Tuesday, October 26, 2021

SC244-11

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/mayhem_madness_authoritarian_monsters_wreak_havoc_on_our_freedoms

Mayhem & Madness: Authoritarian Monsters Wreak Havoc on Our Freedoms

“You see them on the street. You watch them on TV. You might even vote for one this fall. You think they’re people just like you. You’re wrong. Dead wrong.” — They Live

We are living in an age of mayhem, madness and monsters.

Monsters with human faces walk among us. Many of them work for the U.S. government.

What we are dealing with today is an authoritarian beast that has outgrown its chains and will not be restrained.

Through its acts of power grabs, brutality, meanness, inhumanity, immorality, greed, corruption, debauchery and tyranny, the government has become almost indistinguishable from the evil it claims to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, disease, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

We have let the government’s evil-doing and abuses go on for too long.

We have bought into the illusion and refused to grasp the truth.

We’re being fed a series of carefully contrived fictions that bear no resemblance to reality.

We’re living in two worlds: the world we see (or are made to see) and the one we sense (and occasionally catch a glimpse of), the latter of which is a far cry from the propaganda-driven reality manufactured by the government and its corporate sponsors, including the media.

Indeed, what most Americans perceive as life in America—privileged, progressive and free—is a far cry from reality, where economic inequality is growing; pandemic lockdowns (both mental and physical), real agendas and real power are buried beneath layers of Orwellian doublespeak and corporate obfuscation; and “freedom,” such that it is, is meted out in small, legalistic doses by militarized police armed to the teeth.

The powers-that-be want us to feel threatened by forces beyond our control (terrorists, shooters, bombers, disease, etc.).

They want us afraid and dependent on the government and its militarized armies for our safety and well-being.

They want us distrustful of each other, divided by our prejudices, and at each other’s throats.

Most of all, they want us to continue to march in lockstep with their dictates.

Tune out the government’s attempts to distract, divert and befuddle us and tune into what’s really going on in this country, and you’ll run headlong into an unmistakable, unpalatable truth: the moneyed elite who rule us view us as expendable resources to be used, abused and discarded.

In fact, a study conducted by Princeton and Northwestern University concluded that the U.S. government does not represent the majority of American citizens. Instead, the study found that the government is ruled by the rich and powerful, or the so-called “economic elite.” Moreover, the researchers concluded that policies enacted by this governmental elite nearly always favor special interests and lobbying groups.

In other words, we are being ruled by an oligarchy disguised as a democracy, and arguably on our way towards fascism—a form of government where private corporate interests rule, money calls the shots, and the people are seen as mere subjects to be controlled.

Not only do you have to be rich—or beholden to the rich—to get elected these days, but getting elected is also a surefire way to get rich. As CBS News reports, “Once in office, members of Congress enjoy access to connections and information they can use to increase their wealth, in ways that are unparalleled in the private sector. And once politicians leave office, their connections allow them to profit even further.”

In denouncing this blatant corruption of America’s political system, former president Jimmy Carter blasted the process of getting elected—to the White House, governor’s mansion, Congress or state legislatures—as “unlimited political bribery… a subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect, and sometimes get, favors for themselves after the election is over.”

Rest assured that when and if fascism finally takes hold in America, the basic forms of government will remain: Fascism will appear to be friendly. The legislators will be in session. There will be elections, and the news media will continue to cover the entertainment and political trivia. Consent of the governed, however, will no longer apply. Actual control will have finally passed to the oligarchic elite controlling the government behind the scenes.

Sound familiar?

Clearly, we are now ruled by an oligarchic elite of governmental and corporate interests.

We have moved into “corporatism” (favored by Benito Mussolini), which is a halfway point on the road to full-blown fascism.

Corporatism is where the few moneyed interests—not elected by the citizenry—rule over the many. In this way, it is not a democracy or a republican form of government, which is what the American government was established to be. It is a top-down form of government and one which has a terrifying history typified by the developments that occurred in totalitarian regimes of the past: police states where everyone is watched and spied on, rounded up for minor infractions by government agents, placed under police control, and placed in detention (a.k.a. concentration) camps.

For the final hammer of fascism to fall, it will require the most crucial ingredient: the majority of the people will have to agree that it’s not only expedient but necessary.

But why would a people agree to such an oppressive regime?

The answer is the same in every age: fear.

Fear makes people stupid.

Fear is the method most often used by politicians to increase the power of government. And, as most social commentators recognize, an atmosphere of fear permeates modern America: fear of terrorism, fear of the police, fear of our neighbors and so on.

The propaganda of fear has been used quite effectively by those who want to gain control, and it is working on the American populace.

Despite the fact that we are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack; 11,000 times more likely to die from an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane; 1,048 times more likely to die from a car accident than a terrorist attack, and 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist , we have handed over control of our lives to government officials who treat us as a means to an end—the source of money and power.

As the Bearded Man warns in John Carpenter’s film They Live: “They are dismantling the sleeping middle class. More and more people are becoming poor. We are their cattle. We are being bred for slavery.”

In this regard, we’re not so different from the oppressed citizens in They Live, which was released more than 30 years ago, and remains unnervingly, chillingly appropriate for our modern age or Carpenter’s other dystopian films.

Best known for his horror film Halloween, which assumes that there is a form of evil so dark that it can’t be killed, Carpenter’s larger body of work is infused with a strong anti-authoritarian, anti-establishment, laconic bent that speaks to the filmmaker’s concerns about the unraveling of our society, particularly our government.

Time and again, Carpenter portrays the government working against its own citizens, a populace out of touch with reality, technology run amok, and a future more horrific than any horror film.

In Escape from New York, Carpenter presents fascism as the future of America.

In The Thing, a remake of the 1951 sci-fi classic of the same name, Carpenter presupposes that increasingly we are all becoming dehumanized.

In Christine, the film adaptation of Stephen King’s novel about a demon-possessed car, technology exhibits a will and consciousness of its own and goes on a murderous rampage.

In In the Mouth of Madness, Carpenter notes that evil grows when people lose “the ability to know the difference between reality and fantasy.”

And then there is Carpenter’s They Live, in which two migrant workers discover that the world is not as it seems. In fact, the population is actually being controlled and exploited by aliens working in partnership with an oligarchic elite. All the while, the populace—blissfully unaware of the real agenda at work in their lives—has been lulled into complacency, indoctrinated into compliance, bombarded with media distractions, and hypnotized by subliminal messages beamed out of television and various electronic devices, billboards and the like.

It is only when homeless drifter John Nada (played to the hilt by the late Roddy Piper) discovers a pair of doctored sunglasses—Hoffman lenses—that Nada sees what lies beneath the elite’s fabricated reality: control and bondage.

When viewed through the lens of truth, the elite, who appear human until stripped of their disguises, are shown to be monsters who have enslaved the citizenry in order to prey on them.

Likewise, billboards blare out hidden, authoritative messages: a bikini-clad woman in one ad is actually ordering viewers to “MARRY AND REPRODUCE.” Magazine racks scream “CONSUME” and “OBEY.” A wad of dollar bills in a vendor’s hand proclaims, “THIS IS YOUR GOD.”

When viewed through Nada’s Hoffman lenses, some of the other hidden messages being drummed into the people’s subconscious include: NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, CONFORM, SUBMIT, STAY ASLEEP, BUY, WATCH TV, NO IMAGINATION, and DO NOT QUESTION AUTHORITY.

This indoctrination campaign engineered by the elite in They Live is painfully familiar to anyone who has studied the decline of American culture.

A citizenry that does not think for themselves, obeys without question, is submissive, does not challenge authority, does not think outside the box, and is content to sit back and be entertained is a citizenry that can be easily controlled.

In this way, the subtle message of They Live provides an apt analogy of our own distorted vision of life in the American police state, what philosopher Slavoj Žižek refers to as dictatorship in democracy, “the invisible order which sustains your apparent freedom.”

From the moment we are born until we die, we are indoctrinated into believing that those who rule us do it for our own good. The truth is far different.

Despite the truth staring us in the face, we have allowed ourselves to become fearful, controlled, pacified zombies.

We live in a perpetual state of denial, insulated from the painful reality of the American police state by wall-to-wall entertainment news and screen devices.

Most everyone keeps their heads down these days while staring zombie-like into an electronic screen, even when they’re crossing the street. Families sit in restaurants with their heads down, separated by their screen devices and unaware of what’s going on around them. Young people especially seem dominated by the devices they hold in their hands, oblivious to the fact that they can simply push a button, turn the thing off and walk away.

