Newsweek, getting on the survivalist bandwagon…months late…(see my piece “Getting Off the Grid“).

You read it first here or on some other libertarian site…then it percolates upward to the “elites,”  carefully sanitized of its origins. An anthropology of the taboos and totems of the journalistic tribe is in order..

“In the end, what it all boils down to, at least for the preppers, is self-reliance—a concept as old as the human race itself. As survival blogger Joe Solomon pointed out in a recent column, during the Victory Gardens of WWII, Americans managed to grow 40 percent of all the vegetables they needed to survive. “My mother’s parents had a 10-acre garden, and my grandfather worked at the dairy farm next door,” says Hill, the former jet mechanic. “They worked by raising their own food, they had their own chickens, they canned vegetables, and my grandfather fed a family of 12 like that.” But in the modern world, he says, many of those skills are easily forgotten. Today, our food comes from dozens of different sources. Most of us aren’t quite sure how electricity gets from the wires to our stoves. We use debit cards to buy a can of tuna and we wouldn’t have the slightest idea how to filter contaminated water. We are residents of the new millennium; we simply haven’t needed to prepare.

So for the moment, people like Bedford are reteaching themselves lost skills—and in some cases, learning new ones. Bedford has read up on harvesting an urban garden, and is learning to use a solar oven to bake bread. She is ready with a pointed shot in the event she ever needs to hunt for her own food. And until then, she’s got 61 cans of chili, 20 cans of Spam, 24 jars of peanut butter, and much more stocked in her pantry; she estimates she’s spent about $4,000 on food supplies, an amount that should keep her family going for at least three months. Now, even if something simple goes wrong, like a paycheck doesn’t go through, “we don’t need to worry,” she says.”

Former Chairman of President Reagan´s Economic Council:, Martin Feldstein via 321gold.

“In short, there are better ways than gold to hedge inflation risk and exchange-rate risk. TIPS, or their equivalent from other governments, provide safe inflation hedges, and explicit currency futures can offset exchange-rate risks.

Nevertheless, although gold is not an appropriate hedge against inflation risk or exchange-rate risk, it may be a very good investment. After all, the dollar value of gold has nearly tripled since 2005. And gold is a liquid asset that provides diversification in a portfolio of stocks, bonds and real estate.

But gold is also a high-risk and highly volatile investment. Unlike common stock, bonds, and real estate, the value of gold does not reflect underlying earnings. Gold is a purely speculative investment. Over the next few years, it may fall to $500 an ounce or rise to $2,000 an ounce. There is no way to know which it will be. Caveat emptor. “

My Comment:

My interpretation of that is that there´s going to be a concerted effort to push the gold prices lower, which coincides with a technical need to correct…

This is a what a really great reporter looks like – Gary Webb, author of “Dark Alliance,” the book that blew open the CIA-crack cocaine connection. (Webb eventually committed “suicide” after the media trashed his career, although he had once been the recipient of a Pulitzer).

Here is Webb explaining media inertia and resentment in a 1997 interview:

“Webb: It’s been incredible, and it’s been amazing, and it’s been disgusting at times.

You’re referring to the media?

Well, first of all, I think the public’s response was fairly amazing, just the public outcry. I mean, it’s not like something you write about and [expect] people start marching in the street. That was a fairly amazing reaction. And I think some of the media follow-up’s been fairly disgusting.

Why do you think the media reacted the way they did?

Well, I think there’s a couple of reasons. One is that the big papers in this country have sort of an institutional history of sitting on this story. You go back and you look at what was written back in the ’80s by the three big papers in this country about this Contra-cocaine topic, and most of it was just a pack of lies. And they have continued that sort of “There’s nothing here” attitude up until now. So I think that one of the reasons is that they had an institutional history of covering this story up, and this [series] sort of exposed that for what it was. I think the other part of the problem is that you have most of the people that wrote these stories for most of the papers are establishment organs, they are mouthpieces a lot of the time for the government. And I think that’s what they’re being used for in this case, is the government’s side of the story.”

We always suspected that there was something odd about the Mumbai bombings. Something “stagey.” And we have been biting our tongue wondering when some bright-eyed reporter was going to turn over a few stones:

Times Online:

“A key terror suspect who allegedly helped to plan last year’s attacks in Mumbai and plotted to strike Europe was an American secret agent who went rogue, Indian officials believe.

David Headley, 49, who was born in Washington to a Pakistan diplomat father and an American mother, was arrested in Chicago in October. He is accused of reconnoitring targets in India and Europe for Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), the Pakistan-based terror group behind the Mumbai attacks and of having links to al-Qaeda. He has denied the charges.

He came to the attention of the US security services in 1997 when he was arrested in New York for heroin smuggling. He earned a reduced sentence by working for the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) infiltrating Pakistan-linked narcotics gangs.

Indian investigators, who have been denied access to Mr Headley, suspect that he remained on the payroll of the US security services — possibly working for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) — but switched his allegiance to LeT.“

My Comment

Rogue he might be, but it´s odd that, once again, when you dig deep enough….you find a CIA link.

How big is that outfit anyway?

At least, the FBI is on the case.

I got my Christmas present early this year, from Graham Rankin, who is now enshrined in my writerly heart:

“For the role of a modern-day Luther and his 95 Theses, we could suggest to the historians Matt Taibbi and his article on Wall Street bankers Goldman Sachs for Rolling Stone magazine, ‘Inside The Great American Bubble Machine,’ which caused such a huge fuss in July, as long as we remember a lot of similar points had already been made in 2006 by Lila Rajiva in a piece that should have won an award for prescience, and hopefully one day still might. No doubt the historians will debate that role for some time to come.”

Thanks Graham, and if you´ll check on my blog for my articles and books, you will find the rest of Taibbi´s thesis there too. Plus some of my language and one-liners, I do believe.  You get dinner on me some day, buddy.

The other dude who can both read and tell the truth is Robert Wenzel, who´s also cited me on that.

There is hope.

I am off for Christmas…which I hope to spend on the delta of the Parana…an especially pretty spot this time of year..

Best wishes to all.

The Wall Street Journalreports:

“Mr. Tepper’s hedge-fund firm has racked up about $7 billion of profit so far this year—with Mr. Tepper on track to earn more than $2.5 billion for himself, according to people familiar with the matter. That is among the largest one-year takes in recent years.

Behind the wins: a bet worth billions of dollars that America would avoid a repeat of the Great Depression.

Through February and March, Mr. Tepper scooped up beaten-down bank shares as many investors were running for the exits. Day after day, Mr. Tepper bought Bank of America Corp. shares, then trading below $3, and Citigroup Inc. preferred shares, when that stock was under $1. One of his investors insisted more carnage loomed. Friends who shared his bullish beliefs were wary of aping his moves amid speculation that the government was about to nationalize the big banks.

“I felt like I was alone,” Mr. Tepper recalls. On some days, he says, “no one was even bidding.”

The bets paid off. A resurgent market has helped Mr. Tepper’s firm, Appaloosa Management, gain about 120% after the firm’s fees, through early December. Thanks to those gains, Mr. Tepper, who specializes in the stocks and bonds of troubled companies, manages about $12 billion, a sum that makes Appaloosa one of the largest hedge funds in the world.”

My Comment:

I’m all for going against the grain and making out like a bandit. But then you look closer, and it turns out that Tepper once worked at …surprise..Goldman’s junk bond trading department in the 1980s…
turns out that all he did was be on the right side of figuring out whether the government would back the banks whose stocks he’d bought at the bottom in February and March..which they did.

Viva casino capitalism. Especially, when you’ve worked at the casino..

Matt Welch at Reason:

“Last week, you’ll recall, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman began his column by saying: “A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy,” which was in seeming contradiction to his alarmed observation four months prior that “congressmen hanged in effigy” by Tea Partiers represented “something new and ugly” in American politics. Well, yesterday, the Krugger issued one of the better non-apology apologies you’ll read this week:

(Management wants me to make it clear that in my last column I wasn’t endorsing inappropriate threats against Mr. Lieberman.)”

From Chris Floyd

“While we were all out doing our Christmas shopping, the highest court in the land quietly put the kibosh on a few more of the remaining shards of human liberty.

It happened earlier this week, in a discreet ruling that attracted almost no notice and took little time. In fact, our most august defenders of the Constitution did not have to exert themselves in the slightest to eviscerate not merely 220 years of Constitutional jurisprudence but also centuries of agonizing effort to lift civilization a few inches out of the blood-soaked mire that is our common human legacy. They just had to write a single sentence.

Here’s how the bad deal went down. After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president’s fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a “suspected enemy combatant” by the president or his designated minions is no longer a “person.” They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever — save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.”

David Crowe at Lew Rockwell:

“There is a lot of evidence that the activity often called science, and the scientists who practice this activity (as opposed to those few who have a monk-like dedication to the scientific method), are not trustworthy. Peer review is a bankrupt process, for example. It is lousy at detecting fraud but very good at suppressing innovative thought. Financial conflicts of interest are frequent and rarely disclosed. Scientists often fall into the trap of focusing on their next grant rather than what important questions need to be asked (including questioning their own assumptions and biases). The prejudices of the system are amplified in this way. Those who conform are rewarded with grants which inform the granters that this is a subject of great interest.

“The proof of this is that there have been many scientific errors that have survived for decades – Piltdown Man, Radical Mastectomy, (opposition to) continental drift, irradiation of the thymus, the germ theories of scurvy, pellagra and SMON. We, like all generations before us, falsely believe that all false beliefs lie in the past.

“The ClimateGate scandal illustrated this problem well. Without access to data scientists cannot fully evaluate the work of others. Phil Jones, the head of the CRU, at the center of this scandal, said, Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” That is exactly why the data should be released. If it can pass scrutiny from a skeptical, critical, cynical scientist then our confidence in the data and interpretations drawn from it will be much higher. It is a waste of time to give data to a scientist whose intention is to prove that previous interpretations are correct.”