A non-profit news blog, focused on providing independent journalism.

Sunday 2 August 2015

Recently Unveiled Robot Can Build A Brick House In Two Days!

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Robots aren’t only taking over employees’ jobs at McDonald’s, they’re also mastering the construction industry!

As PerthNow reports, Australian engineer Marc Pivac has developed a fully automated bricklaying robot this is capable of building a home in just two days. Named Hadrian, after the Roman emperor who build defense walls in England, the robot can work day and night, lay 1,000 bricks per hour, and can build 150 homes in a single year.

After ten years of research and development, the Perth-based inventor claims to have built the first fully automated bricklaying robot.

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

The Hadrian robot uses 3D computer-aided design (CAD) to minimize waste, and can guarantee accuracy to within one-hundredth of an inch. Furthermore, the machine creates a CAD drawing to determine the location and size of every brick before it cuts the brick, puts it in place with a 28-meter-long telescopic boom, and seals the placement with mortar.

While perhaps bittersweet and awe-inspiring at the same time, the Hadrian technology has clearly surpassed the capabilities of humans, even if bricklaying is one of humanity’s most ancient trades. On the plus side, the robot reduces the risk of worker injuries and, obviously, increases production time substantially. It may also lead to more affordable housing in the future.

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

The one downside would be that with automation comes potential job loss. But the inventor doesn’t believe this is anything to worry about. According to Pivac, there aren’t available bricklayers in Perth, a main issue that inspired his invention.

“We have absolutely nothing against bricklayers,” Pivac told PerthNow. “The problem is the average age of bricklayers is going up and it’s difficult to attract new young people to the trade.”

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

Credit: Fastbrick Robotics

With that news, this advancement opens up many potential outcomes – good and bad.

What are our thoughts? Share in the comments section below.

This article (Recently Unveiled Robot Can Build A Brick House In Two Days!) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and TrueActivist.com.

Texas attorney general Ken Paxton indicted by grand jury

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been indicted on three charges in Collin County, according to KXAS-TV NBC 5The Dallas Morning News’ media partner.

The grand jury’s indictments were issued on Tuesday, then immediately sealed. Paxton was indicted on two counts of first-degree securities fraud and one-count of third-degree failure to register. Sources tell KXAS’s Scott Gordon they will be unsealed Monday.

According to WFAA-TV, a Tarrant County judge has been appointed to the case.  

Paxton paid a $1,000 fine and thought he was done with it, but a criminal grand jury took the case. His admission could result in felony charges, a forfeiture of his office and time in prison, but Paxton does not have to resign.

“As we’ve said for 14 months now, there was no criminal action because there was no crime,” Paxton’s spokesman Anthony Holm said on July 24. “This was solely a civil event with a $1,000 civil penalty.”

As Paxton’s political career flourished, so did his business career. Since he joined the House in 2003, Paxton has a portolio of almost 30 business interests. He previously had pledged to sweep his business interests into a blind trust but it’s unclear whether that process is complete.

The state board fined and reprimanded Paxton for improperly soliciting business in 2004, 2005 and 2012, when he was in the Legislature.

Paxton and the head of the McKinney-based Mowery Capital Management, Frederick “Fritz” Mowery, worked in the same building.

Records obtained by The Dallas Morning News show Paxton earned thousands of dollars by referring at least six of his private law clients to Mowery, who is now accused of “unethical and fraudulent conduct” by the state.

Understanding Oil Qaeda

Al Qaeda region 2

In her analysis, Zimmerman identified the geographical locations of the groups said to be within the Al Qaeda network. These locations outline an area encompassing parts of Northern Africa and all of the Middle East. This region, in which the entire Al Qaeda network is based, represents about 15% of the total land on planet earth.

What is special about this land that might lead its inhabitants to a life of terrorism? Some, including Zimmerman, say that this region correlates to the land of Islam and that therefore the correlation is simply an indication that Muslims are prone to terrorism.

However, the known distribution of the world’s population of Muslims does not support that contention. According to the Pew Research Center, only about 55% of the world’s Muslims live inside the Al Qaeda network region.

The other possibility is that, since the area is rich in untapped resources, powerful people have used claims of terrorism as a pretext to invade. That possibility is definitely supported by evidence. For example, ten years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, U.S. officials began openly admitting that the war in Iraq was motivated by the desire to seize oil. U.S. military leaders including General John Abizaid, head of the U.S. military in Iraq, and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel have said that the war was about oil. Even former Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Alan Greenspan admitted it.