Indeed, there is no larger group activity than that connected with those who watch screens—that is, television, lap tops, personal computers, cell phones and so on. In fact, a Nielsen study reports that American screen viewing is at an all-time high. For example, the average American watches approximately 151 hours of television per month.

The question, of course, is what effect does such screen consumption have on one’s mind?

Psychologically it is similar to drug addiction. Researchers found that “almost immediately after turning on the TV, subjects reported feeling more relaxed, and because this occurs so quickly and the tension returns so rapidly after the TV is turned off, people are conditioned to associate TV viewing with a lack of tension.” Research also shows that regardless of the programming, viewers’ brain waves slow down, thus transforming them into a more passive, nonresistant state.

Historically, television has been used by those in authority to quiet discontent and pacify disruptive people. “Faced with severe overcrowding and limited budgets for rehabilitation and counseling, more and more prison officials are using TV to keep inmates quiet,” according to Newsweek.

Given that the majority of what Americans watch on television is provided through channels controlled by six mega corporations, what we watch is now controlled by a corporate elite and, if that elite needs to foster a particular viewpoint or pacify its viewers, it can do so on a large scale.

If we’re watching, we’re not doing.

The powers-that-be understand this. As television journalist Edward R. Murrow warned in a 1958 speech:

We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent. We have currently a built-in allergy to unpleasant or disturbing information. Our mass media reflect this. But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it, and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.

This brings me back to They Live, in which the real zombies are not the aliens calling the shots but the populace who are content to remain controlled.

When all is said and done, the world of They Live is not so different from our own. As one of the characters points out, “The poor and the underclass are growing. Racial justice and human rights are nonexistent. They have created a repressive society and we are their unwitting accomplices. Their intention to rule rests with the annihilation of consciousness. We have been lulled into a trance. They have made us indifferent to ourselves, to others. We are focused only on our own gain.”

We, too, are focused only on our own pleasures, prejudices and gains. Our poor and underclasses are also growing. Injustice is growing. Inequality is growing. Human rights is nearly nonexistent. We too have been lulled into a trance, indifferent to others.

Oblivious to what lies ahead, we’ve been manipulated into believing that if we continue to consume, obey, and have faith, things will work out. But that’s never been true of emerging regimes. And by the time we feel the hammer coming down upon us, it will be too late.

So where does that leave us?

The characters who populate Carpenter’s films provide some insight.

Underneath their machismo, they still believe in the ideals of liberty and equal opportunity. Their beliefs place them in constant opposition with the law and the establishment, but they are nonetheless freedom fighters.

When, for example, John Nada destroys the alien hyno-transmitter in They Live, he delivers a wake-up call for freedom. As Nada memorably declares, “I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum.”

In other words: we need to get active.

Stop allowing yourselves to be easily distracted by pointless political spectacles and pay attention to what’s really going on in the country.

The real battle between freedom and tyranny is taking place right in front of our eyes, if we would only open them.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the real battle for control of this nation is taking place on roadsides, in police cars, on witness stands, over phone lines, in government offices, in corporate offices, in public school hallways and classrooms, in parks and city council meetings, and in towns and cities across this country.

All the trappings of the American police state are now in plain sight.

Wake up, America.

If they live (the tyrants, the oppressors, the invaders, the overlords), it is only because “we the people” sleep.

....

https://www.globalresearch.ca/unvaccinated-canadians-become-social-outcasts-new-persecuted-minority/5759366

‘It’s Absolutely Appalling’: Unvaccinated Canadians Become Social Outcasts and the New Persecuted Minority

In Canada, the supposedly benevolent country that prides itself on inclusivity, Covid totalitarianism has become unavoidably apparent, with its decision that soon only the fully vaccinated can travel.

Vaccine mandates have also been imposed on healthcare workers, municipal employees and federal public servants. Basically, as part of what PM Justin Trudeau called one of the world’s strictest vaccine-mandate policies, unjabbed Canadians are being increasingly restricted/excluded not only from work, but from social life as well. Supposedly, this is done for their well-being and health. I argue, though, that it’s nothing but “medical fascism.” 

Some months ago, much ado was made in media around the world when the government of Canada shed crocodile tears for the country’s imprisonment, torture, starvation and murder of indigenous children in the horrific ‘residential school’ system. The government, we were meant to believe, suddenly cared for the people it had sought to erase.

But, aside from many examples of that being mere lip service, it has become clear, over the past year and a half plus, that the government doesn’t care for Canadians, period.

Under some of the world’s longest lockdowns, Canadians had their businesses shuttered, were deprived of contact with their elderly, were prevented from worshipping and holding holiday gatherings (while Canadian leadership steadfastly ignored the rules) and, more seriously, were deprived of critical medical care—all in the name of public health.

Already, Canadians with natural immunity say they have been told that’s not enough to enter the country.

Starting from October 30, only the Covid-jabbed can travel by plane or train in Canada. While huge numbers of Canadians have got the shots, many others have legitimate concerns about the safety of vaccines, with good reason.

When Dr. Byram Bridle, associate professor of viral immunology—a well-recognized expert in vaccinology—refused vaccination due to his natural immunity, he was derided by media and banned from his University of Guelph campus. He made clear that he is, “a vaccine lover and an innovator in this field,” but has concerns about the, “possible link between this heart inflammation that is occurring and these COVID-19 vaccines.” 

And although I already realized it is unlikely that I’ll see my family in Canada in person again, the newest ‘no jab, no travel’ dictates seal the deal for me.

But, for people within Canada, it is more than just the matter of being able to see loved ones again. For some, these new dictates might mean a matter of life or death: whether they can get vital medical care and whether they can earn a living.

One such person is an Italian researcher living in Canada since 2001, who was in that year diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. I recently spoke with Valentina Capurri about how the vaccine mandates will affect her.

She explained that, following her MS diagnosis, she was offered to participate in a trial program for a new medication. Although a risky decision, she accepted for different reasons, including the health care and medication it would ensure her as a then-lone international student.

She described the importance of the trial, which lasted twelve years.

“Lots of people who had severe effects of MS would have benefitted from the medication. And yet they were not able to access the medication for a reason: because you cannot give a medication whose effect–if everything goes wrong–can be worse than the cure.”

Trials like this, she emphasized, are something every new medication, or vaccine, endure.

“And none of this has been done in this particular case. So that’s what made me a little suspicious about the Covid vaccines.”

Over the past year and a half, she says, she has not been allowed to see her neurologist, all medical appointments at her Toronto hospital were suspended and replaced with  phone consultations. No physical visits, no MRIs, just phone calls.

“In 2003, when we had SARS, I used to go once a month to the hospital. Despite the fact that SARS in 2003 had a much higher mortality rate than Covid, we still were allowed to enter the hospital on a regular basis. None of our visits were cancelled back then as they are now.”

Since neither she nor her Canadian husband will take the jab, they will lose their jobs, and thus won’t be able to pay for her expensive MS medication.

“You are forcing me to lose my job, to lose my ability to support myself, just because I am exerting my right not to have an experimental medical procedure done on me. This is worse than fascism, this is absolutely appalling.”

On top of this, now, those needing organ transplants face being denied care if they do not consent to mandatory jabs.

Among other Canadians suspended without pay for their refusal to be jabbed are hundreds of hospital workers, including nurses. The sort of people who might know a thing or two about health…

And, in August, emergency room and family practice physician, Dr. Rochagné Kilian resigned over the unethical and coercive pressuring of Canadians to be jabbed.

While medical workers and average Canadians are being forced out of work, denied medical care, ostracized from society, the government has made clear the rules for thee but not for me adage still applies.

PM Trudeau said all federal workers would be compelled to get fully vaccinated but, as it turns out, that’s not the case. According to an article in the Toronto Sun, roughly 70% of the federal workforce will be exempt from getting vaccines, including: federal judges, meat inspectors, park wardens, postal workers, tax auditors, Commons and Senate staff, soldiers, sailors and air force personnel, and Canada Post employees, among others.

Canada doesn’t even pretend to follow logic any longer. Just full-on medical fascism for the majority of Canadians.

With the introduction of vaccine mandates, it is only a matter of time before Canada reaches Lithuanian-level totalitarianism where the non-jabbed are almost fully excluded from all aspects of society.

Please ask yourselves if you really believe this is about public health.

Sunday, October 24, 2021

SC244-9

https://ourfiniteworld.com/2021/10/18/spike-in-energy-prices-suggests-that-sharp-changes-are-ahead/

Spike in energy prices suggests that sharp changes are ahead

An analysis of what is going terribly wrong in the world economy

The world economy requires stability. People living in the world economy need stability, as well. They need food every day and a place to live. Children need a home situation that they can count on.

