Follow Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) on Twitter
Last week we wrote about a book purchase that Warren Buffett labeled the best investment he ever made in Berkshire Hathaway’s most recent annual letter: Benjamin Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor: The Definitive Book on Value Investing. A Book of Practical Counsel.”
This got us to thinking about another book on the subject that you likely have not heard of but that may be equally notable, not only for its valuable content but for its exorbitant cost, and whose author is an outspoken critic of U.S. monetary policy who recently made some dire comments on the state of financial markets.
One of the acolytes of the value investing strategy that Benjamin Graham and Warren Buffett pioneered, hedge fund manager Seth Klarman of the Baupost Group not only served as a contributor to a recent edition of Graham’s other classic book on investing, “Security Analysis,” but also authored his own book (the one in question) on value investing, which is perhaps the most expensive such title in the world.
The book, published in 1991, is titled (more…)
We’re on day five since Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared, and there have been zero public leads as to what happened – just a lot of conflicting information and speculation. Which is ok – everyone seems to have a theory, and with the mystery deepening by the day, let’s look at where we stand.
I’ve tried to consume as much information as possible, and am stuck on three plausible theories for what happened:
1. The “Flight 93″ Theory: This blog post has been circulating on social media and I think it checks off some of the odd boxes of what we know so far. It posits a hijacking took place, with the hijackers (or flight crew turning off the transponders). The hijackers wanted the captain to fly to a major city to inflict some massive, 9/11-like damage, but instead the pilot at some point crashes in order to save the lives of others. The caveat here is this would have to happen without alerting passengers, since no 9/11-like phone calls were made. But this theory does explain why the change in direction, as well as why no terrorist organization has claimed credit – because it failed.
2. The “Pilot Intent” Theory: People have speculated about pilot error or some sort of accident – what if the captain, co-pilot and possibly the flight crew purposely crashed the plane? This was a theory floated by Alex Berenson, formerly of the New York Times. In his case, he raised the possibility of pilot suicide, followed by a locked cockpit and passengers unable to do anything. But that ignores the lack of phone calls like in the first theory. To broaden this theory out, let’s say it’s pilot intent – whether crashing on purpose or committing suicide. (This was a very experienced captain though). Even in these two theories there are lots of unanswered questions and unexplained occurrences. Which brings us to theory 3…
3. The “Anything Is Possible” Theory: All day yesterday we operated under the assumption the flight changed direction from Northeast to West and ended up last being tracked in the Straits of Malacca. Then, that went from fact to a possibility. We’re getting severely mixed signals from Malaysian authorities – so what if they know more than they’re letting on? What if the facts we’re operating under aren’t true at all? Obviously, every possibility would then be on the table. Maybe passengers did make phone calls, but those calls are being suppressed. Maybe there was some sort of embarrassing incident being covered up. Maybe they’ve already found the plane. If the facts, as we know them right now, aren’t the facts at all, truly anything is possible.
Have a theory? Tell me about it on Twitter at @SteveKrak
Last night, Paul Kengor, author of “11 Principles of a Reagan Conservative,” a book that we have covered extensively at Blaze Books (review, interview) appeared on Wilkow! to discuss his newest release.
Kengor and Wilkow partook in a conversation on a variety of topics from what a Reagan conservative truly is, to President Reagan’s faith and what Reagan’s policy would be today.
On this last point, Kengor neatly summarized Reagan’s overarching policy:
“The best poverty program is a job. And the way that you do that [create jobs] is you cut taxes, you deregulate, you put your faith not in the government but in the individual — in the entrepreneur…you allow people to keep their money in the first place which they’ll invest more shrewdly, more smartly, more wisely than the government.”
Check out a clip from their timely discussion in light of the ongoing battle between the establishment and conservatives, and this past week’s events at CPAC.
Recently we have been covering former Prime Minister Netanyahu foreign policy advisor and current deputy managing editor at the Jerusalem Post, Caroline Glick, on her new book “The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East” (reviewed here).
In her book, Glick puts forth a controversial plan that calls for the complete abandonment of the so-called two-state solution, to be replaced by the so-called one-state “Israeli solution,” involving Israel asserting its sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and absorbing all citizens therein.
Below are ten quotes from our interview with Ms. Glick that provide expert insight into the state of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and how it might be solved. All emphasis is ours.
“The United States has been pushing this idea of a two-state solution for over a generation. It was first pushed by the Nixon Administration in 1970 and it’s based on this totally false understanding of the Middle East which places Israel at the center of everything. It says that the size of Israel is really responsible for all the bad things in the Arab world, and if we can make Israel smaller than the problems will be smaller…The problem with this paradigm is that it’s totally false. Israel doesn’t dictate events in the Arab world. Those are dictated by internal issues in each Arab state…They all have to do with the internal dynamics and pathologies of Arab societies. But because the U.S. has been pushing this idea for so long, what has happened is that U.S. policymakers are fundamentally incapable of understanding the Middle East, because they’re basing everything on this false assumption of Israeli culpability.”
The centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy is to push for the establishment of a terrorist state
“…there’s something fundamentally wrong when the centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy is to push for the establishment of a terrorist state that is dedicated to destroying Israel but can’t figure out what to do about it because they’ve been told all of this time that Israel is the problem, or the absence of a Palestinian State is the problem; that if they care about Israel they should support America financing a Palestinian terrorist army and spending upwards of $500 million a year bankrolling Palestinian terrorists. It’s always been crazy, but that’s what people have been told and they’ve come to believe it over time.”
“…at base the Palestinian national movement since its inception in 1920 has not been about the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state but rather the destruction of the Jewish state or earlier the prevention of the establishment of a Jewish state and so it remains to this day which is why the PLO has consistently refused statehood every time it has been offered them since 1993.”