Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks Cable: NASDAQ Folded To Chinese Pressure
jjp9999 writes "A WikiLeaks cable reveals that the NASDAQ folded to pressure from the Chinese regime and kicked out a U.S.-based Chinese TV network, NTD TV. The Chinese Communist Party has been trying to block this station for years now, since it's one of the few major Chinese media that refuses to censor its content. Although they're blocked in Mainland China, they broadcast in with satellites. The timing of the incident aligns well with other actions launched by the CCP against the TV station. They used to broadcast into China through French satellite company Eutelsat, but their connection was cut. Reporters Without Borders investigated and found the Chinese regime was behind it. They now use a Taiwanese satellite."
Sorry, the middle class in China is more important to our businesses than Americans are, given that the middle class in China is larger than the entire American population. Of course, we'll continue to ignore the hundreds of millions of peasants in poverty, just like they're ignored in the US. Bad for profits, you see.
Here's our country on a silver platter." Seriously, in twenty years, we're going to regret moving our of production and debt to China. We're going be left with no leg to stand on, and only ourselves to blame.
Yeah we need to stop being a poor debtor nation. The only person willing to balance the budget is Ron Paul.
But he's unelectable. And a kook. I'm not sure WHY he's either of those things, but CNN, FOX, NBC keep telling me it's true therefore I believe them.
Also those guys Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity on the Romney Radio network also say it, so that's double verification. (Who am to think on my own? I just do what the authorities tell me.)
(goes back to watching tv)
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
What is this American middle class that you speak of? I thought the Congress that we elected to represent "us" was well on the way to eliminating that.
Around the time the cables were released, Assange said Wikileaks were about to release a tranche of documents implicating a certain US bank in shenanigans. What happened to those?
Original cable here:http://wikileaks.org/cable/2007/01/07BEIJING621.html#
He's a kook because, while he makes one or two good points, by and large he's a historical and economic ignoramus, or more likely just a snake-oil dealer selling a suite of easy solutions that would neither be easy or solutions.
Imagine for the briefest moment if Ron Paul got elected. It's certainly not going to be the case that Congress is going to be filled with enough like-minded people that would be willing to go along with him, and so he would have at best very limited capacity to make good on any of his promises, and more likely would soon piss off Congress, regardless of party affiliation, and would find himself a very lonely man in the Oval Office as 2/3s majorities killed his vetoes and refused to co-operate with any of his plans.
Remember this, though sometimes it's hard to tell these days, a President is only as strong as Congress allows him to be.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
if you get the stalled situation, like you said, maybe that's not too bad!
all our 'progress' in the last 10 or 15 years has been backward.
if we stand still, that's actually going forward! (head asplodes).
seriously, though; I'd be ok with having a guy in office that congress can't work with; as long as its both parties that can't work with him. enemy of my enemy and all that.
at this point, even a lunatic would get my vote if he's a true outsider. insiders are all messed up and voting for the same-old is not working. get some crazy guy in there as long as he's not R or D crazy. we've all had enough of that fake R/D choice, haven't we?
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
He's called a kook because his preferred economic theory is to ignore evidence and history, especially when turned into mathematical models, and invest based on psychology. "We think this stock will do well, because the company's CEO is so charismatic" is Austrian School economic advice. The Austrian School is the conspiracy theory of economics. Once in a while, somebody predicts something that happens, but not reliably enough for it to be taken seriously, and the evidence in favor of other theories is far more substantial.
The idea of a perfectly-balanced budget makes little sense for a government. Running with some debt allows the country to have more liquid cash now, and pay for it with growth in a few years. What is even more absurd is going into debt by much more than we can reasonably expect to gain over a short time. Unfortunately, that's what's happening now: With more people unemployed, income taxes are bringing in less revenue than expected, but the contracts still have to be fulfilled, and that means that money has to come from somewhere. China has money to spare, so we sell them bonds to cover our contractual obligations. Of course, this mean we'll owe China a huge amount of money in a while, but that's actually somewhat preferable to defaulting on a large amount now.
There is a possibility that China will forgive some debt in exchange for more lenient political posturing, or extend it to a longer period with little or no additional cost. We'll have to wait and see what happens over the next few years. Maybe Apple will decide to bring its manufacturing to the US, boosting the American economy high enough to cover the debts. Here's hoping.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Ron Paul isn't selling easy solutions: that's precisely why he won't get elected.
People don't want to hear that saving the country requires major changes and serious pain... which is why they'll vote for more of the same and then act surprised in ten years when the Chinese bailiffs turn up to load everything of value into ships as debt repayment after America goes bankrupt.
Because his economic notions are sheer fantasy? Because he would gut government services in pursuit of his fantasy libertarian tiny government?
From wiki
If he made all of these changes he would probably leave a broken shell with no social programs, unregulated industry, and leave the US even more xenophobic and assholish than they are now, and with no tax revenue left because he's given the rich and the corporations a pass on paying them.
He's only slightly less crazy than the guys in armed militias, and anybody who believes his changes would make for a stronger nation has bought into the Libertarian tripe that says the free market is the highest moral ideal.
What he proposes sounds good to him and his base, but it's largely fantasy that simply won't work the way he believes it will ... this isn't sound economic theory, it's a religion.
I don't doubt that he sincerely believes it all, but I have no belief whatsoever that he would do anything other than wreak havoc.
A president has more power than you think.
(1) He can veto, and veto, and veto again any budgets that increase spending. He can just sit tight until the Congress finally he gives him a balanced budget (or close to one).
(2) As Commander-in-Chief he could end the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children in Afghanistan almost immediately. He's simply order them to withdraw and come home.
(3) Also Ron Paul founded the Liberty Caucus in the Congress. It has about 100 members. All they need to do is swing a few Republicans and Democrats to join their cause, in order to get the 51% majority needed to pass laws. (Such as a repeal of the NDAA and Patriot Act.)
IMHO :-)
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
He doesn't want to kill the social programs. He just wants the states to run them instead of the federal government. Like the constitution says. Remember the constitution? That piece of paper on which our country is founded?
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
I have often made similar statements to people who think the President has way more power than he does, but you have gone too far in the other direction. The Executive branch has grown to a size of epic proportions and the President has full authority over it. The war on drugs, the Federal Reserve Bank and the IRS are all prime examples.
>>>"if we stand still, that's actually going forward! (head asplodes)."
You think like a Congressman!
"We made significant cuts in the budget."
But you increased spending by 2%!
"Right. But we had originally planned to increase spending by 5%, so we've cut our original goals. We made cuts. You should reelect us."
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Whereas it used to be "democratic capitalism" vs. "totalitarian communism", what we see now is the merger of the two ideologies into "totalitarian capitalism".
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
Wow.
You are the perfect example of somone who has been programmed by the media.
(1) You are bigoted against creationists? Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus? Wiow. (2) And no he's not a racist. Here's video to prove it - http://youtu.be/i3EADdr-5AY
(3) >>>kill off all social programs
"We made a promise to our citizens to provide Medicare and Social Security, and we must honor that promise. I will make no cuts to those benefits, though people 25 and younger will have the option to opt-out. The cuts will be made through offering early retirement to government workers and soldiers. 1 trillion dollars cut by 2014/" - Ron Paul at his Budget Meeting
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I like Ron Paul. I voted for him in '88, my first vote.
That being said, yeah he is a kook. I think an honest assessment of the types of society he advocates is horrifying. For example in his district this is what libertarianism really looked like in the 1900 Galveston hurricane:
That's what life without FEMA looked like. His ideas on the gold standard are incredibly destructive, the government having the ability to control economic activity has been a huge net positive, including this case where it has softened the blow considerably. The loss is unquestionably worth it.
He's doing a lot to popularize libertarian economics and his move to, along with Lew Rockwell, create paleolibertarianism was brilliant. But libertarianism needs to answer serious critiques if it wants to be the governing philosophy of the United States.
Ron Paul is NOT willing to balance the budget. He uses that as an excuse to cut there programs is big backers want hos to cut. Specifically the EPA.
Of course, your whole statement is fallacies in assume that cutting the budget would actual fix the dept. You have completely fallen for this false austerity that republicans keep pushing through the media.
Why is NBC listed there? they where one of the few to actually report Ron Paul's poll position without it being an aside followed by a jab at him. Ron Paul assumes industry will protect the people. You don't see a problem there?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
>>>The idea of a perfectly-balanced budget makes little sense for a government.
Clinton and the Democrats bargged about it in 1998 and 99. They said it would enable them to pay down some of the debt, and they were correct.
Our current national + state government debt is 18 trillion, or about $180,000 per American home. Add another $110,000 in personal mortgage/credit card debt per household.
Almost $300,000 of debt per American household is NOT a sustainable policy. Even if your "some liquid cash needs to be available" theory was correct, almost 300K/home worth of debt is a Greece or Italy-like situation. It is NOT good.
We need a balanced budget as soon as possible, so we can pay down some of that debt load.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Actually, his point is quite valid. There are situations where congress should have stepped in but didn't (banks), and also situations where congress needs to stay the hell out of it but is eagerly trying to regulate (the internet). Literally, not regulating the internet is a far smarter move than actually doing so.
Same people do both, and it's bipartisan.
Basically, the issue is that money is still funding politics.
1) This alone shows how fucking ignorant you are. Congress can override a veto
2) He could do that, be the results would be really, really, fucking bad. If the pull out isn't done in a way that leaves an established power, even more people will die under the following religious extremist the fill the power vacuum.
3) Yes, letting corporations run with even less regulation, that would be fucking genius. Everythign else about the party is just smoke and mirrors. Look at their record.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
It's like giving your home keys to robbers. And then you wonder "how it came out!"
People think we call the Chinese and say "can you lend us $100 billion this week?
That's not how it works. It's an open auction, and the Chinese are as free to bid and buy as anyone, or they can buy it on the secondary market. As it is, they own about 8% of US-issued debt.
The ownership entitles them to one thing: repayment of the debt with interest. That's it.
"Oh, but if China ever dumped all their debt..." So what? Simple economics...supply rises, price falls (in this case, the interest rate would go up a half-point and other people would buy).
"Oh, but if China ever stopped buying our debt..." Same thing. Demand would fall, price falls. Government pays a little more interest and other people buy.
Advice: on VPS providers
I'm not an economics person but there are plenty of people who do (like Ph.D. Walter E Williams and Thomas Sowell), and they are warning us of the current danger.
Or you could just look at Iceland, Greece and Italy. The U.S. has almost the same debt-to-GDP load they have. We are not immune to the same collapse as they did.
Already China and Russia are abandoning the dollar in order to trade directly with gold (or gold-backed SDRs). It's time to wake up. http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Interesting...WRONG...but interesting.
1> He can veto everything that crosses his deck if he is so inclined. An override can be achieved with 2/3 majority vote of House and Senate. They'd simply be deadlocked on a lot of things, but 'vital' items they both agree on would be rammed through anyway. The public, however, would not be amused by an obstructionist president.
2> He could issue the order, but if the military hates him enough - they would disobey him, and possibly overthrow the government. Not good.
3> Nice to think, yeah - so it wouldn't be as abysmally bleak as point #1 or 2, but he'd be hard up to get anything he wanted done. He'd be fighting the political war on both fronts. Democrats hate Republicans, and vise versa - but they'd hate him MORE than they hate each other. Once his presidential term was over, he would never serve in political office ever -ever- again - the powers that be would make sure of it.
If you understood economics then you know having a debt loadthat your grandchildren wont live to see paid off is a bad thing.
Real economists understood that during 2000-2008 we never recovered from the dot bomb. That the only thing moving forward was low interest rates driving new home sales and anything not in those industries barely grew at all. Yet we doubled our debt, and cut our income at the same time.
Now congress resists trying to restore income, and you say it is a good thing.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
and then act surprised in ten years when the Chinese bailiffs turn up to load everything of value into ships as debt repayment after America goes bankrupt.
The debt will be inflated away. That's the whole point. Today's spending is being paid for by inflating away people's savings and buying power. They can't get away with raising taxes, but what they are doing is worse.
The national debt is meaningless, but a paycheck doesn't seem go as far as it used to, huh?
Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
To point 3, this is a very important distinction.
Most Americans in polls say the economy is the number one issue we have currently, and yet we seem to favor over-regulating industries to the point of crippling them. This doesn't add up.
It is possible to have common sense regulation while not burying businesses in expensive red tape.
For instance, HIPAA has done nothing but cost the health care industry a small fortune, which in turn gets passed on to consumers in rising health insurance premiums. We have extremely complex legislation that costs us all money, which in turn makes health care unaffordable for some. And what do we gain?
Before HIPAA, health records were still treated as confidential with court rulings to back that up. Common sense dictated that doctors and hospitals could be found liable for revealing confidential records. Why overreact with massive legislation that does more harm than good? And yet we do this time and time again because we feel that corporations are evil and can't be trusted, so we need to keep them in chains at all times.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
>>>"1) This alone shows how fucking ignorant you are. Congress can override a veto"
Yeah but how easily?
Not easy at all. My original point that he can keep vetoing a budget he doesn't like still stands.
(2) Why don't we just ask the Afghans? "Leave. Now." is what they say. Maybe we should listen to them. As Ghandi told the Brits several decades ago: "You are masters in somebody else's home. It is time for you to leave. And yes we wll have problems but they will be OUR problems and OUR solutions. Not yours."
(3) I said repeal the Patriot spying/warrantless searches Act and repeal the Indefinite Detention NDAA (or the relevant portions thereof). I never said anything about deregulating corporations (who I hate). You committed a strawman (stupid) argument.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Okay setting aside the "crazy" here's what I predict:
- Mitt Romney will be president
- 1 or 2 years from now we'll be at War with Iran. And also Russia (who have pledged to come o their assistance).
- And then I'll sit here and say, "Told you should have voted for the peaceful Republican who wanted to dismantle 900 based in 130 foreign occupied countries, and bring the troops home to guard our own borders."
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
In all seriousness, what the hell is the American middle class? Here in the UK it pretty much means you've got two employed adults or one adult in a high-paying, professional job and your big problems are all First World Problems. In the US media it seems to mean anything from a highly-paid expert consultant for space rockets to a family scraping together mortgage payments on an pile of 1970s drywall by taking on four part time jobs at the minimum wage.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
I never said anything about deregulating corporations (who I hate)
But Ron Paul has, and you're playing the part of Ron Paul advocate, so unfortunately you have to defend the "bad" of what he says along with the "good", or at least explain why the good outweighs the bad.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
He's selling crazy, and we're all stocked up on the stuff. For every good idea he has, he has two that are the ramblings of a freeway off-ramp prophet.
His competition includes a known adulterer and hypocrite who claims he can build a functional moon base in 8 years, an imbicile who thinks Jesus rode dinosaurs (not to mention bearing a terrifying verbal resemblance to Gee-Dub), and a third guy who made his fortune by raping the American economy and honestly believes Joseph Smith was anything but a con man... that's not even taking into account the Liar in Chief.
Compared to those guys, Ron Paul is positively fucking enlightened.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
So you believe that the federal government should be taking my tax dollars away from me, my state, and my local government to pay for some other state's or local government's problems. The problems you listed are local issues that are best handled by local or state government not the monster that is the federal government. Should the federal government bail out states that piss away money on expensive toys like new sports stadiums instead of taking care of the real issues in the state. Last summer the Minnesota state government shut down for a couple of weeks and most people didn't notice unless they lost their state park reservations.
Time to offend someone
My prediction:
Mitt Romney will be the GOP nominee. Obama will likely defeat him by a wider margin than he did McCain. Nobody really really likes Mitt, he is better looking than McCain but the policy is all the same. The base can't get behind it, they won't come out to vote, election over.
-1 or 2 years from now we will be at War with Iran, but not Russia we are to important a trade partner. The Russians will claim neutrality while making our lives hard.
-You and I will sit here and tell people they should have voted for Ron Paul.
-The Obama voters will are not already wondering what happened to Hope and Change will device, not get fooled again. Next election GOP will win with a Chris Christy or other popular governor. The DNC will take a drubbing.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
This is a misconception. Congress can, in fact, mandate the structure of departments as it desires. The funding power is more of the "big stick" when the Executive says: "Nice piece of paper, but go to hell". The Senate also confirms a lot more people than just the top level secretaries and judges, they also vote to confirm every general at or above one star rank (by way of approving a list), undersecretaries, and deputy directors.
That said, do not underestimate the power of the modern Presidency to run itself. Congress does not have the staff to oversee complete compliance with it's laws, or even to do it's own research. While there are things like the GAO and Congressional Budget Office, ultimately Congress relies on the Executive departments for many facts.
Also, do not underestimate the power inherent in simply not spending the money that the Executive has been given to carry out projects. If a President really wants some influential Congresspeople on his side, there are tricks like indefinitely postponing the execution of some pet pork-barrel project. Pork only works if the money gets spent on their constituents. The President may not be able to prevent the money from being allocated, but he can sure do underhanded things like delay the project with things like EPA inspections, extra auditing, and other delaying tactics until the Congresscritter gives in, or the authorization for the money lapses.
If he is clever enough, the President can actually make it look like he's "clearing away" the obstacles that he himself secretly put up in order to store up favors from the Congressman or Senator. It's really underhanded, hardball stuff, but this is the US Federal Government, this is the Major Leagues of Politics.
However, in the end, Paul would have to exercise the nuclear option to get what he wants done. He's unelectable precisely because, while no one really wants us in Afghanistan, everyone knows that we can't just plain leave. While no one understands the Federal Reserve, our money is printed with it on every note. The changes he wants are not necessarily bad ideas, but you can't just activate them without serious hardship.
The number of regulations has increased by 60,000 pages since 2000 (Clinton's last year) to 2008 (Bush's last year). That is not de-regulation. You've been washed by the media into believing a lie.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Well first off, Bush gutted FEMA. FEMA under Clinton there were no such incidents. But even with gutten FEMA nothing remotely like that happened in New Orleans. New Orleans was bad, but not even close to Galveston 1900.
Yes and no. The problem, as some European nations have recently discovered, is that it doesn't take a whole lot of uncertainty for interest rates to skyrocket. Right now we can issue debt and people will buy it at low interest rates because they trust that we will, in fact, be good for it. China has been buying a large amount of our debt because they have the money, and because they see it as a solid investment - not least because it helps prop up our economy which helps their economy immensely - so they effectively get the interest on the debt plus the positive effect that debt has on their economy.
This has been great for the U.S., because we have been able to maintain low interest rates on our massive debt that keeps it affordable. As long as those interest rates are low, we are fine. However, if China ever decided that they were no longer interested in buying our debt, the interest rates would likely need to be increased to attract investment from other parties. Even relatively small increases in the interest rate result in major increases in our cost of borrowing, which increases the likelihood of default (all else being equal). This is what bit Greece and others - they were okay as long as interest rates stayed low; as soon as rates started to increase because there was some doubt about their future ability to pay it back, that once-affordable debt load quickly became unaffordable. Which, of course, made investors more wary of buying their debt, leading to further increases in interest rates, and so on. The same thing could happen with the U.S. debt, and it could happen very quickly.
Ironically, perhaps the best protection against China abandoning our debt and wreaking havoc with our economy is to ensure that we continue being their major export market. This relationship makes the effective interest rate they receive on our debt higher - basically, with our trade balance they are guaranteed to get a good portion of the economic activity generated by the debt they are buying from us. Large-scale investment from, say, Russia, would not see that extra benefit so buying our debt (as opposed to the debt of a significant trade partner, assuming Russia was in the position to buy anyone's debt) isn't as attractive to them. So, China is willing to buy our debt at a lower interest rate than some other investors might, which helps to keep our debt affordable, which allows us to buy more from China. Not to say that this relationship can go on forever, but a lot of the noise about immediately trying to cut our trade with China could easily backfire and make our current debt-load crippling.
This isn't really true anymore. U.S. debt is about a 50/50 split these days domestic/foreign. And that is worrying, as it makes the situation much more unstable - Japan has a much bigger debt/GDP ratio than just about anyone, but most of their debt has been domestically owned, and that is a large part of why they haven't crashed and burned yet.
T
Laws are horrible moral guides, moral guides make even worse laws.
at this point, even a lunatic would get my vote if he's a true outsider. insiders are all messed up and voting for the same-old is not working.
That's what everyone expected from Obama. Instead he failed his agenda and enhanced all the evil policies started by Bush (short of starting new wars). There supposed to be some radical difference between R and D, or at least that's how they peddle it. Bait and switch.
They were destroyed by a former WikiLeaks employee who left with them, then destroyed the key. Yes, somehow there wasn't a backup of the documents or key (or at least one of the two).
I'm not sure how much we can trust Domscheit-Berg and OpenLeaks. Check their News page (latest 26 Jan 2011, SSL cert expired months ago), Identi.ca (5 months ago), Blog (29 Jan 2011, quote: "Right now we are working on extending our infrastructure and setting it up for testing with our alpha users group. The 1.430 Euro we received as donations in December and January will help us to do so. We will spend this money to help cover infrastructure costs e.g. SSL certificates").
Also Thompson-Reuters isn't a terrific source when it comes to 'piracy'/'hacking' stories so here's an alternative to the rawstory.com link:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/tag/daniel-domscheit-berg/
It seems like a major omission that the writeup doesn't mention that this is referring to kicking the TV network out of the NASDAQ TV studio, not the NASDAQ stock market.
I mean, why even have editors?
rooooar
What are you talking about? Japan has been in crash and burn mode for 20 years! Those of old enough remember when it was all the rage to talk about how Japan was going to dominate the US, then the reality hit. They had an export driven economy with no internal consumption, as exports fell the entire economy stagnated. Japanese growth has either been negative or barely above 0 for close to 20 years.
Although China is a concern those that study such things have noted they are doing exactly what the Japanese did, building an export based economy that has no internal consumption. Now at least the Chinese recognize the problem and are trying to build internal consumption but it's hard when about 75% of your population lives in economic slavery and a 4% increase in your currency will cut your growth in half. So they keep their currency artificially low which stalls their goal of increasing internal consumption because those 75% living in economic poverty will never be able to get out unless the Yuan value increases.
Now here's the kicker, the Chinese have been building a massive export based economy at the expense of Japan. Because they have little to no internal consumption the Japanese are facing yet another decade of deflation and economic stagnation. Deflation makes the debt more expensive.
The US has problems and MUST get it's debt under control, but we can't do that cutting taxes. Anyone that tells you it's possible is lying to you Bush Sr style.
Iceland threw off their bankers, threw some in jail, and are finally free.
Question everything
So, "middle class" is basically anyone who isn't flat broke or a millionaire?
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Stop and think for a second, that debt, who exactly is it owed too. That had to borrow it from someone, now exactly who did they borrow it from (not those people that don't pay taxes by hiding their money in tax havens). Was it by any chance those people that created that debt, that paid for the lobbyists, to buy the politicians to spend the money on the corporations they would borrow it from.
Now if the US goes bankrupt surely those Americans that the government borrowed the money from will also go bankrupt. Those ones the US government spent billions rescuing them from their bankruptcy by borrowing money from bankrupt organisation, to give to those bankrupt organisation so that they were no longer bankrupt but somehow the government now owes money that at the time didn't even exist.
So the US government borrowed nothing, pretended it was something, gave it away and then still owed it to the people they gave it too. Who said drugs are illegal in the US, they got to be using some pretty powerful shit for that stuff to be real.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen