• More Proof mRNA Shots Edit Human Genome
    New Study Again Shows LINE-1 "Junk DNA" Does The Dirty Work

    Dr. Syed Haider
    Could the mRNA shots edit germline DNA?
    Honest scientists have always been worried about retrointegration of foreign mRNA from “vaccine” shots into our own cellular DNA.

    This fear should have been allayed by rigorous genotoxicity safety studies before the mRNA shots where rolled out, but those studies were waived by the Big Pharma controlled FDA (with the DoD behind the scenes pulling all the strings).

    Previous research showed that this could theoretically occur in a human liver cancer cell line inside a controlled laboratory setting utilizing our own bodies reverse transcriptase enzymes that are upregulated in cancer cells.

    Naysayers still argued that this situation was impossible or at least extremely unlikely to occur in our bodies.

    Unfortunately there is now further proof that this really does occur, either right away after vaccination, or if not, then it’s even more likely to occur once a vaccinated individual catches COVID-19, as long as vaccinal mRNA remains present in the body (so far we know it remains in circulation for weeks and in the lymph nodes for months - likely far longer, since all the studies had to be stopped, presumably due to lack of funding, or out of fear of creating unpublishable papers since the news wasn’t looking good).

    Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it.

    Share

    A new paper by Zhang et al, just released on Feb 13, 2023 proves that at artificially high concentrations in a lab setting, the SARS-CoV-2 virus can retrointegrate into our genome.

    Thankfully during natural infection such high levels of viral RNA do not typically occur, but … (you knew there had to be a “but”)

    … such high levels are induced by mRNA vaccination.

    So what the paper may actually prove in the roundabout way of most modern research (required for publication to ever happen in todays politically charged Big Pharma controlled publishing environment) is that the mRNA in the shots is in fact likely to retrointegrate into our cellular DNA.

    To dig into the details we need to start with a quick basic bio refresher:

    Understanding Genetics
    Nearly every cell in our bodies carries a full copy of our genetic code, or genome (the exceptions are red blood cells that have no genome, and sperm and egg cells that have half a genome since they are meant to combine with half of someone else's genome).

    Our genome is made up of individual genes encoded by DNA and bundled together into 46 chromosomes that are stored in a central compartment of our cells called the nucleus.

    In order to “read" the DNA code and convert it into the structure that makes up our bodies, it is first translated by a “reader” protein that writes it out into a new free floating molecule called mRNA for messenger RNA (the mRNA shots carry this messenger RNA, not modified RNA as some people think).

    The mRNA, unlike the DNA is not stuck inside the chromosome and it can exit the nucleus, going into the larger compartment called the cytoplasm of the cell, where its message is “read” and translated into an amino acid sequence that folds itself into a protein (either a body protein, or in the case of the shots the spike protein, or in the case of an RNA virus infection like SARS-CoV-2, all the proteins of the virus).

    Now going back to the nucleus: some of the individual DNA encoded genes can move around within their chromosomes and have therefore been described as "jumping genes" or technically speaking: transposable elements (TEs).

    Jumping genes!
    Some of these jumping genes (Class 1 TEs) use a copy and paste mechanism and others (Class 2 TEs), like the one in the cartoon depiction above, use a cut and paste mechanism.

    The Class 1 TEs (AKA retrotransposons) that use the copy and paste mechanism do so by translating their DNA into RNA and then converting the RNA back into DNA and inserting it somewhere else in the genome.

    The Class 1 TEs or retrotransposons, include within themselves the genetic code necessary to create their own protein enzyme to convert the DNA back into RNA, which is termed reverse transcriptase.

    Fun fact: retroviruses like HIV can be considered a special subtype of retrotransposon that can not only reinsert inside the same cell, but also travel to other cells “infecting” them and reverse transcribing into their genomes.

    In humans the only active jumping genes are from CLASS 1 TEs/retrotransposons and are called LINE-1 retrotransposons (LINE stands for Long Interspersed Nuclear Elements).

    LINE-1 retrotransposons were once considered to be junk DNA, they are usually inactivated, but can be turned on in aging cells, cancer cells, virus infected cells and in general in any cell subjected to significant stress.

    Junk DNA, which makes up 98.5% of our genome, is still little understood. It may help regulate the activity of the other 1.5% of the genome that does code for proteins, is likely involved in genome evolution, and has been implicated in disease states like cancer, autism and dozens of genetic diseases.

    So, what’s been shown in this new paper by Zhang et al, is that a lab clone of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, when present in very high levels, does turn on LINE-1, which means it also turns on the LINE-1 reverse transcriptase enzyme, which it then makes use of to reverse transcribe itself into our DNA.

    But even worse: genome sequencing found the viral genetic code transcribed into our DNA not only in cells where LINE-1 was actively turned on, or overexpressed above baseline, but even in cells where it was not.

    Is Sangamo's Gene-Editing Approach a Bust? | The Motley Fool
    Then, instead of studying the LNPs and spike protein RNA used in the shots, the researchers (who valued their careers) used a different mechanism of delivering low levels of nucleocapsid RNA into the cells in the lab to see if they also up regulated LINE-1 expression and were integrated into the cellular DNA.

    Turns out this handicapped experiment did not up regulate LINE-1, or get taken up in detectable quantities by healthy cells, though it did lead to genomic uptake in cells that already had LINE-1 upregulated - which again happens in aging cells, cancer cells, virus infected cells or simply in cells under stress (perhaps from LNP and spike protein induced inflammation?).

    The study authors addressed the discrepancy in retrointegration between the viral clone and their handicapped version of an mRNA shot by theorizing there were:

    "...several possible explanations for the differences in the levels of retrotransposition in infected and transfected cells: (i) The relative abundance of viral RNA is almost 2 orders of magnitude higher in infected than in transfected cells which would increase the probability of association with LINE1 proteins; (ii) virus infection, but not viral mRNA transfection, can induce endogenous LINE1 expression; (iii) multiple factors during SARS-CoV-2 infection can inhibit the antiviral/anti-retrotransposition function of stress granules (48–53), which could increase retrotransposition.”

    The first theory is the most concerning.

    Based on what we know from a 2020 study by Xie et al that showed the very high levels of intracellular viral RNA achieved by infectious clones, we can extrapolate that in the current study by Zhang et al the concentration of mRNA achieved by the SARS-CoV-2 viral clone was likely about 1000X greater than the low levels typically found during a natural infection.

    In fact the levels of mRNA in each cell achieved by the viral clone in the current study are actually far more likely to be achieved by transfection into cells of LNPs in the shots carrying spike protein mRNA than they are during a natural infection.

    Life finds a way. - Reaction GIFs
    So if the authors first theory is correct, that the difference in retrointegration rates simply depends on the intracellular concentration of foreign RNA, then retrointegration is very likely to occur due to exposure to mRNA in the shots, and it is likely to dramatically increase in case someone who has received the shot later becomes infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus - since we know it upregulates LINE-1 expression, or if they are put under other stressors including the development of cancer, or by the stress of long COVID, chronic vaccine injury, autoimmune disease, autonomic dysfunction, POTS, MCAS, etc - all of which are also sadly enough triggered by the shot.

    This is less likely to happen in germ cell DNA - our sperm and egg cells - and lets hope it doesn’t happen, since we already know that the shots likely do transmit altered immunity from mother to child, if they also pass on the mRNA coding the spike protein itself then huge swaths of humanity may be forever genetically altered.

    Heres hoping the label “junk DNA” actually applies in this case…

    But, if you’ve been vaccinated: don’t worry!

    At mygotodoc we routinely reverse vaccine injuries and sincerely believe every disease has a cure.

    Fear is more likely to kill you than the shot (but do stop getting the boosters), and I mean that literally: fear destroys the immune system.

    A healthy immune system can keep any illness in check even if from a retrointegrated virus or viral mRNA fragment.

    There are a lot of unknowns, but don’t let that scare you. Take your health into your own hands and start making positive changes today.

