Critical Thinking | Big Government

We Need A Social Revolution

Source: PeakProsperity.com
Charles Hugh Smith
August 18, 2017

In the conventional view, there are two kinds of revolutions: political and technological. Political revolutions may be peaceful or violent, and technological revolutions may transform civilizations gradually or rather abruptly—for example, revolutionary advances in the technology of warfare.

In this view, the engines of revolution are the state—government in all its layers and manifestations—and the corporate economy.

In a political revolution, a new political party or faction gains converts to its narrative, and this new force replaces the existing political order, either via peaceful means or violent revolution.

Technological revolutions arise from many sources but end up being managed by the state and private sector, which each influence and control the other in varying degrees.

Conventional history focuses on top-down political revolutions of the violent “regime change” variety: the American Revolution (1776), the French Revolution (1789), the Russian Revolution (1917), the Chinese Revolution (1949), and so on.

Technology has its own revolutionary hierarchy; the advances of the Industrial Revolutions I, II, III and now IV, have typically originated with inventors and proto-industrialists who relied on private capital and banking to fund large-scale buildouts of new industries: rail, steel manufacturing, shipbuilding, the Internet, etc.

The state may direct and fund technological revolutions as politically motivated projects, for example the Manhattan project to develop nuclear weapons and the Space race to the Moon in the 1960s.

These revolutions share a similar structure: a small cadre leads a large-scale project based on a strict hierarchy in which the revolution is pushed down the social pyramid by the few at the top to the many below.  Even when political and industrial advances are accepted voluntarily by the masses, the leadership and structure of the controlling mechanisms are hierarchical: political power, elected or not, is concentrated in the hands of a few at the top. Corporations are commercial autocracies; leadership is highly concentrated and orders are imposed on the bottom 99% of employees with military-like authority.

Social Revolutions Are Not Top-Down

But there is another class of revolution that does not share this hierarchical structure, nor does it manifest in the large-scale, top-down power-pyramids of the state and private corporations: social revolutions are bottoms-up affairs, lacking centralized leadership and hierarchical control mechanisms.

Social revolutions eventually influence the state and private sector, but they do not require the permission, funding or leadership of these hierarchies; as a rule, social revolutions drag the state and corporate sectors forward, kicking and screaming, as the social fabric and values of the populace change and the state and corporate sector cling to the status quo.

Examples of recent social revolutions include the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s, the Counterculture of the 1960s, and the gay rights movement.  The leadership of the state resisted each revolution, and was essentially forced to adapt to the new social order as it became mainstream.

Once corporations figured out ways to profit from the transformed social order, they quickly introduced new products and fresh marketing: all-Caucasian advertising, for example, gave way to targeted ethnic advertising and mixed-race national advert campaigns.

When social revolutions are suppressed by the state, they may spark a political revolution as the socially oppressed come to see the overthrow of the autocratic political order as a necessary step towards liberation.

In other cases, social revolutions may have little immediate impact on the political stage. Faith-based social secular movements–for example, the Second Great Awakening in the early 19^th century– were not overtly political; their eventual political impact (temperance, woman’s rights and support for the abolition of slavery) may manifest decades later.

In summary: social revolutions may generate political waves, but they need not be overtly political to do so, nor do they rely on political, financial or technological hierarchies to transform society.

The Decline of Social Groups and the Erosion of the Social Order

Robert Putman’s 2000 book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, documented the decline of social connections and what we might calling belonging in American society with reams of data. This erosion of social bonds is not limited to social groups such as bowling leagues; it is secular, spanning every social type of connection from family picnics to community and neighborhood groups.

If we extend Putnam’s findings to the core human bonds of family and friendships, we find the same fraying of social ties; people have fewer close friends, are more isolated and lonely, and family relationships are increasingly superficial or characterized by alienation.

The factors feeding this broad-based decline of connectedness and social capital are many: the nation’s economic mode of production has changed, requiring two incomes where one once sufficed, and globalization has increased both the demands on those with jobs and the number of adults who have fallen out of the work force.

This winner-takes-most economy has been accompanied by the rise of political divisiveness, a brand of politics that fosters us-versus-them disunity and the erosion of common ground in favor of demonized opponents and all-or-nothing loyalty to one party or cause.

The technological revolutions of broadcast television and radio homogenized the mainstream media even as they provided superficial substitutes for social engagement. The technologies of social media, mobile telephony and narrowcast echo-chambers of uniform opinion have created even more addictive forms of distraction that are not just shredding social connectedness—they’re destroying our ability to form and nurture social bonds, even within the family.

This dynamic was explored in a recent essay in The Atlantic, Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?

Any careful observer of present-day family life would add that the addictive draw of mobile telephony has also damaged the parents’ generation and the family unit itself.

Cui Bono: To Whose Benefit?

Longtime readers know I often begin an inquiry with the time-tested question: cui bono, to whose benefit? Who has benefited from the erosion of the social fabric and social capital, from the politics of divisiveness and the mass addiction to the technologies of superficial connectedness?

While we can take note of soaring corporate profits, and draw a causal connection between these profits and the modern-day “always connected to work” lifestyle of high-productivity corporate employees, it’s difficult to argue that corporations have benefited directly from the loss of social capital that characterizes American life.

Rather, it seems that the corporation’s relentless pursuit of narrowly defined self-interest, i.e. maximizing profits by whatever means are available, has laid waste to boundaries between work and home life as collateral damage.

In a similar fashion, purveyors of smartphones and the software and content that render them so addictive don’t necessarily benefit directly from the destruction of intimate, authentic social bonds, but they certainly have prospered from the feeding of the smartphone addiction. Once again, the loss of authentic social connectedness is collateral damage.

While it seems quite clear that political groups have fueled divisiveness to their own benefit, does the state (government in all its forms) benefit from the fraying of the social order? It’s difficult to discern a direct benefit to the state, though it might be argued that a fractured populace is easier to control.

But the erosion of the social order has gone beyond fracture into disintegration, and it’s hard to see how class wars and social disunity benefit the state, which ultimately relies on some measure of social unity for its authority, which flows from the consent of the governed.

It’s Time To Take Our Future Back

In Part 2: Rescuing Our Future, we focus on the self-evident truth that governments and corporations cannot restore social connectedness and balance to our lives.  Only a social revolution that is self-organizing from the bottom-up can do that.

And we detail out the specific steps each of us can and should take to develop the values and skills required to form and maintain authentic social wealth—the wealth of friendship, of social gatherings, of belonging.

It takes courage and independence to swim against the toxic tides of our economy and society. The good news is that true wealth is within reach of everyone. The steps we each need take are clear; it’s just a matter of having the will to invest the time and effort.

Do you have it?

Read More At: PeakProsperity.com

CNN dumps ORC polling corporation after 10 years

Source:  RT
August 21, 2017

CNN recently announced that after 10 years, it will no longer be working with ORC International, their polling firm. It stands for the Opinion Research Corporation.

Goldman Sachs, President Of The United States

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
August 21, 2017

In this article, I’m not going to trace and list all the Obama and Trump appointees who have ties to Goldman Sachs. The sources are easily available. The Hillary Clinton connections are clear as well.

The point is, Goldman and its allies can exert enormous influence on the direction of the trillion-dollar casino called the stock market.

And the stock market is the universally perceived indicator of the health or illness of the US economy.

The economy is Trump’s trump card. If the stock market plummets and stays down, his credibility as president takes a hit of far more serious proportions than anything we’ve seen so far.

Keep in mind, as well, that giant pension funds all over the US and giant insurance companies (and other entities) invest in the stock market—and these organizations’ stability, as endangered as it is right now, would fracture in far more serious ways, if the stock market collapsed.

Super-banks like Goldman Sachs therefore hold the political fate of a president, any president, in their hands.

“Play ball with us. Otherwise, we can take down the market.”

What does Goldman Sachs want, aside from a free hand to wheel and deal inside and outside the law re investing and trading?

Goldman wants:

The basic survival of Globalist “free trade” (no tariffs)—the cornerstone of mega-corporate control of the world economy.

Through US military threats and interventions and attacks, the prosperity of the military industrial complex.

The continued prosperity of the pharmaceutical cartel—despite its avaricious market practices and outpouring of destructive medical drugs.

These are a few of Goldman’s top priorities.

But of course, Goldman has a Plan B, if they decide Trump’s presidency is too shaky. And now that several corporate CEOs and financiers have left Trump’s corporate council over the recent Charlottesville violence and Trump’s response to it, causing the president to disband that council, Goldman is obviously mulling Plan B.

What would that be?

Another 2008 financial debacle and yet another round of massive federal bailouts?

Or a war? Wars float all financial boats that count in the eyes of elites.

Perhaps the now-departed Steve Bannon, who used to work for Goldman, would have a few interesting points to make on these issues.

During the presidential campaign, Trump issued a number of statements attacking Goldman Sachs and claiming he was immune from their influence. That was false. Trump obviously knew the score, as did Obama, as did Hillary Clinton.

Now he is hoping Goldman will hold the stock market together for him.

At the outset of his presidency, I wrote that I supported Trump on two major counts. He was mercilessly attacking major media news, and he had stopped Hillary Clinton in her tracks. I said everything else was up for grabs.

A lot of that grabbing is being done by Goldman Sachs.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

A Brief History of Fake News

Source: TheCorbettReport
James Corbett
August 8, 2017

TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=23653 [NOTE: This video was produced for BoilingFrogsPost.com on October 31, 2012. It is being made available in its entirety here for the first time.] Military deception is an ancient and time-honoured art. Throughout recorded history, military commanders have attempted to spread false news and seed false information as part of psychological warfare operations to deceive, confuse, and demoralize the enemy…

California Vote Scandal Blows Up

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
August 8, 2017

The watchdog group, Judicial Watch, is threatening to file a lawsuit if the state government of California doesn’t clean up its vast voting mess. (twitter version here, and here)

What mess?

Judicial Watch: “…public records obtained…show 11 California counties have more registered voters than voting-age citizens.”

What??

There’s more.

“Los Angeles County officials ‘informed us that the total number of registered voters [in the County] now stands at a number that is a whopping 144% of the total number of resident citizens of voting age.’”

FAR MORE REGISTERED VOTERS THAN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE OF VOTING AGE.

That’s doesn’t work. That’s fraud.

Now add this to the mix. Over a million illegal immigrants (some say far more) have received driver’s licenses in California. All of them (unless they specifically opt out), are automatically registered to vote by the Dept. of Motor Vehicles.

Put all this insanity together, and what do you get? A gigantic number of people who can illegally cast votes. Because, in California, it’s legal to be illegal.

Want to proceed further down the rabbit hole?

It’s probable that many illegal immigrants don’t vote. If someone wanted to vote FOR them, how would that work?

Not one at a time, unless some sinister organization had at least half a million foot soldiers on call, on Election Day.

But here is a possible clue: electronic voting systems.

Back in 2007, the secretary of state of California ordered a “Top-to-Bottom Review” of all electronic voting systems currently in use in California elections.

In other words, up to that time, these systems had been considered a very fine way to run the vote count. The systems obviously had been tested and re-tested and checked and approved. They were already being used in the state of California.

However, astoundingly, all the following electronic systems were found to contain fatal flaws: Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold); Hart InterCivic; Sequoia Voting Systems; Election Systems and Software.

The first three systems were disqualified from further use…and then conditionally re-approved. The fourth system was rejected altogether.

To suppose that, after this top-to-bottom review in 2007, everything was quickly fixed is a leap only the foolish and unwary would take—particularly when we are talking about extremely talented hackers who could be employed to change election-vote numbers.

I read the California Top-to-Bottom Review. The public comments section at the end was illuminating. It contained explosive remarks.

For example, there was a discussion of vendors pretending to sell certain voting machines to the state of California…but actually selling other machines…machines that were not certified for use.

Another comment indicated that California lacked a method to ensure the source code for voting-machine software actually belonged to software certified by the state.

All in all, there is no guarantee (far from it) that the California voting system is safe or effective or honest.

If someone manipulated the system, and somehow utilized the huge numbers of illegal immigrants who are registered to vote, as a cover for falsified numbers…

Who would use illegal immigrants in that way?

You can answer that question.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

HUD Secretary Dr. Carson Finds A Mere Half A Trillion In Errors…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 17, 2017

When then-President-elect Trump appointed former neurosurgeon and presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson to be Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, I had to turn to my friend and colleague Catherine Austin Fitts, and exchange the “knowing wink.” Seriously, folks, we weren’t even in the same room when the announcement came. We were, in fact, hundreds of miles away, but nonetheless, I strongly suspect we both turned in that “metaphorical higher-dimensional imaged-space” that we all create when such things happen, and winked at each other. Indeed, later, during a phone call as we were discussing the various cabinet appointments that were rolling out, we both had to speculate on just how long it would take Dr. Carson to find major financial problems. I forget who said what, but one of use gave it about “six months.”

Well, it’s been about six months, and here we are, with the following story shared by Ms. S.H.:

BREAKING: Ben Carson Finds $516.4 BILLION Of Mismanaged Funds… Media SILENT

And here’s the actual PDF put out by HUD:

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC HUD’s Fiscal Years 2016 and 2015 (Restated) Consolidated Financial Statements Audit (Reissued)

Much of the latter is, of course, the usual government boiler-plate. So I direct your attention to page 3 of the PDF file, where we read this:

What We Audited and Why

In accordance with the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended, we are required to annually audit the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development (HUD). HUD reissued its fiscal year s 2016 and 2015 (restated) consolidated financial statements due to pervasive material errors that we identified. Our objective was to express an opinion on the fairness of HUD’s consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) applicable to the Federal Government. This report presents our reissued independent auditor’s report on HUD’s fiscal year s 2016 and 2015 (restated) consolidated financial statements, including an update to our report on HUD’s internal controls.

What We Found

The total amounts of errors corrected in HUD’s notes and consolidated financial statements were $516.4 billion and $3.4 billion, respectively. There were several other unresolved audit matters, which restricted our ability to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to express an opinion.These unresolved audit matters relate to (1) the Office of General Counsel’s refusal to sign the management representation letter , (2) HUD’s improper use of cumulative and first-in, first-out budgetary accounting methods of disbursing community planning and development program funds, (3) the $4.2 billion in nonpooled loan assets from Ginnie Mae’s stand-alone financial statements that we could not audit due to inadequate support, (4) the improper accounting for certain HUD assets and liabilities, and (5) material differences between HUD’s subledger and general ledger accounts. This audit report contains 11 material weaknesses, 7 significant deficiencies, and 5 instances of noncompliance with applicable laws and regulations.

(Emphases added).

Now, let’s translate that from Governmentese to English:

1) “…pervasive material errors we identified,” = “we identified pervasive material errors” = We couldn’t make much sense of the way HUD keeps its books, but…
2) …nonetheless we found “amounts of errors” totaling $516,400,000,000 = in spite of the deplorable state of HUD’s books, we were able to identify half a trillion dollars of errors.

Now, you’re probably wondering, given the title of the first article, whether or not this money is actually missing, or if these were simply “accounting errors.” (Let the magnitude of those two possibilities to sink in for a moment!) Johnny and Susie can’t read, write, add or subtract any more, so it probably should not come as a surprise that HUD can’t add or subtract either. But, tempted as I am to indulge my penchant for rants on Amairikuhn edgykayshun, I will resist, because in the very next sentence we read:

3) “There were several other unresolved audit matters, which restricted our ability to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to express and opinion” = “we did the best audit that we could, but in spite of the fact that we were able to identify half a trillion dollars of errors, we we’re able to get any further because there’s ‘something funny’ about the books.”

And let you think I’m reading too much into that statement, we are then told that

4) “We ran into ‘improper accounting’ of ‘certain HUD assets  and liabilities,'” = “we don’t even know what HUD owns or is liable for”…

…and yes, folks, I’d call that an “accounting problem. It’s beginning to look an awful lot like we’re not just looking at poor addition and subtraction skills from Johnny and Susie Hudd, but an actual missing half a trillion dollars.

But wait. There’s more:

“Why,” you might be asking yourself, “don’t they even know what they own or are liable for?”

And the answer is:

5) There were “material differences between HUD’s subledger and general ledger accounts,” which is a nice Clinton-Obama-Bush-esque way of saying “we don’t know what we own or are liable for because we’re keeping two sets of books!”

Ponder that statement for a moment: they acknowledge the existence of something called a “subledger”. Now, obviously, I’ve never served at any high level of the Federal Cesspool, nor would I want to. So perhaps “subledger” is a professional term of art for Federal Accounting.

But to my hack-from-South-Dakota ears, it sounds like “two sets of books”. And hey, if we can have subledgers, then why not sub-subledgers, and so on, and several sets of books, all the way from the local to the state to the regional to the federal level. Would that confusion allow the looting of the agency? You bet. And why would one loot any federal agency?

To keep their covert operations, drug running, and secret research going.

And that’s a fancy way of saying that, while there is a problem in HUD, the problem doesn’t originate there.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Klaus Eberwein “Commits Suicide” Ahead of Testimony Against Clinton Foundation – Media Blackout

Source: FreedomOutpost.com
Tim Brown
July 15, 2017

On Friday, I reported on the alleged suicide of Republican donor Peter W. Smith, who confessed to the Wall Street Journal that he and his team had worked with Russian hackers to obtain Hillary Clinton’s missing emails.  Today, reports are out that a former head of a Haitian government development agency allegedly committed suicide just prior to allegedly testifying against the Clinton Foundation before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, and the media is largely silent.

Klaus Eberwein, 50, was found dead in his motel room from an apparent gunshot wound to the head, according to the Miami-Dade medical examiner, who ruled his death a suicide.

The Miami Herald reports:

Klaus Eberwein, a former Haitian government official, was found dead Tuesday in a South Dade motel room in what the Miami-Dade medical examiner’s office is ruling a suicide.

“He shot himself in the head,” said Veronica Lamar, Miami-Dade medical examiner records supervisor. She listed his time of death at 12:19 p.m.

“It’s really shocking,” said Muncheez’s owner Gilbert Bailly. “We grew up together; he was like family.”

Bailly said he last spoke to Eberwein, 50, two weeks ago and he was in good spirits. They were working on opening a Muncheez restaurant in Sunrise, he said.

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 shoddy construction of several schools built after Haiti’s devastating Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake.

Eberwein was scheduled to appear Tuesday before the Haitian Senate’s Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, the head of the commission, Sen. Evalière Beauplan confirmed. The commission is investigating the management of PetroCaribe funds, the money Haiti receives from Venezuela’s discounted oil program.

Read More At: FreedomOutpost.com

 

Germany Has Had It, Consider Sanctions Against USA

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 6, 2017

A few days ago I blogged about a suspicion I’ve long entertained, namely, that there appears to be some sort of covert war taking place between Washington and Berlin, and that this covert war has been going on for a while, most recently entering an “economic warfare” guise. I’ve also advanced the hypothesis that American “rebasing” efforts in Eastern Europe were part of a very old geopolitical game, first played by King Edward VII, then by Clemenceau, Chamberlain and Daladier. Edward, of course, helped engineer the Triple Entente, the alliance of France, Russia, and Britain that was, of course, directed against Germany and eventually “lay siege” to the Central Powers for four years during World War One. Edward’s ploy, of course, was also to prevent the “geopolitically unthinkable”: an alliance of Russia and Germany, long the bug-a-boo of geopolitical thinking. After World War One, the formal alliance system was replaced by the idea of the cordon sanitaire, the “buffer zone” of small states created from the nationalities within the old Russian Empire: Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania became the “sanitary cordon” between Russia and Germany to prevent an alliance.

Of course, the Treaty of Rapallo side-stepped all of this. Then came the strengthening of that idea with the military guarantees given by Daladier and Chamberlain to Poland…

… an idea that didn’t work out too well for Poland, France, the UK, or ultimately, Germany.

The most recent version of this game has been the “let’s launch a coup in the Ukraine, and, just to keep Merkel out of it, launch sanctions on Russia (for its aggression in the affair, of course), which sanctions will keep Germany and Russia from building all those pipelines and cementing other lucrative deals). Part and parcel of my hypothesis about this covert warfare also deals with the war of fines and sanctions against German banks (Deutsche Bank) and German auto manufacturers.

Well, it’s beginning to look more and more like this hypothesis might have some traction, for the gloves are increasingly coming off. The most recent round of anti-Russia sanctions, I wrote a few days ago, was as much directed against Germany as they were against Russia.

And now Kanzlerin Merkel is making no bones about it, and pulling no punches: Germany is considering economic sanctions on the USA, this time, against imports of American energy, according to this Sputnik article shared by Ms. K.M.:

The Final Straw: Germany Mulling Over Sanctions… This Time Against the US

There are some important considerations and paragraphs here to note:

In a joint statement, Germany’s Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel and Austria’s Chancellor Christian Kern slammed the decision by the US Senate to impose new sanctions on Moscow over its alleged interference in the US presidential election as well as the ongoing situations in Ukraine and Syria.

“Threatening German, Austrian and other European enterprises with penalties on the US market only because they take part in the gas supply projects such as the Nord Stream 2 together with Russia or finance them, is adding an absolutely new and highly negative aspect in relations between the US and Europe,” the joint statement reads.

For his part, the leader of Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), Martin Schulz, lambasted US senators’ move and called upon German Chancellor Angela Merkel to oppose it.

“We have seen that the US is pursuing a course in energy policy that is dangerous and is directed against Germany,” Schulz told the Federal Association of German Industry (BDI). (Emphasis added)

Now, in my previous blog on this subject, I only suggested that the perception of the new sanctions regime would backfire and be seen as sanctions against Germany (which I also argued was the real additional, though hidden, target of the sanctions). Here, the leader of the opposition party in Germany, Herr Schulz, is now saying openly what only a few days ago was mere suspicion. To put it country simple: the situation is deteriorating quickly.

But there’s more:

Germany and Austria suspect that Senate’s anti-Russian bill is an attempt to “occupy” the European energy market on the part of US corporations.

“Germany and Austria went one step further, too — accusing the US of looking to promote the role of US LNG in Europe at the expense of Russian gas,” the S&P Global Platts writer underscored, adding that the US apparently wants to kill two birds with one stone by exerting sanctions on Nord Stream 2: to “punish” Moscow and promote US LNG supplies in Europe, “which would have the knock-on effect of supporting domestic US gas industry.”

In this context, Danilov wrote, it is most likely that potential anti-American sanctions would be aimed not at inflicting any economic damage on the US but at sabotaging Washington’s attempts to seize the European energy market.

“A ban on the import of American LNG into the EU countries could have become a very effective tool to prevent America’s attempts to influence the European market,” Danilov assumed adding that this measure could potentially attract wide public support. (Emphasis added)

This, too, is a new admission in the growing and widening gulf between Berlin and Washington, and like it or not, where Berlin goes on this issue, Europe goes. That means we are fast approaching the point when Europe will have to choose between the USA and Russia, a choice that has been delayed for some decades, but which, now, with the USSA playing “world cop,” crawling into bed with radical Islamic terrorist organizations, and interfering in the internal policies of several nations, in the long term, I suspect that the choice will not be favorable to Washington, regardless what Europe does in the short term.

The reason: Washington has proven its growing instability and psychopathy since 9/11. The last sentence of the article reminds us of this point: “It appears that the US political elite have completely forgotten that the interest of its European partners should be taken into account, Danilov concluded.”

Precisely, the unipolar paradigm reigns in Washington, in the dominant party, and the fake opposition party. And that unipolar paradigm has, since 9/11, seen the following things be accomplished: (1) Japanese rearmament, (2) Growing Russo-Japanese cooperation, (3) A fed-up Philippines, (4) more bi-lateral currency-trade deals bypassing the US dollar, (5) an insane, banana-republic political culture in Washington, (6) arms sales to the (out)House of Saud, a prime contributor to Islamic terrorism, (7) growing radicalism in Indonesia, and now, (8) the growing estrangement between Washington and our most powerful ally in Europe.

Washington has repeatedly asked its European “allies” to step up to the plate and do more for its own defense. But I have to wonder, if that happened, and Europe then demanded removal of ALL American bases in Europe because they’re sick and tired of being under Washington’s thumb, what the response would be.

I suspect we all know.

In any case, I suspect we’ll find out, after a few years of Japanese rearmament, when they once again ask us to get rid of our bases there.

So, if we want our allies to continue to be allies, then we need to stop treating them as vassals and satraps, and we’d better do so quickly. The trouble is, the idiots in Washington have not existed in a multi-polar world since the beginning of World War Two. They no longer know how.

They’re stupid.

And because they’re stupid, everyone is in trouble.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Don’t Drink Water In Ottawa

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 30, 2017

I’ve known many Canadians over the years and even visited their beautiful country, and for the most part, found them to be a very “grounded” group of people, which leads me to think that maybe the proverbial “they” are putting something – LSD? oxycontin? –  into the water supply at Parliament House in Ottawa, for ever since the lamentable advent of Mr. Trudeau on the scene, Canada appears to be in a race to establish Ottawa, and not Washington D.C., as the undisputed leader for the swampiest and kookiest place on the planet. (To my Canadian friends: yea, good luck with that. We’ve had a lot more practice).  As a tangent, I would like to propose a new Friendly International Competition between the two countries, one perhaps to rival the Stanley Cup, for the USA and Canada to compete for the kookiest idea to come from its political class on a yearly basis. This will pit Congress and Parliament House directly against each other. We can call the award the Grand Tacky Award (le Plus Grande Tacqueie for those in Quebec) or Green Worm Award, or some other appropriate name (to be decided at a later date), for the appalling kookiness governing our respective swamps. The award nominations would be reviewed by a committee of equal numbers of sane Canadians and Americans (if they can be found) and a winner chosen by that committee. In cases of ties, Mr. Putin would be invited to interfere in our internal affairs, and cast the deciding vote, which could then be turned over to Congress and the Canadian Parliament as more evidence of Russian malfeasance.

What am I talking about? Canada’s new “gender language” law, which, like most projects coming out of the left these days, is not only nutty, but a massive restriction on freedom of speech, and, at the same time, a dangerous codification in law of what is, at best, a theory(and thanks to Ms. C.V. for sending along the following article):

Canada Passes Bill-C16 Forcing Gender Theory Acceptance

What is intriguing here is to note the reactions:

Senators who voted against the bill along with Plett are all affiliated with the Conservative Party.

They are David Tkachuk, Yonah Martin, Richard Neufeld, Leo Housakos, Don Plett, Betty Unger, Norman Doyle, Tobias C. Enverga, Thanh Hai Ngo, Lynn Beyak, and Denise Batters.

Senators who abstained are Anne Cools (independent) and Conservatives Larry Smith, and Michael MacDonald.

Campaign Life Coalition, the political arm of Canada’s pro-life movement, condemned the passage of Bill C-16.

“This tyrannical bill is nothing but social engineering to the nth degree, all in the name of political correctness,” Campaign Life’s Toronto vice president Jeff Gunnarson told LifeSiteNews.

Jack Fonseca, Campaign Life’s senior political strategist, said the bill will be used the attacked Christian belief.

“Mark my words, this law will not be used as some sort of ‘shield’ to defend vulnerable transsexuals, but rather as a weapon with which to bludgeon people of faith and free-thinking Canadians who refuse to deny truth,” he told LifeSiteNews.”

This, I suspect, is the real root of the problem: it’s a bill designed to attack certain fundamental core pillars, not just political ones, or not just pillars of Canadian law or custom (or, for that matter, the USA, where similar measures have been attempted), but of our common culture; it is a bill enabling a certain vocal minority to be used by people ostensibly concerned with its rights, to seek to impose cultural norms and values on a greater number of people. This is not politics, but culture, and the plain fact of the matter is, the divide is cultural, and not political.

It is, I suspect, about exactly what its conservative critics say it is: an attempt to legalize unrestrained social engineering, and social engineering of a certain type at that.

This month is June, the month that seventy-three years ago the troops of America, Britain, and Canada stormed ashore in Normandy, France, to put an end to a tyranny that likewise regulated speech in the most extreme manner, choosing what words were acceptable, and what were not. One wonders what those men would think, now.

In the final analysis, the Canadian bill is a form of tyranny, like it or not. Let us hope that the insanity which produced it in Canada, and produces similar nonsense in the USA and elsewhere, will not require similar measures to defeat it.

But note, this bill is about forcing certain types of language, and again, this critique suspect what I suspect, that a certain community, in this case, the transgendered community, is being used by the political elite to drive something very different:

Peterson told the Senate committee last month that he believes “ideologues” are “using unsuspecting and sometimes complicit members of the so-called transgender community to push their ideological vanguard forward.”

“The fact that it’s potentially illegal for me not to participate in that is something that I think is absolutely dreadful. It puts a shudder in my heart as a Canadian that we could even possibly be in a situation like that,” he said.

Peterson became Canada’s preeminent critic of the Liberal bill after he produced three videos opposing the enforcement of gender ideology, one of which blasted Bill C-16, which he said “requires compelled speech.”

He has also vowed that, come what may, he will not use “genderless pronouns” such as “zir” and “ze” for those who self-identify as gender non-conforming when requested.

Lawyer Brown told the Senate Committee the federal Liberals have made it clear they will follow Ontario’s lead when implementing Bill C-16. And Ontario Human Rights Code guidelines “mandate” the use of genderless pronouns on request, he said.

“Mandating use of pronouns requires one to use words that are not their own that imply a belief in or agreement with a certain theory on gender,” he added.

And this, as I wrote and said long ago, is the hallmark of all gnostic systems: the demand to (1) define reality solely by language (2) the demonstration that one has subscribed to that “raised consciousness” by adherence to the linguistic agenda, and hence, (3) the pressure on others – by law or simple “shaming tactics” – to adopt the linguistic agenda.  Ultimately, as I have warned before, the coup was to substitute “gender” for “sex.” Once this occurred, it became possible to deal with a fundamental human issue by manipulations of language.

Make no mistake, this is an assault on free speech, and for the fools in the Canadian transgendered community who think this is a good thing I have only this warning: eventually, they will turn on you, as well, and force you to use language you do not wish to use, to force your subscription to a cosmology with which you are not agreed.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.