MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

When Nazis Call You Nazi – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 31, 2020

What did the Mexican women do in response? They didn’t chant back, they didn’t jeer. They prayed for the people calling them racists and Nazis. It was a site to behold.

As the group of kool-aid-haired women raged through their bullhorns about the pro-life Mexicans being Nazis, KKK, fascist, and racist, a man walked by with a handmade sign that said “HITLER was PRO-ABORTION, and did you know Hitler was also a SOCIALIST ??”

•Hitler was a vegetarian too.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/01/allan-stevo/when-nazis-call-you-nazi/

By

I recently watched a group of kool-aid-haired forty and fifty year old white women yelling through bullhorns and chanting slogans such as “No racist! No KKK! No fascist USA!…No Nazi! No KKK! No fascist USA!”

Or “No more patriarchy. Down with the patriarchy.”

The target of their anger was a group walking down the street whose biggest demographic  was several thousand predominantly Latina women. Of those Latinas, most were Mexican.

The sight was a shocker to me.

Could anyone seriously claim these kool-aid-haired angry women had any place calling total strangers racist? What had these Mexicans women done to them to deserve such derision, you may ask?

You see the group that the kool-aid-haired old women were calling racist and Nazi and loudly denouncing the patriarchy to were participating in a pro-life march. But they didn’t seem to see the individuals they were saying it to. Nor did they seem to digest the meaning of what they were saying.

And by the way, when I call 40 or 50 “old,” that’s not in reference to their age – this band of kool-aid-haired women looked very unhappy and very old for their ages.

What did the Mexican women do in response? They didn’t chant back, they didn’t jeer. They prayed for the people calling them racists and Nazis. It was a site to behold.

As the group of kool-aid-haired women raged through their bullhorns about the pro-life Mexicans being Nazis, KKK, fascist, and racist, a man walked by with a handmade sign that said “HITLER was PRO-ABORTION, and did you know Hitler was also a SOCIALIST ??”

At the sight of that sign, the sloganeering from the kool-aid-haired women continued undeterred. Of course the sign was true,

•Hitler DID support abortion.

•Hitler WAS a socialist.

As for the KKK chant,

•Margaret Sanger founder of the largest pro-abortion organization in the US, Planned Parenthood, spoke at a KKK meeting in Silver Lake, New Jersey according to her autobiography, and

•Sanger had notorious racist writer and klansman Lothrop Stoddard on her first board in 1922 (see this) for the organization that would later become Planned Parenthood.

•Sanger’s 1939 “Negro Project” was about getting black Americans onboard with their own population control.

•Five black babies are aborted for every ten live births in the United States, and

•a number equivalent to more than half of the present black population in America has been aborted since Roe v Wade.

This is all seemingly in accord with the eugenicist agenda of Margaret Sanger and the organization that became Planned Parenthood.

How exactly are pro-life marchers Nazis or KKK by marching AGAINST Nazi and KKK ideas?  They are in fact the opposite.

I looked up and noticed a little ten year old blonde haired girl in a Make America Great Again hat look on in horror at the spectacle of the kool-aid-haired women yelling as she passed.

The kool-aid-haired women were all so angry. Such bad optics. The Mexicans and other pro-lifers were all so jolly, surrounded by big groups of family and friends – it was a giant diverse crowd that the kool-aid-haired women were calling “literally Hitler.”

But Wait There’s More…

Then to make the whole sight even crazier, across the street were a bunch of very trendy looking young folks under thirty years old – maybe 50 or 75 of them – seemingly supporting the pro-life marchers. They were so well-dressed and so well-orchestrated in their motions that I wondered if they were paid actors.

They chanted over and over again: “Harvested eggs are alive.”

And each held the same professionally made sign in the same way and at the same height that read: “Right to rescue.”

It sounded vaguely supportive of something that the pro-life marchers were saying, but it was strange that they were facing the marchers, as if they were protesting against the marchers, rather than marching in the pro-life march.

I asked one of the police officers who they were. “They are pro-life,” he responded.

“Why aren’t they matching then?”

He shrugged.

It turns out they actually weren’t with the pro-lifers. They were PETA-type folks, protesting chicken egg harvesting and eating by humans. They weren’t there for unity. They were pro-abortion people calling it hypocrisy to want to protect a human baby, but not a chicken egg.

On one side you had pro-abortion “privileged” kool-aid-haired women screaming at the Mexican women about the patriarchy and how Nazi the Mexican women and other pro-lifers were. On the other side, you had pro-abortion people chanting about the moral value of a vegetarian lifestyle.

•Hitler was pro-abortion.

•Hitler was socialist.

•Hitler was a vegetarian too.

But facts didn’t seem to matter here. Emoting feelings mattered. Thought didn’t matter. Prefabricated slogans mattered. Communication or trying to understand another person didn’t matter. Being loud mattered. Swearing into a bull horn in front of kids mattered.

The American left increasingly resembles the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, in their plank, and in their bullying and abusive tactics that oppose reason and evidence while operating with a “might makes right” style of morality.

I witnessed exactly that where Powell meets Market in San Francisco at this pro-life march.

Be seeing you

Mel Brooks as Singer in The Producers | monologuedb

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Brexiteers Don’t Want Democracy; They Want Freedom | The American Spectator

Posted by M. C. on January 31, 2020

American satirist H. L. Mencken was devastating in his critique of the common voter. “He not only doesn’t long for liberty, he is quite unable to stand it,” he wrote scornfully. “All else is affectation, delusion, empty words.” But Mencken never met a Brexiteer, for whom liberty is the sine qua non of his existence.

https://spectator.org/brexiteers-dont-want-democracy-they-want-freedom/

And by George, they’ve got it: The UK leaves the EU this weekend.
When the United Kingdom exits the European Union late on Friday, Brexit will be hailed as a victory for British democracy. Three times Britons voted to leave the EU and “take back control”: in June 2016, when the Leave campaign won at the EU referendum; in the general election the following June, when the vast majority of voters cast ballots for parties promising to fulfill the referendum will of the people (even though the Conservative party itself only achieved a minority government); and finally in December 2019 — the second general election in as many years — after months and months of Remainer parliamentary obstruction, Britons overwhelming elected Boris Johnson on the pledge to “get Brexit done.” Third time’s the charm.

But is this really a victory for democracy? Yes, on the face of it, if by democracy you mean one person, one vote. On the other hand, Britons were subjected, figuratively and literally, to months of their elected representatives in the House of Commons hell-bent on frustrating that self-same will, all in the name of parliamentary democracy.

The prime minister and no less than Elizabeth II, fulfilling their legitimate constitutional powers to prorogue Parliament, were vetoed by an unaccountable UK Supreme Court, “miraculously” imbued with the ability to augur that the Head of State and her First Minister were motivated by malevolent intent against democracy. Thus vetoed, Boris Johnson was forced to return to the Commons, cap in hand, to the repellent glee of Remainers. Brexiteers were rightfully outraged, while the establishment was unconvincingly nonplussed. They hear “the fury in your words, but not your words,” to summon up Shakespeare.

