849 mine-resistant vehicles. Welp, it looks like they are expecting war at any moment. Half a billion $'s worth of the things? Really?

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,
It’s not a secret that government’s want to seize as much from the producers as possible to bloat their power-hungry heads.  But a new lawsuit is actually giving the details on just how the government uses the “justice” system to keep the poor in dire states of poverty.

Be obedient or die shot to pieces. Even then, that's no guarantee you'll survive the encounter

The ACLU of North Carolina, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Southern Coalition for Social Justice have slapped the state of North Carolina with a federal lawsuit over the state’s practice of suspending drivers’ licenses over unpaid tickets.
According to Splinter News, in North Carolina, the DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles) is required by state law to automatically revoke a license after it receives notice from the court that a person has failed to pay their fines or penalties or associated costs. The lawsuit alleges that this state law violates the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Fourteenth Amendment reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The two plaintiffs in the case are 27-year old Seti Johnson and 31-year old Sharee Smoot. According to the lawsuit, Johnson is unemployed and can’t afford to pay off a traffic ticket as well as support his three children. He was able to save up $700 to get his license back last year, but before he was able to finally pay it off, he was hit with another ticket for $100 plus $208 in court costs. He covered the $100 ticket, but still owes $228 in court costs, and will lose his license sometime around the end of July. Although Johnson just got a new job, the lawsuit says, “he will have to either forego the job and figure out a different way to get his children to school, daycare, and the doctor’s office, or he will have to illegally drive.”

“I’d previously fallen behind on my rent and sacrificed the needs of my children just to keep my license,” Johnson said in a statement provided by the ACLU of North Carolina. “I cannot afford to do that again. This has to stop.”

Smoot, a single mother who works at a call center 45 minutes away from her home to help support her grandmother as well as her nine-year-old daughter said:

“I just want a fair chance to take care of my family. I can’t afford to pay the tickets right now, but that shouldn’t prevent me from having a driver’s license.”

However, this is a national problem not limited to North Carolina and stems from law enforcement looking to extort money for victimless crimes, and having the state in charge of driver’s licenses. In fact, a Washington Post report from earlier this month found that over 7 million people around the country may have had their licenses revoked for traffic debt-related reasons, although that number could be much higher. It’s just another way that both law enforcement and the justice department, as a whole, kneecaps the poor.
To read about how it all began, see here.
Extorting money from people for victimless crimes (most traffic violations are victimless) does not function to prevent any violent crime or crime with victims. The drug war does not help anyone, and the era of time in which the people of the US were most free, proves that this is the formula for prosperity. Even given the vastly different technology and capabilities of today, it would seem that this formula of freedom for prosperity would add up.
The problem is, we aren’t free and haven’t been for quite some time.  And no matter who gets elected, we get more police, more violence, more “criminals”, and higher taxes.
But, it is time we began opening our eyes to the issue instead of repeating the “we’re free” lie. The best way to end poverty is not to throw money at it but to increase the rights and freedoms of everyone.

As long as you can pay half, you can be "free" TM

And in case you were wondering just how much all this newly militarized policing costs the average joe taxpayer, Statista's Niall McCarthy notes that approximately $6 billion of excess Department of Defense property has been transferred to U.S. law enforcement agencies since 1990. Under the 1033 Program, all sorts of items from laptops to assault rifles have been passed from the military to the police. These fall into two categories - controlled items (like drones or helicopters) and uncontrolled items (like office furniture and tools).
Even though police militarization has become increasingly controversial, particularly in the wake of Ferguson when mine-resistant vehicles and heavily armed officers appeared on the streets, the flow of weaponry has continued without interruption. A recent RAND analysis of the situation found that in fiscal years 2015 to 2017, the value of uncontrolled transfers came to $1.2 billion while controlled items had a value of $775 million.

You will find more infographics at Statista
RAND found that the current value of all excess Department of Defense items held by law enforcement agencies across the U.S. today stands at $1,888,559,339.
The infographic above takes a closer look at a selection of equipment from the analysis and how much it's currently worth. There are 849 mine-resistant vehicles in operation at U.S. police departments and they have a value of just under $583 million. Elsewhere on the list, 64,689 5.56 millimeter rifles have been transferred to law enforcement and they are worth $27.83 million while the grand total for all aircraft in the program comes to around $433 million.

FROM THE INTERNET

Or just renounce your citizenship, flee to Mexico, jump the border back into California, and get a complimentary driver's license, free insurance and housing - kids get free schooling through university. Just don't be white. Whites need not apply.

We have a dangerous section of road in our little town that is notorious for bad head on accidents. Widening the road and/or putting in a median barrier has been proposed but rejected as too expensive. The solution? Mandatory head lights during the day with a $300 fine for non compliance. The cops are taking in quite a haul now. The ridiculous thing now is they put up plastic tubes to simulate a barrier as well. An engineer friend of mine called city counsel begging them to take them down because at night the headlights would produce a strobe light effect and increase accidents. He was right. Within 48 hours of installation there were two head on collisions, one fatal. I have decided just to just avoid the area.

I don't trust lawmakers or enforcers. They are either idiots or sick psychopaths.

Rather difficult to navigate all those current "laws" on the Statute books http://www.kowal.com/?q=How-Many-Federal-Laws-Are-There%3F (way back in 2013, mind you)
Remember that in many States, "Civil" Asset forfeiture is perfectly "legal" - "up to YOU to "prove" you are innocent (at your expense) - and even then good luck getting your property back.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/civil-asset-forfeiture-police-ab…

 

 Tragically, having a job and a family to take care of in itself is enough to trap people into poverty and destroy both families and jobs. It truly is a vicious circle. All thanks to those wonderful fed n' gov incentives, one must submit to food stamps, housing aid and giving their children away to survive. Really sad... And then we're surprised that the poor don't bite the hand that feeds them and hang those corrupt cops and politicians. It's divide and conquer, pure brutality by design. All poor people in this country are similarly fucked. Whether they live in the South or in the rust belt, whether they are black, white or latino.

 

 

 

The Rise Of Mass Knife Attacks Around The World Shows The Problem Isn't Guns. It's People

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,
In China, where firearms are tightly restricted, it’s probably no surprise that those who want to hurt people found another way to do it. The dramatic rise of knife attacks around the world shows that the problem these days isn’t with guns. It’s with people.

Mass knife attacks have become so common over the years that a Chinese police department recently released a video to teach citizens how to defend themselves against knife-wielding assailants and it has gone viral, with 16 million views in just a few days. It has subtitles and some great advice that even I would be able to follow.

All humor aside, some folks in the US who want to do away with the Second Amendment are probably saying smugly, “Well, knife attacks are bad, but only people with GUNS can kill dozens of victims quickly.”
Those folks would be wrong.
For example…

• In 2014, 33 people were killed and 130 more were injured when a group of men coordinated a terror attack using knives at a train station in southwest China’s Yunnan Province.
  
• In 2015, fifty workers at a Chinese coal mine were killed in a coordinated knife attack. Fifty more workers were injured.
  
• In 2016, a facility for the disabled was attacked by a man with a knife. He killed 15 people and injured 45, then later surrendered himself to police.
  
• In 2017, 18 people walking down a city street were injured when a man attacked them with a knife
  
• 13 people were seriously injured by a knife-wielding assailant at a shopping mall in Beijing earlier this year. One woman died from her injuries.
  

This tells me that it isn’t really a problem with guns. It’s a problem with people.

Instead of school shootings, they have school knifings.

While in the United States, school shootings have become shockingly commonplace, what many don’t know is that in China, where gun control is strict, school knife attacks are a frequent threat. On the very same day as the Sandy Hook shooting in the United States, a man with a knife injured 22 children and one adult at a school in Chenpeng village in the southern province of Guangxi.

Knife attacks at schools in China are common. Last year, a man climbed over the wall of a kindergarten and attacked 11 students. None suffered life-threatening injuries.
In 2016, a man in the southern province of Hainan stabbed 10 children before killing himself, authorities said. And another man killed three students at a school in 2014 before jumping off a building.
Perhaps the worst spate of stabbings occurred in 2010 when attackers targeted schools on three consecutive days. (source)

Just last month, a man wielding a knife killed 9 children and injured 10 others outside a middle school where he says he was bullied.

This isn’t just a problem in China

There have been mass knife attacks all over the world.
In the UK, there has been a deadly knife attack every third day of 2018. In 2017, Met Police recorded 37,443 recorded knife offenses and 6,694 gun offenses. The problem is so bad that a judge has suggested banning the sale of large kitchen knives and that those who already have kitchen knives should file them down to avoid stabbings.
In 2016, two soldiers were attacked by a man with a knife in Belgium, and a few days ago, a prison inmate on day leave stabbed two police officers then took their guns and shot them.
Four people were injured and one was killed when a knife-wielding assailant attacked them in Paris last week.
These are just a few examples and I haven’t dug any further than the first page of Google. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

What happens if you take away guns

In each of these cases, something different was blamed.

• Some of the attackers were shouting “Allahu Akbar” as they stabbed their victims.
  
• Some of the attackers cited crippling stress.
  
• Some of the attackers said they were bullied or mistreated.
  
• Some of the attackers were mentally ill and had a history of psychological problems.
  
• Some of the attackers had religious and ethnic differences from their victims.
  
• One attacker just didn’t like disabled people.
  

You can’t fix people who want to harm others for their various reasons by taking away guns. You can only make it harder for the rest of us to defend ourselves against them.
Take away guns, and you get knives. Take away knives and you get improvised explosives. There is no way to take away the yen that some people have to kill others.
And if I am involved in a knife-fight, well, personally, I’d rather take a gun.

The War On Tommy Robinson

Authored by Stefan Molyneux via Quadrant Online,
The rule of law is fragile, and relies on the self-restraint of the majority. In a just society, the majority obey the law because they believe it represents universal values – moral absolutes. They obey the law not for fear of punishment, but for fear of the self-contempt that comes from doing wrong.

Tell the truth, assassination attempts, destroyed livelihood, and endless smear campaigns by the leftist satanic fascists.

As children, we are told that the law is objective, fair and moral. As we grow up, though, it becomes increasingly impossible to avoid the feeling that the actual law has little to do with the Platonic stories we were told as children. We begin to suspect that the law may in fact – or at least at times – be a coercive mechanism designed to protect the powerful, appease the aggressive, and bully the vulnerable.
The arrest of Tommy Robinson is a hammer-blow to the fragile base of people’s respect for British law. The reality that he could be grabbed off the street and thrown into a dangerous jail – in a matter of hours – is deeply shocking.
Tommy was under a suspended sentence for filming on courthouse property in the past. On May 25, 2018,  while live-streaming his thoughts about the sentencing of alleged Muslim child rapists, Tommy very consciously stayed away from the court steps, constantly used the word “alleged,” and checked with the police to ensure that he was not breaking the law.
Tommy yelled questions at the alleged criminals on their way into court – so what? How many times have you watched reporters shouting questions at people going in and out of courtrooms? You can find pictures of reporters pointing cameras and microphones at Rolf Harris and Gary Glitter, who were accused of similar crimes against children.
Tommy Robinson was arrested for “breaching the peace,” which is a civil proceeding that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Was imminent violence about to erupt from his reporting? How can Tommy Robinson have been “breaching the peace” while wandering around in the rain on a largely empty street sharing his thoughts on criminal proceedings? There were several police officers present during his broadcast, why did they allow him to break the law for so long?
Was Tommy wrong to broadcast the names of the alleged criminals? The mainstream media, including the state broadcaster, the BBC, had already named them. Why was he punished, but not them?

These are all questions that demand answers.
Even if everything done by the police or the court was perfectly legitimate and reasonable, the problem is that many people in England believe that Tommy Robinson is being unjustly persecuted by his government. The fact that he was arrested so shortly after his successful Day for Freedom event, where he gathered thousands of people in support of free speech, strikes many as a little bit more than a coincidence.
Is the law being applied fairly? Tommy Robinson has received countless death threats over the years, and has reported many of them. Did the police leap into action to track down and prosecute anyone sending those threats?
If the British government truly believes that incarcerating Tommy Robinson is legitimate, then they should call a press conference, and answer as many questions as people have, explaining their actions in detail.
As we all know, there has been no press conference. Instead of transparency, the government has imposed a publication ban – not just on the trial of the alleged child rapists, but on the arrest and incarceration of Tommy Robinson. Not only are reporters unable to ask questions, they are forbidden from even reporting the bare facts about Tommy Robinson’s incarceration.
Why? British law strains – perhaps too hard – to prevent publication of information that might influence a jury, but Tommy’s incarceration was on the order of a judge. He will not get a jury trial for 13 months imprisonment. Since there is no jury to influence, why ban reports on his arrest and punishment?
Do these actions strike you as the actions of a government with nothing to hide?
Free societies can only function with a general respect for the rule of law. If the application of the law appears selective, unjust, or political, people begin to believe that the law no longer represents universal moral values. If so, what is their relationship to unjust laws? Should all laws be blindly obeyed, independent of conscience or reason? The moral progress of mankind has always manifested as resistance to injustice. Those who ran the Underground Railroad that helped escaped slaves get from America to Canada were criminals according to the law of their day. We now think of them as heroes defying injustice, because the law was morally wrong.
The inescapable perception that various ethnic and religious groups are accorded different treatment under the Western law is one of the most dangerous outcomes of the cult of diversity.
Diversity of thought, opinion, arguments and culture can be beneficial – diversity of treatment under the law fragments societies.
The blind mantra that “diversity is a strength” is an attempt to ignore the most fundamental challenge of multiculturalism, which is: if diversity is a value, what is our relationship to belief systems which do not value diversity?
If tolerance of homosexuality is a virtue, what is our relationship to belief systems that are viciously hostile to homosexuality? If equality of opportunity for women is a virtue, what about cultures and religions which oppose such equality?
And if freedom of speech is a value, what is our relationship to those who violently oppose freedom of speech?
Diversity is a value only if moral values remain constant. We need freedom of speech in part because robust debate in a free arena of ideas is our best chance of approaching the truth.
You need a team with diverse skills to build a house, but everything must rest on a strong foundation. Diversity is only a strength if it rests on universal moral values.
Is Tommy Robinson being treated fairly? If gangs of white men had spent decades raping and torturing little  Muslim girls, and a justly outraged Muslim reporter was covering the legal proceedings, would he be arrested?
We all know the answer to that question. And we all know why.
Diversity of opinion is the path to truth – diversity of legal systems is the path to ruin.
If the arrest and incarceration of Tommy Robinson is just, then the government must throw open the doors and invite cross-examination from sceptics. Honestly explain what happened, and why.
Explain why elderly white men accused of pedophilia are allowed to be photographed and questioned by reporters on court steps, while Pakistani Muslims are not.
Explain why a police force that took three decades to start dealing with Muslim rape gangs was able to arrest and incarcerate a journalist within a few scant hours.
Explain why a man can be arrested for breaching the peace when no violence has taken place – or appears about to take place.
To the British government: explain your actions, or open Tommy Robinson’s cell and let him walk free.

MSNBC or CNN hires foul-mouthed hate-filled harpies like samantha bee

Vicious, hate-filled witch

Shortly after Autotrader abandoned its sponsorship of Samantha Bee's show...

#BREAKING: Autotrader drops their sponsorship of Samantha Bee's show. pic.twitter.com/wNH1neSymR

— Ryan Saavedra 🇺🇸 (@RealSaavedra) May 31, 2018

And State Farm is pulling ads from Sam Bee's 'Full Frontal':

“We have asked TBS to suspend our advertising in the program and are reviewing any future placements. We constantly review programs to ensure alignment to our programming guidelines and brand values.”

Forcing the 'comedian' found it within herself to apologize...

I would like to sincerely apologize to Ivanka Trump and to my viewers for using an expletive on my show to describe her last night. It was inappropriate and inexcusable. I crossed a line, and I deeply regret it.

— Samantha Bee (@iamsambee) May 31, 2018

*  *  *
On the same day as President Trump (and Sarah Sanders) highlight the utter hypocrisy of the liberal media, TBS comedian Samantha Bee 'jumped the shark'.

Samantha Bee to @IvankaTrump on Full Frontal tonight:

"Let me just say, one mother to another, do something about your dad’s immigration practices you feckless cunt!” pic.twitter.com/S8BhRYNYxD

— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) May 31, 2018

On the night before she is set to receive an award from the Television Academy for "advancing social change," The Daily Caller's Derek Hunter reports that the so-called comedian called presidential adviser (and first daughter) Ivanka Trump a "feckless c**t" in her show's monologue.

“You know, Ivanka, that’s a beautiful photo of you and your child," Bee said,
“but let me just say, one mother to another, do something about your dad’s immigration practices you feckless cunt!”

The crowd then screamed and cheered.

“He listens to you,” Bee continued.
“Put on something tight and low-cut and tell your father to fucking stop it,” she said.

And here is the icing on the cake...
Bee will be receiving an award from the Television Academy Thursday night for “advancing social change.”

