Thursday, October 1, 2020
FIVE asteroids due to buzz Earth TODAY, as scientists claim space rock once robbed up to 60% of planet’s atmosphere
NASA has announced that at least five asteroids are due for close flybys of Earth on October 1 alone. Meanwhile, researchers believe one giant impact in the past once removed up to 60 percent of Earth’s atmosphere.
October appears to be kicking off with a bang as a barrage of space-borne boulders heads our way over the course of Thursday.
Asteroid 2020 SM4, measuring 9.9m (half a bowling lane) in diameter, passed at a distance of 3.1 million kilometers away, while the 15-meter long 2020 SU5, (as tall as the Hollywood sign), already passed at two million kilometers.
The largest of Thursday’s unwanted visitors, 2020 RJ3, measures about half the height of the Great Pyramid of Giza, or 69m, and is expected to pass at 5.85 million kilometers.
Bringing up the rear are giraffe-sized (6.1m) 2020 SW6 and the half-telephone-pole sized (5.9m) 2020SN, at a distance of one million kilometers and 976,000km respectively. For context, the average distance between Earth and the Moon is about 239,000 miles (385,000 kilometers).
Meanwhile, researchers at Durham University in the UK just revealed they believe the Earth may have lost between 10 and 60 percent of its atmosphere in the asteroid collision suspected of creating the Moon.
In collaboration with an international team, lead author Dr Jacob Kegerreis et al ran more than 300 supercomputer simulations to determine the impact of asteroids on planetary bodies and the subsequent effect on their atmospheres.
At present, the leading theory suggests the Moon formed some 4.5 billion years ago following a collision between Earth and...
4 Questions James Comey Actually Answered in Senate Hearing
Former FBI Director James Comey took questions from a Senate committee for almost four hours Wednesday, but had the same answers for many of them.
Comey, who President Donald Trump fired in May 2017, fielded questions remotely by video link primarily about the FBI’s Russia-Trump investigation code-named “Crossfire Hurricane” before a special counsel took up the matter.
Throughout the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, in which he gave sworn testimony, Comey repeatedly offered the responses “I don’t know,” “I know nothing about … ,” “I don’t recall,” “I don’t remember,” “I only know what is in the public record,” “I can’t answer that,” and “That doesn’t ring a bell.”
Comey also said, “I don’t know anything about the facts that have recently been revealed about the subsource.”
In another often-repeated variation, Comey frequently responded to senators by questioning their questions, saying, “I don’t agree with your characterization,” “I don’t agree with your preamble,” or “I don’t agree with your predicate.”
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz found numerous flaws in the FBI investigation in a report last year—primarily with regard to the agency’s surveillance of Trump campaign associate Carter Page.
In some instances, Comey did answer senators’ questions. Here are four examples.
1. ‘Proud’ of Russia Investigation
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked the former FBI director: “How would you rate the Crossfire Hurricane investigation in terms of being done thoroughly, by the book, and an investigation the FBI should be proud of?”
Comey responded, “Overall, I’m proud of the work. There are parts that are concerning, which I’m sure we’ll talk about. But overall, I’m proud of the work.”
Later in the hearing, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, asked broadly about the Russia probe as well as the investigation of former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and misinformation in the application for a warrant to surveil Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
“Was that handled in a competent and honest way?” Cruz asked.
Comey continued with his “overall” defense.
“I think the overall investigation of the Russia interference and whether Americans were associated with it was conducted in an honest, competent, independent way,” Comey said.
Cruz noted that Horowitz’s report found 17 significant omissions in the FBI’s application for the initial warrant to spy on Page under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA.
“So, in your view, 17 mistakes and lying to the court is competent and honest?” Cruz asked.
Comey responded of the inspector general: “I don’t believe he concluded they were lies to the court. There were significant failings with how the Carter Page FISA [application] was prepared and renewed.”
Cruz brought up Kevin Clinesmith, the FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty in August to altering information in a CIA email, leaving out information that Page had worked with the CIA.
“That fraudulent document was then used as the basis for a fraudulent submission to the FISA court. Do you believe that is honest and competent?” Cruz asked.
Comey replied, “I don’t believe you offered an accurate summary.”
Cruz wrapped up by calling the FBI’s probe corrupt and hinting that Comey was corrupt:
This investigation of the president was corrupt. The FBI and the Department of Justice were politicized and weaponized. In my opinion, there are only two possibilities: that you were either deliberately corrupt or woefully incompetent. And I don’t believe you were incompetent. This has done severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and women at the FBI, because law enforcement should not be used as a political weapon. That is the legacy you have left.
Later, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, referred to a notorious compilation of anti-Trump material compiled by Christopher Steele, a former Bristish intelligence agent, and financed by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Cornyn asked Comey: “Did you call the Steele dossier salacious and unverified?”
Comey: “The entire dossier was something we were trying to see if we could rule in or rule out.”
Cornyn: “Are you aware of any verification by the FBI?”
Comey seemed unsure before eventually responding: “I learned a lot about the Steele material and the subsource interviews from the Horowitz report that I didn’t know before.”
2. Russia and Hillary Clinton’s Campaign
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe sent a letter to the Judiciary Committee regarding declassified information on how Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign pushed the Russia investigation to distract from her own campaign problems.
“In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee,” Ratcliffe’s letter says. “The IC [intelligence community] does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”
The letter from the director of national intelligence goes on to say:
On 07 September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding ‘U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’
Graham asked Comey: “Do you recall getting an inquiry from the intelligence community in September of 2016 about a concern that the Clinton campaign was going to create a scandal regarding Trump and Russia?”
Comey, as he did for much of the hearing, responded, “I do not,” and added: “That doesn’t ring a bell.”
Later, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked about the appropriateness of the director of national intelligence’s releasing the letter.
“I don’t understand Mr. Ratcliffe’s letter well enough to comment,” Comey responded to Leahy. “It’s confusing. I think it contains in it a statement that is unverified information. I really don’t know what he’s doing.”
3. If Comey Knew Then What He Knows Now
Man Stabbed to Death by Migrant For Trying to Prevent Girlfriend Being Raped Was Targeted Over ‘Sweden Democrats’ Cap
“He’s a racist.”
A 19-year-old Swedish man who was stabbed to death by a Sudanese migrant while trying to prevent the culprit from raping his girlfriend was targeted because the migrant thought he was “racist” for owning a Sweden Democrats cap.
The results of the police investigation into the incident, which occurred in Härnösand on May 10 this year, have now been revealed.
A group of migrants entered a house party uninvited before 23-year-old Abubaker Mohamad Awad noticed the SD cap. Sweden Democrats is a right-wing populist party that opposes mass immigration.
Having repeatedly entered the bedroom of 19-year-old Tommie Lindh’s girlfriend where she was trying to sleep and being told to leave, Awad then pointed a knife at her while accusing Lindh of being a “racist” for owning the cap.
Awad then demanded the girl stand up or he would kill her and Lindh.
The migrant then held the knife to the girl’s throat and orally raped her in a bathroom. When Lindh tried to intervene, Awad stabbed him in the neck, back and chest. He subsequently died from his injuries in hospital.
“While the 19-year-old was bleeding, the African forced the woman to go to one of the bedrooms where he raped her. If she did not come along, he would cut her as well,” reports Fria Tider.
Despite the young woman making repeated emergency calls to police, it took them over an hour and a half to arrive.
After police arrested Awad, “he laughed in front of the camera at the arrest, made grimaces and victory signs with his fingers.”
The rape victim subsequently told friends, “He raped me. I do not want to live anymore.”
It was subsequently revealed that the Sudanese migrant, who was granted Swedish citizenship in 2011, had a long criminal record, including a 2015 conviction of raping a girl under the age of 15.
The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #427
Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,
Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.
If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.
Please Leave Silently Into The Night......
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #1127
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)