More must-read articles. Currently focused on the COVID-19 ‘plandemic’

This post relates to the massive global Coronavirus fraud and connections to the similarly-fraudulent climate change and planned financial reset fiascos. Note: Many more articles follow the twelve below.

Vaccine Passports were in place in 2018

Vaccine Passports were in place in 2018  By greenmedinfo.com , 8 April 2021

Euro Plans For ‘Vaccine Passports’ Were In Place In 2018. Coincidence?

With the world being told that so-called ‘vaccine passports’ will be required for all international travel in future, and in many countries even to enter shops, restaurants, bars, gyms, hotels, theatres, concerts and sports events, the impression we are being given is that the measure is a direct result of the coronavirus pandemic. In Europe, however, which hosts 8 of the top 10 pharmaceutical exporting countries, planning for vaccine passports began at least 20 months prior to the start of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Apparently, the pandemic conveniently provided European politicians with the ‘excuse’ they needed to introduce the idea.

The ‘European Commission’ – the executive body of Europe – first published a proposal for vaccine passports on 26 April 2018. Buried deep in a document dealing with ‘Strengthened Cooperation against Vaccine Preventable Diseases‘, the proposal was essentially ignored by the mainstream media.

roadmap document issued in early 2019 subsequently set out specific plans for implementing the European Commission’s proposal. The primary action listed in the roadmap was to “examine the feasibility of developing a common vaccination card/passport” for European citizens that is “compatible with electronic immunization information systems and recognized for use across borders.” The plan aimed for a legislative proposal to be issued in Europe by 2022.

Interestingly, the roadmap uses several terms that, while relatively uncommon in most countries prior to the pandemic, have since become heard on a daily basis in the mainstream media. Perhaps the most notable of these is ‘vaccine hesitancy’. Supporting European countries in “countering vaccine hesitancy” is listed in the document as one of the key action points.

The possibility of pandemics and “unexpected outbreaks” occurring is also referred to in the roadmap. Revealingly, specific reference is made to supporting the authorization of “innovative vaccines, including for emerging health threats.” Stating that the “vaccine manufacturing industry” has a “key role” in meeting the aims described in the document, the roadmap lists “improving EU manufacturing capacity” and stockpiling vaccines as further action points to be considered.

Towards strengthening “existing partnerships” and “collaboration with international actors and initiatives,” the roadmap also refers to a global vaccination summit meeting that took place in September 2019. A close examination of the attendees and subject matter for this meeting is revealing.

The 2019 Global Vaccination Summit

Unreported by most mainstream media outlets, a ‘Global Vaccination Summit‘ was hosted in Brussels, Belgium, on 12 September 2019. Organized by the European Commission in cooperation with the World Health Organization, the meeting took place just 3 months before the coronavirus outbreak began. Significantly, this was also only 36 days before the now infamous coronavirus outbreak simulation exercisesupported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundationthe World Economic Forum, and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, which took place on 18 October 2019.

An invitation-only event, the vaccination summit participants included political leaders, high-level representatives from the United Nations and other international organizations, health ministries, leading academics, scientists and health professionals, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations.

The summit was structured around three round tables entitled ‘In Vaccines We Trust‘, ‘The Magic Of Science‘, and ‘Vaccines Protecting Everyone, Everywhere‘. Notable panel members for these round tables included Nanette Cocero, Global President of Pfizer Vaccines; Dr. Seth Berkley, CEO of GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance – an organization that has received vast amounts of funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and Joe Cerrell, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Managing Director for Global Policy and Advocacy.

Pandemic planning was clearly in evidence at this summit meeting. Key documents distributed to the participants included reports on ‘Pandemic influenza preparedness planning‘, ‘A pandemic influenza exercise for the European Union‘, ‘Avian Influenza and Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Planning‘, ‘Pandemic influenza preparedness and response planning‘, ‘Towards sufficiency of Pandemic Influenza Vaccines in the EU‘, and ‘A “Public Private Partnership” on European Pandemic influenza vaccines‘.

Across all these documents, the goal of strengthening collaboration with the pharmaceutical industry is repeatedly stressed, as also is the message that a global pandemic was now inevitable.

Vaccine passports: who really benefits?

Who really benefits from vaccine passports? Certainly not ordinary people, for whom sharing their health records and other personal data could soon become mandatory merely for participation in society.

Instead, the chief beneficiary will be the multinational pharmaceutical industry. With global drug and vaccine sales already forecast to reach $1.5 trillion this year, pharmaceutical companies and their investors are salivating at the prospect of vaccine passports becoming mandatory worldwide.

The total market for COVID-19 vaccines is predicted to be worth $100 billion in sales and $40 billion in post-tax profits. Annual vaccinations against mutations of the coronavirus could raise these numbers still further. Unless we resist vaccine passports and instead ‘vote for reason‘, drug and vaccine makers could force the world into long-term economic and political dependency. Our urgent goal must therefore be to replace the greed-driven pharmaceutical ‘business with disease‘ with a healthcare system based on truly preventive approaches.

Accepting the pharmaceutical industry’s alternative to this is simply unthinkable.

See more here: greenmedinfo.com

=======================

Why do so many refuse to take the COVID vaccine

Why do so many refuse to take the COVID vaccine  By Arjun Walia, Collective Evolution, 3 April 2021

The Top Four Reasons Why Many People, Doctors & Scientists Refuse To Take The COVID Vaccine

Editor’s note: Click on above link to view graphics in this article

When you ask somebody why they are choosing to take the covid vaccine or why they are wearing a mask, they may respond, “because science.” The next question to ask is, how many of these people have actually gone through the science of vaccines and whether or not masks may be an effective tool for limiting the spread of COVID?

From what I see, the majority of people receive their information from mainstream media organizations, which are organizations that have strong ties to pharmaceutical corporations and governments, and are known for presenting one perspective that favours a particular agenda while completely ridiculing the other. They sometimes go as far as labelling another perspective as a “conspiracy theory” despite the fact that there is ample, credible evidence to support the claims of that perspective. Do people simply believe things because they feel that everybody else believes it too? What are the social and cultural implications of not being in alignment with the majority?

Due to reliance on a single media source, many people are not shown information and perspectives that tell a different or more complete story, especially when it comes to “controversial” topics. Often times, these topics are avoided using ridicule in place of addressing points brought up from other perspectives. We’ve seen a lot of this with COVID, an unprecedented amount of censorship of science has taken place with regards to all things COVID, and many academics have been speaking up about it for quite some time.Buy New $24.99 ($2.08 / Count)(as of 03:33 EDT – Details)

A quote I often like to use to demonstrate this, and one I’ve used many times before, comes from Dr. Kamran Abbasi, a recent executive editor of the prestigious British Medical Journal, editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, and a consultant editor for PLOS Medicine. He is editor of the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine and JRSM Open. He recently published a piece in the BMJ, titled “Covid-19: politicization, “corruption,” and suppression of science.”

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.

I also recently wrote an article about Vinay Prasad MD MPH, an associate professor at the University of California San Francisco. He is one of many experts in the field during this pandemic who has been criticizing Facebook fact-checkers for their missteps in claiming content is false when it is not.

One of the best examples of suppression is “anti-lockdown” rhetoric. Multiple dozens of studies have shown and concluded that lockdowns do not reduce COVID infection, will kill more people than COVID due to lack of access to health care, starvation and more, and cause a wide range of other health and economical issues. Regardless, the experts who have been publishing and sharing this information have been heavily censored. And culturally, we’re pretending that there’s no science to oppose lockdowns.

recently wrote an article by Dr. Sunetra Gupta, an Oxford professor who is regarded by many as the world’s pre-eminent infectious disease epidemiologist. She is one of many who explains that lockdowns have done nothing to protect people from COVID, and that they have caused a great deal of harm.

Why is it that such an alarming amount of respected experts who oppose the measures being taken to combat COVID, are being ridiculed, ignored, and unacknowledged, yet a political doctor, somebody like Anthony Fauci, can get all of the air time he pleases? Why aren’t all perspectives, science and data shared equally? Why have effective “alternative” treatments been ignored and the vaccine made out to be the only option?

Below are the top four reasons why COVID vaccine hesitancy is at an all time high among people of all backgrounds.Buy New $13.70 ($0.11 / Ounce)(as of 03:33 EDT – Details)

  1. A Lack of Trust In Government & Pharmaceutical Companies.

First I’d like to draw your attention to a quote taken from a paper published in the International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy by professor Paddy Rawlinson, from Western Sydney University.

Critical criminology repeatedly has drawn attention to the state-corporate nexus as a site of corruption and other forms of criminality, a scenario exacerbated by the intensification of neoliberalism in areas such as health. The state-pharmaceutical relationship, which increasingly influences health policy, is no exception. That is especially so when pharmaceutical products such as vaccines, a burgeoning sector of the industry, are mandated in direct violation of the principle of informed consent. Such policies have provoked suspicion and dissent as critics question the integrity of the state-pharma alliance and its impact on vaccine safety. However, rather than encouraging open debate, draconian modes of governance have been implemented to repress and silence any form of criticism, thereby protecting the activities of the state and pharmaceutical industry from independent scrutiny. The article examines this relationship in the context of recent legislation in Australia to intensify its mandatory regime around vaccines. It argues that attempts to undermine freedom of speech, and to systematically excoriate those who criticise or dissent from mandatory vaccine programs, function as a corrupting process and, by extension, serve to provoke the notion that corruption does indeed exist within the state-pharma alliance.

There are many examples that illustrate why so many people simply cannot trust these institutions when it comes to anything, let alone health. Another one comes from comes from a paper published in 2010 by Robert G. Evans, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Vancouver School of Economics, UBC.  The paper, titled “Tough on Crime? Pfizer and the CIHR”  is accessible through the National Library of Medicine (PubMed), and it outlines how Pfizer has been a “habitual offender” constantly engaging in illegal and criminal activities. This particular paper points out that from 2002 to 2010, Pfizer has been “assessed $3 billion in criminal convictions, civil penalties and jury awards” and has set records for both criminal fines and total penalties. Keep in mind we are now in 2021, that number is likely much higher.

A fairly recent article published in the New England Journal of Medicine focuses on outlining why those injured by the COVID-19 vaccine won’t be eligible for compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) because COVID is still an “emergency.” It also brings up the topic of vaccine hesitancy.

It mentions that among African Americans, many are hesitant to get their COVID vaccine because of events like the Tuskegee syphilis study. The study used African Americans to see how syphilis progressed. The people with syphilis were told they were receiving free treatment, but they were really receiving nothing. This also happened after the discovery of a cure, the people were still not given the cure or any other known treatment. They were lied to.Buy New $3.96 ($0.07 / Ounce)(as of 03:33 EDT – Details)

It wasn’t until a whistleblower, Peter Buxtun, leaked information about the study to the New York Times and the paper published it on the front page on November 16th, 1972, that the Tuskegee study finally ended. By this time only 74 of the test subjects were still alive. 128 patients had died of syphilis or its complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had acquired congenital syphilis.

The study in the NEJM points out:

In a Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted in August and September 2020, it was found that 49%of Black respondents would probably not or definitely not take a Covid-19 vaccine, as compared with 33% of White respondents. Similarly, a Pew Research Center poll from November found that although 71% of Black respondents knew someone who had been hospitalized or died from Covid-19, only 42% intended to get a Covid-19 vaccine when it became available. These findings indicate a need to provide strong safety nets and supports to encourage Covid-19 vaccine adoption in vulnerable communities, including adequate injury compensation.

One study estimates up to 31 percent of  surveyed Americans may not take the vaccine. That’s a lot of people if you extrapolate it out to the entire population. And it’s hard to really know how many people won’t. CNN has made it seem as if Donald Trump supporters will not be taking the shot, if this is the case that could be more than 50 percent of Americans, or at least all those who voted for Trump, which is a big number.

There are countless examples, it’s not just within the black community. Multiple polls in Canada and the United States have shown that what seem to be quite a large minority will not be getting the vaccine. This also includes medical professionals. For example 50 percent of healthcare workers and hospital staff in Riverside County are refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Keep in mind that Riverside County, California has a population of approximately 2.4 million. A survey conducted at Chicago’s Loretto Hospital shows that 40 percent of healthcare workers will not take the COVID-19 vaccine once it’s available to them.

Vaccine hesitancy among physicians and academics is nothing new. To illustrate this I often point to a conference held at the end of 2019 put on by the World Health Organization (WHO). At the conference, Dr. Heidi Larson a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project Emphasized this point, having  stated,

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen…still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider.

  1. The Virus Has A 99.95 Survival Rate.

Buy New $11.76 ($0.10 / Ounce)(as of 03:33 EDT – Details)Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine recently shared that the survival rate for people under 70 years of age is about 99.95 percent. He also said that COVID is less dangerous than the flu for children.  This comes based on approximately 50 studies that have been published, and information showing that more children in the U.S. have died from the flu than COVID. This correlates with data from Sweden as well.

Jonas F Ludvigsson a paediatrician at Örebro University Hospital and professor of clinical epidemiology at the Karolinska Institute has published research showing that out of nearly 2 million school children, zero died from covid despite no lockdowns, school closings or mask mandates during the first wave of the pandemic.

There is a perception out there that COVID is no more dangerous that other severe respiratory illnesses, which are the second leading cause of death worldwide, and that covid is similar to already existing coronaviruses that have circled the global for decades affecting hundreds of millions of people a year and killing tens of millions.

Another issue raised by many, which is a matter of public record now, is the fact that it’s very unclear as to how many deaths marked as COVID are, and were, actually a result of COVID.

These are reasons why people view the vaccine as unnecessary. In some cases, people feel that the risk of vaccine injury is greater than the risk of dying from COVID, which may actually be quite true. This is a completely separate debate, but here is data from the (US) Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS):

This system (VAERS) has been known to only capture about 1 percent of vaccine injuries. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) in the United States found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million. For example, From 1990 to 2007 there were about 80,000 US cases of Kawasaki disease; during the same period just 56 US cases were reported to VAERS–0.07%. (Hua et al, Pediatr Inf Dis J 2009: 28:943-947) The cause of KD is unknown; it is rare, it is very serious, and it is prevalent among young and frequently vaccinated children. If any event deserves prompt reporting to VAERS it is Kawasaki disease, but this does not happen.

Keep in mind that approximately 100,000 million people in the U.S. have had at least one shot.

On top of this you have reports of deaths all over social media. There seem to be hundreds of examples but at the end of the day, there is not a proper system in place to properly track adverse reactions and deaths. The mainstream is not at all interested in that conversation either.

  1. Some People Don’t Know How Safe And Effective The Vaccine Is

Dr. Peter Doshi, an associate editor at the British Medical Journal published a piece in the journal issuing a word of caution about the supposed “95% Effective” COVID vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna. It outlines multiple reasons why the effectiveness claimed by the pharmaceutical companies is called into question.

You can also read a piece that dives deeper into this question that we recently published, here.

The vaccine is being heavily marketed as a saviour, which is the case with almost all vaccines despite many concerns being raised over the years. One great example is with regards to aluminum containing vaccines. Scientists have discovered that injected aluminum is very different from ingested aluminum. Injected aluminum doesn’t exit the body, and can be detected within the brain years after injection. Is this “anti-vax”? No, it’s just science, these are legitimate concerns.

When it comes to the COVID vaccine, there are concerns, especially since the mRNA technology used in many of the vaccines is new.

A few other papers have raised concerns, for example. A study published in October of 2020 in the International Journal of Clinical Practice states:

COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

In a new research article published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, veteran immunologist J. Bart Classen expresses similar concerns and writes that “RNA-based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.”

For decades, Classen has published papers exploring how vaccination can give rise to chronic conditions such as Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes — not right away, but three or four years down the road. In this latest paper, Classen warns that the RNA-based vaccine technology could create “new potential mechanisms” of vaccine adverse events that may take years to come to light.

A few years ago, a team of Scandinavian scientists conducted a study and found that African children inoculated with the DTP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) vaccine, during the early 1980s had a 5-10 times greater mortality than their unvaccinated peers.

They state:

It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis.Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.

I’m placing this study here to show that some vaccines may have unknown long term health consequences, even if they do offer some protection to the targeted disease.

  1. There May Be Protection From Infection

As with most viruses, the host gains immunity from infection. Take the measles virus. A child has a 0.01 chance of dying from the measles, yet if they survive the virus, they have lifetime protection against the virus, a strengthened and more evolved immune system, and may even have more possible protection from a select few cancers.

Furthermore, it’s very questionable whether the MMR vaccine is effective. There is a long history of measles outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations. Children are required to get one shot, then the antibodies run out so they are required to get a second. A third one seems to be in the works. It’s not even clear if the vaccine is more dangerous than the measles or not.

Martin Kulldorff, a medical professor at Harvard university and vaccine safety expert recently tweeted,

After having protecting themselves while working class were exposed to the virus, the vaccinated #Zoomers now want #VaccinePassports where immunity from prior infection does not count, despite stronger evidence for protection. One more assault on working people. 

He also recently tweeted:

Trust in #vaccines is declining, but don’t blame the tiny group of anti-vaxxers. It is those pushing #VaccinePassports, arguing that all must be vaccinated, and those censoring vaccine discussions that are undermining trust in vaccines.

There are multiple studies hinting at the point the professor makes, that those who have been infected with covid may have immunity for years, and possibly even decades. For example, according to a new study authored by respected scientists at leading labs, individuals who recovered from the coronavirus developed “robust” levels of B cells and T cells (necessary for fighting off the virus) and “these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time.” This is just one of many examples. There are studies that suggest infection to prior coronaviruses, which prior to COVID-19 circled the globe infecting hundreds of millions of people every single year, can also provide protection from COVID-19.

The Takeaway

At the end of the day, there are ample concerns about the COVID vaccine, its effectiveness, the safety of it in the short term and in the long term. Despite these concerns, the vaccine is heavily marketed as unquestionably safe and effective. A fifth category could have been added to this article, and that’s the ridicule and acknowledgments of other, cheap effective treatments that have shown to have a tremendous amount of success. It seems these treatments would have rendered the vaccine useless and unnecessary, but the vaccine is a multiple billion dollar product.

We have to consider these things in this day and age. Would the “powers that be” really prevent and ridicule treatments that could have saved many lives, and can save many lives and render it useless and dangerous, despite so much evidence that says otherwise, to make the vaccine perceived as the only solution.

Do we really want to live in a world where we give a small group of people the ability to mandate vaccines in order to have access to certain freedoms we enjoyed prior to COVID? Is this right? Is this ethical? If we allow them to do this, what else will we allow them to do in the future?

========================

The ‘Covid’ Vaccine Is a Weapon of Mass Destruction!

 

The Covid Vaccine Is a Weapon of Mass Destruction   By Gary D. Barnett, March 31, 2021

 

“Saying that a state or regime is a murderer is a convenient personification of an abstraction. Regimes are in reality people with the power to command a whole society. It is these people that have committed the kilo- and megamurders of our century, and we must not hide their identity under the abstraction of the ‘state,’ ‘regime,’ ‘government,’ or ‘communist.’”

Rudolph Rummel (1994) “Death by Government”

 

Due to Rummel’s book title, some might take this quote to be contradictory, but it is not. People murder or purposely allow murder; so only identifying the killers by way of identity abstraction is akin to blaming a gun for shooting and killing on its own instead of blaming the actual murderer that pulled the trigger. It is a way of hiding blame in the form of psychological trickery. This can only be an effective strategy when used by the ruling class as propaganda for fools.

Government’s are made up of people, and these people called politicians come from the ranks of the general population, and they are the worst of mankind. Is this then an indictment of all humanity? I would not go quite that far, and those in government are murderers, but complicity by mass voluntary servitude and support of the state in the murder of others is a major factor in the persecution, genocide, and democide of innocents.

Today, we are witnessing the atrocious results of this dynamic, as people around the world are participating in the plot with their chosen governments to exterminate large numbers of society by their cooperation, support, indifference, and especially their silence. The ‘state,’ ‘regime,’ and ‘government’ are certainly murderers in whole, but it is important to attach names to all that take part in the wholesale slaughter of others.

The extermination of societies through genocide and democide is achieved in many ways, from war, forced starvation, psychological destruction, mass imprisonment, and sterilization; from chemical agents, bombs, nuclear weapons, and now the killing will be due to ‘vaccination.’ Surely I jest you say, but I do not, as the indiscriminate killing of hundreds of millions or billions of people around the world at the hands of the powerful is sought. Some call it population control, some call it depopulation, but it is simply planned mass murder to benefit the agendas of the few. The tool being used to accomplish this goal is the untested, experimental, mind-altering, gene-changing, toxic poison called the Covid-19 ‘vaccine,’ and it is the newest weapon of mass destruction.

Many are having horrible effects due to these injections, and many are dying. Some are dying immediately after taking this shot, some are dying after a few hours or days, others after a few weeks, and the long-term effects at this point are virtually unknown. It is as if people are deaf, dumb, and blind when it comes to logic, as this falsely claimed affliction called Covid that supposedly has an survival rate of 99.98%, is being treated as a deadly pandemic, and the ‘cure’ recommended is a ‘vaccine’ that kills many more than the purposely created fake virus scam.

The agendas of the so-called claimed elites are clear, as evidenced in just these few quotes of many below. The desire to eliminate much of the population has been voiced over and over again, but the people still refuse to listen, and in fact, stand in line to take the state’s poison for something that has never once been separated, purified, properly isolated, or identified, and has not even been proven to exist.

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” ~ Ted Turner

“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day.” ~ Jacques Yves Cousteau

“If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full.” ~ Bertrand Russell

“The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.” ~ Margaret Sanger

“A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.” ~ George Bernard Shaw

“Population control will now become the centerpiece of U.S. foreign policy.” ~ Hillary Clinton

“World population needs to be decreased by 50%”. ~ Henry Kissinger

“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.” ~ Bill Gates

While the ruling segment of society, including all the political pawns in government, are behind this push to depopulate the world in order to gain total control, there are many aspects to this plan. Much of the focus has been on the deliberate destruction of the natural immune systems of populations at large, as this alone will be responsible for extreme sickness, dependability, the loss of functional existence, and large-scale death. This has already been essentially accomplished due to lockdowns, quarantines, dangerous mask wearing, job losses, isolation, distancing, lack of exercise, loss of vital vitamin D, and all the extreme stress caused by these absurd and evil mandates. In other words, the trap is set, and due to the much-weakened state of the general health and immunity of the ‘public,’ the deadly vaccine will be the driver of undue mortality, just as is desired by those attempting to take over the planet. A perfect storm has been devised in order to bring down this country and the world, and it is now going forward with little resistance.

All will be blamed on a ‘virus’ of course, but it will not be this bogus Covid strain being propagated by the political class, the medical establishment, and the media, it will be blamed on fabricated new strains mislabeled as ‘mutant variants’ of this bogus ‘Covid-19.’

Thousands upon thousands are already dying due to taking this poisonous concoction, and many more have had horrible adverse reactions such as Bell’s Palsy, paralysis, loss of bodily functions and speech, anaphylactic shock, cardiac arrest and arrhythmia, deadly autoimmune reactions, and a myriad of other detrimental side effects. In Israel, the most highly vaccinated population to date, the Pfizer vaccine has killed “about 40 times more (elderly) people and 260 times more of the young than what the COVID-19 virus would have claimed in the given time frame.” As more and more line up for this toxic lethal injection, the death counts will continue to rise, and every ensuing shot will cause more death. As time goes by, and as subsequent vaccines are claimed to be necessary, the death count will explode.

The government, all its enforcers, the medical establishment, the pharmaceutical cartels, and the mainstream media, are all to blame, but so are all of you that have voluntarily given them this power over you that you now refuse to take away. Without resistance and dissent, the blame for the coming carnage will lie at the feet of all who stood by and allowed this to happen without saying no.

This is a war against the people; the chosen tool to gain the submission of the masses has been a lie called Covid-19, and the weapon of mass destruction being used to accomplish the death of millions is the ‘Covid vaccine!’

If you cherish your family, your freedom and your life, refuse to wear a mask, refuse all orders by the state, and refuse to take this murderous injection wrongly called a ‘vaccine.’

Source links:

Deployment of Covid ‘vaccine’

 

Covid vaccine destroys your immune system

Covid vaccine causes death 

The Covid depopulation ‘vaccine’

Depopulation agenda

Experimental ‘vaccine’ deaths in Israel

Death by government

CDC ignores vaccine deaths

The Best of Gary D. Barnett

Gary D. Barnett [send him mail] is a retired investment professional that has been writing about freedom and liberty matters, politics, and history for two decades. He is against all war and aggression, and against the state. He recently finished a collaboration with former U.S. Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney, and was a contributor to her new book, “When China Sneezes” From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Political-Economic Crisis.” Currently, he lives in Montana with his wife and son. Visit his website.

=========================

WHO confirm Covid-19 PCR test is flawed

WHO confirm Covid-19 PCR test is flawed  By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, via CairnsNews, 30 March 2021

Editor’s note: Click on the link above to view graphics in this article.

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, March 26, 2021

Theme: Science and Medicine

All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

First published on March 19, 2021

***

The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test was adopted by the WHO on January 23, 2020 as a means to detecting the  SARS-COV-2 virus, following the recommendations of  a Virology research group (based at Charité University Hospital, Berlin), supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (For Further details see the Drosten Study)

Exactly one year later on January 20th, 2021, the WHO retracts. They don’t say “We Made a Mistake”. The retraction is carefully formulated. 

While the WHO does not deny the validity of their misleading January 2020 guidelines, they nonetheless recommend “Re-testing” (which everybody knows is an impossibility).

The contentious issue pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles (Ct). According to Pieter Borger, et al

The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture…(Critique of Drosten Study)

The World Health Organization (WHO) tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.

If the test is conducted at a 35 Ct threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that ALL the so-called confirmed “positive cases” tabulated in the course of the last 14 months are invalid.

According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al, the Ct > 35 has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.

The WHO’s Mea Culpa

Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “Retraction”. The full text with link to the original document is in annex:

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

“Invalid Positives” is the Underlying Concept 

This is not an issue of  “Weak Positives” and “Risk of False Positive Increases”. What is at stake is a “Flawed Methodology” which leads to invalid estimates.

What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of covid positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting:  “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”.

The WHO calls for “Retesting”, which is tantamount to “We Screwed Up”.

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Millions of people Worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020. Nonetheless, we must conclude that unless retested, those estimates (according to the WHO) are invalid.  

 

I should mention that there are several other related flaws regarding the PCR test which are not addressed in this article. (See Michel Chossudovsky’s E-book:  The 2020 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”  (Chapter II)

From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at a Ct amplification threshold of 35 or higher, following the January 2020 recommendations of the WHO. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied Worldwide has in the course of  the last 12-14 months led to the compilation of faulty and misleading Covid statistics.

And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect the virusTherefore,  the official “covid numbers” are meaningless.

It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic.

Which in turn means that the lockdown / economic measures which have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever.

According to scientific opinion:

“if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%  (Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al, Critique of Drosten Study)

As outlined above, “the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”: It follows that using  the >35 cycles detection will indelibly  contribute to “hiking up” the number of “fake positives”.

At the time of writing (mid-March 2021), despite the WHO retraction, the PCT test is being used extensively to hike up the numbers with a view to sustaining the fear campaign, justifying the ongoing lockdown policies as well as the implementation of the Covid vaccine.

Ironically, the flawed numbers based on “invalid positives” are in turn being manipulated to ensure an upward trend in Covid positives.

Moreover, those PCR tests are not routinely accompanied by a medical diagnosis of the patients who are being tested.

And now, national health authorities have issued (fake) warnings of a “Third Wave” as part of their propaganda campaign in support of the Covid-19 Vaccine.

The WHO confirms that the Covid PCR test procedure as applied is invalid. There is absolutely no scientific basis for implementing the Covid Vaccine.

Both the WHO and the scientific assessment of Pieter Borger, et al (quoted above) confirm unequivocally that the tests adopted by governments to justify the lockdown and the destabilization of national economies are INVALID.

Invalid Data and the Numbers’ Game

It should be understood that these “invalid estimates” are the “numbers” quoted relentlessly 24/7 by the media in the course of the “First Wave” and “Second Wave”which have been used to feed the fear campaign and “justify” ALL the policies put forth by the governments:

  • lockdown,
  • closure of economic activity,
  • poverty and mass unemployment,
  • bankruptcies
  • social distancing,
  • face mask,
  • curfew,
  • the vaccine.
  • the health passport

Invalid Data. Think Twice Before Getting Vaccinated

And Now we have entered a so-called “Third Wave”. (But where’s the data??)

It’s a complex “Pack of Lies”.

It’s a crime against humanity. 

***

Postscript

Since its release on March 15, quite unexpectedly tens of thousands of people have read this article.

My intent was essentially to Refute and Reveal the Big Lie (focussing on scientific and statistical concepts) without directly addressing the broader implications of the lockdown and closure of economic activity.

This diabolical project which emanates from the upper echelons of the financial establishment (including the World Economic Forum) is destroying people’s lives Worldwide. It is creating mass unemployment, triggering famines in developing countries.

With some exceptions including Tanzania, most of the 193 member states of the United Nations have endorsed the WEF’s “corona consensus”.

The Truth is a peaceful yet powerful weapon. Now is the time to confront those governments and demand a repeal of the lockdown policies which are triggering poverty and despair Worldwide.

The WHO’s BIG LIE is refuted by the WHO.

The alleged pandemic is a scam. That is something which cannot be denied or refuted.

And that was the object of this article.

It’s a complex scam based on “a pack of lies” with devastating consequences.

In the course of the last 14 months starting in early January 2020, I have analyzed almost on a daily basis the timeline and evolution of the Covid crisis. From the very outset in January 2020, people were led to believe and accept the existence of a rapidly progressing and dangerous epidemic.

We are at the crossroads of one of the most serious crises in World history. We are living history, yet our understanding of the sequence of events since January 2020 has been blurred.

Worldwide, people have been misled both by their governments and the media as to the causes and devastating consequences of the Covid-19 “pandemic”.

The unspoken truth is that the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and a justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire World into a spiral of mass unemployment, bankruptcy, extreme poverty and despair.

More than 7 billion people Worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis.

I invite Global Research readers to view the Video below (which provides an overview) as well as consult my E-Book (consisting of 10 chapters) which addresses in detail the complexities of this crisis.

The 2020 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

Also please forward this article. Your support is invaluable.

Video 

click the lower right corner to access full-screen .

.

Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research

Full text of the WHO directive dated January 20, 2021

 

Annex

Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) Technologies that Use Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Product type: Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2

Date: 13 January 2021                                                                      

WHO-identifier: 2020/5, version 2

Target audience: laboratory professionals and users of IVDs.

Purpose of this notice: clarify information previously provided by WHO. This notice supersedes WHO Information Notice for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (IVD) Users 2020/05 version 1, issued 14 December 2020.

Description of the problem: WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology.

Users of IVDs must read and follow the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.

Actions to be taken by IVD users:

  1. Please read carefully the IFU in its entirety.
  2. Contact your local representative if there is any aspect of the IFU that is unclear to you.
  3. Check the IFU for each incoming consignment to detect any changes to the IFU.
  4. Provide the Ct value in the report to the requesting health care provider.

Notes

  1. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020, WHO reference number WHO/2019-nCoV/laboratory/2020.6.
  2. Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: Predictive values. BMJ. 1994 Jul 9;309(6947):102. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6947.102.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

======================

CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET

 

CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET  By Allan M.R. MacRae, 21 March 2021

 

A CLIMATE AND ENERGY PRIMER FOR POLITICIANS AND MEDIA

The below treatise was sent to Canadian and American politicians and the media – but most of them won’t understand it, because they have no scientific competence and have been utterly deceived – programmed for decades by false climate scares and green energy frauds.


SUMMARY

We published in 2002 that there was NO catastrophic human-made global warming /climate change crisis, and green energy schemes were NOT green and produced little useful (dispatchable) energy. Dangerous global warming and climate change have NOT HAPPENED and green energy schemes have proved to be COSTLY, UNRELIABLE AND INEFFECTIVE. Global warming is NOT a threat, but global cooling IS dangerous. In 2002 we predicted that global cooling would start circa 2020, based on low solar activity, and that prediction is increasingly supported by the evidence.

Politicians foolishly accepted very-scary global warming falsehoods and brewed the perfect storm, crippling our energy systems with costly and unreliable green energy schemes that utterly fail due to intermittency, at a time when we will need more reliable, dispatchable energy due to increased energy demand and imminent global cooling. The good people of Australia, Britain, Germany, California and Texas have all suffered and died due to green energy failures that were PREDICTABLE AND PREDICTED.


THE GREENS’ PREDICTIVE CLIMATE AND ENERGY RECORD IS THE WORST

The ability to predict is the best objective measure of scientific and technical competence. Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record – every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~80 they have made since 1970, has FAILED TO HAPPEN.

Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.”

The radical Greens have NO credibility, make that NEGATIVE credibility – their core competence is propaganda, the fabrication of false alarm.

OUR PREDICTIVE CLIMATE AND ENERGY RECORD IS CORRECT-TO-DATE

Our 2002 predictions are among the most accurate on the planet.

In 2002, co-authors Dr Sallie Baliunas, Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian, Dr Tim Patterson, Paleoclimatologist, Carleton U, Ottawa and Allan MacRae, P.Eng. (now retired), McGill, Queens, U of Alberta, wrote:

  1. “Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”
  2. “The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”

Allan MacRae published in the Calgary Herald on September 1, 2002, based on a conversation with Dr Tim Patterson:

  1. “If [as we believe] solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”

MacRae updated his global cooling prediction in 2013:

3a. “I suggest global cooling starts by 2020 or sooner. Bundle up.”


CLIMATE AND ENERGY – SUPPORTING EVIDENCE AND CONCLUSIONS

Points 1 and 2 above are now demonstrated correct-to-date. There is no real human-made catastrophic global warming / climate change crisis. Grid-connected green energy has proven to be costly and ineffective – two abject failures by climate alarmists.

  1. There is no real global warming crisis– the alleged catastrophic warming has not happened and is not going to happen – that false alarm has been fabricated in faulty climate models that deliberately exaggerate any possible CO2-driven global warming. The catastrophic human-made Global Warming (aka “Climate Change) hypothesis assumes that increased fossil fuel combustion drives catastrophic human-made global warming but that assumption is disproved many times by the evidence.

One of the strongest disproofs is my 2008 discovery that atmospheric CO2 changes do not lead temperature changes in time – CO2 changes lag temperature changes by ~9 months in the modern data record. The catastrophic human-made global warming hypothesis therefore assumes that the future is causing the past – FALSE!
THE CATASTROPHIC ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING (CAGW) AND THE HUMANMADE CLIMATE CHANGE CRISES ARE PROVED FALSE   January 10, 2020

CONCLUSION: There will be no catastrophic human-made warming and no significant increase in chaotic weather due to increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

  1. Grid-connect green energy (wind and solar power generation) is costly and ineffective, primarily because of the fatal flaw of intermittency. There is no widely-available, cost-effective means of solving intermittency in grid-connected wind and solar power generation. Electric grids have been destabilized, electricity costs have soared and Excess Winter Deaths have increased due to foolish green energy schemes.

CO2, GLOBAL WARMING, CLIMATE AND ENERGY   June 15, 2019 

Green energy does not even significantly reduce CO2 emissions, because of the need for almost 100% conventional spinning reserve, required when the wind does not blow or the Sun does not shine.

CONCLUSION: Wind and solar green energy schemes are not green and produce little useful (dispatchable) energy.

  1. Point 3, incipient global cooling is more and more probable, based on recent evidence.Contrary to political myth, atmospheric CO2 does NOT significantly drive global temperature – the Sun does – global temperature change is natural and follows solar activity. Global cooling is much more dangerous than global warming.

    This global cooling is primarily solar-induced
    , driven by the end of very-weak Solar Cycle 24 (SC24) and the beginning of very-weak SC25, as I (we) published in 2002 – one year before Theodor Landscheidt’s famous 2003 global cooling prediction.
    NEW LITTLE ICE AGE INSTEAD OF GLOBAL WARMING?   T. Landscheidt   May 1, 2003
    Analysis of the sun’s varying activity in the last two millennia indicates that contrary to the IPCC’s speculation about man-made global warming as high as 5.8C within the next hundred years, a long period of cool climate with its coldest phase around 2030 is to be expected.

    In 2019, expert meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo and I co-authored a paper describing the late planting in 2018 and 2019 and the huge Great Plains crop failure of 2019 due to cold, wet weather.

THE REAL CLIMATE CRISIS IS NOT GLOBAL WARMING, IT IS COOLING, AND IT MAY HAVE ALREADY STARTED   October 27, 2019

Planting was ~one month across the Great Plains of North America for crop years 2018 and 2019. In 2018 the growing season was warm and the crop recovered, but in 2019 there was a huge crop failure across the Great Plains. In 2019 fully 30% of the huge USA corn crop was never planted because of wet ground. Much of the grain crop across the Great Plains was severely harmed because of early cold and snow in the Fall.
See also these crop loss articles.

In this winter of 2020-2021, new record cold temperatures have been experienced all over the world, in January 2021 in Asia and in February 2021 in North America, Europe, the Mediterranean countries and the Middle East. I correctly predicted this cold Winter in August 2020:

Check out NIno34 temperatures, again down to Minus 0.6C – winter will be cold.

Nino34 SST anom’s hit minimums of minus1.4C-1.3C in Oct2020 and Nov2020 – so global coldest temperatures (+4 months) should be Feb2021 and Mar2021.

COLD WEATHER KILLS 20 TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE AS HOT WEATHER September 4, 2015

In 2015 expert meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo and I co-authored a paper that proved that global cooling was much more dangerous than global warming, even in warm countriesExcess Winter Deaths (more deaths in Winter months than non-Winter months) total ~100,000 per year in the USA and ~5000-10,000 in Canada.

Global Lower Tropospheric Temperatures have declined 0.5C in five years, from an anomaly of +0.7C in February 2016 to only +0.2C in February 2021.


CENTRAL ENGLAND EXPERIENCES HISTORICALLY CHILLY OCTOBER   November 1, 2019

The UK’s October 2019 sure felt like a chilly one, but now official Met Office temperature data has confirmed it — Central England just experienced a month on par with those of the mid-to-late 1600s.

20+ WEATHER STATIONS ACROSS CHINA EQUAL/BREAK LOWEST-EVER TEMPERATURE RECORDS FOR MONTH OF DECEMBER January 2, 2021

China knows what’s coming. It’s plays on the global scene are clear: from its expansion into the greening north Africa to its desperate increases in domestic energy production, the country is heeding the warnings delivered down from historical documentation and cosmological cycles, and is acting on the advice of its modern-day scientists — global cooling is coming.

RECORD COLD WEATHER IN CHINA SENDS POWER DEMAND THROUGH THE ROOF   January 8, 2021

Exceptionally cold weather sweeping through China has caused a huge increase in power demand in the world’s largest energy consumer and hampered transportation.

ACCORDING TO THE SATELLITES, EARTH HAS COOLED RAPIDLY DURING THE PAST 2 MONTHS   February 3, 2021

During the past two months, Earth has cooled, rapidly.

The Version 6.0 Global Average Lower Tropospheric Temperature (LT) Anomaly for January, 2021 has come out at just +0.12 deg. C above the baseline, down 0.03 deg. C from the December, 2020 value of +0.15 deg. C.

41 RECORD LOWS SET IN ALBERTA, AS BRITAIN SUFFERS -22.9C (-9.2F)   February 11, 2021

Extreme cold has been gripping our planet for the past few months, driving its average temperature down (UAH) and the NH snow mass up (FMI).

WORST SNOWFALL IN 50+ YEARS HITS MOSCOW, MANITOBA SETS 20 NEW COLD RECORDS ON SATURDAY ALONE (IN BOOKS DATING BACK TO 1879), AND CARS HAVE BEEN BURIED UNDER SNOWDRIFTS IN BRITAIN   February 15, 2021

Record cold and snow has buffeted much of the Northern Hemisphere of late: from northern Asia, to the majority of Europe, to practically ALL of North America — the NH is suffering a truly historic winter of 2020/21 as the Grand Solar Minimum intensifies.

RECORD-SMASHING SNOW AND ICE STORMS LEAVE 5 MILLION AMERICANS WITHOUT POWER (AND COUNTING): “THE SITUATION IS CRITICAL”   February 16, 2021

The historic Arctic front crippling Texas’s power system, sending energy prices soaring to record levels, is intensifying with at least 5 million people across the U.S. now plunged into darkness, unable to heat their homes.

LIBYA SEES SNOW FOR FIRST TIME IN 15 YEARS, RARE FLAKES ALSO HIT EGYPT, SYRIA, LEBANON, PALESTINE, ISRAEL, JORDAN AND SAUDI ARABIA (AMONG OTHERS) AS THE SUN HITS MILESTONE OF 2 SPOTLESS WEEKS   February 18, 2021

The COLD TIMES are returning, the mid-latitudes are REFREEZING in line with the great conjunction, historically low solar activity, cloud-nucleating Cosmic Rays, and a meridional jet stream flow (among other forcings).

Both NOAA and NASA appear to agree, if you read between the lines, with NOAA saying we’re entering a ‘full-blown’ Grand Solar Minimum in the late-2020s, and NASA seeing this upcoming solar cycle (25) as “the weakest of the past 200 years”, with the agency correlating previous solar shutdowns to prolonged periods of global cooling here.

GREECE SUFFERS “MOST INTENSE” SNOWFALL SINCE THE 1970S, AS LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS RECEIVES 6-YEARS WORTH OF SNOW IN A WEEK   February 19, 2021

An exceptionally rare and long-lasting snowstorm battered Attica this week–the historical region that encompasses Greece’s capital city Athens and the surrounding countryside projecting into the Aegean Sea.

THIS FEBRUARY (TO THE 20TH), THE U.S. BROKE 9,075 LOW TEMPERATURE RECORDS VS JUST THE 982 FOR WARMTH   February 23, 2021

The Arctic invasion that recently swept the United States was truly historic, and the record books prove it.

According to warm-mongers NOAA – who willfully ignore the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect – the month of February, 2021 has so far (to the 20th) seen 9,075 daily cold-minimum and cold-maximum temperature records fall across the United States vs just the 982 for warmth.

Of these, 693 also qualified as new monthly record lows.

And of these, a staggering 198 were also new all-time never-before-witnessed benchmarks – often in record books dating back 150+ years.

MONSTER ARCTIC FRONT ENGULFS ASIA AND CANADA, AS EUROPE’S LONGEST BRIDGE IS CLOSED DUE TO SNOW   February 24, 2021

While parts of the United States and Europe enjoy a brief respite from the frostbite, the majority of Canada, transcontinental Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan continue to suffer from a descended Arctic.

  1. HEMISPHERE SNOW MASS JUMPS TO 700 GIGATONS ABOVE 1982-2012 AVERAGE + ARCTIC SEA ICE SEES EXPONENTIAL GAINS + ICELAND VOLCANOES STIR   February 25, 2021

The latest data point from the Finnish Meteorology Institute’s (FMI’s) “Total snow mass for Northern Hemisphere” chart has been plotted, and it reveals pow-pow across the hemisphere as a whole –excluding the mountains– is riding at some 700 Gigatons above the 1982-2012 average:

SWINGS BETWEEN EXTREMES” MUDDLES THE SEASONS IN EUROPE, AS HEAVY SNOW DISRUPTS THE WATER SUPPLY IN JAPAN   February 26, 2021

Plus, Russia’s record-breaking “snowpocalypse” leaves tens of thousands without power and a dozen districts in a state of emergency.

NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA JUST SUFFERED ITS COLDEST SUMMER IN A DECADE   March 1, 2021

According to data from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM), the eastern Aussie state of New South Wales (NSW) has just suffered its coldest summer season since 2011.

COLDEST FEBRUARY ON RECORD IN THE PERMIAN BASIN, AS 6.7 FEET (2.05M) OF SNOW BURIES IWAMIZAWA CITY, JAPAN   March 2, 2021

February, 2021 delivered truly unprecedented wintry conditions to the Permian Basin — the month went down as the coldest February on record (in books dating back to the late 1800s).

MARCH SNOW HITS HAWAII + 3-FEET SLAMS SOUTH KOREA + THE UK, SCANDINAVIA AND THE ALPS BRACE FOR A MID-MONTH BURIAL   March 3, 2021

The National Weather Service in Honolulu said Monday morning that “overnight snow and icy conditions are present over the Big Island Summits.”

20 INCHES OF SNOW BURIES ATLANTIC CANADA, WHITEOUT CONDITIONS HIT MAINE, NEW YORK, VERMONT AND BEYOND + “THE COLD BLOB”   March 4, 2021

Temps are tumbling, snowpack is building, ocean currents are stalling, volcanoes are stirring, magnetic poles are shifting, and the Sun is entering a multidecadal slumber — welcome, all, to the next true climate catastrophe: PREPARE.

TEXAS COULD BE HIT AGAIN: MID-RANGE WEATHER MODELS SEE MORE RECORD COLD ENGULFING THE LONE STAR STATE BY THE FINAL WEEK OF MARCH March 10, 2021

Before we get onto late-March and Texas though, the comings days will bring their own wake-up-call to residents of the Central United States, as feet upon feet of snow look set to bury multiple states.

EUROPE SET FOR HISTORIC SPRING SNOWFALL, AS NORTH AMERICA BRACES FOR WEEKEND OF RECORD-BUSTING BLIZZARDS + SANGAY ERUPTS TO 41,000 FT (12.5 KM) March 12, 2021

Snow is a thing of the future, it would appear, the near future — all-time snowfall records are under threat across Europe and North America in March — Grand Solar Minimum.

HISTORIC AND CRIPPLING” WINTER STORM RIPS THROUGH THE CENTRAL UNITED STATES: “PLEASE STAY HOME” March 15, 2021

Record cold and snow IS NOT caused by anthropogenic global warming. AGW shouldn’t be looked upon as “bad science” anymore — it is the work of agenda-driven charlatans.

CONCLUSION: Dangerous global cooling will continue, it will be sporadic, moving from continent to continent with the polar vortex, and could last for decades.

THE SECOND GREAT GLOBAL FRAUD – THE COVID-19 LOCKDOWN

In October 2019, Event 201, sponsored by the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others simulated a global coronavirus pandemic.https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/about

Just months later, a relatively mild Wuhan-lab-manufactured Covid-19 coronavirus flu was overblown into a false global pandemic, promoted by the World Health Organization into an economy-destroying global lockdown. Well-established government emergency programs were discarded and replaced with an economy-destroying full lockdown of businesses, the workforce and students, populations who were never at significant risk from Covid-19, which was only seriously dangerous to the very elderly and infirm.

INTERVIEW OF LT. COL. DAVID REDMAN, FORMER HEAD OF ALBERTA’S EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Society has experienced more deadly flu epidemics in recent decades without a lockdown. A few states like Sweden and South Dakota did not lock down for Covid-19 , and one year of Covid-19 data has proved that the lockdown was absolutely UNNECESSARY. Several analysts correctly deemed the lockdown unnecessary and highly destructive as early as March 2020, and one year later these assessments are proved correct. The facts were obvious even then.

21March2020 – Willis Eschenbach

The economic damage from the current insane “shelter-in-place” regulations designed to thwart the coronavirus is going to be huge—lost jobs, shuttered businesses, economic downturn, stock market losses. This doesn’t count the personal cost in things like increased suicides and domestic and other violence.

21March2020 – Allan MacRae

LET’S CONSIDER AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH:

Isolate people over sixty-five and those with poor immune systems and return to business-as-usual for people under sixty-five.

This will allow “herd immunity” to develop much sooner and older people will thus be more protected AND THE ECONOMY WON’T CRASH.

22March2020 – Allan MacRae

This full-lockdown scenario is especially hurting service sector businesses and their minimum-wage employees – young people are telling me they are “financially under the bus”. The young are being destroyed to protect us over-65’s. A far better solution is to get them back to work and let us oldies keep our distance, and get “herd immunity” established ASAP – in months not years. Then we will all be safe again.

This Covid-19 full lockdown was never justified and has done vastly more harm than good to society – the key question is how was it possible for so many countries to discard tried-and-proven emergency plans and implement such a destructive lockdown, in response to a relatively minor threat. Who pulled the strings on this fiasco – this huge global fraud?

LINKING THE CLIMATE AND COVID FRAUDS AND THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM’S FINAL SOLUTION – THE “GREAT RESET”

Many global “leaders” quickly linked the two huge frauds, stating ”to solve Covid we have to solve Climate Change” – utter nonsense, not even plausible enough to be specious. Then they introduced their Final Solution, the “Great Reset” – the move to a Chinese Communist Party style dictatorship, a centrally-controlled economy where we all live like poor slaves, lorded over by our wealthy masters.

WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM (WEF) PRESENTS: THE GREAT RESET— “YOU’LL OWN NOTHING, AND YOU’LL BE HAPPY.”

(Deleted WEF video)

The World Economic Forum faced a barrage of criticism before deleting a video which praised coronavirus lockdowns for “quietly improving cities around the world”.
(Deleted WEF video)

Sky News Australia exposes the “GREAT RESET”, the wild Marxist “Final Solution” from the World Economic Forum, as espoused by its founder Klaus Schwab (aka “Doctor Evil”) and a host of bizarre villains out of an Austin Powers movie.

(Schwab starts at 5:05)

More on the Great Reset:

World Economic Forum

Chris ChappellSpiro Skouras

THE COVERT EXTREME-LEFT POLITICAL AGENDA – WHY NOW?

Global politics has now become toxic and unhinged, with the extreme-left panicking, and trying to force the neo-Marxist Great Reset on us all.

WHY NOW? Because solar-driven global cooling is upon us, and the fraud of catastrophic human-caused global warming is about to be exposed to even the most obtuse of humanity.

The Situation Assessment is summarized below – its perpetrators are among the most deceitful scoundrels on Earth, and to date they are succeeding.

For decades, climate skeptics have been correctly arguing that the science of the global warming extremists was wrong, but it was never about the science – it was always a fraud – a false scheme concocted for political and financial gain.

People give the warmist cabal too much credibility – false alarm is their tactic – the climate alarmist leaders know they are lying – they’ve known it all along.

SITUATION ASSESSMENT

It’s ALL a Marxist scam – false enviro-hysteria including the Climate and Green-Energy frauds, the full lockdown for Covid-19, the illogical linking of these frauds (“to solve Covid we have to solve Climate Change”), paid-and-planned terrorism by Antifa and BLM, and the mail-in ballot USA election scam – it’s all false and fraudulent.

The Climate-and-Covid scares are false crises, concocted by wolves to stampede the sheep.

The tactics used by the global warming propagandists are straight out of Lenin’s playbook.

The Climategate emails provided further evidence of the warmists’ deceit – they don’t debate, they shout down dissent and seek to harm those who disagree with them – straight out of Lenin.

The purported “science” of global warming catastrophism has been disproved numerous ways over the decades. Every one of the warmists’ very-scary predictions, some 80 or so since 1970, have failed to happen. The most objective measure of scientific competence is the ability to correctly predict – and the climate fraudsters have been 100% wrong to date.

There is a powerful logic that says that no rational person can be this wrong, this deliberately obtuse, for this long – that they must have a covert agenda. I made this point circa 2009, and that agenda is now fully exposed – it is the Marxist totalitarian “Great Reset” – “You will own nothing, and you’ll be happy!”

The wolves, proponents of both the very-scary Global Warming / Climate Change scam and the Covid-19 Lockdown scam, know they are lying. Note also how many global “leaders” quickly linked the two scams, stating ”to solve Covid we have to solve Climate Change”- utter nonsense, not even plausible enough to be specious.

Regarding the sheep, especially those who inhabit our universities and governments:
The sheep are well-described by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of the landmark text “The Black Swan”,  as “Intellectual-Yet-Idiot” or IYI – IYI’s hold the warmist views as absolute truths, without ever having spent sufficient effort to investigate them. The false warmist narrative fitted their negative worldview, and they never seriously questioned it by examining the contrary evidence.

CLOSURE

The policy incompetence of Western governments over past decades is appalling. By attempting to appease extreme leftists who seek to destroy our economies and our freedoms, governments have adopted a failed strategy that makes us weaker, poorer and at much greater risk.

Allan MacRae, B.A.Sc.(Eng.), M.Eng.

=====================

HIV/AIDS, Parallels to the COVID Hoax

 

HIV,AIDS Parallels to the COVID Hoax  By Jon Rappoport, 10 March 2021

 

In my current series of articles on fake epidemics—Ebola, Zika, Swine Flu—I’ve established that all the symptoms of these so-called diseases can be explained without invoking a virus.

This is a key.

It was my method, when I wrote my first book, AIDS INC., in 1988.

At that time, I looked into the AIDS “high-risk groups” listed by the CDC—Africans, Haitians, IV drug users, gay men, hemophiliacs, and blood-transfusion recipients—and I showed that the immune-system collapse (the hallmark of AIDS) in these groups could be explained without the need to refer to HIV at all.

“AIDS” was not one condition.

 

It was immune-deficiency caused, in various people, by a variety of factors. The hypnotic medical trick was welding all these sick and dying people together under one umbrella label: “AIDS.”

But the truth was—depending on which “AIDS group” and which individuals you were looking at—you had debilitating medical and street drugs destroying immune systems; you had devastating hunger and starvation; lack of basic sanitation; grinding poverty and war; vaccination campaigns; adrenal collapse…

Likewise, today, with a vast relabeling effort, any patient with any sort of lung problem, or flu-like illness, can be diagnosed and repackaged as a case of “COVID-19.” The loose set of so-called COVID symptoms allows for such fraudulent and deceptive diagnosis.

This is the central con.

Back in 1988, after combing through medical journals, I found that the number-one cause of T-cell depletion (immune-system collapse) in the world was malnutrition/hunger/starvation. Yet, in Africa and Haiti, and even in certain Western patients surviving on junk-food diets, T-cell depletion was routinely called HIV/AIDS.

Suddenly, a virus was invoked to substitute for malnutrition.

In fact, in Africa, the earlier label for AIDS was “slim disease.” That fatuous idea was invented via a deeply flawed investigation in Uganda, where the patients were “slim” simply because they were malnourished and starving, and consequently losing weight.

In New York and San Francisco, some gay men were inhaling a brutally dangerous street drug called “poppers.” Severe lung damage was just one of the drug’s many devastating effects. Profound immune-system deficiency was sure to follow.

 

In AIDS INC., I lay out a whole parade of immune-system destroyers in the high-risk groups; and none of these destroyers has anything to do with a virus.

—Just as in Wuhan, in 2019, the deadly chronic air pollution hanging over the city and causing pneumonia—the original hallmark of so-called COVID-19—had nothing to do with a virus.

So when uninformed people bleat, “People are dying, it must be the virus,” whether they’re talking about AIDS or COVID, they’re completely off the rails and on the wrong track.

Here is another parallel between AIDS and COVID: the test for the virus.

I’ve spent many articles detailing how the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 spits out false-positive results like water from a fire hose. A doctor will tell a patient he’s infected simply because the sensitivity of the test is so jacked-up it’ll register positive on a speck of dust on the moon. This is artificial case-number building at its finest.

Well, back in 1988, there was a similar situation. The HIV antibody test was turning out a Niagara of false-positive results. I devoted a chapter in my book to the results of my extensive medical-journal search.

The evidence was undeniable. Both basic types of HIV antibody tests—the Elisa and the Western Blot—were, admittedly, deeply flawed. There was no gold standard for testing.

Cross-reactions were abundant: the test for HIV would come up positive for a whole host of reasons that had nothing to do with HIV, or any other virus. One reason? A person had received the hepatitis B vaccination. Well, in the 1980s, a campaign was launched to recruit gay men into a large study of the new vaccine.

A third parallel between AIDS and COVID: expanding the definition of the “disease” in order to rope in as many patients, and build up as many case numbers, as possible.

 

The 1987 CDC definition of AIDS, which I printed in my book in full, took up 15 pages. With a bit of rigmarole, a doctor could diagnose AIDS in a person who had almost any kind of bacterial infection.

The CDC definition of COVID-19 allows a diagnosis when the patient has nothing more than a cough, or chills and fever, accompanied by a positive PCR test.

There are other parallels between AIDS and COVID I could list, but you get the picture. In both instances, the hoax is rampant.

A few years after I published AIDS INC., I became aware of a new argument: the very existence of HIV was in doubt. Consulting the independent literature on the subject, I became convinced no one had proved HIV existed. In these pages, I’ve published, several times, an illuminating interview journalist Christine Johnson conducted with Australian biophysicist, Eleni Papadopulos, about HIV isolation. Papadopulos makes a compelling case that, according to rigorous rules laid down by mainstream researchers, HIV hasn’t been isolated.

As my readers know, for the past year I’ve been offering compelling evidence that SARS-COV-2 has never been proven to exist. Researchers twist and reverse the meaning of the word “isolation,” in order to “demonstrate” the virus is real.

The non-existence of HIV and SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t surprise me. After all, the so-called symptoms of both “conditions” can be explained without reference to a virus.

In both cases, the reality, which lights up like a giant neon sign in the darkness, is FRAUD.

================================

Sky News Host nails it, Socialism on a Global Scale

Sky News Host nails it, Socialism on a Global Scale  Zerohedge 1 March 2021

“Socialism On A Global Scale”: Sky News Host Demolishes Davos Elites And ‘Great Reset’ Scheme

BY TYLER DURDEN, SUNDAY, FEB 28, 2021 – 14:55

Sky News Australia host Cory Bernardi has just taken a flamethrower to the global elite, telling us we need to be mindful “of any organization with the term “world” in their name” in a monologue which would never see the light of day in most Western nations.

After flaying the World Health Organization (WHO) for ‘giving China a free pass on the Wuhan Flu,‘ while banking $500 million on pandemic bonds, Bernardi demolishes the World Food Program, the World Meteorological Organization, the World Tourism Organization, and the World Trade Organization – for lies, misinformation and climate-related pretzel logic to justify policy.

All these authorities are pushing an agenda – it’s the same agenda, to decarbonize, deindustrialize, and disempower the Western world. They are part of a concerted plan to redesign capitalism in a new image,” Bernardi says, adding: “That image of course is socialism.”

Spearheading this effort is the World Economic Forum (WEF) that meets annually in Davos, Switzerland.

“The WEF is the architect of the Great Reset, and the fourth industrial revolution. They coined the “build back better” hashtag, that is actually proving so popular with big government elites right across the globe,” says Bernardi. “Under the WEF vision, the Davos attendees will own what you’ll be renting. And trust me on this, it’s not gonna be a philanthropic enterprise.”

“By reducing you to a mere user rather than an owner, the world does actually become more equal, because it will concentrate power, authority and money in the hands of a tiny few, while the rest of us become mere economic vassals for these oligarchs.”

Watch:

Full transcript below (emphasis ours):

There are certain warning signs that we all need to be mindful of. You know, it’s like when someone appears in your life and says ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.’ Well, another warning sign is any organization with the term “world” in their name. So let’s start with a couple. Perhaps the World Health Organization to kick it off. That’s the body that gave China a free pass on the Wuhan Flu, while at the same time banking $500 million through issuing pandemic bonds. That’s right, the World Health Organization was scheduled to repay investors around $500 million in early 2020, unless of course, a pandemic was declared. The investors lost all their money that became the World Health Organization’s gain.

Then of course there’s the World Food Program. It too is part of the United Nations and it actually won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2020. Now all that sounds pretty impressive, until you remember that Barack Obama won it in 2008 just for having the right skin color. And despite spending $8 billion every year on hunger and strengthening resilience against climate change, there are still 850 million undernourished people in the world, and around 780 million obese people. Clearly we need more food socialism.

Then we also have the World Meteorological Organization. It has a crew of 200 and it publishes an annual status of the world climate report, casting horror scenarios about greenhouse gasses, climate change, sea level rise, and sea ice. The 2019 report is a beauty – it essentially says that the Australian bush fires of that year were due to climate change, and makes no mention of the arsonists, or the greens’ insistent on terrible land management policies. By the way, according to the WMO, climate change is also responsible for drought, floods, storms and weather-related damage. Now that made me wonder, what caused them before the Industrial Revolution, or before mankind for that matter.

But we’re also fortunate enough to have the World Tourism Organization, which has “a one planet vision for responsible tourism.” These include the vital buzzwords “social inclusion” and “climate action.” It even has some pretty cool hashtags; #responsiblerecover and #buildbackbetter. And it boasts that by shutting down the world economy this past year, it reduced carbon dioxide emissions by a whopping eight percent. That means there’s only 92% to go before we’re back to living in caves! But saving the planet while we do it.

And of course we shouldn’t forget the World Trade Organization, with lofty goals espousing free trade. Its real mission seems not to be holding China to the same integrity requirements as the rest of the world when it comes to intellectual property protection, trade tariffs and barriers, etc. Thank goodness it has the goal to reduce inequality, which is socialist speak for “taking from the productive and giving to the non-productive.” Someone needs to tell them about history. It shows it never works.

But, for those that are unable to sustain the rigor of the real world, there is always a refuge in the World Vegetable Center. That’s right, a world vegetable center. This esteemed body devoted 20 years to researching the sweet potato before giving it away because the costs of doing that research were too high. It now focuses on “looking to the wild relatives of domesticated crops to save the human diet from climate change.” Wowee, if only we never cultivated crops the world would be better off, and the climate wouldn’t be changing!

Hey but, what about those hungry people I mentioned earlier? Wouldn’t they be even hungrier?

Well, all these authorities are pushing an agenda – it’s the same agenda, to decarbonize, deindustrialize, and disempower the Western world. They are part of a concerted plan to redesign capitalism in a new image. That image of course is socialism. And it’s spearheaded by the grand daddy organization of them all – the World Economic Forum. The WEF is the architect of the Great Reset, and the fourth industrial revolution. They coined the “build back better” hashtag, that is actually proving so popular with big government elites right across the globe. And they even predict that by 2030, you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy. They call this ‘servitization,’ which is a term and an agenda that looks a lot like servitude to me. The WEF claim that this servitude – I’m sorry, I mean ‘servitization’ will save the planet, and assist the post-COVID-19 recovery.

However, servitization begs the question; if you don’t actually own anything, who will own what you’re renting? Well the answer lies within the WEF premiere forum – that’s at Davos. Davos is the gathering of global elites including big business CEOs, industry chiefs, government leaders, bureaucrats, and multi-billionaires with political agendas. Under the WEF vision, the Davos attendees will own what you’ll be renting. And trust me on this, it’s not gonna be a philanthropic enterprise. They’ll all be looking to make more money than they currently do, and actually to take more control of your life under the guise of equality. By reducing you to a mere user rather than an owner, the world does actually become more equal, because it will concentrate power, authority and money in the hands of a tiny few, while the rest of us become mere economic vassals for these oligarchs.

So make no mistake – servitization is just a new name for economic slavery. It’s socialism on a global scale.

=====================

MRNA Covid Vaccines: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

CV19 vaccine article 210227 MRNA Covid Vaccines: A Risk-Benefit Analysis


Editor’s note: download the full article at the link above to view all graphics.

Published on February 26, 2021

https://principia-scientific.com/mrna-covid-vaccines-a-risk-benefit-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+psintl+%28Principia+Scientific+Intl+-+Latest+News%29

Written by Sadaf Gilani

Amidst the plethora of Covid-related issues, the Covid injections are the most imminent. Two formulations have received interim approval from the FDA, and Health Canada: Pfizer/BioNtech and Moderna.

Both these injections are employing the same technology, synthetic gene therapy (SGT), which is being dispensed to the populace for the first time in human history.

Medications are given to sick people to treat disease. Vaccines are given to healthy people to prevent an infection. Therefore consideration of risk-benefit analysis is paramount.

Covid is the umbrella label for PCR “positive” people regardless of clinical presentation. Most are “asymptomatic,”some have generic cold/flu symptoms, and a few present with moderate or severe respiratory distress. Unfortunately, the PCR assays being used for diagnosis, are not fit for purpose. Most PCR assays are constructed based on the German Drosten et al. protocol.

On November 27th 2020, 22 scientists submitted a request for retraction of this protocol which was published in the journal Eurosurveillance, citing a number of fatal design flaws.

It is also important to note, despite SarsCov2 virus and the syndrome labelled as Covid being used interchangeably, causation has not been proven as per Koch’s postulates.

The first metric which every medical doctor must convey to a person is how deadly Covid actually is. This is context for the legal and ethical practice of informed consent.

