that the moon will begin to cover the sun until the time when the sun is completely uncovered again, it will take approximately two and a half hours for the entire process to unfold. The following comes from Newsweek...

If you are in the band of totality, you will see (if you look through special 'solar filters' that darken the Sun by a factor of about 100,000) the Moon gradually covering the sun for about 75 min, then the beautiful totality, and then the uncovering for another 75 min.

Of course in the heavens things will be taking place at very high speed. For example, the moon's shadow will actually be crossing the U.S. at a speed of close to 1,700 miles per hour.

And even if you are not in the "totality zone", you will still notice what is happening on August 21st. That is because this eclipse will actually cast a "shadow" over the entire nation.

Could it be possible that has some sort of significance?

I don't know, but without a doubt there will be a whole lot of speculation going on as we get closer to the date.

Many have pointed out that this solar total eclipse in 2017 will be followed by another total solar eclipse nearly seven years later on April 8th, 2024.

And when you plot the projected courses of these two solar eclipses on a map, they form a giant "X" over the center of the United States...

Could this be some sort of extremely bizarre coincidence?

And if it isn't a coincidence, what could it mean?

I am afraid that I don't have the answers to those questions right now, but I do find it to be extremely interesting that the heart of this "X" just happens to fall in the middle of the New Madrid fault zone.

Back in 1811 and 1812, the New Madrid Fault zone was hit by a series of absolutely massive earthquakes. At one point the shaking was so bad that it even caused church bells in Boston to start ringing. 
If similar earthquakes happened in our day and time, the damage would be absolutely unimaginable. The following comes from Smithsonian.com...

The Midwest was sparsely populated, and deaths were few. But 8-year-old Godfrey Lesieur saw the ground "rolling in waves." Michael Braunm observed the river suddenly rise up "like a great loaf of bread to the height of many feet." Sections of riverbed below the Mississippi rose so high that part of the river ran backward. Thousands of fissures ripped open fields, and geysers burst from the earth, spewing sand, water, mud and coal high into the air.

Could you imagine "thousands of fissures" suddenly opening up all over the middle of the country?

One insurance company tried to estimate what the economic toll would be if similar quakes happened today, and they came up with a figure of "about 300 billion dollars"...

A series of big shakes -- of the sort last seen in 1811 and 1812 -- would cause about $300 billion in damage, Swiss Re says. The cost would be double the damage from Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in 2005.

Houses -- especially brick ones -- would collapse. Buildings would sink sideways into liquefying earth. Bridges might tumble into the rivers. The route of the Mississippi River could change -- as it did in the last big quake.

People would die, perhaps by the thousands. Being mainly a property reinsurer, Swiss Re didn't estimate the human toll.

And we should also consider the fact that there are 15 nuclear reactors along the New Madrid fault zone. And so during a major catastrophe we could be looking at Fukushima times 15.

Let us hope that the next major New Madrid earthquake is put off for as long as possible. Nobody should ever want to see that kind of devastation.

But scientists tell us that the Earth's crust is "mechanically weaker" under the New Madrid fault zone than it is in other areas of the country, and they assure us that given enough time there will be more massive quakes in the region someday.
It is entirely possible that it could just be a complete coincidence that these two eclipses form a giant "X" directly over the heart of the New Madrid fault zone, but I think that it would be a mistake to dismiss this phenomenon altogether without reflecting on what it might mean. 

Because as Pastor Mark Biltz has pointed out, it appears that God specifically used solar eclipses back in Biblical times...

"An archaeological find of cuneiform tablets was found in the 19th century describing events in Nineveh. A famous eclipse mentioned in the tablets was known as the Bur-Sagale eclipse, which is verified by NASA as occurring on June 15, 763 BC. 

The path of totality was right over Nineveh. God had declared the sun and the moon were for signs, and now the Ninevites saw the wrath of God coming even before Jonah arrived a couple months later. When Jonah arrived, they were ripe for repentance."

Our world is a very strange place, and it is getting stranger with each passing day.

And one thing is absolutely certain - the entire nation will be looking up into the sky on August 21st, and what they will see will be truly historic.

To learn more about "Signs In The Heavens", Bible Prophecy and to participate in seeing the total solar eclipse you can join fellow Prophecy Watchers at the HEAR THE WATCHMEN Conference in Boise, Idaho - Aug 18-20. Speakers include: Pastor Paul Begley, LA Marzulli, Pastor Carl Gallups, Dr. Michael Lake and Scottie Clark (addressing the controversial Revelation 12 Celestial Sign taking place the following month).  A special discount code of "Boise20" is available to PNW subscribers who wish to attend or livestream the conference.  Learn more here

What The Government Wants To Know About You

What The Government Wants To Know About You

News Image By Sandra July 14, 2017 Share this article:

The government has always had its eyes on the people. For many reasons, the collective ruling class wants to have a very detailed picture of its population. 

Whereas this interest is sometimes purely financial (particularly those in the hands of lobbyists), the ultimate goal is control.

For this very reason, we've seen a major growth in cashless forms of payment, particularly in Europe. 

What seems to be a convenience to newer generations is anything but for the ruling elite. 

They are the first steps leading to a new world of control and oppression.

There's a war for your mind, and it's becoming gradually more technological.

Learning Your Habits and Beliefs

As governments become virtual arms of corporate interest, their desire to monitor all your financial activities increases. 

Doing so allows them to understand what you value and how to manipulate your behaviors.
Whether we realize it or not, how we spend our money says a lot about what's important to us. 