    https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/more-proof-mrna-shots-edit-human


    https://telegra.ph/More-Proof-mRNA-Shots-Edit-Human-Genome-09-17-2
    More Proof mRNA Shots Edit Human Genome New Study Again Shows LINE-1 "Junk DNA" Does The Dirty Work Dr. Syed Haider Could the mRNA shots edit germline DNA? Honest scientists have always been worried about retrointegration of foreign mRNA from “vaccine” shots into our own cellular DNA. This fear should have been allayed by rigorous genotoxicity safety studies before the mRNA shots where rolled out, but those studies were waived by the Big Pharma controlled FDA (with the DoD behind the scenes pulling all the strings). Previous research showed that this could theoretically occur in a human liver cancer cell line inside a controlled laboratory setting utilizing our own bodies reverse transcriptase enzymes that are upregulated in cancer cells. Naysayers still argued that this situation was impossible or at least extremely unlikely to occur in our bodies. Unfortunately there is now further proof that this really does occur, either right away after vaccination, or if not, then it’s even more likely to occur once a vaccinated individual catches COVID-19, as long as vaccinal mRNA remains present in the body (so far we know it remains in circulation for weeks and in the lymph nodes for months - likely far longer, since all the studies had to be stopped, presumably due to lack of funding, or out of fear of creating unpublishable papers since the news wasn’t looking good). Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share A new paper by Zhang et al, just released on Feb 13, 2023 proves that at artificially high concentrations in a lab setting, the SARS-CoV-2 virus can retrointegrate into our genome. Thankfully during natural infection such high levels of viral RNA do not typically occur, but … (you knew there had to be a “but”) … such high levels are induced by mRNA vaccination. So what the paper may actually prove in the roundabout way of most modern research (required for publication to ever happen in todays politically charged Big Pharma controlled publishing environment) is that the mRNA in the shots is in fact likely to retrointegrate into our cellular DNA. To dig into the details we need to start with a quick basic bio refresher: Understanding Genetics Nearly every cell in our bodies carries a full copy of our genetic code, or genome (the exceptions are red blood cells that have no genome, and sperm and egg cells that have half a genome since they are meant to combine with half of someone else's genome). Our genome is made up of individual genes encoded by DNA and bundled together into 46 chromosomes that are stored in a central compartment of our cells called the nucleus. In order to “read" the DNA code and convert it into the structure that makes up our bodies, it is first translated by a “reader” protein that writes it out into a new free floating molecule called mRNA for messenger RNA (the mRNA shots carry this messenger RNA, not modified RNA as some people think). The mRNA, unlike the DNA is not stuck inside the chromosome and it can exit the nucleus, going into the larger compartment called the cytoplasm of the cell, where its message is “read” and translated into an amino acid sequence that folds itself into a protein (either a body protein, or in the case of the shots the spike protein, or in the case of an RNA virus infection like SARS-CoV-2, all the proteins of the virus). Now going back to the nucleus: some of the individual DNA encoded genes can move around within their chromosomes and have therefore been described as "jumping genes" or technically speaking: transposable elements (TEs). Jumping genes! Some of these jumping genes (Class 1 TEs) use a copy and paste mechanism and others (Class 2 TEs), like the one in the cartoon depiction above, use a cut and paste mechanism. The Class 1 TEs (AKA retrotransposons) that use the copy and paste mechanism do so by translating their DNA into RNA and then converting the RNA back into DNA and inserting it somewhere else in the genome. The Class 1 TEs or retrotransposons, include within themselves the genetic code necessary to create their own protein enzyme to convert the DNA back into RNA, which is termed reverse transcriptase. Fun fact: retroviruses like HIV can be considered a special subtype of retrotransposon that can not only reinsert inside the same cell, but also travel to other cells “infecting” them and reverse transcribing into their genomes. In humans the only active jumping genes are from CLASS 1 TEs/retrotransposons and are called LINE-1 retrotransposons (LINE stands for Long Interspersed Nuclear Elements). LINE-1 retrotransposons were once considered to be junk DNA, they are usually inactivated, but can be turned on in aging cells, cancer cells, virus infected cells and in general in any cell subjected to significant stress. Junk DNA, which makes up 98.5% of our genome, is still little understood. It may help regulate the activity of the other 1.5% of the genome that does code for proteins, is likely involved in genome evolution, and has been implicated in disease states like cancer, autism and dozens of genetic diseases. So, what’s been shown in this new paper by Zhang et al, is that a lab clone of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, when present in very high levels, does turn on LINE-1, which means it also turns on the LINE-1 reverse transcriptase enzyme, which it then makes use of to reverse transcribe itself into our DNA. But even worse: genome sequencing found the viral genetic code transcribed into our DNA not only in cells where LINE-1 was actively turned on, or overexpressed above baseline, but even in cells where it was not. Is Sangamo's Gene-Editing Approach a Bust? | The Motley Fool Then, instead of studying the LNPs and spike protein RNA used in the shots, the researchers (who valued their careers) used a different mechanism of delivering low levels of nucleocapsid RNA into the cells in the lab to see if they also up regulated LINE-1 expression and were integrated into the cellular DNA. Turns out this handicapped experiment did not up regulate LINE-1, or get taken up in detectable quantities by healthy cells, though it did lead to genomic uptake in cells that already had LINE-1 upregulated - which again happens in aging cells, cancer cells, virus infected cells or simply in cells under stress (perhaps from LNP and spike protein induced inflammation?). The study authors addressed the discrepancy in retrointegration between the viral clone and their handicapped version of an mRNA shot by theorizing there were: "...several possible explanations for the differences in the levels of retrotransposition in infected and transfected cells: (i) The relative abundance of viral RNA is almost 2 orders of magnitude higher in infected than in transfected cells which would increase the probability of association with LINE1 proteins; (ii) virus infection, but not viral mRNA transfection, can induce endogenous LINE1 expression; (iii) multiple factors during SARS-CoV-2 infection can inhibit the antiviral/anti-retrotransposition function of stress granules (48–53), which could increase retrotransposition.” The first theory is the most concerning. Based on what we know from a 2020 study by Xie et al that showed the very high levels of intracellular viral RNA achieved by infectious clones, we can extrapolate that in the current study by Zhang et al the concentration of mRNA achieved by the SARS-CoV-2 viral clone was likely about 1000X greater than the low levels typically found during a natural infection. In fact the levels of mRNA in each cell achieved by the viral clone in the current study are actually far more likely to be achieved by transfection into cells of LNPs in the shots carrying spike protein mRNA than they are during a natural infection. Life finds a way. - Reaction GIFs So if the authors first theory is correct, that the difference in retrointegration rates simply depends on the intracellular concentration of foreign RNA, then retrointegration is very likely to occur due to exposure to mRNA in the shots, and it is likely to dramatically increase in case someone who has received the shot later becomes infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus - since we know it upregulates LINE-1 expression, or if they are put under other stressors including the development of cancer, or by the stress of long COVID, chronic vaccine injury, autoimmune disease, autonomic dysfunction, POTS, MCAS, etc - all of which are also sadly enough triggered by the shot. This is less likely to happen in germ cell DNA - our sperm and egg cells - and lets hope it doesn’t happen, since we already know that the shots likely do transmit altered immunity from mother to child, if they also pass on the mRNA coding the spike protein itself then huge swaths of humanity may be forever genetically altered. Heres hoping the label “junk DNA” actually applies in this case… But, if you’ve been vaccinated: don’t worry! At mygotodoc we routinely reverse vaccine injuries and sincerely believe every disease has a cure. Fear is more likely to kill you than the shot (but do stop getting the boosters), and I mean that literally: fear destroys the immune system. A healthy immune system can keep any illness in check even if from a retrointegrated virus or viral mRNA fragment. There are a lot of unknowns, but don’t let that scare you. Take your health into your own hands and start making positive changes today. https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/more-proof-mrna-shots-edit-human https://telegra.ph/More-Proof-mRNA-Shots-Edit-Human-Genome-09-17-2
    BLOG.MYGOTODOC.COM
    More Proof mRNA Shots Edit Human Genome
    New Study Again Shows LINE-1 "Junk DNA" Does The Dirty Work
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3594 Views
  • Bombs, guns, treasure: What Israel wants, the US gives
    Connor Echols12 March, 2024
    GettyImages-164224706.jpg
    This article was co-published with Responsible Statecraft

    Close watchers of Israel’s war in Gaza have faced a question in recent months: If the US is rushing weapons to Israel, then why hasn’t the public heard of any arms sales besides two relatively small transfers late last year?

    The Washington Post delivered an answer last week. Reporter John Hudson revealed that the Biden administration has approved over 100 smaller weapons packages for Israel since 7 October that fell under the $25 million threshold for formally notifying Congress - and thus the public - about the transfers.

    In total, these mini-sales could add up to more than $1 billion worth of US military aid.

    The decision to deliver US aid in smaller packages is far from unusual. The US government has done so in the past for practical and nefarious purposes alike; only about 2% of weapons transfers occur above the threshold to notify Congress, according to former officials.

    "When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there's a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law"

    But what is abnormal is the fact that many of those weapons were likely pre-positioned on Israeli territory before the war. Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access.

    When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there’s a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law.

    “It’s clear that it’s been a major source of arms for Israel,” said Josh Paul, a former State Department official who resigned in protest of US support for Israel’s war. Unfortunately, Paul added, “it’s an opaque process, so it’s hard to say exactly what weapons they’re getting” from the stockpile.

    RELATED

    Analysis

    Giorgio Cafiero

    This cache of arms is just a small piece of the puzzle. Taken as a whole, US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country, according to experts and former senior US officials.

    These advantages include modified human rights vetting, special access to US weapons, and a veto on American arms sales to Israel’s neighbours. Up to this point, the State Department hasn’t carried out a formal assessment of Israel’s compliance with the law in its Gaza war.

    Experts claim these arms transfer cutouts have continued or, in some areas, been expanded since Israel launched its campaign in Gaza, which has left over 31,000 Palestinians dead and much of the strip’s population in famine or famine-like conditions. Even last month, as war crime accusations mounted, the US reportedly gave Israel at least 1,000 precision-guided munitions and artillery shells.

    Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access. [Getty]
    “The bottom line is that either you have human rights standards and legal standards or you don't,” Paul said. When US officials fail to hold Israel accountable for alleged abuses, “it not only creates an exception for Israel, but it also undermines your diplomacy with other countries,” he told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab.

    "I have serious concerns that the continued transfer of weapons to Israel is facilitating indiscriminate bombing that may violate international humanitarian law," Rep. Joaquin Castro told Responsible Statecraft/ The New Arab in a statement. "Congress needs to push the Biden administration to hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable for any use of U.S. security assistance that violates international law."

