Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘UN’

Dailywire Article-UN: Risk Of Nuclear War At Record High. Please Engage In Peace Talks, Russia And Ukraine.

Posted by M. C. on April 1, 2023

By  Tim Meads

Ukraine-Russia Bomb
(OLGA Zhukovskaya via Getty Images)

Well, folks, don’t look now, but the “risk of a nuclear weapon being used is currently higher than at any time since the depths of the cold war,” according to the United Nations High Representative for Disarmament Affairs Izumi Nakamitsu.

The war in Ukraine — obviously — is what is driving that risk. Based on reports made during the UN’s security council on Friday, that war isn’t ending any time soon — as if there were any doubt of that. Americans should know it is not going to end any time soon, our commander-in-chief has said that our tax dollars and equipment will be supporting Ukraine in its battle against Russia for “as long as it takes” — whatever that means. The Swamp wants this war to continue — and so it will.

While Biden has been banging the war drums, Putin has been chatting with its neighbors and new BFF Belarus. Now, reports indicate that Russia will be stationing non-strategic nuclear weapons within Belarus territory. According to the UN, those will be in place for aerial use by July.

For its part, Russia denies such accusations.

“We are pursuing cooperation with Belarus without violating obligations,” Russian ambassador and Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia said on Friday. “We are not transferring nuclear weapons. We are talking about the retrofitting of airplanes and training teams in the construction of a storage facility on the territory of Belarus.”

Yet he did make sure to note that Russia would respond to any “provocative measures” as it saw fit, while adding, “A nuclear war cannot be won.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

Imagine If All Officials Were Interrogated By Reporters Like This

Posted by M. C. on March 29, 2023

Caitlin Johnstone

fascinating exchange took place at a UN press briefing the other day between China Global Television Network’s Xu Dezhi and the UN’s Deputy Spokesperson for the Secretary-General Farhan Haq about the US military occupation of Syria. The exchange is interesting both for the wild pro-US bias shown by a UN official, and for the way it illustrates how much truth can be exposed when journalists do what they’re supposed to do in the press gallery.

Xu, who has done on-the-ground reporting in Syria in the past, asked Haq some challenging questions about an attack on a US military base in eastern Syria last week which injured multiple American troops and killed an American contractor. In his response, Haq made the extremely incorrect claim that there are no US armed forces in Syria, and refused to say whether the US military occupation of part of the country is illegal.

Here’s the UN’s transcript of the key part of this exchange (emphasis added by me):

Xu: Do you not urge everyone to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria?

Haq: Well of course, that’s a given, and obviously it’s important that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria is respected. At the same time you are aware of the complexity of the situation of foreign forces, but we call for them to exercise restraint.

Xu: But, do you think the presence of the US military in Syria is illegal or not?

Haq: That’s not an issue that we’re dealing with at this stage. There’s been a war.

Xu: But, is that… because it sounds very familiar this week. We talk a lot about the UN Charter, the international law and relative resolutions.  But, it sounds to me, a foreign ministry based presence in another country without invitation, sounds like something else to me.

Haq: I’ll leave your analysis to you.  That there’s… At this stage there’s no…

XuWhat’s the difference between the situation in Syria and the situation in Ukraine?

HaqThere’s no US armed forces inside of Syria.  And so I don’t have a… It’s not a parallel situation to some of the others.

XuYou’re sure there’s no US military personnel in Syria?

Haq: I believe there’s military activity.  But, in terms of a ground presence in Syria, I’m not aware of that.

Xu: Okay.  Five US service members were injured in that attack.  If there were no US service members in Syria, how could they got injured?  That’s weird, right?  Should I ask you about that?  And by the way, if you’re talking about the resolution, the international law here is the resolution from Security Council 2254 (2015), I believe, it says in its PA [preambular] paragraph, “reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic and to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations”.

Haq: Yes.  I’m aware of that.  And as you see, that is accepted by the members of the Security Council itself.

Xu: Yeah.  So, again, back to my question, is that illegal to have presence in Syria for the US base, according to the relevant resolution that I just read out?

Haq: The relevant resolution does call for that and we call on all countries to respect that.  I wouldn’t go beyond that at this stage.

To be absolutely clear, this is a UN official. Haq has been in his current position as deputy spokesperson for almost a decade, and routinely answers questions about Syria as part of his capacity in that position.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

The UN is Obsolete – The Cabal & Their NGO’s are Mental Cavemen – Helena

Posted by M. C. on March 27, 2023

Ultimately, what Guterres is calling for at the UN is for ALL FRESH WATER to be owned by a global government and doled out to countries based on equity and sustainability metrics.   But there is a hitch –

Russia happens to have the largest reservoir in the world, Lake Baikal.  

Just what I want. The Great Lakes controlled by a faceless Zer or Ze in Brussels.

The lake depth mentioned in the article should have been one mile deep.


The Nationalist Voice

For over Seventy Years the UN has self declared it is the global peacemaker.   The global soothsayer for human rights.   The global climate Tzar. The UN is The Future!   But the tin foil hat blew off into the wind ravaged GMO seed field and revealed nary a root, a sprout, a speck of green – no brain beneath.  

The UN Seeks Solutions! The UN is the world’s global Flagship!   Ad nauseum, the UN self lauds.   The wheel of fortune spun and this time the payload came up China.   China is brokering peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Iran and the UAE, Palestine and Israel, Ukraine and Russia.

A tectonic plate shifts.   And the Mafia is pissed.

Are Western Nations purposefully creating a New BRICS Empire?   Do they envision themselves as a vassal of China?   The US and Canadian governments are clearly supporting communism. Bought by China money.   Beholden with Blackmail. Is the West thus pushing for a globalization based on a China Revolution Order?

The question is – who exactly will run this communist globe? Obviously China is being led to believe they will become the new Global Empire. IF America and the EU are envisioned to become 3rd world African nations – a China/Russia New Empire would most definitely unfold.

According to CSIS, the motto is: Deny, Deflect, Deter.  

The West is operating on two dimensions. Superficially, we are given a reality that is honed in chaos, murder, crime, pedophilia, and a Mad Max authority.   Beneath this superficial surface a maze of NGO power frames are asking AI to tell them what to do…   They have lost their footing, lost their direction, and are desperately attempting to find a means of regaining top tier Reign.

Their Problem:   Western NGO cultists are operating on a barbaric ideology that is rooted in ancient history – CONQUER!   They have yet to evolve beyond the pursuit of creating an ally by first destroying him.   Their perception of the 21st century is still rooted in caveman philosophies. And their fatal errors are increasing exponentially as a direct result.

Xi Jinping played the Tortoise.    The Mafia Cult thought they were invincible.   They did not anticipate the twist in allegiances. Their strategic ploy of installing incompetency into the various offices of White Houses across the globe has backfired!   Instead of giving them the desired space to rule – they have found themselves busily cleaning up mess after mess utilizing precious time! All while losing their footing.

The UN website looks like a Hollywood printout – glowing photoshopped faces – and highlights of money spent to achieve no solution.    NY is hosting UN Members to discuss Water:   We are draining humanity’s lifeblood through vampiric overconsumption and unsustainable use, and evaporating it through global heating.”    Of course EVERY agenda within the UN is discussed to the point of beating a dead horse because no one wants to take action!

Ultimately, what Guterres is calling for at the UN is for ALL FRESH WATER to be owned by a global government and doled out to countries based on equity and sustainability metrics.   But there is a hitch –

Russia happens to have the largest reservoir in the world, Lake Baikal.   At 744 miles deep and encompassing 12,300 sq miles – this ancient massive body of water is a precious resource!   Yet, out of reach to the Greedy Cultists.   They desperately WANT this water at any cost.   As such, it is not a coincidence that control of Russia is considered a primary goal.   Fatal Flaw?   The West sought control from the wrong angle.   Instead of making Russia an ally – the West sought to make Russia a demon.

Strategy is everything – and the imbeciles running the NGO’s blew it!

This month and forward countries will come together for the Water/Climate Summit, the Democracy Summit, the Security Summit, the World Bank Summit, the Hollywood Summit…   Each Summit guarantees a promise.   Each promise is matched by pinky swear testimony.   And nothing is EVER actually accomplished.

While all these Summits declare End of World issues, the Tortoise is busily making ‘friends’.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

The Bretton Woods Institutions and the Accelerated Dystopian Transformation of the Food Industry

Posted by M. C. on September 8, 2022

Subsequently, in 2020, the IMF stressed the importance of raising the prices of “land-intensive food (for example, beef).” This would help reduce the consumption of animal products by shifting “consumer preferences away” from items like meat, milk, and egg products. In essence, the IMF supports having “taxes levied” on “meat, dairy, and ultra-processed food” in order to “discourage their overconsumption.” 

Time for “World” and “International” institutions to go. Oh ya, guess who is paying for them.

Birsen Filip

The global food industry is currently undergoing a major transformation in the name of averting “climate change” that will involve the adoption of new technologies in the production process and the creation of alternative food products for consumption. Facilitating this transition has become a key priority of many international organizations and institutions, including the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations, and the Bretton Woods institutions, which consist of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

However, while the role of the WEF in the “Great Food Transformation” has been garnering more attention in recent months, those of the IMF, World Bank and WTO have gone relatively unnoticed. Like the WEF, these institutions have been highlighting the negative effects of the agriculture sector on the climate over the past few years, primarily “crop cultivation and livestock production.” They also claim that, in addition to being detrimental to the environment, meat and dairy products are “unhealthy” foods. According to the IMF, “reducing livestock emissions” is among the key actions needed to meet the “climate neutrality target [also known as net-zero emissions] by 2050,” which will also include “replacing polluting coal, gas and oil-fired power with energy from renewable sources, such as wind or solar” in over 120 countries. With respect to agriculture, the IMF advises “diversifying away from beef production” by “applying enhanced farm management practices and new technologies.”

In fact, the IMF published an article in 2019 urging radical changes on the supply side of food production in order to decrease “emissions in agriculture.” Specifically, this article stated that

global production and consumption of red meat (especially beef) and dairy will need to be cut by about 50 percent, through substitution of proteins supplied by plants. Urgent action in the top three beef (United States, Brazil, European Union) and dairy (United States, India, China) producers is key. Second, a large-scale shift is needed away from conventional monoculture agriculture toward practices that support biodiversity, such as organic and mixed crop-livestock farming, sustainable soil management, and ecosystem restoration. Denmark and the Netherlands were among the first countries to announce ambitious organic transformation plans.

Subsequently, in 2020, the IMF stressed the importance of raising the prices of “land-intensive food (for example, beef).” This would help reduce the consumption of animal products by shifting “consumer preferences away” from items like meat, milk, and egg products. In essence, the IMF supports having “taxes levied” on “meat, dairy, and ultra-processed food” in order to “discourage their overconsumption.” According to the IMF:

The average US retail price of a Big Mac, for example, is around $5.60. But with all the hidden expenses of meat production (including health care, subsidies, and environmental losses) the full burden on society is a hefty $12 per sandwich—a price that, if actually charged, could more than halve the US demand for burgers…. Likewise, a gallon of milk would run $9 instead of $3.50 and a store-bought, two-pound package of pork ribs would jump from $12 to $32.

It appears that, much like the WEF, the IMF is so committed to achieving “a Great Food Transformation” that it openly endorses using a centrally planned system to set the quantities and prices of food products to be sold instead of allowing them to be determined through voluntary exchanges in the marketplace, even though this would bring about the demise of economic freedom. The IMF also supports measures aimed at preventing individuals from consuming “animal products for breakfast or lunch.” To encourage the acceptance of these ideas and changes on the part of the people, the IMF has called for promoting the notion that such “dietary changes would entail health benefits as well as public spending savings.”

According to the IMF, achieving “a Great Food Transformation” will also require the redirection of state subsidies and loans toward “sustainable farms producing plant-based protein for human consumption and toward incentives for innovation on alternative proteins and smart farming technologies.” It would also involve “removing tax expenditure favoring products with emission-intensity,” such as “dairy/meat products,” and “providing financial support to R&D initiatives on emission reduction and carbon capture in agriculture.” Additionally, the IMF is of the view that stripping financial institutions of the ability to “lend to nonsustainable agri-food firms” would “provide essential support to a Great Food Transformation.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

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

TGIF: Another Climate Conference | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on November 5, 2021

 First, they’ve heard the apocalyptic predictions (driven by GIGO computer models) for too many decades, and second, they care about their living standards. The West’s affluent average don’t want to become poor, and the rest in Asia, Africa, and Latin America don’t want to stay poor.

By making people richer — especially in the world’s poorest countries — freer trade would also lead to societies that are far more resilient to climate shocks, more capable of investing in adaptation, and far less vulnerable to rising temperatures. In that way, free trade can be considered a smart climate policy as well as an excellent way to promote human thriving generally.

by Sheldon Richman

Sometimes we’ve got to be grateful for hypocrisy. If those who pretend to be world leaders actually delivered a fraction of what they promise in Glasgow, Scotland, where the UN’s COP26 (Conference of Parties) Conference on Climate Change runs through Nov. 12, we’d be far bigger trouble than we already are.

You know how these things go. Power-loving, sanctimonious politicians and their minions pontificate (for 12 days!?) on how the world will end in 20 minutes unless they force their subjects to behave in ways they don’t wish to behave and to spend trillions of dollars they would rather keep. Meanwhile, cheap and dependable energy will be taken from or denied to them for their own good. It’s an old song,

Fortunately, these charlatans haven’t yet gone nearly as far as they purportedly intend or their most zealous supporters want them to go. But this is certainly not to say that they do no harm except to give kids nightmares and scarce some grownups. The politicians et al. have done immense harm for years, with their demonization of carbon dioxide (a foundation of all life), and their pushing of “solutions” such as unreliable and costly wind and solar power to imagined manmade problems. (Even Michael Moore has seen through those scams, for which he’s paid a price by alienating himself from former fans. Spoiler alert: a movie he produced, Planet of the Humans, indicts so-called renewable energy  –Alex Epstein calls them the unreliables — as environmentally hazardous.)

One reason for the welcome gap between promise and performance is that politicians worldwide realize that real people won’t stand for the full program. First, they’ve heard the apocalyptic predictions (driven by GIGO computer models) for too many decades, and second, they care about their living standards. The West’s affluent average don’t want to become poor, and the rest in Asia, Africa, and Latin America don’t want to stay poor.

In the developed world, that means people don’t want higher energy prices, and for good reason: power, which comes largely from marvelous fossil fuels, underlies everything that makes life for the masses materially far better than it was only a couple of centuries ago — however much we take it for granted.

And in the developing world, poor people would like to have the living standard that the average Westerner has. In essence, those who lack cheap electricity and gasoline want don’t want to be kept waiting.

