Last October, when we pointed out that China's FX outflows had just hit a whopping $75BN - the single biggest monthly outflow since the 2015 currency devaluation - we concluded that the "unfavorable interest rate spread between China and the US will "likely imply persistent depreciation and outflow pressures in coming months", or in other words, September's biggest FX outflow in years is just the beginning, and very soon - in addition to geopolitics and central banks - the world will also be freaking out about the capital flight out of China... not to mention where all those billions in Chinese savings are going and which digital currency the Chinese are using to launder said outflows."

We wrote that on October 20 when Bitcoin was trading just under $30,000, a level it had been for much of 2023. And, just as we correctly predicted at the time...

Clockwork: every time China FX outflows surge, bitcoin erupts.

From last Friday: China Capital Flight Panic Eruptshttps://t.co/j0eWLnbFMq

... following this surge in Chinese FX outflows, bitcoin - traditionally China's preferred means to circumvent Beijing's great capital firewall since gold is, how should one put it, a bit more obvious when crossing borders - promptly exploded more than 100% higher in the next 4 months.

And while conventional wisdom is that this surge in the price of the digital currency was largely due to the January launch of Bitcoin ETFs, what many missed was a Reuters story in January which confirmed our thesis from back in 2015, according to which much more than ETFs, and much more than rapidly shifting sentiment or frankly any day-to-day newsflow, it is China's massive wall of inert capital that has been the biggest driver of bitcoin moves, and never more so than during periods of FX and capital outflows which usually precede some form of capital controls.

We bring all this up because six months after our first correct prediction that China's spike in FX outflows would send bitcoin surging, it's time to do it again.

One wouldn't know if, however, if one merely looked at the official Chinese FX reserve data published by the PBOC, here nothing sticks out. In fact, at $3.246 trillion, reported Chinese reserves are now near the highest level in past four years, and monthly flows are very much stable as shown in the chart below.

The problem, of course, is that as we have explained previously China's officially reported reserves are woefully (and perhaps purposefully) inaccurate of the bigger picture.

Instead if one uses our preferred gauge of FX flows, one which looks at i) onshore outright spot transactions; ii) freshly entered and canceled forward transactions, and iii) the SAFE dataset on “cross-border RMB flows, we find that China's net outflows were $39bn in March, up from $11bn in February and the fastest pace of outflows since the September spike in FX outflows which we duly noted half a year ago.

How did we get this number? The portfolio investment channel showed net outflows in March. The Stock Connect channel showed net outflows of US$8bn vs. US$5bn inflows in February, and inflows to the bond market slowed in March (US$6bn, vs. US$11bn in February)...

... primarily on record net selling of central government bonds.

Finally, the current account channel showed also net outflows in March, mainly as services trade related outflows picked up.

At the time when FX outflows were re-acclererating, the broad USD strengthened further in March, and USD/CNY spot drifted higher, as one would expect when there is capital flight... Oh, and Bitcoin hit a record high above $70K.

And while Chinese policymakers are still keen on maintaining FX stability - the countercyclical factors in the daily CNY fixing remained deeply negative and front-end CNH liquidity tightened notably in recent weeks - the reality is that with China desperate to boost its exports at a time when its great mercantilist competitor, Japan, has hammered the yen to the lowest level in 3 decades, it is only a matter of time before the currency devaluation advocates win, as they did in 2015. 

We hope that we don't have to remind readers that the first big trigger for bitcoin's unprecedented eruption higher starting in 2015 was - you guessed it - China's August 2015 FX devaluation.

So don't be surprised if in the next 6 months Bitcoin doubles again, and the move has nothing to do with ETF inflows, the halving, or frankly anything else taking place in the US... and instead is entirely driven by China's massive wall of money which at last check was almost 3x bigger than the US.

One of the biggest questions of our time is whether China and the United States can escape Thucydides's Trap. It seems that, in the short term, the US will likely avoid direct conflict with China, but in the long term, there will be a slow march toward conflict in the Indo-Pacific region. 

On Tuesday, Admiral John Aquilino, the head of the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), told reporters in Tokyo that China has become increasingly aggressive across Asia. 

"We all need to understand that it's moving very fast," Aquilino said, as quoted by Bloomberg. 

He said, "The buildup of military power despite a bad economy, the increased narrative of all things inside the 10-dash line are Chinese sovereign territory, then the actions that are going toward enforcement."

After serving three years as the head of INDOPACOM, Aquilino will step down. He oversees 380,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, guardians, Coast Guardsmen, and Department of Defense civilians. 

He warned about rising tensions near the Second Thomas Shoal, where the Philippines has held the line since World War II. A recent incident of Chinese vessels using water cannons to block Philippine military vessels has been an ominous sign for some military observers. 

Aquilino also spoke about China's economy, indicating the world's second-largest economy "has drastically been reduced" because of a "real-estate market crash."

"You go ask any economist if the Chinese are going to deliver 5.3% growth, and they will tell you, 'No way,'" Aquilino said.

Aquilino also called North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's regime "disgusting" for spending large sums of money on the military while a food shortage ripples through the country. 

Aquilino's comment comes days before US Secretary of State Antony Blinken travels to China. He is expected to convey Washington's "deep concerns" about Beijing's support for Russia's defense industrial base.

"We're prepared to take steps when we believe necessary against firms that ... severely undermine security in both Ukraine and Europe," Blinken told reporters ahead of Wednesday's trip. 

David Asher, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, commented on Aquilino's remarks by stating:

"Admiral Aquilino has been a forward-thinking, leaning, and acting US Combatant Commander in the Indo-Pacific. But the facts on the ground and sea have been allowed to strategically favor Communist China which has fortified coral reefs and atolls across the South China Sea and fan its naval forces across the region from the seas surrounding Japan to Taiwan to the Philippines and Vietnam. 

"China's relentless expansionism has been largely unopposed. Beijing cannot be allowed to continue its expansionist wave. It's time for the US, Japan, and Australia to link up and provide active protection to the Philippines and start to begin freedom of navigation missions to Taiwan. Incoming Commander Admiral Sam Paparo will have a lot on his plate." 

Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine and soaring turmoil in the Middle East, including Israel and Iran, with risks of conflicts flaring up in the Indo-Pacific region, are all confirmations that a multipolar world has emerged. 

That said, we have noted that defense spending worldwide has surged, pushing the defense industry into a bull market:

• World Stumbles Into "More Dangerous Decade" As Defense Spending Soars, Says Military Think Tank

• Germany Reportedly Goes On Military Spending Spree To Hit NATO Spending Minimums For First Time

• Lockheed Martin Wins $17BN Interceptor Contract To Protect US Homeland

• German Tank Builder Says "New Decade Of Security Policy Begins" As Defense Bull Market Roars

• SAAB CEO Says Rising War Risk Drives Defense Spending; Missile Stocks In Bull Market

• Global Military Spending Hits All-Time High Of $2.4 Trillion

There's a bull market in global defense stocks. 

The multipolar world will only bring more chaos and destruction. 

Does your state support your 2nd Amendment rights or make it exceedingly difficult to keep and bear arms?

Ammo.com has ranked the worst states to be a gun owner below...

How?

By analyzing each state’s current laws, upcoming laws, concealed carry guidelines, self-defense statutes, and 2A-centric taxes in order to identify the worst states for gun owners in 2024.

Report Highlights

• Hawaii is the #1 worst state for gun owners due to strict purchasing and carry laws, as well as defying the Supreme Court on the individual’s right to carry.

• California is the #2 worst state for gun owners due to its permit-to-purchase and reciprocity laws.

• New York, Illinois, and New Jersey take the #3, #4, and #5 spot in our list of worst states for gun ownership due to strict purchasing and carrying requirements.

• North Carolina, Maine, and Ohio fall into spots #25, #24, and #23 due to new restrictive legislation with some relaxed carry laws.

• Some states rank lower than others due to excessive infringements, additional taxes, and the current Governor’s 2A statements.

• State and local laws defining Stand Your Ground vs. Duty to Retreat vary and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Jump to a state: AL | AK | AZ | AR | CA | CO | CT | DE | FL | GA | HI | ID | IL | IN | IA | KS | KY | LA | ME | MD | MA | MI | MN | MS | MO | MT | NE | NV | NH | NJ | NM | NY | NC | ND | OH | OK | OR | PA | RI | SC | SD | TN | TX | UT | VT | VA | WA | WV | WI | WY

Read the full report on the worst states to be a gun owner in 2024 at Ammo.com.

Authored by Graham Young via The Epoch Times,

“Papers please” used to be the ostinato of totalitarian systems, at least in the movies.

With the passing of the government’s Digital ID bills, Australians will have to become used to the digital equivalent - so what does that say about present-day Australia?

A few things have surprised me over the last few years, not the least the way the famous Aussie spirit of insubordination has been subsumed into a goody-two-shoes compliance with whatever capricious orders the authorities made.

I can’t imagine our forebears accepting lockdowns and forced vaccinations, and I certainly couldn’t see them accepting an identity card linking not just government accounts but private sector ones as well.

While the first proposition is an assertion based on a gut feeling, the second is very much based on fact.

Remember the Australia Card?

In 1984, the Hawke Labor government introduced the Australia Card, and for the next three years, the government and opposition parties tussled over it to the extent that it triggered a double-dissolution election in 1987.

Objections didn’t just come from the federal Opposition either.

Queensland Labor Senator George Georges resigned from the governing party in 1986 over the issue, and in the lower house, Labor backbencher Lewis Kent said:

“Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitlercard or Stalin-card.”

As a result, while the government won the 1987 election, and had the numbers to push the card through, instead, it withdrew the card when a technicality was found that could have affected its operation. One senses this was a relief.

Individual Freedom Chipped Away, One Law at a Time

Yet, apart from a few senators this time there has been little outcry in response to the Albanese government’s Digital ID, although the Liberal-National Opposition did vote against it.

A form of this ID was recommended by the Murray Inquiry into the Financial System in 2014, but the committee was careful to avoid recommending a full-blown government-issued identity card because of the Australia Card debacle.

The then-Liberal-National government acted on these recommendations, but its version of the bill was to facilitate private organisations to issue their own digital identity cards, rather than the government.

Why has the government now decided to make the card a government-issued one, when the recommendation and the draft legislation was for a competitive system?

At one level one might say it is symptomatic of this Labor government that it wants to control everything and is suspicious of both private enterprise and competition.

At another level, it has been gnawing away at the independence of the citizenry, particularly the independence of thought, so maybe there is a long-term agenda of control here.

Two pieces of draft legislation, and one draft regulation, exemplify this tendency—the proposed draft Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, the Online Safety (Relevant Electronic Services—Class 1A and Class 1B Material) Industry Standard 2024, as well as the Religious Discrimination Bill.

The combination of these is to restrict what citizens can say, teach, and whom they associate with, depending on what is approved by the government, or worse, regulators.

Recent Tragedies Reveal How Eager Authorities Are to ‘Protect’ Us

Almost as though to prove the dangers of these proposed laws, the Commonwealth “censor” eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant just days ago ordered Meta and X to remove videos showing footage from the stabbing incidents at Westfield Bondi Junction shopping centre, and the Christ the Good Shepherd church at Wakely.

I’ve seen this footage, as have many other Australians, and suffice it to say, were I the eSafety commissioner, they would still be up.

When it comes to horror, the footage I have seen from Gaza and Ukraine, and reproduced in the pages and on the websites of the major news sites, is more horrific than any of this footage.

And where is the justification for censoring the information that individuals can now access for themselves?

For a moment there, we all became citizen journalists, able to view events and make our own decisions, and now the government is trying to take our accreditation away from us.

Indeed, some of these clips are uplifting as they show acts of heroism as men throw themselves between attackers and victims, or tend to the wounded.

Ms. Grant only has powers over commercial entities, so I can still, for the moment, show the videos on my blog.

But should we all have a unique identifier, known to the government and cross-referenced to every other activity that we are involved in, who knows what petty bureaucrat will hold my free will in their hands? And what else might the government interfere with?

Voluntary? Not Really

In Canada, a country that shares our democratic norms, we saw the Trudeau government bar protestors, and any supporters who donated money to their cause, from using their bank accounts.

Imagine what an interlinking record could allow them to have done.

Is it too far-fetched to think that could happen in Australia?

The government says these concerns are absurd.

The digital ID card is “voluntary” and will only link records to the person, not link them together, and records will be encrypted. It also claims that it will protect against cyber-attacks.

The voluntary aspect is laughable.

You may be able to access your Centrelink welfare benefits without it, but you will need to physically go down to the Centrelink office, even if you live in Oodnadatta—a remote outback town in South Australia—and if the office is in Perth, Western Australia.

And if you are a company director, you will need one, full-stop, because of the now-mandatory “director IDs” introduced by the Morrison government in 2021.

If “voluntary” doesn’t mean voluntary for all people and all activities, then it doesn’t mean voluntary at all.

Believe It or Not, the Slippery Slope Is Real

So why are we acquiescing to this scheme?

Perhaps it is because we’ve become too compliant—that the irreverent generation were the original immigrants and their sons and daughters, and now we are onto third, fourth, fifth generations and more, the spirit of adventure that brought people here has dissipated.

Or maybe it’s the case that the frog has been swimming in digital waters that have gradually risen in temperature.

First, we allowed social media companies to monetise us in return for the free use of their platforms, and then we allowed them to cross-reference our online activities to create profiles to then be used for other unrelated sites.

And how is that working out? They abuse their power.

We know that, come election time, they will be putting their thumbs on our scales and showing us material that they deem suitable, rather than allowing us to make our own decisions.

We also know that they work hand-in-glove with unscrupulous administrations to sell us lies like “safe and effective” and to suppress embarrassing facts, such as the high probability that viruses escape from laboratories more regularly than from pangolins in a market (particularly when the market didn’t have any pangolins for sale).

I don’t believe that governments are any more trustworthy than social media, especially if they are staffed with Bruce Lehrmanns and Brittany Higgins’s.

Democracy is meant to be government by the people, for the people. And Google’s motto was “Don’t be evil.”

But one seems to be converging on government by anyone but the people, and the other seems to have dropped the motto, maybe ashamed of their hypocrisy.

Either way, human institutions seem inexorably to head towards dissolution, so the less they know about you and can link together, the better.

So I’ll probably pass on my Digital ID.

Whoops, I’m a company director. Looks like they are closing in on me already.

Looks like I’ve already learned the true, government-approved, meaning of “voluntary.”

