Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If in recent history an American secretary of State has made a speech as delusional as John Kerry’s in Jakarta last week, I can’t remember it.
Discussing the most dangerous threats facing the world, Secretary Kerry said that “terrorism, epidemics, poverty, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction” are all problems, but added, “the reality is that climate change ranks right up there with every single one of them.”
That was extreme enough, but then came the claim that should disqualify him from serving as Secretary
of State. “In a sense,” he said, “climate change can now be considered another weapon of mass
destruction, perhaps the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction.”
At a time when Iran is on the verge of building a nuclear weapon, Ukraine is erupting into violence,
Syria has collapsed into civil war, Venezuela is falling apart, Iraq and Afghanistan continue to devolve,
and China is asserting itself all over the world, the American Secretary of State stated that the most
urgent threat we face is a small rise in sea level by the end of the 21st century – a threat even greater
than nuclear war, terrorism, or catastrophic attacks on critical infrastructure.
It’s a disaster for someone in that position to announce global warming is the greatest threat to the
human race. It’s dangerous. If these are really his priorities, he should not remain in office.
Kerry clearly doesn’t intend his statement as hyperbole, though. He actually believes climate change
could be worse than nuclear war. You realize that when you hear the doomsday scenarios he goes on
to prophesy: droughts and dry spells, floods and monsoons, typhoons, famine, the end of species
(“cod or sardines,” he says), entire countries submerged, and more.
Kerry predicts economic disaster, too -- for instance, a trillion dollars every year in flood damage to
ports in Asia, “unless we make big changes to the infrastructure of those ports” (which, presumably,
“we” would, rather than bear a trillion dollars in unnecessary costs each year...).
All of these catastrophes, Kerry says repeatedly, are “facts”. The science of climate change, in his
telling, is as indisputable as it is simple--a scientific truth in the same way that gravity is a scientific
truth. “When an apple separates from a tree, it falls to the ground..It’s a scientific fact,” he says.
Similarly, climate change “is not really a complicated equation...This is simple. Kids at the earliest age
can understand this.”
The computer model projections, of course, are not scientific fact -- they’re hypotheses -- and they are
not simple, either. They are based on thousands of variables, and many educated guesses and
assumptions. Guesses and assumptions that failed to predict the last 17 years without warming
(a scenario none of these “scientific” models projected).
Secretary Kerry has no time for questions about his bumper sticker science, however. As a lifelong
politician, he implored the world to ignore “a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme
ideologues” who are skeptical of his claims.
It’s not just the science skeptics Kerry can’t tolerate, however. Your view is equally unacceptable to the
Secretary of State if you grant him his forecasts but question the left’s policy prescriptions (which
always involve giving more power and trillions of dollars to the government in a futile attempt to prevent
the Earth’s climate from changing). We should not allow “any room,” Kerry says, “for those who think
that the costs associated with doing the right thing outweigh the benefits.”
We must follow him anywhere, apparently, even if it does more harm than good.
Not only do Kerry’s injunctions verge on totalitarianism -- intolerance of any view but the state’s -- but
they are also the opposite of the scientific method, which is based on openness to doubt.
Unfortunately, Kerry’s eagerness to shut down the conversation is increasingly common on the left. A
libel because they dared to question his research. (Scientists who sue columnists for questioning their
findings are reason enough to be skeptical of the global warming “consensus.”)
How can anyone take seriously a secretary of State who gives a speech like Kerry did in Jakarta and
actually means it?
Clearly the Iranians can’t take him seriously. The day after Kerry announced that America is more
concerned with global warming than nuclear weapons, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, said
of his nuclear negotiations with the west: “I am not optimistic about the negotiations and they will lead
nowhere -- but I am not against them.”
But Secretary Kerry has bigger problems on his mind. In a delusional administration, he is the most
delusional cabinet member. If Kerry really thinks like this, he needs to resign.
1a) Dear Secretary of State John Kerry:
Because of my respect for the United States, I will attempt to afford you the honor you think you
so richly deserve. It’s hard to speak to you with anything but anger, hard to feel the need, again,
to start from the beginning because you clearly choose to ignore history in your quest for glory.
It is a quest destined to fail but its outcome, even, or more accurately especially, in failure, will
hurt Israel.
Greater men than you have tried to make, to force, peace on the Middle East. I promise you,
you will fail too. You will fail because you are not addressing the root cause of the problem. You,
like so many before you, take the easy way out. Blame Israel. It is so easy to do, and so
stupid.
I could speak to you of history – a history longer and greater than you can imagine. I could
speak to you of injustices – yes, our land is filled with the graves of those murdered for the
unjust reason that they lived here, or traveled abroad, or ate in the wrong restaurant, or took the
wrong bus.
I could speak to you of justice – of a population exchange similar to those that have taken place
We fed our brothers, clothed them, gave them homes. And most importantly, we loved them
and gave them the most precious of gifts – a future, a present, as integral parts of the land and
people of this country. My neighbor, the family across the street – they live in the same houses
that I do, drive the same cars, attend the same schools. He is an engineer; he is a judge in the
courts. She is a nurse; she is a lawyer. All my neighbors, though their grandparents came here
with nothing.
And at the same time, across many borders, the Arabs put their “brothers” in refugee camps,
all but starved them. They raised them to be embittered – not at those who kept them in squalor,
but those they had hoped to defeat. They blame us and you are naive enough to blame us as
well?
They chose war, John Kerry, while we chose compromise. And you would blame us for this
horrible chain of the decades? They invaded – five Arab nations, in 1949. They attacked. Out
of sheer desperation, we won enough of our land to give us a measure of security…it lasted
only 7 years, until they attacked again. But oh what we did in those 7 years. We welcomed our r
efugees from Europe, from Arab lands. We built them tent cities and turned them into real
cities. We conquered swamp land and made it habitable and we raised our children to dream
that someday there would be peace. We created universities and schools and parks.
But the Arabs would have none of it. In 1948, in 1956, again in 1967 and again in 1973 and
again and again, almost daily, we fight off their attempts to do in 2014 what they failed to do in
1948. They have not learned and amazingly enough, John Kerry, neither have you.
We have built and evacuated whole communities; we have withdrawn from land in exchange for nothing but the hope that we could appease the “unappeasable.” We have flown around the
world to help others – from earthquakes, tsunamis, devastating storms, famine and more.
We have allowed the Arabs – yes, allowed them, to fire tens of thousands of missiles at our
cities and we know they have more than 170,000 more rockets and missiles ready to try again.
At any time and with no notice whatsoever, we have the power to flatten Gaza into the world’s
largest, flattest parking lot. And each time they attack, we think of it and know we can’t do it,
won’t do it. And you would blame us for the failure to make peace?
When we attempt to stop them, to push back their military capabilities, just a bit, we aim for the
rocket launchers, the arsenals, the training camps while they aim for our cities – Beersheva,
Shderot, Ashkelon, Netivot, Ashdod. And you would threaten us for the ongoing state of war?
There cannot be peace until you recognize your enemy. There cannot be successful
negotiations if you fail to understand those you would bring to the table. You fail on both counts.
After hearing that you threatened Israel unless the peace talks succeed, I can only conclude that
your ignorance is even greater than I thought. I knew, years ago, that you had no clue what the
Arab world is thinking, feeling, dreaming of. Now I know the same is true about Israel – you
don’t understand us any better than you understand the Arabs and that amazes me.
Unlike the Arab world, Israel is an open society – read our newspapers, speak to the people on
the street. No one will stop you and we won’t escort you with secret police to control your
experience. Pick any town, city, village, settlement and you will hear the same thing. Pick any
street, any person and ask them what they dream of, what they want for their children. We do
not dream of glorious death and martyrdom for our sons. We dream that they will never have to
even serve in the army.