Whoever asks them to give up that dream and remain inhabitants of a tourist theme park ought to be ashamed of themselves. Their rulers give mixed messages on the matter because they prosper from the big money transfers from the developed world’s taxpayers. But as the heroic economist P. T. Bauer taught us so well, government-to-government transfers are more likely to fuel central planning, corruption, and oppression than good things for real people. Rather, Bauer insisted, good things come from freedom, independent enterprise, and free markets.

Fortunately, along with the hypocritical politicians and despondent zealots, we find many voices of reason on the matters of climate and energy — voices of people with impeccably strong credentials in all the relevant fields, from the atmospheric sciences to economics and related social sciences. Since they are not driven by the ambition to use climate to push for a Jacobin and authoritarian “great reset,” they can see things clearly. That is, they are guided by evidence and logic, rather than computer models chock-full of controversial assumptions about something as complex as “the climate.” You can see this in the climate optimists’ (some call themselves “luke warmers) print and video presentations. Compared to them, the merchants of hysteria look like junior high school debaters who memorized a few talking points and scary scenarios the night before.

One optimist is the Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg of the Copenhagen Consensus Center. (To say he is an optimist is not the say he thinks we live in the best of all possible worlds.) I am inclined to disagree with some of what Lomborg says because I as a layman find the pro-CO2 scientists (Princeton’s William Happer, the late Freeman Dyson of Princeton, MIT’s Richard Lindzen, and many others) more persuasive. Lomborg takes the UN IPCC’s climate assessment at face value and reserves a role for the government — though he would spend far, far less than the alarmists — that I find objectionable. Those reservations aside, as a non-alarmist he has sensible things to say.

Lomborg’s book is False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet. As you can tell, he thinks the planet needs fixing with respect to the climate, but where he differs from the catastrophe lobby is that he sees no world-threatening emergency. Instead, he sees warming as one of many world problems — and not even the most dire — that could be addressed calmly, effectively, and much less expensively than the lobby demands. Panic, he says, is misplaced and assures bad responses. That in itself is refreshing. Have a look:

In the Financial Post in August, Lomborg wrote:

Because of economic development, the UN estimates that the average person in the world will become 450 per cent as well-off by 2100 as they are today [if nothing were done about warming]. But climate change will have a cost, in that adaptation and challenges become somewhat harder. Because of climate change, the average person in 2100 will “only” be 436 per cent as well off as today. [Emphasis added.]

This is not the apocalypse but a problem to which we should find smart fixes.

He went on:

[G]lobally, many more people die from cold than from heat. A new study in the highly respected journal Lancet shows that about half a million people die annually from heat, but 4.5 million people die from cold. As temperatures have increased over the past two decades, that has caused an extra 116,000 heat deaths each year. This fits the narrative, of course, and is what we have heard over and over again.

But it turns out that because global warming has also reduced cold waves, we now see 283,000 fewer cold deaths. You don’t hear this, but so far climate change saves 166,000 lives each year.

His bottom line is: “In reality, humans adapt…. Ultimately, this is why the scare stories on climate impacts are vastly overblown and not supported by this new [IPCC] climate report.”

Lomborg sees that the obsession with climate overshadows far more urgent developing-world problems regarding malnutrition, disease, education, and more. And as he points out, these maladies are related to a deeper problem: poverty. He understands that these problems would be best addressed by increased production of wealth, a truism demonstrated repeatedly in modern history. And how is widespread wealth produced? Lomborg goes part of the way with libertarians: freedom.

In Fortune he wrote:

To help make the world better, we need to focus more on the very best policies. Top among these is freer trade. Free trade has recently been criticized by left- and right-wing politicians because it hurts vulnerable communities like manufacturing workers in the Rust Belt.

This misses the bigger picture…. Much of … [the] benefits would go to the world’s poorest, who would have far more opportunities if they could become part of the global market….

By making people richer — especially in the world’s poorest countries — freer trade would also lead to societies that are far more resilient to climate shocks, more capable of investing in adaptation, and far less vulnerable to rising temperatures. In that way, free trade can be considered a smart climate policy as well as an excellent way to promote human thriving generally.

In other words, wealthier is healthier, as the political scientist Aaron Wildavsky used to say. And that means that freer is healthier, more resilient. Changes in climates are nothing new. They’ve always changed. What’s made the natural world so much more hospitable since the late 18th century are: reason, greater freedom in all realms of peaceful action, the division of labor, innovation, free trade, and man’s consequent adaptation to nature’s sometimes perilous changes.

As Lomborg wisely counsels, the world isn’t coming to an end — to which I would add: unless those who want to deprive the world of cheap and dependable energy succeed.

TGIF — The Goal Is Freedom — appears on Friday.

B seeing you

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

The Specter of One World Government Looms Large – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on October 21, 2021

Instead of stressing the word “rights” throughout, as did the original U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the word “rights” appears only once in the Agenda, in Section 19.  Instead of “rights,” the two buzzwords that appear throughout the Agenda are “needs” and “sustainability.”  “Needs” resonates with the Marxist dictum “from each according to his ability; to each according to his needs.”

By E. Jeffrey Ludwig

The U.N.’s Agenda 2030 is still in place, and the clock is ticking toward its empowerment — only eight years and two-plus months to go.  This Agenda is for a new world government, which will implement the policies of the Agenda.

This new government on our horizon explains many of the failures in policies in these first months of the Biden administration.  The failures are based not so much on mistakes as on deliberate sabotage to weaken our country, dilute the power that undergirds our sovereignty, and prepare us to accept one-world government.

The seed ideas for Agenda 2030 began with Pres. Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations in his Fourteen Points at the end of WWI.  A community of nations could bring pressure for peace in the world that the treaty or alliance system could not do, as shown by the First World War.  While this idea took hold in Europe and other countries, it was unable to gain sufficient traction in the U.S. as it met with Republican resistance in the U.S. Senate on the grounds that it would lead to a dilution of U.S. sovereignty.

With the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, all right-thinking persons can see that Woodrow Wilson’s first giant step toward globalism was rightly rejected.  The League was a complete failure in terms of bringing peace to the world.  To the German Nazi government, the League was a joke.  The Japanese left the League after their invasion of China was repudiated.  Yet Republican sway over U.S. governance became diminished by the four-time election of Franklin D. Roosevelt as president of the U.S. and the hegemony of the Democrat party for twenty years from 1933 to 1953.

After WWII, the U.N. was conceived of as having duties and functions that the League did not have.  The U.N. would sustain the world in real ways with the establishment of the International Monetary Fund to strengthen currencies worldwide and the World Bank to finance and endorse vast construction projects.  These institutions would together foster peace and “community” in our fragmented world (whispers of the “it takes a village” cliché that would take hold decades later).  After all, is it not true that poverty is ultimately the cause of conflict in our world?

Yes, the U.S. and the other illogical leftists throughout the West and the other parts of the world bought into the Marxist idea that wars are caused by fierce competition for scarce resources.  Even the great Harvard economist Walt Rostow in the 1950s and 1960s had a vision of global financial institutions through the sponsorship of the U.N. as bringing the poorest countries to a “take-off stage.”  There was only one problem with Prof. Rostow’s well-researched and theoretically sound vision: take-off never happened.  All that great Harvard research was not worth the paper it was written on.  The wealth disparities among the developed world, the less developed countries (LDCs), and the less developed developing countries (LDDCs) persisted. 

As a result of the perceived stratification of the world community, there was a paradigm shift in understanding the relations among the different wealth levels of societies.  Many on the left believed that if the whole world were one, then the destitution and resulting despair of the poorer countries could not be dismissed as a failure of local nation-state governments to enact good policies or to be less corrupt.  If, so to speak, all nations were under the same roof or same umbrella, the thought “that’s their problem” could not easily obtain.

“Their problem” automatically would become “our problem,” as we all are together under one government.  This is an updating of the idea first put forward in 18th-century France by Jean-Jacques Rousseau that the best government is not the liberty-centered, individualistic, and rights-oriented government such as projected by John Locke; rather, the best government bypasses all exploitation by expressing the General Will — it is a vision that goes beyond mere teamwork, a vision of all for all.  Any type of individualism or personal achievement is bourgeois and undermines true progress.

That brings us to Agenda 2030.  This Agenda puts forward a plan for a new soft world government by the year 2030.  It was a plan adopted unanimously by the U.N. on September 25, 2015, and has 91 sections.  The Agenda covers every aspect of human experience and thus is a government without using the word government.  Instead of stressing the word “rights” throughout, as did the original U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the word “rights” appears only once in the Agenda, in Section 19.  Instead of “rights,” the two buzzwords that appear throughout the Agenda are “needs” and “sustainability.”  “Needs” resonates with the Marxist dictum “from each according to his ability; to each according to his needs.”  Just as the more wealthy and advanced countries engage in various socialist and social welfare programs to meet the needs of their poorer citizens, the wealthier countries will feel more obligated and be expected to contribute much more to the needs of their fellow citizens in their new global state.  Trans-national identities of persons will replace national identities.  The needs of people will be uppermost in peoples’ minds, not their location in the world, ethnicity, religion, customs, mores, diets, appearances, and gender identities.  All distinctions become subsumed under needs in this new vision of one world.

“Sustainability” also brings us into the sphere of commonality rather than differences.  We all occupy one environment.  Problems with the oceans near one place may have effects on air quality at another — distant — place.  We all have to breathe the air on Planet Earth.  We influence each other all over the world through carbon emissions and through our habits of waste disposal.  Natural resources may be available to some countries more than others, but insofar as we are all residents of one planet, those resources ultimately belong to all.  Sustainability according to this vision is a global issue, and it must be addressed as a global issue through a world government. 

With this evolution of the U.N. before us, are we not better able to understand why the left is so comfortable with the collapse of our borders?  With the capture and availability of so much U.S. military equipment in Afghanistan?  With the overthrow of law and order in our cities so we look more and more like an unruly third-world country with each passing year?  With our budgets so inflated that currency inflation and collapse are almost a certainty?

Yes, this writer is proposing that these recent “mistakes” are connected with the goal of a one-world government, which has already been enunciated and was signed onto by the USA.  The disintegration we are facing in various sectors is, I believe, part of a move toward the collapse of our sovereignty in favor of a world government as outlined in Agenda 2030.

Image: sanjitbakshi via Flickr.

Be seeing you

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

Erie Times E-Edition Article-Australia, UN face off over reef

Posted by M. C. on June 23, 2021

The One World UN government that many desire is trying to dictate life for one of it’s subjects and that subject doesn’t like it.

Oh the irony of it all. The country that continues to enforce the hardest of hard virus lockdowns on it’s own citizens balks at a possible tourism lockdown by the UN.

Is this the first symptom of an emerging climate lockdown? Whatever this is, I am sure there will be more to come.

Rod McGuirk ASSOCIATED PRESS CANBERRA, Australia – Australia said Tuesday it will fight against plans to downgrade the Great Barrier Reef’s World Heritage status due to climate change, while environmentalists have applauded the U.N. World Heritage Committee’s proposal.

The committee said in a draft report on Monday that ‘there is no possible doubt’ that the network of colorful corals off Australia’s northeast coast was ‘facing ascertained danger.’

The report recommends that the world’s most extensive coral reef ecosystem be added to UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger, which includes 53 sites, when the World Heritage Committee considers the question in China in July.

The listing could shake Australians’ confidence in their government’s ability to care for the natural wonder and create a role for UNESCO headquarters in devising so-called ‘corrective measures,’ which would likely include tougher action to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Any downgrade of the reef’s World Heritage status could reduce tourism revenue that the natural wonder generates for Australia because fewer tourists would be attracted to a degraded environment and dead coral.

Reef cruise operators said the report was wrong and that tourists continued to be awed by dazzling coral and multicolored fish. But some tourists said the reef had seemed more colorful during visits decades ago.

Environment Minister Sussan Ley said she and Foreign Minister Marise Payne had called UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay to express the government’s ‘strong disappointment’ and ‘bewilderment’ at the proposal.

Australia, one of 21 countries on the committee, will oppose the listing, Ley said.

‘This decision was flawed. Clearly there were politics behind it,’ Ley told reporters. ‘Clearly those politics have subverted a proper process, and for the World Heritage Committee to not even foreshadow this listing is, I think, appalling.’

The network of 2,500 reefs covering 134,000 square miles has been World Heritage-listed since 1981.

But its health is under increasing threat from climate change and rising ocean temperatures.

The report found the site had suffered significantly from coral bleaching events caused by unusually warm ocean temperatures in 2016, 2017 and last year.

Australian Marine Conservation Society environmental consultant Imogen Zethoven welcomed the committee’s recognition that ‘Australia hasn’t done enough on climate change to protect the future of the reef.’

The reef would become the first site to be added to the List of World Heritage in Danger primarily for climate change reasons, Zethoven said.

‘It would be a very significant step for the World Heritage Committee to make this decision and one that we really hope that it does make because it will open up a lot of potential change,’ she said.

Richard Leck, a spokesman for the environmental group WWF, said listing the reef as in danger would be ‘a real shock’ to many Australians.

In 2014, Australia was warned that an ‘in danger’ listing was being considered rather than being proposed for immediate action.

Australia had time to respond by developing a long-term plan to improve the reef’s health called the Reef 2050 Plan.

The committee said this week that plan ‘requires stronger and clearer commitments, in particular towards urgently countering the effects of climate change.’

Ley said climate change policy debate should be restricted to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

‘I know … that climate change is the biggest threat to the reef, and in no way am I stepping away from that recognition, and countries including European countries have got strong views about what policies different countries should have on climate change, and I understand that as well, but this is not the convention in which to have those conversations,’ Ley said, referring to the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.

Observers say the swearing in on Tuesday of new Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, who opposes action on climate change that increases prices, signals Australia is likely to set less ambitious targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Terry Hughes, director of the Australian Research Council’s Center for Excellence in Coral Reef Studies, said Australia’s refusal to commit to a net zero carbon emissions target by 2050 made the country a ‘complete outlier.’

‘This draft decision from UNESCO is pointing the finger at Australia and saying: ‘If you’re serious about saving the Great Barrier Reef, you need to do something about your climate policies,’’ Hughes told Australian Broadcasting Corp.

The U.N. World Heritage Committee says Australia’s Great Barrier Reef faces ‘ascertained danger’ and proposes lowering its status. Kyodo News via AP

Australian Environment Minister Sussan Ley said the U.N.’s proposal to list the Great Barrier Reef as ‘in danger’ is flawed and politically driven. Lukas Coch/AAP via AP

Be seeing you

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

How The Grinch Flunked Ecology and Stole the Whole Damn Year – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 2, 2021

Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” –Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg,

By L. Reichard White

OK, I’m going to give away this whole piece with the first quotes. Can you figure out where I’m going with ’em – – –

Athens distributed its most responsible public positions by lottery: army generalships, water supply, everything. …Professionals existed but did not make key decisions; they were only technicians, never well regarded because prevailing opinion held that technicians had enslaved their own minds. –The Way It Used To Be by John Taylor Gatto

Some First Nation folks have a related outlook which clarifies things – – –

My own tradition disbelieves in “experts.” “That which enables, disables also” means that a physicist will fail in understanding in many other areas, precisely because of the amount of time she/he spends on physics and therefore not on other things. Such people are not considered “experts,” but “those extensively informed on part of the whole“. –A NATIVE AMERICAN WORLDVIEW, by Paula Underwood Spencer

“…everything is too important ever to be entrusted to professional experts, because every organization of such professionals and every established social organization becomes a vested-interest institution more concerned with its efforts to maintain itself or advance its own interests than to achieve the purpose that society expects it to achieve.” –Carroll Quigley, ex-president William Jefferson Clinton’s mentor

Here’s the typical reaction when an “organization of such professionals” is challenged – – –

“I’d lie. We have to survive after-all.” –my childhood friend just before an internal evaluation to determine if the organization he headed actually was reducing the prison recidivism rate. He didn’t have to lie.

Particularly note Paula Underwood Spencer’s sentence, “Such people are not considered ‘experts,’ but ‘those extensively informed on part of the whole‘.”

Maybe that use of the word “whole” reminds you of ecology? Not yet? Well I’m pretty sure it will – – –

When Dr. Fauci and I were growing up — he’s five years older — our pale-face cultures — and even science — were a lot more narrow-minded, restricted and boxed-in, mostly because of a few language quirks and associated habits of thought.

Then along came General Semantics, operations research which morphed into systems analysis, and finally, in the 1960s, the environmental movement which popularized ecology.

They all helped us see through the barriers, walls and borders we inadvertantly impose on reality because of those quirks of language and habits of thought. They helped us see the Bigger Picture, and of course, that there always is one.

Another view sees system analysis as a problem-solving technique that breaks down a system into its component pieces for the purpose of studying how well those component parts work and interact to accomplish their purpose.[1… Systems analysis – Wikipedia

Systems analysis showed us we were always drawing lines — mental and otherwise — around parts of things, and thus, as per Paula Underwood Spencer, dividing the whole up into parts. That schooled us, implicitly at least, that there was always something on the other side of every line.

This is my favorite icon for that enlightenment, especially for folks of Dr. Fauci’s and my generations – – –

We know that the earth is round. We know there are people on it. We know that they are all like us. But when you fly around it time and time again —90 minutes to get around the whole earth—again and again and again, it comes in a different way. It doesn’t come in through the head. It comes in through the heart, in through the gut. When you come down from that experience, you’ve crossed thousands and thousands of borders and boundaries that are artificially created. They work nice on maps. You paint them orange and blue and green. But that’s not what it is when viewed from space. You don’t even see those boundaries and borders. We created them, guys, and it’s up to us to do something about it. …That’s what comes through to you when you’re up there in space, when you’re flying around this beautiful planet. –from “On Space,” by Rusty Schweickart, excerpted from The Magic of Conflict by Thomas F. Crum, pg. 85

In the 1960s – – – I turned 20 and Dr. Fauci was probably in medical school “enslaving his own mind” – – – the Environmental Movement, built on ecology, brought things down to earth. It nudged us into recognizing that biological organisms are interrelated and that although each organism has its own ecological niche, everything, affects everything else, often very indirectly.

And Chaos Theory with its butterfly flapping that Kansas tornado into existence expanded our core insights into interrelatedness.

And so we became aware that things we didn’t normally think of as related affecting each other wasn’t just limited to biology. It was the rule not the exception, and the word “ecology” became the go-to word to describe large-scale interrelatedness in general.

So, for example, business enterprises exist in an ecology. In fact, the entire economy is one huge interrelated ecosystem. And that ecosystem includes how you get your money and nearly everything you spend it on. Food for example. In other words, the economy is the central hub of our entire socio-economic ecosystem.

Without the interrelatedness of a well-functioning economy, a huge percentage of us would die, most from starvation.

The medical community is an integral part of that ecosystem. But only a part.

It seems that the medical experts our bureaucrats and elected prevaricators have put in charge — a mistake the ancient Greeks and P. Underwood Spencer wouldn’t have made — all flunked ecology, have forgotten or remain unaware of their ecological niche limitations, and have missed the Big Picture.

Just as Mr. Quigley suggested, enabled by the political establishment and fertilized by Main Stream Media, the medical-government-media complex is behaving as “a vested-interest institution more concerned with its efforts to maintain itself or advance its own interests than to achieve the purpose that society expects it to achieve,” that is, it’s behaving as an out-of-control memetic machine.

So now, let’s put this devastating mistake in proper ecological perspective.

If, as implemented, lockdowns, masks and social distancing would stop COVID-19 the pandemic would be over. Clearly they don’t and it isn’t.

Epidemiologists told us early-on, once things got out of control of contact-tracing, as with other flues, there would be no stopping COVID-19 till it had run its course and one way or another, we reached so-called “herd immunity.

They told us until herd immunity, the best we could do was to slow it down enough that it wouldn’t overwhelm the hospitals because that might lead to inadequate care in some cases and thus more deaths than otherwise expected.

This wouldn’t prevent infections, cases or deaths, it would just spread them out over time. Chaos Theory: Two Essa… Robert P. Murphy Best Price: $15.61 Buy New $7.00 (as of 04:50 EDT – Details)

You remember, “flatten the curve.”

So, as more realistically understood, the best the most extreme medically-proposed measures — particularly lockdowns — could hope for was preventing a relatively few extra deaths by protecting hospitals from serious overcrowding.

Still, isolated from the rest of the socio-economic ecosystem — and suitably hyped by the medical and pharma PR folks — and politicians — that sounds sortta reasonable. Doesn’t it?

However, once you take the medical-expert blinders off — and realize the MSM hasn’t — you can begin to drop this aberration into its niche in our full ecosystem. And you can begin to see the utter devastation this economically blind, idiocracy-worthy lockdown fiasco is still (January 2021 A.D.) wreaking on the world’s health and socio-economic ecology.

For starters, not to disvalue us older folks, but a significant majority of asserted COVID-19 victims are much older and we have fewer years to live. That means that the majority of any lives saved by lockdowns etc. would be, actuarially speaking, our less valuable lives. Taking that into account, this study concludes that COVID-19 Lockdowns [Are] Over 10 Times More Deadly Than the Pandemic Itself .

So the very most we get in return for what multi-credentialed Dr. Roger Hodkinson aptly called the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public is extending a relatively few lives of older folks and taking the pressure off hospital staff for awhile. And that’s the most you can hope for.

What’s the full Big Picture socio-economic cost for this?

For a quick, dirty, and mostly random sampling, in addition to the “10 Times More Deadly” figure above, we can start off with the CDC’s own records which document a 24% to 31% increase in pediatric mental health visits for children between the ages of 5 and 18.

And then, according to a September 2020 economic impact report by Yelp, 163,735 U.S. businesses had closed their doors as of August 31, 2020, and of those, 60% – a total of 97,966 businesses – were permanent closures. Hardest hit were minority enterprises. That’s from “Why Lockdowns Don’t Work and Hurt the Most Vulnerable” by Dr. Joseph Mercola. There’s a lot more in that article.