For instance, someone that spends thousands of dollars collecting would be more likely to respond to ads tailored to their hobby.

They would also be more interested in politicians that speak to their interests, even if those politicians don't actually represent their best interests. 

We see this routinely every election, with talking points directed at garnering votes based on empty promises or illusions of a given party being "relatable."

The government also wants to stamp out 'thought crimes' before they become action. 

Following the financial trail of an individual that is anti-government allows them to keep a closer eye on that person's activities.

For these reasons and more, the government absolutely hates cash. Cash is harder to track, more difficult to tax (due to underreporting) and can be stored outside of banks. 

Digital currency can be stored only in a bank--which means, at the end of the day, they hold all the cards. Their failure becomes your failure.

Watching Your Every Move

The massive increase in spying on the citizenry is largely the result of the biggest con in history. 

By taking advantage of very real dangers seemingly around every corner, the government has encouraged businesses, individuals and municipalities to install cameras at every business, at every intersection and in many homes.
This data is, in part, accessible by government. It allows them to prosecute people for crimes that would normally go ignored (victimless crimes) whenever that person steps out of line.

It's particularly easy on the internet, where every website you visit links to your IP address and identifying information. 

This data trail is astoundingly easy to follow, particularly with the increase in public WiFi usage plotting a virtual map of activities. 

Only those behind proxies or VPNs are safe from this kind of monitoring.

At the same time, most of us now carry a literal beacon on us at all times in the form of a GPS. 

To be sure there are great advantages, but it also just makes us easier to pin down by the ruling elite. You can run, but you can't hide.

Your Social Circle

They say it isn't about what you know, but who you know--and the government is just as interested in that as anything else. 

On the record, they already have a large list of your educational accomplishments, certifications, and licenses.

But they aren't satisfied with just that. 

Thanks to the cooperation of social media and other internet services, the government now has yet another way to tap into understanding everything there is to know about you by finding out who you associate with.
No doubt this comes under the pretense of preventing criminal activity; those associated with criminals are predicted to commit criminal offenses themselves. 

But criminal thought does not equate to criminal action, otherwise we'd all be behind bars.

Though most of us consider it an acceptable tradeoff that who we know is essentially public knowledge, that doesn't mean it isn't dangerous. 

With that kind of information is easy to isolate, bully and ostracize anyone with differing viewpoints. 

It's easy to make someone out to be a monster when you know everyone they've ever spoken with.

The Government Wants In

Like some kind of gang or mob, the government wants its own cut of everything you do. Their goal is to be a part of our lives in a way that makes them indispensable. 

It's a mixture of job security and ambition.

For that, expect to see digital implants soon. Marketed as a means of convenience, digital implants are sure to start off as a means of hands-free, cash free and device free payment. 

Identification that doesn't require an ID card. It's not just speculation; the technology already exists and is being used.

How much will you let the government know about you?

About the Author: Sandra is an online activist and blogger that sees technology as both an avenue for freedom and oppression. Her hope is that together we can stand strong against the many controlling interests that seek to use progress against us.

How Left Run Out of Other People´s Money

The Leftocrats had such a peachy time blowing taxpayers' money to the tune of phony-crony “Let´s share the wealth”

How Left Run Out of Other People´s Money


Margaret Thatcher,  The Conservative Prime Minister of United Kingdom (1979-1990), famously considered that the problem with leftists is that they eventually run out of other people´s money. In her speech to a Conservative Party Conference (October 14th, 1983), the Iron Lady expressed the fundamental truth: “If the State wishes to spend more, it can do so only by bothering your savings or by taxing you more. And it´s no good thinking that someone else will pay, that someone else is you.”
Democracies, unlike dictatorships do not overtax citizens to death of purchasing power, and there can be no freedom without financial freedom. The money transferred from our pockets to the “common wallet” should guarantee a good level of security, access to justice and well -functioning administration- serving people, and not vice versa.
In 2010, when the U.S. national debt was closing in on 14 trillion dollars, the government felt the urge to spend nearly $1 million of taxpayers´ money to “create poetry” for zoos… While one in eight people with advanced cancer could not afford recommended care, The National Institutes of Health felt it was necessary to invest in a $442,340 research on behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam, and Medicare poured $35 million into 118 fictitious medical clinics.
In 2011, the Star Tribune observed: “It´s not a crime to owe money, and debtors´ prisons were abolished in the United States in the 19th century. But people are routinely thrown in jail for failing to pay debts”. While some struggling “commoners” were sentenced to “indefinite incarceration” for $300 debts, Michelle Obama didn´t see anything wrong with blowing $10 million in taxpayers’ money on her vacations. According to Robert Keith Gray, author of “Presidential Perks Gone Royal”, American people “spent” $ 1.4 billion dollars for Obama´ whims in 2011 alone. In comparison, the British Royal Family “costs” about $ 57.8 million per annum.
In 2012, six Saginaw police officers fired 47 times at Milton Hall a homeless man who stole a cup of coffee from a local gas station. Meanwhile, the U.S. government was robbing “we the people” out of $100 000 just to throw a “Celebrity Chef Fruit Promotion Road Show in Indonesia”.
If during the reign of Obama you had problems feeding your kids and helping your elderly parents you must know that the government used your money for “absolute necessities” such as: a study on the effects of Swedish massages on rabbits ($387,000), a new soccer field for detainees in Guantanamo ($750,000), a research on “risky sexual behavior” of gay men in Argentina ($400,000), an evaluation of methane gas emissions from cows ($700,000)-you name it. NASA scientists must have suspected that Congress is on another planet which led to their $3 million study on “how Congress works”.
The Leftocrats had such a peachy time blowing taxpayers’ money to the tune of phony-crony “Let´s share the wealth” that they are trying to impeach lawfully elected President Donald Trump who stands in the way of their immense profits. They still hope to laugh all the way to the tax-paying ATM, but are yet to learn that accountability for their treasonous acts is no laughing matter.


