GOV/MIL Main "Great Reset" Thread

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Heart Pacemaker Manufacturer Warns users to Keep Distance from EV Charging Stations​

  • By: Jason Walsh
  • September 23, 2022
As Electric vehicle (EV) mandates are currently being considered in at least 17 states, there is a growing list of issues associated with them, like having a pacemaker fitted.

Americans who use a pacemaker are particularly at risk when using charging stations.

The Leading Manufacturer of Heart Pacemakers (Medtronic) has recommended that its users distance themselves at least 12 inches from electric vehicle charging stations, according to The Environmental Health Trust.
Medtronic also warns its users to stay away from electric fences, electric pet containment fences, and transformer boxes.

For Implantable Cardiac Devices​

Most household and hobby items are unlikely to affect your heart device when the items are in good working condition, used as intended, and the recommended distances are maintained.

For items that transmit power through an antenna, it is recommended that you follow the noted distances between the antenna and your implanted heart device.

Special Considerations Maintain at least the recommended Distance between the item and your heart device:

12-Inch Distance​

  • Car/Motorcycle – from components of ignition system
  • Electric Fence
  • Electric Pet Containment Fence – from buried wire and indoor antenna
  • Transformer Box (green box in yard)
  • 2-Foot Distance

2-Foot Distance​

  • Beach Comber Metal Detector – from search head
  • Induction Cooktop Stove
Maintain at least a 6-inch distance between the item and your heart device:
  • Electric Grocery Cart/Golf Cart – from motor
  • Electric Kitchen Appliances – hand-held (electric mixer or knife)
  • Electric Shaver – corded
  • Electric Toothbrush Charging Base
  • Exercise Bike – from magnet in wheel
  • Hair Dryer – hand-held
  • Hand-held Back Massager
  • Magnetic Therapy Products
  • Radio-Controlled Items – from antenna
  • Sewing Machine/Serger – from motor
  • Small Magnet (household magnet)
  • Speakers
  • Tattoo Machine
  • Treadmill – from motor
  • Ultrasonic Pest Controller
  • Vacuum Cleaner – from motor
Not Recommended
  • Ab Stimulator
  • Electronic Body Fat Scale
  • Magnetic Mattress Pad/Pillow
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

The Illusion Of Freedom

by Tamara LashchykSeptember 24, 202241360

As an American, I was always told I live in a free country. Yet we see our freedoms constantly eroding, most precipitously over the last two years.

I now wonder if there was one specific event that launched us on this course? This prompts a deeper question: “Were we ever really free?”

But first, let’s define ‘freedom’: exemption from external control, interference, or regulation. It’s the power to act without restraint.

So, again I ask: were we ever really ‘free’? I would say no. Almost no one fully exercises their own free will.

From birth, we are programmed with a system of controls – which ultimately enslave us. This human ‘software’ was first installed by our well-intentioned parents, themselves a product of the same system. Conditioning is simple: rewards when we behave and punishment when we don’t. Over time we self-monitor, and require little to no oversight. Fear is the strongest of all shackles.

Thus, we all essentially live in the prison of our minds.

Over our formative years, these operating models condition our behaviors. By the time we formally engage in society, our behaviors have completely linked with our instincts, which always aim to minimize pain and maximize pleasure.

Aside from bodily needs, we must not overlook the importance of the social arena. In a material culture which craves external validation, this becomes a most effective and subtle mechanism of control.

Advertising, of course, plays a major role by appealing to our fears of lack, prodding us to want what we don’t have and desire what we don’t need. We then make countless buying decisions based on empty promises to relieve our fears of aloneness and satiate our need to fit into a social construct.

This model of control is so effective, it can be seen in every organization and institution. When was the last time you freely expressed your opinion without self-censorship? If you work for a corporation, have you voiced an idea that challenged the status quo? Or have you witnessed a co-worker berated by an abusive boss? Did you speak up, or did you avert your eyes, hoping you weren’t next?

Compliance is always rewarded, but every time you watch an injustice and do nothing, it chips aways at your moral center. If you’re feckless when the risk is low, you won’t have courage when it truly matters. This creates a demoralized society that is docile and malleable.

Think back to the events around 9/11.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM! Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!‘

With the looming fear of more “terrorist strikes” we compliantly gave up our freedoms. I recall boarding the ferry just days after the attacks. I was more than willing to show the contents of my purse to the soldier who I believed would protect me. I realized then that my rights were being taken away, but I was too scared to protest. I wish I knew then, what I know now!

And what I know now, millions of others know too. The elite overlords overreached too quickly. They created a society easy to manipulate so they could consolidate power for themselves. This realization has jolted humanity from a deep slumber, only to find ourselves shackled by a system, to which we unknowingly acquiesced.

There are many forms of tyranny now upon us. However, we also see an awakening populace like never before. We no longer blindly consent; we are taking back our power and our autonomy.

But we must all continue our quest for self-awareness, to understand what dictates our behaviors and drives our decisions.

Only then can we break free from our mental prison cells and exercise our will. Only then can we act without restraint, exempt from external control and interference. And only then will humanity truly be free.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

The Case for Impeachment Gets Stronger​

Republicans should drag out impeachment hearings for a year and feature an array of credible witnesses to testify how Joe Biden has worked to destroy the country.

By Steve Baldwin
September 24, 2022

Over six months ago, I made the case here at American Greatness for impeaching Joe Biden. The case has only grown stronger in the interim. Not only has more information come to light about Biden’s illegal conduct, but he also has pushed a number of new policies that are constitutionally suspect at best and deserve intensive congressional scrutiny—assuming the Republicans don’t blow the midterms in November.

I argued that the impeachment effort should be about educating moderate voters, independent voters, and even working-class Democrats about the stunning number of unconstitutional actions undertaken by the Biden Administration. It doesn’t matter if the GOP doesn’t have the two-thirds vote necessary in the Senate to convict and remove Biden from office. That’s not the point. After all, a successful impeachment and removal would put Kamala Harris in the Oval Office, and she may be even worse.

Some pundits claim that impeaching Biden would hurt the GOP politically. That’s nuts. The Democrats impeached Trump twice and used those hearings to convince many former Trump voters to abandon him in 2020. Along with all the “2000 Mules”-type cheating, it worked.

Similarly, the GOP should drag out the impeachment hearings for a year while they feature an array of credible witnesses to testify how this man has declared war on the American middle class and brought our country to the brink of economic collapse. Try as they might, such political theater would be difficult for the media to ignore.

Biden’s impeachable actions include his refusal to enforce immigration laws; the debacle in Afghanistan; the nuclear deal with Iran; the Hunter Biden scandal; using the COVID epidemic to illegally accumulate power; weaponizing the FBI and Department of Justice against Americans; violating the rights of January 6 protestors; and working with Big Tech to censor the First Amendment rights of Americans.

Indeed, unlike the two phony impeachment hearings held by the Democrats, the GOP’s impeachment hearings would feature real crimes by Biden, involving bribery, treason, and “high crimes and misdemeanors” that many constitutional experts define as “abusing the public trust.”

On illegal immigration, we now know Biden’s Department of Homeland Security has deliberately flauted federal law by refusing to deport convicted criminal aliens. In a memo, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas stated, “The fact an individual is a removable noncitizen therefore should not alone be the basis of an enforcement action against them.” In the same memo, Mayorkas claimed DHS has “discretion” due to the criminal’s “advanced or tender age,” “lengthy presence in the United States,” a “mental condition that may have contributed to the criminal conduct,” a “physical or mental condition requiring care or treatment,” or the “impact of removal on family in the United States, such as loss of provider or caregiver.” In other words, an illegal alien who commits murder can remain in the United States if he’s a senior, has a mental illness, or if removing him does harm to his family.

In fact, the DHS has no such discretion. This policy was simply made up and violates federal law. Indeed, the Biden Administration’s concern for poor criminal aliens does not extend to American citizens who have been victimized by them. The First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered Biden to correct this, but so far, there is little evidence anything has changed and the administration is appealing the decision. Furthermore, documents uncovered by Florida’s attorney general show that Mayorkas knew Biden’s policies would help the cartels and hurt American citizens.

On the Afghanistan front, whistleblowers are now revealing that the Biden Administration brought 324 Afghans to the United States who are on the terrorist “watch list” and apparently didn’t care. Again, like illegal alien criminals, this has already led to crimes against American citizens, but Biden seems unperturbed.

As for Biden’s ongoing effort to strike a deal with the Iranian mullahs bent on acquiring nuclear weapons, Biden has dropped even more demands so that the final deal would not curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The deal is shaping up to be a suicide pact.

Over the last few months, new information has come to light in the Hunter Biden scandal. Joe Biden has consistently claimed he never discussed his son’s foreign business deals. He lied. Hunter’s dealings were clearly illegal “pay for play” schemes, and Biden not only knew about these deals but was involved in them. “The Big Guy’s” involvement in his family’s financial entanglements raises questions of whether he has been compromised by hostile countries. If bribery or treason were involved, Biden’s lies are clearly impeachable. Indeed, Biden has already sold 950,000 barrels of oil from America’s Strategic Oil Reserve to a Chinese government-controlled company. Hunter sits on that same company’s board. How is that not illegal?

Then, of course, there are Biden’s COVID policies, in particular his refusal to grant religious exemptions from mandatory vaccinations to federal workers, including military personnel. Even the Defense Department’s inspector general has concluded that such mandates violate the First Amendment. Moreover, it appears that the Pentagon has illegally coerced service personnel to take the vaccination.

On the Big Tech censorship front, we now know the Biden Administration violated the First Amendment by colluding with Big Tech to censor conservatives.

Then, of course, there is the weaponizing of the FBI and the Department of Justice against Americans, which has escalated dramatically on Biden’s watch. The Justice Department propaganda tarring parents as “terrorists” was a lie. The raids on Americans involved with the January 6 protests is like something we’d see in a Third World country and cries out for investigation. Coupled with illegal spying on Americans, the FBI under Biden is becoming the enforcement wing of the Democratic Party.

Biden has refused to hold Black Lives Matter or Antifa accountable for the billion dollars in damages and two-dozen deaths their riots caused over two years ago. His Justice Department has also ignored acts of terror directed toward pregnancy counseling centers and pro-life groups. One Justice Department official even smeared these groups as if to encourage more violence against them.

Biden has also violated the free speech rights of psychologists by issuing an illegal executive order calling upon federal agencies to put a stop to all counseling aimed at aiding people to overcome same-sex attractions. Bear in mind, most of these are people who have voluntarily approached psychologists for help in leaving the homosexual lifestyle.

If the GOP retakes control of Congress in January, MAGA activists cannot rest. Patriots will need to make it clear to Republican leadership that they will be expected to not only follow the America First agenda but also to hold Joe Biden accountable for his unconstitutional actions.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

How Could We Have Been So Naive About Big Tech?

SATURDAY, SEP 24, 2022 - 07:00 PM
Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via Brownstone Institute,

The 1998 movie Enemy of the State starring Gene Hackman and Will Smith seemed like fiction at the time. Why I didn’t regard that movie – which still holds up in nearly every detail – as a warning I do not know. It pulls back the curtain on the close working relationship between national security agencies and the communications industry – spying, censorship, blackmailing, and worse. Today, it seems not just a warning but a description of reality.

There is no longer any doubt at all about the symbiotic relationship between Big Tech – the digital communications industry in particular – and government. The only issue we need to debate is which of the two sectors are more decisive in driving the loss of privacy, free speech, and liberty in general.

Not only that: I’ve been involved in many debates over the years, always taking the side of technology over those who warned of the coming dangers. I was a believer, a techno-utopian and could not see where this was headed.

The lockdowns were the great shock for me, not only for the unconscionably draconian policies imposed on the country so quickly. The shock was intensified by how all the top tech companies immediately enlisted in the war on freedom of association. Why? Some combination of industry ideology, which shifted over 30 years from a founding libertarian ethos to become a major force for techno-tyranny, plus industry self-interest (how better to promote digital media consumption than to force half the workforce to stay home?) were at work.

For me personally, it feels like betrayal of the most profound sort. Only 12 years ago, I was still celebrating the dawning of the Jetsons World and dripping with disdain for the Luddites among us who refused to get with it and buy and depend on all the latest gizmos. It seemed inconceivable to me at the time that such wonderful tools could ever be taken over by power and used as a means of social and economic control. The whole idea of the Internet was to overthrow the old order of imposition and control! The Internet was anarchy, to my mind, and therefore had some built-in resistance to all attempts to monopolize it.

And yet here we are. Just this weekend, The New York Times carries a terrifying story about a California tech professional who, on request, texted a doctor’s office a picture of his son’s infection that required a state of undress, and then found himself without email, documents, and even a phone number. An algorithm made the decision. Google has yet to admit wrongdoing. It’s one story but emblematic of a massive threat that affects all our lives.

Amazon servers are reserved only for the politically compliant, while Twitter’s censorship at explicit behest of the CDC/NIH is legion. Facebook and Instagram can and does bodybag anyone who steps out of line, and the same is true of YouTube. Those companies make up the bulk of all Internet traffic. As for escaping, any truly private email cannot be domiciled in the US, and our one-time friend the smartphone operates now as the most reliable citizen surveillance tool in history.

In retrospect, it’s rather obvious that this would happen because it has happened with every other technology in history, from weaponry to industrial manufacturing. What begins as a tool of mass liberation and citizen empowerment eventually comes to be nationalized by the state working with the largest and most politically connected firms. World War I was the best illustration of just such an outrage in the 20th century: the munitions manufacturers were the only real winners of that one, while the state acquired new powers of which it never really let go.

It’s hard to appreciate just what a shock that “Great War” was to a whole generation of liberal intellectuals. My mentor Murray Rothbard wrote an extremely thoughtful reflection on the naive liberalism of Victorian-age techno enthusiasts, circa 1880-1910. This was a generation that saw progress emancipation on every front: the end of slavery, a burgeoning middle class, the crumbling of the old aristocracies of power, and new technologies. All these enabled the mass production of steel, cities rising to the heavens, electricity and lighting everywhere, flight, and countless consumer improvements from indoor plumbing and heating to mass availability of food that enabled enormous demographic shifts.

Reading the greats from that period, their optimism about the future was palpable. One of my favorite writers, Mark Twain, held such a view. His moral outrage toward the Spanish-American War, the remnants of family feuds in the South, and reactionary class-based biases were everywhere in his writings, always with a sense of profound disapproval that these signs of revanchist thinking and behaving were surely one generation away from full expiration. He shared in the naivete of the times. He simply could not have imagined the carnage of the coming total war that made the Spanish-American war look like a practice drill. The same outlook on the future was held by of Oscar Wilde, William Graham Sumner, William Gladstone, Auberon Herbert, Lord Acton, Hillaire Belloc, Herbert Spencer, and all the rest.

Rothbard’s view was that their excessive optimism, their intuitive sense of the inevitability of the victory of liberty and democracy, and their overarching naivete toward the uses of technology actually contributed to the decline and fall of what they considered civilization. Their confidence in the beautiful future – and their underestimate of the malice of states and the docility of the public – created a mindset that was less driven to work for truth than it otherwise would have been. They positioned themselves as observers of ever-increasing progress of peace and well-being. They were the Whigs who implicitly accepted a Hegelian-style view of their invincibility of their causes.

Of Herbert Spencer, for example, Rothbard wrote this scathing criticism:

Spencer began as a magnificently radical liberal, indeed virtually a pure libertarian. But, as the virus of sociology and Social Darwinism took over in his soul, Spencer abandoned libertarianism as a dynamic historical movement, although at first without abandoning it in pure theory. In short, while looking forward to an eventual ideal of pure liberty, Spencer began to see its victory as inevitable, but only after millenia of gradual evolution, and thus, in actual fact, Spencer abandoned Liberalism as a fighting, radical creed; and confined his Liberalism in practice to a weary, rear-guard action against the growing collectivism of the late nineteenth-century. Interestingly enough, Spencer’s tired shift “rightward” in strategy soon became a shift rightward in theory as well; so that Spencer abandoned pure liberty even in theory.

Rothbard was so sensitive to this problem due to the strange times in which his ideological outlook took shape. He experienced his own struggle in coming to terms with the way in which the brutality of real-time politics poisons the purity of ideological idealism.

The bulk of the Rothbardian paradigm had been complete by the time he finished his PhD in economics from Columbia University. By 1963-1964, he published his massive economic treatise, a reconstruction of the economics of the origins of the Great Depression, and put together the core of the binary that became his legacy: history is best understood as a competitive struggle between market and state. One of his best books on political economy – Power and Market – that appeared years later was actually written in this period but not published because the publisher found it too controversial.

Implicit in this outlook was a general presumption of the universal merit of free enterprise compared with the unrelenting depredations of the state. It has the ring of truth in most areas of life: the small business compared with the plotting and scamming of politics, the productivity and creativity of entrepreneurs vs the lies and manipulations of bureaucratic armies, the grimness of inflation, taxation, and war vs the peaceful trading relationships of commercial life. Based on this outlook, he became the 20th century’s foremost advocate of what became anarcho-capitalism.

Rothbard also distinguished himself in those years for never joining the Right in becoming a champion of the Cold War. Instead he saw war as the worst feature of statism, something to be avoided by any free society. Whereas he once published in the pages of National Review, he later found himself as the victim of a fatwa by Russia-hating and bomb-loving conservatives and thereby began to forge his own school of thought that took over the name libertarian, which had only recently been revived by people who preferred the name liberal but realized that this term had long been appropriated by its enemies.

What happened next challenged the Rothbardian binary. It was not lost on him that the major driving force beyond the building of the Cold War security state was private enterprise itself. And the conservative champions of free enterprise had utterly failed to distinguish between private-sector forces that thrive independently of the state and those who not only live off the state but exercise a decisive influence in further fastening the yoke of tyranny on the population through war, conscription, and general industrial monopolization. Seeing his own binary challenged in real life drove him to found an intellectual project embodied in his journal Left and Right, which opened in 1965 and ran until 1968. Here we find some of the most challenging writing and analysis of the second half of the twentieth century.

The first issue featured what might be his most mighty essay on political history: “Left, Right, and the Prospects for Liberty.” This essay came from a period in which Rothbard warmed up to the left simply because it was only on this side of the political spectrum where he found skepticism of the Cold War narrative, outrage at industrial monopolization, disgust at reactionary militarism and conscription, dogged opposition to violations of civil liberties. and generalized opposition to the despotism of the age. His new friends on the left in those days were very different from the woke/lockdown left of today, obviously. But in time, Rothbard too soured on them and their persistence in economic ignorance and un-nuanced hatred of capitalism in general and not just the crony variety.

So on it went through the decades as Rothbard was drawn ever more toward understanding class as a valuable desiderata of political dynamics, large corporate interests in a hand-in-glove relationship to the state, and the contrast between elites and common people as an essential heuristic to pile on top of his old state vs market binary. As he worked this out more fully, he came to adopt many of the political tropes we now associate with populism, but Rothbard was never fully comfortable in that position either. He rejected crude nationalism and populism, knew better than anyone of the dangers of the Right, and was well aware of the excesses of democracy.

While his theory remained intact, his strategic outlook for getting from here to there underwent many iterations, the last of which before his untimely death in 1995 landed him with an association with the burgeoning movement that eventually brought Trump to power, though there is every reason to believe that Rothbard would have regarded Trump as he did both Nixon and Reagan. He saw them both as opportunists who talked a good game – though never consistently – and ultimately betrayed their bases with anti-establishment talk without the principle reality.

One way to understand his seeming shifts over time is the simple point with which I began this reflection. Rothbard dreamed of a free society, but he was never content with theory alone. Like the major intellectual activists who influenced him (Frank Chodorov, Ludwig von Mises, and Ayn Rand) he believed in making a difference in his own time within the intellectual and political firmament he was given. This drove him toward ever more skepticism of corporate power and the privileges of the power elite in general. By the time of his death, he had traveled a distance very far from the simple binaries of his youth, which he had to do in order to make sense of them them in the face of grim realities of the 1960s through the 1990s.

Would he have been shocked as I have been about the apostasies of Big Tech? Somehow I doubt it. He saw the same thing with the industrial giants of his own time, and fought them with all his strength, a passion that led him to shifting alliances all in the interest of pushing his main cause, which was the emancipation of the human population from the forces of oppression and violence all around us. Rothbard was the Enemy of the State. Many people have even noted the similarities of Gene Hackman’s character in the movie.

The astonishing policy trends of our time are truly calling on all of us to rethink our political and ideological opinions, as simple and settled as they might have been. For this reason, Brownstone publishes thinkers on all sides. We are all disaffected in our own ways. And we know now that nothing will be the same.

Do we give up? Never. During lockdowns and medical mandates, the power of the state and its corporate allies truly reached its apotheosis, and failed us miserably. Our times cry out for justice, for clarity, and for making a difference to save ourselves and our civilization. We should approach this great project with our eyes wide open and with ears to hear different points of view on how we get from here to there.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Why Orwell Matters

SATURDAY, SEP 24, 2022 - 05:50 PM
Authored by Bruno Waterfield via Spiked-Online.com,

Most people think that George Orwell was writing about, and against, totalitarianism – especially when they encounter him through the prism of his great dystopian novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four.

This view of Orwell is not wrong, but it can miss something. For Orwell was concerned above all about the particular threat posed by totalitarianism to words and language. He was concerned about the threat it posed to our ability to think and speak freely and truthfully. About the threat it posed to our freedom.

He saw, clearly and vividly, that to lose control of words is to lose control of meaning. That is what frightened him about the totalitarianism of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia – these regimes wanted to control the very linguistic substance of thought itself.

And that is why Orwell continues to speak to us so powerfully today. Because words, language and meaning are under threat once more.

Totalitarianism in Orwell’s time
The totalitarian regimes of Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union represented something new and frightening for Orwell. Authoritarian dictatorships, in which power was wielded unaccountably and arbitrarily, had existed before, of course. But what made the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century different was the extent to which they demanded every individual’s complete subservience to the state. They sought to abolish the very basis of individual freedom and autonomy. They wanted to use dictatorial powers to socially engineer the human soul itself, changing and shaping how people think and behave.

Totalitarian regimes set about breaking up clubs, trade unions and other voluntary associations. They were effectively dismantling those areas of social and political life in which people were able to freely and spontaneously associate. The spaces, that is, in which local and national culture develops free of the state and officialdom. These cultural spaces were always tremendously important to Orwell. As he put it in his 1941 essay, ‘England Your England’: ‘All the culture that is most truly native centres round things which even when they are communal are not official – the pub, the football match, the back garden, the fireside and the “nice cup of tea”.’

Totalitarianism may have reached its horrifying zenith in Nazi Germany and Stalin’s USSR. But Orwell was worried about its effect in the West, too. He was concerned about the Sovietisation of Europe through the increasingly prominent and powerful Stalinist Communist Parties. He was also worried about what he saw as Britain’s leftwing ‘Europeanised intelligentsia’, which, like the Communist Parties of Western Europe, seemed to worship state power, particularly in the supranational form of the USSR. And he was concerned above all about the emergence of the totalitarian mindset, and the attempt to re-engineer the deep structures of mind and feeling that lie at the heart of autonomy and liberty.

Orwell could see this mindset flourishing among Britain’s intellectual elite, from the eugenics and top-down socialism of Fabians, like Sidney and Beatrice Webb and HG Wells, to the broader technocratic impulses of the intelligentsia in general. They wanted to remake people ‘for their own good’, or for the benefit of the race or state power. They therefore saw it as desirable to force people to conform to certain prescribed behaviours and attitudes. This threatened the everyday freedom of people who wanted, as Orwell put it, ‘the liberty to have a home of your own, to do what you like in your spare time, to choose your own amusements instead of having them chosen for you from above’.

Edmond O'Brien as Winston Smith and Jan Sterling as Julia, in an adaptation of Nineteen Eighty-Four, 3 June 1955.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, this new intellectual elite started to gain ascendancy. It was effectively a clerisy – a cultural and ruling elite defined by its academic achievements. It had been forged through higher education and academia rather than through traditional forms of privilege and wealth, such as public schools.

Orwell was naturally predisposed against this emergent clerisy. He may have attended Eton, but that’s where Orwell’s education stopped. He was not part of the clerisy’s world. He was not an academic writer, nor did he position himself as such. On the contrary, he saw himself as a popular writer, addressing a broad, non-university-educated audience.

Moreover, Orwell’s antipathy towards this new elite type was long-standing. He had bristled against the rigidity and pomposity of imperial officialdom as a minor colonial police official in Burma between 1922 and 1927. And he had always battled against the top-down socialist great and good, and much of academia, too, who were often very much hand in glove with the Stalinised left.

The hostility was mutual. Indeed, it accounts for the disdain that many academics and their fellow travellers continue to display towards Orwell today.

The importance of words
Nowadays we are all too familiar with this university-educated ruling caste, and its desire to control words and meaning. Just think, for example, of the way in which our cultural and educational elites have turned ‘fascism’ from a historically specific phenomenon into a pejorative that has lost all meaning, to be used to describe anything from Brexit to Boris Johnson’s Tory government – a process Orwell saw beginning with the Stalinist practice of calling Spanish democratic revolutionaries ‘Trotsky-fascists’ (which he documented in Homage to Catalonia (1938)).

Or think of the way in which our cultural and educational elites have transformed the very meanings of the words ‘man’ and ‘woman’, divesting them of any connection to biological reality. Orwell would not have been surprised by this development. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, he shows how the totalitarian state and its intellectuals will try to suppress real facts, and even natural laws, if they diverge from their worldview. Through exerting power over ideas, they seek to shape reality. ‘Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together in new shapes of your own choosing’, says O’Brien, the sinister party intellectual. ‘We control matter because we control the mind. Reality is inside the skull… You must get rid of these 19th-century ideas about the laws of nature.’

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the totalitarian regime tries to subject history to similar manipulation. As anti-hero Winston Smith tells his lover, Julia:

‘Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.’

As Orwell wrote elsewhere, ‘the historian believes that the past cannot be altered and that a correct knowledge of history is valuable as a matter of course. From the totalitarian point of view history is something to be created rather than learned.’

This totalitarian approach to history is dominant today, from the New York Times’ 1619 Project to statue-toppling. History is something to be erased or conjured up or reshaped as a moral lesson for today. It is used to demonstrate the rectitude of the contemporary establishment.

But it is language that is central to Orwell’s analysis of this form of intellectual manipulation and thought-control. Take ‘Ingsoc’, the philosophy that the regime follows and enforces through the linguistic system of Newspeak. Newspeak is more than mere censorship. It is an attempt to make certain ideas – freedom, autonomy and so on – actually unthinkable or impossible. It is an attempt to eliminate the very possibility of dissent (or ‘thoughtcrime’).

As Syme, who is working on a Newspeak dictionary, tells Winston Smith:

‘The whole aim… is to narrow the range of thought. In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller… Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?’

The parallels between Orwell’s nightmarish vision of totalitarianism and the totalitarian mindset of today, in which language is policed and controlled, should not be overstated. In the dystopia of Nineteen Eighty-Four, the project of eliminating freedom and dissent, as in Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia, was backed up by a brutal, murderous secret police. There is little of that in our societies today – people are not forcibly silenced or disappeared.

However, they are cancelled, pushed out of their jobs, and sometimes even arrested by the police for what amounts to thoughtcrime. And many more people simply self-censor out of fear of saying the ‘wrong’ thing. Orwell’s concern that words could be erased or their meaning altered, and thought controlled, is not being realised in an openly dictatorial manner. No, it’s being achieved through a creeping cultural and intellectual conformism.

The intellectual turn against freedom
But then that was always Orwell’s worry – that intellectuals giving up on freedom would allow a Big Brother Britain to flourish. As he saw it in The Prevention of Literature (1946), the biggest danger to freedom of speech and thought came not from the threat of dictatorship (which was receding by then) but from intellectuals giving up on freedom, or worse, seeing it as an obstacle to the realisation of their worldview.

Interestingly, his concerns about an intellectual betrayal of freedom were reinforced by a 1944 meeting of the anti-censorship organisation, English PEN. Attending an event to mark the 300th anniversary of Milton’s Areopagitica, Milton’s famous 1644 speech making the case for the ‘Liberty of Unlicenc’d Printing’, Orwell noted that many of the left-wing intellectuals present were unwilling to criticise Soviet Russia or wartime censorship. Indeed, they had become profoundly indifferent or hostile to the question of political liberty and press freedom.

‘In England, the immediate enemies of truthfulness, and hence of freedom of thought, are the press lords, the film magnates, and the bureaucrats’, Orwell wrote, ‘but that on a long view the weakening of the desire for liberty among the intellectuals themselves is the most serious symptom of all’.

Orwell was concerned by the increasing popularity among influential left-wing intellectuals of ‘the much more tenable and dangerous proposition that freedom is undesirable and that intellectual honesty is a form of anti-social selfishness’. The exercise of freedom of speech and thought, the willingness to speak truth to power, was even then becoming seen as something to be frowned upon, a selfish, even elitist act.

An individual speaking freely and honestly, wrote Orwell, is ‘accused of either wanting to shut himself up in an ivory tower, or of making an exhibitionist display of his own personality, or of resisting the inevitable current of history in an attempt to cling to unjustified privilege’.

These are insights which have stood the test of time. Just think of the imprecations against those who challenge the consensus. They are dismissed as ‘contrarians’ and accused of selfishly upsetting people.

And worst of all, think of the way free speech is damned as the right of the privileged. This is possibly one of the greatest lies of our age. Free speech does not support privilege. We all have the capacity to speak, write, think and argue. We might not, as individuals or small groups, have the platforms of a press baron or the BBC. But it is only through our freedom to speak freely that we can challenge those with greater power.

Orwell’s legacy
Orwell is everywhere today. He is taught in schools and his ideas and phrases are part of our common culture. But his value and importance to us lies in his defence of freedom, especially the freedom to speak and write.

His outstanding 1946 essay, ‘Politics and the English Language’, can actually be read as a freedom manual. It is a guide on how to use words and language to fight back.

Of course, it is attacked today as an expression of privilege and of bigotry. Author and commentator Will Self cited ‘Politics and the English Language’ in a 2014 BBC Radio 4 show as proof that Orwell was an ‘authoritarian elitist’. He said: ‘Reading Orwell at his most lucid you can have the distinct impression he’s saying these things, in precisely this way, because he knows that you – and you alone – are exactly the sort of person who’s sufficiently intelligent to comprehend the very essence of what he’s trying to communicate. It’s this the mediocrity-loving English masses respond to – the talented dog-whistler calling them to chow down on a big bowl of conformity.’

Lionel Trilling, another writer and thinker, made a similar point to Self, but in a far more insightful, enlightening way. ‘[Orwell] liberates us’, he wrote in 1952:

‘He tells us that we can understand our political and social life merely by looking around us, he frees us from the need for the inside dope. He implies that our job is not to be intellectual, certainly not to be intellectual in this fashion or that, but merely to be intelligent according to our lights – he restores the old sense of the democracy of the mind, releasing us from the belief that the mind can work only in a technical, professional way and that it must work competitively. He has the effect of making us believe that we may become full members of the society of thinking men. That is why he is a figure for us.’

Orwell should be a figure for us, too – in our battle to restore the democracy of the mind and resist the totalitarian mindset of today. But this will require having the courage of our convictions and our words, as he so often did himself. As he put it in The Prevention of Literature, ‘To write in plain vigorous language one has to think fearlessly’. That Orwell did precisely that was a testament to his belief in the public just as much as his belief in himself. He sets an example and a challenge to us all.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

‘Silent Majority’ Must Speak Up When Vocal Minority Imposes Views on Society: Rapper and Commentator​

By Ella Kietlinska and Joshua Philipp
September 22, 2022 Updated: September 22, 2022

If people do not speak up when faced with a vocal minority trying to impose their radical views on society, the silent majority and their children will face dire consequences, said rapper and social commentator Zuby, encouraging the “silent majority” to stop censoring themselves.

“A silent majority may as well not exist,” he said. “I think there’s a silenced majority.”

As long as people stay silenced, then that vocal minority—even if it makes up only 1 percent of the population—will not be afraid to state their opinions, he said, because they are very vocal and bold.

People like talking about a “silent majority” because it makes them think that somehow by magic, things are going to turn around for the better, Zuby said in a recent interview for EpochTV’s “Crossroads” program.

”How can you win a fight if you don’t fight? How can you win a debate when you don’t speak?” he asked.

In a debate, if one person is “spouting off the goofiest, most ludicrous ideas” and the other person just sits there silently and nods, then the one who talks will win the debate, he said.

“Most Americans aren’t on board with the most extreme and radical and bizarre notions that are floating around out there,” he said, referring to the recent assertions that men can become pregnant or give birth. “Over 90 percent of people don’t believe that, but those people need to be willing to say something.”

A silent majority is weak when faced with a vocal minority, he added.
Then people wonder why the world has gone crazy, Zuby said, and his answer is that “it’s happened because most people have let it happen.”

“Most people are not being censored by the government or even censored by big tech or censored by social media,” Zuby said. “They’re censoring themselves.”

Breaking From Cowardice​

Video on website .55 min

“Over the past 10 years, we have had this pandemic of cowardice, and people are unwilling to say things in many cases that are objectively true. … They are afraid of repercussions,” he said, adding that cowardice and courage are both habits and they’re also both contagious.

When people start acting like cowards, it can affect others around who will start behaving like cowards, Zuby said.

“When one person stands up, starts speaking out, and using their platform to either state their opinions or to state objective facts, it encourages other people to do the same,” he said.

“I know for a fact that I’ve encouraged thousands, if not millions of people out there in this world, to be a little bit more bold, a little bit more courageous.”

Zuby made a disclaimer that he does not encourage anybody to be radical or go to extremes. He said he encourages people to be willing to say what they believe to be true, or what is true; to have conversations, debates, and discussions; and to stand up and say “no” when being forced into something the person does not want to go along with, such as a mask mandate, a vaccination mandate, or calling people by made-up pronouns.

The rapper believes that nobody should be coerced to accept others’ opinions or punished for not accepting them.

He said that if a man decides he identifies as a chicken and feels most comfortable wearing a chicken costume and eating birdseed, that’s his right.
“I think it’s weird. I support your right to do it, though,” he said. “But then if you want me to—you want to force me to say that you’re a chicken and you want to force me to treat you as a chicken … no, I’m not doing that.”

People in the West understand the concept of “freedom of religion” and “freedom from religion,” he said.

Zuby explained that he has a right to his beliefs, a right to worship and pray, but he does not have a right to force others to accept his beliefs.
In the same way, people should not be coerced into believing or affirming radical new social dogmas.

‘The Power Is Always With the People’​

People are giving up too many of their freedoms, Zuby said. “If you give them an inch, they’re gonna take a yard. If you give them a yard, they’re gonna take a mile.”

There are mayors, governors, presidents, prime ministers, World Economic Forum members, and other unelected people who like to call themselves the elites, Zuby said. “But they are less than 0.1 percent of the population. The power is always, ultimately, with the people.”

“Ultimately, you are the one who makes your choices. And when you understand this, and you take responsibility for it, and you take accountability, it can be a little bit scary to begin with, but it’s actually a very powerful and an empowering message,” he said.

One person can get their own life and family in order, and that helps the wider community to get in order, he said, adding that a country is a collection of communities.

“I look at things much more bottom-up than top-down,” he said.

Consequences of Remaining Silent

Zuby, who also is a podcast host, public speaker, and creative entrepreneur, thinks that people might say to him in response to his encouragement to speak freely: “You’re self-employed. You work for yourself. You’ve got means, you’ve got money. You don’t have a normal job, kids, and a mortgage, and all these other things that normal people have.”

The rapper said he understands and can empathize with people who are concerned about losing their jobs, but he warned that today’s children are going to live in a society that will have fewer freedoms and more coercion, authoritarianism, and tyranny.

“I don’t want anyone to put themselves at risk. But first of all, those fears are largely overblown. And secondly, the consequences of not speaking up are, in the long term, far more severe,” he said. “It’s much easier to nip something in the bud than to let this monster grow to such a level and get so ingrained in so many institutions, in so many aspects of society.”

“If you think it’s difficult now, it’ll be much, much more difficult five years from now, a decade from now, 20 years from now,” he said. “And your children, our children, my future children are going to have to bear the consequences of that.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Martin Armstrong - The Plot to Seize Russia, War Propaganda, & More 1:06:51 min

Martin Armstrong - The Plot to Seize Russia, War Propaganda, & More​

Right2Freedom Published September 24, 2022

World renowned economist Martin Armstrong joins us to break the story of the several-decade long plan to seize Russia, detailing how he has obtained declassified documents from the Clinton Administration, and how he was previously targeted for possessing this knowledge – which he is finally able to release.

Martin takes us through his encounter with an alleged terrorist from 9/11 while he served in prison, who was actually a Pakistani Christian that was framed by the US Government. We also discuss world events, war propaganda, and Martin’s insight into where we are heading.
 

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
Swedish Study Concludes Pfizer’s “Vaccine” Alters Your DNA 3:09 min

Swedish Study Concludes Pfizer’s “Vaccine” Alters Your DNA
SettingBrushfires Published September 24, 2022

(No summary given. Have not watched.)
They admit it DOES alter the DNA
Making covid PART of our DNA makeup
(this after one man got the vax and has then contracted Covid, over and over, 90 times since!- it became part of his genetic makeup--his own body was MANUFACTURING Covid virus)

But THEN they go on to say it's a nothingburger (literally)
that ALL viruses become part of our genetic makeup
That in fact MOST of our DNA is made of of portions of viruses humans have contracted "during our evolution"
and that therefore nothing in this study should be taken to suggest not to get the vax.
 

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
Dr. Paul Marik: There May Be 10 Million Vaccine-Injured People! 11:21 min

Dr. Paul Marik: There May Be 10 Million Vaccine-Injured People!​

Sunfellow On COVID-19 Published September 25, 2022

Critical Care Specialist, Dr. Paul Marik, discusses what can be done to help all the COVID and vaccine-injured people..
He says about 1/2 way thru that he's seeing many more "neurologically injured" folks who have been vaxed, than he has seen among those who got covid and are suffering from "long-covid" symptoms.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
(Germany)
Ahlen, Germany, 24.09.2022 Freedom Fighters!! .39 min

AHLEN, GERMANY, 24.09.2022 FREEDOM FIGHTERS!!​

^^^^
Eisenhüttenstadt, Germany, September 24, 2022 Freedom Fighters!! .18 min

EISENHÜTTENSTADT, GERMANY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2022 FREEDOM FIGHTERS!!​

^^^^
Leipzig, Germany, 24.09.2022 Freedom Fighters .42 min

LEIPZIG, GERMANY, 24.09.2022 FREEDOM FIGHTERS​

^^^^
Seelow, Germany, Anti Covid BS, Anti Agenda 2030, Anti Govt Lies 1:34 min

SEELOW, GERMANY, ANTI COVID BS, ANTI AGENDA 2030, ANTI GOVT LIES​



^^^^
(Ireland)
Irish also rise up. Protests in Dublin against the exponential increase in prices and bills! .23 min

IRISH ALSO RISE UP. PROTESTS IN DUBLIN AGAINST THE EXPONENTIAL INCREASE IN PRICES AND BILLS!​

Irish also rise up. Great demonstration in Dublin against the exponential increase in prices and bills. It will be a very hot autumn in Europe and beyond.

^^^
Thousands of people demonstrate in Dublin, Ireland against the soaring cost of living. .08 min

THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE DEMONSTRATE IN DUBLIN, IRELAND AGAINST THE SOARING COST OF LIVING.​

^^^^^
(Europe)
Energy crisis: Lights go off in Europe as prices soar! 2:15 min

ENERGY CRISIS: LIGHTS GO OFF IN EUROPE AS PRICES SOAR!​

Energy crisis: Lights go off in Europe as prices soar ! Thanks to the WEF puppet leaders in Europe!
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NoCwQqqh44
43:29 min

"Everyone needs to know the truth" Former EcoHealth Alliance VP turned whistleblower speaks out​

Sep 23, 2022

AMLnZu_D0vjTKP4_Sr0nYlCZaro1o2VWuGIbiS2CgYaZ=s88-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj

TrialSite News

Dr Andrew G. Huff, former EcoHealth Alliance VP turned whistle-blower spoke exclusively to Trial Site News’ Sonia Elijah about his tenure at the controversial organization, which has been at the centre of the Covid-origin lab leak theory.

Huff, who is an expert in the field of bioterrorism and biosurveillance worked at EcoHealth Alliance from 2014-2016. He reviewed the research proposal "Understanding the risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence" that was submitted to the NIH which detailed gain of function virology work, which he attests led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2. He warned Dr Peter Daszak, his former boss, about the biosafety and biosecurity risks but Daszak was dismissive of his concerns. Huff also revealed the fact there was no biological security officer and institutional biosafety committee at EcoHealth Alliance, which was a violation of NIH guidelines.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Bill Gates about being target of misinformation and conspiracy theories 3:01 min

BILL GATES ABOUT BEING TARGET OF MISINFORMATION AND CONSPIRACY THEORIES​

Why doesn't he let some real reporters interview him and address these questions? Why these paid shills? There is so much wrong with this person, here is just 1 of dozens of questions!

Bill says the pandemic was completely unexpected. The fact he was involved in simulating of the exact same thing at Event 201 just 3 months before is complete coincidence??
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Nat’l Black Farmers Assn. Pres.: We’re Losing Farmland to China that ‘We’re Never Going to Get Back’ — Biden Hasn’t ‘Done Enough to Help’​

IAN HANCHETT24 Sep 2022392

On Friday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends First,” National Black Farmers Association President John Boyd Jr. urged the Biden administration to stop farm foreclosures and said that when this land leaves the hands of American farmers, it ends up “in the hands of the Chinese government that we’re never going to get back. We’ve given China just about everything,” and stated that Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack hasn’t “done enough to help American farmers to get aid and relief to us here.”

Boyd said, “I’ve been pleading with the administration to stop these farm foreclosures. … And there [are] people like the Chinese government who are buying these farms. So, when this farm leaves — these lands leave American farmers’ hands, they wind up in the hands of the Chinese government that we’re never going to get back. We’ve given China just about everything, from our fuel to now, — to our land. And for those persons who are at these auctions bidding for the Chinese government, I want to tell them that it’s very un-American to do so. So, we have a lot of problems here and the President hasn’t [come] and honored his commitment to meet with me, but I know he’s met with other leaders here recently at the White House, but excluded me from that meeting. So, we have the Secretary of Agriculture, who hasn’t helped — done enough to help American farmers to get aid and relief to us here. But we have all this aid for all of these other regions of the world.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Progressives Demand Two Migrants for Every U.S. Baby​

The U.S. government must end the “venomous nativism” of ordinary patriotic Americans by flooding it with tens of millions of immigrants, according to two immigrants, Indian-born Deepak Bhargava and South Korean-born Rich Stolz.
Americans’ “politics of fear and racism” must be drowned by even more poor immigrants, say the two Democratic-aligned progressive activist-authors:

Under our proposal, the US would admit 75 million immigrants over the next decade, which would double the foreign-born population from 15% to over 30%, giving it the largest share of any developed nation. Admitting 7.5 million people a year would be a dramatic increase compared with recent history – in the Obama years, the US admitted 1 million immigrants a year, and that number shrank dramatically under Trump.

The two authors’ “Statue of Liberty Plan” would force Americans to accept an annual inflow of 7.5 million migrants — or two migrants for each American newborn.

The progressive plan would require the federal government to suppress and trash the much-polled preferences and the economic self-interest of 330 million varied Americans.

The plan would be a massive, three-sided elite smack to ordinary Americans:
That massive migration would reduce the labor-market power and cut wages for tens of millions of American employees by flooding the blue-collar and white-collar labor markets with a massive wave of perhaps 50 million low-wage and compliant workers.

The inflow would also drive up prices by adding 75 million consumers and renters to the U.S. market. The migrants also would dramatically increase the purchase of autos and gasoline, and spike the cost of homes and apartments. that would put a middle-class life out of reach for tens of millions more Americans.

The flood would also wreck Americans’ ability to locally govern their society, schools, and civic support programs by injecting more chaotic diversity into their already-fractured society. The economic and civic chaos enforced by the migration would help the business-backed progressives seize more power over ordinary Americans.

The two foreign-born authors justify the wholesale replacement of American culture and people as the righteous progressive answer to Americans’ beneficial solidarity with each other and their society, which they deride as “nativism.”

In a September 23 article in the Guardian, the two authors call for the flood to help to wash away the sins and crimes of U.S. businesses:

Invasions, annexations, coups and mercenary wars are a bloody throughline in the history of US relations with Latin America. US corporations profit from extreme exploitation, while US trade and sanctions policies have increased poverty, notably in Venezuela where sanctions have increased extreme hardship.

The climate crisis is also a growing cause of migration. In Central America and the Caribbean, nearly a third of migrants in hard-hit areas cite climate-induced lack of food as the main reason for becoming migrants. The number of climate migrants will surely grow; the World Bank estimates that 216 million people worldwide will be forced to migrate by 2050.

In reality, Americans’ free-market economy has enormously helped the developing world, especially the countries that focus on trade. For example, the nations of South Korea, China, Vietnam, and India, and become far richer in a few decades — after spending thousands of years mired in poverty, autocracy, and caste culture.

Moreover, Wall Street likely will support the progressive plan.

The progressives’ plan would extract vast human resources from developing countries — and deliver the migrants to U.S. businesses and Wall Street to serve as 75 million more workers, consumers, and renters in the relatively low-corruption United States.

“If the U.S. is going to be a place where people want to migrate [illegally] for economic reasons, let’s have an immigration system that recognizes and takes advantage of that,” a top business lobbyist said in November 2021. “That, I think, is something that will be true five years now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a pro-migration economist who formerly worked for President George W. Bush when he was pushing the open borders “any willing worker” claim.

Billionaire investors routinely call for more migration. For example, CNN reported on September 23:

Bill Ackman, the billionaire hedge fund manager and activist investor, has an alternative idea to fight inflation: Increase immigration.

“Inflation can be mitigated by reducing demand and/or by increasing supply,” tweeted Ackman of Pershing Square Capital. “Doesn’t it make more sense to moderate wage inflation with increased immigration than by raising rates, destroying demand, putting people out of work, and causing a recession?

Business groups already are applauding the semi-open border policies enforced by President Joe Biden and his Cuban-born homeland security chief, Alejandro Mayorkas. This unpopular policy is on track to extract roughly 2 million southern economic migrants in 2022 from poor countries — alongside another roughly 2 million legal immigrants, visa workers, visa overstayers, and workers who arrive on tourist visas. The 2022 inflow is delivering at least three migrants for every four American newborns.

The progressives’ pro-migration groups are already funded by business-backed progressives, such as the West Coast investors-billionaires at FWD.us.
This Extraction Migration economic strategy is enthusiastically pushed by progressives who wish to transform the U.S. from a society governed by European-origin civic culture into an economic empire of jealous identity groups overseen by progressive hall monitors.

“We’re trying to become the first multiracial, multi-ethnic superpower in the world,” Rep. Rohit Khanna (D-CA) told the New York Times in March 2022. “It will be an extraordinary achievement. … We will ultimately triumph,” he boasted. In September 2022, Khanna called for a revival of President George W. Bush’s “Any Willing Worker” “guest worker” plan that would pressure employers to replace millions of American employees with low-wage Indians and other foreigners.

Progressives who want more migration also argue that is a good counter to China: “We probably need to grow the country threefold [from 330 million] — to one billion Americans,” said author Matthew Yglesias, an elite-leftist progressive founder of Vox.com.

Some of the pro-migration progressives come from poor countries whose histories, cultures, and status are subordinate to Americans’ colossal accomplishments since 1776.

Stolz, for example, was born in South Korea, before he began working for the far-left Center for Community Change. He now runs OneAmerica, a pro-migration lobby in Washington State. His co-author, Deepak Bhargava, was an activist at the far-left ACORN group and is now a “distinguished lecturer at the School of Labor and Urban Studies at the City University of New York.

Similarly, Jia Lynn Yang is the top editor for domestic news at the New York Times. She is the child of Chinese immigrants and the progressive author of a 2020 pro-migration book, titled “One Mighty and Irresistible Tide” where she argues that immigration should sever America from its cultural roots in Europe:

For those Americans who want ethnic pluralism to be a foundation value of their nation, there is unfinished work. The current generation of immigrants and children of immigrants — like those who came before us — must articulate a new vision for the current era, one that embraces rather than elides how far America has drifted from its European roots. If [immigrants] do not, their opponents can simply point out to the America of the last fifty years as a demographic aberration, and they would not be wrong.

The two authors also build their “Statue of Liberty Plan” on the long-standing false narrative that insists the Statue of Liberty is merely a greeter at the doorway to a claimed “Nation of Immigrants.”

The fake and misleading narrative is also pushed by the New York Times‘ Lynn:

The image of the Statue of Liberty, the Emma Lazarus poem at the statue’s base, the notion of America as an eternal “nation of immigrants,” — these make up an intoxicating part of this country’s mythology. Set against all the sins of America’s past — from slavery to the removal and genocide of American Indians — the arrival of open-hearted immigrants, grateful for a chance at a new life on our shores serves as a constant renewal of hope in the American project. If there is salvation for this country, it very well may lie in the underlying gratitude of a refugee whose life has been saved by the granting of a visa.

In reality, the State of Liberty was built by a French artist to display the success of the U.S. Constitution in the 1880s. In subsequent years, a PR campaign by pro-migration advocates portrayed it as a beacon to foreign migrants.
But that success has been lost by many Americans since U.S. economic elites boosted international migration in 1965 and 1990.

Extraction Migration
Government officials want to grow the economy, and immigration is an easier tool than gradually raising exports, productivity, or the birth rate.
So the federal governments extract millions of migrants from poor countries and use them as extra workers, consumers, and renters.

This Extraction Migration policy grows the national economy but also skews it towards employers and investors. For example, migration tends to ensure employers do not run short of labor. The lack of “tight labor markets” ensures that the migration shifts vast wealth from employees to investors, billionaires, and Wall Street. In turn, that makes it difficult for ordinary Americans to advance in their careers, get married, raise families, or buy homes.

Extraction migration also slows innovation and shrinks Americans’ productivity. This happens because it encourages employers to boost stock prices by relying on disposable workers instead of uncapturable American professionals and technology.

This migration policy also reduces exports by minimizing economic pressure on U.S. companies to build up complementary trade with people in poor countries.

Migration undermines employees’ workplace rights, and it widens the regional economic gaps between the Democrats’ cheap-labor coastal states and the Republicans’ heartland and southern states.

An economy fueled by extraction migration also drains Americans’ political clout over elites. It alienates young people and radicalizes Americans’ democratic civic culture because it gives an excuse for wealthy elites and progressives to ignore despairing Americans at the bottom of society, such as drug addicts.

This progressive-backed colonialism-like economic strategy kills many migrants. It exploits the poverty of migrants and splits foreign families as it extracts human resources from poor home countries to serve wealthy U.S. investors.

Progressives hide this extraction migration economic policy behind a wide variety of noble-sounding narratives and theatrical border security programs. For example, they claim the U.S. is a “Nation of Immigrants,” that migration helps migrants, and that the state must renew itself by replacing populations.

Similarly, establishment Republicans, corporate media, and major GOP donors hide the skew caused by migration. They suppress any recognition of the pocketbook impact and instead tout border chaos, welfare spending, migrant crime, and drug smuggling.

Many polls show the public wants to welcome some immigration. But the polls also show deep and broad public opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into the good jobs U.S. graduates need to raise families.
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Biden May Try To Fire World Bank President For Not Pushing Climate Policy Enough, Possible Replacement Chimes In: Report

By Ben Zeisloft
Sep 24, 2022 DailyWire.com

White House officials have considered trying to get World Bank President David Malpass fired for not pursuing climate change policies with sufficient zeal, according to a Friday report from Axios.

Malpass, who formerly served as under secretary of the Treasury for international affairs under former President Donald Trump, was asked on Tuesday whether he affirms that the “manmade burning of fossil fuels is rapidly and dangerously warming the planet.” Malpass reportedly said: “I don’t even know. I’m not a scientist.”

People familiar with the matter told Axios that the Biden administration has long viewed Malpass with suspicion and confirmed that officials have considered replacing him — although the process for triggering a leadership change at the international financial institution would likely be complicated.

The United States is the largest shareholder in the World Bank, which provides loans and grants to the governments of developing nations for capital projects, and the president typically nominates the organization’s leader. Malpass, who was nominated by Trump in 2019, is slated to complete his five-year term in 2024.

Biden could nominate former Vice President Al Gore or Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry. A spokesperson for Gore told Axios that he “strongly believes that there needs to be new leadership at the World Bank, but has no intention of pursuing the role himself and would not accept it if offered.”

Malpass reacted to the notion that he is a climate change “denier” — a charge levied by Gore and other officials — by rejecting the label outright. “I don’t know the political motivations behind that,” he said during an interview with CNN. “It’s clear that greenhouse gas emissions are coming from manmade sources, including fossil fuels, methane, agricultural uses and industrial uses. And so we’re working hard to change that.”

Biden has pushed green energy policies while leasing less federal land for oil drilling than any of his predecessors since the end of World War II. At the beginning of his tenure, Biden also nixed expansions to the Keystone XL pipeline project over environmental concerns. Last month, he signed the $740 billion Inflation Reduction Act, which includes $369 billion in programs meant to accelerate a transition to renewable energy.

A fact sheet from the office of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) claimed that the law will create 9 million jobs across the United States while bringing “manufacturing of clean technology like solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and much more back to America.” Among other items, the law funds $160 billion in clean electricity tax credits, $43 billion in production tax credits, and $40 billion in tax credits to make buildings more energy efficient.

Top administration officials, including Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, have argued that “the only way” out of “boom-and-bust cycles” in energy prices is “deploying clean energy.”

“The real truth is that as long as our nation remains overly reliant on oil and fossil fuels, we will feel these price shocks again,” Granholm said at a June press briefing. “This is not going to be the last time. The next time there’s a war, the next time there’s a pandemic or another hurricane, these extreme weather events we are experiencing — they will impact the access that we have to fossil fuels.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Insect-protein startup raises $250 million in funding

ERIC CERVONESeptember 24, 2022

InnovaFeed, one of the leading producers of insects for animal and plant nutrition, has raised $250 million in a round of funding led by Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, reports Business Wire.

Countless companies have entered the “alternative protein” market in recent years, many claiming to offer more sustainable and healthy products than those typically found in supermarket meat aisles. Companies like Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat offer plant-based meat substitutes, creating vegan options meant to replicate the taste and texture of meat. Others are developing cultured meat, which is meat grown from animal cells in a laboratory.

Protein from insects, particularly crickets, is another alternative to farm-raised animal protein that has been touted as a “solution to world hunger.” The insect-protein market, while significantly trailing other forms alternative protein, is expected to reach nearly $1 billion within the next five years. Still, many in western society have expressed no interest in adding bugs to their diet: just 10% of people in Europe would be willing to replace meat with insects, according to a 2020 survey by the European Consumer Organisation.

“At a time when conservation of our natural resources and the preservation of our environment are becoming an absolute necessity, we are convinced that the insect industry is a key solution for our planet’s food production needs,” InnovaFeed co-founder and CEO Clément Ray said.

InnovaFeed is planning to build 10 new insect farms by the end of this decade, reports TechCrunch. The Paris-based company also confirmed that it will be expanding into the U.S. with a new plant in Decatur, Illinois.

"Our expansion in the United States is a critical step for our scale-up…I am very excited to be working closely with our local industrial partners, who are key contributors to accelerate the development of the entire industry and are supporting our momentum by their investment," said Maye Walraven, Innovafeed's new General Manager for North America.

InnovaFeed had previously raised a substantial amount of money — it's total cumulative financing now stands at $450 million.

Brian Fisher, an ant specialist at the California Academy of Sciences, believes it’s just a matter of time before consumers start accepting insects as part of their regular diet. “If it’s done right, they will keep coming back for more, because it tastes really good,” Fisher told TIME.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

As Democracy Dies In The EU, Von Der Leyen Reveals Its Sins

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 04:00 AM
Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, 'n Guns blog,

It’s no secret at this point that the EU is an anti-democratic organization. The leadership isn’t elected, but selected from a pre-determined pool of candidates from within the Party structure.




Recommended Videos

Unmute
Duration
1:49
/
Current Time
0:09

Advanced Settings

Fullscreen

Pause

Up Next
Business Calendar: Intervention watchNOW PLAYING
Economy in 'unchartered territory,' but some still bullish on Big Tech -wealth manager
Inflation is a 'bit of yesterday's story' -wealth manager
Tesla countersues CA agency behind race bias lawsuit
The Week in Numbers: it's all about rates
Steelmakers in crisis as energy crunch hits output
UK rocks markets with tax cuts, borrowing plans
UK rocks markets with huge tax, borrowing plans
Everyone with the power to make a decision was placed there not by popular vote but by backroom collusion.

As we approach this weekend’s Italian elections there is real despair in the air that there is any light out of this dark time. That no matter what decisions we try to make, they are only in service of those that seek total dominion.

And yet all you hear from these Eurocrats is that we are in a “war of Democracy versus Autocracy,” as EU Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen put it in her hellish EU state of the union address to the European Parliament recently.

Cloaking herself in the inverse of the EU flag’s colors to show solidarity with another anti-democratic regime, Ukraine, Von der Leyen and her merry tribe of vandals in Brussels cast themselves as the protectors of the sacred right of a ‘democracy’ they deny to anyone who disagrees with her.

The same can be said for nearly every major government in Europe. Every time an ‘election’ rolls around the local system is gamed to ensure a particular outcome. The political establishment always coalesces around maintaining the status quo, freezing out any possibility of an ‘unworkable’ or ‘representative’ coalition.

Any outcome they can’t overcome that lies outside the scope of the EU’s values is either laden with poison pills, immediately put under pressure by the EU’s Byzantine rules, and eventually forced out of office.

There is no better example of this anti-democratic structure made flesh than Italy.

For more than a decade Italians have been saddled with mostly-unelected technocratic governments who, at best, stymie any populist/sovereigntist impulses within Italy’s electorate or, at worst, advance the EU’s centralization agenda under the false rubrics of Climate Change and “European Values.”

European Values is a phrase that is synonymous with the phrase “rules-based order.” We make the rules, they say, and you abide by them. We’re allowed to break those rules because 1) we can and 2) we are the goodies.

So, it shouldn’t be a surprise that as the Italians go to the polls this weekend with the center-right coalition led by the Brothers of Italy (FdI) likely to win a major, uncontestable victory, the unelected, openly totalitarian President of the European Commission, Ursula Von der Leyen, openly threaten Italians to ‘vote right’ or face her wrath.

Corrupted unelected bureacurat Von der Leyen threatens the Italians: “We will see the result of the vote in Italy. If things go in a difficult direction, we have tools, as in the case of Poland and Hungary.” This is called meddling in elections VDL

Originally tweeted by AZ (@AZmilitary1) on September 23, 2022.

I’ll be honest. Seeing that threat issued towards inherently disagreeable Italians coming from a German bureaucrat will not go as she thinks it will.

When you run out of the power to persuade people the only things left is threats (no matter how empty) and subterfuge. Italy has been trended towards this moment for over a decade and to this point subterfuge has worked particularly well for the EU.

Now it’s down to open threats and ‘consequences.’

Ask Hungary about those ‘consequences.’ The EU parliament this week exercised its only real power, wagging their finger sternly at a member who doesn’t represent the majority’s conception of ‘European Values’ by declaring the democratically-elected (by a landslide) government of Viktor Orban is ‘not a democracy.’

Orwell’s O’Brien would be proud.

This declaration means they have the ability to withhold shared EU development funds from Hungary.

This is called ‘blackmail’ in common parlance.

Moments like this always invoke the great Lew Rockwell reminding us that the government engages in behavior decent people would be ashamed of. It’s more of the “rules-based order” I keep hearing so much about, I guess.

The rough translation to all of these issues is “rules for me and not for thee,” the very essence of San Francis’ description of anarcho-tyranny. The EU is truly an anarcho-tyrannical State where words only have the meanings they decide they have.

And definitions are malleable.

The goal is to pervert the meanings of words to destroy any concept of meaning itself. Doing that unmoors us from our beliefs, seeing only them as the arbiters of truth.

Orwell tried to warn us about this 74 years ago. Moreover, it’s the mechanism by which to subvert our common bonds as people and replace them with the State.



Dexter White, writing for this month’s Gold Goats ‘n Guns Newsletter, covered this subverting the sacred and turning it into the profane, originally defined as “of this world” as an antipode to the sacred, while discussing Biden’s Reichstag Fire speech at Independence Hall:

To make something of this world, you must remove it from the realm of the sacred and make it profane. We used to reserve the sacred to the temple.​
The goal of the left is to deny the sanctum, in total. The only ideas allowed are the profane ones, even while they are described in sacred language.​
This transition, the act of sacralizing the profanities, is deliberate. It’s what George Orwell was getting at with the concept of newspeak in Nineteen Eighty-Four.​
The sacred is displaced, in its entirety, by the profane, to the point that it can no longer be spoken of because we no longer have the words to do so.​
DEXTER K. WHITE, “WELCOME TO THE PROFANUM,” ISSUE 61 GGNG NEWSLETTER​
So, rights, which are supposed to be sacred and inviolate are now equated with ‘democracy,’ a purely terrestrial concept, the very essence of the profane. We can only have rights the ‘democracy’ grants us, rather than those rights being inherent in our individuality or given to us by God.

To continue exercising our rights means submitting to the whim of the majority, their immediate needs. This is that typical appeal to the ‘common good’ and all those other Star Trek/Marvel level platitudes that are shoved down our throat by the purveyors of the profane (and the obscene) in Hollywood.

Any celebration of the sacred is to be met with brutal denunciation. The gatekeepers of the profane in the media — critics, columnists and talk-show hosts — are all hyper-aware of these threats. They perform their role as gatekeepers almost unconsciously.

In mythological terms the gargoyle guards the entrance to the temple, the profane that guards the sacred at the cost of his own humanity. Biden defiled the Marine corps having them at his speech, itself a desecration of the location.

It should be considered an unforgiveable offense.

That’s where media enforcement comes in, through amplification of one side and the censorship of the other. It’s why a hundred people fleeing Russia’s mobilization order makes the news but the thousands standing in line at military registration centers do not.

Hungary’s sin was voiced eloquently by Balazs Hidveghi, MEP for Hungary, after the recent vote to strip them of their ‘democracy’ status.

“They are simply unable to accept the fact that the people of Hungary have elected a Conservative government for the fourth time in a row,” the politician argued. “A government that dares to defend its nation’s interests, one that stands in the way of the extreme left’s ideology.​
“That is the real ‘sin’ of Hungary, and that is why all these unfounded lies are coming from the left,”​

And it is a sin in the minds of the Von der Leyens of the world for the EU represents their new temple, the apotheosis of their mad quest to finally make Communism work.

It’s also a sincere sin that Orban refuses to subordinate Hungary’s Christian morals and values to those “European Values” held so sacred by Von der Leyen. If you weren’t paying attention the Orthodox Patriarch of Serbia presented Orban with its highest honor recently.

On September 5, Patriarch Porfirije presented Orbán with the gold degree of the Order of Saint Sava, which is the highest decoration awarded by the Serbian Church. The ceremony took place at the Carmelite Monastery in Budapest, the current seat of Hungary’s prime ministers.​
The news would not, perhaps, be worthy of special note were it not for the Patriarch’s speech justifying the award and Orbán’s response. Both addresses summarize the malaise of today’s Europe. Both represent a welcome example of solidarity and unity among Christian believers belonging to different traditions (Orbán is a Protestant at the helm of a mostly Roman Catholic nation). Both are therefore worth bringing in translation to our readers, as no other outlet in the Western world will do so.​

As Srdja Trifkovic put it, this move sees both men as ‘lights in a dark world.’

Von der Leyen’s threat to Italy is the same move just made against Hungary, “Vote the right way, or you will lose the EU’s support.” The problem with that threat, however, is that Italy is not Hungary.

Hungary is a state the EU wants to have fully under its control. Crushing its nationalism and cultural identity is necessary to keep the other Eastern European countries in line and to project a united front, one supernation under NATO, indivisible, with liberty and justice defined for all.

That said, the EU doesn’t need Hungary to survive. But neither can it be allowed to oppose the majority, lest it undermine their authority. That mouse cannot be allowed to roar.

So, not only will Hungary lose its status, because it has exercised its right of refusal to go along with Commissar Von der Leyen’s policies on sanctioning Russia, the EU is now finding that “European Values” no longer require unanimous consent.

The push is on to reform the EU charter to remove each country’s veto power over taxes and foreign policy.

On the other hand, Italy is the second-biggest economy in the EU. It represents the third leg of the tripod on which the entire European Project is built.

So, while the EU wants Hungary crushed to keep Eastern Europe in line and push through its new ‘democratic’ reforms, it needs Italy or the whole EU collapses.

And at that point I have to remind Ms. Von der Lyin’ of the oldest adage in banking.

When you owe the bank $1000 it’s your problem.

When you owe the bank a trillion dollars, it’s the bank’s problem.

And that’s where we are today. Italy’s debt problems thanks to the EU’s mad insistence of keeping control over Italy’s political system are far worse today than they were in 2011 when Silvio Berlusconi was ousted and technocrat Mario Monti was installed.

Mario Draghi only compounded the problem taking the ECB and all of Europe to negative interest rates for nearly a decade. Christine Lagarde was brought in to keep the ball rolling while Draghi was installed to ensure Italy was hog-tied to the EU Commission through COVID relief funds, a bill that Draghi was not able to get passed.

Today Italy’s TARGET2 liabilities are the EU’s liabilities. There is no mechanism to pay them back. There is only default, hyperinflation or both. The leaders of the center-right coalition about to take power in Italy have to realize their leverage in this situation.

Because it is immense and it renders every syllable of Von der Lyin’s threat as hollow and devoid of substance as the power she ultimately thinks she exercises.

And that brings us to the market meltdown we saw after the Fed raised interest rates in the US again by 0.75% on the eve of Italy’s elections and the referenda of four Ukrainian Oblasts to decide who they want to be ruled by, Russia or Ukraine.

The choice for them is simple. The corruption of what they are voting for is meant to complicate that decision.

Every day brings another note about the manufactured energy crisis in Europe using ‘punishing the autocrat Putin’ excuse to cover their real intentions, nationalization of major industries, wholesale debt default and centralization of power across the continent to the EU.

And if it means doing away with functioning capital markets and the middle class that sustains them, then so be it. It’s for the common good, after all.

Another tranche of people finally hit the ‘acceptance’ phase of the Kubler-Ross model on the death of the “Fed Put” and the lie that Europe’s problems are solvable this week. They looked at their portfolios and, waking up from a long, lost weekend at Bernie’s, hit the sell button.

Repeatedly.

Sadly, there are still too many people in ‘denial’ and ‘bargaining’ to really catalyze the revolt against these revolting Eurocrats.

The rush into the US dollar has only just begun. Whatever happens in Italy and Ukraine this weekend will have profound effects on the future of the West.

At the climax of Matt Reeves’ The Batman, Bruce leads the fallen people of Gotham out of the darkness of a biblical flood brought on by the city’s sins to an uncertain future, vowing to finally embrace that role to guard what’s left while the city rebuilds.

I don’t know what Europe will turn into over the next few months, but the one thing we can safely say is that it won’t be a triumph of ‘democracy.’ ‘European values,’ on the other hand, will have been properly defined as the obscenity they truly have become.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Europe's Energy Crisis Will Not Be "A One Winter Story"

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 05:10 AM
By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Reduced energy supply due to the sanctions against Russia and Moscow shutting down key pipeline gas export routes will leave Europe scrambling for oil and gas well after the coming winter as the current crisis is not “a one winter story,” according to analysts at consultant Energy Aspects.

“This is not a one winter story, let’s just make it very, very clear,” Amrita Sen, founder and director of research at Energy Aspects, told Bloomberg television in an interview on Friday.

Europe will need to ration demand in order to be able to balance the market, not only this winter but also the next winter and potentially the one after that, she noted.

The energy crisis is already pushing Germany – Europe’s biggest economy – into a recession, which will deepen as we head into the winter months amid the ongoing natural gas and energy crisis, Bundesbank, the central bank of Germany, said in its monthly report earlier this week. Germany also moved this week to nationalize its biggest gas importer, Uniper, to prevent a collapse of the German energy and gas suppliers. Across Europe, industries are forced to curb or shut down production due to soaring energy prices, and several European industry associations say the European Commission’s proposals to reduce energy prices and help households and businesses through the crisis are not enough to help them survive the winter.

Commenting on the oil market, Energy Aspects’ Sen told Bloomberg that the oil market would see a very volatile last quarter of this year. 2022 so far has been the year with the second-highest volatility since 1990, the highest volatility was seen in 2020.

“We are expecting much higher prices into year end,” and Energy Aspects’ call for oil prices at year-end is about $120 a barrel, she added.

Early on Friday, Brent Crude was trading at $90 per barrel.

After the EU embargo enters into force, India and China in theory could absorb additional Russian oil, but the banking sector would be wary of secondary sanctions from the U.S. and this could cap Russia’s ability to export oil, Energy Aspects’ Sen said. In addition, Russia tying up a lot of oil on ships to Asia and then finding buyers would further raise freight rates, she added.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

WEF twists the meaning of words to make austerity sound desirable

I start the conversation about climate change

Meryl Nass
22 hr ago

The term Climate Change lacks meaning. It is always hotter or colder, wetter or drier than the last season. The term used to be Global Warming, but when the warming slowed down, the PTB segued smoothly and without explanation to Climate Change, and somehow managed to make everyone think it meant the same thing. As it became clear that temperatures were starting to go down, the PTB made another pivot to atmospheric carbon dioxide as ‘the Problem.’ But we don’t actually know whether high levels of CO2 are a problem. The elevated CO2 does help plants more easily trap carbon and grow larger. James Corbett has been on this scam for awhile. He is a wonderful teacher about what is really happening.

The heating of the planet from about 1960 to 2000 occurred reasonably fast, as if it was starting up from the low point on a sine wave, as 1960 was relatively cold. There is some confirmation of this in a Royal Society publication of 1966. It noted that there was a warming in the early part of the 20th century, followed by a distinct cold weather trend around 1960. I like this article on the Australian Academy of Science website, which says

globally averaged near-surface air temperature rose by around 0.8°C between 1850 and 2012 (Figure 2.1c). The rate of warming increased in the mid-1970s, and each of the most recent three decades has been warmer than all preceding decades since 1850. The last decade has been the warmest of these….

The temperature of the oceans has also risen. More than 90% of the total heat accumulated in the climate system between 1971 and 2010 has been stored in the oceans. The greatest ocean warming has taken place close to the surface, with the upper 75 m of the ocean warming by an average of 0.11°C each decade between 1971 and 2010….

The average surface temperatures over the Australian continent and its surrounding oceans have increased by nearly 1°C since the beginning of the 20th century.

Does that seem like a dire emergency?

However, the Australian Academy of Science last month begged the tech giants to censor misinformation and disinformation on climate change. The same language used to silence doctors. The international language of suppression of anything but the single narrative.

Now we expect cooling due to decreased sun spot activity and other factors over the next ten years, so the focus has shifted to CO2 rather than planetary warming.

Creating a fake global threat of planetary annihilation from a natural cycle’s vicissitudes was bold and brazen. Meteorologists who did not drink and expel the Koolaid lost their jobs. USG weather statistics were corrupted, which it seems is very easy to accomplish nowadays. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which Maurice Strong formed, took care of getting out a single cohesive message. I currently rely on the Australian Academy of Science for my facts, but how long will they last?

James Corbett took a peek behind the curtain to identify Maurice Strong as the main inventor of the Global Warming scam and most of the world’s environmental movement. Strong ran the UN’s first 1972 Conference on the Environment and its 1992 Rio Earth Summit. As James Corbett develops the history:

David Rockefeller was there with Strong in Colorado in 1987 for the "Fourth World Wilderness Congress," a meeting of world-historical importance that almost no one has even heard of. Attended by the likes of Rockefeller, Strong, James Baker and Edmund de Rothschild himself, the conference ultimately revolved around the question of financing for the burgeoning environmental movement that Strong had shaped from the ground up through his work at the United Nations Environment Program.

It was at that conference (recordings of which are available online, thanks to whistleblower George Hunt) that Rothschild called for a World Conservation Bank, which he envisioned as the funding mechanism for a "second Marshall Plan" that would be used for third world "debt relief" and that favourite globalist dog whistle "sustainable development."

Rothschild's dream came true when Strong presided over another high-level UN environment summit: the 1992 Rio "Earth Summit." Although perhaps best known as the conference that birthed Agenda 21, much less well known is that it was the Earth Summit that allowed the World Conservation Bank to become a reality.

Do read all that James Corbett has to say on the matter. But I now want to shift to the WEF and its website, where its current plans are laid out.


“3. Raised awareness and ownership for nature and environment – In the last few years, there is an increased awareness and public concern on climate change and specially among youth. The UNDP’s “Peoples’ Climate Vote” reflects that over 64% of people believe climate change is a global emergency. A new Pew Research Center survey in 17 advanced economies found widespread concern about the personal impact of global climate change: 80% of citizens say they are willing to change how they live and work to combat the effects of climate change. Young adults, who have been at the forefront of some of the most prominent climate change protests in recent years, are more concerned than their older counterparts about the personal impact of a warming planet in many public surveys.

* Note the intense concern with what people believe, rather than with what is actually taking place.—Nass

1664109128937.png

“What next? Sustainable cities enabled through smart communities
The three trends provide strong evidence towards enabling a social movement for “My Carbon” initiatives by enabling public-private partnerships to help curate this program. It is suggested to drive a three-way approach to shape this movement.”

See the buzzwords (I have bolded them) that don’t mean much? What I think Klaus is saying, between the lines, is that they have snowed enough people, especially the youth, to now move forward with rationing, justifying it with “public-private partnerships” to make the rationing appear to be a charitable endeavor and not government-imposed reduction in living standard.

See below for what comes next. Increased costs, induced guilt, and a new definition of your ‘fair share’—Nass

1664109213028.png

The three trends provide strong evidence towards enabling a social movement for “My Carbon” initiatives for sustainable cities…

Finally, it is significant that all stakeholders across the value chain come together and contribute towards achieving a net-zero future by leaving no one behind.

Who will be today’s Maurice Strong to push the “My Carbon” (we get to ‘own’ the austerity, it seems) initiatives and the sustainable cities? I don’t know what stakeholders across the value chain means, nor a net-zero future. But I do know that in this context, '“leaving no one behind” means corralling every last (powerless) human into a life of want.

The idea is to insert false beliefs into us and then use them to peacefully have us give away our possessions. And then, disarmed by poverty, we will give away, or have taken, the rest of our rights. If any still exist.

UPDATE: The Sept. 24 WSJ shows how the system works to enforce the single narrative. The head of the World Bank, David Malpass, appointed by Trump, apparently failed to reinforce the climate narrative during a Q and A.

The World Bank chief has been under criticism since Tuesday over his response to questions regarding whether burning of fossil fuels has led to rapid and dangerous global warming. At a New York climate event hosted by the New York Times he declined to directly answer, saying, “I am not a scientist.”

Since then, unspecified climate activists have called for his resignation. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said “Treasury will hold him accountable to this position.” Malpass has since corrected himself, stated that the World Bank is taking a forceful leadership position on climate change, and said he won’t resign.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Steve Bannon and Alex Jones: Global Corporate Fascists’ Culture Is Destruction of the Family

By J.D. Rucker • Sep. 24, 2022

This 18-minute video is worth watching from beginning to end.

Twice.

Global Corporate Fascists’ Culture Is Destruction of The Family, Nationalist Must Defend The Family 18:08 min

Global Corporate Fascists’ Culture Is Destruction of The Family, Nationalist Must Defend The Family​

Bannons War Room Published September 24, 2022
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Michael Yon @MichaelYon
Sep 25, 2022 at 8:35am
Klompen with Jeroen and Jordan in Netherlands
25 September 2022
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Mind dump, sans edit

Yesterday spent most of the day with Jordan Peterson and/or Jeroen van Maanen, a Dutch Dairy Farmer who previously went viral on Jordan’s podcast.

Jeroen is one of the original protest leaders. I’ve talked with Jeroen many hours on different occasions. And so Jordan Peterson and his wife Tammy met yesterday at the farm. No cameras or any of that, just a lot of very interesting conversation that I am sure will be coming out in Jordan’s vital podcasts.

Jeroen the farmer — his farm sits 4 meters below sea level. He and other farmers are concerned that as the energy runs out, this farmland will be flooded as the water pumps stop working.

Meanwhile, wolves are being released in Europe such as in Netherlands and are already eating sheep, cows, horses. Just a matter of time before the wolves are eating children and adults. Jeroen says the wolves are part of the plan to get rid of farmers. Killing wolves is a high crime. Released by the same sort of people who welcomed millions of foreign tribal members into Europe. Tribes will fight tribes. Wolf-packs are forming. Real wolves of every sort.

Jeroen showed photos of cows killed by wolves, and said wolves just killed the horse of some famous German politician who was apparently pro-wolf. Turns out wolves are pro-horse. So she has something in common with wolves. They both love her horses.

We talked about potential for famine. Jeroen and Jordan totally get it and see it. In fact, Jeoren said just recently old people are picking across farmer fields like they did in previous generations. During harvest, a few percent of crops are left in the field. Fall off the tractor or whatever. And so in the past, local villagers would compete with the birds for those leftovers, but in recent generations-of-plenty this stopped. Jeroen said he was surprised to see this starting again.

Jeroen saw old people collecting onions like the old days.

He said also local villagers in past generations would ‘harvest the corners” of the fields where tractors have a hard time turning and harvesting, and so poor people historically harvest the corners. This is starting again.

An American reader kindly mentioned to me that a man showed up a church with a spoon. She had never seen this before but remembered my saying to watch for times when people start carrying spoons. This is a sign around the world of food shortages. I noticed this after reading twenty books on famine. Patterns emerge such as the spoon-thing. Many patterns like that. Such as picking across farmer fields that Jeroen already is noticing. Clear signs.

Jeroen actually wears the wooden klompen shoes at work. He says they are very good anti-slip, and are cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter and just more comfortable after you get used to them. He showed me the bottom saying he’s got to get a new pair.

I got to run. Meeting with Jordan Peterson and a fertilizer expert for dinner. Very educational trip.

1664110666856.jpeg
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Meloni's Right-Wing Alliance Wins Clear Majority In Italian Elections

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 02:20 PM
First Sweden, now Italy.

Europe's unelected authoritarian ruler, Ursula von der Leyen, is not going to be happy: according to early exit polls out of Italy's national election, the right-wing bloc of Giorgia Meloni - which the ultra-left wing press just can't stop comparing to Mussolini - is set for a historic, if largely expected, victory and a clear majority (if, however, not a super-majority) which will propel Meloni to the top of the Italian government as the country's next prime minister, ushering in a historic right-wing shift for a country that - like Sweden until two weeks ago - has traditionally been very left-wing.

Meloni's Brothers of Italy party, which won just 4% of the vote during the last national election in 2018, won the biggest share of the vote in Sunday’s parliamentary elections with around 22.5%-26.5% of the vote according to an exit poll released by Italian national broadcaster Rai. She is now set to become prime minister but would require approval from junior partners in her coalition to assume the role.

1664145807440.png

According to an exit poll from Rai, Meloni's alliance which includes Salvini's League and Berlusconi's Forza Italia will win around 43% of the vote. The Center-Left alliance will have just 25.5%-29.5% of the vote, while the 5 Star movement has 13.5%-17.5% of the final vote.

1664145858304.png
Italy’s electoral system, which strongly favors parties that run as part of a coalition, is expected to help the right to an ample majority in both houses of Parliament: with 228 votes in the Lower House and 115 seats in the Senate (according to SkyTG24), Meloni will have a majority as just 104 votes are required.

As the WSJ notes, the Italian election is "the first big test of the European Union’s political cohesion as it confronts Russia’s attempt to redraw the continent’s post-Cold War order. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s restriction of natural-gas deliveries has sparked an energy-price crunch that, combined with other inflationary pressures, is expected to push much of Europe into a recession this winter."

Meloni replaces former Goldman Sachs partner and ECB technocrat and globalist, Mario Draghi, and will be the country’s first female prime minister.

The likely right-wing government will face difficult decisions over how to protect Italian households and businesses from sky-high prices for natural gas and electricity. While Italy’s parlous public finances allow limited scope for fiscal largess, if the UK is any example - and it is - Italy will engage in a similar strategy of targeted and debt-funded fiscal stimulus which will lead to a blowout in Italian debt, a further plunge in the euro and much chaos everywhere.

Italy's massive debt of roughly 150% of GDP, combined with Italy’s weak long-term growth record, makes the country vulnerable to bond-market selloffs if investors lose confidence in the soundness of Rome’s fiscal policies, and dependent on the European Central Bank to keep its bond yields stable. ECB support has typically been conditional on Rome following cautious budget policies and enacting economic overhauls aimed at improving growth. In other words, the Berlusconi example of 2011 is still vivid - if Meloni's policies displease the ECB, Christine Lagarde will simply refuse (or forget) to buy Italian bonds, sparking Europe's next sovereign debt crisis at the worst possible moment.

During the election campaign, Meloni tried to reassure voters and investors that she will keep Italy’s mammoth debt under control and won’t question the country’s foreign alliances or support for Ukraine. Expect all of that to change tomorrow.

History is written! Despite Ursula von der Leyen's unworthy and dirty threats, Italians vote en masse for the far right. Giorgia Meloni first female premier in the history of Italy. pic.twitter.com/azjKug2xVm

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1574162968639463424
.16 min

1664145971486.png

... as for markets, the spin will be that the lack of a super-majority is actually bullish for for the EUR and BTPs, while focus will quickly turn to coalition stability and who Italy's next finmin will be.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

GOP Leader McCarthy Unveils 'Commitment To America' Plan

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 01:30 PM
Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Sept. 23 unveiled Republicans’ “Commitment to America” plan, which includes a litany of policy promises on various issues.

While the race for the Senate is generally considered slightly favorable for Democrats, in the House it’s widely expected that Republicans will be in control next year.

If they do take the lower chamber, McCarthy is on track to become speaker of the House.

‘A Plan for a New Direction’
McCarthy on Sept. 23 sat down with “Capitol Report” on NTD to discuss the plan, which he called “a plan for a new direction.”

He said that the plan is about “the American public, not about the politicians in Washington."

“For last year and a half, we’ve gone across the nation listening to Americans,” he continued. “And they’re fearful. They wonder whether they can afford it—can they afford to fill up their gas, can they go to the grocery store again which now costs more?”

Adding to these worries, McCarthy noted, is rapidly-rising inflation, which over the past year has broken record after record.

“Now [Americans’] take-home pay is less,” he said. “They only get 11 months, they lost one month of their wages, because the Democrats have caused inflation. And so what we think you should do is actually have a plan for a new direction.”

“That’s what the commitment to America is—a plan for a new direction where we’ll have an economy that’s strong, we take away this runaway spending [by] Democrats, we make America energy independent, so your price of gas goes lower, more money in your pocket, inflation gets slowed down.”

Stop ‘Runaway Spending,’ Address Inflation
The key pillars of the plan re-articulate oft-repeated GOP criticisms of the current regime.

One such position is a promise to stop Democrats’ “runaway spending.” Since they thinly took the majority of both chambers, Democrats have spent a staggering amount of money, and the cost of consumer essentials has risen by over eight percent on average.

In March 2021, the party used the partisan reconciliation process to pass a $1.9 trillion COVID relief bill dubbed the American Rescue Plan with no GOP support or input. Later, the majority party was joined by a handful of Republicans in each chamber to pass a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill.

At the same time, the party pushed for an even more expensive reconciliation, the Build Back Better Act. In its first draft, the 2,000-page bill would have cost $3.5 trillion. Later, in an effort to win the crucial support of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), that figure was dropped to $1.75 trillion, but this bill also failed when Manchin announced that he would not support the package at all.

Most recently, the party again turned to the reconciliation process to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, a bill that carried over some key elements of Build Back Better and which will cost taxpayers over $700 billion.

In total, these three bills alone come out to well over $3.8 trillion spent by the majority party over the course of only a few short years.

Republicans have been highly critical of this pattern of spending, which they argue is the largest factor behind soaring inflation that has reduced the spending power of the dollar by almost 10 percent. McCarthy made just this point.

“If you watch, how did inflation start, it wasn’t just Republicans warning the Democrats because remember, only Democrats voted for the American Rescue Plan,” McCarthy said.

McCarthy also noted that the GOP position was influential among even many Democrat economists.

“Larry Summers, a Democrat, [and] former Secretary of the Treasury warned them not to do it, you cause inflation,” McCarthy said. “Steve Rattner, an economic adviser to [President Barack Obama] calls it ‘the original sin of inflation.'”

“We’ve got to stop that runaway spending,” the California Republican added.

Restore US Energy Independence
Republicans will also seek to restore American energy independence if they take the House, McCarthy said.

Under President Donald Trump, the United States became energy independent for the first time in decades. But when he took office, President Joe Biden, citing the so-called “climate crisis,” significantly cut U.S. energy capacity by shuttering the long-debated Keystone XL Pipeline and by declaring a moratorium on new oil and natural gas leases on federal lands.

At the time, critics warned that these policies would substantially raise gas prices. When the predicted price spikes came about, Biden pulled millions of barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve rather than reversing his energy policies. Republicans joined by Joe Manchin unanimously opposed the move, calling on Biden to reverse his policies rather than pulling from U.S. reserves, which were intended to be used in case of global or financial crises.

If they take the House, McCarthy said that Republicans will work to restore America’s energy sector.

Beyond Democrats’ spending, McCarthy noted that the rising costs of energy have had a substantial impact in worsening inflation.

“Another cause of inflation is the rise of energy costs,” he said. “So we’re going to make America energy independent, create more American jobs, but lower the price. The energy cost goes in every product and good.

“We’re going to make a sound economy with sound money policies,” he added. “That’s a start to get us under control.”

‘A Nation That’s Safe’
McCarthy also said that Republicans will work to reduce crime rates.

Over the past two years, cities across the U.S. have begun to see higher and higher rates of violent crime, with many cities breaking past records for homicide rates.

Republicans have blamed the situation in part on the “soft-on-crime” attitude of Democrats and liberals in the criminal justice system.

Following the death of George Floyd in 2020, anti-police sentiments spiked among liberals, and in several major cities prosecutors and district attorneys have refused to enforce several laws.

Speaking on this issue, McCarthy said, “We believe in a nation that’s safe.”

“We watch the Democrats defund the police and crime rises—from Portland to Philadelphia, it’s the highest it’s been in 20 years,” he continued. “So we … will make sure we don’t defund the police. We’ll actually bring 200,000 more police officers, we put the accountability to these prosecutors and [district attorneys] to uphold the law fairly and equally.”

After largely evading the issue during most of the 117th Congress, Democrats on Sept. 22 finally tried to address rising crime rates with a series of policing bills that passed through the House along broadly party lines. The move, coming as it does only weeks out from a midterm election, raised eyebrows among observers after two years of largely anti-police sentiments among many Democrats.

‘A Future That’s Built on Freedom’
McCarthy also vowed that Republicans will address ongoing controversies in public schools about parents’ rights.

Schools in several major cities have faced scrutiny for the content being taught to children, which has included controversial topics like homosexuality, critical race theory, and graphic representations of nudity or sexual intercourse sometimes shown to children as young as primary school age. In turn, many parents in school districts across the United States have turned up to school board meetings to challenge the material being taught to their children.

If Republicans take the House, McCarthy promised a long-touted “parents bill of rights,” which McCarthy said would ensure that “parents have a say in their children’s education.”

The issue has increasingly become a rallying cry for Republicans.

Republican Glenn Youngkin made the issue the central pillar of his 2021 gubernatorial race in Virginia, which he later won by margins far wider than observers had predicted.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has also put focus on the issue, lobbying and successfully passing a bill that forbids schools from teaching young children about issues like sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Though critics dubbed the legislation the “don’t say gay” bill, polls on it have generally shown that most Americans support the move.

The role of parents in determining what schools teach their children has largely become a mainstream issue only in the past year or two, and it remains to be seen whether the issue can rally new voters to the GOP’s banner in November.

Investigations to ‘Hold the Government Accountable’
McCarthy also vowed that Republicans would look into a series of controversial issues and decisions by the current administration through new probes and investigative panels.

The current rules of the lower chamber give the speaker of the House substantially broad authority over the creation of new committees and probes, meaning that Republicans have largely been unable to use the full force of Congress to investigate things they find potentially concerning.

Under Republicans, McCarthy said, the government is “going to be held accountable.”

“We’re … going to look from the aspects of holding government accountable, as well as the DOJ going after parents,” McCarthy added, referencing a controversial decision from the Department of Justice to pursue parents attending school board meetings to protest their children’s curriculum.

McCarthy also promised accountability from China through a probe into the origins of the COVID-19 virus, which is now widely recognized to have likely leaked from a biological research facility in Wuhan, China.

“Why don’t we find out where the origin of COVID started,” he said.

McCarthy said that he’d also create a select committee on China that would look at ways to have U.S. industries, that were shipped there, return to America.

Republicans have also suggested probes into Dr. Anthony Fauci’s ties to the Wuhan facility, the role of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in leaving the Capitol building unprepared on Jan. 6, and the recent raid by the FBI of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home.

Undoing Democrats’ IRS Expansion
McCarthy said that if they take the House, Republicans will also work to undo Democrats’ recent expansion of the IRS.

Specifically, the expansion was included as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which sextupled the IRS’ current budget overnight.

The IRS provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act were among its most controversial.

The $80 billion allocated to the agency by the bill sextuples its budget, and Republican critics have warned that the bulked-up IRS could hire as many as 87,000 new agents. These agents, in turn, critics have said, will be let loose against middle-class Americans and small businesses, despite Democrats’ claims about the expansion that nobody making less than $400,000 per year will see their tax bill increase.

Proponents of the bill suggest that, in addition to the new tax code changes, a bulkier IRS will bring in an additional $124 billion annually through enforcement efforts.

The funding for the IRS will go toward “necessary expenses for tax enforcement activities … to determine and collect owed taxes, to provide legal and litigation support, to conduct criminal investigations (including investigative technology), to provide digital asset monitoring and compliance activities, to enforce criminal statutes related to violations of internal revenue laws and other financial crimes … and to provide other services.”

Preston Brashers, a senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, told The Epoch Times that contrary to Democrat claims, the IRS expansion will almost certainly mean more audits, and in turn more taxes, for middle-class families and small businesses.

“On the very first day, [we’re going to] repeal 87,000 IRS agents,” McCarthy said.

However, this promise may be impossible for McCarthy to keep, particularly if Democrats retain the Senate. Because the Inflation Reduction Act was passed using the filibuster-immune reconciliation process, Republicans theoretically could repeal the expansion of the IRS if they take both chambers of Congress. But even in this case, the measure would need the signature of President Biden, who’s likely to oppose any such move.

Limitations
Despite the broad range of promises and proposals discussed by McCarthy, Republicans will likely face many limitations on how much they can do, particularly if they only take the House.

Currently, Republicans seem to be on track to reenter the House majority after four years in the minority, but the Senate is less certain. Though Senate races in several states remain nail-bitingly tight, observers currently peg the fight for the Senate as leaning heavily in Democrats’ favor.

Right now, FiveThirtyEight gives Republicans a 71 in 100 chance of retaking the House after four years in the minority. But FiveThirtyEight also gives Republicans only a 29 in 100 chance of reclaiming the upper chamber.

If these projections pan out, Senate Democrats would find their scope heavily limited by the Republican House, while the Republican House would find its scope severely limited by the Senate. If the race does end in a divided government, it is likely that McCarthy will face substantial hurdles to rolling out the policy proposals in the Commitment to America plan.

On the other hand, House Republicans would have the benefit of Manchin’s swing vote, which could help them get some budget reconciliation legislation over the finish line in the Senate.

Nevertheless, even in the best case for Republicans—control of both chambers of Congress—the White House will still be occupied by a Democrat, meaning that a fully Republican Congress’s most ambitious goals would be difficult or impossible to carry out.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Nancy Pelosi Booed At NYC Festival: 'Doesn't Bode Well For Dems Ahead Of Mid-Terms'​


SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 02:00 PM

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a surprise appearance at a Saturday night music festival in New York City, called the "Global Citizen music festival". She was introduced on stage by Priyanka Chopra Jonas, wife of American singer and actor Nick Jonas, to speak about climate change and carbon pollution.

But instead of the climactic "surprise" celebratory moment that organizers were hoping for, Pelosi's presence triggered loud boos from the sizeable audience, as multiple videos from the event show...

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1574022019708080129
.14 min

"As speaker of the house, I am here to thank you for your dazzling advocacy, entrepreneurial thinking, and determination as global citizens," she told the crowd, as quoted in NY Post.

While some occasional cheers could be heard, by and large she was booed and heckled so fiercely throughout the remarks that at times she struggled to speak over the noise. The reaction of the likely largely young Democrat crowd doesn't look good for Dems ahead of the mid-term elections in November: "Crowd's reaction to Pelosi at music festival doesn't bode well for Dems," Fox observed on its homepage.

The Daily Mail has speculated the negative reaction likely stems from recognition of of the spectacle of yet another celebrity politician seen backstage with A-listers and who flies around in private jets lecturing young people about saving the planet:

Nancy Pelosi, 82, is savagely booed during appearance at NYC's Global Citizen music festival in Central Park - after schmoozing backstage with A-listers and drunk-driver husband Paul.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1573977634471550976
.12 min

"It’s thanks to your help that the United States recently enacted historic climate legislation, which will be a game changer," Pelosi said while being drowned out at time by chants and boos heard from different sectors of the venue. "It will slash carbon pollution by 40% by 2030, it will give a historic, an historic $370 billion to fight the climate crisis."

Footage which featured a broader view of the audience showed here struggling to speak for the noise...

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1574057968877780992
.26 min

One person filming is heard questioning, "Why is everyone booing?"

The Daily Mail notes further of the timing of her appearance, "Prior to her appearance on stage, many eyes were on the House Speaker as she met with celebrities in one of her first major public outings following Paul's drunk driving conviction."
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Watch: Fire Breaks Out At World's Largest Produce Market In Paris

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 10:00 AM
There are widespread reports that a huge fire broke out at a massive, well-known produce market and hub responsible for supplying much of Paris and its surrounding region with fresh food.

The Rungis market is often described as the largest fresh produce market of its kind in the world. Social media videos are widely circulating which show a huge blaze which appears to be centered on the expansive market which has been in existence for many centuries.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1574005954244485121
.45 min

Firefighters and emergency responders are on scene battling the blaze, which has resulted in plumes of smoke many stories high stretching above the French skyline.

The location is also near Paris' Orly Airport, which is likely to temporarily impact flights, with eyewitnesses playing the fire "close to the Rungis market complext just outside the airport perimeter," according to early reports.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1574010190067810305
.28 min

Along with local reports, The Associated Press has confirmed that one or more warehouses at Rungis have been engulfed in flames: "Paris firefighters are battling a warehouse blaze at a massive produce market that supplies France’s capital and its surrounding region with much of its fresh food and bills itself as the largest of its kind in the world," the report says.

"Firefighters are urging people to stay away from the area, in the south of Paris, while they tackle the blaze."

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1573997432257449990
.09 min

Since being reported early Sunday, follow-up reports from eyewitnesses suggest the mainstay of the blaze has been brought under control.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1574010235580477440
.15 min

The Rungis market is also one of the oldest functioning large food markets in the world, with the site being operational as a food and produce center going back to at least the 12th century, when various permanent structures began being erected, making it a permanent feature of the city.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Washington Post Columnist Calls For The End Of Impartiality And Balance In Journalism

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 12:30 PM
Authored by Jonathan Turley,

In an age of rage, Washington Post columnist and MSNBC contributor Jennifer Rubin has long been a standout in her attacks on Republicans and conservatives: “We have to collectively, in essence, burn down the Republican Party. We have to level them because if there are survivors, if there are people who weather this storm, they will do it again.” However, her recent column shows that she has made a clean break not only from Republicans but from reason. The writer (long cited by the Post as their “Republican columnist” for balance) has called for the media to abandon balance and impartiality. Rubin is demanding that the media just become overt advocates in refusing to report both sides in the myriad of political issues in this election.

In her column, Rubin rejects the “need for false balance” because the coverage can suggest that Republicans are “rational.”

“The Kabuki dance in which Trump, his defenders and his supporters are treated as rational (clever even!) is what comes from a media establishment that refuses to discard its need for false balance that it has developed over the course of decades.”

That balance was once called “journalism” but Rubin now calls it facilitating “disinformation.” Balanced reporting is now dangerous and makes the media “a megaphone for disinformation, upholding the pretense that there are two political parties with equally valid takes on reality.”

What is striking is how Rubin objects to the current coverage when many already object to a heavy bias in such reporting. Yet, Rubin believes the media must go further.

Rubin’s attack on disinformation is ironic given her own past controversies in misrepresenting news, cases, and events. For full disclosure, I clashed with Rubin over her personally attacking me for a theory that I did not agree with in a column that I did not write. I also challenged her on an equally bizarre column where she wrote about my impeachment testimony and later column misrepresenting the holding in an appellate case involving Trump. That false account was never corrected by the Washington Post. It appears that misrepresenting the holding of a major case is not being a “a megaphone for disinformation.”

Rubin, however, is not alone in this call to abandon the foundational principle of impartiality in journalism.

We have been discussing the rise of advocacy journalism and the rejection of objectivity in journalism schools. Writers, editors, commentators, and academics have embraced rising calls for censorship and speech controls, including President-elect Joe Biden and his key advisers. This movement includes academics rejecting the very concept of objectivity in journalism in favor of open advocacy.

Columbia Journalism Dean and New Yorker writer Steve Coll decried how the First Amendment right to freedom of speech was being “weaponized” to protect disinformation. In an interview with The Stanford Daily, Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.” He rejected the notion that the journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views “journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality.” Thus, “Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”

Lauren Wolfe, the fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled “I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That.”

Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones is a leading voice for advocacy journalism.

Indeed, Hannah-Jones has declared “all journalism is activism.” Her 1619 Project has been challenged as deeply flawed and she has a long record as a journalist of intolerance, controversial positions on rioting, and fostering conspiracy theories. Hannah-Jones would later help lead the effort at the Times to get rid of an editor and apologize for publishing a column from Sen. Tom Cotten as inaccurate and inflammatory.

These figures are killing journalism. Polls show trust in the media at an all-time low with less than 20 percent of citizens trusting television or print media. Yet, reporters and academics continue to destroy the core principles that sustain journalism and ultimately the role of a free press in our society. The result is to turn newspapers like the Post into echo chambers for the values of its reporters and a core of liberal readers.

For the rest of the country (including roughly half that voted for Trump), figures like Rubin are saying that they should go elsewhere. They are. Media outlets like CNN have faced sharp declines in viewership and are trying to break away from this advocacy model to restore ratings. (The move has been denounced by some in the media as potentially helping Republicans by fairly reporting their side of these controversies). The movement toward advocacy journalism is likely to build in the coming years to remake the media in the image of figures like Hannah-Jones and Rubin.

Viewers clearly tune in to Fox News and MSNBC for their strong editorial opinion and commentators. However, there has long been a line between reporters and commentators in how stories are presented. If journalists want to be advocates, they can shift to the side of commentary. That is clearly not sufficient for some like Rubin who do not want readers to be able to receive both sides of these controversies. Readers are to be shaped in their opinions like impressionable children. That was the message from the conference on disinformation led by media and Democratic figures like the recently fired CNN media host Brian Stelter.

Even as a columnist, I prefer the approach of Theodore White that “when a reporter sits down at the typewriter, he’s nobody’s friend.”
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Mob Of People Spontaneously Ransack Wawa Convenience Store In Philadelphia

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 03:00 PM
A mob of people entered a Wawa convenience store on Roosevelt Boulevard in Philadelphia and broke out into a riot, seemingly without warning or reason. There's no comment yet from Philadelphia police on the cause of the rampage. As the economic situation in the US continues to decline and prices continue to rise on most goods, expect to see more scenes like this one on a regular basis.

View: https://youtu.be/ghMb9xHU31s
1:02 min
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

London Banks Prepare For Possible Blackouts

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 06:20 AM
By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Banking and financial firms in London are closely studying and updating contingency electricity supply plans to protect themselves and their customers in case power outages hit the UK this winter.

Some banks are discussing the idea of again encouraging the work-from-home policies from previous Covid lockdowns or using offsite locations, representatives of the trade association UK Finance, coordinating the talks, told Bloomberg.

The UK and the rest of Europe are preparing for potential blackouts this winter, especially if the weather is colder than usual and gas and power shortages strain the grids. Governments in Europe are asking people to conserve energy to avoid rolling outages.

In the City of London, banks are paying closer attention to plans for backup power supply in case of blackouts.

“There is no sense of panic, just everyone is making sure that their ducks are in a row,” Andrew Rogan, director of operational resilience at UK Finance, told Bloomberg in an interview.

This summer, London narrowly avoided a blackout in the eastern part of the city at the end of July. While London and much of the UK were reeling from the hottest day on record in Britain, high power demand and a bottleneck on the grid left parts of East London close to blackout. The UK, however, managed to avoid a blackout in London by buying more electricity from Belgium at a mind-blowing price of $11,812 (£9,724) per megawatt-hour (MWh), which was more than 5,000% higher than the typical price.

Outside the UK, banks across Europe are bracing for energy rationing and possible power outages this winter by getting backup generators ready so that they won’t leave bank transactions and ATMs in the dark if the energy crisis worsens, sources familiar with plans told Reuters earlier this month. As governments in Europe appeal for voluntary gas and electricity conservation and even consider rationing, banks are also bracing for a difficult winter. The banking system is too important for Europe and its economy to be left affected by power outages.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

2022-2030: Transformation Or Stagnation?

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 07:30 AM
Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Some decades are easy and expansive, others are painful but necessary to lay the foundations for future progress.

Many people reject the idea of historical cycles due to their imprecision. I understand the appeal of this objection, but it is nonetheless striking that transformative decades tend to manifest in cycles rather than evenly over time.

Compare the decades of the past 70 years: 1952 to the present. How different was the culture and economy of the U.S. between 1952 and 1959?

While there was progress in civil rights and prosperity, the zeitgeist (the look, feel, values, expectations, beliefs, outlook, mood, etc.) of 1959 was not much different from that of 1952: clothing, films, the Cold War, segregation, etc. were identifiably in the same era.

Elvis, Chuck Berry, et al. enlivened popular music, but the overall impact of rock/R&B was limited to entertainment and youth culture.

Now compare the zeitgeist of 1962 and that of 1969. The zeitgeist of 1969 was nothing like the zeitgeist of 1962. It wasn't just clothing and music that changed; the values, expectations, beliefs, outlook, mood, and the political, social and economic structures had been transformed in ways that reverberated for decades to come.

The 1960s were not just tumultuous; the decade was transformative. The civil rights, feminist and environmental movements changed laws, values, culture, politics, society and the economy. Economically, the stagflation of the 1970s was a consequence of changes that occurred in the 1960s, much of it beneath the surface.

In 1969, the popular music from fifty years before (1919) might as well have been the music of a previous century. Yet here in 2022 the music of the late 1960s and early 1970s is still listened to, purchased and influential today, 50+ years later.

Cycles are often the result of the interconnecting forces of wars, economic turmoil, energy/food scarcities and large-scale economic and social forces: the transition from wood to coal, for example, or the mass immigration generated by crop failures and poverty.

The 1920s is another example of a decade of rapid transformation that laid the groundwork for the Great Depression of the 1930s. New freedoms of personal expression made the 1920s different in look and feel from the immediate post-World War I era of 1919-1920.

The 1870s was another decade that transformed economies and societies globally. The investment boom in railroads following the end of the American Civil War, the reparations imposed on France after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the end of silver coinage in the U.S., a speculative stock market boom in Europe that crashed in the Panic of 1873--all these dynamics reinforced each other, leading to a global depression that by some accounts lasted into the 1890s.

Yet despite the failure of railroads and banks and widespread unemployment and suffering, the Second Industrial Revolution continued transforming economies as coal, iron, steel, manufacturing, transport and urbanization all changed the underpinnings of global economies.

The western powers' industrial expansion drove colonization and reactions to colonization such as the Meiji Restoration of 1868 transformed Japan.

We can of course detect change in every decade of human history, but Lenin's famous exaggeration ("There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen") speaks to the way various dynamics build up beneath the surface, interact with other forces and then burst forth.

Could the world of 2030 look and feel completely different from the world of 2022, which is still coasting on the excesses of the waste is growth Landfill Economy of extreme financialization and globalization?

My guess is yes. Previous cycles emerged from financial excesses of either expansion or contraction, the aftermaths of wars, deep economic changes as energy sources expand (shifts from wood to coal and then to oil) or contract (forests depleted) and climate change (the "years without summer" in the 1630s, etc.).

Though many believe the next energy expansion is starting (fusion or other nuclear power, solar/wind), the practicalities of physics, resource depletion and cost provide little support for these projections.

For example, the U.S. would need to build hundreds of nuclear reactors in the next 20 years to make a dent in hydrocarbon consumption, yet only two reactors have been built in the past 25 years.

There is no evidence that the resources, material and financial, and the political will required to build 500 reactors in the next 20 years are available.

If a massive quantity of wind and solar power is installed over the next 20 years, all the systems that are 20 years old will need to be replaced because they're worn out. These aren't renewable, they're replaceable.

Thus we face an energy contraction at the same time as the extremes of financialization and globalization that have driven expansion unravel.

This unraveling won't be linear, i.e. gradual and predictable. It will be non-linear and unpredictable, with apparently modest changes collapsing supply chains and speculative excesses.

Extremes of inequality and repression act as pendulums. Once they reach the maximum endpoint of momentum, they reverse and trace a line to the opposite extreme, minus a bit of friction.

Many of these dynamics are already visible. What's not yet visible is the rapid acceleration and mutual reinforcement of these dynamics.

Eras of expansion may be liberating and fun, but there is no guarantee that the liberation and fun will be evenly distributed.

Eras of contraction are rarely fun, and the misery is widely distributed. Whether we like it or not, the era of the waste is growth Landfill Economy is ending in what promises to be a non-linear process.

But that doesn't mean the eventual result won't be positive. Tumultuous transformations can set the stage for more widely distributed prosperity and liberation. Some decades are easy and expansive, others are painful but necessary to lay the foundations for future progress. Which will 2022-2030 be? Stay tuned.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

US Inflates Debt Away After Historic Pandemic Binge; Comes At Risk​

SUNDAY, SEP 25, 2022 - 01:55 AM

A high debt-to-GDP level and over $30 trillion in public debt have become a massive problem and a political hot potato in Washington.

It appears the Biden administration and the Federal Reserve have chosen the route to inflate some of the debt away racked up during the virus pandemic.

High inflation rates (currently like what we see today) can reduce the real value of debt, allowing governments to, in effect, pay off debts using money worth less than when they originally borrowed it.

Bloomberg pointed out that "one of its most surprising direct offshoots" of rising inflation has "largely gone unnoticed: U.S. government debt is shrinking rapidly."

But it's not in dollar terms. It's measured against the inflated size of the economy.



There's a challenging trade-off through inflating the debt away, which is the government's gain at the lender's expense. This means bondholders will be repaid by the government much less than they initially put up.

So while inflation makes old debt more manageable for the government to service, it also makes new debt more expensive; and inflating the debt away comes with other consequences.

If investors, businesses, and households, expect higher inflation, it could lead to a doom loop of soaring inflation expectations.

Ricardo Reis, a professor at the London School of Economics, recently told NPR News in an interview that over the last century, "hyperinflation" started when "governments have such a large debt pile that they found themselves unable to collect the taxes to pay for it, resorted to inflation ..."

"This is pretty much every hyperinflation the world has experienced in the last 100 years, with only a few exceptions. Almost every hyperinflation was the result of a government having such a large debt that they found themselves unable to collect the taxes to pay for it, resorted to inflation, and that started a spiral that led to the whole value of the debt certainly going to zero with hyperinflation, but also the government being completely unable to borrow at all and, in the process, destroying its economy."

In a more recent interview, Matthew Piepenburg, Commercial Director at Matterhorn Asset Management, told Kitco News:

Yet rate hikes are "disingenuous" since the Fed has no intention of fighting inflation, Piepenburg claims.

"When you've got 8 to 9 percent CPI inflation, you're not going to fight that with a 4 percent, 3 percent, or even 5 percent Fed Funds Rate, which we can't even afford," he explained. "The truth is that the Fed, like most central banks throughout history, wants inflation to be higher than interest rates."

He suggested that the U.S. is a "debt-soaked nation who has its back against the wall," and would reduce the Fed Funds Rate to "inflate away its debt."

"I think Powell is seeking inflation," said Piepenburg. "The only reason they're raising rates today is not to fight inflation. It's so they'll have some [reason] to cut [rates] when the real recession becomes an official recession."


Based on the current rate of unemployment and inflation, the Taylor Rule
suggests Fed Funds should be over 9%.



The fact that Fed Funds is nowhere near where the rule states may suggest Piepenburg could be right about the Fed's intentions to inflate away government debt.

Listen to Piepenburg's full interview here:

View: https://youtu.be/f9-EdC_EtLs
21:19 min

So shrinking pandemic debt may seem like a solution for the government and Federal Reserve, but if history is any guide, this could lead to even more economic problems.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
FBI Whistleblower: 'Following Orders Is Not An Excuse'- Illegal, Immoral & Unethical - Bongino 2:11 min

FBI Whistleblower: 'Following Orders Is Not An Excuse'- Illegal, Immoral & Unethical - Bongino​

Red Voice Media Published September 25, 2022

"...the Nuremberg peace, it doesn't. It doesn't fly, we know better. Like that's the whole point of history. We're supposed to be able to see that."
^^^
Whistleblower Reveals FBI Is Targeting The 1st Amendment Rights Of American Citizens - Dan Bongino 4:48 min

Whistleblower Reveals FBI Is Targeting The 1st Amendment Rights Of American Citizens - Dan Bongino​

Red Voice Media Published September 25, 2022

"32 minutes after the podcast went live on Thursday, I got an email from FBI headquarters"
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Communist China & Liberal America: What's The Difference? - Dan Bongino 6:04 min

Communist China & Liberal America: What's The Difference? - Dan Bongino​

Red Voice Media Published September 25, 2022

"We talk about China or the liberal versus the United States. Because if you actually put the two side by side, like, here's China, here's the United States, this weird thing happens, they start to look alike. So we're gonna ask tonight, is there a difference?"
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
White House Adviser Adds Fuel to the Fire, Calling MAGA Movement 'a Danger to Our Way of Life' 2:19 min

White House Adviser Adds Fuel to the Fire, Calling MAGA Movement 'a Danger to Our Way of Life'​

The Vigilant Fox Published September 25, 2022

Keisha Lance: "When you have a MAGA Republican agenda that has no respect for the Constitution — that has no respect for free and fair elections, then it is important for all of us ... to call it out for what it is. It is a danger to our democracy. It is a danger to our way of life."
 
Top