Geographical correlation also supports this possibility much better. When the region outlined by Zimmerman’s Al Qaeda network is superimposed on a map of oil reserves by country, over 70% of the world’s oil reserves fall within the same area.

If one considers only oil reserves that are not yet fully within the control of the world’s superpowers (the U.S., Russia, China, and the E.U.), about 90% of what is left is within Zimmerman’s region. Only Venezuela, with 6.5% of the remaining oil, stands out. It is therefore not surprising that the U.S. government has recently declared Venezuela to be a national security threat.

The strong correlation between Al Qaeda and oil suggests that the terrorist group might be better named Oil Qaeda. However, the truth is a little more complex. As reported before, the geopolitical significance of this relatively small part of the world is as much about natural gas as it is about oil. Other critical resources, including lithium and gold, are motivators for those wanting control of the region.

Moreover, it has been seen that the invasion of Afghanistan probably had something to do with that country having the ideal climate for the production of opium. Just before the U.S. invasion in 2001, the Taliban had essentially eradicated the production of opium in Afghanistan. Under the U.S. occupation, opium production has reached record levels and the country now supplies 90% of the world’s heroin.

There’s no doubt that the Al Qaeda network serves multiple purposes. For those who want simple answers, there will continue to be propaganda about the region’s problems with “Islamic terrorism.” For those who can still think and see, it’s becoming increasingly clear that Al Qaeda and its associated network is largely an excuse for seizing resources.

Marines claim $3.5bn F-35B fighter jet is finally ready for service even though it was outperformed by a 40 year old F-16 and lacks the software to fire its own cannons

However, the Marine Corp has declared initial operational capability for their first squadron of F-35Bs. 

The declaration means that the squadron of 10 F-35Bs stationed with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 in Yuma, Ariz., are 'ready for worldwide deployment,' the Marine Corps said in a statement. 

The declaration means that the squadron of 10 F-35Bs stationed with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 in Yuma, Ariz., are 'ready for worldwide deployment,' the Marine Corps said in a statement.

The declaration means that the squadron of 10 F-35Bs stationed with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 in Yuma, Ariz., are 'ready for worldwide deployment,' the Marine Corps said in a statement.

Marine Corps Commandant Joseph Dunford said the stealthy fifth-generation fighter 'will transform the way we fight and win.' 

'I am pleased to announce that VMFA-121 has achieved initial operational capability in the F-35B, as defined by requirements outlined in the June 2014 Joint Report to Congressional Defense Committees.'

'It is capable of conducting close air support, offensive and defensive counter air, air interdiction, assault support escort and armed reconnaissance as part of a Marine Air Ground Task Force, or in support of the Joint Force.'

However, some have said the declaration is simply a PR stunt.

Naval officer that stopped active shooter to face charges for discharging weapon

Naval Officer Lt. Commander Timothy White pictured in uniform. (Photo: Contributed Photo / Times Free Press)

CHATTANOOGA, TN — When a deranged killer crashed a vehicle into a military reserve center and began shooting, a Naval officer drew a personal handgun and helped stop the attack.  Now it is being reported that the officer, regarded as a hero to many, will be facing federal charges because he discharged a weapon on federal property.

* * * * *

Naval Officer Lt. Commander Timothy White (left) and mass-shooter Muhammad Abdulazeez (right).

Naval Officer Lt. Commander Timothy White (left) and mass-shooter Muhammad Abdulazeez (right).

On the morning of July 16th, 2015, Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez, a 24-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen from Kuwait, went on a bloody shooting-spree at two federal offices.  First, he shot up the military recruiting center on Old Lee Highway in Chattanooga, and then sped 7-miles away to perform a second attack on the U.S. Naval and Marine Reserve Center on Amnicola Highway.

At the second location, Abdulazeez crashed his rented Ford Mustang through a gate and began shooting outside the U.S. Naval and Marine Reserve Center, indiscriminately firing at any target he saw. Although the building contained dozens of trained U.S. servicemen, Department of Defense regulations require them to be disarmed on federal property.  Abdulazeez held the upper hand and murdered several unarmed marines, and continued his attack for several minutes until a secretly-armed Naval officer engaged him in a firefight, along with responding Chattanooga police officers.

When the smoke had cleared, Abdulazeez was killed, along with four U.S. servicemen; a fifth succumbed to his wounds in a hospital.

The attack rocked the nation and led to a call for ending the nonsensical weapons prohibition on military bases.  The Pentagon promptly refused to change its rule.