Joanna Rosamond -- Bio and Archives | 3 CommentsJoanna Rosamond is a Coach for high stress jobs, a consultant on PTSD and burnout. Joanna has 16 years of professional experience. Unconditional support for our soldiers and veterans.

China's Drive For Global Resources

Roughly two-thirds of China's power in 2030 will come form fossil energy, the vast majority from coal

China's Drive For Global Resources


Across the globe, on nearly every continent, China is involved in a dizzying variety or resource extraction, energy, agricultural, and infrastructure projects—roads, railroads, hydro-power dams, mines—that are wrecking unprecedented damage to ecosystems and biodiversity reports, William Laurance. 1
It is difficult to find a corner of the developing world where China is not having a significant environmental impact. China is the world’s biggest financier and builder of hydroelectric dams, many of which are being constructed in biologically diverse regions where the dams and their associated roads and power lines will open up new lands for exploitation.
According to a major World Bank analysis of nearly 3,000 projects, Chinese foreign investors and companies often predominate in poorer nations with weak environmental regulations and controls, causing those nations to become ‘pollution havens’ for Chinese enterprises. 1
The factors that might restrain a US or European country in foreign resource development projects—intense press criticism, or laws governing foreign business practices—are largely lacking in today’s China.
Chad is as geographically isolated as places come in Africa. It is also among the continent’s poorest and least stable countries, the scene of recurrent civil wars and foreign invasions since it gained independence from France in 1960. None of that has put off the Chinese. In January 2007 they bought the rights to a vast exploration zone that surrounds the rural village of Koudjiwai, making the baked wilderness of this location, without roads, electricity or telephones, the latest frontier for Chinese thirsty oil industry and increasing global ambitions. 2
The same is happening in one African country after another. In large oil exporting countries like Angola and Nigeria, China is building or fixing railroads and landing giant exploration contracts in Congo and Guinea.
For China, Africa represents oil and minerals to fuel employment and growth at their thousands of factories, a place to send young men to work (some say there are 500,000 Chinese workers in Africa), and a place to invest some of its excess liquidity to keep domestic inflation down.3
China’s dealings with Latin America are staggering. Its bilateral trade with Latin American and the Caribbean has simply skyrocketed, from $15 billion in 2001 to $288.9 billion in 2012—an increase of almost 2000 percent. China is now Latin America’s largest creditor. 4
Nicaragua announced that it is awarding China a contract to build an alternative to the Panama Canal. The $50 billion scheme, started in December 2014, is being built by a Chinese firm. Although Nicaragua’s government says the canal will bring vital investment, some Nicaraguans and environmentalists are opposed to construction of the canal. 5

Gaming With Pollution

No debate, China is also engaged in green activities such as investing heavily in solar and wind energy, cracking down on its notorious air pollution and replanting millions of acres of its denuded lands. But China’s burnishing of its green credentials is in many ways being overwhelmed by the sheer scale of environmental degradation that its policies and corporations are causing worldwide.
Over the last decade Chinese government ministries have released a series of ‘green papers’ outlining lofty environmental and social guidelines for China’s overseas ventures and corporations. However, the Chinese government readily admits that compliance with its guidelines is poor, but accepts no blame for this. Instead, it insists that it has little control over its corporations and blames the host nations themselves for not controlling Chinese corporations more carefully. If China really wanted to reign in its free wheeling corporations, it could easily do so. 1
An example of how China plays games with pollution statistics is the past Olympics. Ahead of the Olympics, China was brandishing its report card on ‘blue sky days’ in Beijing, when measures of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter fell below 100 on a 500 point scale- a measure that would still be considered heavy pollution in other countries. There were only 100 such days in 1998, but after pledging 245 days in 2007, the government announced that it had succeeded with 246 and was on target for the goal of 256. They helped themselves by repositioning the monitors. Two were excluded in more polluted areas and three were added in cleaner ones. One US officials said, “Instead of meeting standards, China sometimes restates standards to meet reality.” 6
In late 2014 China pledged to peak its CO2 emissions by 2030 and achieve 20% of its primary energy from non-fossil energy sources. And certainly China continues to lead the world in annual additions of wind and solar power. While these developments are to be celebrated, there remains a sobering reality: they still leave a lot of head room for China to expand its coal power plant capacity between now and 2030, even though its coal fleet is already more than twice the size of the US coal fleet.
Continued below...