And then, if you’re concerned about saving lives, there’s this biggie:

“2021 Will Be Catastrophic” – UN Warns Of Humanitarian Crisis As 270 Million People May Starve

Once you have the blinders off — and realize the MSM still has them firmly in place — you can begin to see the costs vs. the benefits. I suggest whisky and tranquilizers — not at the same time of course. And you might want to keep your firearms out of reach.

We regularly hear, “Listen to the scientists!” But which scientists?

Despite the quite amazing attempt to censor folks who disagree with the ecologically challenged folks in charge, not all of our medical folks flunked ecology. Apparently only the ones the politicians and bureaucrats decided to put in charge.

Because so far, as of December 23, 2020, these 39,384 Medical practitioners and 13,035 Medical & Public Health Scientists signed The Great Barrington Declaration, dissing The Establishment’s alarmist, misleading destructive, and socio-economically ignorant handling of COVID-19.

The Declaration nails a few of the harmful effects like this – – –

“Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health … with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden.” and “with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.” …”Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. ” …

And Great Barrington Declaration goes on to suggest this immediate correction:

“Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. “

Then there’s Dr. David Nabbaro, the UK’s envoy to the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.) bureaucracy. He’s condemned the mass coronavirus lockdowns as a ghastly global catastrophe for crashing the world economy and doubling global poverty.

Unfortunately, in speaking out clearly, Dr. Nabbaro is somewhat of a W.H.O. rogue.

Even when you’re just consulting the experts and not worshiping them, there’s this final warning about them from inside science – – –

“Learn from science that you must doubt the experts. As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” –Legendary physicist Richard Feynman

And OK, so it’s not fair to cast Dr. Fauci as the Grinch Who Flunked Ecology and Stole the Whole Damn Year, he’s just doing what any self-respecting expert would do in his position. It’s our fault for taking the elected liars who listened almost exclusively to him and his ecologically challenged brethern seriously. And especially it’s on us for taking their literally illegal dictats seriously.

We can stop now.

But, dang it, if there ever was an excuse for type casting – – –

Fauci tells Americans not to see their kids for Christmas | Fox News

So, is all this just socio-economic ignorance? I like to think so, but this haunts me – – –

Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” –Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg,

HERE for updates, additions, comments, and corrections.

AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!

L. Reichard White [send him mail] taught physics, designed and built a house, ran for Nevada State Senate, served two terms on the Libertarian National Committee, managed a theater company, etc. For the next few decades, he supported his writing habit by beating casinos at their own games. His hobby, though, is explaining things he wishes someone had explained to him. You can find a few of his other explanations listed here.

Be seeing you

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

Is the UN Preparing for the “Second Covid Lockdown”? Oppressive Measures Worldwide, Obedience and Acceptance… – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Posted by M. C. on August 28, 2020

They are means and instruments for the New World Order (NWO) to “train” the population for total obedience and control by the invisible super power, or deep dark state. WHO plays a key role in this nefarious plans, as it still is regarded by most people and governments as an authority, as far as world health is concerned which sadly, it has ceased to be decades ago.

Driven by WHO, the Geneva UN Medical Directors (UNMD) group has just issued a CONSENSUS STATEMENT for UN staff in Geneva that is essentially warning UN staff of stricter measures to be taken, such as mask wearing in the office when 2-meter distances could not be respected, as well as increased working from home again, when as recently as in June these conditions were relaxed. Working from home means separating colleagues from each other, connecting them by Zoom, but NO HUMAN CONTACT. That’s the name of the game.

The UNMD refers to the Canton of Geneva’s new regulations, based on Switzerland’s claim of a steady increase in Covid-19 “infections”. Since the beginning of July new “cases” have surpassed 100 a day and reached even way beyond 200 at the end of July and above 250 in mid-August. The testing positive has allegedly steadily increased and often by close to 10% per day. Now, surprisingly – they say – 40% of the “cases” concern people between 20 and 40 years of age. But who checks? – Is it a mandate by WHO to diversify the statistics, so as to better justify universal vaccination and another total lockdown?

We know by now that nothing of this, masks, “cases / infections”, quarantine, lockdown, vaccination, or any other repressive measure have anything to do with covid. They are means and instruments for the New World Order (NWO) to “train” the population for total obedience and control by the invisible super power, or deep dark state. WHO plays a key role in this nefarious plans, as it still is regarded by most people and governments as an authority, as far as world health is concerned which sadly, it has ceased to be decades ago.

The Canton of Geneva, where, incidentally, WHO and the UN are located, is the “worst” Canton of Switzerland, counting for about a third of all “infections”. So, say the Swiss authorities. A spokesperson of the Swiss Ministry of Health remarked, “if Geneva were a separate country, anybody coming from Geneva to the rest of Switzerland would have to go into quarantine.”

How scary!

That’s the level of fearmongering going on – justifying obliging face masks in public places and shops and closed areas. Never mind that there is a strong protest of small shop keepers and retail corporations, since they are losing rapidly customers. People do not want to shop with masks. They also find it useless. So, they migrate to online shopping, much of it abroad. Retail losses are estimated at least at 30%. There is already talk of forcing a masquerade also in the streets. Likewise, new emphasis is put on ‘social distancing’. People are to be trained and reminded at every corner to stay away from each other. A masquerade with people walking – in lockstep – or standing two meters apart.

If a Martian would see the human race, no backbone, no self-esteem, just following orders for what most serious scientists consider human history’s worst hoax – he or she, the Martian, would think “the human race has gone mad, let them lockstepping themselves into oblivion. Let’s the hell get out of this lovely blue but crazy planet.”

And the population zombies along because the authorities order them to do so, under threat of fines – against all common sense. But zombies have been deprived of any common sense to resist in masses. Such restrictions and more are now in place until at least 1 October 2020. That’s about the beginning of the 2020 / 2021 flu season which will be conveniently mixed up with covid-19 – and justifies another lockdown – not to forget – with mass vaccination, for covid and flu. Quarantine, livelihood destruction – an economic skyfall into more poverty, more misery, more deprivation, more famine – more death. Not covid- death, but socioeconomic death. That’s exactly what the eugenics fanatics are dreaming of. A decimation of the world population.

WHO is part and parcel of the party, recommending these steps, if and when they are told to do so. By the invisible monsters, of course. The UN is going along. Or, is it the UN who has forced these increasing covid figures in Geneva, so they may prepare first their staff, then the population in general – worldwide – for a new lockdown in October-November? – All is possible.

We are in for the long haul; the UN paper suggests. And so do authorities (sic-sic), not only in Switzerland, but all around the world. Look at the tyrannical oppressive measures of Melbourne, the Department of Victoria in Australia; similar in New Zealand; South Africa; Thailand has hermetically closed all her borders – Germany is preparing for a new lockdown, though they say the contrary (not withstanding a strong popular resistance), so is France – and the US, State by sorry State, as they are battling racial unrest, Woke protests, Black Lives Matter (BLM) movements, and anti-police riots. All organized and paid for by the Soroses, Rockefellers, Fords, Gates and more oligarchic “philanthropic” humanitarian foundations. The mainstream cannot even keep up anymore with covering the US city chaos.

All this talk, predictions, projections, threats, contradictions, anarchy in the cities – is fabricated on purpose not only to confuse, but also to repress and depress people. Hopelessness is an effective weapon. It’s a weaponized narrative.

The “Consensus Statement of the Geneva UN Medical Directors network” starts by saying – “The recent surge in new cases” – without ever describing what NEW CASES entail.

New infections? Newly tested positive, but no symptoms? Sick people? Hospitalized people? People who died? – In fact, the death rate has not gone up whatsoever. Nobody has died from these “new cases” or “new infections”. But nobody reports on this important fact.

It sounds dramatic: a case, an infection — but nobody dares ask the so-called pathetic and corrupted authorities such crucial questions. Nobody asks for an explanation what these “increased figures” really mean? – Are they increased as a function of increased testing? How is testing performed? Does anybody ever ask how the infamous and controversial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests are performed and analyzed, and the results reported into the annals of statistics, so as to produce ever more “virus-cases”?

The website “Virology Down Under” reports a comment of Professor Martin Haditsch, writing in ProMed-mail:

As to my knowledge “infection” is defined as the proof of an infectious agent AND the proof of multiplication of this agent inside the body (OR associated inflammatory response that can be linked to this agent). Therefore, my question is: where was the specimen taken from the “asymptomatic” nurses? PCR, as we all know, just detects nucleic acids. So, if multiplication cannot be proven and no local or systemic inflammatory response is given, how was “contamination” (no matter whether due to inactivated parts of MERS-CoV or even complete virus particles) ruled out? This is not a semantic question only but should impact the reported number of “cases”.

Does the surge in “new cases” coincide with a surge of new tests?

Who makes the tests?

Is there an independent entity that controls the tests, monitors the tests, as to who is tested and when and with what frequency tests are carried out – and the results reported? For example, are people who are tested several times, also reported several times?

The UNMD CONSENSUS STATEMENT is nothing but a support to the globalized fearmongering. It fits an agenda, a huge sinister agenda. The compulsory mask wearing is the most detested measure imposed by the deep dark state – the invisible masters that are pressuring us into a NWO scheme. They know it. They love it. They are psychopaths. And mask-wearing is dangerous, dangerous for one’s health and well-being.

In most places in Europe, the new school year just began. Students in many places are forced to wear masks, where “social distancing” in class rooms cannot be respected. Many students have been interviewed throughout Europe – and probably on other Continents too. Their response is almost unanimous – masks are uncomfortable, concentration is faltering after about two hours, we are exhausted in the evening and often have headaches. No wonder, breathing your own CO2 instead of oxygen cannot be very healthy.

The forced mask-wearing is an important agenda in the Great Transformation or the Great Reset, predicted by both the IMF and the WEF (World Economic Forum), to be officially “rolled out” in Davos, Switzerland in January 2021. It is an agenda of re-education by rituals. The mask wearing is a ritual on behavioral acceptance. It’s a ritual of initiation towards obedience. The faster and easier you accept the mask, the faster you are accepted – accepted in society. Most people want to be accepted. It makes them comfortable, no matter how much this acceptance is uncomfortable and based on lies.

Watch the first 4 min. of this video.

Then there are the few who will resist, who don’t care about acceptance. They fiercely resist. The system of tyranny makes sure they are socially discriminated and excluded from “society” they are social no-goes. They are looked at as if they were monsters, spreaders of disease, discriminated against, excluded. It is the old “divide to conquer”. Your friend for years has suddenly become your enemy. Families, groups, clubs, entire societies are divided and made to despise each other – division along the ‘ritual line’.

Amazing how it works for masks. Wait until you see how it works for vaccination – another ritual being prepared, as we are oblivious to what’s awaiting us in the next 5 to 10 years. Think Agenda ID2020 and Agenda 2030 – under the UN disguise of Sustainable Development Goals.

We are not doomed yet. But we have to act fast and decisively and in unison – in solidarity. Let’s reinvent solidarity.


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.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; New Eastern Outlook (NEO); RT; Countercurrents, Sputnik; PressTV; The 21st Century; Greanville Post; Defend Democracy Press; The Saker Blog, the and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

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

COVID-19 and the 1918-20 ‘Spanish’ Flu, a ‘Progressive’ Century Apart – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 18, 2020

Along with counting people who actually die from the virus, officials will also count people with the virus as a Covid death but who die from something else. Last month Washington state revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed that anyone who died for any reason who also had coronavirus was listed as a “Covid-19 death,” even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19. Some hospitals have put Covid-19 on death certificates as the cause of death without a Covid test ever being done. It is a true fact that authorities have overcounted Covid-19 deaths.

One observer, Jim Quinn, puts it this way: “This nasty virus, supposedly let loose from a Wuhan biolab, is less deadly than the annual flu among those under 65 years old and more deadly when purposely introduced into nursing homes by politicians.”


This article is taken from a talk I gave on August 16, 2020 at the 38th Annual Meeting of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness in Las Vegas. I compare the two pandemics and touch upon the ‘Progressive’ Century that separates them. With Covid-19 and its sequelae we live in challenging times that call for disaster preparedness. The text includes some of the slides I used for this talk.

The Covid-19 pandemic has been compared with 1918-1920 ‘Spanish’ flu a century ago. I will address this and compare their respective Mortality, Lockdowns (or lack thereof), Treatment, and subsequent Depressions. And finally, with Covid our Brave New World.

Professionally, I have maintained a long-term interest in viruses, vaccines, HIV-AIDS, and vitamin D and have written articles and given talks on these subjects, including one on HIV-AIDS at the 33rd Doctors for Disaster Preparedness meeting in Ontario, CA. Most are on and are grouped by subject on my website


More than 30 million Americans had the ‘Spanish’ Flu in a  population of 105 million, and with 675,000 deaths, a 2.3% fatality rate.

“Fast forward” to today. The Director-General of the UN’s World Health Organization, Tedros Ghebreyesus, is an Ethiopian politician and the first non-physician to head this body. He declared early on that Covid-19 has a 3.4% mortality rate.  With a rate this high Covid could kill many millions of people worldwide.

This spawned a global panic. The Director-General, however, left out people who became infected with this virus but do not get sick and were not tested. Up to 80% of people who test positive for Covid have no symptoms or only have mild ones imitating a cold. Counting them would make the mortality rate for Covid-19 substantially lower.

1918-20 ‘Spanish’ flu:

The 1918-20 influenza pandemic killed between 15 and 100 million people worldwide, 0.8% to 5.6% in a population of 1.8 billion. Now, with the population 7.8 billion, a pandemic of comparable lethality could kill between 60 to 430 million people.

The “Spanish” flu started in Kansas. It spread in 3 main waves. The first one, from March to June 1918, was relatively mild. Soldiers called it “the 3-day flu.” It was seldom fatal, with a mortality rate near 0.5% (5 deaths in a thousand cases), close to that of seasonal flu. The second wave, from August to December was more lethal. One observer noted, “While the first wave of flu in 1918 was relatively nonlethal, the second made up for it in spades.” Two million American soldiers were shipped to Europe to fight in World War I. More died from the flu than in battle.

The Spanish flu targeted healthy young adults, people between age 20 and 40.

The nations fighting in World War I censored any mention of this influenza pandemic, which laid waste to both sides. Spain stayed neutral and did not censor its newspapers. They reported it and thus came the name “Spanish flu.”


SARS-CoV-2 (Systemic Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2), the virus that causes Covid-19 is one of some seven coronaviruses that infect humans. Several of them cause the common cold. SARS-CoV[-1] and MERS-CoV (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus) are two that kill people. The 2002 SARS epidemic caused 774 deaths and the 2015 MERS one, 866 deaths. They did not come in waves, and the current coronavirus will likely not have a more severe second wave either.

The best source on accurate and unbiased facts about Covid-19 is the independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit research group Swiss Policy Research. It publishes frequently updated extensive Covid facts in 25 languages.

Elderly people are the high-risk group with Covid-19, especially those with pre-existing conditions like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. The average age of Covid deaths is 82 in the U.S., 86 in Sweden. People under age 50 have a close to zero risk of dying from Covid. Ones between infancy and age 19 have a 10 times greater chance of perishing in a car accident than dying from an infection caused by this coronavirus.

Most healthy older adults without pre-existing medical conditions do well and have immune systems strong enough to handle the virus.

The jury is still out on whether SARS-CoV-2 is bioengineered and if the Biosafety Level 4 laboratory in Wuhan, China did indeed release it, presumably by accident. In any event, it is not lethal enough qualify as a bioweapon.

Migrating water birds spread the Spanish flu virus to humans.

The Diamond Princess and Overall Covid Lethality:

Over the holidays my wife and I took a two-week cruise to Hawaii on the Star Princess, sister ship to the Diamond Princess, from Los Angeles and returning there on January 4. The Diamond Princess finished a roundtrip 15-day tour of Southeast Asia on February 2, from Japan. It had 2,666 passengers (median age 69) and 1,045 crew (with a median age of 36), totaling 3,711 people onboard. Some passengers tested positive for Covid on the cruise, and Japanese authorities quarantined the ship when it docked back at Yokohama—its passengers for up to three weeks and crew, four weeks.

Health workers tested almost everyone on board for Covid in this “ship laboratory” and found that 712 (19%) were infected—567 passengers (21%) and 145 crew members (13.8%). There were 14 deaths (0.4%), only in passengers over age 70.

Swiss Policy Research cites an increasing number of studies showing that the overall lethality of Covid-19 is between 0.1% and 0.4%, considerably lower than initially thought. Likewise, the CDC now estimates that the Covid-19 death rate is 0.2 to 0.4% (2 to 4 deaths in 1,000 people), like the seasonal flu.

And then there is New York City, with a Covid mortality rate averaging 7.6% in its boroughs, substantially higher than Covid fatality rates other cities, like the five largest ones in Texas that average 1.6%.

Along with counting people who actually die from the virus, officials will also count people with the virus as a Covid death but who die from something else. Last month Washington state revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed that anyone who died for any reason who also had coronavirus was listed as a “Covid-19 death,” even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19. Some hospitals have put Covid-19 on death certificates as the cause of death without a Covid test ever being done. It is a true fact that authorities have overcounted Covid-19 deaths.

Up to 80% of people with Covid remain asymptomatic or have symptoms that mimic a common cold and escape getting tested. Keeping them out of the equation makes the case fatality rate falsely high.

Governors Forcing Covid Patients into Nursing Homes:

One percent of Americans live in nursing homes, but they account for more than 40% of all Covid deaths. In Canada, 80% of Covid deaths have come from nursing homes.

Under an Executive Order that Governor Cuomo signed on March 25, he had 6,300 Covid infected patients shipped to Nursing Homes in NY state. Families were prohibited from visiting their loved ones and checking up on them. On April 23 when nursing homes objected to his plan of prohibiting them from screening for COVID-19, he said that they “don’t have a right to object” and, “That is the rule and that is the regulation and they have to comply with that.” (He rescinded these orders on May 10.) This helps explain why New York City has such a high Covid mortality rate compared with other cities.

Four other governors shown above (all Democrats) also placed Covid-infected patients in nursing homes.  Social media has called this a “boomer remover.”

One observer, Jim Quinn, puts it this way: “This nasty virus, supposedly let loose from a Wuhan biolab, is less deadly than the annual flu among those under 65 years old and more deadly when purposely introduced into nursing homes by politicians.”


Computer models in the UK and one funded by Bill Gates at the University of Washington greatly overpredicted the number of deaths Covid-19 would cause, both forecasting that more than two million Americans would die. This prompted government officials across the country (and worldwide) to shut down the economy and order people to stay at home, without considering its ethical and economic implications.

And then there is social distancing. There is no medical or scientific evidence, however, that justifies this.

Adverse consequences on human health and behavior from lockdowns and social isolation include domestic violence, child abuse, suicide, other potentially fatal medical conditions going untreated, deaths from drug overdoses, civil unrest, and a substantial rise in shootings and crimes. These consequences of lockdowns have yet to be fully reckoned with and measured. They will clearly surpass Covid deaths.

In an interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola, Barbara Loe Fisher declares:

“The authoritarian lockdown approach by governments to the coronavirus pandemic has been framed as a choice between safety and liberty … Public health officials have persuaded lawmakers to divide the American people into two classes: those who are considered “essential” and allowed to continue working and those who are considered “nonessential” and barred from earning a living.

Small businesses and services judged to be ‘nonessential’ have been forced to close their doors … while, paradoxically, everyone is free to roam through grocery stores, drug stores and big box stores like Walmart, Target, and Home Depot, owned by big corporations … What we have allowed to be done in the name of public health has no parallel in American history or human history.”

Face Masks:

Face masks do not work for respiratory viruses. SARS-CoV-2 is 0.125 micrometers (microns) in diameter. The openings in N95 masks are 0.3 micrometers in diameter.

Randomized controlled studies show no significant reduction in virus transmission and do not support edicts to wear masks. Plus, face masks are dehumanizing. They represent submission to authority and are a sign of obedience. Masks can impair breathing, cause hypoxia, a lowered oxygen content in the blood, and hypercapnia, increased carbon dioxide levels that can cause headaches and fainting spells.

Hours spent wearing an N95 mask can decrease blood oxygenation by 20% and cause loss of consciousness. A man in New Jersey driving his car while wearing this mask passed out from a lack of oxygen and crashed into a pole.

Even the New England Journal of Medicine admits, “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection… In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”

I say this having worn a face mask daily for 40 years in my work as a heart surgeon. A new one each day.



There were no vaccines for the Spanish flu, but vaccine companies a century later are working nonstop to develop one for Covid-19.

Human trials to confidently establish a vaccine’s efficacy and safety, however, take time, from 18 months up to 5 years. And 93% of vaccine trials fail.

Vaccines for flu viruses have a checkered history. Public health officials had to recall the one made for the 1976 Swine flu when it was found to cause Guillain-Barré Syndrome—immune system damage with slowly progressive paralysis.

Vaccine officials promoted the vaccine Pandemix for the 2009 Swine flu and fast-tracked it without the requisite clinical trials. This vaccine caused narcolepsy—difficulty sleeping at night associated with night terrors, hallucination, and mental health problems, mainly in children.

Pharmaceutical Agents:

The Trump-attacking media chastised President Trump for promoting the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19. An increasing number of studies, however, show that hydroxychloroquine does work. The drug must be started early and given at the right dose (400mg a day), not when the disease is far advanced and using doses 5x normal (2,000 mg), as studies that show no benefit do.

Remdesivir, given intravenously, provides only a marginal benefit and is not worth its $3,000 cost. Sixty 200 mg tablets of hydroxychloroquine cost $20.

Natural Remedies:

One technique for dealing with the Spanish flu a century ago, little known today, is fresh air. Medics then found that severely ill flu patients nursed outdoors recovered better that those treated indoors.

It turns out that outdoor air contains antimicrobial hydroxyl radicals generated from the interaction of sunlight with ozone in the air that are a natural disinfectant.

Sunlight itself is germicidal. Its UV rays kill viruses in the air, and its UVB rays synthesize vitamin D in the skin. Heat, >80.6º F, also kills coronaviruses.

Vitamin D:

See the rest here

Be seeing you



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