A "firearms are prohibited" sign hangs ironically at the site of a mass murder in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on July 16, 2015.

A “firearms are prohibited” sign hangs ironically at the site of a mass murder in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on July 16, 2015.

Despite the prohibition on carrying personal weapons on base, at least two servicemen apparently broke that rule, risking consequences but ultimately saving innocent lives by hindering the efforts of the active shooter.  Those men included Naval Officer Lt. Commander Timothy White, as well as a U.S. marine.

But rather than being celebrated as a hero, Lt. Commander White may be instead charged for discharging a firearm on federal property.  A former U.S. Congressman from Florida, Lt. Commander Allen West (U.S. Army, retired) personally confirmed that White will face charges.  West, a passionate war veteran, said that he received word of legal action and became “dog fighting mad and seriously pissed off.” Here’s what he wrote:

Ladies and gents, resulting from the text message I received yesterday, I can confirm that the United States Navy is bringing charges against Lt. Cmdr Timothy White for illegally discharging a firearm on federal property.

The text message asked if it would be possible for Lt. Cmdr White to reach out to me. To wit I replied, affirmative.

What kind of freaking idiots are in charge of our Armed Forces — pardon me, our “unArmed Forces”? What would they prefer that Abdulazeez had been able to kill all the Marines and Sailors at the Naval Support Reserve Center? Let me draw an interesting contrast: Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus is more concerned about lifting the ban on transgendered Sailors. Mabus has a problem in that for the first time since 2007 the US Navy will not have a Carrier Battle Group operating in the Persian Gulf. But this knucklehead has no problem with the Navy seeking to destroy the career of a Sailor, a commander of an installation, returning fire against an Islamic jihadist attack. I do not care if it was his personal weapon, he deserves a medal for facing the enemy.

The fact that the U.S. government would punish well-intentioned Americans for exercising the right to bear arms is not new and not surprising.  The wrongheaded “no guns” policy has also led to a great deal of unnecessary bloodshed, many times in the civilian world, and famously at Fort Hood, where mass-murderers have targeted unarmed servicemen on base in 2009 and in 2014.

While we can only hope that political pressure will cause the department to back off of Lt. Commander White, a great injustice and great vulnerability will remain in every federal gun-free zone until the policy is entirely abolished.

 

{ SUPPORT POLICE STATE USA }

Former Head of DHS Warns Americans About the Horrors of Govt-Mandated Crypto “Backdoors”

3-Reasons-Why-Government-Mandated-Crypto-“Backdoors”-Will-Destroy-Your-Information-Security

Last week a surprising actor joined the discussion on the government’s push to mandate “backdoors” to encrypted personal devices. Michael Chertoff, former head of Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS), said, “…it’s a mistake to require companies that are making hardware and software to build a duplicate key or a backdoor…”

He even defended the notion of a free society by saying “…we do not historically organize our society to make it maximally easy for law enforcement, even with court orders, to get information.”

Chertoff works for the tech industry and was being paid to voice their opinion, so his conviction is suspect, especially considering his prior role in dismantling human rights as DHS head.

At the least, he helped bring attention to this issue of grave importance. As companies like Apple and Google are providing encryption to customers to protect their privacy, thanks to the Snowden revelations, government believes they should have complete access to our private data through mandated cryptographic backdoors.

FBI director James Comey had all sorts of doomsday prophecies and Orwellian warnings, saying “encryption threatens to lead all of us to a very dark place” and “Justice may be denied because of a locked phone or an encrypted hard drive.”

While government attempts to scare us into submission, every computer expert that has commented publicly says that mandating this kind of access would perilously weaken information security.

In a letter to the White House, about 140 tech companies, civil liberties and privacy activists stated:

“Encryption protects billions of people every day against countless threats—be they street criminals trying to steal our phones and laptops, computer criminals trying to defraud us, corporate spies trying to obtain our companies’ most valuable trade secrets, repressive governments trying to stifle dissent, or foreign intelligence agencies trying to compromise our and our allies’ most sensitive national security secrets.”

The letter was endorsed by Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter, and Yahoo.

Experts in cryptography, information and security are countering the government’s appeal to fear with sound rationale.

A report by MIT security experts, alongside other leading researchers in the US and UK, describes how government access would “pose far more grave security risks, imperil innovation on which the world’s economies depend, and raise more thorny policy issues than we could have imagined when the Internet was in its infancy.”

The authors state three reasons why “exceptional access” would imperil personal data.

“First, it would require preserving private keys that could be compromised not only by law enforcement, but by anyone who is able to hack into them. This represents a 180-degree reversal from state-of-the-art security practices like ‘forward secrecy,’ in which decryption keys are deleted immediately after use.

“It would be the equivalent of taking already-read, highly sensitive messages, and, rather than putting them through a shredder, leaving them in the file cabinet of an unlocked office,” Weitzner says. “Keeping keys around makes them more susceptible to compromise.”

Second, exceptional access would make systems much more complex, introducing new features that require independent testing and are sources of potential vulnerabilities.

“Given that the new mechanisms may have to be used in secret by law enforcement, it would also be difficult, and perhaps illegal, for programmers to even test how these features operate,” Weitzner says.

Third, special access in complex systems like smartphones would create vulnerable “single points of failure” that would be particularly attractive targets for hackers, cybercrime groups, and other countries. Any attacker who could break into the system that stores the security credentials would instantly gain access to all of the data, thereby putting potentially millions of users at risk.”

Former Head of DHS Warns Americans About the Horrors of Govt-Mandated Crypto “Backdoors”

3-Reasons-Why-Government-Mandated-Crypto-“Backdoors”-Will-Destroy-Your-Information-Security

Last week a surprising actor joined the discussion on the government’s push to mandate “backdoors” to encrypted personal devices. Michael Chertoff, former head of Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS), said, “…it’s a mistake to require companies that are making hardware and software to build a duplicate key or a backdoor…”

He even defended the notion of a free society by saying “…we do not historically organize our society to make it maximally easy for law enforcement, even with court orders, to get information.”

Chertoff works for the tech industry and was being paid to voice their opinion, so his conviction is suspect, especially considering his prior role in dismantling human rights as DHS head.

At the least, he helped bring attention to this issue of grave importance. As companies like Apple and Google are providing encryption to customers to protect their privacy, thanks to the Snowden revelations, government believes they should have complete access to our private data through mandated cryptographic backdoors.

FBI director James Comey had all sorts of doomsday prophecies and Orwellian warnings, saying “encryption threatens to lead all of us to a very dark place” and “Justice may be denied because of a locked phone or an encrypted hard drive.”

While government attempts to scare us into submission, every computer expert that has commented publicly says that mandating this kind of access would perilously weaken information security.

In a letter to the White House, about 140 tech companies, civil liberties and privacy activists stated:

“Encryption protects billions of people every day against countless threats—be they street criminals trying to steal our phones and laptops, computer criminals trying to defraud us, corporate spies trying to obtain our companies’ most valuable trade secrets, repressive governments trying to stifle dissent, or foreign intelligence agencies trying to compromise our and our allies’ most sensitive national security secrets.”

The letter was endorsed by Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter, and Yahoo.

Experts in cryptography, information and security are countering the government’s appeal to fear with sound rationale.

A report by MIT security experts, alongside other leading researchers in the US and UK, describes how government access would “pose far more grave security risks, imperil innovation on which the world’s economies depend, and raise more thorny policy issues than we could have imagined when the Internet was in its infancy.”

The authors state three reasons why “exceptional access” would imperil personal data.

“First, it would require preserving private keys that could be compromised not only by law enforcement, but by anyone who is able to hack into them. This represents a 180-degree reversal from state-of-the-art security practices like ‘forward secrecy,’ in which decryption keys are deleted immediately after use.

“It would be the equivalent of taking already-read, highly sensitive messages, and, rather than putting them through a shredder, leaving them in the file cabinet of an unlocked office,” Weitzner says. “Keeping keys around makes them more susceptible to compromise.”

Second, exceptional access would make systems much more complex, introducing new features that require independent testing and are sources of potential vulnerabilities.

“Given that the new mechanisms may have to be used in secret by law enforcement, it would also be difficult, and perhaps illegal, for programmers to even test how these features operate,” Weitzner says.

Third, special access in complex systems like smartphones would create vulnerable “single points of failure” that would be particularly attractive targets for hackers, cybercrime groups, and other countries. Any attacker who could break into the system that stores the security credentials would instantly gain access to all of the data, thereby putting potentially millions of users at risk.”

The Cyber Wars Begin: Obama Says US "Must Retaliate" Against China For Historic Data Breach

On Friday, we highlighted a "secret" NSA map which purports to show every Chinese cyber attack on US targets over the past five years. "The prizes that China pilfered during its ‘intrusions’ included everything from specifications for hybrid cars to formulas for pharmaceutical products to details about U.S. military and civilian air traffic control systems," intelligence sources told NBC, who broke the story. 

The release of the map marked the culmination of a cyber attack propaganda campaign which began with accusations that North Korea had attempted to sabotage Sony, reached peak absurdity when Penn State claimed Chinese spies had taken control of the campus engineering department, and turned serious when Washington blamed China for what was deemed "the largest theft of US government data ever." "Whether all of this is cause for the Pentagon to activate the 'offensive' component of its brand new cyber strategy remains to be seen," we said yesterday.

As it turns out, the Office of Personnel Management breach will indeed be used to justify a cyber "retaliation"against China, because as The New York Times notes, "the hacking attack was so vast in scope and ambition that the usual practices for dealing with traditional espionage cases [do] not apply." Here’s more:

The Obama administration has determined that it must retaliate against China for the theft of the personal information of more than 20 million Americans from the databases of the Office of Personnel Management, but it is still struggling to decide what it can do without prompting an escalating cyberconflict.

 

The decision came after the administration concluded that the hacking attack was so vast in scope and ambition that the usual practices for dealing with traditional espionage cases did not apply.

 

But in a series of classified meetings, officials have struggled to choose among options that range from largely symbolic responses — for example, diplomatic protests or the ouster of known Chinese agents in the United States — to more significant actions that some officials fear could lead to an escalation of the hacking conflict between the two countries.

 

That does not mean a response will happen anytime soon — or be obvious when it does. 

So the US will do something, it just doesn’t yet know what or when or even if anyone will notice, but one thing is clear: "this aggression will not stand, man."

The problem with "symbolic" responses is that they are merely, well, symbolic, and any real retaliation risks escalating the "cyberconflict." Then again, not doing anything also risks prompting an escalation:

But over recent days, both James Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, and Adm. Michael S. Rogers, director of the National Security Agency and commander of the military’s Cyber Command, have hinted at the internal debate by noting that unless the United States finds a way to respond to the attacks, they are bound to escalate.

 

Mr. Clapper predicted that the number and sophistication of hacking aimed at the United States would worsen "until such time as we create both the substance and psychology of deterrence."

 

This echoes the rhetoric from the DoD’s "cyber strategy" released in April which says that "deterrence is partially a function of perception [and] works by convincing a potential adversary that it will suffer unacceptable costs if it conducts an attack on the United States." 

For now at least, it looks like criminal charges are off the table. 

The Justice Department is exploring legal action against Chinese individuals and organizations believed responsible for the personnel office theft, much as it did last summer when five officers of the People’s Liberation Army, part of the Chinese military, were indicted on a charge of the theft of intellectual property from American companies. While Justice officials say that earlier action was a breakthrough, others characterize the punishment as only symbolic: Unless they visit the United States or a friendly nation, none of them are likely to ever see the inside of an American courtroom.

 

"Criminal charges appear to be unlikely in the case of the O.P.M. breach," a study of the Office of Personnel Management breach published by the Congressional Research Service two weeks ago concluded. "As a matter of policy, the United States has sought to distinguish between cyber intrusions to collect data for national security purposes — to which the United States deems counterintelligence to be an appropriate response — and cyber intrusions to steal data for commercial purposes, to which the United States deems a criminal justice response to be appropriate."

Instead, the US may look to remove the so called "great firewall" which Beijing uses to censor content it considers to be subversive or otherwise objectionable.

One of the most innovative actions discussed inside the intelligence agencies, according to two officials familiar with the debate, involves finding a way to breach the so-called great firewall, the complex network of censorship and control that the Chinese government keeps in place to suppress dissent inside the country. The idea would be to demonstrate to the Chinese leadership that the one thing they value most — keeping absolute control over the country’s political dialogue — could be at risk if they do not moderate attacks on the United States.

So perhaps there's a silver lining in all of this: China's 650 million internet users may, if only for a split second, be free to surf the web without the Politburo filter.

Of course if the US really wanted to do some cyber damage, the Pentagon could hack into China's National Bureau of Statistics and see what the country's real GDP figure looks like, and if that doesn't teach them a lesson, maybe the best option would be to breach China Securities Finance Corporation and hit the "sell" button. 

Finally, for those interested to monitor the global cyber war in real time, you can do so via Norsecorp by clicking on the following map.