On May 31, @FullFrontalSamB will be recognized for advancing social change by @TelevisionAcad at its #TVAcadHonors celebration. 👏👏👏https://t.co/2vCmlQ7wFl pic.twitter.com/YtQesf3uak

— TBS Network (@TBSNetwork) May 30, 2018

The White House has issued a statement in response to this (via Jack Posobiec):

"The language used by Samantha Bee last night is vile and vicious.
The collective silence by the left and its media allies is appalling.
Her disgusting comments and show are not fit for broadcast, and executives at Time Warner and TBS must demonstrate that such explicit profanity about female members of this administration will not be condoned on its network."
- Sarah Sanders

Bee has been on the cutting-edge of liberal virtue-signaling - including slobbering all over AG Schneiderman...
As Brietbart notes, amidst the recent allegations against Schneiderman of non-consensual physical assault by four separate women, Bee and her nightly talk show are doing damage control for their part in promoting both him and his work in November 2017. Bee’s team has already removed a tweet from the show’s Twitter timeline, as called out by Jack Posobiec, and renamed the clip on their YouTube channel of Schneiderman’s appearance on the show to “Former AG Tricks Sam Into Thinking He Was Decent.”
* * *
Meanwhile, Bee's comment has sparked intense scrutiny over Hollywood double standards in the light of the Roseanne Barr controversy.

Compare ABC’s reaction to Roseanne Barr’s tweet w TBS’s non-reaction to Samantha Bee and you’ll see a double-standard in action. There’s no uprising against Bee. Why? Because she is liberal. Because the MSM protects Obama and his aides, but not Trump. The hypocrisy is sickening.

— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) May 31, 2018

I remember when a congressional staffer to a backbench GOP Congressman criticized the way the Obama children dressed at a Rose Garden event. It made the network news. The MSM was outraged for days. She lost her job. https://t.co/GdVZfnDRuh

— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) May 31, 2018

I’m sure @TBSNetwork promptly canceled Samantha Bee’s show after her vulgar remark about Ivanka Trump because those are the rules now right @therealroseanne? Or is there some view Samantha holds that makes her different? Just wondering where the consistency is guys... https://t.co/BWpxSqv3Mq

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) May 31, 2018

Samantha Bee (@iamsambee) is being criticized for calling @IvankaTrump a "feckless c--t." BUT @billmaher called Sarah Palin a "c--t," a "dumb tw--t," a "bimbo"; and called her son, who has Down Syndrome, "retarded." No apology. No retraction. CRICKETS...#SamanthaBee

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) May 31, 2018  

For her amazing ability to stand for feminism, yet call another woman a “feckless c*nt” with impunity? Shame on @TelevisionAcad. #SamanthaBee https://t.co/XnhnxdWl76

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) May 31, 2018

It was only a few weeks ago that Samantha Bee apologized for portraying Eric Schneiderman as a superhero: https://t.co/g3tJjqrWWq

— John Sexton (@verumserum) May 31, 2018

Has Time Warner or Turner Broadcasting condemned Samantha Bee's vulgar and bigoted remarks? https://t.co/1v7i1KGxrV

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 31, 2018

Huh. I guess some vulgar bigotry is more equal than others. pic.twitter.com/drK5QThsm1

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 31, 2018

“Decency” pic.twitter.com/BSFJxUrJmL

— Jason (@jasonelevation) May 31, 2018

And in case you wondered how the left would handle this...

Roseanne is not the same as Samantha Bee. There’s a significant difference between a woman using vulgar language about another woman and a white person using racist language about a black person. pic.twitter.com/tUdqi8iv6E

— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) May 31, 2018

Is NASA's Moon Really a Junkyard? Entire Apollo fakery covered

Apollo Wet Equipment, Flag & Space Suits [Globebusters Mirror]

The TRUTH about 5G and the FCC

Our Spiritual World: The lady and the pear

Our Spiritual World: The lady and the pear: 5-30-18 The lady and the pear Every day, it's something. So, I am just leaving the local grocery store to our home...

In other News with Geoff Brady - Theranos Scandal

http://inothernewsradio.com/podcast/in-other-news-may-28-2018/

We focus in on the diligent complex investigative reporting that examined failed oversight and corporate fraud perpetrated by a multi-billion dollar biotech startup. The company is called Theranos. Its founder was CEO Elizabeth Holmes. In early 2003, Holmes dropped out of Stanford University and created Theranos after patenting an idea to develop portable blood testing machines that use only a single drop of blood. She rose to success and soon became known as the youngest female billionaire. Despite the deals signed with consumer health companies, federal approval, and raving New Yorker and Forbes articles calling Holmes the next Steve Jobs, there were big problems behind the scenes. Theranos blood test technology was exposed as error prone and inaccurate by former employees. Some of the employees fearfully reached out to Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou and he began to investigate. After three and a half years of tenacious reporting, his recently published book Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies In A Silicon Valley Startup now chronicles the hubris and criminal activity that led up to the Theranos crater.

Guest – John Carreyrou is a member of The Wall Street Journal’s investigative reporting team. He joined the Journal in 1999 and has been based in Brussels, Paris and New York for the paper.

Mr. Carreyrou has covered a number of topics at the Journal, ranging from Islamist terrorism when he was on assignment in Europe, to the pharmaceutical industry. In 2015, he won a Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting with several colleagues for a series of articles exposing fraud and abuse in Medicare, the federal health program for the elderly and disabled. Earlier in his career, he was also part of a Journal team that won a Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory Reporting for its coverage of corporate scandals. His coverage of the Silicon Valley blood-testing company Theranos has won George Polk, Gerald Loeb and Barlett & Steele awards.

GROSS. CNN Pours on the Hate – Blames Lovely Ivanka Trump for Obama Migr...