It is important to note that despite additions of substantial wind, solar and nuclear capacity, when properly adjusted for capacity factor to reflect actual capability, the amount of new coal energy added to the China grid in 2014 exceeded solar energy by more than 17 times and wind energy by more than 4 times, and even new hydro by more than 3 times. 7
Roughly two-thirds of China’s power in 2030 will come form fossil energy, the vast majority from coal

References

  1. William Laurance, “The dark legacy of China’s drive for global resources,” e360.yale.edu, March 28, 2017
  2. Howard W. French, “China, filling a void, drills for riches in Chad,” The New York Times, August 13, 2007
  3. Mthuli Ncube and Michael Fairbanks, “China in Africa,” Harvard International Review, November 30, 2012
  4. Jose Cardenas, “China’s great leap into Latin America,” realclearworld.com, May 2, 2017
  5. “Nicaragua canal scheme must be dropped,” bbc.com, October 14, 2016
  6. David Cyranoski, “Visions of China,” Nature, 454, 384, July 24, 2008
  7. Armond Cohen,”No China coal peak in sight; carbon capture will be necessary to tame emissions in this century,” catf.us/blogs, February 18, 2015

8 Best Natural Painkillers to Treat Specific Pain | Health - BabaMail

Cyberattacks Play into Escalating War Cycles

Cyberattacks Play into Escalating War Cycles


Cybersecurity has become a booming industry, especially in the wake of May’s WannaCry ransomware attack and last month’s Nuclear 17 attack on more than a dozen U.S. nuclear plants.
The WannaCry outbreak infected more than 200,000 computers across more than 150 countries and came with an estimated price tag of $4 billion.
And this growing threat is very real.
In late June, the Nuclear 17 attack put key U.S. government agencies – including the FBI, Homeland Security and National Security Agency – in hot pursuit of answers.
After all, it’s easy to see how damaging an attack on America’s power grid could be.
The fact is cybersecurity has become a big deal for business. And here’s why…
For example, the classic denial-of-service attack, or DoS, can make a machine or network resource unavailable to intended users.
And one of the most devastating types of DoS is called the distributed-denial-of-service attack, or DDoS.
With a DDoS, hackers can shut down an online service by overwhelming it with traffic from multiple sources.
Shockingly, these wicked DDoS attacks alone have become so common that many digital-security experts consider them Cyber Enemy No. 1.
Recent figures from Cisco Systems estimated that global distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks surged 172% in 2016.
And they anticipate this figure to mushroom by 2.5 times to 3.1 million by 2021. And that might be conservative.
Hackers — both criminals and government operatives — reach out of the “dark web” to attack businesses worldwide.
Meanwhile, longtime leader in DDoS defense, Nexusguard, saw a 380% increase in DDoS attacks in the first-quarter of this year compared with the same period in 2016.
Clearly, data breaches are becoming more frequent … and more expensive.
Research by IBM and the Ponemon Institute showed the average cost of a U.S. data breach in 2014 was $5.85 million. For this year, that number is up 32% to $7.35 million.
Looking at the problem globally, business insurer Hiscox Ltd. estimates cybercrime costs at more than $450 billion in 2016.
Who’s behind these attacks?
There are large numbers of people on the “dark web” plotting different shakedown plots that do not have our best interests in mind. And it’s become easier with cutting-edge technology that is widely accessible.
But some of the more ominous hacking groups are “state sponsored” and have government backing. Russia for example has been blamed for previous cyberattacks, including two attacks on Ukraine’s electric grid and interference with the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
According to sources in government circles, the Russians also possess digital weapons capable of disrupting the electric grids of rival nations.
Even worse is this all dovetails with intensifying war cycles. These cybersecurity breeches go hand and glove with espionage and outright loss of liberty.
And it’s easy to see why other nations with limited military forces might re-direct efforts toward cyberattacks in hopes of destabilizing a region – or at the very least inflicting damage.
And what’s so insidious is that this was exactly what my former colleague Larry Edelson spoke about. A cyberattack could disrupt key U.S. infrastructure, like communication networks, transportation systems, electric power grids or storage for oil and gas.
What can you do?
You can take advantage of this growing threat and the demand for advanced security systems. Just invest in prominent players within the space.
And that’s why I’m looking to accumulate shares of FireEye Inc. (FEYE), Fortinet Inc. (FTNT), and Symantec Corp. (SYMC) on weakness.
Cheers,
John Isaacson

Mosul and Urban Warfare

Mosul and Urban Warfare

Austin Bay
|
Posted: Jul 19, 2017 12:01 AM
Mosul and Urban Warfare
On July 10, Iraqi prime minister Haider al-Abadi declared coalition forces had won a "total victory" in their fight to free the city of Mosul. Since June 2014, the unfortunate city had been occupied by ISIS terrorists.
Abadi's claim of total victory was premature. In the following days, several small firefights erupted around the city. ISIS fighters reportedly entered a liberated village outside Mosul. Had they been hiding, planning to stage "stay behind" attacks on coalition forces? Or were they fleeing? Who knows. In city fights, flickering resistance may continue for weeks after the major battle is done.
Offensive operations to free Mosul officially began on October 16, 2016. "Shaping operations" to prepare for the decisive assault arguably began in 2015. Throughout the campaign the Iraqi government, fragile as it is, remained patient and persistent. To defeat the Islamic State, Iraqi Army and police units conducted operations with pro-Iranian Shia militias of suspect loyalty and Kurdish militias who disdain Baghdad. The government sought U.S. and NATO help, air support first and foremost, but also special operations personnel, the U.S. Marines and Army artillery units, and intelligence and logistics support.
The result: ISIS has lost Mosul, the once upon a time capital of the terrorist caliphate.
The city is severely damaged, with neighborhoods reduced to rubble. Its people have endured sustained terror.
Blame ISIS for the terror and ruin. ISIS commanders relied on beheadings and torture to control the population. They obliterated numerous shrines and historic sites in the region, with the biblical city of Nimrud a special target. Why? Erasing history ISIS leaders deemed "un-Islamic" was a key political policy.
A Muslim shrine could be marked for elimination. In late June 2017, coalition forces had surrounded the city. Iraqi forces, fighting street by street, neared the Al Nuri Grand Mosque, a magnificent building that had defined the city of eight centuries. In June 2014, ISIS senior commander Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi had proclaimed the ISIS caliphate from a balcony in the mosque.
But rather than let Iraqis retake the mosque, which would demonstrate the terrorists' impending loss, ISIS commanders blew it up.
Then they claimed an American airstrike destroyed the mosque.
So forgive prime minister Abadi his exuberance. His government conducted a complex political operation. It oversaw a complicated military operation, for which the forces it had available in 2015 were poorly suited.
One major operational goal stressed by Iraq officers was minimizing civilian casualties. ISIS fighters use civilians as "human shields" to deter coalition attacks on their positions. The thugs who commit this war crime always accuse their adversaries of targeting the civilians. ISIS also makes routine use of mosques as battle positions and supply depots. That complicates offensive operations where the attackers are trying to minimize the destruction.
Another key goal was protecting refugees. At one time, an estimated 1.5 million people were displaced in and around Mosul.
The coalition wanted to use air strikes and heavy artillery shelling very judiciously in order to minimize civilian deaths. However, in order to defeat ISIS the firepower edge, especially that provided by American airpower, had to be utilized. ISIS fanatics had fortified Mosul, particularly the Old City. They had mined the streets and placed improvised explosive devices in buildings. Firepower is an antidote for fanaticism.
Iraqi units also deployed tanks and armored infantry vehicles in Mosul. Armored vehicles are assets in urban warfare if they are protected by infantry on the ground. To successfully employ tanks and infantry in urban combat takes well-trained troops and experienced commanders.
"Mega-cities" -- think Tokyo, Seoul, Los Angeles, Berlin, Lagos, Cairo, Mumbai -- are 21st century political, economic and infrastructure realities. Urban combat in a mega-city will occur.
Mosul has some of the features found in mega-cities. The U.S. and its allies should conduct thorough and candid after action assessments of Iraqi and coalition operations in the liberation of Mosul.

Pentagon Goes All-in on the Sci-Fi Soldier

Pentagon Goes All-in on the Sci-Fi Soldier


It started with $2 million worth of Fitbits. Very quickly the project evolved to 3D printed helmets with nanofiber sensors.

That’s what happens when the military decides the Internet of Things can improve soldier performance.

The Army Research Lab is now all-in with sensors. In fact, if all goes according to plan, future body armor and munitions will be straight out of a science fiction novel. Equipment will adjust to the wearer’s specific biology.

Investors should take note. Good stuff is coming.

The U.S. military has always been on the cutting edge of technological development. From Caltech to MIT, Uncle Sam has been a willing financial partner to some of the leading academic institutions in the country.

In 1982, the modern internet was born when an obscure academic packet-switching network called APRANET adopted the internet protocol TCP/IP. That project was funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA.

In fact, many of the cutting-edge technologies we take for granted today began in DARPA programs. Siri, the popular iPhone assistant started as CALO, a cognitive assistant that learns and organizes. The interaction of Google Maps began with an MIT team and Aspen Movie Map.

In many ways, what the Army Research Lab is attempting to do with sensors pushes the envelope even further.

Elon Musk, founder of Tesla (TSLA) and SpaceX, often muses about merging humans with artificially intelligent computer networks. And Ray Kurzweil, the noted futurist and Google chief engineer, has been talking about the technological singularity for decades.

DARPA’s own take on this idea began in 2013 with the BRAIN initiative. For example, a better understanding of neuroscience could help amputees and those suffering from brain injuries. And implanted devices and a software interface could lead to super soldiers.

Think Jason Bourne without all the mind control, amnesia and driving soundtrack, theoretically.

Imagine new weaponry, gear and other systems capable of reacting to a soldier’s specific biology.
Now imagine new weaponry, gear and other systems capable of reacting to a soldier’s specific biology. This gear could sense stress, changes in focus, plus physical and mental health. Clothing might automatically cool or warm. A rifle might adjust its trigger level.

The combination would be unstoppable.

Defense One reports the Army Research Lab and other research operations are investing heavily. Subjects are monitored for six months to two years. And unlike private-sector case studies, participants are subject to constant scrutiny because the military provides housing, healthcare and travel.

The Air Force is developing a temporal artery sensor to measure blood-oxygen levels. They are mounting the gizmo inside the helmets of F-22 fighter pilots.

Cameras equipped with infrared technology in the cockpit can measure cerebral oxygenation simply by shining a light on the pilot’s forehead. Oxygenation is directly correlated to cognitive function.

And progress is being made with simple camera technology, too. With the correct software, cameras can measure enough biometric data to understand how small changes in heart rate can determine stress levels, even from 100 meters away.

This technology is already showing up in high-tech hardware like the so-called Iron Man exoskeleton is being developed for the U.S. Special Operations Command. The prototype is in its fifth iteration, and it’s expected to undergo field testing in 2018.

For investors, the payoff is likely to be huge.

Public companies are participating in these developing technologies. And not all of them are the defense contractors you would expect. Finding these success stories and deciding the right time to invest is the service I provide to members.

This is truly the age of invention. Advances in computer processing power, data analytics and modeling have made the process easier than ever.