Back in the 1950 to 1979 era, when energy supplies of many kinds were growing rapidly, it was possible to build stability into the economic system: Jobs with a company were often long-time careers; pensions after retirement were offered; electricity was sold through regulated “utilities” that charged prices that wrapped in long-term maintenance of the electric grid and the cost of fuel, among other things.

But as high energy prices hit in the 1970s, the system became more and more strained. The mood changed. Margaret Thatcher became the Prime Minister of the UK in 1979, and Ronald Reagan became President of the United States in 1981. Under their leadership, debt was increasingly used to cover longer-term costs, and competition was encouraged. A person might say that a move toward greater complexity, but less stability, of the economic system had begun.

Now, through several iterations, the economy has become increasingly complex, with less and less redundancy to provide stability. The energy price spike that is being experienced today is a warning that something is very, very wrong. As I see the situation, the trend toward complexity has gone too far; the economic system is starting to break down. Sharp changes appear to be ahead. The world economy is shifting into contraction mode, with more and more parts of the system failing.

In this post, I will discuss some of the issues involved. It turns out that energy modelers haven’t understood how detrimental intermittency really is. They modeled intermittent electricity from renewables (wind, water and solar) as far more helpful than it really is. This has been confusing to everyone. The sharp changes that the title of this post refers to represent an early stage of economic collapse.

[1] If energy supplies are inexpensive and widely available, it is easy to build an economy.

I have written in the past about the need for energy supplies to keep the economy functioning properly being analogous to the need for food, to keep humans functioning properly.

The economy doesn’t operate on a single type of energy, any more than a human lives on a single type of food. The economy uses a portfolio of energy types. These include human labor, energy directly from sunlight, and energy from burning various types of fuels, including biomass and fossil fuels.

As long as energy sources are inexpensive and readily available, an economy can grow and provide goods and services for an increasing number of citizens. We can think of this as being analogous to, “As long as buying and preparing food takes little of our wages (or time, if we are growing it ourselves), then there are plenty of wages (or time) left over for other activities.”

But once energy prices start spiking, it looks like there is not enough to go around. In the absence of ways to hide the problem, citizens need to cut back on non-essentials, pushing the economy into recession. Or businesses stop making essential products that require natural gas or coal, such as fertilizer or fuel additives to hold emissions down. The lack of such products can, by itself, be very disruptive to an economy.

[2] Once energy supplies become constrained, energy prices tend to spike. In the early stages of these price spikes, adding complexity allows the economy to better tolerate higher energy costs.

There are many ways to work around the problem of rising energy prices, at least temporarily. For example:

  • Build vehicles, such as cars, that are smaller and more fuel efficient.
  • Extend fossil fuel supplies by building nuclear power plants, hydroelectric generating plants, wind turbines, solar panels, and geothermal electricity generation.
  • Make factories more efficient.
  • Add insulation to buildings; eliminate any cracks that might allow outside air into buildings.
  • Instead of pre-funding capital costs, use debt to transfer these costs to later purchasers of energy products.
  • Encourage competition in providing different parts of electricity production and distribution.
  • Develop time-of-day pricing for electricity, so as to keep prices down to the marginal cost of production, even though this does not, in total, repay all costs of production and distribution.
  • Cut back on routine maintenance of electricity transmission systems.
  • Purchase coal and natural gas imports using spot pricing, rather than long term contracts, as long as these seem to be lower-priced than long-term commitments.
  • Throughout the economy, take advantage of economies of scale and mechanization. Build huge companies. Replace human labor wherever possible.
  • Stimulate the economy by increasing debt availability and lowering interest rates. This is helpful because a more rapidly growing economy can withstand higher energy prices.
  • Use global supply chains to source as large a share of manufacturing inputs as possible from countries with low wages and low energy costs.
  • Build very “lean” just-in-time supply chains.
  • Create complex financial systems, with debt resold and repackaged in different ways, futures contracts, and exchange traded funds.

Together, these approaches comprise “complexity.” They tend to make the economic system less resilient. At least temporarily, they pass fewer of the higher costs of energy products through to current citizens. As a result, the economy can temporarily withstand a higher price of energy. But the system tends to become brittle and prone to failure.

[3] There are limits to added complexity. In fact, complexity limits are what are likely to make the economic system fail.

Joseph Tainter, in The Collapse of Complex Societies, makes the point that there are diminishing returns to added complexity. For example, the changes that result in the biggest gains in fuel savings for vehicles are the ones added first.

Another drawback of added complexity is the extreme wage disparity that tends to result. Instead of everyone earning close to the same amount, those at the top of the hierarchy get a disproportionate share of the wages. This is what leads to many of the problems we are seeing today. Would-be workers don’t want to apply for jobs, even when they seem to be available. Citizens become unhappy and rebellious. Lower-paid workers may not eat well, so that pandemics spread more easily.

The underlying problem is that population tends to rise, but it becomes harder and harder to produce food and other necessities with the arable land and energy resources available. Ugo Bardi uses Figure 1 to show the shape of the expected decline in goods and services produced in such a situation:

Figure 1. Seneca Cliff by Ugo Bardi.

According to Bardi, Seneca in the title refers to a statement written by Lucius Annaeus Seneca in 91 CE, “It would be of some consolation for the feebleness of ourselves and our works if all things should perish as slowly as they come into being. As it is, increases are of sluggish growth, but the way to ruin is rapid.” In fact, this shape seems to approximate the type of cycle Turchin and Nefedov observed when analyzing several agricultural civilizations that collapsed in their book Secular Cycles.

[4] An increasing amount of complexity has been added since 1981 to help compensate for rising oil and other energy prices.

The prices of commodities, including oil, tend to be extremely variable because storage is very limited, relative to the large quantities used every day. There needs to be a very close match between supply and demand, or prices will rise very high or fall very low.

Oil is exceptionally important because it is the single largest source of energy for the world economy. It is heavily used in food production and in the extraction of minerals of all types. If the price of oil increases, the price of food tends to rise, as does the price of metals of many types. Oil is also important as a transportation fuel.

In the early days, before depletion led to higher extraction costs, oil prices remained stable and low (Figure 2), as a result of utility-type pricing by the Texas Railroad Commission. Oil prices started to spike, once depletion became more of a problem.

Figure 2. Brent-equivalent oil prices in 2020 US$. Based on data from BP’s 2021 Statistical Review of World Energy.

Economists tell us that oil and other commodity prices depend on “supply and demand.” When we look at turning points for oil prices, it becomes clear that financial manipulations play a significant role in determining oil demand. Such manipulations lead to prices that have practically nothing to do with the underlying cost of producing commodities. The huge changes in prices seem to reflect actions by central bankers to encourage or discourage lending (QE on Figure 3).

Figure 3. Monthly Brent oil prices with dates of US beginning and ending Quantitative Easing. Later Quantitative Easing did not bring oil prices back up to their prior level.

Quantitative easing (QE) makes it cheaper to borrow money. Adding QE tends to raise oil prices; deleting QE seems to reduce oil prices. These prices have little direct connection with the cost of extracting oil from the ground. Instead, prices are closely related to the amount of complexity being added to the system and whether it is having its intended impact on energy prices.

At the time of the 1973-1974 oil crisis, many people thought that the world was truly running out of oil. The petroleum industry did, indeed, succeed in extracting more. The 2005 to 2008 period was another period of concern that the world might be running out of oil. Then, in 2014, when oil prices suddenly fell, the dominant story suddenly became, “There is plenty of oil. The world’s biggest problem is climate change.”

In fact, there was no real reason to believe that the shortage situation had changed. US oil from shale had a brief run-up in production in the 2007 to 2019 period, but this production was unprofitable for producers, especially after oil prices dropped in 2014 (Figures 2 and 3). Producers of oil from shale are no longer investing very much in new production. With the sweet spots of fields depleted and this low level of investment, it will not be surprising if oil production from shale continues to fall.

Figure 4. US crude and condensate oil production for the 48 states, Alaska, and for shale basins, based on data of the US Energy Information Administration.

The real story is that the supply of oil, coal and natural gas is limited by the extent to which additional complexity can be added to the economy, to keep selling prices so that they are both:

  • High enough for producers of these products, so that they can both pay adequate taxes and make adequate reinvestment.
  • Low enough for consumers, especially for the many consumers around the world with very low wages.

