von Koehler
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Shame regular people can't use the term, gay anymore.
GOV/MIL Main "Great Reset" Thread
- Thread starter marsh
- Start date
Shame regular people can't use the term, gay anymore.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
UK Fuel Price Protests Cripple Motorways With "Go-Slow" Convoys
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 08:15 AM
British authorities warned drivers of "serious disruption" on Monday as protestors seeking relief from high fuel costs used "go-slow" convoys to cause traffic jams on major UK motorways over a wide swath of territory.
Organized via social media under the banner of "Fuel Price Stand Against Tax," rolling, slow-moving roadblocks of cars, trucks and tractors started their protests around 7am. According to The Guardian:
Police escorted some of the blockades, only to block them at their turnaround points and make arrests. The PA News Agency reports a dozen motorists were detained after blocking traffic across the Prince of Wales Bridge between South Wales and Somerset. The Telegraph reported the bridge was hardest hit in the protest, with traffic closed for more than an hour.
“The right to protest under UK law must be balanced with the rights of the wider community who may be affected," said Gwent police chief superintendent Tom Harding. UK authorities say the protests threaten to impede the response of emergency services.
The founder of the FairFuelUK, Howard Cox, told the Scottish Sun that protestors were targeting three-lane freeways, with the intent to slow traffic in two lanes while leaving the "fast lane" free.
Police used spike strips to prevent a protest convoy from entering a freeway (Cameron Smith/Getty Images via Guardian)The price of petrol in the UK has surged to to a record 191.53 pence per liter, which equates to $8.78 a gallon.—the highest among the five largest European economies.
The protestors are bent on achieving a cut in fuel taxes. None of their quoted rhetoric connects the dots between the price at the pump and Western sanctions against Russia.
In March, the UK declared it will phase out Russian oil imports by December, as will the European Union.
Cox told The Independent the effort is largely driven by small business owners:
That 5 pence tax cut came in March and is slated to last until March 2023. At the time, UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak touted it as "the biggest cut to all fuel duty rates ever." The 8.6% cut left the tax at 53 pence per liter.
Protestor Vicky Stamper told The Guardian she and her partner quit their jobs because they couldn't afford the commute. “It was costing us £380 [$460] a week just to get to and from work. I then lost a job two weeks ago because the company couldn’t afford to put fuel in that many lorries so last in, first out,” she said.
Protestors warned their next action might come in the form of a blockade on oil refineries. When previously employed in 2000 by farmers and truck drivers fighting taxes so high they represented 80% of the cost of gas, just one week of the tactic caused havoc, from huge lines at gas pumps to mail stoppages and grocery-rationing.
The Royal Automobile Club (RAC), akin to the American Automobile Club, told Bloomberg the rising price at the pump is inconsistent with a five-week drop in wholesale prices. “We would love to hear their reasoning for keeping their prices so high in this instance,” said RAC spokesman Simon Williams.
Some drivers on the M4 stepped out of their idle vehicles and took the opportunity to hone their soccer skills—or, football skills, if you like:
Idled drivers on the M4 pass the time with a "kickabout" (screenshot from Guardian video)
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Hamburg Official Tells Residents Prepare For Hot Water Rationing Amid Energy Crisis
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 02:45 AM
The second-largest city in Germany is mulling over the potential rationing of hot water as the energy crisis worsens.
Kerstan also spoke with the German daily newspaper Hamburger Abendblatt and warned, "We are in a much worse crisis than most people realize."
He asked Hamburg residents to reduce shower times, install energy-saving shower heads, and modernize thermostats for maximum power savings.
Kerstan's possible hot water restrictions follow German Vice-Chancellor and Economy Minister Robert Habeck's interview with Der Spiegel magazine last month that called for German citizens to shower less to overcome the worst energy crisis in a generation.
The German government's increasing talk about reducing shower time and conserving hot water comes as Russia reduced Nordstream NatGas flows by 60%. Germany is heavily reliant on cheap Russian Natgas, and fears mount that Europe's largest economy could face even more NatGas cuts later this summer.
Weeks ago, Germany triggered the "alarm stage" of its NatGas-emergency plan to address shortages. Yasmin Fahimi, the head of the German Federation of Trade Unions, warned over the weekend, "Because of the NatGas bottlenecks, entire industries are in danger of permanently collapsing: aluminum, glass, the chemical industry."
Fahimi warned: "Such a collapse would have massive consequences for the entire economy and jobs in Germany."
Germany's worsening energy crisis shows no signs of abating, and it seems probable that Hamburg residents could be showering in cold water.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Saudis Unwilling To Upset Putin As Biden Begs For More Crude
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 03:30 AM
By Tsvetana Paraskova of Oilprice.com
The world’s largest crude oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, continues to keep close ties with Russia while the top oil consumer, the United States, pleads with major producers—including the Kingdom—to boost supply to the market and help ease consumers’ pain at the pump. While the U.S. and its Western allies are sanctioning Moscow and banning oil imports from Russia, U.S. President Joe Biden is also turning to Saudi Arabia to ask it to pump more oil as Americans pay on average $5 a gallon for gasoline.
The Saudis prefer to keep close ties with Russia in oil policy as the OPEC+ pact and the control over a large portion of global oil supply has benefited both OPEC+ leaders—the Kingdom and Russia—over the past half a decade. Saudi Arabia, however, could use a little thaw in Saudi-U.S. relations under President Biden, who is no longer talking about the world’s top crude exporter as a “pariah” state.
The Saudis are carefully maneuvering to keep Russia as an ally in the OPEC+ group and possibly improve relations with the United States.
President Biden—desperate to see relief for American drivers ahead of the midterm elections—has made a U-turn on Saudi Arabia and is expected this month to visit the Kingdom, which he said on the campaign trail would be treated as a “pariah” state during his presidency. But U.S. gasoline prices at $5 a gallon and the loss of part of the Russian supply have made President Biden reconsider and meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Saudi Arabia has publicly reiterated its “warm” ties with Russia on several occasions since Putin invaded Ukraine, and considers keeping Russia in the OPEC+ alliance an important part of its oil policy. With Russia leading a dozen non-OPEC producers in the pact, Saudi Arabia has more sway over global oil markets with the larger OPEC+ group than with OPEC alone.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman have discussed their countries’ cooperation in the OPEC+ oil production pact in a few telephone conversations since February, and have vowed to continue their cooperation.
Last month, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said that Russia could continue its participation in the OPEC+ agreement even after it officially expires at the end of this year.
Novak was speaking after a meeting in St Petersburg with Saudi Arabia’s Energy Minister, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, who made a surprise appearance at a Russian economic forum.
During that meeting, the Saudi minister said that Saudi-Russian relations were “as warm as the weather in Riyadh.”
Two weeks before that meeting, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Riyadh and met with his Saudi counterpart Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud. The two ministers said that the OPEC+ alliance is solid, with the level of cooperation within it strong.
The recent OPEC+ decision to accelerate the production increase and roll back all cuts in August, a month earlier than initially planned, was pushed by Saudi Arabia amid U.S. pressure.
But the Kingdom had to check with Russia first before proposing the redistribution of the September increase in July and August, sources with knowledge of the behind-the-scenes diplomacy told Reuters this week.
Both the Saudis and Russia benefit from the OPEC+ deal, so Riyadh wants to keep Russia on board, the sources say.
“The Saudis are enjoying high prices while the Russians need guaranteed support from OPEC+ in the current circumstances,” a source familiar with Russian thinking told Reuters.
“No one is interested in a market collapse,” added the source.
After the production cuts are completely rolled back next month, a more difficult decision for OPEC+ looms: what to do next as Russia is more than 1 million bpd behind target and could lose more supply as the EU embargo on its oil begins at the end of this year.
Neither is OPEC+ as a group anywhere close to reaching its target production, nor has Saudi Arabia much spare capacity left to boost production further, as the U.S. and other major consumers want. Per the OPEC+ deal, the Saudi target (as well as Russia’s) is at 11.004 million bpd for August. The Kingdom has rarely reached this level, and not for a sustained period of time. So, it’s not certain that the Saudis have the ability to pump 11 million bpd or more on a sustainable basis. It’s even less certain that the Kingdom can quickly tap—if it wanted to—into the 12.2 million bpd production capacity it claims it has.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
An out-of-touch G7 could lose global leadership to BRICS
The G7 needs to include nations of the developing world.
thehill.com
OPINION>INTERNATIONAL
An out-of-touch G7 could lose global leadership to BRICS
BY AKHIL RAMESH, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 06/29/22 3:30 PM ET
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL
Days apart, the BRICS and G7 meetings were held. The groupings couldn’t be more contrasting.
BRICS is made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — a multiethnic coalition of nations that gather to address the economic challenges of the Global South. G7 is largely a group of white majority countries coming together at a scenic cabin in the Alps to discuss security and containment strategies. While the G7 invited members from the Global South as special invitees, there are no permanent members from it. This could potentially provide room for an alternative to the Western-led world order.
The back-to-back meetings of BRICS and G7 have new significance with the Ukraine conflict in the background. Western nations have been pressing countries in the Global South to take a side in the conflict. Many have either abstained in their votes at the United Nations or have outright supported Russia, earning the wrath of commentators.
Given this grim development, it is natural for leaders of the developing world to discuss ways to circumvent unilateral sanctions of the West and protect their economies, such as alternative reserve currencies to the U.S. dollar, or creating a larger coalition of countries. Both China and Russia have expressed interest in expanding the BRICS to include other nations. China invited Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Kazakhstan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Nigeria, Senegal and Thailand. And recently, in a bigger development, both Argentina and Iran applied to become part of the grouping.
These developments cannot be discounted, especially since much of the West has withdrawn from world affairs, thanks to populist leaders. Even otherwise, most of the proposals that have come from the so-called leaders of the liberal world order are driven by military and security strategies of containment instead of being development oriented.
The G7’s recent launch of an alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative reeks of power politics instead of an actual desire to help the developing world. As the American Enterprise Institute’s Director of Foreign Policy Kori Schake put it “We’d get so much more mileage if we even pretended the initiative was to encourage development rather than to counter China.”
A journalist from the Solomon Islands had a similar message in his New York Times Op-ed, “You have got to show up. And the United States has not.“
The West seems to only engage in moral posturing. If the debauchery in Iraq and Afghanistan are any indicators, it holds no official to account and often leaves invaded countries in tatters.
While one would expect some humility from those defeats, the virtue-signaling about the Ukraine-Russia conflict and desperate attempts to persuade and at times strong arm nations to pick a side demonstrates that they are back to their old ways.
The West is trying hard to change the narrative surrounding the Ukraine-Russia conflict into one of imperialism, though with little success. Former colonies have not endorsed that characterization. Interestingly, the former colonizers are quick to call it that. Through this lens, commentators in the Western world are only belittling the struggles of former colonies. All these judgments are coming while the BRICS come to the aid of poor nations.
Russia, China and India supplied vaccines to the developing world way before America.
Both China and India have given more free vaccines to the developing world than the total vaccines given by America. Beyond COVAX, Europe is yet to open its account with vaccine distribution for the developing world.
As the foreign minister of India, Subramaniam Jaishankar put it, “Europe has to grow out of the mindset that its problems are world’s problems”
The BRICS meeting agenda is a case in point. The former colonies and the developing economies of the world do not want to engage in the competition of moral high ground. They view the Ukraine-Russia conflict as a dispute between two countries. For them, the economic fallout that followed was a major concern, more than who is right and who is wrong in the conflict in Europe. The rising oil and gas prices, double-digit inflation levels and a global economy on the brink of recession keep the leaders up at night more than a conflict in Europe.
Nevertheless, the leader to initiate Ukraine-Russia peace talks was Joko Widodo of Indonesia, who invited Vladimir Putin to the G20. Western leaders on the other hand have been using the conflict to break Russia.
The intentions of the West seem to revolve around the containment of rather than the inclusion of the developing world. Unless and until the G7 adds permanent members from the Global South, it won’t look any different than it was 100 years ago when these same countries were the colonizers.
The G7 needs to include nations of the developing world. If not, sooner than later, they’ll be up against more than 6 billion people and half the world economy.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
US is playing risky game with Saudi Arabia and Iran
“This summit,” Khaled Al-Suleiman, a Saudi Arabian columnist, wrote of President Biden’s upcoming trip to Saudi Arabia, “may be a golden opportunity for the American president to restore …
thehill.com
OPINION>INTERNATIONAL
US is playing risky game with Saudi Arabia and Iran
BY LAWRENCE J. HAAS, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 07/02/22 11:00 AM ET
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL
“This summit,” Khaled Al-Suleiman, a Saudi Arabian columnist, wrote of President Biden’s upcoming trip to Saudi Arabia, “may be a golden opportunity for the American president to restore the [regional countries’] faith in America as a trustworthy historical ally with a solid policy that can be relied upon.
“For the alternative,” he warned, “is that these countries will actually change the map of their international alliances in order to safeguard their interests and enhance their ability to overcome the miscalculations of some of their traditional Western allies regarding the need to defend them from the threat of Iran, whose aggression is known to all and which never stops threatening and igniting fires and wars in the region!”
As Riyadh was planning to seek Biden’s assurances that Washington remains a reliable partner in confronting Iran’s regional expansionism, U.S. and Iranian officials met in Doha in hopes of reviving the 2015 global nuclear deal with Iran — the very deal that Riyadh opposes because it won’t prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons over the long term and because it would do nothing to curb Tehran’s terror sponsorship and other destabilizing regional activities.
For Washington, the question is whether it can have its cake and eat it too — reassure a leader of Sunni Arab nations that seek to contain Shia Iran and reach a nuclear modus vivendi with the latter. The risk, of course, is that Washington will lose on both fronts — fail to revive the nuclear deal and feed more concerns among Saudi officials that Riyadh may need to reconsider its heavy reliance on Washington for regional security.
To be sure, Biden faces an unusually complicated global landscape that has forced him to backtrack on his campaign promise to make Riyadh a “pariah” over human rights, particularly over the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi that the U.S. intelligence community believes was ordered by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS).
The unprecedented sanctions that Washington and its allies have imposed on Russia, along with the growing military arsenal they have sent to Ukraine, have not forced Vladimir Putin to re-think the aggression that has shaken the post-war order. After stalling elsewhere on the ground, Russia’s military is making progress in capturing territory in Ukraine’s eastern region while shelling civilian sites in hopes of demoralizing Ukrainians and prompting Kyiv to surrender.
Moreover, sanctions on Russia’s oil sector have sent global oil prices much higher. That, and decisions by China and India to buy more Russian oil, have enabled Moscow to make more money from oil sales than before it invaded Ukraine. At the same time, U.S. consumers are paying much more at the pump, helping to drive inflationary pressures that prompted the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates dramatically. That move, in turn, is threatening to spark a U.S. recession.
Not surprisingly, Biden hopes to convince Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to increase oil production in hopes of lowering prices and, with mid-term congressional elections looming, to give himself a political boost.
Riyadh, however, seems emboldened by Biden’s decision to scrap the “pariah” talk and visit the kingdom.
“[T]he Biden administration must prove that its renewed interest in the Gulf states is not [just] circumstantial and is not just a constraint imposed by the need for oil,” the pro-government Al-Riyadh newspaper wrote in an editorial. “Moreover, it must prove with deeds, not just with words, that it is still committed to the security of the Gulf and [recognizes that] the Gulf [states] have urgent needs that must be considered.”
Biden’s hopes of strengthening U.S.-Saudi relations is just one more reason to wonder why the administration still wants to revive a nuclear deal that, at best, would constrain Iran’s nuclear pursuits only until the deal expired in the coming years.
As the Saudis, other Gulf nations, and Israel have complained relentlessly, a revived deal would do nothing to constrain Iran’s nuclear-related ballistic missile program or force Tehran to change its regional behavior.
Nor would it force Iranian officials to cooperate with nuclear inspectors any more than they did before President Trump withdrew the United States from the deal in 2018. After the International Atomic Energy Agency passed a resolution in early June to urge Tehran to fully cooperate with inspectors who were probing suspected nuclear activity at three undeclared sites, Tehran responded that it would disconnect 27 cameras at nuclear-related sites that were designed to monitor its compliance with the nuclear deal.
All in all, Biden’s commitment to reviving the nuclear deal is not only problematic in terms of curbing Iranian nuclear activity, but it also threatens to undercut his effort to restore relations with Riyadh that have become increasingly important to U.S. strategic interests.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
CHINA / DIPLOMACY
Xi calls on BRICS to form one big family to reject small circles
By Yang Sheng and Wan HengyiPublished: Jun 24, 2022 12:55 AM
Chinese President Xi Jinping hosts the 14th BRICS Summit in Beijing via video link on June 23, 2022. Photo: Xinhua
In a virtual speech delivered at the 14th BRICS Summit in Beijing, Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday lauded the BRICS mechanism as having shown resilience and vitality in the current global crisis, and called on the mechanism to stay open and inclusive to welcome like-minded partners to join the big BRICS family, while firmly opposing the abuse of unilateral sanctions and rejecting "small circles" built around hegemony.
Chinese analysts said the summit sent a strong signal to the world that apart from Western-dominated organizations, which have harmed the world economy with bloc-to-bloc confrontation and abuse of sanctions, there are multilateral mechanisms formed by non-Western major economies, just like BRICS, that can effectively represent the majority of the international community in making joint efforts to realize recovery and overcome global challenges.
Xi noted that over the past year, the world has faced the continued spread of COVID-19, a tortuous world economic recovery and increasingly salient peace and security issues. Facing these formidable and complex circumstances, BRICS countries have embraced the BRICS spirit of openness, inclusiveness and win-win cooperation, enhanced solidarity and coordination and jointly tackled the challenges. The BRICS mechanism has demonstrated resilience and vitality. BRICS cooperation has achieved sound progress and results.
Xi stressed that this Summit is being held at a critical juncture in the shaping of the future course of humanity. BRICS countries, as important emerging markets and major developing countries, need to act with a sense of responsibility to bring positive, stabilizing and constructive strength to the world.
Chinese analysts said that BRICS is not just an organization formed by newly emerging economies, but is now playing a key role in the international order. Currently, BRICS countries represent 40 percent of the world population, account for 25 percent of the global economy and 18 percent of world trade, and contribute 50 percent to the world's economic growth.
Wang Lei, director of the Center for BRICS Cooperation Studies at Beijing Normal University, told the Global Times that this is a clear trend of change in the global power balance, showing that power is no longer monopolized by the US, and the West needs to get used to this trend and embrace it, rather than contain it.
Trade connectivity among BRICS countries is becoming closer and tighter, especially under the shadow of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to Chinese government data, in the first five months of 2022, China's total imports and exports with other BRICS countries increased 12.1 percent year-on-year, with a 20 percent increase with Russia and 10 percent increase with India.
Later this month, two US-led multilateral mechanisms - G7 and NATO - are also going to hold summits. These US-led blocs formed by Western countries are going to continue to intensify tensions, confrontations and decoupling with US competitors like China and Russia, and this could further harm not only global recovery but also the peace and security of the world, so BRICS needs to stay united and jointly handle the shared concerns and challenges, experts said.
After the summit, leaders of the five countries adopted the BRICS 2022 Beijing Declaration, covering fields including "Strengthening and Reforming Global Governance," "Working in Solidarity to Combat COVID-19," "Safeguarding Peace and Security," "Promoting Economic Recovery," "Expediting Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," and "Deepening People-to-People Exchanges" and "Institutional Development."
Oppose sanctions, hegemony
Xi said "we need to speak out for equity and justice. We need to encourage the international community to practice true multilateralism and uphold the international system with the UN at its core and the international order underpinned by international law, and urge the world to reject the Cold War mentality and bloc confrontation, oppose unilateral sanctions and abuse of sanctions, and reject the small circles built around hegemony by forming one big family belonging to a community with a shared future for humanity."
In the speech held under the theme "Fostering High-quality Partnership and Ushering in a New Era of Global Development" with other BRICS leaders, Xi said "some countries are now seeking absolute security via expansion of military alliances to force other countries to take sides and create bloc confrontation, to overlook other countries' interests and rights and seek supremacy. If we let this dangerous trend continue to develop, the world will become more turbulent and insecure."
A Beijing-based senior expert on international relations who asked for anonymity said that anyone familiar with international politics would easily see who are those "some countries" criticized by the Chinese president.
"Who instigated the Russia-Ukraine crisis by pushing NATO's expansion eastward? Who forced other countries to sanction Russia and ban energy imports to damage the world economy? Who used rumors and disinformation to push illegal sanctions against Chinese products made in Xinjiang? Who is trying to form a new bloc-to-bloc confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region to copy the disaster of the Ukraine crisis to contain China's development? The answer is crystal clear - the US," he said.
Wang Yiwei, director of the Institute of International Affairs at the Renmin University of China, told the Global Times that "based on the experience of history, when a group of major powers tries to isolate one major power without respecting its rightful interests and security concerns, to humiliate it with sanctions and compensation, in other words, 'to push a major power into a corner,' it will bring a world war."
Therefore, BRICS countries are making efforts to find a new type of international relations, to be inclusive and collective, to build a community with a shared future for humanity, and only by doing so can we avoid the crisis between the West and non-Western powers that goes round and round in the Western-dominated order, Wang Yiwei noted.
Emerging non-Western powers
At the summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, "The countries that form this group have been seeking to step up their cooperation on all global and regional matters. The BRICS format has been consistently increasing its prestige and international influence. This is an objective process, since the five BRICS countries, as we all know, have immense political, economic, scientific, technical and human potential."
"We have everything we need to work together and achieve results for ensuring global stability and security, sustained growth and prosperity, and better well-being for our people," Putin said.
Western media reported the BRICS Summit from a special angle, such as saying an "isolated" Russia has made an appearance at a multilateral event with other major economies for the first time since it launched its military operation in Ukraine.
According to the Beijing Declaration, the BRICS leaders said, "We have discussed the situation in Ukraine and recall our national positions as expressed at the appropriate fora, namely the UNSC and UNGA. We support talks between Russia and Ukraine."
Feng Xingke, secretary general of the World Financial Forum and director of the Center for BRICS and Global Governance, told the Global Times that the BRICS countries hold a very similar stance on the Russia-Ukraine crisis, even though they share no common ideology and have no alliance treaty like NATO, and they didn't carry out any specific coordination before announcing their stances, which "proves that BRICS really represents the stance of developing countries and emerging markets."
Developing countries focus more on development and people's livelihood, so they have no interest in instigating conflict and intensifying existing crises through weapon supplies and sanctions, just as those Western countries have done, Feng said.
After the Russia-Ukraine crisis began, the US-led Western abuse of sanctions against Russia totally ruined and interrupted the global economic order, and is bringing global inflation and price rises in many products, which harmed everyone including the US itself, said experts.
"Middle Eastern and African countries like Egypt are facing a serious food crisis, and the inflation rate in Turkey and Argentina has reached 50 percent. These are all serious problems that should not be ignored by the international community," Feng said.
The Ukraine crisis just marginalized many problems in developing countries, as Western mainstream media is paying attention to the crisis in Ukraine, and this also makes the international community give less attention and assistance to developing countries in regions like Africa and the Middle East, analysts said.
This means BRICS is an organization formed by major economies that will pay attention to these problems, as there are many developing countries that have been included in the BRICS Plus platform, and trying to bring about global recovery without solving problems in developing countries will not succeed, experts noted.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
SOURCE / GT VOICE
GT Voice: G7 is in no position to dictate nations’ oil trade with Russia
By Global TimesPublished: Jun 29, 2022 10:33 PM
Photo: IC
The so-called Group of Seven (G7) nations on Tuesday had "positive and productive discussions" with China and India about plans to implement a price cap on Russian oil exports, Reuters reported on Wednesday. The news came on the heels of G7 agreement on exploring imposing a price cap on Russian oil, apparently as part of the West's ever expanding sanctions against Russia.
Details remain sketchy regarding the so-called "discussions." As of press time on Wednesday, there has been no official confirmation from relevant parties regarding Reuters' report, which cited an unidentified source. The report suggested that China and India would be able to buy Russian crude at even lower prices under the plan, but that would represent a significant shift for China and India as both have refrained from joining in the US-led sanctions against Russia and have continued normal economic and trade cooperation with Russia.
China's Foreign Ministry has repeatedly stated that unilateral sanctions are not conducive to resolving issues, and that China and Russia always engage in normal economic and trade cooperation on the basis of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit. India, despite pressure from Washington, has also continued energy trade with Russia.
Although it remains unclear what the reported discussions were about and what the outcome was, one thing is very clear: The G7 led by the US is primarily seeking to increase pressure on Russia, as their previous moves fail to sway Moscow, and the interests of China and India, or any other country for that matter, is not their primary concern despite the so-called "attractive pitch."
Over the past several months, the US and some of its allies imposed an embargo on Russian oil in an effort to maximize pressure on Russia, while the EU agreed to ban most Russian oil imports by the end of the year. But the sanction measure aimed at depriving Russia of oil revenues has proved counterproductive. According to the IEA data, Russian oil export revenues increased by $1.7 billion in May to about $20 billion, which is well above the 2021 average of roughly $15 billion.
Then came the idea of creating a buyers' cartel, with the aim of keeping Russian oil supplies on the market to avoid a further price hike to limit its oil revenues. While a cap on Russian oil prices may sound like a great idea for the West when it comes to curbing Moscow's revenues from oil sales, implementing such a price cap could only be a fantasy with little feasibility if G7 cannot get the world's major oil importers on the same page.
Yet, the problem is that G7 nations are no longer major buyers of Russian oil, and as an unrelated third party, the G7 has neither the qualification nor the market power to dictate energy trade among China, India and Russia.
Western media reports so far suggested that the West may impose such a price cap through insurance. About 95 percent of the world's tanker fleet is insured through the International Group of Protection & Indemnity Clubs in London and some companies in other European countries. G7 could tell crude buyers that if they want to continue using the insurance service for Russian oil shipment, they need to agree to a "capped price."
But even that could also fail to pressure Russia, as Russia has already prepared an alternative by offering insurance through the Russian National Reinsurance Company, according to media reports. The moves could also further disrupt already turbulent global energy trade by creating more barriers and chaos.
As for China, stable energy prices are of great significance to its domestic social and economic development, and China and Russia are important partners in energy trade cooperation, with continuous practical progress recorded over the years. If there is a need for price adjustment in bilateral energy trade, China and Russia can discuss the issue through bilateral channels. G7 has no qualification to tell them how to conduct trade.
Tristan
Has No Life - Lives on TB
There is information in the CV thread which I think is relevant the "Great Reset" - the assertion that CV was created in US Labs.
If proven, this will drive other countries away from us and lead to strengthening ties in their alternative power alliances, such as BRICS.
www.timebomb2000.com
This assertion, if true, would explain the tremendous efforts at obscufication and denial levied at anyone trying to find the source. If true, would lead to the US acheiving Pariah status, as countries will blame their CV deaths and costs to their economies on the US.
If proven true. Or, even if merely accepted as true...
If proven, this will drive other countries away from us and lead to strengthening ties in their alternative power alliances, such as BRICS.
CORONA - Main Coronavirus thread
https://palexander.substack.com/p/mercks-molnupiravir-and-pfizers-paxlovid?utm_source=%2Fprofile%2F58916651-dr-paul-alexander&utm_medium=reader2 (fair use applies) MERCK's Molnupiravir & Pfizer's Paxlovid have MAJOR rebound problems, causing COVID illness; Wang et al. pre-print; "COVID-19...
This assertion, if true, would explain the tremendous efforts at obscufication and denial levied at anyone trying to find the source. If true, would lead to the US acheiving Pariah status, as countries will blame their CV deaths and costs to their economies on the US.
If proven true. Or, even if merely accepted as true...
marsh
On TB every waking moment
I almost think that most of the people of the US are beginning to separate the globalist faction (progressives and RINOs) from what America is. I would say that a growing number are disavowing the predatory and militant actions of the "military industrial complex" and are not in support of it. Biden, and his actions, have lost the support of the American people. He no longer represents them, if he ever did.
The people of the US are as much a victim of the COVID business as anyone else in the world. It is the globalists - the Bidens, Faucis, Collins, Soros, Gates, Schwabs, Bourlas, van der Leydens, etc who are the cabal at the bottom (or top) of it.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
File photo showing businessman John Catsimatidis speaking at an event in New York City, on Nov. 14, 2014. (Slaven Vlasic/Getty Images)
INFLATION
Oil Billionaire Blasts Biden’s Gas Price Blame Game, Says Only One Thing Will Fix Inflation
By Tom Ozimek
June 27, 2022 Updated: July 2, 2022
New York billionaire and refiner John Catsimatidis, who owns hundreds of gas stations, blasted President Joe Biden’s pinning the blame on high prices at the pump on gas station owners, arguing there’s only one solution for inflation—boosting production of crude.
Catsimatidis made the remarks in an interview on Fox News on June 24, after being asked to comment on Biden’s call to gas station owners to “bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you are paying for the product.”
“Do it now. Do it today. Your customers, the American people, they need relief now,” Biden said at a White House press conference on June 23, in which the president called for a federal gas tax holiday, urged oil companies to use their profits to boost refining capacity, and leaned on gas station owners to pass along lower crude oil prices by lowering prices at the pump.
‘Ridiculous to Put It on Us’
Catsimatidis reacted to Biden’s remarks by defending gas station owners, arguing that they’ve been “making the same margin that we’ve been making forever” as they have to cover payroll and pay rent, electricity bills, and other operating expenses.
While the margin gas station owners make fluctuates several cents one way or the other, Catsimatidis said it’s “ridiculous to put it on us. We’re not the ones that created the problem.”
The price of gasoline has nearly doubled since Biden took office, with the president variously blaming oil industry greed, a lack of refining capacity, global supply shortfalls set against a sharp post-pandemic rebound in demand, and the war in Ukraine.
Some experts and industry insiders have argued that the Biden administration’s anti-fossil fuel policies have discouraged companies from investing in refining capacity.
“It’s not the war in Ukraine. It’s really domestically caused constraint on the supply side,” said Ross McKitrick, a professor of economics at the University of Guelph in Ontario and expert on energy and environmental policy, in a recent interview with The Epoch Times.
“Nobody’s willing to invest in expanding refinery capacity because the outlook from everything that the government has said is you won’t get the approvals,” he added.
McKitrick’s view was echoed by Chevron CEO Mike Wirth, who said in a recent interview that he does not believe another oil refinery will be built again in the United States, arguing that government policies are the key factor.
“We’ve seen refineries closed. We’ve seen units come down. We’ve seen refineries being repurposed to become bio refineries. And we live in a world where the policy, the stated policy of the U.S. government is to reduce demand for the products that refiners produce,” Wirth said.
Still, American drivers facing pain at the pump could see some relief from economic headwinds and reduced demand, if not from gas station owners squeezing their margins or refiners finding ways to process more crude.
‘No Denying Biden Has Some Blame’
Oil prices have retreated over the past two weeks amid broad market concern over an economic slowdown as soaring inflation has pushed central banks to tighten financial conditions by hiking rates.
The drop in crude prices has led gas stations to reduce prices at the pump, with the national average for a gallon of gas landing at $4.897 on June 27, according to AAA.
Several weeks ago, that figure stood at over $5 a gallon, while a year ago, the national average for a gallon of gas was $3.095.
Some gasoline market experts, like GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan, predict further drops.
“We’re down to $4.88/gal with #gasprices down for the second straight week. A third is possible, with prices by July 4 falling to $4.75-$4.80/gal,” De Haan wrote in a recent tweet.
What’s De Haan’s take on Biden’s role in high prices at the pump?
“There’s no denying Biden has some blame for rising #gasprices, but it is far far from 100%,” he said in a tweet, while agreeing “100 percent” with a comment that pinned the blame on a massive demand disruption related to COVID-19 combined with a sluggish domestic production response driven by the desire to use profits to repair damaged balance sheets when oil prices crashed at the beginning of the pandemic.
‘Open Up the Spigots’
For his part, Catsimatidis said in the interview on Fox that there’s only one fix for the current inflationary spike—a big part of which is due to soaring energy costs.
“We have 100 years’ worth of oil,” he said. “Open up the spigots.”
“If we open up the spigots and flooded the market with oil, with crude oil, American crude oil, we bring the price of oil back” and “inflation goes away,” Catsimatidis said.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Pres. Biden's Legacy: German Energy Rationing Begins
BY VBL
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 6:31
GoldFix's value.
Russia increasingly likely to reduce or cut off Natural Gas heading into winter. Guess when this all really started?
Bottom Line
Yesterday, News broke of a German city rationing hot water to its citizens. The news is actually potentially worse than the headline. This winter may be a very dangerous one, especially in Europe.
Then we got wind of Hamburg, Germany’s second largest city considering rationing as well Hamburg Official Tells Residents Prepare For Hot Water Rationing Amid Energy Crisis
Hamburg Germany is mulling over the potential rationing of hot water as the energy crisis worsens.
Kerstan also spoke with the German daily newspaper Hamburger Abendblatt and warned, "We are in a much worse crisis than most people realize." -
How We Got Here:
The current flow:
- G7 threatens Oil price caps
- Russia must consider cutting off energy flows to the EU
- EU countries brace for winter by rationing
JPMorgan detailed why an energy counter attack is a growing possibility in their July 1 report on Oil covered in JPM Says $380 Oil Possible If Russia Retaliates
Russia is increasingly likely to simply cut back or cut off its Oil and Natural Gas flows to the EU now. The idea being: If you are capping Russia’s prices (which hurts Russia in more ways than one), then we will sell to the east or not at all.
Screwing Up From Clinton's Administration to Biden's
How did we really get here? Watch for yourself
Back to the main story.
Not Just Hot Water, All Heating Ability
Landlords are rationing hot water as a result of utilities reducing the ability to heat their water. Utilities, we believe, are being mandated to conserve Natural Gas in anticipation of a Russian counter attack if price caps go into effect. In fact, they are in the process of normalizing flows by reducing their dependence anyway now. Mandated conservation is the next logical step. The German Site Bild ran a story on this
Natural Gas is Likely Weapon of Choice
While oil gets all the headlines, it is Natural Gas that is the most likely weapon to retaliate at first. Why? Because Russia derives much more revenue with Oil than it does with natural gas.
Russian Gas Pipelines to China, built for such an occasion…
JPMorgan:
They could cause acute damage in a coldsnap while reducing their economic inflows less.
Who Suffers Most? You Do
The largest importers of Russian gas in the European Union are (Southern) Germany and Italy, accounting together for almost half of the EU's gas imports from Russia. Other larger Russian gas importers in the European Union are France, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland, Austria and Slovakia.
Which is why southern Germany, so dependent on Russian gas, is beginning to “ration” hot water. It is also why we feel the most expeditious (and heinous) next play would be for Russia to reduce or cut off Natural Gas heading into winter. They wouldn’t even have to cut off oil. Then see how the west reacts.
US Implications
If this fear is realized, Natural Gas prices should also rocket higher here as the US will continue selling its own Nat gas for a profit to the EU in the form of LNG.
The only two things we see changing that calculus should the worst come to pass in Europe are:
- mild winter weather, and
- the willingness of the US to “help” Europe.
Finally: If you are wondering where this all ends up. it ends with Central Bank Digital Currency being mandated to direct money to those people and parts of the economy where it is needed most.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Ron Paul: Biden's Sanctions Are A Windfall For Russia, Foreign Policy Fail
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 11:25 AM
Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,
It’s easy to see why, according to a new Harris poll, 71 percent of Americans said they do not want Joe Biden to run for re-election. As Americans face record gas prices and the highest inflation in 40 years, President Biden admits he could not care less. His Administration is committed to fight a proxy war with Russia through Ukraine and Americans just need to suck it up.
Last week a New York Times reporter asked Biden how long he expects Americans to pay record gasoline prices over his Administration’s Ukraine policy. "As long as it takes," replied the president without hesitation.
"Russia cannot defeat Ukraine," added Biden as justification for his Administration’s pro-pain policy toward Americans. The president has repeatedly tried to deflect blame for the growing economic crisis by claiming Russia is solely behind recent inflation. "The reason why gas prices are up is because of Russia. Russia, Russia, Russia," he said in the same press conference.
But Biden has a big problem: Americans do not believe him. According to a Rasmussen poll earlier this month, only eleven percent of Americans believe Biden’s claim that Russian president Vladimir Putin is to blame for high prices.
When it comes to disdain for the average American hurt by higher prices, there is more than enough in the Biden Administration to go around.
Brian Deese, Director of President Biden’s National Economic Council, was asked in a recent CNN interview, "What do you say to those families that say, listen, we can’t afford to pay $4.85 a gallon for months, if not years?"
His answer? "This is about the future of the Liberal World Order and we have to stand firm."
Has there ever been an Administration more out of touch with the American people? If you asked working Americans whether they’d be happy to suffer poverty for the "liberal world order," how many would say "that sounds like a great idea"?
President Biden’s attempts to bring down gasoline prices are bound to fail because he does not understand the problem. He can beg the Saudis to pump more oil, he can even threaten the US oil companies as he did in a Tweet yesterday. He can buy and sell from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in attempt to give the impression that prices are lowering. None of it will work.
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1542691996615180289
.19 min
The strangest part of this idea that Americans must suffer to hurt the Russians is that these policies aren’t even hurting Russia! On the contrary: Russia has been seen record profits from its oil and gas exports since the beginning of the Ukraine war.
According to a recent New York Times article, increasing global oil and gas prices have enabled Russia to finance its war on Ukraine. US sanctions did not bring the Russian economy to its knees, as Biden promised. They actually brought the American economy to its knees while Russian profits soared.
As Newsweek noted last week, Russian television pundits are joking that with the financial windfall Russia has seen since sanctions were imposed, “Biden is of course our agent.”
Washington’s bi-partisan foreign policy of wasting trillions on endless wars overseas has finally come home. Biden is clearly out of touch, but there is plenty of blame to go around. The only question is whether we will see an extended recession…or worse.
intothatgoodnight
. . .
Taking your point a step further, such an international realization will immediately call the attention of We, The People® (who are awakened) to begin the process of "beating the bushes" to flush out those in "authority" who are hiding among us, and who are responsible for USING the goodwill of the people of this Constitutional Republic as cover for their inflicted mayhem and evil upon our world.There is information in the CV thread which I think is relevant the "Great Reset" - the assertion that CV was created in US Labs.
If proven, this will drive other countries away from us and lead to strengthening ties in their alternative power alliances, such as BRICS.
CORONA - Main Coronavirus thread
https://palexander.substack.com/p/mercks-molnupiravir-and-pfizers-paxlovid?utm_source=%2Fprofile%2F58916651-dr-paul-alexander&utm_medium=reader2 (fair use applies) MERCK's Molnupiravir & Pfizer's Paxlovid have MAJOR rebound problems, causing COVID illness; Wang et al. pre-print; "COVID-19...
This assertion, if true, would explain the tremendous efforts at obscufication and denial levied at anyone trying to find the source. If true, would lead to the US acheiving Pariah status, as countries will blame their CV deaths and costs to their economies on the US.
If proven true. Or, even if merely accepted as true...
“And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people,
that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.”
— Revelation 18:4 (KJV)
that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.”
— Revelation 18:4 (KJV)
intothegoodnight
Last edited:
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Steve Bannon: The Major Victory From The Supreme Court Was The EPA 3:45 min
Steve Bannon: The Major Victory From The Supreme Court Was The EPA
Bannons War Room Published July 5, 2022
(Bannon; talks about Neil Sheheen and the concept of the inner US government "centralized state" or Administrative State which arose from his analysis of the Pentagon Papers.)
Steve Bannon: The Major Victory From The Supreme Court Was The EPA
Bannons War Room Published July 5, 2022
(Bannon; talks about Neil Sheheen and the concept of the inner US government "centralized state" or Administrative State which arose from his analysis of the Pentagon Papers.)
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Michael Yon: The Dutch Are Demonizing The Farmers
Michael Yon: The Dutch Are Demonizing The Farmers
rumble.com
Michael Yon: The Dutch Are Demonizing The Farmers
Bannons War Room Published July 5, 2022
(Yon: Netherlands is a huge food exporter. The Dutch farmers are the best in the world. The globalist government is trying to take the farmland and turn into cities. The Dutch have had a famine (Hungervinter) in their history. Global famine is now a done deal. Closing farms is incomprehensible. The Dutch farmers are fighting back. The osmotic pressure of famine will pump migration from Europe and Asia into the US.
Davos and the globalists are using alleged nitrous oxide and ammonia pollution to demonize and attack farmers and take their farms and herds. It is a repeat of the Kulak pattern where the Bolsheviks demonized the most wealthy and successful farmers to target so that collective farms could replace them. The Marxist Chinese did the same.
Bannon: The globalists are trying to break the back of society.
Yon: They teargassed protesting peaceful farmers last night at the food distribution facilities. The shelves are going bare.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
The Best Lawyers in America Take Legal Action Against the FDA
"They have forsaken our most precious and vulnerable, so we will take legal action to stop them." For seemingly the first time since this COVID madness began, the people take the offensive against the
rumble.com
The Best Lawyers in America Take Legal Action Against the FDA
Red Voice Media Published July 5
"They have forsaken our most precious and vulnerable, so we will take legal action to stop them."
For seemingly the first time since this COVID madness began, the people take the offensive against the evil-doers as law teams mobilize against the FDA. Dr. Naomi wolf provides the details (see Substack link).
The Best Lawyers in America Take Legal Action Against the FDA
You can also watch the full segment with Naomi Wolf below.
Dr. Naomi Wolf: We Must Revoke COVID-19 Injections For Children [VIDEO]
marsh
On TB every waking moment
NLPC'S Kamenar blasts SEC for climate change-centered proposal 4:48 min
NLPC'S Kamenar blasts SEC for climate change-centered proposal
One America News Network Published July 5, 2022
Counsel for the National Legal and Policy Center blasts the SEC after the agency proposed a new rule requiring all registered US companies registered to report the estimated impacts of climate change caused by their business activities. One America's John Hines has more from Capitol Hill.
(It appears like they're doing a West VA vs. EPA approach)
NLPC'S Kamenar blasts SEC for climate change-centered proposal
One America News Network Published July 5, 2022
Counsel for the National Legal and Policy Center blasts the SEC after the agency proposed a new rule requiring all registered US companies registered to report the estimated impacts of climate change caused by their business activities. One America's John Hines has more from Capitol Hill.
(It appears like they're doing a West VA vs. EPA approach)
intothatgoodnight
. . .
And, if this migration into the U.S. proves true, will only serve to reinforce (man the ramparts) with AWAKE folks who really get what the deep state/communists are all about - and prove to be of benefit to the efforts of We, The People® against the embedded tyranny within our Constitutional Republic.
NO history, or know history.
We, The People® decide our fate.
(God given) Free will, in action.
intothegoodnight
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Build Back Better, 2.0: global elites rebrand to ‘Rules-Based World Order’
More hubris. Less freedom.
dossier.substack.com
Build Back Better 2.0: global elites rebrand to ‘Rules-Based World Order’
More Hubris. Less Freedom.
Jordan Schachtel
The “free world” is a troublesome slogan, as basic freedoms have become a radical concept in the year 2022. The western ruling class, which used to defend the idea of unalienable rights, has decided that such a term carries too many troublesome connotations regarding the unalienable rights of you, the members of the pleb class. So it’s time for a rebrand, and the deployment of some new rhetoric to protect the elites sitting atop the global hierarchy.
Gillian McKeith @GillianMcKeithNow it’s “rules based order” whatever that means. But it’s peppering their vocabulary all over ...
July 5th 2022 .48 min
In demonstrating their supposed moral superiority, our ruling class is now coalescing behind what they refer to as the “rules-based” world order.
Roberta Metsola @EP_PresidentDelighted to welcome PM @jacindaardern to @Europarl_EN. & are like-minded partners standing up for democracy & rules-based world order. Welcomed NZ aid to & strong position against Russian aggression. Need to further strengthen cooperation on climate & trade.
June 30th 2022
This “rules-based world order,” a bumper sticker slogan that has united the rulers of the Anglosphere, EU and NATO powers against their foreign and domestic enemies, is easy to define, once you understand what they mean by the word “rules.”
This barb is being deployed repeatedly at the Russian government (and the Chinese government in reference to trade policy), in condemning its invasion of Ukraine as violating the modern construction that is the liberal international order, or the illusion of “Pax Americana,” or better yet, the “rules” of territorial sovereignty established after World War II.
Australia House @AusHouseLondon“The resistance of Ukraine has brought democratic nations closer together which have a shared commitment to rules-based, international order, whether they be members of NATO, or non-members such as Australia." -- @AlboMP afr.com/policy/foreign…
PM warns China to heed Putin’s ‘strategic failure’ invasionVladimir Putin’s attack on Ukraine has made Russia a global pariah – and Beijing should take note, says Anthony Albanese.afr.comJuly 1st 2022
Of course, these rules are necessarily malleable, as our rulers have spent the last decades justifying their routine invasions of foreign nations under the banner of democracy, freedom, and the like.
Forbes @ForbesNATO: President Biden: "At this summit, we rallied our alliance to meet both the direct threats that Russia poses to Europe and the systemic challenges that China poses to a rules based world order."
June 30th 2022 2:26 min
And after two years of our prized “free world” autocrats unleashing relentless COVID-excused tyranny upon their own populations, the rules seem to be continuously changing and reoriented at a moment’s notice.
NATO Association of Canada @NATOCanadaHappy Canada Day! In a world with many challenges - Canada works together with our Allies to support peace, prosperity and security. We work to be better & to preserve the rules based international order. Today, we celebrate our achievements & reflect on our future!
July 1st 2022
When Russia invades Ukraine, they are violating the rules-based order. However, when Western powers invade the Middle East and Africa, or subjugate their own citizens in the name of a virus, they are not violating the rules, because their hubris-fueled moral supremacy allows these powers to determine who is and is not in good standing with the “rules-based world order.”
(COMMENT: The Administrative State promulgates rules and regulations. An elected representative legislative body passes laws and statutes. It makes sense that the "rules-based order" would operate outside of elected representative governments.)
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Texas Sheriff: Open Border Is Transforming America to Marxist State
www.theepochtimes.com
Goliad Sheriff Roy Boyd in his office in Goliad, Texas, on June 23, 2022. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)
IMMIGRATION & BORDER SECURITY
Texas Sheriff: Open Border Is Transforming America to Marxist State
By Charlotte Cuthbertson
July 4, 2022 Updated: July 5, 2022
GOLIAD, Texas—Sheriffs in Texas are experiencing the effects of the border crisis in their counties every day—whether it’s armed cartel operatives smuggling illegal immigrants, vehicle pursuits resulting in crashes and deaths, or drug overdose deaths from fentanyl brought across the southern border.
In Goliad, Sheriff Roy Boyd sits 200 miles from the Texas–Mexico border, between McAllen and Houston—a major transport corridor of illegal immigrants and illicit goods.
As a 29-year law enforcement veteran in the region, Boyd said he’s never seen a border crisis so bad or border-related crime so egregious.
“There’s no end to it,” he told The Epoch Times on June 23.
He monitors 16 cartel-operated sites in his county that are currently dormant, but have been used to stash illegal immigrants on their way to Houston. Currently, it’s mostly carloads of illegal immigrants being smuggled straight through his county to the city.
“It’s a movement of individuals from Third World countries, all over the place, into our country. But the farther you get into it, the more you realize it’s all done by design—and it’s at the design of the federal government.
“We’re in a transformation of America from a free Republic to moving to something that’s more of a Marxist state.”
Since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021, border authorities have apprehended more than 3.2 million illegal border crossers, according to Customs and Border Protection data.
An additional 800,000 or so have been detected, but evaded capture.
When asked how allowing millions of people from more than 160 countries through the southern border results in the transformation to communism, Boyd harkened back to the 1960s and President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “war on poverty.”
“LBJ sold the war on poverty to the Democratic National Party … and the DNC’s response was, ‘Why would we give those people something for nothing?'” Boyd said.
LBJ responded by saying he’d have them voting Democratic for 200 years, Boyd said, paraphrasing an infamous quote that has been widely attributed to the former president.
“This is nothing but a replication of the soft enslavement of people through entitlement,” Boyd said. “Because if you understand psychology and you look at the history of things, this is how it functions. Once it starts, it’s hard to stop.”
Trevor Loudon, a communism expert and contributor to The Epoch Times, said in a previous interview that the communists’ main enemy is the United States.
“And if you can’t bring it down through nuclear weapons, you bring it down through illegal immigration, which is maybe just as effective in the long run,” he said. “This is an orchestrated, communist assault on America, to destroy America’s borders, to create confusion in America, to overwhelm the system politically.”
Loudon said an additional 15 million to 25 million Democratic voters would ensure perpetual Democratic control of government.
“You will have a one-party state in America. And that is the plan. That is why they are doing this,” he said.
“This is Marxist. This is Leninist. And this goes back to American politicians cooperating with hostile foreign powers in the destruction of America. And their No. 1 weapon is illegal immigration and overwhelming the border.”
Traditionally, noncitizens have voted about 80 percent Democratic and 20 percent Republican, according to a 2014 study by Old Dominion University.
“We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and congressional elections,” the study concluded.
“Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.”
Now, the number of non-Hispanic illegal aliens entering the United States is increasing at the same time that Hispanics are skewing more Republican, as evidenced by Rep. Mayra Flores’s recent win in south Texas.
While it’s illegal for non-U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections, there’s been a push for years for municipal elections to accept noncitizen voters, including visa holders.
Loudon pointed to Eliseo Medina, a labor union activist and former immigration consultant to President Barack Obama, as a main driver of the illegal immigration movement.
“[If] we reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters,” Medina said in 2009 at the America’s Future Now progressives’ conference in Washington. “Can you imagine … [even] if we get 8 million new voters that care about our issue and will be voting—we will create a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.”
Fourteen municipalities currently allow noncitizens to vote, including 11 in Maryland, two in Vermont, and one in San Francisco.
A recent court ruling quashed a New York City law that would have allowed at least 800,000 noncitizens to vote in municipal elections.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams allowed the measure to become law on Jan. 9.
“I believe that New Yorkers should have a say in their government, which is why I have and will continue to support this important legislation,” Adams said in a statement at the time. “I believe allowing the legislation to be enacted is by far the best choice, and look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process.”
Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative and former member of the Federal Election Commission, said allowing noncitizens to vote “cheapens and diminishes” the concept of citizenship.
“The whole point of the open borders crowd is to do two things: one, extinguish the line between legal and illegal aliens in this country. And second, to frankly get rid of the whole concept of citizenship,” Spakovsky said in a previous interview.
Biden has said he wants a pathway to citizenship for all illegal immigrants in the United States.
Boyd said the Biden administration is working hard to purge conservative and constitutional thinkers at the federal level and replace them with people with a socialist mindset.
“But always remember, as Stalin said, the aim of socialism is communism,” Boyd said.
He said his focus remains in Goliad to protect his county and make it an unwelcoming place for criminals. The sheriffs in the region try to work together to “help each other to fight this massive wave of criminal activity,” he said.
“We don’t deal with immigration, we’re not tasked with it, we’re not authorized with it, we don’t want anything to do with it.
“But we’re fighting all the felonies that are being brought to our doorstep as a result of the national policy that’s causing this problem. And to be quite honest with you, I have no faith in the federal government.”
“My faith is in our Lord and Savior. One day, we’re going to meet the end and we’re going to have to answer for what it is we’ve done, and so I want to have a good answer when I get there.”
marsh
On TB every waking moment
"The Arrival of The Petro Ruble Is Upon Us" And What It Means For You
We are ruled by a senile president that has his strings pulled by a failed previous socialist president that lives down the street.
thebluestateconservative.com
“The Arrival of The Petro Ruble Is Upon Us” And What It Means For You
- by Madame Defarge
- July 5, 2022
The critical situation today is that the BRICs are going to add Argentina and Iran to their alliance. It also appears that Saudi Arabia is applying as well. This is a very interesting new alignment for world affairs. There are several possible outcomes if the US financial and military rule is really fading into a pile of cosmic debris. Three generations have labored for this US-dominated system. It is hanging by a thread when the simpletons are playing with scissors. If changes do occur they will be monumental.
Our WEF brethren have been shown to be lacking in both intelligence and imagination.
Another possibility is that they are again playing both sides of the equation to be assured of a seat at the table when the smoke clears. This is their usual plan. It began in the US under Presidents Lincoln, Wilson, and F. Roosevelt. They supported the Bolsheviks and Nazis during the world wars as well as the democracies. The WEF could easily be playing both sides of the street again. The US government clerks are totally out of their depth as this situation begins to coalesce.
The new BRIC alliance has several members with differing styles of government which will create an unwieldy design. For now, however, they have covered the bases well at the first pitch which is free money for everybody. The members can all put a number of cards on the table.
Argentina, Brazil, and Russia all can export a significant amount of food to China, India, and Iran. Saudi, Russia, and Iran can handle all the fuel requirements for the alliance. China can manufacture widgets and South Africa can mine gold and many minerals. By using the petro-ruble or its’ new equivalent, the US dollar is no longer the currency of the world. This is the largest political and economic earthquake since the Portuguese rounded the Cape of Good Hope. It will require a new set of policies and plans for our survival which of course the DC regime has not the intellect to create.
This will at the very least cause a major shakeup in the world political situation. The entire world system orbited London for all functions such as shipping insurance and debt guarantees. It will need to be recreated. The SWIFT system is already finished and is currently being replaced in Moscow.
The US can easily survive as we can produce anything but it will require a major reorganization governmentally, financially, and commercially. Europe will sink into oblivion with their primitive invaders, green energy horrors, and white tribal jealousies pulling them to oblivion. Russia will have an easy walk to the head of the podium without firing a shot. I remarked on a recent sheet that the EU was finished but did not realize it would be so soon.
The new BRIC organization is a brilliant plan to throw off the dominance of the globe by the US.
There are however several fissures that can easily be exploited such as 1. Brazil and Argentina have a rivalry and a history of financial difficulties. 2. Iran and Saudi are blood and religious enemies. 3. China and India have troops on their border. 4. China is very jealous of anyone in its’ spotlight. China also has a great deal of internal difficulty with resources and tends to have a larger appetite than can be accommodated regionally.
The best option for us is to close the borders to aliens and imported manufacturers. We are able to be totally self-sufficient. The rest of the world can sort out their own problems. It will probably be for the better for all concerned. The corporate ‘crats have forgotten that GM was the largest car manufacturer in the world. US Steel dominated. Our oil industry still does. The union brass needs to realize that they should shut up and not try to pad their own pockets.
This would continue to feed our own markets with customers ala Henry Ford. There are few slave laborers that can afford an iPhone.
Sadly, we are ruled by a senile president that has his strings pulled by a failed previous socialist president that lives down the street. Their supporters are the purple-haired screaming cows that do not show enough intellect to rotate their own slop buckets. We need on this Fourth of July to remember Bunker Hill when our ancestors stood before the most powerful army in the world. This situation is chump change in comparison!
Powder Dry
The Madame
Still Knitting
marsh
On TB every waking moment
CNN's Romans: Biden Blaming Putin, Refiners, and Gas Stations for High Gas Prices Is Contradictory
While discussing President Joe Biden blaming gas stations for high gas prices on Monday's broadcast of CNN's "New Day," CNN Chief Business Correspondent | Clips
www.breitbart.com
CNN’s Romans: Biden Blaming Putin, Refiners, and Gas Stations for High Gas Prices Is Contradictory
IAN HANCHETT5 Jul 2022434
Video on website 2:34 min
While discussing President Joe Biden blaming gas stations for high gas prices on Monday’s broadcast of CNN’s “New Day,” CNN Chief Business Correspondent and host Christine Romans pointed out that President Joe Biden has blamed high gas prices on the Russian invasion of Ukraine and dubbed rising gas prices the Putin price hike and has also blamed refiners for not refining enough oil while also pushing against companies refining more oil long term, and stated that some of these messages are contradictory and “working at cross-purposes.”
Romans stated, “Well, it’s Putin’s price hike, he’s called it, and then he was talking about refiners need to be refining more oil, although, long term, the strategy of this administration is that they don’t want them refining more oil. They want them using other kinds of resources. So, there [are] a lot of different kind of messaging strategies, I think, at play here and some of them are kind of working at cross-purposes.”
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Biden to allow some migrants with terrorist ties into country, raising security concerns
New administration rule could potentially endanger Americans, security experts warn.
justthenews.com
Biden to allow some migrants with terrorist ties into country, raising security concerns
New administration rule could potentially endanger Americans, security experts warn.
Updated: July 5, 2022 - 6:35am
People who worked with terrorist groups will now have an easier time entering the U.S. legally.
Last week, the State and Homeland Security departments announced they had altered the Immigration and Nationality Act, a federal law, to grant entry into the U.S. and other "immigration benefits" to those who provided "limited" or "insignificant" material support to designated terrorist organizations.
Examples of such support include "routine commercial transactions," "humanitarian assistance," "substantial pressure that does not rise to the level of duress," and "the satisfaction of certain well-established or verifiable family, social, or cultural obligations."
The amended language, detailed in a notice to the Federal Register, creates a carveout so immigration restrictions, including an entry ban into the country, no longer apply to these individuals provided they show they "pose no danger to the safety and security of the United States."
Other factors considered by the government include whether the person in question supported "terrorist activities that they knew or reasonably should have known targeted noncombatant persons, U.S. citizens, or U.S. interests."
The notice added that the carveout "may be revoked as a matter of discretion and without notice at any time, with respect to any and all persons subject to it."
The changes are raising alarm bells among immigration and national security experts, who told Just the News that the Biden administration is potentially endangering American lives.
"This is a very concerning decision to weaken the government's ability to keep supporters of terror groups from exploiting our generous immigration system," said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies. "This policy essentially makes excuses on behalf of foreign nationals who have been found to support terror groups, giving them deniability, and enables naive bureaucrats to look the other way at a record of concerning behavior on the part of applicants.
"As a result, it will be even easier for those who hate America and support terror groups to live here legally, free to fight us from within, and free to sponsor others to come in."
A State Department spokesperson told Just the News that the move is meant specifically to help Afghans so they don't get flagged unfairly and can enjoy America's immigration benefits.
"This action will allow the U.S. government to meet the protection needs of qualifying Afghans who do not pose a national security or public safety risk and provide them with the ability to access a durable immigration status in the United States," the spokesperson said.
"Eligible individuals include Afghans who supported and worked with the U.S. military in Afghanistan, worked as civil servants or as doctors, teachers, and engineers during a time when the Taliban was in power, or who paid fees to the Taliban as required by daily life to do things like pass through a checkpoint or utilize a government service to obtain a passport or other document," added the spokesperson, who explained individuals will be vetted on a case-by-case basis.
The Taliban is the Islamist group in control of Afghanistan.
The initial press release from the Biden administration announcing the new exemptions echoed these points, saying they'll allow the U.S. "to protect Afghan allies by alleviating certain obstacles to immigration benefits."
However, the actual language of the new rule is broad and appears to apply to all countries and U.S.-designated terrorist organizations such as ISIS and al Qaeda, according to experts and former officials. The rule doesn't specifically mention Afghans, Afghanistan, or the Taliban.
"If this regulation is truly intended only for the restricted case of Afghanistan, the administration should quickly amend this regulation to remove the troubling loopholes," wrote Gabriel Noronha, who served in the Trump administration as a special adviser for Iran at the State Department.
The State and Homeland Security departments didn't address why Afghanistan isn't mentioned when asked. The departments also didn't address the fact that the Taliban isn't a U.S.-designated terrorist organization and therefore wouldn't appear to be covered under the rule — an apparent discrepancy between the Biden administration's messaging and the language of the carveout.
"As usual, the Biden administration is pushing this on behalf of one particular group (Afghans in this case) that it believes the public will have sympathy for, but in fact it is much broader, and could cover many others of concern, such as drug cartels, gangs, espionage scenarios, and hostile governments," said Vaughan.
She argued the administration added "highly subjective qualifiers" such as "limited" and "insignificant" to describe one's terror support, explaining lawyers representing terror suspects can easily exploit such language and immigration officers can be deceived.
This "practically guarantees that dangerous people who could and should be kept out will slide through our system," said Vaughan.
Retired FBI Special Agent Jeff Danik, who served nearly three decades with the bureau, expressed similar concerns about terrorists slipping through the cracks, arguing the policy shift has merit but the Biden administration will likely execute it poorly.
"Terror organizations routinely coerce local populations where they operate into engaging in a range of minor, often non-violent, support activities," he said. "A primary driver of this amendment is to provide a discretionary tool that can be used to provide immigration benefits for individuals from those local populations, if they have significantly assisted the U.S. in some way."
"In that context," continued Danik, "it's a valuable, powerful, and necessary tool, but unfortunately, due to numerous well-documented abuses and bumbling mismanagement of similar tools by this administration, Americans are well served to be skeptical and vigilant regarding how it will be wielded in the real world by Secretaries Blinken and Mayorkas," the heads of the State and DHS, respectively.
Since October 2020, more than 800,000 illegal immigrants are known to have gotten past border agents.
In fiscal year 2022, there have been 50 arrests of migrants on the Terrorist Screening Database at the southern border by Border Patrol between ports of entry, a significant increase from prior years.
"The next terrorist attack could already be here," former acting Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Mark Morgan recently told Just the News. "That's not being hyperbolic."
Observers have warned that the Biden administration's new rule could reduce visa restrictions on many conscripts from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), an Iranian military force and a U.S.-designated terror group.
Noronha noted this could appear as a concession to Iran, which demanded the U.S. remove the IRGC's terrorist designation as a condition for reviving the 2015 nuclear deal — a top priority of the Biden administration.
Biden refused to delist the IRGC following intense pressure from Congress. However, easing visa restrictions could be seen as a partial olive branch to Iran in a bid to find a compromise on the issue.
Indeed, several Republican lawmakers expressed concerns to the Washington Free Beacon that the policy shift is an effort to grant concessions to Iran in hopes of injecting a shot into the arm of nuclear talks, which restarted this past week but remain at an impasse.
"While the immigration status of low-level IRGC members may not normally be a priority for the Iranian regime," wrote Noronha, "Iran's leadership could view the change in immigration regulations as a new opportunity to insert intelligence operatives into the United States."
Iran and Hezbollah have long maintained sleeper cells and sleeper agents in the U.S., waiting for Tehran's signal to strike.
The U.S. intelligence community assessed in its 2022 Annual Threat Assessment that Iran "will threaten U.S. persons directly and via proxy attacks," "remains committed to developing networks inside the United States," and "has previously attempted to conduct lethal operations in the United States."
Despite such threats, however, the administration's policy shift is par for the course for bureaucrats in the executive branch, according to one expert.
"Unfortunately, this is not a new effort by some within the bureaucracy," said Kyle Shideler, director and senior analyst for homeland security and counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy. "During the Iraq War, similar voices also attempted to undermine the provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) to make it easier for those with known ties to terrorism to enter the country. During the Obama Administration, they sought to waive these provisions multiple times, and instructed [Border Patrol] agents not to enforce them. Hillary Clinton personally lifted a ban on Tariq Ramadan, a known Islamist who had donated to terrorist-controlled charities.
"In most cases, what makes these situations similar is that the ban caused political problems for the administration, which wanted to be able to make certain agreements with certain bad actors without being embarrassed by the requirements of INA. We are seeing this play out again with the IRGC as we speak."
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Dutch Farmers Block Food Distribution Centers; Undercover Cops Chased Away From Protest
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 02:20 PM
Dutch farmers who are livid over government plans to cut nitrogen emissions by 50% - 95% have now taken to blocking food distribution centers in protest of the plan, which would shutter an estimated one-third of farms in the Netherlands.
Some 25 tractors parked outside a distribution center in the city of Zaandam, just north of Amsterdam, donning banners which read "Our farmers, our future" and other slogans, according to the Fresh Fruit Portal.
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543829180403646464
.16 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1544330346124255233
.25 min
Fisherman in the country have also begun blocking ports in solidarity with the farmers.
The upcoming reforms are expected to include a reduction in livestock, as well as buying up farms whose animals produce large volumes of ammonia.
Meanwhile, undercover cops were reportedly ousted from a protest over the weekend.
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1544272468940136448
.39 min
Earlier in the weekend, farmers poured mature on government offices in protest.
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1542190883243802627
.37 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543300949870927873
.45 min
In short, don't **** with farmers.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Is Saudi Arabia Exaggerating Its Oil Production Potential?
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 12:45 PM
Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,
- For years, Saudi Arabia has made some pretty hefty claims about its oil potential.
- It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that the Kingdom may be stretching the truth a little too far.
- Analysts are now beginning to doubt that Saudi Arabia even has the reserves it says it has.
To the figures themselves, then, and firstly, Saudi Arabia’s crude oil reserves figures. At the beginning of 1989, Saudi Arabia claimed proven oil reserves of 170 billion barrels, but only a year later, and without the discovery of any major new oil fields, the official reserves estimate had somehow increased by 51.2 percent, to 257 billion barrels. Shortly thereafter, it increased again to just over 266 billion barrels, a level that persisted until a slight increase in 2017 to just over 268 billion barrels. On the other side of the supply-demand equation, from 1973 to the end of last week, Saudi Arabia pumped an average of 8.192 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil. Therefore, taking 1989 as a starting point (with 170 billion of crude oil reserves officially claimed in that year), in the subsequent 32 years Saudi Arabia has physically pumped and removed forever from its oil fields, a total of 95,682,560,000 barrels of crude oil. Over the same period, there has been no significant discovery of major new oil fields. Despite this, Saudi Arabia’s crude oil reserves have not gone down, but rather have actually gone up. This is a mathematical impossibility.
Secondly, Saudi Arabia’s spare capacity figures, which are a function of Riyadh not just lying about the numbers outright but also engaging in semantic trickery involving the use of various oil market terms interchangeably, despite their not meaning the same thing at all. To be clear here: the official Energy Information Administration (EIA) definition is very specific about what constitutes ‘spare capacity’ in the global oil markets, and it is as follows, directly quoted from the EIA rules: “Spare capacity is production that can be brought online within 30 days and sustained for at least 90 days.” That is it; that is what spare capacity is, no more and no less.
However, Saudi Arabia includes within its own use of the term ‘spare capacity’ every drop of crude oil that it can get hold of: including oil supplies in storage, supplies that can be withheld from contracts and re-directed into those stored supplies, and any oil that it can buy through brokers in the spot market and then sell on as its own. Exactly this semantic trickery was used to cover up the actual supply shortfalls in the aftermath of the September 2019 attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis on Saudi’s Khurais and Abqaiq facilities and later attacks.
In reality, as written in the 2015 book: “The country has often stated that it has a spare capacity of between 2-2.5 million barrels per day (mbpd), with the capability to ramp up its production to about 12.5 mbpd in the event of unexpected disruptions elsewhere. However, it is very unlikely that it could pump at these levels for a sustained period of time, and this idea has been supported by comments from Gulf officials at OPEC, which stated in the midst of Iraqi supply fears that Saudi Arabia could ramp up output by another 1-1.3 mbpd in a best-case scenario.
Officials also mentioned that production of 11.5 mbpd is untested and could only be maintained for a very short period and that, in any event, higher production would be very difficult and would require producing heavy crudes.” Nothing meaningful has changed since then.
And thirdly, the ludicrously-inflated ‘production’ figures that Saudi Arabia has been bandying around for years and which appear to be from the Hans Christian Andersen School of Oil Economics. As highlighted above and back in the 2015 book, despite all the flim-flam and general nonsense from the Saudis about being able to ‘produce’ 11 million bpd or 12 million with ease, and plans to ‘increase this’ to 13 million bpd, Saudi Arabia has actually produced from 1973 to the end of last week, an average of 8.192 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil; that is it. Moreover, as analyzed as long ago as the 2015 book, it has only ever – in the history of the world, up to and including the end of last week – managed to produce 11 million bpd and sustain it for a month on two occasions. Even when Saudi was at almost existential points in its recent history – such as the all or nothing 2014-2016 Oil Price War it instigated to destroy or disable the then-nascent U.S. shale oil sector, or when former U.S. President Donald Trump threatened withdrawal of military support for it if it did not increase oil production – Saudi still could not increase oil production above just 10.5 million bpd for long.
It is consequently of no surprise whatsoever that OPEC+ last week decided not to increase its production over and above what had previously been agreed - because it simply cannot do so. Perhaps this was why neither the Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), and the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (MbZ), agreed to take telephone calls from U.S. President, Joe Biden, after all: not because they were seeking to marginalize him (although that is more than likely true as well) but because they could offer him nothing and have been caught out in a lie. This latter inference can be taken from subsequent remarks – relayed to the world last week by the French President, Emmanuel Macron – that he had a call with MbZ: “He told me two things. I’m at a maximum, maximum [oil production capacity], this is what he claims,” said the French President. “And then he said [the] Saudis can increase by [only] 150 [thousand barrels per day], maybe a little bit more, but they don’t have huge capacities before six months’ time,” Macron concluded.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Norwegian Strikes Could Sever NatGas Supplies To UK
TUESDAY, JUL 05, 2022 - 11:45 AM
The European energy crunch is set to worsen this week after Norwegian offshore oil and gas workers went on strike, threatening to sever the Scandinavian country's energy supplies to the UK and Europe, according to Reuters.
As much as 1,117,000 barrels of oil equivalent, or 56% of daily natural gas exports, while 341,000 barrels of oil would be lost by Saturday if strikes continue closing down fields, the Norwegian Oil and Gas (NOG) employer's lobby warned.
"The strike has begun," Audun Ingvartsen, the leader of Norway's oil workers' union, Lederne, said in an interview. He added the strike would escalate as workers pressure oil/gas companies to increase wages and benefits amid the worse inflation in Europe in decades.
Norway is Europe's second-largest energy supplier after Russia. The timing of strikes comes as European countries rush to inject NatGas supplies into storage ahead of the winter, and Russian energy giant Gazprom significantly reduced Nord Stream flows to Europe. Gazprom plans to halt Nord Stream flows for routine maintenance from July 11 for ten days.
Norway's Gassco, a state-owned pipeline operator, explained to Financial Times, "in a worst-case scenario, deliveries to the UK could stop totally."
"The UK has also become a key conduit for moving supplies on to Europe over the summer, with its export pipelines to Belgium and the Netherlands running at speed to send excess imports of liquefied natural gas and Norwegian supplies into continental storage ahead of the winter," FT said.
News of the strikes sent British wholesale NatGas price for day-ahead delivery up 16%.
Strikes began on Monday and knocked offline 89,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day of production at three fields on Norway's continental shelf. Three more fields could be closed by Wednesday, affecting even more production. If the labor union and energy companies don't come to a resolution on wages, a total of 14 sites could be offline by Saturday, representing a 56% reduction in NatGas exports.
Considering Norway is the UK's largest source of NatGas in 2021, NatGas and power prices are soaring on supply woes. Prices in Europe are rising as well.
Tom Marzec-Manser, an analyst at consultancy ICIS, said the UK will receive four LNG cargos between July 10 and July 19 and might be able to weather the acute loss of NatGas supplies from Norway.
Besides Norwegian supplies, Europe has been betting on LNG cargoes from the US. However, the closure of the Freeport LNG Terminal in Texas last month due to an explosion will affect roughly 16% of the total US LNG export capacity through late year.
As the supply crunch worsens across Europe, Goldman Sachs' Samantha Dart increased her European NatGas price forecast as she "no longer sees" a full resumption of Nord Stream flows.
Strike developments from Norway, affecting supplies to the UK and Europe, couldn't have come at the worst time.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
(How farming is used as a chip in carbon credits trading.)
Inside Look at Agoro Carbon's $9 Million to Farmers In Its First Year
The 10-year timeline includes two payment options. In the first, payments in years 5 and 11 based on verified carbon results with higher guaranteed per/ton floor prices. Or the second, guaranteed annual payments are made in the early years of implementation plus additional variable payments based on verified carbon results in years 5 and 11.(Farm Journal)
By MARGY ECKELKAMP July 5, 2022
Agoro Carbon Alliance has marked its first year and announced a total payment of $9 million to farmers and ranchers enrolled in the program. This carbon market was launched in June of 2021.
The Agoro Carbon program is a 10-year contract which pays for a change practice aiming to increase carbon sequestration. These include cover crops, no-till, reduced tillage, nitrogen management and rotational grazing.
“In this first year we learned a lot about what will work best for farmers,” says Ashley Bruner, U.S. marketing manager for Agoro Carbon. “One thing we did from the start is we tried to build a program that fits farmers’ needs, and then we even adjusted our contract to be the most forward farmer-friendly contract.”
Bruner explains the 10-year timeline includes two payment options. In the first, payments in years 5 and 11 based on verified carbon results with higher guaranteed per/ton floor prices. Or the second, guaranteed annual payments are made in the early years of implementation plus additional variable payments based on verified carbon results in years 5 and 11. The program is open to crop and livestock producers.
“The prepayments each year are based on a floor price for carbon, and we also will pay higher for the carbon if the market continues to go up,” Bruner says.
The $9 million paid in 2022 is based on the forward payments to growers calculated on the expected sequestration rates.
There are eight Agoro Carbon agronomists working to sign up farmers and support them with the agronomic practices required. Bruner also says there are channel partners assisting in the sign up of farmers.
Mark Worner, an Agoro grower success agronomist says this milestone helps answer farmer who question the opportunity in participation.
“There is a level of skepticism surrounding carbon markets, but I openly tell farmers this is the real deal, this is real money, and these markets aren’t going away,” he says.
In Worner’s experience with the program, the reduced tillage is a gateway to get farmers interested, but he’s seeing increased interest in moving to full no-till and also introducing cover crops.
For the year ahead, Bruner shares the team is working to sign up 1 million acres, expand into new geographies, and grow their work with channel partners.
Agoro was launched by Yara International, and is still backed by the global company today.
Inside Look at Agoro Carbon's $9 Million to Farmers In Its First Year
By MARGY ECKELKAMP July 5, 2022
Agoro Carbon Alliance has marked its first year and announced a total payment of $9 million to farmers and ranchers enrolled in the program. This carbon market was launched in June of 2021.
The Agoro Carbon program is a 10-year contract which pays for a change practice aiming to increase carbon sequestration. These include cover crops, no-till, reduced tillage, nitrogen management and rotational grazing.
“In this first year we learned a lot about what will work best for farmers,” says Ashley Bruner, U.S. marketing manager for Agoro Carbon. “One thing we did from the start is we tried to build a program that fits farmers’ needs, and then we even adjusted our contract to be the most forward farmer-friendly contract.”
Bruner explains the 10-year timeline includes two payment options. In the first, payments in years 5 and 11 based on verified carbon results with higher guaranteed per/ton floor prices. Or the second, guaranteed annual payments are made in the early years of implementation plus additional variable payments based on verified carbon results in years 5 and 11. The program is open to crop and livestock producers.
“The prepayments each year are based on a floor price for carbon, and we also will pay higher for the carbon if the market continues to go up,” Bruner says.
The $9 million paid in 2022 is based on the forward payments to growers calculated on the expected sequestration rates.
There are eight Agoro Carbon agronomists working to sign up farmers and support them with the agronomic practices required. Bruner also says there are channel partners assisting in the sign up of farmers.
Mark Worner, an Agoro grower success agronomist says this milestone helps answer farmer who question the opportunity in participation.
“There is a level of skepticism surrounding carbon markets, but I openly tell farmers this is the real deal, this is real money, and these markets aren’t going away,” he says.
In Worner’s experience with the program, the reduced tillage is a gateway to get farmers interested, but he’s seeing increased interest in moving to full no-till and also introducing cover crops.
For the year ahead, Bruner shares the team is working to sign up 1 million acres, expand into new geographies, and grow their work with channel partners.
Agoro was launched by Yara International, and is still backed by the global company today.
marsh
On TB every waking moment
(Comment: Nitrogen and ammonia are 2 of the 4 types of fertilizers. Note, a coordinated effort among the Liberal World Order, rules-based globalists to focus upon them as a pollutant and to severely restrict them. This is part of their war on you through the essentials for life - food, shelter, energy for heating/cooling and transportation. The attack on shelter will come through rising interest rates and inflation.)
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4xJ2G1fjbw
26:22 min (This is a partial. The rest is behind a pay wall.)
Nations Are Manufacturing Food Shortages With Regulation; the Globalists' Agenda Against Fertilizers
Streamed live 8 hours ago
Crossroads with JOSHUA PHILIPP
(Working on My notes Phillipp: Absolutely there is a food crisis coming and it is a man-made, manufactured crisis. Restrictions on nitrates and killing off of chickens and cattle, Really, the big story is fertilizer.
Sri Lanka banned all chemical fertilizers in 2019 and are now experiencing serious problems requiring aid from others. Dutch farmers were told their nitrate and ammonia pollution had to be cut by 30-70%, requiring the closure of farms and extermination of cattle. Nitrates are restricted in Germany and Canada. Cattle in New Zealand have to wear masks to reduce Co2 burpage emissions and restricting nitrates. There are restrictions in the US on transporting nitrates and regulations on use in several states. All of this is coalescing into a huge crisis on food.
Dutch crisis (the Netherlands is the world's 5th largest food exporter): The farmers are trying to shut down food distribution centers until the government rescinds its plans.
30% cattle reduction to meet nitrogen greenhouse gas targets. Plan to reduce nitrogen emissions from ammonia from livestock manure. Some parts of the country have to slash emissions from 70-95%. In those areas, farms will have to close down.
Grocery store shelves are empty due to the protest. These restrictions are being rolled out across the EU. Germany is also starting to protest. They are also coming to N. America.
Phillipp talks about Sri Lanka as the canary in the coal mine. They implemented these policies and stand as a cautionary tale as to where they can lead. In 2019, Sri Lanka banned all pesticides and agricultural inputs, including chemical fertilizers, deciding to lead the world in 100% organic agriculture practices.
This resulted in only a possible 50% yala harvest, even if fertilizer comes.
Phillips states that, although he supports organic, we are seeing you can't just jump into it through regulation. The article states that the repercussions of the policy are only now being realized. It took 2 years for them to realize what a deep inescapable crisis they are now in. Sri Lanka used to grow rice and vegetables in abundance. Now, it could run out of food. The government can no longer afford the food imports the country has grown dependent upon. Sri Lanka is on life support because of the bad policies restricting fertilizers.
Rice yields dropped 2.92 million tons in 2021-22, down from the previous years 3.39 million. The Speaker of their legislature warned of imminent starvation of the island's 22 million people.
Phillipps is going to do a deep dive on his expanded pay wall show. He said that, in his mind, there is no doubt that the regulatory attack on fertilizers to produce a food crisis is intentional. (Comment, note the Dutch case is actually an attack on natural organic manures as well because they are ammonia and nitrogen "polluters." What's left? Nothing. That is why they are closing farms and destroying cattle.)
He next brings on Michael Yon, covering the Dutch protests.
26:22 min (This is a partial. The rest is behind a pay wall.)
Nations Are Manufacturing Food Shortages With Regulation; the Globalists' Agenda Against Fertilizers
Streamed live 8 hours ago
Crossroads with JOSHUA PHILIPP
(Working on My notes Phillipp: Absolutely there is a food crisis coming and it is a man-made, manufactured crisis. Restrictions on nitrates and killing off of chickens and cattle, Really, the big story is fertilizer.
Sri Lanka banned all chemical fertilizers in 2019 and are now experiencing serious problems requiring aid from others. Dutch farmers were told their nitrate and ammonia pollution had to be cut by 30-70%, requiring the closure of farms and extermination of cattle. Nitrates are restricted in Germany and Canada. Cattle in New Zealand have to wear masks to reduce Co2 burpage emissions and restricting nitrates. There are restrictions in the US on transporting nitrates and regulations on use in several states. All of this is coalescing into a huge crisis on food.
Dutch crisis (the Netherlands is the world's 5th largest food exporter): The farmers are trying to shut down food distribution centers until the government rescinds its plans.
30% cattle reduction to meet nitrogen greenhouse gas targets. Plan to reduce nitrogen emissions from ammonia from livestock manure. Some parts of the country have to slash emissions from 70-95%. In those areas, farms will have to close down.
Grocery store shelves are empty due to the protest. These restrictions are being rolled out across the EU. Germany is also starting to protest. They are also coming to N. America.
Phillipp talks about Sri Lanka as the canary in the coal mine. They implemented these policies and stand as a cautionary tale as to where they can lead. In 2019, Sri Lanka banned all pesticides and agricultural inputs, including chemical fertilizers, deciding to lead the world in 100% organic agriculture practices.
This resulted in only a possible 50% yala harvest, even if fertilizer comes.
Phillips states that, although he supports organic, we are seeing you can't just jump into it through regulation. The article states that the repercussions of the policy are only now being realized. It took 2 years for them to realize what a deep inescapable crisis they are now in. Sri Lanka used to grow rice and vegetables in abundance. Now, it could run out of food. The government can no longer afford the food imports the country has grown dependent upon. Sri Lanka is on life support because of the bad policies restricting fertilizers.
Rice yields dropped 2.92 million tons in 2021-22, down from the previous years 3.39 million. The Speaker of their legislature warned of imminent starvation of the island's 22 million people.
Phillipps is going to do a deep dive on his expanded pay wall show. He said that, in his mind, there is no doubt that the regulatory attack on fertilizers to produce a food crisis is intentional. (Comment, note the Dutch case is actually an attack on natural organic manures as well because they are ammonia and nitrogen "polluters." What's left? Nothing. That is why they are closing farms and destroying cattle.)
He next brings on Michael Yon, covering the Dutch protests.
Last edited:
marsh
On TB every waking moment
|
|
Holy Shite — Do not mess with Dutch Farmers…
Posted by Kane on July 5, 2022 2:14 am
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1542817311773663232
.09 min
EU climate regulations started the crisis.
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1544018851742076931
.07 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543955748471930882
.23 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543793882663567361
.20 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543532315653144582
.13 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543995968516984832
.20 min
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1543301820121985024
1:00 min
marsh
On TB every waking moment
|
|
marsh
On TB every waking moment
19:23 min
Explains Why Economic Collapse is Inevitable
Premiered 2 hours ago
Peak Prosperity
Chris says that if you understand this chart, you understand it all.
The more energy you consume the larger the GDP. The idea that we are decoupling and don't need energy is false. America outsources its energy consumption to other countries like China and then imports the finished goods back from there.
The US trade deficit, if it were a country, would be the 19th largest economy in the world. This, too, is coming to an end.
Bretton Woods - 1971, "temporary" closing of the gold window.
The "green area" oil was the kind that was cheap to extract. The red, "tight oil," requires really expensive technology to extract.
In 1970 at peak, one person could support a household on minimum wage because of per capita minimum wage. Now, that is no longer possible. There is a correlation between oil and standard of living.
Also add
. Backing the dollar with oil, rather than gold. Until recently, there was a requirement that if you wanted to buy oil, you had to do it with dollars. You have to run a positive trade surplus with the US. The US would use dollars to buy oil from the Saudis and the Saudis would buy Treasuries and invest them in our stock market.A few months ago, Biden made a call to the UAE and the Saudis and they didn't pick up the phone. So Biden says he is flying there anyway.
They did take calls from Putin and Xi. If the dollar is no longer the Petro-dollar, lots of things change.
If you have energy, you can have an economy - not the other way round.
The concept of "surplus energy" - the fact that you have to use energy to find and extract energy. In the 1930s, you could get a 98% return on 1 barrel of oil with a 2% energy investment. By 1970, it was only a 25% return on one barrel with 75% energy investment. Today we get only a 3.5 - 5% return on a barrel with 95% of its energy expended on extraction and processing.
It takes about 5X more drilling today compared with 1930 to get the oil. 1,000 vs 20,000 ft down in shale and we extract less.
Article pre-pandemic, that if we continued fracking at the same pace, the fields would last only about 3 years.
Oil companies have slowed down to extend their company longevity. About $250 billion worth of capital was destroyed in the fracking boom. They got a lot of oil, but they didn't get enough money back to cover investment. Now they want returns to compensate for their loss.
So, we are not going to see a resumption of the pace of fracking and we can see the oil story coming to a close and the date is now clearly in view. But we are operating at the federal level that it is a different story. China knows better. Russia and most of the world knows better.
Part 1 of 3
Last edited:
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Part 2 of 3
Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm (1) She doesn't know how many barrels of oil we consume in the US per day; Reporter days 18 million, which means they are releasing 3 days supply from the petroleum reserve. (2) She doesn't seem to understand that oil is the economy; and (3) She assumes we can run the economy by diversifying our fuel sources into "Clean Energy."
This does not pass the smell test.
With the exception of nuclear, none of these are going to expand a great deal.
Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm (1) She doesn't know how many barrels of oil we consume in the US per day; Reporter days 18 million, which means they are releasing 3 days supply from the petroleum reserve. (2) She doesn't seem to understand that oil is the economy; and (3) She assumes we can run the economy by diversifying our fuel sources into "Clean Energy."
This does not pass the smell test.
With the exception of nuclear, none of these are going to expand a great deal.
Last edited:
Tristan
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Build Back Better, 2.0: global elites rebrand to ‘Rules-Based World Order’
More hubris. Less freedom.
Build Back Better 2.0: global elites rebrand to ‘Rules-Based World Order’
More Hubris. Less Freedom.
Jordan Schachtel
The “free world” is a troublesome slogan, as basic freedoms have become a radical concept in the year 2022. The western ruling class, which used to defend the idea of unalienable rights, has decided that such a term carries too many troublesome connotations regarding the unalienable rights of you, the members of the pleb class. So it’s time for a rebrand, and the deployment of some new rhetoric to protect the elites sitting atop the global hierarchy.
Now it’s “rules based order” whatever that means. But it’s peppering their vocabulary all over ...
July 5th 2022 .48 min
In demonstrating their supposed moral superiority, our ruling class is now coalescing behind what they refer to as the “rules-based” world order.
Delighted to welcome PM @jacindaardern to @Europarl_EN. & are like-minded partners standing up for democracy & rules-based world order. Welcomed NZ aid to & strong position against Russian aggression. Need to further strengthen cooperation on climate & trade.
June 30th 2022
This “rules-based world order,” a bumper sticker slogan that has united the rulers of the Anglosphere, EU and NATO powers against their foreign and domestic enemies, is easy to define, once you understand what they mean by the word “rules.”
This barb is being deployed repeatedly at the Russian government (and the Chinese government in reference to trade policy), in condemning its invasion of Ukraine as violating the modern construction that is the liberal international order, or the illusion of “Pax Americana,” or better yet, the “rules” of territorial sovereignty established after World War II.
“The resistance of Ukraine has brought democratic nations closer together which have a shared commitment to rules-based, international order, whether they be members of NATO, or non-members such as Australia." -- @AlboMP afr.com/policy/foreign…
July 1st 2022
Of course, these rules are necessarily malleable, as our rulers have spent the last decades justifying their routine invasions of foreign nations under the banner of democracy, freedom, and the like.
NATO: President Biden: "At this summit, we rallied our alliance to meet both the direct threats that Russia poses to Europe and the systemic challenges that China poses to a rules based world order."
June 30th 2022 2:26 min
And after two years of our prized “free world” autocrats unleashing relentless COVID-excused tyranny upon their own populations, the rules seem to be continuously changing and reoriented at a moment’s notice.
Happy Canada Day! In a world with many challenges - Canada works together with our Allies to support peace, prosperity and security. We work to be better & to preserve the rules based international order. Today, we celebrate our achievements & reflect on our future!
July 1st 2022
When Russia invades Ukraine, they are violating the rules-based order. However, when Western powers invade the Middle East and Africa, or subjugate their own citizens in the name of a virus, they are not violating the rules, because their hubris-fueled moral supremacy allows these powers to determine who is and is not in good standing with the “rules-based world order.”
(COMMENT: The Administrative State promulgates rules and regulations. An elected representative legislative body passes laws and statutes. It makes sense that the "rules-based order" would operate outside of elected representative governments.)
Classic.
As soon as the folks begin to catch a clue what they're up to, they change the name and/or narrative!
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Part 3 of 3
Collectively, all the Clean Energy sources add up to exactly nothing. You have to use coal, oil, and natural gas to make wind towers and solar panels. The idea that you just replace the big 3 with clean energy is absurd. They talk as if they can just decide to "transition."
It's broken and at a dangerous level of idiocy. She is not a serious leader.
Collectively, all the Clean Energy sources add up to exactly nothing. You have to use coal, oil, and natural gas to make wind towers and solar panels. The idea that you just replace the big 3 with clean energy is absurd. They talk as if they can just decide to "transition."
It's broken and at a dangerous level of idiocy. She is not a serious leader.
Last edited:
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Great Reset Will Be the Great Reject – David Morgan | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog
By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com Economic analyst and financial writer David Morgan predicted in early March, “When you get gasoline going up to the $5, $6, $7 range and you’ve got food going up to the level it’s gone up to and continues to go up to, it’s going to be bad.” Morgan was right, and
usawatchdog.com
Great Reset Will Be the Great Reject – David Morgan (Silver)
By Greg Hunter On July 5, 2022 In Market Analysis
By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com Economic analyst and financial writer David Morgan predicted in early March, “When you get gasoline going up to the $5, $6, $7 range and you’ve got food going up to the level it’s gone up to and continues to go up to, it’s going to be bad.” Morgan was right, and he says this destabilization of the middle-class is all part of the so-called “Great Reset” by the global elite.
Morgan says this is not going to turn out like the globalists want. Morgan says, “This is not about money–it’s about control. They want absolute control.”
What can people do to make the “Great Reset” not work? Morgan says, “It’s the ‘Great Reject.’ You do not participate in the ‘Great Reset.’ You stay out of the system to the best of your ability, which means you use cash like Catherine Austin Fitts talks about. You can trade in silver and gold. Some states allow you to do that, and more are coming on all the time, putting into law the ability to transact in gold and silver in that state . . . to be able to use gold and silver again. Mitigate your food situation by growing some of your own. . . . Get friendly with farmers. There are a lot of things you can do that are pretty simple. There a lot of things you can do that put you in control. They want this . . . but it’s not going to happen. What they want is the ‘New World Order,’ or globalism. What they are really going to get is the opposite. . . .
You are going to see a disintegration of that kind of power base and get more local. As the situation gets worse and worse, the smaller communities will get together and say what can we do to survive? So, they are basically going to get the opposite of what they want.”
Morgan talks about the deflationary nature of all these CV19 injections. He also talks about why silver and gold work best in deflationary environments. Morgan tells you the importance of having cash and predicts extreme inflation and deflation coming at the same time, which is the definition of stagflation last seen in the 1970’s. This time, Morgan says it will be far worse and predicts, “The next ‘Great Depression’ will make the last ‘Great Depression’ look like a small technical correction. . . . . The worse you inflate or destroy the value of a currency, the worse the repercussions are. . . . Not only are Social Security and pension plans going to collapse, but it is the system at large. It is going to be pervasive; it will touch almost every person.”
In closing, Morgan says, “We are fighting evil people, but are we fighting more than evil people at the top? . . . We are fighting principalities and powers of evil.”
Great Reset Will Be the Great Reject – David Morgan
41:16 min
Great Reset Will Be the Great Reject – David Morgan
Greg Hunter's USAWatchdog.com Published July 5, 2022
marsh
On TB every waking moment
What to do with a Problem like HHS? (Pt. 1)
Unwinding entrenched administrative state agencies is hard, time consuming work
rwmalonemd.substack.com
What to do with a Problem like HHS? (Pt. 1)
Unwinding entrenched administrative state agencies is hard, time consuming work
Robert W Malone MD, MS
47 min ago
Defining the Problem: HHS and The Administrative State
Many have come to believe that if Dr. Anthony Fauci either resigns or is removed from his position as Director of the The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), then the whole COVIDcrisis problem of chronic, strategic and tactical administrative overreach, dishonesty, mismanagement and ethical breaches within the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) would be resolved. Under this theory, Dr. Fauci is responsible for policies which were developed during the AIDScrisis and then flourished during the COVIDcrisis, and once the tumor is removed the patient will recover. I strongly disagree with this magical thinking; I believe that Dr. Fauci represents a symptom, not the cause of the current problems within HHS. Dr. Fauci, who joined the HHS bureaucracy as a way to avoid the Viet Nam draft and personifies many of the administrative problems that have accelerated since that period, would merely be replaced by another NIAID Director who might even become worse. The underlying problem is a perverted bureaucratic system of governance which is completely insulated from functional oversight by elected officials.
The “administrative state” is a general term used to describe the entrenched form of government that currently controls almost all levers of federal power in the United States, with the possible exception of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). The premature leaking of the SCOTUS majority decision concerning Roe v Wade to corporate press allies was essentially a preemptive strike by the administrative state in response to an action which threatened its power. The threat being mitigated was the constitutionalist logic upon which the legal argument was based, that being that authority to define rights not specifically defined in the US Constitution as being federally granted vests with individual states. Played out under the political cover of one of the most contentious political topics in modern US history, this was merely another skirmish demonstrating that the entrenched bureaucracy and its allies in the corporate media will continue to resist any constitutional or statutory restrictions on its power and privilege. Resistance to any form of control or oversight has been a consistent bureaucratic behavior throughout the history of the United States government, and this trend has accelerated since the end of the Second World War. More recently, this somewhat existential Constitutionalist threat to the Administrative State was validated in the case of West Virginia vs The Environmental Protection Agency, in which the court determined that when federal agencies issue regulations with sweeping economic and political consequences the regulations are presumptively invalid unless Congress has specifically authorized the action. With this decision, for the first time in modern history boundaries have started to be imposed on the expansion of the power of unelected senior administrators within the Federal bureaucracy.
Legal underpinning for The Administrative State.
“Nondelegation doctrine”
Administrative law rests on two fictions. The first, the nondelegation doctrine, imagines that Congress does not delegate legislative power to agencies. The second, which flows from the first, is that the administrative state thus exercises only executive power, even if that power sometimes looks legislative or judicial. These fictions are required by a formalist reading of the Constitution, whose Vesting Clauses permit only Congress to make law and the President only to execute the law. This formalist reading requires us to accept as a matter of practice unconstitutional delegation and the resulting violation of the separation of powers, while pretending as a matter of doctrine that no violation occurs.
The non-delegation doctrine is a principle in administrative law that Congress cannot delegate its legislative powers to other entities. This prohibition typically involves Congress delegating its powers to administrative agencies or to private organizations.
In J.W. Hampton v. United States, 276 U.S. 394 (1928), the Supreme Court clarified that when Congress does give an agency the ability to regulate, Congress must give the agencies an "intelligible principle” on which to base their regulations. This standard is viewed as quite lenient, and has rarely, if ever, been used to strike down legislation.
In A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935), the Supreme Court held that "Congress is not permitted to abdicate or to transfer to others the essential legislative functions with which it is thus vested."
“Chevrondeference”
One of the most important principles in administrative law, The “Chevron deference” is a term coined after a landmark case, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 468 U.S. 837 (1984), referring to the doctrine of judicial deference given to administrative actions.
In essence, the Chevron deference doctrine is that when a legislative delegation to an administrative agency on a particular issue or question is not explicit but rather implicit, a court may not substitute its own interpretation of the statute for a reasonable interpretation made by the administrative agency. In other words, when the statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue, the question for the court is whether the agency’s action was based on a permissible construction of the statute.
Generally, to be accorded Chevron deference, the agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute must be permissible, which the court has defined to mean “rational” or “reasonable.” In determining the reasonableness of a particular construction of a statute by the agency, the age of that administrative interpretation as well as the congressional action or inaction in response to that interpretation at issue can be a useful guide.
Judicial Threats to the Administrative State
None of the issues involved in current debates over these two core doctrines of administrative law has the power to fully deconstruct the administrative state. But current debates and decisions could contribute some constitutionally informed limits on the power, discretion, and independence of unelected administrators. Together, recent and pending Supreme Court might help reconstruct a constitutional state which is more closely aligned with the original intent and vision of the founders.
Very few appreciate that these issues underly recent decisions concerning who to appoint to the Supreme Court. Trump’s first two appointments to the high court—Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh—were two of the nation’s leading judicial minds on administrative law, and White House Counsel Don McGahn made clear that this was no coincidence. So too with Trump’s appointments to the lower courts, which included administrative-law experts such as the D.C. Circuit’s Neomi Rao and Greg Katsas, and the Fifth Circuit’s Andrew Oldham.
COVIDcrisis and the Administrative State
The arc of the history of the COVIDcrisis encompasses collusive planning between a wide range of corporate interests, globalists, and the administrative state (Event 201); subsequent efforts to cover up administrative state culpability in creating the crisis; followed by gross mismanagement of public health policies, decision making, and communication all acting in lockstep with the preceding planning sessions. This dysfunctional planning-response coupling revealed for all to see that the US Department of Health and Human Services has become a leading example illustrating the practical consequences of this degenerate, corrupt and unaccountable system of government.
Across two administrations lead by presidents who have championed very different worldviews, HHS COVIDcrisis policies have continued with little or no change; one administration seemingly flowing directly into the next with hardly a hiccough. If anything, under Biden the HHS arm of the US administrative state became more authoritarian, more unaccountable, and more decoupled from any need to consider the general social and economic consequences of their actions. As this has progressed, the HHS bureaucracy has become increasingly obsequious and deferential to the economic interests of the medical-pharmaceutical industrial complex. This is most clearly evident in the maintenance of a state of medical emergency, which provides HHS bureaucrats with almost unlimited powers to bypass constitutional restrictions, despite the clear evidence that there is no longer any medical emergency. Maintaining the ruse of an official public health emergency has been necessary both to maintain power as well as US Government contract revenue for those corporations who have been making obscene profits from selling the “Emergency Use Authorized” medical countermeasures that have been allowed to bypass long-established regulatory, bioethical, and legal liability norms. A public-private partnership like nothing the US had ever seen before, making the War Profiteering against which Harry Truman had campaigned look like child’s play.
There is an organizational paradox which enables immense power to be amassed by those who have risen to the top of the civilian scientific corps within HHS. These bureaucrats have almost unprecedented access to the public purse, are technically employed by the executive, but are also almost completely protected from accountability by the executive branch of government that is tasked with managing them- and therefore these bureaucrats are unaccountable to those who actually pay the bills for their activities (taxpayers). To the extent these administrators are able to be held to task, this accountability flows indirectly from congress.
Their organizational budgets can be either enhanced or cut during following fiscal years, but otherwise they are largely protected from corrective action including termination of employment absent some major moral transgression. In a Machiavellian sense, these senior administrators function as The Prince, each federal health institute functions as a semi-autonomous city-state, and the administrators and their respective courtiers act accordingly. To complete this analogy, congress functions similar the Vatican during the 16th century, with each Prince vying for funding and power by currying favor with influential archbishops. As validation for this analogy, we have the theater observed on C-SPAN each time a minority congressperson or senator queries an indignant scientific administrator, such as has been repeatedly observed with Anthony Fauci’s haughty exchanges during congressional testimony.
In his masterpiece “The Best and the Brightest: Kennedy-Johnson Administrations”, David Halberstam cites a quote from New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan to illustrate the role of the administrative state on the series of horrifically poor decisions which resulted in one of the greatest US public policy failures of the 20th century - the Viet Nam war. In retrospect, the parallels between the mismanagement, propaganda, willingness to suspend prior ethical norms, and chronic lies which define that deadly fiasco are remarkably similar to those which characterize the COVIDcrisis response. And as in the present, the surreptitious hand of the US intelligence community was often in the background, always pushing the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Quoting from Halberstam and Sheehan;
“Since covert operations were part of the game, over a period of time there was in the high levels of the bureaucracy, particularly as the CIA became more powerful, a gradual acceptance of covert operations and dirty tricks as part of normal diplomatic-political maneuvering; higher and higher government officials became co-opted (as the President’s personal assistant, McGeorge Bundy would oversee the covert operations for both Kennedy and Johnson, thus bringing, in a sense, presidential approval). It was a reflection of the frustration which the national security people, private men all, felt in matching the foreign policy of a totalitarian society, which gave so much more freedom to its officials and seemingly provided so few checks on its own leaders. To be on the inside and oppose or question covert operations was considered a sign of weakness. (In 1964 a well-bred young CIA official, wondering whether we had the right to try some of the black activities on the North, was told by Desmond FitzGerald, the number-three man in the Agency, “Don’t be so wet”—the classic old-school putdown of someone who knows the real rules of the game to someone softer, questioning the rectitude of the rules.) It was this acceptance of covert operations by the Kennedy Administration which had brought Adlai Stevenson to the lowest moment of his career during the Bay of Pigs, a special shame as he had stood and lied at the UN about things that he did not know, but which, of course, the Cubans knew. Covert operations often got ahead of the Administration itself and pulled the Administration along with them, as the Bay of Pigs had shown—since the planning and training were all done, we couldn’t tell those freedom-loving Cubans that it was all off, could we, argued Allen Dulles. He had pulled public men like the President with him into that particular disaster. At the time, Fulbright had argued against it, had not only argued that it would fail, which was easy enough to say, but he had gone beyond this, and being a public man, entered the rarest of arguments, an argument against it on moral grounds, that it was precisely our reluctance to do things like this which differentiated us from the Soviet Union and made us special, made it worth being a democracy. “One further point must be made about even covert support of a Castro overthrow; it is in violation of the spirit and probably the letter as well, of treaties to which the United States is a party and of U.S. domestic legislation. . . . To give this activity even covert support is of a piece with the hypocrisy and cynicism for which the United States is constantly denouncing the Soviet Union in the United Nations and elsewhere.
These men, largely private, were functioning on a level different from the public policy of the United States, and years later when New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan read through the entire documentary history of the war, that history known as the Pentagon Papers, he would come away with one impression above all, which was that the government of the United States was not what he had thought it was; it was as if there were an inner U.S. government, what he called “a centralized state, far more powerful than anything else, for whom the enemy is not simply the Communists but everything else, its own press, its own judiciary, its own Congress, foreign and friendly governments—all these are potentially antagonistic. It had survived and perpetuated itself,” Sheehan continued, “often using the issue of anti-Communism as a weapon against the other branches of government and the press, and finally, it does not function necessarily for the benefit of the Republic but rather for its own ends, its own perpetuation; it has its own codes which are quite different from public codes. Secrecy was a way of protecting itself, not so much from threats by foreign governments, but from detection from its own population on charges of its own competence and wisdom.” Each succeeding Administration, Sheehan noted, was careful, once in office, not to expose the weaknesses of its predecessor. After all, essentially the same people were running the governments, they had continuity to each other, and each succeeding Administration found itself faced with virtually the same enemies.
Part 1 of 2
marsh
On TB every waking moment
Part 2 of 2
The parallels of organizational culture are uncanny, and as previously discussed, have flourished under the guise of the need to manage the national biodefense enterprise. Since the 2001 “Amerithrax” Anthrax spore “attacks”, HHS has increasingly been horizontally integrated with the intelligence community as well as with the Department of Homeland Security to form a health security state with enormous ability to shape and enforce “consensus” through widespread propaganda, censorship, “nudge” technology and intentional manipulation of the “Mass Formation” hypnosis process using modern adaptations of methods originally developed by Dr Joseph Goebbels.
The Administrative State and Inverted Totalitarianism
The term “inverted totalitarianism” was first coined in 2003 by the political theorist and writer Dr. Sheldon Wolin, and then his analysis was extended by Chris Hedges and Joe Sacco in their 2012 book “Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt”. Wolin used the term "inverted totalitarianism" to illuminate totalitarian aspects of the American political system, and to highlight his opinion that the modern American federal government has similarities to the historic German Nazi government. Hedges and Sacco built upon Wolin’s insights to extend the definition of inverted totalitarianism to describe a system where corporations have corrupted and subverted democracy, and where macro-economics has become the primary force driving political decisions (rather than ethics, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, or vox populi). Under inverted totalitarianism, every natural resource and living being becomes commodified and exploited by large corporations to the point of collapse, as excess consumerism and sensationalism lull and manipulate the citizenry into surrendering their liberties and their participation in government. Inverted totalitarianism is now what the government of the United States has devolved into, as Wolin had warned might happen many years ago in his book “Democracy Incorporated”. The administrative state has turned the USA into a “managed democracy” lead by a bureaucracy which cannot be held accountable by the elected representatives of the people. Sometimes called the 4th estate, this monster is also referred to as the “deep state”, the civil service, the centralized state, or the administrative state.
Political systems which have devolved into inverted totalitarianism do not have an authoritarian leader, but instead are run by a non-transparent group of bureaucrats. The “leader” basically serves the interests of the true bureaucratic administrative leaders. In other words, an unelected, invisible ruling class of bureaucrat-administrators runs the country from within.
Corporatist (Fascist) partnering with the Administrative State
Because science, medicine and politics are three threads woven into the same cloth of public policy, we have to work to fix all three simultaneously. The corruption of political systems by global corporatists has filtered down to our science, medicine and healthcare systems. The perversion of science and medicine by corporate interests is expanding its reach; it is pernicious and intractable. Regulatory capture by corporate interests runs rampant throughout our politics, governmental agencies and institutes. The corporatists have infiltrated all three branches of government. Corporate-public partnerships that have become so trendy have another name, that name is Fascism- the political science term for the fusion of the interests of corporations and the state. Basically, the tension between the interest of the republic and its citizens (which Jefferson felt should be primary), and the financial interests of business and corporations (Hamilton’s ideal) has swung far too far to the interests of corporations and their billionaire owners at the expense of the general population.
Development of inverted totalitarianism is often driven by the personal financial interests of individual bureaucrats, and many western democracies have succumbed to this process.
Bureaucrats are easily influenced and coopted by corporate interests due to both the lure of powerful jobs after federal employment (“revolving door”) and the capture of legislative bodies by the lobbyists serving concealed corporate interests.
In an investigative article published in the British Medical Journal entitled “From FDA to MHRA: are drug regulators for hire?”, reporter Maryanne Demasi documents the processes which drive development of public-private partnerships between administrative state apparatchiks and the corporations which they are paid to regulate and oversee. Five different mechanisms driving the cooptation process were identified in virtually all of the six leading medical product regulatory agencies (Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, the UK, and US):
Industry Fees.
Industry money saturates the globe’s leading regulators. The majority of regulators’ budget—particularly the portion focused on drugs—is derived from industry fees. Of the six regulators, Australia had the highest proportion of budget from industry fees (96%) and in 2020-2021 approved more than nine of every 10 drug company applications. Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) firmly denies that its almost exclusive reliance on pharmaceutical industry funding is a conflict of interest (COI).
External Advisors.
Concern over COIs is not just directed at those who work for the regulators but extends to the advisory panels intended to provide regulators with independent expert advice. A BMJ investigation last year found several expert advisers for covid-19 vaccine advisory committees in the UK and US had financial ties with vaccine manufacturers—ties the regulators judged as acceptable. See here for further details. A large study that investigated the impact of COIs among FDA advisory committee members over 15 years found that those with financial interests solely in the sponsoring firm were more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor’s product, (see here) and that people who served on advisory boards solely for the sponsor were significantly more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor’s product.
]Speedy approvals.
Following the AIDS crisis of the 1980s and 1990s, PDUFA “user fees” were introduced in the US to fund additional staff to help speed the approval of new treatments. Since then, there has been concern over the way it moulded the regulatory review process—for example, by creating “PDUFA dates,” deadlines for the FDA to review applications, and a host of “expedited pathways” for speeding drugs to market. The practice is now a global norm.
Today, all major regulators offer expedited pathways that are used in a significant proportion of new drug approvals. In 2020, 68% of drug approvals in the US were through expedited pathways, 50% in Europe, and 36% in the UK. Courtney Davis, a medical and political sociologist at the Kings College London, says that a general taxation or a drug company levy would be better options to fund regulators. “PDUFA is the worst kind of arrangement since it allows industry to shape FDA policies and priorities in a very direct way. Each time PDUFA was reauthorised, industry had a seat at the table to renegotiate the terms of its funding and determine which performance metrics and goals the agency should be evaluated by. Hence the FDA’s focus on making quicker and quicker approval decisions—even for drugs not judged to be therapeutically important for patients.”
Having taken a shot at defining the problem of HHS as a leading branch of the Administrative State in Part 1, in Part 2 various actions designed to break the power of the Administrative State (attempted or are in progress) will be reviewed and summarized.
The parallels of organizational culture are uncanny, and as previously discussed, have flourished under the guise of the need to manage the national biodefense enterprise. Since the 2001 “Amerithrax” Anthrax spore “attacks”, HHS has increasingly been horizontally integrated with the intelligence community as well as with the Department of Homeland Security to form a health security state with enormous ability to shape and enforce “consensus” through widespread propaganda, censorship, “nudge” technology and intentional manipulation of the “Mass Formation” hypnosis process using modern adaptations of methods originally developed by Dr Joseph Goebbels.
The Administrative State and Inverted Totalitarianism
The term “inverted totalitarianism” was first coined in 2003 by the political theorist and writer Dr. Sheldon Wolin, and then his analysis was extended by Chris Hedges and Joe Sacco in their 2012 book “Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt”. Wolin used the term "inverted totalitarianism" to illuminate totalitarian aspects of the American political system, and to highlight his opinion that the modern American federal government has similarities to the historic German Nazi government. Hedges and Sacco built upon Wolin’s insights to extend the definition of inverted totalitarianism to describe a system where corporations have corrupted and subverted democracy, and where macro-economics has become the primary force driving political decisions (rather than ethics, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, or vox populi). Under inverted totalitarianism, every natural resource and living being becomes commodified and exploited by large corporations to the point of collapse, as excess consumerism and sensationalism lull and manipulate the citizenry into surrendering their liberties and their participation in government. Inverted totalitarianism is now what the government of the United States has devolved into, as Wolin had warned might happen many years ago in his book “Democracy Incorporated”. The administrative state has turned the USA into a “managed democracy” lead by a bureaucracy which cannot be held accountable by the elected representatives of the people. Sometimes called the 4th estate, this monster is also referred to as the “deep state”, the civil service, the centralized state, or the administrative state.
Political systems which have devolved into inverted totalitarianism do not have an authoritarian leader, but instead are run by a non-transparent group of bureaucrats. The “leader” basically serves the interests of the true bureaucratic administrative leaders. In other words, an unelected, invisible ruling class of bureaucrat-administrators runs the country from within.
Corporatist (Fascist) partnering with the Administrative State
Because science, medicine and politics are three threads woven into the same cloth of public policy, we have to work to fix all three simultaneously. The corruption of political systems by global corporatists has filtered down to our science, medicine and healthcare systems. The perversion of science and medicine by corporate interests is expanding its reach; it is pernicious and intractable. Regulatory capture by corporate interests runs rampant throughout our politics, governmental agencies and institutes. The corporatists have infiltrated all three branches of government. Corporate-public partnerships that have become so trendy have another name, that name is Fascism- the political science term for the fusion of the interests of corporations and the state. Basically, the tension between the interest of the republic and its citizens (which Jefferson felt should be primary), and the financial interests of business and corporations (Hamilton’s ideal) has swung far too far to the interests of corporations and their billionaire owners at the expense of the general population.
Development of inverted totalitarianism is often driven by the personal financial interests of individual bureaucrats, and many western democracies have succumbed to this process.
Bureaucrats are easily influenced and coopted by corporate interests due to both the lure of powerful jobs after federal employment (“revolving door”) and the capture of legislative bodies by the lobbyists serving concealed corporate interests.
In an investigative article published in the British Medical Journal entitled “From FDA to MHRA: are drug regulators for hire?”, reporter Maryanne Demasi documents the processes which drive development of public-private partnerships between administrative state apparatchiks and the corporations which they are paid to regulate and oversee. Five different mechanisms driving the cooptation process were identified in virtually all of the six leading medical product regulatory agencies (Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, the UK, and US):
Industry Fees.
Industry money saturates the globe’s leading regulators. The majority of regulators’ budget—particularly the portion focused on drugs—is derived from industry fees. Of the six regulators, Australia had the highest proportion of budget from industry fees (96%) and in 2020-2021 approved more than nine of every 10 drug company applications. Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) firmly denies that its almost exclusive reliance on pharmaceutical industry funding is a conflict of interest (COI).
External Advisors.
Concern over COIs is not just directed at those who work for the regulators but extends to the advisory panels intended to provide regulators with independent expert advice. A BMJ investigation last year found several expert advisers for covid-19 vaccine advisory committees in the UK and US had financial ties with vaccine manufacturers—ties the regulators judged as acceptable. See here for further details. A large study that investigated the impact of COIs among FDA advisory committee members over 15 years found that those with financial interests solely in the sponsoring firm were more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor’s product, (see here) and that people who served on advisory boards solely for the sponsor were significantly more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor’s product.
Among global regulators, only two—the FDA and PMDA—routinely obtain patient level datasets. And neither proactively publish these data. Recently, a group of more than 80 professors and researchers called the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency sued the FDA for access to all the data which the agency used to grant licensure for Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine. (see here) The FDA argued that the burden on the agency was too great and requested that it be allowed to release appropriately redacted documents at the rate of 500 pages a month, a speed that would take approximately 75 years to complete. In a win for transparency advocates, this was overturned by a US Federal Court Judge, ruling that the FDA would need to turn over all the appropriately redacted data within eight months. Pfizer sought to intervene to ensure “information that is exempt from disclosure under the FOI act is not disclosed inappropriately,” but its request was denied.
]Speedy approvals.
Following the AIDS crisis of the 1980s and 1990s, PDUFA “user fees” were introduced in the US to fund additional staff to help speed the approval of new treatments. Since then, there has been concern over the way it moulded the regulatory review process—for example, by creating “PDUFA dates,” deadlines for the FDA to review applications, and a host of “expedited pathways” for speeding drugs to market. The practice is now a global norm.
Today, all major regulators offer expedited pathways that are used in a significant proportion of new drug approvals. In 2020, 68% of drug approvals in the US were through expedited pathways, 50% in Europe, and 36% in the UK. Courtney Davis, a medical and political sociologist at the Kings College London, says that a general taxation or a drug company levy would be better options to fund regulators. “PDUFA is the worst kind of arrangement since it allows industry to shape FDA policies and priorities in a very direct way. Each time PDUFA was reauthorised, industry had a seat at the table to renegotiate the terms of its funding and determine which performance metrics and goals the agency should be evaluated by. Hence the FDA’s focus on making quicker and quicker approval decisions—even for drugs not judged to be therapeutically important for patients.”
Having taken a shot at defining the problem of HHS as a leading branch of the Administrative State in Part 1, in Part 2 various actions designed to break the power of the Administrative State (attempted or are in progress) will be reviewed and summarized.
Last edited:
marsh
On TB every waking moment
What Is The ‘Liberal World Order?’ 3:04 min
What Is The ‘Liberal World Order?’
Prime Time with Dr. Gina Published July 5, 2022
“The Liberal World Order” is making it’s way around as a talking point among Biden’s administration. But what is it?
Sen. Ted Harvey gives his take on this and more with guest host Miranda Khan.
(His take is that it is US hegemony and the Petro-dollar)
What Is The ‘Liberal World Order?’
Prime Time with Dr. Gina Published July 5, 2022
“The Liberal World Order” is making it’s way around as a talking point among Biden’s administration. But what is it?
Sen. Ted Harvey gives his take on this and more with guest host Miranda Khan.
(His take is that it is US hegemony and the Petro-dollar)
intothatgoodnight
. . .
Marsh - thank you for taking the time to post this lengthy but important commentary by Dr. Malone.
A must read, particularly in light of the recent pro-10th Amendment ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the West Virginia v. EPA case.
intothegoodnight