THERE IS AN ILLEGAL ALIEN SERVING ON A GOVERNING BODY IN CALIFORNIA. WE ...

Tesla's Self-Proclaimed 'World's Safest Cars' Actually Among The World’s Deadliest

The statistic of self ignition after an accident and burning itself and it's occupants to a black charred powder in it's original configuration as it comes from the factory unmolested kind of speaks for itself.
TESLA=charred powder through lithium ion battery ignition=no thanks.
That's the difference, TYVM.
 Self-crematoria feature is built into the seat belt. It can not be disabled  :-)

First off, let's get something straight. AI is hype and a scam.
There is NO SUCH THING AS AI. There is only CPU speed and storage capacity. Computers can only remember patterns and recall them as fast as the CPU can handle they cannot create.
Until the day a computer can lie to you in order to change your opinion on a subject, it is NOT AI, but only pattern recognition.
As of today, there is no such thing as AI... There is, of course, lots of hot money running around loving with Hype.
Think about it...Robot dogs that can jump an keep their balance or win at chess are merely past "Pattern Recognition."
It is not AI and won't be until scientists can create life from nothing.
AI (and Virtual reality) are bullshit).

Submitted by @ElonBachman
If there’s one thing that Elon Musk likes more than pseudoprofundity, it’s superlatives. Small wonder, then, that the company that brought us the Gigafactory, Superchargers, and Ludicrous Mode has had an easy time convincing its fan base that Tesla makes the “safest car on the road”:

Total BS. Stats prove Tesla cars as rated against other brands, have a HIGHER FATALITY RATE than other brands, other models

Lurkers on Tesla forums can confirm that these safety superlatives are articles of faith among Tesla’s flock, and apparently this faith is shared by Wall Street: Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas recently predicted that Tesla’s Model 3 will be “an order of magnitude” safer than the average car. On May 18, Jonas went even further, claiming that after 7.2 billion miles, Teslas have only been “involved” in five U.S. fatalities.
Wait, what? Observant Twitter users were quick to dispute both Musk and Jonas. Following Jonas’ initial note, pseudonymous poster @ElonBachman crowd-sourced a list over a dozen US fatalities. Jonas was out shortly after with a new note admitting to 15 deaths globally. But the internet doesn’t sleep: as of today, @ElonBachman’s list has grown to include 40 Tesla fatalities globally, including 14 U.S. deaths of Tesla drivers and occupants and a Wile E. Coyote-esque smattering of deaths-by-cliff and deaths-by-swimming-pool. A link to that list, and the sources behind it, is included below the following table:

[link to Google docs here]
What do these numbers mean?
First: they mean that you should not rely on the sell-side for either accuracy or insight. Second: they mean that Musk’s “safest car” claim is bunk. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety lists numerous luxury cars in Tesla’s class that have zero recorded fatalities (link here: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/driver-death-rates), which would seem to disqualify the Model S and Model X (we’ll come back to the Model 3 in a minute).
What of Musk’s “4x safer than average” claim? This is tricky because in road safety statistics, as in Princess Bride, there are different kinds of “death.” Luckily, another Musk tweet gives us clues as to how Tesla calculates its deaths:

What a lying pile of excrement. His "stats" are skewed by including every kind accident that can happen on a road, especially pedestrian and bicycle. Total Con Artist.

The NHTSA “fatality” measure that Musk references includes motorcyclists, cyclists, and pedestrians, as well as drivers and occupants. If we exclude occupants of other cars from the table above, then there have been 28 Tesla fatalities globally—that Twitter knows of, anyway. Dividing 7.2 billion miles by 28 deaths gives 257 million miles per death, notably worse than Musk’s claim of 320 million. Perhaps you are inclined to cut Musk some slack; after all, this is still safer than the average car. But the average car is 11 years old, is small, is driven by a younger and less affluent demographic, and lacks the safety features that come on a $100,000 vehicle. Midsize luxury sedans and SUVs in Tesla’s class have death rates far lower than Tesla’s.
Which brings us to the Model 3, Tesla’s “mass market” car offering Kia-level styling starting at $50,000. but really costing 75,000-more than a top of the line E series Mercedes. Model 3 deaths have yet been reported, multiple crashes have (including this one), and of course as of the end of Q1 2018 Tesla had only shipped around 10,000 of them (just somewhat fewer than the 200,000 or so that Musk originally  predicted would be on the road by then).
If a recent Consumer Reports article is any indication (“The Tesla’s stopping distance of 152 feet from 60 mph was far worse than any contemporary car we’ve tested and about 7 feet longer than the stopping distance of a Ford F-150 full-sized pickup”), Morgan Stanley may have to update its Tesla fatality figures again soon. But it won't. These big MSM rags are part of the same satanic network as Tesla and Musk. And being a CIA window dressing whore for the new memes of Agenda 21, expect nothing but Elizabeth Holmes style lies every time he opens his glory hole.

 FROM THE INTERNET

Tesla makes up what .1% or less of the cars on the road?
If you look at deaths per unit volume, a Tesla is a death trap.

I’m afraid that I’m compelled into a stat prof position and have to point out that accident number is meaningless without any information about accident rate.
It’s that latter number that would mean something and it’s not there. A comparison to some similar human driven sedan accident RATE would be nice.
Still, that aside: Tesla is doomed and Musk is an accident waiting to be reported.

Its the 21st Century version of a Ford Pinto !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Remember Gas Tanks exploding and bursting the entire car into FLAMES !!!!

The Tesla electric PINTO !   

For $100,000 this car is a piece of CRAP !

And MUSK is a BIG TIME LIAR !


