Similar Threads
Whats your best money management method? 52 replies
How to flow with the order flow? 26 replies
Money Management / Risk Management 24 replies
Money management model for multiple strategy trading method 16 replies
Most popular money management method. 7 replies
- Post #9,241
- Quote
- Oct 10, 2020 10:25pm Oct 10, 2020 10:25pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,242
- Quote
- Edited 11:46pm Oct 10, 2020 11:24pm | Edited 11:46pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany dared to 'spew' what many call 'hate speech' this week when she tweeted about the extreme and obvious bias (some might say it's systemic) from the Commission on Presidential Debates...
What drove Kayleigh to such un-presidential comments? Hmm, let's see... <sarcasm off>
- Chris Wallace, moderator of the first presidential debate, was widely panned for his non-centrist bias during the chaotic to and fro. Having expressly stated before the event that he wouldn't operate as a fact-checker, that's all he did for at least the first hour of the debate; interrupting Trump but not Biden at nearly every turn, blocking the incumbent before he could correct mischaracterizations and flat-out lies from Biden, to full-throated arguments with the president despite lobbing soft-ball questions — or no questions at all — to the former vice president, Wallace's presentation was appalling.
- Susan Page, moderator the vice-presidential debate, was far better than Wallace but, aside from the fact the fact she is Nancy Pelosi's biographer, her bias was exposed numerous times including highlighting the horrid state of the economy without mentioning that the economy was historically booming before COVID-lockdowns were enforced, cutting off VP Pence numerous times and allowing Senator Harris to escape answering key questions (will you pack the courts?).
- Steve Scully, moderator for the second presidential debate, had previously interned for Joe Biden and tweeted a 'Never-Trump' article in 2016 "No, Not Trump, Not Ever", was caught red-handed in an accidental public tweet to none other than disgrintled former White House Comms Director Anthony Scaramucci on "responding to Trump" (which he later claimed was a hack - the third time the so-called reporter's account had been hacked).
- And finally, the Commission on Presidential Debates has now refused to change the format of the second presidential debate from 'virtual', directly ignoring the 'science' and the words of the 'doctors' who plainly said Trump is healthy (all of which has led to the cancellation of the second debate).
So, is it just us that puts all of this together and suspects an ever-so-modest amount of systemic bias within the commission against the president and for 'anyone-but-Trump'?
Well, it just got a whole lot more real, as Revolver.com reports, it turns out the chairman of the Presidential Debate Commission is co-founder an organization called "Color Revolution" which has strong links to the Steele Dossier and more...
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...2048x1268.jpeg
The nominally Republican Chairman of Presidential Debate Commission, Frank Fahrenkopf, is both a co-founder and current board member of the International Republican Institute (IRI), a top “Color Revolution” propaganda outfit. The IRI was run by Never Trump neoconservative John McCain for decades. It is closely linked to the thoroughly discredited Steele Dossier at the center of the Russia Hoax.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...ff6259eea9.png
Frank Fahrenkopf, Co-Chair of Commission on Presidential Debates, Co-Founder of National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and International Republican Institute (IRI).
At first glance, it might appear as though Fahrenkopf’s Republican Party membership, combined with his board membership at the International Republican Institute, lends him, and by extension the Debate Commission, some semblance of balance.
The Debate Commission’s board has a Republican Co-Chair and a Democrat co-Chair, creating the appearance of fairness and bipartisanship. Nothing could be further from the truth. Bipartisanship in the Trump era all too often means that the corrupt establishment elements of both parties join arms to undermine Trump and his agenda. A Debate Commission consisting of John McCain and Hillary Clinton would be technically bipartisan, but it would not be balanced when it comes to Trump and his supporters. Globalist Republicans and globalist Democrats have far more in common with each other than they do with Trump.
Our choice of John McCain in this example was not arbitrary. As it turns out, the late Senator John McCain served as the Chairman of the Board of the International Republican Institute for 25 years.
Just months before he died, John McCain took to Twitter to scold the Trump Administration for allegedly defunding the organization.
The Washington Post article in the above tweet reveals that George Soros’ Open Society Foundation was furious that Trump would dare to “downscale” a “democracy promotion event” at the State Department.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...0_12-40-41.jpg
Source: The Washington Post
Perhaps McCain was just standing up for his friend Soros, who, incidentally, was a major contributor to the McCain Foundation.
That the current Co-Chair of the Debate Commission Frank Fahrenkopf is himself a sitting board member and Co-Founder of IRI offers insight into just what kind of Republican he is and what sort of balance his Chairmanship really provides — in reality it weighs the scales even more heavily against Trump.
Fahrenkopf’s colleagues on the IRI board include Lindsey Graham, H.R. McMaster, and Senator Mitt Romney. This does not exactly inspire confidence for Trump supporters. By now, it is very clear exactly the type of Republican this organization caters to.
One of Fahrenkopf’s colleagues on the IRI board is especially outrageous — a man by the name of David Kramer.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...02ad049501.png
David Kramer, Board Member, International Republican Institute.
Kramer was an aide to the late Senator John McCain. He is most notorious for spreading the completely discredited Steele Dossier that served as the basis for the Russia Hoax.
David Kramer, the John McCain aide who leaked the discredited Christopher Steele dossier on President Trump, testified in a libel case that he spread the unsubstantiated anti-Trump material all over Washington during the presidential transition.
Mr. Kramer, a former State Department official and a Trump detractor, leaked dossier material to the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post’s Fred Hiatt, CNN’s Carl Bernstein, National Public Radio, McClatchy news service and others, he said. [AP]
Prior to his role at IRI, Kramer served as head of yet another “democracy promotion” NGO called Freedom House. In the following clip, Kramer offers some additional insight on where he stands politically. He notes that Freedom House was founded to fight four “isms” — fascism, nazism, communism and … isolationism. Isolationism is of course a smear word used to refer to the position of people like President Trump and the majority of the American people who reject the Bush-McCain foreign policy of forever wars and democracy promotion. That Kramer would conflate this position with nazism and communism is quite remarkable.
We could go into quite a bit more on this maniacally unhinged globalist, but for now we will turn to another recent member of IRI’s board named Scott Carpenter:
Scott Carpenter is the director of free expression at Google Ideas where he drives implementation of the team’s overall strategy to make online repressive censorship irrelevant. Prior to joining Google, Carpenter founded and directed Project Fikra as the Keston family fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, where he remains an adjunct scholar. [IRI]
For those unfamiliar, “Google Ideas” is the precursor to Google Jigsaw, which is Google’s in-house think tank tasked with developing Artificial Intelligence technology to censor so-called “toxic hate speech” online. Revolver briefly covered the Jigsaw program and its founder Jared Cohen in a recent piece as follows:
Infamously biased anti-Trump Tech behemoth Google sponsors a project known as Jigsaw whose main purpose is to develop Artificial Intelligence capabilities to censor so-called “hate speech” online. Of course, hate speech is weakly defined, and almost always ends up casting a wide net. Inevitably, those censored tend to be Trump supporters concerned with law and order, fighting open borders, and ending America’s wars. The man who runs Jigsaw, Jared Cohen, is a veteran of Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Cohen made a name for himself in developing digital strategies to advance American national security objectives. [Revolver News]
CNBC has more on Jigsaw.
Jigsaw, a technology incubator within Alphabet, says it has developed a new tool for web publishers to identify toxic comments that can undermine a civil exchange of ideas. Starting Thursday, publishers can start applying for access to use Jigsaw’s software, called Perspective, without charge.
“We have more information and more articles than any other time in history, and yet the toxicity of the conversations that follow those articles are driving people away from the conversation,” said Jared Cohen, president of Jigsaw, formerly known as Google Ideas. [CNBC]
Carpenter’s name no longer appears on IRI’s listing of board members. His official Twitter page now lists his current title as Managing Director at Jigsaw. To get a sense of what this (former?) board member of the International Republican Institute and current managing director of Google’s AI tool to censor “hate speech” thinks about Trump, see the following tweet.
“Bipartisan” opposition to Trump, just as we suspected. Here is another instructive tweet, retweeted and endorsed by Carpenter.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...03905132e4.png
Michael Hayden, readers will recall, is a virulently anti-Trump former head of the CIA and NSA.
This consummate Deep State operative oversaw the development of the massive domestic surveillance program that he lied about both to foreign leaders and to the American people.
Hayden has a long history of making misleading and outright false statements, and by the estimation of many lawyers, likely committed countless felonies during the Bush administration. It is something of a wonder that someone responsible for so many reprehensible acts is now considered a totally above-the-fray, honest commentator on all issues intelligence. [Columbia Journalism Review]
While we don’t know whether Scott Carpenter is still on the board of IRI, we do know that he was recently appointed to the board of its parent NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
The IRI is one of four grantees of the NED, and is therefore entirely dependent on it for its funding. The NED is one of the major NGO arms advancing US Government objectives abroad, particularly by supporting the Color Revolution regime change model (more on that later). NED was founded to function as a new, improved CIA.
This provides more context to NED and Scott Carpenter’s approving quote of former CIA Director Hayden.
NED’s mandate is to focus on “democracy promotion” (Color Revolutions) abroad, but it couldn’t keep from weighing in on the death of George Floyd as BLM and Antifa terrorists were burning down Minneapolis.
The brutal killing of George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis has provoked an outpouring of anger and rage that the United States has not seen since the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. more than fifty years ago. Our democracy is being tested as never before in the memory of most living Americans. We will not overcome this crisis and begin to heal our divided nation unless the four police officers responsible for the killing of George Floyd are prosecuted to the full extent of the law,
and unless America commits itself fully to the principles of racial justice and equality for all citizens.
The NED’s mission of supporting people around the world who are fighting for democracy is
based upon the same values of freedom and human equality that inspired the movement for civil rights that ended the Jim Crow system of legalized racial segregation and discrimination in the United States. Those values are rooted in the American creed, and it was by appealing to them that the civil rights movement achieved its historic breakthrough. But much more needs to be done to carry forward the struggle to end racism. By doing so, we will be more united and stronger as a country. [NED]
The current President of the International Republican Institute, the grant subsidiary of NED, fully concurs.
Twining, the current head of the IRI, was previously at the Soros-funded German Marshall Fund, whose Vice President recently had this say about President Trump.
Prior to his employment at the German Marshall Fund, Twining distinguished himself as a legislative aide for arch-neoconservative and Trump nemesis Senator John McCain!
By now we have a good idea of what the IRI is about, and have gained a deeper sense of just what a scandal it is that the “Republican” co-chair and co-founder of the Debate Commission, Frank Fahrenkopf, is also a sitting board member and co-founder of this shadowy organization. The IRI is deeply and intimately associated with one of Trump’s most vicious rivals, whose board members have promoted the discredited Steele dossier and are openly supporting Biden on Twitter.
IRI’s official stated position on the George Floyd issue is directly in keeping with the rhetorical narratives fueling the Antifa and BLM fires that are part and parcel of the Color Revolution against Trump. The notion that Fahrenkopf’s status as a registered Republican provides any kind balance when it comes to the presidential debates is laughable and absurd.
But the story is actually much bigger and more sinister than even the above would suggest. Indeed, the IRI and the Debate Commission are not merely partisan. Careful readers will have already picked up a disturbing national security element to the IRI and its parent NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy.
Both the IRI and the NED function primarily as organizations to promote Color Revolutions abroad. The term “Color Revolution” requires a brief bit of explanation for readers who have not yet read Revolver News’ series on the Color Revolution regime change model and its role in the coup against Trump.
First, a quick note on Color Revolutions. A “Color Revolution” in this context refers to a specific type of coordinated attack that the United States government has been known to deploy against foreign regimes, particularly in Eastern Europe deemed to be “authoritarian” and hostile to American interests. Rather than using a direct military intervention to effect regime change as in Iraq, Color Revolutions attack a foreign regime by contesting its electoral legitimacy, organizing mass protests and acts of civil disobedience, and leveraging media contacts to ensure favorable coverage to their agenda in the Western press.
It would be disturbing enough to note a coordinated effort to use these exact same strategies and tactics domestically to undermine or overthrow President Trump. The ominous nature of what we see unfolding before us only truly hits home when one realizes that the people who specialize in these Color Revolution regime change operations overseas are, literally, the very same people attempting to overthrow Trump by using the very same playbook. [Revolver News]
The IRI is clearly a Color Revolution outfit, as it is one of the most prominent United States government-linked NGOs tasked with providing “democratization support” abroad. Rudimentary research on the IRI — or even a brief scroll through its Twitter feed — reveals its obsession with such efforts overseas. Here is a representative tweet from IRI President Twining.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...47088dcb2.jpeg
The fixation on Belarus, whose combination of a contested election scenario and massive “peaceful protests” bears all the hallmarks of a Color Revolution, is revealing. We urge readers to read Revolver’s first Color Revolution installment, The Curious Case of George Kent, for further context:
The similarity between the Atlanticist-backed Belarus riots and the way the organized ANTIFA and BLM protests operate in the United States is impossible to ignore. Indeed, many of the Color Revolution experts currently fixated on Belarus have explicitly made this comparison in relation to the United States. The Transatlantic Democracy Working Group (more about them later) is a deeply anti-Trump so-called “bipartisan” group that is essentially a Who’s Who of every influential Color Revolution regime-change NGO in the World.
...
Many have noticed theoretical parallels and similarities between how US State Department and associated Atlanticist NGOs run color revolutions in foreign countries, and the sustained operations targeted against Trump in the United States. The case of George Kent — and many others to be exposed in this series — demonstrates that these similarities are not merely theoretical—they literally involve the same people! The very same people running cover revolution operations in Ukraine and Eastern Europe have been using the very same playbook to overturn 2016 and destroy the legitimacy of President Trump’s election.
And guess who runs the Belarus station at the State Department? If you guessed star never Trump impeachment witness George Kent, the “color revolution professional,” you might be right. [Revolver News]
In his tweet above, Twining favorably quotes David Kramer, his fellow board member at IRI who shopped the Steele Dossier. Kramer once served in a diplomatic post in Eastern Europe. In fact, almost every major operative in the effort to overthrow Trump has or has had a diplomatic post in Eastern Europe. Kramer happened to serve from 2005-2008 as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of European and Eurasian Affairs — working on issues related to Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. George Kent currently occupies this very same post. What a coincidence!
Revolver’s Color Revolution thesis explains why there is such an overlap between State Department officials focused on Eastern Europe and key never-Trump operatives — from Lt. Colonel Vindman to Fiona Hill to Yovanovich to George Kent and David Kramer. They are running an Eastern European-style Color Revolution against Trump because they are Color Revolution professionals used to deploying the same strategies and tactics against target regimes in Eastern Europe.
Note the name McFaul in the above Belarus Tweet. Michael McFaul is yet another professional covered in Revolver’s previous reports. Also note the wording of the title of the NBC News piece referenced in the Tweet: “Belarus is on the edge of a democratic breakthrough.”
McFaul elucidated precisely what he meant by a “democratic breakthrough” in a deleted tweet that was perhaps too honest about his intentions.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...04faaa1e5e.png
If you are still unconvinced that IRI and its parent NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy aren’t principally Color Revolution outfits, consider these passages from the Senate Subcommittee on European Affairs from July 29, 1999. In this remarkable exchange, Soros representative J. Fox explains to Senator Joe Biden the role of organizations like IRI, NED, and IRI’s sister NGO, NDI in the “democracy promotion” process.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...05385b7fec.png
Here Biden calls to give Serbia’s “peaceful protesters” walking money to facilitate their overthrow of Milosevic.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...5-2048x761.png
And here is Biden learning about the NED, IRI, and NDI from Soros Foundation representative Fox, who details the IRI-NDI operational procedures to Biden.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...-2048x1455.png
Continuing along this line, Fox complains that the resources devoted to Color Revolution NGOs like NED and IRI in Croatia have not yet been deployed in Serbia (Spoiler Alert: they got their way and effected a Color Revolution against Milosevic called “Otpor!”).
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...058c38d1d4.png
It is worth noting that in Color Revolution craft, the terms “democracy” and “democratization,” like the term “peaceful protest,” are actually terms of art. As McFaul’s own tweet suggests, “democratic breakthrough” is the preferred euphemism for Color Revolution. Here is additional insight on how and why these people use the word “democracy,” taken from the third installment of Revolver’s Color Revolution series.
And there we have it, folks—Norm Eisen, former Obama Ethics Czar, Ambassador to Czechoslovakia during the “Velvet Revolution,” key counsel in impeachment effort against Trump, and participant in the ostensibly bi-partisan election war games predicting a contested election scenario unfavorable to Trump—just happens to be a Color Revolution expert who literally wrote the modern “Playbook” in the explicitly acknowledged tradition of Color Revolution Godfather Gene Sharp’s “From Dictatorship to Democracy.”
Before we turn to the contents of Norm Eisen’s Color Revolution manual, full title “The Democracy Playbook: Preventing and Reversing Democratic Backsliding,” it will be useful to make a brief point regarding the term “democracy” itself, which happens to appear in the title of Gene Sharp’s book “From Dictatorship to Democracy” as well.
Just like the term “peaceful protestor,” which, as we pointed out in our George Kent essay is used as a term of craft in the Color Revolution context, so is the term “democracy” itself. The US Government launches Color Revolutions against foreign targets irrespective of whether they actually enjoy the support of the people or were elected democratically. In the case of Trump, whatever one says about him, he is perhaps the most “democratically” elected President in America’s history. Indeed, in 2016 Trump ran against the coordinated opposition of the establishments of both parties, the military industrial complex, the corporate media, Hollywood, and really every single powerful institution in the country. He won, however, because he was able to garner sufficient support of the people—his true and decisive power base as a “populist.” Precisely because of the ultra democratic “populist” character of Trump’s victory, the operatives attempting to undermine him have focused specifically on attacking the democratic legitimacy of his victory.
In this vein we ought to note that the term “democratic backsliding,” as seen in the subtitle of Norm Eisen’s book, and its opposite “democratic breakthrough” are also terms of art in the Color Revolution lexicon. We leave the full exploration of how the term “democratic” is used deceptively in the Color Revolution context (and in names of decidedly anti-democratic/populist institutions) as an exercise to the interested reader. Michael McFaul, another Color Revolution expert and key anti-Trump operative somewhat gives the game away in the following tweet in which the term “democratic breakthrough” makes an appearance as a better sounding alternative to “Color Revolution.” [Revolver News]
We conclude this installment by returning to the key subject of the piece, Debate Commission Co-Chair and Co-Founder Frank Fahrenkopf.
The fact that Fahrenkopf is chair of the Commission on Presidential Debates and a co-founder and current board member of IRI takes on a more interesting and sinister overtone when we consider the affiliation of his co-chair, Kenneth Wollack.
Prior to his appointment as Co-Chair of the Commission on Presidential debates, Wollack Served as President of the National Democratic Institute (NDI). Like the IRI, the NDI is also an NGO whose purpose is to aid “democracy” efforts overseas — in other words, to serve as a propaganda arm promoting Color Revolution efforts on behalf of the US Government.
Although the IRI is staffed mostly with Republicans and NDI mostly with Democrats, the IRI and NDI are “sister organizations” as two of the four core grantees of the National Endowment for Democracy, which is itself a major umbrella group responsible for aiding Color Revolution efforts. In fact, Debate Commission Co-Chair and Co-Founder Frank Fahrenkopf also co-founded the National Endowment for Democracy, and served as board member and vice chair from 1983-1993.
What does all of this mean? For one, it is rather odd that the commission would have one chair, Fahrenkopf, who co-founded NED and who still sits on the board of IRI, which he also co-founded, and another Chair, Kenneth Wollack, who previously ran NDI. In fact, Fahrenkopf co-founded the Commission on Presidential Debates with Paul Kirk, who, like Wollack, had previously served as President of NDI. Taken alone, the deeply rooted connections between the Commission on Presidential Debates and Color Revolution NGOs (IRI, NDI, NED) would be suspicious in its own right.
This connection becomes positively explosive, however, when one considers it within the context of Revolver’s thesis that the coup being run against Trump is based on the Color Revolution regime change model. The same people, the same networks, and the same institutions tasked with Color Revolutions abroad are the key players in deploying the same strategies here at home against our democratically elected President, Donald J. Trump. As we have shown in this fourth installment of the series, these biased debates are literally being run by the people and institutions tasked with revolutionary propaganda efforts abroad — and this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Stay tuned.
- Post #9,243
- Quote
- Edited 7:37am Oct 11, 2020 7:20am | Edited 7:37am
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
48
Blog/Conspiracy
Posted Oct 11, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...orld-Reset.jpg
What is becoming increasingly clear is that those in strategic power countries have been bribed to impose lockdowns etc, and other countries have followed their lead assuming they are correct. The Flu deaths and real COVID are about the same. Governments have NEVER shut down the world economy for the Flu. It is obvious that there has been a covert operation behind bribing politicians most likely in Germany, Britain, Canada, and Australia for starters. We would NEVER have closed the world economy for the upcoming flu season. The number of doctors coming out against COIVID keeps growing. The more that comes out, the more others are encouraged to speak the truth.
Video Player
00:00
01:02
The press is corrupt and is working very hard to destroy our culture and society. You do not find it in the mainstream press in Germany. They keep trying to pretend these protests do not exist. They are the imagination of “conspiracy theorists” so there is nothing to report.
I am warning right now, Europe is risking a violent uprising if it keeps this Great Reset agenda of Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates. From February onward there is a risk of civil unrest against this absurd agenda. Schwab with his vision of the Fourth Industrial Revolution all built of green energy is the fantasy of a typical academic. Nobody created the industrial revolution. No government invented the steam engine which set it in motion and they NEVER designed or managed it.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w.../Sherman-1.jpg
In fact, the government ALWAYS interferes and suppresses economic innovation. Britain imposed a law that anyone driving a new-fangled automobile had to have a man walk before it with a horn and a flag to warn people one of these machines was coming. By 1890, the merge of all these small railroad companies led to the Marxist intervention known as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Sherman saw that mergers reduced jobs. The internet has been created in the very same way. Small startups are bought out and further the advancement of the whole.
Schwab is so wrong it is laughable. It demonstrates that academics cannot learn everything without experience. Communism collapsed for the very same reason that a planned society cannot replace human ingenuity because bureaucrats, like academics, lack the experience to actually see how the economy evolves.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...rldEconomy.jpg
These people are HIGHLY dangerous for they are fulfilling what our computer has been forecasting – the collapse of Western Civilization and the shift to China of the financial capital of the world. We DESPERATELY need to stop these people. They are destroying our future and that of our children because of their arrogance and lack of experience. If they remove Trump, they win for he is the ONLY person who would dare to prosecute any of these people.
Categories: Conspiracy, Corruption, Disease, Tyranny
« California Doctor Treated over 1700 COVID Patients = 0 Deaths
- Post #9,244
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 7:51am Oct 11, 2020 7:51am
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,245
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 11:44am Oct 11, 2020 11:44am
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,246
- Quote
- Edited 2:09pm Oct 11, 2020 12:21pm | Edited 2:09pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
October 11, 2020
Trump Gets Fifth Nobel Peace Prize Nomination As His Supporters Face Democrat Internment Camps
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers
An interesting new Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) report circulating in the Kremlin today noting the answers given by President Putin asked of him by Rossiya TV journalist Pavel Zarubin on 7 October, says least understood of them by most Americans was his reply when asked about socialist Democrat Party leader Joe Biden—to which President Putin stated:
“As for the Democratic candidate, what can I say? We can hear rather sharp anti-Russian rhetoric as well. Regrettably, we have become used to this. But some things are worth mentioning. First, the Democratic Party is traditionally closer to the so-called liberal values, closer to Social Democratic ideas, if compared to Europe. And it was from the Social Democratic environment that the Communist Party evolved.
After all, I was a member of the Soviet Communist Party for nearly 20 years, or more precisely 18 years. I was a rank-and-file member, but it can be said that I believed in the party’s ideas. I still like many of these left-wing values. Equality and fraternity. What is bad about them? In fact, they are akin to Christian values. Yes, they are difficult to implement, but they are very attractive, nevertheless. In other words, this can be seen as an ideological basis for developing contacts with the Democratic representative.
It is a fact that African Americans constitute a stable electorate, one of the electorates of the Democratic Party. It is a well-known fact, and there is nothing new about this. The Soviet Union also supported the African Americans’ movement for their legitimate rights. Back in the 1930s, Communist International leaders wrote that both black and white workers had a common enemy – imperialism and capitalism. They also wrote that these people could become the most effective group in the future revolutionary battle.
So, this is something that can be seen, to a degree, as common values, if not a unifying agent for us. I am not afraid to say so. This is true.”
A statement that quickly lead to scores of articles being published like “Vladimir Putin Ties Democrats To Soviet Communists And Says He Would Be Happy to Work with Joe Biden” and “Putin Says He Wants To Work With Biden; You Know, Those ‘Shared Values’ Between Democrats And Communists”—all of which are gross distortions of what President Putin meant—as they omitted the historical context underlying President Putin’s words, that are best exampled in his having previously stated about the communist Soviet Union he grew up in: “Whoever does not miss the Soviet Union has no heart…Whoever wants it back has no brain”—what he previously stated about the rising socialist forces in America and the European Union: “Any fourth grade history student knows socialism has failed in every country, at every time in history”—and what he previously stated while watching the Obama-Clinton Regime forcing their socialist ideology on the American people: “President Obama and his fellow Democrats are either idiots or deliberately trying to destroy their own economy”.
And when viewed in its correct historical context, saw President Putin doing nothing more than explaining the obvious fact that all Russian peoples having lived under brutal socialist-communist ideology, like these Democrats are now espousing, see nothing new about what is happening in the United States—a fact that allows Russia to see how these socialist Democrats are beguiling people with Christian-like religious fervor in order to foment a race-class revolution—but whose absurd and glaring inconsistencies of logic and thought, like displayed in all socialist-communist nations throughout history, is the weakness that enables them to be exploited when working with them—with this best being exampled over the past 24-hours—a time period wherein President Donald Trump was historically nominated for a fifth Nobel Peace Prize at the same time socialist Democrats began demanding that President Trump and his supporters be prosecuted, convicted and removed from society. [Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/ip21.jpg
According to this report, with President Putin and the Russian government having forgotten more about failed socialist-communist ideology than these socialist Democrats could ever learn in their entire lifetimes, it makes these socialist forces trying to tear America apart as predictable in their actions as the sun rising in the east every morning—so of course after Vice President Mike Pence destroyed socialist Democrat Party leader Kamala Harris during their debate this past week, the Commission on Presidential Debates immediately cancelled this week’s debate between President Trump and socialist Democrat Party leader Joe Biden—a debate commission led by Frank Fahrenkopf, who is the co-founder of an organization called “Color Revolution” that has strong links to the Steele Dossier and more—the same Fahrenkopf who picked socialist journalist Steve Scully to moderate the now cancelled Trump-Biden debate—the same Steve Scully caught sending out anti-Trump messages this past week, but who now claims he was hacked, though he fails to explain how this was possible as these messages came from his own iPhone—all of which caused revered American statesman, and World War II combat hero former US Senator Bob Dole to message out: “The Commission on Presidential Debates is supposedly bipartisan w/ an equal number of Rs and Ds…I know all of the Republicans and most are friends of mine… I am concerned that none of them support @realDonaldTrump…A biased Debate Commission is unfair”—though most critical of all to notice about, is that distractions such as this keep hidden from the American people exactly what these godless socialist Democrats are really planning—that they actually don’t make any secret about, as best evidenced in the 3 September article published in the scientific journal The Cell titled “Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19”—that was co-authored by radical leftist US government scientist Dr. Anthony Fauci—and calls for the total destruction of America and its society so its peoples can “reconsider the nature of our relationship to the natural world” in order to make them “think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature”—a harmony with nature, however, that most notably doesn’t include God or religion.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/ip22.jpg
In order for these socialist Democrats to begin their destruction of America and throw all of President Trump’s prosecuted and convicted supporters in interment camps to be reeducated or exterminated, this report details, they must first place in power their leader Joe Biden—who yesterday attended a rally of about a dozen of his supporters, whom Biden told to sit down when he began to speak, but saw him failing to notice that they were all standing in white circles without any seats to sit in—after which Biden told these people “You’re trying your BREAST, but it never feels like enough”—then saw him calling for a $15-million an hour minimum wage—that he corrected to a $15-thousand an hour minimum wage—with his finally settling on a $15 an hour minimum wage—and saw him ending his ramblings by telling his supporters: “The only way we lose this is by the chicanery going on relative to polling places”—a word meaning the use of trickery to achieve a political, financial, or legal purpose—and when looking at America today, sees the only “chicanery” happening being to help Biden steal this election—best evidenced over the past 24-hours alone that’s seen over 11,000 voters in North Carolina receiving voter registration forms with incorrect information—sees the largest socialist Democrat Party county in Ohio sending nearly 50,000 voters the wrong ballot—and in Pennsylvania, sees nearly 60,000 ballots in the Trump-heavy county of Westmorland now having gone mysteriously missing.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/ip23.jpg
As to why these demonic socialist Democrats need “chicanery” to get their leader Joe Biden elected, this report concludes, can be seen in that at the same time Biden was rambling demented nonsense to his dozen supporters, President Trump was greeting thousands of his cheering supporters at the White House—while at the same time, Vice President Mike Pence was greeting 4,000 cheering Trump supporters in Florida, that in itself was more supporters then all of those combined at all of Biden’s rallies this year—that was followed by the massive over 30,000 car parade of Hispanic Trump supporters in Miami-Florida—and one can safely assume are cheering Trump supporters included the new Gallop poll showing that the vast majority of the American people are saying their lives are better off under President Trump than they were under the Obama-Biden regime—lives about to get even better under President Trump, as evidenced by the staggering transportation crisis hitting America as its companies and citizens keep buying everything they can—so much so, in fact, America’s high wage paying auto supplies companies are now desperate for workers—all of which brings to mind the truism used to great effect by the last near-normal socialist Democrat Party leader President Bill Clinton—who won his two elections by remembering the words of his top campaign advisor James Carville about what every presidential election is really all about: “It’s The Economy, Stupid!”
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/ip24.jpg
October 11, 2020 EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.
[Note: Many governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human being’s right to know the truth. Due to our mission’s conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their ‘agents’ has been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit us, and others like us, that is exampled in numerous places, including HERE.]
[Note: The WhatDoesItMean.com website was created for and donated to the Sisters of Sorcha Faal in 2003 by a small group of American computer experts led by the late global technology guru Wayne Green (1922-2013) to counter the propaganda being used by the West to promote their illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq.]
[Note: The word Kremlin (fortress inside a city) as used in this report refers to Russian citadels, including in Moscow, having cathedrals wherein female Schema monks (Orthodox nuns) reside, many of whom are devoted to the mission of the Sisters of Sorcha Faal.]
Tsarina Hillary Clinton Is Going To Prison—It's Not If Anymore, It's When
Best Kept Secret Of Science Explains Everything About Trump And 2020
Return To Main Page
- Post #9,247
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 1:53pm Oct 11, 2020 1:53pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,248
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 2:08pm Oct 11, 2020 2:08pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,249
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 5:55pm Oct 11, 2020 5:55pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
Yuan Slides After China Makes It Easier To Short Currency, Signals "Discomfort" With Recent CNY Surge
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...?itok=LY4e264-
by Tyler Durden
Sun, 10/11/2020 - 16:14
On Friday, following its week-long Golden Week (National Day) holiday, we noted that the onshore yuan (CNY) which had not traded since the previous Friday, soared the most since China's 2005 de-pegging - as it rushed to catch up to the recent gains in the offshore yuan (CNH) driven by a shift in market sentiment that a pro-China Biden administration may replace Trump, as well as the continued slide in the dollar.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...H%2010.9_0.jpg
This also resulted in the strongest Yuan print since since April 2019.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...Y%2010.9_1.jpg
Well, it appears that Beijing also noticed the relentless - and deflationary - gains in the yuan since May, and on October 10th, the PBOC announced the reserve requirement ratio for FX derivative sales - which was introduced in late 2015 in order to stem fast FX outflows in the aftermath of China's devaluation - would be reduced from 20% currently to 0%, effective October 12th, in a which Bannockburn Global said was "an attempt to moderate the yuan's increase", and which Goldman said "likely signals the PBOC's discomfort with the recent rapid appreciation of CNY" as the relaxation of the reserve requirement itself would lower the cost for FX liabilities hedging and encourage FX derivative sales (which represents FX outflow).
"It is difficult to decipher Beijing’s intent, but it does appear that it is willing to accept a stronger yuan against the dollar. It is not clear the extent of the move officials will tolerate" said Bannockburn's Marc Chandler.
Actually, it's not that difficult: China wants a weaker yuan and its telegraphing to the world it will have a weaker yuan. Here are the three main points surrounding this "telegraphed" announcement, courtesy of Goldman:
1. Background of the reserve requirement on FX derivatives sales:
First introduced in September 2015, the reserve requirement on FX derivative sales is part of macro-prudential management and effectively a tariff on the non-bank sector for buying FX/selling CNY through derivatives. Specifically, banks need to deposit reserves with the PBOC for their sales of FX derivatives (such as forwards, swaps etc.) to customers (non-bank sectors, including corporate and households). Banks would then pass on the higher costs to non-bank sectors who buy FX/sell CNY through derivatives. The reserve requirement was introduced in response to the fast FX outflows in late 2015 and has been adjusted multiple times over the past years. The 20% reserve requirement was relaxed in September 2017 on the back of reduced FX outflow pressures and continued CNY appreciation, and reimposed in August 2018 amid CNY depreciation and FX outflow pressures related to weakening economic growth and intensified trade tension with the US (Exhibit 1).
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...adjustment.jpg
2. Background of this announcement
This announcement comes after rapid CNY appreciation both against the USD and against a basket of currencies. In light of favorable interest rate differentials and muted policy signals from the PBOC previously, CNY appreciated against the USD from 7.16 in late May to below 6.70 as of October 9th, and on October 9th (the first working day after the week-long national day holiday), the CNY recorded the largest single-day appreciation (1.4%) since it was depegged with the USD in late 2005. On a trade weighted basis, the CNY appreciated by around 3% against the CFETS basket basis since August and is back to the levels in March-April this year. FX flows in recent months have been broadly balanced. There have been small outflows since June partially on the back of seasonal investment income payouts, while foreign buying of Chinese assets (in particular bonds) remained strong.
3. Implications from this policy change
The relaxation likely signals the PBOC's discomfort of the rapid appreciation of CNY recently. In the announcement, the PBOC claimed it would continue to "keep CNY exchange rate flexible; stabilize market expectation and maintain the CNY exchange rate broadly stable at an equilibrium level". The reduction of reserve requirement would encourage outflows in the near term - after the PBOC relaxed the reserve requirement in September 2017, banks' FX forward sales rose from an average monthly level of US$9bn in June-Aug 2017, to an average monthly level of US$24bn in Sep-Nov 2017, and the CNY depreciated by around 2.7% against the USD and by around 1% against the CFETS basket in the two to three weeks after the relaxation of reserve requirement. The removal of reserve requirement reduces FX hedging cost and is by nature a relaxation of macroprudential management, so it is consistent with the broad policy objective of a more flexible and market driven CNY exchange rate. Absolute values of countercyclical factors (CCF) in the CNY fixing averaged at around 20pips for the past two months, relatively small in comparison with the intra-day moves of USDCNY.
If all that sounds a little Greek, then consider this: when the PBOC last did this, in September 2017, the yuan fell around 2.5% in the following few weeks, and a similar move now would bring USD/CNY toward 6.865 versus Friday’s close of around 6.695.
And while it has a ways to drop, the offshore yuan was trading 0.66% weaker in early Asian trading, with the USDCNH spiking from Friday's close of 6.6878 to 6.7317...
LY TOINBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stor
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...nh%2010.11.jpg
... and also pushing the dollar notably higher, a move which may upset the risk complex where upside in recent days was synonymous with USD weakness. Of notes, the Aussie slipped ahead alongside yuan weakness with the AUDUSD down 0.4% to 0.7212, while the EURUSD was down 0.2% to 1.1806 as U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson told German Chancellor Angela Merkel that there were gaps with the EU ahead of the October 15 deadline
- Post #9,250
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 6:14pm Oct 11, 2020 6:14pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,251
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 6:15pm Oct 11, 2020 6:15pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,252
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 6:38pm Oct 11, 2020 6:38pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
The Grim Fairy Tale Of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT): Rumpelstiltskin And The Federal Reserve (Spinning Gold From Hair Will Be Needed With Low Money Velocity)
Guest Post by Anthony Sanders
Politicians and economists love to fantasize about unlimited government spending without restraint. The argument is that the US is so creditworthy that they will never default on their debt (just like the RMS Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable … until it sank on April 15, 1912 killing more than 1,500 people after striking an iceberg.
https://confoundedinterestnet.files.wordpress.com/2020/10/titaniciitolaunchin2018..jpg
?w=756The US economy is already at a Q2 MZM money velocity BELOW 1 (actually 0.955) and public debt to GDP of 136%.
https://confoundedinterestnet.files....gdp.png?w=1024
This becomes even more relevant since Vice President Biden is proposing $11 trillion in new Federal spending (Harris wants $40 trillion in new spending). Of course, both of these will require massive tax increases). But as we know, the wealthy have a cadre of tax accounts to minimize their tax liabilities, so Biden/Harris will have to go after the middle class (the households making under $400,000 per year, the vary households that Biden/Harris and their mouthpieces claim will not see tax increases will of course see tax increases). The rest? MORE public debt!!
Of course, the US national debt is already large than the total economy.
https://confoundedinterestnet.files....sdd.png?w=1024And then we have the Green New Deal (or Biden’s Climate “Plan”). The American Action Forum, estimated that the plan could cost between $51–$93 trillion over the next decade. They estimate its potential cost at $600,000 per household. It is unclear whether Biden/Harris are low-balling their true Green spending intentions or not. But needless to say, the Biden/Harris spending fantasies assume that there is no iceberg ahead.
https://confoundedinterestnet.files....vel.png?w=1024BUT what happens when the US economy strikes the iceberg? Look for taxes to skyrocket, crushing economic growth. Etc. And interest rates to soar.
Maybe The Federal Reserve can take a lesson from Rumpelstiltskin and spin gold from hair, a truly renewable resource.
https://confoundedinterestnet.files....mple.png?w=400-----------------------------------------------------
The corrupt establishment will do anything to suppress sites like the Burning Platform from revealing the truth. The corporate media does this by demonetizing sites like mine by blackballing the site from advertising revenue. If you get value from this site, please keep it running with a donation. [Jim Quinn - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif
- Post #9,253
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 8:28pm Oct 11, 2020 8:28pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,254
- Quote
- Oct 11, 2020 10:56pm Oct 11, 2020 10:56pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
Authored by John Steppling via Off-Guardian.org,
“it’s the proper morning to fly into Hell.”
- Arthur Miller (The Crucible)
“One of the greatest delusions of the average man is to forget that life is death’s prisoner.”
- Emil Cioran (On the Heights of Despair)
Increasingly, I think, the American public operates in a mild dissociative state. I wrote about it here. It is almost as if people are afflicted with a kind of PTSD - only one where the trauma is generalized, relatively low grade, but ongoing.
Any of us who have questioned the Covid narrative have had to put up with an inordinate amount of hectoring, name-calling, ridicule, and ostracism. I remember when I signed on the artist appeal as part of the Milosevic Defense Committee, and the abuse and anger I faced whenever this topic came up. People who had no history with the region, knew little of the political landscape, would nonetheless wax irate, furious and near tears that I would hold such outrageous positions.
Now, over a decade later, two members of that committee have won Nobel Prizes (Harold Pinter and Peter Handke). You would think that might cause people to take a moment, reflect, recalibrate their thinking on the topic. But alas, it rarely does.
The Covid narrative has generated the same near-hysterical indignation. The narrative, as it has been constructed by the WHO, CDC, and more likely a dozen or so billionaires (including Bill Gates) is so rife with contradiction and illogic that one might think cracks would begin to show.
That many who accept the word of authority in general, might at this point start to question why none of this story makes sense. But no. Not in America anyway. (or rather, to be more precise, there is a pushback, but it keeps to a low profile lest the little Cotton Mathers of the haute bourgeoisie put one in the stocks).
Leave it to America to make the flu into a morality play. However there are clear signs of people waking up. In Europe certainly.
And not only Germany, doctors and health care professionals in Belgium, too. But the governments are sticking to the story they were handed.
In Norway here I still cannot drive to Sweden. Why? Who knows, there is no reason provided. The PM uttered something about better safe than sorry, and staying the course. Everything is discussed this way, in infantile baby talk, gibberish and slogans. Anti-democratic edicts delivered as if by a kindergarten teacher.
Someone wrote to me on social media the other day and said “Not everyone gets to live in Norway. Here we are surrounded by death”. Now he lives in Los Angeles. In a nice westside area. He is not surrounded by death. Or rather only in his hallucinatory inner theatre of the mind is death present, surrounding him.
But this language has a quality I associate with Hollywood. Its kitsch image-making. Never mind it’s literally not remotely true. But this is a version of something that I think happens all the time now. This man is in his own private movie.
It is a movie made of diverse parts; there is something from all the various post-apocalyptic zombie films (and TV, think Walking Dead), there is something of Norman Rockwell in there, or even Thomas Kincaid, there is Dr Phil and Oprah and the cheapening of emotion. The snarky pedestrian thoughts of a Bill Maher, too.
This is what has come to pass for public intellectuals and intellectual discourse. All are almost impossibly banal. There are parts from a dozen disaster movies, too. I mean literally all the way back to Towering Inferno. And there is, perhaps most significantly, a quality that is harder to define or outline, but which I associate with JJ Abrams and Joss Whedon.
It is a quality of comforting superficiality, of controlled threat in worlds of generic cheeriness. Interestingly both were born in NY and are only a year apart in age (mid fifties). Both have a background in animation and computer generated affects. Both came out of a comic book sensibility and have, more than anyone else in contemporary media, helped to shape the manufactured nostalgia for a fantasy of America.
It is the creation of a longing for a past that never was. But both have established a universe of whiteness and equilibrium where the threat is from without.
For it cannot be from within because there is no ‘within’.
In that sense these are the anti Psychoanalytic purveyors of a youth culture for adults. A comic or cartoon world view in which the sentimental plays an enormous role. It is a world without tragedy or real suffering. And just beneath the surface but always implied, is a respect for authority. It is also a world where one is encouraged NOT to grow up.
The Covid story takes place in a universe of Whedon and Abrams, with parts of The Hunger Games, Breaking Bad, and the films of John Hughes.
(Hughes was really the precursor for both Whedon and Abrams). Covid is taking place on the streets where Breakfast Club was filmed. In people’s heads anyway.
Covid the virus is an overdetermined symbol — and one that only makes even a tiny bit of sense if it is located in these personal streaming sites in your brain. (and I recommend Jonathan Beller, The Cinematic Mode of Production).
There is a tendency toward fetishization, too, and hence the ubiquitous appearance and opinion of celebrities. Its bordering on surreal much of the time: Hip Hop moguls are asked about climate change, Silicon Valley billionaires voice opinion on overpopulation or vaccinations, soap opera stars offer thoughts on stem cell research.
Nothing is investigated, really. It is all driven by whatever is most lurid or sensationalized. The ruling class has clearly encouraged, if not mandated, a certain line of thinking on the pandemic. The ruling class has profited enormously from the lockdown, and is quite happy with a semi-permanent state of crisis.
In fact it is likely that this was at least partly all planned. I mean what does one think those billionaires at the Bilderberg meeting talk about? Or at DAVOS or the like? The ruling elite anticipated crises in Capitalism, and the lockdown certainly provides cover for massive plunder or pensions, real estate, and really, most everything.
But the system, to some extent, does the work for the ruling class without instruction at this point. For revenue is generated by blood and violence, and secondly by sex. The template has already been put in place. (If it bleeds it leads). Although something has happened to the ‘sex sells’ dimension of the Spectacle.
People seem less and less in the throws of passion or lust.
The societies of the west are declining into some form of neurasthenic bloodless onanism. The consumption of porn is up, but I’m pretty sure sex acts are actually down. And the allegorical dimension of the Covid narrative serves as both substitute gratification and as a symbolic purification ritual.
This week Trump announced he had “tested positive”. He had been campaigning for the previous week and felt fine. Then he tested positive and is described as having flu-like symptoms. That this is part of a strategy I have no doubt, but I also could not begin to describe that strategy. But the magical appearance of symptoms the minute he tested positive echoes the overall magical thinking involved in this entire narrative.
There is a veritable mania, now, concerning testing. And yet even the NYTimes admits the tests are virtually meaningless. But no matter. We must test more!
Magical thinking permeates the climate discourse, as well. Never in history, or never since the Enlightenment, have so many people pretended to know so much. For the educated thirty percent (white and reasonably affluent) it is the era of the TED talk. Nothing dare last longer or be more demanding than a quick (and entertaining) ten minutes. The fires in California have come primarily from downed power lines (badly out of date and rarely serviced), but exacerbated by homeless encampments (rarely mentioned) and fireworks — and of course the drought that has extended backward a decade.
California has always burnt. It was part of the ecosystem to rid the hills and forests of dead of dead shrub and trees. Climate is clearly a part — snowpack is down, and summer heat has dried out shrubbery. But much of what is dried out is shrub not native to California (stuff like cheatgrass, a native of Asia and parts of Africa, and notoriously invasive) whose forests are overstocked anyway.
Infrastructure in America is rotting, and per California, the wild areas have been neglected for almost a hundred years. But that is not a part of the narrative.
The narrative must be about the rebellion of Earth itself and population. And population matters only in terms of who can afford to over consume. The problem is that the most obvious pollution issues (militarism and the packaging industry) are never addressed.
US imperialism is the cause of most of the suffering in the world. Most of the instability. But the infantile anthropomorphizing of much green discourse is just more baby talk. I often hear “we are waging war against ourselves”. This is a dangerous bit of mystification. [note that this riff goes all the way back to the Pogo comic strip in the 1960s].
Its more simplistic sloganeering and like most such chestnuts, class analysis is absent. I have written a good deal on the psychological appeal of certain hi-tech fantasies, the seductive aspect of AI, and yet the world is more proletarianized than ever.
Yes people, in a very general sense, can be seen as self-destructive. It’s one of the most troubling byproducts of the habituation to screens, the loss of literacy and numeracy and the loss, really, of an ability to think critically. But this cultic hysteria is driven by the increasing precarity and desperation in contemporary life.
The loss of unions plays a part, the absence of a real left party, a radical Marxist party. For all the terrific work activist groups do (Prison abolishment groups, criminal justice reform, and stuff like the Innocence Project) there remains a vacuum in terms of electoral politics. Perhaps that is just going to be the way this goes.
Maybe the entire electoral apparatus is dead. And maybe that is a good thing.
There is a quality of suffocating sameness and emptiness that permeates daily life. People don’t look at each other on the street, they look at their phones. One is walking, all the time, among the pod people. America’s mental health is in a dire state. The U.S. and really this is increasingly true in Europe, too, but not nearly to the same extent, is an excruciatingly lonely country. People have lost the ability to make, and more, to sustain friendships. And how the role of social media plays into that is an open question. Or media in general.
So while yes, the marketing of technology serves to manufacture an appeal, on one level there are troubling numbers of people who seem, all by themselves, to *want*, to desire, ravishment by our robot overlords. Android sex is a thing, and its growing.
And it’s not just men who want “pleasure model” androids (ok, for now they have to settle for dolls), but many want to not just fuck androids – but to get fucked *by* androids.
The engine is capitalism.
A number of world leaders have contracted Covid. Much as many get the flu. There is something curiously similar in nearly everyone of these cases. Boris Johnson, Bolsanaro, the fascist interim President of post-coup Bolivia Jeanine Anez, Mikhail Mishustin of Russia, French finance minister Bruno Le Maire, and India’s Amit Shah (the #2 strongman behind Modi), and also in India, Pranab Mukherjee, former President, who subsequently died (age 84) from the virus (no, actually he died from a blood clot on his brain).
I only mention this because I experience an unsettling vertigo when trying to parse all this and make it into something comprehensible. The way Covid tests work one might well think everyone on the planet has the virus.
Already there has been significant psychological harm done to children. The clear lesson is to fear the other. That humans are contagious and potentially lethal. Intimacy is officially discouraged.
I cannot imagine that message were I fourteen or sixteen. Growing up in the sixties the idea was to promote intimacy, feelings, and to exactly *not* fear emotional openness. The English speaking west has gone from Paul Goodman to Theresa Tam.
The resurgent Puritanism is not restricted to odd ducks like Tam. Even bourgeois pundits are noticing. This is Zoe Williams in The Guardian:
There remains, in public life, a rich seam of puritanism that you notice only when times are so bleak that you could really do without it. A sense that frivolity is immoral, even if it is 95% of your economy; a feeling that they had it coming, all those people dedicating their lives to the generation of fun. Puritans tend not to announce their disapproval except in the most roundabout ways, so you can rarely pin it on them. But standing on the precipice of a year that ends without dancing, bears, dancing bears, playhouses, ale houses, music or Christmas, all I can think of is how happy Oliver Cromwell would have been. It is like all his cancelled Christmases come at once. He would be dancing (not dancing) in his grave.”
This is a lament from the privileged class, but perhaps that’s actually a good sign.
The ruling class don’t wear masks or have travel restrictions imposed on them.
There is no longer even a pretense. The rich are entitled to special treatment. The rich deserve a clean depopulated world where they can cavort on the green, frolic in elysian fields by murmuring brooks, and to not be troubled by darkies and riff-raff. Remember it was a mere hundred years ago that Belgium brought Congolese from their African home, to be paraded in human zoos. Those they hadn’t already murdered.
Covid is the final act in the transference of wealth to the top 1%. And culture is being destroyed along with everything else. Cinemas are closing, permanently, theatres, too, permanently, and museums. Galleries and other art spaces are shuttered, likely to never reopen. Something like 30 million jobs have been lost. There is an acute desperation across America.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...%2810%29_5.jpg
Who survives? Amazon, Netflix, Google, Comcast, Facebook, et al. Those who control the screens control the world. It is a new morning in hell.
- Post #9,255
- Quote
- Edited 9:35am Oct 12, 2020 2:19am | Edited 9:35am
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
Authored by Jef Costello via Counter-Currents.com,
On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).
The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...s/Violence.png
Way back in November of 2017 (my, how long ago that seems . . . ) a mere 8% of both Democrats and Republicans held that it is legitimate to use violence to advance their political goals. Actually, there’s nothing “mere” about it. It ought to surprise us that such a sizeable percentage of both parties could hold such a radical view. Also surprising is Republicans running neck and neck with Democrats. Contrary to how they are perceived by Leftists, conservatives are slow to embrace the idea of violence, or any sort of punitive measures against their opponents. Their Achilles heel, in fact, is commitment to “fair play.”
We must remember that when these numbers were compiled it had been a year since the 2016 election. A year of unhinged rhetoric by the Left, and repeated calls for Trump to be assassinated. Madonna spoke about her fantasies of blowing up the White House, and “comedian” Kathy Griffin held up an effigy of Trump’s severed head. Of course, those were the unserious, tongue-in-cheek threats. Countless other people made similar threats, quite openly, and seemed to be pretty serious about it. To my knowledge, none of them was charged with a crime.
As Trump Derangement Syndrome continued to spread, it was actually a healthy sign that more Republicans began to entertain the idea of using violence as a political tool. Leftists presented themselves as having no boundaries. There was no low to which they would not stoop, no trick too dirty. They were threatening to attack and kill not only the President, but his supporters, and, in fact, the entire white race. They made it quite clear that they could not be reasoned with. Faced with an enemy like this, violence was bound to become more attractive, or at least more justifiable, in the eyes of even the most mild-mannered Republican voter.
Almost a year later, in October 2018, the percentage of Democrats condoning violence had jumped to 13. It had become obvious to them, at this point, that the results of the 2016 election were not going to be reversed, though many still held out the hope that Robert Mueller would uncover some dirt that would prove Trump’s undoing. True to form, conservatives lagged behind (see what nice people we are?), with a mere 11% condoning violence. Still, the number had risen. At least part of this has to be attributed to the Kavanaugh hearings (of September-October), which were a wakeup call for many Republicans, including Lindsay Graham, who seems to have sort of lost his innocence as a result. The hearings proved once and for all, if any more proof had been needed, that liberals have no principles whatever, and that attempts to play fair with them will only backfire. One can’t really blame Republicans for that 11%. Please pass the ammo.
By December 2019, things had gotten genuinely scary.
The trend had continued. And how. This was the month that the House approved articles of impeachment against Trump. Earlier in the year, in April, the Mueller report was made public, revealing that we had been subjected to two solid years of hysteria about “Russia collusion” for absolutely no reason whatever. The libs were frustrated, to put it mildly. 16% of them now condoned violence. Republicans were behind the curve again, but not by much, with 15% of them thinking the same way.
But we hadn’t seen anything yet. That was before COVID and BLM. By June of the current year, these percentages had doubled, and Dems and Republicans were now equally in favor of breaking heads: 30% of both groups now condoned violence to advance political goals. Let us pause to consider this number once more: 30%. Let us also pause to consider that this poll was conducted at the beginning of June, when the George Floyd riots had just gotten going.
By September 1st, the percentage of liberals condoning violence had risen by just three points. Still, at 33% this constitutes one third of all Dems. The more interesting result came from the Republicans, however. The percentage in question had risen to 36%, and for the first time, Republicans rated as more violence-approving than Dems. If you will read the fine print, you will find that the September poll’s margin of error is 2.0 percentage points. Thus, the three percentage points separating Republicans from Democrats are statistically significant; conservatives are now demonstrably more in favor of violence than liberals.
Has the sleeping giant awakened?
We were slow to consider violence an option. Unlike liberals, after all, we really do have principles, and we did not want to be like them. But they have pushed us to this point, and it’s difficult to see how there can be any debate about that. Months of watching our cities burn. Months of our history being torn down. Months of draconian lockdowns and arbitrary rules imposed by Democrat governors and mayors. Months of being told that we had to shelter in place, while BLM was given free rein to loot and burn. Months of being told we have no right to defend ourselves; that if you are white, you are automatically guilty. Countless lives and businesses destroyed. Given all of this, and more, it’s surprising that the number isn’t 56% — or 76% or 86%. But since many conservatives are probably afraid to say they might condone violence, I think we can round that 36% up a bit. Quite a bit.
The other day I spoke with a friend who lives in New York. He told me that he recently drove to his local rifle range, which he has visited many times in the past. He had not been there for several months, however, and when he arrived he was shocked to find a line stretching out the door (made up entirely of white people) and what wound up being a 45-minute wait. When he finally got inside, he asked the proprietor about the large turnout and was told that it had been like this every weekend since the BLM riots began, and that the numbers were increasing. I hope all those folks brought their own ammo, because my friend also told me the store was completely sold out. And this was New York, not South Carolina.
Two weeks prior to the Politico essay, The Hill published an opinion piece by a former federal prosecutor titled “Why Democrats Must Confront Extreme Left-wing Incitement to Violence.” It’s a weak and cowardly piece of writing but is nevertheless interesting on multiple levels. The author begins by asserting that Right-wing groups “by far pose the greatest threat of violence.” He bases this on a study by something called the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). This group looked at 900 cases of politically motivated plots or attacks since 1994, and concluded that Right-wing extremists had claimed the lives of 329 people, whereas “Antifa members haven’t killed any.”
This is like somebody saying, in January of 2020, “Over the last 25 years, seasonal flu has claimed the lives of 890,000 Americans, but COVID-19 hasn’t killed any Americans. Therefore, the flu is the real threat.” This would have been a ridiculous position, because COVID was something new and entirely unknown. We had no way of knowing, in January, how dangerous COVID was going to be. And, since then, it has, in fact, claimed far more American lives than the flu ever takes in a given year.
Similarly, since May we have seen Left-wing violence the likes of which this country has not seen since the 1960s. And this phenomenon is fundamentally new because it has been condoned and encouraged by state and local officials, prominent Democrats in Congress, and establishment journalists and pundits. The authors of the CSIS study warn of the dangers posed by groups like the “boogaloos,” a group of “Right-wing, anti-government extremists” bent on “creating a civil war in the United States.” Oddly enough, I’d never heard of the boogaloos until reading this article, and I think I’m pretty “plugged in.”
I know nothing about this group, but I do know one thing for certain: if the boogaloos, or any other “Right-wing extremists” took to the streets and behaved as BLM and Antifa have behaved — looting, burning, assaulting, threatening, or even just blocking traffic — they would have been crushed within twenty-four hours. All the might of state and local police forces and federal law enforcement would have been unleashed against them, and the cops would not have played nice. Many “Right-wingers” would have wound up dead or injured, and the survivors would have faced extensive criminal charges.
This, gentle reader, is why “Right-wing violence” is not the greater threat. Left-wing violence is taking place with the approval and support, financial and otherwise, of the establishment. It is a threat to all ordinary Americans, especially white Americans. Right-wing violence only poses a threat (so far, a very mild one) to the establishment.
The author of The Hill piece, while claiming that Right-wingers pose the greatest threat, wishes nonetheless to warn liberals that their own people are becoming far more violent and that they need to address this problem. This is after referring to the riots we’ve seen since May as “overwhelmingly peaceful social justice protests.” But he fears Democrats aren’t listening:
Perhaps Democrats are afraid of leaving the impression of a false equivalency between extreme right- and left-wing violence. Perhaps they are fearful that acknowledging the threat posed by extreme left-wing incitement gives credibility to Trump’s false narrative that Democrat-run cities are burning because of left-wing violence (they are not burning) and his promotion of outlandish conspiracy theories, such as that people in “the dark shadows” allegedly control Joe Biden.
In other words, the author, a Leftist in deep denial about the threat posed by the Left, wonders why the Left is in such deep denial about the threat posed by itself. You can’t make this stuff up.
In August, Joe Biden asked “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is reelected?” This was widely interpreted by conservatives as a threat. The truth is that the violence will continue regardless of who wins the election. Trump’s reelection will guarantee further violence by the Left. But since Democrats have encouraged the violence and done nothing to contain it, there is every reason to believe that it will continue if Biden wins. Indeed, the “hands off” attitude the establishment has taken to Left-wing violence makes it almost inevitable that the violence will escalate, meaning that it will become more deadly. The Far Left has been emboldened.
If Biden does win, and if the Democrats manage to gain complete control of Congress, we can look forward to an assault on the first and second amendment rights of Americans, in the form of hate speech legislation and gun control. Further, Biden and Harris have signaled that they will pack the Supreme Court — simply by repeatedly refusing to answer the question of whether they will. Democrats are also likely to grant statehood to the District of Columbia (thus increasing their numbers in Congress), amnesty millions of illegals and put them on a fast track to citizenship, and abolish the Electoral College.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...5.image__0.jpg
This is, quite simply, a recipe for civil war — of some kind or other. It is certainly a recipe for the further fragmentation of the country. 62% of white men voted for Trump in 2016, and none of them wants what I have just indicated the Democrats have to offer. The elimination of the Electoral College, if it happens, could be the country’s tipping point toward dissolution. It would mean that millions of Americans in the heartland of the country (most of them white) would be politically disenfranchised. The situation in the US is already volatile; the disenfranchisement of large numbers of citizens would make it much worse. This is particularly true given that those citizens are the backbone of the country: their decency, hard work, and tax money keep it afloat. It is unlikely that those people would readily accept living at the mercy of a combination of urban elites and non-white freeloaders.
Of course, the same situation would be created if demographic projections are borne out, and whites become a minority by 2044, regardless of what happens to the Electoral College. And the re-election of the hapless Trump would not even slow this process. Given demographics, our long-term prospect is a Democratic takeover. So that even if Democrats lose in 2020 — even if they lose big — everything I projected above about what the Democrats will do when they take power is still going to happen, it just may take a little longer.
My own prediction for what will happen to the US is that it will eventually split up along racial and political lines. Already, there is hardly any “union” to assess the state of. Further, all signs now indicate that this is not going to be a peaceful process. The Left began the violence, and they have now succeeded in pushing a whopping 36% of conservatives to approve of answering violence with violence.
Some of my readers will greet these claims with skepticism. Average Americans find it impossible to imagine their country disintegrating in violent conflict. This is the result of years of propaganda about the “stability” of our Republic, the “miracle” of our peaceful transfer of power every four years, yada yada. Average Americans are bizarrely oblivious to just how violent this country really is and always has been (something that has not escaped the notice of the rest of the world): sky-high rates of murder, rape, and assault; urban riots every few years; the assassination of political figures; regular “spree killings”; and a civil war that claimed the lives of around 700 thousand people. Average folks may not want to think about it, but a second civil war is quite plausible.
My readers on the Right, who are far more discerning than average folks, may be skeptical for different reasons. According to some of them, the chances of violent civil war or revolution are zero, since the establishment has far greater firepower. As I said above, if the Right took to the streets like BLM, they would be mercilessly crushed. But suppose they did it again. And again. And suppose the anger that sent them out into the streets did not diminish, but increased. It is naïve to think that determined individuals, through persistent guerilla warfare and other forms of resistance, cannot destabilize a government — especially when the government is run by decadent, out-of-touch elites who inhabit an ideological and social bubble. It has happened before, and can happen again.
Of course, the goal should not be “revolution.” There is no reason to want to “take over” the United States, because it is not desirable that the United States should continue to exist. We don’t want to live with these people anymore, even if we are the ones “in charge.” Instead, what we should aim for is independence — in other words, the partitioning of the country; carving our own country out of this country and saying goodbye to those other people. Folks, it’s either that or persuade the Europeans that we have the right of return. But that’s not going to happen.
So here are my predictions for the near future:
Left-wing violence will continue, indeed it will escalate. However, white conservatives will be increasingly willing to challenge Leftists in the streets. The Politico numbers persuasively suggest that this is likely, and we already see signs of it (notably, the Kyle Rittenhouse episode).
A Trump loss will further radicalize many white conservatives. A Trump win will also radicalize white conservatives, because the response will be even more violence from Leftists. The continued anti-white rhetoric, which shows no signs of abating, will also do the work of radicalization. I predict that we will see more acts of domestic terrorism perpetrated by Right-wing groups, and that many new such groups will spring up in the next several years. These acts will be heavily condemned by all the usual suspects, but this will have little effect, since the double standard is now too obvious. Even Mom and Dad, drinking Snapple and watching Hannity, will now approve of Right-wing violence.
Unlikely? Look at that chart above and think again. How likely is it that the trend has peaked at 36%?
I also predict that we will see cases of mini-secessions, in which towns, cities, and counties that are largely white and Republican will begin resisting the power of state and federal governments (e.g., not enforcing certain laws). This will make parts of the country hard to govern. These areas will become a mecca for white conservatives. They will grow in population and geographic reach, as new arrivals take residence just over county or city lines. Tired of the dirty looks they get, many non-whites and liberals will go elsewhere. In short, there will be de facto secession before secession is ever made official.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...1_12-26-23.jpg
By the way, had I made prognostications about “civil war” as little as a year ago, I would have done so with the caveat “probably not in our lifetime.” Now I am definitely not so sure. It’s hard to believe, but the scenario envisioned by Chuck Palahniuk in Adjustment Day is becoming more plausible with each passing week.
* * *
You can buy Jef Costello’s "The Importance of James Bond" here
- Post #9,256
- Quote
- Oct 12, 2020 12:29pm Oct 12, 2020 12:29pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,257
- Quote
- Oct 12, 2020 8:29pm Oct 12, 2020 8:29pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,258
- Quote
- Oct 12, 2020 8:45pm Oct 12, 2020 8:45pm
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
- Post #9,259
- Quote
- Edited 5:08am Oct 13, 2020 4:24am | Edited 5:08am
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts
THE INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS 2005 (IHR 2005)
IHR2005 is a BINDING international legal agreement sponsored by the UN and WHO which was initiated for the purpose of helping the international community prevent, control and respond to severe public health risks that present international threats.
More than 196 countries have signed IHR2005 including all the member states of the World Health Organisation such as the Pacific island states of Fiji and Kiribati and Caribbean states such as Grenada and Trinidad & Tobago. IHR2005 entered into force in 2007. IHR2005 signatories are bound to comply with the obligations set forth in it.
WHO ARE THE IHR2005 STATE SIGNATORIES?
As of 15th June 2007, the IHR2005 signatories are the following states (and all WHO members):-
Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China , Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Holy See, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India (8 August 2007) , Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of – the country recently reported 20 million Covid19 infections??), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein (28 March 2012), Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro (5 February 2008), Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Niue, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal , Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan (16 April 2013), Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga 2 , Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey 2 , Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America (18 July 2007), Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
NOTABLE IHR2005 PROVISIONS FOR STATE PARTIES CURRENTLY PLAYING OUT
Per IHR2005’s Article 18: Recommendations with respect to persons, baggage, cargo, containers, conveyances, goods and postal parcels
1. Recommendations issued by WHO to States Parties with respect to persons may include the following advice: require medical examinations; review proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis; require vaccination or other prophylaxis; place suspect persons under public health observation; implement quarantine or other health measures for suspect persons; implement isolation and treatment where necessary of affected persons; implement tracing of contacts of suspect or affected persons; refuse entry of suspect and affected persons; refuse entry of unaffected persons to affected areas; and implement exit screening and/or restrictions on persons from affected areas.
Under IHR 2005 18 (2) in respect to goods and physical property:-
implement quarantine, seizure and destruction of infected or contaminated or suspect baggage, cargo, containers, conveyances, goods or postal parcels under controlled conditions if no available treatment or process will otherwise be successful; and refuse departure or entry.
THE GLOBAL PREPAREDNESS BOARD AND JOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR HEALTH SECURITY
The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (“GMB”) is a body that advises the World Health Organisation (WHO) on its heath emergencies policies. It was co-convened in May 2018 by the World Bank Group and the World Health Organization. Its principal advisor is John Hopkins University Center for Health Security.
The GMB’s 15-member Board consists of senior figures from the USA, China, Russia, UK, Netherlands, Norway and also includes those from the WHO, Red Cross, Bill Gates’ Foundation, UNICEF, Netherlands, Japan, Chile, India as well as political leaders, heads of agencies, and experts.
GMB is led jointly by Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, formerly Prime Minister of Norway and Director-General of the World Health Organization and Mr Elhadj As Sy, Secretary General of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
WHAT ARE GMB’S GOALS?
The stated goals of GMB’s Board are to: 1. assess the world’s ability to protect itself from health emergencies; 2. identify critical gaps to preparedness across multiple perspectives; 3. advocate for preparedness activities with national and international leaders and decision-makers.
GMB’S PRINCIPAL ADVISOR – JOHN HOPKINS CENTRE FOR HEALTH SECURITY
Just before the Covid19 pandemic emerged, GMB’s “A world at risk: annual report on global preparedness for health emergencies of September 2019” (Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO) Annual Report was published. The report was commissioned to Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security by GMB.
GMB’S REPORT’S PAPER “PREPAREDNESS FOR A HIGH-IMPACT RESPIRATORY PATHOGEN EPIDEMIC” OF SEPTEMBER 2019
The Annual Report’s paper, “Preparedness for a High-Impact Respiratory Pathogen Pandemic”of September 2019effectively sets the scene for the Covid19 event currently playing out worldwide and which started shortly after the paper was published.
The Paper’s contributors are:-
• Jarbas Barbosa da Silva Jr., Pan American Health Organization; • Rick Bright, US Department of Health and Human Services; • Elizabeth Cameron, Nuclear Threat Initiative; • Gail Carson, University of Oxford; • Jeremy Farrar, Wellcome Trust; • Keiji Fukuda, University of Hong Kong; • Bruce Gellin, Sabin Vaccine Institute; • Julie Lyn Hall, International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies; • William Hall, Wellcome Trust; • Keith Hamilton, World Organisation for Animal Health; • Anne Huvos, World Health Organization; • Chikwe Ihekweazu, Nigeria Centre for Disease Control; • Bruce Innis, PATH; • Daniel Jernigan, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; • Kerri-Ann Jones, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework Advisory Group; to the World Health Organization; • Rebecca Katz, Georgetown University; • Lawrence Kerr, US Department of Health and Human Services; • Marie-Paule Kieny, INSERM; • Marion Koopmans, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, The Netherlands; • Amanda McClelland, Resolve to Save Lives;• Hilary Marston, National Institutes of Health; • Claudia Nannei, World Health Organization; • Toomas Palu, World Bank Group; • Diane Post, National Institutes of Health; • Eduard Salahov, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; • Ethan Settembre, Seqirus; • Cecilia Mundaca Shah, Forum on Microbial Threats, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, USA; • Beverly Taylor, Seqirus; • Jonathan Van-Tam, Department of Health and Social Care, England; • Netsanet Workie, World Bank Group; • Members of the World Health Organization Strategic & Technical Advisory Group for Infectious Hazards.
The Paper’s PROGRESS INDICATOR (S) BY SEPTEMBER 2020 – at page 29 – which is what all IHR2005 signatory countries are to have in place by September 2020 – is particularly telling in relation to the outbreak of Covid19.
Point 2 below is instructive in that regard:-
1. The Secretary-General of the United Nations, with the Director-General of WHO and Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs strengthens coordination and identifies clear roles and responsibilities and timely triggers for a coordinated United Nations systemwide response for health emergencies in different countries and different health and humanitarian emergency contexts.
2. The United Nations (including WHO) conducts at least two system-wide training and simulation exercises, including one for covering the deliberate release of a lethal respiratory pathogen (coincidentally, in this video clip for a news report and in the presence of President Trump, US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo explains that the USA is in live “exercise” mode in relation to Covid19 – perhaps a slip of the tongue?
3. WHO develops intermediate triggers to mobilize national, international and multilateral action early in outbreaks, to complement existing mechanisms for later and more advanced stages of an outbreak under the IHR (2005).
4. The Secretary General of the United Nations convenes a high-level dialogue with health, security and foreign affairs officials to determine how the world can address the threat of a lethal respiratory pathogen pandemic, as well as for managing preparedness for disease outbreaks in complex, insecure contexts.
CHINA’S DECLARED OBLIGATIONS UNDER IHR2005
As there have been inferences that the Covid19 outbreak was initiated by China solely, as it is a member of IHR2005 coupled with the tone of its declaration under IHR 2005 (at Pt. III (page 62 extracted below), this is not a credible proposition:-
III. (CHINA’S) DECLARATIONS AND STATEMENTS
CHINA 1
1. The Government of the People’s Republic of China decides that the International Health Regulations (2005) (hereinafter referred to as “the IHR”) applies to the entire territory of the People’s Republic of China, including the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Macau Special Administrative Region and the Taiwan Province.
2. The Ministry of Health of the People’s Republic of China is designated as China’s National Focal Point, pursuant to Paragraph 1 of Article 4 of the IHR. The local health administrative authorities are the health authorities responsible for the implementation of the IHR in their respective jurisdictions. The General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China and its local offices are the competent authorities of the points of entry referred to in Article 22 of the IHR.
3. To meet the needs of applying the IHR, the Government of the People’s Republic of China is revising the Frontier Health and Quarantine Law of the People’s Republic of China . It has incorporated the development, enhancement and maintenance of the core capability-building for rapid and effective response to public health hazards and public health emergencies of international concern into its program of establishing a national health emergency response system during the 11 th Five-year Plan for National Economic and Social Development. It is formulating the technical standards for the surveillance, reporting, assessment, determination and notification of public health emergencies of international concern. It has established an inter-agency information-sharing and coordination mechanism for implementing the IHR. And it has conducted cooperation and exchanges with relevant states parties on the implementation of the IHR.
4. The Government of the People’s Republic of China endorses and will implement the resolution of the 59 th World Health Assembly calling upon its member states to comply immediately, on a voluntary basis, with provisions of the IHR considered relevant to the risk posed by the avian influenza and pandemic influenza.
CONCLUSION
Is Covid19 a simulated pandemic planned by world governments and coordinated by the UN, WHO and similar international agencies? The evidence for an affirmation is circumstantial but nonetheless highly persuasive due to the high coincidence of how Covid19 unfolded and is unfolding in particular, the short time span between GMB’s September 2019 report and the rolling out of the outbreak and the measures that IHR 2005 prescribed actually falling into place seamlessly worldwide thereafter as if by design.
Furthermore, the architects of IHR2005, GMB and their associated bodies appear to be the very people who are totally in control of the release and control of information worldwide in regard to how Covid19 infections and deaths are reported and the measures that are imposed on the worldwide population to contain the pandemic which measures were put in place more than 15 years ago.
Accordingly, the WHO and UN have a lot of explaining to give to millions who have lots their jobs, livelihoods, businesses and freedom from Covid19 if the pandemic turns out to be nothing more than a planned simulation of the most unkind type upon the world.
About the author: Andre Alexander PhD: is a Queen’s Counsel (hon.) Nominee Barrister (Brussels), Chartered Journalist, Associate Member, Royal Society of Medicine
Read more at www.linkedin.com
PSI Editor’s Note: Please Also Watch This Informative Video That Reinforces The Analysis Presented Above:
https://ise.media/video/.Xz0yXq1J4ow.mailto
- Post #9,260
- Quote
- Oct 13, 2020 5:12am Oct 13, 2020 5:12am
- | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 11,532 Posts