Best wishes,

Jon Markman

Russia says ready to retaliate after U.S. talks end without deal

July 18, 2017 / 2:48 PM / 4 days ago

Russia says ready to retaliate after U.S. talks end without deal

3 Min Read

The Russian Embassy's compound in Centreville, Maryland, U.S. is pictured in this still image taken December 30, 2016 from NBC4/WRC-TV helicopter video footage. MANDATORY CREDIT NBC4/WRC-TV/Handout via REUTERS
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia said on Tuesday that it reserved the right to retaliate against the United States after a meeting in Washington ended without an agreement to return Russian diplomatic property the U.S. had seized.
Barack Obama, then U.S. president, ordered the seizure of two Russian diplomatic compounds in New York and Maryland and the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats in December over what he said was their involvement in hacking the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign, something Russia flatly denies.
President Vladimir Putin decided not to retaliate at the time, saying he would wait to see what the new administration of Donald Trump would do.
But Trump, besieged by a regular stream of questions about his associates' purported links to Russia, has scant room for maneuver. He risks being accused of being overly friendly to Moscow if he hands back the compounds without getting something politically substantial in return.
Moscow had said a lot would depend on the outcome of a meeting in Washington on Monday between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and U.S. Undersecretary of State Thomas Shannon. The meeting ended without agreement.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said its patience was wearing thin.
"The Russian side stressed (in the meeting) that if Washington does not remove this and other irritants, including continued obstacles to the work of our diplomatic institutions, we reserve the right to take retaliatory measures based on the principle of reciprocity," it said in a statement.
Russia has complained that U.S. officials are not issuing visas to its diplomats, preventing it from replacing its staff who were expelled in December.
Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov said he had submitted a list of things that needed to be done to improve battered US-Russia ties. Reports of a breakthrough being close were wide of the mark, he said.
"To say we are on the brink of finding a solution and sorting out this situation would be an exaggeration," Ryabkov told the TASS news agency. "Such unacceptable and contradictory actions cannot be left without a response."
The U.S. State Department said that the talks on areas of mutual concern had been "tough, forthright, and deliberate, reflecting both parties’ commitment to a resolution."
But though it said the talks had reflected a spirit of goodwill, it said it was clear "that more work needs to be done."
It said an agreement had been reached to hold talks focusing on strategic stability and the reduction of strategic arms, however.
Additional reporting by Anton Kolodyazhny and Dmitry Solovyov in Moscow and by Washington Newsroom; Editing by Larry King

Hungary launches PR campaign against George Soros


Have you seen this?

Mary

Don't ever say you weren't warned - 'He IS on his way' ~
  'He IS being groomed at this very minute'

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.google.com_url-3Fsa-3Di-26rct-3Dj-26q-3D-26esrc-3Ds-26source-3Dimages-26cd-3D-26cad-3Drja-26uact-3D8-26ved-3D0ahUKEwim0PWYluPUAhUI-5F4MKHYPTBrAQjRwIBw-26url-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fmichronicleonline.com-252F2017-252F04-252F26-252Fabdul-2De-2Dsayed-2Dmakes-2Dhis-2Dcase-2Dfor-2Dwhy-2Dhe-2Dshould-2Dbe-2Dthe-2Dnext-2Dgovernor-2Dof-2Dmichigan-252F-26psig-3DAFQjCNG0sqlv7jGDAsGtjwb95xS-2Dv0x3jg-26ust-3D1498829768088642&d=DwMFaQ&c=x9-Yv7C9ZJR7oLl-I6JMAcgAGHY0UtAzVxTMrJcn6_Q&r=nWgOlqMqzTHVh242rovTjpKEFQq5uea_B9i7LDllWuo&m=7FiDHS1pr5tG5SkuzIAOdr5TOald2zXYiehD8cLeFi4&s=t5SYhyICPaccRy5gv5aCm9_Wk4VtSlEcFKzujIwekgI&e=
PRESIDENT ABDUL EL-SAYED?

Etch this man's name in your mind.

His name is Abdul El-Sayed.
 
After years of being groomed by George Soros. He has been handpicked by the Left to be their next “champion” of Hope and Change.
 
He is 32 years old, born in the USA, and an extremely well educated Muslim Doctor in Detroit Michigan.  (education funded by Soros)

He is handsome, articulate, charismatic and smart.

He is sympathetic of the Muslim Brotherhood, and is running for Governor of Michigan. 
Which is Step 1 in his preparation to run for President of the United States.

He has the potential to be Obama #2, but far more openly Muslim.
Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is an American physician, epidemiologist, public health advocate, and politician. 

He has announced his candidacy for Governor of Michigan, running as a Democrat.
Wikipedia:
Born: October 31, 1984 (age 32), Michigan
Awards: Rhodes Scholarship; Paul and Daisy Soros; Fellowships for New Americans
Education: University of Michigan, Ann; Arbor (BA); Oriel College, Oxford (MA, PhD); Columbia University (MD)
Political party: Democratic Party.

In 2020 he will be eligible to run for President!

Democrats' mouths are watering in anticipation and raising money.

Elizabeth "Pocahontas" Warren is already campaigning for him.

Another Trojan Horse?

Al Jazeera, which is widely read by Michigan's large Muslim population, is doing its best to help George Soros make him "YOUR" president in 2020!
 
Google: Abdul El-Sayed-Soros
Bet you never dreamed an unknown, like Obama, would end up as the President of the United States of America not just once but twice FOR 8 YEARS total, did you?!