    State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab that all transfers to Israel since 7 October have followed US law and policy, including notifications to Congress.

    “We have followed the procedures Congress itself has specified to keep members well-informed and regularly brief members even when formal notification is not a legal requirement,” Miller said in a statement, adding that claims that the US has cut up weapons packages in order to avoid public scrutiny are “unequivocally false”.

    The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

    "US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country"

    Exceptions make the rules

    When a Middle Eastern country asks the US for weapons, American officials’ minds go straight to Israel. Would Tel Aviv approve of the transfer? Could new fighter jets give Egypt an edge over Israel on the battlefield if their peace deal fell apart? Would Israeli officials come around if we offer them better weapons to sweeten the pot?

    This line of reasoning doesn’t have anything to do with the personal opinions of US officials. In fact, US law explicitly states that the US must give Israel a “qualitative military edge” over its neighbours to counter a threat from “any individual state or possible coalition of states or [...] non-state actors”.

    US partners are starkly aware of - and unhappy about - this reality, according to a former senior US military official in Cairo who requested anonymity to speak freely about his experience.

    Egyptian officials would sometimes request high-tech weapons just to “watch us squirm and come up with some way to say ‘no’ without saying the Israelis won't approve it,” the former official recalled.

    RELATED

    Analysis

    Hanna Davis

    “This is another place where it’s very explicit that Israel has a special status that no other country enjoys,” said John Ramming-Chappell of the Center for Civilians in Conflict.

    This qualitative advantage is enforced by the quantitative side. Since World War II, Israel is far and away the largest recipient of US military aid. Washington’s funding for the Israeli military, which now totals $3.8 billion per year, makes up about 16% of its total budget, according to the Congressional Research Service. Israel, which can spend part of its US aid on Israeli weapons, gets this cash in an interest-bearing account in New York, making it one of only two states that get a multimillion-dollar tip on top of baseline US support.

    When it comes to human rights, Israel also gets special protections. Take the Leahy law, a statute that prevents specific units of foreign militaries from receiving US aid if American officials have evidence they’ve committed “gross violations of human rights”.

    For most countries, Leahy vetting happens before aid is disbursed. Israel gets the equipment first, and the ensuing vetting process looks different than for other countries. Lower-level State Department officials have found multiple cases in which Israeli units should lose access to American weapons under US law, but those cases are consistently blocked by higher-ups in government who usually don’t weigh in on such cases for other countries, according to Paul.

    The result is that, unlike Egypt and other US partners in the Middle East, no Israeli unit has ever been sanctioned under the Leahy law despite numerous credible allegations of human rights abuses, a fact that the statute’s namesake has loudly railed against.

    Over 30,000 Palestinians have been killed since October in Israel's war on Gaza. [Getty]
    The State Department has previously justified this disparity by pointing to Israel’s judicial system, which US officials believe is capable of handling human rights violations internally.

    In recent weeks, congressional attention has focused on whether Israel is violating a US law that prevents countries from receiving American weapons if they block US humanitarian aid in whole or in part. While the statute has rarely been enforced, the Biden administration promised to hold states accountable to the law in a recent memorandum.

    At this point, many experts and lawmakers believe Israel is in clear violation of this law given how little aid now enters Gaza. Yet the White House has still not offered a reason - or a formal waiver - to justify its failure to enforce its own commitment.

    "Given the evidence that Israel is intentionally blocking the passage of humanitarian aid to Gaza, the Biden administration has an obligation to enforce Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act and move towards limitations on further offensive aid to Israel as long as the aid blockade continues," Rep. Castro told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab.

    "US law explicitly states that America must give Israel a 'qualitative military edge' over its neighbours"

    'As supportive as possible'

    When the White House moved to expedite weapons transfers to Israel after 7 October, it faced an unusual problem. The president already had more than enough authority to make this happen, but officials wanted to signal that they were being “as supportive as possible”.

    The solution was to further loosen laws around US arms transfers, according to Paul, who still worked in government at the time.

    “It's not that those were things that we'd been previously thinking about,” Paul said. “The previous position within government had been [that] Israel already has more than you could possibly want in terms of authorities and funding.”

    RELATED

    In-depth

    Jessica Buxbaum

    Now, the Senate’s supplemental spending package for Israel has provisions that would dramatically expand the secretive US stockpile on Israeli soil while loosening public reporting requirements about transfers from it. A bill with similar changes passed the House as well, signalling broad support for the proposal in Congress.

    Alongside already existing loopholes, these new restrictions weaken America’s case that it is committed to protecting human rights on the world stage, according to Ramming-Chappell.

    “The exceptional status that Israel enjoys in US arms transfer policy and law, when taken in conjunction with the devastating effects of Israel’s current campaign in Gaza, really undermines US leadership and claims to moral authority in the international sphere,” he said.

    Connor Echols is a reporter for Responsible Statecraft. He was previously an associate editor at the Nonzero Foundation, where he co-wrote a weekly foreign policy newsletter.

    Follow him on Twitter: @connor_echols

    https://www.newarab.com/analysis/bombs-guns-treasure-what-israel-wants-us-gives


    https://telegra.ph/Bombs-guns-treasure-What-Israel-wants-the-US-gives-03-20
    Bombs, guns, treasure: What Israel wants, the US gives Connor Echols12 March, 2024 GettyImages-164224706.jpg This article was co-published with Responsible Statecraft Close watchers of Israel’s war in Gaza have faced a question in recent months: If the US is rushing weapons to Israel, then why hasn’t the public heard of any arms sales besides two relatively small transfers late last year? The Washington Post delivered an answer last week. Reporter John Hudson revealed that the Biden administration has approved over 100 smaller weapons packages for Israel since 7 October that fell under the $25 million threshold for formally notifying Congress - and thus the public - about the transfers. In total, these mini-sales could add up to more than $1 billion worth of US military aid. The decision to deliver US aid in smaller packages is far from unusual. The US government has done so in the past for practical and nefarious purposes alike; only about 2% of weapons transfers occur above the threshold to notify Congress, according to former officials. "When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there's a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law" But what is abnormal is the fact that many of those weapons were likely pre-positioned on Israeli territory before the war. Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access. When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there’s a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law. “It’s clear that it’s been a major source of arms for Israel,” said Josh Paul, a former State Department official who resigned in protest of US support for Israel’s war. Unfortunately, Paul added, “it’s an opaque process, so it’s hard to say exactly what weapons they’re getting” from the stockpile. RELATED Analysis Giorgio Cafiero This cache of arms is just a small piece of the puzzle. Taken as a whole, US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country, according to experts and former senior US officials. These advantages include modified human rights vetting, special access to US weapons, and a veto on American arms sales to Israel’s neighbours. Up to this point, the State Department hasn’t carried out a formal assessment of Israel’s compliance with the law in its Gaza war. Experts claim these arms transfer cutouts have continued or, in some areas, been expanded since Israel launched its campaign in Gaza, which has left over 31,000 Palestinians dead and much of the strip’s population in famine or famine-like conditions. Even last month, as war crime accusations mounted, the US reportedly gave Israel at least 1,000 precision-guided munitions and artillery shells. Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access. [Getty] “The bottom line is that either you have human rights standards and legal standards or you don't,” Paul said. When US officials fail to hold Israel accountable for alleged abuses, “it not only creates an exception for Israel, but it also undermines your diplomacy with other countries,” he told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab. "I have serious concerns that the continued transfer of weapons to Israel is facilitating indiscriminate bombing that may violate international humanitarian law," Rep. Joaquin Castro told Responsible Statecraft/ The New Arab in a statement. "Congress needs to push the Biden administration to hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable for any use of U.S. security assistance that violates international law." State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab that all transfers to Israel since 7 October have followed US law and policy, including notifications to Congress. “We have followed the procedures Congress itself has specified to keep members well-informed and regularly brief members even when formal notification is not a legal requirement,” Miller said in a statement, adding that claims that the US has cut up weapons packages in order to avoid public scrutiny are “unequivocally false”. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. "US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country" Exceptions make the rules When a Middle Eastern country asks the US for weapons, American officials’ minds go straight to Israel. Would Tel Aviv approve of the transfer? Could new fighter jets give Egypt an edge over Israel on the battlefield if their peace deal fell apart? Would Israeli officials come around if we offer them better weapons to sweeten the pot? This line of reasoning doesn’t have anything to do with the personal opinions of US officials. In fact, US law explicitly states that the US must give Israel a “qualitative military edge” over its neighbours to counter a threat from “any individual state or possible coalition of states or [...] non-state actors”. US partners are starkly aware of - and unhappy about - this reality, according to a former senior US military official in Cairo who requested anonymity to speak freely about his experience. Egyptian officials would sometimes request high-tech weapons just to “watch us squirm and come up with some way to say ‘no’ without saying the Israelis won't approve it,” the former official recalled. RELATED Analysis Hanna Davis “This is another place where it’s very explicit that Israel has a special status that no other country enjoys,” said John Ramming-Chappell of the Center for Civilians in Conflict. This qualitative advantage is enforced by the quantitative side. Since World War II, Israel is far and away the largest recipient of US military aid. Washington’s funding for the Israeli military, which now totals $3.8 billion per year, makes up about 16% of its total budget, according to the Congressional Research Service. Israel, which can spend part of its US aid on Israeli weapons, gets this cash in an interest-bearing account in New York, making it one of only two states that get a multimillion-dollar tip on top of baseline US support. When it comes to human rights, Israel also gets special protections. Take the Leahy law, a statute that prevents specific units of foreign militaries from receiving US aid if American officials have evidence they’ve committed “gross violations of human rights”. For most countries, Leahy vetting happens before aid is disbursed. Israel gets the equipment first, and the ensuing vetting process looks different than for other countries. Lower-level State Department officials have found multiple cases in which Israeli units should lose access to American weapons under US law, but those cases are consistently blocked by higher-ups in government who usually don’t weigh in on such cases for other countries, according to Paul. The result is that, unlike Egypt and other US partners in the Middle East, no Israeli unit has ever been sanctioned under the Leahy law despite numerous credible allegations of human rights abuses, a fact that the statute’s namesake has loudly railed against. Over 30,000 Palestinians have been killed since October in Israel's war on Gaza. [Getty] The State Department has previously justified this disparity by pointing to Israel’s judicial system, which US officials believe is capable of handling human rights violations internally. In recent weeks, congressional attention has focused on whether Israel is violating a US law that prevents countries from receiving American weapons if they block US humanitarian aid in whole or in part. While the statute has rarely been enforced, the Biden administration promised to hold states accountable to the law in a recent memorandum. At this point, many experts and lawmakers believe Israel is in clear violation of this law given how little aid now enters Gaza. Yet the White House has still not offered a reason - or a formal waiver - to justify its failure to enforce its own commitment. "Given the evidence that Israel is intentionally blocking the passage of humanitarian aid to Gaza, the Biden administration has an obligation to enforce Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act and move towards limitations on further offensive aid to Israel as long as the aid blockade continues," Rep. Castro told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab. "US law explicitly states that America must give Israel a 'qualitative military edge' over its neighbours" 'As supportive as possible' When the White House moved to expedite weapons transfers to Israel after 7 October, it faced an unusual problem. The president already had more than enough authority to make this happen, but officials wanted to signal that they were being “as supportive as possible”. The solution was to further loosen laws around US arms transfers, according to Paul, who still worked in government at the time. “It's not that those were things that we'd been previously thinking about,” Paul said. “The previous position within government had been [that] Israel already has more than you could possibly want in terms of authorities and funding.” RELATED In-depth Jessica Buxbaum Now, the Senate’s supplemental spending package for Israel has provisions that would dramatically expand the secretive US stockpile on Israeli soil while loosening public reporting requirements about transfers from it. A bill with similar changes passed the House as well, signalling broad support for the proposal in Congress. Alongside already existing loopholes, these new restrictions weaken America’s case that it is committed to protecting human rights on the world stage, according to Ramming-Chappell. “The exceptional status that Israel enjoys in US arms transfer policy and law, when taken in conjunction with the devastating effects of Israel’s current campaign in Gaza, really undermines US leadership and claims to moral authority in the international sphere,” he said. Connor Echols is a reporter for Responsible Statecraft. He was previously an associate editor at the Nonzero Foundation, where he co-wrote a weekly foreign policy newsletter. Follow him on Twitter: @connor_echols https://www.newarab.com/analysis/bombs-guns-treasure-what-israel-wants-us-gives https://telegra.ph/Bombs-guns-treasure-What-Israel-wants-the-US-gives-03-20
    WWW.NEWARAB.COM
    Bombs, guns, treasure: What Israel wants, the US gives
    In-depth: Israel's exceptional status in US arms policy and law ensures that unending military aid is shielded from scrutiny over human rights abuses.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3568 Views
  • Bombs, guns, treasure: What Israel wants, the US gives
    Connor Echols12 March, 2024
    GettyImages-164224706.jpg
    This article was co-published with Responsible Statecraft

    Close watchers of Israel’s war in Gaza have faced a question in recent months: If the US is rushing weapons to Israel, then why hasn’t the public heard of any arms sales besides two relatively small transfers late last year?

    The Washington Post delivered an answer last week. Reporter John Hudson revealed that the Biden administration has approved over 100 smaller weapons packages for Israel since 7 October that fell under the $25 million threshold for formally notifying Congress - and thus the public - about the transfers.

    In total, these mini-sales could add up to more than $1 billion worth of US military aid.

    The decision to deliver US aid in smaller packages is far from unusual. The US government has done so in the past for practical and nefarious purposes alike; only about 2% of weapons transfers occur above the threshold to notify Congress, according to former officials.

    "When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there's a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law"

    But what is abnormal is the fact that many of those weapons were likely pre-positioned on Israeli territory before the war. Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access.

    When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there’s a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law.

    “It’s clear that it’s been a major source of arms for Israel,” said Josh Paul, a former State Department official who resigned in protest of US support for Israel’s war. Unfortunately, Paul added, “it’s an opaque process, so it’s hard to say exactly what weapons they’re getting” from the stockpile.

    RELATED

    Analysis

    Giorgio Cafiero

    This cache of arms is just a small piece of the puzzle. Taken as a whole, US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country, according to experts and former senior US officials.

    These advantages include modified human rights vetting, special access to US weapons, and a veto on American arms sales to Israel’s neighbours. Up to this point, the State Department hasn’t carried out a formal assessment of Israel’s compliance with the law in its Gaza war.

    Experts claim these arms transfer cutouts have continued or, in some areas, been expanded since Israel launched its campaign in Gaza, which has left over 31,000 Palestinians dead and much of the strip’s population in famine or famine-like conditions. Even last month, as war crime accusations mounted, the US reportedly gave Israel at least 1,000 precision-guided munitions and artillery shells.

    Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access. [Getty]
    “The bottom line is that either you have human rights standards and legal standards or you don't,” Paul said. When US officials fail to hold Israel accountable for alleged abuses, “it not only creates an exception for Israel, but it also undermines your diplomacy with other countries,” he told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab.

    "I have serious concerns that the continued transfer of weapons to Israel is facilitating indiscriminate bombing that may violate international humanitarian law," Rep. Joaquin Castro told Responsible Statecraft/ The New Arab in a statement. "Congress needs to push the Biden administration to hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable for any use of U.S. security assistance that violates international law."

    State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab that all transfers to Israel since 7 October have followed US law and policy, including notifications to Congress.

    “We have followed the procedures Congress itself has specified to keep members well-informed and regularly brief members even when formal notification is not a legal requirement,” Miller said in a statement, adding that claims that the US has cut up weapons packages in order to avoid public scrutiny are “unequivocally false”.

    The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

    "US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country"

    Exceptions make the rules

    When a Middle Eastern country asks the US for weapons, American officials’ minds go straight to Israel. Would Tel Aviv approve of the transfer? Could new fighter jets give Egypt an edge over Israel on the battlefield if their peace deal fell apart? Would Israeli officials come around if we offer them better weapons to sweeten the pot?

    This line of reasoning doesn’t have anything to do with the personal opinions of US officials. In fact, US law explicitly states that the US must give Israel a “qualitative military edge” over its neighbours to counter a threat from “any individual state or possible coalition of states or [...] non-state actors”.

    US partners are starkly aware of - and unhappy about - this reality, according to a former senior US military official in Cairo who requested anonymity to speak freely about his experience.

    Egyptian officials would sometimes request high-tech weapons just to “watch us squirm and come up with some way to say ‘no’ without saying the Israelis won't approve it,” the former official recalled.

    RELATED

    Analysis

    Hanna Davis

    “This is another place where it’s very explicit that Israel has a special status that no other country enjoys,” said John Ramming-Chappell of the Center for Civilians in Conflict.

    This qualitative advantage is enforced by the quantitative side. Since World War II, Israel is far and away the largest recipient of US military aid. Washington’s funding for the Israeli military, which now totals $3.8 billion per year, makes up about 16% of its total budget, according to the Congressional Research Service. Israel, which can spend part of its US aid on Israeli weapons, gets this cash in an interest-bearing account in New York, making it one of only two states that get a multimillion-dollar tip on top of baseline US support.

    When it comes to human rights, Israel also gets special protections. Take the Leahy law, a statute that prevents specific units of foreign militaries from receiving US aid if American officials have evidence they’ve committed “gross violations of human rights”.

    For most countries, Leahy vetting happens before aid is disbursed. Israel gets the equipment first, and the ensuing vetting process looks different than for other countries. Lower-level State Department officials have found multiple cases in which Israeli units should lose access to American weapons under US law, but those cases are consistently blocked by higher-ups in government who usually don’t weigh in on such cases for other countries, according to Paul.

    The result is that, unlike Egypt and other US partners in the Middle East, no Israeli unit has ever been sanctioned under the Leahy law despite numerous credible allegations of human rights abuses, a fact that the statute’s namesake has loudly railed against.

    Over 30,000 Palestinians have been killed since October in Israel's war on Gaza. [Getty]
    The State Department has previously justified this disparity by pointing to Israel’s judicial system, which US officials believe is capable of handling human rights violations internally.

    In recent weeks, congressional attention has focused on whether Israel is violating a US law that prevents countries from receiving American weapons if they block US humanitarian aid in whole or in part. While the statute has rarely been enforced, the Biden administration promised to hold states accountable to the law in a recent memorandum.

    At this point, many experts and lawmakers believe Israel is in clear violation of this law given how little aid now enters Gaza. Yet the White House has still not offered a reason - or a formal waiver - to justify its failure to enforce its own commitment.

    "Given the evidence that Israel is intentionally blocking the passage of humanitarian aid to Gaza, the Biden administration has an obligation to enforce Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act and move towards limitations on further offensive aid to Israel as long as the aid blockade continues," Rep. Castro told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab.

    "US law explicitly states that America must give Israel a 'qualitative military edge' over its neighbours"

    'As supportive as possible'

    When the White House moved to expedite weapons transfers to Israel after 7 October, it faced an unusual problem. The president already had more than enough authority to make this happen, but officials wanted to signal that they were being “as supportive as possible”.

    The solution was to further loosen laws around US arms transfers, according to Paul, who still worked in government at the time.

    “It's not that those were things that we'd been previously thinking about,” Paul said. “The previous position within government had been [that] Israel already has more than you could possibly want in terms of authorities and funding.”

    RELATED

    In-depth

    Jessica Buxbaum

    Now, the Senate’s supplemental spending package for Israel has provisions that would dramatically expand the secretive US stockpile on Israeli soil while loosening public reporting requirements about transfers from it. A bill with similar changes passed the House as well, signalling broad support for the proposal in Congress.

    Alongside already existing loopholes, these new restrictions weaken America’s case that it is committed to protecting human rights on the world stage, according to Ramming-Chappell.

    “The exceptional status that Israel enjoys in US arms transfer policy and law, when taken in conjunction with the devastating effects of Israel’s current campaign in Gaza, really undermines US leadership and claims to moral authority in the international sphere,” he said.

    Connor Echols is a reporter for Responsible Statecraft. He was previously an associate editor at the Nonzero Foundation, where he co-wrote a weekly foreign policy newsletter.

    Follow him on Twitter: @connor_echols

    https://www.newarab.com/analysis/bombs-guns-treasure-what-israel-wants-us-gives
    Bombs, guns, treasure: What Israel wants, the US gives Connor Echols12 March, 2024 GettyImages-164224706.jpg This article was co-published with Responsible Statecraft Close watchers of Israel’s war in Gaza have faced a question in recent months: If the US is rushing weapons to Israel, then why hasn’t the public heard of any arms sales besides two relatively small transfers late last year? The Washington Post delivered an answer last week. Reporter John Hudson revealed that the Biden administration has approved over 100 smaller weapons packages for Israel since 7 October that fell under the $25 million threshold for formally notifying Congress - and thus the public - about the transfers. In total, these mini-sales could add up to more than $1 billion worth of US military aid. The decision to deliver US aid in smaller packages is far from unusual. The US government has done so in the past for practical and nefarious purposes alike; only about 2% of weapons transfers occur above the threshold to notify Congress, according to former officials. "When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there's a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law" But what is abnormal is the fact that many of those weapons were likely pre-positioned on Israeli territory before the war. Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access. When a US-made bomb slams into Gaza, there’s a real chance that it started the day in an American facility, managed by American soldiers and governed by American law. “It’s clear that it’s been a major source of arms for Israel,” said Josh Paul, a former State Department official who resigned in protest of US support for Israel’s war. Unfortunately, Paul added, “it’s an opaque process, so it’s hard to say exactly what weapons they’re getting” from the stockpile. RELATED Analysis Giorgio Cafiero This cache of arms is just a small piece of the puzzle. Taken as a whole, US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country, according to experts and former senior US officials. These advantages include modified human rights vetting, special access to US weapons, and a veto on American arms sales to Israel’s neighbours. Up to this point, the State Department hasn’t carried out a formal assessment of Israel’s compliance with the law in its Gaza war. Experts claim these arms transfer cutouts have continued or, in some areas, been expanded since Israel launched its campaign in Gaza, which has left over 31,000 Palestinians dead and much of the strip’s population in famine or famine-like conditions. Even last month, as war crime accusations mounted, the US reportedly gave Israel at least 1,000 precision-guided munitions and artillery shells. Unlike other countries, Israel has a stockpile of American weapons on its soil to which it has privileged access. [Getty] “The bottom line is that either you have human rights standards and legal standards or you don't,” Paul said. When US officials fail to hold Israel accountable for alleged abuses, “it not only creates an exception for Israel, but it also undermines your diplomacy with other countries,” he told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab. "I have serious concerns that the continued transfer of weapons to Israel is facilitating indiscriminate bombing that may violate international humanitarian law," Rep. Joaquin Castro told Responsible Statecraft/ The New Arab in a statement. "Congress needs to push the Biden administration to hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable for any use of U.S. security assistance that violates international law." State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab that all transfers to Israel since 7 October have followed US law and policy, including notifications to Congress. “We have followed the procedures Congress itself has specified to keep members well-informed and regularly brief members even when formal notification is not a legal requirement,” Miller said in a statement, adding that claims that the US has cut up weapons packages in order to avoid public scrutiny are “unequivocally false”. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. "US efforts to shield Israel from human rights restrictions and guarantee its access to continued military aid go further than for any other country" Exceptions make the rules When a Middle Eastern country asks the US for weapons, American officials’ minds go straight to Israel. Would Tel Aviv approve of the transfer? Could new fighter jets give Egypt an edge over Israel on the battlefield if their peace deal fell apart? Would Israeli officials come around if we offer them better weapons to sweeten the pot? This line of reasoning doesn’t have anything to do with the personal opinions of US officials. In fact, US law explicitly states that the US must give Israel a “qualitative military edge” over its neighbours to counter a threat from “any individual state or possible coalition of states or [...] non-state actors”. US partners are starkly aware of - and unhappy about - this reality, according to a former senior US military official in Cairo who requested anonymity to speak freely about his experience. Egyptian officials would sometimes request high-tech weapons just to “watch us squirm and come up with some way to say ‘no’ without saying the Israelis won't approve it,” the former official recalled. RELATED Analysis Hanna Davis “This is another place where it’s very explicit that Israel has a special status that no other country enjoys,” said John Ramming-Chappell of the Center for Civilians in Conflict. This qualitative advantage is enforced by the quantitative side. Since World War II, Israel is far and away the largest recipient of US military aid. Washington’s funding for the Israeli military, which now totals $3.8 billion per year, makes up about 16% of its total budget, according to the Congressional Research Service. Israel, which can spend part of its US aid on Israeli weapons, gets this cash in an interest-bearing account in New York, making it one of only two states that get a multimillion-dollar tip on top of baseline US support. When it comes to human rights, Israel also gets special protections. Take the Leahy law, a statute that prevents specific units of foreign militaries from receiving US aid if American officials have evidence they’ve committed “gross violations of human rights”. For most countries, Leahy vetting happens before aid is disbursed. Israel gets the equipment first, and the ensuing vetting process looks different than for other countries. Lower-level State Department officials have found multiple cases in which Israeli units should lose access to American weapons under US law, but those cases are consistently blocked by higher-ups in government who usually don’t weigh in on such cases for other countries, according to Paul. The result is that, unlike Egypt and other US partners in the Middle East, no Israeli unit has ever been sanctioned under the Leahy law despite numerous credible allegations of human rights abuses, a fact that the statute’s namesake has loudly railed against. Over 30,000 Palestinians have been killed since October in Israel's war on Gaza. [Getty] The State Department has previously justified this disparity by pointing to Israel’s judicial system, which US officials believe is capable of handling human rights violations internally. In recent weeks, congressional attention has focused on whether Israel is violating a US law that prevents countries from receiving American weapons if they block US humanitarian aid in whole or in part. While the statute has rarely been enforced, the Biden administration promised to hold states accountable to the law in a recent memorandum. At this point, many experts and lawmakers believe Israel is in clear violation of this law given how little aid now enters Gaza. Yet the White House has still not offered a reason - or a formal waiver - to justify its failure to enforce its own commitment. "Given the evidence that Israel is intentionally blocking the passage of humanitarian aid to Gaza, the Biden administration has an obligation to enforce Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act and move towards limitations on further offensive aid to Israel as long as the aid blockade continues," Rep. Castro told Responsible Statecraft/The New Arab. "US law explicitly states that America must give Israel a 'qualitative military edge' over its neighbours" 'As supportive as possible' When the White House moved to expedite weapons transfers to Israel after 7 October, it faced an unusual problem. The president already had more than enough authority to make this happen, but officials wanted to signal that they were being “as supportive as possible”. The solution was to further loosen laws around US arms transfers, according to Paul, who still worked in government at the time. “It's not that those were things that we'd been previously thinking about,” Paul said. “The previous position within government had been [that] Israel already has more than you could possibly want in terms of authorities and funding.” RELATED In-depth Jessica Buxbaum Now, the Senate’s supplemental spending package for Israel has provisions that would dramatically expand the secretive US stockpile on Israeli soil while loosening public reporting requirements about transfers from it. A bill with similar changes passed the House as well, signalling broad support for the proposal in Congress. Alongside already existing loopholes, these new restrictions weaken America’s case that it is committed to protecting human rights on the world stage, according to Ramming-Chappell. “The exceptional status that Israel enjoys in US arms transfer policy and law, when taken in conjunction with the devastating effects of Israel’s current campaign in Gaza, really undermines US leadership and claims to moral authority in the international sphere,” he said. Connor Echols is a reporter for Responsible Statecraft. He was previously an associate editor at the Nonzero Foundation, where he co-wrote a weekly foreign policy newsletter. Follow him on Twitter: @connor_echols https://www.newarab.com/analysis/bombs-guns-treasure-what-israel-wants-us-gives
    WWW.NEWARAB.COM
    Bombs, guns, treasure: What Israel wants, the US gives
    In-depth: Israel's exceptional status in US arms policy and law ensures that unending military aid is shielded from scrutiny over human rights abuses.
    Like
    1
    1 Comments 0 Shares 3442 Views
  • https://www.newsadvertisment.com/2023/11/azam-khans-fine-waived-off-by-pcb-after.html
    https://www.newsadvertisment.com/2023/11/azam-khans-fine-waived-off-by-pcb-after.html
    WWW.NEWSADVERTISMENT.COM
    Azam Khan's fine waived off by PCB after Palestine flag display
    News advertisment is information, about current events, and all the news in the world's, news here you know, and we know,
    0 Comments 0 Shares 665 Views

  • Image Source
    [#silver](https://www.waivio.com/object/silver) [#gold](https://www.waivio.com/object/gold) [#leo](https://www.waivio.com/object/leo) [#pob](https://www.waivio.com/object/pob) [#someeofficial](https://www.waivio.com/object/someeofficial) [#nftm](https://www.waivio.com/object/nftm) [#bro](https://www.waivio.com/object/bro) [#cent](https://www.waivio.com/object/cent)
    When it comes to successful investors in the silver market, several notable individuals have made significant profits and gained recognition for their prowess in this precious metal. Here are a few examples:
    Eric Sprott: Eric Sprott is a Canadian billionaire investor known for his successful investments in the resource sector, including silver. He has been a strong advocate for precious metals and has established himself as one of the leading silver investors. Sprott has consistently shown a keen understanding of market dynamics and has made strategic investments in silver mining companies and bullion, reaping substantial profits over the years.
    Warren Buffett: Although primarily known as a stock market investor, Warren Buffett's investment firm, Berkshire Hathaway, has also made notable investments in silver. In the late 1990s, Buffett purchased over 100 million ounces of silver, believing that the metal was undervalued at the time. This move turned out to be lucrative as the price of silver rose significantly, allowing Berkshire Hathaway to realize substantial gains.
    John Paulson: John Paulson is a hedge fund manager who gained recognition for his successful bet against the subprime mortgage market in the 2008 financial crisis. Paulson has also been an active investor in silver, believing in its potential as a hedge against inflation and economic uncertainty. His firm, Paulson & Co., has invested in silver mining companies and has held substantial positions in silver exchange-traded funds (ETFs).
    Eric Mindich: Eric Mindich, founder of Eton Park Capital Management, is another notable investor who has made successful bets on silver. Mindich has demonstrated a deep understanding of global macroeconomic trends and has used silver as a means to diversify his portfolio and protect against inflation. His strategic investments in silver-related assets have generated substantial returns.
    Carlos Slim: Carlos Slim, a Mexican business magnate and one of the world's wealthiest individuals, has recognized the value of silver as an investment. Through his conglomerate Grupo Carso, Slim has had significant investments in silver mining companies. His strategic approach to investing has contributed to his success in the silver market.
    It's important to note that investing in silver, like any other investment, carries risks, and past success does not guarantee future performance. The silver market can be subject to fluctuations influenced by various factors such as global economic conditions, industrial demand, and investor sentiment.
    Before investing in silver or any other asset, it's crucial to conduct thorough research, consider one's investment goals, and consult with a financial advisor who can provide personalized guidance based on individual circumstances.
    Image Source [#silver](https://www.waivio.com/object/silver) [#gold](https://www.waivio.com/object/gold) [#leo](https://www.waivio.com/object/leo) [#pob](https://www.waivio.com/object/pob) [#someeofficial](https://www.waivio.com/object/someeofficial) [#nftm](https://www.waivio.com/object/nftm) [#bro](https://www.waivio.com/object/bro) [#cent](https://www.waivio.com/object/cent) When it comes to successful investors in the silver market, several notable individuals have made significant profits and gained recognition for their prowess in this precious metal. Here are a few examples: Eric Sprott: Eric Sprott is a Canadian billionaire investor known for his successful investments in the resource sector, including silver. He has been a strong advocate for precious metals and has established himself as one of the leading silver investors. Sprott has consistently shown a keen understanding of market dynamics and has made strategic investments in silver mining companies and bullion, reaping substantial profits over the years. Warren Buffett: Although primarily known as a stock market investor, Warren Buffett's investment firm, Berkshire Hathaway, has also made notable investments in silver. In the late 1990s, Buffett purchased over 100 million ounces of silver, believing that the metal was undervalued at the time. This move turned out to be lucrative as the price of silver rose significantly, allowing Berkshire Hathaway to realize substantial gains. John Paulson: John Paulson is a hedge fund manager who gained recognition for his successful bet against the subprime mortgage market in the 2008 financial crisis. Paulson has also been an active investor in silver, believing in its potential as a hedge against inflation and economic uncertainty. His firm, Paulson & Co., has invested in silver mining companies and has held substantial positions in silver exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Eric Mindich: Eric Mindich, founder of Eton Park Capital Management, is another notable investor who has made successful bets on silver. Mindich has demonstrated a deep understanding of global macroeconomic trends and has used silver as a means to diversify his portfolio and protect against inflation. His strategic investments in silver-related assets have generated substantial returns. Carlos Slim: Carlos Slim, a Mexican business magnate and one of the world's wealthiest individuals, has recognized the value of silver as an investment. Through his conglomerate Grupo Carso, Slim has had significant investments in silver mining companies. His strategic approach to investing has contributed to his success in the silver market. It's important to note that investing in silver, like any other investment, carries risks, and past success does not guarantee future performance. The silver market can be subject to fluctuations influenced by various factors such as global economic conditions, industrial demand, and investor sentiment. Before investing in silver or any other asset, it's crucial to conduct thorough research, consider one's investment goals, and consult with a financial advisor who can provide personalized guidance based on individual circumstances.
    Like
    3
    0 Comments 0 Shares 10495 Views

  • Image Source: https://www.cnet.com/#quantum #computers
    Traditional computers, like the one you're using right now, use bits to store and process information. A bit can represent either a 0 or a 1. It's the basic building block of all the data and instructions that a computer works with. Everything you see on your screen, from text to images, is ultimately represented and processed as a series of 0s and 1s.
    Now, let's talk about quantum computers. Quantum computers are a different kind of computer that use a concept called qubits. Qubits are similar to bits in that they can also represent a 0 or a 1. However, what makes qubits special is that they can also exist in a superposition.
    Superposition is a quantum property that allows qubits to be both 0 and 1 at the same time. It's like flipping a coin and having it land on heads and tails simultaneously. This ability to be in multiple states simultaneously gives quantum computers a significant advantage over traditional computers.
    Think of it this way: if a traditional computer had 3 bits, it could represent only one of eight possible states (2^3 = 8). But with 3 qubits in a superposition, a quantum computer can represent and process all eight possible states simultaneously. This exponential increase in processing power is what makes quantum computers so promising.
    Now, you might be wondering how qubits work and how they can be in multiple states at once. Qubits can be realized using various physical systems, such as atoms, ions, or superconducting circuits. These systems are carefully controlled and manipulated to exploit quantum effects.
    To perform computations with qubits, quantum computers use quantum gates. These gates are similar to the logic gates in traditional computers that perform operations like AND, OR, and NOT. However, quantum gates work on qubits and take advantage of superposition and other quantum properties.
    Another crucial concept in quantum computing is entanglement. Entanglement is a phenomenon where two or more qubits become linked in such a way that their states are connected, even if they are physically separated. It's like having a pair of entangled gloves where the state of one glove is immediately related to the state of the other glove, no matter how far apart they are.
    Entanglement allows quantum computers to perform certain computations more efficiently. It enables qubits to share information and work together, greatly enhancing their computational power. It's like having a team of qubits collaborating and processing information simultaneously, which can lead to faster problem-solving.
    Now, it's important to note that building and maintaining qubits is extremely challenging. Qubits are very sensitive to their environment, and any interaction with the outside world can cause them to lose their quantum properties, a phenomenon known as decoherence.
    Scientists and engineers are working hard to overcome these challenges and improve the stability and reliability of qubits. They are exploring different approaches and technologies to build quantum computers, such as superconducting circuits, trapped ions, topological qubits, and more.
    While quantum computers have the potential to solve certain problems much faster than traditional computers, they are not meant to replace them entirely. Quantum computers excel at tackling specific types of problems like cryptography, optimization, and simulating quantum systems. Traditional computers, on the other hand, are better suited for everyday tasks like browsing the internet, writing emails, and running most software applications.
    In summary, quantum computers are a new kind of computer that use qubits instead of traditional bits. Qubits can exist in a superposition of 0 and 1, allowing them to process information simultaneously. Quantum computers can perform calculations faster and more efficiently by harnessing the power of superposition and entanglement. However, building and maintaining qubits is challenging, and scientists are actively researching ways to make quantum computers more practical and accessible. #blockchain #waivio #someeofficial #sme #spknetwork #oneup
    Image Source: https://www.cnet.com/#quantum #computers Traditional computers, like the one you're using right now, use bits to store and process information. A bit can represent either a 0 or a 1. It's the basic building block of all the data and instructions that a computer works with. Everything you see on your screen, from text to images, is ultimately represented and processed as a series of 0s and 1s. Now, let's talk about quantum computers. Quantum computers are a different kind of computer that use a concept called qubits. Qubits are similar to bits in that they can also represent a 0 or a 1. However, what makes qubits special is that they can also exist in a superposition. Superposition is a quantum property that allows qubits to be both 0 and 1 at the same time. It's like flipping a coin and having it land on heads and tails simultaneously. This ability to be in multiple states simultaneously gives quantum computers a significant advantage over traditional computers. Think of it this way: if a traditional computer had 3 bits, it could represent only one of eight possible states (2^3 = 8). But with 3 qubits in a superposition, a quantum computer can represent and process all eight possible states simultaneously. This exponential increase in processing power is what makes quantum computers so promising. Now, you might be wondering how qubits work and how they can be in multiple states at once. Qubits can be realized using various physical systems, such as atoms, ions, or superconducting circuits. These systems are carefully controlled and manipulated to exploit quantum effects. To perform computations with qubits, quantum computers use quantum gates. These gates are similar to the logic gates in traditional computers that perform operations like AND, OR, and NOT. However, quantum gates work on qubits and take advantage of superposition and other quantum properties. Another crucial concept in quantum computing is entanglement. Entanglement is a phenomenon where two or more qubits become linked in such a way that their states are connected, even if they are physically separated. It's like having a pair of entangled gloves where the state of one glove is immediately related to the state of the other glove, no matter how far apart they are. Entanglement allows quantum computers to perform certain computations more efficiently. It enables qubits to share information and work together, greatly enhancing their computational power. It's like having a team of qubits collaborating and processing information simultaneously, which can lead to faster problem-solving. Now, it's important to note that building and maintaining qubits is extremely challenging. Qubits are very sensitive to their environment, and any interaction with the outside world can cause them to lose their quantum properties, a phenomenon known as decoherence. Scientists and engineers are working hard to overcome these challenges and improve the stability and reliability of qubits. They are exploring different approaches and technologies to build quantum computers, such as superconducting circuits, trapped ions, topological qubits, and more. While quantum computers have the potential to solve certain problems much faster than traditional computers, they are not meant to replace them entirely. Quantum computers excel at tackling specific types of problems like cryptography, optimization, and simulating quantum systems. Traditional computers, on the other hand, are better suited for everyday tasks like browsing the internet, writing emails, and running most software applications. In summary, quantum computers are a new kind of computer that use qubits instead of traditional bits. Qubits can exist in a superposition of 0 and 1, allowing them to process information simultaneously. Quantum computers can perform calculations faster and more efficiently by harnessing the power of superposition and entanglement. However, building and maintaining qubits is challenging, and scientists are actively researching ways to make quantum computers more practical and accessible. #blockchain #waivio #someeofficial #sme #spknetwork #oneup
    Like
    5
    1 Comments 0 Shares 7325 Views

  • Image Source: https://www.escapeartist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/step0001.jpg
    Bitcoin, the pioneering cryptocurrency, has gained significant attention and popularity since its inception in 2009. However, its decentralized nature, volatility, and potential risks have led to debates about the possibility of governments considering the outlawing of Bitcoin. In this article, we will explore some potential reasons that could contribute to such a decision.
    Regulatory Challenges:
    One primary concern for governments is the lack of regulatory oversight in the cryptocurrency market. Bitcoin's decentralized nature allows for anonymous transactions and can potentially facilitate illicit activities such as money laundering, tax evasion, and illegal transactions. Despite efforts to establish regulations and anti-money laundering measures, the anonymity provided by Bitcoin still poses a challenge for authorities to monitor and control financial transactions effectively.
    Financial Stability and Consumer Protection:
    Bitcoin's extreme price volatility can disrupt financial stability and endanger consumer protection. The cryptocurrency's value has witnessed significant fluctuations, often driven by speculative trading, market manipulation, or unexpected events. Such volatility can negatively impact investors, businesses, and overall economic stability. Governments may see the need to protect their citizens from potential financial losses associated with participating in the volatile cryptocurrency market.
    Monetary Policy Control:
    Central banks maintain the responsibility of implementing monetary policy to manage national economies effectively. Bitcoin, being decentralized and beyond government control, poses a challenge to the central bank's ability to influence and regulate monetary systems. If Bitcoin gains widespread acceptance, it could potentially undermine a government's control over its own currency, leading to potential economic instability.
    Cybersecurity and Fraud:
    As with any digital platform, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are susceptible to hacking, fraud, and cyber attacks. Despite the implementation of robust security measures, cryptocurrency exchanges and wallets have experienced numerous high-profile breaches in recent years. These security vulnerabilities raise concerns regarding the protection of users' funds and the potential for criminal activities, which could further contribute to governments considering the outlawing of Bitcoin.
    Potential Loss of Tax Revenue:
    Governments rely on tax revenues to fund public services and infrastructure development. The anonymity associated with Bitcoin transactions presents challenges for tax authorities to identify and track taxable income. The potential widespread adoption of Bitcoin could lead to a substantial loss of tax revenue, making it difficult for governments to meet their financial obligations.
    Conclusion:
    While Bitcoin has attracted a vast user base and supporters who believe in its potential to revolutionize the financial system, several factors may lead governments to consider outlawing it. Regulatory challenges, concerns regarding financial stability and consumer protection, the potential loss of monetary policy control, cybersecurity risks, and the potential impact on tax revenues are some of the primary reasons that may drive governments towards such a decision. However, it's important to note that this article explores potential reasons and does not reflect the definitive outcome or consensus on the future of Bitcoin. The cryptocurrency landscape remains complex and subject to ongoing discussions and developments. #bitcoin #btc #someeofficial #waivio #thgaming #nftm #archon #hivelist
    Image Source: https://www.escapeartist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/step0001.jpg Bitcoin, the pioneering cryptocurrency, has gained significant attention and popularity since its inception in 2009. However, its decentralized nature, volatility, and potential risks have led to debates about the possibility of governments considering the outlawing of Bitcoin. In this article, we will explore some potential reasons that could contribute to such a decision. Regulatory Challenges: One primary concern for governments is the lack of regulatory oversight in the cryptocurrency market. Bitcoin's decentralized nature allows for anonymous transactions and can potentially facilitate illicit activities such as money laundering, tax evasion, and illegal transactions. Despite efforts to establish regulations and anti-money laundering measures, the anonymity provided by Bitcoin still poses a challenge for authorities to monitor and control financial transactions effectively. Financial Stability and Consumer Protection: Bitcoin's extreme price volatility can disrupt financial stability and endanger consumer protection. The cryptocurrency's value has witnessed significant fluctuations, often driven by speculative trading, market manipulation, or unexpected events. Such volatility can negatively impact investors, businesses, and overall economic stability. Governments may see the need to protect their citizens from potential financial losses associated with participating in the volatile cryptocurrency market. Monetary Policy Control: Central banks maintain the responsibility of implementing monetary policy to manage national economies effectively. Bitcoin, being decentralized and beyond government control, poses a challenge to the central bank's ability to influence and regulate monetary systems. If Bitcoin gains widespread acceptance, it could potentially undermine a government's control over its own currency, leading to potential economic instability. Cybersecurity and Fraud: As with any digital platform, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are susceptible to hacking, fraud, and cyber attacks. Despite the implementation of robust security measures, cryptocurrency exchanges and wallets have experienced numerous high-profile breaches in recent years. These security vulnerabilities raise concerns regarding the protection of users' funds and the potential for criminal activities, which could further contribute to governments considering the outlawing of Bitcoin. Potential Loss of Tax Revenue: Governments rely on tax revenues to fund public services and infrastructure development. The anonymity associated with Bitcoin transactions presents challenges for tax authorities to identify and track taxable income. The potential widespread adoption of Bitcoin could lead to a substantial loss of tax revenue, making it difficult for governments to meet their financial obligations. Conclusion: While Bitcoin has attracted a vast user base and supporters who believe in its potential to revolutionize the financial system, several factors may lead governments to consider outlawing it. Regulatory challenges, concerns regarding financial stability and consumer protection, the potential loss of monetary policy control, cybersecurity risks, and the potential impact on tax revenues are some of the primary reasons that may drive governments towards such a decision. However, it's important to note that this article explores potential reasons and does not reflect the definitive outcome or consensus on the future of Bitcoin. The cryptocurrency landscape remains complex and subject to ongoing discussions and developments. #bitcoin #btc #someeofficial #waivio #thgaming #nftm #archon #hivelist
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 10978 Views

  • Image Source: https://d3lkc3n5th01x7.cloudfront.net#blockchain #thgaming #someeofficial #waiv #proofofbrain
    Blockchain technology has the potential to surpass the internet in terms of its transformative impact and widespread adoption. While the internet revolutionized communication and information sharing, blockchain introduces a new paradigm that revolutionizes trust, security, and decentralized transactions. Here are several reasons why blockchain has the potential to surpass the internet:
    Enhanced Security and Trust: One of the fundamental features of blockchain technology is its ability to create a highly secure and tamper-resistant network. Unlike the internet, which relies on centralized authorities and intermediaries to validate transactions and secure data, blockchain utilizes a decentralized network of nodes that collectively validate and record transactions in an immutable ledger. This distributed consensus mechanism eliminates the need for intermediaries, reduces the risk of fraud, and enhances trust among participants. As data breaches and online fraud continue to plague the internet, blockchain's inherent security features make it a compelling alternative.
    Decentralization and Empowerment: The internet brought about a centralized model where power and control are concentrated in the hands of a few large corporations. In contrast, blockchain enables decentralization by distributing control and decision-making among network participants. This decentralized nature has the potential to democratize various industries, such as finance, supply chain, and governance. Through blockchain-based platforms, individuals can directly interact and transact with one another, bypassing traditional gatekeepers and intermediaries. This empowerment of individuals and communities fosters innovation, reduces inequality, and challenges the centralized status quo.
    Immutable and Transparent Records: Blockchain's distributed ledger technology ensures transparency and immutability of records. Every transaction or piece of data added to the blockchain is recorded permanently and cannot be altered without the consensus of the network. This feature eliminates the need for trust in centralized authorities, as anyone can independently verify the integrity of the blockchain's history. Such transparency and immutability can have far-reaching implications for industries that require auditability, such as supply chain management, healthcare, and voting systems. By providing an indisputable and traceable record of events, blockchain technology enhances accountability and reduces fraud.
    Smart Contracts and Automation: Blockchain's programmable capabilities, particularly through smart contracts, enable the automation of complex transactions and agreements. Smart contracts are self-executing contracts with predefined rules and conditions embedded in the blockchain. They eliminate the need for intermediaries and automate the enforcement of agreements, thereby reducing costs, increasing efficiency, and minimizing human error. This automation potential has vast implications across various sectors, including finance, real estate, intellectual property, and supply chain management. By streamlining processes and increasing efficiency, blockchain's smart contracts can reshape industries and drive substantial economic benefits.
    Tokenization and New Economies: Blockchain technology facilitates the tokenization of real-world assets, enabling the representation of physical or digital assets as tokens on the blockchain. This tokenization unlocks the potential for creating new economies and markets. It enables fractional ownership, liquidity, and seamless transferability of assets that were previously illiquid or inaccessible. Tokenization has the potential to revolutionize finance, art, real estate, and even personal data ownership. By enabling the creation of decentralized marketplaces and new economic models, blockchain technology can disrupt traditional industries and foster innovation.
    While the internet has transformed the world, blockchain technology presents a paradigm shift that can surpass its impact. With enhanced security, decentralization, transparency, automation, and the potential for new economies, blockchain has the power to reshape industries, empower individuals, and foster trust in ways that the internet alone cannot achieve. As blockchain continues to evolve and find applications in various sectors, its transformative potential is becoming increasingly evident, making it a strong contender to surpass the internet in terms of its overall impact.
    Image Source: https://d3lkc3n5th01x7.cloudfront.net#blockchain #thgaming #someeofficial #waiv #proofofbrain Blockchain technology has the potential to surpass the internet in terms of its transformative impact and widespread adoption. While the internet revolutionized communication and information sharing, blockchain introduces a new paradigm that revolutionizes trust, security, and decentralized transactions. Here are several reasons why blockchain has the potential to surpass the internet: Enhanced Security and Trust: One of the fundamental features of blockchain technology is its ability to create a highly secure and tamper-resistant network. Unlike the internet, which relies on centralized authorities and intermediaries to validate transactions and secure data, blockchain utilizes a decentralized network of nodes that collectively validate and record transactions in an immutable ledger. This distributed consensus mechanism eliminates the need for intermediaries, reduces the risk of fraud, and enhances trust among participants. As data breaches and online fraud continue to plague the internet, blockchain's inherent security features make it a compelling alternative. Decentralization and Empowerment: The internet brought about a centralized model where power and control are concentrated in the hands of a few large corporations. In contrast, blockchain enables decentralization by distributing control and decision-making among network participants. This decentralized nature has the potential to democratize various industries, such as finance, supply chain, and governance. Through blockchain-based platforms, individuals can directly interact and transact with one another, bypassing traditional gatekeepers and intermediaries. This empowerment of individuals and communities fosters innovation, reduces inequality, and challenges the centralized status quo. Immutable and Transparent Records: Blockchain's distributed ledger technology ensures transparency and immutability of records. Every transaction or piece of data added to the blockchain is recorded permanently and cannot be altered without the consensus of the network. This feature eliminates the need for trust in centralized authorities, as anyone can independently verify the integrity of the blockchain's history. Such transparency and immutability can have far-reaching implications for industries that require auditability, such as supply chain management, healthcare, and voting systems. By providing an indisputable and traceable record of events, blockchain technology enhances accountability and reduces fraud. Smart Contracts and Automation: Blockchain's programmable capabilities, particularly through smart contracts, enable the automation of complex transactions and agreements. Smart contracts are self-executing contracts with predefined rules and conditions embedded in the blockchain. They eliminate the need for intermediaries and automate the enforcement of agreements, thereby reducing costs, increasing efficiency, and minimizing human error. This automation potential has vast implications across various sectors, including finance, real estate, intellectual property, and supply chain management. By streamlining processes and increasing efficiency, blockchain's smart contracts can reshape industries and drive substantial economic benefits. Tokenization and New Economies: Blockchain technology facilitates the tokenization of real-world assets, enabling the representation of physical or digital assets as tokens on the blockchain. This tokenization unlocks the potential for creating new economies and markets. It enables fractional ownership, liquidity, and seamless transferability of assets that were previously illiquid or inaccessible. Tokenization has the potential to revolutionize finance, art, real estate, and even personal data ownership. By enabling the creation of decentralized marketplaces and new economic models, blockchain technology can disrupt traditional industries and foster innovation. While the internet has transformed the world, blockchain technology presents a paradigm shift that can surpass its impact. With enhanced security, decentralization, transparency, automation, and the potential for new economies, blockchain has the power to reshape industries, empower individuals, and foster trust in ways that the internet alone cannot achieve. As blockchain continues to evolve and find applications in various sectors, its transformative potential is becoming increasingly evident, making it a strong contender to surpass the internet in terms of its overall impact.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 12209 Views
  • https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-05-16-covid-jab-recipients-now-suffering-neurological-problems.html #covid #jabs #sme #somee #waiv
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-05-16-covid-jab-recipients-now-suffering-neurological-problems.html #covid #jabs #sme #somee #waiv
    WWW.NATURALNEWS.COM
    Many COVID jab recipients now suffering neurological problems; Big Government, Big Tech trying to cover up the truth
    Anyone who got "vaccinated" for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) and now suffers from neurological or other serious health problems is just dealing with "anxiety due to the COVID vaccine." This is the position of government health authorities, anyway, who refuse to admit that the
    Like
    3
    1 Comments 0 Shares 1494 Views
  • https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/05/16/bitcoin-is-a-threat-to-the-energy-use-status-quo-and-thats-a-good-thing/#cryptonews #someeofficial #bitcoin #waivio #ctp #alive
    https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/05/16/bitcoin-is-a-threat-to-the-energy-use-status-quo-and-thats-a-good-thing/#cryptonews #someeofficial #bitcoin #waivio #ctp #alive
    Bitcoin Is a Threat to the Energy-Use Status Quo – and That’s a Good Thing
    Banning or taxing crypto and crypto mining out of existence isn’t going to solve this country’s issues around power consumption and grid stability – but supporting Bitcoin just might.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3411 Views
  • https://decrypt.co/140424/crypto-lender-compound-deploys-ethereum-layer-2-arbitrum #cryptonews #somee #decrypt #bro #pay #waivio #sports
    https://decrypt.co/140424/crypto-lender-compound-deploys-ethereum-layer-2-arbitrum #cryptonews #somee #decrypt #bro #pay #waivio #sports
    DECRYPT.CO
    Crypto Lender Compound Deploys on Ethereum Layer-2 Arbitrum - Decrypt
    DeFi powerhouse Compound Finance is rolling out its services on various speedy scaling solutions, tapping Arbitrum in the latest deployment.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3129 Views
  • All the while I have missed my lovely friends in the ecosystem and I know my friends missed me too.

    Lots have happened am sure I have a lot to catch up with. Got to discover this new frontend (#someesocial)and I decided to try it out, you can check it out yourself.

    Meanwhile, my fish farm is doing well, this is my second harvest. Over the weekend I decided to smoke some of them and it was so tasty.

    Bye for now

    #someeofficial #homesteading #alive #airhawk-exchange #waivio #helios #neoxian
    All the while I have missed my lovely friends in the ecosystem and I know my friends missed me too. Lots have happened am sure I have a lot to catch up with. Got to discover this new frontend (#someesocial)and I decided to try it out, you can check it out yourself. Meanwhile, my fish farm is doing well, this is my second harvest. Over the weekend I decided to smoke some of them and it was so tasty. Bye for now #someeofficial #homesteading #alive #airhawk-exchange #waivio #helios #neoxian
    Like
    Love
    3
    3 Comments 0 Shares 7716 Views