Pentagon Chief: If Ukraine Is Defeated, NATO Will Be At War With Russia

  As most analysts describe him, Lloyd Austin is seldom the brightest bulb in the room. This definition also applies quite accurately to olaf scholz or Emmanuel Macron. Still, there is little doubt that behind closed doors, the West is panicking. Nobody knows exactly when the Ukrainian army will collapse but the question now only focuses on when, not if. The hundreds of billions of dollars and Euros are lost. The expected return on investment with the dismantlement of Russia is certain not to happen. Credibility is gone. What do you do next? Negotiate or double down?

Pentagon Chief: If Ukraine Is Defeated, NATO Will Be At War With Russia

This is the single most important, dangerous and highly revealing statement from a top defense official in the West in a long time... It also demonstrates the precarious urgency of the moment and the huge stakes going into the November US election. The world truly stands on the precipice of a nuclear nightmare with the following fresh assertion of Biden's Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who said before Congress on Thursday: 

"If Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will be in a fight with Russia," Austin stated.

What's more is that this came the very day that Russian President Vladimir Putin warned things could easily spiral toward nuclear war in the scenario that NATO sends troops to Ukraine. Watch:

According to the fuller context of the Pentagon chief's statements, he emphasized that more Washington funding is crucial for Ukraine in order to prevent a situation where "one country can redraw its neighbors’ boundaries and illegitimately take over its sovereign territory."

"We know that if Putin is successful here, he will not stop. He will continue to take more aggressive actions in the region. And other leaders around the world, other autocrats around the world will look at this and will be encouraged by the fact that this happened and we failed to support a democracy," he added.

"If you are a Baltic state, you are really worried about whether you are next. They know Putin. They know what he is capable of. And, frankly, if Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will be in a fight with Russia," Austin said.

What is even more alarming about this statement is that everyone now knows that Ukraine forces are in retreat at this very moment, especially after the Russian capture of the city of Avdiivka, and surrounding villages.

Bloomberg on Thursday issued a report predicting total collapse of the Ukrainian front lines by summer, as the headline suggests (Ukraine Sees Risk of Russia Breaking Through Defenses by Summer): "Ukrainian officials are concerned that Russian advances could gain significant momentum by the summer unless their allies can increase the supply of ammunition, according to a person familiar with their analysis," the report says. According to more from Bloomberg:

Internal assessments of the situation on the battlefield from Kyiv are growing increasingly bleak as Ukrainian forces struggle to hold off Russian attacks while rationing the number of shells they can fire.

Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi said Thursday that mistakes by frontline commanders had compounded the problems facing Ukraine’s defenses around Avdiivka, which was captured by Russian forces this month. Syrskyi said he’d sent in more troops and ammunition to bolster Ukrainian positions.

US DoD/Flickr

So the consensus narrative and belated mainstream media admission is that Ukraine's military is a mere months away from clear defeat, and the top US defense chief just said NATO will go to war with Russia "if Ukraine falls".

The conflict has reached a dire and perilously unpredictable moment indeed, and clearly the already slim chances of jump-starting serious peace negotiations to end the war are slipping away fast.

A Global, Digital Coup d'État

  Great article which resume very well what happened during the last 4 years with the Global Pandemic, lockdowns and vaccination campaigns.

  Personally, I believe the real coup d'etat took place in 2001 with the 9/11 crisis. Covid was just a further step to increase the control which is now almost total. 

  We'll see in November if resistance is futile.

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

There was a time.

What seemed to be unfolding was a huge intellectual error for the history books.

A new virus had come along and everyone was freaking out and smashing all normal social functioning.

The excuse turns out just to be the cover story. Still, it bears examination.

Even though plenty of outside commentators said the pathogen should be handled in the normal way—with known treatment and calm while those most susceptible stayed cautious until endemicity—some people on the inside fell prey to a great fallacy. They had come to believe computer models over known realities. They thought that you could separate everyone, drive down infections, and then the virus would die out.

This was never a plausible scenario, as anyone who knew something about the history of pandemics would report. All known experience stood against this cockamamie scheme. The science was very clear and widely available: lockdowns do not work. Physical interventions in general achieve nothing.

But, hey, they said it was an experiment born of new thinking. They would give it a whirl.

When it became clear that the lockdowners had gained sway over policy, many of us thought, truly, how long can this really last? A week, maybe two. Then we would be done. But then something strange happened. The money began to flow. And flow. The states thought that was awesome so they kept it up. The money printers got to work. And general chaos broke out: social, cultural, educational, economic, and political.

It all happened so fast. The months rolled on with no break in the narrative. It became crazy after a time. There were so few critics. We didn’t know it but they were being silenced by a new machinery that had already been constructed for this purpose.

Among that which was censored was criticism of the inoculation potion that was being rolled out and which would eventually be forced on populations all over the world. They said it was 95 percent effective, but it wasn’t clear what that could mean. No coronavirus had ever been controlled by any vaccination. How could this be true? It wasn’t true. Nor did the shot stop the spread.

Many people said this at the time. But we couldn’t hear them. Their voices were muffled or silenced. The social media companies had already been taken over by government-connected interests working on behalf of intelligence agencies. We had believed that these tools were designed to increase our connections with others and enable free speech. Now they were being used to broadcast a preset regime narrative.

Strange industrial shifts took place. Gas cars were deprecated in favor of a new experiment in electric vehicles, thanks to intense consumer demand caused by shortages owing to supply chain breakages. Digital learning platforms got a huge boost because physical classrooms were closed. Online ordering and doorstep delivery became the rage because people were told not to leave their homes and small businesses were forcibly closed.

The pharma companies were riding high of course, gradually acculturating the population to a subscription model. There were attempts to convert whole countries to a health passport system. New York City tried this, along with actual physical segregation of the entire city, with the vaccinated considered clean while the unvaccinated were not allowed into restaurants, libraries, or theaters. The digital app didn’t work however, so that plan fell apart quickly.

All of this happened in less than one year. What began as an intellectual error in public health ended up looking like a digital coup d’état.

Coups of the past featured rebel armies from the hills storming the cities and joined by the military as they invaded the palace and the leader and his family fled in a carriage or helicopter depending on the epoch.

This was different. It was organized and planned by intelligence agencies within the structure of the global state, a great reset to reject the forms of the past and replace them all with a new dystopia.

Initially, the people who said this was a great reset were derided as crazed conspiracy theorists. But then it turned out that the head of the World Economic Forum (WEF), Klaus Schwab, had written a book by the very title that you could buy from Amazon. It turns out to be H.G. Wells’s “The Open Conspiracy” updated for the 21st-century technology.

There turns out to be much more than that. There was an angle to all of this that impacts the mechanisms we use for democratic control of societies. Buried in the flurry of bills shoved through in March 2020 was a liberalization of balloting and voting that would never have been tolerated before. In the name of social distancing, mail-in ballots would become the norm, along with the known irregularities they introduce.

Implausibly, this too was part of the plan.

Researching and realizing all of this in real time has been a bit much. It has shattered the old ideological paradigms. The old theories no longer explain the world as it is unfolding. It causes all of us to revisit our priors, at least those with minds adaptable enough to pay attention. For vast swaths of the intellectual class, this is not possible.

Looking back, we should have known something was up at the outset. There were too many anomalies. Were the people in charge really so stupid as to believe that you can make a virus go away by making everyone stay home? It’s absurd. You cannot control the microbial kingdom this way, and surely everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows this.

Another clue: there never was an exit plan. What exactly was fourteen days of frozen activity going to achieve? What was the benchmark of success? We were never told. Instead, the elites in media and government simply encouraged fear. And then met that fear with ridiculous protocols like dousing ourselves with sanitizer, masking while walking, and presuming every other person is a disease vector.

This was psychological warfare. To what end and how ambitious are these hidden plans for us?

Only four years later, we are grasping the fullness of what was going down.

For those of us schooled in the persistent incompetence of government to get anything right, much less deploy a plan with anything like precision, elaborate conspiracy theories of plots and schemes always seem implausible. We just don’t believe them.

This is why it took us so long to see the fullness of what was deployed in March 2020, a scheme that combined a plethora of seemingly disparate governmental/industrial ambitions including:

1) rollout of subscription/platform model of Pharma distribution,

2) mass censorship,

3) election management/rigging,

4) universal basic income,

5) industrial subsidies to digital platforms,

6) mass population surveillance,

7) cartelization of industry,

8) shift in income distribution and entrenchment of administrative state power,

9) crushing of ‘populist’ movements worldwide, and

10) the centralization of power generally speaking.