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

US officials have been quoted in Politico as saying the Biden White House is preparing a "larger than normal" weapons package for Ukraine to be sent quickly once Biden signs the bill into law authorizing $61 billion in spending, following the historic weekend House vote, which was far and away the biggest hurdle.

The officials described the new "significantly larger" tranche as including Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Humvees, M113 armored personnel carriers, and missiles - which will be ready to roll out the door. Also expected included in the package will be older Humvees and M113 armored personnel carriers. Two admin officials have told Reuters that the first single new package is expected to be valued at $1 billion.

ATACMS missile, via US Army

The White House said in a readout of Biden's Monday call with Zelensky wherein the latter thanked the US for the new assistance: "President Biden shared that his administration will quickly provide significant new security assistance packages to meet Ukraine’s urgent battlefield and air defense needs as soon as the Senate passes the national security supplemental and he signs it into law."

Interestingly (and alarmingly, given the cross-border escalation with Russia soon to follow), Zelensky touted that the new bill also included provisions for Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) with a range of about 190 miles. "In the agreement on ATACMS for Ukraine, all the details are in place," Zelensky said. "Thank you, Mr. President, thank you Congress, thank you America."

The $61 billion marked for Ukraine, among a broader final package totaling $95 billion (the rest for Israel and Taiwan), is now set for a vote in the Senate on Tuesday. "The task before us is urgent. It is once again the Senate’s turn to make history," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell stated while previewing the vote.

Biden told Zelensky that he could expect the military assistance to arrive "quickly" - at a moment Ukrainian cities and especially energy and communications infrastructure are getting pounded. One question that remains is how much of the $61 billion is going straight to major US defense contractors, as they work speedily to prepare more military hardware to be shipped out the door.

Meanwhile, the southern port city of Odesa was pummeled overnight, and there are reports of Russian drones having been fired on the capital of Kiev as well:

At least nine people have been injured after an overnight Russian air strike on the city of Odesa, Ukrainian officials said. "As a result of Russian terror, residential buildings were damaged, and there was a fire," Ukraine’s state emergency services said on Telegram.

The day prior, stunning video emerged from Kharkiv showing a large TV tower being taken out during a Russian attack...

Russia just struck the TV tower in Kharkiv, messing with Ukrainian digital signal. It's their scorched-earth tactic in action, déjà vu from spring 2022 pic.twitter.com/rwGOHyaEg2

AFP reported that an "AFP journalist in Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city, saw the red-and-white spire of the 240-meter structure toppled after local officials reported a barrage by Russian forces."

The New York Times has recently observed that "War in eastern Ukraine has killed tens of thousands of people, reduced cities to ruins and displaced millions of people. It has also all but destroyed the factories and plants that were for years an important driver of Ukraine’s economy."

As for what's expected to be rushed US aid the moment Biden signs the new package into law, there are reports saying the staging has already taken place in central and eastern Europe...

According to CNN, most of the American aid to Ukraine, which still needs Senate approval, has already been pre-positioned in warehouses in Germany and Poland. This advance placement will shorten the delivery time to Ukraine.

Among the first items to be supplied will be… pic.twitter.com/1PXWI0N4ML

By Dan Witters of Gallup

Nine percent of U.S. adults report that they use cannabis regularly, defined as at least 10 days of consumption per month.

Regular usage differs by education and income, with the highest rates seen among those with a high school education or less (13%) and those living in households earning less than $24,000 per year (16%). These consumption levels are about three times the rates found among those with postgraduate work or degrees (5%) and those living in households earning $180,000 or more annually (5%).

This analysis is part of the Gallup National Health and Well-Being Index. The results are based on a web survey of 6,386 U.S. adults, conducted Nov. 30-Dec. 8, 2023, as part of the Gallup Panel, a probability-based, non-opt-in panel encompassing all 50 states and the District of Columbia. To measure cannabis use, Gallup asked: “Keeping in mind that this is confidential, how many days in the last month have you used cannabis products (such as smoking marijuana, vaping liquid THC, or consuming baked goods or gummies) to alter your mood and help you relax?”

About one in five adults (19%) report using cannabis products at least once in the prior month, including 23% of those with a high school degree or less and 28% of those in households earning under $24,000 per year.

Regular Cannabis Use Diminishes With Age, Slightly Higher Among Men

In addition to education and income, other factors are associated with greater use of cannabis. Adults younger than 50, for example, are twice as likely as those aged 65 and older to be regular cannabis users (12% vs. 6%, respectively). Men (11%) are marginally more likely than women (8%) to be regular consumers, while little difference is found among White, Black and Hispanic adults.

Cannabis Use Highest in East North Central and New England Areas

Reports of regular cannabis use vary across the U.S. Census divisions. The highest rates of use (11%) are found in the Middle Atlantic (New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey) and East North Central divisions (Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio). The lowest usage rates (7%) are reported in the East South Central (Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama) and the West North Central (North Dakota, Minnesota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri) divisions. These differences are statistically meaningful.

These results generally align with political identity, with residents of politically red states having somewhat lower regular usage rates than politically blue states. While regular use is reported by 10% of Democrats and independents, it drops to 6% among Republicans.

When sorted into states that have legalized marijuana versus those that have kept it illegal, however, little differences in usage exist:

• In states that have legalized marijuana: average of 2.9 days of cannabis consumption per month per person, with 9.7% regular users
• In states that have not legalized marijuana: average of 2.5 days of cannabis consumption per month per person, with 8.6% regular users

Implications

In the U.S., cannabis is fully legal in 18 states and legal for medicinal purposes in 12 states. Another eight states have decriminalized marijuana, while it is fully illegal in 12 others. Legalization for recreational use was passed initially by voters in Colorado and Washington in 2012, with the commercial sale of marijuana to the general public available in both states in 2014. Nationally, 70% of adults now favor the legalization of marijuana for recreational use, an all-time high across over 50 years of measurement and up from 25% as recently as 1995. The narrow gap in cannabis consumption among residents of states where it remains illegal compared with those in states where it is legal suggests that its criminalization does little to curtail its use among American adults.

Dovetailing with broadening legalization, the percentage of U.S. adults who report that they smoke marijuana has more than doubled in the past decade, climbing from 7% in 2013 to 17% in 2023. During that same period, the percentage reporting that they have tried it at least once has climbed from 38% to 50%. (It is worth noting that respondents may have also become more comfortable admitting to its use as its legality has widened.)

How users consume cannabis has also evolved in recent years. For example, CDC BRFSS data show that among those who had consumed cannabis by any means in the prior 30 days, the proportion who primarily chose vaping to do so increased from 9.9% to 14.9% between 2017 and 2019 alone -- and has likely increased since that time, particularly among young adults.

Marijuana use can be addictive, with one study1 estimating that about three in 10 users form marijuana use disorder and a different study2 estimating that about 10% of cannabis users will become addicted. The use of marijuana during adolescence or young adulthood can affect how the brain builds connections for functions like attention and memory. Its use has also been linked to depression, anxiety and suicide. That cannabis use skews toward younger, less educated and lower-income individuals is consistent with previously existing research across an array of different substances and supports the need for early detection and intervention for at-risk individuals.

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) hid how a woman who suffered chest pain and other symptoms following COVID-19 vaccination received a shot because of a mandate at work, newly obtained documents show.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta, Ga., on Aug. 25, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

The agency also redacted how multiple children were diagnosed with Kawasaki Disease after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, according to the documents.

The Epoch Times obtained more than 1,400 pages of emails from the CDC concerning its Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) project, which analyzes post-vaccination problems reported by health care providers. The tranche included numerous redactions.

While redactions are allowed under the Freedom of Information Act, there were signs that too much information was being hidden.

The Epoch Times appealed some of the redactions.

The CDC agreed to remove some of them, revealing what the agency initially shielded.

In one email, a provider reports a 30-year-old woman who suffered chest pain and leg twitching following COVID-19 vaccination. The original copy of the email stated in part that she “got vaccine due to [redacted].”

In the updated copy, the CDC removed the redaction, showing that the woman received a vaccine because of a mandate at work.

Several other portions of the emails that are now unredacted show the CDC hid how multiple children, including a 2-year-old, were said to have suffered from a serious inflammatory illness called Kawasaki Disease shortly after receiving a shot.

One girl suffered inflammation around the eyes, swollen lips, high fever, and a rash, and “was admitted last week with Kawasaki,” one of the girl’s parents wrote on Dec. 5, 2021, the new documents show. She received a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine two weeks prior.

Dr. Matthew Oster is a cardiologist who works for the CDC.

“The biggest question, of course, here, is whether this was truly [redacted] or whether this was [redacted] related to the vaccine,” Dr. Oster wrote after hearing about the case.

The cleaner copy of the email showed that the redactions covered “KD,” or Kawasaki Disease, and “MIS-C,” or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children.

“We do now have a small number of cases like this one,” Dr. Oster said.

An email obtained by The Epoch Times shows a health care provider reporting symptoms in a woman after COVID-19 vaccination. The reason she received a vaccine was hidden by the CDC. (The Epoch Times)

A cleaner copy of the same email, obtained after a successful appeal of the redactions, showed that the woman received a vaccine because of a mandate at work. (The Epoch Times)

The CDC has portrayed MIS-C as only being caused by COVID-19, but studies have found that there were MIS-C cases before the COVID-19 pandemic and that some people suffered the syndrome after vaccination without evidence of COVID-19. The CDC says on its website that the agency is “investigating reports of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which may present with Kawasaki disease-like features.”

Another email originally hid the age of a male child and what his doctor suspected he suffered after receipt of a second dose of Moderna’s vaccine.

The boy was 2 years old, the newly obtained documents show, when he was admitted with what a pediatric infectious disease doctor suspected was “atypical Kawasaki Disease.” The documents show that the doctor also considered MIS-C as a diagnosis in light of how the boy’s sister tested positive for COVID-19 on the same day the boy started showing symptoms of fever, although multiple COVID-19 tests on the boy returned negative.

The doctor said he had a “low suspicion” for a COVID-19 vaccine reaction but still submitted a report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which the CDC helps run.

Kawasaki Disease was detected as a safety signal for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines among children aged 5 to 11 when the CDC first ran an analysis on VAERS data in 2022, according to files previously obtained by The Epoch Times. The analysis did not include children younger than 5. Kawasaki disease after COVID-19 vaccination has been reported in the literature, although a study on patients with a history of the disease who contracted COVID-19 or were vaccinated uncovered no signs of problems.

An internal CDC message, now fully unredacted, showed that an official described there being “another CISA ‘inquiry’ about a child with atypical Kawasaki Disease.” Another official said the reports were “very rare” while a third said the normal CDC processes were sufficient to monitor for the disease post-vaccination “unless there’s a specific ask or data need.”

An email obtained by The Epoch Times shows a healthcare provider reporting symptoms in a child following receipt of a Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. The original copy included redactions. (The Epoch Times)

A cleaner copy of the same email, with some redactions removed, shows the child in question was just 2 years old. (The Epoch Times)

Other removed redactions show that:

• A person reporting symptoms after COVID-19 vaccination was reporting that the symptoms included Coxsackievirus and that he himself was the patient. The provider wrote, “I ... don’t know whether to fear another vax more or less than the risk of infection.”
• A patient who was reported as suffering heart inflammation after a third Pfizer dose, and came back with the inflammation one year later, was 17 and a male.
• The CISA expert who said the woman who suffered chest pain could get additional vaccine doses was Dr. Oster. Previously disclosed emails showed the program repeatedly said people with post-vaccination symptoms should receive more doses.
• A patient with “intense malaise” and other symptoms about six months after a Pfizer shot had an elevated heart rate, per a portable electrocardiogram, and sinus tachycardia per a cardiology consultation.

Words and phrases that were redacted originally, but not any longer, include “your daughter”, “hospitalist”, “the parents”, “cardiac workup”, “a physician”, “I believe”, “patient was started on a course of Prednisone”, and “does not drink, smoke, or use any drugs.”

Every single email chain for which redactions were protested was returned with at least some redactions cleared.

The original version claimed that the redactions were appropriate under exceptions outlined in the Freedom of Information Act, including an exception that protects “personnel and medical files and similar files” if their disclosure “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

A CDC official told The Epoch Times in an email that the agency, after receiving the appeal, conducted a “careful review” and removed some of the redactions. The official did not explain why the CDC wrongly redacted so much information.

The CDC “has provided modified records for the pages listed in your appeal,” an official with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the CDC’s parent agency, told The Epoch Times in an email. Appeals of CDC Freedom of Information Act requests are lodged with the department.

Fits Pattern

Any person can request information through the Freedom of Infection Act (FOIA), and agencies across the government typically redact portions of responsive documents or withhold them entirely. Agencies “often use FOIA exemptions improperly, withholding records simply because they may reveal problems at the agency or just ‘paint the agency in a bad light,’” Melissa Wasser, a lawyer at the Project On Government Oversight, told senators in 2022. People “consistently receive large swaths of arbitrarily redacted information,” she added.

When presented with signs that information was improperly redacted or withheld, people primarily have two options: lodge an appeal or sue.

Both methods have worked to extract information from the CDC during the pandemic.

An Epoch Times appeal in another case, for example, returned a copy that removed significant redactions that were applied to an internal email describing what Pfizer and Moderna told them about studies that were being done regarding heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccines.

The unredacted information showed that Moderna had not tested samples from vaccine recipients for subclinical myocarditis because it was waiting for a “specific cardiac biomarker [to] be identified.” An outside study from Switzerland later found signs of subclinical heart inflammation in about one out of 35 people.

The CDC acknowledged that the information had been wrongly redacted. It reasoned that the information “cannot be considered confidential” because it was shared before and “is readily available to the public,” although some of the details had never been made public previously.

Among other lawsuits, meanwhile, one led to the release by the CDC of answers from its V-safe surveillance survey while a second prompted the disclosure of what participants wrote in free-text fields after the CDC left off adverse events of special interest from the survey. Some of the data had never before been described publicly, while other information from the system had only been outlined in CDC-authored studies and presentations.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

"Pass"/"Over"

There is so much for markets to try to pass over right over: and they are certainly doing so.

Niall Ferguson warns us again about an escalating global Cold War 2 using Tolkien as an analogy – real Tolkien, not the insult that was The Rings of Power season 1. Markets gave that talk of a bifurcating, antagonistic, inflationary world a pass - like everyone did with The Rings of Power.

The Financial Times admits a new CRINK (China - Russia - Iran - North Korea) “axis” at war with the West and its allies on two fronts already; markets are apparently over that revelation, and its implications, despite continuous ‘surprises’ like the TikTok divestment/ban law now likely to pass in the US appearing one after the other.

SIPRI says defence spending is $2.4 trillion globally, a new nominal high. Yet that buys far less than a few years ago and is set to soar further if we are to get back to the percentage of GDP that defence took up during the Cold War, which many agree we have to: where will those trillions come from? But markets pass over that question, it seems; SIPRI is an acronym too far for those interested in monetary wonkery.

The Polish president says he’s happy to host US nuclear weapons, if needed; Russia says it will respond in kind, if necessary. Nothing to see here and ‘get over it’ for markets, apparently.

Mohamed El-Erian underlines a markets/NatSec disconnect over Mid-East events. Markets say “de-escalation”, because the oil price has gone down. National security figures worry; and those saying recent attacks were telegraphed might note reports of White House panic when Iran launched missiles, and Israel planning a larger military strike at first. We have calm now, but neither side will pass on the opportunity to weaken the other; the enmity is not over.

Ukraine keeps attacking Russian refineries; and Russia is attacking Ukraine’s grains. As Carlos Mera points out, wheat was just up 4% as the market suddenly noticed the war isn’t over. Indeed, the looming $61bn US military aid package will see fighting escalate.

There are proposals for the EU to finally sanction Russian LNG, which it is still apparently OK to buy vs. piped gas: but let’s see how that moral stance holds up against the need to fight a war as painlessly as possible for the EU economy.

Copper needed for both green *and khaki* transitions is just shy of $10,000 (+14.8% year-to-date); aluminium, also need for both, is +12.8% y-t-d; cocoa, needed to not think about expensive transitions, is around the same price (+183.4% y-t-d); coffee, for those who don’t drink cocoa, is +35.5% y-t-d. And yet markets are focused on the over / under of when we get rate cuts.

Three Germans were just arrested for allegedly working for China (not the last three Chancellors!); markets pass that news off as BAU now.

The EU needs to forge strategic autonomy partly via remilitarisation says Mario Draghi (something we flagged in December): that could impact every aspect of the EU economy and markets. “Hard pass,” say markets who are only interested in when we get that first rate cut.

Yanis Varoufakis (‘A European War Union?’) also screams ‘PASS!’ in arguing “the main difference of opinion between pro-EU political forces concerned whether Europe’s continental consolidation ought to proceed by Hamiltonian means (debt mutualization precipitating the emergence of a proper federation) or in the original intergovernmental way (gradual market integration)” - but now it’s to be “unproductive” war. Yet Hamilton’s economic strategy was to build a US navy, and: “So vital were supplies to national security that Hamilton did not rule out government-owned arms factories. The godfather of American industrial policy realized that market forces, while they could bring many benefits, could not be relied upon for all of the country’s needs. Knowing that international trade was vital to the early republic, Hamilton advocated for a strong navy to protect American shipping when writing: “The want of a Navy to protect our external commerce, as long as it shall Continue, must render it a peculiarly precarious reliance, for the supply of essential articles, and must serve to strengthen prodigiously the arguments in favour of manufactures.””

Relatedly, the shortlist for Trump’s National Security Advisor is down to Grenell and Colby. In either case, that’s ‘Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum’ on steroids; and an immediate shift in US arms away from Europe towards Asia. That smells like over a trillion in new annual western defence spending could come to pass, even if markets don’t have the nose for it.

Meanwhile, Columbia University sees either 1938 or 1968 style scenes, showing political polarization and volatility are domestic as well as international, and the two are linked.

All of this would have been enough for one Global Daily, but I was inspired by John Authors’ Passover-themed article yesterday to ask just one, not four questions: why is this global market cycle unlike all other global market cycles?

Let’s answer Seder style, to four different children: the wise, the wicked, the simple, and the one who doesn’t know how to ask:

• The wise child asks: "What are the testimonies, statues, and laws of global market cycles laid down by history and different disciplinary approaches?” You can talk to them about long-run cycles, peace and war phases, and huge fiscal deficits centrality in all of this.
• The wicked child asks: "What does this all mean to you?" Because they are too busy shilling ridiculously large Fed cut forecasts, and/or low bond yields, and/or high equities.
• The simple child asks: "What does this mean?” To which a simple summary is: “Free markets brought us out from the bondage of authoritarianism and war; and then led us back there."
• The child who does not know how to ask is to be told adults need to ask difficult questions about this cycle "because of what markets did for us in the West when they were free to be efficient *and* boost Western national security".

You can opt to let all this pass over you if you want. But don’t be surprised if you then look rather ‘unleavened’ compared to others who are prepared to ask, and honestly answer, difficult questions about our very troubling, far-from-BAU backdrop.

By Tim Martin at BreakingDefense

Global military expenditure surged to a record $2.44 trillion in 2023, the largest year-on-year rise on weapons spending since 2009, according to a new Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report.

The report, published today, said that the new figure is an “all time high,” equivalent to a 6.8 percent increase on spending in 2022 and marking the ninth consecutive year in which global military expenditure rose.

The report also shows that for the first time in 15 years, global defense spending increased across all five major geographical regions: Africa, Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Oceania, and the Americas.

“The unprecedented rise in military spending is a direct response to the global deterioration in peace and security,” said Nan Tian, senior researcher at SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. “States are prioritizing military strength but they risk an action–reaction spiral in the increasingly volatile geopolitical and security landscape.”

The US remains the world’s largest defense spender, outlaying $916 billion last year, a 2.3 percent annual increase, ahead of China in second place, which spent an estimated $296 billion, a 6 percent increase over the same period. SIPRI added that Beijing’s total spending stands as the 29th consecutive spike in national military spending, year-on-year, and represents “half” of all military spending across Asia and Oceania. (China’s annual military budget is publicly recorded at $222 billion, though recently a US senator said US intelligence believes the actual budget is more than three times that much.)

Amid its invasion of Ukraine, Russia moved the needle on national military expenditure considerably too, increasing spending by 24 percent for an estimated total of $109 billion last year. The figure also accounts for 16 percent of all government money spent by the Kremlin over 2023.

Ukraine spending reached $64.8 billion, an annual leap of 51 percent. Overall, Kyiv sits as the eighth highest global military spender.

When combined, Ukraine’s spending and miliary aid of “at least” $35 billion, mainly from the US and other international partners, amounted to around 91 percent of Russian spending. Not included in SIPRI’s figures is the new $60 billion in new US assistance, including $13.8 to replenish US stockpiles, after the House passed a $95 billion supplemental on Saturday.

I am grateful to the United States House of Representatives, both parties, and personally Speaker Mike Johnson for the decision that keeps history on the right track.

Democracy and freedom will always have global significance and will never fail as long as America helps to…

At a NATO level, the 31 member states from 2023 spent $1.34 trillion, equivalent to 55 percent of global military expenditure, with the US accounting for more than two thirds of the total.

Elsewhere, as tension with China heightens, both Japan and Taiwan increased their respective military spending by 11 percent, with Tokyo outlaying $50.2 billion and Taipei pitching in $16.6 billion.

SIPRI also said that “war and tensions” in the Middle East led to the largest spending increase across the region in the “past decade”: a 9 percent jump in expenditure, working out to $200 billion for the region last year.

The change was largely a result of increased spending by Israel, the second largest spender in the region behind Saudi Arabia, and which drew on $27.5 billion in 2023 — a 24 percent increase. The push for new funding from Tel Aviv was “mainly driven by Israel’s large-scale offensive in Gaza in response to the attack on southern Israel by Hamas in October 2023,” noted SIPRI.

“The large increase in military spending in the Middle East in 2023 reflected the rapidly shifting situation in the region — from the warming of diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab countries in recent years to the outbreak of a major war in Gaza and fears of a region-wide conflict,” said Diego Lopes da Silva, senior researcher at SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme.

Full report below (pdf link)

Oil priced ended notably higher today after recovering strongly from overnight weakness (driven by a Bloomberg report that said fresh U.S. sanctions targeting vessels and refineries handling Iranian oil shipments were having a muted impact on crude supply).

If implemented and enforced, the new sanctions could add as much as $8.40 to global prices, according to ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based consulting firm.

But...

“Oil traders are nonchalant because they know Biden will certainly sign whatever waivers are necessary to keep Iranian oil flowing into the market just as he is keeping Russian barrels flowing into the market,” said Jim Lucier, managing director at Capital Alpha Partners, a Washington-based research group.

And here's why!

Source: Bloomberg

The rebound in prices came as WTI tested to a $80 handle, finding support at its 50DMA ($81.25), and after dismal PMI data prompted a 'bad news is good news' bid in stocks and bonds as rate-cut hopes were revived (modestly).

Analysts expect a fifth straight week of crude inventory builds and another drawdown in product stocks at tomorrow's DOE data dump. Tonight's API preview will confirm or deny hopes...

API

• Crude -3.23mm (+500k exp)

• Cushing -898k

• Gasoline -595k (-1.5mm exp)

• Distillates +724k (-1.0mm exp)

Crude stockpiles unexpectedly drew down last week (after four straight weekly builds), but distillates stocks unexpectedly built...

Source: Bloomberg

WTI was trading around $83.30 ahead of the API data (after a roller-coaster day)...

The conflict in the Middle East has "undoubtedly exacerbated tensions in an already volatile region," Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, told MarketWatch.

"While the recent attacks have been downplayed, the potential for further escalation cannot be entirely dismissed."

However, "there's a lesson to be gleaned from this situation, particularly in how swiftly demand responded to higher oil and gasoline prices, as evidenced by the increase in U.S. oil stockpiles," he said.