What is it about democracy that Brexiteers dislike? Most would never put the question so bluntly and, if queried, would proclaim themselves the most proud and patriotic democrats in all of England. Except … Why do politicians and more perniciously, “public” servants, put their interests above those whom they have sworn to serve?

Were justification required, we could put the blame on Edmund Burke, who infamously told his Bristol electors that MPs “owe you, not his industry only, but his judgment.” Furthermore, “he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion,” Burke protested.

Burke’s political nostrum, however, had its limits even in his own day, let alone in ours. In truth, we need go no further than to admit that public officials are usually no more “public-spirited” than the general run of the populace. Perhaps even less so.

Brexiteers who are fully committed to British independence don’t stop at limiting the power of Brussels. They’ll extend it to Westminster, too. Here they enjoy the support of the late Victorian political economist and (classical) Liberal MP, W. E. H. Lecky. “This increase of State power means a multiplication of restrictions,” Lecky wrote. “It means an increase of bureaucracy”— them again! — and a “constant increase of taxation, which is in reality a constant restriction of liberty.”

Lecky was an early opponent of the evils attending democracy and taxing powers, joining John C. Calhoun before him and Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek (as well as many others) after him. “No danger in representative government was deemed greater than that it should degenerate into a system of veiled confiscation,” Lecky observed, “one class voting the taxes which another class was compelled to pay.”

So while not disavowing democracy outright, few Brexiteers are happy with its results. Like most public disaffection, democratic dissatisfaction has been roiling under the surface of public discourse for decades. UK governments shifted from Conservative to Labour and back again, sometimes even comprising a coalition when circumstances warranted, but nothing seemed to change for the better. If anything, the state of British politics only worsened. Until Brexit came along.

American satirist H. L. Mencken was devastating in his critique of the common voter. “He not only doesn’t long for liberty, he is quite unable to stand it,” he wrote scornfully. “All else is affectation, delusion, empty words.” But Mencken never met a Brexiteer, for whom liberty is the sine qua non of his existence.

We may no longer need question why the Brexiteer has an uneasy relationship with democracy, seeing as how the burgeoning State robs him not only of his liberty but of his tax dollars, too. More to the point, however, is just how far Brexiteers are willing to go to regain both their freedom and their hard-won earnings. Is their outrage confined to Brussels, or are they willing to take on Westminster, too?

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Hovering in Cyberspace – Edward Curtin

Posted by M. C. on January 31, 2020

Today that myth is the religion of technology.

So if you have any questions you want answered, you can ask your phone.

http://edwardcurtin.com/hovering-in-cyberspace/

…We are of course living with the ongoing results of such medical technical efficiency. The U.S.A. is a country where the majority of people are drugged in one way or another, legally or illegally, since the human problems of living are considered to have only technological solutions, whether those remedies are effective or anodyne. The “accidents” and risks built into the technological fixes are never considered since the ideological grip of the religion of technology is all-encompassing and infallible. We are caught in its web…

But to be out of it is the only way to understand it. And to understand it is terrifying, for it means one knows that the religion of technology has replaced nature as the source of what for eons has been considered sacred. It means one grasps how reality is now defined by technology. It means realizing that people are merging with the machines they are attached to by invisible manacles as they replace the human body with abstractions and interact with machines. It means recognizing that the internet, despite its positive aspects and usage by dissenters intent on human liberation, is controlled by private corporation and government forces intent on using it as a weapon to control people. It means seeing the truth that most people have never considered the price to be paid for the speed and efficiency of a high-tech world.

But the price is very, very high.

One price, perhaps the most important, is the fragmentation of consciousness, which prevents people from grasping the present from within – which, as Frederic Jameson has noted, is so crucial and yet one of the mind’s most problematic tasks – because so many suffer from digital dementia as their attention hops from input to output in a never-ending flow of mediated, disembodied data…

Data is Dada by another name, and we are in Dada land, pissing, not into Marcel Duchamp’s ridiculous work of Dada “art,” a urinal, but into the wind.  And data piled on data equals a heap of data without knowledge or understanding…

Today that myth is the religion of technology.

So if you have any questions you want answered, you can ask your phone.

Ask your phone why we are living with endless wars on the edge of using our most astounding technological invention: nuclear weapons.

Ask your computer why “nice” Americans will sit behind computer screens and send missiles to kill people half-way around the world whom they are told they are at war with.

Ask your smart device why so many have become little Eichmanns, carrying out their dutiful little tasks at Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and all the other war manufacturers, or not caring what stocks they own.

Ask your phone what really happened to the Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 in Iran. See if your phone will say anything about cyber warfare, electronic jamming, or why the plane’s transponder was turned off preventing a signal to be sent indicating it was a civilian aircraft.

Ask who is behind the push to deploy 5 G wireless technology.

Ask that smart phone who is providing the non-answers.

Ask and it won’t be given to you; seek and you will not find. The true answers to your questions will remain hidden. This is the technological society, set up and controlled by the rulers. It is a scam.

Google it!

God may respond.

Be seeing you

MaxEvangel: God's Cell Phone Number!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

How Viral Pandemic Benefits The Globalist Agenda

Posted by M. C. on January 31, 2020

Global pandemic, whether a natural event or deliberately engineered, actually serves the purposes of the globalist establishment in a number of ways. First and foremost, it is a superb distraction. The general public, overcome with fears of an invisible force of nature that can possibly kill them at any moment, will probably forget all about the much bigger threat to their life, liberty and future – the subsequent collapse of the massive ‘Everything Bubble’ and the globalist “solution” that a pandemic can trigger.

“In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Only three months ago, John Hopkins, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum (a hive of self-professed globalists) ran a “pandemic simulation” called “Event 201” specifically focused on Coronavirus.  Not Ebola, or Swine Flu or even Avian Flu – but CORONAVIRUS.

http://www.alt-market.com/index.php/articles/4081-how-viral-pandemic-benefits-the-globalist-agenda

Brandon Smith

The world today suffers from highly fragile economic and geopolitical conditions.  This is not news to most people in the liberty movement that have been tracking the downward spiral for years, but it is news to a majority of average Americans who rarely venture to get in-depth information on any issue.  The fact of the matter is, even though there are millions of us who are aware of the danger, we are still in a minority.

This creates a serious set of frustrations.  When the common citizen is oblivious to the existence of a threat, trying to explain to them the source of that threat becomes a waste of time.  How can they see the root of the problem if they don’t even know the problem is there?

Yes, the world is on the verge of a violent sea-change, but this is not the most important issue.  The most important issue is that this precarious situation is not the product of random chance, simple greed, base human frailty or an “overly complex” system as mainstream experts will predictably claim; it is a deliberately engineered chaos box designed to serve the interests of a select few.