To top it off, all these efforts were global in scope. This whole model truly stretches the bounds of plausibility. And yet all the evidence points to exactly the above. It just goes to show that even if you don’t believe in conspiracies, conspiracies believe in you. It was a digital-age coup d’état unlike anything humanity has ever experienced.

How long will it take us to process this reality? We seem to be only at the early stages of understanding, much less resisting.

Leaked Military Files Show Russia's Nuclear Strike Threshold Lower Than Previously Known

  How far are we from a nuclear war? If both Russia and the West consider the war in Ukraine as existential, the answer may be very close! 

  With this in mind, the current policies of Europe are difficult to understand. They want to save the planet and for this are ready to deindustrialize and make our lives quite difficult indeed by focusing on one atom (C) , But conversely won't negotiate with Russia and take into consideration another far more dangerous atom (U). 

  So Global Warming is wrong but Global Scalding is fine? 

This week the Financial Times has published contents of a cache of leaked classified Russian documents said to lay out the country's doctrine and strategy for tactical nuclear weapons use. Included in the documents is info on the Kremlin's minimum criteria for using tactical nukes.

The criteria outlined in the secret files range "from an enemy incursion on Russian territory to more specific triggers, such as the destruction of 20% of Russia's strategic ballistic missile submarines," according to FT.

Images: Getty & Wikimedia 

The question of the possibility of Russia and NATO stumbling toward nuclear war is without doubt heavy on the minds of many this week, especially after French President Emmanuel Macron's Monday comments wherein he raised sending Western troops to fight Russia in Ukraine and said of the possibility, "nothing should be ruled out."

Putin appeared to respond directly in his Thursday state of the nation televised address, spelling out: "Everything that they are coming up with now, with which they threaten the entire world – all this really threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, and therefore the destruction of civilization – don’t they understand this, or what?"

"They must ultimately understand that we also have weapons – and they know about it, just as I now said  – we also have weapons that can hit targets on their territory," he warned.

As for tactical nuke usage, Russia's tactical arsenal has more limited range in comparison to strategic weapons, and thus are designed and intended for the possibility of a 'nearer' war in Europe or Asia. 

But worrisomely, the FT review of the documents (which date from 2008-2014) finds that the Kremlin likely has a threshold "lower than Russia has ever publicly admitted, according to experts who reviewed and verified the documents." Experts cited in the FT say the contents of the leaks likely remain part of Moscow's current nuclear doctrine.

The documents show that Russia has recently rehearsed scenarios involving war with China. Per the leaks and the FT report:

One exercise outlining a hypothetical attack by China notes that Russia, dubbed the “Northern Federation” for the purpose of the war game, could respond with a tactical nuclear strike in order to stop “the South” from advancing with a second wave of invading forces.

“The order has been given by the commander-in-chief . . . to use nuclear weapons . . . in the event the enemy deploys second-echelon units and the South threatens to attack further in the direction of the main strike,” the document said.

And for another scenario involving a hypothetical enemy invasion of Russian territory: 

A separate training presentation for naval officers, unrelated to the China war games, outlines broader criteria for a potential nuclear strike, including an enemy landing on Russian territory, the defeat of units responsible for securing border areas, or an imminent enemy attack using conventional weapons.

The slides summarise the threshold as a combination of factors where losses suffered by Russian forces “would irrevocably lead to their failure to stop major enemy aggression”, a “critical situation for the state security of Russia”.

Another envisioned situation seems to apply more for something like a Ukraine escalation scenario where there's runaway escalation. According to the FT's analysis and citations of the documents:

Other potential conditions include the destruction of 20 per cent of Russia’s strategic ballistic missile submarines, 30 per cent of its nuclear-powered attack submarines, three or more cruisers, three airfields, or a simultaneous hit on main and reserve coastal command centres.

Russia’s military is also expected to be able to use tactical nuclear weapons for a broad array of goals, including “containing states from using aggression […] or escalating military conflicts”, “stopping aggression”, preventing Russian forces from losing battles or territory, and making Russia’s navy “more effective”.

The particular above section has language in it which seems to lay out the most minimal threshold, but which perhaps leaves open the most interpretation for Russian leadership. Publicly at least, Kremlin leadership has said nuclear weapons could only be deployed if Russian territory and population face existential threat.

Putin in his aforementioned Thursday major address seemed to appeal in his nuclear warning given to NATO to this doctrine of "containing states from using aggression" - given that's precisely what he's now accusing the West of in Ukraine.

"Americans Are Being Lied To About Ukraine" - Tucker Carlson Reflects On Putin, Zelensky, Navalny & Nuclear War

  We are still witnessing the fallback of the Tucker Carlson interview of Vladimir Putin a couple of weeks ago but now the deep state is trying to regain control of the narrative.

  This is an extraordinary fight between a Goliath which control all the news media and a David which has the ear of a majority of the population. 

  The underlying problem is that the US based system cannot live with an independent Russia or China and will therefore double down rather than negotiate. Europe is even in a worse position. Without cheap Russian energy, the continent is toast and condemned to de-industrialization. This explains the current panic.  

"Americans Are Being Lied To About Ukraine" - Tucker Carlson Reflects On Putin, Zelensky, Navalny & Nuclear War

The international attacks on Tucker Carlson, especially from within US mainstream media and NATO-connected circles, have only increased following his hugely controversial eight day visit to Russia earlier this month where he interviewed President Vladimir Putin. Russian state media has even this week claimed authorities uncovered an "assassination plot" - rumored to have been backed by Kiev.

This week the former FOX prime time host was interviewed about his trip and the whole Putin interview experience in three-hour podcast hosted by Lex Fridman. Tucker Carlson revealed more about what motivated him to do the televised Putin segment, and further discussed his personal take on the Russia-Ukraine war and where it could go from here, now having entered its third year. Interestingly, Carlson's main critique of the war focused not on Putin or the Kremlin's actions in Ukraine, which of course are not under his control or influence, but on the impact to America.

Carlson explained that the West's escalation of the conflict long ago into a full-blown proxy war has not only resulted in more needless Ukrainian deaths, but it has been devastating for the United States. "I reject the whole premise of the war in Ukraine from the American perspective," Carlson told Fridman. "There’s a war going on that is wrecking the US economy in a way and at a scale that people do not understand." He also generally characterized the response of the US political class to the conflict, along with the American public which has uncritically followed, as naive.

Carlson emphasized that what would be a cautiously realist approach was utterly abandoned by Washington from the start, as has been typical of the past decades of US interventionism abroad. "It doesn’t even matter what I want to happen… that’s a distortion of what is happening," Carlson explained, and pointed to Russia having 100 million more people and more defense industry might "than all of NATO combined."

He described that a big part of the rationale behind the Putin interview was to bring "more information" to the West so that "people could make their own decisions about whether" escalation of weapons to Kiev and jingoistic rhetoric from Western capitals is a good idea.

Ultimately, he said, Americans are being lied to:

"Just to be clear, I have no plans to move to Russia. I think I would probably be arrested if I moved to Russia. Ed Snowden, who is the most famous openness, transparency, advocate in the world, I would say along with Assange, doesn’t want to live in Russia. He’s had problems with the Putin government. He’s attacked Putin. They don’t like it. I get it. I get it. I’m just saying, what are the lessons for us?

The main lesson is we are being lied to in a way that’s bewildering and very upsetting. I was mad about it all eight days I was there because I feel like I’m better informed than most people because it’s my job to be informed. I’m skeptical of everything and yet I was completely hoodwinked by it."

Topics highlighted throughout the long-ranging conversion included Carlson's personal take on being one-on-one with a seemingly "nervous" Putin, the question of ending the war in Ukraine, the role of the CIA and Western intelligence services, the prospect that the crisis could spiral into nuclear confrontation with the West, the Alexei Navalny saga, as well as a foray into the Israel-Palestine conflict near the end. Watch the full Carlson-Fridman interview below...

The following are some key excerpts of Tucker Carlson's words from the interview, selected by ZeroHedge [emphasis ours]...

* * *

Carlson On Putin. "I want to know who this guy is."

I thought he seemed nervous, and I was very surprised by that. And I thought he seemed like someone who’d overthought it a little bit, who had a plan, and I don’t think that’s the right way to go into any interview. My strong sense, having done a lot of them for a long time, is that it’s better to know what you think, to say as much as you can honestly, so you don’t get confused by your own lies, and just to be yourself. And I thought that he went into it like an over-prepared student, and I kept thinking, “Why is he nervous?” But I guess because he thought a lot of people were going to see it...

I mean, I asked him as I usually do the most obvious dumbest question ever, which is, “Why’d you do this?” And he had said in a speech that I think is worth reading. I don’t speak Russian, so I haven’t heard it in the original, but he had said at the moment of the beginning of the war, he had given this address to Russians, in which he explained to the fullest extent we have seen so far why he was doing this. And he said in that speech, “I fear that NATO the West, the United States, the Biden administration will preemptively attack us.” And I thought, “Well, that’s interesting.” I can’t evaluate whether that’s a fear rooted in reality or one rooted in paranoia. But I thought, “Well, that’s an answer right there.”

And so I alluded to that in my question and rather than answering it, he went off on this long from my perspective, kind of tiresome, sort of greatest hits of Russian history. And the implication I thought was, “Well, Ukraine is ours, or Eastern Ukraine is ours already.”...

I want to know who this guy is. I think a western audience, a global audience, has a right to know more about the guy, and so just let him talk. Because I don’t feel like my reputation’s on the line. People have already drawn conclusions about me, I suppose to the extent they have. I’m not interested really in those conclusions anyway, so just let him talk. And so I calmed down and just let him talk. And in retrospect, I thought that was really, really interesting. Whether you agree with it or not, or whether you think it’s relevant to the war in Ukraine or not, that was his answer. And so it’s inherently significant.

American falsehoods & the Ukraine war

I mean, I guess I reject the whole premise of the war in Ukraine from the American perspective, which is a tiny group of dumb people in Washington has decided to do this for reasons they won’t really explain. And you don’t have a role in it at all as an American citizen, as the person who’s paying for it, whose children might be drafted to fight it. To shut up and obey, I just reject that completely. I think, I guess I’m a child of a different era. I’m a child of participatory democracy to some extent, where your opinion as a citizen is not irrelevant. And I guess the level of lying about it was starting to drive me crazy.

The idea that Ukraine would inevitably win this war. Now victory was never, as it never is, defined precisely. Nothing’s ever defined precisely, which is always to tell that there’s deception at the heart of the claim. But Ukraine’s on the verge of winning. Well, I don’t know. I mean, I’m hardly a tactician or military expert. For the fifth time, I’m not an expert on Russia or Ukraine. I just looked at Wikipedia. Russia has a hundred million more people than Ukraine, a hundred million.

It has much deeper industrial capacity, war material capacity than all of NATO combined. For example, Russia is turning out artillery shells, which are significant in a ground war at a ratio of seven to one compared to all NATO countries combined. That’s all of Europe. Russia is producing seven times the artillery shells as all of Europe combined. What? That’s an amazing fact, and it turns out to be a really significant fact. In fact, the significant fact. But if you ask your average person in this country, even a fairly well-informed person of good faith who’s just trying to understand what’s going on, who’s going to win this war? Well, Ukraine’s going to win. They’re on the right side.

...And I raised that question in my previous job, and I was denounced as of course a traitor or something. But okay, great, I’m a traitor. What’s the answer? What’s the answer? [Vic]Toria Nuland, who I know, not dumb, hasn’t helped the US in any way, an architect of the Iraq war, architect of this disaster, one of the people who destroyed the US dollar. Okay, fine, but you’re not stupid. So you’re trying to get a war by acting that way, what’s the other explanation? By the way, NATO didn’t want Ukraine because it didn’t meet the criteria for admission. So why would you say that? Because you want a war, that’s why. And that war has enriched a lot of people to the tune of billions. So I don’t care if I sound like some kind of left-wing conspiracy nut, because I’m neither left-wing nor a conspiracy nut. Tell me how I’m wrong.

On feeling sorry for Zelensky

If I’m a Russian or a Ukrainian, let’s just be sovereign countries now. We’re not run by the U.S. State Department. We’re just our own countries. I believe in sovereignty, okay? So that’s my view. I also want to say one thing about Zelensky. I attacked him before because I was so offended by his cavalier talk about nuclear exchange because it would kill my family. So I’m really offended by that. Anyone who talks that way I’m offended by. But I do feel for Zelensky. I do. He didn’t run for president to have this happen.

I think Zelensky’s been completely misused by the State Department, by Toria Nuland, by our Secretary of State, by the policymakers in the U.S. who’ve used Ukraine as a vessel for their ambitions, their geopolitical ambitions, but also the many American businesses who’ve used Ukraine as a way to fleece the American taxpayer, and then by just independent ghouls like Boris Johnson who are hoping to get rich from interviews on it. The whole thing, Zelensky is at the center of this. He’s not driving history. NATO and the United States is driving history. Putin is driving history. There’s this guy, Zelensky. So I do feel for him, and I think he’s in a perilous place.

The prospect of nuclear war

Well it’s been what, 80 years? Not even 80 years, 79. And so we haven’t had a world war in 79 years. But one nuclear exchange would of course kill more people than all wars in human history combined.

I am counting. Because I think it obviously, it’s completely demonic and everyone pretends like it’s great. Nuclear weapons are evil.

The use of them is evil, and the technology itself is evil. And in my opinion, I mean, it’s like if you can’t, that’s just so obvious. And what I’m saying is I’m not against all technology. I took a shower this morning. It was powered by an electric pump, heated by a water heater. I loved it. I sat in an electric sauna. I’m not against all technology, obviously, but the mindless worship of technology?

The possibility of Russia-Ukraine Peace: Putin "wants a settlement"

He [Putin] wants a settlement, he wants a settlement. He doesn’t want to fight with them rhetorically and he just wants to get this done. He made a bunch of offers at the peace deal. We wouldn’t even know this happened if the Israelis hadn’t told us. I’m so grateful that they did that, that Johnson was dispatched by the State Department to stop it. I mean, I think Boris Johnson is a husk of a man. But imagine if you were Boris Johnson and you spend your whole life with Ukraine flag, “I’m for Ukraine,” and then all those kids died because of what you did, and the lines haven’t really moved. It hasn’t been a victory for Ukraine. It’s not going to be a victory for Ukraine. It’s like, how do you feel about yourself if you did that? I mean, I’ve done a lot of shitty things in my life, I feel bad about them, but I’ve never extended a war for no reason. That’s a pretty grave sin in my opinion.

Well, the U.S. government’s not allowing negotiations. So that for me is the most upsetting part. It’s like in the end, what Russia does, I’m not implicated in that. What Ukraine does, I’m not implicated in that. I’m not Russian or Ukrainian. I’m an American who grew up really believing in my country. I’m supporting my country through my tax dollars. It’s like I really care about what the U.S. government does because they’re doing it in my name, and I care a lot because I’m American. We are the impediment to peace, which is another way of saying we are responsible for all these innocent people getting dragooned out of public parks in Kiev and sent to go die. What? That is not good. I’m ashamed of it.

On the Alexey Navalny saga

Well, it’s awful. I mean, imagine dying in prison. I’ve thought about it a lot. I’ve known a lot of people in prison a lot, including some very good friends of mine. So I felt instantly sad about it. From a geopolitical perspective, I don’t know any more than that. And I laugh at and sort of resent, but mostly find amusing the claims by American politicians, who really are the dumbest politicians in the world actually, “This happened and here’s what it means.” And it’s like, “Actually as a factual matter, we don’t know what happened. We don’t know what happened.” We have no freaking idea what happened. We can say, and I did say, and I will say again, I don’t think you should put opposition figures in prison. I really don’t. I don’t, period. It happens a lot around the world, happens in this country, as you know, and I’m against all of it.

But do we know how we died? The short answer? No, we don’t. Now, if I had to guess, I would say killing Navalny during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of a debate over $60 billion in Ukraine funding, maybe the Russians are dumb. I didn’t get that vibe at all. I don’t see it. But maybe they killed him. I mean, they certainly put him in prison, which I’m against. But here’s what I do know is that we don’t know. And so when Chuck Schumer stands up and... Joe Biden reads some card in front of him with lines about Navalny, it’s like, I’m allowed to laugh at that because it’s absurd. You don’t know.

An interesting CIA anecdote

I was like, live in foreign countries, see history happen. I’m for that. I applied to the Operations Directorate. They turned me down on the basis of drug use actually. True. But anyway, whatever. I was unsuited for it so I’m glad they turned me down. But the point is I didn’t see CIA as a threat, partly because I was bathing in propaganda about CIA and I didn’t really understand what it was and didn’t want to know. But second, because my impression at the time was it was outwardly focused. It was focused on our enemies. I don’t have a problem with that as much. The fact that CIA is playing in domestic politics and actually has for a long time, was involved in the Kennedy assassination, that’s not speculation. That’s a fact. And I confirmed that from someone who had read their documents that are still not public, it’s shocking.

You can’t have that. And the reason I’m so mad is I really believe in the idea of representative government. Acknowledging its imperfections, but I should have some say, I live here, I’m a citizen. I pay all your freaking taxes. So the fact that they would be tampering with American democracy is so outrageous to me. And I don’t know why Morning Joe is not outraged. This parade of dummies, highly credentialed dummies they have on Morning Joe every day. That doesn’t bother them at all. How could that not bother you? Why is only Glenn Greenwald mad about it? I mean, it’s confirmed. It’s not like a fever dream. It’s real. They played in the last election domestically, and I guess it shows how dumb I am because they’ve been doing that for many years. I mean, the guy who took out Mosaddegh lived on my street. One of the Roosevelt's, CIA officer.

Carlson on the Israel-Palestine conflict

 I mean, it’s not a topic that I get into a lot because I’m a non-expert and because I’m not… Unlike every other American, I’m not emotionally invested in other countries just in general. I mean, I admire them or not, and I love visiting them. I love Jerusalem, probably my favorite city in the world, but I don’t have an emotional attachment to it. So maybe I’ve got more clarity. I don’t know, maybe less. Here’s my view. I believe in sovereignty as mentioned, and I think each country has to make decisions based on its own interest, but also with reference to its own capabilities and its own long-term interest.

And it’s very unwise for… I’m not a huge fan of treaties. Some are fine, too many bad. But I think US aid, military aid to Israel and the implied security guarantees, some explicit, but many implied, security guarantees of the United States to Israel probably haven’t helped Israel that much long-term. It’s a rich country with a highly capable population. Like every other country, it’s probably best if it makes its decisions based on what it can do by itself. So I would definitely be concerned if I lived in Israel because I think fair or unfair-

But now it’s not possible. If you had a coalition of countries against Israel, I know Israel has nuclear weapons and has a capable military and all that and the backing of the United States, but it’s a small country, I think I’d be very worried. So there’s that. I don’t see any advantage to the United States. I mean, I think it’s important for each country to make its own decisions.

Japan's Demographic Implosion: Live Births Crash To Record Low, 12 Years Ahead Of Forecast

  Japan's society is sick. In fact it is dying, literally. With a birth rate of just 1.26 children per women, the population is crashing ever faster, almost 10 years ahead of the most pessimistic projections of the government. And the trend will accelerate further in the coming years since very few children are being born in the cities and the average age in the countryside is rising fast. It is exactly the same problem in China with an index of 1.09 and in Korea 0.72. Just worse.

  This is the result of company friendly policies which completely ignored the needs of young people to raise families. It has now become prohibitively expensive and inconvenient to have a family in these countries and young people behave correspondingly, they don't. 

  There are other social problems making the situation worse. Most young women now work and salaries have been rising for them faster than for men in parallel with education. Most certainly a good thing except that for society this is a catastrophe since most women will not marry a man who earn less than they do! Why would they? This means automatically that almost half the population will never marry which gives us an index of 1 or less for the years ahead even if all couples had two children each which itself is unlikely. The problem is so deep that it is hard to find a practical solution. There may be none!

 

When it comes to monetary and fiscal policy, Japan is doomed. Unfortunately it is also doomed demographically.

Extending what has long been the most dismal trend in Japan's civilizational history, government data showed that the number of babies born in Japan fell for an eighth straight year to a fresh record low in 2023, underscoring the daunting task the country faces in trying to stem depopulation.

The number of births in 2023 fell 5.1% from a year earlier to 758,631, while the number of marriages slid 5.9% to 489,281, the first time in 90 years the number fell below 500,000 - the last time the number was this low the US had just dropped the atom bomb over Hiroshima and Nagasaki - signaling even greater declines in the population as out-of-wedlock births are rare in Japan.

The drop comes more than a decade earlier than the government's National Institute of Population and Social Security Research forecast, which estimated births would decline to below 760,000 in 2035, according to Kyodo news.

Meanwhile, the number of deaths also hit a record - only in the other direction - rising to 1,590,503, while divorces increased to 187,798, up by 4,695.

As a result, Japan's population, including foreign residents, fell by 831,872, with deaths outnumbering births by a record 831,872, double where it was just five years ago.

Asked about the latest data, Japan's top government spokesperson said the government will take "unprecedented steps" to cope with the declining birthrate, such as expanding childcare and promoting wage hikes for younger workers.

None of those measures have led to any perceptive improvement in Japan's demographic bust in the past.

The fast pace of decline in the number of newborns has been attributed to late marriages and people staying single. The administration of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has called the period leading up to 2030 "the last chance" to reverse the trend; all Japan has to do is divert the millions of illegal immigrants entering the US every month through the southern border - with the expectation they will all become diligent Democratic voters - and give them a red carpet welcome.

"The declining birthrate is in a critical situation," Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters. "The next six years or so until 2030, when the number of young people will rapidly decline, will be the last chance to reverse the trend."

A fall in the number of marriages is clearly followed by a drop in births, said Kanako Amano, a senior researcher at the NLI Research Institute. In order to increase the number of marriages, the government must conduct labor reforms, such as increasing wages in rural areas and eliminating the gender gap, Amano said.

The government is planning on submitting related legislation, including a bill on boosting child allowances to combat the declining birthrate, to the current session of parliament.

The number of births has been on a downward trend after hitting a peak in 1973 at around 2.09 million babies. It fell below 1 million in 2016.

The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare is set to release possibly in June population data excluding foreign residents. The revised figure for 2022 showed births falling to 770,747, down about 30,000 from the preliminary figure. If a similar trend continues in 2023, the number of births excluding foreign residents is likely to total around 730,000.

Mindful of the potential social and economic impact, and the strains on public finances, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has called the trend the "gravest crisis our country faces", and unveiled a range of steps to support child-bearing households late last year.

Japan's population will likely decline by about 30% to 87 million by 2070, with four out of every 10 people aged 65 or older, according to estimates by the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

They're Ready, Are You? Simon Hunt on How To Prepare For The Next Global Order (Video)

   With actual inflation above 10% and 900 billion dollars of real estate debt to refinance in 2024, does the market represent real value? The answer is rather obvious. 

  Then, what will puncture the bubble and when? This unfortunately is impossible to predict. Will it be the expending war in the Middle East as Simon Hunt predicts? A catastrophic direct involvement of some Western countries in Ukraine as is currently being discussed? Something else? Nobody knows what will be the actual black swan. The only certain thing is that we are already hearing the roar of the waterfall ahead. Getting ready now as Simon Hunt advises may indeed be a good idea.

 

It Has All Gone So Dreadfully Wrong For The Establishment

  You can still find great articles on Zero Hedge. This is one of them. But it's getting more and more difficult as the platform is slowly, step by step, being taken over by the deep state. The CIA in other words. It is relatively easy to understand just by looking at the growing proportion of articles exposing the views of the neo-cons. Insidious by real and effective. 

  It is unfortunate but a reality. Soon, as international relations deteriorate further, it will be almost impossible to find independent comments and articles. Enjoy while it last!

Authored by Nikolai Hubble via FortuneAndFreedom.com,

• When it rains, it pours for those in power

• Have the people suddenly woken up?

• How will the Establishment respond?

Our Betters have been very busy these last few years. Climate change, diversity equity and inclusion, ESG, net zero, vaccine rollouts, lockdowns, wars, political scandals, court cases and investigations, causing and then preventing inflation, bank meltdowns, government bond market meltdowns, debanking, sanctions, CBDCs, transgenderism, renewable energy, crypto crackdowns and so much more.

 

There’s no challenge too big for the powerful. Even the global climate and the definition of a woman is in their control.

But what’s truly striking is that, all of a sudden, things don’t seem to be going according to plan on any of their initiatives. Nobody seems to believe anything they say anymore.

It’s all gone so dreadfully wrong for our Betters.

The Establishment, the Deep State, the Davos crowd, the Elites, the House of Lords, the Globalists, and whoever else you’d like to add to the totalitarian mix – they’re on the retreat, right across the board.

From climate change to migration policy to the economy, if you were to make a list of their pet policies, you could cross them right off again given the news stories coming thick and fast. I’ve never seen so many top-down initiatives flop in such rapid succession.

I mean, I expected net zero to prove problematic. But I thought they’d at least give it a good go. They seem to be giving up at the first hurdle.

There’s probably no need to add insult to injury. But let’s do it anyway by providing a quick summary of what’s unravelling, and then get to why I’m telling you about it.

On the climate change front, it’s all gone so dreadfully wrong. Even the EU is pulling the plug on its own green initiatives. Heck, the German Greens are leading the charge to water down the EU’s green policies.

No prizes for guessing why – the EU’s farmers are up in arms, literally. It’s totally bizarre to see what was the EU’s most coddled interest group, its farmers, rise up against it.

Remembering that the union was originally a protectionist coal and steel trade zone, it’s worth noting that those two groups of workers didn’t exactly kick up half as much of a fuss as they were phased out by their own protectors. But the farmers had other ideas.

The UK was one step ahead of the EU, watering down a long list of climate change policies over the past few months. You’ve heard plenty about all that already.

In central London, Robin Hood and his merry men have been keeping everyday motorists safe from the sheriff by sabotaging his Ultra Low Emission Zone cameras which punish motorists who can’t afford to pay their green taxes or get an EV. “Let them eat cake to avoid the crippling ULEZ charge,” scream the Elites. Or is that bugs?

But what chance have 15-minute cities got if ULEZ faces this much opposition?

The German government, green virtue signallers extraordinaire, have upped their game from transitioning back to coal by felling windmills. Instead, they now want to fill the gap left by shutting down carbon-emission-free nuclear power with billions of euros of new gas power stations.

To be fair, the idea is that they will be converted to hydrogen at some point in the future. With the hydrogen produced… somewhere, somehow, by someone using something other than nuclear power.

The announcement out of Germany was, of course, carefully timed for an announcement from the US to freeze approvals of new natural gas exports. Cue what must have been a truly bizarre diplomatic spat, with the Europeans complaining that the Americans weren’t exporting enough fracking fossil fuels to support the green energy transition. I mean, what was Nord Stream 2 blown up for?

It’s like an episode of Hogan’s Heroes.

In Australia, a landmark wind farm was hung out to dry by the government over environmental damage it would’ve done to a wetland. To be fair, we’ll have a lot more wetland should climate scientists be right about climate change. But it leaves everyone wondering what sort of power is permissible in a world where the environment comes first. And it’s not like fossil fuels will be kept online for a lack of renewables… or will they?

Even if we did decide to build a green energy system, we still haven’t figured out where the metal will come from. The German government has walked back EU plans to ensure that the metals used in the energy transition are sustainably sourced. In a truly bizarre twist of fate, it’s the Australian mining billionaire Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest who is complaining about it.

What sort of bizarre world do we live in where Australian mining magnates complain about the lack of green regulation coming out of the EU!? And what will the EU shift do to investment in sustainably sourced metal in the future?

Not that the EU needed to add to the existing damage there. The Australian Financial Review newspaper recently had this headline: “Rich List fortunes gouged by green metals slump”. The idea is that those who invested in green metals projects in Australia have lost a fortune, literally.

One executive responded to his stock losing 52% as only a green dream believer could: “I’m not really wealth motivated to be honest.” I wonder if his shareholders are pleased to hear this.

Capitalism’s greatest strength is that it acts as an accountability mechanism. It forces people to put their own money where their mouth is and parts the gullible from said money if the scheme was never going to work.

That’s why car rental companies are trying to offload their EVs at an eyewatering pace. They’re not just refusing to buy more. And they’re not selling them off slowly to avoid crashing the market either. They’re running for it, presumably because the cars won’t take them where they need to go.

The environmentalists are getting so desperate in their plan to save the planet that they’re turning on the world’s cutest animals to try and save it. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this Telegraph headline: “Squirrels will be chemically castrated and deer will be culled, cooked and served to prisoners under net zero plans to protect England’s trees.”

My first thought was to ask what Australia will do? They don’t have any squirrels to cull to save the planet. And the last time the country had a war on Emus, it lost.

Ironically enough, not so long ago, it was trees that were getting vilified over climate change, with Ohio State News complaining, “Climate change is turning the trees into gluttons,” and theories that trees only temporarily sequester carbon because they eventually die off and release it all again. If trees were to live 26 years, those planted today would wreak havoc on our 2050 net zero goals by dying off…

So, for climate change activists, it’s difficult to tell whether squirrels or trees are the real villains in the story of stopping human caused climate change. Why not go after both?

What we do know is that the targets we set ourselves in the fight against climate change are falling left right and centre. The Renewable Energy Magazine reports, “UK solar target for 2035 obliterated by inflated costs and gridlock.” The French have dropped their renewable energy targets. Bloomberg reports, “California’s ‘Ambitious’ Offshore Wind Goal Seen as Unachievable,” and they’re being polite about it. Fossil fueller Shell calculated in its report on liquefied natural gas (LNG) that the world could fall miles short of net zero because of booming gas demand.

Governments are responding to this shortfall in style. The Labour Party plans to cut its green investment pledge by half…

The current government’s much publicised easing of onshore wind farm regulations have resulted in a grand total of zero new onshore wind turbine project applications, a bit like that offshore wind farm auction we had last year.

The world’s leading wind energy companies are running for the hills, with Orsted and Siemens Energy both shuffling their way out of the wind industry.

EVs, the pride and joy of the environmental movement, are struggling in a surprisingly long list of ways. Even the sceptics couldn’t have come up with such a list. Their share of sales, their ability to move in cold weather, their ability to retain value and plenty more is accumulating into a rather large embarrassment. China’s EV graveyards are in the news, drawing allusions to the ghost cities of a decade ago.

Never afraid to take the moral high ground, the UK’s House of Lords found someone to blame for the EV disappointment: Mr Bean. Apparently he had given EVs a bad review.

It’s of course beautifully ironic that EVs don’t work in the sorts of weather conditions that climate change makes more likely, or less likely, but still rather prevalent, depending on which climate change activist you’re listening to.

More and more governments are abandoning bizarre policies to promote EVs as their various shortfalls and links to China become ever more obvious. The same goes for other vanity projects like heat pumps, electric boilers and more.

Soon the scandals will emerge. Things like the thousands of households in Spain that were left high and dry by the government after overinvesting in solar power based on subsidy promises that evaporated.

Nuclear power, the painfully obvious solution to all this, is becoming ever more difficult to ignore. But that just makes the attempts to ignore it ever more unhinged. The EU is implicitly demanding the French shut down nuclear power to increase the share of renewables on their grid to the EU target of 40%…

But it’s not just climate change that is falling apart for the Globalists. It’s everything else too.

Russian sanctions are proving to be laughable as the Houthis manage to disrupt more shipping than the Western world’s combined efforts against Russia, and Western exports to Russia’s neighbours just happen to go berserk.

Good reason to add more sanctions then, isn’t it? This time for the death of a jailed Russian opposition leader.

While Tucker Carlson is reporting from Moscow about their lavish subway stations and cheap food, Western economies are in or skirting recession.

The only thing that does seem to be going in favour of the Establishment is the stock market. On the days recessions were announced in the UK and Japan, for example, stocks in both places rallied healthily.

That’s because, these days, the only thing keeping markets alive is government and central bank intervention. And recessions make more intervention more likely.

But is that really the basis of a sustainable rally? And what does it do to society to see stocks go up on the misery of everyone else?

Inflation is proving to be “sticky” in many places, just when central bankers were ready to declare victory. Some are even threatening to hike interest rates again, instead of cutting as the markets demand! If the markets are wrong, stocks could plunge.

Facing this difficult situation, the European Central Bank is behaving like my four-year-old who runs around Kindy telling everyone, “You’re not my best friend any more!” One of the ECB’s governors recently said this about those who see the ECB’s climate change agenda as being contrary to its legal mandate: “I don’t want these people anymore.” You know what? We don’t want you either.

The verdict on pandemic era policies are growing increasingly embarrassing, putting all other Globalist mandate plans at risk. Masks, social distancing and lockdowns are viewed by many as debunked, the origin of the virus is looking ever more likely to have been manmade, and vaccines are proving rather unpopular. Sometimes, even government policymakers are the obvious.

In the US, the sitting president, for he can barely stand, has been described as too senile to stand trial for the same crimes that his opponent is sitting trial for. The crime would seem to qualify you for president though, given the response from both supporter’s camps about their own candidate’s performance. But then there’s Hillary Clinton, who also mishandled classified information, but didn’t win an election for it.

With Donald Trump leading polls, the Democrats’ new plan is very American: import voters from overseas. But the consequences of opening borders seem to be costing the Democrats more voters than they can gain. Those who argued for open borders and defunded police are begging the police to remove the migrants on their doorsteps.

Indeed, the mass migration policies which voters associate with the Globalists, because no national government that expects to be held to account at the ballot box would approve them, are triggering protests in some of the most welcoming nations I’ve ever migrated to.

I lived in Austria when the Syrians arrived in 2015. I lived in Ireland before Schengen opened the country to mass migration and visited again several times after. I lived in Germany and the UK when the EU established freedom of movement and the right to reside. I lived in Australia when Tony Abbott’s campaign against illegal immigration began and when the country was flooded with economic migrants from Europe after 2008. Let me tell you, perfectly ordinary people are furious about the current surge in migration. They must have taken a turn for the far right…

Most damning of all are of course the excess deaths figures which continue to bubble away without any government panic, let alone investigation. If only someone would model the deaths instead of reporting on actual ones, then something would be done about it. For now, it’s left to the conspiracy theorists to ponder what’s behind them. And they are getting ever closer.

To be honest, the collapse of these supranational policies is happening so fast it resembles the end of every Star Wars movie, when two hours of accumulated problems and challenges suddenly evaporate in one fell victorious swoop of a spaceship, leaving no loose ends to worry about. But there always has to be another sequel, right?

The collapse of so many campaigns has been very amusing, especially for the people who manage to avoid the disastrous consequences of all the government policies gone wrong. It’s not so funny for German factory workers who burn wood to keep warm in winter as their employer moves to Texas or China. Nor for the Irish who can’t go to their favourite pub for fear of being mugged.

I’m moving to Japan in two weeks, where a lot of this chicanery simply doesn’t fly. And my Japanese isn’t good enough to understand what sort of nonsense the local politicians get up to instead. But, let me tell you, they know what a woman is.

For those of you stuck living in a Western democracy, especially in Europe, the consequences are plain to see. People are taking to the streets and abandoning the mainstream political parties like it matters who you vote for. This is where things get dangerous.

A 2022 survey found trust in government in the EU had fallen from 4.7 out of 10 to 3.6. Can you imagine what it is at now?

For those of you who feel vindicated by all the changes happening around you, don’t. Because they aren’t finished with you yet.

I want to raise the old mantra about dangerous and being cornered. It applies to our leaders, including the ones behind the curtains. Can they really stomach such a defeat across the board without raising the stakes? Or are we going to discover a new disease, asteroid, or social cause imminently to justify a new round of eye-watering government intervention in our lives?

What would you do if you were Klaus Schwab and your agenda began to melt away?

Do the do-gooders slink back into their Swiss caves, universities and think tanks whence they came? Do they give up on trying to engineer the world?

Or do they turn to more drastic measures to keep you in line?

This Neurologist Shows You How You Can Avoid Cognitive Decline | Dr. Dale Bredesen on Health Theory (Video)

 It is now well understood that Alzheimer is a social disease. Change your lifestyle and you will change the odds down to almost nothing.  
 

This Goes Deeper Than You Know! | Dr Pierre Kory EXPOSES Disinformation Playbook (Video)

  How corrupt has science become? It may be worse than you think!

 

France Just SHOCKED The World With BOMBSHELL Vaccine Law - And It’s TERRIFYING! (Video)

  As Russell Brand would say, it is indeed terrifying. 

  We are just seeing the remnant of what was already a decaying, manipulated democracy slipping away, replaced by the wet dream of Benito Mussolini of the merger between big corporations and the state, except that this time, it was done at the European level out of reach of the people. Both ingenious and diabolical.

 The next level of control should follow swiftly with CBDC and social credit, sorry green whatever (marketing is working on a proper name) to be implemented in the next few years.   

 But all this presuppose there will still be a Europe by that time...

 I know predictions are dangerous but here's one: In a few months Ukraine will crumble. It will happen suddenly. At that time, Europe will face a dilemma. Accept defeat and the fact that all the money invested in support of Ukraine is lost or double down and intervene. It will be an existential crisis. Europe doesn't have the army to support effectively Ukraine or worse replace it on the Eastern front. But conversely, Europe has invested so much credibility in this adventure that it will be next to impossible to do nothing. The Russian have said that they are planning for the war to last until 2025. That would be surprising. Ukraine is already exhausted. In-between, it is very likely that Israel will attack Lebanon. Maybe as soon as next month. 

  We are clearly heading into troubled waters. The control of the narrative will get tighter. This is only the beginning.

OpenAI's "AGI Pieces" SHOCK the Entire Industry! AGI in 7 Months! (Video)

  If you are interested about AGI, here's a slightly more in-depth video about the subject. The fact is that it's happening as we speak. It's not anymore a matter of exactly when but then what? Are we ready for true artificial intelligence? 

  I think not. And THAT may be the true risk!

 

Open AI's SECRET AGI Breakthrough Has Everyone STUNNED! (Video)

   This video is amazing by what it says. Basically that AGI is down the road and will be achieved soon just by scaling up the computer power.

   I also believed that this was not going to be so easy a few years ago. Not anymore. 

  We will have some kind of AGI by the end of the year. At the latest in early 2025. 5 years earlier than the optimistic previsions of Ray Kurzweil. 

  Now what? Do we also get and explosion of intelligence and the singularity by the end of the year? Not so fast? Who knows?

  A few days ago I heard an interesting metaphor: The arrival of artificial general intelligence may look like a game of chess against a grand master. You think you are playing great and suddenly you realize you've lost the game! Or something else?

  In any case, we should expect the unexpected. We are truly in uncharted territory!

 

Exxon Threatens To Take Billions Of Dollars In Climate Investment Out Of The EU

  It's not just Exxon. Tens of the largest companies, especially in Germany, are exiting the continent. Without oil, nuclear energy or Russian gas, Europe industrially is finished. You don't run a modern economy on renewables! There is still a lot of capital invested but the absurd "green" policies destroying agriculture, factories and investment will put the continent on its knees. Most countries are already in recession, it will be a depression by the end of the year. Ramping up the pressure on Russia will further accelerate the decline by limiting the import of resources. The terrible silence about the crimes of Israel in Gaza is heard loud an clear in the Middle East. What are these people thinking? It looks like some kind of collective suicide. A complete disregard of reality like the meaningless war in Ukraine which is being won by the Ukrainian army all the way to the Polish border. Madness!

By Irina Slav of OilPrice.com

Exxon has warned the European Union that it will leave and take billions of dollars in climate investment with it unless Brussels makes it easier to spend those billions on transition-related projects.

The Financial Times cited the company today as saying that there was way too much red tape in the EU and it took too long to get a project going, which prompted the supermajor to consider spending its $20 billion in decarbonization investments for 2022-2027 elsewhere.

“When we make investments, we’ve got very long time horizons in mind. I would say that recent developments in Europe have not instilled confidence in long-term, predictable policies,” Karen McKee, president of Exxon Product Solutions, told the FT.

“What we’re experiencing is the deindustrialisation of the European economy and we’re concerned,” McKee also said.

The European Union’s leadership has promised time and again it will facilitate transition projects but it seems it has been slow to act on this promise. According to Exxon—and a lot of other companies involved in the transition—getting a project off the ground in the EU is fraught with regulatory obstacles and “slow and torturous” permitting and funding procedures, per Exxon’s McKee.

The EU’s Green Deal plan features a “predictable and simplified regulatory environment” as one of its four pillars but judging from the reactions of the business world, this has yet to go from theory to practice. Faster access to funding is the second pillar in the EU’s lineup but that, too, is taking quite long to materialize.

It is these delays in implementation that have prompted business leaders to meet today in Belgium to press the EU leadership into going from words to actions. There is growing concern that the regulatory burden put on businesses is scaring them away, taking investments elsewhere.

There are also some European leaders, notably France’s Emmanuel Macron and Belgium’s Alexander de Croo, who have blamed red tape for the farmers’ protests.

Douglas Murray Announces New Doxing Database in the UK to Keep Critics of Israel From Getting a Job

  What's happening is the West is simply amazing. We are not only seeing the destruction of democracy but a terrible radicalization of ideas and speech,

  On such tracks, what will be worth keeping in a year or two? 

  Almost nothing I am afraid!

Source: Chris Menahan - Information Liberation

Douglas Murray, the director of the British Free Speech Union, announced a new initiative on Monday aimed at doxing critics of Israel for "hate speech" and keeping them from getting jobs.

"Douglas Murray is Director of the British Free Speech Union. He is now going to lead an initiative to have harsher penalties for those accused of hate speech, and bar 'bigots' from employment opportunities based on social media posts!" Keith Woods commented on X.

"These speech laws have been used to target nationalists more than anyone -- Murray's countryman Sam Melia is going to jail for sharing stickers about mass-immigration and this is what he is working on, what a disgrace!"

The Tafsik Organization, which is behind the initiative, says on their website that they're lobbying for new hate crime laws to block people from getting jobs and keep them from traveling freely:

Proposing a Hate Offenders List akin to the Sex Offenders list for those convicted of Hate Crimes would streamline law enforcement efforts, imposing travel restrictions, limiting access to certain public places, and significantly impacting job opportunities to deter the wielders of hatred from positions of power.

They also say they're building a doxing database using facial recognition and AI:

Utilizing the SEO from social media platforms like Twitter(X)/TikTok/Facebook posts reported onto D.A.V.I.D. will have hyper visibility using a simple google search, affecting the individuals employment opportunities and reputation. D.A.V.I.D. employs facial recognition to identify bigots from photos or videos. AI spiders crawl social media platforms, detecting antisemitic content in posts, comments, and images.

ALERT: CHINA/ RUSSIA AMASSING DOOMSDAY STOCKPILES, SEED VAULTS, SECRET BUNKERS AND WORLD WAR 3 (Video)

  A frightening overview of our preparation for war in the West: The wrong tools for the wrong war! and still it looks like we are rushing head first into a conflict about which nobody understand the consequences. Isn't it the definition of stupidity?

 

Can you handle the truth? (Tucker Carlson video)

  Another amazing interview from Tucker Carlson. This time we get a close up view on how the deep state really works. It is simply amazing.

 Ep. 75 The national security state is the main driver of censorship and election interference in the United States. "What I’m describing is military rule," says Mike Benz. "It’s the inversion of democracy."

https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1758529993280205039?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1758653462232093011%7Ctwgr%5E0badcefd9c52f5ea5d8cf0db8d7ec32d1c7fdd81%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theburningplatform.com%2F2024%2F02%2F17%2Fcan-you-handle-the-truth%2F

From Censorship To Criminalizing Dissent

  This is about the end of free speech in France but make no mistake it's coming to yours likewise if you live in the West. As we let big corporations take over our democratic systems, the next stage will be force. Wasn't it all predictable?

 

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

History does seem to be on fast forward, doesn’t it?

A major battle is brewing throughout the Western world over the basic principle of free speech. Is it going to be protected by law? It’s not entirely clear what the outcome will be. We seem to be on the precipice of a potential calamity if the courts don’t decide the right way. Even if we squeak out a victory, the question is already in play. Our free speech rights have never been more fragile.

Turn your attention to France right now. In the dead of night, a new law slipped through the General Assembly that would make it a crime to criticize mRNA shots. Critics call it the Pfizer law. It calls for fines up to 45,000 euros and possibly three years in prison for debunking an approved medical treatment.

A general view of the French National Assembly (Assemblee Nationale) is seen in Paris on July 17, 2023. (Bertrand Guay/AFP via Getty Images)

Like all Western nations, criticism of the mRNA platform has already been subjected to vast social-media censorship. Even given this, there has been a major and global consumer turn against these shots. People are not convinced that they are necessary, safe, or effective. Still, government imposed mandates for everyone, billions of people worldwide. This was a form of conscription that has driven a deep divide between the rulers and the ruled.

Rather than back down, however, governments, which have been captured by pharmaceutical interests, are going to bat for the companies and the technology to threaten imprisonment of anyone who speaks out openly against them.

Here is where censorship becomes severely weaponized. It’s the next logical step. First you deploy every power to keep the distribution channels of information free of dissent. When that doesn’t entirely work, simply because people find alternative means of getting the word out, you have to intensify matters and institute outright controls.

It stands to reason that this would happen. After all, the whole point of censorship is to curate the public mind to put down opposition to regime priorities. When mainstream corporate media is falling apart and new media is rising, the next stage is to go the full way to flat-out criminalize opinion, like any totalitarian government.

We are very close to that stage. If it can happen in France, it can happen throughout Europe, then the Commonwealth, and then the United States. We know this much about politics today. It is global. The elites that have seized control of our governments coordinate across borders. This is why it is hugely important to pay attention to what’s going on across the pond.

As a second item, I’m alarmed to read the lead piece in the New York Times opinion section that celebrates a defamation case about which I had not previously heard. It is by Michael Mann, professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He had sued a writer for the Competitive Enterprise Institute for taking issue with Mann’s climate change model, and the so-called hockey stick in particular.

This is not my area of specialization at all but I have no doubt that mainstream climate science should be subject to vigorous criticism. If the COVID era has taught us anything, it is that the “scientific consensus” can be outrageously wrong and needs a check that comes in the form of writing, some of it zippy and cutting.

Scientist Michael Mann attends the New York screening of the HBO Documentary "How to Let Go of the World and All The Things Climate Can't Change" in New York on June 21, 2016. (Slaven Vlasic/Getty Images for HBO)

Dr. Mann filed a defamation lawsuit. Defamation is a very high bar: it means to deliberately lie about something with the intention to harm. One might not suppose that many things could qualify as that, certainly not criticism of a climate model. Indeed, most defamation lawsuits are dismissed outright simply because this country generally values free speech.

This one, however, was accepted by the judge in Washington, D.C. court. After a full decade in litigation, and a full hearing, the jury ended up deciding in favor of the plaintiffs. One defendant, Rand Simberg, has been told to pay $1K and the other, Mark Steyn, $1M. Simberg says he will appeal and stands by every word that he wrote. Steyn agrees and is ready to appeal.

Essentially this verdict is criminalizing hyperbole, said the defense attorney.

The op-ed writer, however, says this is justice. “Our recent trial victory may have wider implications,” he says. “It has drawn a line in the sand. Scientists now know that they can respond to attacks by suing for defamation.” He mentions in particular people who have disagreed with the COVID consensus—disagreeing with Anthony Fauci—or otherwise make “false claims about adverse health effects from wind turbines.”

Can you imagine? Criticize a wind turbine or pandemic lockdowns and find yourself hauled in front of a judge!

Will this case have a chilling effect on criticism of government? Absolutely! Indeed, it is terrifying to think what it implies. And the writer leaves nothing to the imagination. He sees this case as a wedge to make scientific criticism of any area of life—from vaccines to climate change to the conversion to EVs—essentially illegal. In any case, if not that, it comes close by erecting so many landmines that critics essentially shut up for fear of having their whole lives ruined.

This case went on for ten years. The article in question was published 12 years ago. How is it possible that litigants pushed a case for that long? It was to establish a serious precedent. That precedent is now clearly established. The definition of defamation is so malleable that juries can decide anything. Just the prospect of being hauled before a judge over ten years is enough to deter speaking out.

We can hope that this appeal reverses the decision. But let’s face it: free speech should not rest on such a thin foundation of jury-created law and arbitrary judicial edict. This is all extremely dangerous and flies in the face of the First Amendment.

Essentially, every critic of the “scientific consensus” in every area has been put on notice. They are already fair game. That’s the world toward which we are moving.

Here’s the issue. Censorship works when government can control all the distribution channels of information. What happens when that no longer works? The powers that be have to use more direct methods, even when they fly in the face of the First Amendment. Those who say that this cannot happen here need to pay closer attention to the reality of what’s happening.

Many people are excited to see the breakup of old media. Certainly I am but consider how the censors will respond. They are getting hardcore, relying more on law rather than capture, and hoping the courts can act to shut up the critics permanently. That’s the future we are looking at. It is extremely dangerous. Under this trajectory, free speech will be no more. The First Amendment will be a dead letter.

Terrifying. This Changes EVERYTHING! (Video)

  Amazing video as food for thoughts.

  This should still be science fiction although it's almost reality now.

  I truly changes everything. Think about it.

 

"This Is A Date With Disaster": Net-Zero Is Pulling The Plug on America’s Electrical 'Life Support System,' New Documentary Says

  Will people realize soon enough what a catastrophe Net Zero really is?

  I doubt is but hopefully I am wrong. 

  The case against an early awakening from this horrible mistake is that usually went people are wrong, instead of backing up from their mistake, they double down. "The reason Net Zero is not working is not because it is the wrong policy but because we are not trying hard enough!" Countless civilizations have failed based on this principle. 

  

 Conversely, the case for a sharp wake-up call is the model of Germany rushing ahead and crashing its economy to the ground. It will of course be the fault of Russia, China, you name it. But other countries may learn from the experience. Hopefully? 

 

 Here's the example of the US below: 

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Electricity is among the most essential sources of America’s unparalleled prosperity and productivity; it is also the greatest vulnerability.

Giant wind turbines are powered by strong winds in front of solar panels in Palm Springs, Calif., on March 27, 2013. (Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)

The United States has become so utterly dependent upon an uninterrupted supply of affordable electricity that, as our grid becomes ever more fragile American society has become fragile along with it.

Former CIA director James Woolsey testified before the U.S. Senate in 2015 that, if America’s electric grid were to go down for an extended period, such as one year, “there are essentially two estimates on how many people would die from hunger, from starvation, from lack of water, and from social disruption.

“One estimate is that within a year or so, two-thirds of the United States population would die,” Mr. Woolsey said. “The other estimate is that within a year or so, 90 percent of the U.S. population would die.”

Chris Keefer, president of Canadians for Nuclear Energy, concurred.

“The energy grid is a civilizational life support system, and without it, modern society collapses very quickly,” he said.

Mr. Keefer is one of the experts featured in energy analyst, author, and documentarian Robert Bryce’s new film, “Juice: Power, Politics and the Grid.” This five-part docuseries looks at how and why America is now “fragilizing” and destabilizing the engineering marvel that is the central pillar of our society.

“We are seeing the grid’s reliability, resilience, and affordability all declining,” Mr. Bryce told The Epoch Times. “We wanted to get people and policy makers to understand that our most important energy network is being fragilized, and we ignore this danger at our peril,” Mr. Bryce said.

He has been fixated on America’s electric grid for decades and authored the 2020 book, “A Question of Power,” one of the more comprehensive studies of how electricity grids work and why they may not work as well in the coming years.

Steven Pinker, author and Harvard psychology professor, wrote in a review of the book that “energy is our primary defense against poverty, disorder, hunger, and death.”

And yet, many nations in the West have engaged in a game of Russian roulette with their power grids, in an attempt to reduce global temperatures.

A ‘Dire Warning’

The warnings don’t just come from the analysts featured in the documentary; electricity regulators are becoming more vocal in sounding the alarm as well.

In a May 2023 report, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), charged with overseeing grid reliability, stated that a majority of America’s grid is now at heightened risk levels for outages.

“This report is an especially dire warning that America’s ability to keep the lights on has been jeopardized,” National Rural Electric Cooperative Association CEO Jim Matheson stated.

It was the near-collapse of Texas’s power grid during winter storm Yuri in 2021 that compelled Mr. Bryce to make the documentary. He partnered with film director Tyson Culver, who along with Mr. Bryce, experienced the crisis first-hand while living in Austin.

“I didn’t plan to make another documentary after we made our first film that we released in 2019,” he said. “I just thought, ‘I can’t do this; it costs too much and takes too long.’

“But then we learned that the [Texas] grid nearly failed, and if it had failed, tens of thousands of people would have died,” he said. “And we realized, if this could happen in Texas, the energy capital of the world, then the electric grid is really being undermined.”

The North American electric grid is rapidly being transitioned from one in which coal had once dominated to one that is seeing an ever increasing share of wind, solar, and natural gas. In the process, America’s electric grid is changing from something that was once so reliable that consumers rarely thought about it, to one that increasingly features rolling blackouts and may, one day soon, be on the brink of long-term failure.

The Fatal Trifecta

The destabilization of the power grid is the result of what analyst and author Meredith Angwin deems the “fatal trifecta.”

“The Texas grid almost collapsed because of what I call the fatal trifecta,” Ms. Angwin states. “The first part of the fatal trifecta is over reliance on renewables, which go on and off when they want to.

“The second part is over reliance on natural gas, which is delivered just in time and can be interrupted just in time,” she says. “And the third part is relying on a neighbor to help.”

All of these factors came into play during Texas winter storm Yuri in 2021. Wind and solar facilities were unable to deliver in freezing weather, and supplies of natural gas were interrupted by freezing temperatures as well, just as people needed electricity to heat their homes.

According to a Texas comptroller’s report, natural gas supplied 51 percent of Texas’ electricity; wind 25 percent; and coal 13 percent. As these sources went offline, utilities frantically enacted blackouts to cut demand, fearing that a mismatch of supply and demand that lasted more than several minutes would cause long-term damage to the grid’s hardware.

While Texas missed having a months-long outage of its electric grid by only a matter of minutes, the damage from short-term outages was severe.

“Rolling blackouts were intended to take stress off the power grid but turned into outages that—in some parts of the state—lasted several days,” the report stated. In that short time, at least 210 deaths were attributed to the outage, which also caused an estimated $195 billion in economic damage.

The third leg of the “fatal trifecta” is the ability of regions of the grid to support each other.

For all its fragmented sources, utilities, and regulations, the North American power grid is interconnected in a way that allows one region to shift electricity to another region if one has an excess and the other a shortfall. Utilities routinely rely on this to balance supply and demand at any given moment.

Increasingly, however, with excess reserves dwindling as coal plants are aggressively shut down across the United States, this ability to “phone a friend” is going away.

Following Europe and California

In many ways, Texas followed the lead of Europe and California in transitioning their grid to wind and solar energy, retiring coal plants and sometimes nuclear plants as well, to halt global warming and please anti-nuclear activists. Because wind and solar are weather-dependent, a dispatchable backup source is needed, and that source is typically natural gas.

As Europe, California, and Texas have learned, this transition creates vulnerability compared to coal and nuclear plants, where fuel can be stored on-site. It has also led to sharply increasing prices for electricity, as dual systems of power generation need to be built, along with additional transmission infrastructure.

According to a 2021 Princeton Study, relying on wind and solar to achieve net zero by 2050 would require America’s high-voltage transmission network to triple in size, at a cost of $2.4 trillion.

In what appears to be a surrender, or at least a retreat, from the net-zero transition, some European countries, like Germany, are restarting their coal plants as wind and solar fail to meet demand, even at inflated prices.

“What we see in Europe from this misguided infatuation with renewables is a stark warning, and I think we can see the same thing in California—skyrocketing electricity prices and no significant reduction in CO2 to speak of,” Mr. Bryce said.

At the same time, the drive to achieve net-zero CO2 emissions has led to political and corporate campaigns to shift ever more products onto the electric grid. This includes such essentials as home heating, transportation, and cooking.

Laws and regulations in Europe and the United States have sought to ban or phase out oil and gas heating in homes, along with gasoline-powered cars, trucks, and buses. The effect of this will be to make people more dependent on electricity while pushing up demand to levels that many say the grid cannot meet.

“The grid is already cracking under existing demand,” Mr. Bryce said. “We’re seeing the grid’s reliability, resilience, and affordability all declining, while these pressure groups are trying to put yet more demand on it.

“This is a date with disaster.”

Wind and Solar Devour Open Spaces

Added to this is the insatiable hunger of the wind and solar industry for the consumption of land.

According to a May report by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), reaching the goal of net-zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2050 would consume more than 250,000 square miles, or 160 million acres, of land.

“With current siting practices, an area the size of Texas is required to accommodate the wind and solar infrastructure we need to reach nationwide net-zero emissions by 2050,” stated Katharine Hayhoe, chief scientist at TNC, a renewable energy advocate.

Many energy experts and environmentalists are coming to the conclusion that nuclear energy is the best choice to generate reliable, affordable energy, while cutting CO2 emissions. Despite headline nuclear catastrophes at plants in Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima, many countries are building new plants or delaying closures of existing nuclear plants, considering it the cleanest and least environmentally harmful source of electricity.

According to a report by the Nuclear Energy Institute, wind farms require up to 360 times as much land area to produce the same amount of electricity as a nuclear energy facility, and solar facilities require up to 75 times the land area. Compared to coal and natural gas plants, wind and solar consume at least 10 times as much land, according to the left-leaning Brookings Institution.

In addition to a smaller footprint, nuclear power stations also typically do not require the construction of thousands of miles of new transmission lines to reach remote locations, where wind and solar facilities are typically built.

With nuclear, Mr. Bryce said, “we don’t need to expand the grid; we can use the grid we have.”

Climate Activists Embrace Nuclear

Even ardent supporters of green-new-deal initiatives are starting to accept that nuclear must be at least part of the plan.

“What we’re seeing out of Congress, and to some extent out of this White House, is more accommodation for nuclear energy,” Mr. Bryce said.

A 2022 report by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace reports that “France, the EU’s leading atomic state with nuclear weapons and fifty-six power reactors, is poised to launch a major reinvestment in nuclear power.”

Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, and Poland are also preparing to build new nuclear reactors, the report states, while other European nations—Austria, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, and Portugal—remain opposed to nuclear power.

California regulators, meanwhile, opted in December 2023 to keep the state’s nuclear facility at Diablo Canyon open through at least 2030, having previously ordered its closure in 2025. This is a retreat for a state that has been plagued with rolling blackouts as it jumped headlong into a wind and solar future.

“If we are going to agree that climate change is an issue, with more [weather] extremes for longer, it’s total insanity to make our most important energy network dependent on the weather,” Mr. Bryce said. “We need weather-resilient, weather-resistant generation, not weather-dependent generation.”

“With the Inflation Reduction Act and the investment tax credits, production tax credits, all of the financial incentives in the power-gen sector are to build more wind and solar,” he said. “To me, that is just absolute crazy town.”

The documentary is available to watch for free on YouTube or at juicetheseries.com.