Just 5 kilometers away from Israel border,Russia Sends Missiles as Moscow Prepares for a possible War

http://www.awdnews.com/society/russian-sends-missiles-to-israel-border-as-moscow-prepares-for-a-possible-war


Just 5 kilometers away from Israel border,Russia Sends Missiles as Moscow Prepares for a possible War

Russian army units are preparing to move into the Syrian town of Quneitra in the coming days and take up positions opposite the Syrian-Israeli Golan border, DEBKAfile reports exclusively from military sources. Their function is to police the second zone of southwestern Syria designated for ceasefire by Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin when they met in Hamburg on July 7.
Quneitra is just 5km from Israel’s border and the line of IDF positions defending it.
Israel has notified Washington and Moscow that it is flatly opposed to the presence of a Russian unit on its border. However, the US and Russian officers coordinating the ceasefire’s implementation agreed to recommend going forward with the Russian deployment. The White House and the Kremlin gave the officers’ recommendation the green light, virtually imposing it on Israel against its will.
Their argument is that the first ceasefire zone that was established last week in the Daraa front on the Jordanian border will quickly break down if it is not shored up by a second zone at Quneitra.
But the two zones differ in major respects, our military and intelligence sources emphasize.
The understandings drawn up for Daraa between the US, Russia and Jordan, included a clause explicitly providing for the withdrawal of Iranian and pro-Iranian forces, including Hizballah, to a point 40km west or north of the demilitarized town.
This clause never stood up for one moment. As DEBKAfile first disclosed on July 16, even after Russian and Chechen troops moved into Daraa on Sunday, Syrian and Iranian forces did move out, but an elite Hizballah unit remained. The US, Russia and Jordan decided collectively to let this breach of the ceasefire deal go without response and tried to keep it dark.
While acting to procure Jordan’s acceptance for the new format, the two powers refrained from turning to Jerusalem. They knew they would be greeted with a flat rejection, because of an earlier lapse: The clause providing for a 40km withdrawal of Iranian and pro-Iranian troops from Daraa was left out of the deal for Quneitra - heedless of urgent Israeli demands for its inclusion.
The absence of any Trump-Putin commitment on this score leaves Israel fully exposed to the presence of Iranian and Hizballah forces within mortar range of its Golan border in an area supervised by their ally, the Russian military.
It was this danger that galvanized Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into broadcasting Israel’s total opposition to the Trump-Putin ceasefire for southwestern Syria during his visit to Paris on Monday, July 17, after his talks with President Emmanuel Macron.
In an apparent bid to calm Israel’s concerns, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made an usual statement for a Russian diplomat: "I can guarantee that we have done everything and the US side has done everything to ensure that Israel's security interests within this framework are fully taken into account," he said later on Monday.
Careful perusal of this comment revealed to our sources that it was made in the context of a previous ceasefire accord for the Russians had made Turkey and Iran “co-sponsors.”  Instead of reassurance, his comment was taken in Israel as a bid to ascertain that the arrival of Russian troops in Quneitra over Israel’s strenuous objections would go smoothly.

Asia Reassurance Initiative Act: A Republican Vision for Engaging Southeast Asia

Asia Reassurance Initiative Act: A Republican Vision for Engaging Southeast Asia

 
 
On July 18, Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO) delivered the keynote address at the seventh international conference on the South China Sea hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC.
Gardner is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific, and International Cyber Security. Under Gardner’s leadership, the Subcommittee has held three hearings to gather information and analysis to support his legislative initiative, the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act (ARIA). The first hearing, held in late March, focused on growing security challenges such as North Korea, the South China Sea, and terrorism in Southeast Asia. The theme of the second hearing, held in May, examined the importance of U.S. economic leadership in Asia. The third hearing, held in July, considered promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in the Asia-Pacific.
Gardner’s keynote address is a welcome sign that legislators in Washington are thinking seriously about U.S. policy in Southeast Asia under the Trump administration. Gardner proposed three major goals for U.S. policy. They are a good starting point but a coherent U.S. strategy toward the Indo-Pacific region still remains elusive.
Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month. Gardner opened his address by offering assurance to the United States’ “jittery allies after years of neglect.” This swipe at the Obama administration was not entirely accurate.
Under President Barack Obama, U.S. alliance relations with the Philippines were raised to new levels of interaction through the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, including U.S. rotational access to bases and facilities in the Philippines. Singapore, a strategic partner, permitted the United States to station two more Littoral Combat Ships for patrols in the South China Sea.
U.S.-Vietnam defense cooperation was stepped up through a Joint Vision Statement on Defense Relations signed in 2015 and the lifting of the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations, otherwise known as the arms embargo, during Obama’s visit to Hanoi in May 2016.
The Obama administration was also active in bringing protracted negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) to a successful conclusion.
The main failure of the Obama administration was not to stand up strongly enough when it became clear that China was implementing a master plan to dominate the South China Sea through the construction of seven artificial islands. As Admiral Harry Harris noted in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 1, the artificial islands “support long-range weapons emplacements, fighter aircraft hangars, radar towers and barracks for their troops. China’s militarization of the South China Sea is real.”
Gardner’s keynote address was divided into four parts. He opened by identifying the “coming nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula” as “the most urgent challenge for U.S. policy in the region.” He reinforced Trump’s China-centric approach by noting “the road to peacefully stopping Pyongyang undoubtedly lies through Beijing.” The senator advocated a policy of “maximum pressure,” including the invocation of further sanctions against commercial entities that do business with North Korea.
Gardner concluded this section by arguing that “Beijing must be made to choose whether it wants to work with the United States as a responsible leader to stop Pyongyang – or bear consequences of keeping him [Kim Jong-un] in power.”
In the next section of his keynote address, Gardner turned his attention to maritime security and escalating tensions in the South China Sea. Here he missed an opportunity to link the North Korean crisis with the South China Sea, the focus of the CSIS conference.
How should the United States approach these two interrelated security challenges? Gardner called for a “consistent and assertive diplomatic engagement with China” on the South China Sea in contrast to his more robust approach to China on the North Korean issue. China’s inaction with North Korea contributed to the present crisis. And China actions in the South China Sea have raised tensions and challenged U.S. national interests.
What is needed is a strategic policy framework for dealing with China on both issues. Without a comprehensive strategy regional states are less likely to be assured that the Trump administration won’t pursue a transactional approach, rewarding China for pressure on North Korea by going soft on China in the South China Sea.
In his discussion of the South China Sea, Gardner, like the Obama administration, used the term “land reclamation” to describe China’s construction of artificial islands. This description is inaccurate and misleading. It is inaccurate because it suggests that China is restoring a land feature to its previous condition. None of the Chinese-occupied features was an island that lost soil due to erosion by wind or waves. China’s artificial islands were constructed by destroying coral reefs and gouging the seabed for fill.
Gardner’s discussion of the South China Sea was all the more remarkable for its omission of any mention of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN not only seeks centrality in the region’s security architecture but it is currently engaged in discussions with China on a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea. It is clear from past U.S. diplomatic initiatives that if the Unites States pursues policies that get ahead of ASEAN, or fails to consult with ASEAN members first, these policies will remain dead in the water.
Most of Gardner’s prescriptions repeat policies that were part and parcel of Obama’s rebalance to the Asia-Pacific. The senator calls for engaging with allies. As noted, U.S. alliance relations were robust under Obama. Gardner proposes assisting the Philippines with maritime domain awareness; this was a central component of U.S. assistance under Obama. The essential point is that Gardner did not address is how to stop and reverse the growing estrangement in alliance relations initiated by Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. Later in his presentation, Gardner mentions human rights but there is no mention of the extra-judicial killing of suspected drug traffickers in the Philippines promoted by Duterte.
Gardner, like the Obama administration, advocates conducting freedom of navigation operation (FONOP) patrols. FONOPs are designed to challenge China’s (and other countries’) excessive maritime claims, but these patrols are largely irrelevant because the United States is not addressing the central issue. China has not promulgated baselines around any of its artificial islands in the Spratlys. These are a prerequisite to determining a 12 nautical mile (nm) territorial sea. The United States is splitting legal hairs when it sails within 12 nm of an artificial island.
The central issue is China’s challenge to FONOPs on the grounds that they threaten China’s security. China routinely warns off military aircraft for entering a “military alert zone.” This is an expansive claim with no basis in international law. However, if China interferes with U.S. FONOPs, the United States would be unable to use the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) for legal redress, as Washington has never ratified the convention. Gardner’s keynote does not mention whether he supports the early ratification of UNCLOS.
Gardner called for U.S. allies such as Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom to join U.S. FONOPs. This is a good suggestion for two reasons. First, as maritime powers the United States and its allies should challenge China’s imposition of a “military alert zone” over the Spratlys. Second, if China attempted to interfere with freedom of navigation patrols by Australian or Japanese warships operating with the U.S. Navy, for example, these countries could take legal action under UNCLOS because they have ratified the treaty.
Gardner also argues that negotiations for a Code of Conduct “must start with the Hague ruling, which invalidated the so-called ‘nine-dash line.’” This is a decision that ASEAN should make. The United States could backstop ASEAN by conducting FONOPs and overflights across the South China Sea and the Spratlys in particular to demonstrate that Washington does not recognize the nine-dash line claim. This would be a modification of the current official rational for freedom of navigation missions. The purpose of challenging China’s nine-dash line should be made explicit.
Gardner is on sound ground in advocating that “urgent steps” must be taken “to rebuild our military, so we can enhance our defense posture in the region.”
Gardner’s third section addressed the threat of “the rising tide of Islamic extremism in Southeast Asia.” He correctly advocates a significant increase in “military, intelligence, and counterterrorism cooperation with the governments of the region.” He presciently observes:
When U.S. leadership wanes, or even the perception of U.S. leadership is waning, it undoubtedly empowers bad actors and constrains the political space for many nations to make choices that comport with U.S. values and interests.
Gardner concluded his keynote by proposing a new legislative initiative, the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act (ARIA). U.S. reassurance is needed not because of Obama’s “flawed ‘Asia rebalance’ policy” as the senator argued, but because of candidate Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy, his criticism of U.S. allies Japan and South Korea during the presidential election campaign, and his withdrawal from the TPP on his first day as president.
ARIA has three components: strengthening U.S. security commitments to its allies; promoting economic engagement and securing a U.S. market access in the Asia-Pacific; and promoting democracy, human rights, and transparency. Gardner left unexplained how these three goals will be integrated into a coherent strategy. But they are important first steps and should be given bipartisan support. ARIA should include a fourth goal – the expeditious completion of the Trump administration’s belated U.S. National Security Strategy mandated by Congress.