The globalist agenda is complicated in design but simple in its goals:  Order out of chaos.  Create or exploit every crisis to manipulate the public into consenting.  But consent for what?

As Richard N. Gardner, former deputy assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations under Kennedy and Johnson, and a member of the Trilateral Commission, wrote in the April, 1974 issue of the Council on Foreign Relation’s (CFR) journal Foreign Affairs (pg. 558) in an article titled ‘The Hard Road To World Order’:

“In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Global pandemic, whether a natural event or deliberately engineered, actually serves the purposes of the globalist establishment in a number of ways. First and foremost, it is a superb distraction. The general public, overcome with fears of an invisible force of nature that can possibly kill them at any moment, will probably forget all about the much bigger threat to their life, liberty and future – the subsequent collapse of the massive ‘Everything Bubble’ and the globalist “solution” that a pandemic can trigger.

The coronavirus is only a moderate threat in comparison to economic crisis. That said, I want to confront a few issues concerning the virus itself before we get to the economic question.

Virus Disinformation

I have seen a lot of delusional assumptions and outright disinformation being spread by people in regards to this potential pandemic. First, the notion that it was caused by Chinese citizens “eating bats” or being exposed to a live animal market is rather ridiculous. We’ve seen NO hard evidence whatsoever that this is true, and I believe the narrative is a cover for the fact that the city of Wuhan where the virus outbreak began is the home of not one but TWO level 4 biohazard labs.

I have a hard time ignoring the strange “coincidence” of the high level biohazard labs in Wuhan in favor of the idea that the virus was launched by chance due to the odd diets of central Chinese people. Given the evidence it appears that the coronavirus was gestated in a lab, not in someone’s bat and snake soup.  In 2017, scientists outside of China warned that these labs were not secure and that a virus might escape one of the facilities.

I would use the term “escape” loosely, as there is a possibility that this event was created intentionally. The virus itself has certain hallmarks of being engineered (including its long dormant period without visible symptoms) and the current strain is probably derived from the one the Chinese stole a year ago from a lab in Winnipeg, Canada.

But it gets even weirder.

Only three months ago, John Hopkins, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum (a hive of self-professed globalists) ran a “pandemic simulation” called “Event 201” specifically focused on Coronavirus.  Not Ebola, or Swine Flu or even Avian Flu – but CORONAVIRUS.  The simulation features the spread of coronavirus in South America, blamed on animal to human transmission (pigs).  The conclusion of the exercise was that national governments were nowhere near ready, scoring 40 out of 100 on their preparedness scale.  The simulation projected over 65 million deaths worldwide.

Event 201 played out almost exactly as it has been in China today.  Some very disingenuous or perhaps rather stupid people have been arguing that this kind of thing is “normal”, claiming that we are “lucky” that the elites have been running simulations in advance in order to “save us” from a coronavirus outbreak.  I assert that Event 201 was not a simulation but a war-game to study the possible outcomes of an event the globalists already knew was coming.  Set aside the fact that before almost every major crisis event and terrorist attack for the past few decades authorities were running simulations for that exact event right before it happened; does anyone really believe that Event 201 is pure coincidence?

Another false assumption that needs to be addressed is the idea that a viral threat will not strike the West, or at least, not the US. This odd bias is one that I don’t think most cultures except Americans suffer from; the belief that they are untouchable and that the system will always avert crisis. From the responses I have been seeing lately many Americans are living in a fantasy world.  Even now, the investment world is placing full stock and hope in the prediction that the Federal Reserve will step in to disrupt any economic downturn related to the pandemic.

Even if the Fed intended to intervene, why would anyone be naive enough to believe the central bank can do anything about how a viral outbreak damages the economy?  Central banks can do nothing but create debt, and debt will not beat back the coronavirus.

In terms of delusional optimism on the pandemic itself, the arguments range from “screening of travelers is too comprehensive to allow the virus to spread here” and “as long as the virus destroys China, who cares…?” This is a narrow view of the situation.

The screening process is terrible, and usually involves basic questions which can be evaded with lies.  But beyond that, the virus is already here. It was circulating through China for at least a few weeks before it was ever addressed by government authorities or the CDC. It also is reported to be asymptomatic, which means it remains dormant, yet also contagious, for up to two weeks before symptoms become visible. This is a far worse scenario than the ebola scare in 2014, in that the coronavirus is able to hide effectively. The only thing that can be done to slow the spread is to shut down ALL international travel, which the CDC and the WHO have no intention of doing right now, not that it matters anymore with over 110 suspected cases in the US already.

So, let’s be realistic. If the virus is as communicable as the CDC and independent scientists claim, then we will see the effects here in America.

Never Let A Good Crisis Go To Waste…

But what do globalists have to gain directly from a coronavirus pandemic beyond simple chaos that can be exploited?

Interestingly, a representative from Johnson and Johnson, one of the companies that may end up designing a “vaccine” for the Cronavirus, suggested during Event 201 that a “centralized” global economic authority in charge of funding and procuring vaccines for various nations in crisis was an option for solving the pandemic.

Gee, that sounds strangely similar to what globalists have been demanding for many years now, and the pandemic just happens to offer a perfect excuse for the creation of such a one-world financial authority.  They might claim that such a system would be temporary according to the life of the pandemic, but this will be a lie.

In terms of the economic effects, even if the virus were to stay primarily in China, the Chinese economy is, in basic terms, the largest in the world; it is the biggest exporter/importer and it is central to the now interdependent global economy. If China’s economy goes down, even for a short time, this will send shockwaves through all other national economies and supply lines.

In May of last year I published an article titled ‘Globalists Only Need One More Major Event To Finish Sabotaging The Economy’. To summarize the situation:

The globalist establishment has created the largest financial bubble in modern history through central bank stimulus, inflating a highly unstable artificial rally in markets while also creating new highs in national debt, corporate debt and consumer debt. The economic fundamentals have been sending alarms for the past two years, and the ‘Everything Bubble’ is showing signs of implosion. It is only a matter of time before the farce collapses by itself. The globalists need scapegoats, but they also need an event or wave of events so distracting that people will not be able to discern what really happened.

The reason why globalists want a collapse is simple – They need crisis in order to manipulate the masses into accepting total centralization, a global monetary system and global governance. They are also rabid believers in eugenics and population reduction. At the very least, a global pandemic is a useful happenstance for them; but the timing of the coronavirus event and their highly accurate “simulation” only three months ago also suggests their potential involvement, as it comes right as the implosion of the Everything Bubble was accelerating.

Consider this: Even if a pandemic does not kill a large number of people, it still disrupts international travel, it disrupts exports and imports, it disrupts consumer behavior and retail sales, and it disrupts domestic trade. If it does kill a large number of people, and if the Chinese government’s response is any indication, it could result in global martial law. With many economies including the US economy already in a precarious balancing act of historic debt vs. crashing demand and useless central bank repo market intervention, there is little chance that the system can withstand such a tsunami.

Make no mistake, the crash has already begun, whether the virus hits the US hard or not. The only question is, will this be the trigger event that accelerates the collapse process that is already in motion?

I took my time in publishing this article because I believed it was important to first watch the Chinese, CDC and WHO response to the virus. If they dealt with the situation quickly then there was a chance that it would have only minor influence on the financial system. They did not deal with the situation quickly or decisively. In fact, over 5 million people left the Hubei region of China before active quarantine and treatment procedures began. The situation has spiraled out of control in China and it is clear that the government is now lying through its teeth about the number of sick and dead.

I would not be surprised if we discover in the next two weeks that the death tally is in the thousands, and the sickness rate is actually in the hundreds of thousands. The fact that China has now quarantined over 50 million people in 16 cities suggests the danger is much higher than they have admitted.  If this is the case, then at the very least, the Chinese economy is about to take a massive hit. If the virus doesn’t spread, the economic damage will.

Pandemic Smokescreen, Economic Collapse And “Climate Change”

Look at it this way – The US and China are still currently in the middle of a trade war. The Phase 1 deal was always a joke, because it demands that China quadruple its purchases from the US within the next 1-2 years. This was never going to happen, but the false hope (along with corporate stock buybacks) lifted global stocks out of reversal. Now, there is no chance that China will meet the requirements of the Phase 1 deal and that will soon become evident, as China’s economy will grind down under the weight of the pandemic.

If Trump continues tariffs against a nation in the state of a viral emergency he will look like a monster (which I believe is his job as a globalist puppet pretending to be a conservative nationalist). In the meantime, global trade becomes muddled and the last structural supports of the system snap in half.

With global supply lines frozen and travel eventually restricted, trade will stall.  There is no way around this.  This is not just about China, it is about all nations.  And, ultimately, this is not even about the coronavirus, it is about the financial time bomb that the globalist establishment created.  It is about our economic interdependency and the house of cards we have become.  In the wake of calamity, the globalists will call for even MORE interdependency.  They will claim tragedy struck because we were not “centralized enough”.

Another advantage of the viral crisis is that the establishment will undoubtedly blame the “climate change” and “global warming” hoax for its impetus.  Even though there is absolutely no concrete evidence linking human carbon emissions to climate change or viral outbreaks, given enough public fear globalists will attempt to link the three things together as if it is a proven fact.  Not only will they have a rationale for an economic collapse THEY created, but they can also present a virus engineered by humans in a lab as an “act of nature”, and use it as a rationale for implementing carbon controls

In the next issue of my Wild Bunch Dispatch Newsletter I will be outlining solutions and preparedness options for surviving a pandemic scenario; all is not lost if this event does accelerate as the globalists predicted in their Event 201 model.  It is still hard to say with certainty, but this appears to be the “black swan” that the globalists were waiting for (or planning) all along.  Remaining vigilant in terms of the pandemic is recommended, but do not forget about the economic disaster that will inevitably follow as the coronavirus continues to spread.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The FBI Has Been Lying About Seth Rich – Craig Murray

Posted by M. C. on January 31, 2020

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/the-fbi-has-been-lying-about-seth-rich/

by

A persistent American lawyer has uncovered the undeniable fact that the FBI has been continuously lying, including giving false testimony in court, in response to Freedom of Information requests for its records on Seth Rich. The FBI has previously given affidavits that it has no records regarding Seth Rich.

A Freedom of Information request to the FBI which did not mention Seth Rich, but asked for all email correspondence between FBI Head of Counterterrorism Peter Strzok, who headed the investigation into the DNC leaks and Wikileaks, and FBI attorney Lisa Page, has revealed two pages of emails which do not merely mention Seth Rich but have “Seth Rich” as their heading. The emails were provided in, to say the least, heavily redacted form.

Before I analyse these particular emails, I should make plain that they are not the major point. The major point is that the FBI claimed it had no records mentioning Seth Rich, and these have come to light in response to a different FOIA request that was not about him. What other falsely denied documents does the FBI hold about Rich, that were not fortuitously picked up by a search for correspondence between two named individuals?

To look at the documents themselves, they have to be read from the bottom up, and they consist of a series of emails between members of the Washington Field Office of the FBI (WF in the telegrams) into which Strzok was copied in, and which he ultimately forwarded on to the lawyer Lisa Page.

The opening email, at the bottom, dated 10 August 2016 at 10.32am, precisely just one month after the murder of Seth Rich, is from the media handling department of the Washington Field Office. It references Wikileaks’ offer of a reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich, and that Assange seemed to imply Rich was the source of the DNC leaks. The media handlers are asking the operations side of the FBI field office for any information on the case. The unredacted part of the reply fits with the official narrative. The redacted individual officer is “not aware of any specific involvement” by the FBI in the Seth Rich case. But his next sentence is completely redacted. Why?

It appears that “adding” references a new person added in to the list. This appears to have not worked, and probably the same person (precisely same length of deleted name) then tries again, with “adding … for real” and blames the technology – “stupid Samsung”. The interesting point here is that the person added appears not to be in the FBI – a new redacted addressee does indeed appear, and unlike all the others does not have an FBI suffix after their deleted email address. So who are they?

(This section on “adding” was updated after commenters offered a better explanation than my original one. See first comments below).

The fourth email, at 1pm on Wednesday August 10, 2016, is much the most interesting. It is ostensibly also from the Washington Field Office, but it is from somebody using a different classified email system with a very different time and date format than the others. It is apparently from somebody more senior, as the reply to it is “will do”. And every single word of this instruction has been blanked. The final email, saying that “I squashed this with …..”, is from a new person again, with the shortest name. That phrase may only have meant I denied this to a journalist, or it may have been reporting an operational command given.

As the final act in this drama, Strzok then sent the whole thread on to the lawyer, which is why we now have it. Why?

It is perfectly possible to fill in the blanks with a conversation that completely fits the official narrative. The deletions could say this was a waste of time and the FBI was not looking at the Rich case. But in that case, the FBI would have been delighted to publish it unredacted. (The small numbers in the right hand margins supposedly detail the exception to the FOIA under which deletion was made. In almost every case they are one or other category of invasion of privacy).

And if it just all said “Assange is talking nonsense. Seth Rich is nothing to do with the FBI” then why would that have to be sent on by Strzok to the FBI lawyer?

It is of course fortunate that Strzok did forward this one email thread on to the lawyer, because that is the only reason we have seen it, as a result of an FOI(A) request for the correspondence between those two.

Finally, and perhaps this is the most important point, the FBI was at this time supposed to be in the early stages of an investigation into how the DNC emails were leaked to Wikileaks. The FBI here believed Wikileaks to be indicating the material had been leaked by Seth Rich who had then been murdered. Surely in any legitimate investigation, the investigators would have been absolutely compelled to check out the truth of this possibility, rather than treat it as a media issue?

We are asked to believe that not one of these emails says “well if the publisher of the emails says Seth Rich was the source, we had better check that out, especially as he was murdered with no sign of a suspect”. If the FBI really did not look at that, why on earth not? If the FBI genuinely, as they claim, did not even look at the murder of Seth Rich, that would surely be the most damning fact of all and reveal their “investigation” was entirely agenda driven from the start.

In June 2016 a vast cache of the DNC emails were leaked to Wikileaks. On 10 July 2016 an employee from the location of the leak was murdered without obvious motive, in an alleged street robbery in which nothing at all was stolen. Not to investigate the possibility of a link between the two incidents would be grossly negligent. It is worth adding that, contrary to a propaganda barrage, Bloomingdale where Rich was murdered is a very pleasant area of Washington DC and by no means a murder hotspot. It is also worth noting that not only is there no suspect in Seth Rich’s murder, there has never been any semblance of a serious effort to find the killer. Washington police appear perfectly happy simply to write this case off.

I anticipate two responses to this article in terms of irrelevant and illogical whataboutery:

Firstly, it is very often the case that family members are extremely resistant to the notion that the murder of a relative may have wider political implications. This is perfectly natural. The appalling grief of losing a loved one to murder is extraordinary; to reject the cognitive dissonance of having your political worldview shattered at the same time is very natural. In the case of David Kelly, of Seth Rich, and of Wille Macrae, we see families reacting with emotional hostility to the notion that the death raises wider questions. Occasionally the motive may be still more mixed, with the prior relationship between the family and the deceased subject to other strains (I am not referencing the Rich case here).

You do occasionally get particularly stout hearted family who take the opposite tack and are prepared to take on the authorities in the search for justice, of which Commander Robert Green, son of Hilda Murrell, is a worthy example.

(As an interesting aside, I just checked his name in the Wikipedia article on Hilda, which I discovered describes Tam Dalyell “hounding” Margaret Thatcher over the Belgrano and the fact that ship was steaming away from the Falklands when destroyed with massive loss of life as a “second conspiracy theory”, the first of course being the murder of Hilda Murrell. Wikipedia really has become a cesspool.)

We have powerful cultural taboos that reinforce the notion that if the family do not want the question of the death of their loved one disturbed, nobody else should bring it up. Seth Rich’s parents, David Kelly’s wife, Willie Macrae’s brother have all been deployed by the media and the powers behind them to this effect, among many other examples. This is an emotionally powerful but logically weak method of restricting enquiry.

Secondly, I do not know and I deliberately have not inquired what are the views on other subjects of either Mr Ty Clevenger, who brought his evidence and blog to my attention, or Judicial Watch, who made the FOIA request that revealed these documents. I am interested in the evidence presented both that the FBI lied, and in the documents themselves. Those who obtained the documents may, for all I know, be dedicated otter baiters or believe in stealing ice cream from children. I am referencing the evidence they have obtained in this particular case, not endorsing – or condemning – anything else in their lives or work. I really have had enough of illogical detraction by association as a way of avoiding logical argument by an absurd extension of ad hominem argument to third parties.

Be seeing you

FIB

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ann Coulter: Fully Automatic Media

Posted by M. C. on January 30, 2020

Wow — neo-Nazis! Wait, what did the arrest of “neo-Nazis” have to do with the Virginia gun rally?  Not a thing, it turns out.

The next time you read a denunciation of Mark Zuckerberg for his maddening refusal to censor Trump ads on Facebook, remember: The Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville was safer than the average Caribbean Day parade. The media want to make sure you have no way of knowing that.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/29/ann-coulter-fully-automatic-media/

by Ann Coulter

The tedium of the impeachment trial has at least allowed me to catch up on my reading. Apparently, there was a peaceful gun rights rally in Virginia last week that had the media in a panic.

Today, I will explain how their hysteria about the gun rally is directly related to their hysteria about the Russians throwing the 2016 election with Facebook ads — or, as MSNBC’s Brian Williams put it, using Facebook, Instagram and Twitter “to turn Americans against one another, psychological and information warfare, that didn’t stop with the election.”

First, the moral panic on guns:

“Virginia’s capital braces for gun-rights rally” — The Associated Press

“New fears tied to a pro-gun rally that’s scheduled in Virginia” — NBC News

“A gun rights rally in Richmond on MLK Day has people fearing a repeat of Charlottesville” — Richmond Times Dispatch

As we have come to expect, the “newspaper of record,” The New York Times, bested them all:

“Virginia Capital on Edge as F.B.I. Arrests Suspected Neo-Nazis Before Gun Rally”

Wow — neo-Nazis! Wait, what did the arrest of “neo-Nazis” have to do with the Virginia gun rally?

Not a thing, it turns out.

The FBI had arrested three white guys with guns in another state the week before the rally. One of the men was an illegal alien from Canada. Three of the four charges against the men had to do with his immigration status.

What does the arrest of an illegal alien and his accomplices in Maryland have to do with a gun rally in Virginia? As the Times explained, “Although the charges were not directly linked to the Richmond rally, law enforcement officials said the three men had discussed attending it.”

Here’s an idea for you, New York Times. Every time an African American is arrested for some infamous crime, cite that arrest in a headline claiming that people are “on edge” about a coming NAACP convention — or maybe a meeting of black scientists.

“Virginia Capital on Edge as F.B.I. Arrests R. Kelly Before NAACP Convention” (Just say Kelly had “discussed attending it”!)

The media are liars, and they know they’re liars. We’ve been having gun rights rallies forever, and they’ve never turned into murderous bacchanals. How about some flood-the-zone coverage of Big Foot sightings?

If journalists were serious about alerting the public to events that are likely to result in violence, they should check out the West Indian Carnival parade in New York.

The Wikipedia entry on the parade has a special listing for “incidents,” which I have fact-checked and edited for brevity:

— In 2003, a man was fatally shot and another was stabbed in the neck.

— In 2005, one man was shot and killed along the parade route.

— In 2006, one man was shot and another was stabbed.

— At the 2007 parade, a man was shot twice in the leg.

— In 2011, there was one murder, three stabbings and numerous shootings, including of a policeman.

— In 2012, two people were fatally stabbed; two others were shot.

— In 2013, several shootings killed two and wounded three.

— In 2015, at a pre-parade celebration, there was one fatal stabbing and one fatal shooting, when an aide to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Carey Gabay, was shot in the head. He died eight days later.

— In 2016, during pre-parade celebrations, four people were shot, two fatally, and two more were stabbed.

Under the bloodcurdling headline, “Playing and Swaying to Caribbean Rhythms,” the Times mentioned a few other incidents. In 2004, a man was stabbed and a woman was run over by a float. In 1999, two young children were killed by floats, and one man was killed by a sound truck.

The 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, which left one person dead, would have been a banner year for safety at the Caribbean day parade.

Despite the annual bloodshed, you will never see the headlines: “Crown Heights Braces for West Indian Labor Day Parade” or “City on Edge Before Caribbean Carnival.” (And why not: “Playing and Swaying to Stirring Second Amendment Rhetoric”?)

At least this makes it easy to figure out the race of the perp. If any white person commits a crime, you know — oh my gosh, do you know! But if there’s no mention of the perp’s race … it’s a minority!

Journalists have convinced themselves that it’s not dishonorable to mislead the public — in fact, it’s actually the honorable thing to do! If we tell the truth, it will just feed the racists!

This is why the media are constantly demanding censorship of the internet. The ability of the public to escape the media’s sleazy, dishonest ecosystem and get the truth elsewhere is a mortal threat, as it is to all totalitarian regimes.

Oh, how they long for the days of three TV stations, a handful of national newspapers and magazines — and nothing else! Every night on MSNBC, you can see them warmly reminiscing about the good old days when they could remove a president from office without breaking a sweat.

The next time you read a denunciation of Mark Zuckerberg for his maddening refusal to censor Trump ads on Facebook, remember: The Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville was safer than the average Caribbean Day parade. The media want to make sure you have no way of knowing that.

Be seeing you

antifa

The ISIS head chopper look. Cultural appropriation!

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Elizabeth Warren proposes criminal penalties for spreading voting disinformation online

Posted by M. C. on January 30, 2020

How long before this requirement filters down to the level of the deplorables?

As with all do-gooder plans touted as benefiting you when they are really intended to control you:

Who decides what is dis-information? Elizabeth Warren?

Who decides whom must prove themselves innocent? Hillary Drivewiper?

Progressives like Warren and Sanders are dangerous.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/29/warren-proposes-criminal-penalties-for-spreading-disinformation-online.html

Key Points
  • Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren on Wednesday released a plan to fight disinformation to hold tech companies accountable for their actions in light of the 2016 election.
  • Warren proposed to combat disinformation by holding big tech companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google responsible for their actions….

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Snowden Warns Targeting of Greenwald and Assange Shows Governments ‘Ready to Stop the Presses—If They Can’ | Common Dreams News

Posted by M. C. on January 30, 2020

” Snowden wrote of Greenwald’s case that “as ridiculous as these charges are, they are also dangerous—and not only to Greenwald: They are a threat to press freedom everywhere. The legal theory used by the Brazilian prosecutors—that journalists who publish leaked documents are engaged in a criminal ‘conspiracy’ with the sources who provide those documents—is virtually identical to the one advanced in the Trump administration’s indictment of [Assange] in a new application of the historically dubious Espionage Act.”

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/01/27/snowden-warns-targeting-greenwald-and-assange-shows-governments-ready-stop-presses

In an op-ed published Sunday night by the Washington Post, National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden connected Brazilian federal prosecutors’ recent decision to file charges against American investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald to the U.S. government’s efforts to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

“The most essential journalism of every era is precisely that which a government attempts to silence. These prosecutions demonstrate that they are ready to stop the presses—if they can.”
—Edward Snowden, NSA whistleblower

Snowden, board of directors president at Freedom of the Press Foundation, is among those who have spoken out since Greenwald was charged with cybercrime on Jan. 21. Reporters and human rights advocates have denounced the prosecution as “a straightforward attempt to intimidate and retaliate against Greenwald and The Intercept for their critical reporting” on officials in Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s government.

Greenwald, who is also on Freedom of the Press Foundation’s board, is one of the journalists to whom Snowden leaked classified materials in 2013.

As Common Dreams reported last week, the NSA whistleblower, who has lived with asylum protection in Russia for the past several years, is also among the political observers who have pointed out that although even some of Greenwald’s critics have rallied behind him in recent days, Assange has not experienced such solidarity. Assange is being held in a London prison, under conditions that have raised global alarm, while he fights against extradition to the United States.

In his Post op-ed, “Trump Has Created a Global Playbook to Attack Those Revealing Uncomfortable Truths,” Snowden wrote of Greenwald’s case that “as ridiculous as these charges are, they are also dangerous—and not only to Greenwald: They are a threat to press freedom everywhere. The legal theory used by the Brazilian prosecutors—that journalists who publish leaked documents are engaged in a criminal ‘conspiracy’ with the sources who provide those documents—is virtually identical to the one advanced in the Trump administration’s indictment of [Assange] in a new application of the historically dubious Espionage Act.”

Snowden—who said in December that he believes that if he returned to the United States, he’d spend his life in prison for exposing global mass surveillance practices of the U.S. government—explained:

In each case, the charges came as an about-face from an earlier position. The federal police in Brazil stated as recently as December that they had formally considered whether Greenwald could be said to have participated in a crime, and unequivocally found that he had not. That rather extraordinary admission itself followed an order in August 2019 from a Brazilian Supreme Court judge—prompted by displays of public aggression against Greenwald by Bolsonaro and his allies—explicitly barring federal police from investigating Greenwald altogether. The Supreme Court judge declared that doing so would “constitute an unambiguous act of censorship.”

For Assange, the Espionage Act charges arrived years after the same theory had reportedly been considered—and rejected—by the former president Barack Obama’s Justice Department. Though the Obama administration was no fan of WikiLeaks, the former spokesman for Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder later explained. “The problem the department has always had in investigating Julian Assange is there is no way to prosecute him for publishing information without the same theory being applied to journalists,” said the former Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller. “And if you are not going to prosecute journalists for publishing classified information, which the department is not, then there is no way to prosecute Assange.”

Although Obama’s administration was historically unfriendly to journalists and leakers of classified materials, President Donald Trump’s administration has taken things a step further with its indictment of Assange. “The Trump administration,” he wrote, “with its disdain for press freedom matched only by its ignorance of the law, has respected no such limitations on its ability to prosecute and persecute, and its unprecedented decision to indict a publisher under the Espionage Act has profoundly dangerous implications for national security journalists around the country.”

Highlighting another similarity between the cases of Greenwald and Assange—that “their relentless crusades have rendered them polarizing figures (including, it may be noted, to each other)”—Snowden suggested that perhaps “authorities in both countries believed the public’s fractured opinions of their perceived ideologies would distract the public from the broader danger these prosecutions pose to a free press.” However, he noted, civil liberties groups and publishers have recognized both cases as “efforts to deter the most aggressive investigations by the most fearless journalists, and to open the door to a precedent that could soon still the pens of even the less cantankerous.”

“The most essential journalism of every era is precisely that which a government attempts to silence,” Snowden concluded. “These prosecutions demonstrate that they are ready to stop the presses—if they can.”

Journalists and press freedom advocates have shared Snowden’s op-ed on social media since Sunday night.

Trevor Timm, executive director of Freedom of the Press Foundation, tweeted Monday morning that Snowden’s piece “should be read in tandem” with an op-ed published Sunday in the New York Times by James Risen, a former reporter for the newspaper who is now at The Intercept. Risen also argued that “the case against Mr. Greenwald is eerily similar to the Trump administration’s case against Mr. Assange.”

And, according to Risen, Greenwald concurred:

In an interview with me on Thursday, Mr. Greenwald agreed that there are parallels between his case and Mr. Assange’s, and added that he doesn’t believe that Mr. Bolsonaro would have taken action against an American journalist if he had thought President Trump would oppose it.

“Bolsonaro worships Trump, and the Bolsonaro government is taking the signal from Trump that this kind of behavior is acceptable,” he said.

Notably, Risen added, “the State Department has not issued any statement of concern about Brazil’s case against Mr. Greenwald, which in past administrations would have been common practice.”

Be seeing you
Snowden and Greenwald

American whistleblower Edward Snowden in a Hong Kong hotel room with journalist Glenn Greenwald in a scene from Laura Poitras’ documentary film Citizenfour. (Photo: Citizenfour/screenshot)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Australia is Burning: Blame the Greens and the Arsonists

Posted by M. C. on January 30, 2020

Other than lies, temperature manipulations, piss poor burn management, arson, environmental restrictions, and other misguided Green ideology, this story is all about climate change.

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/australia-is-burning-blame-the-greens-and-the-arsonists-qOyj1My1CUyZtgo1I8mXIA

Mish

At least 15 million acres of Australia have been devastated by wildfires. Climate change activists are up in arms.
Please consider Why Down Under Is Burning Up

The current round of blazes started late last year. It has charred at least 15 million acres and killed more than two dozen Australians, including brave volunteer firefighters who rush into the inferno to save homes and lives.

The climate-change narrative grossly oversimplifies bush fires, whose causes are as complex as their recurrence is predictable: Australia is in the midst of one of its regular droughts.

Byzantine environmental restrictions prevent landholders from clearing scrub, brush and trees. State governments don’t do their part to reduce the fuel load in parks. Last November a former fire chief in Victoria slammed that state’s “minimalist approach” to hazard-reduction burning in the off-season. That complaint is heard across the country.

On Monday a parliamentarian from the Australian Greens tweeted about one day holding “climate trials” to deal with conservative politicians.

Main Causes

  1. Arson: More than 180 people have been arrested for allegedly starting blazes since the start of the current bush-fire season.
  2. Secondary Cause: Environmental Restrictions and misguided Green ideology.

Perhaps I have those backwards.

Not Climate Change

Please consider Australian Wildfires Were Caused by Humans, Not Climate Change

The similarities between Australian and Californian politics, vegetation, and climate have always been striking. Both places are drop-dead beautiful, far-left, and politically green. In both places, people like living around vegetation that every year dries out enough to burn sky high — with or without climate change.

This is thanks to relatively short rainy seasons surrounded by perfect beach weather. It is spectacularly green when it rains and tinder-dry brown when it stops. When rainfall is high, as it was for recent years in Australia, vegetation grows even thicker, only to provide even more fuel for wildfires.

At the same time, our culture of vegetation worship militates against purposefully burning things down. In California, these “prescribed” fires are now largely prohibited (because burning releases dreaded carbon dioxide), ensuring that disaster is always just around the corner. Ditto for Australia, where some burning is allowed but nowhere near enough.

Australia has been ready to explode for years. David Packham, former head of Australia’s National Rural Fire Research Centre, warned in a 2015 article in the Age that fire fuel levels had climbed to their most dangerous levels in thousands of years. He noted this was the result of “misguided green ideology.”

It’s very convenient for alarmist greens to blame the fires of Australia and California on global warming. In reality, the policies they themselves advocate are the culprits.

67 Years of Brushfire Data

Arson Crisis

Please consider We don’t just have a bushfire crisis. We have an arson crisis, too.

The number of individuals around Australia whose arson has contributed to the current bushfire crisis has now passed 200.

Here is my favorite: “A volunteer firefighter in Australia has been charged with deliberately lighting blazes during the nation’s bushfire crisis. Police arrested the man, 19, for seven counts of alleged arson in an area south of Sydney, New South Wales.”

There are no conspiracies here. Though arson has been tried and called for before as a tool of terror, the Australian fires seem to result from the actions of unconnected individuals who are either disturbed or reckless. This is nothing new; as ecological criminologist Paul Read wrote back in November:

A 2015 satellite analysis of 113,000 fires from 1997-2009 confirmed what we had known for some time – 40 per cent of fires are deliberately lit, another 47 per cent accidental. This generally matches previous data published a decade earlier that about half of all fires were suspected or deliberate arson, and 37 per cent accidental. Combined, they reach the same conclusion: 87 per cent are man-made.

Scourge of Eucalyptus

Here’s an interesting article from 2013: Australia’s Wildfires: Are Eucalyptus Trees to Blame?

“Looking at the eucalyptus forest outside my window in Tasmania, I see a gigantic fire hazard,” David Bowman, a forest ecologist at the University of Tasmania in Australia, told KQED. “On a really hot day, those things are going to burn like torches and shower our suburbs with sparks.”

Like many plants native to fire-prone regions, eucalyptus trees (aka gum trees in Australia) are adapted to survive — or even thrive — in a wildfire. Fallen eucalyptus leaves create dense carpets of flammable material, and the trees’ bark peels off in long streamers that drop to the ground, providing additional fuel that draws ground fires up into the leaves, creating massive, fast-spreading “crown fires” in the upper story of eucalyptus forests.

Additionally, the eucalyptus oil that gives the trees their characteristic spicy fragrance is a flammable oil: This oil, combined with leaf litter and peeling bark during periods of dry, windy weather, can turn a small ground fire into a terrifying, explosive firestorm in a matter of minutes. That’s why eucalyptus trees — especially the blue gums (Eucalyptus globulus) that are common throughout New South Wales — are sometimes referred to wryly as “gasoline trees.”

The threat posed by eucalyptus groves spreading beyond Australia was highlighted in 1991, when a wildfire torched the hills surrounding Oakland, Calif. That conflagration killed 25 people and obliterated more than 3,000 homes, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and was blamed primarily on the thousands of eucalyptus trees found throughout the Oakland Hills.

Despite their well-earned reputation as a firefighter’s worst nightmare, eucalyptus trees remain a favorite landscape specimen, renowned for fast-growing stands of tall shade trees that, according to some research, help repel insects through the same fragrant eucalyptus oil that’s blamed for fueling wildfires.

“Eucalyptus groves on steep hillsides — like those in the East Bay hills — are extremely flammable when hot … winds of late summer and fall start blowing and make control of a moving flame front impossible until the winds stop,” Tom Klatt, UC Berkeley campus environmental manager, said in a report from the university’s Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources NewsCenter.

Three Eucalyptus Ideas

  1. Hey, let’s plant eucalyptus. It grows fast.
  2. When it dries out, let’s not do prescribed burns because that would release CO2.
  3. Blame global warming if anything goes wrong with points 1 and 2.

“What the hell have humans done?” Bowman said. “We’ve spread a dangerous plant all over the world.”

But that story doesn’t sell. Hype that sells. Like this:

Climate Deniers Cooking Themselves

Climate deniers are cooking themselves — and everyone else.