Ha, Muck claimed that Tesla can "update" the cars software on the fly to make it stop in less feet.
Problem is, Muck, you cant make the calipers & brakes larger, you idiot. Worse than a shitty Ford f150? Did they even TEST the car before mass production?
Also, to how good an AUTONOMOUS car needs to be? It's in the fucking title. It needs to be FULLY self driving, in all road conditions.
Anything less, and you have yourself a nice Darwin machine: the idiots who decide to trust the computer will undoubtedly fall asleep, play cards, read their news on the iPhone, etc. and die left and right when the not-fully-autonomous car decides to speed up into a fire engine (must like red a lot).


TESLA is f*cking INSOLVENT. THATS ITS BIG PROBLEM.   IT RELIES ON GUBMINT HAND OUTS< AND ITS STOCK IS OVERINFLATED BY A FACTOR OF 10.   Its BROKE, and ITS DEBT is JUNK.  

The only people STUPID ENOUGH TO stay in MUSK's CON GAME, are all the shareholders, and the 400,000 dummy's who still have a deposit for a Model 3 they gave away free to Musk. 

 

 

Elon claimed you could fall asleep at the wheel and a Tesla would get you home. That every Tesla contains the hardware to be 100% autonomous.
I don't care if the lawyers added "keep your hands on the wheel". Elon Musk who owns the company claimed the car is 100% autonomous and is the safest car ever made.
If that isn't the case, he should go to jail and Tesla should be sued out of existence. I worked for a company that was put out of business by false claims made by our competitor. We never even said anything untrue about our products, but the judge allowed the case because it was determined that the products were close enough in appearance that a consumer could have been duped into buying our product by the false claims, believing our products performed in that way.
It cost us $2 million to fight the lawsuits and we never recovered, but Elon can make hundreds of false claims about the performance of his cars and get away with it? Not only that but be given a mega multi billion dollar marketcap?
Anyone that defends Tesla deserves to be thrown in the pit with Musk.

Tesla specifically tells drivers not to rely on auto-pilot and to keep their hands on the wheel etc.

That's the lamest cop-out ever.  If you want the driver responsible, don't turn on the auto-pilot.  What point is there to an auto-pilot if the driver is responsible?  None.  They use that stupid line to try to avoid lawsuits while advertising "hands free driving".  It's actually despicable.

I see them being tested every day.
There is no way, in any foreseeable future, that these things will ever remotely be road worthy.
Remember these are being made by companies using computers on systems that can't be be run reliably.
Ask any network operator from any of the car co's and they'll tell you it's miraculous their networks run at all.

How in the hell are these autobots supposed to work?

 

Last of the Mi… Oliver Klozoff Wed, 05/30/2018 - 06:56 Permalink

If I had one of those things I'd have a certain sense of anxiety every time I got in it and heard the doors lock. You just can't escape the fact that under certain conditions the thing is a death trap and the makers are doing everything possible to avoid dealing with the issue(s).
I remember looking at the H3 with it's tiny windows and thinking the same thing. That in an accident I don't think i could get out of the damn thing if the doors were jammed. Another one was the Audi R8 that had somewhat of a bad history of bursting into flames unexpectedly.
The difference is those issues were addressed, either by the market or by the manufacturer. What we see with TESLA is just "mushroom marketing" Keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em bullshit. That type of PR just can't and won't go on forever At some point there will be a market correction as the auto's reality hits more and more people.

Ever actually ridden in a Tesla?
I was excited to try the Model S until I realized the thing felt like a Corolla. Cheap interior and the screen felt gaudy.
I have a BMW and a Mercedes. Both are far nicer.

 

 That stopping distance is absolutely CRIMINAL. If they cheaped out on the brakes which should be extremely important for a (practically) autonomous car, where else did they cheap out? That thing should have a stopping distance under 115-120 ft AT LEAST. 152 ft is completely substandard.

 

 The self important techno assholes selling these coffins on wheels conveniently fail to mention that these are essentially for city driving. And that begs the question why aren’t  they taking public transportation instead of burning grid energy? I’m sure Al Greenhouse Gore knows the answer. Meanwhile, take your Tesla for a country spin and wind up in a pond.

 

 

 I am trying to look at things in a non biased fashion. There is not enough information made available to come to conclusion for me. I always make efforts to look at things from point of view science. So let's break any accident into two parts 1)The point of action when high probability of accident comes to light (Driver or AI) 2)Events beyond that point.
Phase 1)At what point was AI turned on? Few seconds before or all the time? If it's all the time then there is no argument AI is inferior to what is being communicated. If few seconds before then by laws of physics, pressing that button initiates series of physics dynamics i.e. pressing the button sends information in form of electrons to the chips, which switches the inert chip on (else you will accuse the car of spying, if its on all the time). The chip then gathers information from other instruments and performs some computations. Such computations would let's say result into a braking sub routine. Which then send information out to brakes to be applied. This phase 1 by laws of physics would take some seconds. If t representing time t0 = pressing of button, t1 = impact, t2 = information sent to brakes. Then if t0 - t1 < t0 - t2. There is nothing AI can do! Unless someone expects AI to do time travel.

The slow theft of more freedoms, one silly act or item at a time.

American social media firms are still reeling after being hit with a raft of lawsuits on the first day of the European Union's GDPR enforcement last week. And already, the bloc is considering its next piece of nanny-state legislation that would create unprecedented headaches for both the food-service industry as well as the companies that manufacture the plastic products used in restaurants, coffee shops and bars.
Not to mention consumers, who likely would bear the brunt of higher costs associated with the rule.
The EU on Monday unveiled a proposal that would ban single-serving plastic products like straws and plastic cutlery in an attempt to cut down on marine litter. The draft rule would ban the 10 plastic products that, according to the Associated Press, comprise 70% of all the garbage floating around the ocean.
These other items would include disposable food containers, single-use cotton swabs (typically used to clean people's ears), as well as plastic plates and cups often used in fast-food restaurants.
According to the BBC, the EU believes the ban will accomplish a number of desirable goals:

• Avoid 3.4 million tons of carbon emissions.
  
• Prevent 22 billion euros ($25.6 billion) of environmental damage by 2030.
  
• Save consumers 6.5 billion euros ($7.6 billion).
  

To be sure, it will likely be three or four years before these rules take effect - that is, assuming they are passed into law in the first place. Not only would the law need to be approved by the European Parliament, but every EU member state (there are presently 28 member states).

Photo op of any plain old garbage dump to sell the outrage, and removal of choice and freedom. it's an old ploy...and it works.

The law would also reduce the sale of these plastic products to households as well, as EU First Vice-President Frans Timmermans points out. The law, Timmermans argues, would go a long way toward preserving the environment as the "harmful" plastic items are replaced with more environmentally friendly (and probably more expensive) products.

"Plastic waste is undeniably a big issue and Europeans need to act together to tackle this problem," EU First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said.
"Today's proposals will reduce single-use plastics on our supermarket shelves through a range of measures.
"We will ban some of these items and substitute them with cleaner alternatives, so people can still use their favourite products."
[...]
"You can still organize a pick-nick, drink a cocktail and clean your ears just like before," Timmermans said.

Timmermans added that the single-serving utensils wouldn't be completely banned - instead, companies would be "encouraged" to use sustainable materials instead of cheap plastic. The new rules would also reduce the sale of these items in supermarkets. Ultimately, the new rules would seek to hold the makers of these items responsible for the environmental harm they cause by ensuring that "it's the polluter that pays," according to the AP.

Everything eventually becomes trash. That's life and since the times of ancient Egypt. SO WHAT.

Bizarrely, industry groups have expressed support for the new rules. But less surprisingly, the notion that the new rules would help "protect" consumers triggered a backlash from conservatives who scoffed at the notion that these rules would somehow improve the quality of life for ordinary working people, who in all likelihood would be forced to pay more for basic household goods from napkins to feminine hygiene products.

This is what tyranny looks like pic.twitter.com/5qTiJGWOVk

— Jacob Wohl (@JacobAWohl) May 28, 2018

Full tyrant indeed as the European Parliament seems to believe that each sovereign nation is unable to decide for themselves. European Green Party lawmaker Monica Frassoni also welcomed the initiative and added that:

“the scale of the problem means that we cannot rely on individual European countries to take action and must instead find a Europe-wide response.”

Producers of these products would be forced to bear some of the costs for environmental cleanup - costs that likely would be passed on to consumers, according to the proposal, a summary of which can be found below (courtesy of DW). The full EU news release can be found here.

• A ban on the private use of disposable plastic products like straws, plastic plates, plastic utensils, plastic coffee stirrers, cotton swabs with plastic stems and plastic balloon holders.
  
• Curbing the use of plastic cups for beverages as well as plastic food containers, such as the ones used for take-away.
  
• Producers of certain products will be required to help cover the costs of clean-up and waste treatment, including: tobacco products with filters (such as cigarette butts), plastic bags, candy wrappers, potato chip packages and wet wipes.
  
• Menstrual pads, wet wipes and balloons will be required to add a label indicating how the product should be disposed.
  
• Producers of fishing gear - which accounts for 27% of beach litter - will be required to cover the costs of waste collection in ports.
  
• Each member state should use a deposit system or other measure in order to collect 90% of plastic bottles used in their country by 2025.
  
• An increase in consumer information about the dangers of plastic packaging.
  

EU members would also be forced to require clear labeling on products to "educate" consumers about how their waste impacts the environment. According to data compiled by the consulting firm Eunomia, the UK produces by far the most straws of all EU member states.

Straws? Really? Why not butt plugs? tampons, those numbers are staggering.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Obama Girls REAL PARENTS Found

Caged Migrant Children Photo Goes Viral As Left Rages At Trump; Except It Happened Under Obama

A photograph of two migrant children sleeping in a cage at an ICE detention facility quickly went viral on Sunday after several prominent liberals tweeted it in a white-hot rage at President Trump's immigration policy.

Gee, the black man chains us up like slaves. Where is the outrage on his evil and heartless actions. Total silence by the LGBTQFKO left. Of course.

After a laundry list of journalists and public figures angrily tweeted the photo - including CNN's Hadas Gold, NYT Mag's editor-in-chief Jake Silverstein, Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau and former LA mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, they deleted their tweets in shame when it emerged that the photo was taken in 2014, under Obama, who gave a direct order to have this type of detention done. Doing so proves the satanic left are the worst hypocrites in the world stage, bar none.

All he did was lie his gay buttocks off to get the vote, then showed he was window dressing of the satanic power structure, like the Hildebeast. He lied about being gay, having a tranny "wife" and "bought" the use of his children from a family in Illinois, whose FB history showed his daughters to be someone else's. Payment? 11 million dollars per child. 4 people were murdered to keep this secret, a secret. (video I had of the proof, deleted by Google/CIA from my YouTube account)

Most fascist act ever put into law by a sovereign nation, bar Great Britain

Indeed - nobody thought to check the date on the attached article, published in June of 2014. 
The award for the lamest excuse goes to CNN's Hadas Gold, who wrote "Deleted previous tweet because gave impression of recent photos (they're from 2014)"

Deleted previous tweet because gave impression of recent photos (they’re from 2014)

— Hadas Gold (@Hadas_Gold) May 27, 2018

Sorry Hadas. The internet never forgets:

No you did not “give the impression”. You flat out said it. pic.twitter.com/kGJ2PmPVgT

— EducatédHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) May 27, 2018

Jake Silverstein, editor-in-chief of NYT Magazine, threw his family under the bus for "distracting" him, like the cunt coward these jewbie leftists are.

Correction: this link, which was going around this morning, is from 2014. Still disturbing, of course, but only indirectly related to current situation. My bad (and a good reminder not to RT things while distracted w family on the weekend). https://t.co/zbM4I0woUF

— Jake Silverstein (@jakesilverstein) May 27, 2018

Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau cranked up the virtue-signaling up to eleven, tweeting "Look at these pictures. This is happening right now, and the only debate that matters is how we force our government to get these kids back to their families as fast as humanly possible."

Aaand it's gone - but not forgotten:

I don’t know what’s worse... Obama’s speech writer self-owning himself by sharing an article dating back to 2014 under Obama or him deleting his tweet showing that he doesn’t actually care about the kids and just wanted to dunk on Trump pic.twitter.com/98SBJEXeot

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) May 27, 2018

Then there's Women's March co-founder Linda Sarsour:

Former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa also had egg on his face after tweeting "Speechless. This is not who we are as a nation."

Hello @antonio4ca Why did you delete this tweet? Is it because this was 2014 and you are no longer outraged because who this all happened under? Are you no longer speechless? Help explain, thanks. pic.twitter.com/Qe8Pr9Zac1

— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) May 28, 2018

As Caleb Hull - Senior Editor of The IJR and others pointed out, many of those who tweeted the picture on Sunday were awfully silent when it actually happened under Obama.

A lot of big names are sharing this article from 2014, but they didn’t say a word back when it actually happened under Obama.

• Linda Sarsour - Women’s March co-founder
• Jon Favreau - Obama’s speechwriter
• Jake Silverstein - NYT Magazine editor-in-chief pic.twitter.com/R4AQEDM6BD

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) May 27, 2018

That a lot of journalists did not recognize those pictures from the unaccompanied minors surge in 2014 and shared the story assuming it depicted a new practice under Trump seems like pretty clear evidence that they didn’t do their jobs during the Obama years.

— James Hasson (@JamesHasson20) May 28, 2018

Of course, then there was the inevitable...

Just look at how the Trump Administration treats immigrant children pic.twitter.com/a1WxNSuB1G

— Jack Posobiec🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 28, 2018

The US economy has been destroyed since 2016. Don't believe me? Just look at this unemployment line. Thanks Drumpf pic.twitter.com/gfbUByPuf1

— Jack Posobiec🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 28, 2018

We will never forget him leading the Trail of Tears. pic.twitter.com/SrwqGcEHFp

— CIA Director Gina Haspell 💎 (@GinaHaspell1) May 28, 2018

He's also made air travel completely unsafe by cutting safety regulations, check out this blimp crash from last week pic.twitter.com/Sln0r2ULqT

— ReSiStArDaTiOn (@Sixlets821) May 28, 2018

This one is too good. This tweet is now deleted. Senior Obama bro wanted to blame the current administration for this only to realize it’s from his own administration. pic.twitter.com/I86zPyeIbm

— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) May 27, 2018

Blue-checkers changing their tune about Obama's immigrant scandal pic.twitter.com/xk64yUIvLq

— Carl Gustav, Asst to the Regional Manager (@CaptYonah) May 28, 2018

Our Spiritual World: Family

Our Spiritual World: Family:   Family by Don Bradley May 28th, 2018 To love and be loved. Not a guaranteed thing. One can commit honestly to family and...

In Other News Radio hosted by Geoff Brady

In Other News Radio hosted by Geoff Brady
airs on WBAI 99.5 FM  -
Permanent Link to show:
http://inothernewsradio.com/podcast/in-other-news-may-28-2018/


Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies In A Silicon Valley Startup
We focus in on the diligent complex investigative reporting that examined failed oversight and corporate fraud perpetrated by a multi-billion dollar biotech startup. The company is called Theranos. Its founder was CEO Elizabeth Holmes. In early 2003, Holmes dropped out of Stanford University and created Theranos after patenting an idea to develop portable blood testing machines that use only a single drop of blood. She rose to success and soon became known as the youngest female billionaire. Despite the deals signed with consumer health companies, federal approval, and raving New Yorker and Forbes articles calling Holmes the next Steve Jobs, there were big problems behind the scenes. Theranos blood test technology was exposed as error prone and inaccurate by former employees. Some of the employees fearfully reached out to Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou and he began to investigate. After three and a half years of tenacious reporting, his recently published book Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies In A Silicon Valley Startup now chronicles the hubris and criminal activity that led up to the Theranos crater.

Most authoritative show in the US. Geoff Bradey

Billy Shepperd Ed's Edited Adventure BEATLES

Ojai in the spring...

Ojai Valley from Shelf Road, looking dead on east, abouts Grandview ( a street I used to live on-amazing times then-in 2005)

Ojai Valley looking South, South east, Shelf road spot. Perfect Spring day. Hard to believe all this burned down not five months ago. You can see why I call landscapes like this and others, Dad's cathedral. It's heaven to me, if you close your eyes to the nephilim infestation. Which, of course, I do not. But up here, they cannot be seen. A great blessing to us all. click on the pics for a larger size.

Ojai Valley looking South east, Shelf road spot.Just below me, is a spot that looms large in my own personal lore, regarding a spiritual day beyond imaginings and which is immortalized by a great stone, placed in a park in the CENTER OF TOWN, by the network, who saw the whole thing from airplane. Event was in March, stone-weighing some many tons-was moved to park in November of 2005.

Nathan and I, on fire road, Shelf. Light walking hiking is good for the tummy muscles, in prep for the cutter. So, here I am, double plus good with the view and all. memorial weekend. In memorium of all my brothers who gave it all for truth over the years, I bow to you and your boundless courage in the race we must all run, one day.

Kitty Picture for all the ladies out there who love these little fur-balls. Mike and Tink, sleeping on Randy's bed. They are very close, are very loving, and are great at keeping the varmints, rats, and snakes from being nasty things that get under foot.