I have friends who agonized over their sons going into the army. I could understand my agony,
as I grew up in the United States where all my friends promised they would run away from the
US before they would ever be drafted. I knew nothing of army and war and guns. But my friends
here in Israel? They had served in the army; why did they suffer so when their sons were drafted.
“We served so that they wouldn’t have to,” I’ve been told over and over again. They never
believed, 20+ years later that their sons and daughters would have to sacrifice three years of
their lives, that we’d still be at war.
You won’t hear that in the Arab world. Oh, they’ll tell you that they dream of peace because they
know that is what you want to hear, but in Arabic, they will talk of a time when there will be no
Jews in the entire Middle East, never mind no Jews in the Palestine they envision. Their
religious leaders will whip them up to the glory of Allah and jihad. But still you would expect us
to make peace with them?
Theirs is a culture built on a dream – a dream that they will own the world…my corner, John
Kerry, and even yours. Theirs is a society that believes in a heaven earned by causing the
deaths of others and so when their sons blow themselves up and kill those Jews, they celebrate.
And yes, they celebrated on 9/11 when they killed your people just as they celebrated when we
released their terrorists and killers in yet another attempt to appease them…and you.
If you don’t understand their ability to celebrate, I will confess that neither do I. I have seen the
mothers hugging their sons in a video, made the night before they killed themselves…and the
innocent men, women, and children, of their enemies who happened to be on that bus, in that
mall, or asleep in their homes. It doesn’t matter to them if they kill a soldier, a man with a gun, a
pregnant woman, or a helpless child. The more, the better, in their twisted interpretation of
what their God wants. You don’t understand this and I can see where it is hard, given your
western mentality. But not understanding it doesn’t give you the right to ignore it.
You won’t fail in your goal of ramming peace down our throats because of this, however. You
will fail because, amazingly enough, you don’t even understand Israel. We are the easiest to
get, the easiest, honestly. All you have to do is listen and see – but even that is beyond you.
Listen to our national anthem – it does not speak of war. It is called, “The Hope” and speaks of
a dream of 2,000 years to be a free people. We value that – the ability to protect ourselves, to
be free in the land of our forefathers. Even the most right wing among us would be willing to
compromise for a real peace, a peace where our children and grandchildren could live without
the fears we deal with daily. We do not interfere in how they raise their children; we are stupid
enough to even fund some of their text books – all in our own misguided belief that we can
make peace with those who do not yet want it.
You threaten us with economic sanctions, with international isolation. This is your latest blunder,
and it is a big one. Israel is laughing at you this morning. Economic sanctions?
They gassed us, beat us, bombed us, burned us. They haunted us, hunted us, hated us through
the centuries across many lands and through this land in the last several decades. They burned
the synagogue where my grandmother was hiding; they gassed my great grandmother to death.
International isolation? They put us in ghettos, they exploded our buses and shot our babies in
the head. They lynched my neighbor, attacked the buses on which my friends travel. They shot
my daughter’s teacher (and his infant son) and ambushed and killed a colleague of mind.
We are fighting for our lives, John Kerry – no less today than we were in 1948. The ONLY
difference is that through the greed and stupidity of the Arab nations, we are stronger than we
ever were, not weaker. You will fail, John Kerry, because you are fool enough to think you can
come here, wave your American flag, look at your watch and tell us you’d like to finish these
peace negotiations by 5:00 p.m. because you have a date at the opera or a baseball game to
go to.
For a long time now, the Arabs have fooled you. They’ll speak to you of peace over the coffee
they serve you and then when you leave the room, they slap each other on the backs and laugh
– another successful day at making the US look stupid.
Now, this time, we will have that in common with the Arabs; we are laughing at you too. Naftali
Bennet has tried to explain it to you, “There has not yet been a nation that has given up its land
due to economic threats, and nor will we. Only security will bring economic stability, not a
terrorist state near Ben-Gurion Airport.”
Greater men have failed, John Kerry – and I promise you, until you know Israel and until you
understand the Arabs, you don’t have a prayer of succeeding. Go watch the Superbowl, at least
then, maybe you’ll have done something worthwhile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) SFSU Student Continued Posting Violent Threats Against IDF, Jews
A violence-glorifying student who has made repeated graphic threats against Israelis and pro-Israel
Americans is finally gone from SFSU, but is presumably still in San Francisco, along with his knives.
By: Lori Lowenthal Marcus
The Jewish Press ran a story about Mohammad Hammad, the San Francisco State University student
and president of SFSU’s General Union of Palestine Students.
Hammad had posted a picture and a message on the social media site Tumblr, which shows Hammad
with a knife, beneath which is the caption, “I seriously can not get over how much I love this blade. It is
the sharpest thing I own and cuts through everything like butter and just holding it makes me want to
stab an Israeli soldier.”
The California-based AMCHA Initiative, which brought Hammad’s original threats to the public’s
attention, released another statement today. This statement links to many more violent and threatening
statements by Hammad which he made after the one that was the original focus of the group’s concern.
The AMCHA Initiative is dedicated to documenting, exposing and eradicating anti-Semitism on
American campuses.
In its Feb. 18 statement, AMCHA said that although its documentation of Hammad’s violent postings had
been submitted to SFSU president Leslie Wong in mid-January, there had been no response.
Because Wong had not responded to AMCHA’s documentations, and due to serious concern about the
health and safety of SFSU students, earlier on the day it released its statement, AMCHA alerted San
Francisco Police Chief Greg Suhr, and the San Francisco District Attorney, George Gascòn, about
Hammad’s violent predilection. They also provided copies of the many threatening and hostile public
statements issued by Hammad.
The lurid messages continued right through November 22, when the student posted a public message
in which he wrote: You know what? Israelis ARE colonizers, there is literally no way around it
And you know what else? My heroes have always killed colonizers I literally see nothing wrong with this
and my only regret is that not all colonizers were killed HMM
In Hammad’s other violence-glorifying posts, he targeted not only members of the IDF and all Israelis,
but anyone who is pro-Israel, as well as American soldiers. He also posted several more general
paeans to murder, decapitation and depraved violence.
Something that AMCHA found particularly troubling was that Hammad revealed his excitement about
being made the president of SFSU’s General Union of Palestine Students (GUPS), because then, he
wrote, he hopes “to radicalize half of our population and bring them back with me as fighters.
” GOOD NEWS FOR SFSU, BAD NEWS FOR SAN FRANCISCANS?
Although Robert Nava, SFSU’s vice president for university development, initially told The Jewish Press
by telephone that SFSU was engaged in the process of discipline with respect to Hammad, he later
called back to provide a far more definitive statement.
Nava said that the student we had been discussing – Mohammad Hammad - “is no longer a student on
campus.” Hammad no longer is in student housing and he is no longer enrolled at SFSU.
When Tammi Benjamin-Rossman, co-founder of AMCHA, was told that SFSU officially stated that
Hammad was gone from the SFSU campus, she expressed both relief and continued concern.
“The GUPS students knew who Hammad was, what kinds of things he said and has done, and yet they
selected him as their representative,” said Rossman-Benjamin. “SFSU cannot just breathe a sigh of
relief and end its diligence with the dismissal of Hammad.”
“What steps is SFSU taking to protect students who remain in harms way?” Rosmman-Benjamin wanted
to know. “Their continued silence suggests they have done nothing more than get rid of one problem,
without ensuring that it won’t be repeated.”
Officer Albie Esparza, the spokesperson for the San Francisco Chief of Police acknowledged that the
office had received a packet of material earlier in the day and told The Jewish Press that the office
was “looking into the matter.” He said that an investigator had already contacted the person who
provided the department with the information.
Esparza focused primarily on whether the alleged criminal acts had been committed within the SFPD’s
jurisdiction. But if Hammad is still in San Francisco, and if he is in possession of the knives he
displayed in some of his public posts, Hammad may very well pose a serious threat to the safety of
individuals and organizations in the Bay area. The director of communications for the San Francisco
District Attorney’s office, Alex Bastian, said he was unaware of the delivery, by email and hand delivery,
of the materials regarding Mohamad Hammad. Officer Esparza asked that anyone with information
regarding violent threats allegedly made by Mohammad Hammad should contact the San Francisco
Police Department at 415.575.4444, or should text the department by dialing TIP411, and put “SFPD”
at the start of the message.
The AMCHA Initiative began monitoring GUPS in November, after the organization hosted an all-day
celebration commemorating the 6th anniversary of the Edward Said mural. At that event, students were
handed stencils with which to make signs that said, “MY HEROES HAVE ALWAYS KILLED
COLONIZERS,” a reference to the killing of Jews.
Although SFSU President Wong publicly condemned the GUPS stencils glorifying violence, he had
made no further public statements on the matter until one was provided to The Jewish Press, through
Robert Nava, in response to our inquiry on Feb. 18.
About the Author: Lori Lowenthal Marcus is the US correspondent for The Jewish Press. She is a
recovered lawyer who previously practiced First Amendment law and taught in Philadelphia-area
graduate and law schools.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)Cruz Control? Part II
By Thomas Sowell
Senator Ted Cruz is a hero in some Republican circles -- and the opposite among
many of his Senate Republican colleagues.
At this crucial juncture in the history of America, internal battles within the only party
that can turn things around are the last thing Americans need. Moreover, each side in
this political civil war has all too many valid criticisms of the other.
The Republican establishment's criticisms of Senator Cruz are criticisms of his
rule-or-ruin strategy, which can destroy whatever chance Republicans have of taking
back the Senate in 2014 and taking back the White House in 2016. And, without
political power, there is no real hope of changing things in Washington.
Senator Cruz's filibuster last year got the Republicans blamed for shutting down the
government -- and his threatened filibuster this year forced several Republican
Senators to jeopardize their own reelection prospects by voting to impose cloture, to
prevent Cruz from repeating his self-serving grandstand play of last year. The
Republicans need every vote they can get in the Senate -- plus additional votes by
defeating some Democrats who are running for the Senate this fall. It can be a very
close call. Jeopardizing the reelection of current Republican Senators is an act of utter
irresponsibility, a high risk with zero benefits to anyone except Ted Cruz -- and the
Democrats.
However unjustified Senator Cruz's actions, the very fact that a freshman Senator can
so quickly gain so many supporters, with so much enthusiasm, ought to be a loud
warning to the Republican establishment that they have long been a huge
disappointment to a wide range of Republican voters and supporters.
One of their most maddening qualities has for decades been their can't-be-bothered
attitude when it comes to explaining their positions to the American people in
language people can understand. A classic example was Speaker of the House John
Boehner's performance when he emerged from a meeting at the White House a while
back. There, with masses of television news cameras pointed at him, and a bank of
microphones crowded together, he simply expressed his disgust at the Obama
administration, turned and walked on away.
Here was a golden opportunity to cut through the Obama administration rhetoric and
set the record straight on the issues at hand. But apparently Speaker Boehner couldn't
be bothered to have a prepared, and previously thought out, statement to present,
conveying something more than his disgust.
Unfortunately, Speaker Boehner is just the latest in a long line of Republican "leaders"
with the same disregard of the need to explain their position in plain English.
That takes work. But it is work that any number of conservative commentators on
radio and television do every day of the week. And they are very successful in getting
across arguments that Republican politicians do not bother to try to get across.
Democrats are constantly articulating their talking points. Less than 24 hours elapsed
after the Congressional Budget Office reported that ObamaCare was likely to cause
many workers to have their hours cut back, before Democrats were all talking about
the "freedom" this would give workers to pursue other interests, rather than being "
locked-in" to long hours on a full-time job.
It was a slick and dishonest argument, but the point here is that Democrats
immediately saw the need for articulation -- and for all of them to use the same words
and phrases, so as to establish their argument by sheer repetition.
Nor was this the first time that Democrats coordinated their words and phrases. A few
years ago, Senator Chuck Schumer was secretly recorded giving fellow Democrats the
word to use whenever describing Republicans -- namely, "extreme."
When George W. Bush first ran for president in 2000, the word among Democrats was
that he lacked "gravitas." People who had never used that word in years were suddenly
saying "gravitas" 24/7.
The Republican establishment has more than a tactical deficiency, however. They s
eem to have no principle that they offer or follow with any consistency. Their lack of
articulation may be just a reflection of that lack of principle. It is hard to get to the
point when you have no point to get to.
Ted Cruz filled a void. But the Republican establishment created the void.
3a) Another Misguided Cruz Missile
Ted Cruz is aiming for Mitch McConnell, but he may blow up the GOP's chances for a Senate majority in November.
A rump band of Beltway conservatives has seen the enemy and it is not Harry Reid. It is Mitch McConnell, whose scalp is apparently worth blowing yet another shot at a Republican Senate majority.
There's a new dividing line in the conservative movement—between a majority who'd like to win against President Obama, and a handful who'd like to win some scalps. It was on vivid display last week during the Senate debt-ceiling vote. Republicans were looking to avoid a fight they were destined to lose. Democrats had the votes to pass the bill with a simple majority, meaning they also would have owned their president's refusal to tackle the debt.
In walked Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to demand a 60-vote majority to pass the increase. Mr. Cruz has subsequently claimed he alone was attempting to get Mr. Obama to agree to spending reforms. Odd, given that he didn't publicly present any reforms to attach to the debt bill. He didn't take to the floor to escalate the issue. To the contrary, he agreed to speed up the vote.
There was only one point to Mr. Cruz's action: To force Republican colleagues, in particular Mr. McConnell, into voting "yes" to proceed to the actual bill. Mr. Cruz has admitted as much, bragging to radio host Mark Levin the next day that his colleagues' "heads exploded" because he'd "forced" them to "tell the truth"—namely, that they "wanted" to give Barack Obama a "blank check to raise our debt." Never mind that every Republican, once past the Cruz show vote, opposed the increase on final passage.
Members of Congress routinely cook up situations that force opposing parties to take "tough votes." This may be the first time a senator did so solely to damage his own party. It may also be the first time a senator has used the privileges afforded him under Senate rules to benefit a small and coordinated band of conservative campaign groups. Their No. 1 target is Mr. McConnell, who Mr. Cruz hasn't forgiven for failing to embrace his damaging shutdown.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz at the Denton County Republican Party dinner, Feb. 1. Michael Ainsworth/Associated Press
The breadth and coordination of these groups was striking. First came Heritage Action—which was created in 2010 by the Heritage Foundation, which is itself run by Cruz-promoter Jim DeMint —explaining it would mark down in its legislative scorecard any senator who voted to move beyond Mr. Cruz's procedural hurdle. Within minutes of Mr. McConnell voting to proceed, his opponent in the Kentucky primary, Matt Bevin, had tweeted out that his rival had given "Obama another blank check."
The Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF), which is backing Mr. Bevin, also immediately blasted Mr. McConnell for voting "with the Democrats to advance yet another debt limit increase." The group, founded by Mr. DeMint and now run by a former DeMint staffer, released a Web video that was already trashing Mr. McConnell on the debt ceiling. The blog site Red State, on cue, praised the ad, instructed readers to "Send Senate Conservatives Fund As Much As You Can NOW," and also complained that Mr. McConnell had given the president a "blank check." The Madison Project, also backing Mr. Bevin, put out a mirror release: " Mitch McConnell Votes to Give Obama a Blank Check."
On Thursday, Mr. Cruz told me his debt procedure was a matter of principle, though he acknowledged an "additional benefit" was the "transparency" he'd forced on Republicans. He told me he had not "spoken to anyone at SCF in months." However, when I asked if anyone on his staff had been in contact with outside groups about his debt-ceiling procedure, he acknowledged: "My staff periodically speaks with people across the conservative movement." He added, "But the debt ceiling vote occurred suddenly and it was a surprise to everybody when Republican leadership asked every Republican senator to consent to letting Harry Reid raise the debt ceiling."
In addition to Mr. McConnell, conservative groups are targeting senators John Cornyn (Texas), Pat Roberts (Kan.), Thad Cochran (Miss.), and Lindsey Graham (S.C.). While the primary challengers aren't likely to win (Mr. Bevin is trailing by 25 points), the attacks are hurting incumbents' general-election prospects.
None of this is about substance. If political principle were at stake, one would assume these outside groups—so keen on purity—would have already dropped Mr. Bevin. It came out recently that he had once praised the very bank bailouts that he has been slapping Mr. McConnell for supporting.
Mr. McConnell holds the same positions as Mr. Cruz on spending, ObamaCare, gun control, etc. His sin? He has refused to ask Republicans to run into the Obama fixed bayonets, a la the Cruz shutdown. Groups like SCF and Heritage Action want to replace the leadership with more of their own kamikaze caucus. They also understand there are far more fundraising dollars and media attention in attacking fellow conservatives.
Republicans have fumbled their last two Senate takeover chances, mostly thanks to infighting. But this latest movement—to take down incumbents over tactics—is a new low. If the GOP remains a minority, this will be why.
4)Two Charts Say the Market Rally Is Coming to
an End |
| By Jeff Clark |
|
|
The stock market has had a great run this month. But it looks like the rally has just about run
its course.
Many technical indicators are showing negative divergence right now. In other words, as the
S&P 500 has been making higher highs on the chart, the momentum indicators have been
making lower highs. That's "negative divergence," and it's a strong warning sign that the rally is
nearing an end.
So now is not the time to bet aggressively that stocks are going to keep pushing higher. But
it's probably a good time to make a bet on the short side of the market.
Here's a 60-minute chart of the S&P 500 as of Tuesday's close, plotted along with three
momentum indicators…
.png)
For the past week, the S&P 500 has been rallying and making higher highs on the chart. But the
MACD momentum indicator and the five- and 14-day relative strength indexes (RSIs) have all
been making lower highs.
Of course, negative divergence doesn't play out 100% of the time. In powerful markets, stocks
can continue higher – negating the divergences. But in an environment that is as extended and
overbought as we have right now, negative divergence is a BIG warning sign. And it's one
aggressive traders can often profit from.
Adding to this potentially bearish view is the following chart of the Volatility Index (the "VIX")…
.png)
The VIX is the market's "fear gauge." When stocks are falling and investors are fearful, the VIX
rallies. When stocks are rallying and investors are complacent, the VIX falls.
The VIX has been falling all month – which is consistent with a rallying stock market. But notice
how the momentum indicators have been rising lately. This "positive divergence" is an early
warning sign that the trend in the VIX is ready to reverse. And a rising VIX usually goes along
with a falling stock market.
So instead of betting on the stock market hitting new highs, it's time to be cautious. And
aggressive traders might want to think about getting in on the short side of the market.
Best regards and good trading,
Jeff Clark |
4a)
"
It's Official: The Chinese Are Selling U.S. Debt...
and Buying Gold |
| By Dr. Steve Sjuggerud |
|
|
The latest news is in…
The Chinese are selling U.S. government debt… and they're buying gold. So let me ask you…
In your opinion, what will the signs be that the U.S. dollar's heyday is ending?
What will the signs be that China is giving up on the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency?
Two very simple signs to look for:
| • | China shrinking its U.S. dollar holdings. |
| | |
| • | China buying lots of gold. |
Just this week, we got word that both of those things are happening… "
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment