Imagine a world where ownership is a distant memory, replaced by an eerie semblance of joy in dispossession.
In 2016, Klaus Schwab, the enigmatic architect of the World Economic Forum, foretold a future whereby, in 2024, humanity would be stripped of its possessions, shackled in digital chains, yet deceived into a state of contentment. Initially dismissed as lunacy, we stand on the precipice of this harrowing reality; Schwab’s vision looms ominously over us, more prophetic than we dared to believe.
For decades, a clandestine cabal of technocrats has meticulously orchestrated our descent into digital serfdom. We sleepwalked into their trap and surrendered our rights and possessions to those who wield the power of the keystroke. In this brave new world, ownership is an illusion, and with a mere digital command, everything we hold dear can be seized.
This article unveils the sinister agenda behind the facade of progress. It explores the erosion of ownership through click-wrap agreements, the dematerialization of our assets into databases over the past few decades, the rise of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which threatens our control over money, and The Great Taking, which threatens our control over the rest of our non-monetary assets.
All is not lost, although, in a separate article, I will address that our salvation comes not at the ballot box but through our radical non-compliance. Technology can either be used to promote freedom or tyranny. I will discuss how we can adopt technologies to counter the digital slave system actively being developed by technocrats, thus guaranteeing our privacy, ability to engage in voluntary trade, and retention of our free will.
The Erosion of Ownership: A Descent into Digital Serfdom
In the bleak dawn of the digital age, we find ourselves trapped in a labyrinth of click-wrap agreements; our freedoms quietly surrendered to the whims of faceless corporations. The once-mighty notion of personal ownership has been reduced to a mere abstraction, a quaint relic of a bygone era.
As we click “I agree” with reckless abandon, we seal our fate, surrendering our autonomy to the technocrats who manipulate and control us through the devices we thought would liberate us. Once hailed as a bastion of freedom and progress, the digital realm has devolved into a dystopian nightmare where our every move is tracked, monitored, and exploited.
The Insidious Nature of Digital Control
We are lulled into complacency by the convenience and ease of digital transactions, unaware of the subtle yet pervasive manipulation that underlies every click, every swipe, and every tap. The fine print, a behemoth of legalese, conceals the true nature of our agreements, hiding in plain sight the draconian terms that govern our digital existence.
Consider the staggering numbers: we encounter an estimated 150-400 click-wrap agreements per year, each a ticking time bomb of obligations and responsibilities that we blithely accept without a second thought. These agreements are ubiquitous, embedded in every aspect of our digital lives:
Software licenses, like Microsoft’s 70-page End User License Agreement (EULA)
Online shopping agreements, like Amazon’s 12,000-word Conditions of Use
Social media terms of service, like Facebook’s 25-page Statement of Rights and Responsibilities
Mobile app agreements, like Apple’s 50-page iOS Software License Agreement
Online banking agreements, like Wells Fargo’s 30-page Online Access Agreement
A Life Sentence of Reading
To keep up with the fine print, we would have to devote up to an hour every day, 365 days a year, just to read the agreements. This is the actual cost of our digital existence: a life sentence of reading, a never-ending task that would consume a significant portion of our daily lives.
A Study in Deception
A recent experiment revealed the shocking truth: 74% of participants blindly accepted terms that would have surrendered their firstborn children to the service’s owners and provided their personal information to the NSA. As one researcher noted:
“The results are a stark reminder of the power of the ‘clickwrap’ – the ability to get people to agree to anything, no matter how outlandish, as long as it’s buried in a long and complex contract.” – Dr. Jonathan Obar, York University.
The Stage is Set for Asset Transfer
Our increased participation with these clickwrap agreements has set the stage for our assets to be transferred at the click of a button. With the rise of digital currencies, online marketplaces, and social media platforms, our financial, personal, and creative assets are more vulnerable than ever. The implications are dire: a future where our assets are seized, frozen, or transferred without our consent, all under the guise of “agreements” we never truly understood.
We have unwittingly surrendered our autonomy, creativity, and humanity to the whims of corporate overlords. As you will see in the coming sections, the assignment of our rights through digital agreements, CBDCs, and asset tokenization will soon leave us owning nothing.
Because this article is long, I will keep a cumulative list of key takeaways as bullet points at the end of each section.
Key takeaways:
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
The Digitized Domain: A House of Cards Built on Fragile Databases and Corrupt Intermediaries
The digitization of our lives has bestowed upon us a double-edged sword: convenience and vulnerability. We’ve traded the tangible for the intangible, surrendering our assets to the capricious whims of databases and their intermediaries. But let’s be clear: databases are not just peripheral components of our digital lives but the foundation of modern commerce.
Consider it: corporations and governments store every transaction, asset, and record of ownership in a database. Your car title, house deed, and even the shares you hold in a company are all reduced to mere data points within these centralized repositories. And yet, we’re asked to trust that these systems will safeguard our investments and identities from prying eyes and malicious actors.
But here’s the thing: most of our assets have already been digitized. They exist only as entries in a database, and their value is entirely dependent on the integrity of that database. If the database is compromised, the asset is compromised. If the database is destroyed, the asset is destroyed. Database corruption is not just a theoretical risk; it’s a very real one. The financial losses alone are staggering—$1 trillion in 2017, a projected $10.5 trillion by 2025.
And what of the human cost? The disruption of lives, the theft of identities, the destruction of trust? The intermediaries who manage these databases – governments, corporations, and financial institutions – have become gatekeepers to our assets, wielding influence over markets and shaping economies. And yet, we’re expected to accept their security and stability assurances blindly.
Let’s take a step back and consider the current state of affairs. The labyrinthine transaction process, as we know it today, is a veritable goldmine for the parasites and leeches that thrive in its shadows. Third-party intermediaries—lawyers, brokers, or bureaucrats—add layer upon layer of time, money, and expense to every transaction, like a suffocating ivy strangling the life out of a tree. Just as the ivy’s tendrils wrap around the tree’s trunk, squeezing out its vitality, these intermediaries choke the life out of our transactions, draining them of efficiency, transparency, and fairness.
Consider this: according to some estimates, these parasitic middlemen gobbled up as much as 30-40% of the revenue in specific industries. That’s right, nearly half of every dollar you spend can vanish into the abyss of unnecessary costs and inefficiencies before it even reaches the hands that produce the goods or services we desire.
And what do we get in return for this fleecing? A system riddled with redundancies, opacity, and corruption. This concern isn’t new. You can read all about it in the pages of The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith, who warned against the evils of middlemen and monopolies over two centuries ago.
“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” – Adam Smith
Whether we like databases being at the heart of commerce or not, they aren’t going away. A new trend is emerging: tokenization, which converts assets into unique digital tokens that can be stored and traded on digital ledgers. Tokenization means a digital token will eventually represent everything from property to goods to services. As we’ll explore in future sections, this shift towards tokenization can either fix some of the security problems and inefficiencies associated with middlemen or create a new level of tyranny. With tokenization, we may be able to create a new, decentralized system for managing our assets and transactions or further surrender our control of our assets to the globalist cabal.
Key takeaways:
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
Our assets and transactions, now digitized and stored in fragile databases managed by corrupt intermediaries, are vulnerable to loss, theft, and manipulation, highlighting the risks and inefficiencies of our current digital system.
The Money in Our Bank Accounts Doesn’t Belong to Us
We’ve come to understand that we’ve been signing away our rights digitally, surrendering control over our lives to the whims of centralized databases and their intermediaries. But the loss of ownership doesn’t stop there – it permeates every aspect of our existence, from our cars and houses to our money.
Let’s start with what should be our most basic financial instrument: the bank account. We consider the money in our bank accounts ours, but a closer look reveals a different reality. Through my research on the terms and conditions of the four largest banks – Bank of America, Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citibank – I’ve discovered that they can cancel the account without cause, sell or give away our data (and they do give our transaction info to the IRS for use with AI to make sure the taxman gets his cut), change fees, and even modify the terms and conditions at will. I encourage you to check the terms and conditions of your bank account.
These contractual terms mean that the money in our bank accounts doesn’t belong to us. It’s held in trust by these financial institutions, subject to their whims and control. And with digital transactions comprising the majority of economic activity—a staggering $3 trillion as of 2023—it’s clear that our money is already primarily digitized.
The insidious tendrils of centralization have trapped us all, from the high and mighty to the lowly and obscure. It’s a web of control extending far beyond mere money – it’s a stranglehold on our lives.
Consider the cases of Nigel Farage, Dr. Joseph Mercola, and his family – their bank accounts were summarily closed without explanation or provocation. And who’s next? Kanye West, Nick Fuentes, gun groups, religious associations, professional unions, and even protesting truckers – all targeted for exercising their rights, all silenced by the banks.
At this point, we aren’t even talking about CBDCs. When people bleat about CBDCs today, they mostly talk about getting their money shut off or being monitored. That already happens today. The threat isn’t the CBDCs of tomorrow but the current state of the dollar today.
CBDCs simply take this surveillance and programmability to the next level – paving the way for complete digital tyranny.
An Introduction to Tokenization
But what if there was a way to break free from the shackles of these intermediaries and their centralized databases? A way to reclaim ownership and control over our assets, to strip away the layers of unnecessary costs and inefficiencies that plague our transactions? Enter the world of digital tokens.
A digital token is a unique digital identifier representing something of value, like a coin or a piece of property. Unlike traditional databases, where information is stored in a single, centralized location, digital tokens are decentralized, meaning they exist independently on a network of computers. Tokenization allows for peer-to-peer transactions without needing a middleman or relying on a single, vulnerable database. Digital tokens can create a more secure, transparent, and efficient system for exchanging value.
However, not all tokens are created equally. These tokens could promote freedom, decentralization, or free trade or be used as a surveillance mechanism that leads to confiscating our assets.
The following is a high-level overview of token types, followed by an overview of the massive range of uses for tokenization. In subsequent sections, we will go through specific examples of tokenization and highlight the dimensions of freedom versus tyranny.
Open Systems: These systems are fully transparent and accessible to all. There are no gatekeepers; anyone can participate or observe without permission.
Transparent Gated Systems: While anyone can view the system’s activities, participation is restricted to approved entities.
Closed Systems: These systems are restricted in both access and visibility. Only authorized parties can participate and view information.
Privacy-Focused Open Systems: These systems allow open participation but obscure the details of individual activities.
Considering all of this, we’re witnessing the dawn of a new era in finance, where the tokenization of assets has unleashed a staggering $1.5 quadrillion+ market (yes, you read that right). But it’s not just the impressive size—the breathtaking breadth of possibilities that’s truly revolutionary.
Imagine being able to buy, sell, and trade anything of value, from the most minor, most personal items to the most significant, most complex assets. Tokenization is making this a reality. For instance, a rare, vintage car can be tokenized and sold to a collector, while a massive renewable energy project can be tokenized and traded on a global market.
A small, independent filmmaker can tokenize their latest movie and sell it directly to viewers, cutting out intermediaries and retaining creative control. Meanwhile, a multinational manufacturer can tokenize its inventory, optimize logistics, and streamline operations.
A local, community-supported farm can tokenize its weekly harvest, allowing customers to pre-order and pay for their favorite produce in advance. At the same time, a global e-commerce platform can tokenize entire shipping containers, facilitating international trade and reducing transaction costs.
The possibilities for tokenization are vast, from intellectual property rights to sustainable forestry credits, from virtual event tickets to rare, collectible books. Whether it’s a small, niche item or a massive global market, tokenization unlocks new opportunities for creators, entrepreneurs, and investors.
Anything of value can be tokenized, traded, and owned. The boundaries between the physical and digital worlds are blurring, and the distinctions between asset classes are dissolving. I have researched a total of 50 different categories of assets that can be tokenized. Here are just the top 20:
The key takeaway from this section is that anybody can tokenize anything of any size or value for trade anywhere in the world. Or, it could be tokenized, programmed, monitored, and censored by 3rd parties. Either way, tokenization is here.
Key takeaways:
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
Our assets and transactions, now digitized and stored in fragile databases managed by corrupt intermediaries, are vulnerable to loss, theft, and manipulation, highlighting the risks and inefficiencies of our current digital system.
Tokenization allows secure, peer-to-peer asset transactions without middlemen and risks third-party surveillance and control.
The Tokenization of Money
The cornerstone of “You will own nothing and be happy” involves technocrats seizing control over the means of exchange for goods and services. Building on the types of tokens described in the previous section, I want to divide money tokenization into two sections: money issued by central banks/governments and money separated from the state. From there, we will look at each of their attributes.
This table provides an overview of the types of tokenized money:
At the outset, it is essential to state that most people worry about programmable, tokenized money, which exists in the form of CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins.
As we discussed earlier, our current dollar (mainly used today in digital form) can already be monitored and censored – a considerable perceived concern for those worrying about CBDCs. However, CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins both have the potential to add the following dystopian features:
Total Control through Programmable Money: CBDCs would empower governments to dictate how you spend your hard-earned money, censoring transactions at will. Imagine being denied access to books critical of those in power or having your transactions monitored like a prisoner in a digital gulag.
Expiration Dates: The idea that CBDCs could impose expiry dates on your money is another frightening reality. Your savings could vanish into thin air if you don’t spend it within a specific timeframe, leaving you powerless and vulnerable.
The surveillance aspect of CBDCs is equally chilling. Those in power would track, record, and analyze every transaction, eroding any vestige of financial privacy. The thought of governments knowing your every purchase, from coffee to groceries, is enough to send shivers down the spine of anyone who values freedom.
Negative interest rates are another potential nightmare scenario. Governments could confiscate a portion of your savings regularly, discouraging you from saving and encouraging reckless spending. These negative rates would lead to economic instability and further erosion of our financial sovereignty.
Gateway to tyranny: But it doesn’t stop there. CBDCs are designed to be integrated with social credit systems, digital IDs, vaccine passports, and even tied to our other non-monetary assets (homes, cars, stocks, bonds), creating a complete control grid over everything we think we own. Complete digital control is the ultimate goal of technocrats: a global currency backed by energy credits, with a social credit system enforcing compliance with the UN’s 2030 Agenda.
At the outset, it is essential to note that there are more CBDC accounts globally than decentralized crypto accounts. In 2020, 35 countries were mainly in the research phase of CBDCs (except China). Today, there are 134 countries at various stages of researching, piloting, and rolling out CBDCs, representing 98% of the global GDP. You can track the real-time developments of CBDCs through the Atlantic Council’s website. Eleven countries have already rolled out CBDCs (although eight in the Eastern Caribbean have moved back to the pilot phase to work out some kinks in their systems).
The technocracy movement, which started in the 1930s and picked up steam in the early 1970s with the formation of the Trilateral Commission by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, has dreamed of flipping the global economy from a price-based system to an energy-credit-based system.
If this sounds far-fetched, I want to introduce you to the Doconomy MasterCard, a credit card co-sponsored by the United Nations through its Climate Action Sustainable Development Goal (SDG), SDG 13—Climate Action. This MasterCard tracks your carbon usage; your card shuts off when you hit a specific limit.
MasterCard has brought together 150 major corporations, including banks like Barclays and HSBC, retailers like Saks Fifth Avenue and L.L.Bean, and airlines like American and Emirates to track and monitor the carbon footprint of our daily activities. The goal is to measure the environmental impact of every transaction, purchase, and action. This means that airlines will calculate the emissions from their flights, and sports organizations like the PGA Tour and Major League Baseball will assess the carbon footprint of their events. The idea is to hold companies and individuals accountable for their environmental impact, but it also raises concerns about the level of surveillance and control over our daily lives.
But let’s be clear: this initiative is not just about companies being socially responsible. It’s a new system of tracking and monitoring our carbon footprint, which could have severe implications for our freedoms. If this trend continues, we may soon face a world where every financial transaction is scrutinized for its environmental impact. This tracking could lead to a situation where we must conform to strict environmental standards with little control over our economic choices. The question is, do we want to live in a world where environmental authorities monitor and judge our every move?
I can’t state this clearly enough—for years, MasterCard has been working with large multinational corporations around the globe to track carbon, tie it to financial transactions, and halt the use of money when certain thresholds are met. This energy-credit-based system is the basis for complete digital tyranny and is the endgame of CBDCs.
We won’t get to a global energy-credit-based system in one step, and we won’t give up all of our assets in one step either – they will use salami tactics – slice by slice. It is a 3-step process:
Each nation will create a CBDC (or bank-issued stablecoin) linked to a ledger, with all other assets tokenized on the same platform.
These nation-centric CBDC/asset ledgers will interoperate with other countries’ CBDC/asset ledgers, creating one global ledger for all assets and CBDCs.
The CBDCs will convert to being backed by energy credits and tied into a global social credit system (like the UN Agenda 2030 17 SDGs) where behavior is rewarded or punished based on how behavior impacts energy usage.
Given the current presidential race, there has been much talk about CBDCs in the US. It is current policy under President Biden, through Executive Order 14067, to pursue a CBDC while taking a whole-of-government approach to regulating digital assets. In February, Trump came out strongly against CBDCs (which I had a tiny part of, as discussed in this Zero Hedge article), which he reiterated at the Bitcoin Conference in Nashville in late July. RFK, Jr. has also said he is against CBDCs.
Unfortunately, this has engendered a highly misplaced sense of complacency in many.
Under the Biden approach (which, at this point, will also be the Kamala Harris approach), we will get a CBDC likely similar to what has been piloted through Project Hamilton. Project Hamilton, a collaboration between the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and MIT’s Digital Currency Initiative, represents a significant step towards implementing a US Central Bank Digital Currency. This initiative has successfully demonstrated the technical feasibility of a digital dollar, with its prototype capable of processing an impressive 1.7 million transactions per second. This high-speed transaction capability suggests that the technology is ready for deployment and could replace traditional cash systems.
The other way we get a CBDC is through bank-issued stablecoins. Based on our description of token types above, CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins are closed systems with limited access, private operations, and centralized control. To be clear, the Republicans in the House have put together bills that would give regulated financial institutions the exclusive right to issue stablecoins. While it isn’t technically a central bank digital currency, since the banks own the central bank, in the end, it is a distinction without a difference because it will still enable all of the programmability and digital tyranny features expected from a CBDC.
We have discussed the tyranny side of tokenized money, but what of the alternatives? There are over 20,000 different cryptocurrencies; as I like to say, it’s the 99% that make the other 1% look bad. Nevertheless, there are various alternatives in the form of open systems, transparent gated systems, and privacy-focused open systems (as outlined in the table at the beginning of this section).
I will expand on the explanation of these categories, give specific examples, and then weigh the pros and cons of each.
Open Systems
Open Systems, exemplified by Bitcoin, are the pioneers of decentralized cryptocurrencies. These systems operate on a universal, permissionless network, allowing anyone to participate, verify transactions, and hold a copy of the blockchain.
Bitcoin transactions are pseudonymous, not anonymous. While users are identified by wallet addresses rather than names, these addresses can be linked to real-world identities through advanced chain analysis and AI techniques. Companies and government agencies use sophisticated tools to analyze blockchain data, track transaction patterns, and correlate this information with external data sources like exchange records and social media.
This analysis allows for the de-anonymization of users, cluster analysis of related addresses, and tracing fund flows across multiple transactions. As these technologies continue to advance, it’s becoming increasingly possible to identify the individuals behind Bitcoin and Ethereum transactions, eliminating practical anonymity on these networks. Users should know that their cryptocurrency activities may be more traceable and linkable to their real-world identities than expected—many people in prison today, including friends of mine, whose assets were identified using these methods through civil asset forfeiture laws.
The so-called Bitcoin Strategic Reserve that Trump announced at a recent Bitcoin Nashville conference would be built on coins seized through civil asset forfeiture, which raises fundamental questions about the fungibility of Bitcoin. Fungibility is a fundamental property of money that ensures that all currency units are interchangeable and of equal value. In other words, if you lend someone a $10 bill, it doesn’t matter which specific bill you give them – any $10 bill will do.
However, Bitcoin’s ability to be traced and identified through its blockchain means that not all Bitcoins are created equal. Suppose a Bitcoin has been seized through civil asset forfeiture or associated with a particular user or activity. In that case, it can be flagged and potentially whitelisted or blacklisted in the future. The ability to classify BTC into categories by address means that some Bitcoins may be treated differently, undermining their fungibility. As a result, Bitcoin fails to meet critical criteria for a reliable and trustworthy currency. Without fungibility, a currency’s value and utility are compromised, making it less useful for everyday transactions and more vulnerable to manipulation and control.
The grubby paws of state surveillance now sully Bitcoin’s promise. In recent weeks, Peter Thiel, Tucker Carlson, and Edward Snowden, the most fastidious of whistleblowers, have all sounded the tocsin: the lack of privacy in Bitcoin transactions is an affront to the very ethos of decentralization.
Transparent Gated Systems (Private Stable Coins): A Compromise on Freedom
Transparent Gated Systems, such as USDC and USDT (Tether), attempt to balance decentralization with regulatory compliance. However, this compromise comes at the cost of reduced financial freedom. These systems have key characteristics that set them apart from other currencies.
They are designed to be more accessible and user-friendly, but this comes with trade-offs. For example, participation in the network may be limited to approved entities or require specific permissions, creating barriers to entry. The level of centralization is relatively high, which can impact security and censorship resistance. Additionally, Transparent Gated Systems often engage with regulatory bodies and implement Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know-Your-Customer (KYC) procedures, increasing the risk of government surveillance.
One of the main concerns with Transparent Gated Systems is the lack of decentralization. They are often controlled by a single company or organization, which means that users’ money could be in trouble if something goes wrong with that company. This is because the currency’s value is tied to the value of a traditional currency, such as the US dollar.
Furthermore, Transparent Gated Systems are vulnerable to various risks, including:
Technical problems: The computer code that makes these coins work can be flawed or hacked, risking users’ money.
Lack of transparency: The company behind the coin might not be honest about how much money it really has, making it difficult for users to trust it.
Centralization: With private stablecoins, there’s one single point of failure. Users’ money is at risk if the company goes bankrupt or gets hacked.
Government surveillance: Because a single company controls these coins, governments can more easily track what users do with their money.
Counterparty risks: If the company backing the coin goes out of business, users could lose their money.
Liquidity risks: If many people try to withdraw their money from the coin at the same time, it could cause problems.
Market risks: Even though these coins are supposed to be stable, they can still be affected by market fluctuations.
While Transparent Gated Systems may offer some benefits, such as faster transaction times and lower fees, these benefits come with significant risks.
Ultimately, Transparent Gated Systems represent a compromise between freedom and control. They occupy a middle ground between traditional and decentralized, secure currencies like Bitcoin. However, this middle ground comes with significant trade-offs, and users must be cautious when using these systems.
Privacy-Focused Open Systems: The Guardians of Anonymity*
Privacy-focused open Systems, such as Zano, Monero, Zcash, and Pirate Chain (ARRR), are designed to protect user anonymity and confidentiality. These systems utilize advanced cryptographic techniques to conceal transaction details and participant identities, ensuring high privacy.
Another important point of differentiation exists within the realm of privacy-focused coins. Privacy coins that are private by default require no extra effort on the user’s part to remain private (Zano, Monero, and Zcash fit this description). Other coins, like Bitcoin Cash (which uses something called CashFusion) and Litecoin (which uses a technology called MimbleWimble), can optionally offer privacy. Still, it requires extra steps on the part of the user.
The benefits of Privacy-Focused Open Systems are clear. They offer robust user anonymity and confidentiality protection, making them an attractive option for those seeking to maintain their financial freedom. However, there are also potential drawbacks to consider. The complex cryptography can make these systems more vulnerable to security risks, and the smaller network size can impact decentralization.
Despite these challenges, Privacy-Focused Open Systems represent a crucial step toward creating a more private and resilient financial ecosystem. We can build a system that values individual autonomy and peer-to-peer trade by prioritizing decentralization, anonymity, and financial freedom. Ultimately, this approach can transform our thoughts about money and financial transactions and create a more equitable and just economic system.
We need not get stuck with dystopian, centralized, closed systems like those offered by CBDCs and bank-issue stablecoins. There are alternatives out there. However, open systems like Bitcoin (BTC) have proven to be too transparent for their own good and have become a form of surveillance coin.
While private stablecoins appear to improve our current digital fiat system, they involve so many intermediaries and points of failure that they undermine their use case and are highly subject to regulation.
In the end, our best path forward to stopping digital tyranny through CBDCs and bank-issued stable coins is through privacy coins and tokens like Zano, Monero, and the other coins mentioned above. At this point, all we’ve discussed is tokenized money—we haven’t even begun exploring the other 95% of the $1.5 quadrillion asset market that will be tokenized.
Tokenized money can empower individuals with decentralized, peer-to-peer transactions, promoting privacy and autonomy, or enable centralized control and surveillance through CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins.
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
Our assets and transactions, now digitized and stored in fragile databases managed by corrupt intermediaries, are vulnerable to loss, theft, and manipulation, highlighting the risks and inefficiencies of our current digital system.
Tokenization allows secure, peer-to-peer asset transactions without middlemen and risks third-party surveillance and control.
Tokenized money can empower individuals with decentralized, peer-to-peer transactions, promoting privacy and autonomy, or enable centralized control and surveillance through CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins.
The Great Taking
Money represents only 5% of total global assets. Most of the rest will ultimately be tokenized as well. However, rather than go straight to comparing and contrasting the technical options for other asset tokenization, I offer a brief interlude to share a frightful bit of news about developments related to the tokenization of stocks, bonds, and other financial instruments that might be the single most significant catalyst to fulfilling Klaus Schwab’s “You will own nothing” agenda.
David Rogers Webb is a former highly successful hedge-fund manager and author who has exposed the most significant financial heist of our time in his book The Great Taking. For several months, I’ve reached Webb’s work and collaborated with people to help spread the word about what he’s uncovered. You can watch the video and read the book for free.
As our current financial system begins to show signs of stress, I am seeing people share clips from movies about the 2008 crisis, such as The Big Short and Margin Call. Imagine if you could watch/read about the next collapse and its aftermath BEFORE it actually happened and take steps to protect yourself. That’s how important I believe this material is.
Webb’s meticulous research reveals how, in the aftermath of the 2008 collapse, these financial overlords colluded to quietly rewrite the laws of all 50 states, effectively rigging the system to ensure that when the subsequent great financial collapse occurs, the spoils will be theirs for the taking. The targets of this insidious plan? Your stocks, bonds, 401(k)s, and retirement accounts – the very foundations of middle-class security.
Here’s how it will play out: when the next collapse comes, the largest banks, now positioned as secured creditors, will swoop in to claim ownership of these assets through bankruptcy proceedings. It’s a cleverly designed trap that will leave millions of Americans with nothing but the faint memory of a nest egg they once thought was their own.
Webb’s exposé makes it clear that this is no accident but a deliberate, calculated move to consolidate wealth and power in the hands of the few. The ‘Great Taking’ is not just a clever title; it’s a stark warning of the most significant transfer of wealth in history, leaving most Americans with nothing but the shirts on their backs.
Let’s begin with the basics. When you “buy” stocks (publicly through a 401K and using a broker), you don’t receive the actual stock certificates or have direct ownership rights. Instead, your broker holds them in “street name,” and there are multiple layers of intermediaries between you and the actual stock. The Depository Trust Company (DTC) and its nominee, Cede & Co., own most shares, with your broker and other financial institutions holding mere electronic records of your “beneficial ownership.” This “indirect holding” system is a labyrinthine construct designed to make trading more efficient, which also means you don’t own your stocks directly.
To make this point even more precise, in 2012, when Hurricane Sandy hit New York, one of DTCC’s vaults housing these stock certificates flooded, soaking 1.3 million. That single vault held paper stock certificates valued at over $39 trillion!
The DTCC vault was flooded in 2012 – soaking 1.3 million stock certificates. Note: This is not an actual picture but added to show how centralized our stocks are and that we don’t own the shares.
But that’s not all. Large institutional investors like BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, who manage massive index funds and ETFs, have voting rights for the shares they hold, giving them influence over company decisions, even though individual investors technically own the underlying shares. And suppose you think that’s not enough. In that case, many brokerages engage in practices like securities lending, where they can lend out “your” shares to short sellers for a profit, often without your knowledge or any benefit to you.
So, when you see charts like this showing that Blackrock, Vanguard, and State Street own everything, the irony is that our stocks are purchased with the money we think we own that we’ve given them voting rights to. And, in a great financial collapse, secured creditors (like JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup) will own our stocks through bankruptcy!
Now, you may be thinking, “What’s the big deal? I still get my dividends and can sell my stocks whenever possible.” But, my friends, that’s precisely the point. You don’t own the stocks; you own a right to the value and benefits of those stocks. And in a financial crisis, this could complicate who owns what.
This, my friends, is the Great Taking – a potential massive transfer of wealth legally enabled by changes most people are unaware of. It’s a stark reminder that the very foundations of our financial system are designed to protect the interests of large institutions at the expense of individual investors. You don’t own your investments; you merely have a contractual claim against a system rigged against you.
Here’s the even more worrisome development. Wall Street is working with the central banks and others to develop a system for tokenizing these stocks and bonds on the same platform as CBDCs. Once this is done, The Great Taking could happen with the click of a mouse button. Everything will be tokenized; the default tokenization is through a closed system, and we have to begin looking for alternatives before it is too late.
Key Takeaways
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
Our assets and transactions, now digitized and stored in fragile databases managed by corrupt intermediaries, are vulnerable to loss, theft, and manipulation, highlighting the risks and inefficiencies of our current digital system.
Tokenization allows secure, peer-to-peer asset transactions without middlemen and risks third-party surveillance and control.
Tokenized money can empower individuals with decentralized, peer-to-peer transactions, promoting privacy and autonomy, or enable centralized control and surveillance through CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins.
The tokenization of financial assets, driven by changes in laws and economic systems, risks enabling a massive wealth transfer to large banks and institutions, leaving individual investors with mere contractual claims rather than actual ownership.
Similar to tokenized money, tokenizing assets poses a significant risk of centralization and control, potentially leading to the confiscation of assets by authorities through centralized platforms like the Regulated Liability Network (RLN). Alternatives exist to promote decentralization and autonomy. The RLN is a catalyst for The Great Taking.
Tokenizing Other Assets
So, there you have it. Legally, you don’t own your stocks, bonds, and 401Ks. Just like with our privacy and data ownership, we have given away our ownership in our retirement investment vehicles, in this case, through click-wrap agreements and strategic changes made by the incumbent financial services industry through changes in the UCC laws in all 50 states.
The tyranny versus freedom aspects of tokenizing money, described in the previous section, apply to tokenizing all other assets as well.
Let’s start with the bad news first. Just as the growth of CBDCs has dwarfed the development of decentralized cryptocurrencies, it appears that all of the momentum is now on the dystopian command and control side of the tokenization of other assets. Generally, tokenized assets through the CBDC system will use the Transparent Gated System type.
Transparent Gated Systems (Permissioned Systems)
Transparent Gated Systems, such as the Regulated Liability Network (RLN), attempt to balance decentralization with regulatory compliance. However, this compromise comes at the cost of reduced financial freedom. Key characteristics include:
Limited Access: Participation in the network may be limited to approved entities or require specific permissions, creating barriers to entry.
High Centralization: These systems are often controlled by a single company or organization, increasing the risk of security and censorship issues.
Regulatory Compliance: Transparent Gated Systems often engage with regulatory bodies and implement Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know-Your-Customer (KYC) procedures, increasing the risk of government surveillance.
What is a Regulated Liability Network (RLN)?
The Regulated Liability Network (RLN) is a proposed global financial infrastructure that aims to digitize and connect various forms of money and assets across countries. Here’s an explanation for a general audience:
What is the RLN?
The RLN is envisioned as a shared digital platform where central banks, commercial banks, and other regulated financial institutions can issue, transfer, and settle digital versions of traditional financial assets. This platform includes central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), tokenized bank deposits, government bonds, stocks, and potentially even regulated versions of cryptocurrencies and stablecoins (imagine having to register Bitcoin, Ethereum, and your other cryptos on a centralized system).
How it works:
Digital tokens: Financial assets are represented as digital tokens on the network. These are permissioned tokens, as per the table above.
Multiple oversight: Authorized parties, including central banks, financial regulators, and law enforcement agencies, can monitor, track, and potentially censor these tokens.
Asset registration: An asset must be registered and approved for trading on the RLN. This registration applies to stocks, bonds, stablecoins, and potentially other cryptocurrencies.
KYC/AML implications: The system would require strict Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) procedures. Every participant and transaction would be identifiable, eliminating anonymity.
Global connectivity: Different countries’ CBDCs and financial systems would connect to the RLN, creating a global digital asset and money platform.
Key players behind the RLN:
MIT (research and development)
Federal Reserve Bank of New York (central bank involvement)
Bank for International Settlements (BIS) (international coordination)
Large global banks (as potential participants and developers)
Relation to “The Great Taking:”
The RLN is the missing piece that could facilitate large-scale asset transfers or seizures due to its comprehensive nature and the level of control it offers to authorities. Here’s a table illustrating how the RLN might relate to aspects of “The Great Taking:”
I know that this table has a lot of technical jargon, so let me simplify the explanation:
The Regulated Liability Network (RLN) is the ultimate tool for the wholesale theft of our assets. Imagine a world where all your financial assets are neatly tokenized and stored on a centralized platform, just waiting to be “reallocated” by the benevolent authorities. And don’t worry; it’s all legitimate because the RLN is designed to comply with all the relevant financial regulations.
It’s like a digital version of the Reichstag Fire Decree, where the government can seize control of all assets in the name of “national security.” Your stocks, bonds, and securities are converted into “security entitlements,” which can be easily confiscated by the powers that be. And don’t even think about trying to hide your assets because the RLN has real-time visibility into all transactions, ensuring that no one can escape the all-seeing eye of the authorities.
The RLN also has smart contracts, which can automate large-scale asset transfers based on predefined conditions. It’s like a digital version of the Soviet Union’s forced collectivization, where the state can seize control of all assets in the name of “the greater good.” By integrating the RLN and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), the authorities can compensate you for confiscating assets using their digital funny money.
This is the essence of the RLN, stripped of its technical jargon and presented in all its Orwellian glory. The table may spell out the details in dry, technical terms, but the end result is the same: a system designed to facilitate the massive confiscation of assets under the guise of “regulation” and “compliance.”
And just like that, You will own nothing, but I am certain you won’t be happy.
Just as there are categories of alternatives to CBDCs, there are also alternatives to centralized, dystopian asset tokenization. We will review them now.
Key Takeaways
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
Our assets and transactions, now digitized and stored in fragile databases managed by corrupt intermediaries, are vulnerable to loss, theft, and manipulation, highlighting the risks and inefficiencies of our current digital system.
Tokenization allows secure, peer-to-peer asset transactions without middlemen and risks third-party surveillance and control.
Tokenized money can empower individuals with decentralized, peer-to-peer transactions, promoting privacy and autonomy, or enable centralized control and surveillance through CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins.
The tokenization of financial assets, driven by changes in laws and economic systems, risks enabling a massive wealth transfer to large banks and institutions, leaving individual investors with mere contractual claims rather than actual ownership.
Alternatives to Centralized Asset Tokenization
We have discussed the tyrannical side of tokenized money, but what about the alternatives for tokenizing other assets? Various options exist in the form of open systems, transparent gated systems, and privacy-focused open systems. Here, I will expand on these categories, provide specific examples, and weigh the pros and cons of each.
Open Systems
Open Systems, exemplified by Ethereum and Ravencoin, are pioneers in the decentralized tokenization of assets. These systems operate on a universal, permissionless network, allowing anyone to create, transfer, and verify asset tokens on the blockchain. The critical attributes of Open Systems are:
Universal Access: Anyone can join the network, regardless of geographical location or financial status.
High Decentralization: Transactions and token creations are verified by a vast network of nodes, making it difficult for any single entity to control the system.
Low Regulatory Oversight: Open Systems operate independently of traditional financial institutions and regulatory bodies, minimizing the risk of government interference.
Transparency: All transactions are publicly visible, ensuring asset ownership and transfer transparency.
Open Systems offer unparalleled decentralization, security, and censorship resistance, making them an attractive option for those seeking to tokenize assets freely.
However, similar to the problems mentioned above regarding Bitcoin needing to be a viable alternative to CBDCs, the transparency of transactions can still be used to track and analyze user activity, potentially compromising privacy.
Privacy-Focused Open Systems: The Guardians of Anonymity
Privacy-Focused Open Systems, such as Zano, are designed to protect user anonymity and confidentiality. These systems utilize advanced cryptographic techniques to conceal transaction details and participant identities, ensuring a high level of privacy.
Universal Access: Anyone can join the network, regardless of location or financial status.
Decentralization: While still decentralized, these systems often rely on smaller networks and more complex cryptography, which can impact security.
Low Regulatory Oversight: Privacy-Focused Open Systems operate independently of traditional financial institutions and regulatory bodies, minimizing the risk of government interference.
High Privacy: Transactions are designed to be highly private, making it challenging to link participants to their real-world identities.
Privacy-Focused Open Systems offer robust protection for user anonymity and confidentiality, making them an attractive option for those seeking to tokenize assets privately.
The complex cryptography can make these systems more vulnerable to security risks, and the smaller network size can impact decentralization.
So far, the best solution I’ve found to The Great Taking is a cryptocurrency called Zano. Zano (as mentioned in the section on the tokenization of money) allows you to tokenize assets, hold them in your self-custody wallet, and trade them anywhere in the world without 3rd parties. You can learn more about this technology at https://zano.org. I am new to the exploration of this technology. I have already used Zano to tokenize and trade a physical goldback and am testing various other applications. I believe this technology could be the basis for an international barter system. I am not making investment recommendations; I strongly suggest you do your research and try using it directly.
Key Takeaways
We have unknowingly given away most of our rights through countless digital agreements we sign without reading, eroding personal ownership and autonomy and making our assets vulnerable to corporate control.
Our assets and transactions, now digitized and stored in fragile databases managed by corrupt intermediaries, are vulnerable to loss, theft, and manipulation, highlighting the risks and inefficiencies of our current digital system.
Tokenization allows secure, peer-to-peer asset transactions without middlemen and risks third-party surveillance and control.
Tokenized money can empower individuals with decentralized, peer-to-peer transactions, promoting privacy and autonomy, or enable centralized control and surveillance through CBDCs and bank-issued stablecoins.
The tokenization of financial assets, driven by changes in laws and economic systems, risks enabling a massive wealth transfer to large banks and institutions, leaving individual investors with mere contractual claims rather than actual ownership.
Alternatives to centralized asset tokenization include open systems like Ethereum and Ravencoin, which offer universal access and high decentralization but come with significant surveillance risks due to transaction transparency. In contrast, privacy-focused systems like Zano prioritize user anonymity and confidentiality, making them a crucial solution to avoid government interference and ensure secure, private asset ownership and transfers. Zano’s advanced cryptographic techniques protect against tracking and surveillance, providing a robust safeguard for tokenizing assets privately and securely.
The Urgency of Action: Radical Non-Compliance
We stand at the crossroads of financial freedom. The threat of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and the Regulated Liability Network (RLN) looms large, posing an existential threat not only to alternative asset classes but also to free will itself. These centralized systems for asset tokenization aim to control not just our money but our very lives.
But we don’t have to surrender to this dystopian future. We have alternatives that can stop all asset tokenization in its tracks. Cryptocurrencies like Zano, Monero, and Bitcoin Cash (with CashFusion) offer a decentralized, private, and secure way to transact and store value. Tokenized gold and silver provide a digital representation of physical precious metals, combining the benefits of cryptocurrencies with the time-tested value of gold and silver.
Physical gold and silver outside the banking system provide a tangible store of value that can’t be quickly seized or controlled digitally. These precious metals have been used as money for thousands of years and offer a reliable alternative to fiat currencies.
It’s time for the alternative currency fields to unite. Cryptocurrency enthusiasts, precious metals investors, and advocates of financial freedom must work together to create a multi-asset approach that will render CBDCs and RLN obsolete. We need to actively use these alternative assets in our daily lives, creating parallel economies that operate outside the control of centralized institutions.
Using privacy alternatives is more than just money – it is about owning our assets. It’s about controlling our destinies and preserving voluntary trade, the basis of free will. We can’t rely on a single asset or system. We need diverse alternatives, working together in harmony, to create a world where financial freedom is a reality.
So, let’s join forces. Let’s use Zano, Monero, Bitcoin Cash (with CashFusion), tokenized gold, tokenized silver, and physical gold and silver to create a world where our economic choices are our own. Let’s build a future where decentralized, private, and secure asset tokenization is the norm.
The Exit the System Movement: Empowering Individuals
I stopped using a personal bank account in 2019 and have been using self-custody crypto, gold, and silver for my day-to-day life since then.
Since 2018, I have also been tokenizing and trading various assets worldwide, including silver, art, wine, clothing, and more.
I wrote The Final Countdown to be a book that someone with no technical know-how could read and walk away understanding the CBDC threat, the inevitable failure of fiat currency (the dollar), and be able to follow simple instructions to download a crypto wallet, obtain crypto, gold, and silver, and to begin using these assets and break free from the system.
In the past six months, the threat of The Great Taking has reached the top of my radar. I am adding to my repertoire of solutions to digital tyranny the ability to tokenize and trade any asset of any size anywhere in the world without third parties.
While many found the book illuminating, not as many were taking the first step to use these alternative assets. My goal in everything I do is not to be a doom peddler but rather to empower people with solutions. I have begun conducting four-hour workshops across the US to teach people the material, set them up with a crypto wallet, tokenized asset, gold, and silver, and show precisely how to use it.
To this end, a grassroots movement is emerging to help people “Exit the System.” I am leading a series of workshops across 17 US cities (with more to come) to educate individuals on practical steps to protect their assets and privacy. These workshops cover various topics, including the truth about the emerging global technocracy and its threats to financial freedom as CBDCs, Universal Basic Income, digital IDs, and social credit scores become a reality.
I empower participants with knowledge of cryptocurrency and blockchain basics, navigating regulatory storms, self-custody and securing digital assets, mastering precious metals like gold and silver, and private asset tokenization to maintain control over your wealth. I also went into detail about the “Great Taking” to ensure you aren’t caught off guard. Learn about the Uniform Commercial Code changes and the Regulated Liability Network and how to protect your financial holdings. Take control of your financial future and make informed decisions with a comprehensive reference guide, joining the movement towards financial freedom and sovereignty.
As detailed in Alan Lash’s recent Zero Hedge article, “Money’s Grim Future,” these workshops provide crucial information and strategies for financial self-defense. Lash writes, “The coming crisis will be used as an excuse to implement a new financial system that gives unprecedented power to central authorities. Those who aren’t prepared will find themselves at the mercy of this system.”
The Daylight Freedom initiative, accessible at https://daylightfreedom.org, offers resources and opportunities for those interested in attending, sponsoring, or hosting these vital workshops nationwide. This grassroots effort aims to create a network of informed and prepared individuals who can resist the encroachment of financial tyranny.
It is becoming beyond urgent to understand and resist one particular strand of all that is imminent. In fact, the move by world governments to sign up to the WHO global pandemic treaty is the principal mechanism, all outwardly very warm and fuzzy, by which our remaining freedoms could completely disappear.
Our country and many others will be completely beholden to WHO’s definitions of what constitutions a health emergency, and the dictates it compels against the people. The digital apparatus to enable a health passport easily integrates digital currency and financial controls, track and trace of cases etc. We have written on all this before.
Mike Adams of Natural News interviews Francis Boyle, a recognised expert on pandemic treaties and bioweapons who has drafted much international legislation himself. Early in 2020 he was calling out Covid-19 as a bioweapon released from Wuhan Institute of Virology before anyone else, a view now generally accepted as being absolutely correct.
Here is Mike’s article on the pandemic treaty, which contains the interview, which is also available separately here.
In the article Mike refers to James Roguski, who has laid out what the current pandemic treaty entails for the many countries tied to the WHO agenda – tied, as we now know to such illustrious ‘humanitarian’ organisations as the CCP, WEF, GAVI, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Penalty clauses for countries that refuse to enact overbearing controls on their citizens for the pandemic du jour, allow for UN troops to enter the country to enforce compliance.
Don’t think it can happen here? Why do we think we were taught history, then? As a warning of what some psychopathic people are capable of. What parts of the last 3 years did we ever imagine we would see in our lifetimes, here in ‘free’ New Zealand?
Forced experimentation on pregnant women and children; lockups; forced face coverings against all scientific evidence; business closures with fines for disobedience; travel restrictions; border controls; widespread deaths and injuries with resulting cover-ups and press silence; literal sabotage of our ability to refine our own oil; radical attacks on water, the health system, farming, and race relations.
The move to firmly equate global health with the climate by bodies like WHO, WEF and UN is for one reason only – to justify further terrible impositions, that they hope we have gotten used to, on whatever freedoms we have left. All in the guise of saving the planet. But for whom is it being saved for?
Truly dark times are being planned. It is the only explanation for everything we are seeing. Complain to your MP and demand they pull us from the global “governance” structures that are only about power and control. Reassert your own. Join a freedom group, or sign up to NZRising.co.nz.
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Then use the fear to do what is right.
Approach Your MP and Demand Withdrawal from the Pandemic Treaty
Complain to your MP and demand they pull us from the global “governance” structures that are only about one thing – power and control.
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Then use the fear to do what is right.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/challenging-un-study-finds-sun-not-co2-may-be-behind-global-warming_3950089.html?utm_campaign=socialshare_twitter&utm_source=twitter.com By Alex Newman The sun and not human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) may be the main cause of warmer temperatures in recent decades, according to a new study with findings that sharply contradict the conclusions of the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The peer-reviewed paper, produced by a team of almost […]
Image: Twitter America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) spoke to former Pfizer Vice President and Chief Science Officer Dr. Mike Yeadon about his views on the COVID-19 vaccine, hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, the regulatory authorities, and more. At the outset, Dr. Yeadon said “I’m well aware of the global crimes against humanity being perpetrated against a large proportion of the worlds […]
Even in The Netherlands, the agenda is out in the open. This article states that only another COVID-19 lockdown makes it possible to reach some of those 2020 climate goals. What a coincidence: a few days later they are telling us the partial lockdown is expanded and extended, probably for the rest of the year.
These politicians are puppets of Schwab, Gates and Soros. In the end they will kill more people then Hitler and Stalin did. At least those dictators of the past did it out in the open so everyone could see they are evil.
Kind regards
S
REPLY: They are extremely well funded. They have infiltrated everywhere in the West. Soros is forcing his open society which is really a one-world government, Gates is getting his climate change and population reduction by restricting the food supply, and Schwab is getting his new communist world order he has been pushing as stakeholder economics and the entire lot is being sold as the Great Reset.
Elected politicians are moving into the authoritarian mode, they will suspend elections killing democracy, we are the great unwashed, too stupid to understand what is best for us. Boris Johnson has implemented Guaranteed Basic Income for Britain. Everyone will get 80% of their wages and he has suspended all mortgage payments for 6 months. This is the end of banking, it is the end of capitalism, freedom, and the West has fully embraced Marxism.
Boris knows what he is doing. He is deliberately destroying small businesses because they employ 70% of the civil workforce. He is handing out welfare (Guaranteed Basic Income). suspending all debts which undermined the entire banking system. By sheer force, he is creating a communist revolution and the police are so stupid, they are carrying out his orders destroying their own family’s future.
In the United States, they are pulling out all the stops to ensure they steal this election from Trump. They caught a guy in Florida registering dead people for Biden. The same is taking place around the country.
I fear that the only outcome will be a Civil War at this point. While Trump should win, I deeply fear this election will be so corrupt that they will steal it from him to subjugate the United States as they are doing in Europe and then use the military might threatening China and Russia to comply with their new one-world government centered in the United Nations to comply with Climate Change demands. They are destroying everything for this Great Reset ending fossil fuels and controlling population growth.
In the early 1900s, the globally-averaged distribution of calculated surface temperature estimates ranged between 14°C (57.2F) and 15°C (59F). For 1991-2018, HadCRUT, Berkeley, and NASA GISS also estimate today’s global temperature is about 14.5°C (58.1°F). Scientists estimating Earth’s surface temperature has been an ongoing pursuit since the early 19th century. A new study (Kramm et […]
“This is a great failure of our democratic process. The new legislation [..] will result in sweeping police powers unseen in this country for many years”
New Zealand will effectively be in a state of emergency for up to two Years
Under New Zealand law a state of emergency is something that must be reassessed week by week. With the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020 the government has created, in fact, if not in name, a state of emergency that will last at least three months, with provision to be extended a number of times, up to a maximum period of two years (the original Bill specified a default period of two years). Furthermore, Jacinda Ardern has already flagged that the country may return to the even more draconian restrictions of Level 3, entailing, for example, virtual house arrest for most of the population, if the number of cases (no matter how mild) rises again.
The original Bill specified a default period of two years unless a conscious decision was made to shorten it through an Order in Council: this was only altered after amendments from the National and Act Parties. Jacinda Ardern has already granted herself special powers with regard to immigration, to be in force for 12 months.
Jacinda Ardern has passed a bill that gives the government, the police and ‘authorised persons’ undreamed of powers to control the lives of New Zealand citizens, for up to two years. All this is on the back of a disease that the New Zealand experience and a vast body of research show to be no different from any other seasonal virus, and milder than many.
“The purpose of the Act is to support a public health response to COVID-19”
There is nothing in the Act that indicates why such a response is necessary – it is taken as read.
Bypassing due process
The government had seven weeks to prepare its measures for ‘coming out of the lockdown’. However, it has continued the precedent it set with the gun legislation of choosing without justification to fast-track highly controversial legislation, with no select committee and no consultation with the public. Furthermore, no regulatory impact assessment has been carried out – the government has suspended regulatory impact assessments for all ‘COVID-19 responses’ by decree of Cabinet (not parliament) until 31 August 2020.
The Act gives the government extraordinary powers
The government can now legally make orders that limit freedom of association and of movement, require quarantining, require intrusive testing – even though there is no known reliable test for Covid-19 – and make decisions based on that unreliable testing.
An order may be made by the Minister or Director-General of Health to require a person to:
(i) stay in any specified place or refrain from going to any specifiedplace:(ii) refrain from associating with specified persons:(iii) stay physically distant from any persons in any specified way:(iv) refrain from travelling to or from any specified area:(v) refrain from carrying out specified activities (for example, businessactivities involving close personal contact) or require specifiedactivities to be carried out only in any specified way or incompliance with specified measures:(vi) be isolated or quarantined in any specified place or in any specifiedway:
(vii) refrain from participating in gatherings of any specified kind, inany specified place, or in specified circumstances:(viii) report for medical examination or testing in any specified way orin any specified circumstances:(ix) provide, in specified circumstances or in any specified way, anyinformation necessary for the purpose of contact tracing: (Section 11)
These powers also can be applied to ‘different classes of persons’ (section 12). An example of this would be permanently quarantining all those over 70 years of age ‘until a vaccine is available’, as mooted in the UK.
The Act gives the police, health officers and ‘authorised persons’ extraordinary powers, including powers of entry
‘State-sanctioned vigilantes’
“The Director-General may authorise a suitably qualified and trained person […] to carry out any functions and powers of an enforcement officer under this Act.” In his speech to the Bill, Simon O’Connor MP referred to such authorised persons as “state-sanctioned vigilantes [..]. They will have the power, not only to watch and report on what you do, but to shut you down“.
Any enforcement officer can enter place or vehicle without a warrant, with the exception of private dwellings, if they have “reasonable grounds”
“An enforcement officer [ie a police officer, an employee of the health department, or any authorised person] may enter, without a warrant, any land, building, craft,vehicle, place, or thing if they have reasonable grounds to believe that a personis failing to comply with any aspect of a section 11 order.“
Police officers, but not other enforcement officers, can make a forced entry into private dwellings without a warrant (section 20).
“(3) A constable may enter a private dwellinghouse without warrant only if they have reasonable grounds to believe that people have gathered there in contravention of a section 11 order and entry is necessary for the purpose of giving a direction under section 21.‘(4) A constable exercising a power of entry under this section may use reasonable force in order to effect entry into or onto the land, building, craft, vehicle, place, or thing if, following a request, a person present refuses entry or does not allow entry within a reasonable time.”
Power to give directions to stop or carry out activity
“An enforcement officer may direct a person to stop any activity that is contravening or likely to contravene the order or to take an action that ensures compliance with section 11”
(section 21)
Power to close roads and public places (section 22)
If a section 11 order provides, “a constable or an enforcement officer acting under the authority of the constable may totally or partially prohibit or restrict public access, with or without vehicles, to any road or public place in that area”.
‘Enforcement officers’ have the power to demand identifying information (section 23)
Non-compliance
Non-compliance renders the culprit liable to a fine or imprisonment, e.g.
“A person commits an offence if the person intentionally fails to comply with a section 11 order.(2) A person who commits an offence against subsection (1) is liable on conviction to—(a) imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months; or(b) a fine not exceeding $4,000.”
The government knows it’s a cold virus
Numerous eminent professors of virology, epidemiology, pulmonology etc have said from the beginning that this is just another seasonal virus; that the best strategy is to allow the healthy to develop natural immunity and protect the vulnerable – i.e. do what we’ve always done. The response of Prof Alexander Kekulé, chair of Medical Microbiology and Virology of the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, is typical – “Infect the young and protect others at risk’”
Assessments of the virus have continued to downgrade its lethality over the months as more information has come to light. A new antibody study with Danish blood donors shows a very low COVID-19 lethality (IFR) of 0.08% for persons under 70 years of age: a new antibody study from Iran also shows lethality of 0.08% to 0.12%.
The New Zealand government has made it very clear that it is aware of the true nature of COVID-19. At the regular press briefings we are told (repeatedly):
Ashley Bloomfield (Director-General of Health) ‘As we have seen around the world, Covid-19 CAN be a deadly disease – particularly for older people, and those with underlying pre-existing health issues.’ (Bloomfield’s emphasis)
Jacinda Ardern (Prime Minister): ‘our older NZers, and those with underlying health issues, are BY FAR at the most risk. It is critical that we all stay at home to give our older NZers as much protection as we possibly can.’ […] (Ardern’s emphasis)
Caroline McElnay (Director of Public Health): “As we have said previously, this can be a very serious disease, particularly for elderly people and also for those with underlying health conditions”.
So no more than a seasonal flu, which can be dangerous for those who are highly immune-compromised, who should be protected.
Considerable license is applied when it comes to determining whether a death is from COVID-19. This report given by Ashley Bloomfield at a ‘Daily COVID-19 media conference’ is typical (4:00 mins):
“Sadly today, I have another Covid-19 related [sic] death to report. […] The person who passed away […] had underlying health conditions and was considered a probable case of Covid-19 due to her clinical presentation and past exposure history, despite testing negative.”
The New Zealand experience of COVID-19 confirms the scientific assessment: the average age of the deceased is 80; all had serious underlying health issues; many had advanced Alzheimers. No caregiver has died from COVID-19, nor any international traveller. (International flights from Auckland, for example, are more than half of what they were a year ago – a traveller on an international Air New Zealand flight has reported that no social distancing is applied at all.)
The Hamburg experience has been similar to that of New Zealand: again, the average age is 80, and the deceased had multiple comorbidities. Klaus Püschel, head of forensic medicine at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, and his team have been autopsying all the people who died in Hamburg in connection with the coronavirus. He has concluded that the hysteria over the coronavirus is ‘completely exaggerated’ as all fatalities he examined had serious previous illnesses which would have soon resulted in death with or without the virus. “There is no killer virus.“
It has been known for months that the sensational reports of mass numbers of deaths overseas have been grossly exaggerated. Administrations in countries such as Italy, the US, and the UK have had policies of declaring deaths to be COVID-19 in case of any doubt – sometimes on the flimsiest basis. Media reports have ignored local factors, such as Northern Italy’s high pollution rate (the highest in Europe), its problem with pulmonary disease, and its antibiotic resistance rate (again the highest in Europe) – data from the Italian authorities show that around 80% of the deceased were treated with antibiotics, indicating bacterial superinfections (the deaths would still be recorded as being due to coronavirus).
There is doubt whether anyone has died from COVID-19. Jacinda Ardern has declaredwhat amounts to a two-year state of emergency for something she knows to be nothing more than a seasonal virus.
The World Health Organisation is now hinting that COVID-19 may not be eradicated, and that ‘countries may have to learn how to live with the virus even if a vaccine is developed’. This will give Jacinda Ardern the justification, should she be re-elected, for continuing and further entrenching her totalitarian regime for as long as she remains in power.
See also:
Facts about Covid-19, which monitors and reports all new research and developments relating to the Covid19 project.
Anyone who thinks for one second that I am exaggerating by calling this a global coup does not know me very well. I do not buy into conspiracy theories. I rely upon qualified sources – not rumor or conjecture. I have WARNED that we are facing a leftist coup of major proportions. I have warned that this virus was not a real threat from the beginning. It was not a biological weapon spliced with aids or a leak. This has been an intentional misrepresentation. My sources suggest it existed in the previous flu season in China.
The United Nations, and their World Health Organization, is behind this coup as well. The death toll is far less than the annual flu (about 10%) but the press is so happy to support this Marxist agenda. The journalists who are following orders from their managing editors are sealing their own future and that of their families and children. They used this virus for there is no vaccine but there are plenty of independent sources saying the medicine to treat malaria have been working with no deaths in France and elsewhere.
The United Nations has now produced a 26-page report outlining an action plan to address the various socio-economic impacts of COVID-19 and the DESTRUCTION of the world economy that has been intentionally carried out by the left. The United Nations has been using Climate Change to try to create a one-world government order, but they have run into way too much resistance. Climate Change is now dead. They have moved on to something that allows them to threaten that people will die IMMEDIATELY unless they surrender all their freedoms. The agenda of the Climate Change was to seize industry and effectively nationalize them. They will do that now by virtually bankrupting them and the state will just take them over. This is the scheme that was even talked about in Germany to nationalize companies since they cannot bail them out.
This is the oldest trick in the book. The United Nations is seeking the power to IMPOSE a 10% global tax on everyone for what they are describing as a “global health crisis unlike any in the 75-year history of the United Nations.” This is because they conspired to create one out of a hyped up virus. You would think this is at the level of the Black Death.
Everything we have ever believed were our human rights are no longer valid. The left was trying to shut down all gun sales. Trump called gun shops essential for protection in light of rising civil unrest. This is the left moving AGGRESSIVELY to force their failed agenda to the ultimate power grab. The pension system is collapsing. All the promises they have made since World War II are crumbling to dust. This is why they have been so intent upon getting rid of Trump and were fighting against BREXIT. They want no opposition. This is why I have tried to document everything and made this report only $9.95. This is our future on the line.
The Michael Mann “Hockey Stick” is suddenly back in the news. It’s been so long since we have heard from it, do you even remember what it is? The “Hockey Stick” is the graph that took the world of climate science by storm back in 1998. That’s when Mann and co-authors Raymond Bradley and […]
Rasputin, described as “The Holy Devil,” moved to St. Petersburg in 1906 and began to gain access to the royal family of Tsar Nicholas II. Posing as a mystic, Rasputin was known for strange prophecies, claims of superstitious healing powers, and sexual excesses. As the Tsar and his family came under Rasputin’s spell, the monarch’s credibility suffered, his authority was undermined, and public distrust spread.
At this time, Tsar Nicholas escalated his father’s policy of restricting Jews and implementing a full anti-Jewish “pogrom” of cruel persecution. More then 2 millions Jews fled, many to the United States. It was a tragedy, which, in a way, spared them from future Russian tragedies.
World War I started in 1914. Fighting raged from Europe to the Middle East.
The Tsar sent three million Russian soldiers west to fight Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II. Unprepared to face German heavy artillery, over 78,000 Russians were killed or wounded and over 90,000 captured at the Battle of Tannenberg, August 26-30, 1914. Within a year, over 1.4 million Russian soldiers were killed and nearly a million captured.
Russian General Denikin described: “The German heavy artillery swept away whole lines of trenches, and their defenders with them. We hardly replied. There was nothing with which we could reply. Our regiments, although completely exhausted, were beating off one attack after another by bayonet. … Blood flowed unendingly, the ranks became thinner and thinner and thinner. The number of graves multiplied.”
Russia’s disillusionment with the Tsar grew. This, together with severe cold weather and food shortages, allowed Vladimir Lenin’s community organizers to agitate and fan unrest, leading to the Bolshevik Revolution – Red October of 1917.
Lenin distributed propaganda, incited class warfare, provoked strikes, staged bank robberies, attacked police and ordered assassinations. Embracing Karl Marx’s socialism, Lenin forced the Tsar from power, seized control of the government, then proceeded to arrest, imprison and execute tens of thousands of Russians in a Red Terror. Tsar Nicholas II and his family were executed.
Because there were relatively few revolutionaries, they used terror as a tactic to coerce people to hurriedly surrender their freedoms to a totalitarian government.
Lenin wrote: “It is necessary – secretly and urgently – to prepare the terror.”
To his revolutionaries in the city of Nizhny Novgorod, Lenin ordered in a telegram: “to introduce mass terror.”
Lenin instructed on how to treat “kulak” farmers: “Comrades! The kulak uprising in your five districts must be crushed without pity. … You must make example of these people. Hang (I mean hang publicly, so that people see it) at least 100 kulaks, rich bastards, and known bloodsuckers. Publish their names. Seize all their grain. Single out the hostages per my instructions in yesterday’s telegram. Do all this so that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble, and tell themselves that we are killing the bloodthirsty kulaks and that we will continue to do so. … Yours, Lenin. P.S. Find tougher people.”
The policy of “dekulakization” – the killing off of millions of independent “kulak” farmers – removed those who could challenge Lenin’s power. It also had the unanticipated consequence of devastating food production, resulting in the horrendous national famine of 1921-22, where an estimated 5 million died.
Bolsheviks replaced the Christian religion with a materialistic atheism. Church property was confiscated or destroyed. Free speech and free press were prohibited. Private property was abolished.
Centralizing power, Vladimir Lenin explained: “The goal of socialism is communism.”
In 1924, as Lenin lay dying, suffering from incessant headaches, Joseph Stalin usurped power, even circulating a fake photo doctored to have him sitting next to Lenin. Stalin then ruled as an absolute dictator of the Soviet Union.
Franklin Roosevelt told the American Youth Congress, Feb. 10, 1940: “The Soviet Union … is run by a dictatorship as absolute as any other dictatorship in the world.”
Stalin’s “Great Purge of 1936-38” executed an estimated 1.2 million Communist Party members, government officials, military leaders and peasants who were accused of being disloyal.
Simply a rumor of holding politically incorrect views or associating with “enemies of the people,” could result in someone losing their job, being arrested and executed, or being one of the 4.5 million sentenced to “gulag” labor camps.
One of those arrested was Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who was born in Russia on Dec. 11, 1918. Solzhenitsyn was detained for writing a letter criticizing Joseph Stalin. He spent 11 years in “gulag” labor camps.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn began secretly compiling horror stories of life in the gulags. For several years of his imprisonment, 1947-52, he was denied pen and paper, so he composed and memorized chapters as poems. He put these accounts into his book “The First Circle,” 1968, and then “The Gulag Archipelago.”
An “archipelago” is a chain of islands in the ocean. Solzhenitsyn used this metaphor to describe a chain of FEMA-style citizen detention camps across Russia.
Similar camps were used in the U.S. as part of Democrat President Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act of 1830, in which some 13,000 Cherokee were forced off their lands into camps before being marched to Oklahoma.
In 1942, Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 forcibly relocated an estimated 120,000 to Japanese internment camps.
FDR also drove thousands off their lands to establish the Great Smokey Mountain National Park in 1934, condemning and evicting entire communities, forcing them to abandon generational homes, farm buildings, mills, schools and churches.
Accounts of these federal evictions are in Wayne Caldwell’s “Requiem by Fire” (Random House, 2009) and memorialized in Carol Elizabeth Jones’s ballad, “Leaving Cataloochee.”
Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s writings were smuggled out of the Soviet Union and translated. They quickly became internationally popular, leading him to receive the Nobel Prize for literature in 1970.
In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Solzhenitsyn wrote: “During all the years until 1961, not only was I convinced I should never see a single line of mine in print in my lifetime, but, also, I scarcely dared allow any of my close acquaintances to read anything I had written because I feared this would become known.”
International pressure led to Solzhenitsyn being expelled from Russia on Feb. 12, 1974.
Wanting to warn the naive youth of America of horrible realities of socialism, Alexander Solzhenitsyn stated in Washington, D.C., June 30, 1975: “In pre-revolutionary Russia … there were attempts on the Tsar’s life. … During these years about 17 persons a year were executed. … The Cheka (Lenin’s Communist Secret Police) … in 1918 and 1919 … executed, without trial, more than a thousand persons a month! … At the height of Stalin’s terror in 1937-38 … more than 40,000 persons were shot per month! Here are the figures: 17 a year … 1,000 a month, more than 40,000 a month!”
Solzhenitsyn wrote in “The Gulag Archipelago” (1973): “A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny.”
Solzhenitsyn continued: “Roosevelt, in Tehran, during one of his toasts, said … ‘I do not doubt that the three of us’ (meaning Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin) ‘lead our peoples in accordance with their desires.’ … We were astonished. We thought, ‘when we reach Europe, we will meet the Americans, and we will tell them.'”
Solzhenitsyn continued: “I was among the troops that were marching towards the Elbe (River). … A little bit more and I would have … shaken the hands of your American soldiers. But just before that … I was taken off to prison and my meeting did not take place. … After a delay of 30 years, my Elbe is here today. I am here to tell you … what … we wanted to tell you then.”
Stalin used a tactic called “psychological projection” or blame-shifting, where a politician publicly accuses his opponents of what he himself is privately guilty of.
In “Communism – A History” (Random House, 2001) author Richard Pipes described how Stalin used a government fabricated crisis – which he blamed on his opponents – as an excuse for the government to seize more power: “Stalin’s regime needed another crisis … as Fidel Castro, the leader of Communist Cuba, would explain … ‘The revolution needs the enemy. .. The revolution needs for its development its antithesis.’ … And if enemies were lacking, they had to be fabricated. …”
Pipes continued: “In 1934, a prominent Bolshevik, Sergei Kirov, the party boss of Lenningrad, was assassinated under mysterious conditions … evidence points to Stalin. … Kirov was gaining too much popularity in party ranks for Stalin’s comfort. His assassination brought Stalin two advantages: it rid him of a potential rival and provided a rationale for instigating a vast campaign against alleged anti-Soviet conspirators. …”
Pipes concluded: “Purges of the 1930s were a terror campaign that in indiscriminate ferocity and number of victims had no parallel in world history. … Authorities … beat them until they confess to their crimes they have not committed.”
Solzhenitsyn warned Americans not to trust mainstream media, June 30, 1975: “There is a … Russian proverb: ‘The yes-man is your enemy, but your friend will argue with you.’ … I am the friend. … I have come to tell you. … One of your leading newspapers, after the end of Vietnam, had a full headline: ‘The Blessed Silence.’ I would not wish that kind of ‘blessed silence’ on my worst enemy. … I spent 11 years in the Archipelago (labor camps). …”
As to trusting government, Solzhenitsyn was quoted in the Observer, Dec. 29, 1974, as stating: “In our country the lie has become not just a moral category but a pillar of the State.”
Solzhenitsyn explained how government-run healthcare provided a cover for Stalin’s political opponents to be “diagnosed” with psychiatric problems and given compulsory “treatment”: “It is not detente (a lessening of tension) if we here … can spend our time agreeably while over there people are groaning and dying and in psychiatric hospitals. Doctors are making their evening rounds … injecting people with drugs which destroy their brain. … There are tens of thousands of political prisoners in our country … under compulsory psychiatric treatment.”
This is similar to the U.S. government’s 40-year-long Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, where black men infected with syphilis were allowed to die, all the while being regularly examined by government health-care workers who documented how the disease progressed.
Solzhenitsyn went on: “You know the words from the Bible: ‘Build not on sand, but on rock.’ … Lenin’s teachings are that anyone is considered to be a fool who doesn’t take what’s lying in front of him. If you can take it, take it. If you can attack, attack. But if there’s a wall, then go back. … Communist leaders respect only firmness and have contempt and laugh at persons who continually give in to them. …”
This is similar to the Islamic concept of “hudna,” namely, when you are strong, attack; when you are weak, make treaties until you get strong enough to attack.
Solzhenitsyn concluded his speech in Washington, D.C., June 30, 1975, with a warning about the “social justice” movement: “I … call upon America to be more careful with its trust. … Prevent those … who are attempting to establish even finer … legal shades of equality – because of their distorted outlook … short-sightedness and … self-interest – from falsely using the struggle for peace and for social justice to lead you down a false road. … They are trying to weaken you; they are trying to disarm your strong and magnificent country in the face of this fearful threat – one that has never been seen before in the history of the world. … I call upon you: ordinary working men of America … do not let yourselves become weak.”
Solzhenitsyn stated: “If we don’t know our own history, we will simply have to endure all the same mistakes, sacrifices, and absurdities all over again.”
Solzhenitsyn wrote in “The Gulag Archipelago” (1973): “If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
Solzhenitsyn stated n an interview with Joseph Pearce (St. Austin Review 2 no. 2, Feb. 2003): “Untouched by the breath of God, unrestricted by human conscience, both capitalism and socialism are repulsive.”
In 1983, Solzhenitsyn received the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, stating: “We can only reach with determination for the warm hand of God, which we have so rashly and self-confidently pushed away.”
A 2016 earthquake has awoken a fault line that was thought to be dormant. Now that it’s becoming active, fears have arisen that New Zealand could be destroyed by a massive 9.0 magnitude earthquake.
The Australian plate is heading north while the Pacific plate is heading west, and the combination of these motions means that the Pacific plate, which includes much of the South Island, is moving relative to the Australian plate at a rate of about 40millimeterss each year in a southwesterly direction.
“One of the biggest hazards of that kind of earthquake is the tsunami that is triggered by a fault rupture offshore.,” Cochran added. “We know from tsunami modeling from a hypothetical earthquake from the Hikurangi subduction zone that the travel times could be very short to the coast, so seven minutes for some of the south Wairarapa coast.”
One year after it struck, scientists are also warning that the Kaikoura quake was not the “big one” for the Hikurangi subduction zone. The quake on the Hikurangi subduction zone was devastating. The magnitude 7.8 that destroyed houses, lifted the Kaikoura seabed by 2m, tore apart farmland, and wrecked kilometers of State Highway 1, may be minor compared to what could come, Cochran said.
I revisited election night videos on youtube of Leftists’ tearful meltdowns in response to Trump defeating Hillary. http://bit.ly/2xo0l5f Their panic, outrage and hatred for Trump was over-the-top; truly amazing. I questioned, why was it so intense?
I am a black Christian conservative. Trump is not ideological. Still, I thought Trump leaned more in Leftists’ camp than in mine. I viewed Trump as a businessman, busy pursuing his American dream, not concerned with the war between liberals and conservatives. Trump simply saw Obama making bad deals for America and knew he could do better. Trump was not overly concerned with social issues, but knew it was weird that Americans were no longer permitted to say, “Merry Christmas!” http://bit.ly/2kMeuqT So Trump decided to get into the presidential race. Political elites and fake news media thought the idea of Donald J. Trump in the White House was the joke of the century.
And where on earth did Trump come up with his cornball, obviously un-poll tested, campaign phrase, “Make America great again”? Due to public schools teaching distortions and lies about American history, Leftists are obsessed with bringing down our country from her throne as the world power. http://bit.ly/1UnBVz3 This is why Trump proclaiming his desire to “make America great again” repulsed and enraged Leftists. Leftists have flooded fake news media with their absurd despicable lie that “make America great again” is code for white supremacy, social injustice, cops free to murder blacks, destroying the planet and so on.
Dethroning America is Leftists’ number one priority. The second most important thing in the world to Leftists appears to be sex and transforming America into a culture in which anything goes sexually. Leftists have been using government to force sexual deviancy down our throats. You cannot turn on TV without being slapped in the face with various forms of sexual deviancy. We have been trained not to complain about it if we know what is good for us.
Third on Leftists’ list of priorities is having as many Americans as possible kill their babies to save the planet. http://ind.pn/2sQCed0
Obama championed Leftists’ sexual transformation of America. Under Obama, some states made homosexual conversion therapy illegal. Pedophilia is deemed a sexual orientation, thereby making therapy to cure it illegal. Ponder that, folks. Leftists are making it illegal for a therapist to attempt to cure their patient of being sexually attracted to children. http://ind.pn/1MT1VC3
Guys who wake up feeling like a woman are legally permitted to use women restrooms. Anyone who objects to this insanity is gang assaulted by Leftists, branded a hater. Recently, a man dressed as a woman was sentenced to 70 years in jail for molesting a 10 year old girl in a restroom. http://fxn.ws/2yAlAUc During Obama’s reign, elementary public school teachers were ordered to no longer address students as boys and girls because gender distinctions are bigoted and insensitive to transgenders. http://fxn.ws/2aSCFyy
Obama lit the White House in rainbow colored lights in celebration of government forced dismantling of marriage. http://bit.ly/2gGUZLF This opened the flood gates for whatever conceivable arrangement to be legally deemed marriage. Fathers are marrying their daughters; people are marrying animals, marrying themselves http://bit.ly/2ySqlqO and marrying inanimate objects. Welcome to Leftists’ new politically protected wild wild west of American sexuality.
Celebrating in the streets, Leftists knew their sexual transformation of America was on a roll making tremendous headway. Polls said Hillary would win in a landslide. Leftists gleefully anticipated Hillary continuing to implement their no-sexual-holds-barred America.
To Leftists’ shock and horror, Trump won!
Upon Trump winning the election, Leftists immediately launched their narrative (lie) that Trump is Hitler reborn? Is Leftists’ insane rage over Americans awarding Trump the key to the Oval Office mostly about sex? Absolutely.
I believe at the core of Leftists’ sexual idolatry is a spirit of anti-Christ. In a nutshell, Leftists hate Jesus for proclaiming himself the only way to heaven. This is why Obama led Leftists’ war on Christianity. http://bit.ly/2plTsy0
Now before you call me paranoid for claiming Leftists have a gerbil up their derrieres against Christians, please answer this question. Leftists are obsessed with promoting homosexuality. So why are Leftists such passionate defenders of Islam which calls for executing homosexuals? Christians tell homosexuals that they love them, but cannot approve of their lifestyle. Isn’t it logical that Leftists would demonize Muslims rather than Christians?
Another thing that has me scratching my head is Leftist women like Kim Kardashian, Rosie O’Donnell and Madonna who defend Islam while trashing Christianity. Muslims suppress women; rapes, beatings and executions for disobedience. http://nyp.st/2q3Dt7s
Leftist female celebs who praise Islam could not be who they are, flashing their derrieres all over the place, if Sharia became the law of the land in America. And yet, these Hollywood and media women love Islam and hate Christians.
Trump’s vow to restore religious liberty has Leftists petrified that he will put the brakes on and roll back their government forced sexual transformation of America. In essence, Leftists have put a political contract on Trump’s head. He must be stopped at any and all cost.
Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Author: “Confessions of a Black Conservative: How the Left has shattered the dreams of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Black America.”
Singer/Songwriter and Conservative Activist http://LloydMarcus.com
The mainstream media’s silence over Klaus Eberwein’s death is deafening. Eberwein was a former Haitian government official who was expected to expose the extent of Clinton Foundation corruption and malpractice next week. He has been found dead in Miami at the age of 50.
Eberwein was a fierce critic of the Clinton Foundation’s activities in the Caribbean island, where he served as director general of the government’s economic development agency, Fonds d’assistance économique et social, for three years. “The Clinton Foundation, they are criminals, they are thieves, they are liars, they are a disgrace,” Eberwein said at a protest outside the Clinton Foundation headquarters in Manhattan last year. Eberwein was due to appear on Tuesday before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission where he was widely expected to testify that the Clinton Foundation misappropriated Haiti earthquake donations from international donors. But this “suicide” gets even more disturbing…
During and after his government tenure, Eberwein faced allegations of fraud and corruption on how the agency he headed administered funds. Among the issues was FAES’ oversight of the shoddy construction of several schools built after Haiti’s devastating Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake. But, according to Eberwein, it was the Clinton Foundation who was deeply in the wrong – and he intended to testify and prove it on Tuesday.
According to Eberwein, a paltry 0.6 percent of donations granted by international donors to the Clinton Foundation with the express purpose of directly assisting Haitians actually ended up in the hands of Haitian organizations. A further 9.6 percent ended up with the Haitian government. The remaining 89.8 percent – or $5.4 billion – was funneled to non-Haitian organizations. –WND
Eberwein was expected to testify against the Clinton Foundation in court and ends up committing suicide shortly before. Where have we heard this before? Untimely deaths seem to follow the Clinton’s around, and this one especially is probably something – considering since the mainstream media is silent about this death.
Everyone in the so called “resistance” movement against Donald Trump thinks that they’re fighting a rising tide of fascism in America. What they don’t realize however, is that they are the biggest authoritarians of all. They’re the ones who love big government, and have a habit of shutting down everyone they disagree with. They’re the ones who have been responsible for the most political violence over the past year. Inside their social echo chambers it’s easy for them to view themselves as heroes, but it’s obvious to everyone else that the far-left is the most tyrannical force in America today.
In fact, Leftists are so unaware of how authoritarian they are that they’ll applaud the words of history’s most famous dictator, because his rhetoric is shockingly similar to theirs. We know this, because last week a Trump supporter managed to infiltrate a leftist protest in Chicago, where he was given an opportunity to speak to the crowd. He proceeded to read off several quotes from Adolph Hitler that were derived from his speeches and Mein Kampf. All he did, was replace words like “jews” or “bankers” with “Donald Trump,” among other words that made the quotes relevant to modern ears.
At the end of the speech the crowd applauded him, and one of the organizers was so impressed that he tried to recruit the Trump supporter.
Of course, you probably couldn’t expect them to recognize these Hitler quotes. Despite how famous and hated Hitler is, very few people in America are actually familiar with his speeches. What’s most alarming and humorous about this incident, isn’t that these leftists had no idea that they were listening to Hitler quotes. It’s that they agreed with the content of these quotes, and thought they were profound. It just goes to show that modern socialists aren’t that different from the socialists of the 20th century, which includes both Communists and Nazis.
Kerish Doctor 2017 is an integrated solution for computer maintenance that utilizes the most promising developments in this area. Due to its unique system, Kerish Doctor 2017 prevents Windows crashes in real time and also safely fixes registry errors. The application regularly performs a maximally thorough and safe cleaning of your system to eliminate accumulated digital "trash", thereby increasing the efficiency of your computer in the best way possible.
Kerish Doctor 2017 protects your PC against malware and potential vulnerabilities and monitors computer settings that are important from the point of view of security. The Smart Update system promptly updates the application's databases, which are constantly being improved by our experts. Thanks to this system, the software suite is becoming more effective every day, making our solution the most promising in its class.
Conditions:
License expiration date: 16 June 2018
Every license key can be used only for one PC (any count of OS, reinstalling OS does not affect the license and can be activated again).
Home/Personal use only.
Lost giveaway license keys can not be restored by the developer.
Submitting of license key in the public domain may lead to license blocking without providing a replacement.
Mass activations of license key on several devices (more than one PC) may lead to license blocking without providing a replacement.
Program does not conflict with the antivirus software and can work with them together.
The VPN service Windscribe runs a promotion right now that bumps the monthly bandwidth of free users from 10 Gigabytes to 50 Gigabytes.
Windscribe offers a free (called limited) and paid accounts. The main differences between free and paid accounts are the following ones:
Free account has a traffic limit. Default is 10 Gigabytes per month, but you get 50 Gigabytes instead with the voucher.
The free account may be used on only once device (at a time).
Servers in eight countries are available for selection to free users, paying customers get servers in more than 45 countries.
Pro accounts get faster upper speed limits (free up to 100 Mbps, pro up to 480Mbps)
The Linux client and Android client is only available for paying customers.
As far as other features are concerned, they are identical between free and paid accounts. The service has a strict no logging policy -- including VPN usage, connection logs, IP addresses -- and session data is discarded three minutes after termination of the session.
The service supports P2P traffic, offers ad-blocking functionality built-in to its clients, and a firewall on top of that. The free version does not offer OpenVPN configurations on the other hand.
Windscribe offers clients for Windows and Mac (also Linux for paying customers), for the Google Chrome, Firefox and Opera browsers, an iOS app (Android only for Pro customers), and configuration tutorials for routers.
Grab your 50 Gigabyte free Windscribe account
To sign up for a 50 Gigabyte free account on Windscribe, do the following:
Click on the "sign up" link in the top right corner of the page.
Select the "use for free" option on the next page.
Fill out your desired username and password. Email is optional, but you will only get 2GB per month if you don't add one.
Click on "have a voucher" on the sign up page.
Add the voucher 50GBFREE.
Complete the sign-up process
The new account has five times the regular bandwidth limit of 10 Gigabytes per month now if things worked well.
Next step is to download one of the available clients to start using the service, or configure your router if it supports it.
Windscribe's offer is excellent, especially with the bump to 50 Gigabytes of traffic. That should be sufficient for all but the most demanding web applications such as video streaming or heavy P2P usage.
Since it is free, it is excellent as a backup VPN even if you use a VPN service already.
Now You: Do you use a VPN service? If so which, and why?
Editor’s Comment: The gift that keeps on giving. An endless ocean of radioactive water, spilling into the Pacific Ocean at an astounding rate, every single day. The effects of this nuclear waste, particularly in the form of cesium 137 and strontium 90, are epidemic – they are being hidden by a refusal to report on the disaster, and by the diffuse global web of biology.
Though consumers of news, or groceries, don’t see it happening, these radioactive materials are curbing population numbers, and contamination is bio-accumulating up the food chain. A cow in California, for instance, may have only been exposed to a very minute amount of this radiation, but likely ate from an entire field of contaminated grass, and every tiny bit adds up. For humans, eating from many sources at the top of the food chain, this accumulates into greater exposure than direct measurements can account for.
There is no end in sight, and no one who has yet managed to grab back the public’s attention and get across how important this issue continues to be.
Northern Hemisphere Potentially In Great Danger As Fukushima Radiation Spikes To ‘Unimaginable’ Levels
by Michael Snyder
Radiation inside one of the damaged reactors at the Fukushima nuclear power facility has reached an “unimaginable” level according to experts. Because so much nuclear material from Fukushima escaped into the Pacific Ocean, there are many scientists that believe that it was the worst environmental disaster in human history, but most people in the general population seem to think that since the mainstream media really doesn’t talk about it anymore that everything must be under control. Unfortunately, that is not true at all. In fact, PBS reported just last year that “it is incorrect to say that Fukushima is under control when levels of radioactivity in the ocean indicate ongoing leaks“. And now we have just learned that the radiation level inside reactor 2 is so high that no human could possibly survive being exposed to it.
According to the Japan Times, the level of radiation inside the containment vessel of reactor 2 is now estimated to be “530 sieverts per hour”…
The radiation level in the containment vessel of reactor 2 at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant has reached a maximum of 530 sieverts per hour, the highest since the triple core meltdown in March 2011, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc. said.
Tepco said on Thursday that the blazing radiation reading was taken near the entrance to the space just below the pressure vessel, which contains the reactor core.
The high figure indicates that some of the melted fuel that escaped the pressure vessel is nearby.
It is hard to find the words to convey how serious this is.
If you were exposed to a radiation level of just 10 sieverts per hour, that would mean almost certain death. So 530 sieverts per hour is simply off the charts. According to the Guardian, this recent measurement is being described by scientists as “unimaginable”…
The recent reading, described by some experts as “unimaginable”, is far higher than the previous record of 73 sieverts an hour in that part of the reactor.
A single dose of one sievert is enough to cause radiation sickness and nausea; 5 sieverts would kill half those exposed to it within a month, and a single dose of 10 sieverts would prove fatal within weeks.
New photographs show what may be melted nuclear fuel sitting under one of Japan’s wrecked Fukushima reactors, a potential milestone in the search and retrieval of the fuel almost six years after it was lost in one of the worst atomic disasters in history.
Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc., Japan’s biggest utility, released images on Monday showing a grate under the Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 2 reactor covered in black residue. The company, better known as Tepco, may send in a scorpion-like robot as soon as February to determine the temperature and radioactivity of the residue.
If that isn’t frightening enough, one Japanese news source is reporting that this melted nuclear fuel “has since come in contact with underground water flowing from the mountain side”…
The melted fuel has since come in contact with underground water flowing from the mountain side, generating radioactively contaminated water every day. In order to dismantle the reactor, it is necessary to take out the melted fuel, but high radiation levels inside the reactor had hampered work to locate the melted debris.
If this disaster was just limited to Japan, the entire northern hemisphere would not be at risk.
But that is not the case.
Most of the nuclear contamination from Fukushima ended up in the Pacific Ocean, and from there it was literally taken around the rest of the planet. The following was reported by PBS…
More than 80 percent of the radioactivity from the damaged reactors ended up in the Pacific — far more than reached the ocean from Chernobyl or Three Mile Island. Of this, a small fraction is currently on the seafloor — the rest was swept up by the Kuroshio current, a western Pacific version of the Gulf Stream, and carried out to sea where it mixed with (and was diluted by) the vast volume of the North Pacific.
We don’t know if there is a connection, but it is extremely interesting to note that fisheries up and down the west coast of the United States are failing because of a dramatic decrease in fish populations. Just check out the following excerpt from a story that was posted on January 18th…
U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker today determined there are commercial fishery failures for nine salmon and crab fisheries in Alaska, California and Washington.
In recent years, each of these fisheries experienced sudden and unexpected large decreases in fish stock biomass or loss of access due to unusual ocean and climate conditions. This decision enables fishing communities to seek disaster relief assistance from Congress.
Things are particularly bad up in Alaska, and biologists are “stumped” as to why this could be happening…
In 2016, the pink salmon harvests in Kodiak, Prince William Sounds, Chignik and lower Cook Inlet came in woefully under forecast and stumped biologists as to why.
The estimated value of Kodiak’s 2016 haul was $2.21 million, compared to a five-year average of $14.64 million, and in Prince William Sound the ex-vessel value was $6.6 million, far less that the $44 million five-year average. The total state harvest was the smallest since the late 1970s.
Although state biologists weren’t ready to declare a cause for the poor pink salmon performance, the Commerce Department press release attributed the disasters to “unusual ocean and climate conditions.”
Further south, it was being reported last month that millions of dead sardines are washing up on the shores of Chile.
I could go on and on with a lot more examples like this, but hopefully you get the point.
Something really strange is happening in the Pacific, and a lot of people believe that there is a link to Fukushima.
Not too long ago, I wrote about how the elite of Silicon Valley are “feverishly prepping“, but the truth is that all of us should be. If you need some tips on how to get started, you can find my prepping book right here. Our planet is becoming increasingly unstable, and the Fukushima nuclear disaster is just one piece of the puzzle.
But it is definitely a very important piece. The nuclear material from Fukushima is continuously entering the food chain, and once that nuclear material gets into our bodies it will slowly irradiate our organs for years to come. The following is an excerpt from an absolutely outstanding opinion piece by Helen Caldicott that was published in the Guardian…
Internal radiation, on the other hand, emanates from radioactive elements which enter the body by inhalation, ingestion, or skin absorption. Hazardous radionuclides such as iodine-131, caesium 137, and other isotopes currently being released in the sea and air around Fukushima bio-concentrate at each step of various food chains (for example into algae, crustaceans, small fish, bigger fish, then humans; or soil, grass, cow’s meat and milk, then humans). After they enter the body, these elements – called internal emitters – migrate to specific organs such as the thyroid, liver, bone, and brain, where they continuously irradiate small volumes of cells with high doses of alpha, beta and/or gamma radiation, and over many years, can induce uncontrolled cell replication – that is, cancer. Further, many of the nuclides remain radioactive in the environment for generations, and ultimately will cause increased incidences of cancer and genetic diseases over time.
Are you starting to understand the gravity of the situation?
Sadly, this crisis is going to be with us for a very, very long time.
According to Bloomberg, they are not even going to start removing melted nuclear fuel from these reactors until 2021, and it is being projected that the overall cleanup “may take as long as 40 years”…
Decommissioning the reactors will cost 8 trillion yen ($70.4 billion), according to an estimate in December from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. Removing the fuel is one of the most important steps in a cleanup that may take as long as 40 years.
The unprecedented nature of the Fukushima disaster means that Tepco is pinning its efforts on technology not yet invented to get the melted fuel out of the reactors.
The company aims to decide on a fuel removal procedure for the first reactor during the fiscal year ending March 2019, and to begin removing fuel in 2021.
A lot of people that end up dying as a result of this crisis may never even know that it was Fukushima that caused their deaths.
Personally, I am convinced that this is the greatest environmental crisis that humanity has ever experienced, and if the latest reading from reactor 2 is any indication, things just took a very serious turn for the worse.
Dropbox finally launched Smart Sync, its desktop app functionality for accessing files stored in the cloud. We were not impressed and compared it with pCloud Drive.
A few months ago Dropbox announced its Project Infinite and we thought, “Meh”. For those of you who didn’t follow that topic, Project Infinite was going to be a “revolutionary” functionality that would let you keep your files in the cloud but access them on your computer as if they were stored locally.
Sounds familiar? It should, as this is exactly what pCloud Drive does – and has been doing for three years already.
A few months later, Dropbox did indeed unveil this new functionality, but in the process, they decided to change its name from Project Infinite to Smart Sync. We took a look at it and decided to compare it to the good old pCloud Drive you know and love.
Availability: pCloud Drive is for everyone, Dropbox Smart Sync – for business clients only
Dropbox’s Smart Sync is available to Business clients only. Free users can’t take advantage of this functionality; neither can paying individual users. The only way to benefit from this functionality is to be a member of a Dropbox Business team.
pCloud Drive, on the other hand, is available to all of our users – Free, Premium or Business plan users. Anyone who signs up with us, can simply download our desktop app and extend the hard disk on their computer by the amount of space they have in their pCloud account according to their plan. Free users have 20 GB, Premium plans come with 500 GB, Premium Plus – 2 TB and Business users – 1 TB for every user in the Business account.
Pricing: pCloud Drive starting at $0.00, Dropbox Smart Sync – at $50/month
Technically, users don’t pay for pCloud Drive or for Dropbox Smart Sync on their own. However, you can’t use Smart Sync unless you are a paid subscriber so we figured it’s worth looking into this here.
As we said, pCloud Drive is available for both free users and for people with paid subscriptions.
Dropbox’s business plans at $10 per user per month with a minimum requirement for 5 users. In other words, to use Smart Sync, you need to pay at least $50/month.
Even if you decide you are willing to pay for the service, it’s better to go with pCloud. Here is why.
The cheapest possible Dropbox Business plan will cost you a minimum of $50 a month and with it, you get 2 TB of storage space for the entire account (all 5 users). If you opt in for a pCloud Business account, you’d still be paying $49.95/month for 5 users but you’ll be getting 5 TB of space instead.
If you only need 2 TB, and you don’t have a team, you can get a pCloud Premium Plus plan instead and it will cost you $7.99/month with an annual subscription instead of the 50 bucks that Dropbox will charge you for the same storage.
Storage space management: pCloud with an edge over Dropbox
pCloud Drive doesn’t take up any space on your local hard disk. Period. Nothing more to add here.
In theory, Dropbox Smart Sync should deliver the same service, only we’re not so sure. Take a look at their promotional materials:
(Highlighting by us)
We don’t know about you, but we think that files that don’t take any space on your computer trump “practically no space” and “very little space” are a much, much better idea.
Plus, Dropbox’s statements are quite vague and don’t really indicate how much space you would need to spare on your local HDD. We actually got in touch with one of their representatives but unfortunately, they couldn’t say either.
Here’s the thing, though. The Smart Sync help section reads that when you double click a file that has been marked for keeping in the cloud only, the file gets automatically downloaded locally – so we’re guessing that the space you need to have on your computer hard drive should match the size of the file you’re opening. This probably wouldn’t be an issue if we’re talking about a smaller file – a JPG, PDF or text file example. But as you know, we often wor with larger files…
File use: Dropbox downloads locally, pCloud keeps it in the cloud
File use in pCloud Drive is pretty straight-forward. You open the file with any program or application you want, you work on the file, you save your changes and close it. The file never leaves the cloud unless you specifically download/sync it. A temporary cache is created when you add files to our desktop app, however, it doesn’t stop the process – it just delays it slightly.
Using your online-only files in Dropbox is more complicated. As we said in the previous paragraph, double clicking on a file that’s kept online only in a Dropbox account downloads the file. This is inconvenient for 2 reasons.
First off, you would need to mark the file for cloud use only again when you finish working on it. This is annoying and takes up time you could spend on something useful like – we don’t know – working?
Then, imagine you’re a motion graphics designer or a video producer who needs to access and use a very large file – but you don’t have much space on your local disk (after all, this is why you decided to give the service a try). It can’t be downloaded because you don’t have enough space. This puts you in a situation of the Catch 22 variety. It also cancels the idea of Smart Sync altogether…
Speed: pCloud Drive is up to 6 times faster than Dropbox
The download and upload speed makes a real difference when working with files that are kept in the cloud only, as it determines how quickly you access the file and save its changes.
We won’t go into too much detail here as we have previously compared the speed at which files are uploaded and downloaded to pCloud and to Dropbox, watch the two video comparisons here:
Last but not least, we want to take a look at that extra layer of security you have with pCloud Drive. We’re talking about pCloud Crypto. You can add this service to your plan at any time and take advantage of the highest possible level of online protection. The client-side encryption of the service has been tested before and remains unbreakable to this day.
Dropbox doesn’t really offer any similar service so you would need to keep your important, security-sensitive and confidential files in together with the pictures of your cat, for example. We’re not saying that the picture of your cat are not important, but having these hacked and leaked on the internet wouldn’t really make the news.
Conclusion
Dropbox took their sweet time coming up with Smart Sync but it seems the service needs some tweaking still. If you are shopping for a real virtual hard drive and a way to expand the memory of your computer, sign up for pCloud and download our desktop app. You won’t be sorry.
In my last article, ‘How Globalists Predict Your Behavior’, I outlined the primary method globalists use to measure public consent, or, public dissent. The use of macro-analytics and the hyper-monitoring of web traffic is a powerful tool at the disposal of the establishment for gauging shifts in public consciousness in real time.
For example, in early 2016 the elites were entirely aware of the rise of conservative and sovereignty movements in the U.S. and Europe. In fact, the dangers of growing “populism” were all that elitists and their publications talked about for the first six months of the year. At first, this notion seemed a little odd to me. Generally, when globalists are attempting to manage public opinion, they are careful not to reveal the slightest hint that conservative movements exist beyond an “extremist fringe”. They certainly never suggest that there is a massive undercurrent of nationalism ready to topple the globalist structure.
In fact, whenever such movements do arise the establishment is swift to obstruct them or co-opt them. I witnessed this first hand during the Ron Paul campaign in 2008 and 2012 – the mainstream deliberately refused to acknowledge Ron Paul’s existence, because attacking him repeatedly would have been a zero sum strategy that would have given him greater public attention and free publicity.
I saw it during the Neo-con co-option of the Tea Party, a movement that I was involved in long before Fox News latched onto it and long before mainstream RINO Republicans not only jumped on the bandwagon but hijacked the horse. In a matter of months the Tea Party became a defunct entity, a shell of its former self. Luckily, most liberty activists simply left it behind and started their own separate groups and projects rather than being absorbed into the Neo-con fold.
I also saw establishment interference on a local and state level during elections in Montana. An associate of mine was running for state office on a liberty platform and was doing rather well in the polls. He was approached by a contingent of political elites running as Republicans who told him in no uncertain terms that he could run on any platform and use any rhetoric he wanted, but if he won, he would be required to follow THEIR direction. They even encouraged him to continue arguing for constitutional government in his speeches and debates, because they felt this was the best way to “sell” his candidacy. But when all was said and done, he was supposed to stab his constituency in the back and take orders from the party leadership.
The point is, the elites dominate the political system. Nothing happens within it without their say. So, for those same elites to suddenly and openly suggest that “populist movements” were threatening to overtake the world and destroy the global economy was suspicious, to say the least.
In order to predict the behavior of globalists and the outcome of future economic and political events, it is important to understand certain dynamics. As just described, the establishment has a stranglehold on the political system. Party politics are a sham built around the false left/right paradigm. However, certain new dynamics are developing, and you must be able to track them.
The best way to do this is to watch what globalists say within their own publications. They often reveal their intentions directly or indirectly. In many cases I think in their arrogance they assume that the masses are too stupid to read these publications and grasp what is being said.
The most important element of predicting globalist actions is to know what they ultimately want; to know their ultimate goals. If you know the specifics of what any group or individual desperately wants, those people become highly predictable, because there are only so many useful paths to get to any goal.
I have used this method to great effect over the years, so I am not merely presenting a theory, I have concrete successes to back my position.
Except for the China SDR inclusion, I predicted all of these events many months in advance and received a heavy amount of criticism each time from people in the mainstream and even from people in the liberty movement. Hilariously, as soon as these predictions proved true, some of the same people that were fervently opposed came quickly out of the woodwork to claim they “saw it coming all along”. I suppose this is human nature, but it is a problem because it keeps people from learning how to better gauge globalist behavior and come to correct conclusions.
My goal in this article is to make EVERY liberty activist adept at predicting globalist driven events. So, here is a good place to start:
Learn To Play Chess
The elites are obsessed with chess and chess symbolism. Many of their strategies develop much like a game of chess develops. If you don’t know how to play chess, I suggest you learn. You don’t have to master the game, but you do need to understand the basic concepts of winning the game.
For example, if you know the target that your opponent is really pursuing, you can easily obstruct his efforts because all his movements will become predictable. If his goal is to take your Queen, and you know this, then he should never be able to take your queen. This is why the elites go to great lengths to distract their opponents (meaning us) from their true target. They want you to think they are going straight for your King, or your Knight; they want you focused elsewhere. They will use feints often.
Another core strategy of chess is the “forced sacrifice”. That is to say, the best chess players are very good at positioning one of their pieces so that it threatens two or more of your pieces. This forces you to sacrifice one piece for the sake of the others. If they do this often enough, before you know it you have sacrificed your way into defeat. The globalists ALWAYS have a primary target and a secondary target. There is always more than one move developing at any given time.
Knowing chess is key to knowing how the globalists think.
Get In Touch With Your Darker Side
Going by their behavior and their rhetoric when they are unguarded, most globalists display highly narcissistic character traits as well as sociopathy and psychopathy. It is not enough to research these traits in a clinical fashion, you have to tap into the darker side of your own psyche, and think as they think. This means being willing to entertain evil and malicious concepts. You must be willing to ask yourself – “If I were them, how would I go about getting what I want?”
Understanding devious and aberrant psychopathic intent goes a long way in making the globalists predictable. Remember, many psychopaths are actually highly intelligent and intuitive. They don’t have a moral compass and have lost the voice of conscience, but in order to adapt they have learned how to fake it. They are chameleons.
ALL people are inherently capable of evil actions, just as they are inherently capable of great good. You don’t have to become like the elites, but you do have to go to some ugly places in your own mind. An elitist is basically a person who went to those places and discovered that he liked it there.
Read Globalist Publications
As noted above, the globalists have their own media outlets in which they publish their “views”, such as Foreign Policy Magazine, The Economist, Bloomberg, Reuters, etc. Sometimes these views are honest and sometimes they are calculated propaganda. Again, if you know exactly what the elitist targets are, then you can better discern if what they are saying is legitimate or a feint to distract you.
I predicted the success of the Brexit and the Trump win based on the knowledge that:
1) The globalists need a large scale crisis in order to drastically change public perceptions on society and governance. That is to say, they need to create a crisis so terrifying that people will be willing to accept a fully centralized global economic system and global governance as a solution.
2) The globalists have already set in motion an economic crisis that cannot be reversed. It is a crisis that they must avoid blame for at all costs once it accelerates.
3) Conservative and sovereignty principles are the primary threat to the dominance of globalism. As long as ideas of individualism, national sovereignty and decentralization exist, globalism can never truly prevail. Therefore, obstructing movements based on these principles is not enough. The globalists must also destroy any positive perceptions of our principles for generations to come.
4) As stated in the section on chess, the globalists like to use the strategy of forced sacrifice, in which they threaten two targets simultaneously, or kill two birds with one stone. I realized at the beginning of 2016 that all the rhetoric by globalists in their own publications on the “rise of populism” was staging the groundwork for the success of the Brexit and the success of Trump. What better strategy for the establishment than to allow conservative movements to take the helm of the political and economic ship just as that ship is about to sink? In this way, the globalists can have the crisis they need, while at the same time scapegoating conservatives and avoiding blame, and, destroying the image of conservative ideals, perhaps forever.
Have No Sacred Cows
This is a hard one for many people. We all have certain biases and these biases can blind us to reality. The overreaching bias within the liberty movement is a desire for heroic leadership. We have grown up on stories of heroes from George Washington to Thomas Jefferson – grand statesmen and military giants that crushed tyranny. The problem is, while men like Washington and Jefferson were indeed instrumental, they were nothing without the hundreds of thousands of unsung patriots working tirelessly for freedom on their own.
The founding fathers were not considered the founding fathers until long after the American Revolution was over. At the time, they were not thought of necessarily as heroes or even great leaders. They were just men, like many other men, gambling life and liberty on a cause that was uncertain at best.
Activists need to STOP looking around for mighty leaders and start taking leadership themselves in their own way. If we do end up with another Washington or Jefferson or Paine or Madison, etc., we will not know who they are until the fight is over and the history books are written.
The globalists take full advantage of the movement’s weakness in seeking out and artificially elevating heroes. Also, when people have this bias, they end up with blinders when examining such heroes with any skepticism. Obviously I am referring to Donald Trump, here.
Sacred cows prevent accurate predictions of major events because a person will refuse to consider them as a potential negative factor.
Moving Beyond Predictions
It is one thing to be able to predict the outcome of social and political events; it is another matter to do something about them. In my next article I will outline solutions liberty activists can pursue on their own and in groups to counter globalist activity. Predicting their tactics is essential, but acting to disrupt those tactics should be the ultimate goal.
The globalists believe that even if some of us do manage to decipher their activities and methods, we will have no means to do anything about them. They see themselves as the “history makers”, as the men who act. They see us as the “history watchers”, or the meaningless masses wafting about with geopolitical tides, helpless and incapable of determining our own destinies. I believe we will become history makers in due course. One weakness of the globalists that will sabotage them is their own hubris. They see people as pawns – but what happens when a piece walks off the chess board completely and acts in an unpredictable way? It is this potential alone that will destroy the globalists in the end.
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com
My liberal friends sometimes ask me why I don’t devote more of my science journalism to the sins of the Right. It’s fine to expose pseudoscience on the left, they say, but why aren’t you an equal-opportunity debunker? Why not write about conservatives’ threat to science?
My friends don’t like my answer: because there isn’t much to write about. Conservatives just don’t have that much impact on science. I know that sounds strange to Democrats who decry Republican creationists and call themselves the “party of science.” But I’ve done my homework. I’ve read the Left’s indictments, including Chris Mooney’s bestseller, The Republican War on Science. I finished it with the same question about this war that I had at the outset: Where are the casualties?
Where are the scientists who lost their jobs or their funding? What vital research has been corrupted or suppressed? What scientific debate has been silenced? Yes, the book reveals that Republican creationists exist, but they don’t affect the biologists or anthropologists studying evolution. Yes, George W. Bush refused federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, but that hardly put a stop to it (and not much changed after Barack Obama reversed the policy). Mooney rails at scientists and politicians who oppose government policies favored by progressives like himself, but if you’re looking for serious damage to the enterprise of science, he offers only three examples.
All three are in his first chapter, during Mooney’s brief acknowledgment that leftists “here and there” have been guilty of “science abuse.” First, there’s the Left’s opposition to genetically modified foods, which stifled research into what could have been a second Green Revolution to feed Africa. Second, there’s the campaign by animal-rights activists against medical researchers, whose work has already been hampered and would be devastated if the activists succeeded in banning animal experimentation. Third, there’s the resistance in academia to studying the genetic underpinnings of human behavior, which has cut off many social scientists from the recent revolutions in genetics and neuroscience. Each of these abuses is far more significant than anything done by conservatives, and there are plenty of others. The only successful war on science is the one waged by the Left.
I strongly recommend reading the full article. It is lengthy but worth it.
But two huge threats to science are peculiar to the Left—and they’re getting worse.
The first threat is confirmation bias, the well-documented tendency of people to seek out and accept information that confirms their beliefs and prejudices. In a classic study of peer review, 75 psychologists were asked to referee a paper about the mental health of left-wing student activists. Some referees saw a version of the paper showing that the student activists’ mental health was above normal; others saw different data, showing it to be below normal. Sure enough, the more liberal referees were more likely to recommend publishing the paper favorable to the left-wing activists. When the conclusion went the other way, they quickly found problems with its methodology.
Scientists try to avoid confirmation bias by exposing their work to peer review by critics with different views, but it’s increasingly difficult for liberals to find such critics. Academics have traditionally leaned left politically, and many fields have essentially become monocultures, especially in the social sciences, where Democrats now outnumber Republicans by at least 8 to 1. (In sociology, where the ratio is 44 to 1, a student is much likelier to be taught by a Marxist than by a Republican.)
Peer review means a lot less today than it once did.
And that brings us to the second great threat from the Left: its long tradition of mixing science and politics. To conservatives, the fundamental problem with the Left is what Friedrich Hayek called the fatal conceit: the delusion that experts are wise enough to redesign society. Conservatives distrust central planners, preferring to rely on traditional institutions that protect individuals’ “natural rights” against the power of the state. Leftists have much more confidence in experts and the state. Engels argued for “scientific socialism,” a redesign of society supposedly based on the scientific method. Communist intellectuals planned to mold the New Soviet Man. Progressives yearned for a society guided by impartial agencies unconstrained by old-fashioned politics and religion. Herbert Croly, founder of the New Republic and a leading light of progressivism, predicted that a “better future would derive from the beneficent activities of expert social engineers who would bring to the service of social ideals all the technical resources which research could discover.”
This was all very flattering to scientists, one reason that so many of them leaned left. The Right cited scientific work when useful, but it didn’t enlist science to remake society—it still preferred guidance from traditional moralists and clerics. The Left saw scientists as the new high priests, offering them prestige, money, and power. The power too often corrupted. Over and over, scientists yielded to the temptation to exaggerate their expertise and moral authority, sometimes for horrendous purposes.
Drawing on research into genetics and animal breeding from scientists at Harvard, Yale, Johns Hopkins, and other leading universities, the eugenics movement of the 1920s made plans for improving the human population. Professors taught eugenics to their students and worked with Croly and other progressives eager to breed a smarter society, including Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Margaret Sanger. Eventually, other scientists—notably, in England—exposed the shoddy research and assumptions of the eugenicists, but not before the involuntary sterilization or castration of more than 35,000 Americans. Even after Hitler used eugenics to justify killing millions, the Left didn’t lose its interest in controlling human breeding.
Eugenicist thinking was revived by scientists convinced that the human species had exceeded the “carrying capacity” of its ecosystem. The most prominent was Paul Ehrlich, whose scientific specialty was the study of butterflies. Undeterred by his ignorance of agriculture and economics, he published confident predictions of imminent global famine in The Population Bomb (1968). Agricultural economists dismissed his ideas, but the press reverently quoted Ehrlich and other academics who claimed to have scientifically determined that the Earth was “overpopulated.” In the journal Science, ecologist Garrett Hardin argued that “freedom to breed will bring ruin to all.” Ehrlich, who, at one point, advocated supplying American helicopters and doctors to a proposed program of compulsory sterilization in India, joined with physicist John Holdren in arguing that the U.S. Constitution would permit population control, including limits on family size and forced abortions. Ehrlich and Holdren calmly analyzed the merits of various technologies, such as adding sterilants to public drinking water, and called for a “planetary regime” to control population and natural resources around the world.
Their ideas went nowhere in the United States, but they inspired one of the worst human rights violations of the twentieth century, in China: the one-child policy, resulting in coerced abortion and female infanticide. China struggles today with a dangerously small number of workers to support its aging population. The intellectual godfathers of this atrocity, had they been conservatives, surely would have been ostracized. But even after his predictions turned out to be wildly wrong, Ehrlich went on collecting honors.
And Ehrlich still insists he was right on pretty much everything, when in fact he has been proven wrong on almost everything. He predicted the death of sea life by 1980, the UK would face starvation by 2000, India could not support more than 200 million people, a billion death toll from starvation etc etc. For being wrong on pretty much everything he has been given no less than 17 honours and awards.
President Trump can solve the global warming crisis overnight, by simply replacing NASA’s Gavin Schmidt with a competent scientist like John Christy or Roy Spencer.
Yesterday I covered NOAA’s Angola fraud, where NOAA claimed Angola had their hottest month ever, despite not having any thermometer data to back it up. Namibia is just south of Angola and is quite a bit larger than Texas. NOAA also claimed August was the hottest ever in Namibia, despite having no thermometer data in Namibia.
NOAA has no coverage on about half of the land surface of this planet.
Satellites on the other hand cover almost the entire earth, including all of Namibia. RSS TLT satellite data showed August was 11th warmest since 1978 in Namibia, behind 1995, 1992, 1993, 1988, 2013, 1980, 2001, 1981, 1990 and 1985. Namibia was 0.54C cooler in August than August 1995.
As with Angola, NOAA is committing blatant fraud. There is no reason to be using imaginary, politically motivated, surface data, when we have actual satellite data which shows no warming this century.
Just yesterday, we published an article highlighting the latest deranged idea floated by Saudi Arabia’s monarchs to sue Twitter users comparing the barbaric kingdom to ISIS.
Today, we present to you a power graphic courtesy of Middle East Eye, which demonstrates precisely why the Saudis are so sensitive about the topic. Namely, because the accusations are true.
The Islamic State (IS) and Saudi Arabia prescribe near-identical punishments for a host of crimes, according to documents circulated by the militant group.
IS published a list of crimes and their punishments on 16 December 2014 to serve “as an explanation and as a warning” to those living in territory under their control in large parts of Iraq and Syria.
The document lists hadd crimes, which are considered to be “against the rights of God,” and includes fixed punishments for theft, adultery, slander and banditry.
Crimes deemed hadd and their punishments are derived from the Quran and the hadith, the collected teachings and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. However, with the exception of Saudi Arabia, and IS-controlled areas, they are rarely applied.
the West could – at some point in the future – have diplomatic relations with IS “simply because they [IS] are sitting on oil and are happy to sell it”.
“It might happen given the pragmatism of the West and how willing it is to compromise on human rights,” she added.
FixWin 10 is an update to the popular FixWin application that introduces several Windows 10 specific repair options to the application.
We have reviewed FixWin back in 2010 when it was released to the public and came to the conclusion that it is a useful troubleshooting tool for devices running Windows.
The update delivers more of the same include a setting reserved solely for Microsoft's latest operating system.
The program requires the Microsoft .Net Framework 4 but no installation. The interface itself has been updated slightly with a modern look. Information about the underlying system are displayed on start.
There you find fixes for common issues listed as well, for instance to register all store apps again to make sure they are available again on the system and functioning properly.
If you have removed an app accidentally for instance, it can be helpful to regain access to it.
A click on Windows 10 opens all repair options for fixes for the operating system. The following options are provided:
Repair the Windows Component Store using Deployment Imaging and Servicing Management (DISM).
Reset the Settings app. Useful if it does not open anymore or crashes.
Disable OneDrive file synchronization.
Repair the Windows Start Menu. Handy if it does not work properly or does not open at all.
Repair WiFi if it is not working.
Fix Windows Update stuck downloading updates after upgrading to Windows 10.
Clear and reset the Store cache to resolve issues downloading applications from the Windows Store.
Fix "The Application wasn't installed" in Windows Store, Error Code: 0x8024001e.
Fix Windows Store apps not opening. Registers all apps anew.
The remaining options appear to be more or less identical to those provided in the previous version of FixWin.
One great feature of FixWin 10 is that you get instructions to run the fix manually as well. All you have to do is click on the help icon next to each fix to display information on what it does in detail, and instructions to run it manually.
The manual approach usually comes down to one or multiple commands that you need to run from the command line or PowerShell. To make things easier, it is possible to double-click on the manual instructions to copy them.
I like this option a lot since it allows me to check the fix before it is applied. I always have a hard time trusting applications when they don't reveal what they do in the background to fix an issue. Since FixWin details that, I find it much easier to trust it in this regard.
Closing Words
If you run into one of the issues that FixWin 10 can repair, then you may want to give it a go as it may fix the issue for you in that case.
It is up to you to run the fix from within the interface or manually. The manual approach may take longer but it has the added advantage that you know what to do next time without running the program at all.
So the fundamental case for a 20 year bull run as BMO is calling for and certainly many other banks seem to be onboard with that is not looking great YTD. In fact, most perma bulls have shy’d away from even mentioning fundamentals other than to say that generally they aren’t looking great but don’t worry the Fed is still engaged. And so I feel its a worthwhile exercise to have a look at the technicals. Thing about the technicals is that you can cherry pick any baseline point to really make any case, good or bad. But if we take a look at a time period that encompasses several cycles we negate our ability to cherry pick the baseline and we can be much more confident in our overall analysis.
So what I’ve done is taken a two decade period of S&P pricing which encompasses several cycles. Mid 1990′s was a market mid cycle having recovered from the short recession of the early 1990′s but before things really began heating up in the late 1990′s. If we just have a gentle look at the chart we see we’ve had a couple large cycles with fairly extreme booms and subsequent busts. Currently we are in the midst of the third boom which has taken us to new all time highs. Now even a 5 year old can look at the chart and say at some point this thing has a large down turn, same as it always does. That’s easy to see and not many will argue it. But as so many bulls remind us we could have said the same thing about this chart a year ago and we’d have missed out on significant returns. Very true. So the key is then figuring out where the down turn begins. I know I know that’s the kind of stuff you have to go to biz school for eh. Ok so let’s first have a look at the easy chart.
So pretty simple. Two full cycles and into the third which doesn’t tell us much. Let’s add some markers to see if we can’t pick up on some technical cues.
So what we’ve done is run a 2.5 standard deviation Bollinger Band (BB) using a 100 period moving average looking at monthly returns because we are interested long cycle technical cues. We’ve also run Relative Strength Indicator (RSI) using 20 periods. What we find is actually quite notable. During the tech bubble cycle we saw the S&P rise to the upper BB where it tracked the upper band for some time. During that same period we saw the RSI move above 70. Now as the market peaked we saw the S&P move below the upper BB and we also saw a decline in RSI. What is very interesting is that the point where RSI dropped below 70 is the point the tech bubble burst and sent S&P into a free fall. The market continued to sell until the RSI dropped below 30 at which point the market stabilized and reversed higher.
This took us into the start of the credit bubble cycle. Here the RSI move up very quickly and plateaued just below 70 for several years during which time the S&P moved up but never quite made it to the upper BB. Then in 2007 the RSI moved above 70 but then quickly reversed back down below the upper band. Interestingly again the RSI dropping below the upper band seemed to trigger the bursting of the credit bubble as we saw S&P again move into free fall. Then here too we saw the market stabilize as the RSI moved through the bottom band.
And again this brought us into the latest Fed bubble. Now during this latest cycle the RSI moved up but bounced off the upper band a few times without actually breaking through 70. At the same time the S&P moved higher but with quite heavy volatility. Eventually we saw the RSI move up and break through the upper limit. It was about the same time that the S&P traded higher to the upper BB where it tracked for some time. However, at the end of November 2014 the S&P started to dislocate and moving down below the upper BB. And then ominously January of this year we saw the RSI also move below the upper RSI band.
Remember this technical signaled the popping of the past two bubble cycles. Now February saw the RSI move back above the upper band but March moved back down below. I would watch this very carefully now. I would venture to say if April remains below the upper RSI band we could very well have moved into the latest and perhaps greatest period of wealth destruction. It is time to protect those assets.
Google Earth adds historical imagery and Street View expands to nearly 80 places in the latest update.
Kerish Doctor 2017 is an integrated solution for computer maintenance that utilizes the most promising developments in this area. Due to its unique system, Kerish Doctor 2017 prevents Windows crashes in real time and also safely fixes registry errors. The application regularly performs a maximally thorough and safe cleaning of your system to eliminate accumulated digital "trash", thereby increasing the efficiency of your computer in the best way possible.
Kerish Doctor 2017 protects your PC against malware and potential vulnerabilities and monitors computer settings that are important from the point of view of security. The Smart Update system promptly updates the application's databases, which are constantly being improved by our experts. Thanks to this system, the software suite is becoming more effective every day, making our solution the most promising in its class.
Conditions:
License expiration date: 16 June 2018
Every license key can be used only for one PC (any count of OS, reinstalling OS does not affect the license and can be activated again).
Home/Personal use only.
Lost giveaway license keys can not be restored by the developer.
Submitting of license key in the public domain may lead to license blocking without providing a replacement.
Mass activations of license key on several devices (more than one PC) may lead to license blocking without providing a replacement.
Program does not conflict with the antivirus software and can work with them together.
(Highlighting by us)