Incidentally, all Covid death stats are inflated: under direction of the WHO, deaths ‘from” and incidentally “with” Covid are not distinguished. Death coding has changed compared to Influenza/Pneumonia. According to one published analysis, this has resulted in over 16 times inflation of death stats, as supported by CDC data.

Furthermore, Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) stats based on seroprevalence antibody studies are also inflated since T-cell immunity, is not measured in these studies. This may result in a 3-5X lower IFR for Covid. Regardless, the general IFR is on order of the seasonal influenza, approx. 0.2%.

Covid mortality is a reflection of increased mortality with age, more so than influenza/pneumonia of previous years. The median age of Covid deaths (86) exceeds average life expectancy in Canada. Tragically, 70% of the deaths in the province of Ontario took place in care homes. The mortality rate from Covid in Canada under 59 years of age is 0.0017%.

According to the CDC, the survival from Covid (with inflated stats) is as follows: (under 20) 99.997%, (29-49) 99.98%, (50-69) 99.5% and (over 70), 94.6%.

The Covid synthetic gene therapy injections employ synthetic, thermostable nucleotide sequences which are wrapped in a PEG (polyethylene glycol)-lipid nanoparticles to protect from destruction in the bloodstream and facilitate entry into the cells. The claim is that the cellular machinery will engage with these synthetic sequences and produce segments which code for the SarsCov2 S1 spike protein. It is believed that the immune system will mount a sufficient antibody response.

Dr David Martin, emphasized that this technology does not meet the definition of a traditional vaccine as per the manufacturers’ claims. The trials do not test for reduction in transmission. These therapies do not prevent infection, merely reduction in one or more symptoms.

Interestingly, Moderna describes its technology as the “software of life,” not a vaccine.

Media outlets, politicians, and public health officials have blared the 95% efficacy for both formulations. To the casual observer, this would denote 95% reduction in hospitalizations or deaths. When in fact the 95% is calculated, based upon the “Primary Efficacy Endpoints.”

In the trial literature these endpoints are described by both companies as non-severe cold/flu SYMPTOMS coupled with a positive PCR.

Pfizer has reported:

For the primary efficacy endpoint, the case definition for a confirmed COVID-19 case was the presence of at least one of the following symptoms and a positive SARS-CoV-2 NAAT within 4 days of the symptomatic period: Fever; New or increased cough; New or increased shortness of breath; Chills; New or increased muscle pain; New loss of taste or smell; Sore throat; Diarrhea; Vomiting.”

Moderna reported in likeness:

For the primary efficacy endpoint, the case definition for a confirmed COVID-19 case was defined as: At least TWO of the following systemic symptoms: Fever (?38ºC), chills, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s), OR At least ONE of the following respiratory signs/ symptoms: cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, OR clinical or radiographical evidence of pneumonia; and NP swab, nasal swab, or saliva sample (or respiratory sample, if hospitalized) positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR.”

To reiterate, in both trials, once one/two symptoms appeared in a participant, it was designated a “case” or “event” when coupled with a positive PCR “test”. Once 170 “cases” occurred in Pfizer/BioNtech trial, and 196 “cases” occurred in Moderna trial, this data was used to calculate efficacy. Shockingly, only under 200 cases for a novel therapy which is being deployed/subjected on millions of people around the world.

Furthermore, people are not being informed that “95%” or so efficacy, is calculated based on a useless metric of relative efficacy and is therefore very misleading.

Eg.Pfizer/BioNtech:

8 “cases” in vaccine group
162 “cases” in placebo group

8/162 = 5%
100%-5%= 95%

Therefore, they are claiming that the synthetic gene therapy injections are 95% efficacious. What they are not factoring in is the size of the denominator. If it is large, then with 8 vs 162, the difference becomes less significant. It matters how many people were in each group, for example, whether this be 200, 2,000, or 20,000.

This is the absolute risk reduction for Pfizer/BioNtech, each group had over 18,000 people!

Injection Group: 8/18,198 = 0.04%
Placebo Group: 162/18,325= 0.88%

Therefore, the absolute risk reduction for Primary Efficacy Endpoint is 0.84%. (ie. 0.88-0.04)

This means, that someone who takes the Pfizer/BioNtech injection, has less than 1% chance of reducing at least one symptom of non-severe “Covid” for a period of 2 months. This means that someone who takes this injection has over 99% chance that it won’t work, regarding the efficacy. Over 100 people have to be injected for it to “work” in one person.

The actual efficacy of Pfizer/BioNtech Synthetic Gene Therapy

The actual efficacy of Moderna Synthetic Gene Therapy

There are many issues with the trial data, and design. It must be noted that PCR tests are not fit for purpose and without Sanger sequencing we have no idea how many of these people actually had “Covid” vs another respiratory virus or something else. This is a preeminent reason why Dr Yeadon and Dr Wodarg filed a Stay of Action on the vaccine trials.

As Dr Peter Doshi, Associate Editor of BMJ highlighted, access to the raw data is required to further elucidate the areas of concern:

With 20 times more suspected covid-19 than confirmed covid-19, and trials not designed to assess whether the vaccines can interrupt viral transmission, an analysis of severe disease irrespective of etiologic agent—namely, rates of hospitalizations, ICU cases, and deaths amongst trial participants—seems warranted, and is the only way to assess the vaccines’ real ability to take the edge off the pandemic.”

Approximately 5-6 symptoms listed as “side effects” are the same as Covid symptoms. Pfizer/BioNtech only started counting “cases” one week after the second dose, and Moderna, 2 weeks after the second dose. Therefore, if these side effects were labelled as “Covid” symptoms instead, even the paltry efficacy of about 1% would be relegated into the negative integers.

In others words, the injected group may have been sicker with “Covid” more than the placebo group.

There have been many critiques of the applicability of the limited data to the general populace, especially the vulnerable elderly. An important analysis of this was done by Dr James Lyons-Weiler who discovered the general population is dying at a rate 6.3 times the rate of participants in the Moderna trial (including placebo and injection groups).

If Moderna’s on-vaccine death rate is so far below the national death rate and also simultaneously more than five times greater than Pfizer’s on-vaccine death rate, then Pfizer’s study sample appears even less representative of the entire population. This, too, requires due consideration.”

An integral question as to whether Pfizer/BioNtech and Moderna recruited supermen and women for their trials, comes to mind. The incidence of “severe” Covid in Placebo groups which scrutinizing the details, wasn’t necessarily severe presentation, is so low that trials of 30,000-40,000 lacked statistical power to determine reductions in hospitalizations and deaths, according to Tal Zaks, CMO Moderna.

Zaks is correct, the incidence of severe “Covid” was only 0.04% in Pfizer/BioNtech and 0.22% in Moderna. Due to this very low attack rate of severe presentation in the population, the absolute risk reduction in severe presentation, even taking data at face value, is nominal.

Therefore, potential SGT recipients must be informed that to reduce “severe” presentation, chances are over 99.5% that these synthetic gene therapies will not work.

The British Medical Journal has reported:

Hospital admissions and deaths from covid-19 are simply too uncommon in the population being studied for an effective vaccine to demonstrate statistically significant differences in a trial of 30?000 people. The same is true of its ability to save lives or prevent transmission: the trials are not designed to find out.”

To convey informed consent, the side effect profile must also be considered. Up to 80% of injected trial recipients experienced side effects, in a setting for a nebulous syndrome where 80% of people are asymptomatic.

The incidences of immediate side effects in both trials were significant and dwarfed the absolute risk reduction in both the primary efficacy endpoints, as well as for “severe” Covid.

For example, for Moderna 81.9% experienced any systemic reaction. Grade 3 reactions (considered severe) were experienced by 17.4%. This is 79X more likely than the incidence of severe Covid in the Moderna group. (17.4/.22=79X) Based on preliminary reports of adverse events [emphasis added]:

This is an injury rate of 1 in every 40 jabs. This means that the 150 shots necessary to avert one mild case of COVID will cause serious injury to at least three people.

The safety data for both companies is approximately only two months before receiving emergency use authorization status. Therefore, there is no data for mid-long term side effects, as the trials are ongoing.

The estimated completion date for Pfizer/BioNtech trials is Jan 31, 2023. The estimate completion date for Moderna trials is October 27, 2022.

According to the data, and elaborated by Tal Zaks (CMO of Moderna) the trials are not designed to demonstrate a reduction in transmission, due to “operational realities”. It is therefore baffling how medical doctors and public health officials are proclaiming these SGTs will promote herd immunity.

The manufacturers have also made it clear that efficacy beyond 2 months or so is unknown. Therefore, the 1% absolute risk reduction in mild/moderate, cold/flu symptoms may not last more than a few months.

Tragically, there is no pervasive data-centred discourse, only excessive fear-mongering. Without addressing the data people cannot make an informed choice about experimental SGTs.

Many are not aware any SGT recipient who participates in this therapy is now a part of an unprecedented experiment. When Health Canada shockingly agreed to interim authorization of the Pfizer/BioNtech injection, it came alongside a caveat: The company must submit 6 months of trial data when it is available.

To underscore: Health Canada approved this experimental SGT on the populace without even 6 months of trial data.

It is difficult to embark on a comprehensive risk-benefit analysis, as there is no safety data beyond a couple of months. New vaccines typically take about 7 to 20 years of research and trials before going to market. Pfizer/Moderna ran all of their trials simultaneously, including their animal trials, instead of sequentially. As retired Health Canada research scientist Dr Qureshi elaborated, it is during proper animal trials that meaningful toxicology data is obtained.

The anaphylactic reactions observed in some people is also worrisome, worthy of analysis. Children’s Health Defense submitted a request to the FDA to address PEG allergies, as up to 70% of the populace has antibodies to these compounds. PEG has never been a component in a vaccine before.

It must also be noted that according to an internal Health Human Services and Harvard study, less than 1% of vaccine side effects are reported. At this juncture, based on: paltry efficacy, issues with data transparency and trial design, high level of immediate side effects, and low IFR for Covid, there is already enough reason for concern.

Yet, the more disconcerting side effects are the potential mid-long term effects.

Many doctors and researchers around the world have promulgated concerns about the well-documented phenomena referred to as Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) seen in some viruses such as coronaviruses.

In previous SARS, MERS, Dengue fever and RSV virus vaccine trials the exposure of wild viruses to vaccine recipients resulted in severe disease, cytokine storms, and deaths in some animal and human trials. The phenomenon of ADE did not present initially in vaccine recipients, rather it presented after vaccine recipients were exposed to wild viruses.

This is the reason we do not have a vaccine for the common cold, MERS and SARS which is 78% homologous with SarsCov2 (based on analysis of the digital genome). Immunology Professor Dolores Cahill warned that this disease enhancement may cause many vaccine recipients to die months or years down the road. Esteemed German infectious disease specialist, Dr Sucharit Bhakdi opined:

This vaccine will lead you to your doom.”

Researchers in The International Journal of Clinical Practice stated:

The absence of ADE evidence in COVID-19 vaccine data so far does not absolve investigators from disclosing the risk of enhanced disease to vaccine trial participants, and it remains a realistic, non-theoretical risk to the subjects. Unfortunately, no vaccines for any of the known human CoVs have been licensed, although several potential SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV vaccines have advanced into human clinical trials for years, suggesting the development of effective vaccines against human CoVs has always been challenging.”

Traditional vaccines involve injection of the pathogen/toxin in whole/part to elicit an immune reaction. For the first time in history, the recipients’ cells will manufacture the pathogen, the S1 spike protein of SarsCov2 virus.

In a presentation for Emergency Use Authorization to the FDA, Moderna reps explained that the mRNA stays in the cytoplasm of the cells, manufactures the S1 Spike Protein and then is destroyed. As Dr Sucharit Bhakdi and others have queried:

Where else do these packages go?”

Also, based on a couple of months of safety data, we do not know that these mRNAs last long enough to manufacture the protein but not long enough to exert deleterious effects. This nascent technology is risky.

Firstly, the RNA sequences are synthetic. Therefore, we do not know how long they will last in the cells. Dr Judy Mikovits has expressed concerns in that they may not be degraded immediately, and perhaps linger for days, months, years.

Moderna previously tried to use this same technology to treat Crigler-Najjar syndrome and was not able to strike the balance between therapeutic dose and toxic side effects.

It’s encased in nanolipid to prevent it from degrading too rapidly, but what happens if the mRNA degrades too slowly, or not at all? What happens when you turn your body into a “viral protein factory”, thus keeping antibody production activated on a continual basis with no ability to shut down?

So, taking a synthetic messenger RNA and making it thermostable — making it not break down — [is problematic]. We have lots of enzymes (RNAses and DNAses) that degrade free RNA and DNA because, again, those are danger signals to your immune system. They literally drive inflammatory diseases.

Moderna boldly claims that these synthetic mRNAs will not integrate with the host cell DNA. The discovery of epigenetics has revealed that DNA expression is in flux and constantly interacts with environmental signals. Dr Lanka explained that RNA-DNA is also a two-way process, dynamic.

There is the potential for this synthetic RNA to integrate into human DNA via the enzyme, reverse transcriptase. This may lead to mutagenesis, possibly cancer. It may lead to birth defects if it integrates into the germ cells of the injected. Reassurances cannot be made based on such limited safety data.

Therefore, it is important to clearly understand the potential risks of this type of mRNA-based vaccine, which include local and systemic inflammatory responses, the biodistribution and persistence of the induced immunogen expression, possible development of autoreactive antibodies and toxic effects of any non-native nucleotides and delivery system component”

It has been discovered that commonly transcribed mRNA sequences can integrate with DNA for form “R loop” patterns. Dysregulation of these sequences is implicated in different pathologies, including “oncogenic stress.”

This finding was referred to as:

unexpected interplay between RNA modifications (the epitranscriptome) and the maintenance of genome integrity.”

Clearly, we are in the nascent stages of understanding the complex field of epigenetics. The S1 SarsCov2 spike protein is highly homologous with HERV (human endogenous retrovirus) protein knowns as Syncytin-1. There is the potential for autoimmunity, as the Spike protein antibodies might attack Syncytin-1.

Whilst natural infections are benign and self-limiting for the vast majority of affected people, autoimmune diseases are mostly irreversible. This is even more terrifying with the mRNA treatment.

If the translation of SarsCov2 S1 spike protein persists there is potential to cause amplification of the expression of autoimmunity. As the SGT recipients’ cells are now producing the viral spike proteins, there is the potential for explosion of auto-immune diseases in coming years.

Syncytin-1’s primary function is in the placenta as well as sperm. Dr Wodarg and Yeadon’s Stay of Action, included concerns that the potential for antibodies against Syncytin-1 proteins (part of the placenta) may result in permanent infertility in women and possibly men as well. The manufacturers give the caveat:

It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility. And women of childbearing age are advised to avoid pregnancy for at least two months after their second dose.”

Pregnant women were not included in either of the trials. Trial recipients were instructed to use birth control.

The PEG-lipid nanoparticle is highly lipophilic, to cross cell membranes. Renowned aluminum and neurotoxicity expert Dr Chris Shaw, stated that these nanoparticles do cross the BBB (blood-brain barrier) and cited evidence from Moderna’s previous animal trials.

On social media, there have been many documented cases of bizarre neurologic symptoms in the SGT recipients. Could one mechanism be dysregulation of Syncytin-1 in the brain?

Except for the normal physiologic function of Syncytin-1 in the development of placenta, the activity and expression of Syncytin-1 increase in several diseases, such as neuropsychiatric disorders, autoimmune diseases, and cancer […] Syncytin-1 participates in human placental morphogenesis and can activate a pro-inflammatory and autoimmune cascade […] A growing number of studies indicate that Syncytin-1 plays an important role in MS.”

Bottom line: elevated levels of Syncytin-1 = brain inflammation.

We now have a therapy that uses the body’s own cells to produce unknown (perhaps continuous) levels of a protein that is almost identical to Syncytin-1. This is potential for disaster, as Dr Mikovits elaborated:

Syncytin is the endogenous gammaretrovirus envelope that’s encoded in the human genome…We know that if syncytin…is expressed aberrantly in the body, for instance in the brain, which these lipid nanoparticles will go into, then you’ve got multiple sclerosis […] The expression of that gene alone enrages microglia, literally inflames and dysregulates the communication between the brain microglia, which are critical for clearing toxins and pathogens in the brain and the communication with astrocytes that dysregulates not only the immune system but the endocannabinoid system…”

In the longer term, she suspects we’ll see a significant uptick in migraines, tics, Parkinson’s disease, microvascular disorders, different cancers, including prostate cancer, severe pain syndromes like fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis, bladder problems, kidney disease, psychosis, neurodegenerative diseases such as Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) and sleep disorders, including narcolepsy. In young children, autism-like symptoms are likely to develop as well, she thinks.

Heart attacks are another documented side effect. Loved ones of the deceased have shared on social media that these deaths are not considered vaccine reactions and are therefore not recorded as such.

=========================

What They Said About Lockdowns Before 2020

What They Said About Lockdowns Before 2020  By Amelia Janaskie, via The American Institute for Economic Research, 15 Jan 2021

In 2020, beliefs about how to handle a new virus shifted massively.

Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, mainstream epidemiology and public health entities doubted – or even rejected – the efficacy of lockdowns and mass quarantines because they were considered ineffective.

This all changed in March 2020, when sentiment flipped in support of lockdown measures.

Still, there is a vast body of evidence explaining their original stance and why these mandates do not work. 

  1. Fauci said that shutting down the country does not work. (January 24, 2020) 

Early into 2020, Fauci spoke to reporters saying, “That’s something that I don’t think we could possibly do in the United States, I can’t imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese health authorities is that given the fact that it’s spreading throughout the provinces… it’s their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it. Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you shut things down it doesn’t have a major effect.”

  1. World Health Organization Report discusses NPIs and why quarantine is ineffective. (2019)

In a table, WHO lists their recommendations of NPIs depending on severity level. Quarantine of exposed individuals is categorized as “not recommended in any circumstances.” The report explains that “home quarantine of exposed individuals to reduce transmission is not recommended because there is no obvious rationale for this measure, and there would be considerable difficulties in implementing it.”

  1. WHO acknowledges social-distancing did not stop or dramatically reduce transmission during the 1918 influenza pandemic. (2006)

The WHO authors ultimately conclude that NPIs, including quarantining, require better and more focused methods to make them more effective and less “burdensome.” “Ill persons,” the authors assert, “should remain home when they first become symptomatic, but forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical.” Summarizing reports from the 1918 influenza pandemic the WHO cites Lomé (British-occupied Togo) and Edmonton (Canada) as places where “isolation and quarantine were instituted; public meetings were banned; schools, churches, colleges, theaters, and other public gathering places were closed.” Yet, despite additional measures (Lomé halted traffic, and Edmonton restricted business hours) in both cases “social-distancing measures did not stop or appear to dramatically reduce transmission.” A United States, comprehensive report on the 1918 pandemic also concluded that closures “[were] not demonstrably effective in urban areas but might be effective in smaller towns and rural districts, where group contacts are less numerous.” 

  1. study in the Bulletin of Mathematical Biology regarding the 1918 influenza pandemic in Canada also concluded quarantines do not work. (2003)

The study simulated different levels of travel and found that travel limits could be effective but “that a policy of introducing quarantine at the earliest possible time may not always lead to the greatest reduction in cases of a disease.” The authors conclude that, “quarantine measures limiting intercommunity travel are probably never 100% effective, and simulation results suggest that such a situation may actually make things worse, especially in the absence of strong efforts to keep infectious individuals isolated from the rest of the population.”

  1. Popular author and Tulane adjunct professor John M. Barry, a strong opponent of the Great Barrington Declaration, argued that quarantines do not work in the case of the Spanish Flu. (2009)

Over a decade ago, Barry found that historically quarantines have been unsuccessful: “This author supports most proposed NPIs except for quarantine, which historical evidence strongly suggests is ineffective, and possibly school closing, pending analysis of recent events.” And instead promotes commonly touted measures, such as remaining home when unwell (and isolating from family members while doing so), frequently washing hands, and wearing a mask if you are sick. On the latter point he warns against healthy people wearing masks, noting: “Evidence from the SARS outbreak suggests that most health care workers infected themselves while removing protective equipment.”

  1. Seton Hall’s Center for Global Health Studies Director says travel restrictions did not delay the transmission of SARS. (2009)

Yanzhong Huang acknowledges that “travel restrictions and quarantine measures have limited benefit in stopping the spread of disease […] affecting travel and trade, dissuading the very kind of transparency and openness essential for a global response to disease outbreaks.” These measures ultimately undermine a country’s surveillance capacity because “people who show symptoms might choose to shun public health authorities for fear of quarantine or stigmatization [and squander] limited health resources […] Laurie Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations [noted] by July signs of fatigue and resource depletion had already set in most of the world.

  1. A study from Wake Forest University encounters ‘self-protection fatigue’ in simulated epidemic. (2013)

Study uses a multiplayer online game to simulate the spread of an infectious disease through a population composed of the players. The authors find that “people’s willingness to engage in safe behavior waxes or wanes over time, depending on the severity of an epidemic […] as time goes by; when prevalence is low, a ‘self-protection fatigue’ effect sets in whereby individuals are less willing to engage in safe behavior over time.” They say this is “reminiscent of condom fatigue—the declining use of condom as a preventive measure—in the context of HIV/AIDS prevention.”

  1. In Biosecurity and Bioterrorism journal, Johns Hopkins epidemiologists reject quarantines outright. (2006)

In an article titled, “Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza,” JHU epidemiologists note problems with lockdowns: “As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable.” Their concluding remark emphasized, “experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.”

  1. In a top journal, American Journal of Epidemiology, authors explain the conditions when quarantine would be effective, which do not align with the characteristics of Covid-19. (2006)

Specifically, they note that quarantines will only be effective when: (1) isolation is not possible; and (2) asymptomatic spread is significant and timed in a narrow way (none of which is the case for Covid). They conclude that “the number of infections averted through the use of quarantine is expected to be very low provided that isolation is effective.” And if isolation is ineffective? Then it will only be beneficial “when there is significant asymptomatic transmission and if the asymptomatic period is neither very long nor very short.” But, should mass quarantine be used it would “inflict significant social, psychological, and economic costs without resulting in the detection of many infected individuals.”

  1. In the Epidemiology Journal, Harvard and Yale professors Marc Lipsitch and Ted Cohen say delaying infection can leave the elderly worse off. (2008)

They explain how delaying the risk of infection can work counterintuitively when the pathogen is more lethal for older populations. They say, “Reducing the risk that each member of a community will be exposed to a pathogen has the attendant effect of increasing the average age at which infections occur. For pathogens that inflict greater morbidity at older ages, interventions that reduce but do not eliminate exposure can paradoxically increase the number of cases of severe disease by shifting the burden of infection toward older individuals.” Based on this analysis, Covid-19, which disproportionately harms the older more than the young, is better handled by allowing the community to be exposed, whether through natural infection or vaccination.

  1. A team of Johns Hopkins scholars say quarantines don’t work but are pursued for political reasons. (September 2019)

In the report, they explain how quarantine is more political than related to public health: “During an emergency, it should be expected that implementation of some NPIs, such as travel restrictions and quarantine, might be pursued for social or political purposes by political leaders, rather than pursued because of public health evidence.” Later on, they explain the ineffectiveness of quarantine: “In the context of a high-impact respiratory pathogen, quarantine may be the least likely NPI to be effective in controlling the spread due to high transmissibility.”

In March 2020, Michael Osterholm – now Biden’s Covid-19 advisor – also argued that lockdowns are not a “cure” for the pandemic, listing multiple costs from a lockdown. Yet, Osterholm’s New York Times article in August reveals a contrasting viewpoint, stating that “we gave up on our lockdown efforts to control virus transmission well before the virus was under control” by opening “too quickly.” Osterholm and (Neel) Kashkari promote a mandatory shelter-in-place “for everyone but the truly essential workers.”

Also in March 2020, these findings from the listed works and many others culminated in an open letter to vice-president Mike Pence signed by 800 medical specialists from numerous universities throughout the country which pointed out: “Mandatory quarantine, regional lockdowns, and travel bans[…] are difficult to implement, can undermine public trust, have large societal costs and, importantly, disproportionately affect the most vulnerable segments in our communities.”

While expert consensus regarding the ineffectiveness of mass quarantine of previous years has recently been challenged, significant present-day evidence continuously demonstrates that mass quarantine is both ineffectual at preventing disease spread as well as harmful to individuals. Learning the wrong lesson – assuming that mass quarantines are both good and effective – sets a dangerous precedent for future pandemics.

============================

COVID-19 Un-Explained

Editor’s note: This article is the most comprehensive available to date – essential reading…. click on the link below to see all graphics.

COVID-19 Un-Explained  By Larry Romanoff, 17 December 2020

Waves, Ripples and Surges

Let’s examine the normal pattern for an outbreak of a typical infectious disease. According to the US CDC:[1]

“A common-source outbreak is one in which a group of persons are all exposed to an infectious agent or a toxin from the same source. If the number of cases during an epidemic were plotted over time, the resulting graph . . . would typically have a steep upslope and a more gradual downslope (a so-called “log-normal distribution”). A propagated outbreak results from transmission from one person to another [usually] by direct person-to-person contact . . .” Propagated outbreaks typically exhibit several peaks one or two weeks apart, the epidemic normally dying out after several of these generations.

“Some epidemics have features of both common-source epidemics and propagated epidemics. The pattern of a common-source outbreak followed by secondary person-to-person spread is not uncommon.” The CDC states these also can produce several generations or peaks during the following few weeks. But in all of these instances of natural infectious agent outbreaks, the spread and timing follow essentially the same typical pattern, perhaps elongated but still with close timing of the peaks. Here are three graphs from the CDC to illustrate. You can see clearly that we have a rise (rapid if single-source, slow if propagated or mixed), then a peak, a gradual tapering-off, and a cessation.

The Dreaded “Second Wave”

While the literature on this point is confusing from a multiplicity of factors, there is no evidence to support the assertion of a natural “second wave” for infections. An epidemic or pandemic manifests itself by starting slowly, increasing exponentially, peaking, then slowly tapering off and disappearing. There may be isolated infections popping up later, but they don’t start a new epidemic. One of the major unexplained curiosities with COVID-19 is that from early on in the process the US mass media were fervently preparing us for a ‘second wave’. To enhance the plausibility of their tale, they linked it to the natural emergence of influenza that normally occurs when the weather turns cold in the Autumn and Winter, but that was deliberately misleading, a patently dishonest ‘guilt by association’ for the majority who don’t think. Let’s remember this is not a flu virus; this is a SARS virus, a different strain to be sure, but it wasn’t originally called SARS-CoV-2 for nothing, and there was no reason to expect it to behave like, or act in concert with, the common flu. And in fact, all nations experienced their COVID-19 outbreaks in March or April and, long prior to the outbreak of cold weather, the virus had already peaked and tapered in many countries to the point where it had died out or nearly so.

When researching other recent epidemics or pandemics such as the 1968 H3N2 or the 2009 H1N1, we find no evidence of any ‘second waves’. The 2009 H1N1 was typical, though prolonged, lasting from April 2009 to February 2010, but it peaked in May or June and slowly tapered until year-end. Others are similar. Here are a few examples of typical distribution patterns. The virus’ tail in China is truncated due to the strong containment measures implemented; the spike is from a data update since not all infections had yet been collated. You can see that China had reached the end, Saudi Arabia and Bolivia nearly there, India and Argentina tailing off. All graphs are courtesy of Worldometer. (The ‘Spanish flu’ of 1918 was an anomaly. See note (1) in the End Notes.)

Western Europe

Note that there are no ‘normal distribution’ cases for Western Europe, where every nation was hit with a “second wave”. Switzerland, Spain, the UK, and many others went sharply from essentially zero to 20,000 or 30,000 new infections per day, a pattern lacking any historical or epidemiological explanation. It almost seemed that someone hadn’t done their job properly the first time, and returned to try again. Let’s look at some examples.

Turning to Eastern Europe

Little Latvia is typical of many countries. The initial outbreak in March was so small as to be almost invisible, then tapered off and died. There were a few scattered infections, but nothing to cause a resurgence. Then suddenly and inexplicably a huge explosion at the beginning of October . Almost all of Eastern Europe followed this pattern with Russia and Belarus being two notable exceptions. Let’s look at Russia:

I watched Russia very closely from early in 2020. For about two months, infections were stable at only a few hundred per day. Russia had implemented many containment measures and it began to appear that the virus would be a non-event. Then suddenly an explosion in April with new infections quickly rising to more than 10,000 per day, and occurring simultaneously in almost every area of the country. It was painful watching Russia for four months attempting to lower the daily infection rate below 5,000, but finally 4,900, 4,800, and it appeared the tail was nearing, then suddenly another explosive jump to nearly 30,000, again simultaneously in all regions, and still increasing. There is no infection that manifests in this manner without human assistance.

Still with Russia, the country experienced high infections but a comparatively low death rate, to the dismay of many in the West, so much so that Reuters published an astonishingly-stupid article titled “Experts Want to Know Why Coronavirus Hasn’t Killed More Russians”.[2] “Tasteless” and “deplorable” were two of the kinder adjectives used on Reuters in the instant public backlash, so they amended it to “Experts question why coronavirus hasn’t killed more Russians”, but no improvement in public censure so a third incarnation, “Experts Question Russian Data on Covid-19 Death Toll”. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg joined in to support Reuters by stating that Russia was “spreading . . . disinformation . . . trying to change the world order”. “Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova drily observed in a Facebook post that a ‘world order’ in which it’s considered acceptable to lament why a virus didn’t kill more Russian people could probably use a change.” Helen Buyniski covered this in a charming article in RT; I recommend you read it.[3]

Turkey

Then we have the strange case of Turkey. New daily infections had been at around 1,000, followed by a quick increase to around 5,000, then suddenly exploding to 30,000 – in one day – and increasing. As with Russia, there is no known natural pathogen outbreak that manifests itself in such a manner. This is just a thought, but if I wanted to punish someone for buying and activating Russian S-400 missiles, this might be a good method.

The Blessed Triumvirate

It is further worthy of note that while most nations received only a second wave, the US, Japan and South Korea were blessed with a third wave, apparently having been given Most-Favored-Nation status by COVID-19. (I copied this term from an article in Counterpunch by Paul Street.[4])

Another Curious “Two Waves” Manifestation

As I noted above, there is no such thing as a natural ‘second wave’ for an epidemic, much less of this next kind: No one has yet addressed the fact that virtually all countries in the world were hit with COVID-19 virtually at the same time, in two blasts.[5] There were two waves – the first hit 25 countries on all continents, where medical practitioners confirmed their first domestic infection all within three days of each other. In the second wave, almost exactly one month later, 85 countries confirmed their first domestic infection, again almost all within three days of each other, and all in multiple locations. It shouldn’t be necessary to point out that no natural epidemic can manifest itself this way without human assistance.

A natural virus simply hasn’t the ability to simultaneously infect 85 different countries on all continents of the world, with outbreaks in multiple locations in each country – and all on the same day. Perhaps even more curious is that these countries were not all infected with the same variety of the virus, and each country experienced so many multiple infections in different provinces that none were able to definitively identify all their several ‘patients zero’. Considering the above information in light of the known basic facts of virus transmission, intuition suggests at least the possibility of there having been many people carrying a pail of live viruses. All of this constitutes prima facie evidence of a bio-weapons attack. I wrote an earlier article titled, “COVID-19 Needs a Criminal Investigation“.[6] And it still does.

Search for the Origin

A high-level Italian virologist, Giuseppe Remuzzi, published papers in the Lancet and elsewhere in which he states that Italian physicians now recall having seen “a very strange and very severe pneumonia, particularly in old people in December and even November [2019].[7] This suggests that the virus was circulating, at least in Lombardy, and before we were aware of this outbreak occurring in China.”

Italy detected traces of the virus in wastewater from the summer of 2019, and France, Spain, the Netherlands and other nations have made the same discoveries. I detailed these in a prior article.[8] In Brazil, researchers found COVID-19 samples in wastewater from late 2019. France showed chest scans indicating COVID-19 from early November of 2019. Blood samples in Italy showed the virus present in September. In Spain, researchers found the virus in wastewater collected in March of 2019. The Irish Mirror reported that “many countries are beginning to use wastewater sampling to track the spread of the disease”, scientists claiming these detections were “consistent with evidence emerging in other countries” that COVID-19 was circulating around the world long before China reported its first cases, all of which would of necessity have had to have originated in the US and transported around the world because only the US had all the different types, meaning the virus had been circulating (and mutating) there for months before contaminating the world.

The Italians have “unequivocally” demonstrated the presence of the virus in many individuals from 2019, in frozen medical samples taken during other examinations and now tested for COVID-19. Many of these have resulted from cancer screening, from chest X-rays, and from blood donations. Non-American media have covered these discoveries in some detail[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16], but while the Chinese and Europeans know, Americans and Canadians don’t know because the owners of their major newspapers and TV networks don’t want them to know.

French researchers obtained evidence of Covid-19 from frozen samples, where these are kept at –80°C for years, the same method that allows anti-doping laboratories to keep athlete samples for years when new methods arise for detecting illegal drugs. For the virus, they use two distinct methods: a serological test which searches for antibodies in the blood, and a virological test, RT-PCR, a very sensitive technique that searches for the actual genome of the virus, its specific genetic information.”[17][18]

French virologists have now concluded “The coronavirus outbreak in France was not caused by cases imported from China, but from a locally circulating strain of unknown origin . . .”,[19] and, from other studies, that strain existed only in the US. My information is that Italy, Spain and Portugal have come to the same conclusion. The data also show that Canada’s early COVID-19 cases came from the U.S. not China.[20]

A number of American cities made the same discoveries of the virus in their wastewater samples from 2019. The US mass media didn’t pick up the stories, but the local papers did. It was at that point that Pompeo issued another gag order that hospitals and labs were forbidden from disclosing any virus information directly to the CDC or the media but that all must be passed through the White House. That killed all further reports of COVID-19 in America’s wastewater in the second and third quarters of 2019.

With the accumulated volume of evidence, it now seems a certainty that COVID-19 was circulating in the US since June or July of 2019, far earlier than admitted, and that the CDC’s prevention (and forbidding) of testing was to bury this evidence. One example was headlines in the US media on June 21, 2020, stating, “Over 40 mysterious respiratory deaths in California could dramatically rewrite narrative of COVID-19” in the US.[21] The LA Times reported on “a cluster of mysterious respiratory deaths” beginning in December of 2019. The local news website www.bakersfield.com stated this meant that COVID-19 was circulating in California “way earlier than we knew”. Evidence of COVID-19 was also found in many blood donations collected from residents in nine states across the US as early as mid-December, according to a study published on Nov 30 in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. And let’s not forget too quickly that Japanese tourists were infected in Hawaii in September of 2019.

The internet has seen many posts by Americans – including many physicians – claiming infections from September, 2019 onward, all describing similar symptoms consistent with COVID-19. I have many received messages from Americans in Washington, New York, California, Maryland, Virginia, and other states, as well as from Germany and Italy, claiming similar infections as early as late September, claims too numerous, too detailed, and too similar to be ignored.

New York’s Governor Cuomo still claims the “Coronavirus came to New York from Europe, not China“, but this is more a pre-emptive move to deflect the blame which is certain to follow the inescapable conclusion that Europe was seeded from the US. The basis for their claim appears to be solely that the virus strain affecting New York and Italy are identical, the blame attributed to travelers from Italy infecting Americans in New York, ignoring the fact that the airplanes, people – and viruses – travel in both directions with equal ease and all evidence is that the infection occurred in the other direction.[22][23] Since only the US contained all varieties of this virus, the most logical assumption is that the travel path was from the US to Italy.

Others in the US have used the same directional reasoning, still without justification. American researchers tracked the start of the COVID-19 outbreak in LA and found most of the early cases may track back to Europe. They examined around 200 patients with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test results positive for SARS-CoV-2, and found that 82% of the cases shared closest similarity to those originating in Europe while only 15% from Asia. This suggests that SARS-CoV-2 genomes in Los Angeles were predominantly related to the viral strain in New York City, and unrelated to Wuhan or China. In July of 2020, the US CDC released a report saying SARS-CoV-2 specimens in NYC resembled those circulating in Europe, suggesting probable introductions of the virus from Europe, other US locations, and local introductions from within New York.[24] Again, they ignore the inescapable fact that travel is a two-way street.

Japan, South Korea, Italy and Iran reported that their domestic outbreaks of COVID-19 were not from China but instead showing connection to the US. Japan and Taiwan have documented proof that several Japanese became infected in Hawaii in late September of 2019. As well, the huge pent-up eruptions in Washington and New York were domestic in origin, having no proven connection with China.[25] Australia’s Prime Minister stated that 80% or more of all infections in his country came from the US,[26] while Iceland confirmed that some of their coronavirus infections have been traced to Denver.[27][28] The mayor of Belleville, New Jersey, Michael Melham said he has tested positive for coronavirus antibodies, adding that he contracted it in November, over two months before the first confirmed case was reported in the U.S.[29] Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, said the coronavirus may have been circulating in the country since November.[30]

There was also independent research by a Cambridge geneticist suggesting the coronavirus may have been circulating much earlier than previously believed, also claiming powerful circumstantial evidence that the virus did not originate in Wuhan.[31] In a paper published in May of 2020 in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, he reported three main strains of the virus that he labeled A, B and C. His research determined that A was the founding variant because it was the version most similar to the type of SARS-Cov-2 discovered in bats. But the A strain was non-existent in China, with only a handful of samples discovered in the entire country, and those in American nationals. Wuhan was infected with type B, a version two mutations from A, meaning it could not have originated in China because it had no prior source from which to mutate.

Further, a German scientist has recently assembled a volume of evidence that the virus in Europe spread from (but not necessarily originated in) Northern Italy.[32] Germany’s top virologist Alexander Kekule said “[the COVID-19] rampant around the world is not from the central Chinese city of Wuhan, but a mutation from northern Italy.” The Italian strain is called “G” mutant, which has genetic mutations, and is likely to be more contagious than the variant found in Wuhan. He said that over 99% of the COVID-19 cases can be genetically traced back to the Italian variant, and even the current cases in China are re-imported from Europe and the rest of the world. He noted that for at least the European pandemic, “the starting shot was fired in northern Italy.”

There is more. Recent research conducted jointly by British and German experts, testified the variant of novel coronavirus that is closest to that discovered in bats was actually found mainly among cases from the US, rather than in Wuhan. Experts from the University of Cambridge and their peers from Germany analyzed 160 virus genomes that were extracted from human patients around the world and found the coronavirus mutated into three distinct strains. They found that most cases carried type A virus – the ancestral type of virus, which is bat coronavirus, with 96 percent sequence similarity to the human virus – were mostly seen only in patients from the US and Australia. And of the five individuals with type A detected in Wuhan, all were American patients who had resided there.[33] Type C is a variant of type B, seen most commonly in European countries and also evident in Singapore and South Korea as well as China’s Hong Kong and Taiwan. Their other conclusion was that because the virus mutates significantly faster outside China, the European spread likely occurred between September 13, 2019 to December 7, 2019.

Zeng Guang, the chief epidemiologist at China’s CDC said one reason China identified the virus and the dangers of an epidemic was from its experience with SARS, and from that the nation established a reporting system for pneumonia with unknown causes. But he said that also made China easily misunderstood. Other nations including the US experienced respiratory illnesses that were almost certainly COVID-19 but weren’t looking for an external pathogen and thus didn’t find it, as with the US vaping-death epidemic and similar.[34] He also said studies show “a very high possibility” that COVID-19 first emerged outside China.

The evidence is now accepted more or less universally that the Huanan Market in Wuhan was a victim of COVID-19 rather than the origin. And in fact, the first person in China proven to have been infected by the virus, had had no contact whatever with that market, nor did about 30% of the first victims. Further, the virus strains in Italy, Iran, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, are different from the one that contaminated Wuhan. Since only the US has all the various strains, it would seem those infections must have originated there.[35] Chinese scientists are certain the origin and distribution of the virus can be found if all nations cooperate. Unfortunately, the US refuses to do so, blocking all attempts at cooperation on this matter – while demanding that China be investigated.

Prior Knowledge – Who knew What and When?

Todas Philipson, an economist who was acting Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) said his team alerted the White House about the dangers of a looming pandemic outbreak about three months before Covid-19 erupted in the US. In an interview with CNN’s Poppy Harlow he said he co-authored and published a CEA report titled “Mitigating the Impact of Pandemic Influenza through Vaccine Innovation” that warned a pandemic disease could kill as many as half a million Americans and cause up to $3.79 trillion in damage to the US economy, stating the report was presented to President Trump or his top officials and that “The White House is fully aware of what CEA puts out.”[36]

A bit more to the point, an ABC News Report stated, “Concerns about [COVID-19] were detailed in a November intelligence report by the military’s National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI), according to two officials familiar with the document’s contents. The timeline of the intel side of this may be [even] further back than we’re discussing,” the source said of preliminary reports from Wuhan.” The intelligence source quoted by ABC said further, “Analysts concluded it could be a cataclysmic event”. And the Washington Post wrote that “. . . reports from US intelligence agencies starting in January that warned of the scale and intensity of the coronavirus outbreak in China, [in Wuhan] could develop into a “full-blown pandemic”.”

CNN had this report: “The US military’s National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI) compiled a November intelligence report in which “analysts concluded it could be a cataclysmic event”, one of the sources of the NCMI’s report told ABC News. The source told ABC News that the intelligence report was then briefed “multiple times” to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s Joint Staff and the White House. The Pentagon, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and White House National Security Council, originally declined to comment.” They later denied knowledge of the report, but ABC was sufficiently secure in the reliability of its four unrelated sources that they repeatedly republished the article for days after the NCMI disavowal.

Perhaps most startling of all, Israeli television and other news media claimed that US intelligence agencies alerted Israel to the coronavirus outbreak in China in November – long before the Chinese had any idea the game was afoot.[37] According to Israel’s Channel 12 news, the US intelligence community became aware of the emerging disease in Wuhan in the second week of that month and drew up a classified document. They claimed Trump “did not deem it of interest”, but the Americans delivered their classified document to both NATO and Israel’s IDF – who informed the government, who then leaked it to the media. They claimed it wasn’t clear if the NMCI report was the same one sent to NATO and the IDF. US authorities disclaimed this, but the Israeli media were firm in their assertion that the information was valid and followed the path they stated. The Times of Israel has a good reputation for factual reporting and cannot be dismissed as easily as can CNN or Fox News. Or the NYT and WSJ, for that matter.

The Wuhan Military Games

An American, George Webb, published some videos where he claimed he had identified “patient zero”, a US soldier who had participated in the Wuhan Games and who had exhibited COVID-19 symptoms and later tested positive for the virus. The woman’s name was Mattje Benassi, who understandably did not benefit from the adverse publicity. She and her husband claim they have received hateful messages and even death threats from this. I genuinely sympathise with the woman and I deplore the fact that she was personally identified. I do not know if she had or did not have the virus infection in Wuhan but, if she did, she was certainly a victim and not a perpetrator. However, I would say that she now knows how China feels at having been lambasted incessantly in the US media, when China was also an innocent victim and not a perpetrator. Benassi should take her problem to Mike Pompeo, which is where it belongs. In any case, Benassi should be left alone because the preponderance of evidence is that the virus was circulating in both the US and Europe long before the Military Games.

Nevertheless, there were indeed a number of Americans who were hospitalised in Wuhan during the Games for a strange and unidentified illness. One hospital spokesman attempted to cover up the story by claiming the Americans were suffering from Malaria, a claim which could not possibly be true. I have no further details, but if the virus were in fact transmitted to China during the Military Games, it would not have been done by first infecting all the American soldiers, then setting them loose onto the Chinese, any military infections likely being accidental. My information is that it was the civilian hangers-on who would have been responsible for the virus distribution – assuming the Americans were behind it, of course.

There was initial speculation that the virus had come to China (and spread around the world) from the US during the Games, but this died from a lack of hard evidence – prematurely, as it turns out . Not only were many US troops infected, but it is now apparent that a great many soldiers from different countries did in fact return home from the Games infected with COVID-19. The respective governments have downplayed the matter and the US media have totally censored it, so almost no one outside Europe has any knowledge of this. I would note here that I am in contact with a group of about 200 scientists, primarily but not exclusively European, who have informally banded together to investigate the origins of COVID-19 and to share information. They have identified many countries whose soldiers returned home infected from Wuhan, France perhaps being the most notable with half the crew of the Charles de Gaulle (the flagship of the French navy) being infected and a large concentration of infections (and the first death) occurring at the airport where the French soldiers made their transit on their return.

The Italian Gazetta Dello Sport wrote that Wuhan “became a hotbed of the pandemic” and that there were emerging testimonies of many Italian athletes who, on those dates or after returning home, were all similarly affected by typical COVID-19 symptoms including coughing, breathing difficulties, weakness and a persistent fever. Athletes from many countries returned home ill from Wuhan, and it wasn’t the food. France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Italy, Germany, Saudi Arabia, the US, and others. There was a great deal of media coverage, but none of that reached the US or Canada; the information was totally censored.

According to Matteo Tagliariol, a star fencing member of the Italian delegation, “When we arrived in Wuhan, almost everyone got sick. I had a heavy cough. (…) Many had a fever, even though their temperature was not very high” adding that one of his teammates had to be bedridden for most of the stay. A week after returning home, Tagliariol became seriously ill. “I have mild asthma, but this was different. I felt like I couldn’t breathe anymore.” His partner and two-year-old son also became ill. “When we started talking about coronavirus, without any medical skills, I thought I’d caught it. I’m 37 years old, I’m a sportsman and I was really bad.”[38]

French pentathlete Élodie Clouvel stated (for herself and her husband Valentin Belaud, also a pentathlete), “we have already had the coronavirus. We were in Wuhan for the World Military Games and then we all got sick. Valentin missed three days of training. I also had stuff I hadn’t had before. We didn’t worry more than that because we weren’t talking about [the virus] yet. There were a lot of athletes at the World Military Games who have been very sick.” Clouvel stated that a military doctor confirmed that they had been infected by the coronavirus, and repeated the physician’s evidence that “many people in [the French] delegation were sick”.[39]

In May of 2020, the French media group RTL published a report which said in part, “In the search for the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic, suspicions are growing, as well as testimonies about the World Military Games held in Wuhan, the epicentre of the epidemic, at the end of last October. French pentathlete Élodie Clouvel has already assured that she was most certainly infected, as was her husband Valentin Belaud, when she was there. Italian and Spanish athletes have made similar statements, and now we learn that the luggage of French athletes has passed through the military base of Creil, in the Oise, where the virus circulated very early in France . . . This new element shines a little more spotlight on these military Games, with always so many questions and few answers.”[40]

“Scores of athletes from other nations, including France and Italy, who participated in the games reported symptoms consistent with COVID-19 upon their return to their home countries. In retrospect, some doctors said those athletes suffered from COVID-19 and in some cases infected others, according to news reports.”[41] “French athletes’ concerns that they were infected by COVID-19 while participating in the games have been called “completely plausible” by Eric Caumes, an infectious and tropical disease specialist at the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital in Paris.”[42]

It was amusing that the French DGSI, France’s intelligence service, were also affected, the symptoms apparently including massive diarrhea, but as one French news medium reported, “How many are there? What is their state of health? It’s impossible to know. The country’s most secretive institution does not disclose anything, much less when it is hit within it. At the Ministry of the Interior, it is motus and mouth sewn: no confirmation, no information, the secret remains well guarded.”

Still with France, the Oise region in the North was one of the epicenters of COVID-19, with local officials convinced the Creil airbase was “the source of contamination” of the entire area which had several serious infection clusters. This was the airbase used to return soldiers from the Games as well as to repatriate French nationals from Wuhan. Military officials first claimed that all arrivals had been tested, but later during a parliamentary grilling confessed to misunderstanding because of “not being doctors” and not actually having tested anyone.

One portion of France’s Defense Ministry was honest and forthcoming: “The spread of the virus by the military is not to be excluded, more than 9000 participants for 110 states [during the Military Games], which explains the global contamination. On their return, the representatives (in France 415 including 58 gendarmes) infected family, relatives and colleagues. . . . at that time nothing was known, it was “unbeknownst to them . . .”[43] But then, the French Ministry of Armies was less forthcoming: “There were no cases reported within the French delegation to the Influenza Or Hospital Army Health Service during and on the return of the military Games, which could be akin to cases of Covid-19. To date, and to our knowledge, no other country represented in Wuhan has reported such cases.”[44] But then a third military official settled the matter with a typically French finality of phrase: “No, definitely no, the military base in Creil is not the source of a cluster in the Oise . . . I think I can tell you . . . probably not . . .”

It is a bit maddening that in each case in Europe, as with the US, the authorities either disclaim any knowledge of, or deny outright, any COVID-19 infections among their troops. According to Le Parisien, the French delegation’s cargo (and personnel) passed through the Creil airbase, which was one of the major COVID-19 flash-points in France, with infections actually beginning in November of 2019, more than three months before the first “officially-confirmed” case. But the version of the French officials is that the virus was unknown at the time so that no testing was done although general medical attention was delivered. Officials from several European militaries and Defense Ministries made essentially this claim: “We contacted the athletes to ask if any had had any symptoms. None of them came forward, so we assumed that no one had been infected.” Nothing more to see here. The Swiss military believed it was “unlikely” that its 121-member delegation was affected, even though a handful of Swiss athletes had to be hospitalized in Wuhan, while the military health services of several countries say they “cannot recall” any cases of illness on the return from Wuhan. All this while the same troops are giving media interviews describing this same illness.

In the US, after the Games about 300 US military personnel returned home to nearly 250 bases in 25 states, without ever being screened for possible COVID-19 infection. “According to the Pentagon, there was no reason to do so then, or subsequently. A spokesperson issued a terse email response to the question, saying there was no screening because the event—held from October 18 to 27, 2019 – “was prior to the reported outbreak “. Since that email, Pentagon officials have repeatedly declined to speak on or off the record regarding the subject.”[45]

This report in Prospect.org claims that “Contrary to the Pentagon’s insistence, however, an investigation of COVID-19 cases in the military from official and public source materials shows that a strong correlation exists in COVID-19 cases reported at U.S. military facilities that are home bases of members of the U.S. team that went to Wuhan . . . infections occurred at a minimum of 63 military facilities where team members returned after the Wuhan games.” It states that this information was emerging but on March 31, 2020 the Pentagon restricted the release of information about COVID-19 cases at installations “for security reasons”. As of June 5, there were 10,462 COVID-19 cases in the Department of Defense in the military, civilian, dependent, and contractor categories.

“When asked why the athletes and support staff who had been in China were not screened as a precaution once the COVID-19 threat was known in January , Defense Secretary Mark Esper said at an April 14 press conference: “I am not aware of what you are talking about.” The question and response were not included in the Pentagon’s official written transcript of the briefing, as is the normal procedure. The official video of the briefing goes silent when the question is asked and Esper can be seen – but not heard – reacting to the question. The full audio and video exchange remains on the C-SPAN video of the event.”[46]

The Vaccination Twilight Zone

There is something potentially much more sinister here, detailed by two medical specialists: Dr. Michael Yeadon, a former V-P of Pfizer and the head of their respiratory research, and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a German physician, pulmonary specialist, and epidemiologist, and former Public Health Department head. Dr. Yeadon states that Pfizer’s vaccine [and possibly others] contains a spike protein called syncytin-1, which is vital for the formation of the placenta in pregnant women. He states that if the vaccine works as intended and forms an immune response against the spike protein, the female body will then also attack syncytin-1, which could cause infertility in women that might (or might not) be permanent. His public statement was basically that Covid-19 vaccines were effectively a female sterilisation program. On December 1, 2020, Drs. Yeadon and Wodarg filed an application with the EMA, the European Medicine Agency, for the immediate suspension of all SARS CoV 2 vaccine studies, in particular the BioNtech/Pfizer variants.

This would seem bizarre at first glance, except for the knowledge that this precise protocol has been executed before. Some years ago, the WHO, in conjunction with Rothschild, Sanofi and Connaught Labs and the US CDC, sterilised about 150 million women in undeveloped countries, without their knowledge or consent. This is not conspiracy theory, but documented fact. The WHO’s own website covers in detail how they spent 20 years and more than $400 million developing a “fertility-regulating” vaccine that was intended to cause permanent sterilisation. They utilised the female hCg hormone – which is vital for the implantation of the placenta in the uterus wall – combined with tetanus toxoid, and launched massive international campaigns ostensibly to vaccinate females against tetanus. But they conducted this campaign only among females of child-bearing age (roughly 14 to 40). The intent, and the result, was that when a woman’s body recognised the hCg hormone, it would attack and destroy it as an invader and thus prevent any pregnancy from coming to term. There were massive lawsuits and recriminations when this was discovered, and today there are many nations that will not permit entry to the WHO, UNICEF, or other UN bodies. When Bill Gates was speaking of the world population increasing to perhaps 9 billion and that, with effective planning, he could reduce this increase by “maybe 1.5 billion births”, this is almost certainly what he had in mind, and Gates is the largest financial supporter of the WHO. I won’t dwell further on this here, but I did research the topic thoroughly and wrote an article which is available on this site.[47] If you haven’t read it, I strongly recommend that you do so. It will give you a powerful insight into the criminality of these international organisations.

With reference to the COVID-19 vaccines being promoted by Pfizer and others, I have received communication from medical scientists in two European countries claiming the vaccinations may indeed be intended primarily for sterilisation, perhaps not meant for Western nations, but for all the others. They are similarly concerned about the sudden campaign by the WHO and US CDC for cervical cancer shots for teenagers.

Media Censorship

We have already read much here from Ron Unz and others about Google suppressing websites, articles and authors which conflict with the official story on any matter, with Twitter and Facebook doing the same, either through an open policy of controlling “fake news” or surreptitiously by other means. But there are many more, and more pointed, censorship attempts occurring well beyond Google, Facebook and Twitter. As one example, I knew my email was being monitored so I obtained an encrypted Proton Mail account. Following this, certain (non-China) acquaintances informed me that all mail from this account was automatically directed to their spam folders, a fault they are helpless to rectify. In addition, they inform me that attempting to send email to this same account (or reply to it) is rejected by their either their ISP or email program as “spam”, and are thus forced to communicate with me only through my public email address – which can be monitored. Another European friend now sends her emails with topic headings like ‘What are you doing this weekend?’ She discovered that any attempts to send a message with either my name or the titles of any of my articles in the subject line, will result in Google’s Gmail categorising the messages as spam, and not only refusing to send the messages but deleting the list of intended recipients.

A Few Ponderables

  1. Prior to the COVID-19 outbreaks, why was the US military advertising for Russian DNA from the fluid of specific body joints, insisting the sources had to be entirely ethnic Russian and not Ukrainian or similar?
  2. Why did the US CDC suddenly shut down Fort Detrick entirely, for about 6 months? Why, immediately following this shutdown were there persistent reports of strange pneumonia infections (and deaths) affecting the elderly, especially in nursing homes, in the area surrounding Fort Detrick?
  3. What was the cause of the severe pneumonias and deaths of the young people that were originally attributed to vaping? All attending physicians claimed the vaping itself was not the prime cause, that there was another pathogen at work but they had no idea what it was at the time, stating now that the combination with COVID-19 could indeed be deadly even to young otherwise-healthy individuals.
  4. Why did Pompeo suddenly mandate that all COVID-19 information be classified and run through the NSC? Why did he further mandate that all hospitals, clinics and labs remit all COVID-19 information to the White House and bypass both the CDC and the media? When reports began surfacing of COVID-19 being found in US wastewater samples from 2019, why were they subject to a gag order?
  5. Why was the US the only significant country that refused to conduct any search for a patient zero?
  6. Why did the CDC specifically forbid testing for the coronavirus, except in severe cases already in the ICU?
  7. Why was Dr. Helen Chu given a formal and legal “cease and desist” order preventing her from testing the thousands of flu samples in Washington State from 2019?
  8. Why were FEMA and Israel’s Mossad hijacking planeloads of face masks, respirators and other vital protective equipment from airports in China, and shipping them to Israel instead of the US where they were badly needed?[48]Why was FEMA confiscating these materials and equipment from suppliers and hospitals all across the US, and refusing information about their disposition?[48]
  9. How was Pompeo able to notify NATO commanders and Israel’s IDF – in November – about a mysterious virus that would be circulating in China two or three months later?
  10. Why did John Bolton eliminate the entire executive group responsible for pandemic response coordination in the US, eviscerating the nation’s infectious disease defense infrastructure, and eliminating 80% of the department that could have helped other nations detect and control the epidemics they later suffered?

A Few Comments on China

China has accumulated much experience in dealing with US bio-pathogens, seven or eight in the last two years alone. When the Chinese authorities learned that the new pathogen was SARS-2, they already knew the source, the intent, and the potential effects. That was why Xi Jinping said “This is a demon, and we cannot let this demon hide.” When they knew what it was, they knew what had to be done.

China has had virtually no domestic infections since Wuhan was unlocked. There have been occasional ones and twos in scattered locations, but all others have been imported by foreign nationals. Many want to say that China handled the virus badly, but look at the results. China’s economy is booming. GDP is well in positive territory, projected at 7.5% for 2021, foreign trade is up around 15% over 2019, with exports rising sharply and domestic consumption doing the same. Unemployment is not an issue in China; I speak to factories that have to offer a 30% premium to obtain sufficient workers. All the kindergartens, schools and universities, and restaurants are open, domestic train and plane travel have recovered to 95% or more of normal in most cases, and life is essentially back to normal. Life in Wuhan is as alive and active today as before the epidemic, with few remaining hints of its early suffering. China is developing vaccines against the virus, but I haven’t met anyone who wants one or who thinks they need it. We have no intrusive measures, no “contact-tracing” software, and no RFID chips implanted in the backs of our necks. We still wear face masks on the subway and our temperature is taken as we enter travel venues like airports and train stations, so vigilance is still there, but without effect on anyone’s daily life.

American politicians and the major US media still claim that China badly understated its numbers and that the country really had 50 million infections and 5 million dead. If this were true, that makes the country’s recovery even more dramatic, doesn’t it?

Epilogue

I would like to end this essay on a note of cheer, but no encouragement exists for such a sentiment. From the earliest days, when it became apparent this virus would spread, I researched daily the progress of infections and deaths for every country and all indications are that we are still very far from the end. There are almost no nations that appear to be tailing off and almost all major countries are still increasing, the US most notably but it isn’t alone. Worse, whenever a nation does taper off, it is hit harder. China was one case, with the release in Beijing’s Xinfadi Market and then in Xinjiang, but most every other nation has received the same treatment. Most economies, certainly the West, are in free-fall with the end not yet in sight. In the contrived financial crisis of 2007 – the one the FED pretended to end in 2009 but that never actually ended – the US saw about a full half of its middle class descend into the lower class. I wrote then that they would never recover because that was only the first step of a deliberate process, and I believe subsequent events have vindicated my position. Before this crisis ends, another full half of the remaining American middle class will disappear, and this will now never be recoverable. Americans need to believe their leaders who tell them life will never return to ‘normal’. It will not.

For COVID-19, I am 100% convinced that some part of the American government, perhaps acting independently on behalf of the Deep State, created and deliberately released the coronavirus upon the world. With everything I know, the alternative of a natural outbreak is almost an impossibility. There is still new information escaping confinement and I am hopeful we will find sufficient evidence to justify an international criminal tribunal to unearth all the facts and perhaps undo some of the damage. Those responsible will escape, as always.

Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 28 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English-language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. His full archive can be seen at https://www.moonofshanghai.com/ and http://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/ He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com.

End Notes

(1) The 1918 influenza pandemic that we now call the ‘Spanish Flu’ had three waves, but I am ignoring this example because (a) it appears unique, (b) the mass movement of troops during the war contributed to and greatly affected the spread and, (c) there are disturbing reports with credible documentation that this deadly pandemic may not have been a natural disaster but the result of human tinkering, an experimental bacterial meningitis vaccine cultured by the Rockefeller Institute and tested at Fort Riley which is where the pandemic began. To tell the truth, the mere fact that Reuters did a “fact-check” on this topic and declared the claim false (a), is enough to make anyone damned suspicious since Reuters have the same credibility in these matters as do the NYT and WSJ. I don’t want to dwell on this here, but suffice to say it doesn’t qualify as a template for multiple waves of an infection. You can read more here, if you’re interested. (b) (c) (d)

(a) False claim: the 1918 influenza pandemic was caused by a vaccine; https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccines-caused-1918-influe-idUSKBN21J6X2

(b) https://freepress.org/article/did-vaccine-experiment-us-soldiers-cause-%E2%80%9Cspanish-flu%E2%80%9D

(c) https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/03/no_author/did-a-vaccine-experiment-on-u-s-soldiers-cause-the-spanish-flu/

(d) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2126288/pdf/449.pdf

(2) China had its own ‘second wave’ in the outbreak at the Xinfadi Market in Beijing. I wrote an article on this, (e) providing much of the background detail, but let me cover a few points here. Xinfadi is the largest fruit and vegetable market in Asia, covering millions of square feet and with thousands of shops. The authorities discovered that the entire market “from head to foot” had been infected with what I am calling “COVID-20” to differentiate it from the initial outbreak in Wuhan. The reason is that this was an entirely new version of the virus (Type A) that had not been in China before, a much more virulent strain (at least to ethnic Chinese) and one which, had it escaped confinement, would have created a humanitarian disaster of enormous proportion. Fortunately, the authorities had not at all relaxed their vigilance and discovered the infections almost immediately, shutting down the market, locking down the neighborhood, tracing all the contacts, and killing it dead within two weeks and with only a handful of infections. Pompeo must have been livid.

(e) https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/china-reseeded-with-covid-20/

China also had a ‘third wave’, a spike of COVID-19 cases in Xinjiang that were similar or the same variety introduced into Beijing. (f) But once again, the Chinese government was unquestionably expecting further attempts to infect the nation, Xinjiang almost certainly being a favored location. Thus, the medical authorities never relaxed their vigilance so the cases were caught quickly and the new virus stamped out within two or three weeks after only a few dozen cases. Pompeo must have been livid.

(f) https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1195811.shtml

References

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson1/section11.html

[2] https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/experts-want-to-know-why-coronavirus-hasnt-killed-more-russians/ar-BB142pz3

[3] https://www.rt.com/usa/488690-western-media-russia-coronavirus-numbers/

[4] https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/11/27/why-covid-19-granted-the-u-s-most-favored-nation-status/

[5] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/covid-19-two-major-waves-of-global-infection-towards-global-contamination/

[6] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/part-2-a-paradigm-shift-covid-19-needs-a-criminal-investigation/

[7] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/covid-19-targeting-italy-and-south-korea-the-chain-of-transmission-of-infection/

[8] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/china-reseeded-with-covid-20/

[9] https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/italy-sewage-study-suggests-covid19-was-there-in-december-2019/news-story/2fd865f7b12a33698f3e9ab2f15a35e3

[10] https://sputniknews.com/europe/202006191079667103-scientists-find-traces-of-sars-cov-2-in-italian-wastewater-predating-2019-wuhan-outbreak/

[11] https://www.chinadailyhk.com/article/152038#Italy-traces-virus-back-to-December-2019-study-finds

[12] http://en.people.cn/n3/2020/1211/c90000-9798189.html

[13] https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-italy-timing/coronavirus-emerged-in-italy-earlier-than-thought-italian-study-shows-idINKBN27V0KH

[14] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-italy-anitbodies-covid-study-b1723243.html

[15] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-spain-science-idUSKBN23X2HQ

[16] https://www.rt.com/news/506796-coronavirus-italy-blood-september/

[17] https://www.leparisien.fr/societe/covid-19-comment-des-chercheurs-ont-retrouve-des-traces-de-la-maladie-quatre-mois-apres-04-05-2020-8310726.php

[18] https://www.leparisien.fr/societe/patient-infecte-par-le-coronavirus-en-decembre-comme-des-coups-de-couteau-en-plein-thorax-05-05-2020-8311272.php

[19] https://www.msn.com/en-sg/news/world/coronavirus-outbreak-in-france-did-not-come-directly-from-china-gene-tracing-scientists-say/ar-BB13kun3

[20] https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-05-01/Data-shows-Canada-s-early-COVID-19-cases-came-from-the-U-S-not-China-Q8jSdpazo4/index.html

[21] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192389.shtml

[22] https://newsaf.cgtn.com/news/2020-04-25/Coronavirus-came-to-New-York-from-Europe-not-China-Governor-PXHsqNUTHG/index.html

[23] http://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-nw-nyt-new-york-coronavirus-europe-genomes-20200409-iti55bz5crbatn2xo5a56sdzda-story.html

[24] http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-10/11/c_139431301.htm

[25] https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202004/30/WS5eaa39a6a310a8b241152e71.html

[26] https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-03-22/PM-Morrison-80-percent-Australia-cases-are-imported-mostly-from-U-S–P41uG3CfWU/index.html

[27] https://www.denverpost.com/2020/03/13/iceland-coronavirus-traced-denver/

[28] https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2020/03/13/three_covid_19_cases_in_iceland_traced_to_denver/

[29] https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-05-05/U-S-Belleville-mayor-claims-that-he-had-coronavirus-in-November-2019-Qfq40LrHlC/index.html

[30] https://www.ft.com/content/aba67162-9129-41b9-b82b-d61a890e6589

[31] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-13/scientist-suggests-coronavirus-originated-outside-of-wuhan

[32] https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-11-28/Novel-coronavirus-not-from-Wuhan-says-top-German-virologist-VMzm7Cj6ZW/index.html

[33] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1185291.shtml

[34] https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-11-10/Expert-Spotting-COVID-19-first-doesn-t-make-China-origin-of-virus-VjaqEE3Mre/index.html

[35] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/part-2-a-paradigm-shift-covid-19-needs-a-criminal-investigation/

[36] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/17/business/pandemic-warning-tomas-philipson/index.html

[37] https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-alerted-israel-nato-to-disease-outbreak-in-china-in-november-report/

[38] https://www.gazzetta.it/Sport-Vari/06-05-2020/coronavirus-mondiali-militari-wuhan-ottobre-tagliariol-370755837301.shtml

[39] https://lecourrierdesstrateges.fr/2020/05/19/covid19-laffaire-des-jeux-mondiaux-militaires-de-wuhan/

[40] https://www.rtl.fr/actu/bien-etre/coronavirus-les-bagages-des-athletes-des-jeux-militaires-wuhan-ont-transite-a-creil-7800496768

[41] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8291755/Did-European-athletes-catch-coronavirus-competing-World-Military-Games-Wuhan-OCTOBER.html

[42] https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/french-army-returned-wuhan-military-21988912

[43] https://www.defense.gouv.fr/terre/actu-terre/jeux-mondiaux-militaire-d-ete-de-wuhan

[44] https://www.lematin.ch/story/des-athletes-infectes-a-wuhan-en-octobre-deja-990586772177

[45] https://prospect.org/coronavirus/did-the-military-world-games-spread-covid-19/

[46] https://www.c-span.org/video/?471201-1/defense-secretary-esper-general-milley-coronavirus-news-conference

[47] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/a-cautionary-tale-about-the-who/

[48] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/covid-19-fema-and-mossad-stealing-from-peter-to-pay-paul/

====================

Coronavirus Litigation

 

German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation  By Joseph Mercola, Mercola.com, 13 December 2020

 

Reiner Fuellmich,1 who has been a consumer protection trial lawyer in California and Germany2 for 26 years, is a founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,3 or ACU),4,5 launched July 10, 2020.

Fuellmich is leading the committee’s corona crisis tort case — an international class-action lawsuit that will be filed against those responsible for using fraudulent testing to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic in order to implement economically devastating lockdowns around the world.

He estimates more than 50 other countries will be following suit. In the video above, Patrick Bet-David interviews Fuellmich about how and why the group was formed and the status of this work.

The Backstory

Early on, as Fuellmich started hearing concerns from family and friends in Germany about a new respiratory virus, one particular name kept popping up: professor Christian Drosten, Ph.D., a German virologist.

As head of the Institute of Virology at the University of Bonn Medical Centre, Drosten is best known for developing the first diagnostic test for SARS in 2003. He also developed a diagnostic test for the swine flu,6 and in 2009 helped drum up panic with doomsday prophesies about H1N1.

When COVID-19 initially emerged in early 2020, Drosten kept saying there was no cause for concern. Then, seemingly overnight, he changed his tune, “as though someone had given him a signal.” All of a sudden, Drosten was saying that this virus was extremely dangerous and that drastic measures to contain it had to be implemented.

Based on whistleblower testimony, the German government relied on the opinion of Drosten alone when deciding on their pandemic response, which included the lockdown of healthy citizens and the suspension of constitutional rights for an indefinite period of time.

Interestingly, Fuellmich’s team recently discovered that Drosten’s Ph.D. dissertation is a fraud. It was only created this year when people began investigating his background.

Aside from Drosten, other individuals who have prominent roles include Lothar H. Wieler, the head of the German equivalent of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, head of the World Health Organization and Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College of London.

Unsure of what was going on, Fuellmich contacted an old friend, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a former member of the German Congress and the Council of Europe. Wodarg urged him to investigate and suggested some names of experts to look into, such as professor John Ioannidis at Stanford University and professor and Nobel Prize winner Michael Levitt.

The more he investigated the facts available, the more Fuellmich realized COVID-19 was being grossly oversold. Eventually, he started making inquiries to see if there were any other lawyers out there raising questions about the legality of the pandemic and the global response to it.

He discovered that Beate Bahner, an attorney specializing in medical law, had in fact spoken out, arguing that Germany’s quarantine measures were unconstitutional. She was arrested and held in a psychiatric ward for a number of days. Needless to say, that wasn’t an encouraging start.

Separation of Power Has Been Breached

Disturbingly, while the governments of many nations have the same separation of power as the U.S., where you have separate legislative, judiciary and executive branches, we are now finding that this separation has been breached and nearly destroyed in most places.

Rather than being run by the legislators that we voted into power (and who have the legal power to make law), we’re being ruled by the executive branch, such as our local governors, who are creating rules and regulations without having the legal and constitutional power to do so.

They may issue emergency orders for a few days, but really that’s the extent of their legal power. After that, the legislature must be brought in. Yet here we are, several months into the pandemic, and local governors and mayors all over the world are still issuing long-term mandatory mask and social distancing orders, many of which call for the arrest of those who don’t follow the rules.

We now have plenty of data showing its lethality is on par with the common flu and that the absolute risk of death is equivalent to the risk of dying in a car accident.

As noted by Fuellmich, the judiciary branch must step in, and now, finally, they are starting to do so. In Austria, the constitutional court issued an order November 12, 2020, not only clarifying the separation of powers and stressing that the legislative branch must be involved, but also that there must be a comprehensive discussion where both sides are heard. There are other scientists besides those anointed by the government, and their opinions must be considered as well.

Suing the World Over Faux Pandemic

As noted by Bet-David, there are several important questions that must be answered:

  • What caused the pandemic?
  • Who started it?
  • Who needs to be held accountable?
  • In what way must they be held accountable?

Fuellmich agrees, saying that answering these questions is the reason for why ACU was formed. Governments appear unwilling to investigate the answers to these questions, and that’s why he and three other attorneys decided to take on the task of preparing class-action lawsuits. The primary questions the ACU seeks to answer are:

  1. How dangerous is the virus, really?
  2. How trustworthy is the PCR test; what does a positive test really mean?
  3. How much damage do the anti-COVID measures inflict to the economy and the health and well-being of the population?

What Do We Now Know?

The last question is easily answered, Fuellmich says. Evidence shows pandemic measures have caused tremendous harm, killing more people than the virus itself by restricting routine medical care to people with acute and chronic health conditions that have nothing to do with COVID-19.

As for the danger of SARS-CoV-2, we now have plenty of data showing its lethality is on par with the common flu7,8,9,10,11 and that the absolute risk of death is equivalent to the risk of dying in a car accident.12,13 It may be different in terms of symptoms and complications, but the actual lethality is about the same.

According to Fuellmich, even the WHO has now admitted that the mortality of COVID-19 is on par with seasonal influenza. In October 2020, the WHO also reversed its stance on lockdowns, stating they no longer recommend using lockdowns as a primary control method.14

Several experts have also stressed that there is no excess mortality,15,16 meaning we’ve had an average number of deaths during the pandemic as would normally die anyway. And, if there’s no excess mortality, how can there be a lethal pandemic? It doesn’t add up.

Fraudulent Testing Is Driving Pandemic Narrative

Of the three questions, the second one is perhaps the most important, as mass testing is driving the narrative that we’re in a lethal pandemic. As explained by Fuellmich, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests have several weaknesses that appear to be taken advantage of to create needless fear.

The fact is, the PCR test is not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as it cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and “live” or reproductive ones.17 This is a crucial point, since inactive and reproductive viruses are not interchangeable in terms of infectivity. If you have a nonreproductive virus in your body, you will not get sick and you cannot spread it to others.

Secondly, many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing “positive.” The video above explains how the PCR test works and how we are interpreting results incorrectly.

In summary, the PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. However, they must be amplified to become discernible. Each round of amplification is called a cycle, and the number of amplification cycles used by any given test or lab is called a cycle threshold.

When you go above 30 cycles, even insignificant sequences of viral DNA end up being magnified to the point that the test reads positive even if your viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive and poses no threat to you or anyone else.

According to Fuellmich, the consensus is that anything over 35 cycles is scientifically indefensible. Yet Drosten’s test and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to 45 cycles.18,19,20

When labs use these excessive cycle thresholds, you end up with a far higher number of positive tests than you would otherwise. At present, and going back a number of months now, what we’re really dealing with is a “casedemic,”21,22 meaning an epidemic of false positives.

Remember, in medical terminology, when used accurately, a “case” refers to someone who has symptoms of a disease. By erroneously reporting positive tests as “cases,” the pandemic appears magnitudes worse than it actually is. For this reason, Fuellmich and his team are primarily focused on the PCR test issue.

They’ve taken testimony from a number of well-respected immunologists from around the world, all of whom agree that the PCR test is incapable of telling us anything about the transmission of COVID-19.

The Panic Paper

According to Fuellmich, the sole reason the PCR test is used, and used in an incorrect way, is to create enough fear that no one will question the pandemic measures being put into place and simply do as they’re told. He goes on to review the so-called “Panic Paper,”23,24 written by the German Department of the Interior.

This classified paper, which was leaked to the press, reveals there was an intentional plan at the level of the German government to drive people into a panic.

One of the strategies laid out in the paper was to guilt children into compliance, to make them feel responsible “for the tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the anti-corona regulations.” According to Fuellmich, what we have is a staged PCR test pandemic. It’s not a lethal virus pandemic, “and I can prove this in court,” he says.

What’s the End Game?

As noted by Fuellmich, more and more people around the world are now starting to wake up to the fact that the restrictions put into place under the guise of protecting public health are not going away anytime soon. They’re part of a much larger, long-term plan, and the end goal is to usher in a new way of life, devoid of our previous freedoms.

The judicial branch is “the last anchor of democracy,” Fuellmich says. He brings up an important point. The WHO, the World Economic Forum and the United Nations are all private corporations, yet they wield tremendous power over the governments of the world.

The World Economic Forum, founded by Klaus Schwab, is incredibly influential and lobbies politicians around the globe. Together, private corporations and politicians have in some instances usurped power from the government and are acting above the law of the land.

Big Tech plays an important part in this usurpation of power. The most important human right around the world is the right to free speech. It’s foundational for any democracy. Yet the tech giants have all banded together to censor certain segments of the global population.

“We have to take back the power from them and put it back where it belongs, with the government, and we have to take a really close look at who is in government and who became too close to these corporations,” Fuellmich says.

Key Players

While the full picture is still being put together, Fuellmich and his team have some ideas of who the key players are, at least in Germany. They include the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) of Germany, Drosten, Wieler (the head of the German equivalent of the CDC), Ghebreyesus (head of the WHO), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust.

These individuals have repeatedly met over the years, including in May 2019, at which time they discussed plans for a coming pandemic. During this meeting, Drosten explained how his PCR test would be used to identify infections — “A blatant lie, as we now know it,” Fuellmich says.

These were the same individuals who in 2020 rolled out the narrative for the COVID-19 pandemic and pushed for the global implementation of PCR testing, mask wearing, social distancing and the shut-down of economies around the world.

According to Fuellmich, Germany is at the center of this global fraud, and three of the key criminals in this case appear to be Drosten, Wieler and Ghebreyesus — and the organizations behind them.

That said, he also admits there must be others behind these public marionettes that are pulling the strings. Fuellmich believes that through pretrial discovery, these shadowy figures will eventually come to light.

Battle Plan

As mentioned earlier, we must now push the judicial branch of our government to step in. Fuellmich explains:

“We have the power [to ask] courts of law to step in, but we have to show in a court of law that this is not a corona pandemic but rather a staged PCR pandemic, which was made up — invented — for completely different purposes, for these corporations.

We do not know exactly who is responsible, but we see that some of the corporations that are now censoring us are in part responsible; we know some people — such as Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab or Blackrock — were investing their money into pharmaceutical and technical companies. Also, the mainstream media, they [have been] brought into line and are not going to report on the other side of the story.

In order to bring out this story, we have to have a court of law that will take a look at the evidence that is there … And that’s what we’re doing right now. We’re doing this both in Germany and in the United States … The U.S. and Canada are so important in this because they are the two countries that have class-actions.”

At present, class-action lawsuits are being prepared in the U.S. and Canada. Lawsuits are also being prepared in Germany. Germany does not permit class-actions so, there, the process is being done a bit differently. ACU is also working on the creation of legal guidelines and data caches that attorneys around the world will be able to use to file their own lawsuits.

As for the average person, Fuellmich urges everyone to, first of all, don’t give up, and secondly, ask lots of questions. Continue asking questions because the more questions are asked, the more answers will come to light. Continue to counter the censorship by asking questions. Once court hearings begin, the information will start to spread more quickly.

To learn more, all ACU meetings are live-streamed and available on the Committee’s YouTube channel25 (at least for now). Fuellmich can be contacted via www.fuellmich.com, and the Corona Inquiry Committee via corona-ausschuss.de. Information in multiple languages should also be available on www.ACU2020.org.

Sources and References

==========================

The Greatest Hoax Ever Perpetuated on an Unsuspecting Public

 

The Greatest Hoax Ever Perpetuated on an Unsuspecting Public  By Joseph Mercola, 11 December 2020

 

According to Dr. Roger Hodkinson, one of Canada’s top pathologists and an expert in virology, the COVID-19 pandemic is the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public.” Hodkinson made these blunt statements during a zoom conference with an Alberta Community and Public Services Committee (see video above).

Hodkinson is the CEO of Western Medical Assessments, a biotech company that manufactures COVID-19 PCR tests, so “I might know a little bit about all this,” he said, adding that the entire situation represents “politics playing medicine,” which is “a very dangerous game.”1

He stressed that PCR tests simply cannot diagnose infection and mass testing should therefore cease immediately. He also pointed out that social distancing is useless as the virus “is spread by aerosols which travel 30 meters or so.” As for face masks, Hodkinson stated that:

“Masks are utterly useless. There is no evidence base for their effectiveness whatsoever. Paper masks and fabric masks are simply virtue signaling. They’re not even worn effectively most of the time.

It’s utterly ridiculous. Seeing these unfortunate, uneducated people — I’m not saying that in a pejorative sense — seeing these people walking around like lemmings obeying without any knowledge base to put the mask on their face … Nothing could be done to stop the spread of the virus besides protecting older more vulnerable people.”

Former Pfizer Science Officer Claims COVID-19 Is a Scam

Hodkinson is far from alone in his assertions. For example, Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer and founder and CEO of the biotech company Ziarco, has spoken out about how fraudulent PCR testing is being used to manufacture the appearance of a pandemic that doesn’t really exist.

As I explained in “Asymptomatic ‘Casedemic’ Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear,” by using PCR testing, which cannot diagnose active infection, a false narrative has been created.

I’m calling out the statistics, and even the claim that there is an ongoing pandemic, as false. ~ Michael Yeadon, Ph.D.

Currently, rising “cases,” meaning positive tests, are being used yet again as the justification to impose more severe restrictions, including lockdowns and mandatory mask wearing, when in fact positive tests have nothing to do with the actual spread of illness, and nothing to do with the risk of death.

Like several other scientists, doctors and researchers, Yeadon has pointed out that there are no excess deaths due to COVID-19.2,3,4 According to Yeadon, who has analyzed the statistics, about 1,700 people die each day in the U.K. in any given year. Many of these deaths are now falsely attributed to COVID-19.

“I’m calling out the statistics, and even the claim that there is an ongoing pandemic, as false,” he said in a recent interview with British journalist Anna Brees (see video above). He challenges anyone who doesn’t believe him to seek out any database on total mortality. If you do that, you will find that the daily death count is “absolutely bang-on normal,” Yeadon said.

Like Hodkinson, Yeadon is concerned about the fact that the laws of immunology are being completely ignored — apparently in order to fit some hidden agenda.

While Yeadon is unwilling to guess at what might be behind the creation of these false narratives, or why scientific truth is being censored, others have linked together evidence pointing to the pandemic being used as an excuse for the redistribution of wealth and the technocratic takeover of the whole world under the banner of a “Great Reset.”

It’s being used to usher in social and economic changes that simply could never be introduced without some sort of calamity, be it war or a biological threat, because they involve a radical limitation of personal freedoms, including medical and financial freedom, and the elimination of privacy and private ownership. In short, no one in their right mind would agree to the changes that are coming, which is why fear is being used as a tool to coerce compliance.

As noted in the Journal of Law and the Biosciences paper5 “COVID-19 Emergency Measures and the Impending Authoritarian Pandemic,” written by Stephen Thompson and Eric C. Ip, both from the University of Hong Kong:

“This Article demonstrates — with diverse examples drawn from across the world — there are unmistakable regressions into authoritarianism in governmental efforts to contain the virus.

Despite the unprecedented nature of this challenge, there is no sound justification for systemic erosion of rights-protective democratic ideals and institutions beyond that which is strictly demanded by the exigencies of the pandemic …

With a gratuitous toll being inflicted on democracy, civil liberties, fundamental freedoms, healthcare ethics, and human dignity, this has the potential to unleash humanitarian crises no less devastating than COVID-19 in the long run.”

German Lawyers Gear Up to Expose the Hoax

Others who have identified the COVID-19 pandemic as a global hoax of unprecedented proportions include a group of German lawyers who founded the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee.6,7 They are now preparing the biggest class-action lawsuit in history,8,9,10,11 in which they seek to prove that fraudulent PCR tests are being misused to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic.

“This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a corona scandal; and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages,” Reiner Fuellmich said during a video announcement of the committee’s tort case (see video above).

Key questions the committee seeks to answer through judicial means include:

  1. Is there a COVID-19 pandemic or is there only a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test pandemic? — Specifically, does a positive PCR test result mean that the individual is infected with SARS-CoV-2 and has COVID-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the COVID-19 infection?
  2. Do pandemic response measures such as lockdowns, mask mandates, social distancing and quarantine regulations serve to protect the world’s population from COVID-19, or do these measures serve only to make people panic and therefore comply with liberty-eroding edicts?

Fuellmich’s team also stress that SARS-CoV-2 — which is touted as one of the most serious threats to life in modern history — “has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world.” Pandemic measures, on the other hand, have “caused the loss of innumerable human lives, and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide,” Fuellmich noted in his announcement.

As I discussed in yesterday’s article, “Emergency COVID-19 Vaccines May Cause Massive Side Effects,” modern history is filled with pandemic scares, none of which has panned out and lived up to projected death tolls. The technocrats in charge have had plenty of practice, and COVID-19 appears to be the crown jewel of their pandemic war arsenal.

Everything was in place this time. The mainstream media, Big Tech, key government leaders, nongovernmental organizations and their chosen health “experts” — all have worked in tandem to manufacture unreasonable and illogical fear. Together, they’ve effectively promoted falsehoods while simultaneously censoring truth. The end result is devastating to democracy, freedom and public health.

Others Speaking Out About COVID Hoax

One medical professional who is now speaking openly about the COVID-19 pandemic being a brazen power-grab by the technocratic elite is Dr. Lee Merritt, an orthopedic spinal surgeon with a medical practice in Logan, Iowa.12

August 16, 2020, she delivered a speech at the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness13 convention in Las Vegas, Nevada, featured in “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible,” in which she dissected the many fear-inducing lies we’ve been told about this pandemic.

When you look at the actual data and statistics available, and compare them to what we’re being told by government officials and the media, it becomes evident that there’s a gulf between the two. The data tell us SARS-CoV-2 is not the existential threat it’s been made out to be so, clearly, they want us to be fearful for some other reason.

Merritt suggests it’s because a fearful public will not put up a fight when their human rights are stripped away. Indeed, many who are fearful will gladly relinquish any and all freedoms. As noted by British Supreme Court Judge Lord Sumption in a March 30, 2020, interview with The Post:14

“The real problem is that when human societies lose their freedom, it’s not usually because tyrants have taken it away. It’s usually because people willingly surrender their freedom in return for protection against some external threat. And the threat is usually a real threat but usually exaggerated.

That’s what I fear we are seeing now. The pressure on politicians has come from the public. They want action. They don’t pause to ask whether the action will work. They don’t ask themselves whether the cost will be worth paying …

Anyone who has studied history will recognize here the classic symptoms of collective hysteria. Hysteria is infectious. We are working ourselves up into a lather in which we exaggerate the threat and stop asking ourselves whether the cure may be worse than the disease.”

The End Goal Is Total Control

Vladimir Kvachkov, a former colonel of Russian military intelligence, would probably agree with the assessment that the fearmongering has a purpose other than keeping us safe from a respiratory virus. In the video above, Kvachkov refers to COVID-19 as a false pandemic, planned and implemented with the goal of gaining totalitarian control over the world population.

“It’s all a lie and needs to be considered as a global, strategic special operation,” Kvachkov says. “These are command and staff exercises of the world’s behind-the-scenes powers on controlling humanity.”

Comparing it to a military exercise, Kvachkov says the ultimate aim is to reduce the world’s population to 1 billion “ordinary” people and just 100 million of those in control — with the ordinary people being there to serve the 100 million.

In short, he says, the “artificially created” and “purposely spread” coronavirus has four dimensions. The first is religion and population reduction; the second is to establish political control over humanity; the third is to deflate the world economy; and the fourth is to eliminate geo-economic competition.

It’s important to remember that the World Health Organization, the World Economic Forum and the United Nations are all private corporations, yet they wield tremendous power over the governments of the world and act above the law of any given nation.

Big Tech also plays an enormous role in this usurpation of power. The power grab probably couldn’t succeed without them, because the greatest threat to would-be totalitarian rulers is an informed and educated public. By banding together to censor certain information and segments of the global population, Big Tech is instrumental in undermining the foundation for democracy around the world.

What Can You Do?

More and more people around the world are now starting to wake up to the fact that the restrictions put into place under the guise of protecting public health are here to stay. They’re part of a much larger, long-term plan, and the end goal is to usher in a new way of life, devoid of our previous freedoms. This means that, eventually, everyone must decide which is more important: Personal liberty or false security?

To derail the technocrats plan, we have to make full use of the judicial system, which is why Fuellmich and his team are suing to expose the fraud, put an end to pandemic restrictions and restore our human rights. Class-action lawsuits are currently being prepared in the U.S. and Canada.

Lawsuits are also being prepared in Germany, and the Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee is working on the creation of legal guidelines and data caches that attorneys around the world will be able to use to file their own legal challenges. Fuellmich can be contacted via www.fuellmich.com, and the Corona Inquiry Committee via corona-ausschuss.de.

In closing, here’s a summary list of suggestions compiled from Fuellmich, Yeadon and others as to how you can resist and be part of the solution:

  • Turn off mainstream media news and turn to independent experts — Do the research. Read through the science. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s The Defendernewsletter is one reliable source for “banned” news. Other sources include America’s Frontline Doctorsand Doctors for the Truth (Medicos por la verdad — a group of more than 600 doctors in Spain).
  • Continue to counter the censorship by asking questions — The more questions are asked, the more answers will come to light. Arm yourself with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how and why this pandemic simply isn’t a pandemic anymore.
  • If you are a medical professional, especially if you’re a member of a professional society, write an open letter to your government, urging them to speak to and heed recommendations from independent experts.
  • Sign The Great Barrington Declaration,15which calls for an end to lockdowns.
  • Join a group so that you can have support. Examples of groups formed to fight against government overreach include:

?Us for Them, a group campaigning for reopening schools and protecting children’s rights in the U.K.

?The COVID Recovery Group (CRG), founded by 50 conservative British MPs to fight lockdown restrictions16

?The Freedom to Breathe Agency, a U.S. team of attorneys, doctors, business owners and parents who are fighting to protect freedom and liberty

Sources and References

The Best of Joseph Mercola

===========================

Previous articles

August 2016

July 2016

June 2016

May 2016

April 2016

March 2016

February 2016

January 2016

December 2015

November 2015

October 2015

September 2015

August 2015

    •  A sea of frothing, sweary, often pompous, intolerance  By Tim Black, Spiked Online, 29 August 2015

July 2015

June 2015

May 2015

April 2015

March 2015

February 2015

    •  

January 2015

 

The Great Global Warming Hoax

By John Rofe, Fraud Investigator, Auckland, New Zealand.

Editor’s note: this post comprises a series of emails, submissions and documents send to NZ Ministers, Government Departments, shadow Ministers and major NZ media describing the current global warming hoax, including compelling supporting evidence. 

As background, this PowerPoint presentation explains the reasons why Russia and most countries didn’t get into the emission reduction programme, and the history and background for the climate fraud: THE KYOTO PROTOCOL CO2 – Russian presentation to Vladimir Putin 2004.

Email from John Rofe to David.Seymour@parliament.govt.nz; Simeon.Brown@parliament.govt.nz; Shane.Reti@parliament.govt.nz; Judith.Collins@parliament.govt.nz; Stuart.Smith@parliament.govt.nz

Dear friends and politicians,

My explanation of the beginnings of the Great Global Warming Fraud above (3rd item “Many Whistleblowers”) just scratched the surface.

Just lately I have been astounded by the efforts of the new Marxist-Leninist Government of New Zealand with its “free gifts for all” policies on the one hand and the tearing down of New Zealand’s past cultural achievements and re-writing of history on the other.  I didn’t know until this year that I was a racist because my skin was white, or that I had oppressed thousands of people I have never met or now need to be dispossessed because of crimes I never committed.  I had an idea I was a rapist from The days when Germaine Greer was a youngster.  But I was innocent of that too.

Marc Morano has Just published his new book “Green Fraud” to explain the not really secret but very embarrassing agenda of the Soviet Socialist Biden Government’s “Green New Deal” in the USA.  You can buy it on Amazon (but soon before it gets banned by order of Jeff Bezos) because it exposes their conspiracies.  You will understand why, when you watch this brief YouTube clip…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4_KvKJzf3M

Since Senator Rand Paul’s book “The Case Against Socialism” was stocked by the public library in Auckland a year ago, I became aware that the climate fraud which Comrades Ardern and Shaw promote had much wider implications for our future. 

Recapping….

It was easy to understand why PM Jacinda Ardern would go for total lockdown into level 4 in late March 2020, because that was consistent with her goal to convert New Zealand into a socialist state.  Step one was always about the destruction of capitalism.  So she was probably aware that the way to achieve that was to shut down the economy and make all business – large and small – totally reliant on Government handouts.  If large, she could victimise the business owners if they made a profit afterwards.  If they went out of business after she had subsidised staff wages, she could criticise them for incompetence and the failures of capitalism.  Successive shutdowns would destroy business reserves.  It worked well.   So well it got her re-elected for effectively bribing everyone with their own money.  Perhaps we Kiwis aren’t the sharpest knives in the drawer?  But surely this was necessary to “be kind be kind be kind be kind – ad nauseam” to our old people and not kill us with the new version of flu.  Right?

The next step was to declare a “Climate Emergency” and this justified and continues to justify the imposition of curbs on the freedom of expression and association for private citizens and freedom of the press.  The global socialists are on her side as is the Davos brigade of globalist billionaires.  The news media and education system are already in her pocket anyway – committed socialists, at least many of them.  But very soon, no-one will be able to write an email like this because it will either be classed as racist, homophobic, violent, or some other form of hate speech.

Jacinda learned well from her communist handlers.  She learned to make her personal brand of Bolshevism (self-styled as “progressive socialism”) appealing.  But the problem is that they use the same tried dogma now that everyone has forgotten that the “Socialist Unity Party” members have taken over the “NZ Greens”…

  • “Equality of outcome” is an intoxicating thought, but it caused the demise of the USSR, because eventually they ran out of other people’s money
  • “It takes a village to bring up a child” is great for parents who go in for child neglect, but bad for children and when the state demands greater loyalty, that philosophy eventually undermines or collapses parental authority and responsibility, and then the children dob in the devious parents once taught in state schools to do so (this has started in the UK already).  That worked initially, but eventually backfired in the USSR too.  Eventually for many, the state simply became the enemy and walls needed to be erected to stop them escaping.
  • The bourgeoisie have to pay for the collapse.  So tax and blame all landlords for the sin of property ownership, blame financiers (getting the Reserve Bank to be responsible for housing cost inflation is just a case in point) for all failed policies.  It worked in the USSR, too but after a while there was no source of capital to ensure production and productivity growth.  Blame industrialists and eventually, industry and enterprise died and everyone became poorer.
  • Where will she site her Gulags to lock up us reactionaries? 
  • Collapsing the economy is permissible if you can point to fake emergencies… Jacinda’s pet Climate Change Emergency and Covid-19 will do for now.  As Rahm Emmanuel famously said, “Never let any disaster go to waste”.
  • So throughout the OECD where democracies need to be bowled over, we hear the stirring cry of the global communist cadre, “We Must Build Back Better”.  This is a promise for the future that will never be delivered but it will justify destroying the economy with poorly thought out major projects and bring us to our knees.  A bit like her climate change fraud. The sun will cause the coming Grand Solar Minimum with earthquakes, volcanism and cold weather.  Jacinda will take the credit for the cooling until it gets cold and then she will blame it on Bill Gates (why not? Anyone stupid enough to want to reflect the sun’s rays from earth deserves all he gets).
  • The Fuhrer/Chairman/ Dear Leader could always decide who were good or bad, who were the heroes and who would become the enemies of the people.  It she can get a law through parliament to outlaw the very material we are made from, anything is possible.  As with Stalin’s, Hitler’s and Mao’s purges, you can kill off your enemies once you control all of the apparatus of the totalitarian state.  If the media ignores the purges, did anyone actually die?

And so from USA to Canada and from France to New Zealand, wherever there is climate fraud, or over-reaction to Covid-19, we now have communists in the driver’s seat, steered by Senor Antonio Guterres the top global socialist – the snake who is now running the UN. 

Why Communists?  Because, whether they dubbed themselves as progressive socialists or not, that delusion of equal prosperity for all first entails poverty for all, and then Communism with totalitarianism and secret police (whether called Gestapo of KGB) to keep everyone in line.

When do the confiscations of property start?  I wonder.

Best regards

John Rofe

============================

From: jcrofe@xtra.co.nz <jcrofe@xtra.co.nz>
Sent: Wednesday, 24 February 2021 2:05 pm
To: ‘news@tvnz.co.nz’ <news@tvnz.co.nz>; ‘newstips@stuff.co.nz’ <newstips@stuff.co.nz>; ‘news@nzherald.co.nz’ <news@nzherald.co.nz>; ‘news@heraldonsunday.co.nz’ <news@heraldonsunday.co.nz>; ‘Judith Collins’ <Collinsjudith88@gmail.com>; ‘David.Seymour@parliament.govt.nz’ <David.Seymour@parliament.govt.nz>; ‘Jacinda.Ardern@parliament.govt.nz’ <Jacinda.Ardern@parliament.govt.nz>; ‘James.Shaw@parliament.govt.nz’ <James.Shaw@parliament.govt.nz>
Cc: ‘Peter J. Morgan’ <pjm.forensic.eng@gmail.com>; ‘Terry Dunleavy’ <terry@winezeal.co.nz>; ‘Juana Atkins’ <sb@thebfd.co.nz>; ‘andrew.tait@niwa.co.nz’ <andrew.tait@niwa.co.nz>; ‘john.morgan@niwia.co.nz’ <john.morgan@niwia.co.nz>

Editor’s note: the four attachments referred to in this email can be viewed at The Biggest Fraud in Human History, 030321 .The email / letter also appears on https://thebfd.co.nz/2021/03/03/open-letter-to-the-msm-nz-parliamentarians/  

Subject: You don’t need to tell lies about Anthropogenic Global Warming to have a positive effect on the environment

Dear Addressees,

It seems our PM and Minister for Climate Change are determined to keep repeating the lies spread by the UN IPCC and their Socialist cronies, together with active support from NIWA and the Ministry for the Environment, that we humans have a detrimental effect on the earth’s climate, when it is the variability of the solar cycles – moderated by the impacts of the water cycle that truly influence both climate and weather.  One or two of you understand that by demonising CO2 you make yourselves look ignorant and yet you are too scared to stand against a clear and present fraud and by your silence or inactivity, you now appear on the addressee list.

I may be an experienced fraud investigator and forensic analyst, but any person with a modicum of common sense can see that in your decision-making and the governance of the Climate Change Commission, you have “given to the fox the management of the hen-house”.  Sack the lot.

I can now prove by simple arithmetic that humans don’t influence the climate to any material effect but as you all have closed minds.  But I will park that for use in a court of competent jurisdiction.

As media representatives or Parliamentarians, your lack of zeal in questioning the three fundamental lies and willingness to promote the Great Global Warming fraud simply denotes a failure in your duty of care to taxpayers. 

  • Human carbon emissions have no effect on the climate and there is nothing of substance to support that lie.
  • The suggestion that CO2 is a pollutant could be understandable coming from and ignorant child but coming from someone claiming to be an environmentalist means that person(s) are lying about their credentials.
  • The suggestion that humanity can change the climate by reducing atmospheric CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions is so easily disproven that those accepting that line of argument must have avoided asking even the easiest of questions.

Your actions aren’t just mistaken.  There is no Climate Emergency, as the first attachment above shows. 

The marked degree of distance between the truth and your own assertions denotes your own activities as potentially fraudulent.  My short note summarising the points differentiating excusable mistake from actionable fraud is attached and the only thing remaining is for the NZ Serious Fraud Office to do its job.  The leaders at the UN  are open about their global power grab and cynically leverage off your complicity to avoid being held to account…Today we hear…

https://mailchi.mp/cfact/un-frightening-report-debunked?e=fc9def239e

Theirs is the biggest fraud in world history.  It was clear to the Russians and the majority of those in emerging economies that was the case, and aside from the willingness of those ramping up their own emissions, and their aspirations to benefit from the stupidity and ignorance of people like you, few intend or have the ability to prostrate their economies to the nonsense promoted by unaccountable UN bureaucrats.   The Russian Academy of Sciences stands by the validity of their own scientific experiments which show natural forces as the cause of climate change.  The Russians are most affected by both warming and cooling of climate and weather, so their infrastructure projects are designed to cater for the coming forecast changes – cooling, not warming.

My letter to Minister Shaw of 15 May 2019 (as attached) containing allegations of your government’s complicity in the promotion of fraud is still accurate and relevant.

Given my career history of unravelling frauds of all shapes and sizes, and the fact I benefit in some of my investment projects from the very fraud that you are either covering up with active censorship, or promoting, by your action or inaction, I have a clear duty to reveal what I know and demand an investigation by the proper authorities.   So please stop hiding behind your woke protocols and agree to commission a full enquiry.

I am happy to stand by my analysis of the difference between the science-based Russian facts and UN IPCC bullshit as per the attached short summary, headed simply “Earth’s Climate is a Truly Wonderful Thing”.

From my investigations I have encountered at least one member of the Climate Change Commission attacking the reputation and credibility of the brilliant scientists who perform their work for the good of humanity despite continual harrassment.  I have been distressed by the way, “playing the man rather than the ball” has been used to destroy blemish-free careers.  While this activity is common for fraudsters, hundreds if not thousands of reputations have been destroyed, to either advance or defend the UN IPCC’s cynical and deliberate climate fraud.

Your role in the fraud is a tribute to either the poor advice you are getting or your own malfeasance.

So please sharpen up your act while you can.

In the unlikely event you are remotely interested in the environment as opposed to your PC career aspirations, I will be prepared to show you the sort of things an environmentally serious person invests in. Certainly, if you are an environmentalist it will capture your attention and hopefully imagination.

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

====================

There is No Climate Emergency – A Direct Public Repudiation of the Great Global Warming Fraud


The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“UN IPCC”) was born to commit fraud because it was set up to find evidence of human influence on climate. The warming of the last century is neither unprecedented, nor is there evidence to substantiate the allegations made. Instead, and to attempt to substantiate man-made warming, there have been unscrupulous attempts to “fiddle the figures”. When called out on that, the fraudsters resorted to the time-honoured tricks of misdirection, disinformation, sophistry (to cloud the debate with excessive complexity), ad hominem attacks on critics and straight-out lies. The fraudsters rely on various databases of surface temperatures to combine exaggerated figures. But their problem is that these don’t represent the global position – only fragments of it. Many of the figures used in UN IPCC compilations come from biased computer models and not thermometer readings. The only reliable global database we can use is provided by the NASA satellite network and monitored under contract by two separate organisations (RSS and UAH). This provides timely monthly reports that are automated and tamper-proof. This shows the average temperature for the Lower Troposphere, which is the environment we live in. It covers the period since satellites were sent up in 1979. It shows that if there is no change to the modern rate of warming (which we are falsely told is suicidal), the increase over the next century will be about 1.4oC. but not the 4oC. to 5.5oC. estimated by the cabal of fraudsters and their local agents. Whether they are wrong by design or simple mistake makes no difference. The Climate Emergency is a fraud, as is the Zero Carbon legislation and the Paris Accords.

See full article and diagram at 210205 – The Biggest Fraud in Human History

The UN IPCC’s problem is that human carbon emissions cannot possibly exert a significant influence on the climate.
There has never been any empirical scientific evidence to corroborate that extravagant claim. The causes are solar variability and the way heat transfer is handled by the air, oceans and the water cycle on a diurnal, seasonal and multiyear cycle. The total of the three human-affected greenhouse gases (CHGs) (CO2, CH4 and N2O) in the atmosphere is less than 420 parts per million of air. In contrast, water vapour (which varies from place to place and time to time) is on average 10,000 parts per million. Of the 420 parts per million CHGs that we influence, humans cause only 4% to be emitted. The rest is due to nature. But even worse for the fraudsters, atomic absorption spectroscopy proves that each water vapour molecule has five times the efficacy of each molecule of the human influenced CHGs for incoming solar radiation. For outgoing infrared heat radiation, a water vapour molecule has 12 times the CHG efficacy of the human affected CHGs CO2, CH4 and N2O. A law of physics (Beer-Lambert) even proves the impotence of CO2as a CHG.
The power of water vapour on its own is easily able to be confirmed from diurnal weather data by any Year 12/13 school student.

Analysis of NIWA’s daily weather data in New Zealand shows the combined effects of the water cycle have a major or dominant effect on the distinctly different climates of New Zealand cities and towns. QED.


Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant and is essential for all life on earth. More CO2 is preferable to less CO2.


Whether we spend $34 billion or $34 trillion, New Zealand Zero Emissions strategies cannot change earth’s climate.


Thus the New Zealand Climate Change Commission has a major problem gnawing at its collective conscience.


John Rofe, Experienced Fraud Investigator, email:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz Auckland, NZ, 5 February 2021

 The Most Complex Fraud in History, 16 December 2020

Note: This email and attachments were sent to all 120 new New Zealand MPs and others as below.

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 16 December 2020 11:54 a.m.
‘Jacinda.Ardern@parliament.govt.nz’;  ‘David Seymour’; ‘Hon Judith Collins’   +++++++++

Subject: The most complex fraud in history – some holiday reading

Editors’s note: As below, See all attachments as PDF document: The most complex fraud in history, 16 December 2020

There can be no doubt that the current Climate Emergency declared by PM Jacinda Ardern is ill advised, wrong in science and simply a fraudulent enterprise.

But to be fair it was possibly born before she was.  Since its inception as a result of debate over the book “Limits to Growth” in 1972;  then followed by the establishment of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change  (”UN IPCC”) in 1988, the sheer improbability that humans could dominate two of the strongest forces known to humankind (the sun’s variable electromagnetic power and earth’s water cycle) has led to a rapidly increasing sophistication being employed by them and their spreading circle of colleagues within the scientific community.  Sophistry is the mark of all complex frauds, and my indictment will stand until addressed.

Anthropogenic Global Warming” is a political fraud, and everyone from Prince Charles to Atonio Guterres has mortgaged their future credibility with insanely dire warnings of coming Armageddon…which have been imminently threatened since 1989 and yet fail to materialise on an almost yearly basis…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftmkgsrfDNs&feature=youtu.be

What the UN IPCC- aligned “scientists” have produced is not science but confirmation bias, and this fraud is in some instances a repeat of what happened in Russia with Trofim Lysenko (many, and perhaps up to six million deaths as a result).  The US public was warned about the danger of scientists doing what politicians wanted in 1960 by retiring President Dwight D. Eisenhower, but that was 60 years ago and few now remember.  Now any scientist who does not act to benefit the fraud is either sacked or marginalised.

The UN IPCC demands allegiance of world governments whose taxpayers provide an almost open chequebook for scientists who spread the word… but have never shown any scientific evidence to support their contention ab initio that human “carbon emissions” cause “global warming”, or their default positions “climate change” and “Climate Emergency”.  The weather data in no way supports any of their claims.

New Zealanders – of all people – should be able to recognise the fraud, because we live in a mixed maritime/continental climate where a differentiating factor is the power of both water vapour (96% of all greenhouse gases) and the full water cycle..

The attachments to this email provide six short essays on the subject…included within these is the fact that because the level of atmospheric water vapour massively affects the climate from time to time and from place to place, it totally dominates the tiny residual impact of slowly rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, on weather and climate.  It gives the lie to the fraud.

I won’t go into the role of the elites or their purpose in driving this global fraud.  But I will comment that if the elites did not monopolise the mainstream media narrative and the UN IPCC did not monopolise the scientific narrative on the fraud, the general public would have seen through it years ago.

  1. A general summary of the science – headed “Global Ambition” and “Greenwashing”.  The heading only represents the supposed purposes for using this fraud to dominate New Zealand  politics.   Although these political leaders were not the first, they are now certainly the drivers and hope to profit from the fraud – both now and in the future.
  2. Which natural cycles provide the dominant cause for climate change and how did the scientific community create the false notion that human carbon dioxide emissions drive all natural effects? 
  3. What do I mean, when I mention the use of misdirection to fool the public?
  4. A view for the public which shows how each and every one of us can spot the fraud. (Loss of Innocence Part I)
  5. Probable cause of climate change…from time immemorial. (Loss of Innocence Part II)
  6. Spelling out why no-one will see justice. (Loss of Innocence Part III)

See all attachments as PDF document: The most complex fraud in history, 16 December 2020

New Zealand politicians are now divided into two camps.  One camp that is hoping for advantage from the fraud (led by PM Jacinda Ardern and Minister for Climate Change James Shaw)  and another camp who either have not addressed their minds to the matter or who dare not confront this issue because those foreign forces driving it are too powerful.

So all the politicians in the new 2020 parliament form two camps…frauds and wimps.

But why would you not be a wimp?  The NZ Serious Fraud Office has walked away from my complaint on this.  The Ministry of Justice and NZ Police ignore it hoping it will go away.  My latest complaint addressed to NZ Police is attached above.  No response ever received.   (all documentary evidence is available on request).

But the truth never does go away.  Does it?

Enjoy your holidays.  The fraud will still be here when you get back.  It will scare your children until enough of you wimps cry, “Enough!”

Yours Sincerely & Merry Christmas

John Rofe

=======================

Date: 26 October 2020

Email to: New Zealand senior politicians and news media,

We 7.8 billion humans in the digital age are lucky that the truth is normally very simple and straightforward, the facts are so easily accessible.  But where lies and fraud are both officially promulgated and government-sanctioned, the truth is normally regarded as subversive.  Because we have so little time to question accepted ideas, it is extremely serious for us to find you are all guilty to a greater or lesser extent of spreading both lies and facilitating large scale corruption.  So I hope my complaints will be acted upon by the proper authorities.  (after a year of procrastination, a fairly forlorn hope – regrettably)

So if you are of a frail disposition and cannot handle the truth, please stop at this point.  If you wonder what I am saying about you, read on.

For reasons I won’t go into, I watched the entire Trump Congressional impeachment hearings on YouTube.  I had always believed that the US voters must have hit rock-bottom electing someone as “alternative” as Donald J. Trump as President, so I thought he would get his “come-uppance” during the hearings.  On the contrary, there were no allegations of impropriety made against Mr Trump because everyone delivered evidence under oath and clearly there was no evidence available for them to give.  Their clear wish was to dish the dirt, but none was offered.

The annoyance at improper US vice presidential involvement in Ukraine’s affairs, expressed by the state department officials during impeachment hearings came to the fore.  But nothing improper by Trump was presented, yet a cascade of allegations against Joseph Biden came flooding out regarding his part in the Ukraine Burisma scandal involving his family and himself.  It convinced me that Joe Biden was a corrupt Vice President to Obama and there is now plenty of evidence to show the Obama administration was well aware of his corrupt practices.  To be fair, the people of the USA have become desensitised to the systemic graft which permeates US politics called “Pay for Play” for which no impeachment is ever considered.  So they need to get their act together and tidy things up.  What Mr Biden got up to was disgusting.  You cannot elevate a crook to become the leader of the “free world”.

Recently, we find stories and even compelling evidence emerging from the US Department of Justice that the Russia-Gate impeachment process was a simple fraud with active FBI and CIA complicity.

Every day, evidence of Biden’s complicity in fraud in a Democrat-controlled US Congressional hearing is never mentioned in the mainstream media, yet 10,000 miles away I could hear and see the testimony on the live video feeds.  Today, half of the USA is getting the Biden scandal news, but it is barred from every mainstream media outlet other than Fox.  Our own TVNZ and the NZ Herald have been taking the news feeds from the US media which continues to attack Trump and actively support Biden and his frauds, and our media has repeated the feeds verbatim.  Let me name the media organisations involved…

  • CNN and MSNBC
  • Washington Post
  • New York Times
  • The Guardian

How did the so-called “free world” find itself exposed to such criminality of intent and execution?

These listed are the same news organisations promoting the United Nations sponsored climate fraud (for which a short 2-page summary of the simple and not so simple truth about Earth’s climate is attached above).

Every day Mr Trump’s alleged involvement in serious malfeasance, warranting an impeachment circus, appeared in our mainstream New Zealand media.  The massive and prominent stories of his wickedness often seemed just a total fabrication, whereas I knew the facts.  Mr Trump is so guileless and unscripted that I wondered how he got into such a position of power, but in many key issues of the day, his position is principled and steadfast.  (Is he genius, buffoon or both?) The US voters certainly got the guy they elected.  So how can we ever believe our own press in future?  They are guilty of suppression of the truth in the same way that they routinely suppress the evidence of climate fraud.  For instance:

  1. Every warming event is magnified.
  2. Every cooling event is not mentioned at all, unless it occurs locally – i.e. within New Zealand.
  3. Historical charts that have been falsified under the auspices of the UN IPCC, NOAA, NASA, CSIRO and NIWA use scale and choice of periodicity to create the illusion that human carbon emissions cause climate change, when there is not only no empirical scientific evidence that they do, but masses of easily verifiable empirical scientific evidence that they do not.  The fakery of the UN IPCC’s junk science can never even be questioned in the New Zealand media without a bucket of ink from foreign journalistic scum (or local stooges) being thrown over it.

The real changes to average temperatures always seem to get noticed first by those living in the large land masses of the Northern hemisphere because of the otherwise moderating influence of the world’s oceans.  That was the case between 1980 to 2000 when I became convinced that rapid heating was occurring in Europe, Asia and North America (because I was regularly travelling there in international consulting roles during that time).  There was almost no noticeable warming in New Zealand during that time.   The end of the “little ice age” also came late for us in the 1860’s after the massive blizzards of 1863.  (I found this time lag well understood in Russian Academy of Sciences climate reports.)

We are now more than 50 years into the space age and more than 40 years into having access to empirical global temperature data with 2-3 days of the end of each month.  Yet what do we get?  Just spin.  Sure, according to empirical satellite data, the Earth shows no signs yet of atmospheric cooling, but it has shown no signs of average  warming for the last three years either.  So who are these fraudsters pushing the fake climate crisis?  The UN claims it is science but no, they just use the same sort of sophistry when they gather and summarise the scientists’ reports, that commercial fraudsters use to make 2+2= 5.  This isn’t just the biggest ever fraud, it is so widely decentralised every player appears on the face of it to be potentially innocent of bad intent.  The climate is elegant and the sophistry of the fraudsters is equally so.  And thereby we are all deceived…well not all of us.

Now from the space weather and in accordance with existing predictions from the Russian Academy of Sciences, we are entering what is probably going to be a 200 year event called a Grand Solar Minimum.  When the cold comes, then we will have a genuine crisis because there has not been such an event since the world population was less than 1.5 billion people.  For the last three years a series of major anomalous climate cooling events has begun in those same Northern land masses, while for us the warming continues because we are still warmed by the surrounding seas.

So, you can watch the news flow in the few days ahead of today and decide from the following…. 

  1. On climate …my “version of the truth” is that solar cycles and the terrestrial water cycle determine major climate fluctuations.  See this video which contains a forecast for the coming week for North America showing the kind of information which will be suppressed in NZ media by week’s end:

https://youtu.be/qtbkhYSy7R0

I can now prove absolutely that the UN IPCC narrative is just a fraud…but it isn’t rocket science because analysis of our automated and official  met. data will show anyone that.  All you need is six hours over a two day period and a computer and any year12/13 student can do the maths.

Does anyone really think the result of anomalous cooling will get media mention this week?   This video also contains  the realisation by the US President (at 2 minutes 27 seconds in), that it is the space weather dominated by the sun that causes climate change.  At last the Trump Administration is realising the Russians and Chinese scientists are right (see the final link on my 2-page article below).  Now that the science is agreed between the major powers with their massive scientific establishments, surely it is time for the NZ SFO to deal with my climate fraud complaints against NIWA, PM Ardern and Minister Shaw?

You may wish to avail yourselves of the full and complete details of this week’s new US legislation.  It is called  the “Promoting Research and Observations of Space Weather to Improve the Forecasting of Tomorrow Act” or the “PROSWIFT Act”.  Ref S.881 and covered by the official POTUS Statement dated 21 October 2020.

As an aside…for those who have read the POTUS’ statement…

Obviously, with ever greater reliance on electricity as our energy source, the impact of a Coronal Mass Ejection (a CME from solar storms) will not just potentially take our affected regions back to the “Stone Age”, but because electricity generators will increasingly monopolise our energy supply mix, our resilience to a CME event will also be diminished.  So while we must diversify away from finite supplies of fossil fuels, the process will come with escalating risk.  A CME (such as the Carrington Event of 1-2 September 1859)  has only happened once or twice throughout recorded history, but when it did there were few implications due to our low tech production and communication systems.  Unlikely as the possibility of a direct hit may be, the events are not uncommon and the cost of a CME could prove a near extinction level event.  So the security implications of the PROSWIFT Act are obvious…and not just for the protection of assets in space, but also our civilisation.  By reference to my summary of Earth’s climate you will see reference to the web site www.spaceweather.com run by the brilliant NASA scientist Dr Tony Philips and this contains the data that does have a causal effect upon Earth’s climate – even though some aspects require more investigation.

  1. Is it wise for you to continually channel the ultra-corrupt Joe Biden and his media backers?   There are several key questions that Biden does not give any straight answers to, and he has not even held more than a couple of genuine rallies during this electoral cycle.  Our media gives him a “free ride” and I have to wonder why we are so heavily subjected to another country’s political spin.  The climate fraud is as much as a Democrat led fraud as anything else, and like any experienced fraud investigator, I don’t like coincidences that benefit the same actors.  Because this malfeasance appears to be “a genie that is out of its bottle” these items below summarise some of the allegations :  (this stuff is backed by much more as the internet is overflowing with material as two of Hunter Biden’s former partners come out of the woodwork.)

https://youtu.be/aiiSq7toqlQ

and

https://youtu.be/lDdxavJoLrM

and China…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPm0EduPhgY&feature=youtu.be

But affecting China’s CCP involvement too – really?  https://www.newsletter.zerohedge.com/click.html?x=a62e&lc=kfc&mc=c&s=Fdi&u=v&z=YaKiOBr&

Many of those I have seen ratting out the Biden family are Democrats who claim they want to stay Democrats because they believe the Democrat party of old, but like some Americans we have personally met, they couldn’t vote for Hillary and now they cannot vote for Biden because if nothing else, Mr Trump isn’t gaming the American people.  He is dealing to the “Deep State” actors who on the face of it seem to be selling out the USA.  Yet our mainstream media completely ignores what is the biggest tale of fraud in US history.

Meantime the biased articles about Mr Trump continue to flow.  Will the “Trump Derangement Syndrome” mean he does get voted out, to be replaced by Mr Biden or not?  That remains to be seen, but I don’t really care about the US election outcome.  

What I do care about is the use of the public media to convey state-directed Orwellian conspiracies to the people of New Zealand.  How many times does it take to repeat lies in order to ensure they become accepted as facts?  I guess you could ask Greta Thunberg or one of Minister Shaw’s “groupies”.  Our children should not be so deliberately subjected to political manipulation or taught fake science in our schools.

As they used to say in the USSR just before its collapse in 1989,  “The only way we know for sure that a rumour is true, is when it is officially denied.”

Is that what we Kiwis have now come to?

Despite regular warnings, successive New Zealand’s governments and even our education system have become wedded to the climate fraud.  The problem for the bad actors is that there is a ripeness of time for all frauds to be revealed for what they are.  The present POTUS has signalled the time for those in the USA will come if/when he is re-elected.  This makes this election significant to the political scientists.  But whether that happens  during 2020 or not the truth will out, because truth, like science is apolitical.

PM Ardern and Minister Shaw may have “jumped the shark” at their own October elections, but that does not make wrong right.  Nor does it excuse institutional complicity in the UN IPCC-centred climate fraud, and in this respect, the complicity of NIWA, the Ministry for the Environment and the universities (particularly Auckland and VUW) need to be singled out for review.

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Fraud would not have been possible were it not for the active involvement of the “media barons” among whose ranks, the activities of George Soros and his “Open Society” needs close official examination.  In NZ it is TVNZ and the Herald who need official investigation.  They have let us all down.

As for you, are you part of the solution, or part of the problem?  You probably know which….

If you say that, “climate change is causing bad weather, storms or forest fires”, you are already one of the bad guys.  So get an education.

Please clean up your act because the NZ public deserves better.

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

============================

THE EARTH’S CLIMATE IS A TRULY WONDERFUL THING

After 15 years of trying to figure out whether the “Warming Alarmists” or the “Climate Change Deniers” are right, I have concluded that the causes of climate change are almost totally natural…solar variability on the one hand (because the sun provides 99.9% of Earth’s energy) and the water cycle on the other (because 71% of the Earth’s surface is covered by water and its evaporation, condensation and precipitation can be seen to affect the climate everywhere, from place to place and from time to time).  Just elegant natural homeostasis.

1.15 trillion tonnes of surface water is converted into water vapour every day and being lighter than air, it rises to the skies, cooling as it ascends (because the air cools by 6.5oC with every 1,000 metres of altitude). Then it forms clouds and they mask 60-70% of Earth’s surface. When condensation has completed the cycle, and minute water vapour droplets coalesce into rain drops, hail or snow, precipitation of an approximate 1.15 trillion tonnes descends, leaving between 15-20 trillion tonnes in the atmosphere at any point in time.

So the sun heats the Earth and the water cycle moderates both the day-time heating and discharge of night-time heat into space.  This is easily provable from official published meteorological data, yet no-one is interested in fact checking, because it would end the gravy train for so many over-paid pseudo-scientists.

Over geological time, the Earth’s attitude to, and the distance from the sun has been the cause of the massive variability in the global temperatures between ice ages and intervening inter-glacial periods.  These “long period” changes are referred to as Milankovich cycles, but they are of no immediate relevance.

For the “Alarmists” to blatantly ignore the 10,000 years history of the current interglacial period (known as the Holocene) and impute a dominant role for humanity’s effects in the changed levels of certain trace gases is at best a gross exaggeration.  There is no evidence that any change in atmospheric carbon dioxide has caused climate change although the reverse has been indicated as possible from Antarctic ice core analysis.

For our leaders to be conned by the protestations of parties benefitting from the deception that it is “settled science” (i.e. UN IPCC) is at best incompetent or at worst malfeasance.  We rightly expected NIWA, the Ministry for the Environment and cabinet ministers have exercised rigorous oversight of public expenditure. 

For our Minister for Climate Change to write a letter in response to my provision of evidence (in 2018) to inform me that good science is never settled, but in this case he is sure it is, defied all logic.  There is no empirical scientific justification for his actions so this showed that no independent New Zealand due diligence was ever performed before the Zero Carbon legislation was enacted by our Parliament. 

It is often argued that the motive for the deception has been the desire of people beyond our shores to tax an element of the periodic table that is the very essence of all life on Earth – carbon.  That was why finding human involvement in climate change was central to the role of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.   With an open chequebook from many governments, the OECD’s scientific community was set to work to employ “confirmation bias” and sophistry in order to achieve the required result.

Around the world and in most countries (from the outset) the bogus nature of this hoax has been resisted by scientists. They are in part the heroes of this sorry business even though blatant systemic media bias in favour of the hoax has left them impotent and ignored (even ridiculed) despite no evidence supporting the supposed orthodoxy.  But every serious scientist works in a silo.  In critic’s silos their expertise is contested, but the overwhelming impossibility of the UN theory disappears into the mist of deliberate sophistry.  In 30 years of deliberate malfeasance, science and the scientific method has been corrupted.  Censorship follows.

2.

How did climate science get corrupted when the corrupting process occurred in the plain sight?

  1. The Vostok ice core experiments were alternately ignored or misinterpreted.
  2. The historical impacts of solar variability were actively suppressed – whether they came from the 11- year regular solar cycles, or the longer term Grand Solar Maximums and Minimums.
  3. The volume of human influenced “greenhouse gases” was overstated and their efficacy magnified.
  4. The measurement by atomic absorption spectroscopy of the impacts of various gases was ignored and the impact of the Beer-Lambert law of physics which down-rated the efficacy of additional concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane was also minimised by either intent or modelling emphasis.
  5. The true natural power of the water cycle was de-rated by deliberately splitting up the three thermally active phases of (i) evaporation – yielding water vapour, (ii) condensation – yielding clouds, and (iii) precipitation-yielding rain hail or snow (by which high altitude H2O is transferred to earth’s surface with cooling effect). It is the water cycle that always provides the climate with moderation.
  6. The automatic cleansing effect of the water cycle is deliberately ignored and in particular the way in which rain brings carbon dioxide (which is also heavier than air) and all pollutants – including residue of the worst catastrophic events earth can sustain – back down to where we live, farm and fish.
  7. The impact of the variable heating from sub-sea volcanism is little understood as is the impact of changes to the magnetosphere from changes in the variability of solar electromagnetic energy.
  8. There is a large area of study still into the role and impact of the changed cyclic influx of galactic cosmic rays on cloud formation and the huge variability in the changes in the thickness and temperature of Earth’s Thermosphere.

With new missions now on their way to Mars, “Climate Science”, the one-dimensional perspective of Earth’s climate being enclosed in a greenhouse is akin to the now rejected flat earth theories of the 17th Century.

Climatologists now keep a weather eye on the “space weather” (key variables are published each day on www.spaceweather.com ). There is growing evidence that it is the space weather (where the role of the sun dominates) that drives our terrestrial climate.  Certainly, that has been the interpretation of the folk running the Russian experiments on the International Space Station.  Their views are shared by many NASA astronauts.  So what is delivered to us as “settled science” is really just a set of theories for which there is no empirical scientific proof at all!”  Human carbon emissions don’t have a significant role to play.

While we are told that many countries do not support the actions of the UN (such as with the Paris Accords), the fact is that there are good and proper reasons to object – and from objectors there is considerable  empirical scientific evidence, in addition to the factors that were accepted by the Russian Academy of Sciences in this 2014 presentation:  (please forgive and forget the audio: concentrate on the screen shots)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdNw8-Cq8h8&feature=emb_logo

The use of “misdirection” techniques is too obvious to ignore and this suggests there is an undercurrent of intent to deceive in much of the material I have reviewed.  So the proper authorities have been informed.

John Rofe            Auckland, New Zealand                                                                                                       20 October 2020

============================

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 5 October 2020 4:31 p.m.
To: ‘terry Dunleavy’
Cc: ‘Hon Judith Collins’; ‘Paul Hunt’; ‘Gerry Brownlee’; ‘Hon Scott Simpson’; ‘Peter Goodfellow’; ‘geoffduffy@lycos.com’; ‘Peter J. Morgan’; ‘Jock Allison’; ‘Deborah Alexander’; ‘John Ansell’
Subject: I think this may be the most important three pages Judith Collins will read today/this week
Importance: High

Hi Terry,

Attached as “The Loss of Innocence for Jacinda’s Team of Five million” ( The Loss of Innocence for Jacinda Ardern’s Team of Five Million – Part I ).  It will be the kiss of death for Jacinda’s nuclear moment if anyone in National bothers to read it.  Please feel free to circulate it as widely as you wish.  It contains proof regarding real [as opposed to political/official ‘science’ and how that matches the observed weather.

To support this for the non-believers, a document for the Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy shows the relative efficacy of water vapour, methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide [not attached but available by request].  This needs to be factored by volume, where water vapour totally dominates.

To also support this for the non-believers are the three schedules [not attached but available by request] showing the observations of how temperatures and humidity are matched and the dominant role of water vapour in reducing the diurnal temperature range.  Those started as casual observations because I simply couldn’t believe that hundreds of over-paid climate scientists around the world wouldn’t already have done such comparisons.  It seems they haven’t.  I even selected days with no Foehn North-Westerlies to reduce the differentials between East and West. 

The three key variables of climate between say Napier and New Plymouth (and elsewhere) are Latitude, Altitude and Humidity.  At high school in the 1960’s we just learned that continental climates varied from maritime climates.  How “maritime” a climate is, is indicated by its humidity…and the other features of the water cycle, clouds and rain.

Clouds aren’t just a factor in the calculation of Earth’s energy balance, they are also an important climate variable from place to place and from time to time.

As the second requirement for its establishment as a UN agency, was to show the human influence on climate change, the UN IPCC scientists were not stupid when they separated out the various components of the water cycle and then minimised the impact of each.  If they couldn’t show humans could influence the climate, what role did they have?  That was their motivation for the fraud that the Club of Rome saw as creating a vehicle for One-World government and to get their global enterprises far fewer separate tax codes and thereby reduce business complexity.

Prof. Duffy saw through it as did the Russians.  But in general, it enabled the UN IPCC-centric scientists to call clouds as one dimensional and do the same with water vapour.  Then divide and conquer with fairy stories about CO2, CH4 and N2O.

I have two further parts to write and publish…

Part 2. What do I believe causes climate change (summarising the evidence I have sighted for the role of the solar cycles)

Part 3.  A dissertation on the use of miss-direction and sophistry to mask the biggest fraud in history … as perpetrated by a cast of thousands.

I am extremely grateful for the guys at NZCSC who persevered in helping me.

Hopefully, someone will take the time and replicate my calculations.  It just takes 2 hours in the afternoon and 3 hours the next morning.

Best regards

John Rofe

=====================

AN EGREGIOUS FAILURE OF THEIR DUTY OF CARE!

THE GREAT UN IPCC GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD AND ITS NEW ZEALAND AGENCY

Albert Einstein is reputed to have said: 

“The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it.”

Please take the time to think this through for yourself:

Is it logical to consider that three relatively ineffectual human-influenced greenhouse gases which in total are less than 4% of the volume of the far more potent gas (water vapour) can drive climate change, solely because a corrupt group of bureaucrats at the United Nations say that it is “settled science”?  If one investigator, acting alone, can see through this fraud, then the scientists at all influential New Zealand institutions have not performed proper due diligence.

[NZ Green Party leader] James Shaw & [NZ Prime Minister] Jacinda Ardern, with the help of NIWA and complicit scientists, promote the following lies:

  1. That the changes in human emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide cause climate change, their increases cause warming and our use of fossil fuels is the “culprit” driving the Modern Warm Period.
  2. That carbon dioxide is the dominant so-called “greenhouse gas” and it is a pollutant.
  3. That humans can restore climate equilibrium by reducing our so-called “carbon emissions”.

The principal causes of climate change are well known because the 100,000-year cycles of glaciations with short interglacial intervals are caused by cyclical changes to earth’s orbit of the sun (known as Milankovich cycles).  The shorter significant variations that have caused periods of relative warmth and cold have been due to the changed activity that varies during 11-year cycles, as the solar poles switch places.  The visible effect is marked by variations in the number of sun spots that appear on the face of the sun.  Groups of active solar cycles (as with three during the 20th century) cause climate warming and groups of markedly inactive solar cycles which are referred to as Grand Solar Minimums, cause atmospheric cooling and the perturbation of the magnetosphere.  Short-term anomalous weather is just a mixture of pattern and chaos. 

If you thought the science supporting the UN IPCC’s fraudulent hypothesis is settled, think again.  (http://www.petitionproject.org/) The UN IPCC report number AR5 fails to even ascribe any role to the dominant greenhouse gas water vapour and clouds that have always acted to moderate earth’s climate through volcanic eruptions and asteroid strikes causing mass extinctions.  Carbon dioxide is essential for all life on earth and is not a pollutant.  Like all of the others, the global warming fraud is common malfeasance.

At best, our leaders are derelict in their duty of care to the general public, but to have ignored all of my warnings since 2018, they must have had a mindset of denial and/or vested interest.  At worst they are deliberate and manipulative fraudsters, relying on those who influence or control the UN IPCC,  ensuring the media foster the deliberate lie that anyone who points out the obvious fraud is just a conspiracy theorist.  For this reason I have laid complaints with the NZ Serious Fraud Office, the NZ Police and the Secretary for Justice.  The alleged fraudsters are aware of my allegations.  So irrespective of their political affiliations:

I am convinced that no-one implicated in this fraud is a fit or proper person to stand for public office.

John Rofe, Experienced Fraud Investigator                                           Auckland New Zealand, August 2020             

===============================

FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE OFFICER COMMANDING NZ POLICE – HENDERSON  AREA                                                                                TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE

By Hand

Dear Superintendant,

Following many years of investigation and supported by both empirical scientific evidence and having diligently and independently pursued the empirical observations to back up my allegations, I wish to register three complaints of fraud.  They are as follows:

FORMAL COMPLAINT REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF SERIOUS FRAUD BY THE CHIEF SCIENTIST, CLIMATE AND ATMOSPHERE, OF NIWA.

FORMAL COMPLAINT REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF SERIOUS FRAUD BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND, THE RT. HONOURABLE JACINDA ARDERN.

FORMAL COMPLAINT REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF SERIOUS FRAUD BY THE MINISTER FOR CLIMATE CHANGE, THE HONOURABLE JAMES SHAW.

I allege they are promoting for personal gain, the quasi-scientific theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, with no empirical scientific evidential support for the de-bunked theory they promote.

Internationally, this has become the biggest fraud in world history and it involves three main limbs:

  1. Falsely representing that human emissions of carbon dioxide gas, methane and nitrous oxide are key drivers of climate change, partially by minimising the role of the solar influence, clouds and water vapour. No empirical scientific evidence exists to support their claims.
  2. Falsely representing that carbon dioxide gas is a pollutant, when it is a gas essential for all life on earth.
  3. Falsely representing that the New Zealand Government is capable of changing the climate by altering the New Zealand emissions of the three gases mentioned in point 1. above.

Herewith is a copy of my email of 4 July 2018 and a letter received in late 2018 containing the Government’s misguided and disproven claims.  Also a copy of my warning to Minister James Shaw that is dated 15 May 2019 that outlines the basis of the above allegations of fraud.

My research has been transparently provided to a wide range of politicians from all parties.  The allegations have been pursued at regular intervals over the last three years.  The Government has relied on a news blackout in the matter and as a result, while they acknowledge receipt of my emails they haven’t made any other response.  I have tried to minimise the impact of my allegations on the people involved and failed to achieve any traction.  This is a blatant abuse of their statutory powers.

I am an active conservationist and the actions of Government, while damaging to the New Zealand economy bring disrepute to both the scientific community and the conservation movement.   

My personal resources have been sufficient to now prove beyond reasonable doubt that an ongoing, systemic and costly fraud has occurred and is planned for the future.  I have been able to independently validate the evidence provided by the international and domestic scientific experts.

My personal resources are not sufficient to prove the parties intended to commit the fraud.  Only you have those resources and are entrusted with the job of protecting the New Zealand public.

There is a massive amount of information available to support this allegation and yet absolutely no empirical scientific evidence to refute my claims.  Herewith are the following documents:

  1. Scope of facts, headed “A TALE OF FRAUD, COMPLICITY AND ARRANT STUPIDITY”
  2. A summary of the evidence against the core fraud, headed “GOOD NEWS- NO CRISIS – AND CARBON DIOXIDE DOESN’T EVEN CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”.
  3. A note on how physical evidence supports the expert empirical scientific evidence provided by the scientists, headed “ARRANT STUPIDITY – or – RESTATING THE OBVIOUS”.
  4. A short paper describing the business, political and media influences ensuring the truth never leaks into the mainstream media, headed “Many Whistleblowers – Yet nothing to be heard”.

This matter is the most serious set of allegations ever provided to a New Zealand Police station because the implications of derivative frauds includes all schemes for Carbon Tax, The Zero Carbon Act, all carbon trading and schemes for selling carbon credits are all frauds and many of the actions of Government departments focused on “Climate Change”  are all parts of the core fraud.

Please therefore provide this letter and attachments to the Commissioner of Police, for discussion with the Secretary for Justice.  The Secretary has been separately appraised.

I believe that neither Minister James Shaw nor PM Jacinda Ardern is a fit and proper person to be elected as part of the next Government.  I stand ready to cooperate with your investigations.

Yours faithfully

John Rofe, Experienced Private Fraud Investigator

========================

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Saturday, 18 July 2020 12:58 p.m.
To: ‘Enquiries’
Cc: ‘Hon Judith Collins’; ‘gerry.brownlee@national.org.nz’; ‘Mafi Tu’inukuafe’; ‘Hon Scott Simpson’; ‘Peter Goodfellow’; ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘Rt. Hon. Winston Peters’; ‘david.seymour@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘alfred.ngaro@national.org.nz’; ‘simeon.brown@national.org.nz’; ‘news@tvnz.co.nz’; ‘news@nzherald.co.nz’; ‘newstalkzb’; ‘news@heraldonsunday.co.nz’; ‘newsdesk herald’; ‘newstips@stuff.co.nz’; ‘Terry Dunleavy’; ‘Richard Treadgold’; ‘Peter J. Morgan’; ‘leighton smith’; ‘shane.jones@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘shane.reti@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘Geoff Duffy’; ‘Jock Allison’; ‘Graham Kearns’
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to NIWA – NIWA’s role in the biggest ever fraud in human history

Attention Caroline:  This is not a normal email because I am hereby notifying NIWA and its directors that they are implicated in a serious and extensive criminal enterprise.  This email exchange is being broadcast and it is being copied to the NZ Serious Fraud Office.

 It attaches a lot of information not relevant to an allegation of fraud because I believe NIWA must work out its own position to advise the Minister in charge and to do that, NIWA must be in a position to match my allegations with NIWA’s own records and research.

Nevertheless, NIWA now faces the allegation of fraud.  The evidence for which I have satisfied myself is compelling, with no room for dispute.

 I urge all readers to begin this email string, by reading my first short email below and then NIWA’s short response.  Then please read on…

“Dear NIWA PR, Management and Directors,

The empirical scientific evidence behind the summary of facts as included in the above one-page attachment marked “A Tale of Fraud, Complicity and Arrant Stupidity”, is all attached herewith in the form of two papers by Professor Duffy, one paper from Dr Jock Allison and my own attempt to establish whether CO2 had any role at all in changing the climate and, if not, whether the role of “greenhouse gas” is totally monopolised by water vapour and clouds.  The undeniable conclusions from my studies are that water vapour is the only significant greenhouse gas and in effect, changes to the climate are due almost entirely to natural causes as  Professor Duffy has claimed in his evidence.

Thank you for your response on behalf of Dr David Wratt (retired).  I note that because you have referred me to the UN IPCC, you are effectively deferring to its leadership role at the centre of the Great Global Warming Fraud.  During the 16 years since I first contacted Dr Wratt, NIWA has seemingly learned nothing about the cause of changes to the climate (which is very sad, given NIWA is paid to do so) and has likely become integrated within the UN IPCC’s fraudulent enterprise, either as a compliant accessory or as a full “Partner-in-Crime”.

Anyway, thank you for the courtesy of a reply to my first email in this string.  Unbeknown to you, I now hold all the evidential “cards”, so I already know the proper responses to the four questions in my email should have been as follows:

Q1.  There is none,

Q2. There is none,

Q3. There is none, and,

Q4. NIWA has no plans to provide certainty to anyone, nor can it do so.”

 (Memo.  The first two documents I have attached above were also attached to the original email.)

 NIWA and most readers may be unfamiliar with the history between this Government and the writer.  So for the avoidance of confusion…

During 2018 I sent a number of emails to Government ministers advising they were in danger of becoming accessories to fraud as no science supported their climate change rhetoric.

 In September 2018 the Minister for Climate Change wrote to me (as attached) claiming that he had no idea on the science but his fledgling coalition government accepted that the UN IPCC position reflected the “overwhelming consensus”, which it never did.  I then spent a further fruitless six months revisiting the science with the UN IPCC’s so-called “international experts.”   I wanted to find reasons to discontinue, so finding further evidence of malfeasance was certainly not what I had hoped for.  Meantime, the media contained sporadic news of defections from the more highly credentialed ranks of UN IPCC scientific advisers who all claimed that paid UN IPCC bureaucrats and politicians altered their scientific evidence in order to reflect UN IPCC policy, yet had fraudulently maintained their names as authors or even lead authors to the reports.

I then concluded that The New Zealand Government must be exercising some sort of agency from the UN IPCC to import its fraud into New Zealand.  On 15 May 2019 I wrote to the Minister for Climate Change, copying the Deputy Prime Minister and Prime Minister, advising them as to the specific areas where they could be complicit in fraud – not the least of which was that the suggestion of an “overwhelming consensus” was at variance with the facts.   If the Minister misrepresented NIWA’s advice, will NIWA be saying that the Minister for Climate Change misled the people of New Zealand that the science was settled, when neither NIWA, nor he, nor the UN IPCC had any empirical scientific evidence that could possibly withstand public scrutiny?  If so please explain?

The seriousness of NIWA’s answers (by comparison with my own version at Q1-Q4 that I have spelled out above) will become apparent.

We have a Government trying to persuade us to reduce CO2 emissions when there is no empirical scientific evidence that increased atmospheric emissions have any impact at all on the climate.    If you think that this cannot possibly be true, I wish to refer you to the interchange between the NZ Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Juliet Gerrard and Mr Peter Morgan, the CEO of Environomics (NZ) Trust Inc., as attached above and marked “191207…”.   She was unable to provide any empirical scientific evidence although Mr Morgan could, so she disengaged, and there are records of plenty of other prevarications in addition to those of NIWA.  In late 2004 I had the same experience with NIWA’s Dr Wratt but did not document it at the time.  The “Augie Auer Memorial Prize” of $10,000 offered in New Zealand remains uncollected as does at least one similar prize overseas. As someone whose first official roles in investigating fraudsters within organisations such as Equiticorp and Goldcorp from as early as 1989, and after 15 years of dogged pursuit of the truth of this case, I believe I am entitled to presume this is just a fraud like any other – even if the sum involved now ranks in the trillions of dollars and is a semi-global fraud (one third of the world population are affected, two-thirds are not – so the fraud and the corruption of science at the hands of the UN IPCC is not quite global – yet).

We have a Government trying to persuade us that CO2 is a pollutant and there is too much “atmospheric carbon” while in fact CO2 is a gas that is essential to all life on earth and the world’s vegetation not only wants three times as much as that which remains in the atmosphere today, but NASA has studies and satellite photos which show a greening of planet earth, due to the increase that has taken place over the last 30 years.  It is colourless, odourless and non-toxic at current atmospheric levels.

As for spending money to solve a non-existent problem when there is absolutely no chance of altering either the atmospheric levels of CO2, or effecting any change to the future climate by human action or restraint, the futility of the Minister for Climate Change’s actions and future published plans show that he is unfit to hold political office.  NIWA should review the Minister’s outrageous claims in 2018 as extracted from attachment 001. above.

  1. “the Government believes that  climate change is a serious global issue that requires international cooperation and domestic action.”
  2. “It is clear that the overwhelming consensus is that human induced climate change is occurring.”
  3. and on the Zero Carbon bill, “ The Zero Carbon Bill will set a target in law, which will be a long term commitment for New Zealand’s transition to a net zero emissions economy. It will provide certainty for businesses, households and for local government so they can make confident decisions about the investments they need to make over the coming decades.”

But anyway, my thanks to NIWA for the confirmation provided through your response that…

  1. NIWA apparently cannot differentiate between the sophistry required to support fraud and what constitutes “empirical scientific evidence”.  (You surely must be aware that there is no empirical scientific evidence of anything relevant contained  in those sections of the UN IPCC’s AR5 report that you just referred me to?)
  2. NIWA is complicit in the UN IPCC fraud by using the UN IPCC’s standard evasive response.
  3. NIWA has scientists as well as administrators who have been corrupted by association with the UN IPCC, or they would realise that 18 years of using the phrase “consensus” instead of making proper enquiry (as you are paid to do) places you at the centre of this fraud.
  4. NIWA has supplied “Lead Authors” for UN IPCC studies and yet there has never been any evidence (let alone empirical scientific evidence) to confirm the effect of changed atmospheric levels of CO2 on the climate.
  5. While frauds are committed by people and not by faceless organisations, NIWA’s involvement shows a failure of governance as well as management.

Whether NIWA’s complicity has occurred to you or not, I am confident that your response makes NIWA at the very least an accessory to the biggest fraud in New Zealand history as agents for the biggest fraud in world history, now being perpetrated by the UN IPCC and its Secretary General Sr. Antonio Guterres.

It seems to me that this Ardern-led government has made a number of multi-billion-dollar decisions justified solely by the illusion that there may be some foreign scientific justification.   I therefore doesn’t seem to me sufficient for NIWA to pass the buck to the UN IPCC, the way NIWA has done in your email to me, dated 15 July 2020 as shown below.  This has all the hallmarks of modern-day “Lysenkoism”.    NIWA is now at least in considerable part, responsible for the contagious effects of this fraud in spawning Ponzi and other commercial frauds, including those of the NZ Government in levying a carbon tax using deceptive and misleading information to justify it, planting huge forests that will have no material effect on the climate, for carbon trading schemes which serve only to enrich bankers and promoting the purchase of carbon credits (by firms such as Air New Zealand) – which are all fraudulent as they lack the substance of genuine purpose.  NIWA’s role is not to participate in projects designed to fleece New Zealanders, whether coerced by corrupt politicians or not.

The farming sector and the Oil and Gas industry and all those who rely on NIWA for weather and climate advice deserve to know what NIWA’s evidence for this mythological but human-instigated faux climate crisis is.  This is a fraud that has depended to date on everyone who is either driving it, or complicit, trying to hide behind faceless and unaccountable bureaucrats somewhere else.   NIWA’s devious response to my email now seems a part of the sort of dance that all fraudsters go though when discovery is close. 

NIWA regularly publishes data about the weather on the public internet.  So anyone with access to the internet can witness the huge role that water vapour, humidity and clouds play in the temperature, the weather and the climate; CO2, CH4 and N2O have absolutely no identifiable impact on daily, weekly and yearly weather and I have empirical scientific evidence that the radiative impact of those three trace gases is negligible by comparison with the radiative effect of water vapour alone – yet water vapour has many other drivers including (inter alia) the impact of variability of cloud cover and the more than 400 trillion tonnes per year of evaporation and precipitation. 

NIWA must surely be aware that during geological time, from 540 million years ago, the atmospheric level of CO2 reached 7,000ppm (compared with only 415ppm today) and  since then there has been no correlation between the movements in the level of CO2 and the movements in the global temperature.  During the last 600,000 years of the Pleistocene era that has been covered in detail by the ice core analysis performed by teams of French and Russian scientists at Vostok in Antarctica, the evidence was absolutely clear that changes in atmospheric temperature pre-dated the change in atmospheric CO2 by 400-800 years, thereby demonstrating that CO2 is a trailing indicator but certainly not a possible driver of changes to the climate.  The ice core analysis performed in Central Greenland that provided temperature data  going back 11,000 years showed that the Holocene climate temperature maximum occurred during the Minoan Warm period some 3,300 years ago at about 6 degrees C. higher than today.  Moreover, it showed that the current global average temperature that NIWA believes shows “unprecedented warming” is in fact considerably lower than 75% of the last 10,000 years of the Holocene.

Please pause at this point to review the expert submission of Dr Jock Allison ONZM, FNZIPIM, to the Zero Carbon public hearing.  It shows in Fig 3 that there is no correlation between the level of atmospheric CO2 and temperature over 540 million years of geological time – that is, according to the consensus of all geologists.  In Fig 4. The Greenland ice core temperatures provides an insight into the temperature of the Holocene interglacial period and show that there is no “Climate Crisis”.  These two schematics are on Page 5 of Dr. Allison’s submission. 

This would lead any prudent person who is appraised of the facts to conclude that changes in atmospheric CO2 have never even appeared to have any influence over the climate.  NIWA’s support for the widely published fraud brings all of science and environmental policy into disrepute.

For there to be evidence of CO2, CH4 and N2O effecting warming, the gases actually need to be capable of doing so, which as it emerges, they are not.  (This is the biggest likely indictment of UN IPCC’s fraud and it is also the biggest likely indictment of NIWA’s seeming negligence.)

The Hon. James Shaw’s letter to me of September 2018 offered me and all New Zealanders the certainty of solving a non-existent problem for the nation.  Not only is there no climate crisis, but CO2, CH4 and N2O have almost no influence in changing the climate.  NIWA is either complicit in Minister Shaw’s misleading statements or has influenced him to issue them.

Which is it?

My role as a fraud investigator requires me (among other things) to examine the evidence and opinions of everyone involved in an issue.  Over 15 years I have had correspondence with many scientists from many countries but now that I am totally convinced that Anthropogenic Global Warming has nothing to do with science and is politically inspired only (and have presented evidence to prove it), I need to address the consequences of this discovery.  My intention is to spend the balance of 2020 fund-raising for private litigation in 2021.  But that is only if the NZ Serious Fraud Office does not pick this up and run with it.  If one political party were to pick this up as an election issue then the way will be open for a week or so for you to get your act together.  First to check the science and  second to work out a strategy for regaining public trust.  Let me make this plain, the NZ SFO has turned down the opportunity to investigate it once; and if they do so again their leadership needs to be promptly changed.

In order to fast track NIWA’s rehabilitation, you should speak with the scientists whose work is included in this document.  They are the experts, not me.

NIWA’s Chief Scientist should review the atomic absorption spectroscopic tests for water vapour, CO2, CH4 and N2O and the way in which the Beer-Lambert Law of Physics drastically reduces the impact of changes in the atmospheric level of CO2 on temperature.  NIWA should also review the attached two papers prepared and presented as evidence by Professor Emeritus of Chemical Engineering, University of Auckland, Dr. Geoffrey G. Duffy, D.Eng, PhD, BSc, ASTC Dip., FRSNZ, FI Chem E. 

Supporting the two papers provided by Professor Duffy attached, I have separately tested the conclusions reached in them and as a result I agree that only water vapour and clouds have true relevance as greenhouse gases.  This is supported by empirical observations as noted in the two attachments marked as “Casual observations…” as above.  These were drawn from web-based meteorological data. 

The UN IPCC has a reason for its fraud which should have been apparent to scientific observers.   Article 2. requires the UN IPCC to show what human influences affect changes to the climate, or if they cannot do so, the organisations that were instrumental in the establishment and the UN IPCC’s conduct will no longer have the incentive to do so and the UN IPCC will be redundant.  But NIWA scientists have a different duty of care and have become so focused on compliance with the fraud, that NIWA has seemingly neglected to point out what the Egyptians and Chinese knew thousands of years ago, that it is the sun which dominates earth’s climate – at least in between the less frequent but much larger perturbations of the Milankovich cycles. 

While the Russians, Indians and Chinese are properly advised and are taking steps to deal with an approaching Grand Solar Minimum at the commencement of solar cycle 25, NIWA appears to cling to the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory that was disproven 20 years ago.  Of course those countries face the same challenges we do of resource depletion, the demands of exponential population growth and pollution, but they waste no time or resources on foolish fads.

In fact, the modern temperature records since 1934 do not even show any correlation at all between global temperature and Global CO2 emissions.  May I jog NIWA’s thought processes and provide a short video of the sort of information that is provided to President Vladimir Putin….(I suggest you should freeze each screen-shot because the presenter’s English is poor and he has a cold)…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdNw8-Cq8h8&feature=emb_logo

(Dr Habibulo Abdussamatov the presenter, is the eminent  scientist who runs the prestigious Pulkovo Observatory and was responsible for supervising the Russian experiments on the International Space Station.  If you examine his presentation closely you will find that his predictions for the last six years have been borne out by the changes to the solar magnetosphere and his forecast of extreme impending cold this century is now being taken up by many others.)

Readers of this email may be unaware that of all the many computer modellers’ climate forecasts used by the UN IPCC, only the Russian one has been accurate to date, so must be taken seriously.  The others escalate projections of temperature increases that have been at least three times those of NASA satellite recordings showing the temperature graphs for the Lower Troposphere since 1979.  The only purpose they appear to fulfil is to continue to extract ever more funds from governments by meeting the UN IPCC’s agenda.

Yet the average of inaccurate models is still the source of UN IPCC alarmist temperature projections for the future.

Despite the surface temperature measurements being projected by the UN IPCC to accelerate – or as the UN IPCC inspired claims, “Faster than previously thought”, the temperature is only increasing or decreasing within the range of natural variability as shown below…

The biggest upward spikes of the graph above denote el Nino years and their size denotes the fact that 70+%  of the earth’s surface is ocean so the huge heat sinks called simply “the world’s oceans” act as something of an intermediary between the sun’s intensity and the weather we enjoy on planet Earth.  The graph you see above is published monthly, from the NASA satellites, which are monitored by two independent science based organisations (UAH and RSS).

Meanwhile, the earth’s outer defence against the un-survivable frigidity  of outer space, which is called “the Thermosphere” is thinning and cooling according to the recorded physical evidence, at a great rate – right at this point in time.  That is what exercises the minds of leaders such as Putin, Trump, Modi and Xi Jinping, yet clearly does not suit the machinations of Secretary General Guterres, Prime Minister Ardern or Minister Shaw. 

What happens as the activity of solar cycle 25 once again naturally builds over the next 4-5 years remains to be seen.  However unlike the UN IPCC and NIWA, the Russians and Chinese are using real science and are taking note of the lessons of history.   President Trump is trying to follow, but with active Democratic Party leaders’ connivance in the UN IPCC fraud, his options are limited.

My summary of findings based on examining NIWA humidity and temperature data is, as attached above called “Physical Evidence of the Impact….”.  It consists of five pages and with it is enclosed two graphs of recent movements in the level of atmospheric CO2 which is a separate attachment above marked as “CO2 at Keeling …”.  The two papers attached above which are marked “Casual observations…” complete the record of my humble experiment which seeks the truth.

But what was NIWA thinking?  NIWA has all the source data and yet was somehow lured into a fraud that is so obviously deceitful.  Now NIWA’s fraud can be seen by anyone who observes the weather in New Zealand.  Please consider the following “self-evident observations” to support the empirical scientific evidence of Professor Duffy and also Dr Allison.

NIWA scientists and everyday observers know that most deserts with 0.2-0.5% humidity are usually hot during the afternoon due to the low level of water vapour, and similarly, get very cold at night for the same reason.  Massive temperature ranges of hundreds of degrees Celsius are the hallmark of solar system planets lacking “greenhouse gases”.  So the massive diurnal temperature ranges like those in Siberia (up to 107 degrees Celsius in one day!) are a hallmark of low humidity denoting water vapour as the sole dominant greenhouse gas.  NIWA scientists must know that many farmers often check to see whether they can see cloud cover or the stars before going to bed at night, as a precautionary check against the possibility of massive overnight heat loss that can lead to frost.  

The difference in maximum and minimum diurnal temperatures between Auckland and Christchurch, even during hot, still days, is often due to the difference in real humidity; and the overnight heat loss (NIWA’s favourite indicator of a “greenhouse gas”) should have reinforced its true role in NIWA’s Chief Scientist’s mind.  While it is not the only driver of climate, why has NIWA never considered the candidacy of humidity in the difference between the climates of Napier and New Plymouth (same latitude and altitude), between Wellington and Masterton and between Greymouth and Christchurch? 

Then consider what happens when the non-radiative impacts of water vapour and clouds come into play?  Water vapour and clouds vary by the hour and by the day and yet CO2 varies only slightly by the year and decade.  Somehow the dominant natural greenhouse gas (water vapour) finds itself either excluded, or deliberately minimised in many UN IPCC peer-reviewed papers on climate change.

That is the UN IPCC’s game, but what is NIWA’s objective in promoting the interests of the UN IPCC…and why?

In my own insight into the motivation behind the fraud ( marked “Many Whistleblowers…) I named NOAA, NASA, CSIRO and NIWA among those organisations which have altered temperature records at about the same time in an apparently orchestrated move.  Now I want to know why NIWA did that.  Last time I asked this, I was threatened with punitive action by one of your PR team.  Will I get an honest response this time, now that Dr David Wratt is no longer on NIWA’s staff?

To protect myself, this email is going on the public record.   The longer this goes on, the worse the damage to the reputations of science, scientists and the conservation movement will be when the public realises that they and their children have been lied to for the last two decades.

Many sensible people are already suspicious because of all the repeated threats of apocalyptic events that have been held over people’s heads since the UN IPCC was first established and issued its first of several “ten years to Armageddon” warnings in 1989.

Why frighten the children?  Why teach them fake science?  NIWA can change this perception, but only if the empirical scientific evidence provided by Drs Allison and Duffy is accepted.

Your call.  But remember I am happy to litigate if necessary.

Kind regards

John Rofe, Private Fraud Investigator

======================

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Saturday, 11 July 2020 12:54 p.m.
To: ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’
Cc: ‘todd Muller’; ‘Hon Scott Simpson’; ‘Hon Judith Collins’; ‘Hon Nikki Kaye’; ‘Rt. Hon. Winston Peters’; ‘simeon.brown@national.org.nz’; ‘alfred.ngaro@national.org.nz’; ‘shane.reti@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘Terry Dunleavy’; ‘peter@lockfinance.co.nz’; ‘david.seymour@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘shane.jones@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘Jock Allison’; ‘Barry Brill’; ‘Geoff Duffy’; ‘John Ansell’; ‘news@tvnz.co.nz’; ‘leighton smith’; ‘newstips@stuff.co.nz’; ‘news@nzherald.co.nz’; ‘newstalkzb’; ‘newsdesk herald’; ‘news@heraldonsunday.co.nz’; ‘andrew.laxon@nzme.co.nz’; ‘Peter J. Morgan’; ‘Jim Tucker’
Subject: There is no embargo on the publication of the truth

Dear PM and Minister of Climate Change,

Please find attached a summary of the essential underlying facts after completion of my 15-year enquiry into the Great Global Warming Fraud.

This information may upset you, and if so I apologise for the shock.

In my next email I will provide all the evidence to support my claim that you each – as the Prime Minister and Minister of Climate Change – have either failed to do proper due diligence before taking your actions to waste billions of taxpayer dollars, or else are simply committing malfeasance by lying to the public.  Given the warnings provided to you both over a three year period I believe I am justified in using the common term for malfeasance, rather than either “ignorance” or “stupidity”.

The problem for corrupt but powerful people like you is that the courts love empirical scientific evidence that is supported by inter-locking, self-evident truths.  It typically trumps big names, rock-star scientific reputations, foreign conspiracies and popular misconceptions.

Just as a series of Popes in the 16th and 17th centuries could not counter the fact that people woke every morning and observed the sun rise in the East then later set in the West, the self-evident truth was always that earth revolves around the sun and it rotates each day.  Luckily I am in the happy position of being able to show the public why your actions are so flawed.  The sun dominates our climate, as well as the climate of all other planets within the solar system.   When the self evident truths that we all see every day of the year are pointed out to the public, the game will be up.  You like everyone else will wonder how you could have been so gullible. 

There has never been any consensus among the scientific community about Anthropogenic Global Warming theory, because there has never ever been any empirical scientific evidence to support the fraudulent assertions of the UN IPCC.

The leaders of the world’s major (CO2) emitting countries, Messrs Modi, Trump, Putin and Xi Jinping are doubtless already aware of this.  That is why they are likely laughing at our leaders’ stupidity and why Putin is building floating nuclear power stations for the frozen Arctic regions (to ensure cooling water intakes cannot be iced up) while also completing his fleet of huge nuclear powered ice-breakers to cope with what they believe will be the cold of an unfolding Grand Solar Minimum (each ship has greater cost and tonnage than New Zealand’s entire Cook Strait ferry fleets) .  Forget what they say, look at what they are doing.  Their actions are informed by the expectation of cold rather than warmth.  But I don’t wish to buy into whether that will eventuate, although the change they expect seems on track at this point.

The major net CO2 emitters are clearly being differently advised to you, along the lines of this semi-audible 15-minute video clip below.  (Hint … this Russian expert is difficult to understand so you would be well advised to pause the video at each new slide he presents and read the slide while muting his talk.)  He is probably reading directly from it because of his limited English language skills.  At 3.00minutes his graph of the Vostok ice core analysis explains why during the Pleistocene era (the last 2,7 million years) CO2 has never influenced the global climate.  If you also look closely at the graph at 15-mins 23 secs, you will see the reduction in solar activity is exactly today what he predicted many years ago and then consistent again, during his talk in 2014 during the active peak of solar cycle 24.  He has the credibility of any scientist who can predict what is happening to the climate, using the “space weather” to confidently show his client, the Government of the Russian Federation, what they can expect.

Dr Habibulo Abdussamatov has been Director of the Pulkovo observatory and he ran the Russian scientific programme for the International Space Station.  His forecasts for a looming Grand Solar Minimum and “little Ice Age” date back many years and have in November 2019, finally been confirmed by NOAA and NASA.  I guess those two organisations are both now trying to work out how to escape their roles in the UN IPCC conspiracy as this email is being written.

For the last few years I have been monitoring the accuracy of Dr Abdussamatov’s predictions from the data shown on www.spaceweather.com .

Also from the work of several others.

At the end of June 2020 the world is still warm, if marginally cooler than it was during the previous months, however, the highly subjective and grossly inaccurate models that the UN IPCC use as the basis for their fraud are no substitute for the observed data.  This unimpeachable graph from the NASA satellites below shows the climate isn’t facing unprecedented warmth, despite deliberate lies to the contrary.  Nor is there any climate crisis as the changes are within natural variability.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_June_2020_v6-550x317.jpg

The UN IPCC’s accepted models show three times the warming shown in the above graph.  You back their inaccurate and subjective models, I back the empirical data. 

The first news organisation or political party to agree to widely publish the attached page will get access to the “smoking gun” evidence that I hold…. before you do.

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

Private Fraud Investigator

See article on why whistleblowers are not heart: Many Whistleblowers – Yet Nothing to be Heard


===========================

A TALE OF FRAUD, COMPLICITY AND ARRANT STUPIDITY

THE GREAT UN IPCC GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD AND ITS NEW ZEALAND AGENCY

As Albert Einstein is reputed to have said: 

“The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it.”

Now think it through for yourself:

It is illogical to consider that three relatively ineffectual human-influenced greenhouse gases which in total are less than 4% of the volume of the far more potent gas (water vapour) can drive climate change, just because a group of bureaucrats at the United Nations say that it is “settled science”.  If one investigator, acting alone, can see through this fraud, then the New Zealand scientists have not performed any effective due diligence.

The Great Global Warming Fraud costs OECD countries between USD1-2 trillion every year.

The most important things you need to know are:

  • Methane and Nitrous Oxide have never had any proven impact on the earth’s climate.
  • Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (“CO2”) is a more prolific greenhouse gas but…
    • There is no empirical scientific evidence that CO2 has ever had a material effect on earth’s climate.  The UN and their supporters have never offered any. Nor can they.
    • The proportion of CO2 emissions that humans influence is less than 5% of the total.
    • The main source of CO2 emissions is “ocean out-gassing” when it is warm.
    • CO2 is subject to the Beer-Lambert Law of Physics and therefore any thermal impact was almost saturated at the pre-industrial atmospheric level of 280ppm in 1850. 
    • CO2 is not a pollutant and “zero carbon” entails the end of all complex life on earth.
  • There was never any consensus to support this fraud…  http://www.petitionproject.org/
  • There is no climate crisis…  https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
  • Plants thrive with three times current levels of atmospheric CO2, (arguably in short supply).
  • The “Milankovich cycles” drive the 100,000-year climate cycles of ice ages and inter-glacials.
  • In between, climate change is dominated by the sun which supplies 99.5% of earth’s energy.
  • The Solar Cycles conform to the Holocene pattern of 200-year periods of extreme cold.
  • The great majority of the earth’s population is led by people who don’t bow to this fraud.
  • Few of those who signed up to the Paris accords have either the intention or ability to comply.  It is impossible for New Zealand, even with total support, to get any value from this.

I warned the Government in 2018 of their likely complicity in a serious fraud.  The Minister prevaricated so I warned him in 2019 of the actionable basis for a possible fraud complaint. 

As a result of their intransigence, I now see no alternative than to accuse the Right Honourable Jacinda Ardern and the Honourable James Shaw of both fraud and deceptive and miss-leading conduct.  I stand ready to support those serious accusations, as and when called upon to do so.

John Rofe, Private Fraud Investigator                                                        Auckland, New Zealand,  10.7.2020

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, 28 January 2020 12:40 p.m.
To: ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘Rt. Hon. Winston Peters’; ‘shane.jones@parliament.govt.nz’
Cc: ‘Hon Simon Bridges’; ‘simeon.brown@national.org.nz’; ‘Todd Muller’; ‘Hon Scott Simpson’; ‘alfred.ngaro@parliament.govt.nz’
Subject: Really Big frauds inevitably require bigger and bigger lies…then the child soldiers are weaponised once the biggest lie of all loses its credibility

Hi Politicians,

Each of you, by signature to the Zero Carbon legislation is now guilty of fraud; and of both complicity in, and actively promoting carbon trading Ponzi schemes.  These are criminal offences and I am directly accusing you of at least being accessories to criminality, along with Antonio Guterres and his fellow travellers.

I have told you before, there is a ripeness of time for all frauds to be laid bare to public scrutiny and opprobrium.   So you need to come clean.

If not, then gather your evidence (if any real evidence exists) and lets litigate.  I simply want evidence that human CO2 emissions have any material effect on climate change.  After two years of asking for this I will continue to accuse you of fraud until you deliver it.  As a taxpayer I am entitled to an explanation for your actions – as is everyone.

From 15+ years of my research into the spurious UN IPCC claims, I have found there is no justification for any spending on attempting to reduce “climate change” because the only measurable effects of the human use of the fossil fuels since 1850 has been the increase in atmospheric CO2, the increased wealth and well-being of all humanity from abundant and cheap energy and the greening of planet earth as a result of increased atmospheric CO2.  But because of the long duration of CO2 within the atmosphere, and because human actions account for less than 4.3% of all CO2 emissions (as accepted by UN IPCC) there is absolutely no possibility of confidence that a reduction in human emissions could cause the future level of atmospheric CO2 to fall.  Natural variability could even cause it to increase, despite controlled draconian global attempts at human reduction, which will never happen.

As there are still far more countries planning to increase CO2 emissions than those trying either successfully or unsuccessfully to control them, there is zero chance of any credible reduction in human emissions being made within the next 10-20 years.

The only thing your misguided actions can achieve is to destroy the reputation of science and the scientific method, to go hand in hand with destruction of our economy.  All this to bring about the enrichment of a few of your fellow travellers and higher energy costs for those least able to afford them.

Each adult human inhales a tiny 400 ppm of CO2 to go with 20% O2.  We exhale air heated to body temperature, with 100% relative humidity and CO2 emissions at 4% (or 40,000ppm).  So our inhalations cleanse and oxygenate our blood and we emit 100 times the CO2 we inhaled.  The oxygen exhaled is reduced to 15% or less.  Given the weight of CO2, we each exhale about 360kgs of CO2 per annum.  Animals many time more – or less.  What do you want to do?  Tax us for our exhalations?

Contrary to your advice from the UN IPCC and your ignorant cabal of “junk” scientists, (by both satellite imagery and experimentation) the increase in atmospheric CO2 has already benefitted all plant life, and will continue to do so.  It increases the vigour of plant growth and makes all plants more drought resistant.  There is and has never been any evidence that CO2 is a pollutant and together with water and oxygen, CO2 is one of three reasons that complex life exists on earth, whereas it exists nowhere else in the solar system.  If the atmospheric CO2 concentration falls to 150ppm  or less, then all life on earth will die and the carbon cycle may end.

We are carbon-based life forms and our extinction as an apex mammal would likely be an early effect of low atmospheric CO2.

There has never been any evidence that CO2 has either been a significant influence on climate change as atmospheric CO2 levels have always been a trailing indicator of major temperature fluctuations for as long as scientists could perform their experiments and calculations.  It is generally accepted that ocean de-gassing of CO2 occurs when it is warming, and conversely taking up more CO2  when the atmosphere has been cooling, is the cause for this.  There is even a lag time due to the fact that the ocean takes longer to take up heat and to cool, than does land.

The solar and space weather sciences, together with all the known history of the solar cycles and the Milankovich cycles are an extra-terrestrial cause for the variations in earth’s climate and together with the attempts within the seas and atmosphere to equalise heat distribution as the earth rotates, these account for climate change and  remove any justification for your erroneous presumption that humans have a significant effect on climate.  Localised warming yes, but it dissipates with no significant, measurable effect on climate change.  The extremely active solar cycles of the 20th century alone account for the increases in temperature of earth’s climate during the modern warm period, which despite the deliberate “official”  doctoring of temperature records have only achieved a total increase of 1.1 degree Centigrade between the year 1850 and December 2019.  That is, over a period of 169 years.  So the average increase during that period is well within natural variability.  Forecasts of sea level rise and atmospheric heating made by the UN IPCC junk scientists are simply ridiculous.  But they do show that junk scientists will do anything for money.  Yet still, one by one, they defect.

For politicians of any colour to support the fraud, you must first be prepared to believe that an improbable theory promulgated to advantage sectional interests is superior to the existence of the Beer-Lambert Law of science, because that law already relegates all increases in CO2 to having an inconsequential impact on thermal uptake and therefore climate, at even the pre-industrial levels (i.e. about 280ppm).  Atmospheric CO2 is already thermally saturated and can provide no significant future effect within an enormous time horizon.

You have been taken for idiots by a small group of extremely well paid and funded scientists, UN politicians and their bureaucrats, most of whom have no idea about climate science.  Simply put…from the Google search below… the “we” is you…

“Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive”

“(Sir Walter Scott) Whenever we deceive others, in order to make things better for ourselves in the moment, we deceive ourselves most of all.Oct 25, 2017

If you want to prove that human CO2 emissions have a dominant effect on climate, meet me in court.  I will be happy to litigate this as soon as you are ready.  I want a trial date…so come and get me before I go public, along the lines of my 1 January trial run in the NZ Herald.  A copy of that is at the top of the page.

Your fraud is now pretty obvious, and all the world’s delusional Greta Thunbergs cannot change the laws of physics and chemistry.  Now your “tangle” only gets tortuous as any fair-minded person would accept from the detail below…

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

The following advertisement was placed in the NZ Herald Public Notices on 1 January 2020:

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 9 December 2019 2:08 p.m.
To: ‘Hon Simon Bridges’; ‘simeon.brown@national.org.nz’; ‘Todd Muller’; ‘Hon Scott Simpson’; ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘Rt. Hon. Winston Peters’; ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’
Cc: ‘Terry Dunleavy’; ‘Peter J. Morgan’; ‘John Ansell’
Subject: Merry Christmas

Dear politicians,

In 2018 I warned of the dire consequences of failing to check the science you rely on for public policy settings over climate change.  I warned of the climate phenomena appearing that supported the narrative that we are probably moving into a Grand Solar Minimum.

In 2019 I laid complaints with the NZ Serious Fraud Office and the NZ Commerce Commission regarding your demonstrably false climate change narrative.  Naturally the complaints came to nothing.  I noted the radical shortening of the Northern growing seasons that have further reduced for each year from 2017, 2018 and again in 2019.  I commented on the signs that food shortages will soon loom large due to cold climate crop losses.  The only certainty at this point is that food costs will head much higher in 2020, because despite shortages, we humans can possibly adapt to cope and farmers will now start changing their cropping choices.

In 2020 the earth will reach the bottom of the eleven year solar cycle numbered 24, and it will start into solar cycle number 25.  So the best Christmas present I can offer you is to explain why the solar cycles are so important.  NASA, NOAA, the Russians and the Chinese have indicated that solar cycle 25 will be the least active for at least 100 years and many experts claim the unfolding Grand Solar Minimum will be a 200 year event.

1. The successive ice ages on earth during the 2.5 million year Pleistocene era have historically been triggered by what is known as Milankovich cycles (now generally accepted).  These consist of three separate cycles referred to as “the Tilt variation of earth from the sun”, “the Obliquity of earth’s motion through space”, and “Eccentricity of earth’s orbit around the sun”.  Of these three cycles the most influential is eccentricity and it takes around 100,000 years to happen.  Our civilisation has only begun during the latest 10-12,000 year interglacial period we live in called the “Holocene”, which has now lasted for at least 11,500 years.  A plunge into extreme glaciations is now probably due.  It was alluded to by the expert climate scientists during the 1970’s when earths average temperature had cooled by about 0.4 degrees C., from 1945.  No-one actually knows when it will happen.

2. Within the Holocene period,  The time of maximum warmth due to natural cycles is said to have already passed and it is considered that the Minoan Warm period 3,500 years ago was when that occurred.  So there is good evidence available that points to earth’s average temperatures today being some 2-3 degrees C. cooler than the Holocene temperature maximum.  There are possibly two certainties that will affect us.  The first is that the solar cycles with rising and falling levels of electromagnetic activity will drive the natural climate variations on planet earth as they will the climates of the other planets within our solar system since the beginning of time.  The second certainty (well an extremely high probability) is that at some point the Milankovich cycles will usher in the return of a period of extensive glaciation that is similar to previous ice ages.

3.  Full ice ages with extensive glaciations must be accepted as near certain extinction-level events.  The significance for New Zealand is less onerous than for others, yet that may mean a progressive but effective end to agriculture in the South Island…. as and when it occurs.

4. Our recorded history of the impact of varying levels of solar activity really began with the Maunder Minimum (1645AD-1715AD) but these provided a mathematical trace back to earlier Grand Solar Minimums before the birth of Christ.  Grand Solar Minimums coincide with the coldest periods of “the Little Ice Age” (which ran from about 1280AD – 1870AD).  They also align well with the record of famines and the fall of dynasties in China.  Both the Russian and the Chinese governments take the science behind Grand Solar Minimums very seriously and use the known cycles for their strategic planning.  As a result I commend the history of Grand Solar Minimums to the attention of yourselves and your Civil Defence personnel.

5.  Space exploration and remote climate monitoring only really began in about 1979.  Today the probing of solar influence is a regular event and the effect of the solar cycles on earth’s weather is well-known if suppressed by the mainstream media.

6.  So my Christmas present to you is to provide my personal understanding of how Grand Solar Minimums likely affect the earth’s climate

This will be extremely topical because many believe we have entered a cooling cycle that will last until 2055.  Some believe it will last much longer.  The data supports this conclusion.  The data does not support suggestions that humans, CO2 build-up and/or CH4 build-up cause climate change.  So I think this topic is well worth spending some time on.

The principle indicator of solar electromagnetic activity is visible to humans by virtue of the number of sunspots appearing on the face of the sun each day.  These are carefully counted and conform to maxima and minima based on the stage of the eleven year solar cycles.  Solar minimums are marked by no sunspots appearing for days or even months.  There is a huge and growing body of solid science surrounding this topic.

If we look at the regular eleven year minimum that occurred between solar cycles 23 and 24, there have been 70 sunspot free days in 2006 (or 19 %), in 2007 there have been 152 sunspot free days (or 42 %) and in 2008 there were 268 days (or 73%).  In the tail end of solar cycle 24 there have been considerably more sunspot-free days.  With 2017 at  104 days (compared with 70 in sc23), in 2018 at 220 days (compared with 152 in sc23).  With the year almost up in 2019 the percentage of spot-free days already stands at 76% compared with 73% in 2008.  This signals how the sun is rapidly becoming less active.  From the attached link to a schematic of solar cycles you can see how the eleven year solar cycles vary and in particular the low sunspot numbers of the Dalton Minimum in the early 19th century.

https://spaceweather.com/glossary/sunspotnumber.html

The reduced solar activity has a number of effects.  First the Total Solar Insolation which strikes earth’s atmosphere is reduced.  The second is that the earth’s Thermosphere tends to thin and become colder.  This  variation to earths outer temperature is indicative of what is to come… as we move towards the solar minimum in 2020…

“Thermosphere Climate Index
today: 3.26×1010 W Cold
Max: 49.4×1010 W Hot (10/1957)
Min: 2.05×1010 W Cold (02/2009)
explanation | more data: gfxtxt
Updated 08 Dec 2019”

With reduced solar activity, the solar wind drops.  It is the solar wind which keeps cosmic rays from flooding the galaxy.  The solar wind is also the reason the tails of comets point away from the sun and not at the direction the comet has come from.  So a key measure of the space weather is the solar wind strength and density…

Solar wind
speed: 353.3km/sec
density: 5.0protons/cm3
explanation | more data
Updated: Today at 2116 UT”

There are always cosmic rays intruding in our atmosphere and they result in the increased nucleation of water vapour into low level clouds.  The cloud cover is the primary reflective umbrella for earth, with usually about 65% cloud cover.  So only about 56% of the sun’s rays hit the earth’s surface and any contribution to increasing cloud cover has a net cooling effect.

The Earth is once again being bombarded by the highest intrusion of cosmic rays for the space age…

This below is a snap shot of the current stats from www.spaceweather.com that suggest to me the highest influx of galactic cosmic rays will occur in 2020-2021.

“Oulu Neutron Counts
Percentages of the Space Age average:
today: +10.9% Very High
7-day change: +3.3%
Max: +11.7% Very High (12/2009)
Min: -32.1% Very Low (06/1991)
explanation | more data
Updated 08 Dec 2019 @ 1800 UT”

The solar electromagnetic variation affects earth’s magnetosphere and there is some evidence that the tectonic plates are affected by the changed gravitational effects and by the effect of cosmic rays on sub-surface magma.  However I am not sure how reliable the correlations are between Grand Solar Minimums and volcanism.  Even so the fact that 80% of all volcanoes are under the oceans and they have the potential to heat deep ocean water in a way the surface temperatures cannot, suggests they may have a far greater impact on New Zealand’s eventual weather than anyone acknowledges.  Our climate is maritime by nature, so we are less likely to be affected by cooling solar influences while our oceans remain warm.

So to summarise, the likely effects of the space weather on the climate of earth includes:

1. Variations in Total Solar Insolation (not very large but certainly these are grossly under-rated by the UN IPCC).

2. Variations in the Thermosphere Climate Index because when it cools and thins, the loss of heat at night via infra-red radiation will be greater.

3. Variations in the cosmic ray influx affecting the formation of low level cloud.  This is a climatic feature attributed to large scale flooding and heavy snows during Grand Solar Minimums.

4.  There is a poorly understood effect on both the Northern hemisphere and Southern hemisphere jet streams which leads to them slowing and meandering closer to the Equator.  This leads to reduced temperatures where the loops venture into lower latitudes and higher  temperatures in the higher latitudes when the jet streams venture outside their normal routes.  Historically, we are told this accounts for the massive floods of the so-called “Dark Ages” and the “Little Ice Age”.

From what I can tell from the historical records, the advent of a 200 year cyclic Grand Solar Minimum doesn’t seem to dramatically alter the earth’s average temperature, but it does alter the climate of normally temperate or warm zones.  Hence the snowing in places like the Serengeti, the Sahara and Saudi Arabia in 2018.

In 2019 the effects of the “Eddy” Grand Solar Minimum have become obvious and this has led to recognition by NASA  that the earth is headed for a period of cooling.  Yet all mention of the solar cycles is still absolutely banned from mention in the mainstream media.

Russia and China are already taking emergency steps to protect their food supplies.

Yet you remain asleep at the wheel.   New Zealand is exposed, despite the kindness of our maritime climate.

So may I suggest you give this some thought when you are choosing what to read during your Christmas holidays.  Books by John L Casey such as “Cold Sun” or “Dark Winter” from your local library could be a good start.

Anyway,  I have retired as a Justice of the Peace to eliminate any suggestions of conflict of interest when I plan my year of action.  So 2020 is going to be a whole new “ball game” for me.

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2019 9:46 a.m.
To: ‘news@tvnz.co.nz’; ‘news@nzherald.co.nz’; ‘news@heraldonsunday.co.nz’; ‘newstips@stuff.co.nz’
Cc: ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’
Subject: The abject fear of answering three simple questions

Hi Newshounds,

Humour me.  You will find it worthwhile…because you too were either fooled into drinking the populist Koolaid about climate change, or there are powers that control your news reporting that make our world an Orwellian nightmare, and our freedoms lost.  More factual evidence has been presented in previous submissions .

We have entered an era where there are today, arguably more than five times the number of “scientists” who have ever lived before them.  Many ignore the “scientific method” when it is more convenient to “lose it”.  The contestability test is subordinated to the popularity of a theory.

They now tell us which toothpaste to use and which drugs are good and which are bad,  and in most cases they espouse an undisclosed business, or political reason for doing so.  This deception is nowhere more prevalent than the area of climate science where fake news is promoting an orthodox agenda of various trans-national groups, and now this and its sub plots have become the biggest-ever fraud in human history.  Real conservation has been prostituted in favour of fakery.  Yet the science at the heart of the paradigm is missing and can never be discussed in polite company.

And now we have the 11,000 pseudo-scientists’ report – really a blog opinion piece with the “likes” of others signified – heralded as yet another scientific breakthrough.

This is the latest of the faux authoritative scientific studies… https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biz088/5610806

The surveyor of opinions was an obscure forestry blog site at Oregon U., masquerading as a reputable international group of scientists,  and an initial critique is contained here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs3ZPGLPiss&feature=youtu.be

The survey was treated as a learned and peer reviewed research paper, whereas it was really a simple survey of folk who may for whatever reason be willing to share the writers’ opinions and while ‘Professor Mickey Mouse’ and ‘Professor Albus Dumbledore’ of Harry Potter fame were originally respondents, the list was edited to remove anyone who didn’t look worth the “powder and shot” to present their survey. The pruning supposedly was very severe.

This is a critique…  https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/who_are_these_11000_concerned_scientists.html

To check the criticism I have just waded through the entire 323 pages of the names of the “11,000” so-called “knowledgeable scientists” (following editing) providing the latest faux warning of climate Armageddon at this link below.  

 

The kindest things I can say about the New Zealand based contributors to the survey is this:

1. They seem to be well educated, but generally do not seem to have relevant experience in the subject matter of the dire warning to humanity.

2. I doubt they can have known that they were click bait for promoting eugenics as part of this.

3. Of the 230+  Kiwis who put their names, occupations and employment details forward in the survey, there would be less than 5 (possibly only 2) with relevant climate science qualifications and experience who I would wish to consult on this subject.

4. The largest cadre were computer scientists, either Emeritus Professors, Professors, Associate Professors, computer analysts or Lecturers (I suppose they must therefore receive some NZ Government  incentive for noting their agreement to the questionnaire).  Lots of people who work for the NZ Institute for Plant and Food Research popped up too….did someone organise mass support for the individual “likes”? 

5. I couldn’t find any names of the NZ climate scientists I am familiar with.

But I will give the Kiwi respondents the benefit of the doubt because among these folk, there must surely be at least one who can answer the following questions that none of the known climate scientists can answer (certainly not the PM’s science adviser – Professor Juliet Gerrard – see also the letter from the CEO of the Environomics (NZ) Trust above):

1.  What empirical evidence is there that changes in the atmospheric level of carbon dioxide are able to alter the climate and what evidence is there that it ever has to date?  (After all, atmospheric CO2 has increased from 280ppm since the end of “the Little Ice Age” in 1880, to 415ppm at the present date so surely there is clear evidence one way or the other?)

2. What evidence is there that human emissions of CO2 and CH4 act as atmospheric pollutants?

3. What evidence is there that it is possible for humans to reduce the atmospheric level of CO2 by a sufficient amount to reduce the Global Mean Surface Temperature by even one tenth of one degree Centigrade below that which would otherwise obtain from natural causes or the actions of others, by the year 2100?

In 2020 these questions will be a big deal for the PM and the Minister of Climate Change.  You see I am not only a private fraud investigator but I already warned them last year that these are essential planks that support the legitimacy or criminality of their actions.  Failing to answer which, they are at best promoting a fraud, because you see, they say they are implementing policies because the UN IPCC says they should.  No-one, anywhere in the world has, or would be brave enough (or perhaps stupid enough) to provide answers to the three questions I have been asking over the 40 years that this runaway deception has been rolling….

If I were sick of drinking beer and said the only reason I drink it is because “Big Terry” drinks it, that would be OK.   But I am not hurting anyone by failing to make enquiry of my options.

But the response from the Minister of Climate Change (that I have in writing) admits he is committed to his course of action because the UN IPCC and their tame cabal of supposedly orthodox scientists says he should.   And that is not OK because it is the least financially robust of our citizens who will ultimately bear the cost of this fraud.

So who is running this government programme?    PM Jacinda Ardern regards this “fraud” (my word not hers) as her administration’s defining issue.  So why is she going to waste billions of our money to satisfy her and past PM Helen Clark’s Socialist mates at the UN – when there is not a scintilla of scientific justification and yet huge cost?   The ploy of claiming the science is proven when it isn’t, is not a tenable position for our activist government to take when damaging whole industry sectors.  Ministers of the Crown have a fiduciary duty of care to act for proper purpose and I argue that in the case of their climate change bigotry they are not…or at least cannot possibly….demonstrate they are doing so.

In a detailed and fully-referenced paper, Wellington researcher/analyst Barbara McKenzie has published a withering rebuttal of the New Zeaand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s comments in a speech lauding ther passage in the NZ Parliament of the so-called Zero Carbon Bill.Ms McKenzie writes: “Jacinda Ardern calls [the bill] the ‘nuclear moment for this generation.” What she means, of course, is that Parliament is in effect nuking the New Zealand economy and the New Zealand environment on the back of what is frequently referred to as the greatest hoax in the history of science.”Later in the paper, Ms McKenzie says any MP who claims to take an interest in the climate debate must know “Jacinda’s speech was a pack of lies.”

LINK

If you look at my previous correspondence it isn’t that I have not given the Government fair warning.  What we, the people must demand is the truth about the core issue.  This is not about partisan politics nor a criticism of National and NZ First folding their principles to a wasteful piece of legislation.

If the answers to three simple questions are provided and these do actually hold water, I will go quietly into the night.

But remember that in exercising your power of editing or ignoring this information, you have already, by accident or design, ignored numerous warnings of climate Armageddon that have been proven wrong year after year, since 1989 and some before, including Prince Charles, the Duke of Edinburgh, several heads of the United Nations and heads of global corporations.

So we have a dominant paradigm that is nothing more than a 40 year fraud, with numerous subsidiary frauds appended to it.

As Jack Nicholson’s character said in “A Few Good Men”,  “The truth?  You can’t handle the truth!”

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Saturday, 19 October 2019 5:55 p.m.
To: ‘todd.muller@parliament.govt.nz‘; ‘scott.simpson@parliament.govt.nz‘; ‘simon.bridges@national.org.nz‘; ‘simeon.brown@national.org.nz
Subject: A short look at Vladimir’s view of the Eddy Grand Solar Minimum contrasted with that of a knowledgeable US farmer
Importance: High

Gentlemen,

It is still too early to see what sort of damage is occurring in the Northern hemisphere due to the approach of the Eddy Minimum.  But the folk at the web site Adapt 2030 have the best window on the 2019 crop losses at this 4 minute video below.  The losses in 2017 and 2018 were not visible because inventory movements masked them.  This year may be the first of many where that becomes impossible…

https://youtu.be/hUOBKTarY5Y

The weather these folk speak of is only relevant, insofar as the early autumnal blizzards are covering crops before they can be harvested.  So every USDA and other forecast of crop levels is being sequentially reduced as they factor in more and more bad news.  How serious will it get? It is too early to tell.

Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin know exactly what is happening.  The Chinese have more than 2,000 years of records of solar cycles and can point to the critical impacts of Grand Solar Minimums, like the current one.  There is a near precise correlation between these and the famines that have affected China for the last two millennia .  Matching that timing has been the sequential overthrow of the Chinese dynasties.  Xi Jinping’s planning is obvious and has been underway for at least ten years.  He knows they have not done enough and are being forced to talk trade with Trump in order to get supplies from a US President who doesn’t yet know that he may not have the supplies to meet even a USD50 billion order (or so the American farmers believe).  But for his government Xi knows what is coming is a potentially existential threat for the CCP.

But today I will restrict this email to Russia.  Their space agency collects the same space weather data that NASA does in the USA.  Putin’s principle adviser if the head of the Pulkovo observatory, and the head of the Russian space programme for the International Space Station – a guy called Dr Habibullo Abdussamatov.

I don’t want you to read this stuff at the link below in detail, but a glance would be informative.  It is indicative of the depth of understanding the Russians have for a subject that is strictly banned in the Western media while, the UN pursues global hegemony – focused on warming rather than either the facts or the science.  This is a link to some of his research…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khabibullo_Abdussamatov

and

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/2011474380_Habibullo_I_Abdussamatov

The actions of the Russian Government are pretty transparent to anyone monitoring the international media (that part which is not affected by Soros, Turner, the Rothschilds and their affiliated three deep state cabals).   While PM Scott Morrison of Australia recently took a firm line with the UN interference in Australian policy two weeks ago (and it never got into the NZ media), three months ago a lecture was given to the Russian press corps by Sergei Lavrov on what the government saw as the biggest existential threat to the Russian Federation – the New World Order being promoted by the UN and the same deep state actors that control the Western media.

Meantime, President Putin has focused his international diplomacy on making friends with every country to the South of Russia and with China.  The Middle East is the new theatre of influence as Russia realises growing seasons will keep shortening.  The strategy to capture the Crimean Peninsula was part of this as was his support for Syrian President Assad.  Murmansk in the West, Syria in the South, Iran in the near East and Vladivostok in the East are strategically linked to the North by his six tiny ice-breakers (a joke)… each has two large nuclear power plants pushing huge propellers, and because the Western Siberian oilfield is substantially depleted, they are following the field offshore into the Kara Sea.  So he has oil tankers to be towed through sheet ice from time to time.  Here is a short video of one of them…does it look like he expects the Arctic Sea Ice to disappear any time soon?

https://youtu.be/bKaVhXn49xY

At home the emergency food planning has been in place for some time.  While Putin has made a big thing about helping the Chinese out, his resource is limited.  But the build of granaries has been well under way and with Grand Solar Minimums the cold is not linear, there will be good years during the 11 year solar cycles and bad years …but more bad years than usual.  Subject to restrictions and embargoes he is reducing the US dollar debt he is holding and converting it into gold, increasing Russia’s bullion holdings, year on year.  He has built and deployed one floating nuclear power station which will be based in the Russian Arctic.  More may follow.

Elsewhere in the Northern hemisphere, regional rivals, PM Modi and PM Khan also understand what is happening but their preparations are less effectual.  Already hit by extensive flooding, peasant farmers will do the best they can.

The farming communities in Europe, USA, Japan and elsewhere are waking up because farmers are on the front line.  Every time there are crop losses the farmers become twitchy.  They lose their farms.  In New Zealand, ours’ is a maritime climate and with warm seas (relatively) we have a farming holiday for a little while longer.

But for the entire continent of North America on average, the 2019 harvest will be a huge disaster.  We have not been allowed by our news media to know that the period from October 2018 to May 2019 has been the coldest and also the wettest in over 100 years.  With growing seasons shortening each year for the last three years.  The Chinese are aware of this and yet they will still try to wring every shipload of oats, soya beans, corn, rice, hogs etc from the USA that they can get.  They have also increased their buying from Canada, who will similarly experience difficulties meeting the Chinese purchase orders.  This will affect New Zealand because when we changed Canterbury farms from cereals to dairy, we became dependent on Australia.  This year Australia plans to import from Canada and will not be an exporter at all.

Some North American farmer blog sites are full of the unfolding drama.  This particular farmer in the link below usually chronicles the moves in the weather extremes and comments on the harvest data.  But in this link he unloads on the causation.  From my knowledge of what is happening, he isn’t far wrong…

https://youtu.be/jbsslmdxvhc

The Eddy Grand Solar Minimum is something we cannot change but we can plan for how it will affect our country.  Perhaps the first thing for your shadow ministers is to understand that Anthropogenic Global Warming is just a fraud.  It has nothing to do with the science or climate, because it is just about transference of the power of national governments to the UN.

The second thing is to have at least one of each of your assistant’s, take an interest in the data appearing on  www.spaceweather.com .  The left hand third of the web site pages is devoted to the unfolding statistics.  The sun is now the quietest it has been since the beginning of the space age and this solar minimum is still deepening.

Can I draw your attention to my summary of the cause of climate change as per the two MS Word documents attached above.

You will see from that and the Farmer’s graphs that the true cause of the “Modern Warm Period” following the end of the “Little Ice Age” in about 1850, was the extraordinary solar activity of the 20th century.  The sun was then its most active in at least 4,000 years.  That isn’t hypothesis, it is published solar science.

I do hope you make good use of this or at least have your staff do so.

By Christmas we will probably know the true dimension of the unfolding crop losses.  I hope I am wrong.  The last time there was a Grand Solar Minimum (the Dalton Minimum) the global population was only about 950 million.  Then most people grew their own food and did not have brittle supply chains and JIT planning.  How will we get on with 7.7 billion?

It will be bad, but just how bad?  We must wait for Christmas.

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

A Concerned Citizen.

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 30 September 2019 9:57 a.m.
To: ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’
Cc: ‘Rt. Hon. Winston Peters’; ‘newstips@stuff.co.nz’; ‘news@tvnz.co.nz’; ‘news@heraldonsunday.co.nz’; ‘news@press.co.nz’; ‘news@nzherald.co.nz’; ‘Mafi Tu’inukuafe’; ‘contact@comcom.govt.nz’
Subject: The truth always comes out sooner or later

Dear Prime Minister and Minister of Climate Change,

This email will provide people with an opportunity to choose sides, whether to be “part of the problem or part of the solution”.

I hope those who receive this long message will take the time to print it and its attachments, and also take the time to view any video footage it contains.  You have had time to verify the science and there seems no point in allowing you to continue to attack the New Zealand economy in support of whatever your true ends may be.  So I will publish this as widely as I can.

This email is about the New Zealand section of the biggest and most egregious political crime in human history, now requiring an urgent political solution.  But I think many who receive this email will already know that.  You also know that.  Frankly the science is not complicated, it is simple.

Last week a sub-set of the world’s real scientists provided a rebuttal to the climate alarmism you espouse so fervently…

 

Yet you will ignore it and shrug off its logic.  For me?  I am just a fraud investigator, so I have sat between the competing perspectives of science, to form my own view of the facts irrespective of my financial interests.  You will ignore these at your peril.

Please find attached above in two single page Word documents, the core summary of the climate facts, together with a copy of the satellite temperatures since the tamper-proof records began in 1979.  There is no climate crisis.  There is no man-made global warming.  There is no need to demonise the naturally occurring gases CO2 and CH4 as pollutants, when they are both essential to the survival of all species on planet earth and already in short supply for plant life.  There is no need to drive worried farmers to either depression or off their land.

My allegations of fraud against you are simple and easily substantiated by the facts of your complicity.

Supporting Background Information

15 years ago I started investigating this criminality from the standpoint of a believer in Anthropogenic Global Warming theory and wanted to know why people rebelled against a logical perspective of science that was claimed to be so settled.  Alas, the first thing I discovered was the only reason the science was claimed to be “settled” was because it couldn’t stand any real scrutiny.  It was always a simple political scam as scams go – as simple as the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, where the mythical tailors wanting the king’s money, claimed only fools could see the King was wearing no clothes at all. 

So by 2003 when the theory was comprehensively disproven, the UN IPCC backers changed the term for “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” and then set out to claim there was a consensus supporting the science…. and then began to demonise the vast body of serious scientists as “Climate Change Deniers”.   The UN IPCC and their backers’ power base is so huge,  obvious and corrupt, as they secured for their “anointed ones” 3 Nobel Peace Prizes and 1 Nobel Prize for Economics…and locked false scientific claims within Wikipedia.  From BBC to “Stuff”  no major media organisation will now allow the truth to be spoken. 

How sick is that?  Science is meant to thrive on scrutiny, yet this junk science does not.

The Great Global Warming Fraud has only been possible for four reasons…

1. We humans do warm our surroundings with a mixture of exotic and natural fuels.

2. We humans have no idea about the composition and chemistry of the air we breathe or how our exhalations are valued by other life forms.  Air is simply taken for granted.

3. We humans are so successful that since 1750, humans and their livestock have gone from comprising about 7% of the world’s land mammals to over 98%;  leaving a trail of species extinctions and pollution behind as we have done so.  Now we worry about resource depletion and over-full waste sinks.

4. We want to do the right thing to “save the planet” and eagerly follow any sensible consensus on how to do that.

More than a year ago I started writing to the three of you (our NZ Government’s coalition leaders), to warn you that you could soon – by your actions – become accessories to the Great Global Warming Fraud.  This was met with distain as per the attached message from Minister Shaw who seemed unfazed by the allegations of fraud I made… (see the Adobe file linked above).  But I did recognise that as a well-rehearsed legal defence against probable fraud charges.

Because your responsible Minister prevaricated, I laid a complaint with the NZ Serious Fraud Office in April 2019 and followed that up with complaints about the misconduct of your Minister of Climate Change (and his political party) to the NZ Commerce Commission.  On 15 May 2019, (see the fourth linked Word document above) I made sure you understood the substance of my complaint, by copy of a letter sent to Minister Shaw and your Deputy PM, which noted three causes of potential criminal action regarding your deliberate and false misrepresentations and the fact that criminality in another jurisdiction is no excuse for committing crimes within New Zealand… 

The causes of action where you now stand accused ( or from your point of view, seek vindication) are simply… 

1.            That changes in the atmospheric content of carbon dioxide (“CO2”) have no impact on climate change.

2.            That carbon dioxide (“CO2”) is not a pollutant, but a gas essential for all life on earth. CH4 rapidly converts to H2O and CO2, upon contact with the atmosphere.

3.            Your “climate change” spending cannot possibly have any measurable impact on earth’s climate.

You, together with your international associates have dreamed up a non-existent crisis that will soon be revealed for all to see as a simple fraud from which the various Ponzi schemes grow and for a time will thrive – but to no legitimate purpose.   When the weather once again changes into severe cooling mode, to reflect the ever-changing solar cycles that drive earth’s climate, the public will react against your obvious lies and lose confidence in you and all politicians. 

Because I have some investments which may already be benefitting from the Great Global Warming Fraud, I was persuaded by some friends to call you to account.  Frankly,  I don’t want to benefit from your criminality, if your actions are proven to be so.  Nor do I want to abandon my renewable energy investments. 

But how did I go from being a believer in the well-orchestrated  lies, to being an active sceptic, now demanding your immediate resignation?

1.  In 1998 a survey of reputable scientists was performed that revealed 31,487, including more than 7,000 with PhD qualifications, had no time for the theory that the modern warming is man-made.

2.  I found the regularly used mantra that  “97% of all scientists supporting the UN IPCC science”  to be a subsidiary fraud and when I looked at the sources being given for the fictional consensus, I found them to be total garbage.

3.  The hyping of sea level change to a height which is thermodynamically impossible was a worry for me.

4.  The reduction in Arctic sea ice extent is being over-hyped.  These days the UN IPCC simply chooses dates to begin sea ice graphs at a date when the ice extent and thickness reached a cyclic maximum and thereby uses the subsequent downward trend to deliberately mislead the public.  The UN IPCC sea ice graphs begin in 1979 when the earth’s climate had cooled significantly from the early 1940’s.  If they had started in 1972 they would see that NASA has satellite photos of the sea ice at the end of that summer melt that were almost identical to the extent the satellite photo at the end of the 2018 summer melt.  I have viewed all those photos and am aware the sea ice extent was far less in 1941 and 1942 when the Arctic convoys ferried supplies from the UK to Murmansk.

5.  In the last 3 years the ice load on Greenland has grown by about 1.2 trillion tonnes.  Where is that in the news?  It does have an effect on sea levels whereas sea ice has no effect.

6.  The polar bears were being hunted to extinction in 1967 and so in 1973 the Arctic Treaty nations placed a moratorium on hunting, save for limited Inuit rights in Canada.  Since then their numbers have grown to the point where they now actively predate on Inuit villages, who want culling to be reintroduced.  Polar bears survived and prospered during the Holocene climate maximum called the “Minoan Warm Period”, through the “Roman Warm Period” and the “Mediaeval Warm Period”.  These warm periods were all considerably warmer than our climate is today.  So fear mongering about the impact on polar bears from loss of sea ice is facile.  The same with so-called “all time heat records” that can only be described in derisory terms. 

6.  When polar bears attack the huge herds of walrus on dry land, some walrus have throughout recorded history been seen to get pushed off cliffs by the crush of others.  They breathe the same air that we do so they prefer to haul out in large numbers (for protection) on dry land near their shallow feeding grounds.  We are told they are sad about climate change.  How can they be?  They are thriving, just like the polar bears. 

7.  Obviously naive funding agencies can get any report they want from venal scientists if those scientists’ tenure is at stake or they are paid enough.  Lysenkoism is extant everywhere I look within the OECD and I despair when watching TV to see yet another phony scientist coming up with implausible studies, which have been funded on the sole basis that they will reinforce the UN IPCC disinformation.

What are the Russians, Indians and Chinese doing to comply with this man-made global warming hoax and with the Paris Accords?  Heck, they don’t even believe the UN IPCC dogma even though they profit from it.  They have each been preparing for the coming Grand Solar Minimum for at least the last 5-10 years.  Look at their preparations.  If you don’t believe me, you could try Googling  the name of  Dr Habibullo Abdussamatov (the scientist who runs the Pulkovo observatory and the Russia programmes on the International Space Station – Vladimir Putin listens to his advice) and you will be able to understand the Russian strategies in the Middle East, why they have built a fleet of nuclear powered ice breakers capable of towing oil tankers through 2 metre thick sheet ice, and why they needed to annex Crimea…all part of the same strategy.  “Winter is coming, Jon Snow!”

It is the same with China and their “String of Pearls” and Silk Road  construction,  together with the diversification of food sources into South America and Africa.  They are already in food trouble that will manifest this winter.  They have records that show whenever there has been a cyclic “Grand Solar Minimum” over the last 2,000 years there has also been both famine and the collapse of China’s major dynasties.  They accept Dr Abdussamatov’s conclusions, given the changes now underway.  I can neither confirm nor reject those forecasts of approaching cold, but you must be made aware that others who have expert knowledge now consider them valid and urgent.

Check this desperate cry for help from Australian sceptics as they pay higher and higher power prices that are based on policies grounded on fraud and disinformation…(This is shown in the third attached Word document above)…

How many of those 31, 487 scientists who have dissented from the UN IPCC’s  politically inspired disinformation programme are allowed to give TV or newspaper commentaries?  Only one in a thousand.  Each year, more of those who work on the mischievously inaccurate computer models on which the overhyped heating claims by the UN IPCC rest, defect to the sceptic camp providing information on how desperately flowed the models and resulting forecasts really are.  The sceptics are either ignored or driven from their jobs, denied publication of their learned, peer reviewed scientific papers and treated like “holocaust deniers” by the likes of smug, self satisfied media presenters who refer to their legitimate scepticism by the derogatory term “Climate Change Deniers”.  Sceptics are never allowed to write the truth about the subject of climate change by mainstream media publications (including such as the NZ Herald and other rags, in favour of “puff pieces” of no journalistic or scientific merit.  These do get taken to print without question or scrutiny, as feedstock of alarmism from overseas newspapers and such climate experts as Past PM Helen Clark.  But her late 2018 NZ Herald article did strike me as indicative that her actions should also have been under scrutiny during her term in office.

Finding such a  cloud of obfuscation  is “meat and veg.” to any true fraud investigator, this is the sort of stuff that points directly to a false narrative which is collapsing, as the lies become less and less credible to a greater proportion of those singled out to be its victims.

I believe I know what has caused the modern warming.  I believe I know what is going to cause the imminent period of cooling.   Sadly for whatever your political intentions may be, the feared cooling is already starting in the Northern hemisphere and were it not for the UN IPCC’s  PR machine, everyone would already know about the threat this cooling poses to global food supplies – all too soon. Perhaps that will change, but there are signs that earth’s Thermosphere is thinning and cooling, so if that worries the people at NASA and NOAA, it should concern you too.   If you actually do know this stuff, then throwing young school children into the front lines of your struggle looks more like an act of desperation and cowardice on your part … the last throw of the dice to deflect allegations of your government’s complicity in an international power play to assert UN control against the primacy of national sovereignty.

If you aspirations were honest, you would have asked the population to vote on whether they want our government to be dominated by the UN.  Instead you choose to prostitute climate science as if it were a global emergency that only the UN could fix.

But whether it is warming or cooling, the changes to earth’s climate are only resulting from natural causes.  If the truth does interest you, may I suggest you have your staff analyse and monitor the web site – www.spaceweather.com.  Even NOAA, an organisation closely enmeshed in the UN IPCC web of influence, acknowledges that it is the space weather that drives earth’s climate.  When you understand how that happens, you may understand why your political actions have been so egregious.

Your cohorts at the UN IPCC upped the ante last week, with their well-orchestrated disinformation.  Seemingly expecting those among us who have actually taken the time to check the science, to retreat under the onslaught of a hysterical teenager and her handlers’ fantasies – ably augmented by the catastrophic alarmism delivered by the usual UN IPCC suspects – yet with attribution to no-one of substance and only peer-reviewed by “partners in crime”.  This short video below captures the sequence including the obvious motivation, the lies and the truth, in one elegant 12 minute splurge…

https://youtu.be/cEs31hNMebg

The international resistance to your global and national scam has begun, and something approaching 50% of New Zealanders will already know or suspect the UN IPCC version of the truth is flawed, because many remember their tirade of concatenated alarmist scares have all failed to materialise.  Most people are now too scared to confess their appreciation of the truth in case you label their words as “Hate Speech”.   Yes, I too have a list of those UN IPCC linked alarmist lies that date back to 1989 when the UN IPCC first started.  But also beyond that to when the same “new World Order” posers were trying to set up a coming ice age as the platform for a UN global takeover…

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions

Nowadays, many celebrities squander their good names and reputations to underwrite the fraud.  To what end?  They, and even Sir David Attenborough cannot possibly know the scientific facts, even though  they talk of the “settled science” with such authority.  That is, unless they too are implicated in the dastardly criminality. 

For Joseph Stalin, the use of children and adults who went along with him but were never really aware of what he was doing, led Stalin to coin the term “Useful Idiots”.  Are our MPs, as well as our own children and grandchildren to be treated as those too? 

I know you believe that because you are “saving the planet” you can alienate us all from the basic truths of science in the same fashion as Chairman Mao used the “Cultural revolution” for.  But that seldom works for long.  All you need to do is to provide us sceptics with empirical evidence which proves that changes in atmospheric CO2 cause climate change.  We will melt into the night if you do that.  But I know you cannot do that, because I am able to prove why CO2 – at its molecular level – cannot have any measurable effect on climate, compared say to clouds and water vapour.  The sceptics can never be met in a public debate for one reason, the UN IPCC is now unable to defend the indefensible.  If you feel lucky, try to prove me wrong.

So 30 years after the fraud was dreamed up, there is still no evidence that CO2 does what the UN IPCC says it does, and yet you are prepared to near-bankrupt this country because you conveniently claim you are only taking someone else’s lies on faith?  What sort of Prime Minister would someone be, if they did that?  For Minister of Climate Change  I envisage the title of “King Canute” will be used by the mob when it turns on him, once the true science is generally known.  Frankly the science is not complicated, it is simple.

I believe it is contrary to your fiduciary duty of care as PM to stir up fear among workers, farmers, parents and children alike, and for you to preside over an education system that teaches fake science.  Science is not a popularity contest, it is about facts.  Please also find below  a list that chronicles the truth about alarmist falsehoods, to set our children’s minds at ease. 

(Source of the following is Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun, 26 September 2019)

“·         You have never been less likely to die of a climate-related disaster. Your risk of being killed has fallen 99 per cent in the past century. Source: International Disaster Database.

·         You have never been more likely to live longer. Life expectancy around the world has risen by 5.5 years so far this century. Source: World Health Organisation.

·         We are getting fewer cyclones, not more. Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeBureau of Meteorology.

·         There is more food than ever. Grain crops have set new records. Source: Food and Agricultural Organisation.

·         The world is getting greener. Leaf cover is growing 3 per cent per decade. Source: NASA.

·         Low-lying Pacific islands are not drowning. In fact, 43 per cent – including Tuvalu – are growing, and another 43 per cent are stable. Source: Professor Paul Kench, University of Auckland.

·         Cold weather is 20 times more likely to kill you than hot weather. Source: Lancet, 20/5/2015

·         Global warming does not cause drought. Source: Prof. Andy Pitman, ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes.

·         Australia’s rainfall over the past century has actually increased. Source: Bureau of Meteorology.

·         There are fewer wildfires. Around the world, the area burned by fire is down 24 per cent over 18 years. Source: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center et al.

·         Polar bear numbers are increasing, not decreasing. Source: Dr Susan Crockford.

Perhaps it is time for you to come clean.    But you must now defend your crime against the New Zealand people in your Parliament  or prove me wrong with the substance of my complaints to the SFO and ComCom.

I would be happy to be able to apologise to you and Minister Shaw, because I know from history that warmth is good… and that cold is very bad for humanity.

The next move is over to you and your parliamentary colleagues.

I hope you place some weight on the truth and avoid the urge to attack the messenger.  After all, I am only saying what many thousands of Kiwis would like to be saying to you.

Stop telling blatant lies.

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

An Extremely  Concerned New Zealand Citizen asking for the lies to stop.

=====================

From: John Rofe [mailto:jcrofe@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Sunday, 28 July 2019 9:06 p.m.
To: ‘james.shaw@parliament.govt.nz’; ‘jacinda.ardern@parliament.govt.nz’
Cc: ‘Rt. Hon. Winston Peters’; ‘Hon Simon Bridges’; ‘Simeon Brown’; ‘peter.goodfellow@national.org.nz’; ‘Todd Muller’; ‘Mafi Tu’inukuafe’; ‘letters@nzherald.co.nz’; ‘letters@press.co.nz’; ‘newstips@stuff.co.nz’; ‘news@tvnz.co.nz’; ‘news@heraldonsunday.co.nz’
Subject: Time for the truth about the “Great Global Warming Hoax” to get a public hearing?

Dear Minister,

It is now a year since I explained to you and PM Ardern about your fraud, and explained the reasons why you should cease and desist.    I have summarised the position outlined in this email in a single page as per the last (Word) document attached above for circulation to the news media.  This lengthy email that follows, substantiates my short statement on such an extremely complicated topic.

My reason for writing this email to you is to ensure that you have the facts at your fingertips to avoid New Zealand becoming further embroiled in the “Great Global Warming” fraud, which is nothing more nor less than a globalist conspiracy orchestrated under the auspices of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“UN IPCC”).  But then, I suspect you already know this.  The fact the conspiracy is global does not in any way excuse your conduct.  By your actions, you and your government are already complicit, and you can no longer rely on the UN IPCC.

The “Great Global Warming” fraud now has an eerie similarity to the “South Sea Bubble” in the following respects…

  1. They were each the largest frauds in recorded history at the time they occurred and then, by the time they were revealed, caused great heart-break.
  2. Both frauds relied on the remoteness of the populace from the facts on the ground.  With the South Sea Bubble, it was geographical remoteness.  With the Great Global Warming fraud it is the scientific remoteness mixed with complexity of the fraud and the interwoven, related conspiracy at the United Nations (“UN”), as they attempt to hype a global emergency to justify their takeover of global government…all in the shaddows.
  3. In both cases the perpetrators have had an incomplete understanding of the true facts that made, or now makes discovery inevitable.

In fairness to those at the centre of the Great Global Warming fraud (whether they and you deserve fairness or not), they/you did not initially have access to all the data.  Furthermore, the very few complicit scientists involved at the outset in 1988 then fell under the sway of politicians progressively including such as (in sequence) John Holdren, Al Gore, Helen Clark, Barrack Obama and even David Attenborough  – all should have known better, with different degrees of ignorance or motivation, as they lent their reputations and legacies to this fraud in order to profit from it – either in terms of political power, or for financial benefit, or for both. 

This shambles evokes the memory of Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned upon his retirement as US President, against the use of political sponsorship for the scientific community who are then funded to distort science for political purposes (as first happened with the Trofim Lysenko fiasco in 20th Century Russia).  What is unusual about your fraud is that it is supported by globalist businessmen and financiers as well as a significant element of the climate science community.

Retired Professor Nils Axel Moerner of Sweden calls it what it is.  I found his frustration with the lies contained in the link below rather like my own. I can now, at last, easily prove that he is right in almost every respect….

https://youtu.be/W1PS9-oOfRw

The Professor is as unaware (as you seem to be) that this fraud is about to be unmasked for public distaste by the speed at which the latest Grand Solar Minimum is advancing.  While outfits like NASA and NOAA still tend to downplay the implications of the new and disastrously weak 11-year solar cycle number 25, their web sites contain the evidence that it is happening as I write this.  Disillusionment day for your public will likely be sometime in early 2020.

So far this year there have only been 11 sunspots.  The public can watch this looming solar minimum threat on a daily basis at www.spaceweather.com  if they have the time and inclination.

NASA suggests that the number of sun spots in sc25 will drop to 111, which is an extremely low level of solar activity.  However, the Russian and British scientists claim they will not exceed 50!  The first is on the level of the Dalton Minimum.  The second is the level of the Maunder Minimum.  Either will prove disastrous to global agriculture and destroy your fraud as well.

It is now proven that the “modern warm period” has nothing to do with increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 (which we humans do give a boost to), but has been solely caused by a huge spike in solar activity…the greatest for 4,000 years. 

As a result of scientific progress, we are now in a position to prove that what you are doing with the NZ zero carbon legislation is a fraudulent enterprise.  It must now be stopped by either your free will, or by court injunction.

  1. The vilification of carbon dioxide (“CO2”) as a pollutant is just one of many essential limbs of this fraud

CO2 is essential for all life on earth.  That is a scientific fact.  All plant life relies on CO2 for the process of converting light into the plant sugars that support all other terrestrial life on earth (animals, humans etc)  and, should the atmospheric concentration of CO2 drop below 150ppm, every complex carbon based life form on this planet will likely become extinct.  Plants actually do better when they are given access to a concentration that is between 1,000 and 2,000ppm.  The current concentration is only 415ppm.  This atmospheric deficit is routinely compensated for by farmers injecting bottled CO2 gas into their greenhouses.

Meantime you elect to wage war on CO2 and label it as “undesirable pollution” for UN IPCC’s own devious ends.  They are of course conflicted, yet conceal their conflict of interest from the masses.

The evidence that shows increased concentrations of CO2 leads to the greening of the planet is contained in successive NASA satellite photos that are readily available to you and your advisers.  This greening has occurred primarily because the atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased from 280ppm at the end of “The Little Ice Age” in 1850, to the current level of more than 400ppm as of today.  If you were a true green you would find that good, not bad.

Plant growth experiments at various CO2 levels have also proven this fact as contained in the first “Word” attachment at the head of this email.  This attachment shows the practical limitations of CO2 as a “greenhouse gas” that were the reasons why it’s possible impact on climate change was trialled and rejected by such eminent scientists as Professors Niels Bohr and Anders Angstrom some 100 years ago.  Those reasons – discovered by actual experiments rather than by totally subjective theoretical modelling – haven’t changed.  The only thing that changed was the arrival of the UN IPCC in 1989 and some biddable scientists who wanted to establish their new field of knowledge and scorned the older inter-linked evidence based earth sciences.

We humans can tolerate an atmospheric CO2 level up to at least 100 times greater than it is at present.  Should you personally ever take ill and collapse, requiring CPR,  any trained person could probably resuscitate you by “rescue breathing” with air containing 40,000ppm of CO2 and a reduced concentration of oxygen (of only about 16% of the air mixture). That is because we all breathe in anywhere between about 400ppm and 800ppm of CO2  and breathe out roughly 4% or 40,000ppm – thereby reducing the amount of oxygen that was inhaled by 20%.

The scientific record has shown that before the beginning of the Quaternary Ice Age the atmospheric levels of CO2 were considerably higher than today and the relentless sequence of natural sequestration of CO2 in rocks, soil and sea bed occurring during colder times over the last 500 million years considerably reduced the CO2 in the atmosphere and will almost inevitably mean for the future, that by the end of the next 90,000 year terrestrial ice age of the current Pleistocene era (or subsequent repeats of that cycle of ice ages and interglacial periods), the atmospheric concentration of CO2 could even fall back to, or fall further from the 180ppm at the end of the last ice age (12,000 years ago), to a much lower level and possibly even reach or breech the extinction threshold of 150ppm at some point. 

So there is considerable hard evidence that human CO2 emissions which involve using and emitting sequestered carbon will actually help to restore a desirable atmospheric balance that is more suitable for all natural life on earth.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with that!  Unless you can prove that increased atmospheric CO2 has a significant effect on climate change, you should regard your criticism of this naturally occurring gas as a grave error, that is contrary to the best ideals of the green movement.

What needs to be dealt with, is to clean up real pollution rather than attempting to levy extortionate taxes based on deliberate lies.

  • In 30 years there has never been any empirical evidence that variations in atmospheric CO2 cause any measurable change in earth’s climate. 

Sure, we humans warm our surroundings by using many heat sources and fuels that provide us with comfort and wealth, but the claim that we alter the future climate is quite extraordinary …. and extraordinary scientific claims require extraordinary proof.   Such proof has never been found – despite the wasting of billions of dollars on the ever more complex computer models.  Sadly for the theories you espouse, there is ample proof that human and indeed total CO2 emissions have no measurable impact on climate and I itemise that proof below…

  • The historical record from the empirical analysis of ice core samples taken from the depths of the Antarctic Ice Sheet at Vostok, and from Greenland has provided clear evidence that as earth’s temperature changes, the level of atmospheric CO2 then also changes after a delay of several hundred years.  When temperatures rise, a rise in CO2 levels follows; then when temperatures fall,  CO2 levels also fall.  This is not only well accepted data, but the result is logical.  The sun which supplies  more than 99% of earth’s energy, heats the ocean more slowly than either the land or the atmosphere and the ocean releases its heat far more slowly.  Water absorbs atmospheric CO2 when cold and releases it when the water is warmed.  The ocean contains 50+ times the CO2 of the atmosphere, so when the ocean is warming it releases more CO2 into the atmosphere than it takes up; and when cooling it takes up more CO2 than it releases.  The data underpins the Vostok evidence.
  • During the last 100 years there has been clear evidence that the level of atmospheric CO2 has increased from around 300ppm to over 400ppm, and at no stage have the recordings at the US National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration’s (“NOAA’s)testing site in Hawaii (which both UN IPCC and sceptics accept as valid data) have ever fallen.  Yet during the time from 1918 to 1940 the climate warmed, and then from 1945 to 1975 the climate cooled, and then from 1975 to 1998 the climate warmed again.  From 1999 to 2015 the temperature did not increase by any measurable amount.  Then in 2016 there was a spurt in warming due to the strong El Nino conditions, and then after that the temperature has fallen again – to the present.  This shows that CO2 has had no appreciable effect, unless one changes the starting and finishing times used for the temperature comparison to manipulate the meaning of the data.  In general, the world has emerged from the effects of “The Little Ice Age” and the solar cycles became appreciably more active – with the Total Solar Insolation (“TSI”) during the modern warm period higher than it has been for thousands of years.  It is the sun that has caused the modern warming.   There is no upturn in the number and severity of serious weather events and on the contrary there has even been a significant reduction in severe weather events since the late 1930’s.  You wouldn’t know that to listen to the media.

2.3 The impact of the huge increase in solar activity underpins this evidence and accounts for the warming of the ocean and its current slow expansion.

  • The reasons why human CO2 emissions cannot drive earth’s climate are now well known.

3.1  It is generally accepted by the UN IPCC that human CO2 emissions comprise only 4.3% of total CO2 emissions.  Yet the presumption is made by the UN IPCC that human CO2 emissions drive 98% of climate change with no allowance for the variability over the 95.7% of natural CO2 emission effects.  For example a warming sea alone will emit more CO2 than humans can influence from all activities.  But to make their models work, the UN IPCC modellers even invent separate classes of CO2 molecules.  First, they state that human influenced CO2 molecules do not dissipate, but instead  only increase the level of residual atmospheric CO2.   Second, they say only the CO2 emissions from natural causes do dissipate due to the requirements of vegetation etc.  Of course this is junk science because there is no difference in the molecules, so any lay person can see through that.  But whether we allow the UN IPCC to clutch at straws to support their UN sponsored fraud or not, we humans cannot affect climate change.  Could King Canute turn back the tide?

      3.2  Atmospheric CO2 molecules do not impact with more than an extremely narrow band-width of infra-red re-radiation emanating from earth’s surface/sea and even then, not fully.  Water vapour on the other hand impacts twelve times the band width that CO2 does, and of that scope, for much of it, water vapour fully affects the re-radiation in some of the applicable band widths (As per the first attached (Word) document at the head of this email).  The water vapour also has other effects because of its involvement in the cloud cover and with its ability to phase change between liquid, gas and solid with massive localised thermal effects that the UN IPCC modellers deliberately ignore.  Not only that but water vapour is between 10 to 100 times as voluminous as CO2, depending on temperature and humidity. The suggestions that human CO2 emissions cause climate change is therefore somewhere between risible and ridiculous.

  • The atmospheric concentration of CO2 was already almost thermally saturated at the pre-industrial level of 280ppm (The Beer-Lambert Law refers). This is because an increase in CO2 concentration only leads to a logarithmic increase in the absorption of heat.  After the pre-industrial level of CO2 ( i.e. at 280ppm), its thermal impact for extra atmospheric concentrations of each – say – 100ppm of extra atmospheric CO2 is almost un-measurably minute and similarly, any reduction in temperature change from a reduction in the CO2 level would need to involve a huge reduction of – say 100ppm, if it is to have any measurable effect (even in theory).   As a result, the UN IPCC desire to reduce CO2 emissions and thereby effect a reduction in earth’s temperature is a pipe-dream and is misleading people who are being told that with the expenditure of trillions of dollars over time it can be done.  That change is not within human power because… i. Humans influence only a tiny portion of CO2 emissions and, ii. Because natural causes of CO2 emissions are far greater, so a relatively small variation in natural emissions will overpower any influence from human influenced CO2 emissions, and iii. While CO2 may be a greenhouse gas it is a significantly weaker one, than either water vapour which is measured and clouds which are not, and these factors dominate as shown in Dr Holmes’ video at the link in item 4.1 below.  But meantime a Finnish study has concluded that the increase in atmospheric CO2 over the last 100 years has only resulted in a temperature increase of 0.1 degrees C. and of this the human proportion is only 0.01 degrees C. as noted in this link :
https://summit.news/2019/07/11/new-finnish-study-finds-no-evidence-for-man-made-climate-change/

3.4  Water vapour and clouds provide the principle “greenhouse effect” that keeps earth warmer than outer space.  (But please note, the term “greenhouse” is a gross oversimplification which is mainly used to suit the UN IPCC narrative, because there is no restrictive membrane in earth’s atmosphere – like the glass of a greenhouse.  The true effect of cloud cover is more complicated because clouds’ net effect is one of competing forces of insulation between the partial  shielding of the sun’s rays which (along with water vapour, and other atmospheric compounds) only allows 56% of Total Solar Insolation to descend to the earth’s surface, and the low level cloud and water vapour which inhibits the infra red re-radiation of heat leaving earth’s surface and reaching the extreme cold of space). The attached paper by Emeritus Professor Geoffrey Duffy, dated July 2019, shows “why it is not possible for any of the non-condensable greenhouse gases to have an appreciable effect on weather and climate change”.  It is attached herewith as the second (Adobe) article at the head of this email. 

  • It is now generally accepted that Space Weather determines the weather on earth.  While the UN IPCC chooses to believe that Total Solar Irradiance (“TSI”) only varies by 0.05 watts per square metre – up or down, that is based on their purposefully short term comparison of TSI changes and is demonstrably both biased in their favour and incorrect in fact, as has already been published in a number of peer-reviewed studies (again, see the link at item 4.1 below).  But not only is the TSI variation far greater than the figures shown in the UN IPCC computer models, but also the variations in solar activity (and numbers of sun spots) change the amount of solar wind affecting the planets in the solar system including planet earth.  The stronger the solar wind, the less the number of the galactic cosmic rays that can enter either the solar system or the earth’s atmosphere.  During the regular 11 year solar minimums the influx of galactic cosmic rays increases and during events called “Grand Solar Minimums”  the influx of cosmic rays is even more dramatically increased. 

Cosmic rays not only threaten astronauts and high altitude air crews (as they will do for the next two years) but they act to nucleate water vapour to form low level clouds and these provide an increased cooling effect for the earth as well as initiating massive anomalous rain, hail and even snow events.  In 1997 the work of Danish Professor Hendrik Svensmark and his son led to this being promulgated as a substantial theory – but now it has been convincingly proven with successful experiments in the “Cloud” project at CERN.  Unlike Anthropogenic Global Warming which has been disproven, the Svensmark theory about cosmic ray impacts on cloud formation is now, if not settled science (as the UN IPCC fraudsters will never accept the truth) but it is repeatable by scientific experimentation.  Who could ask for more proof?

3.6  There are now numerous studies of climate change that cast doubt on the validity of all of the UN IPCC sponsored computer models, showing all to grossly overstate possible warming.  But each model has a theoretical basis that relies totally on human generated parameters (for which complexity the humans involved receive multiple billions of dollars each year), so the UN IPCC studies cannot be relied upon for one good reason…the actual climate conditions have to date borne no relationship whatsoever to the forecasts of 101 of the 102 computer modelled predictions, or of the 72 models that are currently in vogue and used as the basis for creating deliberate warming alarmism.  They may as well have licked their finger and held it up to the air and taken a guess…because both that guess and the computer models are equally subjective.

3.7  By February 2020 we will see whether the Northern Hemisphere is to suffer massive food shortages as a direct result of the extraordinary cold and wet weather that has been interspersed with drought conditions there over winter of 2018/9 and spring of 2019.  Northern spring planting has been extensively disrupted as a result Grand Solar Minimum conditions and unless there is an “Indian summer” to delay Autumn, their harvest will likely be dire.  While Minister, you have thus far ignored my well-intentioned warnings that you are now becoming at least an accessory to fraud (for over a year), you must try to understand that New Zealand, by your actions is probably becoming exposed to the impacts that will occur on a global basis as a direct result of the presently unfolding Grand Solar Minimum.  You have been warned of this material and demonstrably cyclical hazard.  Now time is of the essence. Watch what is happening to cereal futures prices if you don’t believe me.

  •  How big is your fraud? (the total cost of this fraud globally is estimated at USD1.5 trillion per year and is growing exponentially larger and more onerous for the countries of the OECD)

4.1 The hallmark of a fraud is often denoted by the subsidiary lies that need to be told to lend credence to the central falsehood.

Everything from forest fires… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phw8OlN_x1E&feature=youtu.be

to sea level rise is subject to alarmism…(see for sea level the Professor Moerner link above in the preamble to this email report).

Also for ocean acidification… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bJjBo5ICMc&feature=youtu.be

Editor’s note: the following paragraphs from the Australian IPC are not in the email to the NZ Prime Minister, and have been added to clarify further details of the ongoing issue and court case. Professor Ridd’s key point is that James Cook University scientists have published many reports that do not comply with the proper scientific methodologies and, as such, are not valid. Eg the results cannot be replicated and the data has not been made available. Yet these reports have been published ‘as gospel’ by many mainstream media, leading to, amongst other things people world-wide believing the Great Barrier Reef is ‘dead’ or at least dying, and no longer travelling to see the reef, causing, amongst other issues, a major downturn in the tourist industry.

As reported by the Australian IPC: ‘Professor Peter Ridd has won his litigation against James Cook University about the Great Barrier Reef, the big scandal for North Queensland is the alleged death of coral that is being deliberately used to create an over-hyped sense of climate emergency.  There is nothing wrong with the world’s coral reefs, other than periodic bleaching  occurrences that they often quickly recover from.  This is a cyclic phenomenon.

In May 2018, after an academic career of more than 30 years, Peter had his employment terminated as a professor of physics at James Cook University in Townsville, Australia. Peter had spoken against the accepted orthodoxy that climate change was ‘killing’ the Great Barrier Reef. ‘There’s some absolute rubbish being spoken about the reef and people’s livelihoods are being put in jeopardy. If nobody will stand up, then this is just going to go on and on and on. It has to be stopped.’

Peter’s court case has enormous implications for the international debate about climate change, and for the ongoing crisis surrounding freedom of speech.

In April, Federal Court Justice Vasta ruled JCU had erred in its interpretation of a clause in its enterprise agreement and deprived Dr Ridd of his right to express his academic opinion. Within hours of the judgment being released in April, JCU published a statement on its website criticising the ruling.

Dr Ridd is seeking financial compensation after he was sacked by JCU for publicly criticising the institution and one of its star scientists over claims about the impact of global warming on the Great Barrier Reef.

In his decision, Judge Vasta stated that:

[T]he concept of intellectual freedom is not recent and is extremely important as it helps to define the mission of any university… It is the cornerstone upon which the University exists. If the cornerstone is removed, the building tumbles.

[…] To use the vernacular, the University has “played the man and not the ball”. Incredibly, the University has not understood the whole concept of intellectual freedom. In the search for truth, it is an unfortunate consequence that some people may feel denigrated, offended, hurt or upset. It may not always be possible to act collegiately when diametrically opposed views clash in the search for truth.

[…] That is why intellectual freedom is so important. It allows academics to express their opinions without fear of reprisals. It allows a Charles Darwin to break free of the constraints of creationism. It allows an Albert Einstein to break free of the constraints of Newtonian physics. It allows the human race to question conventional wisdom in the never-ending search for knowledge and truth. And that, at its core, is what higher learning is about. To suggest otherwise is to ignore why universities were created and why critically focussed academics remain central to all that university teaching claims to offer.’

We continue to see story after story that hypes the warm temperatures and ignores the cold weather.  Heat waves?  Hype and hoopla.  The sceptics are calling out every one of the lies now, just as quickly as the mainstream media prints them…

https://youtu.be/f5B8gcpggfs

This is only because the media is being manipulated by political forces aligned to the (your?) international socialist movement.  The fake news propaganda effort is being coordinated by the UN IPCC and their supporters.  We can no longer get accurate media reporting on how weather compares, or about climate change, nor on the other sub-plots.  Like this one about Arctic Sea Ice because the fraud dominates… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwUhJaQVi-M&feature=youtu.be  and  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZDtnq9A-Bg&feature=youtu.be

Even the fate of polar bears is being twisted to suit the UN agenda… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6bcCTFnGZ0&feature=youtu.be

In mid July (only last week and during mid-summer!) the “Crown Prince Haakon” a Norwegian icebreaker set out to crash through from Svalbard to the North Pole based on the stories of rapid ice melt.  They quickly turned back due to striking solid 10 ft thick ice.  Even with Greenland’s and Iceland’s principle glaciers now advancing we still get stories that they are retreating.  This level of scientific disinformation may suit your purposes but if this Grand Solar Minimum (2019-2055) is to be a 400 year event like the Maunder Minimum – rather than 200 year event like the Dalton minimum – then this will end in tears because it will soon be too late for us to prepare.

4.2 The establishment of carbon trading schemes relies totally on the ability of the UN IPCC scientists to predict what happens in the future as CO2 levels are notionally to be brought under control by exerting the influence of humans over natural forces to reduce both atmospheric CO2 and global temperatures. That relies totally on the accuracy of trumped up, totally inaccurate, but extremely expensive computer models. In this rush to implement a false doctrine, the developed countries have joined a collective rush that will destroy their economic base.  If you sit down with your scientists and watch these two videos by Dr Robert Holmes and Dr Patrick Moore you will get a sense of the gravity of what your government’s involvement in this fraud is doing to all except those in the developing world who (are already and) will happily continue to eat our lunch in every possible way.

4.3  Herewith is the video of a comprehensive rebuttal of the science that your globalist friends rely upon (by Dr Robert Holmes).  Each video Dr Holmes has put out gradually tightens the knot around the Great Global Warming fraud as he itemises the genuine peer reviewed experiments and research that gives the lie to the UN IPCC dogma that is essential for their survival.  This latest in his series contains most of the evidence that will blow this fraud apart.

4.4  You claim to be a devout environmentalist, yet I allege you are betraying the environmental movement and misleading the general public.  Accordingly I have laid a separate complaint about the deceptive and misleading conduct of both  you as Leader, and the NZ Green Party, with the Commerce Commission under s. 13 of the Fair Trading Act 1986.  You cannot take destructive action against all earth’s/New Zealand’s  vegetative species and still lay claim to being “green”.  Here is Dr Patrick Moore’s video on the destructive actions of others also participating in this fraud.  I make no apology for its length which enables you to better understand his credentials and the similar conundrum they face in Canada to the trouble you are stirring up in New Zealand.   As with Greenpeace, Canada, it is all counter-productive.

https://youtu.be/UWahKIG4BE4

At this point in time there are between 10-15,000 scientists working in every OECD country to combat the Great Global Warming Fraud.  But essentially, when the global harvests begin to fail (as they did last year – if only in some regions), it will be too late for us to prepare.

  • The preoccupation of the UN IPCC with their fraud is because it is an existential requirement for that organisation, as noted by Dr Moore’s video at 29 minutes and 44 seconds…I quote from the UN IPCC’s mandate to analyse… “a change in climate that is attributed to directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.”  The facts however tell us a different story as per the link below…even using UN IPCC approved data…the knowledge of what happened once the ice cores from Antarctica were analysed in 2003, busted their theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, and since then the UN simply ratcheted up their fraudulent activities to increase their hold on power over national governments.  This Vostok ice core data is also confirmed by Greenland studies of the Holocene climate history, covering only the last 11,500 years…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=higXpFF79Hw&feature=youtu.be

4.6  I cannot open a newspaper without some element of the fraud being telegraphed as proven science.  Whether it is as a result of the studied ignorance of journalists or because children have believed the lies that you and their teachers have told them as part of their school curriculum.  Those elements of the mainstream media that spread the lies and disinformation must be stopped forthwith.  The sceptics know the role that George Soros and others have played in this fraud.  Local Government, Maori interests, Central Government officers, farmers, oil companies business leaders and others have all been misled and become unwitting accomplices.  But of greater cost to the country is the rubbish that carbon trading will lead to some form of beneficial climate modification.  This activity and many others are by definition only Ponzi schemes.  Their life and existence depends on “greater fools” making bigger and bigger financial contributions to the point when the fraud is discovered and a massive “debt jubilee” automatically takes place, to the cost of everyone who has obeyed your erroneous interpretation of junk science and obeyed your corrupt laws.   There is a ripeness of time for all frauds to be exposed.  But the longer it takes, the worse the situation will be.

  • The cost of your policies will be too steep for the country of New Zealand to bear, as it has already been in Germany and Australia.  As the proven cost of the UN IPCC’s wasteful programme becomes known, the global resistance is getting stronger now that the truth is getting out. 

This is a sample of something doing the rounds in Australia…. https://www.youtube.com/embed/BC1l4geSTP8

Minister, you have a duty to familiarise yourself with the science.   Although I am not associated with it, I believe the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition’s experts can provide you with directions of where to get help and support.

I believe from the data that the earth’s climate is always changing, either up or down, and because I now see a bias in favour of the solar and space weather scientists’ consensus – who mostly believe the climate will now cool – I am classed as a “Climate Change Denier”.  Those who believe in human instigated global warming and insist that the term “climate change” is the same as “global warming” are hyping runaway warming for all they are worth and yet their un-warranted alarmism is based solely on computer models that only do one thing – they reinforce their own personal world view.  After 30 years, because their models don’t agree with the data, they simply change the data to suit their models.  Are you really happy to go along with that? 

The Russians used to have a saying,  “The most difficult thing to predict is history”.  (It is like Tiananmen Square and the CCP) Try to track the unwarranted and self-serving alterations to temperature data and you will understand why I, like Professor Moerner of Sweden think the UN IPCC are such frauds.  If you do check this information for yourself you will find yourself sitting on the wrong side of the biggest fraud in global history.  I hope you will feel comfortable there, until the truth does out.

I am simply an investor in renewable energy projects moonlighting as a fraud investigator, calling the facts as I see them.  I don’t like what I see, but unlike you, I face them.  Don’t we, the people, pay you to do the same?

Yours sincerely

John Rofe

An Extremely Concerned New Zealand Citizen

============================================

CLIMATE  CHANGE

By Professor Emeritus Geoffrey G Duffy

DEng, PhD, BSc, ASTC Dip., FRS NZ, FIChemE, CEng

CARBON DIOXIDE COand WATER H2 CONTRASTED       

  • Showing water and condensable water vapour have by nature much greater actions on weather changes and climate patterns than non-condensable CO2 ever could.
  • SOLAR RADIATION:  CO2 only has TWO narrow absorption bands for incoming solar energy.  Water vapour has SEVEN (5 larger bands).  Water vapour is 5 times more effective with incoming Solar radiation.
  • RADIATION from EARTH:  CO2 only has TWO more narrow absorption bands for radiation coming back from earth.  Water vapour covers 85% of the entire span. Water vapour is more than 12 times effective than CO2.
  • Overall, water vapour is about 12 times more effective than non-condensable CO2 with respect to all radiation
  • Condensable water vapour evaporates, humidifies, then condenses to form clouds, which can precipitate to produce rain or snow, and scrub dust and pollutants from the air, and then cool the atmosphere and planet surface. 

CARBON DIOXIDE CO2

  • CO2 is NOT a pollutant or a toxin [Carbon MONOXIDE CO is the toxin: prevents blood from carrying oxygen]
  • CO2 in the atmosphere is vital for LIFE – plants and vegetation: we would die without it !
  • Crops, trees, plants, convert CO2 into sugars, cellulose, fruit, vegetables, and more
  • Leaf ‘factories’ convert CO2 into organic carbon compounds and O2
  • Marine plankton and molluscs uptake and convert CO2 too!
  • Humans exhale 1 kg CO2 per day (close to 7 Billion humans on Earth) and the concentration is 40,000 ppm at the exit of the mouth
  • NOT all CO2 in the atmosphere is man-made (< 5%) – most is naturally produced
  • Ruminating animals put out more greenhouse gases than all the cars, buses, trucks and other vehicles in the world
  • The main sources of anthropogenic greenhouse gases are Fossil Fuels: coal, oil, gas, and the burning of crops and waste, wood, trees and other wastes and garbage (still very small worldwide)
  • CO2 absorbs radiant energy over a total of 4 LIMITED NARROW BANDS [see Graph below],
  • Atmospheric CO2 is a non-condensable GAS like nitrogen, oxygen, and methane. Water vapour is the ONLY condensable gas. These changes of phase (evaporation, condensation, precipitation) produce all the atmospheric effects: heat-shielding clouds, cooling, and atmospheric scrubbing
  • For every 1,000,000 molecules of atmosphere, only 10,410 in NZ are greenhouse gas GHG molecules. But 10,000 of the 10,410 are water molecules.  Of the remaining 410, ONLY about 405 are CO2.  Of these, only 5% (about 20 molecules) are from man-made processes (20 in 1 million; 0.002%; 1 molecule in 50,000!!  Can that be the main culprit in climate change when water is typically about 1% in New Zealand; or 1 molecule in 100, while absorbing far more radiant energy as the graph below shows
  • The ocean holds 93% of ALL CO2 (38,000 billion tonnes); the land 5% (2,000 billion tonnes); the atmosphere 2% (850 billion tonnes), of which anthropogenic CO2 is ONLY 5% of that (about 45 billion tonnes)
  • CO2 in rain water is acidic: CO2 in sea water is alkaline (pH 8.1), and can never-ever be acidic while shells, carbonates and molluscs exist to neutralise it. It can become less alkaline but not acidic
  • CO2 is commonly injected into greenhouse to increase plant growth rates and crop yields
  • It has been reported that there has been a 20 – 40% greening of the planet over the last several decades
  • China has 1,171 coal-fired plants planned; India 446; so coal is still in strong demand
  • Examining atmospheric CO2 must always be considered simultaneously with the many larger effects of H2O.

Increasing CO2 concentration increases crop yields as shown in this actual Greenhouse experiment!

WATER VAPOUR H2O

Water is UNIQUE and quite different from CO2:

  • WATER: The most abundant compound on the planet and a universal solvent.  Water makes up over 60% of the human body.  It is in all plants, animals, cells etc ..
  • WATER VAPOUR:  Is the ONLY condensable atmospheric gas. So only H2O can evaporate, humidify, condense (clouds), and precipitate (rain, hail, and snow). 
  • WATER: H2O is the ONLY fluid that FLOATS ON ITSELF when it FREEZES on the liquid surface.  [If it did not float it would sink and crush the creatures (fish, sharks, whales) in the Oceans.  Marine life flourishes in water below the floating ice].
  • WATER VAPOUR: Has the largest percentage greenhouse gas EFFECT [about 45% – 70% (clear sky), 70% – 90% (cloudy sky)]
  • WATER VAPOUR:  The water vapour concentration in the atmosphere depends on temperature and location [< 0.2% in very cold climates to >4% by mass at high Humidity in the tropics >35 0C]
  • WATER:  Oceans absorb 1,000 times more heat energy than the atmosphere, and BUFFERS more than 80% of the large heat fluctuations (and hence temperature variations), thereby moderating weather changes and climate patterns greatly.  This key factor is missed when only isolating radiation-only and CO2.  93% of all CO2 is in the oceans (~38,000 billion tonnes)
  • WATER:  Liquid water has the highest surface tension (surface molecular skin) of all natural liquids. It controls water droplet formation, cloud structures, ocean surfaces, waves, evaporation rates, etc
  • WATER: H2O molecules are polar (H slightly +ve; O slightly –ve). Hence adjacent water molecules can ‘attract’ each other, particularly as the temperature is lowered (ice floats on water because of this). [Liquid water can also ionise slightly H3O+ hydronium ions, and OH hydroxyl ions]. Hydrogen onding gives some unique features unlike CO2: H2O has the second highest specific heat capacity [only ammonia* is greater]: H2O has a very high heat of vaporisation (2,257 kJ/kg at its boiling point), and ENERGY TRANSFERS are very important in atmospheric changes (weather) (shows up as temperature differences)
  • WATER:  The ‘Structure’ and ‘Behaviour’ of H2O molecules have LARGE buffering effects that moderate the earth’s weather and they affect both evaporation from the seas and condensation in cloud formation. Non-condensable COgas forms NO clouds
  • WATER: The specific enthalpy of fusion (at freezing) is very high (333.6 kJ/kg at 0°C) [only ammonia* is higher], and this confers resistance to melting on the ice. [Density decrease or Bulk increase at freezing is about 9%] 
  • WATER: Water Vapour – Liquid Water – Ice COEXIST at the equilibrium Triple Point.  It is amazing that it occurs near 00C (By comparison, the Triple Point of CO2 is -56.50C so it strongly differs from water).  This has some unique effects in phase transitions near the poles (eg solid ice can go to vapour DIRECTLY with no liquid water for example [sublimation]) (dry ice CO2 used widely on stage and TV)). 
  • WATER: Water has a freezing point of 00C and a boiling point of 1000C due to its unique molecular polar structure.  We live because of that!! 
  • WATER: The nearest molecule to Water (Atomic Weight of 18) is Ammonia (Atomic Weight of 17).   In direct contrast, the freezing point of Ammonia is -770C and a boiling point of -330C even though the Atomic Weights are 1 point different.  This shows that the structure of water is unique!  Just as well, water is THE MOST ABUNDANT COMPOUND on the EARTH’S SURFACE and the temperature absorption-emission bands are just right for life on Earth.
  • The Thermal Lapse Rate or temperature drop is the 6.5C0 temperature drop per kilometer rise above earth.  This is caused by all atmospheric gas molecules moving further with increasing elevation (lower density and lower pressure result). This is vital for humidification, mists, fogs and cloud formation
  • WATER VAPOUR: can regulate, buffer, compensate, correct, and restore atmospheric changes

Professor Emeritus Geoffrey G Duffy

DEng, PhD, BSc, ASTC Dip., FRS NZ, FIChemE, CEng

EMAIL:  geoffduffy@lycos.com

The KEY REFERENCE sources:

            Radiation:  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Atmospheric_Transmission.png

            Humidity:   http://www.lenntech.com/calculators/humidity/relative-humidity.htm

====================================

THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD – SUMMARY

By John Rofe, 28 July 2019

  1. After 30 years of repeated warnings of impending Armageddon from the United Nations (“UN”) based on the subjective and inaccurate computer modelling performed at the cost of national governments (and all taxpayers) at the UN’s behest, they are certainly no closer to understanding the climate.  But they are instead still trying to defend their 30-year fraud.
  2. Meantime, credible solar scientists have good evidence that the principle cause of climate change lies with the variability of the solar cycles that have continued to affect earth’s climate since the beginning of time.  UN bias ignores this evidence.  Even so, there are some longer cycles that affect the passage of ice ages and inter-glacial periods, and are caused by earth’s movements in relation to the sun.  These don’t yet figure within our time horizon.
  3. The only plausible cause of all the warming that has happened since “The Little Ice Age” ended in 1850, has come from the highest level of solar electromagnetic activity for 4,000 years.  The increase in earth’s temperature of little over 1 degree Centigrade over 160 years is latterly being called the “Modern Warm Period”. Those of us who have checked the history find it is not remarkably warm at all today, even though a lot of effort is being made to convince us that it is, with lies, damned lies and cherry-picked statistics.  The Mediaeval Warm Period was arguably much warmer – a thousand years ago. What about the 1930’s?
  4. NASA now tells us a new weaker 11 year solar cycle – called simply “sc25” – is commencing at a time when there is record thinning and cooling of earth’s outer layer of atmosphere (called “the Thermosphere”) which we are also told heralds the imminent arrival of a new 30 year event called a “Grand Solar Minimum”.  Many scientists now expect a period of much colder weather to last from 2019 to 2055 that could result in horrific global crop losses.  I guess the proof of that is about to be revealed, as early as February 2020.  We will see.
  5. The truth about carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide is that they are only minor trace gases and cannot possibly influence earth’s climate.  They are proven to have no measurable effect on climate change, and carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but a gas necessary for all life on earth.  Besides water and light, carbon dioxide is the only resource essential for all plant growth.  Plants really need 1000 parts per million of carbon dioxide from the air.  Yet today the atmosphere only contains about 415 parts per million.  To remedy this deficiency, horticulturalists pump bottled gas into glass houses and growing tunnels at up to 2,000 parts per million.  So carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but it is also in relatively short supply.  There is clearly no possibility of influencing climate change by reducing human emissions of carbon dioxide (“CO2”) which anyway constitute less than 4.3% of total CO2 emissions.  So NZ Government actions are just part of the UN IPCC coordinated fraud.
  6. Because methane emissions have even less effect than CO2, the present demands being made on the NZ farming community are somewhere between bizarre and ridiculous.
  7. But why is your Government lying to you?  I cannot answer for them, but I can assure you that after a year of failing to get satisfactory reasons for their fraudulent behaviour, I laid allegations against Minister James Shaw and PM Jacinda Ardern with the NZ Serious Fraud Office in mid-April 2019…and later also laid a complaint with the NZ Commerce Commission against Minister James Shaw and the NZ Green Party under s.13 of the Fair Trading Act 1986.

There is a ripeness of time for all frauds to be revealed…for this one, let’s fix it today.

=======================

 

 

Environmentalism: gravy trains, lies, hidden agendas and alarms such as 5G and gsms.

Scroll down to read the most recent articles; links to previous articles follow.

GMO SEEDS ALREADY OBSOLETE?

 

GMO SEEDS ALREADY OBSOLETE  By Joseph P.Farrell, 3 March 2021

 

If you’re a GMO seeds proponent, or an employee of Mon(ster)santo or I.G. Farbensanto, don’t say we didn’t warn you. Our warning was that by trying to create genetically modified crops that would repel pests, that nature would adapt to the modifications faster than research laboratories could adapt GMOs to nature’s adaptations, thus rendering them not only potentially obsolete, but by creating a pest problem, endangering the food supply (and don’t forget those falling crop yields-per-acre that the University of Iowa documented a couple of years ago with respect to GMO yields: falling yields + higher costs to maintain GMO crops = GMO failure, and cost effectiveness makes natural seeds over the long term a better investment. Now it’s officially come home to roost, according to this article shared by B.:

The coming obsolescence of GMO seeds

There’s much to note about this article, but there was one thing that it stated that leaped out at me:

For the $55 billion genetically modified seed industry, the news hasn’t been good lately. The great “successes” of Bt corn and cotton seeds are turning to failure as insects such as corn rootworms and cotton bollworms are developing resistance to the GMO crops. As a result, farmers have to spray more toxic insecticides to kill the resistant insects.

The situation has become so bad that the Environmental Protection Agency has proposed phasing out more than 40 varieties of Bt corn and cotton over the next three to five years as a way to reduce the insect resistance.

Meanwhile, herbicide-tolerant GMO soybeans are facing massive weed resistance problems. With U.S. farmers spraying 300 million pounds of glyphosate on their fields each year, weeds have naturally developed resistance. Monsanto and other biotech companies’ solution was to develop new GMO seeds that would work with dicamba and 2,4-D herbicides, which are more toxic than glyphosate and prone to drift, causing damage to other crops.

The result has been a disaster. Dicamba has damaged millions of acres of non-dicamba tolerant soybeans as well as other crops, fruit orchards, millions of trees, and gardens in the past four years. The largest peach producer in Missouri lost 30,000 trees to dicamba drift damage. He sued Monsanto, now Bayer, and won a $265 million settlement. One farmer even murdered another over a dicamba drift dispute.

GMO seeds are failing because GMO technology is short-sighted and supports a failing system of agriculture. GMOs still dominate U.S. corn, soybean, and cotton production but I believe their days are numbered. They are going against the trends in agriculture, which are toward regenerative and organic methods.

growing number of farmers are focusing on practices to build soil health such as planting cover crops and diverse crop rotations and grazing livestock. Because of those practices, regenerative farmers find they no longer need the GMO seeds, and they are also able to slash their use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers.(Boldface emphasis added)

“… a failing system of agriculture”: Let those words sink in. And let the other words “the result has been a disaster” sink in too. But wait, there’s more:

The main point is that soil health and regenerative practices are the leading trends in agriculture today, and as farmers journey on the path to soil health, many don’t see the need to plant GMO seeds.

GMO seed technology was designed to work with a system of industrial agriculture whose toxic effects—pesticides that threaten human health, depleted and eroded soils, polluted waterways from fertilizer runoff, greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change, among others—are becoming more apparent and threatening to the world. As more farmers move away from this system toward regenerative and organic practices, the use of ag chemicals and GMOs will fall away.

Biotechnology proponents point to the emergence of gene editing, and say that new gene edited seeds and crops will be developed. They say these crops will increase crop yields, produce more nutritious foods, reduce pesticide use, and help to “feed the world.” Wait, wasn’t that the promise of the “old” GMO seeds? Gene editing supporters say the technology is precise. But a study published in Nature magazine last July found that gene editing of human embryonic cells caused “chromosomal mayhem.” That isn’t precise. Similar genetic mayhem has been seen in gene edited rice and other crops. Gene edited crops will have the same problems as the older GMO crops, and consumers will likely reject them.(Boldface emphasis added)

In other words, human genetic tinkering is creating chaos in agriculture; think of the growing number of stories about adverse reactions to the mRNA covid “vaccines” and transfer that to crops and you get the picture: we are playing with systems which in spite of our vaunted “science” we do not yet completely understand, and in our rush to “play” with them and “improve” them, are creating a mess, possibly one that could threaten the food supply. And in both cases, crops and “vaccines”, the model used is one to maximize profits of a few big corporations. Why sponsor hydroxychloroquine for covid, when it’s so cheap, when profits can be maximized for a “vaccine” which comes with all sorts of health risks. Why sponsor ordinary seeds, when GMO seeds and their associated pesticides are so much more expensive, and can maximize profits?

Similarly, note the response to these models: “organic” crops and “holistic” medicine. In other words, more and more involved in the practice of farming or medicine are turning away from technological and artificial fixes more natural ones. Note that Russia, for example, not only turned very deliberately away from GMOs, but that its vaccine is not an experimental one tinkering with messenger RNA and human genetics.

And also note the response of “Big Agribusiness” (or as we like to call it here, I.G. Farbensanto or Mon[ster]santo) and Big Pharma (or as we like to call it, Muck Pharmaceuticals) to those who’ve opposed their agendas: Mon(ster)santo would sue farmers if one of their plants was spotted on their fields (meaning that Mon[ster]santo was actually spying on people), and Muck Pharmaceuticals? Well, it’s a curious thing that so many holistic doctors were being murdered in the years running up to the covid planscamdemic, and we all saw how apopleptic some doctors and media became at the mere mention of hydroxychloroquine, vitamin d, or zinc.

So yes, perhaps we need a new model of doing things. One that isn’t anti-science, but skeptical of rushed scientism, of rushed promises of “a better world” and “cures” without adequate testing and skepticism. In this, the whole GMO panacea has been a lesson in the dangers of rushed technologies, lack of inter-generational testing, and bought-off and corrupted “corporate science” and media promising the utmost safety of their witches’ brews.

Or to put that lesson more succinctly, no more Mon(ster)santo’s, and no more “Operation Warp Speeds” either. And here’s the good news:

The good news is that a seed industry independent of the big biotech/pesticide companies—Bayer, BASF, Corteva, and Syngenta—is growing stronger, worth an estimated $10 billion. This includes organic seed companies such as Albert Lea SeedGreat Harvest OrganicsHigh Mowing Organic Seeds, and others. There are also seed companies emerging to meet the demand for non-GMO corn including SureFlex Hybrids in Minnesota, Spectrum Non-GMO in Indiana, Hybrid85 in Nebraska, and De Dell Seeds in Canada, to name a few.

Now, hopefully, we’ll see the emergence of doctors’ and physicians’ consortia that will treat their covid patients with things other than questionable “vaccines”. We’ve seen a few individuals questioning the whole narrative, but the whole idea of other points of view should, perhaps, become a business model.

======================

Senate inquiry is bringing evidence about state of Great Barrier Reef to the surface

Senate inquiry is bringing evidence about state of Great Barrier Reef to the surface  By Professor Peter Ridd, an independent scientist, The Australian, 16 September 2020

 

Editor’s note: Professor Ridd was sacked by James Cook University, Queensland, for challenging some university colleagues regarding the accuracy of their reports concerning the Great Barrier Reef.  Ridd challenged this in court and won a resounding victory in which the judge castigated JCU. An appeal by JCU was lost based on some convoluted points.  Ridd is escalating an appeal to the highest Australian court.  Over $760,000 has been collected for Ridd’s appeal in a Go-Fund appeal. Ridd is pushing in particular for a far better level of quality control in science.

The Senate committee inquiry into the regulation of farm practices impacting water quality on the Great Barrier Reef has yielded some remarkable confessions by science institutions about the state of the reef. It has been the first time many of the scientists have been asked difficult questions and publicly challenged by hard evidence. They have been forced out of their bubble.

It was revealed by Paul Hardisty, boss of the Australian Institute of Marine Science, that only 3 per cent of the reef, the “inshore reefs”, is affected by farm pesticides and sediment. He also stated that pesticides, are a “low to negligible risk”, even for that 3 per cent.

The other 97 per cent, the true offshore Great Barrier Reef, mostly 50km to 100km from the coast, is effectively totally unharmed by pesticides and sediment.

This has been evident in the data for decades but it is nice to see an honest appraisal of the situation.

Why has this fact not been brought to the public’s attention in major documents such as the GBR Outlook Report produced by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority? Why has everybody been deceived about the true extent of the problem?

AIMS was also forthcoming on other important points. Records of coral growth rates show no impact from agriculture. Large corals live centuries, and have annual growth rings like trees. They record their own rate of growth. If farming, which started about 100 years ago on the reef coast, was damaging the it, there should be a slowing of the growth rate. The records show no slowing when agriculture started a century ago, or when large-scale use of fertiliser and pesticides began in the 1950s.

I have written previously that AIMS has been negligent in not updating the GBR-average coral growth data for the past 15 years. We have the scandalous situation that there is data going back centuries – but nothing since 2005. AIMS claimed coral growth rates collapsed between 1990 and 2005, due to climate change; however, there is considerable doubt about this result because AIMS changed the methodology for the data between 1990 and 2005. At the Senate inquiry, under some duress, AIMS agreed it would be a good idea to update this data if the government will fund the project.

Updating the coral growth rate data will be a major step forward. It will prove or disprove the doubtful decline between 1990 and 2005. It will also give the complete record of how the GBR has fared in the past 15 years, a period when scientists have become more strident in their claims that it is on its last legs.

Hardisty, to his credit, has recently implemented red-blue teams within his organisation to help with quality assurance of the work that AIMS produces. A red team is a group of scientists that takes a deliberately antagonist approach to check, test and replicate scientific evidence. A genuine red team is a far more rigorous quality assurance approach than the present system used in science – peer review – which is often little more than a quick read of the work by the scientist’s mates. What AIMS has done internally is similar to what I have been proposing – an Office of Science Quality Assurance that would check, test, and replicate scientific evidence used for public policy.

Unfortunately, Hardisty’s commitment to quality in science was not reflected by many other important witnesses at the Senate inquiry. Many are in denial and resorted to shooting the messengers. An extract from a letter signed by Professor Ian Chubb, a former Australian chief scientist, was read out by Senator Kim Carr.

Disputing the conventional wisdom on the reef was likened to denying that tobacco causes cancer, or that lead in petrol is a health risk. Worse still, the reason sceptics do this, apparently, is “usually money”. Scientists such as Dr Piers Larcombe, the pre-eminent expert on the movement of sediment on the reef, with decades of experience, is thus written off as a corrupt charlatan.

It is scientific “cancel culture”. It is easier than confronting Larcombe’s evidence that farming has very limited impact on the GBR.

It is customary to be very cynical of our politicians, but it was senators Roberts, Rennick, Canavan and McDonald who forced some truth from our generally untrustworthy science institutions. Only our politicians can save us from them.

The evidence about the reef will not be buried forever. All the data indicates agriculture is having a negligible impact on the reef, and recent draconian Queensland legislation against farmers is unwarranted. And this issue will be influential come the Queensland state election on October 31.

(Professor) Peter Ridd is an independent scientist.

======================

We need an inquiry into climate alarmism

 

We need an inquiry into climate alarmism  By Chris Kenny, The Australian, 29 August 2020

I hope you are sitting down; this foray into political and media madness over bushfires and climate change starts with recognising some excellent, forensic journalism by the ABC. Investigating last summer’s devastating Gospers Mountain fire, journalist Philippa McDonald took us to the very tree where the fire is believed to have been started when it was struck by lightning in a thunderstorm.

McDonald used this to give us the brilliantly counterintuitive opening line; “It began not with fire, but ice.” In a series of reports, McDonald and her team retraced the history of the fire over a number of weeks, how it was almost extinguished by rain, how bushwalkers in the wrong place at the wrong time thwarted a backburn that might have stopped it, how another prescribed burn got out of control and destroyed houses, and how a fortuitous wind change stopped it encroaching on suburban Sydney.

We might quibble with some of the alarmist language — repeating the silly new “megafire” term and pretending that when fires meet they join and get bigger when, in fact, this reduces the number of fronts and total length of fire perimeter — but overall the reporting was factual and admirable because it explained the many variables in fire behaviour and the factors that can influence whether a fire can be contained or extinguished before weather conditions turn it into an unstoppable beast. Surprisingly, and refreshingly, the reports did not dwell on climate change.

When it comes to our bushfires climate change is so close to being irrelevant, it should hardly warrant a passing reference — we have always faced disastrous bushfire conditions and always will. If climate change makes the worst conditions either marginally more or less common, it matters not; we still need to do the same things to protect ourselves.

In previous articles I have detailed the leading scientific analysis showing the main precondition for the NSW fires — a long drought — cannot be attributed to climate change. Unless climate activists want to argue Australia could do something to alter the global climate sufficiently to reduce our bushfire threat, they are exposed as cynical campaigners who used the sure bet of bushfires to advance their political scare campaign.

The NSW bushfire inquiry released this week took a dive into the climate science — as it was tasked to do — and found, predictably enough, that climate change “clearly played a role in the conditions” that led up to the fires and helped spread them. But thankfully it did not waste much time on climate in its recommendations, merely suggesting climate trends need to be monitored and factored in.

Apart from exercises in politically correct box ticking — Indigenous training for evacuation centre staff so they are “culturally competent”, wildlife rescue training for firefighters, and signs to promote ABC radio stations — most of the recommendations were practical. Better equipment for firefighters, more water bombers, more communication, public education and most importantly, a range of suggestions on fuel reduction around settled areas and planning controls on building in fire prone areas.

The bottom line has always been obvious: the one fire input we can control is fuel, so where we want to slow blazes or protect properties, we must reduce fuel. Planning is also important to prevent housing in indefensible locations, but one crucial phrase missing from the report was “personal responsibility”.

Houses on wooded hilltops or surrounded by bush cannot be protected and their residents should not expect others to risk their lives trying to do so.

People must be educated to clear extensively around properties, sufficient to withstand not a moderate fire but a firestorm, otherwise they must be prepared to surrender their homes and escape early.

“Hazard reduction is not the complete answer,” said report author Mary O’Kane. “People do need to take responsibility, they need to realise that if they live in certain areas it can be very dangerous, and we try to give a strong message of, if you are in a dangerous area and there is one of these big, bad megafires, the message, is get out.”

O’Kane is right, of course. But it seems a hell of a waste to hold a full inquiry only to be told we should do more fuel reduction, be careful where we build houses, and get the hell out of the way rather than try to fight firestorms. We knew all this.

The push for an inquiry was largely driven by the climate catastrophists. Remember, they wanted to blame the blazes on the axing of the carbon tax, and on Scott Morrison. It was inane and rancid stuff.

They will be at it again, this fire season. They love making political capital out of disasters, although they go as quiet as Tim Flannery when it comes to full dams and widespread snowfalls.

The area of land burned in the Australian summer has now been revised down by 25 per cent, and the claims about wildlife deaths revised downwards too, to factor in the mind-blowing realisation that animals actually escape fire when they can — birds fly, wombats burrow, kangaroos hop and even koalas can climb to the treetops and escape all but a crowning blaze.

Remember we had articles in The Guardian, The New York Times, and on CNN and the BBC, saying the bush might never recover. Take a drive through the Blue Mountains, Kangaroo Island or the Australian Alps and see how their predictions turned out.

The sclerophyll forests of southern Australia are not just adapted to fire, they are reliant on it. Therefore, the wildlife also is reliant on it for the rejuvenation of the vegetation — why does basic ecology escape the climate activists? If it is any comfort, the same madness is now playing out in California. Similar climate, similar history of bushfires, and the same maddening political debate. With fires burning more than a million acres in northern California this month, the state’s Democratic Governor, Gavin Newsom, sent a recorded message to his party’s national convention; “If you are in denial about climate change, come to California.” The trouble is that while these are bad wildfires, they are not unusual in the natural and settled history of that environment.

Like the Australian bush, the redwood forests that US journalists suggest are being destroyed by fire, depend on fire for propagation. Just like here, one of the issues has been the suppression of bushfire by human interference, leading to the unnatural build up of fuel that can explode when a wildfire does get away in bad conditions.

Environmentalist and author of Apocalypse Never; Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, Michael Shellenberger says the climate is warming but the impact of this on fires is overstated. In an article for Forbes.com he quoted Scott Stevens of the University of California, Berkeley, saying climate change is not a major factor, as well as other experts scoffing of the idea that severe fires are anything new.

“California’s fires should indeed serve as a warning to the public, but not that climate change is causing the apocalypse,” wrote Shellenberger. “Rather, it should serve as a warning that mainstream news reporters and California’s politicians cannot be trusted to tell the truth about climate change and fires.”

Ditto for Oz. I have detailed previously how Fran Kelly told ABC audiences in November that “the fire warning had been increased to catastrophic for the first time ever in this country” — but that was wrong, wildly wrong.

Greens Senator Jordon Steele-John accused his political opponents of being “no better than arsonists” and other Greens and Labor MPs said Australia’s climate policies were exacerbating bushfires. Insane as this might be, it was amplified rather than interrogated by most media.

The thick smoke haze in Sydney was portrayed as something “unprecedented” — if it has not been on Twitter before it must never have happened — but a quick search of newspaper files found similar bushfire-induced shrouds in 1951, when airports were closed, and 1936, when a ship couldn’t find the heads.

Fires in rainforest areas of southern Queensland and northern NSW were not “unprecedented” either, with archived reports noting similar fires in the spring of 1951 and even the winter of 1946.

Despite 200,000 media mentions of “unprecedented” tracked by media monitors across December and January, the facts showed none of this was new. Greater areas were burned in 1851 and 1974-75, and human devastation was either as bad or worse on Black Saturday in 2009, Ash Wednesday in 1983, Black Tuesday in 1967, Black Friday in 1939 and Black Thursday 1851.

Bushland was not destroyed forever, koalas were not rendered extinct and Scott Morrison was not to blame. We should have an inquiry into climate alarmism, political posturing and media reporting — we would learn a lot more from that than we have from relearning age-old fire preparedness from yet another bushfire inquiry.

CHRIS KENNY

 

ASSOCIATE EDITOR (NATIONAL AFFAIRS)

Commentator, author and former political adviser, Chris Kenny hosts The Kenny Report Monday-Friday 5pm, and Kenny on Media, 8.30pm Friday, on Sky News. He takes an unashamedly rationalist approach to national a… Read more

=====================

Alarmism in New Zealand


Alarmism in New Zealand  By Dr Muriel Newman, NZCPR.com, 25 July 2020

Fear is a natural survival instinct and arguably more motivating than logic and reason. It can also be used to great effect to shift the mindset of communities and nations.

While such manipulation is, of course, not uncommon, what is surprising is how blind societies are to recognising when fear is being used as a tool for political persuasion.

We recently saw this in the Government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic when the Prime Minister used alarmist computer modelling to justify her “Captain’s Call” to lock the country down.

Claiming “tens of thousands of New Zealanders” could die, the PM rejected Ministry of Health advice to stay at Level 2 for 30 days, and imposed what we now know to be the most stringent policy response in the world.

Instead of relying on cost benefit analyses and regulatory impact statements from trusted government agencies to inform her decisions, the PM chose inaccurate computer models that grossly exaggerated the number of deaths.

It has now been revealed that the modelling she relied on did not take into account the contact testing and tracing that was central to the health response being implemented by Dr Ashley Bloomfield, the Director General of Health.

The explosion of predicted deaths that resulted, was then used by the PM to scare the country into accepting her hard-line lockdown.

This is not the first time the Prime Minister has used scaremongering to force her policy agenda onto the country. Her whole response to climate change has been based on fear.

Climate change is, of course, a natural process influenced by a wide range of factors including the sun, clouds, and ocean currents. Throughout history, the Earth’s climate has been far hotter than it is today and far colder. Sea levels have been far higher and far lower. Carbon dioxide – the trace gas used by plants to manufacture food – has existed at far higher atmospheric concentrations and far lower.

But the United Nations’ climate models that are being used to redefine economic policy around the world, only focus on the minuscule proportion of carbon emissions produced by humans. In doing so, they disregard not only the 97 percent of carbon dioxide produced from natural sources, but also the overwhelming influence that other crucial factors such as the sun have on the climate.

These alarmist models, which blame climate change on humans, are being used by politicians – including our Prime Minister – to implement the UN’s socialist agenda: state control of all economic activity through the regulation of carbon emissions.

Fortunately, most scams motivated by scaremongering are eventually exposed – often by the very people who pioneered the movements before they were captured by political extremists.

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator Michael Shellenberger is a leading American climate activist, who, having promoted global warming propaganda for almost three decades, has decided to stop the lies:

“On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.

“Here are some facts few people know: Humans are not causing a ‘sixth mass extinction’; Climate change is not making natural disasters worse;  Netherlands became rich not poor while adapting to life below sea level; Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change; Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels…

“I know that the above facts will sound like ‘climate denialism’ to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism.”

Michael Shellenberger explains how difficult it has been to speak out against the climate scare:

“I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I referred to climate change as an ‘existential’ threat to human civilization, and called it a ‘crisis’.

“But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public…

“But then, last year, things spiralled out of control. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said ‘The world is going to end in twelve years if we don’t address climate change.’ Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed ‘Climate Change Kills Children…

“As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change. Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened. I thus decided I had to speak out.”

While Michael Shellenberger deserves credit for speaking out and exposing the misrepresentation, those activists who lie should be held to account – particularly by the media. It is therefore regrettable that so many in the media have decided their interests are better served by aligning with the popularists, rather than adhering to the bedrock values of their profession.

Prime amongst New Zealand’s serial alarmists is the Green Party’s Climate Change Minister James Shaw. Not only does he knowingly describe carbon dioxide – the cornerstone of life on earth – as a “pollutant”, but he also continues to claim that as a result of climate change, adverse weather events are getting worse, which is another alarmist fabrication that is simply untrue.

But as the late Stephen Schneider, a Stanford University Professor who had been a lead author for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change explained, for advocates of climate alarmism the truth is not a priority: “…we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination.  That entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”

Fearmongering, of course, has been an effective tool to manipulate the public throughout history.

The myth that population growth will deplete food and resources, and ultimately destroy the planet, can be traced back to the writing of the Reverend Thomas Malthus in 1798.

These idea gained unprecedented traction following the 1968 release of The Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich, an entomologist at Stanford University. The book incited such fear of overpopulation that it triggered waves of repression around the world.

The facts, however, tell a different story. Population growth has been slowing for more than three decades. Forty years ago, while the average woman had between five and six children to ensure the survival of the next generation, she now has between two and three. Women are having fewer children because better healthcare means that most babies now live to grow up. As a result, half of the world is already below the long-term replacement level.

Concerns over ‘peak oil’ have also been in and out of vogue over recent decades. Driven by the theory that the world would run out of oil, the reality is that scarcity has been the result of geopolitical disruption rather than resource depletion.

The Club of Rome, an Italian-based think tank established in 1965, investigated resource scarcity in their highly influential book The Limits to Growth. Using computer modelling, they forecast apocalyptic economic and environmental disaster.

Ironically, it has now become clear that, contrary to what they were predicting, the best way to improve humanity and the environment is through more growth, not less. As countries improve their living standards, so too they improve social, economic and environmental wellbeing. It is the resourcefulness of free markets to innovate and maximise the efficient use of resources that results in a progressive improvement in living standards.

What is also bizarre is that while in the 1970s climate computer models predicted that the burning of fossil fuels would trigger another ice age, nowadays they are claiming the exact opposite – that the burning of fossil fuels will cause the planet to dangerously overheat.

This contradiction has not stopped our politicians – with fossil fuels identified as the villain, their policy response of an increasing carbon levy, has effectively imposed socialist state control over all economic activity.

When the Prime Minister and Climate Change Minister introduced their Zero Carbon Act last year, they boasted about imposing the harshest restrictions on carbon emissions of any country in the world. Then last month, they amended the Emissions Trading Scheme to cap carbon emissions, causing the price of carbon to jump from around $25 a tonne to $33.

At $25, New Zealander motorists were paying an ETS levy of around 4c for every litre of petrol they bought. At $33, the levy is now around 7 cents a litre, and at $35, it will be around 9c a litre. Such price hikes will flow right through the economy, increasing the cost of living.

The Climate Change Minister expects carbon prices will go much higher.

Meanwhile the price of carbon has had a major impact on vegetable affordability, especially tomatoes. With hothouses no longer economical in some areas, local growers are being forced to close. As a result, New Zealanders will see an increase in produce imported from countries with no carbon costs.

With the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change specifying that measures introduced to enable countries to meet their carbon targets must not reduce food production, Minister Shaw is clearly breaking the rules.

Governments can only get away with imposing socialist control under the guise of climate change because of their scaremongering. Endlessly claiming that burning fossil fuels is causing dangerous global warming, they promote renewable energy as the only sustainable alternative.

In a controversial new filmPlanet of the Humans, which climate activists have tried to ban, filmmaker Michael Moore provides a devastating indictment of the renewable energy scam, explaining it is not clean, green, nor sustainable, but is more destructive than the energy sources it seeks to replace.

The film shows how wind, solar and biofuel projects destroy wildlife habitats, rare and endangered species, and millions of acres of forests, deserts and grasslands.

It exposes bogus claims about the benefits of renewable energy and explains that electricity for a small city of 50,000 households requires 15 square miles of solar panels, along with wind turbines, and a huge array of batteries – or a coal or gas power plant – for nights and cloudy days.

Paul Driessen, a senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow has reviewed  the film and describes the turbines:  “Each one is comprised of nearly 5,000,000 pounds of concrete, steel, aluminum, copper, plastic, cobalt, rare earths, fiberglass and other materials. Every step in the mining, processing, manufacturing, transportation, installation, maintenance and (20 years later) removal process requires fossil fuels. It bears repeating: wind and sun are renewable and sustainable; harnessing them for energy to benefit mankind absolutely is not.”

While some of the film’s conclusions are questionable, Michael Moore raises concerns about the merits of alternative energy that alarmists have conveniently ignored: “We’re basically being fed a lie.” Maybe we’d be “better off just burning fossil fuels in the first place,” than doing all of this.

Although dissenting voices are not yet dominating the debate about climate alarmism, there is enough concern for political leaders to stop the headlong rush into policy extremism and exercise some common sense judgement.

With New Zealand already struggling to recover from the harsh lockdown, the last thing this country needs is climate policy based on scaremongering to undermine our fragile economic recovery.

========================

Sorry for misleading you, but I cried wolf on climate change

Sorry for misleading you, but I cried wolf on climate change  By Michael Shellenberger, The Australian, 1 July 2020

I have been a climate activist for 20 years but on behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologise for the climate scare we created.

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologise for the climate scare we created over the past 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.

I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.

But as an energy expert asked by the US congress to provide ­objective testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to serve as a reviewer of its next assessment report, I feel an obligation to apologise for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.

Here are some facts few people know: Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”;

The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”;

Climate change is not making natural disasters worse;

Fires have declined 25 per cent around the world since 2003;

The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska;

The author’s new book.

The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California;

Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany and France since the mid-1970s;

The Netherlands became rich, not poor, while adapting to life below sea level;

We produce 25 per cent more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter;

Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change;

Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels;

Preventing future pandemics requires more, not less, “industrial” agriculture.

I know the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism. In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those ­conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the Inter­national Union for the Conservation of Nature and other leading scientific bodies.

Some people will, when they read this, imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s co-operatives. In my early 20s I lived in the semi-Amazon doing research with small farmers fighting land invasions. At 26 I helped expose poor conditions at Nike factories in Asia.

Green beginnings

I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27 I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to ­invest $US90bn into them. Over the past few years I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossil fuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions.

But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I ­referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilisation, and called it a “crisis”.

But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.

I even stood by as people in the White House and many in the media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke Jr, a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favour of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his ­research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse. But then, last year, things spiralled out of control. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said: “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed “climate change kills children”.

Turning point

The world’s most influential green journalist, Bill McKibben, called climate change the “greatest challenge humans have ever faced” and said it would “wipe out civilisations”. Mainstream journalists ­reported, repeatedly, that the Amazon was “the lungs of the world”, and that deforestation was like a ­nuclear bomb going off.

As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity ­extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.

Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened.

I thus decided I had to speak out. I knew that writing a few articles wouldn’t be enough. I needed a book to properly lay out all of the evidence. And so my formal ­apology for our fearmongering comes in the form of my new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.

Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany and France since the mid-1970s.

It is based on two decades of research and three decades of environmental activism. At 400 pages, with 100 of them endnotes, Apocalypse Never covers climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, industrialisation, meat, nuclear energy, and renewables.

Some highlights from the book:

  • Factories and modern farming are the keys to human liberation and environmental progress.
  • The most important thing for saving the environment is producing more food, particularly meat, on less land.
  • The most important thing for reducing pollution and emissions is moving from wood to coal to petrol to natural gas to uranium.
  • 100 per cent renewables would require increasing the land used for energy from today’s 0.5 per cent to 50 per cent.
  • We should want cities, farms, and power plants to have higher, not lower, power densities.
  • Vegetarianism reduces one’s emissions by less than 4 per cent.
  • Greenpeace didn’t save the whales — switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did.
  • “Free-range” beef would require 20 times more land and produce 300 per cent more emissions.
  • Greenpeace dogmatism worsened forest fragmentation of the Amazon.
  • The colonialist approach to gorilla conservation in the Congo produced a backlash that may have resulted in the killing of 250 elephants.

Why were we all so misled? In the final three chapters of Apocalypse Never I expose the ­financial, political and ideological motivations. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests. Groups motivated by anti-humanist beliefs forced the World Bank to stop trying to end poverty and instead make poverty “sustainable”. And status anxiety, depression and hostility to modern civilisation are behind much of the alarmism.

The most important thing for reducing pollution and emissions is moving from wood to coal to petrol to natural gas to uranium.

Reality bites

Once you realise just how badly misinformed we have been, often by people with plainly unsavoury motivations, it is hard not to feel duped. Will Apocalypse Never make any difference? There are certainly reasons to doubt it. The news media have been making apocalyptic pronouncements about climate change since the late 1980s, and do not seem disposed to stop. The ideology behind environmental alarmism — Malthusianism — has been repeatedly debunked for 200 years and yet is more powerful than ever.

But there are also reasons to ­believe that environmental alarmism will, if not come to an end, have diminishing cultural power.

A real crisis

The coronavirus pandemic is an actual crisis that puts the climate “crisis” into perspective. Even if you think we have overreacted, COVID-19 has killed nearly 500,000 people [Editor’s note 1: There is compelling evidence this figure is grossly inflated due to dubious practices and methods of measuring] and shattered economies around the globe [Editor’s note 2: It is the related governmental regulations that have ‘shattered economies around the world’, not COVID-19].

Scientific institutions including WHO and IPCC have undermined their credibility through the repeated politicisation of science. Their future existence and relevance depends on new leadership and serious reform. Facts still matter, and social media is allowing for a wider range of new and independent voices to outcompete alarmist environmental journalists at legacy publications.

Nations are reverting openly to self-interest and away from Malthusianism and neoliberalism, which is good for nuclear and bad for renewables.

The evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilisation is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilisation that climate alarmists would return us to.

Greenpeace didn’t save the whales — switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did.

The invitations from IPCC and congress are signs of a growing openness to new thinking about climate change and the environment. Another one has been to the response to my book from climate scientists, conservationists and ­environmental scholars. “Apocalypse Never is an extremely ­important book,” writes Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer-winning ­author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb. “This may be the most important book on the environment ever written,” says one of the fathers of modern climate science, Tom Wigley.

“We environmentalists condemn those with antithetical views of being ignorant of science and susceptible to confirmation bias,” wrote the former head of The Nature Conservancy, Steve McCormick. “But too often we are guilty of the same. Shellenberger offers ‘tough love’: a challenge to entrenched orthodoxies and rigid, self-defeating mindsets. Apocalypse Never serves up occasionally stinging, but always well-crafted, evidence-based points of view that will help develop the ‘mental muscle’ we need to envision and design not only a hopeful, but an attainable, future.”

That is all I hoped for in writing it. If you’ve made it this far, I hope you’ll agree it’s perhaps not as strange as it seems that a lifelong environmentalist and progressive felt the need to speak out against the alarmism. I further hope that you’ll accept my apology.

Michael Shellenberger is president of Environmental Progress, an independent research and policy organisation. He is the author of Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, published by Harper Collins

=======================

Links to previous articles

Which ‘New World Order’?

Who is planning a ‘New World Order’ (NWO),  in what form, and what progress so far?  Will it be ‘The Great Reset’? Many more articles follow the seven below.

Saving America and the world

Saving America and the world  By Martin Geddes, 28 February 2021

 How “The Bidan (sic) Show”
is saving America (and the world)

?This article is not intended for dangerous morons. If you are a dangerous moron who believes that colour revolutions and communist insurrections cannot be attempted in America, please stop reading now. This article will only distress and annoy you, and that would be unkind to yourself.

Thank you.

° ° °

OK, now we’ve insulted the dangerous moron audience segment and driven them away, that leaves the rest of us — who can have an adult conversation about what is really going on in America, and the pivotal role of the media and propaganda in spinning a false reality.

A lot of us are living in frustration that the obvious landslide win of Donald Trump in November — try finding someone who went to a Biden rally — did not result in immediate truth and justice. Our patience is being annealed into a hardened resoluteness to see this through to the end.

Here is my best sense of what is going on; keep in mind I’m just one guy with a laptop and an opinion, and you can have your own equally functional laptop and valid opinion. There is a perverse and paradoxical logic to what is happening, bizarre as it all sounds. As Mark Twain said, “Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t.”

° ° °

MAGA is the end game of the original 18th century American Revolution. The European banking aristocracy and monopolising monarchies didn’t just pack up and go home when they were shot at and it was heard around the world. They simply switched tactics and played a long game to stealthily retake America. The war of invasion became a war of infiltration; the War of Independence never ended in reality.

After various attempts to impose a central bank, the 19th century Civil War plunged America into debt and set up the conditions for a “bankocracy” to take power. America was turned into a corporation ruled by a Masonic city state — Washington DC — that was effectively an extension of the alliance of the British Crown (i.e. City of London freemasons) and the Vatican (i.e. Rome freemasons) plus the bloodline families (i.e. occultist banking and commerce mafia).

This allowed maritime and contractual law to displace the people’s sovereign rights under common law, and opened the way for the unconstitutional Federal Reserve to impose debt slavery on Americans. The history of America is a nonstop tussle between individual and state sovereignty versus federal and bankster oligarchy. The good news is that the former have won, and we’re in the final phase of restoring liberty.

The Chinese Communist Party is the front through which the globalist totalitarian banking aristocracy has been operating its plan to gain complete control of this planet. November 2020 was an attempt by the CCP to hijack America — the last bastion of true freedom due to an armed populace — via a classic colour revolution. Demoralise the public via a scamdemic, impose economic hardship by closing small businesses, kill some old people in nursing homes to spread fear and terror, and spray pervasive media lies over any opponent. Then use election fraud to seize control without having to send a single soldier or fire a shot.

° ° °

I was stunned recently when an otherwise lucid professional associate — whose work I admire — said there was no election fraud. The zillionth item of evidence is the hand recount in New Hampshire where the Dominion voting machines short changed only Republican candidates. If you cannot find the evidence, please go back to the beginning of this article and reconsider whether you might be a dangerous moron. Because refusal to consider the possibility and look at the data would surely qualify you for that title.

This election fraud has been going on for decades — a century and more, even. The Bush vs Gore matter in 2000 surfaced a lot of the problems. Our “liberal” (i.e. authoritarian) leftist friends used to complain about the lack of transparency and trustworthiness of voting machines, until it was the hated Donald Trump who was the victim. Then they went silent and decided it was of no importance. Oh well, dangerous morons are a thing after all. We’ll all get over it when the truth comes out.

If you are not a dangerous moron, it is obvious that there is no “Joe Biden” presidency. A fake and unconstitutional prerecorded “inauguration” (where the weather kept magically changing with the camera angle) was attended by military not wearing insignia. There was no handover of the nuclear code “football”, no arrival on Air Force One, no foreign dignitaries, and no salutes.

The White House is empty and dark right now, and there is no Marine guard. The pictures of the Oval Office are visibly of a movie set; they’ve even recycled some of the art from a previous show. Trump hinted in 2019 it wasn’t really Joe Biden himself by calling him “Joe Bidan”, and you can look closely and see it isn’t him. The ears and shape of head are different. Whether it is a double, clone, CGI, actor in a latex mask, hologram, ghostly apparition from another dimension, or all the above — I don’t care and it doesn’t matter.

° ° °

It isn’t just a fake Presidency, it seems like the whole election was a fake — a sting operation to draw out every cunning clown who thought they could get away with a communist takeover in America. Remember, these things are not announced in advance. You only find you’ve got a real communist in power when potential opposition is being exterminated (with no media coverage). You also only get to find out it’s a sting operation when it’s over (and the official state media are discredited).

President Trump has a long history of election fraud tweets. This operation to retake America for its People has been planned for decades. He has executive orders on election fraud and human rights, allowing him to seize the assets of those conspiring against the public and breaking their oath of office. The Stafford Act, 2019 Presidential Handover Act, and Insurrection Act give him the needed powers and allow FEMA and the military to take control. PEADs — Presidential Emergency Action Documents — were established under Eisenhower and are the “nuclear option” of continuity of government for exactly this kind of exigency.

Remember, if you have read this far then you’re not a dangerous moron, so this is all objective stuff that we can believe in. Rational empirical people are driven by evidence, not prior belief or limits of our imagination.

Washington DC is now a prison complex under the control of Gen Walker, not the Mayor, nor “President Bidan”. This allows military tribunals to run for the election fraud: traitors don’t get to spend years fighting in corrupt civilian courts when you work for the CCP. Child sex trafficking is the bedrock of power via blackmail, and its underground infrastructure can be flushed of the nightmarish nastiness that has long been going on. Those responsible won’t be seen again, and deservedly so.

Capturing the leadership of a defunct corporate government that does not represent the people is a political booby prize. Returning power to the people means taking it away from this unaccountable capital of the cancer of corruption. In other words, Washington DC is OVER and FINISHED: it is about to become a museum and alligator swamp reserve. The whole place is one deceptive occult hellhole from conception to demolition. It cannot stand as a totem of the sovereign American People.

° ° °

The establishment of a new free American Republic involves a cutover from the old and bankrupt corporate entity that the “Joe Bidan” movie character heads up. It cannot be done instantly, and those who are losing power would love to create chaos and deny the public their rights and inheritance. Capturing and removing the Deep State isn’t enough; you also need to deliver a functioning society afterwards.

There are very specific benefits of Donald Trump being “off stage” during this transition period:

  • The corrupt mass media that is under CCP control cannot accuse Trump of being a military dictator when the US military overtly becomes in control.
  • It preserves the legality of the change, and avoids confusion for the public of which Presidency they are endorsing (corporate entity vs federation of sovereign states).
  • It ensures the safety of both President Trump and his family, since they are assassination targets. It also avoids the need for rallies or other events where the public would be put at risk of terrorism.
  • “Joe Bidan” can do increasingly absurd things in the “show” — like zany “rule by executive order” — to wake up more “normies” and decrease the “dangerous moron” count.
  • You can do military operations that otherwise would be politically unacceptable (think Iran, Syria).
  • Any chaos is attached to the Deep State and its Democratic and RINO operatives.
  • It gives time for the global takedown to occur, since this all has to be synchronised. Even if America is ready, success is removing all bases of power from which this criminality could return.

Finally, and most importantly, it sets up the total destruction of the Mockingbird Media. They are fully invested in promoting “The Bidan Show” as objective reality. But as with the Truman Show, there is a moment when it “glitches” and the stage set is visible. It only takes the President Bidan actor to remove his latex mask on TV, and it’s all over, as the illusion machine is shattered.

Frank Zappa, no stranger to the military-industrial-entertainment complex, once said: “The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”

He was nearly right. The deceived element of the public (including a large subset of dangerous morons who pose a civil war risk to us all) will get to watch the curtain pulled back, but instead of a brick wall, they will find that the whole theatre has been dismantled around them. They are free; their “Plato’s Cave” has been excavated and opened to the fresh air.

° ° °

So the “big picture” is that we are watching a total reboot of America, and consequently the world. When a computer reboots its operating system goes down a series of “run levels”, and then back up again. We are experiencing the same thing in America: “The Bidan Show” is just a “holding screen” and distraction put on to educate the public while the military does the election fraud cleanup operation. This is done at the lowest Constitutional “run level” where normal civilian government is (quietly) suspended. The inevitable riots and chaos of the wakeup phase — when this is all official and in the open— have to wait until the cleanup is finished. One problem at a time.

As this corrupt bankocracy is removed from power we will likely experience a financial reset, exposure of these war crimes, and disclosure of the hidden technology that has been hoarded by a minority in secret (yet paid for by the public). It is already happening — and seems like something from a sci-fi movie. But you can go check out the legit anti-gravity and energy devices from the US Navy on the official patent site.

Having Donald Trump immediately be re-elected in November would have been a strategic failure, even if it offered a temporary emotional release. It would have perpetuated the fake corporate government, and sustained the illusion of its legitimacy. The two real tasks are to prevent a descent into civil war in the short run, and to prevent a recurrence of this horror show in the long run. “The Bidan Show” is a necessary “liminal passage” in the story of the rebirth of America. It cleverly skirts around the traps that would lead to disaster and the prize of peace being snatched away at the last minute.

° ° °

The cancer of corruption is an aggressive one, and returns easily. Its cure demands the total elimination if the mass media brainwashing machine. You may have noticed how quiet Hollywood has been recently; it is equally as finished as Washington DC. Allowing the election fraud to happen sets up the case for strong voter ID and robust election technology. Changes that were previously unthinkable will be demanded by all as they understand how close they came to losing their Republic and freedom.

Saving America is not the hard part; keeping her saved is the real struggle. Only a massive cultural shift can achieve this. “The Bidan Show” triggers self-identification of the “dangerous morons” and authoritarian colluders in our society. Their loss of credibiltiy in turn forces a reordering of power among the people towards Patriots. A lot of arrogant and prideful dangerous morons are about to get the hardest lesson of their lives as their conceit and carelessness is exposed. Academia is set for revolt and revolution, mass media for implosion, “sick care” medicine for replacement. It’s an “apocalypse of authority”.

The Q military intelligence operation has prepared Patriots for this time of upheaval — The Great Awakening. We are given objective reasons to believe this is a carefully planned process with a benevolent outcome, so we do not engage in our own insurrection against an illegitimate entity in Washington DC. The genius combination of plausible deniability and strategic ambiguity delivers exactly the right information at the right moments to those with the eyes to see. Shelves of books will be written about how this sensational covert military plan was executed.

° ° °

The bottom line is that we are in an epic transition from slavery to sovereignty, poverty to prosperity, and war to peace. We may have some difficult struggles ahead — food shortages, nature causing havoc, genocidal pharma “vaccines” — but we will overcome them. But at least we won’t have to endure the lies of the Mockingbird Media for much longer.

Nor will we have to suffer the mocking of dangerous morons. “The Bidan Show” says wakeup time is almost here for everyone. The multi-year cleanup is nearly done. America has been saved by its military and Patriots. The whole world is next.

Enjoy the show!

======================

Great Reset? Putin Says, “Not So Fast”

Great Reset. Putin Says, Not So Fast  By Tom Luongo, Zerohedge, 13 February 2021

Did you happen to catch the most important political speech of the last six years?

It would have been easy to miss given everything going on.  In fact, I almost did, and this speech sits at the intersection of nearly all of my areas of intense study.

The annual World Economic Forum took place last week via teleconference, what I’m calling Virtual Davos, and at this year’s event, of course, the signature topic was their project called the Great Reset.

But if the WEF was so intent on presenting the best face for the Great Reset to the world it wouldn’t have invited either Chinese Premier Xi Jinping or, more importantly, Russian President Vladimir Putin.

And it was Putin’s speech that brought down the house of cards that is the agenda of the WEF.

The last time someone walked into a major international forum and issued such a scathing critique of the current geopolitical landscape was Putin’s speech to the United Nations on September 29th, 2015, two days before he sent a small contingency of Russian air support to Syria.

There he excoriated not only the U.N. by name but most importantly the U.S. and its NATO allies by inference asking the most salient question, “Do you understand what you have done?” having unleashed chaos in an already chaotic part of the world?

As important as that speech was it was Putin’s actions after that which defined the current era of geopolitical chess across the Eurasian continent.   Syria became the nexus around which the resistance to the “ISIS is invincible” narrative unraveled

And the mystery of who was behind ISIS, namely the Obama administration, was revealed to anyone paying attention.

President Trump may have taken credit for beating ISIS, but it was mostly Putin and Russia’s forces retaking the Western part of Syria which allowed that to happen, while our globalist generals, like James Mattis, did as much damage to Syria itself and as little to ISIS as possible, hoping to use them again another day.

And regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the U.S.’s policy in Syria, which I most definitely do not, it is hard to argue that Russia’s intervention there fundamentally changed the regional politics and conflicts for the foreseeable future.

It was the beginning of the voluntary disconnection of China, Russia and Iran from the West.

For standing athwart U.S. and European designs on consolidating power in the Middle East, Russia has been vilified in the West in ways that make the indoctrination I received as a kid growing up in the Cold War look like vacation advertisements for spending the summer in Crimea.

But it is that strength of purpose and character that has defined Putin’s two decades in power. He’s done wonders in rebuilding Russia.

He’s made many mistakes, mostly by first trusting American Presidents and second by underestimating just how arrogant and rapacious the leadership in Europe is.

That said, he’s now reached his limit, especially with Europe, and he’s set a firmly independent path for Russia regardless of the short-term costs.

And that’s why his speech at the World Economic Forum was so important.

Putin hadn’t spoken there for nearly a decade.  In a time when WEF-controlled puppets dominate positions of power in Europe, the U.K., Canada and now the U.S., Putin walked into Virtual Davos and dumped his coffee on the carpet.

In terms I can only describe as unfailingly polite, Putin told Klaus Schwab and the WEF that their entire idea of the Great Reset is not only doomed to failure but runs counter to everything modern leadership should be pursuing.

Putin literally laughed at the idea of the Fourth Industrial Revolution – Schwab’s idea of a planned society through AI, robots and the merging of man and machine.

He flat-out told them their policies driving the middle class to the brink of extinction over the COVID-19 pandemic will further increase social and political unrest while also ensuring wealth inequality gets worse.

Putin’s no flower-throwing libertarian or anything, but his critique of the hyper-financialized post-Soviet era is accurate.

The era dominated by central banking and the continued merging of state and corporate powers has increased wealth inequality across the U.S. and Europe, benefiting millions while extracting the wealth of billions.

Listening to Putin was like listening to a cross between Pat Buchanan and the late Walter Williams.  According to him the neoliberal ideal of “invite the world/invade the world” has destroyed the cultural ties within countries while hollowing out their economic prospects.  Putin criticized zero-bound interest rates, QE, tariffs and sanctions as political weapons.

But the targets of those weapons, while nominally pointed at his Russia, were really the West’s own engines of vitality, as the middle classes have seen their wages stagnate, and access to education, medical care, and the courts to redress grievances fall dramatically.

Russia is a country on the rise, so is China.  Once their ties are embedded deeply enough to stabilize its economy, so too will Iran rise.

Together they will lead the central Asian landmass out of the nineteenth-century quagmire that exists thanks to British and American intervention in the region.  Putin’s speech made it clear that Russia is committed to the process of finding solutions to all people benefiting from the future, not just a few thousand holier-than-thou oligarchs in Europe.

In a less confrontational address, Chairman Xi said the same thing.

He gave lip service, like Putin, to climate change and carbon neutrality, focusing instead on pollution and sustainability.

Together they basically told the WEF to stuff the Great Reset back into the hole in which it was conceived. 

I’ve followed Putin closely for nearly a decade now.  I got the feeling that if he was speaking to a college-level political science class and not a convocation of some of the most powerful people in the world he would been laughed in their faces.

But, unfortunately, he understands better than any of us having been the object of their aggression for so long, he had to treat them seriously as their grasp of reality and connectedness to the people they ruled was nearly severed.

At the end of his planned remarks, Klaus Schwab asked Putin about Russia’s troubled relationship with Europe and could it be fixed.  Putin pulled no punches. 

If we can rise above these problems of the past and get rid of these phobias, then we will certainly enjoy a positive stage in our relations.

We are ready for this, we want this, and we will strive to make this happen. But love is impossible if it is declared only by one side. It must be mutual.

I don’t get the sense from anything I’ve seen from the Biden Administration or the European Commission in Brussels that anyone heard a word he said.

=====================

What Is the Great Reset? Part I: Reduced Expectations and Bio-techno-feudalism

What Is the Great Reset. Part 1 Reduced Expectations and Bio-techno-feudalism  By Michael Rectenwald, Mises Institute, 18 December 2020

The Great Reset is on everyone’s mind, whether everyone knows it or not. It is presaged by the measures undertaken by states across the world in response to the covid-19 crisis. (I mean by “crisis” not the so-called pandemic itself, but the responses to a novel virus called SARS-2 and the impact of the responses on social and economic conditions.)

In his book, COVID-19: The Great Reset, World Economic Forum (WEF) founder and executive chairman Klaus Schwab writes that the covid-19 crisis should be regarded as an “opportunity [that can be] seized to make the kind of institutional changes and policy choices that will put economies on the path toward a fairer, greener future.”1 Although Schwab has been promoting the Great Reset for years, the covid crisis has provided a pretext for finally enacting it. According to Schwab, we should not expect the postcovid world system to return to its previous modes of operation. Rather, alternating between description and prescription, Schwab suggests that changes will be, or should be, enacted across interlocking, interdependent domains to produce a new normal.

So, just what is the Great Reset and what is the new normal it would establish?

The Great Reset means reduced incomes and carbon use. But Schwab and the WEF also define the Great Reset in terms of the convergence of economic, monetary, technological, medical, genomic, environmental, military, and governance systems. The Great Reset would involve vast transformations in each of these domains, changes which, according to Schwab, will not only alter our world but also lead us to “question what it means to be human.”2

In terms of economics and monetary policy, the Great Reset would involve a consolidation of wealth, on the one hand, and the likely issuance of universal basic income (UBI) on the other.3 It might include a shift to a digital currency,4 including a consolidated centralization of banking and bank accounts, immediate real-time taxation, negative interest rates, and centralized surveillance and control over spending and debt.

While every aspect of the Great Reset involves technology, the Great Reset specifically entails “the Fourth Industrial Revolution,”5 or transhumanism, which includes the expansion of genomics, nanotechnology, and robotics and their penetration into human bodies and brains. Of course, the fourth Industrial Revolution involves the redundancy of human labor in increasing sectors, to be replaced by automation. But moreover, Schwab hails the use of nanotechnology and brain scans to predict and preempt human behavior.

The Great Reset means the issuance of medical passports, soon to be digitized, as well as the transparency of medical records inclusive of medical history, genetic makeup, and disease states. But it could include the implanting of microchips that would read and report on genetic makeup and brain states such that “[e]ven crossing a national border might one day involve a detailed brain scan to assess an individual’s security risk.”6

On the genomic front, the Great Reset includes advances in genetic engineering and the fusion of genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics.

In military terms, the Great Reset entails the creation of new battle spaces including cyberspaces and the human brain as a battle space.7

In terms of governance, the Great Reset means increasingly centralized, coordinated, and expanded government and “governmentalities,” the convergence of corporations and states, and the digitalization of governmental functions, including, with the use of 5G and predictive algorithms, real-time tracking and surveillance of bodies in space or the “anticipatory governance” of human and systems behavior.8

That being said, “the Great Reset” is but a coordinated propaganda campaign shrouded under a cloak of inevitability. Rather than a mere conspiracy theory, as the New York Times has suggested,9 the Great Reset is an attempt at a conspiracy, or the “wishful thinking”10 of socioeconomic planners to have corporate “stakeholders”11 and governments adopt the desiderata of the WEF.

In order to sell this package, the WEF mobilizes the warmed-over rhetoric of “economic equality,” “fairness,” “inclusion,” and “a shared destiny,” among other euphemisms.12 Together, such phrases represent the collectivist, socialist political and ideological component of the envisioned corporate socialism13 (since economic socialism can never be enacted, it is always only political and ideological).

I’ll examine the prospects for the Great Reset in future installments. But suffice it to say for now that the WEF envisions a bio-techno-feudalist global order, with socioeconomic planners and corporate “stakeholders” at the helm and the greater part of humanity in their thrall. The mass of humanity, the planners would have it, will live under an economic stasis of reduced expectations, with individual autonomy greatly curtailed if not utterly obliterated. As Mises suggested, such planners are authoritarians who mean to supplant the plans of individual actors with their own, centralized plans. If enacted, such plans would fail, but their adoption would nevertheless exact a price.

Author:

Contact Michael Rectenwald

Michael Rectenwald was a professor of liberal studies at New York University (retired).

========================

Klaus Schwab & His Great Fascist Reset

Klaus Schwab & His Great Fascist Reset  From WinterOak.org.uk, Off-Guardian.org, 2 November 2020

Editor’s note: Click on link above to see the article with all the compelling graphics.

Winter Oak

Born in Ravensburg in 1938, Klaus Schwab is a child of Adolf Hitler’s Germany, a police-state regime built on fear and violence, on brainwashing and control, on propaganda and lies, on industrialism and eugenics, on dehumanisation and “disinfection”, on a chilling and grandiose vision of a “new order” that would last a thousand years.

Schwab seems to have dedicated his life to reinventing that nightmare and to trying to turn it into a reality not just for Germany but for the whole world.

Worse still, as his own words confirm time and time again, his technocratic fascist vision is also a twisted transhumanist one, which will merge humans with machines in “curious mixes of digital-and-analog life”, which will infect our bodies with “Smart Dust” and in which the police will apparently be able to read our brains.

And, as we will see, he and his accomplices are using the Covid-19 crisis to bypass democratic accountability, to override opposition, to accelerate their agenda and to impose it on the rest of humankind against our will in what he terms a “Great Reset“.

Schwab is not, of course, a Nazi in the classic sense, being neither a nationalist nor an anti-semite, as testified by the $1 million Dan David Prize he was awarded by Israel in 2004.

But 21st century fascism has found different political forms through which to continue its core project of reshaping humanity to suit capitalism through blatantly authoritarian means.

This new fascism is today being advanced in the guise of global governance, biosecurity, the “New Normal”, the “New Deal for Nature” and the “Fourth Industrial Revolution”.

Schwab, the octogenarian founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, sits at the centre of this matrix like a spider on a giant web.

The original fascist project, in Italy and Germany, was all about a merger of state and business.

While communism envisages the take-over of business and industry by the government, which – theoretically! – acts in the interests of the people, fascism was all about using the state to protect and advance the interests of the wealthy elite.

Schwab was continuing this approach in a denazified post-WW2 context, when in 1971 he founded the European Management Forum, which held annual meetings at Davos in Switzerland.

Here he promoted his ideology of “stakeholder” capitalism in which businesses were brought into closer co-operation with government.

“Stakeholder capitalism” is described by Forbes business magazine as:

the notion that a firm focuses on meeting the needs of all its stakeholders: customers, employees, partners, the community, and society as a whole.”

Even in the context of a particular business, it is invariably an empty label. As the Forbes article notes, it actually only means that “firms can go on privately shoveling money to their shareholders and executives, while maintaining a public front of exquisite social sensitivity and exemplary altruism”.

But in a general social context, the stakeholder concept is even more nefarious, discarding any idea of democracy, rule by the people, in favour of rule by corporate interests.

Society is no longer regarded as a living community but as a business, whose profitability is the sole valid aim of human activity.

Schwab set out this agenda back in 1971, in his book Moderne Unternehmensführung im Maschinenbau (Modern Enterprise Management in Mechanical Engineering), where his use of the term “stakeholders” (die Interessenten) effectively redefined human beings not as citizens, free individuals or members of communities, but as secondary participants in a massive commercial enterprise.

The aim of each and every person’s life was “to achieve long-term growth and prosperity” for this enterprise – in other words, to protect and increase the wealth of the capitalist elite.

This all became even clearer in 1987, when Schwab renamed his European Management Forum the World Economic Forum.

The WEF describes itself on its own website as “the global platform for public-private cooperation”, with admirers describing how it creates “partnerships between businessmen, politicians, intellectuals and other leaders of society to ‘define, discuss and advance key issues on the global agenda’.”

The “partnerships” which the WEF creates are aimed at replacing democracy with a global leadership of hand-picked and unelected individuals whose duty is not to serve the public, but to impose the rule of the 1% on that public with as little interference from the rest of us as possible.

In the books Schwab writes for public consumption, he expresses himself in the two-faced clichés of corporate spin and greenwashing.

The same empty terms are dished up time and time again. In Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution: A Guide to Building a Better World Schwab talks of “the inclusion of stakeholders and the distribution of benefits” and of “sustainable and inclusive partnerships” which will lead us all to an “inclusive, sustainable and prosperous future”! [1]

Behind this bluster, the real motivation behind his “stakeholder capitalism”, which he was still relentlessly promoting at the WEF’s 2020 Davos conference, is profit and exploitation.

For instance, in his 2016 book The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Schwab writes about the Uberisation of work and the consequent advantages for companies, particularly fast-growing start-ups in the digital economy:

As human cloud platforms classify workers as self-employed, they are—for the moment—free of the requirement to pay minimum wages, employer taxes and social benefits”. [2]

The same capitalist callousness shines through in his attitude towards people nearing the end of their working lives and in need of a well-deserved rest:

Aging is an economic challenge because unless retirement ages are drastically increased so that older members of society can continue to contribute to the workforce (an economic imperative that has many economic benefits), the working-age population falls at the same time as the percentage of dependent elders increases”.[2]

Everything in this world is reduced to economic challenges, economic imperatives and economic benefits for the ruling capitalist class.

The myth of Progress has long been used by the 1% to persuade people to accept the technologies designed to exploit and control us and Schwab plays on this when he declares that “the Fourth Industrial Revolution represents a significant source of hope for continuing the climb in human development that has resulted in dramatic increases in quality of life for billions of people since 1800”.[2]

He enthuses:

While it may not feel momentous to those of us experiencing a series of small but significant adjustments to life on a daily basis, it is not a minor change—the Fourth Industrial Revolution is a new chapter in human development, on a par with the first, second and third Industrial Revolutions, and once again driven by the increasing availability and interaction of a set of extraordinary technologies.[1]

But he is well aware that technology is not ideologically neutral, as some like to claim. Technologies and societies shape each other, he says.

After all, technologies are tied up in how we know things, how we make decisions, and how we think about ourselves and each other. They are connected to our identities, worldviews and potential futures. From nuclear technologies to the space race, smartphones, social media, cars, medicine and infrastructure—the meaning of technologies makes them political. Even the concept of a ‘developed’ nation implicitly rests on the adoption of technologies and what they mean for us, economically and socially.[1]

Technology, for the capitalists behind it, has never been about social good but purely about profit, and Schwab makes it quite clear that the same remains true of his Fourth Industrial Revolution.

He enthuses:

Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies are truly disruptive—they upend existing ways of sensing, calculating, organizing, acting and delivering. They represent entirely new ways of creating value for organizations and citizens”.[1]

In case the meaning of “creating value” was not clear, he gives some examples: “Drones represent a new type of cost-cutting employee working among us and performing jobs that once involved real people”[1] and “the use of ever-smarter algorithms is rapidly extending employee productivity—for example, in the use of chat bots to augment (and, increasingly, replace) ‘live chat’ support for customer interactions”.[1]

Schwab goes into some detail about the cost-cutting, profit-boosting marvels of his brave new world in The Fourth Industrial Revolution.

He explains:

Sooner than most anticipate, the work of professions as different as lawyers, financial analysts, doctors, journalists, accountants, insurance underwriters or librarians may be partly or completely automated…
[…]
The technology is progressing so fast that Kristian Hammond, cofounder of Narrative Science, a company specializing in automated narrative generation, forecasts that by the mid-2020s, 90% of news could be generated by an algorithm, most of it without any kind of human intervention (apart from the design of the algorithm, of course).[2]

It is this economic imperative that informs Schwab’s enthusiasm for “a revolution that is fundamentally changing the way we live, work, and relate to one another”.[2]

Schwab waxes lyrical about the 4IR, which he insists is “unlike anything humankind has experienced before”.[2]

He gushes:

Consider the unlimited possibilities of having billions of people connected by mobile devices, giving rise to unprecedented processing power, storage capabilities and knowledge access. Or think about the staggering confluence of emerging technology breakthroughs, covering wide-ranging fields such as artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, the internet of things (IoT), autonomous vehicles, 3D printing, nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science, energy storage and quantum computing, to name a few. Many of these innovations are in their infancy, but they are already reaching an inflection point in their development as they build on and amplify each other in a fusion of technologies across the physical, digital and biological worlds.[2]

He also looks forward to more online education, involving “the use of virtual and augmented reality” to “dramatically improve educational outcomes” [1], to sensors “installed in homes, clothes and accessories, cities, transport and energy networks” [2] and to smart cities, with their all-important “data platforms”.[2]

“All things will be smart and connected to the internet”, says Schwab, and this will extend to animals, as “sensors wired in cattle can communicate to each other through a mobile phone network”.[2]

He loves the idea of “smart cell factories” which could enable “the accelerated generation of vaccines” [1] and “big-data technologies”.[2]

These, he ensures us, will “deliver new and innovative ways to service citizens and customers”[2] and we will have to stop objecting to businesses profiting from harnessing and selling information about every aspect of our personal lives.

“Establishing trust in the data and algorithms used to make decisions will be vital,” insists Schwab. “Citizen concerns over privacy and establishing accountability in business and legal structures will require adjustments in thinking”.[2]

At the end of the day it is clear that all this technological excitement revolves purely around profit, or “value” as Schwab prefers to term it in his 21st century corporate newspeak.

Thus blockchain technology will be fantastic and provoke “an explosion in tradable assets, as all kinds of value exchange can be hosted on the blockchain”.[2]

The use of distributed ledger technology, adds Schwab, “could be the driving force behind massive flows of value in digital products and services, providing secure digital identities that can make new markets accessible to anyone connected to the internet”. [1]

In general, the interest of the 4IR for the ruling business elite is that it will “create entirely new sources of value” [1] and “give rise to ecosystems of value creation that are impossible to imagine with a mindset stuck in the third Industrial Revolution”. [1]

The technologies of the 4IR, rolled out via 5G, pose unprecedented threats to our freedom, as Schwab concedes:

The tools of the fourth industrial revolution enable new forms of surveillance and other means of control that run counter to healthy, open societies.”[2]

But this does not stop him presenting them in a positive light, as when he declares that “public crime is likely to decrease due to the convergence of sensors, cameras, AI and facial recognition software”. [1]

He describes with some relish how these technologies “can intrude into the hitherto private space of our minds, reading our thoughts and influencing our behavior”. [1]

Schwab predicts:

As capabilities in this area improve, the temptation for law enforcement agencies and courts to use techniques to determine the likelihood of criminal activity, assess guilt or even possibly retrieve memories directly from people’s brains will increase. Even crossing a national border might one day involve a detailed brain scan to assess an individual’s security risk”. [1]

There are times when the WEF chief gets carried away by his passion for a sci-fi future in which “long-distance human space travel and nuclear fusion are commonplace”[1] and in which “the next trending business model” might involve someone “trading access to his or her thoughts for the time-saving option of typing a social media post by thought alone”.[1]

Talk of “space tourism” under the title “The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the final frontier” [1] is almost funny, as is his suggestion that “a world full of drones offers a world full of possibilities”.[1]

But the further the reader progresses into the world depicted in Schwab’s books, the less of a laughing matter it all seems.

The truth is that this highly influential figure, at the centre of the new global order currently being established, is an out-and-out transhumanist who dreams of an end to natural healthy human life and community.

Schwab repeats this message time and time again, as if to be sure we have been duly warned.

The mind-boggling innovations triggered by the fourth industrial revolution, from biotechnology to AI, are redefining what it means to be human,” [2]

The future will challenge our understanding of what it means to be human, from both a biological and a social standpoint”.[1]

Already, advances in neurotechnologies and biotechnologies are forcing us to question what it means to be human”.[1]

He spells it out in more detail in Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution[1]:

Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies will not stop at becoming part of the physical world around us—they will become part of us. Indeed, some of us already feel that our smartphones have become an extension of ourselves. Today’s external devices—from wearable computers to virtual reality headsets—will almost certainly become implantable in our bodies and brains. Exoskeletons and prosthetics will increase our physical power, while advances in neurotechnology enhance our cognitive abilities.

We will become better able to manipulate our own genes, and those of our children. These developments raise profound questions: Where do we draw the line between human and machine? What does it mean to be human?

A whole section of this book is devoted to the theme “Altering the Human Being”. Here he drools over “the ability of new technologies to literally become part of us” and invokes a cyborg future involving “curious mixes of digital-and-analog life that will redefine our very natures”. [1]

He writes:

These technologies will operate within our own biology and change how we interface with the world. They are capable of crossing the boundaries of body and mind, enhancing our physical abilities, and even having a lasting impact on life itself.”[1]

No violation seems to go too far for Schwab, who dreams of “active implantable microchips that break the skin barrier of our bodies”, “smart tattoos”“biological computing” and “custom-designed organisms”.[1]

He is delighted to report that “sensors, memory switches and circuits can be encoded in common human gut bacteria”,[1] that “Smart Dust, arrays of full computers with antennas, each much smaller than a grain of sand, can now organize themselves inside the body” and that “implanted devices will likely also help to communicate thoughts normally expressed verbally through a ‘built-in’ smartphone, and potentially unexpressed thoughts or moods by reading brain waves and other signals”.[1]

“Synthetic biology” is on the horizon in Schwab’s 4IR world, giving the technocratic capitalist rulers of the world “the ability to customize organisms by writing DNA”.[2]

The idea of neurotechnologies, in which humans will have fully artificial memories implanted in the brain, is enough to make some of us feel faintly sick, as is “the prospect of connecting our brains to VR through cortical modems, implants or nanobots”.[1]

It is of little comfort to learn that this is all – of course! – in the greater interests of capitalist profiteering since it “heralds new industries and systems for value creation” and “represents an opportunity to create entire new systems of value in the Fourth Industrial Revolution”.[1]

And what about “the bioprinting of organic tissues” [1] or the suggestion that “animals could potentially be engineered to produce pharmaceuticals and other forms of treatment”? [2]

Ethical objections, anyone?

It’s all evidently good for Schwab, who is happy to announce:

The day when cows are engineered to produce in its [sic] milk a blood-clotting element, which hemophiliacs lack, is not far off. Researchers have already started to engineer the genomes of pigs with the goal of growing organs suitable for human transplantation”.[2]

It gets even more disturbing. Ever since the sinister eugenics programme of the Nazi Germany into which Schwab was born, this science has been deemed beyond the pale by human society.

But now, however, he evidently feels eugenics is due a revival, announcing with regard to genetic editing:

That it is now far easier to manipulate with precision the human genome within viable embryos means that we are likely to see the advent of designer babies in the future who possess particular traits or who are resistant to a specific disease.”[2]

In the notorious 2002 transhumanist treatise I, Cyborg, Kevin Warwick predicts:

Humans will be able to evolve by harnessing the super-intelligence and extra abilities offered by the machines of the future, by joining with them. All this points to the development of a new human species, known in the science-fiction world as ‘cyborgs’. It doesn’t mean that everyone has to become a cyborg. If you are happy with your state as a human then so be it, you can remain as you are. But be warned – just as we humans split from our chimpanzee cousins years ago, so cyborgs will split from humans. Those who remain as humans are likely to become a sub-species. They will, effectively, be the chimpanzees of the future. [3]

Schwab seems to be hinting at the same future of a “superior” enhanced artificial transhuman elite separating from the natural-born rabble, in this particularly damning passage from 4IR:

We are at the threshold of a radical systemic change that requires human beings to adapt continuously. As a result, we may witness an increasing degree of polarization in the world, marked by those who embrace change versus those who resist it.

This gives rise to an inequality that goes beyond the societal one described earlier. This ontological inequality will separate those who adapt from those who resist—the material winners and losers in all senses of the words.

The winners may even benefit from some form of radical human improvement generated by certain segments of the fourth industrial revolution (such as genetic engineering) from which the losers will be deprived. This risks creating class conflicts and other clashes unlike anything we have seen before.[2]

Schwab was already talking about a “great transformation” back in 2016[2] and is clearly determined to do everything in his not inconsiderable power to bring about his eugenics-inspired transhumanist world of artifice, surveillance, control and exponential profit.

But, as revealed by his reference above to “class conflicts”, he is clearly worried by the possibility of “societal resistance”[1] and how to advance “if technologies receive a great deal of resistance from the public”.[1]

Schwab’s annual WEF shindigs at Davos have long been met by anti-capitalist protests and, despite the current paralysis of the radical left, he is well aware of the possibility of renewed and perhaps broader opposition to his project, with the risk of “resentment, fear and political backlash”.[1]

In his most recent book he provides a historical context, noting that “antiglobalization was strong in the run-up to 1914 and up to 1918, then less so during the 1920s, but it reignited in the 1930s as a result of the Great Depression”. [4]

He notes that in the early 2000s “the political and societal backlash against globalization relentlessly gained strength”,[4] says that “social unrest” has been widespread across the world in the past two years, citing the Gilets Jaunes in France among other movements, and invokes the “sombre scenario” that “the same could happen again”.[4]

So how is an honest technocrat supposed to roll out his preferred future for the world without the agreement of the global public? How can Schwab and his billionaire friends impose their favoured society on the rest of us?

One answer is relentless brainwashing propaganda churned out by the mass media and academia owned by the 1% elite – what they like to call “a narrative”.

For Schwab, the reluctance of the majority of humankind to leap aboard his 4IR express reflects the tragedy that:

the world lacks a consistent, positive and common narrative that outlines the opportunities and challenges of the fourth industrial revolution, a narrative that is essential if we are to empower a diverse set of individuals and communities and avoid a popular backlash against the fundamental changes under way”.[2]

He adds:

It is, therefore, critical that we invest attention and energy in multistakeholder cooperation across academic, social, political, national and industry boundaries. These interactions and collaborations are needed to create positive, common and hope-filled narratives, enabling individuals and groups from all parts of the world to participate in, and benefit from, the ongoing transformations.”[2]

One of these “narratives” whitewashes the reasons for which 4IR technology needs to be installed everywhere in the world as soon as possible.

Schwab is frustrated that “more than half of the world’s population—around 3.9 billion people—still cannot access the internet”,[1] with 85% of the population of developing countries remaining offline and therefore out of reach, as compared to 22% in the developed world.

The actual aim of the 4IR is to exploit these populations for profit via global techno-imperialism, but of course that cannot be stated in the propaganda “narrative” required to sell the plan.

Instead, their mission has to be presented, as Schwab himself does, as a bid to “develop technologies and systems that serve to distribute economic and social values such as income, opportunity and liberty to all stakeholders”.[1]

He piously postures as a guardian of woke liberal values, declaring:

Thinking inclusively goes beyond thinking about poverty or marginalized communities simply as an aberration—something that we can solve. It forces us to realize that ‘our privileges are located on the same map as their suffering’. It moves beyond income and entitlements, though these remain important. Instead, the inclusion of stakeholders and the distribution of benefits expand freedoms for all.”[1]

The same technique, of a fake “narrative” designed to fool good-thinking citizens into supporting an imperialist capitalist scheme, has been used extensively with regard to climate change.

Schwab is a great fan of Greta Thunberg, of course, who had barely stood up from the pavement after her one-girl protest in Stockholm before being whisked off to address the WEF at Davos.

He is also a supporter of the proposed global New Deal for Nature, particularly via Voice for the Planet, which was launched at the WEF in Davos in 2019 by the Global Shapers, a youth-grooming organisation created by Schwab in 2011 and aptly described by investigative journalist Cory Morningstar as “a grotesque display of corporate malfeasance disguised as good”.

In his 2020 book, Schwab actually lays out the way that fake “youth activism” is being used to advance his capitalist aims.

He writes, in a remarkably frank passage:

Youth activism is increasing worldwide, being revolutionized by social media that increases mobilization to an extent that would have been impossible before. It takes many different forms, ranging from non-institutionalized political participation to demonstrations and protests, and addresses issues as diverse as climate change, economic reforms, gender equality and LGBTQ rights. The young generation is firmly at the vanguard of social change. There is little doubt that it will be the catalyst for change and a source of critical momentum for the Great Reset.[4]

In fact, of course, the ultra-industrial future proposed by Schwab is anything other than green. It’s not nature he’s interested in, but “natural capital” and “incentivizing investment in green and social frontier markets”.[4]

Pollution means profit and environmental crisis is just another business opportunity, as he details in The Fourth Industrial Revolution:

In this revolutionary new industrial system, carbon dioxide turns from a greenhouse pollutant into an asset, and the economics of carbon capture and storage move from being cost as well as pollution sinks to becoming profitable carbon-capture and use-production facilities. Even more important, it will help companies, governments and citizens become more aware of and engaged with strategies to actively regenerate natural capital, allowing intelligent and regenerative uses of natural capital to guide sustainable production and consumption and give space for biodiversity to recover in threatened areas.[2]

Schwab’s “solutions” to the heart-breaking damage inflicted on our natural world by industrial capitalism involve more of the same poison, except worse.

Geoengineering is one of his favourites:

Proposals include installing giant mirrors in the stratosphere to deflect the sun’s rays, chemically seeding the atmosphere to increase rainfall and the deployment of large machines to remove carbon dioxide from the air.”[1]

And he adds:

New approaches are currently being imagined through the combination of Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies, such as nanoparticles and other advanced materials.”[1]

Like all the businesses and pro-capitalist NGOs backing the threatened New Deal for Nature, Schwab is utterly and profoundly ungreen.

For him, the “ultimate possibility” of “clean” and “sustainable” energy includes nuclear fusion[1] and he looks forward to the day when satellites will “blanket the planet with communications pathways that could help connect the more than 4 billion people still lacking online access”.[1]

Schwab also very much regrets all that red tape preventing the unhindered onward march of GM food, warning that:

global food security will only be achieved, however, if regulations on genetically modified foods are adapted to reflect the reality that gene editing offers a precise, efficient and safe method of improving crops.”[1]

The new order envisaged by Schwab will embrace the entire world and so global governance is required in order to impose it, as he repeatedly states.

His preferred future “will only come about through improved global governance”[4] he insists. “Some form of effective global governance”[4] is needed.

The problem we have today is that of a possible “global order deficit”,[4] he claims, adding improbably that the World Health Organization “is saddled with limited and dwindling resources”.[4]

What he is really saying is that his 4IR/great reset society will only function if it imposed simultaneously everywhere on the planet, otherwise “we will become paralysed in our attempts to address and respond to global challenges”.[4]

He admits:

In a nutshell, global governance is at the nexus of all these other issues.”[4]

This all-englobing empire very much frowns on the idea of any particular population democratically deciding to take another path. These “risk becoming isolated from global norms, putting these nations at risk of becoming the laggards of the new digital economy”,[2] warns Schwab.

Any sense of autonomy and grassroots belonging is regarded as a threat from Schwab’s imperialist perspective and is due to be eradicated under the 4IR.

He writes:

Individuals used to identify their lives most closely with a place, an ethnic group, a particular culture or even a language. The advent of online engagement and increased exposure to ideas from other cultures means that identities are now more fungible than previously… Thanks to the combination of historical migration patterns and low-cost connectivity, family structures are being redefined.[2]

Genuine democracy essentially falls into the same category for Schwab. He knows that most people will not willingly go along with plans to destroy their lives and enslave them to a global techno-fascist system of exploitation, so giving them a say in the matter is simply not an option.

This is why the “stakeholder” concept has been so important for Schwab’s project. As discussed above, this is the negation of democracy, with its emphasis instead on “reaching out across stakeholder groups for solution building”.[1]

If the public, the people, are included in this process it is only at a superficial level. The agenda has already been pre-supposed and the decisions pre-made behind the scenes.

Schwab effectively admits as much when he writes:

We must re-establish a dialogue among all stakeholders to ensure mutual understanding that further builds a culture of trust among regulators, non-governmental organizations, professionals and scientists. The public must also be considered, because it must participate in the democratic shaping of biotechnological developments that affect society, individuals and cultures.[1]

So the public must “also” be considered, as an afterthought. Not even directly consulted, just “considered”! And the role of the people, the demos, will merely be to “participate” in the “shaping” of biotechnological developments.

The possibility of the public actually rejecting the very idea of biotechnological developments has been entirely removed thanks to the deliberately in-built assumptions of the stakeholder formula.

The same message is implied in the heading of Schwab’s conclusion to Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution: “What You Can Do to Shape the Fourth Industrial Revolution”.[1] The techno-tyranny cannot challenged or stopped, merely “shaped”.

Schwab uses the term “systems leadership” to describe the profoundly anti-democratic way in which the 1% imposes its agenda on us all, without giving us the chance to say ‘no’.

He writes:

Systems leadership is about cultivating a shared vision for change—working together with all stakeholders of global society—and then acting on it to change how the system delivers its benefits, and to whom. Systems leadership requires action from all stakeholders, including individuals, business executives, social influencers and policy-makers”.[1]

He refers to this full-spectrum top-down control as “the system management of human existence”[1] although others might prefer the term “totalitarianism”.

One of the distinguishing features of historical fascism in Italy and Germany was its impatience with the inconvenient restraints imposed on the ruling class (“the Nation” in fascist language) by democracy and political liberalism.

All of this had to be swept out of the way to allow a Blitzkrieg of accelerated “modernisation”.

We see the same spirit resurging in Schwab’s calls for “agile governance” in which he claims that “the pace of technological development and a number of characteristics of technologies render previous policy-making cycles and processes inadequate”.[1]

He writes:

The idea of reforming governance models to cope with new technologies is not new, but the urgency of doing so is far greater in light of the power of today’s emerging technologies… the concept of agile governance seeks to match the nimbleness, fluidity, flexibility and adaptiveness of the technologies themselves and the private-sector actors adopting them”.[1]

The phrase “reforming governance models to cope with new technologies” really gives the game away here. As under fascism, social structures must be reinvented so as to accommodate the requirements of capitalism and its profit-increasing technologies.

Schwab explains that his “agile governance” would involve creating so-called policy labs – “protected spaces within government with an explicit mandate to experiment with new methods of policy development by using agile principles” – and “encouraging collaborations between governments and businesses to create ‘developtory sandboxes’ and ‘experimental testbeds’ to develop regulations using iterative, cross-sectoral and flexible approaches”.[1]

For Schwab, the role of the state is to advance capitalist aims, not to hold them up to any form of scrutiny. While he is all in favour of the state’s role in enabling a corporate take-over of our lives, he is less keen about its regulatory function, which might slow down the inflow of profit into private hands, and so he envisages “the development of ecosystems of private regulators, competing in markets”.[1]

In his 2018 book, Schwab discusses the problem of pesky regulations and how best to “overcome these limits” in the context of data and privacy.

He comes up with the suggestion of

public-private data-sharing agreements that ‘break glass in case of emergency’. These come into play only under pre-agreed emergency circumstances (such as a pandemic) and can help reduce delays and improve the coordination of first responders, temporarily allowing data sharing that would be illegal under normal circumstances.” [1]

Funnily enough, two years later there was indeed a “pandemic” and these “pre-agreed emergency circumstances” became a reality.

This shouldn’t have been too much of a surprise for Schwab, since his WEF had co-hosted the infamous Event 201 conference in October 2019, which modelled a fictional coronavirus pandemic.

And he wasted little time in bringing out a new book, Covid-19: The Great Reset, co-authored with Thierry Malleret, who runs something called the Monthly Barometer, “a succinct predictive analysis provided to private investors, global CEOs and opinion- and decision-makers”.[4]

Published in July 2020, the book sets out to advance “conjectures and ideas about what the post-pandemic world might, and perhaps should, look like”.[4]

Schwab and Malleret admit that Covid-19 is “one of the least deadly pandemics the world has experienced over the last 2000 years”, adding that “the consequences of COVID-19 in terms of health and mortality will be mild compared to previous pandemics”.[4]

They add:

It does not constitute an existential threat, or a shock that will leave its imprint on the world’s population for decades.” [4]

Yet, incredibly, this “mild” illness is simultaneously presented as the excuse for unprecedented social change under the banner of “The Great Reset”!

And although they explicitly declare that Covid-19 does not constitute a major “shock”, the authors repeatedly deploy the same term to describe the broader impact of the crisis.

Schwab and Malleret place Covid-19 in a long tradition of events which have facilitated sudden and significant changes to our societies.

They specifically invoke the Second World War:

World War II was the quintessential transformational war, triggering not only fundamental changes to the global order and the global economy, but also entailing radical shifts in social attitudes and beliefs that eventually paved the way for radically new policies and social contract provisions (like women joining the workforce before becoming voters).

There are obviously fundamental dissimilarities between a pandemic and a war (that we will consider in some detail in the following pages), but the magnitude of their transformative power is comparable. Both have the potential to be a transformative crisis of previously unimaginable proportions”.[4]

They also join many contemporary “conspiracy theorists” in making a direct comparison between Covid-19 and 9/11:

This is what happened after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. All around the world, new security measures like employing widespread cameras, requiring electronic ID cards and logging employees or visitors in and out became the norm. At that time, these measures were deemed extreme, but today they are used everywhere and considered ‘normal’”.[4]

When any tyrant declares the right to rule over a population without taking their views into account, they like to justify their dictatorship with the claim that they are morally entitled to do so because they are “enlightened”.

The same is true of the Covid-fuelled tyranny of Schwab’s great reset, which the book categorises as “enlightened leadership”, adding:

Some leaders and decision-makers who were already at the forefront of the fight against climate change may want to take advantage of the shock inflicted by the pandemic to implement long-lasting and wider environmental changes. They will, in effect, make ‘good use’ of the pandemic by not letting the crisis go to waste”.[4]

The global capitalist ruling elite have certainly been doing their best to “take advantage of the shock inflicted by the panic”, assuring us all since the very earliest days of the outbreak that, for some unfathomable reason, nothing in our lives could ever be the same again.

Schwab and Malleret are, inevitably, enthusiastic in their use of the New Normal framing, despite their admission that the virus was only ever “mild”.

“It is our defining moment”, they crow. “Many things will change forever”. “A new world will emerge”. “The societal upheaval unleashed by COVID-19 will last for years, and possibly generations”.

Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is: never.”

They even go as far as proposing a new historical separation between “the pre-pandemic era” and “the post-pandemic world”.[4]

They write:

Radical changes of such consequence are coming that some pundits have referred to a ‘before coronavirus’ (BC) and ‘after coronavirus’ (AC) era. We will continue to be surprised by both the rapidity and unexpected nature of these changes – as they conflate with each other, they will provoke second-, third-, fourth- and more-order consequences, cascading effects and unforeseen outcomes. In so doing, they will shape a ‘new normal’ radically different from the one we will be progressively leaving behind. Many of our beliefs and assumptions about what the world could or should look like will be shattered in the process.[4]

Back in 2016, Schwab was looking ahead to “new ways of using technology to change behavior”[2] and predicting:

The scale and breadth of the unfolding technological revolution will usher in economic, social and cultural changes of such phenomenal proportions that they are almost impossible to envisage”.[2]

One way in which he had hoped his technocratic agenda would be advanced was, as we have noted, through the phoney “solutions” to climate change proposed by fake green capitalists.

Under the title “environmental reset”, Schwab and Malleret state:

At first glance, the pandemic and the environment might seem to be only distantly related cousins; but they are much closer and more intertwined than we think.” [4]

One of the connections is that both the climate and virus “crises” have been used by the WEF and their like to push their agenda of global governance. As Schwab and his co-author put it, “they are global in nature and therefore can only be properly addressed in a globally coordinated fashion”.[4]

Another link is the way that the “the post-pandemic economy” and “the green economy”[4] involve massive profits for largely the same sectors of big business.

Covid-19 has evidently been great news for those capitalists hoping to cash in on environmental destruction, with Schwab and Malleret reporting:

The conviction that ESG strategies benefited from the pandemic and are most likely to benefit further is corroborated by various surveys and reports. Early data shows that the sustainability sector outperformed conventional funds during the first quarter of 2020.”[4]

The capitalist sharks of the so-called “sustainability sector” are rubbing their hands together with glee at the prospect of all the money they stand to make from the Covid-pretexted great fascist reset, in which the state is instrumentalised to fund their hypocritical profiteering.

Note Schwab and Malleret:

The key to crowding private capital into new sources of nature-positive economic value will be to shift key policy levers and public finance incentives as part of a wider economic reset”.[4]

A policy paper prepared by Systemiq in collaboration with the World Economic Forum estimates that building the nature-positive economy could represent more than $10 trillion per year by 2030… Resetting the environment should not be seen as a cost, but rather as an investment that will generate economic activity and employment opportunities.” [4]

Given the intertwining of climate and Covid crises set out by Schwab, we might speculate that the original plan was to push through the New Normal reset on the back of the climate crisis.

But evidently, all that publicity for Greta Thunberg and big business-backed Extinction Rebellion did not whip up enough public panic to justify such measures.

Covid-19 serves Schwab’s purposes perfectly, as the immediate urgency it presents allows the whole process to be speeded up and rushed through without due scrutiny.

This crucial difference between the respective time-horizons of a pandemic and that of climate change and nature loss means that a pandemic risk requires immediate action that will be followed by a rapid result, while climate change and nature loss also require immediate action, but the result (or ‘future reward’, in the jargon of economists) will only follow with a certain time lag.[4]

For Schwab and his friends, Covid-19 is the great accelerator of everything they have been wanting to foist upon us for years.

As he and Malleret say:

The pandemic is clearly exacerbating and accelerating geopolitical trends that were already apparent before the crisis erupted.” [4]

The pandemic will mark a turning point by accelerating this transition. It has crystallized the issue and made a return to the pre-pandemic status quo impossible.” [4]

They can barely conceal their delight at the direction society is now taking:

The pandemic will accelerate innovation even more, catalysing technological changes already under way (comparable to the exacerbation effect it has had on other underlying global and domestic issues) and ‘turbocharging’ any digital business or the digital dimension of any business.[4]
[…]
With the pandemic, the ‘digital transformation’ that so many analysts have been referring to for years, without being exactly sure what it meant, has found its catalyst. One major effect of confinement will be the expansion and progression of the digital world in a decisive and often permanent manner.

In April 2020, several tech leaders observed how quickly and radically the necessities created by the health crisis had precipitated the adoption of a wide range of technologies. In the space of just one month, it appeared that many companies in terms of tech take-up fast-forwarded by several years.[4]

Fate is obviously smiling on Klaus Schwab as this Covid-19 crisis has, happily, succeeded in advancing pretty much every aspect of the agenda he has been promoting over the decades.

Thus he and Malleret report with satisfaction that “the pandemic will fast-forward the adoption of automation in the workplace and the introduction of more robots in our personal and professional lives”.[4]

Lockdowns across the world have, needless to say, provided a big financial boost to those business offering online shopping.

The authors recount:

Consumers need products and, if they can’t shop, they will inevitably resort to purchasing them online. As the habit kicks in, people who had never shopped online before will become comfortable with doing so, while people who were part-time online shoppers before will presumably rely on it more. This was made evident during the lockdowns.

In the US, Amazon and Walmart hired a combined 250,000 workers to keep up with the increase in demand and built massive infrastructure to deliver online. This accelerating growth of e-commerce means that the giants of the online retail industry are likely to emerge from the crisis even stronger than they were in the pre-pandemic era.[4]

They add:

As more and diverse things and services are brought to us via our mobiles and computers, companies in sectors as disparate as e-commerce, contactless operations, digital content, robots and drone deliveries (to name just a few) will thrive. It is not by accident that firms like Alibaba, Amazon, Netflix or Zoom emerged as ‘winners’ from the lockdowns.[4]

By way of corollary, we might suggest that it is “not by accident” that governments which have been captured and controlled by big business, thanks to the likes of the WEF, have imposed a “new reality” COV under which big businesses are the “winners”…

The Covid-inspired good news never stops for all the business sectors which stand to benefit from the Fourth Industrial Repression.

The pandemic may prove to be a boon for online education,” Schwab and Malleret report. “In Asia, the shift to online education has been particularly notable, with a sharp increase in students’ digital enrolments, much higher valuation for online education businesses and more capital available for ‘ed-tech’ start-ups… In the summer of 2020, the direction of the trend seems clear: the world of education, like for so many other industries, will become partly virtual.[4]

Online sports have also taken off:

For a while, social distancing may constrain the practice of certain sports, which will in turn benefit the ever-more powerful expansion of e-sports. Tech and digital are never far away!” [4]

There is similar news from the banking sector:

Online banking interactions have risen to 90 percent during the crisis, from 10 percent, with no drop-off in quality and an increase in compliance.” [4]

The Covid-inspired move into online activity obviously benefits Big Tech, who are making enormous profits out of the crisis, as the authors describe:

The combined market value of the leading tech companies hit record after record during the lockdowns, even rising back above levels before the outbreak started… this phenomenon is unlikely to abate any time soon, quite the opposite.” [4]

But it is also good news for all the businesses involved, who no longer have to pay human beings to work for them. Automation is, and has always been, about saving costs and thus boosting profits for the capitalist elite.

The culture of the fascist New Normal will also provide lucrative spin-off benefits for particular business sectors, such as the packing industry, explain Schwab and Malleret.

The pandemic will certainly heighten our focus on hygiene. A new obsession with cleanliness will particularly entail the creation of new forms of packaging. We will be encouraged not to touch the products we buy. Simple pleasures like smelling a melon or squeezing a fruit will be frowned upon and may even become a thing of the past.”[4]

The authors also describe what sounds very much like a technocratic profit-related agenda behind the “social distancing” which has been such a key element of the Covid “reset”.

They write:

In one form or another, social- and physical-distancing measures are likely to persist after the pandemic itself subsides, justifying the decision in many companies from different industries to accelerate automation. After a while, the enduring concerns about technological unemployment will recede as societies emphasize the need to restructure the workplace in a way that minimizes close human contact.

Indeed, automation technologies are particularly well suited to a world in which human beings can’t get too close to each other or are willing to reduce their interactions. Our lingering and possibly lasting fear of being infected with a virus (COVID-19 or another) will thus speed the relentless march of automation, particularly in the fields most susceptible to automation.[4]

As previously mentioned, Schwab has long been frustrated by all those tiresome regulations which stop capitalists from making as much money as they would like to, by focusing on economically irrelevant concerns such as the safety and well being of human beings.

But – hooray! – the Covid crisis has provided the perfect excuse for doing away with great swathes of these outmoded impediments to prosperity and growth.

One area in which meddlesome red tape is being abandoned is health. Why would any right-minded stakeholder imagine that any particular obligation for care and diligence should be allowed to impinge on the profitability of this particular business sector?

Schwab and Malleret are overjoyed to note that telemedicine will “benefit considerably” from the Covid emergency:

The necessity to address the pandemic with any means available (plus, during the outbreak, the need to protect health workers by allowing them to work remotely) removed some of the regulatory and legislative impediments related to the adoption of telemedicine.” [4]

The ditching of regulations is a general phenomenon under the New Normal global regime, as Schwab and Malleret relate:

To date governments have often slowed the pace of adoption of new technologies by lengthy ponderings about what the best regulatory framework should look like but, as the example of telemedicine and drone delivery is now showing, a dramatic acceleration forced by necessity is possible.

During the lockdowns, a quasi-global relaxation of regulations that had previously hampered progress in domains where the technology had been available for years suddenly happened because there was no better or other choice available. What was until recently unthinkable suddenly became possible… New regulations will stay in place.[4]

They add:

The current imperative to propel, no matter what, the ‘contactless economy’ and the subsequent willingness of regulators to speed it up means that there are no holds barred.” [4]

“No holds barred”. Make no mistake: this is the language adopted by capitalism when it abandons its pretence at liberal democracy and switches into full-on fascist mode.

It is clear from Schwab and Malleret’s work that a fascistic merging of state and business, to the advantage of the latter, underpins their great reset.

Phenomenal sums of money have been transferred from the public purse into the bulging pockets of the 1% since the very start of the Covid crisis, as they acknowledge:

In April 2020, just as the pandemic began to engulf the world, governments across the globe had announced stimulus programmes amounting to several trillion dollars, as if eight or nine Marshall Plans had been put into place almost simultaneously.
[…]
COVID-19 has rewritten many of the rules of the game between the public and private sectors […] The benevolent (or otherwise) greater intrusion of governments in the life of companies and the conduct of their business will be country- and industry-dependent, therefore taking many different guises.
[…]
Measures that would have seemed inconceivable prior to the pandemic may well become standard around the world as governments try to prevent the economic recession from turning into a catastrophic depression.
[…]
Increasingly, there will be calls for government to act as a ‘payer of last resort’ to prevent or stem the spate of mass layoffs and business destruction triggered by the pandemic. All these changes are altering the rules of the economic and monetary policy ‘game’.[4]

Schwab and his fellow author welcome the prospect of increased state powers being used to prop up big business profiteering.

They write:

One of the great lessons of the past five centuries in Europe and America is this: acute crises contribute to boosting the power of the state. It’s always been the case and there is no reason why it should be different with the COVID-19 pandemic.”[4]

And they add:

Looking to the future, governments will most likely, but with different degrees of intensity, decide that it’s in the best interest of society to rewrite some of the rules of the game and permanently increase their role.”[4]

The idea of rewriting the rules of the game is, again, very reminiscent of fascist language, as of course is the idea of permanently increasing the role of the state in helping the private sector.

Indeed, it is worth comparing Schwab’s position on this issue with that of Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, who responded to economic crisis in 1931 by launching a special emergency body, L’Istituto mobiliare italiano, to aid businesses.

He declared this was:

a means of energetically driving the Italian economy towards its corporative phase, which is to say a system which fundamentally respects private property and initiative, but ties them tightly to the State, which alone can protect, control and nourish them”.[5]

Suspicions about the fascistic nature of Schwab’s great reset are confirmed, of course, by the police-state measures that have been rolled out across the world to ensure compliance with “emergency” Covid measures.

The sheer brute force that never lies far beneath the surface of the capitalist system becomes increasingly visible when it enters it fascist stage and this is very much in evidence in Schwab and Malleret’s book.

The word “force” is deployed time and time again in the context of Covid-19. Sometimes this is in a business context, as with the statements that “COVID-19 has forced all the banks to accelerate a digital transformation that is now here to stay” COVD or that “the micro reset will force every company in every industry to experiment new ways of doing business, working and operating”. [4]

But sometimes it is applied directly to human beings, or “consumers” as Schwab and his ilk prefer to think of us.

During the lockdowns, many consumers previously reluctant to rely too heavily on digital applications and services were forced to change their habits almost overnight: watching movies online instead of going to the cinema, having meals delivered instead of going out to restaurants, talking to friends remotely instead of meeting them in the flesh, talking to colleagues on a screen instead of chit-chatting at the coffee machine, exercising online instead of going to the gym, and so on
[…]
Many of the tech behaviours that we were forced to adopt during confinement will through familiarity become more natural. As social and physical distancing persist, relying more on digital platforms to communicate, or work, or seek advice, or order something will, little by little, gain ground on formerly ingrained habits.[4]

Under a fascist system, individuals are not offered the choice as to whether they want to comply with its demands or not, as Schwab and Malleret make quite clear regarding so-called contact-tracing:

No voluntary contact-tracing app will work if people are unwilling to provide their own personal data to the governmental agency that monitors the system; if any individual refuses to download the app (and therefore to withhold information about a possible infection, movements and contacts), everyone will be adversely affected.” [4]

This, they reflect, is another great advantage of the Covid crisis over the environmental one which might have been used to impose their New Normal:

While for a pandemic, a majority of citizens will tend to agree with the necessity to impose coercive measures, they will resist constraining policies in the case of environmental risks where the evidence can be disputed.” [4]

These “coercive measures”, which we are all expected to go along with, will of course involve unimaginable levels of fascistic surveillance of our lives, particularly in our role as wage slaves.

Write Schwab and Malleret: “The corporate move will be towards greater surveillance; for better or for worse, companies will be watching and sometimes recording what their workforce does. The trend could take many different forms, from measuring body temperatures with thermal cameras to monitoring via an app how employees comply with social distancing”. (135)

Coercive measures of one kind or another are also likely to be used to force people to take the Covid vaccines currently being lined up.

Schwab is deeply connected to that world, being on a “first-name basis” with Bill Gates and having been hailed by Big Pharma mainstay Henry McKinnell, chairman and CEO of Pfizer Inc, as “a person truly dedicated to a truly noble cause”.

So it is not surprising that he insists, with Malleret, that “a full return to ‘normal’ cannot be envisaged before a vaccine is available”.[4]

He adds:

“The next hurdle is the political challenge of vaccinating enough people worldwide (we are collectively as strong as the weakest link) with a high enough compliance rate despite the rise of anti-vaxxers.” [4]

“Anti-vaxxers” thus join Schwab’s list of threats to his project, along with anti-globalization and anti-capitalist protesters, Gilets Jaunes and all those engaged in “class conflicts”, “societal resistance” and “political backlash”.

The majority of the world’s population have already been excluded from decision-making processes by the lack of democracy which Schwab wants to accentuate through his stakeholderist corporate domination, his “agile governance”, his totalitarian “system management of human existence”.

But how does he envisage dealing with the “sombre scenario” of people rising up against his great new-normalist reset and his transhumanist Fourth Industrial Revolution?

What degree of “force” and “coercive measures” would he be prepared to accept in order to ensure the dawning of his technocratic new age?

The question is a chilling one, but we should also bear in mind the historical example of the 20th century regime into which Schwab was born.

Hitler’s new Nazi normal was meant to last for a thousand years, but came crashing down 988 years ahead of target.

Just because Hitler said, with all the confidence of power, that his Reich would last for a millennium, this didn’t mean that it was so.

Just because Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret and their friends say that we are now entering the Fourth Industrial Revolution and our world will be changed forever, this doesn’t mean that it is so.

We don’t have to accept their New Normal. We don’t have to go along with their fearmongering. We don’t have to take their vaccines. We don’t have to let them implant us with smartphones or edit our DNA. We don’t have to walk, muzzled and submissive, straight into their transhumanist hell.

We can denounce their lies! Expose their agenda! Refuse their narrative! Reject their toxic ideology! Resist their fascism!

Klaus Schwab is not a god, but a human being. Just one elderly man. And those he works with, the global capitalist elite, are few in number. Their aims are not the aims of the vast majority of humankind.

Their transhumanist vision is repulsive to nearly everyone outside of their little circle and they do not have consent for the technocratic dictatorship they are trying to impose on us.

That, after all, is why they have had to go to such lengths to force it upon us under the false flag of fighting a virus. They understood that without the “emergency” justification, we were never going to go along with their warped scheme.

They are scared of our potential power because they know that if we stand up, we will defeat them. We can bring their project crashing down before it has even properly started.

We are the people, we are the 99%, and together we can grab back our freedom from the deadly jaws of the fascist machine!

NOTES:

[1] Klaus Schwab with Nicholas Davis, Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution: A Guide to Building a Better World (Geneva: WEF, 2018), e-book.

[2] Klaus Schwab, The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Geneva: WEF, 2016), e-book.

[3] Kevin Warwick, I, Cyborg (London: Century, 2002), p. 4. See also Paul Cudenec, Nature, Essence and Anarchy (Sussex: Winter Oak, 2016).

[4] Klaus Schwab, Thierry Malleret, Covid-19: The Great Reset (Geneva: WEF, 2020), e-book. Edition 1.0.

[5] Benito Mussolini, cit. Pierre Milza and Serge Berstein, Le fascisme italien 1919-1945 (Paris: Editions de Seuil, 1980), p. 246.

=====================

Globalist Technocrats Poised to Press the Great Reset Button

Globalist Technocrats Poised to Press the Great Reset Button  By Dr Joseph Mercola, ChildrensHealthDefense.org 23 December 2020

Editor’s note: Click on link above to view all graphics.

ot one area of life will be left untouched by The Great Reset plan, which aims to reform everything from government, energy and finance to food, medicine, real estate, policing — even how we interact with our fellow human beings.

 Story at-a-glance:

  • The globalist technocracy is using the COVID-19pandemic to bypass democratic accountability, override opposition, accelerate their agenda and to impose it on the public against our will.
  • The Great Reset refers to a global agenda to monitor and control the world through digital surveillance. You’ll be tied to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, and a social credit ID that will end up dictating every facet of your life.
  • The Great Reset is about getting rid of capitalism and free enterprise, and replacing them with technocracy, publicly referred to as “sustainable development” and “stakeholder capitalism”.
  • There’s not a single area of life that is left out of this Great Reset plan. The planned reform will affect everything from government, energy and finance to food, medicine, real estate, policing and even how we interact with our fellow human beings in general.
  • Privacy protections are a major hurdle in this plan, which is why every effort is made to get people to loosen their views on the right for privacy. In the U.S., we also have the Constitution that stands in the way, which is why efforts to undermine, circumvent, ignore or nullify it are increasing.

What is this “Great Reset” we’re now hearing about? In a nutshell, the Great Reset refers to a global agenda to monitor and control the world through digital surveillance.

As explained by journalist James Corbett in his Oct. 16, Corbett Report above, the Great Reset is a new “social contract” that ties every person to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, and a social credit ID that will end up dictating every facet of your life.

It’s about getting rid of capitalism and free enterprise, and replacing them with “sustainable development” and “stakeholder capitalism” — terms that belie their nefarious, anti-humanity intentions. As noted in the book, “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order”:

“… Sustainable Development is Technocracy … The Sustainable Development movement has taken careful steps to conceal its true identity, strategy and purpose, but once the veil is lifted, you will never see it any other way. Once its strategy is unmasked, everything else will start to make sense.”

The grand plan 

In her blog post “The Great Reset for Dummies,” Tessa Lena summarizes the purpose behind the call for a global “reset”:

“The mathematical reason for the Great Reset is that thanks to technology, the planet has gotten small, and the infinite expansion economic model is bust — but obviously, the super wealthy want to continue staying super wealthy, and so they need a miracle, another bubble, plus a surgically precise system for managing what they perceive as ‘their limited resources.’

“Thus, they desperately want a bubble providing new growth out of thin air — literally — while simultaneously they seek to tighten the peasants’ belts, an effort that starts with ‘behavioral modification,’ a.k.a. resetting the western peasants’ sense of entitlement to high life standards and liberties (see awful ‘privilege’).

“The psychological reason for the Great Reset is the fear of losing control of property, the planet. I suppose, if you own billions and move trillions, your perception of reality gets funky, and everything down below looks like an ant hill that exists for you. Just ants and numbers, your assets. Thus, the practical aim of the Great Reset is to fundamentally restructure the world’s economy and geopolitical relations based on two assumptions:

“One, that every element of nature and every life form is a part of the global inventory (managed by the allegedly benevolent state, which, in turn, is owned by several suddenly benevolent wealthy people, via technology).

“And two, that all inventory needs to be strictly accounted for: be registered in a central database, be readable by a scanner and easily ID’ed, and be managed by AI, using the latest ‘science.’

“The goal is to count and then efficiently manage and control all resources, including people, on an unprecedented scale, with unprecedented digital … precision — all while the masters keep indulging, enjoying vast patches of conserved nature, free of unnecessary sovereign peasants and their unpredictability.”

Global asset reallocations will not benefit “the people”

These new global “assets” can also be turned into brand new financial instruments that can then be traded. An example of this was given by Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., in my interview with her.

In it, she explained how India is headed toward Zero-Budget Natural Farming — a brand-new concept of farming in which farmers must trade the carbon rate in their soil on the global market if they want to make a living. They’ll get no money at all for the crops they actually grow.

There’s not a single area of life that is left out of this Great Reset plan. The planned reform will affect everything from government, energy and finance to food, medicine, real estate, policing and even how we interact with our fellow human beings in general.

Privacy protections, of course, are a major hurdle in this plan, which is why every effort is made to get people to loosen their views on the right for privacy. In the U.S., we also have the Constitution that stands in the way, which is why efforts to undermine, circumvent, ignore or nullify it are increasing.

“To sum it up, the desired end result is a giant, joyless, highly controlled global conveyor of everything and everybody where privacy is tremendously expensive, dissent is unthinkable, and spiritual submission is mandatory.

It’s like a 24/7 medicated reality, except the medications are both chemical and digital, and they are reporting you back to the mothership, which can then punish you for bad behavior by, say, blocking your access to certain places or by putting a hold on your digital bank account — perhaps without any human intervention at all,” Lena writes.

Stakeholder capitalism

An Oct. 5, Winter Oak article addressed the “technocratic fascist vision” of professor Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the WEF who wrote the book, “The Fourth Industrial Revolution”. Schwab announced the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset Initiative in June 2020, which includes stripping all people of their privately owned assets.

In addition to being a staunch technocrat, Schwab also has a strong transhumanist bend, and he has spoken of a near future in which humans merge with machines and in which law enforcement will be able to read our mind.

Winter Oak — a British nonprofit social justice organization — points out that Schwab and his globalist accomplices are using the COVID-19 pandemic “to bypass democratic accountability, to override opposition, to accelerate their agenda and to impose it on the rest of humankind against our will.”

“Ultimately, the Great Reset will result in two tiers or people: The technocratic elite, who have all the power and rule over all assets, and the rest of humanity, who have no power, no assets and no say-so in anything.”

This is no conspiracy theory. The plan is out in the open. As noted by Time magazine, “The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to think about the kind of future we want.” The same statement has been delivered by a number of politicians and organizations around the world in recent months.

Schwab’s book, “COVID-19: The Great Reset” also urges industry leaders and decision makers to “make good use of the pandemic” and “not letting the crisis go to waste.” Incidentally, the owner of Time magazine and founder of Salesforce, Marc Benioff, is also a board member of the WEF, so he’s clearly familiar with the reset plan.

The problem is that while the plan is being sold as a way to, finally, make life fair and equitable for all people, the required sacrifices do not apply to the technocrats running the system. Ultimately, the Great Reset will result in two tiers or people: the technocratic elite, who have all the power and rule over all assets, and the rest of humanity, who have no power, no assets and no say-so in anything.

While technocracy is not a political system but an economic one, in practical terms it does resemble fascism. None of it is being sold under the banner of fascism, of course. Instead, they use financial terms like “stakeholder capitalism,” described by Forbes magazine as “the notion that a firm focuses on meeting the needs of all its stakeholders: customers, employees, partners, the community and society as a whole.”

In that same article, Forbes points out that this strategy has already been tried and failed. It failed because balancing conflicting stakeholder claims was near-impossible and only led to mass confusion and poor returns. The failure of this strategy is what led big businesses to focus on maximizing shareholder value instead.

Now, at a time when big business finds itself under attack for “single-mindedly shoveling money to its shareholders and its executives at the expense of customers, employees, the environment and society as a whole,” the answer, they say, is to return to stakeholder capitalism. But if it didn’t work before, what makes us think it will work now?

Great reset plan for big food 

A Nov. 9, article in The Defender, a new media platform by the Children’s Health Defense, also points out the problems with the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset plan for the food industry:

“The architects of the plan claim it will reduce food scarcity, hunger and disease, and even mitigate climate change. But a closer look at the corporations and think tanks the WEF is partnering with to usher in this global transformation suggests that the real motive is tighter corporate control over the food system by means of technological solutions.”

Aside from the food industry, partners include data mining giants, telecommunications, weapons manufacturers, finance, drug companies and the biotechnology industry.

Looking at that list, it should come as no surprise that the WEF insists the future of food and public health hinges on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), laboratory-grown protein, drugs and industrial chemicals.

The EAT Forum and the rise of food imperialism

To further the fake food takeover, the WEF has partnered with the EAT Forum, which will set the political agenda for global food production. The EAT Forum was cofounded by the Wellcome Trust, which in turn was established with the financial help of GlaxoSmithKline.

EAT currently collaborates with nearly 40 city governments across Africa, Europe, Asia, North and South America and Australia, and maintains close relationships with imitation meat companies such as Impossible Foods, which was co-funded by Google, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates.

As noted by The Defender, the ultimate aim is to “replace wholesome nutritious foods with genetically modified lab creations.” To this end, EAT is working with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) to establish global dietary guidelines and sustainable development initiatives.

The “Planetary Health Diet” developed by EAT is a diet that is supposed to replace all others. Federic Leroy, a food science and biotechnology professor at University of Brussels told The Defender:

“The diet aims to cut the meat and dairy intake of the global population by as much as 90% in some cases and replaces it with lab-made foods, cereals and oil.”

Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., has raised harsh critique against the proposed diet saying it “is not about nutrition at all. It’s about big business and it’s about a corporate takeover of the food system.” The Defender adds:

“According to EAT’s own reports, the big adjustments the organization and its corporate partners want to make to the food system are ‘unlikely to be successful if left up to the individual,’ and the changes they wish to impose on societal eating habits and food ‘require reframing at the systemic level with hard policy interventions that include laws, fiscal measures, subsidies and penalties, trade reconfiguration and other economic and structural measures.’

But Shiva said this is the wrong approach, because ‘all of the science’ shows that diets should be centered around regional and geographical biodiversity. She explained that ‘EAT’s uniform global diet will be produced with western technology and agricultural chemicals. Forcing this onto sovereign nations by multinational lobbying is what I refer to as food imperialism.’”

The future of food and health care

You can get a feel for where the future of food is headed by analyzing the WEF’s strategic intelligence map. As you can see, this top-down approach ties food production to a wide range of sectors, including biotech, the chemical industry, artificial intelligence, the internet of things and the digital economy.

For more details on Schwab and the WEF’s strategic intelligence plan, see Covert Geopolitics’s article, “Breaking Down the Global Elite’s Great Reset Master Plan.”

If any of this raises your concern, you’re probably not going to like what the World Health Economic Forum has in store for health care reform either. As detailed on their website:

“Our current capital intensive, hospital-centric model is unsustainable and ineffective. The Platform for Shaping the Future of Health and Healthcare leverages a data-enabled delivery system and virtual care, integrated across the continuum of care from precision prevention to personalized care delivery …”

Aiding the WEF in this health care transformation are the biggest corporate criminals in the history of the modern world, including Bill GatesAstraZenecaBayerJohnson & JohnsonMerckPfizer, Novartis and a host of others.

These companies have at various times been found guilty of all sorts of crimes that they have paid tens of billions of dollars in fines for. They are also loaded with conflicts of interest in nearly every venture they are involved with. Yet we’re now supposed to believe these companies are going to put aside their profit incentives and fix the whole system?

Build back better 

As noted in a July 21, 2020, WEF article, the economic devastation caused by COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns “has the potential to hobble global prosperity for generations to come.” The answer is to come up with stimulus measures, such as infrastructure development, that can allow countries to move forward.

But while at it, countries are urged to make sure the economic system is “built back better.” Make no mistake, this catchy slogan is part and parcel of the Great Reset plan and cannot be separated from it, no matter how altruistic it may sound. As reported by Fox News:

“A radical movement called the Great Reset embraced by some Democrats poses a grave threat to liberty and free markets in the United States and around the world … The Great Reset is perhaps the biggest danger to capitalism and individual rights since the collapse of the Soviet Union …

“It would destroy the current capitalist system and replace it with progressive and modern socialist systems, with a special emphasis placed on eco-socialist policies … Policy ideas offered by ‘Great Reset’ advocates include government-provided basic income programs, universal health care, massive tax increases and the Green New Deal …

“For example, at a campaign event on July 9, Biden said we need to end the ‘era of shareholder capitalism,’ a major part of the Great Reset proposal that would alter how companies are evaluated, elevating social justice causes and climate change concerns over property rights …

“The Build Back Better plan comes straight from the Great Reset’s playbook … As recently as July 13, the WEF promoted ‘building back better’ through ‘green’ infrastructure programs as part of the Great Reset …”

Part of the “building back better” is to shift the financial system over to an all-digital currency system, which in turn is part of the system of social control, as it can easily be used to incentivize desired behaviors and discourage undesired ones.

An Aug. 13 article on the Federal Reserve website discusses the supposed benefits of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). There’s general agreement among experts that most major countries will implement CBDC within the next two to four years.

Many uninformed people believe that these new CBDCs will be very similar to existing cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, but they would be mistaken. Bitcoin is decentralized and a rational strategy to opt out of the existing central bank controlled system, while these CBDCs will be centralized and completely controlled by the central banks and will have smart contracts that allow the banks to surveil and control your life.

The Great Reset psyops guide

It goes without saying that to achieve that kind of radical transformation of every part of society has its challenges. No person in their right mind would agree to it if aware of the details of the whole plan. So, to roll this out, they had to use psychological manipulation, and fear is the most effective tool there is.

As explained by psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin, there’s an entire school of public health research that focuses on identifying the most effective ways to frighten people into accepting desired public health measures.

By adding confusion and uncertainty to the mix, you can bring an individual from fear to anxiety — a state of confusion in which you can no longer think logically — and in this state, you are more easily manipulated. The following graphic illustrates the central role of fear mongering for the successful rollout of the Great Reset.

Social engineering is central to technocratic rule

In closing, keep in mind that technocracy is inherently a technological society run through social engineering. Fear is but one manipulation tool. The focus on “science” is another. Anytime someone dissents, they’re simply accused of being “anti-science,” and any science that conflicts with the status quo is declared “debunked science.”

The only science that matters is whatever the technocrats deem to be true, no matter how much evidence there is against it. We’ve seen this first hand during this pandemic, as Big Tech has censored and banned anything going against the opinions of the World Health Organization, which is just another cog in the technocratic machine.

If we allow this censorship to continue, the end result will be nothing short of devastating. We simply must keep pushing for transparency and truth. We must insist on medical freedom, personal liberty and the right to privacy.

One fight in particular that I don’t see us being able to evade is the fight against mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations. If we don’t take a firm stand against that and fight for the right to make our own choice, there will be no end to the medical tyranny that will follow. As noted in the Covert Geopolitics article.

“As you might have guessed, ‘the most important anchor of recovery is for a COVID-19 vaccination … The implication is that without a vaccine the world will be unable to return to any sense of normality, particularly in terms of open interaction with your fellow man …

You can actually participate in the global efforts to cripple the Deep State organized criminal cabal’s ability for genocide, while enjoying healthcare freedom at the same time, by boycotting Big Pharma for good.”

Published with permission from Mercola.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

Dr. Joseph Mercola

Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder of Mercola.com. An osteopathic physician, best-selling author and recipient of multiple awards in the…

=====================

Who Pressed the Great Reset Button?

 

Who Pressed the Great Reset Button  By Dr Joseph Mercola, 17 November 2020

Editor’s note: the extensive graphics can be seen at the link above.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The globalist technocracy is using the COVID-19 pandemic to bypass democratic accountability, override opposition, accelerate their agenda and to impose it on the public against our will
  • The Great Reset refers to a global agenda to monitor and control the world through digital surveillance. You’ll be tied to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, and a social credit ID that will end up dictating every facet of your life
  • The Great Reset is about getting rid of capitalism and free enterprise, and replacing them with technocracy, publicly referred to as “sustainable development” and “stakeholder capitalism”
  • There’s not a single area of life that is left out of this Great Reset plan. The planned reform will affect everything from government, energy and finance to food, medicine, real estate, policing and even how we interact with our fellow human beings in general
  • Privacy protections are a major hurdle in this plan, which is why every effort is made to get people to loosen their views on the right for privacy. In the U.S., we also have the Constitution that stands in the way, which is why efforts to undermine, circumvent, ignore or nullify it are increasing

What is this “Great Reset” we’re now hearing about? In a nutshell, the Great Reset refers to a global agenda to monitor and control the world through digital surveillance.

As explained by journalist James Corbett in his October 16, 2020, Corbett Report above,1 the Great Reset is a new “social contract” that ties every person to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, and a social credit ID that will end up dictating every facet of your life.

It’s about getting rid of capitalism and free enterprise, and replacing them with “sustainable development” and “stakeholder capitalism” — terms that belie their nefarious, anti-humanity intents. As noted in the book, “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order”:2

“… Sustainable Development is Technocracy … The Sustainable Development movement has taken careful steps to conceal its true identity, strategy and purpose, but once the veil is lifted, you will never see it any other way. Once its strategy is unmasked, everything else will start to make sense.”

The Grand Plan

In her blog post “The Great Reset for Dummies,” Tessa Lena summarizes the purpose behind the call for a global “reset”:3

“The mathematical reason for the Great Reset is that thanks to technology, the planet has gotten small, and the infinite expansion economic model is bust — but obviously, the super wealthy want to continue staying super wealthy, and so they need a miracle, another bubble, plus a surgically precise system for managing what they perceive as ‘their limited resources.’

Thus, they desperately want a bubble providing new growth out of thin air — literally — while simultaneously they seek to tighten the peasants’ belts, an effort that starts with ‘behavioral modification,’ a.k.a. resetting the western peasants’ sense of entitlement to high life standards and liberties (see awful ‘privilege’).

The psychological reason for the Great Reset is the fear of losing control of property, the planet. I suppose, if you own billions and move trillions, your perception of reality gets funky, and everything down below looks like an ant hill that exists for you. Just ants and numbers, your assets. Thus, the practical aim of the Great Reset is to fundamentally restructure the world’s economy and geopolitical relations based on two assumptions:

One, that every element of nature and every life form is a part of the global inventory (managed by the allegedly benevolent state, which, in turn, is owned by several suddenly benevolent wealthy people, via technology).

And two, that all inventory needs to be strictly accounted for: be registered in a central database, be readable by a scanner and easily ID’ed, and be managed by AI, using the latest ‘science.’

The goal is to count and then efficiently manage and control all resources, including people, on an unprecedented scale, with unprecedented digital … precision — all while the masters keep indulging, enjoying vast patches of conserved nature, free of unnecessary sovereign peasants and their unpredictability.”

Global Asset Reallocations Will Not Benefit ‘the People’

These new global “assets” can also be turned into brand new financial instruments that can then be traded. An example of this was given by Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., in my interview with her.

In it, she explained how India is headed toward Zero-Budget Natural Farming — a brand-new concept of farming in which farmers must trade the carbon rate in their soil on the global market if they want to make a living. They’ll get no money at all for the crops they actually grow.

There’s not a single area of life that is left out of this Great Reset plan. The planned reform will affect everything from government, energy and finance to food, medicine, real estate, policing and even how we interact with our fellow human beings in general.

Privacy protections, of course, are a major hurdle in this plan, which is why every effort is made to get people to loosen their views on the right for privacy. In the U.S., we also have the Constitution that stands in the way, which is why efforts to undermine, circumvent, ignore or nullify it are increasing.

“To sum it up, the desired end result is a giant, joyless, highly controlled global conveyor of everything and everybody where privacy is tremendously expensive, dissent is unthinkable, and spiritual submission is mandatory.

It’s like a 24/7 medicated reality, except the medications are both chemical and digital, and they are reporting you back to the mothership, which can then punish you for bad behavior by, say, blocking your access to certain places or by putting a hold on your digital bank account — perhaps without any human intervention at all,” Lena writes.4

Stakeholder Capitalism

An October 5, 2020, Winter Oak article5 addressed the “technocratic fascist vision” of professor Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum who wrote the book on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Schwab announced the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset Initiative in June 2020, which includes stripping all people of their privately owned assets.

In addition to being a staunch technocrat, Schwab also has a strong transhumanist bend, and he has spoken of a near future in which humans merge with machines and in which law enforcement will be able to read our mind.6

Winter Oak — a British nonprofit social justice organization — points out that Schwab and his globalist accomplices are using the COVID-19 pandemic “to bypass democratic accountability, to override opposition, to accelerate their agenda and to impose it on the rest of humankind against our will.”

Ultimately, the Great Reset will result in two tiers or people: The technocratic elite, who have all the power and rule over all assets, and the rest of humanity, who have no power, no assets and no say-so in anything.

This is no conspiracy theory. The plan is out in the open. As noted by Time magazine,7 “The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to think about the kind of future we want.” The same statement has been delivered by a number of politicians and organizations around the world in recent months.

Schwab’s book,8,9 “COVID-19: The Great Reset” also urges industry leaders and decision makers to “make good use of the pandemic” and “not letting the crisis go to waste.” Incidentally, the owner of Time magazine and founder of Salesforce, Mark Benioff, is also a board member of the World Economic Forum,10 so he’s clearly familiar with the reset plan.

The problem is that while the plan is being sold as a way to, finally, make life fair and equitable for all people, the required sacrifices do not apply to the technocrats running the system. Ultimately, the Great Reset will result in two tiers or people: the technocratic elite, who have all the power and rule over all assets, and the rest of humanity, who have no power, no assets and no say-so in anything.

While technocracy is not a political system but an economic one, in practical terms it does resemble fascism. None of it is being sold under the banner of fascism, of course. Instead, they use financial terms like “stakeholder capitalism,” described by Forbes magazine11 as “the notion that a firm focuses on meeting the needs of all its stakeholders: customers, employees, partners, the community and society as a whole.”

In that same article, Forbes points out that this strategy has already been tried and failed. It failed because balancing conflicting stakeholder claims was near-impossible and only led to mass confusion and poor returns. The failure of this strategy is what led big businesses to focus on maximizing shareholder value instead.

Now, at a time when big business finds itself under attack for “single-mindedly shoveling money to its shareholders and its executives at the expense of customers, employees, the environment and society as a whole,” the answer, they say, is to return to stakeholder capitalism. But if it didn’t work before, what makes us think it will work now?

Great Reset Plan for Big Food

A November 9, 2020, article12 in The Defender, a new media platform by the Children’s Health Defense, also points out the problems with the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset plan for the food industry:

“The architects of the plan claim it will reduce food scarcity, hunger and disease, and even mitigate climate change. But a closer look at the corporations and think tanks the WEF is partnering with to usher in this global transformation suggests that the real motive is tighter corporate control over the food system by means of technological solutions.”

Aside from the food industry, partners13 include data mining giants, telecommunications, weapons manufacturers, finance, drug companies and the biotechnology industry.

Looking at that list, it should come as no surprise that the World Economic Forum insists the future of food and public health hinges on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), laboratory-grown protein, drugs and industrial chemicals.

The EAT Forum and the Rise of Food Imperialism

To further the fake food takeover, the World Economic Forum has partnered with the EAT Forum, which will set the political agenda for global food production. The EAT Forum was cofounded by the Wellcome Trust, which in turn was established with the financial help of GlaxoSmithKline.

EAT currently collaborates with nearly 40 city governments across Africa, Europe, Asia, North and South America and Australia, and maintains close relationships with imitation meat companies such as Impossible Foods, which was cofounded by Google, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates.14

As noted by The Defender, the ultimate aim is to “replace wholesome nutritious foods with genetically modified lab creations.” To this end, EAT is working with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) to establish global dietary guidelines and sustainable development initiatives.

The “Planetary Health Diet”15 developed by EAT is a diet that is supposed to replace all others. Federic Leroy, a food science and biotechnology professor at University of Brussels told The Defender:16

“The diet aims to cut the meat and dairy intake of the global population by as much as 90% in some cases and replaces it with lab-made foods, cereals and oil.”

Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., has raised harsh critique against the proposed diet saying it “is not about nutrition at all. It’s about big business and it’s about a corporate takeover of the food system.”17 The Defender adds:18

“According to EAT’s own reports, the big adjustments the organization and its corporate partners want to make to the food system are ‘unlikely to be successful if left up to the individual,’ and the changes they wish to impose on societal eating habits and food ‘require reframing at the systemic level with hard policy interventions that include laws, fiscal measures, subsidies and penalties, trade reconfiguration and other economic and structural measures.’

But Shiva said this is the wrong approach, because ‘all of the science’ shows that diets should be centered around regional and geographical biodiversity. She explained that ‘EAT’s uniform global diet will be produced with western technology and agricultural chemicals. Forcing this onto sovereign nations by multinational lobbying is what I refer to as food imperialism.’”

The Future of Food and Health Care

You can get a feel for where the future of food is headed by analyzing the World Economic Forum’s strategic intelligence map.19 As you can see, this top-down approach ties food production to a wide range of sectors, including biotech, the chemical industry, artificial intelligence, the internet of things and the digital economy.

For more details on Schwab and the World Economic Forum’s strategic intelligence plan, see Covert Geopolitic’s article,20 “Breaking Down the Global Elite’s Great Reset Master Plan.”

If any of this raises your concern, you’re probably not going to like what the World Health Economic Forum has in store for health care reform either. As detailed on their website:21

“Our current capital intensive, hospital-centric model is unsustainable and ineffective. The Platform for Shaping the Future of Health and Healthcare leverages a data-enabled delivery system and virtual care, integrated across the continuum of care from precision prevention to personalized care delivery …”

Aiding the World Economic Forum in this health care transformation are the biggest corporate criminals in the history of the modern world, including Bill Gates, AstraZeneca,22 Bayer,23 Johnson & Johnson,24 Merck,25 Pfizer,26 Novartis27 and a host of others.28

These companies have at various times been found guilty of all sorts of crimes that they have paid tens of billions of dollars in fines for. They are also loaded with conflicts of interest in nearly every venture they are involved with. Yet we’re now supposed to believe these companies are going to put aside their profit incentives and fix the whole system?

Build Back Better

As noted in a July 21, 2020, World Economic Forum article,29 the economic devastation caused by COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns “has the potential to hobble global prosperity for generations to come.” The answer is to come up with stimulus measures, such as infrastructure development, that can allow countries to move forward.

But while at it, countries are urged to make sure the economic system is “built back better.” Make no mistake, this catchy slogan is part and parcel of the Great Reset plan and cannot be separated from it, no matter how altruistic it may sound. As reported by Fox News:30

“A radical movement called the Great Reset embraced by some Democrats poses a grave threat to liberty and free markets in the United States and around the world … The Great Reset is perhaps the biggest danger to capitalism and individual rights since the collapse of the Soviet Union …

It would destroy the current capitalist system and replace it with progressive and modern socialist systems, with a special emphasis placed on eco-socialist policies … Policy ideas offered by ‘Great Reset’ advocates include government-provided basic income programs, universal health care, massive tax increases and the Green New Deal …

For example, at a campaign event on July 9, Biden said we need to end the ‘era of shareholder capitalism,’ a major part of the Great Reset proposal that would alter how companies are evaluated, elevating social justice causes and climate change concerns over property rights …

The Build Back Better plan comes straight from the Great Reset’s playbook … As recently as July 13, the World Economic Forum promoted ‘building back better’ through ‘green’ infrastructure programs as part of the Great Reset …”

Part of the “building back better” is to shift the financial system over to an all-digital currency system, which in turn is part of the system of social control, as it can easily be used to incentivize desired behaviors and discourage undesired ones.

An August 13, 2020, article31 on the Federal Reserve website discusses the supposed benefits of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). There’s general agreement among experts that most major countries will implement CBDC within the next two to four years.

Many uninformed people believe that these new CBDCs will be very similar to existing cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, but they would be mistaken. Bitcoin is decentralized and a rational strategy to opt out of the existing central bank controlled system, while these CBDCs will be centralized and completely controlled by the central banks and will have smart contracts that allow the banks to surveil and control your life.

The Great Reset Psyops Guide

It goes without saying that to achieve the kind of radical transformation of every part of society has its challenges. No person in their right mind would agree to it if aware of the details of the whole plan. So, to roll this out, they had to use psychological manipulation, and fear is the most effective tool there is.

As explained by psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin, there’s an entire school of public health research that focuses on identifying the most effective ways to frighten people into accepting desired public health measures.

By adding confusion and uncertainty to the mix, you can bring an individual from fear to anxiety — a state of confusion in which you can no longer think logically — and in this state, you are more easily manipulated. The following graphic illustrates the central role of fearmongering for the successful rollout of the Great Reset.

===================

A Global Conspiracy Against God

A Global Conspiracy Against God  From Zerohedge, 3 November 2020

“A Global Conspiracy Against God” – Archbishop Says Trump Is Only One To Save Humanity From ‘The Great Reset’

The Italian archbishop best known for confronting Pope Francis over the Vatican’s willful blindness to priests who abuse boys has written a letter in which he lashes out at the “global elite”, prompting some to accuse him of sympathizing with the “QAnon” movement of conspiracy theorists.

The letter, penned by Archibishop Carlo Maria Vigano, formerly the Vatican’s ambassador to the US, attacks a shadowy “global elite”, that is plotting a “Great Reset” intended to undermine “God and humanity”.

This same group, the archbishop argued, is also responsible for the lockdowns that have restricted movement and freedom around the globe, eliciting protests in many European capitals.

“The fate of the whole world is being threatened by a global conspiracy against God and humanity,” Viganò wrote in the letter, which comes just days before the US election, which the archbishop wrote was of “epochal importance.”

“No one, up until last February,” Viganò writes, “would ever have thought that, in all of our cities, citizens would be arrested simply for wanting to walk down the street, to breathe, to want to keep their business open, to want to go to church on Sunday. Yet now it is happening all over the world, even in picture-postcard Italy that many Americans consider to be a small enchanted country, with its ancient monuments, its churches, its charming cities, its characteristic villages.” Viganò adds: “And while the politicians are barricaded inside their palaces promulgating decrees like Persian satraps, businesses are failing, shops are closing, and people are prevented from living, travelling, working, and praying.”

Working to protect the world from this group of elites seeking to recast society in a secular, totalitarian model, Viganò portrays President Trump as “the final garrison against the world dictatorship”. Viganò cast Trump’s opponent, Vice President Joe Biden, as “a person who is manipulated by the deep state.”

Analysts who monitor “QAnon” conspiracy theories and their spread online warned the mainstream press that the letter had been widely discussed on various QAnon message boards, and had been disseminated in languages including Portuguese, Spanish, French, German and Italian, according to Yahoo News.

Over the summer, Trump tweeted an earlier letter penned by the archbishop, and encouraged his supporters to read it.

So honored by Archbishop Viganò’s incredible letter to me. I hope everyone, religious or not, reads it! https://t.co/fVhkCz89g5

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 10, 2020

In the past, Viagnò has accused Pope Francis of sweeping the child abuse crisis under the rug, and moving to protect homosexual priests, part of a “homosexual current” flowing through the Vatican.

Read the full letter below:

* * *

DONALD J. TRUMP

Sunday, October 25, 2020

Solemnity of Christ the King

Mr. President,

Allow me to address you at this hour in which the fate of the whole world is being threatened by a global conspiracy against God and humanity. I write to you as an Archbishop, as a Successor of the Apostles, as the former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America. I am writing to you in the midst of the silence of both civil and religious authorities. May you accept these words of mine as the “voice of one crying out in the desert” (Jn 1:23).

As I said when I wrote my letter to you in June, this historical moment sees the forces of Evil aligned in a battle without quarter against the forces of Good; forces of Evil that appear powerful and organized as they oppose the children of Light, who are disoriented and disorganized, abandoned by their temporal and spiritual leaders.

Daily we sense the attacks multiplying of those who want to destroy the very basis of society: the natural family, respect for human life, love of country, freedom of education and business. We see heads of nations and religious leaders pandering to this suicide of Western culture and its Christian soul, while the fundamental rights of citizens and believers are denied in the name of a health emergency that is revealing itself more and more fully as instrumental to the establishment of an inhuman faceless tyranny.

A global plan called the Great Reset is underway. Its architect is a global élite that wants to subdue all of humanity, imposing coercive measures with which to drastically limit individual freedoms and those of entire populations. In several nations this plan has already been approved and financed; in others it is still in an early stage. Behind the world leaders who are the accomplices and executors of this infernal project, there are unscrupulous characters who finance the World Economic Forum and Event 201, promoting their agenda.

The purpose of the Great Reset is the imposition of a health dictatorship aiming at the imposition of liberticidal measures, hidden behind tempting promises of ensuring a universal income and cancelling individual debt. The price of these concessions from the International Monetary Fund will be the renunciation of private property and adherence to a program of vaccination against Covid-19 and Covid-21 promoted by Bill Gates with the collaboration of the main pharmaceutical groups. Beyond the enormous economic interests that motivate the promoters of the Great Reset, the imposition of the vaccination will be accompanied by the requirement of a health passport and a digital ID, with the consequent contact tracing of the population of the entire world. Those who do not accept these measures will be confined in detention camps or placed under house arrest, and all their assets will be confiscated.

Mr. President, I imagine that you are already aware that in some countries the Great Reset will be activated between the end of this year and the first trimester of 2021. For this purpose, further lockdowns are planned, which will be officially justified by a supposed second and third wave of the pandemic. You are well aware of the means that have been deployed to sow panic and legitimize draconian limitations on individual liberties, artfully provoking a world-wide economic crisis. In the intentions of its architects, this crisis will serve to make the recourse of nations to the Great Reset irreversible, thereby giving the final blow to a world whose existence and very memory they want to completely cancel. But this world, Mr. President, includes people, affections, institutions, faith, culture, traditions, and ideals: people and values that do not act like automatons, who do not obey like machines, because they are endowed with a soul and a heart, because they are tied together by a spiritual bond that draws its strength from above, from that God that our adversaries want to challenge, just as Lucifer did at the beginning of time with his “non serviam.”

Many people – as we well know – are annoyed by this reference to the clash between Good and Evil and the use of “apocalyptic” overtones, which according to them exasperates spirits and sharpens divisions. It is not surprising that the enemy is angered at being discovered just when he believes he has reached the citadel he seeks to conquer undisturbed. What is surprising, however, is that there is no one to sound the alarm. The reaction of the deep state to those who denounce its plan is broken and incoherent, but understandable. Just when the complicity of the mainstream media had succeeded in making the transition to the New World Order almost painless and unnoticed, all sorts of deceptions, scandals and crimes are coming to light.

Until a few months ago, it was easy to smear as “conspiracy theorists” those who denounced these terrible plans, which we now see being carried out down to the smallest detail. No one, up until last February, would ever have thought that, in all of our cities, citizens would be arrested simply for wanting to walk down the street, to breathe, to want to keep their business open, to want to go to church on Sunday. Yet now it is happening all over the world, even in picture-postcard Italy that many Americans consider to be a small enchanted country, with its ancient monuments, its churches, its charming cities, its characteristic villages. And while the politicians are barricaded inside their palaces promulgating decrees like Persian satraps, businesses are failing, shops are closing, and people are prevented from living, traveling, working, and praying. The disastrous psychological consequences of this operation are already being seen, beginning with the suicides of desperate entrepreneurs and of our children, segregated from friends and classmates, told to follow their classes while sitting at home alone in front of a computer.

In Sacred Scripture, Saint Paul speaks to us of “the one who opposes” the manifestation of the mystery of iniquity, the kathèkon (2 Thess 2:6-7). In the religious sphere, this obstacle to evil is the Church, and in particular the papacy; in the political sphere, it is those who impede the establishment of the New World Order.

As is now clear, the one who occupies the Chair of Peter has betrayed his role from the very beginning in order to defend and promote the globalist ideology, supporting the agenda of the deep church, who chose him from its ranks.

Mr. President, you have clearly stated that you want to defend the nation – One Nation under God, fundamental liberties, and non-negotiable values that are denied and fought against today. It is you, dear President, who are “the one who opposes” the deep state, the final assault of the children of darkness.

For this reason, it is necessary that all people of good will be persuaded of the epochal importance of the imminent election: not so much for the sake of this or that political program, but because of the general inspiration of your action that best embodies – in this particular historical context – that world, our world, which they want to cancel by means of the lockdown. Your adversary is also our adversary: it is the Enemy of the human race, He who is “a murderer from the beginning” (Jn 8:44).

Around you are gathered with faith and courage those who consider you the final garrison against the world dictatorship. The alternative is to vote for a person who is manipulated by the deep state, gravely compromised by scandals and corruption, who will do to the United States what Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing to the Church, Prime Minister Conte to Italy, President Macron to France, Prime Minster Sanchez to Spain, and so on. The blackmailable nature of Joe Biden – just like that of the prelates of the Vatican’s “magic circle” – will expose him to be used unscrupulously, allowing illegitimate powers to interfere in both domestic politics as well as international balances. It is obvious that those who manipulate him already have someone worse than him ready, with whom they will replace him as soon as the opportunity arises.

And yet, in the midst of this bleak picture, this apparently unstoppable advance of the “Invisible Enemy,” an element of hope emerges. The adversary does not know how to love, and it does not understand that it is not enough to assure a universal income or to cancel mortgages in order to subjugate the masses and convince them to be branded like cattle. This people, which for too long has endured the abuses of a hateful and tyrannical power, is rediscovering that it has a soul; it is understanding that it is not willing to exchange its freedom for the homogenization and cancellation of its identity; it is beginning to understand the value of familial and social ties, of the bonds of faith and culture that unite honest people. This Great Reset is destined to fail because those who planned it do not understand that there are still people ready to take to the streets to defend their rights, to protect their loved ones, to give a future to their children and grandchildren. The leveling inhumanity of the globalist project will shatter miserably in the face of the firm and courageous opposition of the children of Light. The enemy has Satan on its side, He who only knows how to hate. But on our side, we have the Lord Almighty, the God of armies arrayed for battle, and the Most Holy Virgin, who will crush the head of the ancient Serpent. “If God is for us, who can be against us?” (Rom 8:31).

Mr. President, you are well aware that, in this crucial hour, the United States of America is considered the defending wall against which the war declared by the advocates of globalism has been unleashed. Place your trust in the Lord, strengthened by the words of the Apostle Paul: “I can do all things in Him who strengthens me” (Phil 4:13). To be an instrument of Divine Providence is a great responsibility, for which you will certainly receive all the graces of state that you need, since they are being fervently implored for you by the many people who support you with their prayers.

With this heavenly hope and the assurance of my prayer for you, for the First Lady, and for your collaborators, with all my heart I send you my blessing.

God bless the United States of America!

+ Carlo Maria Viganò

Tit. Archbishop of Ulpiana

Former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America

 

=======================

Previous articles 

John’s newsletter

This post provides John’s latest newsletter which covers a range of topical political, technical and environmental issues.

John’s newsletter, 13 December 2020

Hi Guys,

Investments…

 The Reserve Bank of NZ and all other central banks expect a continuation into lower and even negative interest rates during the next several months.  This means investment yields will fall;  and inflation will sooner or later become hyper-inflation.  Even with no news to report the share markets headed higher this week and dividend yields in percentage terms fell further.  Unless invested in companies mauled by the impact of Covid, the actual dividends being paid have held steady in dollar terms. But the rush to shares has had a huge impact.

In New Zealand, the attempted hostile takeover of the Infratil group by “Australian Super”  has also had an impact share prices on energy stocks as well as for Infratil, and not just for Trustpower.

Real estate prices continue higher as bank interest rates for funds on deposit fall through the floorboards.  This affects yields on rentals for both commercial and industrial real estate.  House prices rose on average by $24,000 in November alone.  Incompetent government now driving incompetent central bank policies.

Politics

 By the end of this week, if Boris Johnson holds his nerve, the British will have a “no deal Brexit”.  This will be a lose/lose for both Britain and the EU…

https://youtu.be/iUAzwJBtemI

How could Britain have won in 1945 yet lost to both France and Germany’s bullying in 2020?    The wealthy UK “remainers” have simply persuaded the EU leaders that Boris will cave to their pressure.  Nigel Farage is also continuing his political opposition to Britain either remaining in the EU or the EU continuing to make UK laws…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBQjmjixIl0

In the USA a form of civil war has begun as 19 states sue the states that changes their rules for this specific election. This has nothing to do with Trump versus Biden but the equality of the treatment of a vote from state to state…yet the US Supreme Court is reluctant to get involved.

The Russia-gate effort to impeach Trump was an attempted “soft coup”.  Going after General Flynn was also just a hyped-up attack on Trump’s White House arrangements…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pERAU2e332Q

The votes stats look very iffy…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijtaV5Twf6o&feature=youtu.be

But by the end of next week Trump will either have scored some major surprise victories or will likely have conceded.  As they say, “He is running out of runway”.  The Electoral College votes for the POTUS on Monday and at this point I cannot see that being delayed.  The problems with the Bidens’ obvious criminality are more likely now to see the active communist, Kamala Harris as POTUS than Trump at this stage.  While the Hunter Biden issues have been public knowledge for 70% of US citizens, the news media has protected the Bidens by enforcing an embargo on publication.  Now, instead of the long-running FBI investigation into the conduct of the Biden family being blamed for the attack on “Sleepy Joe”, the mainstream media finger the FBI and IRS actions as being a “loser’s” complaint by Trump.  The Democrats threw the Bidens under the bus during the Congressional impeachment hearings in early 2020 yet the mainstream media completely suppressed the news.  You may recall I was commenting about this at the time.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/joe-biden-deeply-proud-son-hunter-who-just-admitted-facing-federal-tax-fraud?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

and according to Wall Street Journal, US AG Bill Barr intercepted information implicating Hunter Biden and concealed it during the presidential election campaign to Trumps disadvantage.  Now the matter is all over the news despite CNN also having been involved in the cover up.

https://cms.zerohedge.com/political/chinese-money-launderer-called-james-biden-after-fbi-arrest-who-said-he-was-trying-reach?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Our own media reflects that mainstream globalist media agenda and simply treats the allegations against the Bidens that originated from the US State Department as Trumps sour grapes.  So it seems to me the dystopian Orwellian world of “1984” is here in New Zealand.  Now there is a fourth investigation into Biden…

https://youtu.be/Go7TkInP0mQ

Onto the Great Reset, planned by the global Uber-elites.   Just as the Duke of Windsor was a Nazi, many of the Nazi opinions have now re-surfaced under the guise of the drift towards socialism and the need for practical eugenics to depress global population.  The globalist billionaires are all for it and the leading proponents are now Soros, Schwab and Prince Charles.  But who is Klaus Schwab?

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/youll-own-nothing-and-youll-be-happy?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

The Economy

 Thanks to Covid, the big get bigger and the small get gobbled up…

https://www.mauldineconomics.com/frontlinethoughts/survival-of-the-biggest

No-one seems interested as China sustains more flooding.  What they have had this year is flooding of biblical proportions and the 3-Gorges Dam is still at risk.  No wonder they have famine…

https://youtu.be/LokuLywuXxk

Would China be a better banker to the world than the USA is?

Energy

This looks pretty significant for China but they are still a long way off from viable nuclear fusion power generation…

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Will-China-Win-The-Nuclear-Fusion-Race.html

Trouble in paradise for Bahrain…

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Tiny-Oil-Nation-At-The-Center-Of-A-Middle-East-Power-Struggle.html

It looks like US oil producers are struggling following Covid-19…

https://peakoil.com/production/update-on-us-oil-production

Covid-19 and implications

 The inevitable result of the decimation of the ocean cruise industry and the halt in globalisation – however temporary…

https://youtu.be/qo-2gDg-37w

So Melinda Gates reckon they miscalculated?  Of course they are being blamed in some quarters…

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/melinda-gates-admits-we-hadnt-really-thought-through-economic-impacts?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

The Climate and Space Weather

 While the space weather drives climate change, major anomalous solar events can cause mayhem on Earth…as solar cycle 25 gets into gear there are signs of possible CMEs in our near future…

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/digital-economy-disruption-possible-terminator-event-suggests-strongest-sunspot-cycle?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

This will be my last email before Christmas unless something  really surprising happens.  In the New Year I fear we will awaken to a Kamala Harris presidency in the USA and to the reality of Brexit.  A brave new world – 1984 2.0 accelerates.  As Mel Brooks said ‘Be afraid, be very afraid’.

 Merry Christmas to everyone…

 Best regards

John

‘PC’, ‘Woke’ Orwellian censorship – 1984, official lies, media lies, ‘socialism’, modern ‘democracy’ and modern ‘capitalism’

Many from the ‘Left’, progressives, Cultural Marxists and activists keep trying to stymie democracy with their shrill, often illogical, Orwellian and ideological views and variations of mind control. The following articles provide evidence.

Links to more articles follow the five below

America’s Future Is Liberal Fascism

America’s Future Is Liberal Fascism  By Robert Bridge, The Strategic Culture Foundation, via Zerohedge 2 Dec 2020

America’s Future Is Liberal Fascism Sporting A Smiley Shirt And Armed With A Syringe

The globalists responsible for engineering a medical tyranny across much of the Western world have something valuable to teach right-wing nationalists and would-be fascists, and that is you don’t sell your damaged product out of the barrel of a machine gun, but rather dripping from the end of a syringe that promises to end all pain and misery.

 

Patrick Henry, one of America’s more outspoken Founding Fathers, famously remarked “give me liberty or give me death” when the life of his nation was on the line.

Today, America’s famous battle cry has been replaced by a masked and muffled gasp that advises, without hope of a second opinion, “give me lockdowns and keep me safe.”

So terrified is the American public of catching a virus that comes with a 99 percent survival rate that they are willing to forego Thanksgiving, the great national holiday commemorating – with no loss of irony – their Pilgrim ancestors’ collective courage to overcome the wild, hostile conditions of their new land.

It must be said that no fascist party has ever been so adept when it came to sealing the collective fate of their people to a common enemy. That’s because the threat facing mankind today, or so we are told, is not some nefarious ideology, like communism, or even a terrorist organization that the masses can be rallied to fight. Rather, the threat is a microscopic contagion that is capable of invading every nook and cranny of our lives. Already the age of manly handshakes is over, replaced by an emasculated majority, while an entire generation of youth now looks at their fellow human beings as infernal germ factories.

And unlike a traditional enemy that can be seen, attacked and eventually defeated, the coronavirus – we have been oddly forewarned – will make landfall again and again, while regularly morphing with comic book abilities into an increasingly deadlier villain. In this landless battle, only the medical authorities are decorated as heroes, while the people, lacking the professional credentials, are forced to be passive and helpless onlookers, their freedom of movement severely constrained. More importantly, the forces of nationalism have become irrelevant; only a globalist, one-world-order response can defeat this pandemic.

There is very good reason to suspect, however, that either the science on all of this is half-baked, or we the people are being intentionally duped on a grand scale. In fact, it’s probably a little bit of both. First, relying on nothing more than empirical evidence, it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that there is no existential emergency confronting mankind. If there were, we would expect to see decomposing bodies piling up in the streets, like in the medieval times during the Black Plague. This would be especially the case among the homeless population, which is certainly not practicing social distancing etiquette as they pass around open containers on street corners.

Nor does there seem to be any massive queuing up at hospitals for emergency treatment. In fact, as early as April, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo told President Trump that the Navy hospital ship USNS Comfort deployed to New York City by the federal government to help fight the coronavirus outbreak was “no longer needed”. Cuomo said the need for the support vessel “didn’t reach the levels that had been projected.” And I am certainly not the only one who has noticed that Covid cases seem to fluctuate curiously with the political climate.

Let’s not forget that the overwhelming majority of Covid ‘victims’ recover nicely at home, according to no less of an authority than Anthony Fauci. At the same time, many people who acquire the disease are asymptomatic and never even knew they were infected. Children, meanwhile, seem amazingly impervious to the virus. That is not to say that there has been no sign of a virus this winter season. Of course there has been, just like every year. But while Covid cases may be on the rise in some places, and invisible in others, the death rate from this illness remains low and tumbling, predominantly hitting elderly people already suffering from comorbidities.

There are other reasons to be suspicious that what we are dealing with is not a first-class medical emergency, but rather something much more sinister. Like maybe an excuse for rolling out a Western-made vaccine that carries a microchip implant with tracking technology? Such a claim will sound less fantastic when it is realized that it has already been developed.

It is no secret that just one month before Covid-19 made its dramatic landfall in the United States, purportedly from Wuhan, China, MIT researchers announced a new method for recording a patient’s vaccination history: storing the smartphone-readable data under the skin at the same time a vaccine is administered.

“By selectively loading microparticles into microneedles, the patches deliver a pattern in the skin that is invisible to the naked eye but can be scanned with a smartphone that has the infrared filter removed,” MIT News reported.

“The patch can be customized to imprint different patterns that correspond to the type of vaccine delivered.”

Would it surprise anyone to know that the research was funded largely by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the same family venture that now provides the bulk of funding to the World Health Organization?

Then, in September 2019, ID2020, a San Francisco-based biometric company that counts Microsoft as one of its founding members, announced a new project that involves the “exploration of multiple biometric identification technologies for infants” that is based on “infant immunization.”

We could continue here with a long list of other disturbing technologies that would effectively turn people into walking antennae for the rest of their lives, but the point is hopefully clear: although many people might be willing to accept a vaccine against Covid-19, they probably do not want the extra technological add-ons that people like Bill Gates, a man with zero medical qualifications, seem extremely anxious to include.

Bottom of Form

So what can Americans expect next? How about ‘Freedom Passes’ that Britons may need before they are able to return to some semblance of normalcy?

According to the Daily Mail, “Britons are set to be given Covid ‘freedom passes’ as long as they test negative for the virus twice in a week, it has been suggested…To earn the freedom pass, people will need to be tested regularly and, provided the results come back negative, they will then be given a letter, card or document they can show to people as they move around.”

And this is what they call a “return to normalcy.”

Personally, I call those plans the approach of fascism. And for those who doubt that it could not happen in America should heed the words of the late sagacious comedian George Carlin, who once quipped that “when fascism comes to America, it will not be in brown and black shirts. It will not be with jackboots. It will be Nike sneakers and smiley shirts.” Had Carlin been alive today to see the tremendous mess we’ve inherited, he would most likely have included a syringe in the neo-fascist’s toolkit.

=====================

A Biden counterrevolution would be a disaster for democracy, solidarity and freedom

A Biden counterrevolution would be a disaster for democracy, solidarity and freedom  By Brendan O’Neill, Editor, Spiked Online, 7 November 2020

A victory for Joe Biden would embolden the regressive woke elites across the Western world.

Make America Boring Again. Remarkably, this has become the rallying cry of many in the Joe Biden camp. ‘Vote Biden and make the presidency boring again’, instructs the New York Daily News. ‘The delightful boringness of Joe Biden’, as Vox puts it. ‘Joe Biden is a boring candidate. That’s why he is doing well’, says a writer for the Guardian. After the fire and the fury and the lies and the bluster of the first Trump term, what America needs right now is a big ol’ ‘dose of monotony’, says one observer.

This all captures what is motoring the extraordinarily uniform pro-Biden outlook across the old political establishment, the media class and the celebrity set. Every now and then these people will use words like ‘renewal’ to describe a Biden presidency. They even occasionally claim he is riding on a similar wave of ‘HOPE’ to the one that swept Obama to power in 2008.

But in truth, at root, what the cultural elites love about Biden is that he would render politics dull again. He would help to restore calm and normalcy and, most importantly, order. More specifically, he will restore the order, the old order, the pre-Trump order in which politics was a fundamentally boring, technical, managerial affair, the business of educated elites rather than of loudmouth populists and the swarms of excitable people who come to hear them and cheer them. Make no mistake: the celebration of Biden’s tedium speaks to an elitist longing to drain the popular democratic spark from political life and return politics to the aloof, bureaucratic clerisy who had been running things before Trump came along.

The most important thing about Joe Biden is not the man himself – it is what has been invested in him by the establishment. This is why those who go on about Biden’s age and his bouts of mental confusion and the stark possibility that he wouldn’t survive a four-year presidency are kind of missing the point. Biden, for the purposes of this election, this election that the elites tell us is the most important of everyone’s lifetime, is not a politician; he’s a mascot. He’s a flag. He’s a largely symbolic figure, primarily symbolising Not Trump and Not Populism, whose presence in the White House will, the old establishment hopes, help to embolden their efforts to rebalance politics away from the frankness and populism of the last four years and return it to what a writer for the Los Angeles Times refers to as the ‘expertise’ of the pre-Trump era, which is apparently preferable to ‘the authenticity’ of a political figure like Trump.

So what will happen today is not really a normal election. Rather, it is an attempted restoration. A restoration not of monarchy but of technocracy; not of a king but of the status quo ante and its conduct of politics in a removed, disconnected way. Not only in the US but across Europe and elsewhere in the world, the political and moral clerisy see the restoration of their preferred order in the US as an essential first step in their longed-for rollback of the populist rebellions of the past few years. This is why spiked thinks a victory for Joe Biden will be a disaster for the world – because it would further embolden the most regressive, anti-democratic, woke strains in Western political life. If Biden wins, we all lose.

One of the most revealing justifications for voting for Biden is that he would relieve people of the burden of thinking about politics. As one writer says, the main horror of the Trump era is that it made ‘politics and government’ into ‘the omnipresent centre of gravity in our daily lives’. With a monster like Trump in the White House, many people, apparently, could think about little else other than politics and what a shitshow it had become courtesy of the ‘deplorables’ who elevated Trump to power. And the great thing about Biden’s rule is that it ‘promises to return the outsized stature of politics to its rightfully diminutive place’ (my italics). Diminutive: extremely or unusually small. That is the presence politics should have in most people’s lives, apparently: an infinitesimally small one. Don’t think about politics – just let other people get on with it. And that is what Biden promises – ‘a government you simply don’t have to think about all that often’.

This has become a common cry in the vast pro-Biden lobby. It is a central component of the Make Politics Boring Again worldview. They want a world where most people – ordinary people – don’t have to worry themselves about issues of governance. They can just leave that stuff, the business of the national destiny, to the competent classes (‘competence’, alongside ‘boring’, is another buzzword of the Biden lobby). As the Los Angeles Times says, this election is really a reckoning between ‘experts’ and the ‘authentics’. The experts are the likes of Hillary Clinton and, latterly, Joe Biden (eight years in the Obama administration ‘boosted his expert credentials’, says the LA Times), and the ‘authentics’ are people like Trump. And what we need to restore is ‘the expertise’ and ‘reliance on science’ of that pre-Trump class, against ‘the feral frankness’ of the Trump era, the LA Times says.

So the wave of pro-Biden sentiment among vast swathes of the establishment is not merely about changing policy in the White House, as most elections are. (Indeed, it is striking how much of the pro-Biden commentary says Biden’s policies don’t actually matter. ‘It’s not the policies that count’, as the Guardian says.) Rather, it is about negating the ‘feral’ populism of recent years and restoring the rightful rule of the smart set, of those who can be trusted to govern while the rest of us just get on with our lives and never think about politics. A Biden presidency is a ‘protest against protest’, in the words of the Guardian. That is, it would be a protest against the protest votes cast by vast numbers of ordinary people in 2016 for a different, more democratic way of doing politics. There’s a word for ‘protest against protest’, of course: counter-protest, or counterrevolution. That is what the elite Biden wave represents: a counterrevolution against the populist cries and democratic demands of the 2016 era.

‘Feral’ means having escaped from domestication and become wild. That is how much of the cultural and media elites view the masses in the post-2016 era: we disobediently broke free of the domesticating force of managerial politics and became beast-like, ignorantly voting for Trump or Brexit. The Biden reaction, the Biden counterrevolution, is fundamentally a project of redomestication, of returning the masses to the tamed state in which they do not concern themselves with politics and instead leave it to ‘America’s system of checks and balances’, as The Economist says in its pro-Biden leader.

If successful, this ‘protest against protest’, this elitist reaction against the feral demands of the people for change, would be bad not only for America but for other parts of the world, too. It would be particularly bad for the Brexit spirit. We know that Biden is hostile to Brexit, viewing it as a Trump-like phenomenon. We know that he is keen to reward the European Union for its steadfastness in the face of the Brexit revolt and of the various challenges to its authority from the East, especially from Poland and Hungary. The masses’ democratic impulse would suffer both in the US and in Europe if the self-consciously domesticating force of technocracy is restored to power in Washington, DC.

The desire to make politics diminutive again, to return decision-making to ‘the experts’, speaks to the overarching aim of the technocratic impulse – to insulate political life from the pressure of the masses. The elite meltdown of the past four years, in both the US and the UK, has been motored by a great fear that the votes for Trump and Brexit tore away the insulation of politics from popular pressure. This project of insulation had been taking shape for decades, in the form of the European Union, of the increased juridification of political decision-making, of quangos and checks and balances. In questioning the authority of the EU and the expertise of the Clinton-style establishment, British and American voters started to pull apart this insulation and make the case for more direct forms of democracy and decision-making. The ‘delightful boringness’ of Biden, his promise to make politics ‘diminutive’ again, his implicit invitation to ‘the experts’ to take authority back from ‘the authentics’, is fundamentally a project of restoring the insulation between politics and the masses. This will be a deeply concerning backward step for democracy.

The restoration of the pre-2016 order would not only insulate public life from people’s feral political demands but also from our cultural and moral values. It would redomesticate the masses morally as well as politically. A Biden victory would embolden the woke mobs of the new elite and their tyranny of cancel culture. Under the imperfect instrument of Trump’s often crude, narcissistic presidency, ordinary people have had a mechanism through which they could express their disdain for the eccentric, divisive, identitarian crusades of the new elites, on everything from transgenderism to the nonsense of ‘white privilege’. The defeat of Trump, the removal of one of the few anti-woke leaders in the West, would green-light the intensification of those crusades. We should expect to see an even keener assault on the apparently outdated family values and community concerns of the ‘deplorable’ sections of society by a newly emboldened elite.

Trump’s victory fundamentally represented a rude intrusion by ordinary people into the democratic life of America. It was an assertion of their democratic, moral concerns against an establishment that wasn’t only not listening to them but which was treating them with open contempt and hostility. The elite Biden wave is about reversing this rude intrusion and returning the people to their apparently natural state: one in which their role is merely to be governed, not to think about government. You might not want Trump to win, and that’s fine. But you should want Biden to lose. A Biden counterrevolution would be a disaster for democracy, solidarity and freedom.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy

=============================

“Capitalism” Is No Longer Attractive To Capitalists

 

Capitalism Is No Longer Attractive To Capitalists  By Charles Hugh Smith, vai OfTwoMinds blog, Zerohedge, 31 October 2020

This “capitalism” is only attractive to parasites, predators, kleptocrats, legalized looters, embezzlers, fraudsters and all those insiders whose palms get greased along the way.

Back of the envelope definition of classical capitalism:

  1. Transparency in markets, including pricing, information on quality and reliability of products, sellers and buyers, and of rules of conduct and rights governing all participants;
  2. Risk is tightly bound to reward, i.e. everyone has skin in the game, those who lose are forced to absorb the entire loss.
  3. Open competition, i.e. no monopolies or cartels limiting supply or setting prices;
  4. Free flow of capital and labor;
  5. Everyone pays the same rates of taxes, duties and fees on every transaction.

Needless to say, what is presented as “capitalism” in America today is not actually capitalism; it is monopoly-state-socialism for the wealthy, a kleptocracy incompetently cloaked by a rigged simulacrum market in which risk and losses are transferred to the debt-serfs and tax donkeys and the “socialism for the rich and powerful” is enforced by a pay-to-play simulacrum democracy and kleptocratic, totalitarian central bank, the Federal Reserve.

In this winner take most, anything goes if you’re rich casino, the weaker players are ruthlessly stripmined and exploited and those enterprises without political protection are cannibalized by rapacious, predatory monopolies and cartels.

Parasitic elites take a skim from every table: student loans over here, state junk fees over there; everyone gets clipped by self-serving insiders and entrenched interests.

Transparency is an illusion. Complexity thickets protect monopolies and cartels, and the fine print… try getting a set price for healthcare services. (You must be joking.) Sign the form for the $30 oil change and come back to an $800 bill for “work you authorized.” (You didn’t read the fine print? Too bad.)

Quality has gone downhill across the board but there’s no recourse or competition. All the items regardless of brand come from the same factory in China. So what if your new oven turns on by itself randomly (true story, happened to me); the once-proud American brand’s warranty is only one year, so tough luck, bucko, the repair bill for the defective $5 sensor will cost you as much as a new range.

In American “capitalism,” the name of the game is scale up with cheap debt supplied by the Federal Reserve, use the “Fed free money” to buy up any potential competitors and then start buying back your own shares, jacking your share price even as sales and profits stagnate. (Charts of Apple below).

Once you’re too big to fail or jail, then you can gamble to your heart’s content because all the winnings will be yours to keep and if you lose big, the Fed or the Treasury will step in and transfer the losses to the debt-serfs and tax donkeys.

In America, as Warren Buffett jacks up the price of Sees candy, etc. to maximize his profits and add more billions to his net worth, and Amazon uses its quasi-monopoly power to relentlessly jack up the price of Prime membership, nobody asks Warren or Jeff “don’t you have enough already?”

The answer is “no”. It’s never enough, because as long as the Fed and federal government enforce, enable or allow your monopoly, quasi-monopoly or cartel to kill transparency and competition, and offer you limitless “Fed free money” while students pay 8% on their loans, then why not add another $10 billion to your personal wealth?

Go ahead and lie, cheat, embezzle, rig markets, commit fraud, collude–everything is allowed if you’re a powerful corporation because all your execs have get out of jail free cards from the Department of Justice. Nobody in Corporate America ever goes to prison no matter how egregious the fraud or theft. And you get to keep all the loot, other than a wrist-slap fine if you’re caught. But that’s just a modest cost of doing business in American “capitalism.”

If this “capitalism” was actually attractive to capitalists, why would everyone pile into the same six Big Tech monopolies? Is that really the only opportunity left to “create shareholder value,” to pour hundreds of billions of dollars in “Fed free money” into a handful of Big Tech monopolies?

Paraphrasing the late Immanuel Wallerstein, “Capitalism” is no longer attractive to capitalists. This “capitalism” is only attractive to parasites, predators, kleptocrats, legalized looters, embezzlers, fraudsters and all those insiders whose palms get greased along the way.

If you think this “capitalism” is sustainable, the future holds a big surprise.

=======================

Previous articles

    • pauling-hansons-first-speech-in-the-senate-14-september-2016
    • cairns-post-editorial-201016  Laws of diminishing returns as the ‘nanny state’ takes over control of our freedom, By Julian Tomlinson, Cairns Post, 20 October 2016

Empires: rises and falls, so now what?

The US was the dominant world power after WWII but has been failing, compounded by lies and desperate plans for hegemony compounded by declining culture and values. Previous empires such as the UK and Roman empires failed in similar manner.

Scroll down to read the most recent articles.  Links to previous articles  follow.

America’s Social Credit System Is Worse Than China’s

 

America’s Social Credit System Is Worse Than China’s  By Gregory Hood, The UNZ Review, 17 November 2020

China is notorious for a “Social Credit System” that controls the lives of citizens, rewarding what the authorities want and punishing what they don’t. The United States has a social credit system, too, even if we don’t call it that. And ours is worse.

The Chinese system tries to build social trust. Ours destroys trust. The Chinese system defends the interests of the Han, the ethnic group that built and sustains Chinese civilization. Our system hurts whites. The Chinese system encourages charity, good citizenship, and patriotism. Ours incites hatred and spreads bitterness and division.

The Chinese government’s goals are clear: According to a 2014 planning document, the state wants to build a “social credit environment of honesty, self-discipline, trustworthiness, and mutual trust.” Despite the reputation of the Chinese Communist Party, there is no central system of control, but that is only because the government lacks the capacity. According to the 2014 plan, by this year, China should have “basically” completed “a credit investigation system covering the entire society with credit information and resource sharing.”

Vox reports China has a grading system for people from A to D. Ds are “untrustworthy.” “Citizens can earn points for good deeds like volunteering, donating blood, or attracting investments to the city,” said the MIT Technology Review in 2019. “They can lose them for offenses like breaking traffic rules, evading taxes, or neglecting to care for their elderly parents.” Taking seats on public transportation reserved for old people or doing anything the South China Morning Post called “uncivilized behavior” can also cost points.

You can lose points for playing video games too oftenbuying too much alcoholarguing at check-in countersboarding a train without a ticketgetting into a fightposting stickers hostile to the governmentor letting chickens out of their coop. You can lose your dog if you walk it too often without a leash or if it bothers people. NPR reports that “if you spread rumors online” you could lose points, and even “spending frivolously” can cost points. The system punishes some things just as we do in the United States. If you drive drunk in China, you lose points. If you drive drunk in America, you can lose your license.

How does the system find out all this about you? The Chinese track people through a combination of cameras, facial recognition software, spies, and data from tech and social media companies. There are an estimated 626 million security cameras in China, capturing all sorts of behavior. The Straits Times reported that cameras caught a citizen jaywalking, recognized her face, and immediately put her photo up on a video screen above the street, along with her name and past infractions. The Chinese use drones disguised as birds.

There are groups of paid government informers. In one case, a group of senior citizens called the Chaoyang Masses supposedly tracked behavior, though some people thought the group was questionable. This could be a feature of the system; you don’t know who is watching. The New York Times reported in 2019 that the government uses students to track professors.

Companies such as Alibaba and Tencent track your online activity, and you can lose points if you publish political opinions without permission or talk about certain issues such as Tiananmen Square. You also lose points if your friends commit infractions; collective punishment helps isolate dissidents and discourage others. However, you can gain points if you parrot the government line. Some of this is self-reported and checked against data held by the government, tech companies, and surveillance records. There is an app called Sesame Credit that lets you track people’s scores. It is voluntary for now but will eventually be mandatory.

 

“Trust-breakers” go on an online “blacklist” that anyone can search. “Trust-keepers” go on an equivalent “redlist.” Everyone’s behavior is public, and the authorities encourage citizens to compete with each other to get good scores.

Good citizens can get discounts on energy bills, better returns on bank deposits, and can rent bikes or hotel rooms without paying deposits. Local officials praise them publicly. In Suzhou, “trust-keepers” get cut-rate public transportation.

Depending on the locale, if your credit score reaches 600, you can take out an instant loan of about $800 without collateral when shopping online. At a score of 650, you can rent a car without a deposit. At 700, you get priority for a Singapore travel permit, and at 750, you are on the fast track for a coveted Schengen visa for 28 European countries.

Punishments include banning you or your children from top schools, barring you from top jobs and the best hotels, and preventing you from buying high-speed train or air tickets.

Businesses also get grades on, for example, whether their advertising is deceptive. If their grades are too low, they can’t issue bonds or bid in land auctions.

There’s a financial aspect to the system. It costs points if a person or business fails to repay a loan. We have credit scores, too. The difference is that the Chinese government can — and does — deduct points for political reasons. It could cut a business or family out of normal activity for saying the wrong things. Your social credit “grade” could wreck your life.

If the system is fully imposed, it would be terrifying to be a D. China does not yet have a centralized, all-encompassing system. Different government agencies, localities, regions, and private companies share information and have different programs, rewards, and penalties. Two years ago, Foreign Policy explained that “unless people are sole proprietors or company representatives, have taken a loan or credit card, violated the law, or defaulted on a court judgment, they’re unlikely to be in the social credit database.”

China wants to get all 1.4 billion people into the system. Since China routed the Hong Kong autonomy movement, the system will surely spread there too. “All regions and departments should have ideological unity,” says the plan.

China is working hard in two areas that will help it control its people. The first is artificial intelligence to manage vast amounts of data. The United States and China are competing in AI systems, and that battle could help determine who rules this century. Collecting enormous amounts of data on citizens will mean finely detailed control.

The second area is digital currency. China is already experimenting with a digital yuan. Most people in China already use mobile apps for transactions, not cash. A full record of transactions, combined with AI, means tremendous government power to track individual behavior and modify social credit scores.

A “cashless,” total-social-credit China could be a prison. It would mean no unauthorized buying or selling, no political opposition (“ideological unity”), and little privacy. However, citizens would be forced to fulfill basic duties such as taking care of families and paying bills. They would be rewarded for helping their communities. The Chinese Communist Party would succeed in turning the people it rules into typical petit bourgeois with conservative norms.

The Chinese government wants to “broadly shape a strong atmosphere in the entire society that keeping trust is glorious and breaking trust is disgraceful . . . .” In other words, China wants a high-trust society.

Diversity destroys trust, as white advocates often point out. China is working to overcome this problem by replacing Tibetans and Uighurs with Han Chinese. The government is also Sinicizing these areas, especially by suppressing Islam. A faithful Muslim should rebel against these policies, but a Han Chinese sees this as protecting national interests.

Xi Jinping, President of China, can be seen on a video wall in the western Chinese city of Kashgar. Strict security measures are in place in the oasis city, making reporting difficult for journalists and affecting the lives of Uighur minorities. (Credit Image: © Simina Mistrenau / DPA via ZUMA Press)

We have the equivalent of a social credit system in the United States. It just has different incentives. You can lose your job for a politically incorrect remark caught on camera. Political dissidents find they can no longer use PayPal or even banks. Twitter bans people with whom it disagrees, while users with verified accounts can make threatening or violent statements.

“Spreading rumors” or “conspiracy theories” is cause for social media to boot you. Some journalists spend time hunting down people who spread “conspiracy theories.” If journalists or trolls decide that your small business or video channel needs to be deplatformed, they can complain to tech companies, and once you are off, there is no appeal. For many people, that means loss of livelihood.

Power-hungry people invent new forms of social credit all the time. Democrats have started a Trump Accountability Project so that Trump supporters can “never serve in office, join a corporate board, find a faculty position or be accepted into ‘polite’ society.” With a remarkable new website called Donor.Watch, you can find out exactly how much your neighbors (or anyone in the country) gave to any of the 2020 candidates. The tools are there for Democrats to set up shaming mobs to harass or intimidate Trump supporters.

Social media, which let ordinary people express themselves and were originally to be bastions of free speech, have taken it upon themselves to determine what is official information. Even now, Twitter is censoring President Trump, and Facebook is removing Trump supporters and their groups.

You can’t cast an informed vote or express yourself if you can’t learn or speak the truth. In his book Deleted, Allum Bokhari showed Google’s power to direct information, sway votes, and bury stories it doesn’t want covered. While the Democrats often say tech companies don’t censor enough, they at least recognize their power. A House Judiciary Committee report recently found that Amazon, Alphabet (Google/YouTube), Apple, and Facebook use monopoly power to suppress competition. President Trump’s Department of Justice recently sued Google, calling it the “gatekeeper of the Internet.”

Conservatives banned from the big platforms can go elsewhere, but what happens when Parler and Gab lose their payment processors or servers or even their bank accounts? Will we have to build our own banks and internet?

Our system is not exclusively punitive. The American system encourages banks to lend to non-whites with doubtful credit. There is a broad set of incentives to promote minority — especially black — bank ownership, even as black banks keep going under because they keep lending money to dubious black borrowers.

Social media openly promote Black Lives Matter, and every minority cause, holiday, and celebration. Book sellers direct you to endless titles on anti-racism and white privilege.

Unlike the Chinese version, American social credit is not state run and is even less centralized than China’s. However, it’s not true that the state has no involvement. Acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan admittedin 2019 that although the government cannot act as a censor, it expects to work with tech companies and “watchdog groups” to force ideas it doesn’t like off the internet.

The Republicans have done hardly anything about this. An American president is relatively weak, and unlike Xi Jinping, can’t issue orders through the bureaucracy and expect obedience. Perhaps President Trump lacks the will. Kamala Harris, probably the next vice president, appears to have plenty of it. She wants to give the FBI millions of dollars to “more vigilantly monitor white nationalist websites” and “put pressure on online platforms to take down content that violates their terms and conditions.”

Under a Biden/Harris White House, the partnership between state and media would therefore grow stronger. Like Chinese officials, many Democrats and journalists take it for granted that not only traditional media should promote certain stories and suppress others, but “open” social media should do the same. The American system increasingly resembles the Chinese, with ideology imposed from the top.

We do not have single-party rule in the United States, but we do when it comes to white interests. Republicans and Democrats unanimously blamed “White nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and other hate groups” for violence at the Unite the Right rally in 2017 — as if antifa were not even there — even though local officials deliberately forced demonstrators and antifa together so that violence would be an excuse to shut down a legal rally. There may be two parties, but both agree that whites must not promote their collective interests in the streets or online.

Just as the Chinese system punishes people for associating with low-scoring trust-breakers, the media and “watchdog” groups love to publicize “links.” The Washington Post recently revealed in an indignant article that a Trump Interior Department official had linked to an article at AmRen.com. American dissidents routinely use pen names, and “respectable” people keep their relations with them secret.

In some respects, an openly authoritarian government is better than our system. It’s clear who is in charge. Citizens know who rules them. It’s easier to remove a tyrant because you can always march on the palace or the party HQ. If you are ruled by a dictator, king, or party, you also know what the rules are; if you follow them, you can avoid trouble.

 

Our system is much more diffuse and therefore much harder to fight or even understand. Private companies, on a whim, can shut down your social media account, refuse to sell your books, make it impossible for your business to take credit cards, and close your bank account. You have no recourse, not even to the courts. Each company has its own inconsistent, arbitrary, ever-changing rules. Now, they all say, in effect, “We’ll kick you out if we don’t like you.” And that’s what they do.

If there were legal censorship, there would be laws that limited free speech. They might be vague and inconsistently enforced, but there would be rules. If the court system had any integrity, there could be litigation and legal appeals. In our system, every person you know is a potential commissar. If you become the subject of a “viral” story, literally millions of people can turn against you. This is “public shaming” worse than anything the Chinese face.

Their system is authoritarian, but it has this crucial difference from ours: It pushes people to behave correctly. In our Anglo-American tradition, personal virtue is the guarantor of our liberties, so we don’t need overarching government. However, we are no longer virtuous, at least not in the way the Founders understood virtue. Instead, anti-racism has become America’s moral code, and blacks are semi-sacred. Any social interaction with a non-white can be a life-changing disaster if it is caught on camera. The rules for what is politically correct change so quickly no one can be sure what to say to avoid trouble. We’re in an absurd system in which groups that enjoy government mandated “affirmative action” lecture us about our privilege. Although “racism” is the main sin our social credit system punishes there are others: “homophobia,” “Islamophobia,” “misogyny,” “xenophobia,” with more new ones invented all the time.

While the Chinese social credit system builds a better — if regimented — society, ours makes it worse. The media feed non-whites moral arguments to use against whites, whether they are about “racist” police, “systemic racism,” or “far-right extremists.” Anyone non-white, from educated elites to illiterate thugs, can feel justified in attacking middle-class whites because the only explanation for inequality is white racism.

Thus, our system doesn’t build “mutual trust” but suspicion and even hatred. Instead of building national unity, the American system undermines the foundation of patriotism by telling us our history and heroes were racist and evil. The Chinese system punishes destructive behavior and rewards charity. The American system winks at destructive behavior such as BLM rioting, and rewards “virtue signaling,” not real virtue.

White-owned business can be deplatfromed online and some can be ransacked by radicals, with no interference from the police. The right even to self-defense is under attack (ask Kyle Rittenhouse or Mark and Patricia McCloskey). In some areas, people cannot gather to demonstrate or even to worship, while antifa and BLM protesters can do almost anything with impunity.

Can we honestly say we have more freedom than the Chinese? Can we say that our government pursues our interests or protects our rights? Can we trust technology companies and major media? Are our elites pushing us towards greatness or towards dispossession and pariah status?

Still, we do have advantages. The great strength of the American Social Credit System is that it is ad hoc and unofficial. It’s hard to know exactly what or whom to attack but that’s also its weakness. There are “gaps” in the system we can exploit. At the same time, our rulers’ lust for power is clearer than ever. Donald Trump, however half-hearted and bumbling, forced our opponents to reveal their snarling hatreds and their breathtaking arrogance in believing they have the right to control what we read, hear, watch, and think.

 

We still have rights. American Renaissance sued the state of Tennessee, and won the right to use public facilities without paying for security. Others are suing tech companies. We are creating new ways of donating and accepting money, spreading our message, and building new platforms. These aren’t temporary workarounds, but steps towards community- and even nation-building. They are forcing us to do the things we should have been doing anyway.

What should a healthy society want? Perhaps every advanced society will have a formal or informal Social Credit System. Elites always try to control information, capital, and behavior. When we take control of our own destiny, we will promote strength, beauty, and virtue. We are a freedom-loving people, so I believe that if we slough off this current system, we can achieve these goals without repression.

Who rules the United States? I’d argue it’s media and Big Tech. They decide who can speak in the public square, raise money, do business online, or enjoy the full protection of law. They encourage victimhood instead of heroism, and distrust instead of unity. China’s system promotes positive values, exalts its people, and directs them towards positive ends.

It’s hard not to feel envious. The greatest threat to white Americans certainly isn’t Beijing. It’s those who presume to rule us, holding us captive, trapping us behind a blue screen.

====================

Trump and the real resistance

Trump and the real resistance  By Brendan O’Neill, Editor, Spiked Online, 8 November 2020

The 70 million people who voted for Trump are revolting against the new elites. We should listen.

So, Joe Biden has won the highest popular vote in the history of the US. At the time of writing, more than 73 million people have voted for him. He has beaten the record set by Barack Obama who was swept to power on that famous wave of ‘HOPE’ and 69.5 million votes in 2008. But here’s the thing: so has Donald Trump. Trump might trail Biden in the popular vote of 2020, but he, too, has beaten Obama’s 2008 record. Trump, at the time of writing, has 69.7 million votes. So he has won the second-highest popular vote in the history of the American republic. That is remarkable. Far more remarkable than Biden’s very impressive count.

Why? For one simple reason. Trump is the man we’re all meant to hate. He has been raged against ceaselessly by the cultural elites for the past four years. Hardly any of the American media backed him in 2020. Globalist institutions loathe him. Academia, the media elites, the social-media oligarchies, the celebrity set and other hugely influential sectors have branded him a 21st-century Hitler and insisted that only a “white supremacist” could countenance voting for him. He’s the butt of every sniffy East Coast joke and the target of every fiery street protest. He’s the worst thing to happen to Western politics in decades, we’re told, by clever people, constantly.

And yet around 70 million Americans voted for him. The second-highest electoral bloc in the history of the US put their cross next to the name of a man who over the past four years has been turned by the political clerisy into the embodiment of evil.

That is what makes the vote for Trump so striking, and so important. Because what it speaks to is the existence of vast numbers of people who are outside of the purview of the cultural elites. People who have developed some kind of immunity to the cultural supremacy of the “woke” worldview so intensely mainstreamed by the political and media sets in recent years. People who are more than content to defy the diktats of the supposedly right-thinking elites and cast their ballots in a way that they think best tallies with their political, social and class interests. People who, no doubt to varying degrees, are at least sceptical towards the narratives of identitarianism, racial doom-mongering, climate-change hysteria and all the pronouns nonsense that have become dominant among political and cultural influencers, and which are essentially the new ideology of the ruling class.

READ MORE:‘Time to unite’: Biden to address nation|What’s next for Donald Trump?|Biden’s cabinet to transform US politics|Face it, Trump did get many things right

Hillary Clinton infamously referred to many Trump supporters as “the deplorables”. But a far better word for them would be “the unconquerables”. These are minds and hearts uncolonised by the new orthodoxies. Seventy million people in a peaceful state of revolt against the new establishment and its eccentric, authoritarian ideologies. This is the most important story of the

The fury of the elites in the wake of the US election is palpable, and at times visceral. Even though their man has won, they are incandescent. Already there is rage against the innate racism and “white supremacy” of the throng. Already there is neo-racist disgust with the Latinos and black people who, in larger numbers than 2016, voted for Trump. “We are surrounded by racists”, said New York Times columnist Charles M Blow, capturing the sense of siege felt by the woke clerisy. This rage of the elites against the masses, despite the victory of the elites’ preferred candidate, suggests they instinctively recognise their failure to bring significant sections of the masses to heel. They splutter out terms like “racist” and “white supremacist” as reprimands against the millions who refuse to take the knee to their politics of fear, politics of identity, and politics of cancellation and control.

The elites, despite getting their way with a Biden presidency, have been thrown by this election. First, because they called it so wrongly. Their predictions of a “blue wave” did not materialise. Their polls and punditry insisting that Trumpism would be resoundingly defeated turned out to be catastrophically incorrect. The stories of a 10-point swing to Biden evaporated upon contact with reality. So far, Trump has increased his vote by seven million.

The elite’s wrongness about this election is itself a crushing confirmation of their failure to ideologically domesticate large numbers of Americans. Many Americans have clearly chosen not to communicate their beliefs to pollsters, a key part of the new political clerisy, because they are aware that the political elites hold them in contempt. As one election analyst said, because of the “degree of hate” directed to Trump supporters “by nearly all the media”, we have a situation where “people didn’t necessarily want to admit to pollsters who they were supporting”. Not only do many Americans refuse to embrace the new orthodoxies of the uniformly anti-Trump cultural elites, but they also refuse to engage honestly with the cultural elites. They know it’s a waste of time. That is the size of the moral and political chasm that now exists between the guardians of correct-thought and millions of ordinary people.

The second reason this election has rattled the seeming victors — the pro-Biden establishment — is because of who voted for Trump. Exit polls suggest there were significant shifts of black and Latino voters to Trump. It is reported that 18 per cent of black men voted for Trump, up from the five per cent who voted for John McCain in 2008 and the 11 per cent who voted for Mitt Romney in 2012. A shift of this kind towards a politician relentlessly described as a “white supremacist” is very significant. According to the AP VoteCast, 35 per cent of Latinos seem to have voted for Trump. And a whopping 59 per cent of Native Hawaiians and 52 per cent of Native Americans and Alaska Natives opted for Trump. Seemingly these First Nation peoples didn’t get the NYT, SNL, DNC message that Trump is a racist who hates all non-white people.

As we should expect from the neo-racialists of the identitarian elites, there is already fierce denunciation of minority groups who voted for Trump. They have sold out to “white supremacy”, woke academics and columnists claim. Blow writes in the NYT that the Latino and black shift towards Trump is proof of the “power of the white patriarchy” and the influence it has even over oppressed racial groups: “Some people who have been historically oppressed will stand with their oppressors.” That’s a lot of words to say “Uncle Tom”. The anger with Latinos and blacks who voted for Trump is motivated by a view of these people as racial deviants, as traitors to their race. In the rigid worldview of the identitarian elites, people are not individuals or members of an economic class — they are mere manifestations of race and ethnicity and they must conform to that role. That many voters have clearly bristled at such racial fatalism is a very positive development. Identity politics was dealt a blow in this election, and the elites know it.

More striking still is the educational divide in terms of who voted for Biden and Trump. A majority of people whose educational level is high school or less voted for Trump, while a majority of college graduates voted for Biden. Among white voters, the educational divide is even more stark. Majorities of white men voted for Trump, but among white men who didn’t go to college 64 per cent voted for Trump, while among white men who did go to college it was only 52 per cent. Meanwhile, 60 per cent of white women who didn’t go to college voted for Trump, whereas 59 per cent of white women who did go to college voted for Biden.

The educational divide is telling. Naturally, some observers claim it is proof that clever people primarily vote for Biden while dumb people prefer Trump. In truth, this split is primarily reflective of the key role universities now play as communicators of the new orthodoxies. In recent years, universities in the Anglosphere have gone from being citadels of intellectual consideration and experimentation to being factories of woke indoctrination. From critical race theory to genderfluidity, from the view of American history as one crime after another to the myopic policing of speech — including conversational speech in the form of “microaggressions” — universities have become important transmitters of the ideologies of the new elites. As a consequence, one of the great ironies of our time is that it is those who have not attended a university who seem better able to think independently and to resist the coercions of elite-decreed correct-thought.

US President Donald Trump golfs at Trump National Golf Club, on November 7 in Sterling, Virginia. Picture: Getty

The ideas that hold on a university campus — that men can become women, that offensive people must be “cancelled”, that complimenting a woman on her hair is a racial microaggression, that describing America as a “melting pot” is a denial of people’s “racial essence”, as UCLA has claimed — hold no sway whatsoever in the factories, delivery centres, mess rooms or bars of vast swathes of America. That university-educated and non-university-educated people now think so differently is testament, not to uneducated people’s stupidity, but to the transformation of universities into machines for socialising young adults into the ways and creeds of the removed new elites.

Indeed, the split of Biden and Trump voters on issues is striking, too. Of the voters who think the economy and jobs is the most important issue, the vast majority are Trump supporters: 81 per cent compared with just 16 per cent of Biden supporters. Of the voters who think racism is the most important issue, 78 per cent were Biden supporters and just 19 per cent were Trump supporters. And of the voters who think climate change is the most important issue, 86 per cent were Biden supporters and just 11 per cent were Trump supporters. On Covid, 83 per cent of Biden supporters said it is “not under control at all”, while just 15 per cent of Trump voters said the same thing.

This is incredibly revealing. On issues that are central to the clerisy’s worldview — the idea that racism in America is as bad as ever, that the climate is heating uncontrollably, that COVID poses an existential challenge to the future of the nation — Trump voters deviate consistently from the elite narrative. That isn’t to say that they don’t think climate change or racism are problems we must address — I’m sure majorities of them do. But they clearly reject the fatalism and dominance of these issues in the body politic. They clearly baulk at the ceaseless discussions of America’s inescapable racism and the idea that if Americans do not radically alter their lifestyles then they will fry in the heat-death of climate catastrophe. They push back, in their thoughts and their votes, against the identitarianism and apocalypticism of the new elites. And they do so even on issues for which you can be cancelled for disagreeing. Try going on to a campus and saying that racism and climate change are not major issues for the US. You would be finished. But not in other parts of America. There, free discussion, or at least free thought, appears still to reign.

One study, published in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology after the 2016 election, described the widespread support for Trump among working-class or less-educated communities in particular as a form of “cultural deviance”. The study used over-psychologised language to describe people’s voting behaviour, but it hit on an important point: the evidence suggests that Trump-voting for many people was a form of “cultural deviance… [from] the salience of restrictive communication norms”. In short, the Trump phenomenon represents a revolt against the cultural supremacy of political correctness and its cancellation of any views or beliefs that are judged to be problematic. Trump became a vehicle for those who don’t agree that America is broken or racist, or that climate change will kill us all, or that identitarian correctness is more important than the economy and jobs, or that Trump is Hitler — things it is increasingly difficult to say in a polite society so feverishly policed by the new elites.

The real resistance

Perhaps the most important act of “cultural deviance” carried out by the millions who chose Trump over Biden is their attempt to re-elevate class over identity. This is why the shift of working-class blacks and Latinos towards Trump is so important. It is also why Trump voters’ overwhelming belief that the economy and jobs is the most important issue in the US right now — in contrast with very small numbers of Biden voters who think the same thing — is so relevant. What we have witnessed in the US is a reassertion of the importance of class over identity, of the shared social and economic interests of a significant section of society over the narrow cultural obsessions of the new elites and their supporters in the new knowledge industries. The emerging populist coalition of working-class blacks, Latinos and non-university whites is a quiet revolt against the stranglehold that the upper middle-class elites have over the political narrative, and against the elites’ self-conscious promotion of the neoliberal myopia of identity and their diminution of the importance of class.

This is another reason why the elites are so furious in the wake of their own election victory. It’s the key reason, in fact. Because they instinctively recognise that the economic concerns, and, more importantly, the economic consciousness, of substantial sections of society pose a threat to their ideological dominance. Witness the sneer, the naked contempt, with which the phrase “economic populism” has been uttered by Biden-backing observers in recent days. ‘Economic populism’ is a cover for racism, our moral superiors insist. They dread nothing more than the re-emergence of a more class-based politics because they know it would run entirely counter, politically, morally and economically, to the divide-and-rule identitarianism they have cultivated in recent decades.

Corporations, academia, the education system, the Democratic establishment, the media elites and the social-media oligarchies are heavily invested in the cult of identity because it is a means through which they can renew their economic dominance over society and exercise moral authority over the masses. Identitarianism has provided spiritual renewal for the capitalist elites, new means of rebuking and censuring the workforce in corporations, and a sense of purpose for a political class utterly adrift from the working masses it might once have sought to appeal to. And they are not about to let some uppity blacks and Latinos and uneducated whites disrupt this new ruling-class ideology with their vulgar concerns about the economy and jobs.

Trump has lost. But so has the anti-Trump establishment. In some ways, the establishment’s loss is far more significant. These elites see in the 70 million people who disobediently, flagrantly voted for “evil”, and who question the doom and divisiveness and censure of the new elites, a genuine mass threat to their right to rule and their self-serving ideologies. And they are right to. For these unconquerables, these teeming millions who have not been captured by the new orthodoxies, are proof that populism will survive Trump’s fall and that the self-protecting narratives of the new elites are not accepted by huge numbers of ordinary people.

This is the real resistance. Not the upper-middle-class TikTok revolutionaries and Antifa fantasists whose every view — on trans issues, Black Lives Matter, the wickedness of Trump — corresponds precisely with the outlook of Google and Nike and the New York Times. No, the resistance is these working people. These defiant Hispanics. Those black men who did what black men are not supposed to do. Those non-college whites who think college ideologies are crazy. These people are the ones who have the balls and the independence of mind to force a serious rethink and realignment of the political sphere in the 21st-century West. More power to them.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked www.spiked-online.com

========================

 Eyewitness To The Trial and Agony of Julian Assange  By John Pilger, JohnPilger.com, 4 October, 2020

John Pilger has watched Julian Assange’s extradition trial from the public gallery at London’s Old Bailey. He spoke with Timothy Erik Ström of Arena magazine, Australia:

Q: Having watched Julian Assange’s trial first-hand, can you describe the prevailing atmosphere in the court?

The prevailing atmosphere has been shocking. I say that without hesitation; I have sat in many courts and seldom known such a corruption of due process; this is due revenge. Putting aside the ritual associated with ‘British justice’, at times it has been evocative of a Stalinist show trial. One difference is that in the show trials, the defendant stood in the court proper. In the Assange trial, the defendant was caged behind thick glass, and had to crawl on his knees to a slit in the glass, overseen by his guard, to make contact with his lawyers. His message, whispered barely audibly through face masks, WAS then passed by post-it the length of the court to where his barristers were arguing the case against his extradition to an American hellhole.

Consider this daily routine of Julian Assange, an Australian on trial for truth-telling journalism. He was woken at five o’clock in his cell at Belmarsh prison in the bleak southern sprawl of London. The first time I saw Julian in Belmarsh, having passed through half an hour of ‘security’ checks, including a dog’s snout in my rear, I found a painfully thin figure sitting alone wearing a yellow armband. He had lost more than 10 kilos in a matter of months; his arms had no muscle. His first words were: ‘I think I am losing my mind’.

I tried to assure him he wasn’t. His resilience and courage are formidable, but there is a limit. That was more than a year ago. In the past three weeks, in the pre-dawn, he was strip-searched, shackled, and prepared for transport to the Central Criminal Court, the Old Bailey, in a truck that his partner, Stella Moris, described as an upended coffin. It had one small window; he had to stand precariously to look out. The truck and its guards were operated by Serco, one of many politically connected companies that run much of Boris Johnson’s Britain.

The journey to the Old Bailey took at least an hour and a half. That’s a minimum of three hours being jolted through snail-like traffic every day. He was led into his narrow cage at the back of the court, then look up, blinking, trying to make out faces in the public gallery through the reflection of the glass. He saw the courtly figure of his dad, John Shipton, and me, and our fists went up. Through the glass, he reached out to touch fingers with Stella, who is a lawyer and seated in the body of the court.

We were here for the ultimate of what the philosopher Guy Debord called The Society of the Spectacle: a man fighting for his life. Yet his crime is to have performed an epic public service: revealing that which we have a right to know: the lies of our governments and the crimes they commit in our name. His creation of WikiLeaks and its failsafe protection of sources revolutionised journalism, restoring it to the vision of its idealists. Edmund Burke’s notion of free journalism as a fourth estate is now a fifth estate that shines a light on those who diminish the very meaning of democracy with their criminal secrecy. That’s why his punishment is so extreme.

The sheer bias in the courts I have sat in this year and last year, with Julian in the dock, blight any notion of British justice. When thuggish police dragged him from his asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy – look closely at the photo and you’ll see he is clutching a Gore Vidal book; Assange has a political humour similar to Vidal’s – a judge gave him an outrageous 50-week sentence in a maximum-security prison for mere bail infringement.

For months, he was denied exercise and held in solitary confinement disguised as ‘heath care’. He once told me he strode the length of his cell, back and forth, back and forth, for his own half-marathon. In the next cell, the occupant screamed through the night. At first he was denied his reading glasses, left behind in the embassy brutality. He was denied the legal documents with which to prepare his case, and access to the prison library and the use of a basic laptop. Books sent to him by a friend, the journalist Charles Glass, himself a survivor of hostage-taking in Beirut, were returned. He could not call his American lawyers. He has been constantly medicated by the prison authorities. When I asked him what they were giving him, he couldn’t say. The governor of Belmarsh has been awarded the Order of the British Empire.

At the Old Bailey, one of the expert medical witnesses, Dr Kate Humphrey, a clinical neuropsychologist at Imperial College, London, described the damage: Julian’s intellect had gone from ‘in the superior, or more likely very superior range’ to ‘significantly below’ this optimal level, to the point where he was struggling to absorb information and ‘perform in the low average range’.

This is what the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, Professor Nils Melzer, calls ‘psychological torture’, the result of a gang-like ‘mobbing’ by governments and their media shills. Some of the expert medical evidence is so shocking I have no intention of repeating it here. Suffice to say that Assange is diagnosed with autism and Asperger’s syndrome and, according to Professor Michael Kopelman, one of the world’s leading neuropsychiatrists, he suffers from ‘suicidal preoccupations’ and is likely to find a way to take his life if he is extradited to America.

James Lewis QC, America’s British prosecutor, spent the best part of his cross-examination of Professor Kopelman dismissing mental illness and its dangers as ‘malingering’. I have never heard in a modern setting such a primitive view of human frailty and vulnerability.

My own view is that if Assange is freed, he is likely to recover a substantial part of his life. He has a loving partner, devoted friends and allies and the innate strength of a principled political prisoner. He also has a wicked sense of humour.

But that is a long way off. The moments of collusion between the judge – a Gothic-looking magistrate called Vanessa Baraitser, about whom little is known – and the prosecution acting for the Trump regime have been brazen. Until the last few days, defence arguments have been routinely dismissed. The lead prosecutor, James Lewis QC, ex SAS and currently Chief Justice of the Falklands, by and large gets what he wants, notably up to four hours to denigrate expert witnesses, while the defence’s examination is guillotined at half an hour. I have no doubt, had there been a jury, his freedom would be assured.

The dissident artist Ai Weiwei came to join us one morning in the public gallery. He noted that in China the judge’s decision would already have been made. This caused some dark ironic amusement. My companion in the gallery, the astute diarist and former British ambassador Craig Murray wrote:

I fear that all over London a very hard rain is now falling on those who for a lifetime have worked within institutions of liberal democracy that at least broadly and usually used to operate within the governance of their own professed principles. It has been clear to me from Day 1 that I am watching a charade unfold. It is not in the least a shock to me that Baraitser does not think anything beyond the written opening arguments has any effect. I have again and again reported to you that, where rulings have to be made, she has brought them into court pre-written, before hearing the arguments before her.

I strongly expect the final decision was made in this case even before opening arguments were received.

The plan of the US Government throughout has been to limit the information available to the public and limit the effective access to a wider public of what information is available. Thus we have seen the extreme restrictions on both physical and video access. A complicit mainstream media has ensured those of us who know what is happening are very few in the wider population.

There are few records of the proceedings. They are: Craig Murray’s personal blog, Joe Lauria’s live reporting on Consortium News and the World Socialist Website. American journalist Kevin Gosztola’s blog, Shadowproof, funded mostly by himself, has reported more of the trial than the major US press and TV, including CNN, combined.

In Australia, Assange’s homeland, the ‘coverage’ follows a familiar formula set overseas. The London correspondent of the Sydney Morning Herald, Latika Bourke, wrote this recently:

The court heard Assange became depressed during the seven years he spent in the Ecuadorian embassy where he sought political asylum to escape extradition to Sweden to answer rape and sexual assault charges.

There were no ‘rape and sexual assault charges’ in Sweden. Bourke’s lazy falsehood is not uncommon. If the Assange trial is the political trial of the century, as I believe it is, its outcome will not only seal the fate of a journalist for doing his job but intimidate the very principles of free journalism and free speech. The absence of serious mainstream reporting of the proceedings is, at the very least, self-destructive. Journalists should ask: who is next?

How shaming it all is. A decade ago, the Guardian exploited Assange’s work, claimed its profit and prizes as well as a lucrative Hollywood deal, then turned on him with venom. Throughout the Old Bailey trial, two names have been cited by the prosecution, the Guardian’s David Leigh, now retired as ‘investigations editor’ and Luke Harding, the Russiaphobe and author of a fictional Guardian ‘scoop’ that claimed Trump adviser Paul Manafort and a group of Russians visited Assange in the Ecuadorean embassy. This never happened, and the Guardian has yet to apologise. The Harding and Leigh book on Assange – written behind their subject’s back – disclosed a secret password to a WikiLeaks file that Assange had entrusted to Leigh during the Guardian’s ‘partnership’. Why the defence has not called this pair is difficult to understand.

Assange is quoted in their book declaring during a dinner at a London restaurant that he didn’t care if informants named in the leaks were harmed. Neither Harding nor Leigh was at the dinner. John Goetz, an investigations reporter with Der Spiegel, was at the dinner and testified that Assange said nothing of the kind. Incredibly, Judge Baraitser stopped Goetz actually saying this in court.

However, the defence has succeeded in demonstrating the extent to which Assange sought to protect and redact names in the files released by WikiLeaks and that no credible evidence existed of individuals harmed by the leaks. The great whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg said that Assange had personally redacted 15,000 files. The renowned New Zealand investigative journalist Nicky Hager, who worked with Assange on the Afghanistan and Iraq war leaks, described how Assange took ‘extraordinary precautions in redacting names of informants’.

Q: What are the implications of this trial’s verdict for journalism more broadly – is it an omen of things to come?

The ‘Assange effect’ is already being felt across the world. If they displease the regime in Washington, investigative journalists are liable to prosecution under the 1917 US Espionage Act; the precedent is stark. It doesn’t matter where you are. For Washington, other people’s nationality and sovereignty rarely mattered; now it does not exist. Britain has effectively surrendered its jurisdiction to Trump’s corrupt Department of Justice. In Australia, a National Security Information Act promises Kafkaesque trials for transgressors. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has been raided by police and journalists’ computers taken away. The government has given unprecedented powers to intelligence officials, making journalistic whistle-blowing almost impossible. Prime Minister Scott Morrison says Assange ‘must face the music’. The perfidious cruelty of his statement is reinforced by its banality.

‘Evil’, wrote Hannah Arendt, ‘comes from a failure to think. It defies thought for as soon as thought tries to engage itself with evil and examine the premises and principles from which it originates, it is frustrated because it finds nothing there. That is the banality of evil’.

Q: Having followed the story of WikiLeaks closely for a decade, how has this eyewitness experience shifted your understanding of what’s at stake with Assange’s trial?

I have long been a critic of journalism as an echo of unaccountable power and a champion of those who are beacons. So, for me, the arrival of WikiLeaks was exciting; I admired the way Assange regarded the public with respect, that he was prepared to share his work with the ‘mainstream’ but not join their collusive club. This, and naked jealousy, made him enemies among the overpaid and under-talented, insecure in their pretensions of independence and impartiality.

I admired the moral dimension to WikiLeaks. Assange was rarely asked about this, yet much of his remarkable energy comes from a powerful moral sense that governments and other vested interests should not operate behind walls of secrecy. He is a democrat. He explained this in one of our first interviews at my home in 2010.

What is at stake for the rest of us has long been at stake: freedom to call authority to account, freedom to challenge, to call out hypocrisy, to dissent. The difference today is that the world’s imperial power, the United States, has never been as unsure of its metastatic authority as it is today. Like a flailing rogue, it is spinning us towards a world war if we allow it. Little of this menace is reflected in the media.

WikiLeaks, on the other hand, has allowed us to glimpse a rampant imperial march through whole societies – think of the carnage in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, to name a few, the dispossession of 37 million people and the deaths of 12 million men, women and children in the ‘war on terror’ – most of it behind a façade of deception.

Julian Assange is a threat to these recurring horrors – that’s why he is being persecuted, why a court of law has become an instrument of oppression, why he ought to be our collective conscience: why we all should be the threat.

The judge’s decision will be known on the 4th of January.

===============================

The Saker’s View of the US Election

The Saker’s View of the US Election  From The Saker, via PaulCraigRoberts.org, 15 September 2020

In early July I wrote a piece entitled “Does the next Presidential election even matter?” in which I made the case that voting in the next election to choose who will be the next puppet in the White House will be tantamount to voting for a new captain while the Titanic is sinking. I gave three specific reasons why I thought that the next election would be pretty much irrelevant:

1The US system is rigged to give all the power to minorities and to completely ignore the will of the people

2The choice between the Demolicans and the Republicrats is not a choice at all

3The systemic crisis of the USA is too deep to be affected by who is in power in the White House

I have now reconsidered my position and I now see that I was wrong because I missed something important:

A lot has happened in the past couple of months and I now have come to conclude that while choosing a captain won’t make any difference to a sinking Titanic, it might make a huge difference to those passengers who are threatened by a group of passengers run amok. In other words, while I still do not think that the next election will change much for the rest of the planet (the decay of the Empire will continue), it is gradually becoming obvious that for the United States the difference between the two sides is becoming very real.

Why?

This is probably the first presidential election in US history where the choice will be not between two political programs or two political personalities, but the stark and binary choice between law and order and total chaos.

It is now clear that the Dems are supporting the rioting mobs and that they see these mobs as the way to beat Trump.

It is also becoming obvious that this is not a white vs. black issue: almost all the footage from the rioting mobs shows a large percentage of whites, sometimes even a majority of whites, especially amongst the most aggressive and violent rioters (the fact that these whites regularly get beat up by rampaging blacks hunting for “whitey” does not seem to deter these folks).

True, both sides blame each other for “dividing the country” and “creating the conditions for a civil war”, but any halfway objective and fact based appraisal of what is taking place shows that the Dems have comprehensively caved into the BLM/Antifa ideology (which is hardly surprising, since that ideology is a pure product of the Dems (pseudo-)liberal worldview in the first place). Yes, the Demolicans and the Republicrats are but two factions of the same “Party of Money”, but the election of Trump in 2016 and the subsequent 4 years of intense seditious efforts to delegitimize Trump have resulted in a political climate in which we roughly have, on one hand, what I would call the “Trump Party” (which is not the same as the GOP) and the “deplorables” objectively standing for law and order. On the other hand, we have the Dems, some Republicans, big corporations and the BLM/Antifa mobs who now all objectively stand for anarchy, chaos and random violence.

I have always criticized the AngloZionist Empire and the USA themselves for their messianic and supremacist ideology, and I agree that in their short history the United States have probably spilled more innocent blood than any other regime in history. Yet I also believe that there also have been many truly good things in US history, things which other countries should emulate (as many have!). I am referring to things like the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the spirit of self-reliance, a strong work ethic, the immense creativity of the people of the US and their love for their country.

It is now clear that the Dems find nothing good in the US or its history – hence their total support for the wanton (and, frankly, barbaric) destruction of historical statues or for the ridiculous notion that the United States was primarily built by black slaves and that modern whites are somehow guilty of what their ancestors did (including whites who did not have any slave owners amongst their ancestors).

Putin once said that he has no problems at all with any opposition to the Russian government, but that he categorically rejects the opposition to Russia herself (most of the non-systemic opposition in Russia is profoundly russophobic). I see the exact same thing happening here, in the USA: the Dem/BLM/Antifa gang are profoundly anti-USA, and not for the right reasons. It is just obvious that these people are motivated by pure hate and where there is hate, violence always follows!

To think that there will be no violence if these people come to power would be extremely naive: those who come to power by violence always end up ruling by violence.

For the past several decades, the US ruling elites have been gutting the Constitution by a million of legislative and regulatory cuts (I can personally attest to the fact that the country where I obtained my degrees in 1986-1991 is a totally different country from the one I am living in now. Thirty years ago there was real ideological freedom and pluralism in the US, and differences of opinion, even profound ones, were considered normal). Now the apparatus needed to crack down on the “deplorables” has been established, especially on the Federal level. If we now apply the “motive, means & opportunity” criterion we can only conclude that the Dem/BLM/Antifa have the motive and will sure have the means and opportunity if Biden makes it to the White House.

Furthermore, major media corporations are already cracking down against Trump supporters and even against President Trump himself (whom