Venezuela Increasingly Looks Like A War Zone

Over the years, we have repeatedly poked fun at the transformation of Venezuela into a "socialist utopia" - an economy in a state of terminal collapse, where the destruction of the currency (one black market Bolivar is now worth 107 times less than the official currency's exchange rate) and the resulting hyperinflation is only matched be barren wasteland that local stores have transformed into now that conventional supply chains are irreparably broken.

Just this past Wednesday we showed a clip of what is currently taking place inside Venezuela supermarkets, noting that "the hyperinflationary collapse in Venezuela is reaching its terminal phase. With inflation soaring at least 65%, murder rates the 2nd highest in the world, and chronic food (and toilet paper shortages), the following disturbing clip shows what is rapidly becoming major social unrest in the Maduro's socialist paradise... and perhaps more importantly, Venezuela shows us what the end game for every fiat money system looks like (and perhaps Janet and her colleagues should remember that)."

 

Unfortunately, while mocking socialist paradises everywhere is a recurring theme especially once they have completely run out of other people's money to burn through, what always follows next is far less amusing - completely social collapse, with riots, civil war and deaths not far behind.

That is precisely what the video shown below has captured. In the clip, a demonstration against Venezuela's poor transportation services quickly turned violent. End result: one person dead from a gunshot wound, more than 80 arrested and four shops looted on the Manuel Piar Avenue in San Felix.

What is most distrubing is how comparable to an open war zone what was once a vibrant, rich and beautiful Latin American country has become.

This is just the beginning: with the ongoing collapse of the economy, the resultant acts of social violence will only deteriorate and claim more innocent lives, until the "socialist utopia" ends as it always does: with the arrival of a military coup or a full blown civil war.










Why Did Greece Get 'Bitch-Slapped', While Ukraine Got Some 'Good-Loving' From Europe?

Ukraine Flag

George Orwell once wrote in ‘Animal Farm’ ‘all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others’. This famous sentence is now valid more than ever before as surprisingly, the IMF will continue to cut Greece out of potential funding, whilst it’s embracing Ukraine by offering that country billions of dollars in hard cash as support.

In a surprising statement, the IMF confirmed it has currently no intention to continue to back Greece by making more cash available for the country. Citing the high debt levels and the poor level of implementing the much needed changes and reforms, the IMF says Greece currently does not meet the criteria required by the IMF to step in and provide more financial assistance. As you might remember, the IMF has pulled the plug on providing Greece more cash to help the country out until it will be able to re-finance its existing debt on the private markets.

As the IMF has now conveniently ‘leaked’ a ‘strictly confidential’ document stating it doesn’t even want to consider to extend a new debt package to Greece, two conclusions can be drawn. First of all, it’s now unlikely the IMF will be part of the next financing round for the country, and this results in the second conclusion; the European Union will now be on its own. All future help will have to come from either the member states or the European Central Bank (which would need to see its mission statement updated before being able to do so).

Ukraine IMF GDP

Source: tradingeconomics.com

But then the IMF made another eyebrow-raising decision. Whilst it was slapping Greece on the wrist, it was praising the Ukrainian government for its reforms despite the fact the GDP dropped by 28% in just one year time, pushing the debt to GDP ratio to an all-time high of almost 72%.

Okay, that’s still lower than Greece, but you can’t possibly believe that Ukraine is doing so much better than Greece! Even the credit scores are indicating the opposite; whereas Greece has a CCC+ credit score from S&P, Ukraine’s score is just CC, three steps lower than Greece indicating a default is imminent.

The sentiment and used language by Lagarde, the head of the IMF, is also completely different from the language used to describe Greece. According to the IMF, Ukraine’s situation is ‘incredibly encouraging’ which is quite a surprise considering the oil and gas prices are trading at multi-year lows and the iron ore price is also trading at just $50/dmt.

As in excess of 50% of Ukraine’s economy consists of both mining-related activities and the production and transportation of oil and gas, it’s very difficult to share Lagarde’s optimism about the country’s potential to rectify the current situation.

Or to update George Orwell’s phrase. All countries are equal, but some countries seem to be more equal than others.

>>> Want To Know Where Gold Is Headed? Check Out Our Latest Gold Report!

Secular Investor offers a fresh look at investing. We analyze long lasting cycles, coupled with a collection of strategic investments and concrete tips for different types of assets. The methods and strategies are transformed into the Gold & Silver Report and the Commodity Report.

Follow us on Facebook @SecularInvestor [NEW] and Twitter @SecularInvest