Be it Gods or ET, “Are we alone?” is a question which cannot be asked; there may not be anyone to answer.
The Nebra sky disk was found in Germany, near Nebra, and ever since, European scholars have used it to advance the notion of Euro-centric superiority. It has been dated to the mid-late Bronze Age, at approximately 1600 BC The claim is that it was made in Germany.
“The Nebra sky disk features the oldest concrete depiction of the cosmos worldwide. In June 2013 it was included in the UNESCO Memory of the World Register and termed “one of the most important archaeological finds of the twentieth century.””
The only problem with this theory is that the disk was probably made in Asia and altered not such a long time ago, in Wales. (This is only my surmise, for the moment; you will see why, below.)
From Wikipedia (emphasis mine):
At some later date, two arcs (constructed from gold of a different origin, as shown by its chemical impurities) were added at opposite edges of the disk. To make space for these arcs, one small circle was moved from the left side toward the center of the disk and two of the circles on the right were covered over, so that thirty remain visible. The two arcs span an angle of 82°, correctly indicating the angle between the positions of sunset at summer and winter solstice at the latitude of the Mittelberg (51°N).
The final addition was another arc at the bottom, the “sun boat“, again made of gold from a different origin.
The only ‘proof’ of the disk’s European provenance are the gold bands of eighty-two degrees which were added at a later date. How much later is uncertain. I think it was much much later, probably just after it was discovered. In fact, two of the ‘stars’ were even moved to accommodate the gold bands, so how can it be claimed that the knowledge conveyed by them dates to 1600 BC? We have fraud on three levels: provenance; age; forgery.
In this video (6:03) [part three of a series of three short films] professor Green displays a mosaic of photos of the disk on her restoration laboratory wall. In these photos, the curved gold object at the bottom of the disk (said to be a solar barge or boat) is both there, and isn’t.
This is the mosaic she assembled with photographs she claims she had nothing to do with creating. Notice how photo 5 is offset to the right.
I superimposed photo 5 onto photo 4 at 50% opacity which is what can be seen in the yellow circle below – “The boat should be here.”
When confronted with these images, professor Green had this to say, “But half the boat is visible on the bottom left picture, exactly where it should be. i may be missing your point but I don’t see the problem.” [sic]
There was clearly nothing in the bottom-left photo. Of course, this is up to one’s interpretation of the meaning of the word ‘left.’ Whereas I meant left as it is viewed – ‘house left’, she may have meant left as in ‘stage left.’ It seems to me that when one is attaching pictures to the wall, the one on the left is self-evident. In all fairness, and given the number of lectures she has probably given, it is entirely possible that this is the whence from which the confusion sprang:
Now, to her credit, professor Green is a very reputable scientist, archaeologist, and religious historian. She is professor emeritus and has written a great number of books. She is perhaps best known for her work on the peat bog mummies. I, in no way intended to offend her, defame her, or accuse her of any untoward behaviour. Her reputation is unassailable, after all. I simply wanted to know why her fingerprints were on photos of an obviously trafficked historical artefact posted on the wall of her own restoration laboratory, why she did not notice the obvious anomaly (none of the thousands who viewed these videos on YouTube ever noticed either, I might add,) and if she had any part to play in the trafficking of said object. Unfortunately, after a brief email exchange with me, she thought my questions too aggressive, was resentful of my implications, and did not, “wish to get into this.” She claims not to remember much about it at all, it having happened so long ago, that she had no part in the imaging of the disk, and that she was merely there to offer commentary about the meaning of the disk. This is odd considering the disk is considered to be one of the most significant discoveries of the 20th century, but if you’ve seen one, I suppose you’ve seen them all, or so the saying goes. She has asked me not to contact her again. Given her status and her reputation, I will, of course, honour that request. I meant no offense and was simply seeking answers to my numerous and decidedly direct questions. On the other hand, it seems to me that when one is presented with five images of a thing and a large enough table, the first thing one does is to put them together like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, in which case the anomaly would have been obvious to anyone, let alone an expert such as herself, as it had been to me after having only seen the video images for a few seconds. Nevertheless, I suppose this one slipped by the expert. Perhaps she had a restricted time budget. Those documentary film shooting schedules can be very tight, no seriously, and she is probably a very busy woman, to her credit. It is more than just plausible (deniability.) [Please forgive me the sarcasm. It is one of the few joys of writing.] In all seriousness however, if she had been given just five minutes to shoot the clip, and she had already done her research about the disk ahead of time, she may not have noticed the anomalies. Fair enough. Then again, she did offset photo 5 by a considerable amount in order to isolate the boat, for the sake of commentary, and had she not done so, this article would have been far less interesting, admittedly. But having said that, why put up photo 4 at all as it contained no information besides the information contained in its lack thereof? Are you still following this? Mysteries abound. Onward.
If there is any doubt as to the photographic evidence presented above, this is a découpé of the images on the video, taken at different times.
… I ask you, where is the boat? Even the sun is missing from photo 4. (photo 4 is the one on the bottom left, house left, to be precise.)
The only conclusion one can come to is that the photos show the disk in different stages of manufacture. In case you are wondering about photo-manipulation, the patina under the spots where both the boat and sun should be does not show any repeating pattern similar to anywhere else on the disk, as far as I can tell.
This is not to say that Heinrich Wunderlich, the man who authenticated the corrosion on the bronze parts of the disk (see video #1) was incorrect. The disk could very well be authentic and his estimate of the age of the bronze could very well be accurate. As far as I know, he only analyzed the bronze portion of the disk since oxidation does not occur on gold. Remember that the gold leaf depicting the three arcs was definitively added afterwards, and perhaps more. Perhaps, indeed, all of it was.
What about the holes punched around the outside of the disk? What is their purpose? This disk, it would seem to me, was probably an adornment originally made as a breastplate. Adding some of the gold leaf in order to further the story of Euro-centric knowledge of the stars would not have been difficult, especially for someone with a lab full of specialized restoration equipment, as exists in Cardiff. Did I mention that professor Green was from the University of Cardiff in Wales?
The Saracens, Indians, Persians, Ottomans, and even Genghis Khan all wore similar breastplates. These designs were not typical of European armour. This would explain the holes punched around the circumference of the disk which could serve as attachment points to the rest of the armour. How have all the experts missed this simple fact? It is simply supposition on my part; nevertheless, it should be retained as a possibility, shouldn’t it?
The Nebra disk is not as ornate as these examples, but perhaps it was not destined to adorn a general, either.
The crescent was well used in the iconography of the Ancient Near East and was used transplanted by the Phoenicians in the 8th century BC as far as Carthage in modern Tunisia. The crescent and star also appears on pre-Islamic coins of South Arabia.
The combination of star and crescent also arises in the Ancient Near East, representing the Moon and Ishtar (the planet Venus), often combined into a triad with the solar disk. It was inherited both in Sassanian and Hellenistic iconography.
(Keep in mind that the sun symbol on the disk seems to have been added later. It may originally just have been a star and crescent design, if anything at all.) Triads can be depicted with five, six, or eight-pointed stars, and sometimes even more.
An obvious triad combining the sun, the moon, and one star – not seven stars. See below. Why this is assumed to be the Pleiades is beyond me. In 1600 BC, with no light pollution or smog, I would think that more than seven of the stars in that constellation would have been visible. Galileo noted a total of thirty-six. The cluster actually contains over one thousand stars, fourteen of which can be seen with the naked eye. Interestingly, the cultures of Japan and India (amongst others) associate the Pleiades with the number six.
Above is a Parthian (Iranian) coin from the first century BC Note the moon and star motif. (The star depicted on the coin above appears to be six-pointed with a bar connecting the star to the moon, as is often the case. It looks a lot like our Pleiadean group, does it not?)
Could the disk have originally belonged to an Asian invader? Did the Huns bring it to Europe as some sort of inspirational and motivational artefact in their attempt to overrun ancient Germany? Did it arrive much earlier as an object for barter or an adornment for clothing? If some of the elements on the disk are authentic, are they of Asian origin or design? The 51st parallel runs right through Inner Mongolia, after all. The Asian astronomical tradition is ancient and well-reputed, and trade routes from the Indus Valley, Mongolia, and all over the near-east to the Mediterranean are well-established, once camels had been domesticated in the early to mid Bronze Age.
“On 20 June 2007 a multimedia visitor center was opened near the discovery site at Nebra.” This center obviously cost a great deal of money to build, and tourists pay a fee to visit.
However, the disk is part of the permanent exhibition in the Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte (State Museum of Prehistory) in Halle. The museum states that the disk is an object from the early Bronze Age. Even in the technologically late-blooming Europe, 1600 BC must be considered mid-late Bronze age. The Bronze Age started much sooner in the east, after all.
If there has been a forgery of the disk, it has cost the people of Germany, the tourists to Germany, and the people of Asia, where it belongs, quite a lot of money. The people have a right to know whether this object is authentic or not, and an investigation into this matter should begin immediately. There must have been many people involved in this scheme.
So, an Asian artefact, found in Europe seems to have been dressed up to look like it was local, and the myth of European supremacy lives on. The people of Europe, and the rest of the world for that matter, may have been duped. Asian knowledge has, as it would seem, once again been appropriated by the west for nothing more than bragging rights.
In 1971, the French sent a gunboat to New York harbour to get their gold back because the USA was over-extending itself as per the Bretton-Woods agreement. It was President Nixon who was not playing by the rules. In this example, it was the Vietnam war which was being funded but without enough gold to back the expenditures. The US was inflating its own currency. Since the Franc was pegged to the dollar and the dollar was pegged to the gold that America held, there wasn’t enough gold to maintain the value of the French currency. This is why the French acted. This was essentially the beginning of what we now know as central bank money, or modern fiat money.
Why mention all this? Well it seems to me that the Chinese are de-evolving in monetary terms, going back to a Bretton-Woods type system in order that they can play the role that the US played but with their allies, instead. For that to happen, they need to back their currency with gold, and so they will need as much as they can get. Russia has also spoken about a gold-backed ruble.
Gaddafi was in the process of creating a gold-backed pan-African currency, but Libya did not have the clout to withstand the American onslaught, and we all know what happened after that. China does.
If we exclude QEII, the largest land-owners in the world are Russia, China, the King of Saud, the King of Thailand, the King of Morocco, and the King of Oman. All of these countries have large Muslim populations; even Russia is about 15% Muslim. All of them have been involved with some form of gold-backed currency, or are currently talking about implementing one. China is going to do it for them, and unite Asia in the process.
This is why Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev said, at the UN, that the IMF must go and that the world reserve currency should no longer be dollars. He also said that the UN should be based in Asia. Kazakhstan is hugely rich in natural resources (oil, gold, uranium…) He gave this speech on the same day as Obama and Putin spoke, but nobody was listening.
This, in my opinion, is what we are seeing in China now. They are slowly trying to shed dollars without causing too much commotion. If they do it too quickly, they would lose a great deal of value in the process. Eventually, though, the dollar will be dumped. China did just get into the IMF’s basket, for credibility and support if nothing else, but this may be short-lived and not for the reasons most would think.
With Turkey looking east, they could collectively control all the oil and gas flowing into Europe (Turkish Stream pipeline,) and most of the water flowing into the middle-east. The east would have Europe by the short-and-curlies.
This is also why they want to ‘easternize’ Europe with a large influx of migrants. Terror is a serious issue for all these actors, not just an excuse for expansion like it is for America. Russia has an outpost called Ingushetia to guard against Chechen fighters. Even China has terror at its back door.
Energy-poor Europe really has no choice in the matter and America is powerless to stop it. This is what made Ukraine such a target. Russia is diverting all pipelines into Europe through Turkey instead of Ukraine, making the entire exercise there moot. This is what makes the middle-east, the Spratley Islands in the South China Sea, North Korea, and Lithuania so important to the west. This is why the west (and NATO) is trying to encircle Russia and break up Eurasia, but what’s the expression again…? A day late and a dollar short (pun definitely intended.)
One could draw a line from Beijing to Moscow and cross only one country, Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan may be where the new Prime Meridian passes, where the new UN headquarters might be located, and is where the world’s monopoly of low-enriched uranium (LEU) is kept. Buffett knows it, too. Kazakhstan is land-locked and so is very easy to defend.
China is starting to unwind, all of Eurasia will be dumping the dollar very soon (?this summer/fall?) the petro-dollar’s days are numbered (Saud has been in negotiations with Russia for years now over this very issue) and if America doesn’t wake up to this incontrovertible fact, war will be the only option. If the USA and NATO and the EU start making preparations now, perhaps there could be a way to draw this out nicely enough not to have to crash the western economy. They could also all be working behind the scenes together, east and west, knowing that the inevitable is coming. Hey, ya’ never know.
As it happens, last year, American private equity fund KKR bought Mexico’s Pemex Oil. They have secured rights to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and now they are moving even further south. Venezuela seems to be the next target now that the Americans know they have lost the middle-east, and will soon have to leave.
“Seventy percent of Petropiar is owned by the state-run Petróleos de Venezuela, and 30% by its overseas partner, Chevron. The government has now offered to sell a portion of its shares to the Russian Rosneft, along with a stake in the rights to extract oil from the premium-grade Orinoco Oil Belt. This, of course, is no less than a stab in the back for Chevron. (Rosneft faces sanctions from the US, which, of course, Chevron does not.)
Venezuela has also expropriated shares belonging to ConocoPhillips, for which it has not yet paid, at the same time as they’re negotiating with a Japanese investment bank to obtain further funding.”
These deals, in the American perspective, are worth protecting and fighting over especially if Russia’s Rosneft gets control of some of the oil in the Americas.
“The involvement of the U.S. military in an upcoming multilateral military drill in South America has raised concerns over potential ulterior motives on the part of the U.S.
The drill, dubbed “Operation: America United,” will involve the installation of a temporary military base on the triple border shared by the drill’s other participating nations: Peru, Brazil and Colombia.“
Clearly, the Americans know that their time under the petro-dollar scheme is winding down, and they are desperately seeking alternative sources of oil. Now that Erdogan has refused the EU membership and is looking east, even the Germans are moving their troops from Incirlik to Jordan. They too must sense that something is changing within NATO and in the middle-east.
All this talk of populism vs. globalism (I was caught up in it, too) is like so many squirrels scurrying to hide their nutz. This is also why we needed the king of all squirrels, Donald Trump, to completely dominate our lives. After two years of him dominating the main-stream media scene, much of the groundwork has been done quietly, and in the shadows.
Clapper has called AQAP (Al Qaeda on the Arab Peninsula) the greatest threat to US national interests… now it’s Russia. Quite a shift in so little time. But what was the AQAP remark all about? Weapons sales, of course.
Terror has been the excuse for small corrupt governments, like that of Yemen, to milk hegemons (either global like the US, or local like Saud) of their money to combat terror. While strikes against both civilians and terror groups lead to more recruitment, the terrorists (considered by locals as freedom-fighters) are increasing acts of terror (read: liberation) to further the cycle. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy and a perpetual wheel, and US military contractors salivate at the prospect. If war is the most profitable industry, that is where capital (and capitalism) will flow… moral compass be damned. A corporation can be sued by its shareholders for acts of morality which cost the company money. Let the poor defenseless suckers pay for it all. This is disaster capitalism at its finest, the strong picking on the weak. This is why there is a wealth gap, in the first place.
Meanwhile, the poorest suffer, but they fight, for what other choice is there? Abandoning sovereignty is not a choice, it is a consequence of defeat.
America’s Dangerous Game In Yemen – (25:01)
Prince Charles is one of the world’s leading arms dealers (47:15) and should be brought to answer for his deeds especially concerning Saud and their war with Yemeni people. Unfortunately, there exists no legal mechanism in England to accuse any member of the royal family of having broken the law. They are the law. The UK, USA, Turkey, and Canada, amongst others, have sold the Saudis all the weapons which are now being used against the innocent people of Yemen including illegal cluster bombs and white phosphorus munitions. The mainstream media are silent and, in so being, complicit.
There are many images which have been foisted upon the west through its media sources. We all remember the picture of the Syrian boy who washed up on a beach in Turkey.
There is also the Syrian boy who was rescued from the rubble of what once was his house. (What was the girl’s story? She was too old, and so was ignored by the media.)
These are, of course, just two of the horrendous images of war in Syria. But releasing these images had a purpose, that of demonizing Assad.
There is another war going on. It is a war few people speak of. There is far less coverage of it in the news, but the effects this war has on its population are just as devastating. It is the war in Yemen.
On one side are the Huthis, an armed group whose members belong to a branch of Shi’a Islam known as Zayidism. The Huthis are allied with supporters of Yemen’s former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. On the other side are anti-Huthi forces that are allied with the current President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi and the Saudi Arabian-led coalition.
Members of the coalition include the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan and Sudan. The USA and UK have been providing key intelligence and logistical support to the coalition.
The USA, UK, France, Spain, Canada and Turkey transferred nearly US$5.9 billion worth of arms to Saudi Arabia between 2015 and 2016, including drones, bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles, which risk being used to facilitate serious violations in Yemen.
Strangely enough, though the Amnesty International article I have quoted above is quite thorough, it fails to mention that many of the pilots flying Saudi-owned American jets, which seem to be indiscriminately bombing hospitals, schools, and markets, are from Israel.
So there we have it, all the countries currently fighting (or helping to fight) Assad in Syria (illegally) are now ganging up on a relatively small band of un-sophisticated fighters known as the Huthis, in Yemen.
There is, however, one notable exception absent from this coalition: the western media. In Syria, the media generates sympathy for civilians in order to discredit Assad; in Yemen, on the other hand, the coalition supports the government. Surely, if the truth about the situation there were to leak out, it would show the ‘allies’ for what they truly are. It would point the finger of atrocities straight at the west. It would show that WE are to blame (since the Huthis have no air-force.) So while massive resources go into scripting the overthrow of Assad in Syria and setting all sorts of traps for him (Ghouta, Khan Sheikoun, barrel bombs – because he has helicopters, etc…) the people of Yemen are forgotten and their images are forever put away, never to be shown for what they are.
*** WARNING — The following contains VERY GRAPHIC CONTENT ***
As Russia’s Sergey Glazyev said, “As soon as we and China dump the dollar, it will be the end of the US’ military might…” Keep that in mind as you read the following.
China’s current credit crisis causes concern for the world’s economies, but not for China. China can amass all the debt it wants in order to finance its economic revolution and the New Silk Road. There is no limit because the money it is using is free money. This is why they support shadow banking, why they lend enormous amounts to institutions, corporations, entrepreneurs, and citizens; it’s not their money they are lending. They are using their manufacturing sector to pull as much cash as possible out of the west and using that to finance their future. Their own foreign debt is financed by Americans paying interest on obligations. Even their US holdings were financed with American money. Trillions of dollar-store knick-knacks can buy a lot of T-bills. Merry Christmas.
Once they have squeezed all the blood they can out of the dollar, they have no need for the US anymore. This is when they will start calling in their US debt, gradually at first, but accelerating until the dollar is out of breath and collapses, well short of the finish line. This will kill the US dollar, and remove its ‘reserve’ status.
America owes China about $1 trillion, give or take, and owes Japan about $1.1 trillion. Japan is very close to China, both physically and culturally (in many respects – much closer than it is to America in any case.) This will become important in the near-future.
Eric Clapton – Nobody Knows You (3:19)
“The United States allowed China to become one of its biggest bankers because the American people enjoy low consumer prices. Selling debt to China funds federal government programs that allow the U.S. economy to grow. It also keeps U.S. interest rates low. But China’s ownership of the U.S. debt is shifting the economic balance of power in its favor. …Owning U.S. Treasury notes helps China’s economy grow by keeping its currency weaker than the dollar. It keeps Chinese exports cheaper than U.S. products. …China would not call in its debt all at once. If it did so, the demand for the dollar would plummet like a rock.”
America, as it turns out, is at China’s mercy. China and Russia have become very close, best buds, if you will. The New Silk Road is a plan to bring the Chinese economy to Europe’s doorstep. Beijing and Moscow are connected by a rail line which passes through Kazakhstan. Russia now controls most of the energy going into Europe through pipelines that run (or are being built) through Turkey. Turkey has a virtual stranglehold on the EU because it will have all the pipelines supplying European energy running through its territory as well as having control of the Euphrates river which delivers water to the middle-east. Because of Russian military strength, Turkey listens to Russia. Saud will soon see (or already does) that it makes a lot more sense to sell their oil to China and Europe, and now that Russia can protect them in the middle-east, they have no need for America anymore, nor Israel, for that matter. The petro-dollar will die the same death, America will leave the middle-east once and for all, and Israel will stop settling Arab land, one way or another. They will never have felt so alone. ISIS will be eradicated in short order, to boot.
Once the dollar is crippled, the stock markets will obviously take a nose-dive, but here’s where the insidious part of the plan goes into action – all western investors will be wiped out in one fell swoop. Sure lots of slick investors have a bearish hedging strategy against a Chinese credit crunch, but just think about it. If you are bullish and bet long stocks or dollars or whatever, you will lose it all; but even if you are bearish, what will you be paid with, dollars? Sure you will win all your bets, but your dollar rewards will then be worthless, too… and I haven’t even mentioned derivatives.
There will be nowhere left to turn. Only stackers will be able to eat, and only those heavily invested in crypto-currencies will manage to keep up their standards of living… in another country, of course.
In this new reverse alchemy, defenestration would become a popular pastime and paper gold would turn into lead, one bullet at a time.
Europe will suffer greatly as their currencies collapse, and Saudi and Russian energy will be very expensive (Saud has to make up all that money they’ve lost trying to kill US shale,) but they could still pull through. They might even sell a lot of luxury cars to the new billionaires in the east. Canada could also survive, as it could simply trade one global hegemon for another and sell its resources to China, instead. A very weak dollar would be good for exports, after all.
America, on the other hand, would finally be punished for all its bull-y-ing as city after city would very swiftly be turned into so many Detroits.
America would be rid of its arrogant bull’, and bears would once again roam free, smirking.
If anything ever goes wrong with the Chinese economy, they always have the option of selling their American holdings (T-bills) despite the fact that this would weaken USD.
The BIS, since its reporting is lagged, can provide cover for secret Chinese plans to crush the USD.
“This collapse in foreign exposure to China is confirmed by Bank of International Settlements (“BIS”), although this data is only to q3 2016.”
“The forced deleveraging of China’s WMP-driven excess was not helped overnight by disappointing trade data as both import and export growth slumped.”
“The question now is not if China’s economy will slow, but rather how fast,” Mr Frieda added.
If ever there was a good time to sell some US assets, now might be it.
Eurasia may be a new term all Americans will be forced to learn.
The Euro’s collapse may well be due to Turkey’s geo-political shift.
China’s debt crisis is no big deal, they’ll just liquidate their US holdings.
Kremlin advisor Sergey Glazyev reveals ‘cure for US aggression’
“The more aggressive the Americans are, the sooner they will see the final collapse of the dollar and by getting rid of the dollar this would be the only way for victims of American aggression to stop this onslaught. As soon as we and China dump the dollar, it will be the end of the US’ military might…”
“In objective terms, they are conducting a global hybrid war [an American invention, btw] and in subjective terms, this war is aimed at us. Moreover, as it always happens when a global leader is changed, the war is for control over rimland nations. During WWI and WWII, Britain acted as an instigator in a bid to keep its global leadership. Now the United States is doing the same. And Trump expresses these interests,” he said.”
Turkey is turning its back on the west which will have disastrous consequences for the US dollar and all of the EU’s central banks. The quadrillion dollar derivatives market is about to become the world’s biggest eraser, rubbing out the US and EU economy in one blow. Turkey controls all the ME oil flowing into Europe and most of the water flowing into the ME.
News conference following Russian-Turkish talks
“…expansion of trade and investment exchanges, and looked at the possibility of carrying out mutual settlements in our national currencies.”
“We continue our joint work on building the new gas pipeline Turkish Stream.” This pipeline is the first step in making the Ukraine obsolete as far as supplying Europe with Russian gas.
“We discussed Turkey’s first nuclear power plant in Akkuyu, in which Russia is investing a total of $22 billion.”
“A third of Russians taking breaks abroad over this May holiday period have chosen Turkey as their destination.”
Russia hits another home-run while NATO tucks its tail between its legs. More and more countries are saying NO to NATO, Finland being the latest.
“Syrian opposition forces are ready to implement Russia’s proposal on establishing four zones for reducing tensions. Most armed opposition groups have already agreed to take part in creating these territories, the leadership of Syria’s opposition delegation, which is heading to Kazakhstan’s capital of Astana for a new round of talks on Wednesday (see below,) told Izvestia. Russian armed forces should control the zones, the Syrian parliament said. However, Damascus has refused to accept the participation of UN forces.”
“…satisfaction with the adoption of a Memorandum on establishing de-escalation zones. They noted that its implementation by all sides would strengthen the ceasefire, improve the humanitarian situation, and on the whole promote the political settlement of the Syria crisis.”
Nazarbayev has openly called for an end to American hegemony through the reserve currency, wants the UN headquarters to be in Astana, and, oh yes, controls all the world’s LEU uranium, thanks in large part to Warren Buffet.
With Syria going Russia’s way, Turkey knows it better start playing nice with Asia. Russia controls over half of Turkey’s gas imports, and a third of its coal. It is also working out a deal to supply Turkey with the S-400 missile defense platform. The days of the petro-dollar are coming to an end.
“Ankara has decided to suspend its plan to become a member of the European Union… supported by the United States since 1987.”
Still, the US presses on with its belligerence, surrounding Russia with nuclear weapons, launching sanctions, gossiping all day on CNN, all with the goal of pushing Russia to launch a first-strike so it can retaliate and say, “You see… Russian aggression.” This is just silly because if Russia does launch a first strike, it won’t be with nukes, it will be to take out all American satellites, thus rendering all US missiles and defense systems useless. America cannot get astronauts to the ISS, nor can it get new satellites into space without Russian rockets. Russia controls space, therefore, it controls the battle-space.
“Mattis is to meet with President Dalia Grybauskaite next Wednesday to discuss strengthening security in Lithuania and the Baltic region, and bilateral cooperation.”
Lithuanian security? C’mon, just look at a map of Lithuania. Are they going to be attacked by Poland? The only territory in danger is a small part of the Russian Federation which Lithuania and Poland surround. Just another excuse for missiles to surround Russia. Bilateral cooperation with a country so small and remote, of course, means, “Do as we tell you.”
Is this an exercise in futility? You bet it is. It’s over, and Nero is tuning his fiddle.
Now you may ask yourselves why I quoted TASS, the Kremlin, Xinhua, and voltairenet.org & strategic-culture.org instead of mainstream western sources? It is for the simple fact that none of them have reported any of this.
Is there anyone left who can start a sentence with a word other than, “So”?
This article will be used as an example. Many more can be found.
Sixty-eight (68) sentences in the interview transcript included the word “so” in the first two words of that sentence. (“So”, “Yeah so”, and “And so”. “Also” was not counted.)
A few run-on sentences could also have been counted where the second sentence should have started, but weren’t.
Is this level of literacy acceptable coming from a professor of communications (she did it much more often than he did, although she is just an associate professor) and a journalist? (Scientists are especially vulnerable to this affliction, but they are not expected to have studied language.)
Should someone with this level of expertise (in her own field) be allowed to coin phrases which are then used as industry standards?
Another indicator of poor language skills is the use of the word “that” in place of the word “who,” as in, “The man THAT did the thing…” but this is so rampant as to be considered normal.
These are only the tip of the iceberg as far as poor language skills in the media go, but they serve as good examples. I am not alone in noticing this trend.
This from a research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute. “I have noticed that in my most recent focus groups I use the word ‘so’ rather excessively. Many of my sentences start with “So, …”, and the word also appears somewhat randomly in the middle of a sentence. Analysing the transcripts, this really gets on my nerves.”
Is this being used to manage or lead conversations, or is it just plain bad English? Either way, it’s annoying.
Semi-literate individuals should not be making (so much) money from their use of language. Like the semi-literate Jake Tapper who thinks ‘Mexican’ is a race… the dictionary definition of the term, in fact.
The dumbing-down of people and Orwellian double-speak both have their roots in this problem. The next step is changing or conflating the meaning of words, examples of which are so common that they need not be mentioned here.
Maybe ‘the most powerful man on Earth’ would be more appropriate. Let me explain.
Turkey and the EU have been in limbo now for almost thirty years. Turkey has wanted to join, but there have been doubts about its stability… well-founded doubts.
Recently, the west’s relationship with Turkey has soured. Erdogan has been playing both sides of the conflict in Syria. There is little doubt that he has sponsored mercenary forces to overthrow Assad, that he has moved Daesh oil, and that he has attacked both the Russians (by downing a Sukhoi) and the Americans in Syria:
It would seem that Turkey has said goodbye to its EU aspirations, and perhaps the EU has also:
“The European Union has warned that the bloc could redefine the entire status of its relations with Turkey in light of recent developments in the country and amid growing disputes between the two sides.”
As I have written in past articles, if Turkey looks to the west, America wins in the middle-east along with its allies Israel and Saud. They would essentially control all the pipelines through Turkey, the Euphrates river, and the Mediterranean. Assad would be ousted, eventually. The Russians would lose access to the Mediterranean, and would be blocked at the Bosporus. New terror groups would undoubtedly spring up to threaten Russia from Georgia and Chechnya. This would give the west more power over Ukraine and Crimea, where the focus would undoubtedly shift. The globalists would win, too, by the way.
If Turkey looks east then the New Silk Road will be a ‘fait accompli’ giving China land access to the EU and giving Russia more say about what happens near its borders (with Georgia and Ukraine.) New pipelines would be built to bring Iranian oil to markets in the EU. The China/Russia/Iran/Kazakhstan connection would win over India, in time, as well as Saudi Arabia. The price of oil in America could quadruple overnight, shale or no shale. Populism would soar across the west and the EU, and Assange would be free to leave the Ecuadoran embassy in London.
Turkey looking east would almost instantly save Assad, sever the links between America and Saud, which would lead to the destruction of the petro-dollar scheme, which would kill the US dollar, which would, in turn, bring down all the central banks in the EU. The world’s derivatives markets are highly sensitive, especially these days, to the effects of any downturns with the central banks, just ask
Douchebank (ahem) I mean Deutsche Bank. Actually, don’t; they’ve been very tight-lipped about the whole situation.
The entire derivatives market is worth an estimated 1 quadrillion dollars, and if anyone of its substantial pillars were to fall, well, let’s just say that things would not end well. If the whole thing fell apart, it would be the end of America, and the EU, as we know it.
So there we have it, Erdogan looking east would blow up the western world’s economy more assuredly than any bomb Russia could drop. Putin could end up beating the Americans simply by making nice with Erdogan. He wouldn’t even have to launch a missile. Good thing the west was thinking ahead, allowing a scapegoat like Trump, who would certainly be blamed, to win the white house.
Who’d have thought that the entire populist movement, the western banking system, and the fate of the western world, for that matter, depends not on Trump, or Le Pen, or on Farage, or even on Wilders, but rather on a paranoid dictator worth 1 quadrillion dollars headquartered in Turkey named Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and all so he can kill some Kurds?
Putin maybe, but he’s always been good at chess, and there ain’t no Bobby Fischers left.
It would appear that Turkey and Russia are indeed getting closer…
“Russia’s Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller said Wednesday that the energy giant will begin the offshore laying of the Turkish Stream pipeline in the second half of 2017 and plans to complete the construction of two legs by the end of 2019.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will meet face-to-face in Sochi on May 3 to discuss these and other matters. Clearly, the rapprochement since Turkey shot down a Russian jet is going well, much to the dismay of the west.
“I’m sure that those steps that we are taking together will change the fate of the whole region,” Erdogan said.”
And they lived happily ever after…
Follow up to this article is here.
The title of this article “Cremation Of Care” (9:41) comes from the name of the ceremony held at the Bohemian Grove every July where some of the most powerful people in the world come together for… well, for who knows what?! In front of a giant owl-god, Molech, the concept of care is burnt in effigy.
The image is of the Kindlifresser (child-eater) in the Swiss capitol of Bern, feasting on a sack full of children.
You will soon see how these two notions relate to the upcoming video.
Do you remember “Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man” (Part 1 – 53:35) in which John Perkins claims to have played a role in an alleged process of economic colonization of Third World countries?
Well, consider that the first chapter. This is the second chapter. It’s much worse.
(Original in Dutch, with English subtitles.)
On March 25th, everyone was encouraged to turn off the lights for Earth Hour.
We were told that we were doing the earth a favour. Turn off those bad electric lights, and light a candle to inspire others to do the same next year.
What a crock.
We were told to replace highly efficient and super clean hydro-generated electricity with sooty candles. Now, not all the countries in the world are as fortunate as we are (here in Canada) to have access to hydro-electric power, but even a gas-powered lawnmower engine is more efficient than an open flame burning a cotton wick. Cotton is made of carbon, after all, and burning it… well, you can guess the rest.
I’m not saying that carbon is bad for the planet – a better word might be ‘essential’ – but even if carbon were the GHG global-warming environment-killing enemy we are being told it is, should burning more of it be a symbol of our collective will to reduce its abundance in our atmosphere?
No wonder less and less people are paying attention to this mass-shaming claptrap.
“Fewer Torontonians shut off the lights for Earth Hour this year, Toronto Hydro reveals, but the city did see a 2.8 per cent drop in electricity demand.”
When people don’t even understand the very basic principles which underpin their most vehement beliefs, it’s probably time to pack it in. Carbon taxes, indeed. Sheesh!
They say that getting to the summit is only half the journey; you hafta’ make it back down again, too. It’s getting to be a pretty big drop.
How long do you think it’s gonna’ rain? Forever?
And what do you think will happen when it stops?
The greatest economic mind in America (supposedly) thinks she can keep the ball rolling indefinitely. Some, including Al Bartlett (1:13:53), would disagree.
I have written much over the last two years about US support for terrorist groups. I have also written about Kerry and Syria, Israel and Turkey, Saud and Wahhabism, the fact that Syria is not a divided democracy (there is no civil war there, and never has been – Assad has the support of his electorate,) (49:34) and that mercenaries from NATO have fomented the entire situation. I have stated that Russia, and Vlad Putin, really did save the world. It would seem I was not wrong.
If there is one story the world needs to hear about it is surely this one. As usual, the main-stream media dropped the ball (on purpose) on this next non-helicopter-delivered-bombshell. Please pass this on!!
John Kerry admits US support for terrorist groups in the Middle-East. War on Terror, indeed: (36:56)
As Voltairenet.org (Thierry Meyssan) writes,
“The support that Kerry offers to Daesh violates several UN resolutions and constitutes proof of his responsibility and that of Obama in the crimes against humanity committed by the terrorist organisation.”
And to think that the only thing which prevented him from becoming president of the USA was the election of George Bush.
It looks like both these guys, one democrat, one republican, both had the war on terror in their sights. And they say we have a choice. Skull and Bones members might, but we sure don’t. Even the Nobel Peace prize recipient Barack Obama said the USA supports ISIL and nobody batted an eyelash. They’re all on the same side, and it isn’t the one we’re on. Maybe the only reason they killed Osama bin Laden (if they did) was so that they could take over his organization.
Now let’s see what happens in Ukraine once Turkey rejects NATO and takes sides with Russia, China, and Khazakstan to join the New Silk Road. The end of the American empire is upon us. Let’s just hope they don’t drag us all down with them. Long gold, long Rubles, long VIX, watch for oil prices to spike in Europe, and stock up on supplies – this could get even uglier.
With the past year’s electoral comedy festival coming to a close today, and with Obama’s economy (let’s face it) in the toilet, is it any surprise that the Dow went up this morning? Futures are up, PMs are up, even CNN’s ratings are up, hope is on the rise, and change is in the air… change not even Obama could have foreseen.
Whether you voted for a billionaire, a billionaire wanna-be, or you stayed home and didn’t vote (majority,) you have just witnessed the most vitriolic fight ever to have rocked the airwaves on CNN. But was it, as is all the other ‘news’ on CNN, all just a show? One of your candidates would have been beholden to Goldman-Sachs, the other will be sipping lemonade with them at his country club(s.) Some choice. Some democracy.
Billionaires have been moving their money out of the markets and into gold for the last year or so. Out of risky investments (they are all risky these days) and into wealth storage goes the ‘smart’ money (I would call it the ‘informed’ money, but I digress) whereas the rest of us are being lulled into buying stock at the (obvious) top of the market. Someone is gonna’ make a killing, and somebody else is about to get fleeced… usually the sheep.
More and more experts are hedging against a catastrophic crash in the markets – they say it will make 2008 look like a minor hiccup – and betting on $5,000 gold, and many have been saying this for some time. Meanwhile, the manipulated markets are levitating on fumes. The crash is being postponed. Someone wants Obama to go out looking like a hero. Easy when unemployment numbers don’t include those who’ve stopped looking for work. Unemployment, by some estimates, could be as high as 20%, and with the national debt growing exponentially, population rates dropping, a soon-to-be-retired population aging fast, tax-havens for corporations, a growing prison population, and a bankrupt pension industry, the tax base is falling fast as spending (especially military) is going through the roof and government is growing faster and faster every year. Hell, even the cost of presidential libraries is more than doubling every term.
I used to think Trump was just thrown in to the mix in order to divide the Republican vote and get HRC elected. Could be, but Trump really was an anomaly. Did he really take the country by surprise, or were there those who had a plan all along? I’m starting to think that when Trump was first being seen as a champion for the people, others were taking advantage of the situation to further their own interests.
The economy could not be held up on ‘good news’ forever, they needed a way out of the downwardly-spiraling miasma beyond blaming the weather, or at least someone to pin it on. So the economy was propped-up for the exit of the Nobel prize-winner, and once Trump is inaugurated, the wheels will be allowed to come off. The end of 2017 could see the VIX at 100!
Since Brexit and talk of other countries leaving the EU, the big debate around the planet this year has been about one thing – globalism versus the dangers of populism. What if globalists are using Trump as a fall guy, a scapegoat to blame the coming crash on? What if they have their fingers on the markets just waiting to pull the plug? What better way to defeat populism than by using its own best champion to bring it down? “You see? We told you that he was dangerous, didn’t we? We told you globalism would prevail. Now show us your papers.” And that’s just the economic side… there’s also this situation in the middle-east involving Russia, Saud, Turkey, et al, but that’s another story.
Would it surprise me? No. Nothing, at this point, would surprise me.
The media was building the foundation of the narrative from the moment Trump won the election. Bloomberg was quick to publish its rather hilariously skewed propaganda on the matter, asserting that Trump was lucky to inherit an economy in ascendance and recovery because of the fiscal ingenuity of Barack Obama. This is of course utter nonsense. Obama and the Fed have created a zombie economy rotting from the inside out, nothing more. But, as Bloomberg noted rightly, any downturn within the system will indeed be blamed on the Trump administration.
Fortune Magazine, adding to the narrative, outlined the view that the initial stock rally surrounding Trump’s election win was merely setting the stage for a surprise market crash.
I continue to go one further than the mainstream media and say that the Trump administration is a giant cement shoe designed (deliberately) to drag conservatives and conservative principles down into the abyss as we are blamed by association for the financial calamity that will occur on Trump’s watch.
Personally, I think it less about left vs. right and more about us vs. them. It’s a class thing. Both conservatives and liberals will suffer through the next major crisis, but populism will be pummeled.
The Coming War on China
For those who can afford paying to watch it, I strongly recommend the links here.
For the rest, the film is available on putlocker.
American war/fear-mongering against Russia and China has something in common: neither Russia nor China has a history of invading neighbouring countries. America, on the other hand, has a long and rich history of empire-building, as does their parent state England.
The film touches on a great many interconnected topics (nuclear testing, political uprising, America’s pivot to Asia, etc.) and provides a very clear insight into the world we can expect, as well as the one we have chosen, for so long, to ignore.
John Pilger is one of the very best people who has ever graced this planet. His body of work is of great historical importance. This film is another outstanding documentary by one of the last remaining genuine journalists.
The EU has suspended talks on whether or not to include Turkey.
Brazil and South Africa’s currencies were simultaneously annihilated – like Greece’s was, now BRICS will show what it’s really all about: the New Silk Road. [I have covered this topic several times in other articles.]
If the USA is in Syria, Turkey belongs to Europe. If Russia is in Syria, Turkey belongs to Asia.
Additionally, Turkey controls all the on-land pipelines into southern Europe, and most of the water into the ME. (Ukraine controls the rest of the pipelines into Europe.)
You can’t make war in the Middle East without Egypt and you can’t make peace without Syria.
[Wikiquotes says that the above quote remains unsourced; other sites disagree. Whether he said it or not, it is a prevalent idea, and it makes the point.]
Recent reports have Egypt going one step beyond simply supporting Al-Assad to providing Syria with pilots and generals.
This seems like a bit of fake news. Maybe there was a translation problem from the original article.
Despite denying the military facts behind the reporting, the fact that Al-Sisi openly showed support for Al-Assad (instead of just the Syrian people – as he had previously done) means that the US’s former puppet/ally has just rejected American hegemony in favour of a pan-Asian alliance between China, Russia, Kazakhstan, India, Iran…
With Egypt (long-time foe of Israel) and Turkey (lynchpin of Eurasia) joining the ‘dark side’ and bringing Syria with them, America will be surrounded and will either be stuck in Iraq for a very long time, or they will go home, like the Russians did, from Afghanistan. Either way, Saudi and Israel are shaking in their boots at the prospect.
The opposite of a conspiracy theorist is a pundit, in the same way as the opposite of a terrorist is a freedom fighter; they are both killers.
If one visits a site devoted to mathematics, only empirical fact will be found. If one visits CNN.com, for example, 90% of the content is nothing but opinion put forward by a panel of pundits. How is this different than a conspiracy site? The only difference is whose side they are on. Much of the time, their facts are just as dubious.
The trust which people seem to have had in the media has all but evaporated. Despite all their differences, both Liberals and Conservatives agree that the news (if we can still call it that) is anything but impartial. Even journalists (like Ted Koppel) are saying that the news media has acted inappropriately. This speaks to the problem of media consolidation, of mergers & acquisitions, and to the problems we’ve all been warned of when too few people control too many sources of information: It becomes very easy to sway the apathetic populace.
Newspapers, and journalism in general, were the first to go. Newspapers have been closing down… no, dropping like flies is a better phrase. I think it started on 9/11/2001 when the FBI claimed that nineteen Saudi men were responsible for something they had nothing to do with, and when one man in particular, who was never officially implicated, was blamed by everyone but the FBI. Then came the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. By this time, the media was so far gone into the unchecked ‘facts’ that they could no longer go back. They were complicit in their collusion and war-mongering and race-baiting with government and could, therefore, not retrace their position for fear of loss of their reputation. They hedged their positions with news stories exposing minor government lies at the expense of the whoppers.
The declining trend in the newspaper industry has been attributed to the rise of the internet, but I’m not so sure. That might be backwards. Maybe, because the news media stopped doing its job, people turned to the internet. When journalists are told what to write, they stop looking for stories. When that happens, people notice and begin to lose trust in the system. News turns into propaganda. This always precedes the rise of authoritarianism. This time, despite being better disguised, the people started to see through the veil. This eroded trust in the media, trust in long-standing institutions, and trust in the government (which aligned itself very closely with the propaganda machine.) It also raised the question, “If everything is fine with democracy in the USA, why does the media feel the need to lie to us?”
The financial crisis of 2007/2008 was the next step in the collusion between the elected and the falsely and self-proclaimed defenders of democracy, the press. Obviously the headlines were wrong. Nobody, thanks to the subsequent rise of political correctness, said anything for fear of reprisals. The Patriot Act was named thusly, not because it was a particularly patriotic piece of legislation, rather, because patriots would be targeted. This was the opening salvo in the war between populism and globalism. It now became illegal to take a position contrary to the establishment view.
Politicians should not ask why we do not trust them, they have always lied. The advent of the internet and of cell-phone technology makes this easier to prove. The press, however, has always been trusted; and now that we know it did not merit such trust, we are starting to walk-back our position towards them. It turns out that there has been very little truth in the media, even going back as far as Cronkite. Maybe it started with Kennedy, maybe it has been going on for far longer than that.
The ‘Official Story’, no matter what it references, must always be verified lest democracy be lost in the trade. When the news stops doing its job, we must rely on other sources, namely, each other. Rumour has had to replace journalism, the people have nothing else with which to do the job.
Do you feel vulnerable? You need look no further than the current election reporting to know that something isn’t right. Edward R. Murrow is doing cartwheels.
Donald Sterling, of ‘Los Angeles Clippers Owner’ fame, was branded a racist. He had been recorded making racist remarks; he admitted to them and apologized. His English grammar skills are mediocre, at best. After his explanation, he came out looking very bad.
Some people, whose family smoked in the house while they were children, became addicted to nicotine before they ever started smoking. It was just ‘in the air.’ Do you see where I’m going with this?
Donald Sterling was raised in a racist environment (as was everybody else back then) and even if it was a passively racist environment, his father would have been raised in a much stricter one. He knew it was wrong, and he hid it publicly, he tried to suppress his urge to smoke. He never explained himself in this way. If he had, he might still own the Clippers.
I’m not defending Donald Sterling, but he was an old man, and his talk would have been normal at the country club. ‘I don’t mind them, per se, just don’t bring them home.’
However, when refering to how tough HRC’s father was, phrases like, “…but it was a different time back then…” and, “…he was old-fashioned…” sprung up apologetically.
Trump finds himself in very much the same position, only, it relates to sexual harassment against women, which is now a very touchy subject. The problem is that it wasn’t considered sexual harassment at the time, it was tolerated and even encouraged to a large extent, so why should he be held to that standard? Some of the women who allowed it, in order to further their careers in a male-dominated world, benefited greatly and ‘played the game.’ That should not need to happen in a civilized society, but then again, sex sells… it always has.
And a paid escort suing him for kissing her?!?
It’s hard to blame a billionaire for indulging; you just know that their tastes for exotic things and experiences often lead them to debauch. Even a sixteen year old with a Ferrari will be tired of ‘just’ banging super-models by his mid-twenties. When one can afford anything, what won’t they be tempted to try? How far will they go?
He is a braggart and pompous and spoiled. He should own it more. So should Sterling have. He tends to talk in hyperbole. He gets picked on a lot for this, but as for Donald Trump’s language skills, I think the man truly has a great deal of trouble translating what’s in his head into words. He didn’t study much English at Wharton. I suspect many politicians and public figures have this same problem. I’m not saying that all his foibles are attributable to his poor communication skills, there are some old vestiges in there, of times long past when you could dry hump a girl on roller-skates while doing a line on the table. Nobody cared what you did. Everybody has done something embarrassing. Billionaires just have more opportunities to, and the spotlight on them when it does. But compared to all the allegations against the Clintons from Whitewater to Pay-to-Play and the implications thereof, he’s just a street-smart buffoon, she’s a diabolical lawyer, and she is very good at what she does. So was Madoff, until he got caught.
[A no-fly zone in Syria (which HRC supports and Trump does not) will undoubtedly lead to WW3 with the Russians.]
Still, when pundits misinterpret an already flawed message, the results can be very far from those intended.
Trump’s a businessman who takes advantage of the laws in place, and has had to compete with others all his life. But now he’s put himself on the other side of that. He knows what needs fixing. I’m not an apologist for any of the stupid things he’s said, I just think that he needed help in framing his very general ideas. It took forty-three minutes to get a minute of locker-talk out of him. He was bragging and I think he probably did grab a lot of women; I’m not condoning that, but it was a far lesser offence forty years ago. And he has always skirted the law, as a rule, always seeking the greatest advantage. Isn’t that sort of thing supposed to be revered, or are people so depressed economically that anyone who gets more than their share is vilified. Is this a struggle over capitalism itself, or rather just our version of capitalism today? Implied socialism ??
I don’t think he’s as radical as they make him out to be, and yes, the media and the establishment show great bias, but it really shines a light on the people on either side. The Hutu knew who the Tutsi were… and vice-versa.
The issue of the American election, and of Brexit before, and the colour revolutions throughout the ME, and even the situation in Ukraine have all led to the inevitable binary showdown: Globalism vs. Populism.
Is this the start of WCW (World Class War?) Or are we avoiding a war with Russia/China/Iran/Kazakhstan? Which way will the Saudis align themselves? Is Syria the tipping point? What the hell is Trump gonna’ do about that? He has to withdraw pressure on Syria immediately, put Erdogan in his place (impossible – the Turks have had their land much longer than ‘Merca’s been a country – it controls all the pipelines and most of the water in the ME,) make nice with the Russians by withdrawing NATO and removing missiles, leave the South China Sea, and withdraw into a protectionist shell, like Iceland, saving the world from globalism.
I don’t pretend to know what’s about to happen to the world, but a lot of people feel like it’s not going to be good; it’s as if all the animals know that the earthquake is coming and start to scatter. But where is there left to go?
Gold is one place left to go. Silver is another.
With all the hoopla surrounding COP 21 in Paris, you’d think there would be some media coverage of COP 22 in Marrakech. Not a word. That always makes me nervous. Huge deals signed in the dark always will.
I’ve always wondered how the cities get picked for these events. Today, Julian Assange let slip that King Mohammed VI of Morocco has given the Clinton Global Initiative twelve million dollars (24:52). On the other hand, that means nothing. Maybe there is a better reason to hold it there. There is a lot of dissent in Morocco, at the moment, and might prove to be a good staging area against populism in Africa. That’s a legitimate reason. You see, not everything has to be a conspiracy.
Then again, there could be more to it than that… there always is.
BOMBSHELL – NOAA whistleblower says Karl et al. “pausebuster” paper was hyped, broke procedures
“In an exclusive interview, Dr Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data – the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) – of ‘insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximised warming and minimised documentation… in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming pause, rushed so that he could time publication to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy’.
Dr Bates was one of two Principal Scientists at NCEI, based in Asheville, North Carolina.
Official delegations from America, Britain and the EU were strongly influenced by the flawed NOAA study as they hammered out the Paris Agreement – and committed advanced nations to sweeping reductions in their use of fossil fuel and to spending £80 billion every year on new, climate-related aid projects.”
Another must watch video, this one features world-renowned journalist and film-maker John Pilger, interviewing Julian Assange about the recent email dump.
A concise summation of the email question, the thread that runs through them all, and why it is so important.
The story behind this, and ignoring Weiner’s sexting (coulda’ been a set-up – man’s got his kinks – distraction piece,) Anthony Weiner seemed to be some sort of errand-boy for the Clintons. A subordinate with those perversions says much about their level of tolerance to such things. He is married to ‘Huma’. This is the real story. Huma Abedin’s mother and father are very interesting characters as well, and Huma’s rise was exceptional. Working for HRC is the only job she’s ever had in the USA. Her husband was Bill Clinton’s introduction. I’m not sure that ‘arranged marriage’ is the appropriate term here, but…
It was opined that a vagina nearly took out Bill Clinton. It now seems that a Weiner might take out Hillary. Bill Maher will then murder Mr. Weiner, presumably on air.
Clinton knew that Saud and Qatar financed terror, had terrible human rights records, treated women very badly, tortured prisoners… but accepted their cash and favours to the Clinton Global Initiative – which appears to be a giant money-laundering fraud. Even Chomsky said NGOs like them were the real problem in Haiti, although he didn’t name them.
Huma worked by HRC’s side for twenty years, she knew everything. Did she keep the back-ups on Weiner’s ‘puter for protection, as some sort of way to avoid jail? Some say she’s a planted spy or that HRC is really a secret muslim or a witch or a pervert?!? Well, at this point, nothing would surprise me. Would it shock me? Sure, but it wouldn’t surprise.
Of course, I will not go into the more sordid details of occult practice and paederasty said by some to be enjoyed by the Clinton inner circle, and really, the entire Washington inner circle, for that matter – see the film, “Conspiracy of Silence” (55:13). No surprise where Bill is concerned, but HRC’s involvement brings it to another level, entirely. You’d want your eyes wide shut for that.
Now, what if HRC wins? A woman whose mentor was KKK chapter founder and senator who tried to prevent the passing of the Civil Rights Act, Robert Byrd. For one, Bill might be appointed US ambassador to the UN. That’s been their plan all along according to Larry Nichols. That’s where the real money is after all, Brussels. (see the documentary “The Brussels Business.”)
After his term, Justin Trudeau could be appointed Secretary General. António Guterres only had to wreck Portugal’s economy to get the job, and severe economic times are foreseen for Canada. Wrecking your own countries’ economy is the ultimate test of loyalty. His father, Pierre, privatized money creation in Canada, I wonder what JT has in store. He has the drive, he’s definitely going for it. It’s just a matter of time. Youngest SecGen ever? Who else would it be in eight to ten years after Guterres? (Surely not a woman. GAWD!! /sarc) Say it ain’t so…
Kerry’s got some ‘splainin’ to do:
MUST WATCH: American peace delegation goes to Syria, sees opposite of what MSM reports. No civil war in Syria; Syria united under Assad.
See here for clarification on the barrel bomb question (by the obviously biased reporter who didn’t identify herself.)
Here is Vanessa Beeley’s blog.
Here is Eva Bartlett’s blog.
And see here for some back-up from Global Research.
This article is not about texting.
Most anthropologists agree, at least, this is my understanding of that which I learned in school, that despite weak defenses, humans evolved to dominate the world because of big brains; more sophisticated might be a better term, or it might not.
Many animals have bigger brains than we.
It has been shown that animals are capable of language and that their math skills are far superior to ours. Dolphins and gorillas especially, but who knows how many animals can outwit us? IQ tests are said to be unfair because it is difficult to design them without some cultural bias. How different, then, must an animal’s IQ environment be? Street-smarts over book-smarts, one might say. Who’s to say how many species are more cleverer than us?
The problem, perhaps, isn’t one of intelligence but simply communication.
Some would say that the reason we took over was our thumbs (opposable digits.) Thumbs allowed for tool-making which quickly devolved into an arms-race that goes on to this day.
But, other animals have thumbs, too. So, why not them? Maybe they know love.
Maybe they had the good sense to know that ‘less is more.’ They traveled light. They had the power to defend themselves, but they lacked the desire to dominate, to take everything over. They saw that growth (1 of 8 – 09:17) would only lead to their eventual demise. They had the courage to face the world and its dangers, to do things the hard way, without seeking to insulate themselves more and more from the hardships which make life interesting. Are they foolish or wise? Asian cultures consider that animals kept in captivity are ultimately happy, like they won the lottery of life. The western view differs, thinking it cruel to deprive animals of their freedom (to face danger,) although western culture, strangely enough, reflects this way of thinking by isolating itself from the ‘dangerous’ natural world. Is it in our very essence to imprison ourselves and to weaken ourselves to the point of total dependence? Desmond Morris thinks so.
Instead of spending hours growing food we can eat, we now spend hours growing grass which we throw away. That’s a big red flag.
So maybe there is something else which allows us to dominate, another quality which permits us to lord over all we see, to the point of writing it into our gospels. Maybe it’s a moral quality or a primal arrogance, maybe we are just so physically weak that we have become a paranoid species. “Humanity No# 1 !” Discipline through fear seems pretty natural to humans on many levels.
As Gunnery Sergeant Hartman said, “It is a hard heart that kills.” I would distinguish that it is either a hard heart, or an empty stomach. Killing everyday to eat makes one a pacifist by nature. You don’t want to have to kill during your breaks, too. Killing is hard and it’s dangerous. You only do it when absolutely necessary. Does never killing anything besides a mosquito or a spider cause a buildup of whatever it is that got us here, in the first place? Does not killing result in us not being able to control the urge to kill? Do we need to kill? That would explain a lot. Maybe it isn’t the killing we need, maybe it’s the risk of being killed. That would explain extreme sports.
Maybe it was the combination of language, technology, and hubris that got us here. Maybe it was dumb luck. I wonder what animals must think of our stewardship. After seeing an interesting episode of the CBC’s “The Nature of Things,” I thought about [when a translation device is invented] what kind of questions animals will want to ask us. I also wonder about the answers we will have for them. I also wonder if the government will be involved to put the proper ‘spin’ on the first official inter-species communication. Government, industry, the military, and religion will probably all be represented and involved.
It might be good practice for when the aliens arrive. Come to think of it, it’s probably just hubris… and it’s all down-hill from here.
…pocket change that is, is changing.
One dollar coins (Loonies) were popular as a forgotten novelty; two-dollar coins (Toonies) were not. I remember working in the service industry back in those days. Everyone complained about the amount of change they would have to carry around in those money belts. The money belts grew more robust. Waiters today are in for a surprise.
The nickel and the quarter will be eliminated in favour of a twenty cent piece, called a “Twenny.” (I don’t know that for sure, in fact, I just coined the phrase. Nevertheless, I think it sounds catchy. In France they are called “des pièces de vingt centimes” but then everything takes more words to say in French… maybe that’s what makes it romantic.)
This move, on it’s own, will likely lighten waiters’ loads (and necessitate another re-design of the money belt,) but there’s more.
The five dollar bill will be replaced by a coin. $5 bills represent just under 2% of the Canadian money supply. [It won’t be long now for the tens.] A two-hundred dollar bill will also be introduced. And all this for 2017. What ever happened to banning the ‘C’-note? In the cancellation of a bill, is a demand for it not being created? As they cancel more and more bills, and create new ones, won’t they be feeding the monster they wish to slay? Getting people to hoard cash is not good for banks. The Bank of Canada eliminated the thousand-dollar bill in 2000 for this purpose, and put the blame squarely on drug-runners and money-launderers. Movement of physical cash is closely watched at the borders and at all points of entry. Are they developing cover for a digital monetary system? Are they really going to ban cash? These recent actions lead us to believe that they will not, but sometimes an event must be manufactured with nothing but ‘good intent’ behind it acting as a catalyst to ensure it’s quick demise. Kissinger might find it easier to pop the balloon rather than let it deflate on its own. That would require intervention. Intervention always incurs cost.
Either this brings us closer towards the European system, or the people at the Mint are preparing for inflation. You don’t think of the economy in the same way if it costs a million of something to buy a loaf of bread. Being a millionaire is easy in some places. Debasing currency (by lowering the cost of production,) even fiat, always leads to inflation. The central banks have been struggling to find a way to increase inflation to keep this sham system afloat, and it looks like this turned out to be their best-worst option. Will this replace the need for ‘helicopter money‘ or is it just an addition? Perhaps it’s all been scripted in order to introduce a global [?digital?] currency. Either way, UNPA member Justin Trudeau is paving the way for his ascension through the UN. [Read the “Welcome” message in the UNPA link.]
Portugal had to wreck its economy for the former Prime Minister (1995-2002) António Manuel de Oliveira Guterres (a notable socialist, ECFR, and Club of Madrid member – not to mention his long list of distinctions) to be elected Secretary General of the UN. That’s quite a cover charge for entry to the big boys’ club. I wonder if it was on a dare or a bet, or if it was just an initiation, of sorts. With that against him, his loyalty would be assured. Amongst other positions, he had previously served as the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees.
Is Canada next? The Asian money doesn’t seem to think so, but the Canadian government’s recent action in the Vancouver housing market was a clear signal for Asian markets to ‘keep away.’ The manipulation practiced by Wells-Fargo, Shkreli, Volkswagen, and the gold market pale by comparison. Where’s RICO when you need him?
It looks like the Lone Ranger is gonna’ need some more silver bullets, and gold ones; or maybe Dorothy could just click her heels… rubies and sapphires might have some value, but emeralds are not a good investment.
“Aversion wee have for things, not onely which we know have hurt us; but also that we do not know whether they will hurt us, or not.”
As with all military forces, where there is a significant advantage, be it technological, logistical, geographical, financial, etc., wars of aggression are always waged by the more powerful. Mice do not roar. Knowing that international power ebbs and flows, and that the militarized police act as the glue, they take it while they can. Holding it proves harder. Holding and expanding is the ultimate goal. Hundreds, no thousands, from Alexander, Caesers, Attila, Napoleon, Rothschild, Hitler, have all wanted to rule the world. Who’s to say nobody wants to do that anymore.
TPTB have always wanted a slave population to do their bidding. They have always been at war with the lower class. They have wealth, and we have numbers. They get richer, develop better weapons, live longer, and we just multiply. They’ve never been richer, but they’ve neither ever been so outnumbered. All international treaties, the UN, world governments, Ngo’s, trade deals, environmental legislation, the legal system, industry, the military, etc. are structured to keep us occupied (productive) and distracted, and to die older. Don’t rock the boat and you get to have toys; start thinking for yourself and it’s time for re-education. The more docile the population and the more loyal the soldiers (by love or by fear) the better the odds they will be triumphant in an aggressive war.
The US spends more money on ‘defense’ than any other country in the world. It is assumed they have the best military. They also spend more on health care than anyone else. They do not, however, have the best health care. But they THINK they do.
So what if, while trying to hold on to hegemony, they do attack Russia overtly thinking they have the advantage? What if Russia calls their bluff? What if Russia isn’t so backwards? They keep hacking the US, after all. If Russia and China can hack the US, all their drones belong to ‘them’. Size doesn’t matter if you can just pull the plug. And it ain’t just the military; it could be demographics, it could be the banking sector, debt, cyber, stocks, disease, natural disaster… any one of these things could beat them before they get out of the gate.
And what if THEY see an advantage?
The problem here is that US military superiority is only perceived to be so, the reality is, though greatly speculated on, unknown. What if they perceive an advantage where there is none? We’re still the ones doing their bidding, but there might be a lot less of us after something like that. That’s how much they hate us… they’re willing to go live underground for a generation if it will just rid them of us. Like when you have to move out of your house when you fumigate, well it’s something like that.
I wonder if there are any underground cities yet…
L. Ashwell Wood, 1950
Like barrel bombs and helicopters, everything else is also untrue, on both sides. There’s their public angry face, their country club polite face, and their, “Let’s do business.” face.
Assad has been accused, by John Kerry and everybody else, of using chemical weapons against his citizens by way of helicopters to drop chemical-filled barrel bombs, and lacing artillery shells with toxins (like depleted uranium? – no, that’s a US thing – and don’t get me started on anthrax…)
Even Wikipedia is in on it:
Barrel bombFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A barrel bomb is an improvised unguided bomb, sometimes described as a flying IED (improvised explosive device). They are typically made from a large barrel-shaped metal container that has been filled with high explosives, possibly shrapnel, oil or chemicals as well, and then dropped from a helicopter or airplane. Due to the large amount of explosives (up 1,000 kilograms (2,200 lb)), their poor accuracy and indiscriminate use in populated civilian areas (including refugee camps), the resulting detonations have been devastating. Critics have characterised them as weapons of terror and illegal under international conventions.
Lots of options on the content, not many options on the delivery system.
“…indiscriminate use…” but by whom?
“Accordingly, we have taken unprecedented steps to declassify and make facts available to people who can judge for themselves.” -John Kerry
There might be some problems with his story.
What does ‘declassify’ mean, in this context? Invent?
Official U.S. government report on the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government against rebels on Aug. 21.The document proposes a possible motive for the attack — a desperate effort to push back rebels from several areas in the capital’s densely packed eastern suburbs — and also suggests that the high civilian death toll surprised and panicked senior Syrian officials, who called off the attack and then tried to cover it up.
While unusually detailed, the assessment does not include photographs, recordings or other hard evidence to support its claims. Nor does it offer proof to back up the administration’s assertion that top-ranking Syrian officials — possibly including President Bashar al-Assad — were complicit in the attack.
The material, prepared by senior intelligence officials, was said to reflect the judgments of the CIA, National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies involved in gathering information on the Syrian conflict. Using understated phrasing typical of bureaucratic reports, it asserts with “high confidence” that the Assad government launched a chemical weapons attack, using what it said was “nerve agent,” a class of chemical munitions that includes sarin.
Oh, and about sarin gas, the [US] military variant is known as VX.
As it turns out, there was some truth in that report, and it was all backwards. The barrel bombs and the gas and all the WMDs are coming from the West-backed rebel side. Saddam got his chemicals from the US (ask Rumsfeld what Iraq was about covering up,) as did other allies in the region. Kerry didn’t really do anything about it either, apart from shaking his fist quite a bit.
[Next three photos are from a VT article; commentary is mine.]
These men are not Syrian government forces, they are US-backed rebels. They are not packing the bombs with explosives or the man on the left would not be smoking.
Hmm… but it can’t be the rebels. How do they drop those things if they don’t have helicopters?
All the newspapers said the same thing all along, “unguided barrel bombs” dropped from Assad’s helicopters (’cause he’s the only one who had helicopters.) Remember?
“Seems to be coming from the clubhouse.” With that golf cart in the background, there’s gotta’ be at least a couple of white guys around… maybe four. “Just look what those Assad bastards did to the practice green. War is hell!”
Fighting has intensified around Aleppo and its neighboring provinces since the government sealed off the final route into rebel-controlled neighborhoods of the city. The United Nations said the encirclement of rebel-held areas of deeply divided Aleppo traps nearly 300,000 residents, making it the largest besieged area in war-torn Syria.
The rebels have launched a counteroffensive, clashing with government forces on a number of fronts. They detonated at least one large tunnel bomb underneath a government position on the southern outskirts of Aleppo on Tuesday evening, in a renewed attempt to break the government’s siege on the city’s east.
Smoke in the sky; for defense or for targeting, or for an alibi? Were they setting tire fires around hospitals?
All these articles use many terms differently. They also suggest that west-backed rebels (USA’s ISIL, al Qaeda, al Nusra, etc.) are the real thugs in this failed regime change. Turkey’s, Georgia’s, Saudi’s, Israel’s, and America’s deep states are synced in Syria. Whether or not they succeed is up to Syria (and Russia.)
There are different levels of funding; ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, (the special forces of the rebel world) look like they live pretty high on the hog. They must all benefit from the best funding. Note the plastic wrap still on the headrest, the faux wood dash, and even a disco ball hanging off the mirror…
…and the lack of battle scars on any of their gear.
These images looks like the Neiman-Marcus catalogue for zealots. This is the propaganda of Jihad and its manipulation by the West …just as long as the rifles are Russian, everything is copacetic. The repeated “We’re Number 1” kinda’ tips the bit. [They may be pointing up.]
The financing cannot be denied, however, and most of the gear and ammo comes from Uncle Sam via Incerlik and Saud. The medical care comes from Israel, mainly.
The Brits know what’s going on, they’ve even helped, but, “Tight lips sink ships” and all that.
The innocent victims, on the other hand, are getting little to no support. Perhaps a magnanimous superbug will come along and end it quickly for them all.
American peace delegation goes to Syria on a fact-finding mission – UN. Must watch video for the truth about Syria:
Intelligence and Military Sources Who Warned About Weapons Lies Before Iraq War Now Say that Assad Did NOT Launch Chemical Weapon Attack
I was gonna’ write a short tribute, pre-mortem, to Gord Downey. There are others for whom I would have liked to have done the same: Arthur C. Clark; Kurt Vonnegut Jr.; Hunter S. Thompson; Leonard Nimoy; et al… Oh well, they didn’t get theirs’ on time, but Gord should.
Before glaciers covered all the lands, there lived a tribe of rather primitive people, the Oogy-Mi-Booli. They occupied the forested region bordering the mountain steppes of what is now Lower Slobbovia. The village was on the only river in the area.
Sure, they could write and add and irrigate and such, but they were primitive in their thinking, in their predominantly short-term thinking. However, they thought themselves sophisticated because their economy was so complex. More on that later.
One evening, to everyone’s astonishment, a group of hunters had brought home with them a gargantu-nocerus, alive! Despite dispatching many of it’s kin, they had spared this one from the kill. Apparently, the gargantu-nocerus had spoken to one of them, the shaman. It wanted to make a deal. The animal was a young mother (after experiencing child-birth, gargantu-nocerususes lactate for life) who had just lost her only offspring to an even more gianter beast.
[Gargantu-nocerus milk was extremely nourishing; it was what sustained the hunters and allowed them to haul back such massive quantities of meat for the women and children of the tribe. Unfortunately, it didn’t keep. During a hunt, it was customary for the fastest runner to bring back as much milk as he could carry so that all the children in the village could have a taste before it went sour. Animals would chase him. Often-times, when the hunt was far, or the weather was hot, he would return with nothing but rancid butter.]
Upon arrival at their village (called Kshepaw-Oozju-Rendoo, where everybody lived in the same lodge-house,) the shaman called out all the villagers (which they found troubling, given the late hour – they had been tending to their pagan rituals) and instructed them on what needed to be done.
The animal in question, in a bargain for it’s life, was to be revered, made sacred, and placed in what was to remain, for all time, the most prominent spot in the village… on the roof of the communal house. It would be pampered, and cleaned, and fed, and attended to, and most of all, it would be protected from it’s other natural enemy, the enormo-saurusus (which stayed far afield of the human village on account of the smell.) The animal would be their de-facto emperor. In exchange, it would provide them with all the fresh gargantu-nocerus milk they could drink.
So the villagers got to work. A throne needed to be built, scaffolding had to be erected to reinforce the roof, and stairs needed to be constructed for the scores of volunteers attending to the behemoth which slept above their beds. Their prayers to the new emperor overhead would mostly be about structural failure, design flaws, and engineering specifications, or a desired lack, thereof, and sometimes, during the dry season, about getting more rain. Being mostly carnivorous – they ate some fish and insects, too – they didn’t need the rain for crops. They just enjoyed playing outside in it. The only thing better than rain showers, in the eyes of the people, was being ‘blessed from above’ by the animal’s showers of excrement. What an honour that would be, to be shat upon by the emperor! But first, they had to get the beast up there. Once they did, they could harvest the super-nutritious milk.
Needless to say, the task was a monumental one, but little by little, the throne was fashioned, the scaffolding and the stairs were built, and it didn’t all come crashing down onto the villagers’ heads. With this new supplement to their diet, gargantu-nocerus milk, the children grew up healthy, and strong, and with the belief that this lifestyle had to be protected, for the sake of the next generation. Stronger hunters make for bigger hunts. Bigger hunts make for more people to go on bigger and bigger hunts. Can you say ‘exponential growth curve’ or ‘doubling function’?
Every year, the gargantu-nocerodes’ genitals would be rubbed down and its musk would imbibe the rags. These rags would then be used to lure other gargantu-nocerodes during the hunt, making it less time-consuming, hence, more beasts could be felled.
One year, the emperor’s health began to fail, and another had to be captured in order to take its place. This tradition grew with time as did the need to expand the lodge-house. The hunts had never been so successful, and gargantu-nocerus meat could be smelled cooking for miles around, all day long. Boom-times !!
Well, with all the additions to the lodge-house, and with all the fires used to cook the Oogy-Mi-Booli’s meat, the forest in which they lived began looking more and more like the adjacent steppes, where the gargantu-nocerus roamed, treeless. The tribe’s economists (who were necessary now that the economy was booming) started developing insurance schemes, derivatives contracts, and other tools to mitigate the losses should anything really bad ever happen (of course, ‘really bad’ had only one result: doomsday. Nevertheless it re-assured the people that the smart ones, the bankers and businessmen, really did know what they were talking about.) It had gotten so bad, that the trek to get wood was now even longer than the trek to the hunting grounds. A generation later, there was no wood to be found anywhere, not even up-river, where the bankers lived.
The emperor’s excrement was gathered with nets (it was fibrous enough, given her vegetarian diet) and was used to stoke some of the fires (so much for manna showers – austerity became a noble goal,) but it was not enough. Eventually, people started to use wood from the lodge-house to cook their plentiful meat. When all the walls and the roof had been consumed they had reverted back to covering those surfaces with gargantu-nocerus skins. After the floorboards had been used, the scaffolding was next.
Life became like a game of ‘shortest straw’, nobody knowing when the shavings of wood they salvaged from the structural members of the scaffold would weaken it enough to initiate its collapse. The architects and the engineers (all the chief’s men) were called in by the shaman to reassure the people that “…at the present rate, the structure could withstand this whittling for decades to come, long enough, surely, to find a more permanent solution to this most pressing, but not by any means urgent situation. Everything’s fine; nothing to see here. No need to panic.” But ‘present rates’ tend not to stay ‘present’ for long; they grow.
One morning, while everyone else slept, the emperor’s head attendant peeled off some splinters of wood from the creaking structure to boil a pot of water for the emperor’s morning tea. Before anyone knew what had happened, they were all crushed by the weight of their utopic dream. All but the bankers, that is, but they all starved to death within a month.
Why does Japan’s Emperor Akihito want to quit?
Did he just fall on his sword (or cut his own guts out) by acquiescing to the International Order? (Those hand signs are really disconcerting.) Will there even be another emperor, or will the son turn out to be another Obama or Trudeau, a young(er) and popular sell-out to globalism and world parliament?
Maybe the son is a war-hawk, and Emperor Akihito disagrees that Japan’s military should be used elsewhere than in defense of Japan. Japan just decided the issue of ‘collective defense‘. This is all after Trump accused Japan of not paying its fair share for American defense. (The Yen isn’t enough reparations for having been bombed into the stone age? /s)
Has Japan been castrated?
This year is set to be a stellar year for the annual Perseid meteor shower. Comet Smith-Tuttle (not Buttle) is responsible.
It has something to do with Jupiter.
Jupiter’s Effect Will Make Perseid Meteor Shower One to Remember
Remember to look north-northeast towards the constellation Perseus (under the big ‘W’) on Thursday, Aug. 11 into the morning of Friday, Aug. 12.
People tend to build next to rivers in order to facilitate trade. The best agricultural land tends to be near rivers. For decades, suburban centres have been making the switch from zoning for agricultural land to zoning for residential. Some residents are even being fined for growing food on their property because some municipal bylaws prohibit it.
We’ve replaced our farmland with lawns. We’ve gone from planting seed for food to planting grass for nothing. We’ve gone from tending our crops to watering our lawns. We’ve gone from harvesting our own winter stores and declaring our independence to cutting the grass on one of our two days off just to keep up appearances. Tending a well-landscaped lawn, flower beds, shrubs and hedges, non-fruit-bearing trees, can be as much work as farming, but the yield is zero. In fact, it turns out to be an enormous time sink, much like entertainment, socializing, and child-rearing. It also turns out be be a circular exercise in recycling compost for no benefit outside the aesthetic.
As a response to this long-term trend, big-agri is developing GMO’s in order to feed the ever growing population. They’re actually making quite a big deal of it, too. There is such a shortage of good farmland, we now need to engineer our food like we should have engineered our spaces.
Even a fruit tree every so often would make an impact on the ever-growing problem of ‘food islands.’ Why should I drive past unused farmland to go buy synthetic vegetables trucked into the tiled mall?
So with the scare-mongering of over-population and the fear-porn of climate change, the two things we can do to increase global yield in food supplies and prevent starvation are: home gardens; and increased atmospheric levels of CO2, but both have fallen into dis-favour. (A solar panel on some rooftops here and there wouldn’t hurt either.) The point is that population is controlled by the availability or scarcity of resources, and it is not the majority poor who control that.
Is there a systemic problem looming? Sterility has needlessly become a very large industry. A very large and damaging industry. See Morgan Spurlock’s “The Truth Behind Toxins“. CNN doesn’t even mention that it is about chemicals, addressing only ‘food’ in the introduction. The common thread throughout most of the show is sterility and cancer. The show starts off with what is probably the most persistent danger, flame-retardants. An honest examination, dis-honestly portrayed. There are many earlier examples of journalism on the topic; most were not widely viewed.
Birth rates are down almost everywhere in the western-world, as cancer rates skyrocket. GMOs are said to have negative effects on fertility and also may ‘transform cells.’ Cleaning products and beauty products also, as it turns out.
Deranged monarchs re-incarnated as merciful diseases do not a sensible solution make.
With food independence comes a better use of our time, money, resources, and health. Perhaps, we should rather think about saving a buck than making one.
Just when I thought that the music industry had nothing left for me, just as I was preparing to hang up my hat and satisfy myself with a playlist of old favourites never to be added to again, just as my complacency reached an all time “Meh”, along came NeO.
You won’t ever hear them on the radio. They wouldn’t care. These guys are real musicians, after all. They bring a presence and a grace and a particular aggressiveness to the stage which I cannot ascribe to any other band.
- Tim Charles – violin, clean vocals
- Xenoyr – growled vocals, lyrics
- Matt Klavins – guitar
- Brendan “Cygnus” Brown – bass
- Daniel Presland – drums
- Benjamin Baret – lead guitar
Formed in 2003, the Australian progressive/extreme metal band Ne Obliviscaris had come to Montreal for the first time just four months ago. They came again last night. I almost did, too. Last night was their first sold-out show outside of Aus!
My son, an aspiring musician, discovered them before they were even known outside of their native Australia. (He also found Carach Angren.) Good ear! There is hope for the new generation, after all. He told me of a tattoo worn by the lead singer Xenoyr based on a painting by Polish dystopian artist Zdzisław Beksiński. He thought he was teaching me something. I’ve been a fan of Polish art for a long time, and Beksiński is one of the best. He makes Giger look like a well-adjusted toddler by comparison. Small world.
Their musical style is beyond schizophrenic (a compliment, in this case.) A beautiful fusion of folksy fiddle and grunting progressive death metal the likes of which have not been seen anywhere, to my knowledge. Many times, when musical influences are combined, the result is a compartmentalized Mondrian-like back-and-forth jousting for dominance in any given track. NeO does it differently. The line between their varied influences is blurred, no, it is non-existent. Seamless transitions and a surprisingly effective melange give the music a feeling of completeness. The holes in their aural net are very small indeed. The reference to Beksiński is well-portrayed. His style is one of blending – combining images and effects into a seamless canvas full of symbols and meaning. Theirs is very similar, mixing styles and genres, and from it weaving a perfect tapestry, flowing, melodic, not-nearly-as-aggressive-as-it-may-seem, yet gut-punching, heart-squeezing, brain-twisting, and thought-provoking, a journey beyond the mainstream, beyond alternative, beyond the typical expectations of music itself. Needless to say, I was moved.
Many others were moved as well. The crowds attending their shows have ballooned and they were greeted with much excitement. The energy of the crowd was absolutely amazing! They may have to think about getting a bigger venue next time. (Don’t play the Olympic Stadium, though, the acoustics are terrible.)
Whether their music is your cup of tea or not, their talent and the moods they bring forth are powerful tools that make their shows emotional, almost spiritual experiences which are not to be missed by those who appreciate good music in all its forms. The members are all extremely skilled musicians and easily make up one of the tightest bands I have ever seen, and I expect to be seeing them, with my son, as often as they are in town. Hell, I would even travel to catch their shows!
Best of luck to NeO and I hope to be seeing them again, soon. As one enthusiastic fan yelled out, they will always be welcome here. If you are a fan, here’s why you should help support them. Visit Patreon for details.
Maybe with enough support, Xenoyr could afford to buy himself a new shirt or two. Marduk is cool and all, but… 😉
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t support Trump or Clinton. I don’t have a horse in this race (anymore than anyone under the influence of the US economy does.) I believe that they’re all a bunch of psychopaths. Only psychopaths are willing to put in the time and effort necessary to rise to such positions. Only psychopaths wish to rule over others. True leaders want to help others, to serve others, and to protect others. Psychopaths want money, power, and control over the lives of all who surround (and outnumber) them. Psychopaths are cowards who hide their cowardice through excessive aggression.
Having said this, there is a You Tube video which came out just two days ago. Short of bringing hard evidence (plausible deniability is not an accidental occurrence,) the documentary paints a pretty compelling picture about the Clintons and their misdeeds around the world while occupying positions of power in the USA.
The documentary below doesn’t even mention Mena Arkansas, or Bill’s near-pederasty, Whitewater, or any of their other well-documented scandals or social deviancy, but focuses on international donorship to the Clinton foundation by states and NGOs while the Clintons were in power as either POTUS, FLOTUS, or Secretary of State.
“Clinton Cash” (1:04:56)
From Congo, to Haiti, to Kazakhstan, it is difficult to imagine a more corrupt organization (without referring to the WWF – more on this coming soon) than the Clinton Global Initiative.
With no good choices in this year’s electoral cycle, perhaps Americans should elect a council instead of an executive, or splinter into city-states. Maybe we should all collectively push the ‘big red button’ – not the nuclear launch button, rather the button marked RESET.
There has been a groundswell of political revolution all across the world. From the Arab Spring (yes, yes, nevertheless…,) to Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, to a mass movement against the corrupt and complicit mass media, an awakening is being fueled by the internet and the dissemination of information nobody but the privileged have been privy to in the past. This must continue to the next level if the word ‘freedom’ is ever to regain its true meaning again.
© laphotoshoppe [at] gmail [dot] com
Is it snobbery, is it paranoia, is it legitimate fear, or is it all nonsense?
Seventeen athletes have, so far, declined the invitation to got o the Olympic Games in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil citing the danger of zika. Even the USOC has said it ‘would understand’.
“The United States Olympic Committee told U.S. sports federations that athletes and staff concerned for their health over the Zika virus should consider not going to the Rio 2016 Olympic Games in August.”
A few athletes from Britain have chosen to remain at home, as well. Greg Rutherford froze some sperm before leaving.
Australian athletes have been issued thicker, coated, zika-proof condoms, and will attend. (It’s Rio, after all; who’s kidding whom?)*
The Koreans have developed a zika-proof uniform. (Presumably, a larger version of the Australian solution.)
The Chinese athletes got some health advice.
Some have gone very far out of their way to find a necessarily convoluted reason to slip the word ‘zika’ into their article, obviously trying to capitalize on the click-bait nature of the modern wwweb. It goes to show to what lengths some will go to in order to hype a story. Stories that are broadly good for the media raise all their boats and so see the most attention. It has precious little to do with what’s really going on. Besides, the press are not under any obligation to tell you everything. They don’t have the resources to cover everything, after all. The following article is a good example of click-bait.
“The threat of Zika at the Rio Olympics is on the mind of many athletes but few more so than China’s former badminton world champion Wang Yihan, who was attacked mercilessly by insects while competing in Indonesia last week.”
“They’re itchy,” she told Reuters…
Itchy?!? Is that all? That seems pretty weak. So what?
“I’m really not sure what kind of bugs they were. I don’t think they were mosquitoes. Maybe it was on the bed that I was sleeping on.”
Oh, bedbugs. Indonesian bedbugs, no less.
“I bought some cream for them, but they’re still itchy.”
Great setup for the zika scare story. By the way, ‘Zika’ is always capitalized.
When asked about zika:
“Yes, I think everyone’s been thinking about (Zika),” Wang said. “But obviously we’ve been told about how to be safe, wearing repellent and staying indoors and so on.”
She doesn’t seem too concerned, does she?
What’s with all the hype?
Thankfully there is some truth out there, if you read Portuguese.
“I don’t know where it comes from this information that children up to seven years would be the most susceptible, but it is not so,” he says. -trans. (Yandex)
There is a lot of evidence (and common sense) which indicate that zika should not be a significant threat, not to mention the fact that many tourists would be going to Rio, Olympics or no Olympics.
Anyhow, as Vox reports, August isn’t mosquito season in Rio.
“It’s going to be winter [during the Olympics], so the risk is going to be low in terms of mosquito transmission,” said Duane Gubler, a leading researcher on mosquito-borne diseases at Duke-NUS Medical School.
But if you like your fear even more ‘porny’, here’s a scary story from China, which rebuts the ‘winter’ claim. It hasn’t deterred Chinese athletes from attending, though. I suppose, when one grows up with dragons, a little mosquito isn’t really that bad.
*There’s also a more disturbing plot affot. Remember those Australian condoms? Reuter’s, CNN, RT, the Guardian (and several other British papers) have all pushed the story, but it turns out to have been a marketing gimmick. Surprise, surprise, surprise.
Here’s the thing: all condoms protect against Zika infection when used correctly.
So is this a case of snobbery? Do certain athletes from certain countries not want to participate because of Brazil’s third-world status? It didn’t keep them out of the world cup, did it? Or is this a political move aimed at the scandalous behaviour of the government? Maybe it’s just good old-fashion fear-mongering. Should we all be afraid all the time? Or is this something else?
Are mosquitos (humanity’s natural vaccinators – they hold disease in check by exposing everyone’s immune system to very small doses of it) to be the new ‘boogey-man’? Whatever could be the reason? Is a vaccine in the works? You bet!
The discovery “could lead to the development of a universal vaccine” against both diseases, they hoped.
Much of South America suffers from pollution, economic strife (which causes shortages in medicine,) and food shortages, and and the CDC states that microcephaly is caused primarily by toxins, infections, and malnutrition. Is it any wonder Brazil is a ‘hot-spot’ for zika, mosquitos or not?
A bit of advice for those going to Brazil: Don’t lose your pretty little heads over it.
A: “Of significance, the Zika virus is a commodity which can be purchased online from the ATCC-LGC for 599 euros, with royalties accruing to the Rockefeller Foundation.”
The dark green-striped republic in the above image.
Caught between Russia to the north and Georgia to the south, North Ossetia to the west and Chechnya to the east, lies a small Caucasus republic called Ingushetia. The president of Ingushetia is Yunus-Bek Yevkurov. He’s the bad-ass’s bad-ass. He’s like Bond’s Jaws.
Yevkurov was recently (October 11, 2015) invited to sit in on a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud. Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud is the deputy crown prince of Saudi Arabia, second deputy prime minister and the youngest minister of defense in the world. Also included in the meeting were foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, industry and trade minister Denis Manturov, energy minister Alexander Novak, and defence minister Sergei Shoigu.
Turkey has ties to the Ukraine just as it has ties to Georgia. Turkey also has ties to IS which is seen from Syria to Chechnya. Georgia is known for many things, some of which involve smuggling. People, drugs, weapons, and now viruses have become black market currency in and through Georgia. This is why picking Sochi for the winter olympics in 2014 was such a brave move (despite being somewhat shielded by Abkhazia.) It was a move of great strength and one of great defiance. If the terrorists could be contained, Russia was impenetrable – a claim America could not make.
Ingushetia has always been used to cushion against/contain Chechen rebels. It’s a rough neighbourhood. It is, in essence, nothing but a military outpost, as it needs to be. It acts as a buffer zone between Russia and Chechyn ‘terrorists.’ It is also a passage from Russia to Turkey and Greece (Europe) through Georgia. Ingushetia is the Gibraltor of the Caucasus. If Russia ever secures South Ossetia, the focus may then shift away from Ingushetia, to a certain degree. Either that or a block will be formed of the two.
Why was Ingushetia included in this meeting? What do Saud and Caucasus terror have in common? What is Israel’s role?
Ingushetia Proposes Measures To Crack Down On IS Recruitment, Blowback
“Local militants have shifted their allegiance from the local Islamist insurgent group, the Caucasus Emirate, to IS. In June, IS’s leadership accepted pledges of allegiance from militants in the North Caucasus, including in Ingushetia, and declared an IS “province” in the region called Wilayat al-Qawqaz.”
This article may provide some context. (Ignore the title and the call for funding at the top of the page and scroll down for the main article.)
“Washington continues to force its European vassals to impose sanctions on Russia based on the false claim that the conflict in Ukraine was caused by a Russian invasion of Ukraine, not by Washington’s coup in overthrowing a democratically elected government and installing a puppet answering to Washington.”
The president of Ingushetia, who is recovering from an attempt on his life, accused on Monday the United States, Britain and Israel of seeking to destabilize the situation in the North Caucasus.
“I am miles from believing that Arabs are behind this. There are other, more serious forces there… We understand whose interests these are: the United States, Britain, and Israel too,” President Yunus-Bek Yevkurov said in an interview with the Russian News Service (RSN) radio.
Size means nothing in the world of geo-politics; what really counts is location, location, location.
Switzerland just said no (with 78%) to a guaranteed income (helicopter money) for all its citizens.
With an unemployment rate of about 3 1/2%, they didn’t really need it. The fear was that it would encourage immigration. That seemed to be enough of an argument for Swiss adults to decide they did not want an extra 2500 CHF (625 CHF per child) per month. The system was to replace welfare.
The practice remains more or less untested. It was first posited by economist Milton Friedman in 1969. The basic principle is that if a central bank wants to raise inflation and output in an economy that is running substantially below potential, one of the most effective tools would be simply to give everyone direct money transfers.
Canada tried it in limited amounts and found that it did decrease poverty, but at what price? Some had trouble dealing with it and feared it would push the country further towards socialism. The Canadian program is set to launch in 2016. Canada’s unemployment rate is twice that of Switzerland which means it might have more popular support.
Finland is set to begin in 2017. France, United Kingdom, and parts of the Netherlands are set to implement similar programs soon. Will the US be next?
Helicopter money indeed, but for whom? Cui bono?
image: ©laphotoshoppe [at] gmail [dot] com
My father smoked four packs of cigarettes per day. The first five years of my life were lived in a smoke-filled environment. I was addicted to smoking before I ever became a smoker. Now I smoke socially – very little.
Donald Sterling was raised in a racist environment. So were most of the older rich white men in the USA. Because of social pressures (and common sense,) most are now only ‘social racists’ if at all. They probably wouldn’t deny visible minorities a job in their companies, but they would probably laugh at an off-colour joke at the country club. They might think twice if their daughter were to marry a black man.
I was raised in a household and a school and a town in which racism was never an issue. I had childhood friends of all sorts, and all were welcome in our house. Racism is as foreign to me as smoking is to the vast majority of people who don’t. I’ve told jokes, socially, which could be considered beyond the pale. I’m not trying to defend the practice, but nobody who knows me would consider me a biggot on any level.
The prevailing opinion is that one is either racist or not. This duality is rather ironic. There are many shades in between. Labelling people as racists because of an off-the-cuff remark or a bad joke would be akin to saying someone is an alcoholic for simply having had a drink.
We all have biases. We might think and have all said that our country is better, our gender is better, our sports team is better, our religious beliefs are better, or our political choices are better for any number of reasons. I find it disingenuous, from a purely philosophical perspective, to label people so quickly and so decisively, especially considering the long-term effects such a moniker can now have, given the pervasiveness of social media. Sadly, our definition of people as we see them (sometimes based only upon a snapshot in time) can over-ride all the good they have done. We are actually depriving ourselves of another acquaintance with much to teach, even if they have some things to learn.
“But it’s not who you are underneath, it’s what you do that defines you.”
Rachel Dawes – from Batman Begins
I’m not saying that injustices haven’t been committed, I’m not saying that there isn’t a privelege to being a majority (from which I have undoubtedly benefitted,) and I’m not saying that denigration due to skin tone is acceptable. I simply think we should lighten up (figuratively speaking) just a little bit.
After having just recently had my Twitter account closed (new account – 2 tweets – both mentioned CNN) I had a record number of hits on this blog yesterday. Most were from the US. All of my most anti-mainstream articles were read. The CO2 poll at the top of my home page was (disproportionately) trolled.
It would seem I won’t be getting my Twitter account back. I expect to have problems with my WordPress account soon, too. *crosses fingers* – Update: I got it back.
Am I just being paranoid? Perhaps. But these days, the difference between co-incidence and probability is a spot on a list somewhere, or worse, a knock on the door.
Update: A script has stopped working on my site meaning that I need to go through many onerous steps to see my stats (which are not being counted properly anymore) and just loading any page is muuuuuch sloooooooower.
The “Code of Ethics” of the Society of Professional Journalists states: “Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair. Journalists should examine the ways their values and experiences may shape their reporting. Journalists should support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.”
In the spirit of transparency and openness, which is touted by the mainstream media, wouldn’t it be in the best interest of everyone involved for journalists (read: reporters,) when doing a political piece, to state which party or candidate they support beforehand? If a reporter has a vested interest in the outcome of an election, and does a hit piece on one of the candidates, a conflict of interest necessarily arises.
The politics of journalism are pervasive in every election cycle. Cenk Uygur, in a recent interview on CNN, said it loud and clear. He accused CNN of bias in its reporting. There is no such thing as the concept of ‘fair and balanced’ in the mainstream media anymore. There hasn’t been for a long, long time. Media outlets have long distorted their stories, fabricated the news, misrepresented facts, and tried to dumb-down the population by spoon-feeding them un-truths, half-truths, and outright lies.
There are many examples of this, even outside the realm of politics. Photos are routinely re-labeled for use in completely unrelated stories. Many articles about military actions, political demonstrations, government coups, and even environmental effects, have photos attached which were taken months or years before in different countries portraying different events, altogether. Photos attached to a story about the consequences of a Russian bombing campaign in Syria could actually have been taken from an American sortie in Iraq. Photos of a mass student rally in South America could be used to make it look like a mass uprising in the middle-east. Photomanipulation also plays a key role in some instances.
Ambiguous retractions (offered only when the evidence is publicly debunked) are often buried or said in passing, and only once. For example, after days of non-stop coverage of ‘Assad’s chemical weapons strike,’ CNN aired an interview with a man (who could hardly speak any English) refuting the claim that Assad’s forces were responsible, based on a report from Médecins Sans Frontières. The report was aired once and at 4am EST. They did not, based on this new evidence, change their tune. The MH-17 tragedy was reported on in much the same manner, neglecting to mention conflicting reports simply because John Kerry (based on no evidence) proclaimed it to be so. Most of the information about the situation in Ukraine and Russia’s ‘incursion’ into the Crimea is also suspect. Is the western news media beholden to the State Department? It would appear so.
Many examples of government lines being spun by the media in order to further a political agenda can be found. There are almost as many examples of those stories having been proved biased, mis-leading, incomplete, out of context, or just plain wrong. Stories about 9/11, terrorism, Ukraine, Russia, China, Israel, the Federal Reserve, economics, the middle-east, ISIS, the environment, refugees, prominent suicides, plane crashes, and anything involving John Kerry seem disproportionately affected.
Vocabulary is another tool which the media use to villify others and push their version of the truth. Jake Tapper recently categorized Donald Trump’s ‘attack*’ of an American judge of Mexican descent as being, “…the definition of racism.” He (Jake Tapper) specifically said that ‘Mexican’ was a race. Trump did not. Trump was also accused of ‘attacking’ Latinos and women when he commented that because of a tripling in food stamps, the governor (who is both) should do a better job. I do not support Trump, (nor do I support Clinton,) but none have had their words twisted to the extent that he has. Many bastardizations, miscategorizations, and ignorance of context and nuance are used routinely to bend the words of guests, pundits, and newsworthy individuals. The ‘loose’ translations of speeches and statements by foreign dignitaries is an easy way to achieve this goal, as well. (Religious scholars have been using this trick for millennia.) The word literally, literally, has a new meaning. Words are often mis-pronounced in order to show who’s on which side of the debate. Divisive (div/iss/ive vs. div/ice/ive) is a classic – btw, the former is correct.
Case in point:*attackverbtake aggressive action against (a place or enemy forces) with weapons or armed force, typically in a battle or war.nounan aggressive and violent action against a person or place.note: If words are defined as weapons, this definition might be true, but it certainly goes against the spirit of the definitions presented.
And then there is the stuff they just make up.
Television news has been corrupted. Bought and paid for by corporate and political interests and financed through advertising by these same entities. “Support our candidate or we will advertise on another station.” “Portray the new congressional bill in a positive light or we will cut your funding.” “Support our wars of conquest or you will be labeled as subversive, or worse.” Scratch our backs and we will scratch yours is the mantra that pervades that which passes itself off as news.
Of course, they mainstream news tries to blame the prevalence of fake stories on the internet. “How the internet misled you in 2015”-BBC. This is certainly a valid point. The reality, though, is that much of what is viral first came from a news desk. Not all their mistakes are attributable to conspiracy theorists and subversive forces. Fake social media stories can easily be ignored; those from reputed (Reuters, AP etc) and state-run news agencies (CBC, BBC etc) cannot. The implications are far too important.
News agencies must vett their sources, check their facts, verify their media, do their own research, and double-check everything otherwise the 1st Amendment (and other statutes similar to it) are left hollow, bereft of any meaning in a free and democratic society. Either that or they should admit to being an entertainment program and lose the ‘News’ moniker, altogether. Either way, honesty and integrity need to find their way back into the daily lives of the masses. They simply don’t have time to check.
Is it any wonder why news media outlets are so mis-trusted? Is it any wonder why politicians often use distrust of the news media to deflect, to distract and to deceive? And for those of you who think that this used to happen, but doesn’t anymore…
Both these people still make regular appearances on the cable news network. I guess their budgets are not what they used to be. I wonder why.
…do a search with these terms, “cnn fake parking lot.”
Actually, just watch this short video. (26:11)
Some more images (some viral, some from the news) for your consideration.
This is a placeholder. I have been working on an article (perhaps in several parts) which will be posted here as soon as possible.
Lincoln, contrary to popular opinion, did not free the slaves. Slavery exists in many forms and is prevalent in every corner of the globe,
even especially in the Western world.
Slavery must be ended; there is no doubt about that. “How?” is the question.
There are many aspects to this issue. Be it for labour (chocolate workers in Ivory Coast, construction workers in Dubai, textile workers in India, etc,) domestic help (in Washington diplomatic circles and embassies around the world,) baby factories (in Nigeria,) or in the sex trade (Kenya, Thailand, Nigeria, eastern Europe, etc.,) slaves are being used and moved around with impunity.
The simple fact is that it is the trade routes which must be taken down. This is even more crucial than going after the people who use these slaves. We saw Boko Haram take girls from Chibok and sell them. How do a gang of local African hoods get these girls into Europe to be used as sex slaves? Networks. These networks have been active for centuries (since colonial days) and have been used to smuggle animal parts, drugs, guns, and people. It is high time to burn down the very foundations of this practice and put an end, once and for all, to the crimes being committed to our brothers, sisters, and children all around the world. No place is immune.
The revelations on this subject will absolutely shock most of you to your core, to your very essence. Some of the names will leave you speechless.
Please stay tuned as there is much more to come on this crucially important issue.
Jason De Graff paints in a style called photorealism.
Acrylic on canvas, if you can believe that!
The following painting, “Eight” is an example of his work.
“My paintings are about staging an alternate reality, the illusion of verisimilitude on the painted surface, filtered so that it expresses my unique vision. Though my paintings may appear photoreal my goal is not to reproduce or document faithfully what I see one hundred percent, but also to create the illusion of depth and sense of presence not found in photographs. I try to use objects as a vehicle to express myself, to tell a story, or hint at something beyond what is actually painted. Therefore I try to choose subjects that have meaning to me or are artifacts from my life. I choose colours and composition intuitively with the intent of infusing my paintings with mood and mystery. Throughout, I try to remain open to new ideas as the painting unfolds.”
Stunning. There must be a trick to it.
I didn’t redo his work, I just joined the ends.
If someone is vehement about not wanting you to buy something, it’s probably because they want it for themselves.
Additionally, if they vehemently want you to sell them that same thing, this can only serve to reinforce the impression that gold really is the only thing worth having.
“Awww, forget about gold, it’s so ‘passé.’ What you want are these financial instruments – ‘paper gold’. They’re more modern, and sexier, easier to trade, and no storage fees; not to mention that there are 400 times as many of these as gold! By the way, if you want to sell me some of your gold, I have a few of these choice opportunities for you. Besides, would you prefer carrying a briefcase, or a trunk? C’mon let’s go have a drink and talk it over.”
“Yeah I could really use one or two of those, what with work, mortgage, loans, an education for the kids, and don’t get me started about my…”
If you can’t spot the sucker, the sucker is you.
“…for such men, (commonly called Slaves,) have no obligation at all; but may break their bonds, or the prison; and kill, or carry away captive their Master, justly.”
-Thomas Hobbes, ‘Leviathan’
[I must add here that the message is NOT that if you feel like a slave, you may kill your boss, justly. Murder is murder and should not be belittled or glorified. Were these Medieval times, my opinion might differ. Bonds, however, must be broken – the level to which depends on the force needed to defend, against that applied.]
The question is, “Is your freedom worth your life… and your family’s… and all your brothers’ and sisters’?”
Is the cost of your bondage worth your contribution, to your masters?
We will always have to pay the land-owners. If every man cannot have his plot of land, and no more, there will always be serfs.
We trade liberty and privacy for safety and convenience, each generation, successively, excessively, continuously. We may have come to a state of “Full Pussy“.
Young men have always needed to prove themselves in battle. The young men of today’s slaves have not have that necessity, for some time. Are they then men? Do they feel like men? Is there something missing which superheroes and action stars supply?
There are those who believe that ‘global warming’ is a consequence of natural forces, there are those who believe that ‘global warming’ is man-made, and there are some who don’t believe it is happening at all.
Most reputable scientists seem to agree that there was a warming trend noticed in the mid-eighties (when satellite data became ‘de rigueur’) which lasted until 1998. Most would also agree that this warming has plateau’d and that the average global temperature has been steady for the last two decades. Many say that CO2 is to blame, many don’t.
Let’s, for the sake of argument, put all that aside for the moment. It really doesn’t matter, anyhow. What does matter in the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) debate is whether or not there are some people who have been trying to get the earth to warm up. Dane Wiggington is of the opinion that the earth is warming and that the result will be catastrophic. He also believes that geo-engineering is (partly) to blame. The implications are surreal.
There are three reasons for which this scenario is plausible: derivatives; market share; and commodities.
Derivatives (without getting too technical) are insurance. They are side bets made by financiers in order to protect themselves against investments gone bad. A farmers’ crops may be worth a million dollars, but if a natural disaster strikes, the failed crop might be worth two million through the derivatives market. This is the basis for ‘disaster capitalism.’ The derivatives market is said to be worth hundreds of trillions. Profits depend on failures in more traditional enterprises.
Market share is what drives corporations to monopoly. The more market share, the more customers, the more sales. Companies such as Monsanto have been developing techniques which would assure them almost complete market dominance. They, along with their partners, have been researching seed technology which could grow in almost any condition such as drought, flood, and even radiation.
Commodities are everything the world uses. They are raw materials. They are food. They are mineral resources such as gold (debatable,) oil, uranium, and coal. Some say that they are running out, or at least, that the low-hanging fruit has already been picked. There could be a new source of commodities, though. There could be an entire ocean of virgin ground awaiting exploration.
This would satisfy all three conditions.
If the world was warming, the polar ice caps would melt. This would wreak havoc with the global economy and the derivatives market would prove very profitable for the psychopaths praying for (and betting on) plague conditions. Environmental devastation would also prove very profitable for large conglomerates that could supply (very expensive) food which could not be grown anywhere else anymore. Thirdly, if the poles did melt, great swaths of new land would be exposed and exploited immediately.
This doomsday scenario begs the question, are there those who would sabotage the world for their own gain? If history is any indication, the answer is a resounding, “Yes!” If these people do exist, are they presently putting their resources to work in trying to achieve this goal? Is geo-engineering being used to warm the planet further and faster?
Whether or not this is being implemented, the people in Davos have just put together a plan to ensure that whatever happens, they will control the outcome. “Scott Minerd (who before Guggenheim worked at Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley) …joined a World Economic Forum advisory council. Its task? Develop guidelines for those nations looking to do business at the top of the world. That framework is to be released Thursday, in Davos.”
“The Arctic guidelines are voluntary, like many other sustainable investment initiatives, including the Principles for Responsible Investment or even the WEF’s own work on “sustainable competitiveness.” How does anyone expect to protect the Arctic environment in such a gold rush? The project is designed to complement the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and while the green earth is littered with do-good business pledges, the notion received a shot in the arm recently. In December, almost 200 nations agreed in Paris to adhere to the first-ever universal climate goals. How nations contribute to progress toward them is their call, since there are no binding demands to cut greenhouse gas emissions.”
The above taken from Bloomberg’s “The World Has Discovered a $1 Trillion Ocean.”
So cui bono? Who are the people who would benefit from a world destroyed, what tools would they employ to see such a strategy implemented, and just how far would they go to dominate and control the earth and its resources?
One would expect to find the answer just north of 66 degrees.
Can the end be seen; is it visible? Is there a path? Is it even discernible? Sorting the truth from the non-truth, and all the variations therein, seems self-defeating. It seems, most times, that there is no hope. Man has always lived in a condition of servitude, the wealthy have always held power, the ratios haven’t changed.
“So you think we might have put a few people out of business today. That its all for naught. You’ve been doing that everyday for almost forty years Sam. And if this is all for naught then so is everything out there. Its just money; its made up. Pieces of paper with pictures on it so we don’t have to kill each other just to get something to eat. It’s not wrong. And it’s certainly no different today than its ever been. 1637, 1797, 1819, 37, 57, 84, 1901, 07, 29, 1937, 1974, 1987-Jesus, didn’t that fuck me up good-92, 97, 2000 and whatever we want to call this. It’s all just the same thing over and over; we can’t help ourselves. And you and I can’t control it, or stop it, or even slow it. Or even ever-so-slightly alter it. We just react. And we make a lot of money if we get it right. And we get left by the side of the road if we get it wrong. And there have always been and there always will be the same percentage of winners and losers. Happy foxes and sad sacks. Fat cats and starving dogs in this world. Yeah, there may be more of us today than there’s ever been. But the percentages-they stay exactly the same. “
– Jeremy Irons as John Tuld from the movie “Margin Call.”
Let me begin by saying that if there is no solution, nihilism wins, the universe will get colder, and humanity is a temporary condition in a losing proposition. If there is an end goal to our technological progression, if there is a long-term reason for our ingenuity, be it immortality, or time travel, whatever, if there is a summum to our bonum, then we must figure out a way to attain our potential instead of being held back by our own particular ‘destinies.’
Let’s assume, for the benefit of this article, that there is a way for us to beat the system, that we can become emancipated from the continuous drudgery of life as we have come to accept it, and that we can improve the human condition. This is quite an assumption (for many reasons,) but let’s just start from there; it will simplify the discourse.
The one thing which we must consider at this point is that every war ever fought (yes, even the French revolution and the American war of secession) was a contrivance. There is no war possible but a class war, otherwise we are simply fighting to protect the interests of those who hold us in bondage. The struggle for freedom is class-based, and there can be no other way to sovereignty.
“And his hands would plait the priest’s entrails, For want of a rope, to strangle kings.”
“Et ses mains ourdiraient les entrailles du prêtre,
Au défaut d’un cordon pour étrangler les rois.”
Les Éleuthéromanes, in Poésies Diverses (1875) – Denis Diderot
There is a relationship which exists between the crown and the cross. From ancient Egypt to modern England, there has always been an interplay between the divine and the sovereign. To deny the monarchy exclusive access to the divine is an emancipation of our very souls.
“For who is there that does not see, to whose benefit it conduceth, to have it believed, that a King hath not his Authority from Christ, unlesse a Bishop crown him?” Leviathan (1651) – Thomas Hobbes
If there is to be any freedom, not only the people who control the system, but the very system itself must be brought down, not to be replaced with a surrogate, but with something so completely novel that power itself is seen in its true light. Nationalism, religion, food distribution, inequality, and all the other divisive pillars of what we call civilisation must be re-examined. To be a patriot is to abhor all that is not native to one’s culture. To follow a flag is an exercise of submission. A pledge of allegiance is a denial of equality. Religious sectarianism is nothing more than cultism, no matter how convincing the rhetoric. The golden age of Hegelistic thought must end for there to be any semblance of equality and personal sovereignty.
If centralization has not worked under any economic system, perhaps we must go in another direction. If Americanism (disaster capitalism*) has not fulfilled the needs of the populace, there must be another way, and we owe it to ourselves to find it. Whether that way be metallism, anarchy, direct democracy, autonomous collectivism, controlled despotism, or a return to a monarchistic city-state, we must, eventually, find a path which will protect the rights of all, allow co-operation rather than competition, glorify good deeds over good deals, and bring actual meaning to our lives, not just ‘progress’ – whatever that means, ‘growth,’ and personal profit.
[Perhaps, if man were immortal, he would think more of others. He wouldn’t be gone by the time his deeds were known; he would have to live with them forever.]
Would you sell weapons for profit, thus helping your family to buy food? Would you steal rations from dead soldiers to feed your family? Would you kill to protect them? What is evil, then? Evil can be justified as pre-emptive self-defence. If there is no aggression, there is no need to defend. Co-operation, then, is critical to ensure peace, competition will inevitably lead to war. Defence, on the other hand, is essential to a free life. Self-defence is an unalienable right… that doesn’t make it more desirable as a means of communication.
Negotiation always comes from a position of power, authority, or truth. We need not negotiate for that which is already ours.
Can we change the world? We say we always have. But have we really? It’s like painting the walls of a very old house. It’s a change, technically speaking, but the architecture remains in place.
* An example of disaster capitalism:
Derivatives insure crops against failure by multiples of the value of said crop, so a field with one million dollars worth of wheat can be worth two million in insurance if disaster strikes. At the same time, insurance companies in Calgary funded cloud-seeding projects in order to move hailstorms away from the city and down-wind into the farms because it was cheaper to insure failed crops than a parking lot full of SUVs. Not only was it cheaper, the derivatives against the crop hedged for huge profits.) When it is in the best interests of shareholders of a corporation to lay waste to crops (in order to cash in on the derivatives taken against them,) all manner of geo-engineering is undertaken and food-security is lost to the populace. Not only do these companies profit from natural disasters, they are financially motivated to cause them. This is very similar to the scenario which brought Lehman down.
President Obama just went over congress’ heads, again. It’s going to get harder and harder for Americans to aquire firearms.
The missing link in all gun (firearm) stories portrayed on the MSM is mental health. The issue of mental health is often mentioned as some sort of justification but never examined.
There is no difference between having one’s firearms confiscated for no reason and having them confiscated for an accusation of mental health. In some cases, the claim may be legitimate, nevertheless, when an accusation of failing mental health is all that is needed in order to strip someone of their rights, who is to say that this power cannot and will not be used arbitrarily. Indeed, there have been many instances in which it has. Mental health issues have been used to take people’s children, lock people up indefinitely, and have the very basis of certain legal cases discounted and thrown out. There are certainly those who are a danger to themselves and others, but using this argument against everyone in order to limit the public availability of firearms is disingenuous and unreasonable.
[This point is brought to light when one considers that very large multi-national corporations such as Serco control the mental health industry, the prison system, as well as adoption and child services, all at once. A military contractor, they also control Britain’s entire nuclear arsenal, their airports, and a good deal of the British economy. It helps that they have contacts with parliament.]
The notion of ‘pre-crime’ goes against all the democratic foundations of our system of government. The case of Sammy Yatim demonstrates this perfectly. One can be in a restaurant with thirty other people holding a steak knife and not be considered a threat, but on a bus it is a whole different matter. Even though everyone was let off the bus safely, Sammy Yatim was killed for exposing himself and holding a three inch knife in a threatening manner. He was obviously not there to kill anybody. He was clearly frustrated, distressed, and crying out for help. Isn’t helping people in that situation what the police are supposed to do? There were many different non-lethal options available to the armour-clad police, and none of them were in any danger. This begs the question, why was he shot eight times before being tasered.
Clearly, a great deal of gun violence is attributable to suicide, as are a great many police shootings. It must be assumed that this would have been accomplished with or without guns. Most young people don’t shoot themselves, anyway.
Guns are offensive weapons. Unfortunately, the only way to defend against them is to shoot back. The Swiss have a high rate of gun ownership and a very low murder rate. Swiss army chief André Blattmann advises the Swiss people to arm themselves in the face of social unrest. The US is doing the opposite. Why? Over 99.9% of all ammunition is expended in non-criminal and non-violent (unless you are a deer) activities. Guns, therefore, must serve a useful purpose. Cars are more dangerous. The environmentalists will have their hands full taking people’s cars away, too.
From ZeroHedge: Wed, 01/06/2016
Knowledge from Your Dictionary:
“Knowledge is defined as what is learned, understood or aware of.”
A collection of definitions of ‘knowledge.’
Intelligence from Wordsmyth:
“In an organizational context, knowledge is the sum of what is known and resides in the intelligence and the competence of people.”
Intelligence, indeed, has many components, but it can also be seen as a process.
- pattern recognition
Not only is intelligence complex, it is as broad as it is tall.
“E=mc^2” has become something of a badge of intelligence although it displays nothing but information. It was arrived at, however, using nothing but pure intelligence (and lotsa’ chalk.)
In AI terms, intelligence means accomplishment of a mission. This implies that success is an integral part of intelligence. Truly, if it didn’t work, it wasn’t an intelligent conclusion to have reached, or supposition to begin with.
The only thing necessary for something which is wrong to be accepted is agreement (faith, consensus, belief.)
“What a misfortune it is that we should thus be compelled to let our boys’ schooling interfere with their education!” –Grant Allen
Genius describes one who knows more about a particular subject (or subjects) than almost everybody else in the world, or is seen to. The knowledge behind the intelligence to put it all together is very vertical in nature. It needs to be. Like a focused beam of light, it can reach farther. In this case, a narrower base builds a taller tower. A genius can often experience serious failings in other areas, though. Genius is relative.
Wisdom is something else altogether. Wisdom has more to do with judgement.
“Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment.” -Evan Hardin
Ignorant simply means not knowing. Everyone has a similar capacity to learn, it is simply that we are not all interested by the same things, and so if I am ignorant in your particular field of expertise, you view me as a moron; but you are equally ignorant in my field, and so who is stupid? Both of us? Neither? Remember that we all think we are good drivers yet we think most others are not.
And then there’s just looking smart.
Dumb – not being able to say and having nothing good to say are seen as equivalent… but that is another subject, altogether.
“For who is there that does not see, to whose benefit it conduceth, to have it believed, that a King hath not his Authority from Christ, unlesse a Bishop crown him?”
-Thomas Hobbes, ‘Leviathan’
Today is the day the Fed decides whether it will raise interest rates or not. Nobody at all is talking about this but, heck, they might even go negative. From a nominal 0.10%, if the rate is dropped 0.25%, that would turn (near) ZIRP into (full-on) NIRP.
Maybe there will be a bomb scare and the meeting will be called off. That way ISIS can be blamed, guns can be confiscated, Christmas spending won’t be affected, the Fed won’t be scrutinized, and the hike can happen in January when it won’t matter so much, if at all. Everybody will be broke by then anyway.
We will have to wait and see. In the meantime, watch for falling… uh… objects.
No bomb scare, no NIRP (yet,) no good sense from the Fed. Today’s hike caused already over-priced markets everywhere (even Brazil) to climb even higher. Is this a good thing, or did the Fed screw up once again?
If hikes are no good, and Nirp is no good (punishes responsible savers,) what options are left? When all markets are manipulated (to paraphrase Carney,) how does this bode for the entrepreneurs who are supposed to lift us out of recession? How are they supposed to make projections? How can they justify risking investments and hiring their workforce?
Defenestration did not appear to be a significant problem.
“In the end, the Fed did not surprise, and raised interest rates for the first time in almost a decade in a widely telegraphed move while signaling that the pace of subsequent increases will be “gradual” and in line with previous projections. The Federal Open Market Committee unanimously voted to set the new target range for the federal funds rate at 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent, up from zero to 0.25 percent. Policy makers separately forecast an appropriate rate of 1.375 percent at the end of 2016, the same as September, implying four quarter-point increases in the target range next year, based on the median number from 17 officials.”
(The quote in the above image, as was said by several characters throughout the movie, was actually, “I will not be subjected to criminal abuse.”)
It is always odd to see such a movie as this get so little press. Even the reviews have been bereft of any deep interpretation. What is it about ‘Cloud Atlas’ which elicits such hesitation, such muted detachment, such reverence?
Normally, a Hollywood movie (directed by Tom Tykwer and the Wachowskis) with an A-list cast (Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Susan Sarandon, Hugo Weaving, Hugh Grant,) based on such an excellent book (by David Mitchell,) commanding such an enormous budget, and with arguably one of the best, most innovative screenplays (Tom Tykwer and the Wachowskis) in a long time would be hyped ad nauseum. Normally, the reviews of such a film would tear into the plot, dissecting it, explaining every motif, exposing every hidden nuance. Normal does not seem to be a word one can easily associate with this film.
Roger Ebert had nothing to say. The New Yorker review read like a history of the Wachowskis and only mentioned the plot in the second paragraph of a much too long article, going on to drop names of other great movies for lack of any constructive analogies. Salon broke the movie down chronologically and descriptively, did an FAQ style article, but failed to give any meaningful interpretation of the plot. Why such hesitation on telling an admittedly confused public what the movie was really about?
The New York Times, surprisingly, does a better job. At least it uses the words others shy away from using: freedom; slavery; deprivation; political; humanity; hope. Perhaps here are we getting closer to the ‘true-true’ reasons for such quiet praise.
There is one common thread in this movie and that is freedom. It underlies each scene and every word. Every character is at once a subject and a master. Confinement and escape are in every action. Even gravity is portrayed as an oppressive force, as well as one which brings everything together (the bridge, the cliff, the walkway, and the comet.) Yet, in the end, all are bound to each other, to the universe, and to time itself.
Collectivist ideals are rampant throughout the film through cliques, tribes, classes, and societies, yet the individual struggle to affect the whole is put front-and-center.
The film is highly politicized, as could be expected from the Wachowskis, but the lack of pre-release hype is itself telling. In this world of geo-political duplicity and main-stream propaganda, has Hollywood shown its hand as far as support for political agendas goes? It is obvious that the media wants us to feel, not think, and that subdued masses are what is needed to further the goal of societal change on a global level. One wonders if the film would have been shown at all had the story-line been any less confusing.
The film ‘Cloud Atlas’, much like ‘The Matrix’, is as close to a call-to-action as one could hope to find in a film of this scope. Truly the world needs more block-busters like this, if only to feed the divide between those who know and those who believe. Division is, after all, the goal of any socio-political movement. The modern politics of Washington are no different in this respect. Even the fabricants’ hair displays a red and a blue striped marking (which Sonmi is shown cutting off when her understanding grows.) Hopefully, there are still those amongst us who will look deeper into the message than just ‘stunning visuals’ and ‘an all-star cast.’ Hopefully, there are those who will heed the call to act when individual liberty and state sovereignty are the prize at stake.
“The weak are meat, and the strong do eat.”
Turkey’s recent (and seemingly inexplicable) foray into the spotlight of middle-eastern affairs has baffled many international observers. Turkey’s provocations against Syria, Russia, and now Iraq, and their alleged support of terror groups in support of their energy industry appear to have angered Washington (and NATO,) have puzzled Kazakhstan, irked China, and have put Europe in a difficult situation. Nobody seems to know what Erdogan is up to.
Resources are the default excuse, but cultural ties to the region’s other local actors play an important part. Is Turkey creating a buffer zone between Russia and the middle-east in order to inflate its importance? How many of the ‘-stans’ are on his side?
“In concrete terms, the only achievement was the announced agreement to launch the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP). «Trans-Anatolian gas pipeline – TANAP can be launched sooner than it was initially scheduled», said Mr Ahmet Davutoglu at a joint press conference with Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev.
Some 6 billion cubic meters of gas of 16 billion cubic meters will go to Turkey, while some 10 billion cubic meters of gas will go to Europe. TANAP will connect the giant Shah Deniz gas field in Azerbaijan to Europe through the South Caucasus Pipeline (SCP), TANAP and the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP).”
Is Turkey using Azerbaijan to further its goal of regional dominance or is Turcic concern for its neighbours genuine? The move north and east puts several other states, especially Georgia, into harm’s way. No wonder Putin included Yunus-Bek Yevkurov in its meeting with the Saudi defense minister Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud. This aggrandization of the empire would serve as a bonding agent solidifying Turkey’s plan for regional dominance. Turkey already controls all the land-based pipelines into Europe from the middle-east and seems to have no qualms about using less legitimate groups to help further its agenda. The term ‘deep-state’ was coined in reference to Turkey, after all. (Note the black Turkish flag in the above image.)
“The rulers of re-emerged Ottoman Empire are trying to rekindle the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. The fighting between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces has escalated recently. The Paris Armenia-Azerbaijan summit slated for December 1 was indefinitely postponed.”
Turkey has many battle-fronts now; they look to start conflict with everybody it would seem. A war forces states to take sides, and with Turkey controlling a great deal of European energy, as well as the water from the Euphrates river, perhaps Erdogan is trying to force his ally’s hands. He thought he had NATO support, but that is as yet uncertain; Turkey did fight a war against Poland in the 17th century. He seems to have Washington’s, in any case. But will Russia and the US both fall for the ploy, or will the two super-powers turn against him? He may well take Assad’s place as the next Gadaffi. Turkey’s role is at least as important as Ukraine’s, and they just got about the same amount of money from Europe as the IMF gave the Ukraine. Will we see increased terror attacks across the Caucasus as Putin has feared since the Sochi games? Time will tell.
Just to push the point of Caucasus-ISIS young men with no better options than to make war with each other… The trickle-down is military, minute, and manipulative. War is a job; it comes with training, decent pay, glory and valour, and it leaves more women for the surviving (or conquering) men. The nomadic mercenaries are the Highlanders of the middle-east.
“Turkey, the US, Russia, Syria – all these countries, the Kurds are all involved in the struggle against ISIS in Syria and in Iraq.
Yes, yes they are – and maybe that’s part of the reason why Erdogan despises them more now than ever.”
– Tyler Durden
Everything in life which has been given importance works to divide us.
Capitalism leads to competition, it divides us into competing groups (corporations) or competitive entrepreneurs, who must each compete with each other by increasing service while decreasing cost. It is conflict which drives each market, sector, and industry. We must even compete for our jobs. We must all be better by working more and getting less value for our own time, and all for the greater good of society. Time is, after all, the only thing with which we are all born. Time is the ultimate non-renewable resource. Good is also a relative term. The more time we spend working for the good of our family, the less time we have to spend at home to raise our families properly. Since we cannot do it ourselves, the state must do it for us. Through babysitters, day-care workers, teachers, tutors, coaches, mentors, religious leaders, and nannies do we educate our children by using their morals, values, ethics, and philosophies as proxy to our own. Is this actually good? Does this lead to the betterment of society or simply a ‘lowest common-denominator’ way of looking at education. Does this improve the independance, empowerment, and decision-making ability of our kids or does it hinder their development? Increased competition has led to both parents being away from their children just to maintain the same level of comfort our parents enjoyed. We also have less time for our friends, of which we have more now. Can this be considered inflationary economics vis-a-vis relationships and familial life?
Thanks to the hightened sense of capitalistic values (or the negative view on communistic ones,) committee work is sneered at. A committee is considered to result in the lowest common denominator of the decision process instead of leading to a greater coverage of the areas involved. Ayn Rand had much to say on this subject. Capitalism has always been pitted against communism (democracy and socialism are terms of governance) as if there were no alternatives other than those two, as either can lead to fascism (which is a state solution to competition as it eliminates all forms of conflict through authoritarian rule, much like Monarchy.)
Democracy, which has become synonymous with capitalism in the west, also leads to factions: there’s the right and the left, the red and the blue, the Republicans and the Democrats, all very Jungian. Factions of factions are also present and evolving; centrist (fence-sitting,) center-right, center-left, and all the attendant sub-categories lead to more and more levels upon which to disagree. Whether you’re an elephant or a donkey, it’s always a fight against the other team (or combination of other teams) instead of working together to find common solutions.
Religious sects are a perfect example of this be they Catholics versus Protestants, Sunni versus Shia, Reform and Orthodox Judaism, or Hinduism, which is a veritable cacaphony of conflicting ideologies.
Sports, either individual or team, also bring the dualistic paradigm into sharp focus. Even reality shows are a competition. Sure, the teams must work together at times, but the end result is always the elimination of certain members such that in the end, there can be only one, the so-called winner. Victorious and alone, like the Highlander, confined to a life of solitude. This is better?
Sex is the ultimate competition. Whose genes will be passed on? What is the goal here, to solely populate the earth with one gene pool? This is surely not better. We all compete for the best mate but then lose interest after a decade or so only to start competing again, but this time with lesser resources. This has less to do with progeny than with ego, though. But ego has led to many people bringing competition in this market to the level of changing themselves physically, often with terrible consequences. Is fake ‘perfect’ better than real unique?
Everything, it would seem, is a war now. The war on terror, the war on drugs, the battle for the environment, it would seem as though the competition has been brought to its ultimate level in all aspects of our lives. Advertising displays this violent mentality better still – “We must beat the competition to bring you the best.” Wouldn’t working with the competition bring about a better deal in the end?
A good example of this is the automotive industry. It can be argued that without cars, there would be no pollution, no oil dependancy, no wars, and a lot less stress. This may be stretching things somewhat, but a case could be made. The point is that public transport would be at a far higher level than it is at today because if all those companies that try to build a ‘better’ car would have worked together and pooled their resources from the start, we’d be able to go anywhere in the world in an hour, and for a pittance. The basic structure of our thinking which has produced this economy that glorifies our duality and competitive ‘nature’ is at fault.
Is it in our nature to compete or is it more akin to humanity to work together? Different societies will have differing views on this, but beneath all that, beneath the modern constructs and psychological affectations, have societies and whole civilizations not arisen by working together? Is that not what is meant by community?
The truth of the matter is that we have been influenced, to a great extent, by those who would have us working more such that they may work less. They don’t want us working together, that’s how revolutions happen. They want us focused on bringing each other down so that we cannot climb upon our brothers’ and sisters’ shoulders for a glimpse at our own emancipation. The lazy rise to the top in our society, not the hard-working. It is always through top-down pressure that terms like team-player, overtime, austerity, trickle-down, and company-man find favour. We have been conditioned to think like those we wish to emulate. We have forgotten, it would seem, that it does tend to be lonely at the top. When team-work is given the true status it deserves, it can get to be quite dangerous there, as well.
Terrorism itself has had many uses and gone through many transformations throughout the ages. Terrorism has been used in order to subvert, manipulate, silence, coerce, influence, persuade, and otherwise intervene in both the operations of nation-states and the interruption of such operations. Terrorism has been used by both sides, small and large, weak and strong, defender and aggressor, antagonist and protagonist, over many issues, and in many theatres. Terrorism is a relative term.
Consider, for a moment, its definition, roughly: the act of instilling fear in order to serve a specific purpose. Thus terrorism has been used in advertising (buy this before we run out,) in child-rearing (do you want to be punished?,) in religion (avoid this or you will go to hell,) in politics (they will hurt the economy,) and in environmentalism (the consequences would be disastrous.) Truly, terrorism has been used in all aspects of all of our lives. The degree to which it has is simply a matter of scale.
However, when we speak of or hear the term in our daily lives, we understand it to mean something more sinister, more dire, and more violent.
Terrorism is always used to describe the tactics of an opponent no matter which side of a conflict they find themselves on. One would never describe one’s allies as terrorists. Al-Qaeda would not describe members of ISIS as terrorists, just as NATO would not describe the Turkish government as such (even though some Kurds might.)
Terrorism is also a tool. Just as a hammer can be used to build a house or to tear one down, terror can be used for the purpose of (perceived) good or (perceived) evil. It all depends on whether the terrorists themselves use terror tactics or they are used by proxy. Terrorists refer to themselves as rebels or freedom fighters whereas their opponents who use those same acts by proxy refer to them as mercenaries. When acts of terror are used against one’s self, they are called false flag attacks.
Although terror has been used against populations for millenia, the nineteen-seventies saw terror take on new and different forms. For one thing, the television played a big part in bringing attention to many unknown causes, opinions, and state actors. Terrorism would fizzle out very quickly were it not for the mass media making its case. For another thing, the terrorists in the seventies knew who to target (they often went after pertinent individuals,) but the governments did not. Now the tables have been turned. The government (supposedly) knows about plots before they happen (when it is to their benefit,) governments target individuals, and the terrorists attack helpless civilians instead of those in positions of power.
One must ask the question, why do the terrorists never attack the wealthy, the elite? Why are F1 races and polo matches and horse races and film festivals not attacked? Why has Monaco never been attacked (the worse that can be said of Monaco is that there is an underlying threat from terrorism? ) Why are certain buildings never targeted, buildings in which decisions concerning global policy are struck? They must be much easier to hit than buildings like the Pentagon, the Murrah, and the big three in New York. With ISIS destroying ancient art, why are museums and art galleries never hit? Buildings like bank headquarters and world trade associations are not targeted… nobody ever hits an NGO, just civilians.
It is said that terrorists hate our freedom, but it can’t be just that (if it is at all) because there are many groups, each with their own issues. They can’t all be against freedom and only against freedom. Don’t they have other demands like sovereignty, food, peace, freedom from resource-driven oppression, water, education… ? They seek freedom too, after all, freedom from western intervention.
Terrorists used to want to get the general public on their side. They wanted sympathy towards their cause. Attacking a population is what you do when you want minorities to leave your town, or when you want to start a race war. When you have a political message to send, you target those involved, like they knew to do way back in the seventies – the ‘golden age’ of terror.
If government wanted us NOT to be afraid, state-run news agencies would ignore the attacks, not produce free advertising for the terrorists (like when they withhold a name so as not to fan the popularity fire.)
So what do we make of terror perpetrated ON the masses while being shown ad infinitum TO the masses and never injuring ANY of the elite? Conditioning? Advertising? But what are they selling? Dominance, perhaps.
We must therefore assume that terrorism, these days, is not the work of terrorists, but of ‘other’ groups that want us scared, obedient, and docile. <sarc>Who could that possibly be? And why? Why? </sarc> Of course we all know the answers to the questions posed in New York, Madrid, London, Boston, Newtown, Paris, San Bernadino, et al.; it is high time we started admitting that to ourselves. There may never have been a legitimate act of terror perpetrated in the west outside of the IRA, ever (actually, the IRA WAS involved in talks with the British government… hmmm?!)
Besides, don’t ISIS have websites? Couldn’t their ISPs shut them down or, at least, identify them? It’s not like ISIS has its own satellites.
Another truly excellent article by ZH’s George Washington:
“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists or are created by our own security services.”
Waking Times Media
“The latest whistleblower is David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps intelligence officer, and the second-highest-ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence. He is a former CIA clandestine services case officer, and this is what he had to say:”
Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.
There is nothing to worry about concerning an EMP attack. The reason is quite simple.
Two words: Faraday cage.
A microwave oven is a Faraday cage. So is a cardboard box covered in chicken wire.
Your plastic computer case is no good, but rest assured, sensitive servers are protected.
Here are some points about carbon taxes which may have passed under the radar gleaned from Canada’s Ecofiscal Commision (a Canadian think-tank.)
The commission had what they refered to as a debate today between Chris Ragan, chair of Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission and Merran Smith, Executive Director or Clean Energy Canada moderated by the Globe and Mail’s Editorial Page Editor Tony Keller. It wasn’t much of a debate, it was more like publicity. The live event was aimed at corporate oil sector executives.
The participants mostly echoed each others’ comments. Even pre-recorded clips and guest questions simply regurgitated the day’s talking points. They were few, but seemed to encourage oil companies to accept the incentivization programs aimed directly at them. The public, and its concerns, were for the most part, ignored.
The one point which kept coming up was that carbon taxes should be revenue-neutral. What this means is that while companies would be taxed for their share of carbon emissions (again, there was no distinction between CO, CO2, and CH4) at about $30/tonne, the money would then come back to the company through special programs, tax breaks in other areas, or subsidies. BC’s cement industry was cited saying that some $25M had already been given in order to reduce GHG emissions. So is the government trying to get some of its money back, or is it trying to get corporations to pay for their own subsidies?
BC uses a revenue-neutral system whereas the system in Quebec is cap and trade (Quebec carbon is taxed at about $14/tonne.) The problem here is the perception of oil companies; if they feel the taxes are not revenue-neutral, the ‘debators’ conceded, there would be an exodus of mostly manufacturing jobs towards cheaper emerging markets. In other words, ‘the working man’ suffers.
They then pointed out that manufacturing jobs were being replaced with other jobs (in Ontario total hires went up.) If those jobs are being replaced with better jobs (R&D,) (re)education will cost more for the workers and saddle them with more debt – if Canadians are even qualified to do these jobs – which is doubtful. But if the jobs (as is more probably the case) are being replaced with lesser jobs (service sector) as is the current trend, again it is ‘the working man’ who suffers.
Emerging market countries have been quick to point out that most of this ‘pollution’ was made by developed market countries who then counter that the pollution from the next fifty years will be mostly EM, and much worse. We got it on credit, but you have to pay up front.
Finally, the ‘leftover’ taxes would be used to help subsidize public transport. Since less people will be able to afford cars, this seems reasonable. Again it is ‘the working man’ who suffers. Those who can afford it will be encouraged to buy newer cleaner cars. More money being spent by the public which already owes a tremendous amount of new car debt in favour of the car companies who produce the pollution in the first place. This is all getting rather circular. Who suffers? You guessed it.
All this is based upon the notion that this entire carbon market will not be a free market, but a highly manipulated one; one in which the price of carbon can never be high enough, much like the already carbon-tax-laden airline ticket. Prices will be set, because if the market were left to its own devices, and it turns out that CO2 does nothing to raise global temperatures, the >$1T market would collapse taking everything out with it.
Canada’s Ecofiscal Commision has no literature referencing sources for CO2 harm, cites no peer-reviewed papers backing up its claims, will not provide any references, and says the science is settled which negates the need for any pesky proof.
The commission has also indicated that all forms of carbon emissions should be subject to taxation. Get ready for a breathing tax, Canada.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is hurting. Their move of increasing oil production with the goal of lowering prices in order to gain a larger market share (Saud denies this but they are trying to put US shale out of business – low interest rates in the US have contributed to staving off the death blow, for now) has hurt all net oil exporting economies worldwide, including Saud, itself. The secondary effect was to pressure Russia into leaving Assad to the jackals. Russia bit the bullet and did not yield. Strike two. The war in Yemen as well as the financing of Syrian rebels costs the kingdom a lot of money they just don’t have. Steeeerike three.
Oil represents about 80% of Saud’s revenue. With ISIS competing for market share by selling oil to Turkey at $20/barrel – thereby undercutting the market by half, their economy can simply not withstand this price point for much longer. So what can they do?
They could find other sources of income, they could cut output of oil, they could de-peg from the US dollar, or they could start selling oil in yuan. Remember what happened to Saddam Hussein when he tried to sell his oil in Euros. Everybody was a loser in that affair.
Today, the renminbi (yuan – for all intents and purposes) will likely be included in the IMF’s SDR basket of funds. There is an OPEC meeting this Friday.
Saudi Aramco is rumoured to be going public, that is to say, privatized. An IPO is being considered. Of course the Saudis wouldn’t let this corporation fall into the wrong hands (5% for now,) so is this simply a variation on a stock-buyback scheme of epic proportion? This way they can raise their stock price without raising the price of oil. Since doing so would hurt the stock price, this would more or less guarantee low oil prices for a while. This would be a bad thing for all oil net exporters; Canada will be especially hard hit.
One wonders if they will allow Yuan transactions for their shares.
In light of the recent attack in Paris, and with police claiming they cannot ensure the security of the many participants to COP 21 including the pope and other heads of state, no public demonstrations will be allowed. Period.
The emphasis has been on the hundreds of thousands of supposed supporters who had been expected to march in solidarity with the aims of the conference (whether or not it would have manifested.) No mention has been made, however, of those who oppose the conference and its goals. No mention will be made of them at all as they will, thanks to the new normal of global security, not even be allowed to show up. This has turned out to be a tremendously effective way to silence dissent. Is this the future of global governance?
The fear was that support for the ‘environmental’ goals would be overshadowed by those who denounce them. Public apathy on the subject is rampant and the arguments against anthropogenic global warming are gaining momentum. In no way did they want a repeat of many G-7/G-8/G-20 conferences in which protestors turned out ‘en masse’ while support for the policies was nowhere to be seen.
Surely their numbers must be substantial. The CO2 poll at the top of this blog shows that fully two thirds of respondants believe that the world would be better off if CO2 levels were not reduced.
One can only wonder, had the events of Nov. 13th in Paris not occured, just what the conference, or more precisely, the scene outside the conference, would have looked like. Just lucky, I suppose.
Since all demonstrations were banned for the reason of security (anti-terrorism,) all demonstrators will be seen as terrorists; hence, if you are a skeptic, you’re no better than a member of ISIS.
With the unelected writing policy to be sold by the elected to the electors, and with an absolute media blackout on dissent, it is difficult to see how the ‘international order’ could be headed towards a democratic future.
Sun Tzu wrote that the best way to win a war was not to fight in the first place. Wise words taken to heart in Paris. One more in a long list of debates which alarmists have done everything possible to avoid.
It all started here at COP 2.
COP 2 took place in July 1996 in Geneva, Switzerland. Its Ministerial Declaration was noted (but not adopted) July 18, 1996, and reflected a U.S. position statement presented by Timothy Wirth, former Under Secretary for Global Affairs for the U.S. State Department at that meeting, which:
- Accepted the scientific findings on climate change proffered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its second assessment (1995);
- Rejected uniform “harmonized policies” in favor of flexibility;
- Called for “legally binding mid-term targets”.”
“In the State Department, he worked with Vice President Al Gore on global environmental and population issues, supporting the administration’s views on global warming. A supporter of the proposed Kyoto Protocol, Wirth announced the U.S.’s commitment to legally binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions. From 1998 to 2013, he served as the president of the United Nations Foundation, and currently sits on the Foundation’s board.”
“The United Nations Foundation was launched in 1998 with a $1 billion gift from Ted Turner to support the United Nations causes… The main issue areas that the Foundation addresses are child health, climate change & energy, sustainable development, technology, women, girls, and population, and supporting the United Nations.”
How is it that the philanthropists who are the most ardent supporters of medical programs to save more lives (especially in the 1/3 world) through health services, disease reduction, and mass vaccination, are the same alarmists who decry over-population as the number one threat to humanity in being the number one cause of climate change (0:58)? These Ehrlichians, these Holdrenites really need to clarify why they routinely spend billions funding these programs to save millions of lives while publicly stating that it is a death sentance to us all. In order for people to voluntarily agree to have no more than one or two children, poverty must be eradicated. Funding health services will only make that problem worse, if one listens to the men who share the views of the Ted Turners’ and the Bill Gates’ and the Al Gores’ of the world. When notable people say one thing yet do another, it should be noted. When objecting to these incongruencies is not tolerated, it should be feared.
What’s going to happen when Trump retracts by saying he mis-spoke about the cheering Arabs? He will correct himself by saying that it was , in fact, Israelis who cheered (6:51) when the towers came down.
He will, of course, be right, and the media will have no choice but to report the fact that some Israelis claimed to have had fore-knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. This will re-open the wounds of 9/11 and all the truthers will team up with the bankster-haters to give him his landslide presidency.
After all, who knows more about New York real estate than the Donald? Who knows more building inspectors? Is this how he plans to reveal the truth about 9/11 to the American voters? In light of the current trend to buck the establishment types, perhaps this is just what the US secretly wants right now – a protectionist president who calls them like he sees them.
Expect talk of the USS Liberty to become a hot topic in the upcoming news/election cycle.
He didn’t capitalize the last time he had a chance to wrap up the election; will he do it this time?
Step two is complete.
“The Donald: Israel, American Jews, Funding ISIS and World Terrorism“
“ipsa scientia potestas est”
Meditationes Sacrae (1597) – Sir Francis Bacon
Physics tells us that power equals work over time (P=W/t.) If knowledge is power and time is money, we can substitute: knowledge equals work over money. Therefore, the ratio between knowledge and money is inversely proportional. Ergo, the more money you make, the less you probably know; or conversely, the more you know, the less you are likely to make. (There is a lower limit to this.)
Possibly also, the more money one has, the less one needs to know.
High-paying jobs are usually very pointed, very specific as far as knowledge goes. In this case, a broader base does not a taller tower make. More like a laser beam, a narrow base creates a more focused and distant reach.
This is why schooling equals ‘success’ and education equals freedom.
Furthermore, work is defined as force times distance (W=F*d.) Work, therefore, requires exertion and movement.
Work is also the product of power and time (or knowledge and money,) but since they are inversely proportional, it is a zero-sum. In other words, all work is equal in value, unless it requires no exertion, in which case it isn’t work at all.
A telling point is that the combination of knowledge and money portends force at a distance.
So the next time someone with soft hands tells you they’ve worked hard to get where they are, or that they’ve earned everything they’ve gotten through being smart, either they don’t understand the facts, or they’re lying. Maybe both.
This isn’t just an opinion; it’s math, it’s physics, it’s science!
While the world was busy watching the aftermath of the Paris attacks, the IMF just gave its recommendation to place China’s Renminbi in the global Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket of funds.
“In an ironic twist, while the IMF has historically delayed the moment of acceptance, it caved just months after China officially devalued its currency for the first time in decades to stimulate its exports, and has unleashed an unprecedented campaign (using overt and covert means) to stabilize the Yuan as capital outflows in the past several months have soared. ”
This puts pressure on the faith in the US dollar and its world reserve currency status and has many international consequences, as well.
Today is the day. Is the beginning of the end nigh for the US dollar?
“In 2009, amid the West’s scramble for signs of recovery, Zhou Xiaochuan, the governor of the Peoples Bank of China, called for a new financial order with a global reserve currency replacing the U.S. dollar. The Financial Times noted, “If, as expected, the imf this month approves the inclusion of China’s renminbi as a reserve currency, it will mark a small step for Mr. Zhou’s 2009 vision but a big move for the renminbi.” ”
“The US Dollar might have reached the top of its strength and could see a downward correction in the next few weeks.”
With the Fed expected to raise interest rates in December, more outflows from the US dollar to the Yuan (renminbi) and some downward pressure on the dollar can be expected in the short term. Long term, the dollar still looks strong, but the renminbi is set to catch up.
It’s official, the yuan will be part of the SDR basket starting Oct. 1, 2016 with a weighting of 10.92%. Could this be a catalyst for portfolio re-allocation? If it is, and if new buyers of yuan stem the outflow of capital from China, the yuan may soar undoing all the devaluations to date and, ironically, hurt the already faultering Chinese economy. Could China’s hard landing turn into a crash?
False Flags? G20? COP21? Strong Cities Network? Refugees?
What’s that in the fireplace?
Fareed Zakaria interviewed John Kerry “…on the next steps for the U.S. response to the crisis in Syria and Iraq, whether there is still hope for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, if Iran’s actions towards the West have improved since the P5+1 nuclear deal, and what to expect from next week’s global conference on climate change.”
The interview was posted Friday 13th, 3:36PM EST… the day of the attacks (actually, at the exact same time as the first attack) and one day before Jean Jullien’s ‘Peace for Paris’ artwork went viral. The interview had certainly taken place quite some time before this.
Did Jean Julien copy this? He seemed extremely defensive when I asked him about it. Is this a simple case of ‘plagariat,’ or there something more nefarious going on?
It is worth mentioning that this is the only one of Fareed Zakaria’s CNN interviews which is not available online.
And one more thing…
It bears repeating here that there are ‘terrorist’ events of this scale happening every week in Africa, Asia, and South America. These events are almost never reported unless they serve some higher purpose. Did we ever bring back Michelle Obama’s Chibok girls? Do you know? Do you remember? Does she? Boko Haram et al. have been importing young girls and boys into Europe to serve the sexual desires of the European elite ever since colonial days at the rate of thousands per year.
Paul Craig Roberts, in a recently penned article has written, “…the world is accustomed to following the lead of the West.” This is wrong. More correctly, the world has no choice but to follow the lead of the West. If it didn’t, we’d never hear about it anyhow. Emerging markets are being dragged around by the nose-ring in order to support a western narrative, western military goals, and western economic policy. In the west-centric news cycle, only white lives matter. This is why shutting the door to millions of migrants/refugees because of a single fake Syrian passport will be an easy and readily acceptable thing to do.
Is Paris the European equivalent of 9/11? Will the world have to radically change because of it? Are the lives of 100+ Parisiens that much more worthy of fighting for than the hundreds of thousands or millions of middle-easterners who have suffered at the hands of the West for centuries? Who are the terrorists and what is the true goal behind their attacks?
“Multiple myeloma is a cancer that forms in a type of white blood cell called a plasma cell.” It affects bone marrow.
Researchers at Mayo think that introducing a strain of measles into a cancer patient has ‘cured’ her condition.
“Two patients in the study received a single intravenous dose of an engineered measles virus (MV-NIS) that is selectively toxic to myeloma plasma cells. Both patients responded, showing reduction of both bone marrow cancer and myeloma protein. One patient, a 49-year-old woman, experienced complete remission of myeloma and has been clear of the disease for over six months.”
The paper goes on to state,
“In their article, the researchers explain they were reporting on these two patients because they were the first two studied at the highest possible dose, had limited previous exposure to measles, and therefore fewer antibodies to the virus, and essentially had no remaining treatment options.”
Is it safe to say that measles vaccines would prevent treatment of this condition in this way?
What other diseases are vaccinations preventing us from curing? And how long has this been known? The theory has, in fact, been posited since before vaccines were commonly administered.
“Oncolytic virotherapy – using re-engineered viruses to fight cancer – has a history dating back to the 1950s. Thousands of cancer patients have been treated with oncolytic viruses from many different virus families (herpesviruses, poxviruses, common cold viruses, etc.). However, this study provides the first well-documented case of a patient with disseminated cancer having a complete remission at all disease sites after virus administration. ”
“A major factor of eligibility is that patients have no detectable measles antibody. If this is present, it prevents the vaccine from working. About a third of all myeloma patients tested will have this lack of measles antibody, regardless of whether they have had measles before or have been vaccinated.”
“Two tests are run to see if patients are measles antibody-negative.”
Perhaps we will need an anti-vaccine vaccine if we end up with a treatable cancer.
“Dr. Kapoor, in turn, has informed us that the principal investigators leading the Phase 2 trial have confirmed that there were, indeed, no responses to the vaccine therapy observed in the first 12 patients treated in the Phase 2 portion of the trial. “
The Canadian, Dick Pound, seems to have gotten his revenge. Spurred on by several Canadian athletes, and despite every country in the world using some form of performance enhancing drugs in their athletics programs or in some of their athletes, whether they know it or not, Dick focused almost entirely on Russia, and in
peculiar particular, on Putin. Everyone knew. Putin must have been aware, complicit, and complacent. Will Russia be banned from the Olympics for this conspiracy of athletic terror? Gold medals are good for the economy, and if medals are stolen, so too is the cash with which they come. This has economic implications. What doesn’t? The Israelis used the same economic terror argument against Gaza.
Remember Sochi? Wow, the opening ceremonies were just… wow! And all they ever talked about was that malfunctioning snowflake. Sour grapes.
Ben Johnson (Canadian,) Lance Armstrong (American,) and thousands of others have been found to use steroids; what is interesting here is the timing of these releases. Ben was quickly stripped of his medal in favour of his American counterpart, and Lance revealed everything at the end of his career in order to sell more books.
This story is not a story about doping. This is a story of intimidation, coercion, strong-arming, and pretending-to-not.
If it weren’t a whale; what if it were a man? If you kept a man in a cage, even a big comfortable cage, and told him to do tricks for you, and if he didn’t do the tricks he would go back into his cage without any food, he’d probably do the tricks; and if you asked him if he was happy to do tricks for his food, he would thank you for the privilege, and bow to you, and speak highly of you, and curse you ’til the day he dies.
How could he do otherwise? You will have taken the world from him.
There is nothing further to say on this subject.
There is, however, plenty to say on the subject of modern slavery, but more on this elsewhere, soon.
Is this what the ‘globalized’ world will look like? Many thousands of separate and distinct megalopoli or city-states all operating under the same laws and all governed by a global parliament. Will there be a place for nationhood? How will people be made to abandon their flags and their armies? Have we come this far only to regress?
“Members of the [Strong Cities] network will join in the network’s first annual summit in Paris in spring 2016. The network will be led by a steering committee of about 25 cities and regions, and will be run by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, described in the press release as a “leading international ‘think-and-do’ tank” that fights violent extremism.”
Of course cities co-operate in many ways, and have for a long time, but for an organization of corporate cities to do away with the executive is still treason, and a coup d’état, whether it is to the cause of global terror or not.
It’s as though the middle class (the national executive) in world government were also being excised. Left behind are the regional elected, and the international un-elected. It’s like getting rid of Hoffa. In this way, it is turning a strong nation of [insert population here] into a set of much weaker individual cities [divide by 10 to 1000] in order to have more influence over each. It’s what every corporation has wanted to do with every trade union ever formed, and will now get their chance to do it. Off with their heads!
Combine this with the power which the UN already exercises over climate treaties, food production, medical intervention, land rights, disaster relief, etc. and we no longer need imagine a ‘New World Order’ or an ‘International Order,’ it is already upon us.
It seems that the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau wants to cross the rubicon. He was working on something else right before he was elected ‘Minister Prime.’ (The homepage has since been changed to this.)
“The Campaign for the Establishment of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly is a global network of parliamentarians and non-governmental organizations advocating for citizens’ representation at the United Nations.
A United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) would be the first parliamentary body directly representing the world’s citizens in the United Nations. It is envisaged as first practical step towards the long-term goal of a world parliament.”
Wouldn’t this put the Prime Minister out of a job? And what does the Queen think about all of this?
It would seem that Mr. Trudeau (true to his father’s image) wants to play with the big boys. What’s he gonna’ hafta’ do and who’s he gonna’ hafta’… Nah, he’ll prolly get a free pass. You see, Pierre Elliot Trudeau (Justin’s father) was the man who privatized money creation in Canada. He ushered in the era of private central banking and huge national debt. The Canadian national debt when he took office (April 20, 1968) was $14B. When he left office (June 30, 1984,) it had reached $130B. That’s a factor of nine within sixteen years. At that rate, the debt would have been over $11T by 2016. <sarc>Thankfully, it’s only $613B now.</sarc> No wonder his son, as a liberal, likes to spend, spend, spend.
Each and every denuded cities’ largest export will be its own management. Will there be a global currency at that point, or will that be moot, as well? If it smells like feudalism…
Justin Trudeau (born on Christmas day, 1971) just won a majority government for the Liberal party in Canada. It was a landslide… a blowout.
Another point to note is that Justin Trudeau has been involved in making the job of PM obsolete. Elizabeth May (Green Party leader) as well as former PMs John Turner and Paul Martin (who once famously said that if you pay taxes in Canada, you need to get a new accountant) are also part of the same United Nations group which wants to do away with national sovereignty here in Canada, as well as in the rest of the world. This group is the United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA.)
“The Campaign for the Establishment of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) is a global network of parliamentarians and non-governmental organizations advocating citizen’s representation at the United Nations.
A United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) would be the first parliamentary body directly representing the world’s citizens in the United Nations. It is envisaged as first practical step towards the long-term goal of a world parliament.”
Does this mean that the people would end up being represented (on the world stage, in this new global society) by politicians and corporations? The same NGOs responsible for the TPP and TTIP are going to tell the UN what people want and what they need.
Trudeau’s new job is a step in the right direction. Are there bigger things in store for ‘Pierre the technocrat’s’ son? It will be illuminating to see what he has to say about COP 21, the TPP, and the UNPA now, after his first day in office. He should be careful, though, because what he says might be treasonous, to his career.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to hear what a Prime Minister is told on his very first day on the job? One would expect them to be told which campaign ‘promises’ were just ‘not on the agenda’ anymore. It would also be interesting to see just who was doing the telling. Would it be a general or a bureaucrat, a scientist, a judge, a banker, the Governor General, or a guy in a black suit? Maybe the whole bunch of them with a security detail to ‘protect’ the leader and their family… for the rest of their lives.
If he gets his marching orders from inside Canada, or whether he does it on his own is one thing; should he start taking direction from the UN, its groups, or their members’ advice, he makes his own job moot. He is an intermediary for someone, the question is who? It’s not like he’s an expert in any of the above fields.
Montreal is part of the Strong Cities Network, which is:
“… the first global network of cities and other sub-national entities working together to build social cohesion and resilience to prevent violent extremism in all its forms. The Strong Cities Network provides a global platform to support local authorities to systematically share lessons learned, pool resources and build a community that can mobilize local action on a global scale.”
Is this Justin Trudeau’s idea of leadership, or governance?
As an afterthought, if this came as such a surprise to everybody reading the polls, it may be time for them to start getting some of their information from outside the mainstream. Why have Canadian news shows been so blind-sided on election data, lately? How can an analyst comment on something they didn’t see coming? How can they then laud it?
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
-Mao Tse Tung – Problems of War and Strategy” (November 6, 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 224.
Nobody knows when to use WHOM. I get that. It’s at a higher level of linguistic complexity than is ordinarily encountered… fine.
The problem is, nobody knows how to use WHO any more, either.
WHO is used to indicate a human being; THAT is used to indicate a thing such as an object, an institution, a concept, a body etc.
“The home THAT I lived in.”
“The dog THAT ate my homework.”
“The company THAT hired me to work on THAT machine.”
“The person WHO helped me.”
“The woman WHO gave birth.”
“The man WHO corrected my syntax, and in so doing, improved my grammar.”
More and more …and I’ve been hearing this since I can remember… people: reporters; pundits; news anchors; professors; translators; lawyers; poets; priests; and politicians, WHO all have words to thank for their positions (-Sting,) have been making THAT very mistake during public announcements, pronouncements, disclosures, and discourse.
“The woman THAT… ”
“The guy THAT… ”
I’ve even heard, “The dog WHO… ” but that was unique.
Much more prevalent, and worse yet, “The company WHO hired a thousand people THAT all applied for a job” or something similar is rather common nowadays.
WHO is only ever used to distinguish a corporation, and never to describe an individual… anymore. A man, a woman, a child, a grandmother is reduced to a thing, a commodity perhaps. Corp-or-ations (em-body-ments) are promoted to the noble rank; as though a company had a soul. It is a pleasant construct, but one based primarily on techniques of motivation found throughout the subject of organizational behaviour. Even if a company could be said to have a soul, it should surely not supercede the soul of a man, woman, or a child; should it?
Let’s get back to the habit, as it has always existed, of showing ourselves and each other… a little respect (-AF.) Let’s call each other WHO, and leave THAT for the heartless legal fictions THAT make up this power structure, this architecture, this, this, netherworld we survive in. Commerce is akin to magic, to dark matter. Commerce is the anything machine of the world. Therefore, as a machine, it should be put in its place beneath us, it should show deference, and it should be represented by THAT.
“WHO are you?”
“Are you THAT man?”
“…THAT man WHO did THAT thing?”
“THAT was me.”
“I’m THAT man, THAT man WHO did THAT thing.”
I had an exchange with a climate alarmist the other day, an exchange for which I felt the need to apologize. I sent him an email today. The subject line read: “Apology”.
Yesterday, we had exchanged opinions and facts about climate change and couldn’t agree about any of it. Today, the day after our exchange, I found myself bothered by it. I wondered why we couldn’t get along? He is a damn good researcher; how could he be so wrong. Maybe he thought the same of me.
I was going through an article I had recently written, looking at a graph which showed temperature and CO2 levels over the past several hundred million years. I saw that both CO2 levels and global temperatures had very rarely ever been this low, and I thought that surely this would lead to desertification. After all, the tundra is a desert, despite its low temperature. How could he think that this natural uptrend after near-record cold was anything but normal, anything to be worried about, anything unexpected? It had since leveled-off, so no problem, right? Why did he look at it as record highs when it was clearly (near) record lows?
My short answer was that he must only have been looking at the local US surface temperature record over a very short time span, and I was looking at satellite data as well as long term data covering more of the history of the earth, and this is what led to his distorted view. If the charts start in the sixties, it’s been getting warmer. If the charts start six-hundred million years ago, brrr. On a planetary level, however, no big deal. This seemed to explain away the problem as well as all the sub-problems like sea-level rise, Arctic ice extent, storm activity, etc. etc. etc. He was the American alarmist who took the ‘nothing outside our borders matters’ and the ‘we have the best equipment so everyone else is wrong’ view, and I was the voice of reason with a view to the world. Typical US-Canada relations.
I went for a walk to clear my head. Why was this still bothering me? I had figured out the problem; I had my answer. But there was more to it than that. There was something missing. As I walked around my neighbourhood, I thought about power structures and relationships, I thought about hegemony and what it can do to one’s perspective, I thought about the philosophy behind the situation when it hit me: Hegel – Mondrian – binary code. What if we were both right?
“He that takes up conclusions on the trust of Authors, …does not know any thing; but onely beleeveth.”
-Thomas Hobbes, ‘Leviathan’
This article is dedicated to the memory of Tim Russert, as he was the only journalist to have had the courage to ask both 2004 presidential candidates (0:54) about the implications of their involvement in the same secret society while in university. He died, on the job, of heart failure in 2008. He was fifty-eight years old.
Occultism features prominently in many secret societies. One of the best known is a Yale club called ‘Skull and Bones‘ whose members meet in a clubhouse called the tomb. It is the oldest senior class landed society at Yale. It owes its notoriety to the fact that both of the presidential candidates in the US elections of 2004, namely John Kerry and George W. Bush (who, incidentally, are also 9th cousins, twice removed,) are members.
The society’s alumni organization, the Russell Trust Association, owns the society’s real estate and oversees the organization. From 1978 until his death in 1988, business of the Russell Trust Association was handled by its single trustee, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. partner John B. Madden. Madden started with Brown Brothers Harriman in 1946, under senior partner and senator Prescott Bush (Bonesman 1917,) who was the step-brother of George Herbert Walker Jr. (Bonesman 1927,) father to George H.W. Bush (Bonesman 1948 [nickname: Magog,] head of the CIA, and 41st president,) father to Jonathan James Bush (Bonesman 1953 banker,) and grandfather of George W. Bush (Bonesman 1968 [nickname: Temporary] 43rd president.) As a sidenote, U S Federal District Court Judge John Walker (Bonesman – not listed on Wikipedia’s list) 1st cousin to Bush 41 and, once removed, to Bush 43 was a judge in April Gallop’s law suit against Dick Cheney for his failure to evacuate the Pentagon on 9/11. Prescott Bush was also a founder of the Union Banking Corporation which was seized by the United States under the Trading with the Enemy Act for its business ties with Nazi Germany.
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s fortune was inherited from his maternal grandfather Warren Delano. In 1830 he was a senior partner of Russell & Company. It was their merchant fleet which carried Sassoon‘s opium to China and returned with tea. John Kerry‘s maternal grandfather, James Grant Forbes, was born in Shanghai, China, where the Forbes family of China and Boston accumulated a fortune in the opium and China trade. Kerry’s paternal grandfather, Frederick A. Kerry (born Fritz Kohn), was born in the Czech Republic. The Kerry-Kohns were Jewish, but the family concealed its background upon migrating to the United States, and raised the Kerry children as Catholics. Richard John Kerry, John’s father, also graduated from Yale.
Yale happens to have had a great number of these clubs throughout its long history. The three most exclusive are perhaps ‘Skull and Bones,’ ‘Scroll and Key,’ and ‘Wolf’s Head.’ The logo of ‘Skull and Bones’ features the number 322 displayed under, you guessed it, an image of a skull and crossbones. Of the three, ‘Skull and Bones’ members were said to be the ones who took care of the ‘dirty work.’ Many members went on to very high ranks in diverse fields, but there did seem to be a lot of athletes amongst them.
“Consensus: “The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner: ‘I stand for consensus?”
Before getting into details, some very basic questions on the topic answered briefly:
1- Who are the chief actors?
- Pro AGW actors will herein be known as ‘alarmists.’
- Con AGW actors will herein be known as ‘doubters.’ ‘Deniers’ is seen as derogatory and has been replaced in the mainstream media (MSM.) Skeptics is still prefered by some.
2- Is the global climate changing?
Yes. It always has and it will continue to do so. This is why there have been ice ages.
3- Is this change due to human activity?
No. (see question 4, below) The sun is the primary determinant of climate as this is where the planet gets almost all its energy.
4- Does human activity contribute to warming or cooling trends?
Otherwise stated, is anthropogenic global warming or anthropogenic climate change (AGW or AGCC) a legitimate concept? On the face of it, probably not, but if it is, the effect is truly minimal. The rub here is whether or not we consider geo-engineering (besides a slight mention, geo-engineering is not a substantial part of this article) as part of this equation? If so, the effect would be to increase the amount of influence man has on his environment, although very slightly. In which direction, though, is still not known.
5- Is CO2 pollution or plant food?
CO2 is most definitely not pollution by any definition of the word. Conflation between carbon monoxide (CO – which is pollution) and carbon dioxide (CO2 – which is plant food) and basic scientific ignorance seem to be at fault here. See this article for disambiguation.
6- Does the economy have an effect on the science?
Just as with politics, when money is introduced into a problem, it tends to aggravate the situation by bringing up new problems. The economy affects everything. Governments need revenue to fund research and address issues. Corporations need investors in order to continue doing business. Universities and think-tanks need government (and private) money to continue their research. Magazines, journals, and publishing houses need advertising revenue to continue to publish. Scientists need money to support their families. There are many points along this chain in which to introduce money as a corruptive factor. Money can indeed influence science, and has.
7- Does politics control policy, or do the facts?
It would seem that there is an agenda at work behind the question. The IPCC (the UN’s main deliberative body on climate change) was, at its inception, created with a mandate. The IPCC is a political body and not a scientific one and was created with specific goals and objectives to attain. Their own literature attests to this fact. Scientists who participate with the IPCC do so as consultants and advisors only. Motions put forth by the UN are written by lawyers, bureaucrats, translators, and policy-makers, not scientists.
8- Is there bias in the debate?
Both sides of this question are subject to biases (scroll down to the comments section where professor Brown references these biases) when reporting on the data. Everybody who works in this field has a horse in the race, so to speak, and everybody wants their horse to come out ahead. However, there are several documented instances of outright fraud concerning manipulated data which all seem to come from one side of the table in particular – the alarmist side. (More on this later) And yes, many people on the internet lie or are mis-informed, on both sides.
9- How much carbon dioxide is there in our atmosphere?
400 ppm = 0.04% That is to say that four one-hundredths of one percent of our atmosphere is composed of carbon dioxide.
Some basic facts about CO2 concentrations:
- 70,000-100,000 ppm (unconsciousness within an hour)
- 7000-8000 ppm (earth’s historic high)
- 5000 ppm (US Occupational CO2 exposure limits – 8 hrs.)
- 3000-4000 ppm (poorly ventilated indoor spaces)
- 2000-2500 ppm (well ventilated indoor spaces)
- 2000-2500 ppm (Jurassic era levels)
- 800-4000 ppm (optimal greenhouse targets)
- 360 – 410 ppm (earth’s atmosphere today)
- 250 ppm (earth’s historic low)
- 200 ppm (IPCC target level)
- 150 ppm (level under which plants start to die)
- 0 ppm (where Bill Gates wants it)
If you only click one link in this entire article, make it the following:
Start at the 20:00 mark if you don’t have much time. In this video, Lord Christopher Monckton lays bare the language of the agreements reached at several climate summits demonstrating the true intent behind these schemes. He then goes on to suggest some very positive actions which we all can take in order to guarantee legitimacy and transparency in these international tribunals governed by non-elected bodies accountable only to their own interests. With the COP-21 United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Paris quickly upon us (November 30 to December 11, 2015) there is precious little time to act.
Let’s put an end to global war
Kazakhstan is an interesting place with a broad and diverse history. From Genghis Khan’s invasion to Stalin’s deportation of undesirables from the west of the country (which contributed to the region’s ethnic diversity) as inmates of the gulags to the unilateral dismantling of their nuclear program in the post-Soviet era, Kazakhstan has been down a long road to its present form of democracy/dictatorship.
The image above is of the The Palace of Peace and Reconciliation, a.k.a. Pyramid of Peace and Accord. Among its many features are stained glass panels at the top showing three doves in the middle triangle, two doves on the right, and two doves on the left. This motif is echoed below by lozenges, again three in the middle, two on the right and two on the left.
“The Pyramid was specially constructed to host the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions. It contains accommodations for different religions: Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism and other faiths. It also houses a 1,500-seat opera house, a national museum of culture, a new “university of civilization”, a library and a research center for Kazakhstan’s ethnic and geographical groups. This diversity is unified within the pure form of a pyramid, 62m (203ft) high with a 62x62m (203x203ft) base. The building is conceived as a global center for religious understanding, the renunciation of violence and the promotion of faith and human equality.”
Kazakhstan has, of late, been on a building spree which would put pre-crisis Spain to shame. Financed by Kazakh supplies of oil, gold, and uranium (the world’s second largest producer and America’s largest supplier) as well as massive amounts of foreign investment (from the likes of Warren Buffet, no less,) universities, infrastructure projects, religious institutions, and sky-scrapers have all been popping up at a phenomenal rate. But there’s more. They have been building trade deals and international relationships, as well.
One of these deals was the foundation of the IAEA Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Bank in Oskemen. “The IAEA LEU Bank, operated by Kazakhstan, will be a physical reserve of LEU available for eligible IAEA Member States. It will host a reserve of LEU, the basic ingredient of nuclear fuel, and act as a supplier of last resort for Member States in case they cannot obtain LEU on the global commercial market or otherwise.”
“The establishment and operation of the IAEA LEU Bank is fully funded through US $150 million of voluntary contributions from the Nuclear Threat Initiative, the United States, the European Union, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Norway and Kazakhstan.”
Strangely enough, there are some other ‘improvements’ of note, which may seem, at first glance, contrary to the Kazakh stance on WMD. The USA is funding a bio-weapons research lab with the goal of fighting global terror. The lab will also serve as a storage facility for some of the most harmful and virulent strains of disease known (such as bubonic plague, yellow fever, anthrax, cholera, smallpox et al..) The BSL-2/3 (the highest level is BSL-4) lab will not only protect the diseases studied within from being stolen, but also protect the bio-chemists and engineers (and the knowledge they possess) from being hired by shady groups. There has been much unemployment in this field since the collapse of the Soviet Union, after all.
There is also the possibility that the US is funding the lab with other intentions in mind…
*Update* The CDC reports unususally high rates of bubonic plague (black death) in the US.
“The United States must target all attributes of the biothreat, using all available tools–from the cognitive realms of transparency and partnerships which have the potential to shape and dissuade, to the firm reality of denial and punishment through vaccinations and kinetic responses as necessary.”
But more on this later. *Update – some evidence of this plan coming to light: America has attacked a power plant and a water treatment facility in Aleppo, Syria with no military value against ISIS. This could lead to an outbreak of cholera.
“Russia currently pays Kazakhstan $115 million annually to use Baikonur Cosmodrome, plus $50 million every year for maintenance, under a deal signed in 2004. That agreement is slated to expire in 2050.” This is a pretty good deal considering the following, “NASA Administrator Charles Bolden sent a letter to Congress Wednesday saying the agency would need to pay $490 million to Russia for six seats on Soyuz rockets for U.S. astronauts to fly through 2017. That comes to nearly $82 million a seat, up from $71 million a seat. Since the retirement of the space shuttle in 2011, NASA has relied on Russian federal space agency Roscosmos to provide seats on its Soyuz spacecraft to send U.S. astronauts to the space station.” Further, “At the moment, Russia is the only nation capable of launching astronauts to the International Space Station. Russia’s crew-carrying Soyuz spacecraft all launch from Baikonur…” In addition, the US buys its rocket engines used for satellite launches from Russia and will need to do so for years to come. The American space program seems to be completely dependant on both Russia and Kazakhstan. What would happen if they decided to cut the Americans off?
With all the new investment opportunities (mostly from the USA) as well as the very close ties to Russia, it seems odd that Nursultan Nazarbayev (who also attended a NATO summit on Afghanistan in 2010) would say the things he said at the UN during a speech he gave on September 28th (which, oddly enough, is not on the UN’s video channel,) to wit:
- That the world should move towards a global currency (thus stripping the USA of its reserve currency status.)
- That the International Monetary Fund (IMF) should be removed from USA control and folded into the UN.
- That the headquarters of the UN should be moved from New York to somewhere in Asia (he did not say where.)
Granted, these recommendations were to take place over a rather long period of time, nevertheless, it demonstrates either a cunning international play against the hand feeding it, or a willingness to accede to a plan already long in the making. He did sign on to help in America’s ‘War on Terror’, after all.
Putin also said, during an interview with Charlie Rose, that there could be room for change at the UN, and the French and Mexican delegations pushed for a reform of the veto rules at the Security Council’s meetings, as well. It would seem that the winds of change are blowing squarely into American faces.
There has been much talk about the niqab as it relates to the swearing-in portion of citizenship ceremonies. Everyone seems to be missing the point on this subject, especially Stephen Harper.
First, let’s get the facts straight; identification is done through paperwork, not facial recognition. Yes, there is an aspect of facial recognition to the identification process, but ultimately, it comes down to documentation. This is very simply demonstrated with the example of triplets at the border; they don’t all use the same passport simply because they look alike.
Second, the swearing-in ceremony is a chance for people who are new to the country to present themselves as they are. It is an opportunity to introduce themselves to their peers, and if the goal is to be recognizable, then their appearance must reflect who they are even moreso than what they look like. They will not be forced to go through the procedure for a second time should they fall victim to a disfiguring injury, for example. They must, therefore, present their public face. Whether that face is veiled or not, it is their own personal choice and it reflects their own personal identity.
Third, the niqab is not a disguise. Wearing a mask at a protest march is a change in one’s public face in order to hide one’s identity. Wearing a niqab (or a burqa, chador, dupatta, tichel, snood, babushka, or veil) is a celebration of one’s cultural identity, not a duplicitous attempt to conceal it.
Fourth, there are some who would say that because some women are forced to wear such coverings by the males in their social groups, this behaviour should not be encouraged. However, this is not the issue at hand. Surely women who are oppressed by men have avenues available to them in order to help them break free from these bonds. Replacing such bondage by governmental oppression is not an acceptable option.
Fifth, a person should have the right to personal freedom of expression. Furthermore, a person should have the right to adorn one’s body as one sees fit, and to practice the religion of their choice, if this is the case. Be it cultural garb, mandated medical procedures, abortion, prostitution, or euthanasia, a person should have exclusive rights over their bodies and the way these are portrayed, displayed, treated, and cared for. If wearing something cannot be forced upon us, not wearing something should not either.
Sixth, the right to determine one’s own lifestyle should never rest with the state.
A final thought – when a government equates a form of dress with a certain pattern of behaviour, be it overtly or not, that is a form of discrimination and has no place in a modern society. Whether it is stated directly or not, equating the idea of a niqab with a sense of fear from terrorism is no different than identifying a religious group with a special ‘brand’ in the hopes of generating the same feelings of uneasiness. We should all be disgusted that some feel this debate is necessary or even appropriate.
Update – Zunera Ishaq just took the oath of citizenship while displaying her niqab-adorned ‘public face.’ This represents a victory for human rights in Canada, although, the court decision risks being overturned when a new government is elected.
The first and current President of Kazakhstan is Nursultan Nazarbayev. In his speech to the UN today, he made several recommendations to the council. They were monumental in scope, especially considering the limited international status of his 25 year old country. Then again, based on what Putin said about the UN (or rather, didn’t say,) perhaps there are things in the works about which we don’t yet know.
“When the Soviet Union collapsed in December 1991, Kazakhstan inherited 1,410 nuclear warheads and the Semipalatinsk nuclear-weapon test site. By April 1995, Kazakhstan had returned the warheads to Russia and, by July 2000, had destroyed the nuclear testing infrastructure at Semipalatinsk.”
“On 2 December 2009, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the Republic of Kazakhstan designated 29 August as International Day against Nuclear Tests, anniversary of the date the Semipalatinsk test site closed in 1991.”
Kazakhstan is the largest landlocked country in Asia and has the strongest economy in central Asia. They have enormous oil reserves and are a leading exporter of uranium (ironic as that is.) It is also a world leader in coal, iron, and gold production.
Their elections have been largely considered to be unfair and anything but free in the eyes of international observers.
Kazakhstan is vying for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council in 2017. They enjoy good diplomatic relations with both Russia and the Ukraine.
He proposed five main points:
- That there be one global currency to replace the favoured status of a reserve currency and the unfair advantages it confers upon the country that controls it.
- That the IMF be folded into the UN’s mandate removing it from US control (since they won’t have the reserve currency, anyways.)
- That the IAEA Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Bank in Oskemen, Kazakhstan (agreement signed this August,) which removes the need for individual countries to enrich their own uranium by centralizing the distribution thereof, be the only source for enriched uranium. A kind of central bank for fissile material. This bank would be overseen by, and indeed, folded into the UN and included in its mandate.
- That nuclear weapons be banned, outright.
- That the UN headquarters be moved out of the US and into Asia.
Given that France and Mexico et al. have proposed that the veto right of the permanent members of the UN Security Council be severely limited, It doesn’t look like the world is going to leave a lot of meat on the bone for the US to cushion its fall from grace. Could this be the impetus for WWIII which the UN was formed to avoid?
There is a short follow-up article here.
Should prostitution be legalized? This question has always been met with controversy, but here is an example of the good prostitutes can do for the less fortunate.
Disabled people have always been subject to social stigma and discrimination. Be it for issues of work, mobility, or equal rights, handicapped people have it rough. It is much more difficult for them to hold down good jobs and to participate in society on an equal footing with the rest of the able-bodied population. Does this mean that many of them should die virgins, without ever having experienced what some would describe as the summum bonum of human relations? They have enough hardship as it is; why should they be denied sex given that they must obviously have a very difficult time finding people interested in having a relationship let alone wooing people into their bedrooms?
What a woman (or any consenting non-minor) does with her body is still a topic of debate within several subjects such as: abortion; wearing of the niqab/burqa; euthanasia; mandated medical treatment; and, of course, prostitution. Only religion (despite its good intentions) and government and their historical and cultural significance can be shown to object to this most fundamental human principle. Of course people should have a right to decide their own futures as long as they are not coerced.
The Netherlands considers sex a human right and prostitution legal. This combination has led to legislation which allows for and pays for, in some cases, the services of a prostitute for the disabled of their country. Should this modern attitude towards mercy not be available in more places? It’s only human, after all.
Based on a recent interview with Charlie Rose, Vladimir Putin made some subtle comments regarding the status of the UN and what the future might hold in store. This is simply speculative interpretation, but did he hint at the possibility of an overhaul of the foundations of global governance? The BRICS association analogy may be a valid comparison to draw at this point.
“…I will have to say a few words about…the fact that the United Nations remains the sole universal international organisation designed to maintain global peace. And in this sense it has no alternative today.”
This is an interesting comment. Of course, everybody knows that the UN is unique, so why mention it here? Is there a plan amongst the developing economies to overhaul the UN, or is the plan to replace it with a less partisan body? His qualification of the comment with the word ‘today’ leads one to believe that tomorrow might be a different story. With Russia being a founding member (since its inception at Yalta after WWII,) and if Russia can convince the other members of the BRICS countries to follow suit, they could withdraw from the UN and create their own body to uphold international law without granting the US veto power over all its decisions. On the 25th of September, Putin met with the other members of the UN’s security council to discuss the situation in Syria, as well as current domestic policy issues. One wonders what these issues might be, but given recent comments by Putin (such as those given at Valdai) as well as those given by Assad (here and here,) not to mention the rift which is developing between Germany and France against the US over NATO’s involvement in the Ukraine and US involvement in Syria indicate that the world’s opinion about the US and its activities in the middle-east and elsewhere are changing (or worsening, depending on your point of view.)
“It is also apparent that it should adapt to the ever-changing world, which we discuss all the time: how it should evolve and at what rate, which components should undergo qualitative changes. Of course, I will have to or rather should use this international platform to explain Russia’s vision of today’s international relations, as well as the future of this organisation and the global community.”
It is very clear, based on these statements that the UN is an ever-evolving entity, but it is also clear, given the prevalence of this comment at the beginning of the interview, that there is a will amongst the participants (not including the US) to reform the role of the UN in the near future.
“…in my opinion, provision of military support to illegal structures runs counter to the principles of modern international law and the United Nations Charter. We have been providing assistance to legitimate government entities only.”
This comment was clearly meant to demonstrate US support for the forces opposing Assad – ISIS/ISIL et al. – and its illegality. Will the international community continue to allow the Western forces’ ‘carte blanche’ towards the middle-east, and will it stand idly by as Syria is turned into Libya v2.0? It would not appear to be the case. China has also decided to support Assad’s forces by sending its navy to the port at Tartus in Syria. Has the BRICS military coalition started?
“There is only one regular army there. That is the army of Syrian President al-Assad.”
And in another quote from a past interview,
“It’s my deep belief that any actions to the contrary in order to destroy the legitimate government [of Syria] will create a situation which you can witness now in the other countries of the region or in other regions, for instance in Libya, where all the state institutions are disintegrated. We see a similar situation in Iraq,” Putin stressed.
“There is no other solution to the Syrian crisis than strengthening the effective government structures and rendering them help in fighting terrorism. But at the same time, urging them to engage in positive dialogue with the rational opposition and conduct reform.”
The Russian leader stressed that US-led coalition partners need to understand that only the Syrian people are entitled “to decide who should govern their country and how.”
With this, Putin is upholding the democratic process by which Assad was elected, and legitimizes his presence in the discussion.
That which the future holds, only time will reveal, but clearly the winds of political change are blowing squarely in the face of the US, its official policies, NATO, and the UN.
*Update* Given what the Kazakh president said at his speech to the UN, there are more massive changes coming to the ‘International Order’ as we know it. Buckle up!
Tonight in Amherst Massachusetts, Janet Yellen, while giving a speech titled, “Inflation Dynamics and Monetary Policy” appeared to have had a stroke, live on stage.
Initial reports claim it wasn’t a stroke. <sarc> Perhaps the Russians poisoned her with polonium-210. </sarc>
Her reaction caused a stir in the markets, which then rebounded on the news that she would survive.
Apparently she’s doing fine and is heading off to supper. We’ll see.
From Zero Hedge:
One way or another, she doesn’t seem well. Whether it’s penis envy vis-a-vis Christine Lagarde, or another stroke, she looks as healthy and as in-the-loop as the global economy and the people paying for it. Or did she just ‘get it‘ that her monetary policy has played into the hands of the ‘International Order,’ as Barack Obama called it.
This poll is now closed. Recent attempts to troll the results are to blame.
The final tally was not surprising.
Those who thought that CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere should remain the same or be higher than they are today outnumbered those who thought they should be lower by a 2 to 1 margin.
The question read: Given that the current level of atmospheric CO2 is 400 ppm, what would the ideal level be?
1500 ppm = 33%
400 ppm = 33%
200 ppm = 25%
0 ppm = 9%
Thank you to the hundreds of people who participated.
See here for an article to explain the climate situation, and how it relates [or doesn’t] to the current level of atmospheric CO2.
September 27th until October 2nd is banned books week at the Kurt Vonnegut Memorial Library.
This page contains a schedule of events to be held at the library located at:
“…DePauw University Dean of Libraries Rick Provine lives 24/7 in its plate-glass window, in a “prison” of banned books. He will be blogging about his experience and thoughts about banned books within society.”
Banned books master list is here.
My personal tribute to KV Jr. is the featured image at the top of this article (© laphotoshoppe.) His books are well worth reading for children of any age, and I strongly recommend them all.
Yes Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi was a dictator (despite the fact that he did not consider himself as such and that his Libya was a direct democracy with socialism at its core.) Yes he was brutal in his rule. Yes he lived very well at the expense of the treasury. However, considering the salaries and bonuses of successful CEOs taken from their investors for a job well done, as well as the harm that many of these industries do to the public, perhaps, by Western standards, he deserved to.
Ten things you don’t know about Gaddafi’s rule, and the conditions within Libya.
CNN parroting the above. CNN officially claims that these reports cannot be verified, but they can be, and they have been.
Global Research published an illuminating article about Gaddafi highlighting the plans he had for his country and the opposition to his will expressed and implemented by the international community.
Additionally, Gaddafi was instrumental in liberating telecommunications in Africa.
“The Regional African Satellite Communication Organization (RASCOM) will provide telecommunication services, direct TV broadcast services and Internet access in rural areas of Africa. Under an agreement with RASCOM, RascomStar-QAF (a private company registered in Mauritius) will implement RASCOM’s first communications satellite project. This joint African project is expected to lower the continent’s dependency on international satellite networks such as Intelsat.”
Mercenaries could have been paid to assassinate Gaddafi and claim that the people wanted him dead. Or the people themselves, who enjoyed many of the astounding benefits seen in the above links, could have suddenly gone crazy. Unproven, either way.
It seems more likely that he was killed for the same reason Lincoln, Jackson (almost,) Garfield, Kennedy, and Hussein were killed… money. More correctly, the protection of American money – namely the dollar. Gaddafi was in talks to develop a pan-African gold-backed currency. Congressman Larry McDonald and senators John Heinz and John Tower all died in plane crashes after having criticized the Federal Reserve and called for audits. Chavez was also villified for his stance on re-patriating Venezuela’s gold.
The truth is that Gaddafi was an ardent supporter of direct democracy and a champion for his people. Bashar al Assad is supported by most of the Syrian population (saying that life was better with Assad than it is with ISIS) and it would appear that he will soon face the same fate as Gaddafi if the Americans get their paws on him. And don’t forget what happened to Arbenz, Mossadeq, Allende, Roldos, Torrijos, Aristide, not to mention Yanukovych… the list goes on.
Article from Zerohedge:
Parliamentary Report Confirms What the Alternative Media Has Been Saying for Years
The UK Parliament just confirmed what the alternative media has been saying for years.
Specifically, a new report from the bipartisan House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee – based on interviews with all of the key British decision-makers, review of documents, and on-the-ground investigations in Africa – found that Libyan war was based on lies, that it destroyed the country, and that it spread terrorism far and wide.
The War Based On Bogus Intelligence … Like the Iraq War
Initially, the report finds that the threat to civilians from Libyan government forces was dramatically overstated:
Former French Foreign Minister Alain Juppé, who introduced Resolution 1973 [imposing a no-fly zone over Libya, and laying the groundwork for overthrowing the government], asserted in his speech to the Security Council that “the situation on the ground is more alarming than ever, marked by the violent re-conquest of cities”. He stressed the urgency of the situation, arguing that “We have very little time left—perhaps only a matter of hours.” Subsequent analysis suggested that the immediate threat to civilians was being publicly overstated and that the reconquest of cities had not resulted in mass civilian casualties.
The proposition that Muammar Gaddafi would have ordered the massacre of civilians in Benghazi [which was the basis for the West’s war to overthrow Gaddafi] was not supported by the available evidence. The Gaddafi regime had retaken towns from the rebels without attacking civilians in early February 2011 …. Gaddafi regime forces targeted male combatants in a civil war and did not indiscriminately attack civilians. More widely, Muammar Gaddafi’s 40-year record of appalling human rights abuses did not include large-scale attacks on Libyan civilians.
On 17 March 2011, Muammar Gaddafi announced to the rebels in Benghazi, “Throw away your weapons, exactly like your brothers in Ajdabiya and other places did. They laid down their arms and they are safe. We never pursued them at all.” Subsequent investigation revealed that when Gaddafi regime forces retook Ajdabiya in February 2011, they did not attack civilians. Muammar Gaddafi also attempted to appease protesters in Benghazi with an offer of development aid before finally deploying troops.
An Amnesty International investigation in June 2011 could not corroborate allegations of mass human rights violations by Gaddafi regime troops. However, it uncovered evidence that rebels in Benghazi made false claims and manufactured evidence. The investigation concluded that much Western media coverage has from the outset presented a very one-sided view of the logic of events, portraying the protest movement as entirely peaceful and repeatedly suggesting that the regime’s security forces were unaccountably massacring unarmed demonstrators who presented no security challenge.
In short, the scale of the threat to civilians was presented with unjustified certainty. US intelligence officials reportedly described the intervention as “an intelligence-light decision”.
The Libyan Government Was Fighting Terrorists
The report also notes that the Libyan government really was – as Libyan dictator Gaddafi claimed at the time – fighting Islamic terrorists based in Benghazi:
Intelligence on the extent to which extremist militant Islamist elements were involved in the anti-Gaddafi rebellion was inadequate.
Abdelhakim Belhadj and other members of the al-Qaeda affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group were participating in the rebellion in March 2011.
Secret intelligence reports from 2011, written before and during the illegal US-led attack on Libya and recently obtained by the Washington Times, state:
There is a close link between al Qaeda, Jihadi organizations, and the opposition in Libya…
We reported in 2012:
The U.S. supported opposition which overthrew Libya’s Gadaffi was largely comprised of Al Qaeda terrorists. According to a 2007 report by West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center’s center, the Libyan city of Benghazi was one of Al Qaeda’s main headquarters – and bases for sending Al Qaeda fighters into Iraq – prior to the overthrow of Gaddafi:
The Hindustan Times reported last year:“There is no question that al Qaeda’s Libyan franchise, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, is a part of the opposition,” Bruce Riedel, former CIA officer and a leading expert on terrorism, told Hindustan Times.
It has always been Qaddafi’s biggest enemy and its stronghold is Benghazi.
(Incidentally, Gaddafi was on the verge of invading Benghazi in 2011, 4 years after the West Point report cited Benghazi as a hotbed of Al Qaeda terrorists. Gaddafi claimed – rightly it turns out – that Benghazi was an Al Qaeda stronghold and a main source of the Libyan rebellion. But NATO planes stopped him, and protected Benghazi.)
The Daily Mail reported in 2014:
A self-selected group of former top military officers, CIA insiders and think-tankers, declared Tuesday in Washington that a seven-month review of the deadly 2012 terrorist attack has determined that it could have been prevented – if the U.S. hadn’t been helping to arm al-Qaeda militias throughout Libya a year earlier.
‘The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,’ Clare Lopez, a member of the commission and a former CIA officer, told MailOnline.
She blamed the Obama administration for failing to stop half of a $1 billion United Arab Emirates arms shipment from reaching al-Qaeda-linked militants.
‘Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea,’ Lopez claimed. ‘They were permitted to come in. … [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed..
‘The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.’
‘The White House and senior Congressional members,’ the group wrote in an interim report released Tuesday, ‘deliberately and knowingly pursued a policy that provided material support to terrorist organizations in order to topple a ruler [Muammar Gaddafi] who had been working closely with the West actively to suppress al-Qaeda.’
‘Some look at it as treason,’ said Wayne Simmons, a former CIA officer who participated in the commission’s research.
The West and Its Allies Directly Supported and Armed the Rebels
The UK report confirms that the West and its allies directly supported and armed the rebels:
The combat performance of rebel ground forces was enhanced by personnel and intelligence provided by states such as the UK, France, Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. For example, Lord Richards told us that the UK “had a few people embedded” with the rebel forces.
Resolution 1973 called on United Nations member states to ensure the “strict implementation of the arms embargo”. However, we were told that the international community turned a blind eye to the supply of weapons to the rebels. Lord Richards highlighted “the degree to which the Emiratis and the Qataris … played a major role in the success of the ground operation.” For example, Qatar supplied French Milan antitank missiles to certain rebel groups. We were told that Qatar channelled its weapons to favoured militias rather than to the rebels as a whole.
The REAL Motivation for War
The real motivation for the war? The Parliamentary report explains:
A further insight into French motivations was provided in a freedom of information disclosure by the United States State Department in December 2015. On 2 April 2011, Sidney Blumenthal, adviser and unofficial intelligence analyst to the then United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, reported this conversation with French intelligence officers to the Secretary of State:
According to these individuals Sarkozy’s plans are driven by the following issues:
- A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
- Increase French influence in North Africa,
- Improve his internal political situation in France,
- Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world,
- Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa.
The sum of four of the five factors identified by Sidney Blumenthal equated to the French national interest. The fifth factor was President Sarkozy’s political self-interest.
Gaddafi Tried to Step Down … But the West Insisted On Violent Regime Change
Gaddafi had offered to hand over power, but the West instead wanted violent regime change. (The British report notes: “By the summer of 2011, the limited intervention to protect civilians had drifted into an opportunist policy of regime change.”)
The Parliamentary report notes that Gaddaffi may have been attempting to flee the country when he was killed:
Muammar Gaddafi might have been seeking an exit from Libya in February and March 2011. On 21 February 2011, for example, Lord Hague told reporters that he had seen credible information that Muammar Gaddafi was on his way to exile in Venezuela. Concerted action after the telephone calls conducted by Mr Blair might have led to Muammar Gaddafi’s abdication and to a negotiated solution in Libya. It was therefore important to keep the lines of communication open. However, we saw no evidence that the then Prime Minister David Cameron attempted to exploit Mr Blair’s contacts.
Political options were available if the UK Government had adhered to the spirit of Resolution 1973, implemented its original campaign plan and influenced its coalition allies to pause military action when Benghazi was secured in March 2011. Political engagement might have delivered civilian protection, regime change and reform at lesser cost to the UK and to Libya. If political engagement had been unsuccessful, the UK and its coalition allies would not have lost anything. Instead, the UK Government focused exclusively on military intervention. In particular, we saw no evidence that it tried to exploit former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s contacts and influence with the Gaddafi regime.
The U.S. and France were also hell-bent on regime change. And the New York Times confirms that Hillary Clinton is largely responsible for the violent regime change in Libya.
Why Should We Care?
Why should we care?
The Libyan economy generated some $75 billion of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2010. This economy produced an average annual per capita income of approximately $12,250, which was comparable to the average income in some European countries. [The former Indian representative to the U.N. notes that, before the war, Libya had less of its population in poverty than the Netherlands. Libyans had access to free health care, education, electricity and interest-free loans, and women had great freedoms that were applauded by the U.N. Human Rights Council]. Libyan Government revenue greatly exceeded expenditure in the 2000s. … The United Nations Human Development Report 2010—a United Nations aggregate measure of health, education and income—ranked Libya as the 53rd most advanced country in the world for human development and as the most advanced country in Africa.
In 2014, the most recent year for which reliable figures are available … the average Libyan’s annual income had decreased from $12,250 in 2010 to $7,820. Since 2014, Libya’s economic predicament has reportedly deteriorated. Libya is likely to experience a budget deficit of some 60% of GDP in 2016. The requirement to finance that deficit is rapidly depleting net foreign reserves, which halved from $107 billion in 2013 to $56.8 billion by the end of 2015. Production of crude oil fell to its lowest recorded level in 2015, while oil prices collapsed in the second half of 2014. Inflation increased to 9.2% driven by a 13.7% increase in food prices including a fivefold increase in the price of flour. The United Nations ranked Libya as the world’s 94th most advanced country in its 2015 index of human development, a decline from 53rd place in 2010.
In 2016, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs estimated that out of a total Libyan population of 6.3 million, 3 million people have been impacted by the armed conflict and political instability, and that 2.4 million people require protection and some form of humanitarian assistance. In its World Report 2016, Human Rights Watch stated that Libya is heading towards a humanitarian crisis, with almost 400,000 people internally displaced and increasing disruption to basic services, such as power and fuel supplies. Forces engaged in the conflict continued with impunity to arbitrarily detain, torture, unlawfully kill, indiscriminately attack, abduct and disappear, and forcefully displace people from their homes. The domestic criminal justice system collapsed in most parts of the country, exacerbating the human rights crisis
People-trafficking gangs exploited the lack of effective government after 2011, making Libya a key transit route for illegal migration into Europe and the location of a migrant crisis. In addition to other extremist militant groups, ISIL emerged in Libya in 2014, seizing control of territory around Sirte and setting up terrorist training centres. Human Rights Watch documented unlawful executions by ISIL in Sirte of at least 49 people by methods including decapitation and shooting. The civil war between west and east has waxed and waned with sporadic outbreaks of violence since 2014. In April 2016, United States President Barack Obama described post-intervention Libya as a “shit show”. It is difficult to disagree with this pithy assessment.
The Parliamentary report confirms that the Libyan war – like the Iraq war – has ended up spreading terrorism around the globe:
Libyan weapons and ammunition were trafficked across North and West Africa and the Middle East.
The United Nations Panel of Experts appointed to examine the impact of Resolution 1973 identified the presence of ex-Libyan weapons in Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Gaza, Mali, Niger, Tunisia and Syria. The panel concluded that “arms originating from Libya have significantly reinforced the military capacity of terrorist groups operating in Algeria, Egypt, Mali and Tunisia.” In the 2010-15 Parliament, our predecessor Committee noted that the failure to secure the Gaddafi regime’s arms caches had led to “a proliferation of small arms and light weapons, and some heavier artillery, across North and West Africa”. It identified that Libyan small arms had apparently ended up in the hands of Boko Haram militants.
In January 2014, Egyptian Islamist insurgents used an ex-Libyan MANPAD to shoot down an Egyptian Army helicopter in the Sinai.
The FCO told us that “Political instability in Libya has led to a permissive environment for terrorist groups in which to operate, including ISIL [i.e. ISIS] affiliated groups”. Professor Patrick Porter, Professor of Strategic Studies at the University of Exeter, agreed with the FCO analysis, stating that “a lack of effective government is creating opportunities for the Islamic State.”
ISIL has used its presence in Libya to train terrorists. For example, Sefeddine Rezgui, the gunman who killed Western holidaymakers in Tunisia in June 2015, was trained by ISIL at its base in Sabratha along with the two gunmen who killed 22 tourists at the Bardo museum in Tunis. ISIL’s plans may extend beyond terrorism. Vice-Admiral Clive Johnstone, a Royal Navy officer and NATO commander, commented that:
We know they [ISIL] have ambitions to go offshore … There is a horrible opportunity in the future that a misdirected, untargeted round of a very high quality weapons system will just happen to target a cruise liner, or an oil platform, or a container ship.
And the UK report confirms that the Libyan war has created a tidal wave of refugees:
The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimated that some 1 million migrants were present in Libya in June 2016. This estimate comprised 425,000 internally displaced Libyans, 250,000 non-Libyan migrants and 250,000 returnees. Most non-Libyan migrants travelled from West Africa, the Horn of Africa, South Asia and the Middle East. The most common countries of origin for non-Libyan migrants were Niger, Egypt, Chad, Ghana and Sudan. Between 1 January and 31 May 2016, 47,851 migrants arrived in Italy after crossing the Mediterranean from Libya. A similar number of migrants attempted the crossing over the same period in 2015. Despite the increased resources committed to Operation Triton, however, crossing the Mediterranean is becoming increasingly hazardous for migrants transiting through Libya. The IOM recorded 2,061 migrants as dead or missing between 1 January and 31 May 2016, which showed a 15% increase in fatalities compared with the same period in 2015.
In other words – just like the Iraq war – the Libyan war was based on fake intelligence, was carried out for reasons having little to do with national security or protecting civilians, destroyed a nation and created a “shit show”, spread terrorism far and wide, and created waves of refugees.
The following are selected quotes from Gaddafi (translated from French by yours truly:)
“La lutte politique qui aboutit à la victoire d’un candidat, avec, par exemple 51% de l’ensemble des voix des électeurs, conduit à un système dictatorial, mais sous un déguisement démocratique. En effet, 49% des électeurs sont gouvernés par un système qu’ils n’ont pas choisi, et qui, au contraire, leur a été imposé. Et cela c’est la dictature. Cette lutte politique peut aussi aboutir à la victoire d’un appareil ne représentant que la minorité, notamment lorsque les voix des électeurs se répartissent sur un ensemble de candidats dont l’un obtient plus de voix que chacun des autres considéré à part. Mais si l’on additionnait les voix obtenues par les « battus », cela donnerait une large majorité. Malgré cela, c’est celui qui a le moins de voix qui est proclamé vainqueur, et son succès est considéré comme égal et démocratique ! Mais en réalité il s’instaure une dictature sous des apparences démocratiques. Voilà la vérité sur les régimes politiques qui dominent le monde actuel. Leur falsification de la vraie démocratie apparaît clairement: ce sont des régimes dictatoriaux.”
“The political struggle which ends in the victory of one of the candidates, with, for example 51% of the total of electors’ votes, leads to a dictatorial system, but under the guise of a democratic system. In effect, 49% of the voters are governed by a system they have not chosen, and which, to the contrary, was imposed upon them. And this is dictatorship. This political struggle can also end in the victory of a system which represents the minority, most notably when the electors’ votes are spread out over a certain number of candidates where one gets more votes than any of the others individually. But if we add up the votes of all the “beaten” candidates, it would show a large majority. Despite this, the one with the lowest tally is proclaimed victor, and his success is considered equal and democratic! But in reality, a dictatorship is installed through a disguise of democracy. Here is the truth about the political regimes which dominate the world, today. Their falsification of true democracy appears clearly: these are dictatorial regimes.”
“La démocratie directe, quand elle est mise en pratique, est indiscutablement et incontestablement la méthode idéale de gouvernement. Comme une nation, quelle que soit sa population, ne peut être rassemblée pour discuter, étudier et décider de sa politique, les sociétés sont détournées de la démocratie directe, qui est demeurée une idée utopique éloignée de la réalité. Elle a été remplacée par de nombreuses théories de gouvernement, telles que les assemblées parlementaires, les coalitions de partis, les référendums. Toutes ont conduit à isoler le peuple de l’activité politique, à usurper sa souveraineté, et à confisquer son pouvoir au profit d’ « appareils de gouvernement » successifs et en conflit, qu’ils soient individu, classe, secte, tribu, Parlement ou parti.”
“Direct democracy, when put into practice, is incontestably the ideal method of government. But as a nation, whoever makes up the population, cannot all be reunited to talk about, study, and plan its policies, the idea of direct democracy is illusory and utopian and is divorced from reality. This concept has been replaced by numerous theories of government, such as parliamentary assemblies, party coalitions, referendums; all of which have served to isolate the people from their political activities, to usurp their sovereignty, and confiscate its power to the profit of successive ‘government apparatus’ and conflict, be they individual, class, sect, tribe, Parliament (sic,) or party”
“La propriété pourrait bien changer de mains, le résultat serait le même: le travailleur demeure un salarié tant qu’il n’a pas été rétabli dans son droit sur sa propre production, et que celle-ci continue à être détournée au profit de la “collectivité” ou de l’employeur.La solution finale à ce problème consiste à abolir le salariat, par la libération de l’homme de l’asservissement dans lequel celui-ci le maintient.”
“Property could change hands, the result would be the same: the worker remains a salaried employee as long as he has not reclaimed the rights of his personal production, and so long as it continues to be usurped to the profit of the ‘collective’ or the employer. The final solution to this problem consists in abolishing the working class by the liberation of the man in a condition of servitude through which he is held.”
“Celui qui possède la maison que vous habitez, la voiture dans laquelle vous vous déplacez et qui assure votre salaire pour votre subsistance, s’approprie en fait votre liberté, ou du moins une partie de celle-ci. Or, la liberté est indivisible.”
“He who owns the house you live in, the car you drive in, and who assures you a salary for your subsistence, is, in fact, appropriating your freedom, or, at least, a part thereof. However, liberty is indivisible.”
“LE LOGEMENT est une nécessité pour l’homme et sa famille. Il ne doit appartenir à personne d’autre qu’à lui. Un homme n’est pas libre quand il habite une maison louée. En matière de logement, la politique suivie par les Etats a consisté à réglementer la location en bloquant ou en augmentant les loyers. La seule solution radicale et définitive est l’accession à la propriété. Dans la société socialiste, nul ne peut être maître des besoins de l’homme. Personne ne peut dans cette société, bâtir un logement autre que pour lui-même et ses héritiers. La maison de l’individu étant un de ses besoins fondamentaux, nul ne peut construire dans le but de louer.”
“Housing is a neccessity for man and his family. His house must belong to no other but him. A man is not free when he inhabits a rented house. Where housing is concerned, the policies followed by the State consists in regulating rental by stopping or raising rents. The only definitive solution, be it a radical one, is accession of property. In socialist society, none can be master of the needs of man. Nobody, in this society, can build housing for anyone but himself and his heirs. The individuals house being one of his fundamental needs, none can build with the goal of renting.”
“L’éducation obligatoire et standardisée constitue en fait une entreprise d’abrutissement des masses. Tous les Etats qui déterminent officiellement les matières et les connaissances à enseigner et qui organisent ainsi l’éducation, exercent une contrainte sur les citoyens. Toutes les méthodes d’éducation en vigueur dans le monde devraient être abolies par une révolution culturelle mondiale visant à émanciper l’esprit humain de l’enseignement du fanatisme et de l’orientation autoritaire des goûts, du jugement et de l’intelligence de l’être humain. Cela ne veut pas dire qu’il faille fermer les écoles ou, comme pourrait le supposer un lecteur superficiel, tourner le dos à l’éducation. Cela veut dire, au contraire, que la société devrait fournir toutes sortes d’activités éducatrices, permettant aux jeunes de choisir spontanément et librement les matières qu’ils souhaitent étudier.”
“Mandatory and standardized education consists of, in fact, an enterprise of mass-stupification of the masses. All states which officially determine the subjects and knowledge to be taught and who thereby organise education, exercise a certain constraint upon the citizens. All the methods of education in the world should be abolished by a worldwide cultural revolution which should aim to emancipate the human spirit from the teaching of fanaticism and the authoritarian orientation of human tastes, of human judgement, and of human intelligence. This does not mean that we must close the schools or, as a merely superficial reading would indicate, turn our backs to education. To the contrary, this means that society should supply all sorts of educational activities, such that children could spontaneously and freely choose the subjects which he wishes to study.”
There is much talk about the one percent and how they control the world. This could not be further from the truth. The error comes with statistics like this one:
Despite pure wealth, governance is the key to the notion of the 1%. The fact is that even the top 0.1% don’t have anything to say about governance, and neither do the top 0.01%, nor the top 0.001%. As it happens, if you are a billionaire, you are part of the 0.00003%; and those aren’t even the important billionaires, just your standard run-of-the-mill billionaires.
There are about 2000 billionaires in the world. The population of the world is 7.3 billion (or 7 300 000 000.) That comes out to about 0.00003%. If we only consider the top 100 billionaires (the Bilderbergers of the world,) that figure goes to 0.0000015%. These are the real ‘one percent.’
Bill Gates (being the richest human) would have the unique distinction of being the only part of the 0.00000001%.
This gives the term ‘society of entitlement’ a whole new meaning. This phrase is usually reserved for those who make so little money that they have to rely on government assistance. It might be a mis-nomer. It should probably refer to those who have so much money that they can tell the government what to do.
Raising the minimum wage has been suggested as a means to close the wealth gap, and it has also been argued that the economics behind this argument is flawed. Perhaps then, it is time we start talking about a maximum wage.
One wonders who the world’s first trillionaire will be. One way or another, it won’t be long before we find out:
“If you added up the net worth of the 51 richest Americans last year, the trillionaire mark would be reached. This year, that number is down to 37 individuals. … Existing wealth has a greater capacity to accumulate wealth. … If we are now at 37 individuals to reach a trillion, will we be down to five people in 2039, with $200 billion each, and 65 years from now, turn those five into one?”
(Click on above graph for a larger view.)
Final thought – If we were to get rid of 90% of the world’s population, nothing would change. If we, on the other hand, were to get rid of 0.01% of the world’s population, everything would. Which would be the more humane solution?
[Disclaimer: The above thought is NOT a call to action, rather, it is a thought experiment which harkens back to the eugenics movement/de-population agenda and those amongst the elite who, even now, would support such things.]
American Imperialism is alive but perhaps not so well in the middle-east. There are many stories about the region and its mind-boggling complexity in the news these days, but there doesn’t seem to be any over-arching analysis of the entire situation which stretches from the Crimea to the Yellow Sea. The big picture is frightening in scope and potential.
Let’s start with some basic facts:
- The UN just lifted crippling sanctions on Iran.
- The lifting of sanctions would clear a path for Iran to re-purpose its nuclear industry.
- Iran just discovered uranium reserves within its borders.
- China wants to build a ‘new silk road’ overland through the middle-east to the Mediterranean; the only way through is Iran.
- China is also building a high-speed rail line to Russia.
- Most of the pipelines which ship Russian oil to Europe run through the Ukraine.
- Ukraine’s gas interests are controlled by US companies.
- Ukraine’s gold was flown to the USA right after the coup.
- Ukraine wants to join NATO and has permitted them access to Russia’s border.
- The US has nuclear weapons in Poland and Germany, with 20 more coming.
- Despite this, Germany and France have abandoned the US position to ‘punish’ Russia.
- Putin supports Syria and has accused the west (USA) of fomenting trouble in order to dominate both the middle-east and the Ukraine.
- Syrian refugees are flooding Europe.
- Assad blames the west for the refugee crisis.
- Assad gives interview to explain his position.
- Putin has accused the west (USA) and its allies of supporting ISIS/ISIL and Syrian rebels.
- Evidence suggests that it was the rebels, and not Assad, who used chemical weapons.
- The west has demonized Putin.
- Putin gives speech at the Valdai club lashing out at the USA for destabilizing the world.
- Russia dumps and burns food from the west because it contains GMOs.
- Syria has a Russian naval base at Tartus which has just been visited by a Chinese warship.
- The Israeli Golan Heights were once part of Syria.
- Israel has granted oil drilling rights to US interests in the Golan Heights and wants to push the border back even further.
- Israel has discovered enormous gas reserves in the waters off the coast of Gaza.
- Israel has no friends in the middle-east (relations with Egypt and Jordan are tenuous.)
- Europe considers a boycott of Israeli banks over the Palestinian settlements.
- Israel has (unofficially) admitted to having some eighty nuclear weapons.
- Saudi Arabia doesn’t maintain diplomatic relations with Israel, although both are US allies.
- The US-Saudi petro-dollar arrangement is one of the pillars of the US economy.
- Most of the pipelines which ship middle-eastern oil into Europe run through Turkey.
- Turkey also controls the waters of the Euphrates river.
- Conflict between Turkey and local Kurds has escalated.
- The Shia rule Syria despite being a minority, and the Sunni majority rule Saudi Arabia.
- OPEC has been increasing oil production in order to drive prices down, eliminate competition, and increase its market share.
- China, Russia, India, Brazil, and South Africa have put together a bank called the BRICS.
- Efforts to destabilize BRICS countries and bring them into line has led to manipulation of many markets including gold.
- China wants the Renminbi in the IMF’s SDR basket and is vying for global reserve currency status.
- The US does not want to lose its status as the global reserve currency.
- The US has been ramping-up its military presence in Africa.
- China has been gobbling-up African resources.
- The Chinese and Japanese economies are inter-dependant and the US has a lot of influence in Japan.
- The US does not want Japan to join the AIIB and start trading in Yuan rather than Dollars.
- Relations between Japan and China are tense.
- Japan disputes China’s claim of islands in the South China Sea and the US warns against militarization.
- The Japanese economy is teetering on the brink of collapse.
- Both the Chinese (shadow banking) and the US (over-valued stock) economies are fragile.
- China, Russia, and the US have been accusing each other of aggressive cyber espionage and are enjoying tense relations.
- Western banks have been caught rigging markets, and disaster capitalism seems not to be a solution to the problematic future of the world.
- Supressed evidence suggests that Russia was not to blame for the destruction of flight MH-17.
- The terms ‘economic crash’, ‘world war III’, and ‘Armageddon’ have rarely ever been so prevalent in the news.
Upon further reflection, the rest of this article will be left to the reader’s imagination. However, the main takeaway should certainly be the fact that this quagmire in Asia has (to a large extent) been engineered to protect the US Dollar. It may not work out that way, in the end.
The CBC has been on a fact-finding mission; they want to know why so many people, and young people in particular, are uninvolved in politics. They have asked ‘experts’ (self-proclaimed, no less) to chime in, they have brought forth their own opinions, they have even tried to compare politics to sporting events. None of it has brought them any closer to the truth.
There are many legitimate reasons for the lack of interest, but none of these have been considered. Young people are not uninterested in politics; young people are uninterested in politicians. If anyone doubts this, they need only try to tell a young person what to do (or what not to do.) The youth are fiercely independant and do not easily subject themselves to the trappings of authority, to their credit. The youth have always been an energetic and enthousiastic voice for change when it was needed (do you remember the ‘Printemps Érable’?) They just don’t like the system as it stands, and they are simply not hypocritical enough to use it for the obtention of their objectives. After all, politics is full of old people, and old people don’t listen to the young.
This is not about apathy. If the youth understood to what extent politics affects their lives, they would say so aggressively. Futility is probably a better word. No matter how hard we push, some things never get done, some promises are never kept, and some people can never be trusted. In essence, trust in the government is a more important consideration. Dissatisfaction with the results of misplaced trust is another leading factor. Politicians tend to promise many things which they cannot deliver, whether or not they know this when making those promises speaks to the trust issue once again. Is it ignorance or deception? If we do not know, we will assume the worst. Neither do we seem surprised if it is deception. For once, we might say, expectations were met. If the above reasons are true (or can be shown to have some merit,) the only conclusion we can come to is that there is a tremendous waste of time and money involved.
With apathy not being the case, and futility, dissatisfaction, and mis-trust being the key issues, how can we re-engage the populace to take more action when it comes to picking a leader? Given that most leaders tend to act in similar fashion when elected, and that most of them are not particularily charismatic to begin with, perhaps, as was positied by one of the CBC’s guest analysts, all which needs be done is to jazz up the look of advertising. Saying that the young are so superficial that an improved ad campaign would change everything is naive and insulting. The truth is that the ads reflect the state of politics: black and white and boring, the way it should be. We certainly don’t need to put lipstick on this pig; we need to explain that this is where bacon comes from.
The main problem with the “My taxes pay your salary so I want you to take action on my behalf” argument is that the top 20% pay more taxes than do working-class citizens, and often, the actions they want taken are contrary.
The government has to do what’s in the public interest. What most people don’t realize is that there are many publics, each with their own interests. The government only chooses which interests from which publics they will act upon.
As can be seen in the above chart, the top 20% of earners pay almost 70% of individual taxes. The bottom 80% account for only about 30% in the USA.
So beware that when using the, “I pay your salary” argument, you probably don’t; but by saying so, you justify being ignored.
We should not allow our complacency to undermine what could potentially be the best boost to our economy since hydro and the lottery. This plan amounts to surface-picking / recovering rubble piles left behind during the massive mining of asbestos. There are 500 M tonnes of rubble piles which are accessible by bucket and loader. Magnesium is selling for $4.20 US / kg (as of August 2015 – and has previously traded for more.) Magnesium is present in the rubble at levels from 25% and higher, and it is of high quality. Other valuable resources are also present. Revenues from the magnesium alone could generate upwards of half a trillion dollars.
*Update – magnesium prices have dropped significantly since this article was written. The current (31 March, 2016) value of $2.03/kg changes the aove math considerably. The historic high price was over $6/kg at the end of Q1 in 2008. Nevertheless, even with this lower price, the resource is worth as much as all the oil in Alberta, and the cost of transformation is still much less.*
Currently, China produces 75% of the world’s magnesium, and Canada is not even on the map; Canada is a net importer. The US market is protected from Chinese imports by high antidumping duties and is supplied instead by Israel and domestic primary and secondary production.
Some main markets for magnesium include automotive, electronics, and battery.
Not only could this provide funds through taxes and duties for the Quebec government, but there are other sectors which would benefit greatly, as well. The entire region would be re-energized with new industry, tourism, services, not to mention recycling technology. The truth is that we can not simply bury this rubble under a canopy of trees (and falsely call it green) for future generations to clean up. The rubble from the mining of asbestos can not simply be left, and we can simply not turn down this economic opportunity. This green project could fuel an industry, reduce un-employment, re-energize an entire region, and provide for more independence on the part of Quebec, if properly managed. It will also greatly contribute to a cleaner environment and a fueling of green industries which could grow in the shadow of the ‘Projet du Grand Nord.’
If any of you have ever experienced a speed wobble, you’ll know that it is a time of sheer panic and massive (over) corrections. Speed wobbles happen when stability is lost.
What does this have to do with Wall Street? Well, this is exactly what is going on with US monetary policy. The single steering pivot is the Fed. The quick oscillation is the recent volatility of the markets. The stolen energy (see following graph) is the intervention in the markets. The high speeds are the algos and the massive volumes generated when they read the headlines. Normally, volumes have been very low of late, but with very high rates of acceleration, wobbles, not bubbles are created (well, bubbles too, but the wobbles are what burst the bubbles.)
The simple fact that stability indicates growth and volatility spells panic is what investors rely upon in order to place their bets. That which has been seen in the markets would tend to indicate that with ‘wobbliness’ increasing, the crash may be imminent.
A good explanation of the effect this has on markets can be found here.
“If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”
That line has been parroted by government officials, law enforcement officers, and members of the media, but there is a flaw in this argument; in fact, there are several.
We have all done things we would like to change. There are episodes in all of our lives we are less than proud of. Haven’t we all picked our noses at some point in time? That surely does not mean that we want it displayed on YouTube. However, these indiscretions are not crimes. In the light of public opinion, and with the ubiquitous and timeless nature of the internet, we will end up being judged for these indiscretions longer than a murderer will have to serve a sentance. Getting a job could be jeopardized forever over some small indiscretion which may become taboo in the near future, despite being harmless.
There are cultural considerations, too. What if something is normal in one society but scandalous in another? Wouldn’t job prospects then be limited in a global marketplace despite being later sensitized to such a thing? Ignorance, it is said, is no escape from the law; can it then be considered the same way for a cultural peccadillo?
Perhaps this is what is meant by original sin?!?
The recent hacking scandal in which the USA lost millions of personnel records and millions of fingerprints was attributed to Chinese hackers (if the Chinese could do such a thing, wouldn’t they be able to make it look like the Russians did it.) No matter who did it, the point is that as with all digital technologies, the ability to hold those records safely is non-existant. If it can be programmed, it can (and will eventually) be hacked. Be it software, hardware, databases, or websites, there will always be an entry point – otherwise it couldn’t be programmed or updated. The result of this is that now some hacker has the biometric information of millions of Americans. If one loses their password, it can be changed. What does one do when their fingerprints are stolen? And what was the security clearance of the person who lost those prints? Entry into some of the countries most secure locations can be attained with a 3-D printer and a silicon glove. The more secure (unique) the information stolen is, the more dangerous it becomes.
While you may never have heard of St. Lambert, there is something you should know about it. The city of St. Lambert is a small one, merely 150 years old, counting a population of just over twenty thousand. With an area of only three square miles, it is disproportionately affluent, anglophone, aged, and religious. It is also, arguably the most important city in North America; or it could turn out to be.
“In the 1950s, the development of Saint-Lambert was enhanced with the building of the St. Lambert Locks in the St. Lawrence Seaway, to bypass the smaller Lachine Canal, and this became the most easterly lock in the Seaway.”
St. Lambert is also an important rail hub.
“Via Rail serves Saint-Lambert railway station with its daily Montreal-Quebec City, Montreal-Gaspé and Montreal-Halifax trains.
Amtrak, the U.S. national passenger rail system, also provides daily service to Saint-Lambert railway station, operating its Adirondack in both directions between Montreal and New York City, using the Victoria Bridge.”
A great many cities in the interior of the continent depend upon the seaway for the transport of goods and commodities. Toronto, Buffalo, Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, and Chicago are all dependant on imports being shipped through the seaway to the Great Lakes. Being the easternmost point in the seaway, St. Lambert is the entry point and the most important link in the supply chain to the interior of the continent.
“The Great Lakes region receives special attention because the provinces and states in it constitute the fourth largest economy in the world…” http://www.canadiansailings.ca/?p=8857
Starkly, one well-positioned nuclear bomb could put a crater where St. Lambert is and severely hinder the north american supply line to the heartland. The Russians know it, but do the residents of St. Lambert know it? The safe zone for an ICBM strike is about twenty kilometers which means that Montreal and most of the South Shore would become nothing more than a fond memory. Knowing this, one wonders how many of the residents there would endorse antagonizing the Russians over the crisis in the Ukraine.
Some years ago, the psychologist Albert Bandura listed eight mental tricks people play to disengage their consciences so they can perform the acts of violence they would normally abhor.
1. Moral Justification: one is persuaded, for example, that killing the enemy serves a higher moral purpose such as protecting one’s country or serving God’s plan, etc.
2. Euphemistic Labeling: people mask the true nature of behavior they know is unethical, such as labeling “enhanced interrogation” for torture, “servicing the target” for shooting the enemy, and “disinformation” for lying.
3. Advantageous Comparison: as in “What I am doing is not as bad as what they are doing.”
4. Displacement of Responsibility: Uncritically following orders, as in the Nazi concentration camp workers or SS execution squads.
5. Diffusion of Responsibility: when a whole group decides on the unethical action or when the action is divided into many subparts, for example, the building of nuclear weapons. (“All I do is assemble this little electronic part.” Or, “I’m just driving a truck [to] bring supplies—I don’t shoot anybody.”)
6. Disregard or Distortion of Consequences: for example, when harm is inflicted at a distance (as in officers in Montana who guide drones that make “bug splats” in Afghanistan) or dropping bombs from a plane on “targets” even though women and children and old men are being killed below.
7. Dehumanization: labeling the victims of one’s violence as non-human or subhuman, as in calling Vietnamese people “slants” and “gooks” during that war, or Germans “Huns” in WWI, or Arabs “towel heads” and “sand niggers” in the First Gulf War.
8. Attribution of Blame: or blaming the victim who is seen as deserving the mistreatment or seen as having brought it on themselves. For example, “These German civilians we are killing below should not have voted for Hitler; therefore they are to blame for our bombings.
Generally speaking, in the run-up to a war and during it, most or all of these powerful psychological techniques are employed by governments and their militaries on both sides.
(excerpt taken from Good People Doing Bad Things By Kent Shifferd)
With Donald Trump’s appearance in Alabama on Friday night, and with the Dow’s 500 point ‘correction’ that day (about 1000 points down that week,) he may just have missed his best opportunity to win the election outright. If he had said “Liquidate!” (whether markets were going to crash or not) he would have caused the crash and would have secured the election instantly.
This is the master stroke.
If the NSA stores all of our email, wouldn’t it be safe to say that they could very easily verify what Hillary sent, when she sent it, to whom she sent it, and whether or not it was classified? Come to think of it, maybe they could check on Lois Lerner’s email, as well.
Ok, maybe not the NSA directly, but any one of the other ‘Five Eyes’ could, legally. England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand all share information; somebody’s got it.
So Megyn Kelly was asking the wrong question. Maybe the question should have been,
“Could the NSA request this information from one of its partners?” Information is international now. It can be recorded by proxy (the NSA can’t do it, but they can hire someone to do it for them,) It can be split and stored in multiple locations, it can be moved and shared and monitored and intercepted quite easily.
*Update – Well, it took a while (almost a year,) but the truth has finally come out, from no less than William Binney himself.
“Binney was an architect of the NSA’s surveillance program. He became a famed whistleblower when he resigned on October 31, 2001, after spending more than 30 years with the agency.”
“I, like everybody else, have a certain fear of heights, and I have to be very careful when I am in the clouds, but it is also what I love; it is my domain, so when you love something, you don’t have fear.”
btw – The documentary was much better than the movie. Some might call it a film, but it wasn’t. It was a movie.
Fear keeps us safe. If we had no fear, we would never have survived this long. Fear is not to be avoided, it is to be respected and managed. We should not let fear, interfere, with our goals.
Bravery is an act of defiance. Bravery is the will to stand up and speak up even though the situation might not be to one’s perfect advantage. Bravery is taking risks and having the conviction to see them through to their own unique and individual ends.
Bravery is not a lack of fear; it is a willingness to act, despite.
Probably not, and that is exactly what they’re counting on.
CO (carbon monoxide – lighter than air) is formed as a result of oxygen-poor combustion (as in combustion engines,) it is used as a coloring agent in US meat production (illegal in EU and Japan,) and has potential in the medical field as a biological regulator. It is widely used in chemical manufacturing. It may even be used, one day, as a fuel source on Mars. CO is toxic to humans in very low concentrations (35ppm.) Atmospheric concentrations are approximately 0.1ppm.
CO2 (carbon dioxide – heavier than air) “is a colorless, odorless gas vital to life on Earth.” Plants use it to photosynthesize sugars from CO2 and water (with oxygen produced as a byproduct.) CO2 is produced by the respiration of animals and fish, organic decay, fermentation, and combustion of wood and fossil fuels. It is used throughout many industries for decaffeinating coffee, adding sparkle to carbonated beverages (soda, beer, champagne) and when frozen becomes ‘dry ice’. CO2 is only toxic in extremely high concentrations (>70,000ppm.) Atmospheric concentrations are between 360 – 410ppm depending on location.
The above article contradicts itself in several places and also claims that CO2 is directly responsible for ‘global warming’, but more on that later.
In a sentence, CO is poison and CO2 is plant food necessary for all life on Earth. Both are so-called greenhouse gases (GHG.) CO2 is truly a greenhouse gas in the sense that farmers enrich their greenhouse environments with it in order to stimulate plant growth and increase yield.
Without CO2, breads wouldn’t rise, sparkling wine wouldn’t sparkle, beer would be flat, and compressed-air tools (not actually air, but CO2) would cost a lot more to run. Oh and by the way, all green plants (on land and in the seas) would die causing mass starvation for herbivores and humans alike.
Jon Stewart – Sad Clown © laphotoshoppe
We’ll miss you, for the most part.
The recent drop in the price of oil has had widespread negative consequences for Canada and many other net oil-exporting countries. It has also had dire consequences for the United States. The fracking industry has seen lay-offs, rig closures, and the beginnings of consolidation; the smaller outfits are becoming more and more attractive to large corporate buy-outs as their over-leveraged business models are being slaughtered by dwindling margins. We have been told that lower gas prices are good for the average consumer, but how good can it be if it takes out their entire economy? The petro-dollar scheme, it would appear, is showing signs of stress.
Meanwhile, strategic reserves and storage facilities are filling up fast. It has been estimated that all the extra storage space left in the USA will be full by the end of May. According to the American Petroleum Institute (API) last month saw the biggest build-up of US oil reserves in 34 years (at least.) Most countries that can afford to buy more oil are also adding to their reserves; and who can’t at these prices? Stockpiles are at an all-time high, and not just in the USA; China is also buying a lot of oil while the prices are near record lows. When all the storage capacity is used up, oil will be dumped onto the market driving the price down even further. Yet, the algos aren’t crashing; nobody is putting much pressure on the Saudis to cut production, the markets are not in a panic, and there seems to be a laissez-faire attitude towards the whole debacle. Surely this must be temporary. Maybe things will turn out for the best, but how? We’ll get back to this in a moment.
The Arab spring has brought about many changes in the middle-east. Egypt, Bahrain, and Yemen have seen meaningful change since 2011, and they are not alone. There has been a political awakening in some parts of the region, and there are now new actors taking the stage. ISIS has become a force thanks to the backing (either direct or indirect) of the Saudi and American governments; a renewed call for a caliphate has re-awoken a new generation of Arabs who want to assert themselves internationally. There are grass-roots political movements springing up all around the region and even spilling into northern Africa. It seems that change is all around.
(click for full size)
April 9th, 2015 would have been Eadweard Muybridge‘s 185th birthday. His legacy lives on in these modern times. He worked on motion; and without his contributions, there would be no movies, no TV, no video, and no animated .gifs. <— (Probably untrue, but motion capture comes to mind; his work was revolutionary.)
Science does have its foibles. Unless mathematical, it is very difficult to prove beyond any doubt that what you assert is actually true. Even the best physicists have this problem. Einstein famously disagreed with himself about the existence of the cosmological constant referring to it as his greatest mistake. It later turned out to be correct, as far as we now know; and Newton didn’t agree that light behaved as a wave; rather, he thought it acted like a corpuscle (particle) alone which we now know to be false.
Science, as it were, is forever wrong. Every good scientist who comes along ends up dis-‘proving’ his/her predecessor. Just look at the evolution of the model of the atom; every model (except the present one – and that’s just a matter of time) has been wrong. Atoms were considered by the ancient Greeks to be the smallest particles (their name even means indivisible) until the advent of Thomson’s plum pudding model, the discovery of the nucleus and the proton by Rutherford, quarks by Gell-Mann and Zweig, and strings (largely based on Heisenberg’s work) by Susskind et al. Things have only gotten more complex since.
Science is based on developing theories based on the prevailing evidence, and then trying to support those theories by repeatable experiment (Young’s double-slit,) mathematical proofs (Huygens/Copernicus,) or some other type of irrefutable evidence (Mendel/Darwin??) In this sense, when there is a lack of good data, much science truly is done by consensus (IPCC.)
A (more or less) recent trend in physics echoes an older system of mathematics: probabilities. The compilation of statistics leads to the calculation of probabilities, or in a lesser sense, possibilities. [I digress here to make the connection to information gathering and mass surveillance as this is the same process of statistical analysis which leads to both concepts of ‘thought crime’ and ‘future crime.’ The types and/or the likelihood of criminal behaviour can be determined for any individual by such factors as: past record; social class; credit; intelligence; location; education; health; self-worth; piousness; lineage/eugenics. Now, our main character traits can all be calculated and cross-referenced with everything we’ve ever written, every job we’ve ever had, everyone we’ve ever known, everything we’ve ever bought, everywhere we’ve ever gone, and practically every idea we’ve ever had. Pre-dispositions to certain traits do indeed exist; but it is how those propensities are controlled which make us moral or ethical people. It cannot be assumed that every citizen is a potential threat. How can the government operate in this environment? Who does it represent? It becomes fascistic by definition as it has no other choice. The government must have the trust of its people; otherwise it is serving other interests.]
As the above notion of public interests is akin to the problem of competing interests; on the one hand there is the truth, on the other hand is that which the patron of the project expects to find, and then there is the effect which the discovery will have on these stated goals. Any discovery which would cause the re-writing of an entire branch of science (and showing all others going before to have been wrong) will clearly not be accepted outright despite the evidence, no matter how axiomatic it may be. In modern science, there are often multiple sponsors, who each have their own interests, goals, expectations, limitations, backgrounds, and opinions. Again, the beast of complexity readies its bottomless maw.
Corruption is also a factor. Many would claim that science, and by extension, scientists are incapable of any type of fraud or skullduggery since their interests lie with the truth. Well, as it turns out, scientists also have families to support, bills to pay, praise to garner, awards to win, and patrons to please. As Wyndham wrote, “It is an old maxim that every man has his price…” and that price can take many forms and can be collected in many ways. Nobody can be said to be above corruption, not (in ascending order, from least to worst,) corporations that sell poison, doctors who push pills, priests who abuse children, nor librarians who cheat on their taxes. The ‘climate-gate’ scandal demonstrates this point perfectly.
Eugenics is a good example of the effect of popular thought on science. Since the end of WWII, even scientists who believe it to be true and provable can no longer state so publicly (although it is still written about extensively.) Public opinion weighs in on more and more of that which we call science, and any attempt to silence it is called snobbery. Nicholson’s famous phrase, “You can’t handle the truth!” has never rung more true. The facts are that most people who lack a scientific education and the appropriate training can simply not follow the logical reasoning upon which modern science is based. They let emotion and instinct creep into the mix, which foreshadow the death of any scientific notion right off the bat.
Scientists* think science is always right, yet all scientists are almost always all wrong. Religious* groups trust scientists to back up their claims that science is always wrong. The truth is that the largest part of science is research, or should be. There are thousands of dedicated researchers and their staff who try to answer unanswered questions, who make learning interesting, and who do concretely lead to new developments in a wide variety of fields. However, science isn’t ALL fun and glamour and fame (ahem.) For many on the larger projects, science can be like a factory job. For those in smaller labs, the schedules can be as hectic as any office job. Doing science is no different than any field in which some people claim a special proficiency. We plod on until we find a problem, fix it, and move on.
All this is not to say that science is bad, and that we should put an end to it as soon as possible, to the contrary, we have a tendency to put science on a pedestal; perhaps we should view it as a discipline filled by people just like the rest of us, capable of error, oversight, poor judgment, and pure genius. Science essentially means, “As much as we know… as far as we know it… it could all be wrong. Check back tomorrow.”
* – gross generalizations
Self-defense is not a right, it is a necessity. For example, Israel does not have a right to self-defense, it has the obligation of it… unless there is something we do not know.
A right is a freedom granted. Any freedom granted can be un-granted. This implies subservience.
When you say, “I have a right to _____, it’s the law! ” you tacitly agree to be ruled and have your rights doled-out to you by the ruler. Real rights do not require anybody’s permission for them to have effect, thereby making any request moot. Nor can they be taken away; although, they can be (and often are) ignored. Our rights can not be enforced by statute, only our liberties can. We are ultimately responsible for the claims we make, but we can only hold them passively.
Our voice is our only tool, in this sense, until we are threatened – in which case all bets are off.
“It is not wisdom but Authority that makes a law.” – Thomas Hobbes
For example, the right to water is a necessity, no water can be denied us if we are in need, otherwise we will surely die. Nobody can rightly force us to our death. Access to clean drinking water, on the other hand, is not a right, it is a convenience. The value added is what we cannot claim. The problem arises when there is no alternative source.
All rulers are oligarchic by nature; and sometimes their oligarchy is limited to one person, which makes it a tyranny. Either way, it can only be pleasant for them. Their claim to rights is vastly greater than is ours, but theirs is a legal construct; ours is merely a manifestation of our will.
With absolute power DOES NOT come absolute responsibility, but absolute discretion.
“For the fate of Charles the First hath only made kings more subtle—not more just.” – Thomas Paine
‘Pussy’ comes from the word ‘pusillanimous.’
Pusillanimous means, in short, to give little credence to important issues while, at the same time, making mountains out of mole hills. Some would define it as a lack of courage, but this definition is too simplistic and lacks a historical context. Pusillanimity can be seen as a lack of prioritization. One way or another, it has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘lady parts,’ nor does it denigrate anyone by comparing them to such. It denigrates them by other means.
“So powerful is the influence of fashion, it can even cause murder to be regarded as a venial peccadillo.” – Charles Mackay
If you’re so hell-bent on comparing someone to ‘lady parts,’ call them a cunt, instead.
Anything which is programmable will soon become hackable.
This is axiomatic.
There is nothing else to say about drones.
Now that even cars can be hacked, and drones with pistols are scary (even though those with missles are OK,) perhaps people will understand that all military platforms will, too, become hackable and can be turned against the forces (mis)using them.
One does not play with their Legos. One plays with their Lego. An individual piece of Lego is known as a brick, not a Lego. If Lego is not the singular form, Legos cannot be the plural.
One does not go golfing, one plays golf or one goes to play golf. Just as one does not soccer; nor does one go soccering, or hockeying, or billiarding, or baseballing, etc. (Bowling and rowing are the exceptions here.)
Phrases such as “…but it’s concerning to me.” remind me of Dubya’s term (the good ole days of top-notch politico-linguistic comedy. – Remember “nucular”? ) Many words are being ‘verbified’ in this way, and it is a source of great concern to me. (Ahhhhh.) Or even better, “…and it is, to me, a source of great concern.” (Oooohhhh baby! Way to finish strong.)
Many other mis-uses of words can be found, and they take many forms. Some words have come to mean something completely different.
Safety has come to mean security, guns has come to mean violence, education has come to mean schooling, global warming has come to mean CO2, pro-Russian has come to mean Russian, anti-Zionism has come to mean anti-Semitism, and if you’re an economist, bad has come to mean good, and vice-versa. George Orwell had something to say about this.
This article should be viewed as a thought experiment and taken with an enormous grain of salt. The following is subjective and philosophical, at best.
As you may or may not be aware, 2015 was designated as the International Year of Light and Light-Based Technologies by the United Nations. 2015 is also the International Year of Soils. As disparate as these two topics might appear, their relationship is interesting inasmuch as it relates to food production. There seems to be a whole lot more emphasis on the Year of Light, however. Much has been said of late regarding light, light-bearers, and Armageddon.
What exactly does the term ‘light’ imply? It can be said that in the universe, there is matter and there is radiation. Under this broad definition, light can be seen as all types of radiation. Visible light is only a small sliver of the electro-magnetic radiation spectrum. Alpha, beta, gamma, microwave, x-ray, infrared, ultraviolet are all manifestations of waves at different frequencies. Many technologies depend on this notion; cell-phones, smart meters, lasers, radar, telescopes, microscopes, and many others rely on these basic principles which govern their use.
As the topic is a very broad one, the focus here will be on those technologies which cater to the needs of the greatest number of us, either directly or indirectly; and also those which affect the planet in the most meaningful ways. Some of the most important aspects of life on earth are (arguably) economics, health, environment, and governance.
Information is a commodity. By extension, truth can also be said to be a commodity. The concept of sharing information is a very recent development. Traditionally, many organizations have sponsored the search for knowledge. Some have done so in order to advance their own positions, others have gathered knowledge with the goal of ultimately hiding it. Still others have funded research with the intention of suppressing the information it contradicts, whether it was true or simply popular. There are many other reasons for the ownership of truth, but the main goals have always been profit and control.
Many institutions have been at the forefront of research in the past. Scholars, philosophers, religions, governments, and corporations have all engaged in information gathering all for their own purposes; but general education is never and has never been the final aim. Some groups, such as the Jesuits, have been at the cutting edge of information gathering as well as being known as ‘educators.’ The filters which are engaged in order to teach that desired knowledge to those who need to know are of crucial importance here. An interesting illustration of this point can be seen in the hundreds of secret societies which have existed throughout the course of history. Every ascent to a higher level (or degree) is accompanied by new information which often contradicts that which was learned previously. So where is the truth in all this? At the highest level, of course. It can thus be assumed that ignorance is the main mechanism of control over those lower down in the pyramidal hierarchy of these organizations.
Nevertheless, we must not assume that only secret societies operate in this way. Truly, all organizations use this system in order to preserve the authority of those at the higher levels. Examples of this structure can be gleaned from all aspects of life. Militaries keep information from governments, governments keep information from the public, and the public keeps information from themselves and each other. Universities keep information to themselves, as do corporations, and even go so far as to take out copyrights or patents on this form of intellectual property. This shows that information is private and the information gathering industry has been, to a very large extent, privatized.
Just as Darwinism helped fuel eugenics, information is only released when its dissemination furthers a global cause.
Is it only considered hate speech if the people doing it disagree with mainstream opinion? Is it like terrorism in this respect?
For example, Stephen Harper made it illegal to speak badly of the state of Israel (the political body, not its status) and thus called it a hate crime to ‘anything but support’ Israel. He also donned a yarmulke and prayed at the Western Wall. Doesn’t this just go to show that politicians will go to any lengths, even hypocritical religion, to get some support for their plans?
The question one must ask is, “Does he support Jews, does he support Israel, or does he support Zionism; and in what ratio?” The context is also important.
Following Bibi’s failed senate speech (despite the pomp,) most would agree that his political future is limited. ‘Real Jews,’ whoever they may be, will not (it seems) let any one man represent their faith to the world. So, who are the Jews he represents? For the most part (90 %) those in question are American, and for the greatest part, they come from three American families (50 %.) Should the USA have such influence over the electoral process of a sovereign nation? It seems only fair considering the heft that the Israeli lobby has in the USA. Sure beats an overthrow, an assassination, or a war. As long as the voting in the UN stays the same – 191-2 ?, Israel can ‘defend’ herself, the ‘War on Terror’ is continued, the economy is ‘trickle-up,’ and carbon is pollution, everything is copacetic.
It would appear that Canada is doing alright. One of the few western nations to have weathered the credit collapse, Canada seems to be doing okay, for now.
The recent drop in the price of oil, however, has hurt and will continue to hurt. Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz patted himself on the back yesterday by saying that it was a good thing that he lowered the rates when he did, rather than wait and see. The effect is to slightly weaken Canadian GDP in Q1, but reduce the long-term sting (assuming oil will rebound this year – a scenario which some consider unlikely.) This continues the storyline that Canada has been conservative in its financial planning and that ‘slow and steady’ wins the race.
Japan, on the other hand, faces many huge problems. An ageing population coupled with a low birth rate, little land for crops, radioactive food on what little land they do have (which will hurt the birth rate more than increase the death rate) and a money-printing strategy of which even the Fed is jealous.
Europe is printing money, Australia’s natural resources are crashing in value, China’s economy (the shadow side of it anyhow) is plummeting, and Russia… it could go either way. The only thing holding up the US economy now, besides hype and faith, is the value of the dollar. (What Saudi did to oil, America did to its currency; but Saudi is hurting, too.) The strong dollar is leaving all other currencies in its wake. Swiss de-pegged the Franc and said enough, we’re not playing this game anymore. (They should have gotten their gold back in that referendum last year, even it if was all in coin bars.)
Let’s not forget that the Canadian economy would be in tatters were it not for the American market. This is Canada’s greatest vulnerability; but Canada has been hedging of late with emphasis on the TPP and other trade deals abroad.
Nevertheless, other factors bring one to conclude that Canada is the place to be. Li Ka-Shing (richest man in Asia) just sold everything he had in Hong-Kong and got himself a Canadian passport. The Rothschilds’ head office is in Toronto (they may or may not still control the world, but they do know what they’re doing.) Things can’t be all bad, can they?
The true state of the environment is nothing particularly abnormal as can very clearly be seen in the following chart.
On the other hand, this next chart is the kind of pseudo-science which is all-pervasive these days. Note the dotted line and that the next forty year rise is equal to the previous 60,000 year decline. The graph itself is speculative even displaying a question mark, but this is the kind of thing that passes for science in this debate.
Despite the fact that both vaccines and chem-trails contain some of the same neuro-toxins, vaccines are safe and chem-trails don’t exist.
As stated in a recent article by Mother Jones, “People who have measles are more susceptible to starvation through climate change… In its landmark report last year, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that global warming poses a range of health threats… Kirk Smith—an environmental health expert at UC, Berkeley, and a lead author of the IPCC chapter on health impacts—points out that “a child weakened by measles is more likely to die from the malnutrition caused by climate change.” In other words, anything we can do to reduce the impact of existing health problems will be even more important in a warming world. And vaccinating children, he says, is one of the most cost-effective public health tools we have.”
I would also like to mention that if you are susceptible to starvation, measles and climate change are not your biggest problems. Kirk Smith points out that “one of the most cost-effective public health tools we have” is vaccines. I would like to point out that THE most cost-effective public health tool we have is better nutrition. Warmer temperatures, increased rainfall, and increased levels of CO2 would only increase crop yields.
People with wealth, power, and influence say many things. Of those things, some seem to come up more often than others, namely:
1- Overpopulation is our biggest problem
2- CO2 is pollution, and climate change is bad
3- GMO’s are safe and can feed more people
4- Vaccines will make you healthy
5- Wireless radiation isn’t harmful
6- Nuclear energy is green energy
7- There are no conspiracies
8- Did I mention overpopulation?
Based on the initial premise that there are too many people on the planet; do you think that the powers that be would suggest doing anything which would make that problem worse? Why implement plans that make the biggest problem bigger? So the rest of the things on that list should not help increase the population, should they? In fact, all of those things will actually reduce the population, as they should; given that over-population is such a problem.
It would be akin to saying that despite the fact that nuclear weapons are the biggest threat to mankind and must be eradicated, we need more nuclear weapons to keep us safe. No, wait, that’s a bad example. It would be like saying that we must find a cure for cancer, and then spend most of the money to research treatment options. Scratch that, another bad example. Like self-regulating financial industries… no. Like we need more debt to pay our debts… no. Oh, like more security means less freedom… no, no, no. Ok, so these aren’t the best examples; but you get the gist, right?
Well, the truth of the matter is that the narratives are becoming hopelessly intertwined.
Let’s begin by assuming two things, (1) that you can influence massive amounts of capital flow (and have friends in many industries who can do the same) and, (2) that you genuinely think there are far too many people on Earth. In the immortal words of Keanu Reeves, “What do you do?” There are three courses of action you could take: decrease the birth rate; increase the death rate; or both. Let’s break this down.
In order to decrease the birth rate, there are several options available, namely: reduce the amount of available food; sterilize a certain segment of the population; convince people to stop reproducing (by ‘education’ or by mandate.)
Reducing food supplies in a global way would necessitate impeding the forces of nature from supplying energy to plants. Decreasing CO2 concentrations, preventing sunlight from reaching the earth, acidification of soil, make private ownership of seed illegal, environmental manipulation (more/less rain, hail, pesticide resistance,) re-zoning agricultural land (Bundy ranch.)
Sterilization in humans can occur through several mechanisms. Some known causes: ELF, VLF, LF radiation (microwaves, cell-phones, wi-fi, Bluetooth, SMART meters, RFID;) other radiation (depleted uranium, Fukushima, x-ray, chemo-therapy;) GMOs (which also cause allergies;) certain vaccines; certain reproductive diseases and conditions, STDs; mercury and other neurotoxin contamination; castration (enforced up until 1967 in Britain for ‘treatment’ of homosexuality.) There are many other ways in which humans can be sterilized; these will be examined in future posts.
As an added bonus, if you can reduce the ability of people to think, there would be far less resistance to your movement, should the ‘truth’ or parts of it begin to leak out. So distractions (sports, celebrities, activities, make the important stuff boring,) lowering the level of education (teach by wrote not by reason, don’t teach about money,) and drug-induced dementia could be useful tools, as well.
Another tack is to promote the gay agenda (gay people don’t reproduce,) and yet another is to limit births to a certain number per family by mandate (as was done in China.) A less overt way might be to indoctrinate people in school that less people is a good thing (read a modern social studies textbook.)
Increasing the death rate could be brought about by killing lots of people outright either through war or starvation or disease.
Some of the many ways to start a war (civil or otherwise*) are: political movements can be subverted (Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Ukraine;) economies can be crashed (Greece, EU, US, Japan;) food could be made scarce (California drought, honey-bee die-off, lower nutrition content, increased price of oil;) access to water could be limited (privatization of resources, pollution of natural sources;) increase poverty (wealth gap;) invade foreign sovereign states (the post-WWII list is prohibitively long;) start wars by proxy and religious belligerence – bring about ‘Armageddon’; and limit access to energy (by quashing new technologies.)
*(For the purposes of this article, war and revolt are considered synonymous.)
Starvation could be achieved by reducing plant size thereby reducing crop yields (decreasing plant nutrients like CO2, limiting solar radiation needed for photosynthesis by increasing the earth’s albedo,) limiting the nutrition in foods (fast foods, GMOs, poor soil conditions/pH balance,) regulating nutrients (codex alimentarius,) increasing the cost of producing food (regulations, seed cost, oil price,) killing pollinating insects (like honey-bees,) and by introducing droughts and floods and hail (geo-engineering projects in Calgary started by the insurance companies transport bad weather [hail] from the metropolitan area over to the prairies. Better to destroy a crop than dent some luxury automobiles. Through derivatives trading espoused by ‘disaster capitalists,’ a profit can be gleaned by crop failure, but insurance claims divert cash in the wrong direction in the economy: downwards.)
Disease is easy enough to spread. Many diseases could be custom-made in a lab to target certain segments of the population (weaponized anthrax, mad-cow disease, ebola, AIDS) and could be spread either by injection through vaccination programs or other medical interventions (gonorrhoea in South America, sterilization in Kenya, MKUltra in Canada) or by giving them an infectious component such that they can spread on their own (HIV/AIDS.) Blood and vaccines can easily be infected (Bayer.) Birth defects can also be introduced (thalidomide,) the environment can be polluted (cancers,) and voluntary disease can be cultivated (lung cancers through smoking, liver disease from drinking, heart disease through inactivity.)
So far, so good. Through these measures, we have effectively reduced the world’s population by fifty percent and have lowered the birth rate into negative territory. The projected population by the year 2050 is now two billion people. This number can still be tweaked, but we now have the time to be more selective about who to keep and who to discard. Eugenics is back!
The only thing one needs in order to be considered a VIP is money. You don’t even need to be important, just rich. But let’s just assume that these two words (rich and important) are synonymous. Now, who are you going to save? Are you going to allow masses of uneducated labourers to run the world as they see fit, or are you going to save the important people? The question answers itself, doesn’t it?
Now all you need is an excuse to go about doing all these things. “Pollution caused by man-made CO2 emissions is destroying the planet and we need to put an end to it before it is too late.” Whether or not the basic premise is flawed, and if this is what you believe, then your course of action becomes limited to lowering the global population or facing death (real or imagined.) The CO2 issue is central to the question of depopulation. Now, to re-state, “What do you do?”
There you have it. CO2, vaccines, GMOs, and the rush towards global depopulation; that, in a nutshell (or in a nuthouse) is all you need to know about the New World Order. Oh… that, and that there are actually a large number of VIPs who are in just that position and who really do believe it.
As if it weren’t already obvious enough, Mother Jones just published this article which states in black and white, and as clear as day that “Vaccines Are One of Our Best Weapons Against Global Warming.” Well, if humans are to blame for global warming, then vaccines are our best weapons against people?!?
From the article:
“A child weakened by measles is more likely to die from the malnutrition caused by climate change.”
This goes to show just how intertwined these narratives have become. The unwind is going to be a lot of fun to watch. This MJ article is full of nonsense, but it does show to what extent these political pseudo-pundits will go to drive their drivel home.
And consider this article from the Toronto Star.
“While this study evaluates climate, social and economic data and consequently its impact on Syria, it is not the first to suggest that extreme weather events — especially droughts, water scarcity and consequently food insecurity — could lead to violence.”
Turkey’s control on the flow of the Euphrates is doing just that. That’s anthropogenic, I guess.
“In 2013, the Centre for American Progress and the Centre for Climate and Security in Washington released a series of essays that argued climate change played a significant role in the Arab Spring.”
Another stunningly short-sighted article by Raveena Aulakh.
More twisted logic, more non-sequitur arguments, and a complete lack of any science in these articles go to show just how important these themes have become to the ‘de-population is more urgent now than ever’ crowd.
Genetics has brought about a new and profound understanding of the relationships between the peoples of the world. Many ancestral traits can be traced back throughout the ages by means of studying the human genome and its variance amongst populations. Diseases specific to certain cultural groups are a very good indicator of lineage. Many blood lines can be traced back up their respective family trees by examination of the common diseases within these groups. A good example of this is haemophilia. Another good example is Dupuytren’s contracture.
[Also known as ‘Viking’s disease’ or ‘Celtic hand’ or ‘claw hand’ or ‘morbus Dupuytren,’] “Dupuytren’s disease (DD) is an ancient affliction of unknown origin. It is defined by Dorland as shortening, thickening, and fibrosis of the palmar fascia producing a flexion deformity of a finger. Tradition has it that the disease originated with the Vikings, who spread it throughout Northern Europe and beyond as they traveled and intermarried. After being present for hundreds of years, DD was named in the 19th century after a famous French surgeon, who was not the first to describe it.
While there seems to be a link to people with Northern heritage the theory that Dupuytren’s contracture is a Viking or Celtic disease is probably wrong (see also R. McFarlane “On the origin and spread of Dupuytren’s disease” J. Hand Surg. (Am) 27 (2002) p385-390 link_abstract). The earliest reported case of Dupuytren’s disease is an Egyptian mummy dating back 3000 years (full_text_Spanish).”
A good picture of the mummy’s hand can be found here.
Dupuytren’s contracture seen in Egyptian mummy. (page 100, fig 6 F-G).
Here, we have established a possible genetic link from ancient Egypt across the Mediterranean through to Scandinavia and into northern Europe. How is this possible? The explanation may lie with the forgotten tribe, the thirteenth tribe of Israel, the tribe of Dan. More on this later.
These may seem like completely unrelated topics, at first glance; but the reality is that they have much more in common than you might like to know.
One of the claims made by the geo-engineering crowd is that very tiny particles of certain metals (aluminum, barium, strontium, silver, et al.) are being sprayed into the sky in order to control various aspects of the weather cycle and to control global warming through an increased albedo. This argument is flawed in its own right, but I digress. The point being made is that nano-sized particles of aluminum are being pumped into the air, and as a result, end up in our lungs and in the water supply through run-off.
Here is some of what has been observed in the environment after geo-engineering spraying was conducted.
This article by Dr. Russell Blaylock, shows that the really insidious part of this story is that tiny particles of aluminum (which has been linked to dementia and Alzheimer’s) can and will penetrate the blood-brain barrier through either the lungs, the nose, or the gut.
“Studies have shown that these particles pass along the olfactory neural tracts, which connect directly to the area of the brain that is not only most effected by Alzheimer’s disease, but also the earliest affected in the course of the disease. It also has the highest level of brain aluminum in Alzheimer’s cases.”
It is not possible, once the aluminum is in the environment, to remove it through any means except distillation. Water filters are ineffective due to their pore size which is much bigger than the particles they are meant to remove. One would expect the metal particles to fall out of solution and settle on the bottom of rivers, lakes, and oceans, but this is not the case. As anyone who has studied fluid mechanics will attest to, underwater currents and surface flows do not mix. Temperature gradients, density, and salinity prevent streams of water from combining with others. This means that if the surface water being taken up by a filtration plant contains nano-sized particles of aluminum (or any other metal, for that matter) the water which is then pumped out as potable will contain those same particles. Whether they are breathed in or they are swallowed, these particles find their way into the body where they accumulate and cannot be easily removed, if at all.
“…aluminum is a widely recognized neurotoxin that inhibits more than 200 biologically important functions and causes various adverse effects in plants, animals, and humans.”
The Alzheimer’s Society’s official position is that there is no conclusive proof that Al leads directly to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Perhaps Al is not the only cause of AD, there could be other factors involved; and Al might lead to or aggravate the situation despite not being the sole causal agent. Any way one looks at this, nobody claims that Al is good for the body, Al is considered a toxic metal and can be found in many places, including vaccines and chem-trails.
“Aluminum is found in a shocking number of foods and consumer products, including:
– Foods such as baking powder, self rising flour, salt, baby formula, coffee creamers, baked goods and processed foods, coloring and caking agents
– Drugs, such as antacids, analgesics, anti-diarrheals, and others; additives such as magnesium stearate
– Vaccines—Hepatitis A and B, Hib, DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis), pneumococcal vaccine, Gardasil (HPV), and others
– Cosmetics and personal care products such as antiperspirants, deodorants (including salt crystals, made of alum), lotions, sunscreens, and shampoos
– Aluminum products, including foil, cans, juice pouches, tins, and water bottles”
Whether Al causes AD, leads to AD, or contributes to the development of AD, this is not a substance we want in our bodies, period. The introduction of nano-sized particles of aluminum, mercury, or any other toxic metals into our environment, and hence, our bodies, should be regarded as a non-consensual medical intervention with potentially harmful effects to ourselves, to our food supply, and to life in general.
Internet research just got a whole lot more complicated.
While doing some digging, I noticed that some web sites post certain articles in reverse text. Sure there are lots of articles in languages which read from right to left, but I’m not talking about those. I’m talking about articles from english-language sites which post sensitive information backwards so that they can say that the information is public while leaving it well masked.
An example of reverse text can be seen here (scroll down to the charts.)
And another can be seen here. [Update: This page from Australia has been un-reversed. Must be summer.]
But here’s another example.
I have seen this sort of behaviour on sites ranging in topics from educational to governmental to military to journalistic to economic. Most are economic. There are other ways to disguise plain text, as well. The site ‘textmechanic’ has several options. Try it out. There are many sites which allow an encryption of text strings, also.
Here is a Chinese(?) site which advertises knock-off Louis Vuitton pumps, but then gives an account of an exchange between Obama and Romney in reverse text. Is this how the underground media operates?
Many of these reverse hits seem to refer to .pdf documents. When links to them are clicked, browsers and .pdf readers sometimes display the information properly (with a warning that it isn’t being displayed in its original form;) this simply means that the information is accessible, just not searchable. Aah, the magic of loopholes.
The deep web is one thing, hidden in plain site is quite another. Look for yourselves, it really does open up a whole new world of research possibilities.
All the articles contained herin are ‘big-picture’ personal perspectives. They should all be one long article (‘the interconnectedness of all things’ as Dirk Gently might say,) however, doing this would be utterly impossible to write. Notions tend to repeat. Themes develop. Read accordingly.
STEP 1: Make yourself comfortable, prepare yourself an invigorating beverage, and fasten your seat-belt; this trail ain’t paved. Welcome to the newly improved atokenman blog.
*Use Ctrl+scroll wheel (or use zoom) to change to a single, double, or three column page view.*
STEP 2: Open your eyes, your ears, your mind, and a private browser window.
Click on articles in order to share them.
Email me on the Drawing Board. Thanks for those.
STEP 3: Remember This…
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) devised 38 rhetorical tactics which, when mastered, permit one to win any discussion, debate, or argument. When your data is unassailable and your measurements are sound, an unscrupulous Barker will resort to using the following underhanded tricks to ‘prove’ you wrong.