Australia, like many countries (very much including the United States) is pathologically addicted to fossil fuels, and is roasting itself and the world in the process. Without strong international climate policy, there will be future droughts, fires, and other disasters that make the current crisis seem like a friendly daydream.

On the whole, that only rates a B- or a C+ because it does not end with a projection like AOC’s that the World Will End in 12 Years if We Do Nothing

Everyone in Miami Will Drown in 6 Years

“Cooking yourself” is OK but the article itself fell flat.

To gain real traction one needs a headline like this: “Everyone in Miami Will Drown in 6 Years”

Now, that’s an A++ story headline guaranteed to garner attention.

Lies and manipulations

Amazing stuff.

The Green police discarded temperatures all over the board and manipulated early temperatures lower.

In my favorite example, the climate police discarded a record high temperature because the person who measured temperatures did so on a Sunday. They claim the recorder was not supposed to be working on Sunday, thus the record high should not have been recorded.

Of course they moved thermometers to airports with increasing numbers of planes and hot asphalt, etc. And finally, they switched to electronic measurement recently which tends to be hotter than mercury-based thermometers.

All About Climate Change Except

Other than lies, temperature manipulations, piss poor burn management, arson, environmental restrictions, and other misguided Green ideology, this story is all about climate change.

Unfortunately, a politically incorrect story like this is going nowhere. But “Everyone in Miami Will Drown in 6 Years” just might.

By the way, I propose the most likely reason for arson is global warming activists wanting to blame climate change.

Mike “Mish” Shedlock

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fed’s Core Mission Now Includes Climate Change

Posted by M. C. on January 30, 2020

Here’s a lesson for you climate fearmongers: Never put a time frame on your prediction that is shorter than your expected life or you will be ridiculed until you die.

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/fed-s-core-mission-now-includes-climate-change-9i0VcEMMnka-AOFy69N5XQ

Mish

The Fed, ECB, Bank of England, and Bank of Japan have now embraced climate change as part of their mission.
It’s bad enough that central bankers are clueless about inflation.They now want their hands in another thing they do not understand and cannot control even if they did.

Fed’s Core Mission Change

Lael Brainard, Chair of the Fed’s Committee on Financial Stability, says Climate Change Matters for Monetary Policy and Financial Stability.

So how does climate change fit into the work of the Federal Reserve? To support a strong economy and a stable financial system, the Federal Reserve needs to analyze and adapt to important changes to the economy and financial system. This is no less true for climate change than it was for globalization or the information technology revolution.

To fulfill our core responsibilities, it will be important for the Federal Reserve to study the implications of climate change for the economy and the financial system and to adapt our work accordingly.

Climate Change Essential to Achieving Mission

Brainard was just one of the speakers at the Fed’s Economics of Climate Change summit last November.

Mary Daly, San Francisco Fed president has this Q&A in her presentation.

Q: Why is the San Francisco Fed hosting a climate conference? Why this? Why now?

A: The answer is simple. It’s essential to achieving our mission.

Bank of Japan Warns of Climate Change Risks

Japan Times reports Bank of Japan Gov. Haruhiko Kuroda Warns of Climate Change Risks.

The challenges posed by a string of recent natural disasters and the potential hit to the economy from slowing overseas growth “should be better addressed by government with fiscal policy and structural policies,” Kuroda said at a seminar.

As Japan is prone to big typhoons and earthquakes, Kuroda highlighted the risks related to climate change as an example of new issues central banks must deal with in maintaining financial stability.

“Climate-related risk differs from other risks in that its relatively long-term impact means the effects will last longer than other financial risks, and the impact is far less predictable,” he said. “It is therefore necessary to thoroughly investigate and analyze the impact of climate-related risk.”

Bank of England Climate Change Warning

The Bank of England hopped on the climate change bandwagon on December 30, with a Climate Change Warning from BoE Chief Mark Carney.

The world will face irreversible heating unless firms shift their priorities soon, the outgoing head of the Bank of England has told the BBC.

He said leading pension fund analysis “is that if you add up the policies of all of companies out there, they are consistent with warming of 3.7-3.8C”.

Scientists say the risks associated with an increase of 4C include a nine metre rise in sea levels – affecting up to 760 million people – searing heatwaves and droughts, and serious food supply problems.

“Now $120tn worth of balance sheets of banks and asset managers are wanting this disclosure [of investments in fossil fuels]. But it’s not moving fast enough.”

ECB in on the Climate Change Act

The Financial Times reports Christine Lagarde Wants Key Role for Climate Change in ECB Review.

Consider this Open Letter to ECB head Christine Lagarde from the European Parliament.

During your hearing at the European Parliament, you rightly pledged to make sure the ECB puts the “protection of the environment at the core of the understanding of its mission.” As academics, civil society and trade union leaders, entrepreneurs and citizens deeply concerned by climate change, we believe that the most powerful financial institution in Europe cannot just sit passively as we witness a growing environmental crisis.

Climate change not only imperils life-sustaining processes, it also threatens the financial stability, real economy and jobs. It has been estimated that without mitigation efforts, physical risks related to climate change could result in losses of up to $24 trillion of the value of global financial assets.

Wow. $24 Trillion at risk.

Nonetheless, Germany’s Bundesbank president Jens Weidmann, who also sits on the on the ECB’s governing council, understands the silliness of the move.

Weidmann says that he would view “very critically” any attempt to redirect a central bank’s actions towards climate change, such as favouring the purchase of green bonds as part of a quantitative easing programme.

Weidmann is guaranteed to be overruled.

Excellent Video on Climate Nonsense

Global Warming Fraud Exposed In Pictures

Please consider Global Warming Fraud Exposed In Pictures

The key to understanding the fraud is a changing timeline for temperature, fires, Winters, growing seasons, and sea level, all cherry picked for maximum impact.

Central Bank Fearmongering Blue Ribbon Contenders

  1. European Parliament: $24 Trillion in Damages
  2. Bank of England: 9 Meter rise in seal level (29.53 feet).

To decide who wins the blue ribbon, first let’s do a simulation.

10 Meter Rise in Seal Level

Mercy!

The above Alarming Map shows what might be left of Florida when the sea level rises by 10 meters.

Caney said 9 meters but the average elevation of Florida is allegedly only 6 feet. The highest elevation is only 312 feet.

Mark Carney Wins Fearmongering Blue Ribbon

I give Mark Carney the Central Bank fearmongering Blue Ribbon because people can understand the concept of Florida being three feet underwater.

In contrast, no one understands $24 trillion. Besides, that estimates will soon be $250 trillion or higher due to Fearmongering Inflation.

Fearmongering Lesson

None of the above tops AOC who says World Will End in 12 Years: Here’s What to Do About It

Here’s a lesson for you climate fearmongers: Never put a time frame on your prediction that is shorter than your expected life or you will be ridiculed until you die.

Mike “Mish” Shedlock

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »