Aggregatore di feed

The United Nations is going into its 80th annual conference as an organization in decline. Nevertheless, this week, world leaders will meet in New York to discuss how they can exploit the world’s problems for their globalist ends.

Under the guise of reducing disease, combating mental illness, and dealing with the next pandemic, the UN plans to use its waning power to surveil and censor people.

Since its creation, the UN has sought to exploit legitimate societal threats and problems for their ultimate goal, installing a world government. They don’t hide their true intentions. UN Secretary-General António Guterres said last year during his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos that the “only way” to address the world’s needs is through “strong multilateral institutions and frameworks and effective mechanisms of global governance.”

In 2015, just after the UN revealed its Agenda 2030 plan, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs Wu Hongbo cited a long list of problems that only “global governance” can solve. It’s quite the speech. To soothe concerns of so much power in the hands of so few, he even claimed the UN is just, fair, and transparent. “We need a global governance that encompasses a much broader range of development facets and provides long-term solutions for them,” Wu said, adding that “the United Nations can become a locus for such global governance.”

And back in 1962, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member, Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor, and former State Department official Lincoln P. Bloomfield wrote a report for the U.S. State Department in which he said:

A world effectively controlled by the United Nations is one in which “world government” would come about through the establishment of supranational institutions, characterized by mandatory universal membership.

Exploiting Health Concerns

A draft laying out one of the discussions happening this week indicates the globalists seek more control over how nations respond to disease, mental illness, and the next health “crisis.” In the “political declaration,” they claim they want to reduce death from noncommunicable diseases by 30 percent, make treatment for hypertension and mental illness more accessible, and reduce smoking, all supposedly part of a larger goal to reduce poverty and inequality.

The way they intend to accomplish these goals is by bringing “together governments, civil society and the private sector” — also known as public-private partnerships. That includes funding and empowering the UN’s public health arm, the World Health Organization (WHO). They also plan to “enact within national and, where relevant, regional contexts legislation and regulation.” And they want to develop and implement “multisectoral national plans and, where appropriate, subnational plans.” This is all just a fancy way of saying they want control over sovereign nations’ governments.

The declaration says that accomplishing all this will require censorship and surveillance. The censorship is euphemistically defended as necessary to “counter misinformation and disinformation around the prevention and treatment of noncommunicable diseases and mental health conditions.”

It also mentions their intent to “regulate digital environments.”

The UN wants to keep track of people’s personal data; this is explained under the heading “Strengthen governance.” One of their goals is to:

Improve infrastructure for systematic and ongoing country surveillance on noncommunicable diseases, risk factors and mental health, including death registration, population-based surveys, and facility-based information systems.

Changes to International Health Regulations

And they plan to reverse, or at least censor, the growing skepticism toward the corrupt Western Medical Establishment. The document says that it’s important to “acknowledge that there are evidence-based interventions for preventing, screening, diagnosing, treating, and caring for people with noncommunicable diseases and mental health conditions.” When they say “evidence-based,” that’s a sly way of saying they want to discredit methods and drugs out of the paradigm of the Western medical cabal.

This week’s meeting is happening just as the WHO’s changes to the International Health Regulations go into effect. These changes essentially give WHO more power over how member nations deal with pandemics and other health emergencies.

On Friday, WHO announced the changes in a press release. A central message of the release is that since borders don’t restrain diseases, globalism is the antidote. A WHO press release says:

[The amendments] recognize that infectious diseases and other public health risks do not respect borders, and that coordinated global action is critical.

Among the changes is a new “global alert” that will “trigger stronger international collaboration when a health risk escalates beyond a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) and poses the risk of becoming, or has already become, a pandemic, with widespread impact on the health system and disruption to societies.”

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office this year that withdraws the U.S. out of WHO. The White House said the disastrous way the organization handled the spread of Covid-19 and allowed the Chinese to influence it justified the exit. But the withdrawal comes with a one-year notice period, so, technically, the U.S. is still in the WHO.

U.S. Not Fully On Board?

A number of Council of Council (CoC) members — the CoC is subagency of the CFR — discussed what the UN looks like now that the United States has leadership that isn’t fully sold on globalism.

Ryan Neelam, the director of the Public Opinion and Foreign Policy Program at the Lowy Institute in Australia, says:

Founded to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” the United Nations now finds itself sidelined as conflicts rage in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, and tensions between major powers escalate. Legal scholars warn of a “catastrophic collapse of norms against the use of force.” Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump’s erratic tariff policies have fractured decades of broad consensus on rules-based trade. Foreign aid budgets are shrinking, military spending is rising, and global momentum to act on climate change and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has slowed.

The forecast is not looking good, especially since the reduction of U.S. funding to the UN. Neelam continued:

Amid those geopolitical rifts, the United Nations is under severe financial strain. The United States, its largest donor ― contributing some 22 percent of the regular budget ― is expected to announce further funding cuts following a review of international organisations ordered by Trump.

The UN secretary-general, Neelam adds, will be reducing the UN budget and workforce by 20 percent.

Michele Valensise, president of the Institute of International Affairs in Italy, also noted the effect of American indifference to the UN:

The United Nations needs to contend with fierce competition and deep divisions between its member states at the international level, along with a decreased interest in multilateralism even as the world becomes increasingly interdependent. The latter is due, in part, to the detachment of the United States from the activities and structures of the United Nations.

Héctor Cárdenas, president of the Mexican CFR, has a similar complaint:

The United Nations is stumbling into its eighth decade with mounting dysfunction. The second Trump administration’s renewed disdain for multilateralism — evidenced by its withdrawal from integral bodies such as the World Health Organization and UN Human Rights Council, and by its steep cuts to humanitarian aid — has deepened a crisis that was already structural.

Getting US Out

If this is what the UN looks like with minimal U.S. support, imagine what Americans could accomplish with a full withdrawal.

The United States funnels a lot of money to this subversive organization — but there is no reason for it to exist. By its own admission, it hasn’t maintained peace around the world. And, again, by its own admission, its primary goal is to hijack power from nation-states. If it believes its humanitarian motivations are legitimate, then the catastrophic results alone should disqualify these people. One need look no further back than Covid. At the center of Europe’s response was the UN through the WHO.

The parent company of this magazine, The John Birch Society (JBS), has been fighting to get the U.S. out of the UN since 1962. The JBS deserves credit for the decades of work its members carried out to expose the true nature of this organization and create resistance to it. You can learn more about the UN’s disastrous impact and what you can do to help here.

This article was originally published on The New American.

The post A Weakened United Nations Plans Medical Censorship and Surveillance appeared first on LewRockwell.

Netanyahu will soon find that Israel has lost America – and the rest of the world, too.

‘Gaza is on fire; the Jewish state will not relent’, Israeli Defence Minister Katz excitedly proclaims: “The IDF is striking with an Iron fist at terrorist infrastructure”. In fact, over recent weeks Israel has struck at ‘infrastructure’ in West Bank, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Tunisia – besides Gaza.

The so-called ‘Rules-Based Order’ blueprint (if it ever truly existed beyond narrative) has been ripped up in favour of violent Zionism: Genocide, sneak attacks under the guise of on-going peace negotiations, assassinations, and the de-capitation of political leaderships. It is war without limits; without rules; without law; and in complete disdain for the UN Charter. Ethical boundaries, more particularly, are dismissed as mere ‘moral relativism’.

Something profound is re-shaping Israeli foreign policy. The transformation needs be understood as a U-turn within the very core of Zionist thinking (a journey from Ben Gurion to Kahane), as Yossi Klein has written.

Israel’s strategy from past decades continues to rest on the hope of achieving some literal Chimeric transformative ‘de-radicalisation’ of both Palestinians and of the Region, writ large – a de-radicalisation that will make ‘Israel safe’. This has been the ‘holy grail’ objective for Zionists since Israel was first founded.

Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer claims that such radical mutation in consciousness will only come from the bombing of opponents into utter submission. (The lesson which he draws from WWII). One aspect – Israel’s foreign policy – then is clear: It is the ‘War of the Jungle’.

But there is another aspect; one perhaps more troubling: These norms and ethical principles that Israel openly seeks to tear apart are, in the last resort, American proclaimed norms and values. Strikingly, the U.S. has abandoned its traditional ethos when it comes to Israel. And rather than criticise or seek to limit Israel’s use of such norm-busting military actions, the Trump Administration emulates them – sneak attacks under the guise of talking peace, de-capitation attempts, and striking with missiles at unknown vessels off Venezuela, vaporising the crew.

The U.S. is doing this openly – thumbing its nose, like Israel, at international law and conventions.

It does appear that key components of the U.S. Establishment increasingly favour the military strategies of Israel and even are shifting from the moral ethos of a ‘Just War’, shall we say, to one closer to the Hebraic ethos of ‘Amalek’. It amounts to updating western moral ‘software’ with the alternative ‘justice’ of absolute war.

Does the Israel state have a future? Israel is now carrying out a second Nakba in Gaza and the West Bank, with Jewish society remaining trapped in repression and denial – just as it was back in 1948. Israeli Historian, Ilan Pappe wrote in 2006 in his seminal work on the 1948 Nakba the fundamental importance of “retrieving [the events of 1948] from oblivion”:

Once the decision was taken [on 10 March 1948], it took six months to complete the mission. When it was over, more than half of Palestine’s native population, close to 800,000 people, had been uprooted, 531 villages … destroyed, and eleven urban neighbourhoods emptied of their inhabitants. The plan … and above all its systematic implementation in the following months, was a clear-cut case of an ethnic cleansing operation, regarded under international law today as a crime against humanity …

The story of 1948 is not complicated … It is the simple but horrific story of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, a crime against humanity that Israel has wanted to deny and cause the world to forget. Retrieving it from oblivion is incumbent upon us, not just as a greatly overdue act of historiographical reconstruction or professional duty; it is … a moral decision, the very first step we must take if we ever want reconciliation to have a chance.

I wrote recently how Israeli film-maker Neta Shoshani’s controversial documentary about the 1948 Nakba showed Israeli ethical and legal boundaries to have been erased in a bout of bloodletting and rape. The absolute loss of ethos (there was no accounting or justice), Shoshani says, imperilled the then-legitimacy of the State founding project. Repeated a second time – the current war – she warns, “could be the one That Ends Israel”.

Shoshani’s comments hint at the trauma felt by secular liberal Jews at witnessing the norms and lifestyle of their largely secular-liberal society upended by the swivel towards the militaristic and eschatological objectives of the Israeli Right. Finance Minister Smotrich declared recently that the Jewish people are experiencing “the process of redemption and the return of the divine presence to Zion – as they engage in the ‘conquest of the land’”.

Many European Jews did arrive in the new Israeli state to find safety and protection, however, they also came to participate in the Zionist project in Palestine.

For now, Netanyahu states he has Trump’s “100%” support and “unlimited credit” for the maelstrom unleashed across the region. As Ben Caspit writes, quoting a senior Israeli diplomat:

“The fact that Rubio landed here just days after the [Doha] attack, and voiced almost no criticism — in fact, the opposite — gives a tailwind to Israel’s operation in Gaza … Israel has not received such a generous and long line of credit from any American administration”.

And Trump seems to be moving away from the ‘global peacemaker’ moniker to concentrate more narrowly on demonstrating American ‘exceptional greatness’ – through tariffs, sanctions or military operations – thus demonstrating a dominating, if not Great, America.

Yet the problems are all too apparent: In previous years, Israel had been largely relegated to the sidelines at the U.S. National Conservatism Conference. This time around, the Jewish state and its wars couldn’t be avoided. The latest Conservatism conference slid into ‘civil war’ between the neo-con ‘realists’ supporting Israel, and those asking: “Why are these our wars? Why are Israel’s endless problems America’s liabilities? Why should we accept [Israel as being part of] ‘America First’?”, as the editor of The American Conservative exploded: “We f***ing shouldn’t!”

The tension within the Republican Party is obvious: MAGA supporters wish to support Trump, but the big Jewish donors and commentators, such as pro-Israel hawk Max Abrahms, mocked Tucker Carlson-loving “MAGA isolationists” at the conference, who had gone “insane” in their push to disengage from the Middle East.

Trump warned Netanyahu that the genocide in Gaza is causing Israel to bleed support among Republicans, including especially among younger people. Nonetheless, Trump has not modified his unwavering support for Israel (for whatever reason), but he has taken notice of the ‘mood vibe’ amongst his base.

If Trump has indeed noticed the change, Netanyahu doesn’t care. As Amir Tibon in Haaretz reports:

“If Trump thinks his comments on Israel’s loss of ‘control over Congress’ will be a wake-up call for Netanyahu, he’s mistaken. Israelis didn’t need Trump to know that their country is losing the battle over global public opinion”.

“Netanyahu and Ron Dermer … are at peace with Israel’s loss of international support, heightened isolation, the threats of sanctions against it, and arrest warrants for its leaders (including Netanyahu himself). The two don’t seem to care, and the reason, ironically, is the very man sounding the alarm: Donald Trump”.

“From Netanyahu’s point of view, as long as he’s got Trump’s backing – none of it matters”.

Well, Israel’s wars have lost a generation of young American conservatives – and they’re not coming back. Whatever the circumstances to the killing of Charlie Kirk, his death has let loose the genie of ‘Israeli First’ dominance in Republican politics to escape from the bottle.

When Netanyahu does peer out, he will find that Israel has lost America (and the rest of the world, too).

This article was originally published on Strategic Culture.

The post The Genie of ‘Israeli First’ Dominance Is Out of the Bottle appeared first on LewRockwell.

The covid lockdowns caused many Americans to stop trusting the government’s propaganda and led to a 39 percent increase in homeschooling in the 2020-21 school year. While the number of homeschoolers did decline some after this jump, homeschooling has continued growing in popularity over the last several years. Today, approximately six percent of American school children are homeschooled.

Parents choose to homeschool for a variety of reasons, including objections to certain political and social agendas promoted by some government schools. Many parents became aware of how many government schools were sacrificing education for indoctrination while observing their children’s covid-era “virtual” classrooms.

Some parents started homeschooling as a temporary measure but discovered they could teach their children as well, or better, than the so-called experts. This makes sense. No one knows a child’s skills, interests, strengths, and weaknesses better than the child’s parents.

Two recent developments are going to increase homeschooling’s popularity.

First is the troubling results of the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). NAEP is commonly referred to as “the nation’s report card.” In NAEP’s latest assessment the average eighth grade science score was significantly lower than the pre-lockdown 2019 score. Other scores including for twelfth grade mathematics and reading are lower than they were ten or more years ago. To put this in perspective, consider that in 1992 spending per pupil was an inflation-adjusted 12,000 dollars, whereas the average per pupil spending in 2021 (the most recent year for which figures are available) was 17,500 dollars — a nearly 50 percent increase. The decline in scores also follows a series of federal education “reforms” that were supposed to “fix” American education by giving more power to the federal government.

The second reason homeschooling will grow even more popular is two provisions of the “Big Beautiful Bill” (BBB). These provisions provide tax benefits for parents who choose alternatives to government schools, including homeschooling. First, the BBB expands the use of tax-free 529 Education Savings Accounts. Money in these accounts can be used for a variety of expenses such as curriculum materials, online education, and tutoring.

The BBB also provides tax-credits for donations to Scholarship-Granting Organizations (SGO) SGOs provide scholarships to families, including homeschooling families to cover a variety of educational expenses. Giving Americans more control over the education dollar will do more to improve education than any centralized “reform.”

Parents looking for a homeschooling curriculum incorporating the ideas of liberty should consider my online curriculum. My curriculum provides students with a solid education in history, literature, mathematics, and the sciences. It also gives students the opportunity to create their own websites and internet-based businesses. This provides students with “real world” entrepreneurial experience that will be useful to them no matter what career path they choose.

The curriculum is designed to be self-taught, with students helping, and learning from, each other via online forums. Starting in the fourth grade, students are required to write at least one essay a week. Students also take a course in public speaking.

The curriculum emphasizes the history, philosophy, and economics of liberty, but it never substitutes indoctrination for education. The goal is to produce students with superior critical thinking skills. If you think my curriculum may meet the needs of your child, please visit www.RonPaulCurriculum.com for more information.

The post Good News for Liberty appeared first on LewRockwell.

UK, Canada and Australia: Never fear, Palestinians! We’re here to save the day!

Palestinians: You’re going to stop the genocide?

UK, Canada and Australia: HAHAHAHAHA! No! Oh god no. Haha! No, we are going to give a great big Thumbs Up to the idea of your eventual statehood!

Palestinians: Will you at least stop sending them weapons?

UK, Canada and Australia: LOL no.

❖

In response to the UK, Canada and Australia announcing their recognition of a Palestinian state, Benjamin Netanyahu has proclaimed that Israel will never allow such a state to exist.

“It’s not going to happen. There will be no Palestinian state to the west of the Jordan River,” Netanyahu said, adding that Israel will continue expanding settlements in the West bank.

It’s funny how Israel supporters will claim it’s a genocidal hate crime to say “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free”, but apparently it’s fine to say from the river to the sea Palestine will not be free. Even if you say it while actually committing genocide.

❖

Israeli officials coming out saying there will never be a Palestinian state are completely discrediting all the two-state solution western liberals who’ve spent two years condemning Hamas because they didn’t pursue their liberation by going through the proper channels.

Reminds me of that Jon Stone quote you see going around sometimes, “One reason people insist that you use the proper channels to change things is because they have control of the proper channels and they’re confident it won’t work.”

❖

Westerner: I support a two-state solution.

Israel: There will never be a Palestinian state.

Westerner: Okay then I support a one-state solution where everyone has equal rights.

Israel: You’re calling for an end to the Jewish state you monster.

Westerner: Alright then I support the Palestinian resistance.

Israel: That’s supporting terrorism. You are Hamas and we can legally murder you.

Westerner: Well can I at least support a permanent ceasefire to end the genocide?

Israel: [cocks pistol] What did I just tell you about supporting Hamas?

Westerner: Okay then, I support Palestinians living as a permanent underclass until they can be slowly salami sliced out of existence as a people.

Israel: Getting warmer.

Westerner: I support removing all Palestinians from their historic homeland via ethnic cleansing or extermination before the end of Donald Trump’s presidential term.

Israel: [puts away gun] That’s more like it.

❖

I saw a video where two Australian doctors described how they had to deliver a baby via emergency c-section because the baby’s mother had been decapitated by an Israeli airstrike. Information like this always reminds me of that period last year when all the western politicians and media outlets were telling us that the worst people in the entire world were the university students who were protesting against this genocide.

❖

The Global Sumud Flotilla is saying they’re seeing drones around their ships again just days out from their planned arrival to bring aid into Gaza. Earlier this month drones repeatedly dropped incendiary firebombs on the boats.

This comes as Israel’s Foreign Ministry declares that the flotilla is a Hamas ally, and as Google runs Israel-sponsored ads spinning the flotilla as a terrorist operation.

I don’t know if the Israelis are going to kill these courageous activists, but you can tell they really, really want to.

❖

Remember that time we spent two years watching a horrific live-streamed genocide and then everyone tried to tell us we’re supposed to cry and express our deepest condolences when one of the propagandists for that genocide got shot? That was weird, right?

When Biden finally fucking dies I’m going to be much more insensitive and hostile than I ever was about Charlie Kirk, because he was objectively more murderous and destructive. And when I do, right wingers won’t be shrieking at me about how evil it is to speak ill of the dead. These people have no principles; they’re just herd-minded NPCs trying to canonize a horrible man because he has the same ideology as them.

❖

You’re never going to believe this, but it turns out that news story everyone’s been yelling hysterically about is being used to advance many pre-existing agendas of the US empire.

Officials at the US War Department have announced that they’re considering using Charlie Kirk as a tool for military recruitment. You can add that to the list of all the other agendas they’re using Kirk’s death to advance like increased censorship and surveillance and attacks on leftist dissident groups.

This was predictable from the very beginning. Never play along with their games.

_________________

The best way to make sure you see everything I write is to get on my free mailing list. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Click here for links for my social media, books, merch, and audio/video versions of each article. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

The post ‘Recognizing’ The Rubble of Palestine appeared first on LewRockwell.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday has offered President Trump a temporary nuclear arms control deal that would extend the status quo by one year, at a moment the future of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or New START, is hanging by a thread.

During a meeting with permanent members of the Russian Security Council, Putin said he was ready to extend by one year the last arms control treaty between Washington and Moscow, Reuters reports. This would allow time to negotiate its further extension, likely by another five years. This would be “if the US reciprocates, to prevent a new arms race,” Putin stipulated.

He painted a dire picture of strategic security in the world. “Unfortunately, it continues to degrade, which is caused by the combined impact of a number of factors, including negative ones, provoking the aggravation of existing and the emergence of new strategic risks,” Putin said.

He described that central to the problem is that multiple Cold War era arms agreements had steadily eroded and then been dropped between the US and Russia, while only New START remains.

“Step by step, the system of Soviet-American and Russian-American agreements on control over nuclear missiles and strategic defensive weapons was almost completely dismantled,” the Russian leader said.

“We associate the multiple problems that have accumulated in the strategic sphere since the beginning of the twenty-first century with the destructive actions of the West.”

Putin further asserted that no one should have doubt that Russia will be ready for any threat. “Our plans to strengthen the country’s defense capability are being developed taking into account the changing global situation and are being implemented in full and in a timely manner,” he underscored, before saying:

“I emphasize, and no one should have any doubt about this, that Russia is able to respond to any existing and newly emerging threats.”

But the fact that Putin is offering a year-long extension to New START while its renewal is negotiated is a major positive sign, showing advancement in trust related to Trump’s efforts to have bilateral talks even as the Ukraine war rages.

New START will expire in February 2026 unless a half-decade extension can be reached. Both leaders have shown willingness to reach a breakthrough on this issue. Putin on Monday…

Putin says ‘Removal of such limitations would not be a reasonable step’ Adds that Russia is offering a one-year EXTENSION of limits if the US reciprocates — to prevent a new arms race.

The treaty is intended to limit and reduce nuclear arms on either side, setting a limit of no more than 1,550 deployed warheads and 700 missiles. START I began in 1991, with New START signed under the Obama and Medvedev administrations in 2010 as a successor agreement.

In August 2023 the US accused Russia of violating the treaty in disallowing US on-site inspections under its stipulations. In response, Washington halted Russian inspectors’ ability to do the same on American soil.

Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge.

The post Putin Offers US a Temporary Nuclear Control Deal ‘To Prevent New Arms Race’ appeared first on LewRockwell.

The official narrative of Charlie Kirk’s assassination is unraveling faster than it can be put back together.  The latest is that the alleged 30-06 caliber bullet that hit Charlie Kirk in the neck did not exit Kirk’s  neck.  This is an impossibility.  A 30-06 qualifies as a large animal caliber for moose, elk, and grizzly bear.  The surgeon who said the missing bullet made no exit wound said that Charlie was so healthy that he was “a man of steel” and his bone density stopped the bullet.  What bone density does the neck have? 

The narrative controllers must be laughing their heads off.  They have Charlie Kirk’s Christian supporters off focus and enraptured with God’s miracle of Kirk’s bone density which saved the lives of those standing behind Kirk. See this and this.

How is it possible that it took so long for anyone to realize that there was no exit wound?  Why were they talking about a missing bullet when there is no exit wound?  Moreover, if the surgeon found a bullet in Kirk’s neck, who can we trust to ascertain that it was fired from a 30-06?  That has to be the finding or the narrative again has to be revised.

The whore media has implanted the idea that Kirk was killed from a shot from the high-powered rifle found or planted in the woods.  As of this time we don’t know what caliber the bullet that killed Kirk is or whether it was shot by the rifle  that was found or planted.   The assumption is that the bullet is a 30-06 because that is the caliber of the rifle allegedly found in the woods and alleged without any evidence to be the murder weapon.  The surgeon speaks of a 30-06 bullet, but if he has removed the bullet from Kirk’s neck it most certainly is not a 30-06 bullet.  The basic fact is that if Kirk was professionally assassinated by the CIA or Israel, those responsible can control the explanation. See this.

If the report is true that the bullet did not exit Charlie Kirk’s neck, the bullet was not a high powered rifle bullet.  It was a bullet from a palm pistol as suggested by the video below. If it was a bullet from a palm pistol, it will be a .17 caliber, a .22 caliber, at most a .25 caliber.  The recoil from the palm pistol in the shooters hand is slight, certainly not 30-06.

On Coffee and a Mike, Gary Heavin and I discuss if Israel or the American Establishment might be responsible for Kirk’s assassination.  Gary Heavin pointed out that the shot to Kirk’s neck appears to be a shot from a palm pistol from a very close bystander.  The video at the bottom of this page shows the shooter with the palm pistol.  It is very clear as is the face of the shooter who was not the person on the roof. The shooter then jumps over the railing and rushes to Kirk’s aid–a clever way to escape.  It should be easy to find, identify, and question this suspect.  Will they?

Tyler Robinson has not confessed as of September 21.  In place of a confession, what the whore media offers is “Kirk suspect appears to confess in online chat;”  “Kirk suspect confessed in hidden note to roommate.”  In other words, the whore media is planting the story that was planted on them that there is a confession when there is not.  Without a bullet, without an exit wound, there is no evidence that the rifle that allegedly belongs to Tyler Robinson is the murder weapon.  Indeed, what is the evidence for Tyler Robinson’s arrest?  How soon before Tyler Robinson is assassinated like Oswald, and the case declared closed?

We will never get the true story.  The best bet is to disbelieve any and all official narratives. Everyone of them is a lie.  There is no one in the American Establishment or the Israel Lobby that Americans can trust.

Mike Farris, Gary Heavin, and PCR discuss if Charlie Kirk might have been assassinated by the American establishment because he was a rising leader not under their control or if Kirk might have been assassinated by Israel because he was rescuing the rising American generation from its pro-Israeli indoctrination.

The post Mike Farris, Gary Heavin, and PCR Discuss if Charlie Kirk Might Have Been Assassinated by the American Establishment appeared first on LewRockwell.

It is said that things come in three’s — well so do accomplices in deep crime.

These three deep state operatives have formed a coven to operate as the front line purveyors of a corporate re-branding of Palestine’s Gaza peninsular.

Tony Blair is already a recognised war criminal, having been personally responsible for the mass murder of 300,000 Iraqi citizens, on the basis that Saddam Hussein was in possession of ‘weapons of mass destruction’.

There were no such weapons, as special government weapons advisor Dr David Kelly strongly stated – and paid for his life in doing so. 

But Blair’s bold faced lie set off the 2003 Iraq war, and the bombing into oblivion of the citizens and infrastructure of that tragic country. An action sanctioned by President George Bush and led by US ground forces under the brutal General ‘Rambo’ Schwarzkopf.

Well, now Blair is back, and has teamed up with that other frigidly cold, calculating killer Benjamin Netanyahu, to work out the best way to exterminate the Palestinian race and simultaneously make a profit from its blood.

Netanyahu’s overt act of genocide has earned him a United Nation’s citation as ‘perpetrator of crimes against humanity’. Aside from this, he has broken every international humanitarian treaty of the past century and is subject to arrest in any country with sufficient backbone and moral fiber to carry this through.

However, the USA is not one of those countries. President Donald Trump has vowed to keep rolling out the (blood) red carpet for his dear friend ‘Bibi’s’ Stateside visits.

Trump’s very existence appears to be controlled by Zionist Israel. His big, brash, bully authoritarian despotism has earned him friends in some quarters. Mostly those who think they see some financial advantage by sheltering under his wing.

He has a large “won’t say anything against our saviour” following amongst Republican voters who have been cheering him along his pompous MAGA bonanza.

The absurdity of all this is not seen by the masses. Few seem to realize that America was never ‘great’ in the first place. With a history that commenced with the violent oppression of indigenous Indian tribes and their ultimate incarceration is special ‘reserves’ followed by open encouragement to fall into alcohol and drug addiction. 

USA was pretty much founded on the ethos ‘every man for himself’, which promoted a rush for material wealth and self-interest-driven land grabs, spurred on by an ego fueled belief that ‘big is beautiful’ and ownership is power.

A cruel civil war established the domination of big industry and the industrialisation and intense exploitation of almost everything, including vast areas of what was once the richest farmland in the world.

Or, is ‘once great America’ judged to be so honored due to its bombing and invasion of more than twenty eight countries since 1945, and the murder of countless millions of human beings via a Blitzkrieg policy designed to out-do the example set by Nazi Germany during the Second World War.

What does the bellicose real estate dealer Mr. Trump have to say about being the number one accomplice to the genocide of the Palestinians of Gaza? 

About being the closest partner in Netanyahu’s ethnic cleansing regime? 

About his continued role as weapons supplier for the Zionist supremacist goal of ending any possibility of Palestinians retaining their homes and regaining their rights to territories they have occupied for centuries?

What kind of degraded animal is this pompous poser who wants ‘to make America great again?’

By concentrating on this three-pointed nexus of evil, I don’t wish to obscure the fact that there are hundreds more human clones in positions of power in the world who have equally failed to lift a finger to end the Gaza carnage, or indeed any other acts of war that they themselves have knowingly provoked through a seemingly irreversible obsession with money and power. 

This includes most of the planet’s religious institutions whose lofty rhetoric of “peace and love on earth” has proved entirely empty when put to the actual test of standing up against brutal villainy.

As Trump, Blair and Netanyahu pour over their blueprint for the construction of a ‘Palestine Free Riviera’ over the ashes of a razed Gaza, with its landscape of surreal Trump Towers, glistening steel high-rise apartments and multinational corporate power pyramids – the men, women and children of that territory continue to be subjected to mass starvation, murder, torture and eviction from their already gutted homes.

What more can one say about this despicably cruel carnage that reveals its perpetrators to be deeply sick, psychotic entities who take pleasure in death and operate at the lowest level of existence of the human species.

As long as such psychopathically hardened criminals continue to be allowed to roam this earth, barking out their executioner orders to a brain dead mind controlled military – there can be nothing but bloodshed in store for humanity.

This is an unconscionable prospect.

Therefore, a coalition of the brave, true and noble must be formed to devise and execute a strategy for the immediate arrest and incarceration of Netanyahu and Blair. And, if Trump refuses to use his Presidential powers to intervene in the Gaza massacre, he too must be subject to the same treatment.

These arrests are not something that will happen via the intervention of ‘the justice system’. That is an illusion. Although the case against Israel is soon to be released by the International Court of Justice and will no doubt prompt further vocal saber-rattling.

We have already seen how cowardly and inept is the United Nations in its failure to enforce international criminal court edicts, further exposing its singular lack of determination to install an expanded peace force in Gaza.

The necessary decisive actions will be taken by a new kind of ‘citizen’s law enforcement body’, comprised of those who recognise that only a coming together of individuals willing to take responsibility for decisive intervention to end the murder of their brothers and sisters, will break the otherwise interminable blood bath.

The imperative is for ‘the citizen’s arrest’ to be projected into the international arena. An action that will, in the context of the slaughter of the innocents in Gaza, receive the emotional and actual support of the majority of the people of the world. 

Once on the move, nothing will be able to stop a vast groundswell of humanity from ultimately ending this nightmare.

Such decisive heroic action will light up the world – and once again raise the flag of dignity of the human race. 

It will clear the way for the reestablishment of a refreshed approach to justice, peace and true respect for all forms of life..

A re-sculptured society, carved out by the hands of a citizen led movement whose unstoppable momentum will finally overpower the dark deep state cult that has the world so relentlessly crushed within its deadly embrace.

N.B. As further proof of high ranking duplicity – at the time of writing – King Charles and the British government are honoring President Trump with an exceptionally lavish state banquet in Windsor castle at the expense of the British tax payer. 

The original source of this article is Global Research.

The post The Outstanding Criminality of Netanyahu, Blair and Trump Must End appeared first on LewRockwell.

Imagine being transported to another time, in which you’re standing at a slave market. The slaves are shackled and afraid. You watch as your neighbors bid on the purchase of these people. You go home and hear from your excited uncle. He has a new worker, a slave, a child. The social norm is to congratulate him on his purchase. Would you?

It’s so easy to say no when we’re departed from it, when we’re never going to be tested, so we issue our denials thoughtlessly and yet with confidence. Slavery has appeared across civilizations—from ancient Mediterranean cities to medieval Europe where Slavs were captured and sold, and beyond. Its cruelty was never limited to any one race or culture.

Most of us jump reflexively to deny that we would be party to such an evil, and we readily paint self-portraits of our would-be heroism in the face of it. But reality can be an unforgiving mirror.

What do we do when that homosexual couple in the family texts a photo of the baby that they purchased through surrogacy? Or when a favorite online “personality” tweets out their new acquisition? It feels emotionally complicated because we recognize the buyer. We think we know them. We laugh at the jokes they tell. Our recognition of their humanity makes it easier to tell ourselves comfortable lies—that’s why it’s so much easier to condemn the slave trader of the past than of the present. We would rather not admit the truth to ourselves: we witnessed a modern slave market. It’s simply too awful to consider.

The truth would demand too much of us. We couldn’t just hit the like button and keep scrolling, or even look the other way. We would be duty bound to respond with outrage, indignation, and even grief at the magnitude of the injustice. We would want to burn down the modern-day slave market and rescue those vulnerable children from the grasp of those who would reduce them to commodities. Anything less would be unthinkable.

It’s ironic that our recognition of the humanity of the modern-day slave traders is what allows them to commodify their victims with impunity. Rebukes against those who purchase newborns through surrogacy can seem harsh and uncaring in a world numb to the personhood of the real victims.

We’ve redecorated the institution of slavery so that we don’t have to admit what we are doing. There are no shackles, merely a birth certificate bearing the names of one’s owners. The child is delivered into the arms of its owners in blankets, and one of the most respected institutions of modern society (medicine) encourages the façade with unneeded beds for men who did not give birth, along with well-orchestrated photo ops. It is as socially acceptable as buying a slave has been in different times in history. It’s as scientifically legitimized as lobotomizing your troublesome child or sterilizing the mentally handicapped.

Of course, these children are not bought to be laborers (we hope), but they are entertainers nevertheless. As items to be bought and sold, they are placed into a home because of what they can do for the purchasers. Perhaps they can provide the purchaser with a sense of fulfillment at having achieved one of life’s milestones; or they can make him feel less lonely; or they can validate his feelings that his household is in some way more like those of the families in his neighborhood. More importantly, the child is not correctly recognized as a gift, to be protected and treated as such, born out of the loving embrace of his mother and father. His inherent dignity as a human being is eviscerated in favor of his utility as the plaything of a buyer with deep pockets.

Stories of abuse in these scenarios are beginning to emerge, but let us focus instead on the abuse that is inherent to the transactional nature of these acquisitions. The child is born as the product of a science experiment that sacrificed his siblings, exploited a poor woman for her womb, and deprived him of both his mother and the woman who carried him, with whom he shares a unique bond. He is violated from the moment of his conception. And for the sake of the happiness of his purchasers, he will be deprived of a healthy family dynamic forever—not because of a tragedy but by orchestrated design.

We claim to be better than the people of pre-modernity: learned, developed, civilized. But our most vulnerable experience a different reality. These victims must live in the knowledge that they were sold and purchased—a product in a contract that demanded their execution if they had an unexpected health problem or if they were on the losing end of “selective reduction” because too many of their siblings survived implantation. This is not something that we can choose to celebrate or ignore. It is an institution that deserves our relentless opposition until the day we can sneer at it as casually as we now do the slave market.

Our commodification of the unborn perpetuates the same moral blindness that once made slave markets possible. It is a tragic but unsurprising reality that many young people today are fighting against meaninglessness. When we tolerate surrogacy, we build a society that debases who man is, reduces him to an object, and provides moral assent to all manner of evils made possible by this willfully blind and egregious concession.

This article was originally published on Crisis Magazine.

The post An Unhailed Holy Queen appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

John Leake

The post Perplexity About No Apparent Exit Wound appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Peter Chamberlin:

Have you seen the alternative killer videos yet?  I have them posted on my website.  One of has recorded the sound of a pistol shot.

https://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2025/09/18/new-video-release-showing-apparent-up-close-killer-of-charlie/

SOURCE:

https://rense.com/general98/31fcdec5-8f27-4688-a665-446ec6e3f5b5.mp4?_=1

The post Video of another shooter of Kirk appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, David Martin.

Madhava Setty

Fooling Us Badly With Psyops

The post The Parallels of 9/11 & Charlie Kirk False Flag Operations appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post Back To Bagram? Trump Threatens To Re-Occupy Afghanistan! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

Daniel McAdams

The post What Everyone’s Missing On The Jimmy Kimmel Firing appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click here:

John Leake

The post The Battle Between Light and Darkness is Joined appeared first on LewRockwell.

______________________________________________________________________________________

di Joakim Book

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/ma-scusi-lagarde-leuropa-e-gia-un)

“L'Europa è un museo, il Giappone è una casa di riposo, la Cina è una prigione e Bitcoin è un esperimento”. Queste sono state le parole dell'ex-Segretario al Tesoro Lawrence Summers rivolte agli investitori durante la Morningstar Investment Conference del 2023.

Summers parlava delle condizioni monetarie globali e della necessità di detenere i propri investimenti e denaro in una qualche valuta, da qualche parte. “Preferirei giocare le mie carte con l'America piuttosto che con qualsiasi altro Paese al mondo [...] bisogna mettere i propri soldi da qualche parte e il dollaro è un buon posto dove metterli”.

Il dollaro è la proverbiale camicia meno sporca.

Non posso verificare se Christine Lagarde, la presidente della Banca Centrale Europea, o un membro del suo staff fosse tra il pubblico, ma di certo non hanno recepito il messaggio. I politici europei hanno una lunga storia di manipolazione delle menti nei confronti della popolazione. Con aria seria, raccontano bugie e danno per scontato che i loro sudditi seguiranno le loro orme – e, a nostro discredito, la maggior parte di noi lo fa.

A giugno la Lagarde era in prima pagina sul Financial Times. Non si capisce bene il motivo ma lei e i suoi consiglieri hanno l'impressione che questo sia il momento dell'Europa. Con il presidente Trump che tiene gli Stati Uniti sulle proprie sponde e il dollaro in ritirata, l'euro, una creazione sovranazionale pianificata in modo eccellente e governata in modo impeccabile, è il sostituto ideale.

O forse no...

Ci sono alcune cose ovvie da citare qui: i venditori di fumo e quella citazione di Upton Sinclair sul non capire qualcosa quando da essa dipende il proprio stipendio (nell'ordine dei $500.000)... ma sto divagando.

L'editoriale del Financial Times prosegue esplorando come “la forza economica sia la spina dorsale di qualsiasi valuta internazionale”. Un osservatore imparziale squalificherebbe presto l'Eurozona, la quale ha flirtato per anni con recessione e crescita intorno allo zero, con le peggiori prospettive di fertilità al mondo, prezzi dell'elettricità record, nessuna sovranità energetica – e poco più di un decennio fa era sull'orlo del collasso sotto il peso della prodigalità degli stati. La maggior parte delle persone non si rende conto che le economie americana e dell'area Euro avevano più o meno le stesse dimensioni negli anni '90, e di nuovo durante la crisi finanziaria mondiale, ma che l'economia statunitense è ora più grande di circa il 77%. Secondo la maggior parte delle stime, la vita economica – la “forza” – è migliore in America, a prescindere dalle strane idee che vengono in mente agli uomini dai capelli arancioni nelle case bianche.

Anche secondo i vecchi standard mondiali di inflazione bassa e stabile, e mercati dei capitali solidi e affidabili, l'Eurozona ha una performance nettamente inferiore a quella americana. Il mercato obbligazionario americano è almeno il doppio di quello europeo, frammentato e disarticolato, e i suoi mercati azionari sono circa 6-7 volte più grandi. David Hebert su queste pagine s'è posto la domanda giusta: Perché non ci sono aziende da mille miliardi di dollari in Europa?. Finanziamenti, imprenditorialità e ostacoli normativi sono alcune delle risposte ovvie, ma anche il fatto che “gli Stati Uniti rimangono un luogo privilegiato per lavoratori e imprese. Il nostro sistema promuove le imprese e la creazione di opportunità di lavoro in un modo che è invidiato dal resto del mondo”.

Anche per le start-up l'erba del vicino è molto più verde negli Stati Uniti: meno oneri normativi e un accesso al capitale decisamente migliore. Alcune delle aziende tecnologiche europee di maggior successo, da Klarna e Spotify alla (britannica!) Wise, hanno optato per New York invece di Stoccolma, Francoforte o Londra. Una statistica sorprendente la dice lunga sul dinamismo, la liquidità e i mercati dei capitali del museo Europa: “Nessuna azienda dell'UE fondata negli ultimi 50 anni ha una capitalizzazione di mercato superiore a €100 miliardi, mentre tutte e sei le aziende statunitensi con una capitalizzazione superiore a $1.000 miliardi sono state create durante suddetto periodo” (si potrebbe discutere sull'olandese ASML o sulla danese Novo Nordisk, ma il punto resta...).

In una frecciatina agli Stati Uniti, la Lagarde ci dice che l'Europa ha una maggiore indipendenza per quanto riguarda la sua autorità monetaria (un livello piuttosto basso...), un processo decisionale inclusivo e “pesi e contrappesi”. Il paragrafo successivo mina questo impegno: “Non si deve più permettere che un singolo veto ostacoli gli interessi collettivi degli altri 26 Stati membri”, e meno veti “permetterebbero all'Europa di parlare con una sola voce”, ovvero di scavalcare gli stati turbolenti.

La parte peggiore è quando indica le “industrie strategiche” come quelle impegnate nella tecnologia verde, che non sono né strategiche né tantomeno “industrie”, bensì implementazioni di sogni ideologici sovvenzionati a livello pubblico e morenti.

Tutto ciò che l'Europa ha da offrire al mondo sono il calcio e le case di riposo, un'architettura secolare e spiagge eccessivamente regolamentate e infestate dai turisti.

Credere che l'euro avrà un ruolo più importante negli affari monetari internazionali è ridicolo. Nella misura in cui i gestori patrimoniali e le riserve monetarie dovessero essere spostati dal dollaro, questi non finirebbero nell'euro (o nella sterlina), ma in valute più piccole e non tradizionali. Le istituzioni finanziarie scettiche sull'egemonia monetaria mondiale stanno accumulando oro (e Bitcoin), non nella moneta regionale supervisionata dalla Lagarde.

Sebbene il predominio del dollaro sia costantemente diminuito a seguito delle turbolenze politiche, della crisi fiscale e del congelamento delle riserve russe, è ancora molto più avanti dell'euro. Circa il 58% delle riserve monetarie è in dollari, mentre la seconda migliore “alternativa” rimane immobile al di sotto del 20% – ben lontana dalle ambizioni della Lagarde.

Quel che è peggio è che il tipo di stati, istituzioni e individui che necessitano di de-dollarizzazione non otterrebbero nulla euroizzandosi. Stati e gestori di fondi in Cina, Russia o India non otterrebbero alcuna diversificazione politica detenendo euro invece di dollari; di fatto la Russia l'ha fatto, poiché la maggior parte delle sue riserve congelate era custodita presso Euroclear e banche europee. Tutto ciò che un passaggio dal dollaro all'euro farebbe è sostituire i rischi di governance, inflazione e confisca associati alla leadership americana con gli stessi identici rischi (peggiori) in un formato europeo. Evviva!

“Nonostante le sue altre virtù, usare la moneta di riserva mondiale come arma la si uccide”, ho scritto a proposito del dollaro l'anno scorso. Tali questioni certamente sfavoriscono lo Zio Sam e il dollaro come moneta di riserva mondiale... ma gli europei sono messi peggio.

Sebbene la guerra della Lagarde al contante sia stata un tantino esagerata, in Spagna e Francia esistono norme invasivamente restrittive che limitano l'uso del contante a €1.000, con un limite di €10.000 in vigore in tutta l'Unione Europea entro il 2027.

Le grida al crollo imminente del dollaro sono sempre esagerate, ma l'idea dell'euro come sostituto è ancora più esageratamente illusoria.

La Lagarde avrebbe dovuto leggere l'altro importante quotidiano britannico, The Economist. Il titolo di febbraio di quest'anno? L'Europa non ha scampo dalla stagnazione.

Mi dispiace, Christine.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una mancia in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.

In this episode of The Alex Marlow Show, Alexander engages in a deep conversation with Mike Benz, discussing the impact and legacy of Charlie Kirk, a prominent figure in conservative activism. The discussion delves into Kirk’s influence on young voters, his role in building Turning Point USA, and the tragic circumstances surrounding his assassination. Benz and Marlow explore the broader implications of political violence, the role of educational institutions in shaping political discourse, and the challenges of maintaining free speech in an increasingly polarized environment. They also touch on the influence of online communities and the need for counter-narratives to prevent radicalization. The episode concludes with a call for transparency and reform in both domestic and international political strategies.

Escalation of the Strategy of Tension

The post Exclusive: Mike Benz on Who Funds Trantifa Terror, Charlie Kirk’s Legacy appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Left constantly subjects us to propaganda about the alleged danger posed by “climate change” or “global warming.” They assure us that we must “follow the science,” which, it is claimed, has proved that the rise in global temperatures caused by fossil fuels, which emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, will soon result in catastrophe unless we “green” the economy. Under brain-dead “President” Joe Biden, extensive steps were taken towards “greening.” Fortunately, Donald Trump has rolled back some of these steps, but the constant barrage of the Left is a continuing menace.

The Left reacts with horror to any attempt to question “climate change.”  They say that skeptics should be denied their right of free speech, just as they called for the suppression of those who warned of the dangers of Covid vaccinations, who it turned out were entirely correct. Noam Chomsky has said that Trump’s efforts in his first term to end “greening” made him a worse war criminal than Hitler.

One problem many people have is that they find it difficult to evaluate the alleged evidence offered by scientists who claim that “climate change” poses a dire threat, but in his remarkable book Fossil Future (Portfolio2022), Alex Epstein changed the terms of the debate about the danger of “global warming” and the alleged need to take drastic action in response to this. The opponents either question the evidence that disaster impends or argue that the threat can be handled without revamping the economy.

Epstein thinks that the danger from global warming has been exaggerated, but though he presents extensive evidence in support of this, his main contribution lies elsewhere. He argues that modern civilization depends on fossil fuels and that far from curtailing their use, we need to spread them to the impoverished parts of the world. So great are the benefits from using the fuels that only a true “end of the world” nightmare caused by CO2 emission could require that we shift to other energy sources, and despite the alarmists’ caterwauling, this nightmare is most unlikely to occur. Moreover, Epstein holds that the benefits of fossil fuels are so obvious that only a defect in thinking could have induced people to ignore them. He is a philosopher as well as an energy economist, and he expertly identifies the false thought pattern that has led to our current confusions.

Epstein says, “Whenever we hear about what the ‘experts’ think, we need to keep in mind that most of us have no direct access to what most expert researchers in the field think. We are being told what experts think through a system of institutions and people…. Understanding how this system, which I call our ‘knowledge system,’ works and how it can go wrong is the key to being able to spot when what we’re told the ‘experts’ think is very wrong—about fossil fuels or anything else.”

On the issue of energy, Epstein argues that the system has gone very wrong, indeed, owing to the fact that its leading lights are in the grip of a philosophy that views human beings as an upsetting intrusion on the earth: through their feverish pursuit of growth, people have interfered with the “delicate balance” of nature. Having done so, people must repent and “green” the economy, though some experts opine that it would be better to get rid of us altogether. Concerning this bizarre philosophy, Epstein remarks: “Why does our knowledge system always expect extreme negative impacts from cost-efficient energy’s side-effects and always expect that we will be unable to master these impacts? Because of a false assumption that leads anyone holding it to expect that all forms of significant impact on nature will inevitably be self-destructive. I call this the ‘delicate nurturer’ assumption … [which is] that Earth, absent human impact, exists in an optimal, nurturing ‘delicate balance’ that is as stable, sufficient, and safe as we can hope to expect.”

You might be inclined to object that scientific findings deal with facts, not philosophies: if “climate scientists” predict that continued global warming will have dire consequences, don’t we have to judge their arguments strictly as they stand, without regard to their proponents’ views about the proper place of human beings, however repellent we may find these views? Epstein responds that predictions are far different from claims about what has happened in the past, which can often, though not always, be assessed objectively. Climate predictions are for the most part highly speculative, and the antihuman ideology of the “catastrophists,” as Epstein calls the climate alarmists, should incline us to view what they say with doubt, all the more so if they have wrongly predicted catastrophes in the past. “Such predictions [about climate] necessarily rely on highly complex science and models that are difficult for non-researchers to assess … it is both far easier and highly informative to assess our knowledge system’s, including designated experts’, track record of climate prediction” (the “designated experts” are those whom the system treats as authoritative). One of these “experts,” Michael Mann, famed for his controversial “hockey stick” graph, is weighed in the balance and found wanting: “Designated expert Michael Mann has written: ‘We probably already exceed the [planet’s] carrying capacity by a factor of eight.’”  It is unlikely that someone with this opinion will be eager to suggest policies that promote human welfare, and the same holds true of the notorious Paul Ehrlich, who has many times wrongly predicted disaster but whose oracular status nevertheless remains undiminished. Mann, by the way, is one of those who wants to suppress and even imprison climate skeptics. Why listen to them?

If the designated experts were not blinded by partisan passion, what would they see? The answer, Epstein says, is that Nature untouched by man is no “delicate balance” but rather an ever-dynamic, often hostile place. To survive and flourish in it, we must specialize in what we produce and use powerful machines in doing so. Such machines immensely multiply our natural energy and enable us to master the environment to our advantage. Only the fossil fuels— viz., coal, oil, and natural gas—can be used to produce these machines in a cost-efficient way. Wind and solar power are paltry by comparison. Hydroelectric and nuclear power fare rather better, but even they are no match for the fossil fuels, and furthermore, fossil fuels are often required to produce and implement the other forms of energy.

Epstein says about the fossil fuels: “Contrary to our anti-impact, anti-energy knowledge system these are not trivial benefits that are already overwhelmed by fossil fuels’ negative side-effects on the livability of our world—they are fundamental to the livability of our world. The current benefit of the world’s massive use of ultra-cost-effective fossil fuel energy is a radical increase in the productive ability of billions of people—via ultra-cost-effective fossil-fueled machine labor and the enormous amount of mental labor it frees up, along with fossil fuel materials—that makes the world unnaturally livable, i.e., conducive to human flourishing.”

It is here that the primary source of the book’s originality lies, together with the author’s cogent analysis of the conflicting opinions’ philosophical underpinnings. Other critics of the global catastrophists propose palliative measures to cope with what they deem a much lesser threat than their opponents envision; they suggest, for example, a shift to nuclear power and the limitation of such pollution as remains through “cap and trade,” a carbon tax, and the like. Epstein, by contrast, is uncompromising. Not only does he want to maintain the use of fossil fuels; he relishes the prospect of the extended use of these fuels, particularly in poor areas of the world, where people without this resource languish. “Since 1980, the percentage of humanity living on less than $2 a day has gone from 42 percent to under 10 percent today. This wondrous development is the result of increasing and expanding productivity, which is driven by the increasing and expanding use of fossil-fueled machine labor and the enormous amount of mental labor it frees up. But there is still far more progress to be had…. Expanding fossil fuel use will enable everyone, especially the world’s poorest people, to become more productive and prosperous.”

But has Epstein dismissed the perils of untoward climate changes too quickly? Don’t floods that result from a rise in temperature pose real dangers, for example? Epstein responds by again appealing to the benefits of technology, made possible by fossil fuels. Technology enables us to achieve what Epstein calls “climate mastery.” He cites in this connection a telling statistic. Despite the temperature rise that occurred in the twentieth century, deaths from climate have sharply decreased. “In reality, dangerous temperatures—which overwhelmingly come from too much cold, not too much heat—are a smaller danger than ever thanks to two forces: fossil-fueled climate mastery and modestly warming temperatures…. Before human beings had fossil-fueled machines to master dangerous climates, they were overwhelmed by natural temperature dangers, both heat and (especially) cold…. Heat-related deaths are a much bigger problem in the unempowered world today, which is yet another reason why empowerment is a moral imperative.”

Let’s do everything we can to stop the “climate change” fanatics from destroying our economy!

The post The ‘Climate Change’ Danger appeared first on LewRockwell.

The consensus holds there will be another bubble after the Everything Bubble pops, but this might be misplaced confidence in the godlike powers of central banks.

The consensus holds that central banks–the Federal Reserve in the US–will gradually inflate away the world’s rising debt burden while propping up assets and the economy with the usual bag of monetary magic: suppress interest rates so debt service costs ease, increase the money supply and credit to prop up asset bubbles in stocks and housing, and thereby generate growth in consumption via the elixir of “the wealth effect:” as assets loft higher, everyone feels richer and so they borrow and spend more.

Well, not everyone, because only the top 10% own enough assets to feel “the wealth effect,” but since they account for 50% of all consumer spending, that’s enough to maintain the status quo, in which the bottom 90% lose ground (especially the bottom 60%) and the top 10% are doing splendidly.

Should the bubble du jour pop, no worries, central banks will rush to the rescue as they have for 25 years, goosing money supply and credit, opening the floodgates of liquidity, pushing interest rates down so everyone and every entity can borrow and spend / speculate more, more, more.

This is a nice story, and proponents have the past 25 years of history to back it up. But beneath the surface appeal of this story–a Hollywood ending every time, as the Fed will inflate another bubble, one after the other in an endless loop–there are stirrings in the deep that suggest the Everything Bubble is the last bubble of its kind, and attempts to inflate another bubble when this one pops will collapse the entire rickety contraption.

In other words, everything is forever until it is no more. Let’s consider some points that speak to the nature of speculative bubbles.

1. Speculative bubbles don’t require central banks increasing money supply and manipulating interest rates. Recency bias leads us to imagine that central bank policies inflate and pop speculative bubbles via monetary levers, but the colossal South Seas Bubble in 1720 that popped with such devastating consequences arose and fell in the pre-central bank era. The madness of crowds–or more specifically, the greed-driven madness of greedy crowds is the core driver of speculative frenzies / bubbles.

2. Confidence is the foundation of speculative frenzies. Yes, confidence, as in a con. Back in 1720, the South Seas Company was supported by the establishment, and so confidence was high that it was a can’t lose proposition. The riches skimmed by early investors encouraged this confidence.

Today, confidence that the Fed will rush to the rescue should the Everything Bubble pop is high, as is the confidence that the AI Bubble isn’t a bubble because AI is going to change everything and that transformation will be immensely profitable–if not for the gold miners, then for those selling the miners picks and shovels.

3. Quasi-religious fervor, confidence, staggering gains and speculative frenzies all meld into one overflowing river, sweeping all before it. The primary force here is the belief that this isn’t irrational, or speculative–it’s all based on solid facts. That this was the exact same belief that powered bubbles in 1720, 1925-1929, 1998-2000 and 2004-2008 is brushed aside, for as we all know, this time it’s different. Of course it is, but perhaps not in the way that the consensus anticipates.

Just as a break from all the fun and games, let’s consider a chart of M2 money supply, generally conceded as the driver of stocks rising, and compare it to GDP–a measure of economic expansion–and the S&P 500 stock index (SPX).

It’s interesting to note the ratio of M2 and GDP. That money supply and economic expansion would rise together qualifies as common sense, but what makes this interesting is the slippage in the ratio.

For two decades, GDP was roughly double M2. In 1981, M2 was $1.6 trillion and GDP was $3.1 trillion. In 2001, M2 was $5 trillion and GDP was $10.5 trillion. So far so good.

In Q1 2009, at the bottom of the stock market crash / Global Financial Crisis, there was bit of slippage: M2 was $8.4 trillion and GDP was $14.4 trillion–no longer 1 to 2.

By the pre-Covid high watermark of Q1 2020, M2 was $15.5 trillion and GDP was $21.7 trillion. After the Covid crash and stimulus, here in Q2 2025 M2 is $22.1 trillion and GDP is $30.3 trillion– 1 to 1.37.

There’s a phrase that describes this: diminishing returns. Goosing money supply is no longer goosing GDP to the same degree it once did.

Meanwhile, back in Speculative Frenzy-Land, the SPX is up 10X, from the biblical low in Q1 2009 of 666 to today’s high of 6660 (well, 6656, but close enough).

Read the Whole Article

The post Is This the Last Bubble? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Policymakers are preparing for the worst-case scenario from their perspective, the US’ expulsion from the Eastern Hemisphere, hence their new goal of urgently achieving strategic autarky in the Americas.

Politico cited unnamed US sources to report in early September that the draft National Defense Strategy will radically break from its predecessors, including Trump 1.0’s own from 2018, by prioritizing the Western Hemisphere over containing China and Russia. If this grand strategic pivot makes it into the final version, which is likely since only comparatively minor points are usually changed during this process, then it would be accounted for by recent events in Eurasia prompting a sea change in US calculations.

To be sure, the US is still expected to pursue the containment of China and Russia, which can collectively be referred to as the Sino-Russo Entente. It’ll just be done more through proxy, AUKUS+ vis-à-vis China and NATO vis-à-vis Russia, than through direct measures like before. The predicted injection of Western influence into the geostrategic Central Asian region between them via NATO member Turkiye through the new TRIPP Corridor will complement the aforesaid measures to stir trouble for them on the cheap.

The US’ evolving modus operandi is to “Lead From Behind” by empowering regional partners through ISR aid, logistics support, and arms deals in order to advance shared geostrategic interests without risking another imbroglio for itself. The preexisting multipolar processes from before the special operation have accelerated in the 3,5 years since and consequently reached the point where a return to unipolarity is impossible even though complex multipolarity has yet to emerge and might still take decades to do so.

The Biden Administration’s “dual containment” of the Sino-Russo Entente failed while Trump 2.0’s Eurasian grand strategy of a resource-centric strategic partnership with Russia in order to deprive China of the resources required for turbocharging its superpower trajectory also just failed as explained here. Despite high hopes that the latter would succeed, the writing was on the wall in hindsight that Putin likely wouldn’t agree to major territorial and/or security concessions in Ukraine in exchange for such ties.

In parallel with the failure of these policies, the SCO and BRICS began playing more complementary roles in transforming global governance, beginning with the impressive diversification of some members’ economic-financial ties vis-à-vis the West since the start of Russia’s special operation. American strategists accordingly calculated that the restoration of unipolarity is impossible and more complex multipolarity might thus characterize the coming years so it’s time to prioritize the ultimate backup plan.

Focusing more on the Western Hemisphere than on directly containing the Sino-Russo Entente is meant to reverse the decline of the US’ unipolar hegemony in its half of the world. The goal is to reassert its traditional hegemonic status via the “Fortress America” strategy in order to dominate the Western Hemisphere’s resources and people, thus enabling the US to achieve strategic autarky should it be pushed out of the Eastern Hemisphere, however unlikely that possibility might appear to be at present.

The logic behind the US’ reported draft National Defense Strategy is therefore that policymakers are preparing for the worst-case scenario from their perspective, the US’ expulsion from the Eastern Hemisphere. This is due to them accepting that the multipolar advances of recent years are irreversible and that the cost of attempting to directly decelerate their future progress entails too high of a risk of world war. It’s a pragmatic approach but it remains to be seen whether it’ll really defuse global tensions.

This article was originally published on Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

The post Explaining the Logic Behind the US’ Reported Draft National Defense Strategy appeared first on LewRockwell.

As an Economist and student of the Constitution, I can tell you with utmost confidence that the Dystopia described in the title is accurate if Congress is not changed by election or prosecution. I am referring to the House, because the Senate has been controlled by Big Money since the Coup of 1913 and the People can do little to change it.

Most people, and officials in both parties, don’t have any understanding of the reality of our Economic Situation. We are on the brink of Dystopia. Look it up.

We missed one civil war by the skin of our teeth when Trump was elected. But this only bought a little time for him to root out the Criminal Enterprise, which is most of government, and follow the Constitution. Please remember the prior sentence because these simple words are seminal. It has been my experience that a majority of The People are economic illiterates, and are ignorant and apathetic about politics and the Constitution. But they do spout talking points like a robot, and, being successfully brainwashed, are almost impossible to change.

This article is not about what President Trump must do to restore the Constitutional Republic, that is for my next paper. My concern in this paper is to tell you what YOU can do so you don’t end up living on the street, dodging bullets during a Civil War.

Let me tell you why I am not overstating my case. Even if Trump’s Grandiose Programs succeed, he will ultimately fail near term, Economically, because he has not investigated, prosecuted and jailed corrupt members of Congress and bureaucrats of the Administrative State. Large portions of the Federal Government are a Criminal Enterprise, and must be rooted out to comply with the Constitution. Last but not least, the role of the States and their Federal government must be reversed to be Constitutionally-compliant again.

You must remember when Biden’s shock troops, Antifa and Black Lives Matter, burned down the cities and their followers rioted because the criminal George Floyd died in police hands. NONE of these criminals were prosecuted. All of these criminal actions are returning with the political assassination of Charles Kirk and the attempted assassinations of President Trump. It may not take much more for the political right to respond, starting a Civil War. Please remember the Democrats aka Communists brought in an army of Illegal Invaders totaling more than 21 million. Our military is not currently large enough to handle a force this large; a draft may be required.

Civil War or not, you must arm yourself to the teeth to protect yourself and family from the Communist gangs. You don’t stop a gang with a pistol, you need an AR15 or 12 gauge shotgun. If you are living in a Blue City, move. Stock up on food and emergency supplies. Supermarket food does not last long enough, so buy emergency rations that last 25 years. Remember Supermarkets will be looted And will not be open during any conflict.

Don’t forget their individual attacks of brutality on innocents and the failure of Blue city prosecutors to keep even repeat offenders in jail because theydon’t use Cash Bail. Communist cities are being funded unconstitutionally by the Federal Government.

You may be one of the few being protected by government, but you can’t count on it and things change constantly during a Civil War or Guerilla War. It may take only one more Charles Kirk-type assassination to push the MAGA people to retaliate in kind.  Cutting off government funding of Communists will likely infuriate Communists  and provoke attacks on Patriotic Americans.

You must wake up and admit that we are living in very dangerous times.

The post Live on the Street Begging for Food and Dodging Bullets in a Civil War, or Fire Corrupt Congress…Your Choice! appeared first on LewRockwell.