Many people have missed the point that, at least since 2014, financial manipulations have not kept prices for fossil fuels high enough for producers. Low prices are driving them out of business. This is the case for oil, coal and natural gas. In fact, low prices caused by giving wind and solar priority on the electric grid are driving producers of nuclear electricity out of business, as well.

Oil producers require a price of $120 a barrel or more to cover all of their costs. Without a much higher price than available today (even with oil prices over $80 per barrel), shale oil production can be expected to fall. In fact, OPEC and its affiliates won’t ramp up production by very large amounts either because they, too, need much higher prices to cover all their costs.

[5] Economists and analysts of many types put together models that give misleading results because they missed several important points.

After oil prices fell in late 2014, it became fashionable to believe that vast amounts of fossil fuels are available for extraction, and that our biggest problem in the future would be climate change. Besides low prices, one reason for this concern was the high level of fossil fuel proven reserves reported by many countries around the world.

Figure 5. Ratio of reported proven reserves at December 31, 2020, to reported production in 2020 based on data from BP’s 2021 Statistical Review of World Energy.

Even fossil fuel companies started to invest in renewables because of the poor returns experienced from fossil fuel investments. It looked to them as if investment in renewables would be more profitable than continued investment in fossil fuel production. Of course, the profits of renewables were largely the result of government subsidies, particularly the subsidy of “going first.” Giving wind and solar first access when they happen to be available tends to lead to very low, and even negative, wholesale prices for other electricity producers. This drives these other producers of electricity out of business, even though they are really needed to correct for the intermittency of renewables.

There were many things that hardly anyone understood:

  • Energy prices in today’s financially manipulated economy bear little relationship to the true cost of production.
  • Fossil fuel producers need to be guaranteed long-term high prices, if there is to be any chance of ramping up production.
  • Intermittent renewables (including wind, solar, and hydroelectric) have little value in a modern economy unless they are backed up with a great deal of fossil fuels and nuclear electricity.
  • Our real problem with fossil fuels is a shortage problem. Price signals are very misleading.
  • The models of economists are mostly wrong. The use of carbon pricing and intermittent renewables will simply disadvantage the countries adopting them.

The reason why geologists and fossil fuel producers give misleading information about the amount of oil, coal and natural gas available to be extracted is because it is not something they can be expected to know. In a sense, the question is, “How much complexity can the economy withstand before it becomes too brittle to handle a temporary shock, such as a pandemic shutdown?” It isn’t the amount of fossil fuels in the ground that matters; it is the follow-on effects of the high level of complexity on the rest of the economy that matters.

[6] At this point, ramping up fossil fuel production would be very difficult because of the long-term low prices for fossil fuels. Unfortunately, the economy cannot get along with only today’s small quantity of renewables.

Figure 6. World energy supply by type, based on data from BP’s 2021 Statistical Review of World Energy.

Most people don’t realize just how slowly renewables have been ramping up as a share of world energy supplies. For 2020, wind and solar together amounted to only 5% of world energy supplies and hydroelectric amounted to 7% of world energy supplies. The world economy cannot function on 12% (or perhaps 20%, if more items are included) of its current energy supply any more than a person’s body can function on 12% or 20% of its current calorie intake.

Also, the world’s reaction to the pandemic acted, in many ways, like oil rationing. Figure 6 shows that consumption was reduced for oil, coal and natural gas. An even bigger impact was on the prices of these fuels. Prices fell, even though the cost of production was not falling. (See, for example, Figure 2 for the fall in oil prices.)

These lower prices left fossil fuel providers even worse off financially than they were previously. Some providers went out of business. They certainly do not have reserve funds set aside to develop the new fields that they would need to develop, if they were to ramp up production for oil, coal and natural gas now. Because of this, it is virtually impossible to ramp up fossil fuel production now. A lead time of at least several years is needed, besides a clear way of funding the higher production.

[7] Every plant and animal and, in fact, every growing thing, needs to win the battle against intermittency.

As mentioned in the introduction, humans need to eat on a regular basis. Hunter-gatherers solved the problem of intermittency of harvests by moving from area to area, so that their own location would match the location of food availability. Early agriculture and cities became possible when the growing of grain was perfected. Grain was both storable and portable, so it could be used year around. It could also be brought to cities, allowing people to live in a different location from where the crops were stored.

We can think of any number of adaptations in the plant and animal kingdom to intermittency. Some birds migrate. Bears hibernate. Deciduous trees lose their leaves each fall and grow them back again each spring.

Our supply of any of our energy products is in some sense intermittent. Oil wells deplete, so new ones need to be drilled. Biomass burned for fuel grows for a while, before it is cut down (or falls down) and is burned for fuel. Solar energy is available only until a cloud comes in front of the sun. In winter, solar energy is mostly absent.

[8] Any modeling of the cost of energy needs to take into account the full system needed to “bridge the intermittency gap.”

As far as I can see, the only pricing system that generates enough funds is one that takes into account the full system needs, including the need to overcome intermittency and the need for transportation of the energy to the user. In fact, I would argue that even more than this needs to be included. Good roads are generally required if the system is to be kept in good repair. Good schools are needed for would-be workers in the energy system. Any costs associated with pollution should be wrapped into the required price. Thus, the true cost of energy generation really should include a fairly substantial load for taxes for all of the governmental services that the system requires. And, of course, all parts of the system should pay their workers a living wage.

This high level of pricing can only be provided by utility type pricing of fossil fuels and electricity. The use of long-term contracts to purchase fossil fuels, uranium or electricity can also build in most of these costs. The alternative approach, buying fuels using spot contracts or pricing based on time of day electricity supply, looks appealing when costs are low. But such systems don’t build in sufficient funding for replacement of depleted fields or the full cost of a 24/7/365 electrical system.

Modelers didn’t understand that the “low prices now, higher prices later” approaches that were being advocated don’t really work for the long term. As limits are approached, prices tend to spike badly. Modelers had assumed that the economic system could handle such spikes in prices, and that the spikes in prices would quickly lead to new supply or adaptation. In fact, huge spikes in prices are very disruptive to the system. New supply is what is really needed, but providers tend to be too damaged by previous long periods of artificially low prices to provide this supply. The approach looks great in academic papers, but it leads to rolling blackouts and unfilled natural gas reservoirs for winter.

[9] Major changes for the worse seem to be ahead for the world economy.

At this point, it seems as if complexity has gone too far. The pandemic moved the world economy in the direction of contraction but prices of fossil fuels tend to spike as the economy opens up.

Figure 7. Chart by BBC/Bloomberg. Source: BBC

The recent spikes in prices are highly unlikely to produce the natural gas, coal and oil that is required. They are more likely to cause recession. Fossil fuel suppliers need high prices guaranteed for the long term. Even if such guarantees could be provided, it would still take several years to ramp up production to the level needed.

The general trend of the economy is likely to be in the direction of the Seneca Cliff (Figure 1). Everything won’t collapse all at once, but big “chunks” may start breaking away.

The debt system is a very vulnerable part. Debt is, in effect, a promise of goods or services made with energy in the future. If the energy isn’t there, the promised goods and services won’t be available. Governments may try to hide this problem with new debt, but governments can’t solve the underlying problem of missing goods and services.

Pension systems of all kinds are also vulnerable. If fewer goods and services are being made in total, they will need to be divided up differently. Pensioners are likely to get a reduced share, or nothing at all.

Importers of fossil fuels seem likely to be especially affected by price spikes because exporters have the ability to cut back in the quantity available for export, if total supply is inadequate. Europe is one part of the world that is especially dependent on oil, natural gas and coal imports.

Figure 8. Total energy production and consumption of Europe, based on data of BP’s 2021 Statistical Review of World Energy. The gap between consumption and production is filled by imports of oil, coal, natural gas and biofuels. Within Europe, countries also import electricity from each other.
Figure 9. Europe energy production by fuel based on data from BP’s 2021 Statistical Review of World Energy.

The combined production of hydroelectric, wind and solar and biofuels (in Figure 9) amounts to only 19% of Europe’s total energy consumption (shown in Figure 8). There is no possible way that Europe can get along only with renewable energy, at any foreseeable time in the future.

European economists should have told European citizens, “There is no way you can get along using renewables alone for many, many years. Treat the countries that are exporting fossil fuels to you very well. Sign long term contracts with them. If they want to use a new pipeline, raise no objection. Your bargaining power is very low.” Instead, European economists talked about saving the planet from carbon dioxide. It is an interesting idea, but the sad truth is that if Europe takes itself out of the contest for energy imports, it mostly leaves more fossil fuels for exporters to sell to others.

China stands out as well, as the world’s largest consumer of energy, and as the world’s largest importer of oil, coal and natural gas. It is already encountering electricity shortages that are leading to rolling blackouts. In fact, rolling blackouts in China started almost a year ago in late 2020. China is, of course, a major exporter of goods to the rest of the world. If China has major energy problems, the rest of the world will no longer be able to count on China’s exports. Lack of China’s exports, by itself, could be a huge problem for the rest of the world.

I could continue speculating on the changes ahead. The basic problem, as I see it, is that we have reached limits on oil, coal and natural gas extraction, pretty much simultaneously. The limits are really complexity limits. The renewables that we have today aren’t able to save us, regardless of what the models of Mark Jacobson and others might say.

In the next few years, I am afraid that we will find out how collapse actually proceeds in a very interconnected world economy.

....

https://www.oftwominds.com/blogoct21/imposters10-21.html

A Nation of Imposters

You've read the warnings about the proliferating imposter scams: scammers posing as "officials", representatives of utilities or "a close friend of a family member" all exploit the fast-draining reservoir of trust in America to extract financial information out of the unwary marks.

I'm not sure what's more remarkable: the depths of scammer perversity or the fact that some people can still be conned by claims of authority or friendship. Most are seniors, of course, as the elderly still retain an easy-to-scam trust in institutions and officialdom as a holdover from an era before trust was unraveled by wholesale self-serving deception.

The deeper problem is that America is now a nation of imposters. Everything that is presented as august and trustworthy is an imposter organization designed to enrich the few at the expense of the many via deception and the cloaking of self-serving skims and scams.

A useful tool to uncloaking imposters is to ask: cui bono, to whose benefit? Take the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve. It claims to be serving the public and the common good, but who actually benefits from its policies?

1. Insiders frontrunning the Fed's public pronouncements to enrich themselves. Here's looking at you, Chairperson Powell and the rest of your self-serving imposter cronies.

2. The top 0.1% who own the majority of productive assets goosed ever higher by Fed policies.

3. Billionaires.

4. The top 10% who own 89% of all stocks:
The wealthiest 10% of Americans own a record 89% of all U.S. stocks

If we strip away the PR, the Fed is an imposter, a self-enrichment scheme for the already-wealthy and the super-wealthy. Its claims to serve the public are just the imposter's deceptive mumbo-jumbo to exploit the naive trust of the marks.

Next up: our imposter judicial system: white-collar financial criminals get wrist-slap fines, if that, while hundreds of thousands of people rot away in America's Drug War Gulag, the fruit of a judiciary obsessed with locking people up even as the War on Drugs enriches drug cartels and has completely failed to reduce drug use.

Rich people can plunder without any fear of our imposter judiciary. Bernie Madoff's fatal mistake was ripping off other rich people, and that made him the perfect stooge for a Soviet-style show-trial in which one fall-guy is convicted as a PR stunt to mask the systemic rot of an imposter judiciary.

Then there's our imposter media, virtually all of which is owned by a handful of quasi-monopoly corporations. This imposter media/social media exemplifies the appeal to authority via "objectivity" and "expertise", while the real action is in what's off limits to serious journalistic digging, what's buried and what's touted as the dominant narrative to explain away what is risibly questionable. ("Let's go Brandon," etc.)

Unfortunately, even the scientific media is riddled with imposters: Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies (journals.plos.org).

Once again, the imposters exploit one of the last remaining pockets of trust, in this case, the trust that "research" that makes it into an academic journal is trustworthy, i.e. the results can be replicated by other researchers, the data hasn't been massaged to reach highly profitable results, dosages haven't been adjusted to skew the results in favor of special interests, and so on.

Lastly, consider our "democracy," which is now little more than an invitation-only auction of favors: $10 million in "auction bids" (campaign contributions, Super-PAC funds, etc.) and some grease in the lobbying machinery can easily garner $100 million in private gains via tax subsidies, no-bid contracts, Medicare limitations on monopoly pricing, etc.

Sorry, but this is an imposter form of democracy, a PR facade fabricated to mask the invitation-only auction of favors. If you don't have the money, your vote doesn't count. If you doubt this, please read:

Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens (www.cambridge.org)

Monopoly Versus Democracy: How to End a Gilded Age (www.foreignaffairs.com)

No one wants to admit we're a nation of imposters because that's a confession of just how deep the rot has penetrated. The systemic rot of imposters exploiting the last reserves of trust starts at the top and then filters down into every nook and cranny as everyone looks at how the rich get richer and learns from the top-level imposters.

That's how we've become a nation of imposters: our imposter stock market hits a new high and the imposters cheer because it proves the scam is still working. 

Saturday, October 23, 2021

SC244-8

https://www.globalresearch.ca/white-rose-uk-sets-example-world-follow/5759010

End the Covid Fraud and Global Genocide Now!

The White Rose UK Sets an Example for the World to Follow

Named after the famous German underground movement The White Rose (Die Weisse Rose) which distributed leaflets calling on people to resist the Nazi regime, The White Rose UK urges people everywhere to resist the medical/political tyranny being carried out under the guise of a fake pandemic.

Several members of the German White Rose were caught by the Nazis and sentenced to death or imprisonment.  Today, the Biden-Harris regime is attempting to inject harmful, ineffective, and often lethal genetic-modification agents (“vaccines”) into every man, woman, and child in America.  These so-called vaccines have already killed, disabled, and severely injured millions of people in the US and around the world, according to the governments’ official statistics.  Unvaccinated, sensible people who refuse this grotesque experimental treatment are demonized, vilified, and falsely accused of spreading illness.

Backed by the presstitute news media, Big Tech censorship, and wholly corrupt government health agencies which are fronts for Big Pharma, the US government’s ultimate goal is to remove the unvaxxed from society—get them fired from their jobs, make them unable to go shopping or travel, and isolate them in FEMA-style concentration camps which have already been built. 

Distributing truth-telling leaflets, as do members of The White Rose UK, is one way to fight this insanity.  Another method is a freely distributed print newspaper. 

Druthers is a free newspaper widely distributed across Canada—350,000 copies of the November issue reportedly on the way, also available as a free pdf download (Druthers.net).  Druthers has announced that it has launched into the United States this month (DruthersUSA.com).  The newspaper has featured hard-hitting articles that tell the truth about the injurious COVID-19 “vaccines”, the fraudulent PCR test, the mountains of junk data, the mountains of corpses from those who got the jab, and grassroots resistance to the suicidal course that Canada, USA, and most other nations are pursuing.

Challenging the Narrative

The following statement, from The White Rose UK website, needs to reverberate far and wide across America, from sea to shining sea, or the USA will not survive physically as a nation:

The disproportionate and dehumanising covid restrictions are a disgrace to humanity.

Masks, social distancing and the so-called covid vaccines are causing great harm. People protesting against lockdowns have been arrested and treated like criminals for gathering and exercising their right of free speech. At the same time, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter have been censoring videos and posts that do not match the current trend of the mainstream media. Schools have now turned into social engineering sites. Forcing children to wear masks and keeping children constantly at a distance in class and on school grounds is deeply dehumanising, and will have a damaging effect on children’s mental development. Parents should stand up against these guinea-pig methods. It’s not the way we grew up, and we should make sure our children grow up with the same freedoms we enjoyed!

Many experts have warned that the so-called covid vaccines will do a lot of harm and now with over a million adverse reactions – many of them severe – and over a thousand six hundred deaths reported in the UK alone, there is proof that the covid jab is causing great harm. But those reported adverse reactions and deaths only make up 1-10% of all covid injection injuries. In fact, it has become clear that the covid jab is causing far more injuries and deaths than the alleged covid virus.

Bit by bit, we have given up our freedom and our rights out of fear of a virus. After the first lockdown it was evident that more people died from the lockdown than from the virus. Our economy will suffer severely and poverty will increase. How many people have lost their job and how many businesses are ruined due to the lockdowns?

The so-called ‘new normal’ is not normal, it’s entirely abnormal, and we should never get used to it! It’s time to take over responsibility and to make decisions for ourselves, or else, the next generation of grown-ups will not experience the same freedom we’ve had before this manufactured covid crisis.

Like the White Rose in Germany, that resisted the Nazi regime, we encourage people to resist the covid tyranny. We do not want anymore lockdowns and demand an end to all restrictions. Visit your friends and family, the lonely, the vulnerable and the dying. We are humans and not controllable robots. We need to socially interact, without anti-social distancing and without face masks.

Journalists, teachers, doctors, lawyers, politicians should stand up for the truth and speak out publicly. If the majority of people rid themselves of fear and panic and make use of common sense, those who want to control us will eventually have to give up, and we will be able to guarantee a future of peace and freedom for our children and grandchildren.

***

Here is The White Rose UK manifesto which sends a powerful message that needs to be absorbed and understood by every global citizen:

End the Covid Fraud and Global Genocide Now!

People are experiencing serious adverse reactions after receiving the covid jab, or are dying.

Many more will die in the coming months and years. The covid fraud is causing a global genocide. This needs to end now. Crimes being committed or supported by governments, government advisory groups, members of the World Economic Forum, the mainstream media, social media platforms and other agencies in positions of authority:

  • Extreme fear mongering via press releases, media announcements and nation-wide advertisement, using taxpayers’ money
  • Inducing unnecessary fear and terror of a virus less lethal than a strong seasonal flu
  • Cynical use of new variants to promote fear and justify continued restrictions
  • Falsifying death records by stating covid as the primary cause of death when not applicable
  • Mask mandates on public transport, in shops, schools, work places and other public places – in many cases for hours a day – exposing the wearer to potential and actual damage to their mental and physical well-being
  • Forcing children and adults to take covid tests, often regularly, that are not fit for purpose, produce mainly false positives, and can cause damage to health
  • Using covid “cases”, which are based on false test results, for prolonging covid restrictions and lockdowns
  • Coercing people into taking an experimental “vaccine”, which is in fact a gene-modifying injection, can induce infertility, and is causing more adverse reactions and deaths than all other vaccines together
  • Promoting the use of an unlicensed therapy as though it were fully approved and safe
  • Suppressing or underplaying the data regarding adverse reactions and deaths of the covid jabs
  • Ignoring the Nuremberg Code by not enabling people to give informed consent before vaccination or testing
  • Disruption of education
  • Suppression of religious freedom, prevention of worship
  • Restricting freedom of movement across borders, and during lockdowns, within the country
  • Causing job losses, business failures and loss of opportunities
  • Delaying diagnosis and treatment of conditions far more serious than covid resulting in unnecessary loss of life
  • Forced quarantine of healthy people at their own expense
  • Suppression of the right to protest, freedom of association and freedom of speech
  • Suppression of scientific debate, giving voice only to “approved” agencies

Find out more: thewhiterose.uk

....

http://patricklawrence.us/patrick-lawrence-psyops/

Psyops

The Deep State’s imperative to colonize independent media is now before us.

Watch and listen, O you with open eyes and ears. The national security state’s long, very long campaign to control our press and broadcasters has taken a new turn of late. If independent media are what keep alive hope for a vigorous, authentic Fourth Estate, as argued severally in this space, independent media are now subject to an insidious, profoundly anti-democratic effort to undermine them.

The Independent Consortium of Investigative Journalists, Frances Haugen, Maria Ressa: Let us consider this institution and these people. They are all frauds, if by fraudulent we mean they are not what and who they tell us they are and their claim to independence from power is bogus.

The Deep State — and at this point it is mere pretense to object to this term — long ago made it a priority to turn the mainstream press and broadcasters to its purposes — to make a free press unfree. This has gone on since the earliest Cold War decades and is well and responsibly documented. (Alas, if Americans read the many excellent books and exposés on this topic, assertions such as the one just made would not arrive as in the slightest outré.)  

But several new realities are now very evident. Chief among them, the Deep State’s colonization of corporate media is now more or less complete. CNN, filling its airtime with spooks, generals, and a variety of official and formerly official liars, can be counted a total takeover. The New York Times is prima facie government-supervised, as it confesses in its pages from time to time. The Washington Post, owned by a man with multimillion-dollar CIA contracts, has turned itself into a comic book.

For reasons I will never entirely fathom, corporate media have not merely surrendered their legitimacy: They have actively, enthusiastically abandoned what frayed claim they may have had to credibility. The national-security state incorporates mainstream media into its apparatus, and then people stop believing the mainstream media: The thrill is gone, let’s say.

Accumulating Credibility

Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur in a discussion while hosting The Young Turks live streaming show in 2015. (tytvault, CC BY-SA 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)

In consequence of these two factors, independent media have begun to rise as … independent media. They accumulate audiences. A little at a time, they acquire the very habits of professionalism the mainstream press and broadcasters have let decay. Gradually, they accumulate the credibility the mainstream has lost.

Certain phenomena engendered by independent media prove popular. There are whistleblowers. People inside Deep State institutions start to leak, and they turn to independent media, most famously WikiLeaks, to get information out. While the Deep State’s clerks in mainstream media keep their heads down, and their mouths closed while cashing their checks, independent media take principled stands in favor of free expression, and people admire these stands. They are, after all admirable.

Those populating the national-security state’s sprawling apparatus are not stupid. They can figure out the logical response to these developments as well as anyone else. The new imperative is now before us: It is to colonize independent media just as they had the mainstream in previous decades.

There are some hopelessly clumsy cases. I urge all colleagues to stop bothering with The Young Turks in any capacity. Those running it, creatures of those who generously fund it, are simply infra-dig. As Matt Taibbi pointed out over the weekend in a piece wonderfully headed, “Yes, Virginia, There Is a Deep State,” they’ve now got some clod named Ben Carollo proclaiming the CIA as an accountable force for good, savior of democracy — this in a video appearing under the rubric “Rebel HQ.”

As an East European émigré friend used to say, “Gimme break.”

Democracy Now! is a subtler instance of colonization. The once-admirable Amy Goodman drank the Russiagate Kool-Aid, which I counted the first sign of covert intervention of one or another kind. Then she caved to the orthodoxy on the chemical-weapons scam during the Syrian crisis, and lately — you have to watch to believe — Goodman has begun broadcasting CNN “investigative” reports with unalloyed approval.

It seems that Democracy Now!’s donors may have threatened to delay their checks.

The three recent phenomena suggested above are indications of the Deep State’s latest tactics in its assault on independent media and the culture that arises among them. It behooves us to understand this.

International Consortium of Investigative Journalists

Two weeks ago, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists published “The Pandora Papers,” a “leak” of 12 million electronic documents revealing the tax-fiddling, money-hiding doings of 300–odd political figures around the world. “The Pandora Papers” followed publication of “The Panama Papers” in 2016 and “The Paradise Papers” a year later. There are many useful revelations in these various releases, but we ought not be fooled as to the nature of the project.

Where did the ICIJ get the documents in “The Pandora Papers,” and how?  Explaining provenance, authenticity, and so forth is essential to any investigative undertaking, but ICIJ has nothing to say on this point.

Why, of all the people “The Pandora Papers” exposes, is there not one American on its list? As Moon of Alabama notes in an analysis of this release, it amounts to a list of “people the U.S. doesn’t like.”

The ICIJ vigorously insists on its independence. But on close inspection this turns out not to be so by any serious understanding of the term. Among its donors are the Ford Foundation, whose longtime tiesto the CIA are well-documented, and the Open Societies Foundation, the (in)famous George Soros operation dedicated to cultivating coups in nations that fall outside the fence posts of neoliberalism.
The Midtown Manhattan offices of the Ford Foundation. (Moucheraud, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

The group was founded in 1997as a project of the Center for Public Integrity, another institution dedicated to “inspiring change using investigative reporting,” as the center describes itself. Among its sponsors are Ford, once again, and the Democracy Fund, which was founded by Pierre Omidyar, bankroller of The Intercept (another compromised “independent” medium). Omidyar is, like Soros, a sponsor of subversion ops in other countries masquerading as “civil society” projects.

ICIJ’s other sponsors (and for that matter the Democracy Fund’s) are comprised of the sorts of foundations that support NPR, PBS, and other such media. Anyone who assumes media institutions taking money from such sponsors are authentically independent does not understand philanthropy as a well-established conduit through which orthodoxies are enforced.

What are we looking at here? Not what we are supposed to think we are looking at, certainly. I will return to this question.

Maria Ressa

Maria Ressa speaking at the World Economic Forum in 2014. (Sikarin Thanachaiary, World Economic Forum, Flickr)

There is the case of Maria Ressa, the supposedly courageous, speak-truth-to-power co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize this year, a Filipina journalist who founded The Rappler, a web publication in Manila. The Nobel committee cited Ressa for her “fight for freedom of expression.” Who is Maria Ressa, then, and what is The Rappler?

I grow tired of writing this sentence: She and her publication are not what we are supposed to think they are.

Ressa and The Rappler, each insisting on independence just as the ICIJ does, are straight-out lying on this point. The Rappler recently received a grant of $180,000 from the National Endowment for Democracy, a CIA front — this according to an NED financial report issued earlier this year. None other than Pierre Omidyar and a group called North Base Media own nonvoting shares in the publication. Among North Base’s partners is the Media Development Investment Fund, which was founded by George Soros to do what George Soros likes to do in other countries.

Does a picture begin to emerge? Read the names together and one will. You have to figure they all party together.

Nobel in hand, Maria Ressa has already declared that Julian Assange is not a journalist and that independent media need new regulations, as in censorship. Henry Kissinger got a Nobel as a peacemaker: Ressa gets one as a defender of free expression. It’s a fit.

Frances Haugen

Frances Haugen earlier this month. (Office of Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Wikimedia Commons)

This brings us to the case of Frances Haugen, the former Facebook exec who recently appeared before Congress waving lots of documents she seems to have secreted out of Facebook’s offices to argue for — what else at this point? —increased government regulation of social media, as in censorship. Frances Haugen, you see, is a courageous, speak-truth-to-power whistleblower. Never mind that her appearance on Capitol Hill was carefully choreographed by Democratic Party operatives.

It is hard to say who is more courageous, I find — the ICIJ, Maria Ressa, or Frances Haugen. Where would we be without them?

The culture of independent media as it has germinated and developed over the past decade or so gave us WikiLeaks, and its effectiveness cannot be overstated. It gave us all manner of gutsy journalists standing for the principles of a genuinely free press, and people listened. It gave us whistleblowers who are admired even as the Deep State condemns them.   

And now the national-security state gives us a secret-disclosing crew of mainstream hacks, a faux- independent journalist elevated to the highest honors, and a whistleblower who was handed her whistle — three crowd-pleasers, three simulacra. These are three frauds. They are to independent journalism what McDonald’s is to food.

There is only one defense against this assault on truth and integrity, but it is a very good one. It is awareness. CNN, Democracy Now!, the ICIJ, Maria Ressa, Frances Haugen—none of these and many other media and people are properly labeled. But the labels can be written with modest efforts. Awareness and scrutiny, watching and listening, will prove enough.

Friday, October 22, 2021

SC244-7

https://www.globalresearch.ca/all-makes-sense-once-you-realize-they-want-kill-us/5758884

It All Makes Sense Once You Realize They Want to Kill Us

....Do you like his choice of words: “blowing up the trials”? Do you think it is a fair description of what the drug companies did?

Yes, it is.

And what possible motive would the drug companies have to blow up the trials? I can see only two possibilities:

  1. They think their vaccine is so terrific, it will save the lives of many of the people in the placebo group.
  2. They expect a high percentage of the people in the vaccine group to get either severely sick or die, so they want to hide the evidence of vaccine-linked injury.

Which is it?

You know the answer. Everyone watching this farce knows the answer.

Question– Okay, so let’s cut to the chase: Are the vaccines are safe or not?

No, they are not safe. The way we decide whether a drug is safe or not is by putting it through a rigorous process of testing and clinical trials. After the testing, the data is passed on to physicians, statisticians, chemists, pharmacologists, and other scientists who review the data and make their recommendations or criticisms. That didn’t happen with the Covid vaccines, in fact, all the normal standards and protocols were suspended in the name of “urgency”. But many believe that the “urgency” was manufactured to push through vaccines that would never have been approved on their own merits. All you have to do is look through the vaccine injury data (VAERS) and you’ll see this is the most lethal medical intervention of all time and, yet, the public health experts, the media and the government keep crowing that they’re “safe and effective”. It’s nonsense and the drug companies know it’s nonsense which is why they reject all liability for the people that are going to be killed by these “poison-death shots.”

Do you know what goes on inside your body after you are injected with one of these “gene based” vaccines?

Once the vaccine enters the bloodstream it penetrates the cells that line the blood vessels forcing them to produce spike proteins that protrude into the bloodstream like millions of microscopic thorns. These thorns activate blood platelets which trigger blood clotting followed shortly after by an immune response that destroys the infected cells thus weakening the vascular system while draining the supply of killer lymphocytes. In this way, the vaccine launches a dual attack on the body’s critical infrastructure causing widespread tissue damage throughout the circulatory system while leaving the immune system less able to fend off future infection.

Now if you think you can have a long-and-happy without a functioning circulatory system, then none of this matters. But if you’re bright enough to realize that wreaking havoc on your vascular system is the fast-track to the graveyard, then you’ll probably understand that injecting these “poison-death shots” is a particularly bad idea.

By the way, it’s a real stretch to call these hybrid injections, “vaccines”. They have about as much in common with a traditional vaccine as a python does with a coffee table. Nothing. The “vaccine” moniker was chosen in order to shore-up public confidence, that’s all. It’s part of a marketing strategy. There is no real similarity. The majority of people trust vaccines and see them as a shining example of medical achievement. The drug companies wanted to tap into that trust and use it for their own purposes. That’s why they called it a “vaccine” instead of “gene therapy” which more accurately describes ‘what it does.’ But–like we said– it’s just a marketing strategy.

Have you ever wondered how the drug companies were able to roll out their own-individual vaccines just weeks apart from each other? That’s a pretty good trick, don’t you think; especially since vaccine development typically takes from 10 to 15 years. How do you think they managed that? Here’s an excerpt from an article which provides a little background on the topic:

“The virus behind the outbreak that began in Wuhan, China, was identified on Jan. 7. Less than a week later — on Jan. 13 — researchers at Moderna and the NIH had a proposed sequence for an mRNA vaccine against it, and, as the company wrote in government documents, “we mobilized toward clinical manufacture.” By Feb. 24, the team was shipping vials from a plant in Norwood, Mass., to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in Bethesda, Md., for a planned clinical trial to test its safety.” (“Researchers rush to test coronavirus vaccine in people without knowing how well it works in animals”, Stat)

Got that? “The virus broke out in Wuhan…on Jan. 7, and less than a week later Moderna had a proposed sequence for an mRNA vaccine against it???

Really? Is that the same Moderna that had been playing-around with mRNA for over a decade but was never able to successfully bring a vaccine to market?

Yep, the very same company. Here’s more:

“And by Feb. 24, the team was shipping vials from a plant in Norwood, Mass??”

Wow! Another Covid miracle! You almost get whiplash watching these companies crank out their “wonder drugs” at record-breaking speed.

Keep in mind, there’s a very high probability that the virus was man-made, (In other words, it’s a bioweapon.) and the people who have been implicated in the funding and creation of that bioweapon are also closely aligned with the big drug companies that have produced the antidote in record time that has already netted tens of billions of dollars in profits for a drug for which there was no reliable animal testing, no long-term safety data, and no formal regulatory approval.

So I’ll ask you again: Doesn’t that all sound a bit suspicious?

Is it really that hard to see the outline of a political agenda here? After all, aren’t the drug companies working with the regulatory agencies that are working with the public health officials that are working with the media that are working with the corrupted politicians that are working with the Intel agencies that are working with the meddling globalist billionaires that are working with the giant private equity firms that oversee the entire operation pulling the appropriate strings whenever needed?

It sure looks like it.

And, don’t the tectonic social changes we’ve seen in the last year have more to do with a broader scorched-earth campaign launched by the “parasite class” against the rest of humanity than they do with a fairly-mild virus that kills mainly old and frail people with multiple underlying health conditions?

Right, again. In fact, many have noticed the cracks in the pandemic artifice from the very beginning, just as many have pointed out that the virus-meme is just the mask behind which parasites continue to conduct their global restructuring project. In short, it’s all about politics; bare-knuckle, take-no-prisoners NWO politics.

Answer– You’ve asked a number of questions about the animal trials, but none about the biodistribution and the pharmacokinetics studies that were done at the same time. Why is that? (Note--Pharmacokinetics; “the branch of pharmacology concerned with the movement of drugs within the body.”)

Question– I didn’t know there were any. Did the media report on them?

Answer– No, they didn’t. They completely ignored them, even though they were produced by Pfizer and provide essential information about where the substance in the vaccine goes in the body, in what amounts, and for how long. By knowing how the drug is distributed, it is possible to make educated assumptions about its effect on the organs and other tissue. In other words, these studies are invaluable. The Doctors for Covid Ethics have done extensive research on the studies and written a report titled “The Pfizer mRNA vaccine: pharmacokinetics and toxicity”. Here’s a few excerpts that help to illustrate the dangers of the vaccines:

“As with any drug, a key consideration for the toxicity of the COVID mRNA vaccines is where exactly in the body they end up, and for how long they will stay there. Such questions, which are the subject of pharmacokinetics, are usually thoroughly investigated during drug development. Initial studies on pharmacokinetics and also on toxicity are carried out in animals… this document has rather far-reaching implications: it shows that Pfizer—as well as the authorities that were apprised of these data— must have recognized the grave risks of adverse events after vaccination even before the onset of clinical trials. Nevertheless, Pfizer’s own clinical trials failed to monitor any of the clinical risks that were clearly evident from these data, and the regulatory authorities failed to enforce proper standards of oversight. This dual failure has caused the most grievous harm to the public….

What do Pfizer’s animal data presage for biological effects in humans?

  • Rapid appearance of spike protein in the circulation.
  • Toxicity to organs with expected high rates of uptake, in particular placenta and
    lactating breast glands
  • Penetration of some organs might be higher with the real vaccine than with this
    luciferase model…The rapid entry of the model vaccine into the circulation means that we must expect the spike protein to be expressed within the circulation, particularly by endothelial cells. ( Endothelial- The thin layer of cells lining the blood vessels) We have seen before that this will lead to activation of blood clotting through direct activation of platelets and also, probably more importantly, through immune attack on the endothelial cells….

Summary

Pfizer’s animal data clearly presaged the following risks and dangers:

  • blood clotting shortly after vaccination, potentially leading to heart attacks, stroke, and venous thrombosis
  • grave harm to female fertility
  • grave harm to breastfed infants
  • cumulative toxicity after multiple injections

With the exception of female fertility, which can simply not be evaluated within the short period of time for which the vaccines have been in use, all of the above risks have been substantiated since the vaccines have been rolled out—all are manifest in the reports to the various adverse event registries. Those registries also contain a very considerable number of reports on abortions and stillbirths shortly after vaccination, which should have prompted urgent investigation.
….
Of particularly grave concern is the very slow elimination of the toxic cationic lipids. In persons repeatedly injected with mRNA vaccines containing these lipids… this would result in cumulative toxicity. There is a real possibility that cationic lipids will accumulate in the ovaries. The implied grave risk to female fertility demands the most urgent attention of the public and of the health authorities.

Since the so-called clinical trials were carried out with such negligence, the real trials are occurring only now—on a massive scale, and with devastating results. … Calling off this failed experiment is long overdue. Continuing or even mandating the use of this poisonous vaccine, and the apparently imminent issuance of full approval for it are crimes against humanity.” (“The Pfizer mRNA vaccine: pharmacokinetics and toxicity”, The Doctors for Covid Ethics)

Don’t you think people are entitled to know what the government wants to inject into their bodies? Don’t you think they have a right to know how it will effect their immune systems, their vital organs and their overall health? Don’t you think they have the right to decide for themselves which drugs they will take and which they will refuse to take?

Forcing someone to take a drug they do not want, is not just wrong. It’s unAmerican. Which is why people should reject vaccine mandates as a matter of principle. They are an attack on personal liberty, the foundation of our constitutional system. It’s a principle worth dying for.

As for the mass vaccination campaign, it is the most maniacally-genocidal project ever concocted by man. There’s simply no way to calculate the amount of suffering and death we are about to face for trusting people whose policies were obviously shaped by their undiluted hatred of humanity. As German microbiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi said:

“In the end, we’re going to see mass illness and deaths among people who normally would have had wonderful lives ahead of them.”

It is a great tragedy.

....

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/56825.htm

Russia Tells NATO to Shove Abusive Relationship

Russia told the U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization to shove its faux diplomacy, thus ending about 30 years of post-Cold War talks and delegations which have achieved little to nothing in terms of normalizing relations.

Moscow may have slammed the door, but it’s not locked. Russia said that from now on it is up to NATO to take the first step in improving relations, thereby implying that sometime in the future Moscow would be open to pursuing a new relationship.

NATO expressed “regret” over Russia’s decision to cut diplomatic channels. German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas asserted Russia was making already-fraught relations worse, plunging communications back into the icy recesses of the Cold War.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced this week that Russia was closing down its representative mission to NATO in the Belgian capital, Brussels, where the U.S.-led military alliance is headquartered. Russia also gave notice to NATO to close its information bureau in Moscow. Any further communication that is required can be conducted through the office of the Russian ambassador to Belgium.

Such paring down of communication links may seem a reckless move at a time of heightened tensions between NATO and Russia. Surely, it might be better to keep as many communication lines open as possible in order to prevent misunderstandings and miscalculations?

The truth is, however, that NATO’s ties with Russia have degenerated a long time ago to the abject level of an abusive relationship. Moscow is thus right to walk away, given the circumstances. To stick around only invites more contempt from the NATO side. That would be more dangerous.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia and NATO agreed to set up dialogue and partnership. That culminated in the Russia-NATO Founding Act of 1997. Delegations were hosted in the respective capitals.

But in contravention of earlier promises, the NATO alliance has expanded eastwards to include in its memberships several former Warsaw Pact countries that border Russian territory. NATO is eyeing former Soviet Republics Georgia and Ukraine to join the 30-member bloc which Moscow has denounced as a “red line” endangering its national security.

The relentless expansion of NATO around Russia’s western borders has greatly disturbed the strategic balance deterring nuclear war. Arguably, the situation is even more precarious than at the height of the former Cold War.

In addition, the United States has, in tandem, ditched nuclear arms controls treaties during its encroachment on Russian territory. The Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty was unilaterally abrogated by the U.S. in 2002, likewise the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty in 2019 and the Open Skies Treaty in 2020.

This all amounts to a gross repudiation by the United States and its allies of the Russia-NATO Founding Act.

To add insult to injury, all the while NATO has reduced communications with Russia to one-sided accusations of alleged Russian malign conduct. Moscow is accused of “threatening” Europe and Western democracies, of “invading Ukraine” and of “annexing Crimea” among other unsubstantiated allegations, such as “shooting down” a Malaysian airliner, “assassinating” opponents with chemical weapons and blowing up ammo dumps in the Czech Republic. The evident pattern here is to pump out propaganda to antagonize.

If NATO conducted its relations with Russia as a proper partnership, the representative missions would be able to discuss allegations in reasoned debate with evidence and counter-evidence. As it is, NATO has not engaged even minimally with Russian representatives in recent years. Accusations are presented as a fait accompli without any due process for Russia to rebut. NATO’s communications with Russia are more akin to a medieval inquisition where the accused is forbidden from having due process and recourse to cross-examine the accusers.

The last straw for Russia was the expulsion earlier this month of eight Russian diplomats from its Brussels mission to NATO. Without any substantiation, NATO accused the Russian officials of being “undeclared spies” and promptly blackballed them.

The complete shutdown this week by Russia of its NATO mission in Brussels as well as of NATO’s bureau in Moscow was described by the Russian foreign ministry as “just retaliation”. Germany’s Heiko Maas would do well to take his head out of the sand and do some reflection on historical reality instead of absurdly blaming Russia for “making relations worse”. Was it Russia that backed the coup d’état in Kiev in 2014, for instance, that set off the Ukraine conflict? Is Russia installing missile systems on the Mexican border with the U.S.?

Blaming Russia for freezing the relationship is classic getting things back to front. Washington and its NATO allies are the ones who have been turning the dial on the thermostat always downwards, and arrogantly presuming there would be no icy consequences.

There has been no reciprocal communication from NATO for years, but rather only relentless Russophobia and baseless allegations. In addition to psychological warfare, the U.S./NATO hybrid war has involved mounting nuclear threats to Russia’s national security from the installation of new missile systems in Poland and Romania.

As Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigui pointed out this week, the flights of NATO warplanes near Russia’s borders have increased by 30 percent compared with last year. This week Russian jets were scrambled to ward off two U.S. B-1B nuclear capable bombers from Russia’s airspace in the Black Sea.

The reality is that Washington and its NATO allies have increasingly treated Russia with disrespectful, irrational attitude. For Russia to maintain a fake dialogue with an organization that has gone from supposed partnership to adversarial, and indeed overtly hostile – that in itself only invites further contempt. It is more dangerous to stay in such a relationship than to be out of it.

Far from jeopardizing security, Russia’s decision to walk away from NATO is the right one. It is right to end the illusion of dialogue and partnership when the reality is the other party is cynically offering to shake hands while trying to piss down your leg.