Aggregatore di feed

Meeting with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Scotland, President Trump announced his decision to scrap his 50 day deadline for an end to the Ukraine war and instead make it a 10 day deadline. But what will he do? Trash the US economy with 100 percent secondary sanctions on China and India? Green-light deep strikes into Russia – Biden-like – and bring us back to the brink of WW!!!? What’s the plan?

The post Trump Blows Up At Putin: ‘Stop Fighting In 10 Days…Or Else!’ appeared first on LewRockwell.

Dallas ’63: A Brilliant Synthesis Regarding the November 22, 1963 Coup d’état, by Charles Burris

Once again, the intrepid Peter Dale Scott takes us into that claustrophobic wilderness of mirrors where the criminal underworld meets the establishment upperworld in the sub-rosa labyrinth of the Deep State. Scott is the premier synthesizer unearthing all the various seemingly unconnected strands of hard documentary factual evidence and counterfactual hypothesizing concerning the November 22, 1963, coup d’état.

Dallas ’63: The First Deep State Revolt Against the White House, by Peter Dale Scott

He begins by addressing head-on the seminal question of “Who was Lee Harvey Oswald?” in a brilliantly sketched portrait we have not seen before. The intelligence services (especially the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence James Jesus Angleton – Associate Deputy Director of Operations for Counterintelligence (ADDOCI) suspected a Soviet mole had penetrated the dank bowels of the Deep State and obtained highly secret information concerning the U-2 spy plane. Soon an elaborate multilayered mole hunt began.

Abroad, the CIA/State Department “dangled” Oswald as a US Marine radar operator “defector” to the Soviets, while in the US they compiled a byzantine, contradictory and ever-shifting documentary “legend” of manipulated and altered biographical data concerning Oswald as a trap to snare whom among the various interagency intelligence personnel who accessed his files was the possible mole. Upon his return to the US, Oswald continued his counterintelligence role as agent provocateur, informer, and ultimately as “patsy.”

Mentioned almost in passing was Pyotr Popov, a Soviet military intelligence (GRU) officer who had been passing secrets to the Americans for seven years. In April 1958, Popov had alerted his Soviet Russia Division (SRD) case officer George Kisevalter that clandestine technical information regarding the CIA U-2 spy plane had reached Soviet intelligence via a Soviet mole. Thus began Angelton’s elaborate efforts to discover and out this treacherous mole. We journey deeper within the Wilderness of Mirrors as a young Marine radar operator, Lee Harvey Oswald, soon attempts defection to the USSR, entering the cloistered labyrinth of decades of lies, disinformation, duplicity, and deception regarding this mysterious individual.

That disturbing aspect of the story is fleshed out in John M. Newman’s Countdown to Darkness: The Assassination of President Kennedy, Volume II, Uncovering Popov’s Mole: The Assassination of President Kennedy Volume IV, and in Peter Dale Scott’s Dallas ’63: The First Deep State Revolt Against the White House. (.pdf) Angelton was in the epicenter of events which led to the November 22, 1963 coup d’état and savage murder of President John F. Kennedy.

As he was dying from lung cancer, the Machiavellian CIA head of Counterintelligence, James Jesus Angleton, provided author Joseph J. Trento (also cited by Morley in his book) this startling candid and diabolic confession:

You know how I got to be in charge of counterintelligence? I agreed not to polygraph or require detailed background checks on Allen Dulles and 60 of his closest friends . . . They were afraid that their own business dealings with Hitler’s pals would come out. They were too arrogant to believe that the Russians would discover it all . . .

Fundamentally, the founding fathers of U.S. intelligence were liars. The better you lied and the more you betrayed, the more likely you would be promoted. These people attracted and promoted each other. Outside of their duplicity, the only thing they had in common was a desire for absolute power. I did things that, in looking back on my life, I regret. But I was part of it and loved being in it . . . Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, Carmel Offiie, and Frank Wisner were the grand masters. If you were in a room with them you were in a room full of people that you had to believe would deservedly end up in hell. I guess I will see them there soon.

In my personal library I have several thousand books, hundreds relating to the covert and overt background concerning the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. From every chapter, from every page of Dallas ’63, leaps long forgotten names and events from these shelved volumes which Scott has masterfully woven into a head-spinning narrative describing the sinister milieu of intriguers from that period.

This concise volume is unlike any previous work on the subject in its magisterial detail of facts and scrupulous documentation of sources. I highly recommend it to the experienced JFK Assassination research community.

Revisiting the “Legend” of Lee Harvey Oswald

[With the onrush of contradictory information/disinformation being put out concerning the alleged attempted assassin of President Donald Trump, Thomas Matthew Crooks, let us briefly take a look at the “patsy” in the November 22, 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.]

The “Legend” of Lee Harvey Oswald, by Charles Burris

Because so many of my LRC articles/blogs over the years have focused upon the November 22, 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the insidious coup d’état by Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson and the highest echelons of the National Security State, many readers have inquired again and again what was my assessment of Lee Harvey Oswald, targeted by the Warren Commission as the sole assassin. I have over 100 books in my personal library on these matters. Here briefly are my thoughts and reflections on this controversial subject.

The “Legend” of Lee Harvey Oswald

Our story begins with Petr Popov. Popov was a Soviet military intelligence (GRU) officer who had been passing secrets to the Americans for seven years. In April 1958, Popov had alerted his Soviet Russia Division (SRD) case officer George Kisevalter that clandestine technical information regarding the CIA U-2 spy plane had reached Soviet intelligence via a Soviet mole. The intelligence services (especially the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence James Jesus Angleton – Associate Deputy Director of Operations for Counterintelligence (ADDOCI) suspected a Soviet mole had penetrated the dank bowels of the deep state and obtained highly secret information concerning the U-2 spy plane.

Thus began Angleton’s elaborate efforts to discover and out this treacherous mole. It will ultimately lead to his downfall within the CIA.

We journey deeper within the Wilderness of Mirrors as a young Marine radar operator, Lee Harvey Oswald, soon attempts defection to the USSR, entering the cloistered labyrinth of decades of lies, disinformation, duplicity, and deception regarding this mysterious individual. That disturbing aspect of the story is fleshed out in John M. Newman’s Countdown to Darkness: The Assassination of President Kennedy, Volume II, and in Peter Dale Scott’s Dallas ’63: The First Deep State Revolt Against the White House.

Angleton was in the epicenter of events which led to the November 22, 1963 coup d’état and savage murder of President John F. Kennedy.

Soon an elaborate multilayered mole hunt began. Abroad, the CIA/State Department “dangled” Oswald as a US Marine radar operator “defector” to the Soviets, while in the US they compiled a byzantine, contradictory and ever-shifting documentary “legend” of manipulated and altered biographical data concerning Oswald as a trap to snare whom among the various inter-agency intelligence personnel who accessed his files was the possible mole.

Upon his return to the US, Oswald continued his counterintelligence role as agent provocateur, informer, and ultimately as “patsy.”

History has recorded Lee Havey Oswald as the “lone nut assassin” of President John Kennedy. But perhaps he is someone substantially different than what “official history” has made of him.

His favorite TV show as a kid was, I Led Three Lives about a double agent for the FBI, Herbert Philbrook, who secretly spies on the Communist Party in the US (I have a signed edition of Philbook’s book by the same name). Oswald was a ninth-grade dropout who joined the Marines in 1956 and became a radar operator with a top security clearance who worked on projects related to the secret U-2 spy planes for the CIA. Oswald was assigned first to Marine Corps Air Station El Toro in July 1957, then to Naval Air Facility Atsugi in Japan in September as part of Marine Air Control Squadron 1. He learned to speak Russian while a Marine at a secret CIA/ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) training base at Nags Head, North Carolina.

Like all Marines, he was trained and tested in shooting and scored 212 in December 1956, slightly above the requirements for the designation of sharpshooter. In May 1959 he scored 191, which reduced his rating to marksman. He was a poor shot.

Oswald obtained a hardship discharge from the Marines allegedly because of his mother’s poor health, left the United States, and tried to defect to the Soviet Union in 1959. The Soviets were immediately suspicious of his intentions believing he was one of many such agents sent to spy on them. He tried to commit suicide. He was then sent to the city of Minsk to work as a lathe operator at the Gorizont Electronics Factory, which produced radios, televisions, and military and space electronics. He was under constant surveillance by the Soviets. Oswald met a young 19 year old girl, Marina Nikolayevna Prusakova, who was the niece of a Soviet intelligence official. Marina thought he was a Russian because he spoke the language like a native Russian. He married Marina and later petitioned the US State Department for permission to return to the United States. It was granted. The State Department loaned them the money to come to the US in 1962. This was quite unusual for the State Department to grant permission to return and loan money to someone who tried to renounce his US citizenship as a “defector.”

Although he was someone who tried to defect to the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War, he traveled in right-wing, anti-Communist circles of former Russian émigrés. His new best friend was George de Mohrenschildt, a petroleum geologist with international business connections who was a CIA contract agent and colleague of George Herbert Walker Bush.

Oswald held a series of odd jobs.

He moved to New Orleans and became the sole member of the New Orleans chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Oswald ordered the following items from a local printer: 500 application forms, 300 membership cards, and 1,000 leaflets with the heading, “Hands Off Cuba” establishing a paper trail of his pro-Castro activities. He visited anti-Castro militant Carlos Bringuier at a store he owned in New Orleans offering his services as a former Marine. Bringuier was the New Orleans delegate for the anti-Castro organization Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil (DRE). This was a CIA front group.

In 1963 the group was financed by the CIA with $25,000 per month, under a CIA program named AMSPELL run by George Joannides, the chief of the psychological warfare branch in Miami’s JM/WAVE station. The money went to Luis Fernandez Rocha, the DRE’s leader in Miami, and supported the DRE’s activities in a variety of cities, including New Orleans. Joannides also provided non-financial support, including reviewing military plans and briefing them on how to handle the press. Joannides worked with the group from December 1962 to April 1964; CIA monthly reports on the group from 1960 to 1966 have been declassified, except for this period. It was this group which first spread to the media after the assassination disinformation concerning Oswald’s Cuban connections.

In 1978 the CIA summoned Joannides out of retirement to serve as the Agency’s liaison to the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations, in specific regard to the death of President Kennedy. Former Washington Post reporter Jefferson Morley writes “the spy withheld information about his own actions in 1963 from the congressional investigators he was supposed to be assisting. It wasn’t until 2001, 38 years after Kennedy’s death, that Joannides’ support for the Cuban exiles, who clashed with Oswald and monitored him, came to light.”

Bringuier would later tell the Warren Commission that he believed Oswald’s visits were an attempt to infiltrate his group, when they were actually used to establish his “legend” or cover as a Marxist supporter of Cuba.

On August 9, Oswald turned up in downtown New Orleans handing out pro-Castro leaflets. His Fair Play for Cuba leaflets had the address “544 Camp Street” hand-stamped on it. This was actually the address where the anti-Castro, anti-Communist groups were headquartered. Bringuier confronted him claiming he was tipped off about his leafleting by a friend. A well-publicized scuffle ensued and Bringuier, Oswald, and two of Bringuier’s friends were arrested for disturbing the peace. Before leaving the police station, Oswald asked to speak with an FBI agent. Agent John Quigley arrived and spent over an hour talking to him.

Oswald later appeared on New Orleans TV and radio interviews claiming to be a Marxist supporter of Castro and the Cuban regime, further establishing his “legend” or cover identity persona, just as Herbert Philbrick did as a double agent for the FBI in his favorite TV show as a child.

In 1961-62, the New Orleans chapter of the Cuban Revolutionary Council, a CIA front group, occupied an office in the Newman Building at 544 Camp Street. This was the building where anti-Castro activist and accused JFK Assassination conspirator Guy Banister had his office. Banister also had worked in Naval Intelligence and continued his intelligence connections. This was also the address Oswald had stamped on his pro-Castro flyers.

Banister’s office was within walking distance of the New Orleans offices of the FBI, CIA, Office of Naval Intelligence and the Reily Coffee Company where Oswald worked. Reily was Oswald’s employer and a supporter of anti-Castro Cubans. During this period, Banister associate Sergio Arcacha Smith was the “official delegate” for the New Orleans chapter of the CRC.

Banister’s secretary, Delphine Roberts, told author Anthony Summers that Oswald “…seemed to be on familiar terms with Banister and with [Banister’s] office.” Roberts said, “As I understood it, he had the use of an office on the second floor, above the main office where we worked…. Then, several times, Mr. Banister brought me upstairs, and in the office above I saw various writings stuck up on the wall pertaining to Cuba. There were various leaflets up there pertaining to Fair Play for Cuba.”

Later Oswald is going to be accused of shooting at right-wing former Major General Edwin Walker in his home, although both Walker and the Dallas police stated he was shot at with a 30.06 rifle, a firearm Oswald never owned. The Dallas police claimed that the bullet was a 30.06 caliber; the bullet shells from the Texas School Book Depository were 6.5mm. The Walker bullet was too severely deformed to allow a conclusive analysis of its pattern of grooves. A spectrographic examination by Henry Heilberger of the FBI laboratory found that the lead alloy in the bullet was different from that of bullet fragments found in President Kennedy’s car.

Oswald’s wife Marina was the Warren Commission’s chief witness to the alleged shooting at both General Walker and President Kennedy. She later fully renounced her testimony stating it was achieved under duress and threats of sending her back to the Soviet Union to face reprisals.

Although Oswald never spoke of any hostility or dislike towards President John Kennedy he is going to be accused of shooting the most protected man in America.

Oswald is going to be accused of ordering a cheap mail order rifle so there is a paper trail, instead of simply going to a local gun shop in Texas to purchase the rifle incognito. In Texas no identification was needed, and no incriminating paper trail would exist. An incriminating paper trail was created when purchasing a weapon from a different state by mail order. The 6.5×52mm Mannlicher-Carcano ordered from Chicago allegedly by Oswald using the name of “A. Hidel.” The rifle portrayed in the ad and which Oswald allegedly received were not the same.

He is going to be accused of taking pictures of himself with the rifle he is going to use. Then he is going to be accused of shooting the president from the place where he works, the Texas School Book Depository.

The Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) building was owned by D. H. Byrd, co-founder of the Civil Air Patrol (in which Oswald served in as a youngster in New Orleans) and was a strong financial supporter of Lyndon Johnson. After World War II Byrd helped incorporate CAP and have it designated as an Auxiliary of the Air Force, helped initiate the International Air Cadet Exchange, and established or supported cadet scholarships. For his work with the CAP Byrd was awarded the US Air Force’s Air Force Scroll of Appreciation on 24 May 1963. Byrd and fellow Dallas right-wing billionaire H. L. Hunt were personal friends of Air Force Chief of Staff General Curtis Lemay, a rabid Kennedy hater who later flew hundreds of miles to be in the operation room gallery at JFK’s autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital on the day he was murdered

D. H. Byrd also employed LBJ’s personal hitman Malcolm Wallace at his defense company LTV. LTV got a big defense contract in January, 1964. Wallace’s fingerprint was found in the sniper’s nest on the Sixth Floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). Byrd had the so-called “sniper’s window” removed from the TSBD which he kept as a souvenir. Byrd was a big game hunter and had the trophy heads of all sorts of animals in his house. Some persons suspect the TSBD sniper’s window was right next to those mementos.

Oswald was not in that window at the time of the assassination but was downstairs eating lunch. In that window just prior to the assassination was TSBD employee Bonnie Raye Williams eating a chicken bone sandwich.

Oswald is going to be accused of taking off from the TSBD and shooting a cop, Officer J. D. Tippit, and leaving his wallet on the scene so he could be found.

On November 24, 1963, Oswald is going to be shot by Dallas night club owner Jack Ruby in the garage of the Dallas Police headquarters in full view of television cameras broadcasting live to millions and die at Parkland Hospital. Ruby had stalked Oswald at police headquarters all weekend since his arrest.

Jack Ruby had long standing connections to organized crime figures, all the way back when he was a numbers runner for Al Capone’s mob in Chicago while a youth. He later worked for Congressman Richard M. Nixon, at the urging and recommendation of Lyndon Johnson. In the weeks prior to the assassination, Ruby had been in contact with major crime figures from around the country.

While watching Jack Ruby shooting Oswald on Sunday morning on TV, Richard Nixon voiced his recognition of Ruby as the man who once worked for him.

This Oswald/Dallas assassination “plot” is one of several other uncovered such plots.

There were two uncovered in Chicago, one involving a group of Cuban men with high-powered rifles and scopes, and one involving a former Marine Thomas Arthur Vallee who, like Oswald, had served at the Naval Air Facility Atsugi in Japan.

Abraham Bolden, the first African-American Secret Service agent, claimed that in October, 1963, the Chicago Secret Service office received a teletype from the Federal Bureau of Investigation warning that an attempt would be made to kill President John F. Kennedy by a four-man Cuban hit squad when he visited the city on the 2nd of November. Armed with high-powered rifles, the men were from “a dissident Cuban group”. According to investigative journalist Edwin Black, the Secret Service arrested two suspects, however, they were eventually released.

Bolden later discovered that this information was being kept from the Warren Commission. When he complained about this he was warned “to keep his mouth shut”. Bolden decided to travel to Washington where he telephoned Warren Commission Counsel J. Lee Rankin. Bolden was arrested and taken back to Chicago where he was charged with discussing a bribe with two known counterfeiters. He was eventually found guilty of accepting a bribe and spent six years in prison. When he tried to draw attention to his case, he was placed in solitary confinement. Mr. Bolden has steadfastly maintained his innocence, arguing that he was targeted for prosecution in retaliation for exposing unprofessional and racist behavior within the U.S. Secret Service.

Mr. Bolden chronicles his experiences in his book The Echo from Dealy Plaza. He has been recognized through numerous platforms for his ongoing work to speak out against the racism he faced in the Secret Service in the 1960s, and his courage in challenging injustice. In 2022 Bolden received a full pardon from President Joe Biden,

Another plot involved an assassin in Tampa, Florida who was to be situated in a high-rise building while the presidential motorcade passed. The Tampa gunman would have fired from a window of the Floridan Hotel, then the tallest building in the city. (In Dallas, Lee Harvey Oswald was accused of shooting from a window on the sixth floor of a book depository.)

The post Dallas ’63: A Brilliant Synthesis Regarding the November 22, 1963 Coup d’état appeared first on LewRockwell.

La stragrande maggioranza dei canali di informazione che la maggior parte delle persone legge sono redatti e scritti da chi fa gli interessi della cricca di Davos/City di Londra. Sono pochi quelli ufficiali e nella cosiddetta “controinformazione” che scrivono negli interessi degli USA. Questa situazione tira al suo interno anche analisti e commentatori indipendenti, che in buona fede, finiscono per essere dei megafoni involontari di una narrativa fasulla. La Lagarde sta cercando di abbassare il costo del capitale in Germania? Sì. Sta cercando di abbassare il costo del capitale in tutta Europa? Sì. I tagli dei tassi sono così virulenti in Europa prima di tutto perché la principale economia del continente, quella tedesca, è in condizioni peggiori di quelle del 2008 e, in secondo luogo, perché sta affrontando un problema di deflazione alimentato dalle politiche monetarie restrittive della FED sull'offerta di dollari offshore. La devastazione europea è tutta qui: la chiusura dei rubinetti del mercato dell'eurodollaro. La Lagarde sta cercando di tappare i buchi nei bilanci delle banche commerciali europee e delle banche centrali nazionali che sono emersi quando è stata costretta a seguire Powell quando ha iniziato a rialzare i tassi. Mentre la curva dei rendimenti americana è indirizzata a scendere sul lato lungo, quella europea, nonostante i numeri ridicoli e inverosimili, è inclinata verso l'alto. Quindi prima di parlare dei buchi di bilancio nella FED, meglio preoccuparsi prima di quelli nella BCE. Senza contare che fare affari con l'UE significa esporsi alla sua linea di politica commerciale estorsiva, mentre gli USA trovano accordi invece. E per chi sventola il feticcio della “forza dell'euro”, vorrei ricordare che la prima fase di una crisi monetaria è l'aumento della stessa. Pensate davvero che l'euro arriverà a 1.22 e il dollaro a 70? Con dazi potenzialmente al 50% per l'UE? Con quanto descritto da Lacalle nell'articolo di oggi? Un altro tema sono i pronti contro termine inversi che, starnazzano gli analisti indipendenti, saranno quelli che la FED userà presa dal panico. Ok... perché invece non sento una parola riguardo l'RRP usato a tutto gas dalla Banca d'Inghilterra già adesso per tenere solventi le banche inglesi? Solo la scorsa settimana erano $83 miliardi. E il default dell'Ucraina su tranche di debito coperte dall'Europa il mese scorso? La vera guerra è finanziaria come ho descritto nel mio ultimo libro, Il Grande Default.

______________________________________________________________________________________

di Daniel Lacalle

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/i-keynesiani-si-sono-sbagliati-sulleconomia)

Negli ultimi sei mesi un coro di analisti e commentatori ha lanciato l'allarme per un imminente crollo dell'economia statunitense.

Molti avevano previsto che l'inflazione persistente, i tassi d'interesse alti e l'aumento dei deficit pubblici avrebbero arrestato la crescita e innescato una recessione.

Invece i dati raccontano una storia diversa: gli Stati Uniti dimostrano forza economica, controllo fiscale e aspettative di inflazione in miglioramento.

Le stime di crescita in aumento smentiscono i pessimisti

All'inizio del 2025 le previsioni dipingevano un quadro cupo. Il primo trimestre ha visto una contrazione del PIL, con l'economia statunitense in calo dello 0,5%. Tuttavia quel calo era determinato da una minore spesa pubblica e da maggiori importazioni, mentre il settore privato aveva continuato a rafforzarsi. Poco dopo la narrazione è cambiata. A metà anno i principali modelli economici e analisti hanno iniziato a rivedere al rialzo le loro stime di crescita. Trading Economics, ad esempio, prevedeva un robusto tasso di crescita del PIL al 3,5% per il secondo trimestre, una netta inversione di tendenza rispetto al precedente pessimismo. Il modello GDPNow della FED di Atlanta annunciava un analogo cambiamento positivo, stimando una crescita al 2,6% per il secondo trimestre. Inoltre le stime del consenso economico sono salite al 2,1% per il secondo trimestre, rispetto all'1,3% precedente, mentre le stime di inflazione sono diminuite.

Questa inversione di tendenza è stata alimentata da diversi fattori:

• Le famiglie americane hanno continuato a spendere, soprattutto perché la crescita dei salari ha superato l'inflazione.

• Gli investimenti fissi sono aumentati del 7,6% all'inizio del 2025, il ritmo più forte sin da metà 2023.

• Le aziende hanno anticipato le importazioni in vista dei nuovi dazi, stimolando l'attività economica; le successive revisioni hanno evidenziato esportazioni positive e importazioni normalizzate.

Queste revisioni al rialzo hanno colto di sorpresa molti commentatori e hanno costretto a rivalutare le precedenti previsioni ribassiste.

Le aspettative di inflazione stanno calando

Un altro ambito in cui gli analisti hanno valutato erroneamente l'economia è l'inflazione. Dopo anni di forti pressioni sui prezzi, molti si aspettavano che le aspettative di inflazione rimanessero ostinatamente elevate. Invece i dati recenti mostrano una chiara tendenza al ribasso: l'inflazione dei prezzi al consumo è diminuita su base mensile, trimestrale e semestrale. Le aspettative di inflazione al consumo negli Stati Uniti per l'anno a venire sono scese al 3% a giugno 2025, in calo rispetto al 3,2% di maggio, il livello più basso degli ultimi cinque mesi. Anche le aspettative di inflazione a tre e cinque anni sono scese leggermente, rispettivamente al 3,0% e al 2,6%.

I costi energetici sono diminuiti significativamente, con i prezzi della benzina in calo del 12% su base annua a maggio e i prezzi del gasolio in calo dell'8,6%. Anche l'inflazione degli immobili, un fattore chiave dell'indice dei prezzi al consumo complessivo, si è attenuata, con il tasso sceso al 3,9% a maggio dal 4% di aprile. Gli aumenti mensili dei prezzi sono stati modesti, con l'indice dei prezzi al consumo in aumento solo dello 0,1% a maggio e le previsioni per giugno indicano un aumento mensile dello 0,23%, mantenendo l'inflazione al livello più basso degli ultimi cinque anni e, secondo Truflation, a un tasso annuo dell'1,7% a giugno.

Il calo generalizzato delle aspettative di inflazione riflette la solidità della catena di approvvigionamento statunitense, un rallentamento dei costi degli immobili e un calo dei prezzi dei prodotti alimentari essenziali.

Il surplus di bilancio di giugno: una sorpresa fiscale

Forse la prova più eclatante della sottovalutazione dell'economia statunitense da parte degli analisti si è avuta a giugno, quando il governo federale ha registrato un surplus di bilancio di oltre $27 miliardi, il primo surplus mensile sin dal 2017. Le previsioni più ottimistiche prevedevano un deficit di oltre $40 miliardi.

Il surplus è stato determinato da due fattori chiave:

• Una forte riduzione della spesa, poiché la spesa pubblica è calata di $187 miliardi a giugno a causa di misure aggressive di riduzione dei costi e di una riduzione delle dimensioni della forza lavoro pubblica.

• I dazi sono saliti a $27 miliardi a giugno, rispetto ai $23 miliardi di maggio e sono più che quadruplicati rispetto all'anno precedente.

Le entrate sono aumentate del 13% rispetto al giugno dell'anno scorso, mentre le spese sono diminuite del 7%.

Tagli alla spesa e contenimento fiscale

La svolta fiscale è stata alimentata anche da una significativa riduzione della spesa discrezionale non destinata alla difesa. La proposta di bilancio 2026 del Presidente Trump ha ridotto le spese non destinate alla difesa di $163 miliardi, pari al 23% rispetto all'anno precedente, portando la spesa al livello più basso sin dal 2017.

Sebbene il deficit federale più ampio rimanga elevato – oltre $1.340 miliardi da inizio anno – è in gran parte un retaggio delle politiche della precedente amministrazione e si prevede un calo significativo entro la fine dell'anno. Il deficit inferiore di maggio, insieme ai consistenti surplus di aprile e giugno e ai tagli alla spesa, ha offerto un respiro positivo e ha messo in discussione la narrazione di una irresponsabilità fiscale incontrollata.

Una lezione di umiltà

Gli eventi del 2025 ci ricordano i rischi delle previsioni economiche keynesiane e l'errore dell'analisi ceteris paribus (a parità di condizioni). Sebbene le sfide permangano, soprattutto per quanto riguarda il debito a lungo termine e il costo degli interessi, l'economia statunitense si è dimostrata ancora una volta più dinamica e adattabile di quanto molti esperti avessero previsto, e l'attenzione dell'amministrazione alla responsabilità fiscale è chiara.

L'aumento delle stime di crescita, il calo delle aspettative di inflazione, il controllo di bilancio e i tagli disciplinati alla spesa evidenziano che le precedenti stime allarmistiche erano motivate da motivazioni ideologiche. La lezione che si può trarre da questa esperienza è quella di affrontare le previsioni economiche con cautela. Le stime keynesiane spesso si rivelano eccessivamente ottimistiche riguardo a crescita e inflazione quando la spesa pubblica aumenta e prevedono pessimismo quando accade il contrario.

L'economia statunitense è più forte ed è probabile che il settore privato cresca più rapidamente poiché i tagli fiscali e la deregolamentazione alleggeriranno gli oneri sugli investimenti e sull'occupazione.

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

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

Substantial parts of the world are at war, The Mideast and Ukraine attract the most attention, but there are others as well. Our traditional foreign policy calls for non-intervention in foreign wars, but even those who do not fully accept this policy should agree on one thing. America should not ship weapons to troubled areas. Wars are bad things, and we shouldn’t make them worse by making it easier to kill people.

Unfortunately, that’s just what we are doing. When he ran for President, Trump made statements in favor of a non-interventionist policy. He especially seemed eager to disengage from Ukraine.

But once he took office, he continued the policy of massive arms shipments to Israel of brain-dead “President” Biden and his gang and his gang of neocon controllers. He went even further with Iran, actually sending American bombers to drop bunker busting bombs on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

At first, Trump partially fulfilled his campaign rhetoric about cutting off military aid to Ukraine. But he has now restored it, and he threatens to impose sanctions against Putin. This risks nuclear war.

Let’s look first at American arms shipments to Israel. According to an article in The Times of Israel in May 2025, “The US State Department told Congress on Friday that it plans to sell nearly $3 billion in weapons to Israel, including thousands of bombs and $295 million worth of armored bulldozers that had been held up by the previous administration over human rights concerns that US President Donald Trump has largely eschewed. The prospective weapons sales were notified to US Congress on an emergency basis, meaning they will not be subject to review by the House and Senate’s foreign relations committees. Trump’s predecessor, US President Joe Biden, also utilized the measure to approve arms sales to Israel during the war in Gaza. In a statement, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio ‘has determined and provided detailed justification that an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale to the Government of Israel of the above defense articles and defense services in the national security interests of the United States, thereby waiving the Congressional review requirements.’”

Here is Rubio’s statement in full, from the Department of State website: “I have signed a declaration to use emergency authorities to expedite the delivery of approximately $4 billion in military assistance to Israel. The decision to reverse the Biden Administration’s partial arms embargo, which wrongly withheld a number of weapons and ammunition from Israel, is yet another sign that Israel has no greater ally in the White House than President Trump. Since taking office, the Trump Administration has approved nearly $12 billion in major FMS sales to Israel. This important decision coincides with President Trump’s repeal of a Biden-era memorandum which had imposed baseless and politicized conditions on military assistance to Israel at a time when our close ally was fighting a war of survival on multiple fronts against Iran and terror proxies. The Trump Administration will continue to use all available tools to fulfill America’s long-standing commitment to Israel’s security, including means to counter security threats.”

Now let’s turn to Iran and the bunker-buster bombs. Here is what American bombers did according to the USNI: “A bomber mission of seven B-2 Spirit bombers and more than 30 Tomahawk Attack Missiles fired from an Ohio-class guided-missile nuclear submarine struck three Iranian nuclear sites at Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo, Pentagon officials confirmed on Sunday. ‘Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,’ President Trump said in a Saturday night address at the White House. The main strike package of seven bombers began the more than day-long round trip from Whiteman Airbase, Mo., on Saturday. The B-2s ultimately dropped 14 GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators on the enrichment facilities at Natanz and Fordo early Sunday morning Iranian time, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said in a Pentagon press briefing. The MOP is a 20-foot-long, 30,000-pound munition capable of tunneling through more than 100 feet of concrete and is thought to be the only weapon in the U.S. or Israeli arsenal capable of destroying Iran’s underground uranium enrichment facilities.”

When he ran for office, Trump said he favored non-intervention. In September 2024, he said he was going to cut off military aid to Ukraine: “Donald Trump on Tuesday praised Russia’s military record in historical conflicts and derided U.S. aid to Ukraine as he again insisted he would quickly end the war launched by Moscow’s invasion if elected president. Speaking in Savannah, Georgia, Trump mocked President Joe Biden’s frequent refrain that the U.S. would back the Ukrainian armed forces until Kyiv wins the war. He raised two long ago conflicts to suggest Moscow would not lose — the former Soviet Union’s role in defeating Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in World War II in the 1940s, and French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte’s failed invasion of Russia more than a century earlier. Trump insisted that the U.S. had ‘to get out,’ though he did not specify how he would negotiate an ending to U.S. involvement in the war. “Biden says, ‘We will not leave until we win,’” Trump said, lowering his voice to mimic the Democratic president. ‘What happens if they win? That’s what they do, is they fight wars. As somebody told me the other day, they beat Hitler, they beat Napoleon. That’s what they do. They fight. And it’s not pleasant.’”

When he became President, Trump at first did cut off arms shipments to Ukraine: The New York Times said on March 3, 2025: President Trump on Monday temporarily suspended the delivery of all U.S. military aid to Ukraine, senior administration and military officials said, just days after Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine had an explosive confrontation at the White House. The order affects more than $1 billion in arms and ammunition in the pipeline and on order. It resulted from a series of meetings at the White House on Monday between Mr. Trump and his senior national security aides, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The officials said the directive would be in effect until Mr. Trump determined that Ukraine had demonstrated a good-faith commitment to peace negotiations with Russia. Mr. Trump’s decision dramatically escalates the breach between Washington and Kyiv, at a critical moment in the conflict. The most immediate beneficiary of the move is President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. If the suspension is lengthy, he can use the time to press for further territorial gains. And he may well decide to hold back from any negotiations at all, figuring that any prolonged dispute between Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky will only strengthen his position, either on the battlefield or when cease-fire talks ever take place.”

But Trump restored the military aid after only a week and denied he had ordered a pause at all: According to PBS News “The Trump administration has resumed sending some weapons to Ukraine, a week after the Pentagon had directed that some deliveries be paused, U.S. officials said Wednesday. The weapons heading into Ukraine include 155 mm munitions and precision-guided rockets known as GMLRS, two officials told The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to provide details that had not been announced publicly. It’s unclear exactly when the weapons started moving. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed the pause on some shipments last week to allow the Pentagon to assess its weapons stockpiles, in a move that caught the White House by surprise. Affected was Patriot missiles, the precision-guided GMLRS, Hellfire missiles, Howitzer rounds and more, taking not only Ukrainian officials and other allies by surprise but also U.S. lawmakers and other parts of the Trump administration, including the State Department. It was not clear if a pause on Patriot missiles would hold. The $4 million munition is in high demand and was key to defending a major U.S. air base in Qatar last month as Iran launched a ballistic missile attack in response to the U.S. targeting its nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump announced Monday that the U.S. would continue to deliver defensive weapons to Ukraine. He has sidestepped questions about who ordered the pause in exchanges with reporters this week.”

Let’s do everything we can to discourage Trump from sending arms to troubled hot spots!

The post Don’t Ship Weapons to Troubled Hot Spots appeared first on LewRockwell.

In these uncertain times, when the world seems to go mad, you can’t help but wonder how long until we will experience a martial law scenario.

One day we might have to live under such a scenario since it seems there are many SHTF events that would impose it. The current pandemic is just an example, and personally, I believe we were lucky so far that things didn’t lead to further chaos and social upheaval.

The United States has a certain history when it comes to martial law, and like many other nations, it will do whatever is necessary to defend its integrity (and protect?) its citizens. I believe we should all have a survival strategy if martial law will be upon us in the near future.

What is martial law?

To put it simply, martial law is the imposition of military rule and the occupation of the government over a specific region. It is declared when an imminent threat disturbs peace and order. Martial law can be declared during a state of war when natural disasters are too much to handle for local authorities, when a coup is developing or even when uncontrollable riots and protests affect an entire region.

When martial law is declared, everyone is expected to follow the same rules, no questions asked!

It doesn’t matter if you think what’s happening is right or wrong, and you have to give up certain civil rights for the good of the nation/state.

What Survival Secret We Lost To History

There are certain rights that will be suspended if martial law hits, such as:

• Right of Information
• Freedom of Expression
• Right to privacy
• Right of Habeas Corpus
• Right to make choices

Those that are prepared and organized should be able to survive such a scenario without having their lives turned upside down. However, even for them, there are certain things that become mandatory under martial law.

How to survive martial law:

Being self-reliant

As preppers, we are already prepared to outlast various scenarios that may cut us off from the major supply chains. For most of us, it will be rather easy to survive when the government takes full control of food and supplies and their distribution.

As an average Joe, you should avoid waiting for handouts during a disaster or hope that some military rations will find their ways towards you, and you must have your own supply of food and water. Your supplies should last for at least six months if you don’t want to stay in line for help. Also, all your supplies will become government property if you don’t stockpile smart (more on that in the next paragraphs).

Being self-reliant under martial law means that you must have a method of producing your own electricity, the means to prepare and cook food, ways to sterilize water, and everything else that will assure the same level of comfort you were used to before martial law was declared.

Be ready to bug out

In certain cases, when you see the first signs of an impending scenario when martial law is imminent, you might want to bug out to a safe location, if you have one. If you manage to do so before roadblocks and checkpoints are installed, you might be one of the lucky few. If you’re not so lucky, hunkering down may be the safest choice for you and your family. This will be the norm for most folks living in densely populated areas.

If you plan to bug out, you should have everything ready to make a successful trip. This means that your bug out bag should be properly packed and updated for the season. Also, your bug out vehicles should be in good shape to handle the road ahead and eventual obstacles. I won’t get into details about what to pack in your bug out bag or vehicles since these are distinctive cases from one person to another. What I will stress is the need to have everything updated and make sure they function properly.

Stay safe during martial law

We love our freedom and liberty, and certain folks will not bow down and take it easy when martial law is declared. For some, being stripped of certain civil rights is unthinkable and unacceptable. Most Americans fear that giving someone absolute power will lead to mistreatments against the general public.

That being said, the safest course of action would be to avoid areas that are exposed to social upheaval and other scenarios that may lead to dangerous escalations. You will first need to protect yourself and what’s yours before handling any other thing.  There are various ways to protect your home when civil unrest is developing, and you can find a lot of information on Survivopedia.

Keeping a low profile is also recommended before you will get involved in matters that may not be a priority for you and yours. You will have the time needed to plan and act following your own belief system if you stay out of sight. You have to think before you act and decide on an individual case if you follow the rules or rebel against them. Don’t go with the herd and follow the curfew under martial law. Make sure you have all the means to protect yourself and survive whatever scenario unfolds.

Get informed

When martial law is declared, the media and all the information channels will be controlled by the federal government. You might not get all the required information, and the truth may be filtered to avoid creating mass panic. While listening to official broadcasts will provide you with information and updates regarding the imposed rules, you might need to have a backup source of information.

A HAM radio is a great alternative, and the HAM radio community will take care of its own. They will provide all the “unofficial” information, and they will tell you things as they see them. It’s better to know both sides of a story before you decide if its ending is the proper one. We are bombarded by media propaganda on a daily basis, and the last thing you need is to have filtered information being delivered and remain misinformed during martial law. Information is key to your survival during an SHTF event, and you must always be aware of what happens around you.

Always be alert and improve your skills

This is a general rule for us preppers, and staying in shape, constantly learning, and improving our skills proves useful in any type of crisis scenario. Preparedness and our will to survive have to be backed up by proper knowledge and a good set of survival skills.

If you run out of food and water, or if you run out of guns and ammo, what will you do then? What happens if you get hurt by accident, or otherwise?

You need to be able to handle the above scenarios, and these are not things you can learn on the spot. One needs to prepare in advance and challenge his or her skills with every occasion or opportunity provided.

Take a first aid course, learn to cook without your stove, try to fish or hunt and practice any skill that you may think, one day, will come in handy. You will have to survive on your own during martial law, and the skills you have will make your life much easier. Also, consider that all the activities you do will leave you weak and tired if you’re not in good shape. You don’t need to become a couch potato when dealing with martial law, and you need to be ready for anything.

When you are tired and stressed, your judgment will get clouded, and you may end up making mistakes that will leave you injured or worse. You must avoid this at all costs!

Read the Whole Article

The post Martial Law in Times of Civil Disorder appeared first on LewRockwell.

I estimate that a majority of the Federal Establishment is a Criminal Enterprise because it is not authorized by the Enumerated Powers in our Constitution. Many, if not most, of these Unconstitutional and Criminal activities were enacted into Unconstitutional Laws by Congress. It is impossible for the United States to long survive with these unconstitutional expenses.

Our states are Sovereign Governments, not so the Federal Government. So I label it as the Establishment, not Government.

The Federal Establishment’s powers are limited to the Enumerated Powers in the Constitution which are: Taxes, Borrowing, Commerce, Money, Post Offices, War, Federal Courts, Naturalization, Intellectual  property, Foreign Affairs, Counterfeiting, Bankruptcy, Piracy and Militia.

If an activity is not associated with an Enumerated Power the Federal Establishment has no legal power to enact or enforce it…but they do, big time.

No one should violate unconstitutional laws or edicts and believe that the government won’t ruin them financially or worse.

There are 15 Executive Departments ( Cabinet Secretaries)  and a mind-blowing, bankrupting 2,000 departments and agencies! Remember if a federal agency, department or activity is not associated with one of the Enumerated Powers, it is Unconstitutional, unlawful and probably part of the Criminal Enterprise in government.

Few people understand that the government is run by unelected bureaucrats of the Administrative State who don’t answer to anyone. They are responsible for much of the waste, fraud and abuse recently uncovered by DOGE.

One example of abuse by the bureaucrats of the Administrative State is Alcohol Tobacco, and  Firearms  (ATF). This agency writes rules to restrict the Second Amendment Rights of citizens, determines punishment for violations and enforces it. There is one major thing wrong with this…bureaucrats have no legal authority to write laws, much less to enforce them. Only Congress can pass laws.

There is one ray of hope for those in litigation with Government. It is the Chevron Ruling by Supreme Court that allows judges not to defer to government on issues that used to be decided in favor of the government.

The Military Industrial Complex of the Parasitic Super-Rich Ruling Class (PSRRC) probably does more to separate citizens from their lives and property than any other criminal enterprise in government. I am thinking of the last 80 years, of 105,000 Military Dead, reduced living standards to finance unconstitutional wars without a

Declaration  of War. Did I forget to mention that all the wars were for profit, not a single one for national security? It is impossible to have a war for National Security because we can’t be invaded; we can only be defeated by weapons of Mass Destruction or the army of illegal invaders invited into our country by Democrats/Communists who hate America.

Foreign Aid of any type is unconstitutional and has done us more harm than good. We have been giving money subject to bribes and kickbacks that we can’t afford.

Our Overseas Troops are at risk like canaries in a coal mine, and should be brought home where they are desperately needed to combat illegal invaders.

Illegals are the greatest danger to the Republic and the lives of its citizens since the founding.

Citizens will have to defend themselves because the police and military are inadequate especially in Communist cities. Citizens should be prepared with 12 gauge shotguns or AR15s with plenty of ammunition and emergency supplies. Circumstances will be dire in Communist cities with vulnerable supply lines and are ruled by incompetent and corrupt officials. President Trump is trying to deport Illegals but, under the present circumstances, he has as much chance as a snowball in hell in getting it done before the census in 2030. If illegals are here for the Census, Democrat/Communists will never lose another election.

Democrat/Communists who put them here will do everything possible to stop deportations. We should deny illegals all government benefits and prosecute employers who hire them without using E-Verify.. President Trump will have to use every available means to deport illegal invaders. We will lose our country if Trump does not get tough.

According to our Constitution the right of a writ of Habeas Corpus can be suspended in cases of rebellion or invasion when public safety requires. it. Since this is primary tool used to get hearings for illegals, President Trump should suspend Habeas Corpus for illegal Invaders. President Trump, if you don’t do this you will reign over our destruction and all that you have done will be for naught. If they somehow still stop you, declare Martial Law with a Declaration of War. If you save the country from total destruction, the people will forgive your methods. Illegal Invaders, if they remain, are guaranteed to destroy America like they did Europe.

It is past time for Elected Officials to realize that America has no reason or justification to make war or support those that do. Elected Officials who support wars are Traitors and Criminals beholden to those who bribe them. We can never justify putting our lives and resources at risk in any foreign country because we have no national security interests in other countries.

The post Unlawful Parts of Government Are a Criminal Enterprise! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Matt Smith: All right, good morning, Doug. I think the biggest thing in the news is that Obama is a traitor. I mean, we know this officially now. Although a lot of this information had been uncovered in years past—about RussiaGate and all of that—the connections weren’t as clear as they are now, based on Tulsi’s release of information and what she’s told Trump. So much so that Trump felt quite confident recently, in an open forum at a press conference, to just outright call him a traitor. He said, “I’d like to say let’s give it time and just see, but we know he was a traitor.”

Doug Casey: I can’t wait to find out. Although I never thought of him in such an overt role. I’d only credited the fact that he was a homosexual rental boy in Chicago’s bathhouses. Too bad that’s been pretty well swept under the rug.

Matt Smith: I was always fixated on the citizenship or birth certificate thing personally. But you know, bathhouses, birth certificate, Columbia University—no one knew him when he went there. There are a lot of weird things in his past.

Doug Casey: That’s true. There are a lot of indications that he’s a genuine Manchurian Candidate. They don’t just come out of nowhere. But anybody can be elected president—or installed as president today. We almost had Kamala Harris, a total nothing-nobody who can’t even string together words into a coherent sentence.

Matt Smith: And we had Biden, who was unfit—incapable mentally.

Doug Casey: Yes, and they almost ran him instead of Kamala. This is all crazy. I guess the question is: Are they going to be able to prove that Obama was conducting a coup in the US? I’m not surprised, because coups occur—different types—all the time in all kinds of countries around the world. So why not the US? Although the US used to be unique in that it was formed to defend the average citizen against the government, that’s ancient history. That’s what the Bill of Rights is all about, which is unique, actually. But it’s a dead letter at this point.

Another question is: Will Trump pursue this thing right to the end? Can they mount evidence? Can they find a fair venue to try Obama? And even if they find that he’s criminally liable for treason, will they prosecute him right to the end? Major scandal. Much bigger than Benedict Arnold.

Matt Smith: Yeah, and it’s weird to make these declarations without—you’d assume there would be cases. Like, the declaration wouldn’t be made before there are actually cases filed.

Doug Casey: I agree. And Tulsi Gabbard impresses me as a very levelheaded person who wouldn’t just fly off the handle. Of course, she’s a hardcore leftist who believes in all kinds of standard leftist things, but they don’t have a lot to do with her current position running the so-called intelligence community. It’s funny they call it a “community.” That sounds so benign and beneficial. Everybody likes communities.

Our intelligence community is full of hardcore killers and sociopaths. I can’t wait to see how this plays out. It serves as a good distraction from the Epstein mess, that’s for sure.

Matt Smith: You’ve got to wonder—do they take this approach and really be aggressive? Because they can. Obviously, there’s a conspiracy there, which means all kinds of people could be swept up by this easily, and arrests could be made.

I mean, one of the most aggressive charges they used against the J6 people was conspiracy to overthrow the government, or something like that. Some major thing, and they went after them super hard—morning raids and everything.

If they really believe this, they could go after Comey, Clapper, Gina Haspel, and a whole bunch of people right away without even touching the president.

Of course, J6 was just little people. That was just the peasants. You can round them up. But it’s hunting big game when you go after these major-league criminals.

Doug Casey: I hope they don’t go after Hillary too hard and heavy. God forbid that Tulsi commits suicide or has an accident.

She could be added to a list of—how many here? Forty-five or fifty other possible Arkancides, as they say.

Matt Smith: So what’s your best guess on whether or not this will be something that serves as political theater that motivates the base for the next couple of years—appointing a special counsel, for instance, to investigate it—or will this actually turn into something real?

Doug Casey: I think it’s a coin flip. But it’s possible that this will make the big time. I mean, look at Watergate. Watergate was a big nothing. It was just a break-in for political reasons.

Matt Smith: One could say that was a coup.

Doug Casey: You could say that. And in that coup, it wasn’t the coup itself that was the problem. It was the cover-up that was.

Matt Smith: Well, what I mean is I think a lot of people used it against him and told Nixon—like all the Republicans in the Senate told him, “You don’t have the votes. You’ve got to get out of here,” you know, and he just walked away.

Doug Casey: There is a difference between what’s going on now and what happened in the Nixon days. Of course, nobody liked Nixon. I certainly don’t. He was a creepy guy and a disaster for the country. But the Democrats are really out-and-out communists at this point. I know that sounds inflammatory to say, but when it comes to their philosophical beliefs—yes, they’re all Marxists, ultra-hardcore leftists, socialists, statists, and what-have-you.

And we’re on the ragged edge, I still think, of a civil war in the US because the Red and Blue people hate each other. It’s not just a bunch of leftist students like in the ’60s. Nasty attitudes are widely inseminated throughout US society. Yeah, we could have a civil war. And if you do prosecute these horrible people, it’s hard to say what their supporters will do. These things can take on a life of their own.

Matt Smith: Yeah. And you’ve got to wonder, if you’re going to go after them—if you really wanted to target these people—you’d think you would spend the energy going and arresting them, collecting evidence, filing charges. Not just talking about them in the public domain.

Doug Casey: We’re not within the halls of power, and we don’t know what’s on Trump’s mind, how he might be colluding with various people, or how his enemies are colluding against him. But it’s an unstable situation. It amazes me that the stock market—and for that matter, the bond market—are so close to all-time highs.

Matt Smith: Things are good. It’s the golden age, Doug. I don’t know if you forgot.

Doug Casey: Oh, I’d pretty much forgotten. But I would not be surprised, actually. As overpriced as the stock market is, and with all the money that’s been printed, at some point it’s going to work its way through the python, and we could have really radical retail price rises.

So, you add a stock market crash to high inflation, and corporations laying off more people—I think we’re in for rough running for at least the next few years. I hope I’m wrong because I prefer good times to bad times. God forbid we live in an active war zone—especially an active civil war zone.

Matt Smith: And I think this Obama stuff adds another wrinkle to the overall objective, which I really believe Trump is attempting to pursue. As we’ve talked about months ago, it’s a global trade and monetary reset. I really believe that effort is underway, and that is going to be chaotic no matter what. And he has limited time to do it.

Doug Casey: And when we were talking before, you mentioned—who was it that came up with the ultra super-cockamamie idea of expiring currencies? Who’s doing that?

Matt Smith: It was on Sky News Australia. It says the Reserve Bank is quietly helping to build a world in which money could expire or be geographically restricted by jumping feet first into the world of programmable money.

Doug Casey: Good grief. Expiring money, which would almost force you to spend it. The way they see it is: stimulate the economy by spending and consuming. But that will destroy private capital and destroy savings. If digital currencies are bad—and they’re very, very bad—this is the ultimate expression of it. Expiring digital currencies.

It’s a criminally insane idea. And if the Australian central bank is playing with it, there are people who take it seriously.

Matt Smith: I’m sure all these things become possible with the GENIUS Act, which basically creates a structure for these stablecoins. And these stablecoins all have the possibility to do this.

I think it’s on its way no matter what. But Australia is a special case—maybe because they’re isolated and docile and unarmed, I don’t know. But they seem to be the test case. They got it really bad during COVID.

I have an Australian friend who didn’t see his wife and child for over a year because of the COVID restrictions. They were trapped in Australia, and due to their situation, they couldn’t leave, and he couldn’t enter. It was super crazy.

They also passed a law recently that says if you leave the country, you have to pay taxes as if you lived in Australia for three years. But you know that three-year limit will increase.

Doug Casey: They’re following in the footsteps of the United States from that point of view, aren’t they?

Matt Smith: They are. And then, right after they did that, they passed a law taxing unrealized gains.

Doug Casey: That was the main reason I didn’t become a Kiwi citizen after living there for years. In New Zealand, that’s already in effect for offshore assets. You’re taxed on gains at the end of the year, regardless of whether you sell or not.

The whole world, frankly, is going in the wrong direction, except for Argentina, where Milei is trying to go in the right direction. But of course, the bad guys are throwing as many roadblocks at him as they possibly can.

Matt Smith: Exactly. But in the world we’re in, you know—for the sake of it, let’s just use Klaus’ term “The Great Reset” of the economic system—every nation is overloaded with debt and obligations, and something must change. Something big must change.

It’s a fourth turning time. We just call it “The Great Reset” for the sake of it. And we have these stablecoins being part of it. We see that coming in. We see all the other economic stuff that Trump is doing. Part of it is a grab for money by the state.

You could look at these two laws I mentioned for Australia as capital controls, right?

So we’re going to see more and more capital controls.

They want to be able to sell private equity—make private equity stuff available in 401(k)s—to basically allow the billionaires to dump their shitty assets on the public.

They’re changing the banking rules so the banks can buy more treasuries.

So we have, within the scope of all this stuff, the possibility that they may actually go after a head of state as a traitor in the US. Not to say he doesn’t deserve it, but they may actually go after him.

Within the background of all of this, the most important part is what’s happening on the economic front, I think, and that is this global system reset.

Doug Casey: All the more reason why you need to activate a Plan B. In other words, get yourself a second residence in a country you like—other than your home country. Preferably a second citizenship. And foreign accounts.

Anything can happen anywhere. And getting back to what Trump will do about this treason thing with Obama… I think Trump believes, with very good reason, that unless he really cleans house of these people—which may be impossible to do for a number of reasons—once he’s out of office, they’re going to come after him with a vengeance.

Matt Smith: Especially now that he’s named names. The more rhetoric against them, the greater his risks become. He could try to become friends with them behind the scenes and smooth things over.

But when you’re coming out publicly and calling people traitors—especially the first black president—I think it’s hard to walk that back.

Gerald Celente says, “If nothing else, they take you to war.” When things go bad, they take you to war.

And we see the war stuff looking like it’s only going in one direction—which is up. They delivered US nuclear weapons to the UK for the first time in 15 years. Why would they do that?

Doug Casey: Why? That’s crazy, actually. It really is crazy. They’re looking for a real war.

Matt Smith: I think so too. And you mentioned something to me about bunkers in Germany being rebuilt?

Doug Casey: Yes. There was an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday or the day before about how the German government has a plan to renovate all the bunkers that were built during the nuclear war scares of the 1980s—and the 1960s, for that matter. They’re renovating those. And why are they doing that? Because they’re looking at a war.

That ties in, incidentally, with one of the more insane things that Trump is proposing and pushing the European nations to do: increase their military spending up to around 5% of GDP. In most of these countries, that means doubling it. Doubling military spending.

Well, that might be good for Lockheed and General Dynamics and the rest of these Praetorian companies, but who’s the war going to be against for the Europeans? It must be Russia, because Trump is still providing weapons to the Ukrainians so they can kill each other.

Matt Smith: And he gave Russia a 50-day deadline.

Doug Casey: He’s so full of bluster… let’s hope he backs down from that. But things can get out of control when you have all this stupidity going on. Somebody could go psychotic, just as the pilot of an airliner can go psychotic. It can happen with people who are close to the red button—in Washington or Moscow or Tel Aviv or Brussels. Or London. Maybe it will just be a mistake. It doesn’t have to be a psychotic break.

Matt Smith: It’s crazy. These people are playing with fire. It’s really unbelievable. All those things are going on. Did you watch the Tucker interview with a German reporter from Bild? Did you see that by chance?

Doug Casey: No.

Matt Smith: Okay, I’m going to send it to you (link). You have to watch it. He is so insulting to the German people—how they’ve basically been broken, that they’re an occupied country, which they are.

And they have no self-respect. Their ally blew up their most important infrastructure—the largest industrial act of terrorism ever—and they don’t want to talk about it. They really believe that the Russians are their number-one threat, and yet they see all these migrants around and don’t look at their own leaders.

He was relentless about it. And he was joking, like, “You guys like this abuse I’m giving you.” It’s like they’re such a broken people now. I’ll send it to you—it’s hilarious and so accurate.

Doug Casey: I’d like to see that.

And in addition to the fact that they’re supposed to double their military spending— Germans have been programmed to be Marxists, leftists, and believe in the welfare state.

And it’s even worse than that, because a soft coup is going on in Germany. The AfD party—Alternative für Deutschland—which represents conservatism, is under serious attack. Most of the other parties are making moves to outlaw the AfD. Which is to say to outlaw anybody who’s not an overt socialist.

Whether they can pull it off or not, I don’t know. But the people running the German government—they’re just criminals.

Matt Smith: Yeah. And honestly, Germany was Europe. France too, I guess, in terms of powerhouses. But Germany especially was the powerhouse, and they’ve just destroyed themselves—or allowed themselves to be destroyed—by our blowing up of the Nord Stream pipeline.

It completely destroyed their industry. And importing all these migrants… all these terrible things they’ve done. Which, of course, we’re doing a lot of in the US too.

Anyway, he addresses that point you just mentioned in that interview as well. So you’ll love it. You’ll find it very entertaining. Tucker’s on fire. This Bild guy is a major reporter—he interviews heads of state.

Tucker’s just trying to convince him—trying to change his mind. And the guy doesn’t change his mind at all, but Tucker’s doing his best. It’s hilarious how insulting he is to them.

The other thing I think is worth mentioning is that I was going through and reading the Big Beautiful Bill… I gave up on the effort because nobody cares.

But you know, one thing that stood out to me in there was the ICE budget, which was up 800%. A lot of Americans—or a lot of MAGA people—would cheer that as a positive thing. But there’s an article in Newsweek about it.

These aren’t people obviously friendly to Trump—Newsweek is mainstream press. I know they’re terrible people, I totally agree. But what they do here is highlight some of the features of this increase.

One of the particularly interesting things is that ICE now has a budget that is higher than the military expenditure of all but 15 countries.

That seems a little over the top.

Doug Casey: Are the ICE guys going to be running around in uniforms, or in plain clothes so they’re more surreptitious? Do we know what they’re going to do with the extra money?

Matt Smith: We know parts of it. For instance, they’re going to spend $45 billion to build jails for single adults and females.

Doug Casey: Wow $45 billion? That’s a lot.

Matt Smith: Yeah. I mean, I thought we were going to deport the people, not just keep them locked up, right? So what’s the point of the jails?

Doug Casey: Well, I’m fine if they’re deporting criminals, ne’er-do-wells, parasites. The US tends to draw the worst kind of people now because we offer such massive benefits. Scams attract these people.

It’s funny—there’s a group I’m part of, a bunch of rich guys. One of them is in the Hamptons, and he’s friendly with his gardener, his housekeeper, the usual entourage. He talks to them because he’s interested in these things.

And he says that among the migrant community, it’s well known exactly which benefits you can get, how you get them, how to fill out the forms, and how not to get caught. They’re picking up all these great freebies and subsidies.

They know exactly how to game the system. It’s why they came to the country. Plus, in a place like the Hamptons—or for that matter, Aspen—I’ll bet it’s higher in Aspen now. You pay $30 an hour, cash, tax-free, to these people. It’s an incredible scam.

Matt Smith: So, let’s say you’re going to house 1 million people. That’s $45,000 per person.

Doug Casey: That’s just amazing, isn’t it?

Matt Smith: Yeah. That is a lot of money on jails.

Doug Casey: And we already have more jails per capita—by far—than any other country in the world, including Russia and China.

Matt Smith: And my guess is it doesn’t cost $45,000 for a jail cell. If you’re building big, if you’re doing this Alligator Alley stuff—that swamp one—how much could that cost per holding cell?

Doug Casey: Well, in the cages they erected at Guantanamo—this was 25 or 30 years ago—when they built those cages, even back then they were $50,000 a cage. That’s like $150,000 today.

How can you spend that much money for basically a cage?

Matt Smith: And those were theoretically terrorists, at least theoretically. So I can imagine there’s a certain number of real bad actors that came through in the invasion under Biden, no doubt. If you wanted to imprison those guys, I guess I can understand that.

Doug Casey: I would understand it a little more if they’d actually given them trials. Before you put somebody in a cage for many years, there ought to be a trial. But there was never a trial for any of these people.

Matt Smith: But with these invaders, I just feel like—we’re deporting them. So I don’t understand why we would need a holding facility for 100,000—or a million—whatever that number is.

I just don’t know why we would need that, unless you’re looking toward the future and imagining a future of great disruption, where there might be dissidents of all varieties—not necessarily just illegal immigrants.

And you might want to use the 16th-largest military in the world against them.

Doug Casey: That’s right. They’ll want to round up the usual suspects and suspected enemies of the state.

Matt Smith: Well, that’s what concerns me.

Doug Casey: I’ve said for many years, I’d much rather watch this on my widescreen down here than out my front window in the US. It’s going to get serious. It’s got to get serious as the bond market blows up, interest rates go much higher, and the stock market collapses. It’s at all-time highs by all conventional measures.

Well, I can wait to see what happens. And I hope I’m dead wrong about this.

Matt Smith: But it’s all coalescing in this very limited window of time, I think, because basically Trump wants to make something happen. He’s got three years to make it happen.

Doug Casey: I read in WaPo today—Washington’s fag hag rag—which has improved greatly since Bezos fired most of the ultra-leftist staff. They just have ordinary leftists now. They had an article about how Rahm Emanuel is planning, it seems, to run for president in 2028.

Matt Smith: This was the chief of staff under Obama, right?

Doug Casey: Yes, exactly. He’s very slick and very smart. And interestingly—although of course he was born in the US—he’s also an Israeli citizen. Gee, I think that would be great, to have the president of the US be a citizen of Israel, not just a supporter of Israel.

Matt Smith: And his brother is one of the biggest Hollywood agents and is the owner of the UFC.

Doug Casey: I didn’t know that.

Matt Smith: Yeah, it was his brother who basically waged a personal jihad against Kanye for the things he noticed.

Doug Casey: And of course, Trump is a fan of the UFC. I like watching cage fighting too. But Trump really likes it.

What was it—they’re going to have a cage fight on the White House lawn sometime?

When is that?

Matt Smith: I guess it would be July 4th of next year, which is the 250th anniversary.

Doug Casey: Yeah, that’s really funny. We can’t have gladiatorial combats, but cage fighting is as close as you can get.

Matt Smith: Maybe if things deteriorate enough, we can get back to the old days where we have real gladiators out there. Maybe we’ll live long enough to see that.

You know, have migrants fight for their freedom.

It’s going to get wild, though, Doug, because I think the biggest thing people have to realize is—there’s all this chaos happening, and there’s a drive to increase wars, not decrease them. The money is being spent. Society’s attitudes are being shaped.

This Tucker interview with the Bild guy—Tucker said, “I get the impression the German people see Vladimir Putin as a much greater threat to Germany than they do their own leadership or the problems they have socially.” And the Bild guy said, “Yes, that’s true.”

Doug Casey: They’ve been totally programmed. Absolutely programmed. It’s insane.

But there’s even more that’s changing. For hundreds of years, it’s been accepted among nation-states that wars are fought by the peasants in fields, but the king or president or top people are insulated. You don’t think of killing them.

Well, the Israelis have done that on a massive scale—both with Hamas and Hezbollah, and now Iran, an actual nation-state. And the US is famous for sending out assassins in the form of drones. We don’t call them assassinations. We call them high-value targets. They’re not assassinated—they’re just high-value targets.

This is a new thing. Even during World War 2, it is said—though it’s hard to verify—that Hitler’s staff suggested assassinating Stalin and his top henchmen to perhaps overthrow the Soviet Union. Good idea. Hitler supposedly said that it would be improper and quashed it.

But the US and Israel are now doing things that even Hitler thought were a bad idea. I think it’s a good idea, frankly, because the miscreants that run governments should be afraid for their own lives and not feel insulated from the bad things they do. But like anything, these things can get out of control.

Matt Smith: That’s true. But my worry is that the success Israel has had with this—excluding Iran, which didn’t go as they hoped—has validated that strategy.

They may feel like they could take on almost anybody that way. I think that they feel that if they could do it this way, they could actually take down Russia this way.

They’ll never win a conventional war on the battlefield. They don’t want it to go nuclear. But what might they do using this strategy?

If they think they can get away with it—if they think they could pull off some super-effective, highly coordinated, Palantir-planned, AI-generated attack on multiple key places at the right time—I don’t think they’d be successful. But if you try it, you’re playing with fire.

Doug Casey: There’s a good chance Israel isn’t going to survive another decade as a nation-state. It’s true they’ve taken out all of their enemies—or supposed enemies—through all the color revolutions.

Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Egypt—which is being bribed to be their BFF by the US. In addition to the fact that we send Israel $4 billion a year. I don’t know when that started—around the time of the USS Liberty incident.

I question whether Israel is going to last long. There’s just too much antipathy toward them at this point, given what they’re doing.

Matt Smith: Well, the internal disruption could be bad. I saw an article several days ago where the IDF was calling up 54,000 Orthodox Jewish students for conscription. Now, the Supreme Court passed a law last year saying they were no longer exempt from these conscription drives. But this is the first time there’s been an actual effort by the government to do it.

Fifty-four thousand, as a percentage of the population, is significant. If you applied that number to the US, it would be the equivalent of calling up over a million people—calling up a group that was once untouchable to participate. The internal strife that could come from that alone could take it down.

Doug Casey: It’s fun to watch. Well—not so fun to watch.

Matt Smith: The main game at the center of all this is the monetary and fiscal matters, I think they’re trying to address, which are part of this Great Reset. That’s the main show. You’ve got to keep your eye on the ball, right?

Doug Casey: There’s nothing we can do about it except be aware and insulate ourselves to the greatest degree possible. And part of that is financially.

I’m pleased to say that, finally, all these crappy little mining stocks are starting to move up. I’m just hoping—it’s quite possible—it’ll be like it was in the ’70s and part of the ’80s, when as a group, these stocks went 10-to-one, with many going 100-to-one, and actually a couple of 1,000-to-one shots—one of which I owned, actually.

Matt Smith: Yeah. You know, when you think about it, during the ’70s the dollar lost between, what, 75% and 90% of its value, right?

And I think we’re in that period again where that has to happen. The dollar must be depreciated—it’s been a stated objective of the administration. So that factor, as a driving force behind these stock moves, would make sense.

Doug Casey: Yeah. And in the meantime, the rich are getting richer, and the poor, the middle class, and even the bottom of the upper middle class are being squeezed. What a witch’s brew.

Matt Smith: Yeah, no kidding. One last thing I’ll say is, the grifting that’s happening—not just grifting, but the outright corruption—is pretty shocking.

Of course, we have the Trump Coin, which was launched near the inauguration. That was a good scam.

Doug Casey: What’s it trading at now? Do we know?

Matt Smith: I don’t know. I know Truth Social, Trump’s holding company, now owns $3 billion of Bitcoin.

But they also floated this idea of a tariff on copper. And right before that, someone front-ran that trade—maybe by a minute, maybe three minutes—and made a ton of money.

There’s so much of that going on, it’s actually incredible.

Doug Casey: It is so profitable to be well-connected with high-level government officials. It really is.

Matt Smith: It’s clearly illegal—unless you’re a congressperson. But people are doing it, and no one seems to care.

Anyway, all right. I think we’ll leave it there for today.

Doug Casey: Thanks, Matt.

Reprinted with permission from International Man.

The post Global Disintegration: Currency Collapse, Controlled Chaos, and the Rise of Technocratic Tyranny appeared first on LewRockwell.

The sewer gates are opening as the endgame approaches. It’s not just the Kiev cabal that will be swept away.

Previously, any observer who had pointed out the rampant corruption that is endemic in the Kiev regime was automatically denounced by Western governments and media as a peddler of Russian disinformation.

Hilariously, though, this week, the Kiev kleptocracy burst open in such a spectacular way that even the American and European apologists for the regime could no longer maintain the worst-kept secret of their charade.

The fiasco exploded after the self-appointed President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, passed a law that stripped two anti-corruption agencies of their independent powers.

Citizens took to the streets of Kiev and other cities in furious protest against what they openly lambasted as an autocratic regime trying to prolong its corrupt racketeering. The demonstrations were the largest seen on the streets of Ukraine despite the country being at war with Russia for over three years. As the Wall Street Journal reported: “The protests exposed long dormant divisions between the government and society.”

Zelensky, whose official presidential mandate expired last year, was stunned by the upsurge in public anger. By the end of the week, he was backtracking on the move to close the anti-graft agencies and was claiming, somewhat unconvincingly, that he was drafting a new bill to return the investigative powers. It was damage-limitation mode and largely prompted by the alarm of his Western backers.

It is not clear if the U-turn will appease the Ukrainian public, who appear to have reached a pivotal level of disgust with the Kiev regime, not just over its endemic corruption but also over the grinding war with Russia and forced mobilization of reluctant military recruits.

Significantly, the Western governments and media also reacted with extraordinary contempt towards Zelensky and his ruling circle. Western media headlines highlighted the problem of corruption in Ukraine and Zelensky’s brazen attempt to curb the anti-corruption organizations. The Washington Post reported: “Ukrainians protest as Zelensky cracks down on corruption watchdogs.” Ditto, among others, The New York Times, Time, CNN, France 24, The Economist, BBC, and even the usually supportive CIA-run Radio Free Europe. With remarkable uniformity, the Western media were condemning their erstwhile favorite “Churchillian figure”. Even the slavishly supportive U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham rebuked Zelensky. Were they all of a sudden drinking Russian Kool-Aid?

The Wall Street Journal reported: “Ukrainians ramp up protests as Zelensky tries to find a way out.” Likewise, the BBC headlined: “Zelensky backtracks on law over anticorruption bodies after protests.”

There are signs that the scandal has gone too far for Zelensky to now try to put the stench back in the bottle.

This is what the staunchest backers of the Kiev regime are really worried about. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer were among the European leaders who vigorously remonstrated with Zelensky over the corruption debacle. Von der Leyen chided Zelensky that anti-corruption was key to the country’s path towards eventually joining the EU, if it ever does, which, like its aspiration to join NATO, is doubtful.

What worries the NATO sponsors of the proxy war against Russia is that the corruption in Kiev will hasten a disorderly collapse of the regime. And with that, their long-term geopolitical game to confront and weaken Russia is over. The news of corruption is hardly new, and the Western governments know that. Pentagon auditors have long noted the vast amount of money that has disappeared unaccountably under Zelensky.

The racketeering has become even more brazen since Zelensky declared martial law and cancelled elections last year, making him a self-appointed president indefinitely. The Ukrainian people have had it with his crony rule, while thousands of men are killed and maimed every week on the front lines. Adding to the public anger and resistance are the goon squads that the regime dispatches to drag men off the streets to be sent to the front lines and certain death. Videos increasingly show Ukrainian communities standing up to snatch squads who are terrorizing them.

The shutting down of the anti-graft agencies by Zelensky is part of the regime’s desperate endgame. Last month, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) charged Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov with embezzlement. He is close to Zelensky and Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak. Thus, the investigators were making inroads into Zelensky’s inner circle of racketeering. Even the Kyiv Independent news outlet predicted last month that Zelensky would strike at the NABU and its partner anti-graft agency, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). Indeed, this is exactly what happened this week when the regime raided the offices of the two organizations, arresting officers under suspicion of being “Russian spies” and then rushing through a law to remove the independent powers of investigation. Under the new law, NABU and SAPO will be controlled by the Ukrainian Prosecutor General, who is a political appointee of Zelensky. In other words, muzzled.

Since the NATO proxy war against Russia erupted in February 2022, which the West lies about as Russia’s “unprovoked aggression,” it is estimated that NATO and EU nations have funneled over $300 billion into propping up the Kiev regime. The true figure may be $500 billion or higher. It has been a scam of historic scale perpetrated on Western taxpayers. As much as 30 to 40 percent of the money has disappeared through corruption, benefiting Zelensky and his cronies. The largesse has funded the purchase of luxury properties in foreign destinations, as well as his wife’s holidays to St Moritz and shopping trips in New York and Paris. But hey, this is just Russian propaganda, right?

The gargantuan racket is in danger of falling apart as the Russian military advances like lava on the crumbling Kiev regime, as independent geopolitical analyst Mark Sleboda eloquently put it this week. Additionally, like a pincer, the corruption probes are inevitably closing in on Zelensky and his circle.

In this desperate bunker situation, Zelensky’s response is to shut down the graft investigations and to project a seriousness about peace talks with Russia. There was a third round of talks in Istanbul this week. But, as Ukrainian opposition lawmaker Artem Dmytruk pointed out in an interview for RT, the peace negotiations are a sham simply to prolong the corrupt regime.

Western sponsors are finally admitting the rank corruption that has existed for many years. The stench is no longer bearable or possible to cover up. But what really concerns the NATO planners is that if the Ukrainian people are not placated – and it looks like they will not buy any more of Zelensky’s putrid clown show – then the proxy warmongers are facing an urgent dilemma. Mixed with the pong of graft is the even more obnoxious smell of ignominious defeat.

Zelensky, the former comedian, is beyond a bad joke. Veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh reported this week that U.S. President Donald Trump is making plans for Zelensky’s ouster. Hersh quoted an involved U.S. official saying that if the Kiev puppet refuses to quit, “he’s going to go by force.”

The Kiev regime of Neo-Nazis and embezzlers was always built on a massive propaganda deception. The lie that it was a democracy standing for Western values of freedom. The sewer gates are opening as the endgame approaches. It’s not just the Kiev cabal that will be swept away. Western leaders are up to their necks, too.

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

The post Kiev Kleptocracy… Stench of Corruption Fouls NATO Regime’s Endgame appeared first on LewRockwell.

In January 2024 Taiwan’s current President Lai Ching-te won the election against two other candidates. (Taiwan has no run off elections.)

His Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) though, which supports Taiwan’s independence from China, failed to get a majority in parliament. The opposition was thus, by controlling the budget, able to prevent Lai Ching-te from furthering a split from the Chinese homeland.

Like many recent election winners in so called democracies Lai Ching-te set out to manipulate the system to win powers the voters had been unwilling to concede to him. He organized a recall campaign against dozens of opposition lawmakers in the hope to gain a majority in parliament.

The New York Times reporting of it (archived) seemed to be in favor of this:

Voters in Taiwan face a critical decision on Saturday: whether to throw out 24 opposition lawmakers they elected just last year, in an extraordinary recall campaign that could put more power in the president’s hands but add to tensions with Beijing.

The vote threatens to flip the legislative balance in favor of President Lai Ching-te, who wants Taiwan to forge a future separate from China, against an opposition that favors closer ties with Beijing.
…
This weekend, two dozen Nationalist Party lawmakers face recall votes; an additional seven will next month.

To supporters, the “great recall” campaign reflects the vigor of Taiwan’s democracy, which emerged in the 1980s after decades of authoritarian rule under the Nationalist Party. Although a successful campaign would help Mr. Lai, many activists promoting the recalls say they are acting independently.

“We’re building a decentralized grass-roots movement,” said Molly Kuo, an organizer of one of the recall efforts in New Taipei. “We’re witnessing a deepening of democracy.”

A “decentralized grass-roots movement” that is running a well organized, millions of dollars campaign against parliament members of one specific party ???

Recall of a significant number of opposition lawmakers would make it much easier for Mr. Lai to push his agenda, which includes shifting Taiwan’s economy further from China. He could also appoint his preferred judges to Taiwan’s high court.

The recall votes were held today and the results are in. The voters did not fall for it.

In a rather pathetic attempt to cover the loss of its campaign the DDP party is urging everyone to not see the whole affair as what it is:

The defeat of a recall campaign against 24 KMT lawmakers should not be interpreted as the outcome of a struggle between political parties, the DPP argued Saturday.

Results showed all 24 legislators survived the vote, with anti-recall votes surpassing pro-recall in every election district, per the Central Election Commission.
…
Speaking to reporters Saturday evening, DPP Legislative Caucus Secretary-General Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) called on the public not to rush to conclusions.

The party’s secretary-general, Lin Yu-chang (林右昌), echoed her remarks, saying the recall votes had not been a fight between political parties, so the result should not be interpreted as a victory or a defeat for one party or another, the Liberty Times reported.

Sure.

As Arnaud Bertrand comments:

[This] couldn’t be more ironic coming from the same party that explicitly framed the entire campaign as exactly this: presenting themselves, the DPP, as heroically trying to “save Taiwan’s democracy” from the KMT, painting them as existential threats because of their pro-China bent. But now that they lost they suddenly want to pretend it was all just a non-partisan civic exercise.

The NYT report, written before the voting, noticed that this outcome would have consequences:

Widespread rejection of the recalls could hint at tepid support for Mr. Lai’s party ahead of local and presidential elections, experts say.

With his anti-China position Lai Ching-te is the U.S.’ preferred candidate. As he is now likely to lose the next presidential election Taiwan should watch out for some of the usual U.S. directed manipulations.

Reprinted with permission from Moon of Alabama.

The post Taiwan’s Voters Reject Anti-Chinese Recall Plot appeared first on LewRockwell.

We have to decide whether the Epstein story is child rape or Mossad blackmail.  

If “child” is defined  as under the statutory age of female sexual consent, in the US depending on the state, a child is a female under 16 years of age, under 17 years of age, or under 18 years of age. In New York the age of female consent is 17.  In Hawaii it is 16. Hawaii has a “close-in-age” exception that allows 14 year olds to consent with those up to 21 years in age. In Hawaii the goal seems to be not to prevent underaged females from sexual intercourse but to prevent overaged males (over 21) from sex with females declared underaged for them but not for younger men. There is an element here of age discrimination.  In the Philippines the age of female consent is 12.  In Germany the requirement is for a female to be 14 years old in order for a sexual relationship with a male over 18 to be legal.

In Mexico the age of consent is 15.  In Russia it is 16.  It Japan it is 13 but is being raised to 16.  In England it is 16. In Italy and China the age of consent is 14.  In Denmark and Poland it is 15. In Saudi Arabia sex is only legal within marriage. The legal age for marriage for males is 18, for females 16. In the 1950s the age of consent in the state of Georgia was 14. In Delaware in the late 19th century it was 7, yes 7, not a typo.  During the 1880s the age of consent in many US states varied between 10 and 12.  Whatever the varying legislated age, if the information provided me is correct that some mothers have 12 year old daughters on birth control pills, the de facto age of female sexual consent in the US is 12.

Was Virginia Giuffre a child?  If she is American it depends on her state of residence.  If she is British, Australian or a New York resident,  she is not a child.  There was no child rape of Virginia Giuffre for which she collected three million pounds according to reports.

Normally we think of a child as before puberty. I don’t know if Epstein had such young kids as sex bait for his entrapment scheme.  If so, it would seem to involve kidnapping in addition to illegal underage sex.  Would the prominent Jewish billionaires, who Ryan Dawson (see this) says was Mossad’s way of directing funds to Epstein, put themselves at risk by being complicit in kidnapping and underage sex?

Why would they when there are volunteers attracted to influential men just as groupies are attracted to rock stars.

Young women are not what they formerly were.  It is a fact that many young women have porn sites on which they proudly demonstrate themselves in sexual activity that not long ago would have been regarded as depraved.  Some of them compete in having the largest number of sexual partners in a 24 hour time period. One has a goal of 1,000 sexual partners in 24 hours, which with no breaks for food, water, or toilet, comes to about 80 seconds per partner.  It has become a matter of pride to achieve sexual penetration by 1,000 strangers in 24 hours.  According to reports, young women in Internet chat brag about having had 150 sexual partners.  True or false, it shows they are not shamed by their behavior whether claimed or real.

What I have reported are facts, not a brief for pedophilia. Use the facts to decide whether the Epstein Saga is one of child sex-trafficking or one of a Mossad honey-trap for blackmail purposes to ensure US policy in the Middle East conforms to Israel’s.

Sex-trafficking of children in the US is far more extensive than Epstein’s operation.  Principally, the sex-trafficking of illegal alien children. Many were separated from their parents, and if reports are correct tens of thousands, or is it hundreds of thousands, of them have been “lost.”  US authorities don’t know where they are.  Another source was the seizure of children by Child Protective Services, many of whom allegedly ended up in child prostitution.  As far as I know, nothing has been done to find and to rescue these children.

As a final suggestion, consider whether the purpose of the hullabaloo over Epstein’s sex-trafficking is to focus attention off the Israeli spy operation that has succeeded in destroying an independent American Middle East policy and five Muslim countries regarded as obstacles to Greater Israel.

The post The Epstein Saga: What It Is Really About appeared first on LewRockwell.

Perhaps when we look back on the Epstein Affair, we’ll understand that it broke the back of Americans’ faith in their political and law enforcement institutions.

We’re being told the Epstein Affair is old news, nothing to see here, move along–but I’m not so sure. It could be the opposite of old news, a watershed moment in American history.

Watershed moments can be sudden, dramatic events that we all experience as “nothing is the same after this,” or long-brewing crises that we only discern were watersheds when looking back.

The Epstein Affair may be the second type of watershed, only recognized in the rear view mirror. In his post Jeff Epstein, MAGA, and Monopolies, Matt Stoller made two noteworthy observations:

1. The MAGA movement–which includes many factions–attached great importance to the Epstein case as the most egregious manifestation of elite abuse of power. To have the files buried yet again only proves the powerful who would be exposed have yet again evaded being held accountable.

2. The scandal isn’t what’s been hidden, it’s that Epstein operated in plain sight.

Naomi Wolf’s essay, “The Network” in the Worlds of the Elites, reveals the enormous reach of Epstein’s recruitment of elites across the entirety of America’s power structure, what I’ve called since 2007 (see diagram below) Elites Maintaining and Extending Global Dominance.

This structure isn’t The Deep State, it’s far larger and just as entrenched, for it’s “the sum is greater than the parts” assembly of all of America’s elites and elite institutions of soft and hard power projection. (Soft power: cultural, institutionalized influence, non-military systems; hard power: military, diplomatic, financial.)

Epstein’s operation was an informal hub-and-spoke network of power elites ranging from politics to academia to science to media to Big Tech and beyond.

The French word engrenages comes to mind here: commonly translated as gearing, but more appropriately perhaps it also denotes being caught up in gearing that is irreversible due to the design and mechanics of the system, and then being caught up in an inescapable series of events.

In other words, Epstein’s hub-and-spoke network wasn’t an aberration, it was the optimization of the status quo system. This is the taboo that cannot be said out loud. Now everyone who is caught up in the gearing is also a participant in an inescapable series of events.

My summary of the Epstein Affair is: the elites aren’t above the law; there is no law. This is what’s being displayed in plain sight, but we recoil at recognizing it, for it means democracy and rule of law are both convenient fabrications deployed to maintain public compliance.

Recall Smith’s Neofeudalism Principle #1: If the citizenry cannot replace a kleptocratic authoritarian government and/or limit the power of the financial Aristocracy at the ballot box, the nation is a democracy in name only.

Read the Whole Article

The post Is the Epstein Affair a Watershed Moment? appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Vigilant Fox just reported a live radio exchange between vaccine advocate, Peter Hotez, and a woman who called in to the studio to tell of her ordeal after receiving a COVID-19 mRNA booster.

Infamous vaccine pusher Dr. Peter Hotez recently had an uncomfortable moment during what started as a softball radio interview on Hello Houston.

Everything was going his way. The hosts praised Hotez for battling “disinformation” and hung on to his every word as if it were gospel.

But then, things went off the rails when a possibly vaccine-injured woman called into the show.

Carol, who says she keeps up with her boosters, asked Hotez over the phone why she suffered the “worst experience [she] ever had” just two days after her last COVID shot. . . . She described how she was so exhausted she was sleeping 16 hours a day, and had a “really bad cough with deep phlegm.”

At first, Hotez assumed she’d had a severe case of COVID. But to his shock, Carol told him she had NEVER had COVID.

Hotez scrambled for an explanation:

“So, what possibly could have happened is in between the time you got the booster and the immune response kicks in, you could have gotten some intercurrent viral infection, such as Covid or flu or a gazillion other things. So sometimes it’s hard to know what’s ascribed to a SIDE EFFECT of the vaccine versus some other intercurrent illness.”

Note that Hotez didn’t ask the woman if any diagnostic tests had been performed to ascertain if she had indeed suffered “an intercurrent illness” two days after receiving the booster shot. In an instant he dismissed the proposition that she’d suffered side effects—including the possibility that her severe fatigue and malaise were the expression of damage to her organs that could pose a serious threat to her health and life from now on.

Listening to the tape, it seems to me that her speech is halting, as if she is struggling to find and annunciate the words. Responding to her lack of swiftness and brevity, the idiot radio show host tells her pick up the pace.

Professor Hotez — who has been coddled by Baylor University and fawned over by the media for many years—seems incapable of thinking critically about his vaccine advocacy. His worldview consists largely of Articles of Faith.

I believe he deserves to called the Disheveled Defender of the Vaccine Faith — in Latin, Defensor Fidei Vaccinationis Inordinatus

Note that Hotez is merely the latest in a long line of Vaccine apostles going back to the Reverend Cotton Mather during the Boston smallpox outbreak of 1721. As we show in our new book, Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality, Hotez’s lack of critical thinking has been a salient feature of the vaccine enterprise since its inception in the 18th century.

I am confident that those interested in medical, intellectual, and religious history will find the book fascinating. Please click on the icon below to review its description on Amazon and consider ordering a copy.

This article was originally published on Courageous Discourse – Focal Points.

The post Peter Hotez: Disheveled Defender of the Vaccine Faith appeared first on LewRockwell.

I occasionally gab about the world with friends and family. Recently, a friend and I were bitching about the rise of “fascism” in America. We soon realized we had different visions of what that meant. About what’s possible in a country like America.

America spans about 3.8 million square miles, with many different climates, economies, and ways of life. America’s size and spread-out population shape its politics in important ways. The country’s large area makes local issues and regional differences central to political life. This encourages local and state governments to respond to their own regions rather than to a unified national agenda. People in California often prioritize different things than people in Alabama or North Dakota. These differences make it hard to find national agreement, leading to gridlock or unsatisfying compromises.

My friend and I brainstormed what the country’s unique characteristics could mean for the rise of fascism in America. We took notes and turned it into the following Q&A:

Why does America’s size prevent popular uprisings and protests like seen in France and the UK?

France and the UK, while politically complex, are geographically smaller and more densely populated than the United States. This density makes it easier to organize large-scale protests or strikes that disrupt daily life and demand attention. In the U.S., long distances between major population centers, combined with state-by-state policy differences and local enforcement, make it harder to build unified movements. A protest in New York may feel completely disconnected from events in Texas or Oregon.

In addition, national media in the U.S. is fragmented, and local media dominates in many areas, which further splinters public awareness. This limits the ability of a single event or issue to spark a truly nationwide movement in the way it can in more compact and media-unified countries like France or the UK.

Why did the Civil War happen if uprising is so difficult?

The Civil War was exception. Southern states were united by one clear and urgent issue: the preservation of slavery. This issue wasn’t just political or moral. It was deeply tied to their economies, social structures, and identities. Having a single, overriding concern gave the Southern states a strong reason to act collectively. They saw the end of slavery as a direct economic threat, which made secession and war appear to them as rational steps.

Today’s political climate is deeply divided, but it lacks that same unifying issue on either side. Instead of one dominant concern, the country faces a wide range of cultural, economic, and ideological disagreements. Political polarization is real, but it’s scattered across many topics. Immigration, education, public health, guns, and more. These divisions often split not just regions but households and communities. That makes it harder to form large, coordinated blocs of action, whether for rebellion or reform. Unlike in the Civil War era, no single issue today binds one half of the country tightly enough to provoke a unified uprising.

Why have other large countries faced major civil conflict while the U.S. hasn’t?

Countries like Russia, the Soviet Union, and China have experienced serious internal conflicts, often because their governments were highly centralized. In Russia, central control after World War I led to a civil war and later regional uprisings. In the Soviet Union, tight control over diverse regions eventually caused unrest and collapse. In China, heavy-handed central rule has led to unrest in areas like Tibet and Xinjiang.

America has avoided this largely because of its decentralized structure. State and local governments have real power. Elections and courts give people ways to push back without turning to violence. This setup reduces the risk of civil conflict, even when tensions run high.

Still, decentralization has downsides. While it protects against sudden takeovers, it can let democratic norms fade slowly. Problems can grow in pockets, through local laws, policies, or political behavior, without triggering a broader response.

Given America’s decentralized nature of governance and broadly distributed population, is it possible we are currently sliding into authoritarianism?

Yes. I think it is already happening. Because power is spread out, no single moment feels like a breaking point. But we’re seeing steady shifts: voter suppression, political disinformation, legal decisions that weaken oversight, and increasing executive power. These changes are happening in ways that don’t always spark national outrage, especially when they’re unevenly distributed across states. The real question isn’t whether the slide is happening, it’s how far it will go and how quickly. Without a shared national response, there’s little friction slowing it down.

What could authoritarianism or fascism look like in America?

In the U.S., authoritarianism might not involve tanks in the streets or the sudden loss of elections. It would look more like gradual shifts. Media manipulation, reduced transparency, weakened courts, and fewer checks on political leaders.

What mitigates the risk of military force or overt police control from dominating public life is partly the country’s decentralized system. Local and state governments can resist federal overreach, and courts still offer legal recourse, at least in theory.

But recent trends show there are limits to this counterforce. Agencies like ICE have received massive funding and have operated detention centers that resemble prison camps. There have also been documented incidents of people being detained or removed from protests without clear legal process. These actions don’t match traditional images of authoritarian regimes, but they carry some of the same dynamics: fear, lack of accountability, and concentration of power.

Because Americans are spread out and not easily unified, there’s less chance of a large, sustained public response. That fragmentation may be allowing a quiet centralization of power. Instead of shock tactics, U.S. authoritarianism might grow through public complacency, limited accountability, and the slow normalization of actions that would once have been widely rejected.

Read the Whole Article

The post The Future Includes Mass Murder of Undesirables… appeared first on LewRockwell.

If it is not going to be enforced even now, regarding the extermination (genocide) to eliminate the Gazans (and there is zero indication that it will be), it is dead. If it will be enforced against anything else but not against that, then it will be so outrageously selective so that it reflects the sheer power of some imperialistic “higher power,” as to have no relationship whatsoever to any authentic justice, but ONLY to the ethic of psychopaths: “Might makes right.” But if might makes right, then what is law supposed to be about? Is it only about fulfilling the will of some fictitious “The Almighty” — a personification and idealization of power? So, whomever is powerless, such as the Gazans are now, and such as the people who were processed through Hitler’s concentration camps were then, “They have it coming to them” — they deserve it, because they are powerless against it? This is the new world, but it is really very ancient, and it shows that in social and political, and even economic affairs (after all, the Gazans were placed there because their land had been stolen from them by Zionists), humans have actually made no authentic progress at all.

On July 25th I headlined “Israel Now Admits to Exterminating Gazans. The Origin of this Genocide Goes Back to 2003.”

On July 23rd I headlined “HYPOCRISY ON STEROIDS, about the Gaza genocide”.

On July 12th I headlined “Israel’s Auschwitz for Palestinians: How It’s Being Carried Out Now”.

All of these are solidly documented news-reports about an ongoing event that is of immense historical significance, but no such reports get many page-views and reader-comments from the public. The public are far less interested in them than they are in ordinary news-events that are far less important and far less conclusive evidences that the world is descending deeper and deeper into the ideological victory of Adolf Hitler despite his loss in World War Two. And Israel, America, Germany, and UK, are at the forefront of what is now clearly Hitler’s ideological victory — the victory of racist-fascist-supremacist imperialism, or “nazism,” which is the common term for that ideology, Hitler’s ideology, and the Zionists’ ideology.

The most pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian countries — America and its European colonies — are so blind to the evilness of Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing and genocide against the residents of Gaza, and of its ongoing and accelerating land-thefts from the Palestinians in the West Bank, as to present the serious question of why these massive ongoing evils, which are of historic magnitude, are absent from their Governments’ official condemnations and (until recently) almost completely absent from these countries’ news-reports, even as-if these horrors weren’t being perpetrated by Israel with America’s weapons and satellite guidance and targeting, or weren’t even happening at all. There is a real blindness about the blindness, as if this tolerance of Israel’s (and America’s) genocide and land-theft against Palestinians simply were not so. But it is. What explains the blindness and the blindness about the blindness — the utter refusal — to acknowledge the evilness of Israel (and of the U.S. Government ever since Harry Truman created the state of Israel in 1948, even when the genocidal intent of Israel’s founders was already known both privately and publicly)?

Stupidity — believing the Israeli Government’s lies — is part of the answer. Especially the lie that to be anti-Israel is to be anti-Jew is obvious to everyone but idiots, because many Jews are anti-Israel — even some rabbis, both in America and in Israel, are against Israel — and this means that the equation between “Jew” and “Zionist” (supporter of Israel) is false. Only stupid people would believe it. Nonetheless, the Trump Administration and many throughout the world spout Israel’s lie that to be anti-Israel is to be anti-Jew (an “anti-Semite”); and, for example, prestigious American universities have expelled students for speaking publicly against Israel’s slaughter of Gazans — and the U.S. Government, despite the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment (which prohibits the Government’s suppressing public expressions of political opinions), has halted federal funds to universities that DON’T expel such students. The U.S. Government now blatantly violates the U.S. Constitution.

However, even many opponents of that lie falsify, by alleging that the Jewish religion does not support this ethnic cleansing and genocide. Here are a few examples from the Jewish religion’s alleged ‘holy texts’ or canonized Scriptures, specifically referring to what their ‘God’ wants, showing that this ‘God’ doesn’t merely want it but DEMANDS it:

Genesis 15:18-21

“On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abraham and said, ‘To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt [the Nile] to the great river, the Euphrates, including the lands of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amoriotes, the Caananites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.’”

Deuteronomy 7:1-2

“You must not let any living thing survive among the cities of these people the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance: the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Caananites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. You must put them all to death.”

Deuteronomy 7:16

“Destroy every nation that the Lord your God places in your power, and do not show them any mercy.”

Deuteronomy 20:16-18

“When you capture cities in the land he Lord your God is giving you, kill everyone. Completely destroy all the people: the Hittites, the Amorites, the Caananites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as the Lord has ordered you to do. Kill them so that they will not make you sin against the Lord by teaching you to do all the disgusting things they do in the worship of their gods.”

Israel’s Government takes such passages as ‘justifying’ what they do to Palestinians. And the vast majority of Israelis agree with that viewpoint. America’s Government says it doesn’t like what Israel is doing, but nonetheless continues to provide almost all of the weaponry and satellite intelligence in order to do it, and is therefore co-equal with Israel in doing this genocide, but (since America pretends to be not a theocratic nation [and our Constitution is entirely secular, so anything at all theocratic in the U.S. Government would actually be traitorous], and not even an aristocratic nation, but instead a democratic nation — though it now IS actually an aristocratic nation, a nation ruled by billionaires instead of by mere voters) America’s Government alleges that it isn’t participating in the genocide. That allegation by the U.S. Government, that it isn’t participating in this genocide, is clearly a lie.

Israel, therefore, does represent Judaism’s mythological god by its doing to the Gazans what it is doing to them (exterminating them), and also by doing to Palestinians in the West Bank what it is doing to them (ethnically cleansing them). Self-alleged Jews — including some rabbis — who say otherwise (that Judaism isn’t intrinsically racist and even genocidally so), are clearly lying about the Jewish religion, by saying that being a follower of the Jewish religion does NOT necessarily entail being a Zionist (a supporter of such biblical passages as I have just quoted). Though Zionism, as a political movement, started only with Theodor Herzl’s pamphlet The Jewish Nation in 1896, Zionism had been an intrinsic part of the Jewish faith ever since that faith’s Scripture, the Torah, which includes those passages, which — regarding these passages — Israel is now trying to finalize in both Gaza and the West Bank (and a bit beyond), which Scripture became Judaism’s Torah, or ultimate holy Scripture, at some time during the 6th-5th Century BC. (Which was long before Zionism as a political movement even existed.) Since that ancient time, every Jewish assembly place or synagogue has had a Torah, the religion’s ‘holy book’. It is the basis of the Jewish religion, and before that, Jews were simply tribes. But Zionism turned those evill Biblical passages into a political movement, and this happened starting in 1881, “in reaction to tsarist pogroms, formed the Ḥovevei Ẕiyyon (“Lovers of Zion”) to promote the settlement of Jewish farmers and artisans in Palestine.” Until those pogroms, which were instigated if not encouraged by the devoutly Christian Tsar Alexander III, there WAS no Zionism. This Jewish-nazi movement started in reaction to that Christian-nazi Tsar.

Judaism’s hatred of, and desire to destroy, the Palestinians, is as old as is the faith itself, though it did not become politically activated until Tsar Alexander III precipitated it. For this reason, I headlined on 14 August 2017, “Netanyahu’s Pro-Nazi Lie: ‘Hitler Wanted To Expel The Jews’”: Netanyahu blamed Palestinians — NOT Christians — for the Holocaust. He said this despite Hitler himself having been a Catholic, and that Church having held a solemn private (but attended by Bormann and Goebbels) Memorial Mass for him, on 6 May 1945, a week after his suicide. Hitler was born, lived, and died, as a Catholic. But the nazi Netanyahu blamed those Muslims — no Christian.

However, there is nothing unique about Judaism’s racism. Consider, for example, that the Christians, not just Hitler but all of the Nazi leaders, and the 94% of Germans in that time who called themselves “Christian,” WERE Christians. Why do Jewish nazis ignore this fact? Whereas many Jews want to exterminate Palestinians, many Christians have wanted to exterminate Jews. Many Christians cooperated with the Holocaust, and some of them were even proud to do so.

For example, as regards the Christian clergy, they very predominantly supported Hitler’s anti-Semitism, and they even provided to his Government the documentation as to whom was and therefore also whom was NOT a Christian — the basic data from which the Holocaust’s “Jews” would be selected for extermination — and they were proud to do it:

Eberhard Bethge, who had been a liberal Protestant cleric during the Third Reich, was interviewed in the last chapter of Augustin Hedberg’s 1992 FAITH UNDER FIRE and was asked what those years had been like. Bethge commented, “‘Bad blood’ was the great term. You had to have Aryan blood.” Hitler, in only his private statements, had defined “Aryan,” as pureblooded Christian. Bethge’s interviewer inquired, “So we know this Jewish poison [Jewish blood] had to be cleansed. How did they propose to do that?” Bethge replied, tellingly: “For instance, everybody in an office, in a village, in a city, in a province, in Berlin, had to prove that he had [only] Aryan ancestors. How could he do that? He could do it only if he wrote to church officers in the villages or in the cities and asked them to look in the old books of the church in which baptisms were recorded. So many pastors and church secretaries had to work for hours and hours, weeks and months to answer all these requests. ‘Please give me an excerpt out of the church files that proves my ancestors had been Christians.’ The church officers and the ministers, they didn’t care. They did that. They said, ‘How important we are now.’ I was an assistant curator in the winter of ’33. I had to sit all morning and look through the books and answer these letters.” It was therefore the Christian clergy themselves — people indoctrinated with John 8:44, and Matthew 27:25, and Matthew 23:31-36, and Luke 19:27, etc. — who were the proud implementers of the indispensable first step in the Nazis’ 12-year-long “racist” war against the Jews, by supplying the crucial raw data for segregating-out Jews. Bethge was even honest enough to admit, “We were anti-Semitic, and we thought this was Christian.” (Of course, they did, because it was, and they had absorbed this from Christianity’s Scripture.) The essential first step in the “final solution” was this identification of who was NOT an “Aryan,” who WAS “a Jew.” Hitler commanded this first step in the year he came into power, 1933, and the Christian clergy executed it with pride. And yet even today, so-called “historians” say that Hitler didn’t have execution of the Jews in mind from the very start, and that Hitler was no Christian, and so forth.

The Catholic-raised Hitler took very seriously such anti-Semitic New-Testament statements as, from ‘Jesus,’ John 8:44, Matthew 23:31-38, and Luke 19:27; and from Paul, 1 Thes. 2:14-16. (Hitler even said to his followers, on 18 December 1926, “The teachings of Christ have laid the foundations for the battle against the Jews as the enemy of Mankind; the work that Christ began, I shall finish.” Then, on 26 April 1933, he told the Pope’s representative, “I am doing what the Church has done for 1,500 years. I am simply finishing the job.”) All of that was Christian racism against Jews. Furthermore, virtually all of Germany’s Nazis were Christians — committed to the New Testament — and, in fact, that (an applicant’s purebred Christianity) was a requirement in order to join the Party, and ESPECIALLY in order to join the SS, as is documented in a 13,000-word masterpiece of an article by Coel Hellier, on “Nazi racial ideology was religious, creationist and opposed to Darwinism”, which can leave no intelligent reader to doubt that the Nazi Party was itself a Christian movement, which historical fact is covered-up by ‘journalists’ and ‘historians’ (but exposed and documented by the primary sources cited in that article — they’re all authentic).

In addition to this: On 21 October 1941, Hitler, in the privacy of his bunker, concluded a long tirade against Jews (as transcribed in his Table-Talk) by saying: “By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea.” Hitler’s buddy, Himmler, stated, in a speech to top SS leaders, two years later, when the Holocaust was in full swing, on 4 October 1943, that this extermination was necessary for them to carry out, in order to have “exterminated a bacterium because we do not want in the end to be infected by the bacterium and die of it.” Hitler had stated, on various occasions, that the “Jewish infection” or “Jewish bacterium” or “blood-poisoning by Jews,” was transmitted to non-Jews in their “blood,” and so Jews must be entirely eradicated like plague-carrying rats — not only in Germany, but beyond. Hitler said, on 24 February 1943: “This fight will not end with the planned annihilation of the Aryan [which to him meant the descendants of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 — and the snake was, according to the NT, the father of the Jews] but with the extermination of the Jew [which to Hitler meant the descendants of the snake in Genesis 3] in Europe. Beyond this, thanks to this fight, our movement’s world of thought will become the common heritage of all people.” He meant “all people” — he aimed to eliminate all Jews — not merely in Germany, and for Germans, but everywhere. (Yet, still, there are Holocaust-deniers who say that the Holocaust is just ‘a Jewish hoax’, or that if it happened, Hitler didn’t know about it. Some people are stupid enough to reiterate such blatantly false tropes.) Or, as Hitler stated it in his last official words, his “Political Testament” right before his suicide: “Above all I charge the leaders of the nation and those under them to scrupulous observance of the laws of race and to merciless opposition to the universal poisoner of all peoples, international Jewry.” (His phrase “international Jewry” referred to Jews in all nations. He didn’t make any explicit reference here to exterminating them, because this statement from him was intended to be public — not merely private. He was explicit about it ONLY in his private statements, such as I have quoted.)

Furthermore, that 24 February 1943 quotation ISN’T from the flawed Trevor-Roper publication of the Table-Talk but instead from an authentic private speech that Hitler gave on that date, and the varying translations of which were discussed in an 8 March 1943 OSS Memorandum http://www7.bbk.ac.uk/thepursuitofthenazimind/FDR/DSCN2002.jpg by Walter Langer to William Donovan. The 1941 quotation from Hitler isn’t only in the original German version of the Table-Talk but was quoted in a book by Winston Churchill in 1948, four years before any translated version of the Table-Talks (Tischgesprache) (and this includes the one issued by Trevor-Roper) was published. The Himmler quotation is likewise accepted as authentic by historians.

Moreover, Horst von Maltitz perceptively observed in this regard in his excellent 1973 The Evolution of Hitler’s Germany (p. 171), that “railroad transport trains carrying Jews from the West to extermination camps in Poland were given priority over trains for urgently needed troops and war supplies. Moreover, skilled Jewish laborers, desperately needed in the munitions plants in occupied Poland, were carted off to extermination centers, in spite of strong objections by plant managers.” And, according to the Polish Ambassador, Jan Ciechanowski, in his 1947 Defeat in Victory (p. 179), he had personally handed U.S. President Roosevelt in the White House on 28 July 1943 a memo that, “The unprecedented destruction of the entire Jewish population is not motivated by Germany’s military requirements. Hitler and his subordinates aim at the total destruction of the Jews before the war ends and regardless of its outcome.”

And, as I pointed out in my 2000 WHY the Holocaust Happened: Its Religious Cause & Scholarly Cover-Up (see summary of it here), Hitler said that “Aryans” have remained unchanged since the time God first created Man (Adam and Eve). Thus, Mein Kampf asserted that the objective was “to give the Almighty Creator beings as He Himself created them.” Though during his later years Hitler was trying to adopt a scientific view, he failed, and Hitler even in his war bunker on the night of 25 January 1942, confided that Darwinian evolution does not apply to Man, who “has always been as he is now.” This was NOT an atheistic type of racism; it was SPECIFICALLY Biblical, a religious type of racism, despite all of the propaganda to the contrary (which has fooled almost all of the Hitler ‘experts’ ever since — though the evidence proves conclusively that the contrary is true).

Consequently, it will be good here to quote the most important New Testament origins of Hitler’s — and many other Christians’ — Holocaust:

John 8:44

“You are the children of your father, the Devil, and you want to follow your father’s desires. From the very beginning, he was a murderer, and has never been on the side of truth, becuse there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he is only doing what is natural to him, because he is a liar and the father of all lies.”

Matthew 23:31-38

“So, you actually admit that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets! Go on, then, and finish up what your ancestors started. You snakes and sons of snakes! How do you expect to escape being condemned to hell? And so I will tell you that I will send you prophets and wise men and teachers; you will kill some of them, crucify others, and whip others in the synagogues and chase them from town too town. As a result, the punishement for the murder of all innocent men will fall on you. … The punishment for all of these murders will fall on the people of this day!”

Luke: 19:27

“Now, as for all those enemies of mine who did not want me to be their king, bring them here, and kill them in my presence!” (This is told as the closing line of a parable.)

Paul 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16

“You suffered the same persecutions from your own countrymen that they suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and persecuted us. How displeasing they are to God! How hostile they are to everyone! They even tried to stop us from preaching to the Gentiles the message that would bring them salvation. In this way, they have completed the full total of the sins they have always committed. And now God’s anger has at last come down on them!”

To put those passages into their true historical context: Paul never met nor heard the living Jesus but wrote the earliest of all documents that came to be canonized in the year 393 by the Roman Catholic Church and later adopted by all other Christian churches; and his followers wrote the four canonical Gospel-accounts of ‘the words of Jesus’ but even in their time Jesus’s having been a rabbi who had preached Judaism (NOT Christianity) was so well known so that 3 out of the 4 canonized Gospel accounts of ‘Jesus’ mentioned specifically that his disciples sometimes addressed him simply as “rebbi” rabbi: Matthew 23:7, 23:8, 26:25, 26:49; Mark 9:5, 11:21, 14:45; and John 1:38, 1:49, 3:2, 3:26, 4:31, 6:25, 9:2, and 11:8. They could not deny it, because to have tried to would have been too obviously false and thus Paul’s new religion would have been recognized for what it actually was, not as they wanted it to become — they were evangelists for Paul’s religion, which they believed to be true because Paul told them that it was.

As I documented in my 2012 CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS, Paul created Christianity in the year 49 or 50 in order to get back at Jesus’s brother James who was heading the former Jesus-created sect of Jews and finally decided that the by-then thousands of uncircumcised (or Gentile) men in Paul’s congregations would either be circumcised in accord with Genesis 17:14 or else be expelled from the sect. That is the reason why Christianity is anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic): James finally decided to enforce Genesis 17:14 (in that age when no such things as anesthetics nor antibiotics existed — and circumcision was therefore almost always perpetrated upon only infants, who didn’t volunteer for it and whose screams adults didn’t take seriously).

“Historians” have not been doing their job, for the truth. That’s why the general public cannot separate propaganda from history — the latter is just an extension of the former. Compare this account of the origin off how the Nazis managed to identify who was “a Jew” and who was not, that was given in a traditional history book on that topic, Edwin Black’s 2001 IBM AND THE HOLOCAUST. Christianity’s role is ignored.

So: Zionists such as Netanyahu can’t blame Christianity for the Holocaust; they need Christian believers to blame Palestinians instead — people who had nothing to do with it — this was instead a Christian operation. The historical truth and context behind the 7 October 2023 event needs to be, and has effectively been, hidden from the publics in America, and in its European colonies.

There is a Big Lie, and, this time, it comes not from Germany’s racist-fascist-imperialist-supremacist (or ideologically nazi) Nazi Party and all the rest of Christendom, but instead from Judaism’s own racist-fascist-imperialist-supremacist Zionists and all the rest of Judaism.

And what about Islam’s equivalent? That is the jihadists, the fundamentalist Arab Sunni (U.S. propaganda lies that it’s instead fundamentalist Iranian Shiite) movement that includes both al-Qaeda and ISIS and whose former leader in Iraq and Syria, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, Donald Trump made a deal with on May 14th for Syria to become a U.S. colony, now that this former al-Qaeda and then ISIS leader, whom both Obama and Biden, and also Trump, had protected ever since 2012, finally succeeded (with U.S.-supplied weapons and training) at overthrowing Syria’s secular President Bashar al-Assad, and started the ethnic cleansing in Syria against Shiite Muslims and Christians there (that isn’t being reported in the U.S. empire).

So, in what way was the victory of the Allies in WW2 an ideological victory? Although both Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) and Joseph Stalin were passionately AGAINST imperialism, both Winston Churchill and Harry Truman were FOR it, and it was THEY (Churchill and Truman) who ended up generating the world we have today, as being Cecil Rhodes’s 1877-conceived joint Anglo-American-Zionist global empire, which in WW2 had — with Stalin — defeated Hitler’s intended global empire of an “Aryan,” 100% pure-bred Christian and entirely Jew-free world, Hitler’s “Paradise” (as he called it) being ruled by the 100% pure-bred descendants of, as Hitler read the Bible, Adam and Eve, and with NO surviving descendants of the snake or Satan, which, in the New Testament (John 8:44, Matt. 23:31-38, etc.), Jews are (as Hitler viewed them). All three of the Big Three WW2 Allies, working together, won WW2, against the fascist Axis powers, but then, Harry Truman became America’s President, and he and Churchill, working together, intentionally created the Cold War by reversing the post-WW2 plan that FDR had had, of working together with Stalin under an FDR-designed anti-imperialist United Nations. Stalin would have cooperated with FDR, but he could not cooperate with Churchill and Truman. Stalin was anti-imperialist like FDR had been; and, so, we have had, after WW2, a continuation of the prior world-order, of contesting empires — exactly what FDR had so carefully planned to AVOID. The ideological victory thus went to the racist-fascist-supremacist-imperialists: Churchill and Truman. They — those two fascists — took up Hitler’s goal of defeating Russia. FDR would have isolated Churchill (would have decisivelly ended the British Empire), not Stalin. The way that Truman started the Cold War was by telling Stalin that the U.S. Government must share authority with the Soviet Goverment over the lands that Stalin’s forces had freed from Hitler’s control. Stalin said no. Truman and Churchill thus (in accord with the Rhodes-conceived, but Churchill-named, “Special Relationship”) took up Hitler’s goal of ultimately conquering Russia. And America and its colonies (‘allies’) have continued this war, the Cold War, right up to the present.

Hitler had had no idea that the Christian faith and its New Testament were actually products of Paul and his followers, and that Paul in the year 49 or 50 turned against Jesus’s brother James who now headed the Jesus sect of Jews, and that Paul broke away from that sect to create his own new religion, which rejected the circumcision commandment which James in that year finally ordered Paul to impose upon his Gentile congregations. Hitler believed that the Bible was instead the “Monumental History of Mankind” — fact, no fiction — and tried to understand it as being 100% true. So, he absorbed both the racism of the Old Testament and the Jew-hatred of the New Testament, and this is the reason why he said on 21 October 1941 that “Jesus was not a Jew.” And, as I mentioned, he said on 18 December 1926, “The teachings of Christ have laid the foundatioons for the battle against Jews as the enemy of Mankind; the work that Christ began, I shall finish.” Then, on 26 April 1933, he told the Pope’s representative, “I am doing what the Church has done for 1,500 years. I am simply finishing the job.”

It is, by now, undeniable that the Zionists, who are racist-fascist-supremacist-imperialist Jews, are the Jewish equivalents of Hitler’s Christian nazis — Jewish nazis to eliminate Palestinians, just as were the Christian nazis to eliminate Jews.

Churchill was likewise a nazi, but neither of Hitler’s type, nor of the Zionists’ type, but he intensely supported the Zionists’ cause, because his political career was financed largely by extremely wealthy Jews, and not only by extremely wealthy Christians. For example, the Jewish banker and financier, Sir Henry Edouard Strakosch, who had wealth from South African gold mines, paid off Churchill’s huge debts in 1938 and 1940. Furthermore, Churchill had been a protégé of Cecil Rhodes, and after Rhodes’s death in 1902 was the most effective of all of his protégés at actually achieving the “Special Relationship” that Rhodes had first proposed in 1877 — Rhodes’ goal of retrieving the U.S. for the UK. (Soon, the UK became subordinate in the relationship.) Allegedly, Rhodes — who built up an enormous fortune in South African gold and diamond mines — was financially backed by Lord Baron Lionel Nathan de Rothschild, and the allegation is actually true; the details were actually provided in John Flint’s 1974 biography, Cecil Rhodes, starting on page 86: then, on pages 92 and 93 is quoted from Rhodes’s 1888 will, “I leave … the balance of my property to Lord Rothschild.” And, then, “the world’s greatest financier was instructed, somewhat brusuely and sketchily, to use the money to establish the beloved society of the Imperiall elect.” Flint also notes that “Rothschild’s name appeared in Rhodes’s subsequent wills, and it is probable that his influence helped later to transform the mad scheme for a secret society into that which set up the Rhodes Scholarships.” As I pointed out at that last link, Churchill and General Eisenhower persuaded Truman to start the Cold War, on 25 July 1945. Eisenhower’s argument especially impressed Truman.

Truman, likewise, started the nation of Israel on 14 May 1948, and the reasons he gave for it were Biblical. He was a total fool, easily manipulated by exploiting his prejudices (in that case, his agreement with Hitler that the Bible is the monumental history of mankind — though Truman focused on the Old, and Hitler on the New, Testament).

Churchill was retired from politics when Truman created Israel, but Churchill had worked previously for this objective. However, his motivation for it was more directly racist (the type of racism that Rhodes himself had had) than Truman’s. Here is how Churchill had expressed it:

In a 12 March 1937 testimony before the Peel Commission on Palestine, Churchill revealed the racist and “white supremacist” basis of his support for the Zionist project (the testimony was only [first] published in 1982 — in Martin Gilbert, Winston S. Churchill Companion Volume 5, Part 3: The Coming of War, 1936-1939, 1982, p. 616). He said there:

“I do not agree that the dog in the manger has the final right to the manger, even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit, for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race, a more worldly-wise race, to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.” [Churchill requested that this statement by him not be published in the Peel Commission’s official eport, and it was not.] It is shown here.

So, that’s the historical background for the current death of international law. Because Truman fundamentally reversed FDR’s anti-imperialist plan for the U.N. (and ‘historians’ never said so), we now have reached the utter failure of the WW2 Allies’ ‘victory’, and need to reconstruct the U.N. on the basis of the plan for it that the U.N.’s inventor had been intending it to be.

If some of this is news to you, all of it is solidly documented history. Based on the actuall documentation, none of this is really news. You can decide for yourself what the actual history here is, and I have linked through to the sources so as to facilitate your checking out anything here that you question. There is more of real history in this 5,000-word article than in a typical 500-page history-book.

This article was originally published on Eric’s Substack.

The post International Law Is Now Completely Dead appeared first on LewRockwell.

The more I study science, the more I come to see how often fundamental facts end up being changed so that a profitable industry can be created. In the case of heart disease, I very much believe that is the case and in this publication, I’ve tried to expose the erroneous information that predominates our understanding of this subject (e.g., previously I’ve discussed why our model of how the heart pumps blood in the body is incorrect, the forgotten Russian research that shows the heart intelligently controls how blood moves within the body, and how blood pressure management is filled with erroneous premises that exist to perpetually sell medications).

Within cardiology, I believe one of the most damaging falsehoods is that cholesterol causes heart disease and that taking statins (or their newer lucrative equivalents), which lower cholesterol, are the key to preventing heart disease. This is because, in addition to those “facts” being incorrect, statins are also some of the most dangerous and widely used pharmaceutical drugs on the market.

Cholesterol and Heart Disease

Frequently, when an industry harms many people, it will create a scapegoat to get out of trouble. Once this happens, a variety of other sectors that also benefit from that scapegoat existing will jump on the bandwagon. Before long, a false belief that harms society becomes an unquestionable dogma that becomes very difficult to overturn because many corrupt parties have a vested interest in maintaining the lie.

For example, various easily addressable factors (which often exist in the first place because they benefit an industry) are responsible for the chronic diseases we face in society and our vulnerability to infectious diseases (e.g., the obese and diabetics were much more likely to catch COVID-19). However, by saying all diseases result from insufficient vaccination, it gets all those destructive industries off the hook and creates a huge market for selling vaccines and treatments for these illnesses. Thus, since there are so many vested interests behind the vaccine paradigm, it is very difficult to overturn—despite the fact there’s no evidence vaccines ended the era of infectious disease but the existing evidence does show they are responsible for the massive epidemic of chronic disease that is sweeping our country.

In the 1960s and 1970s, a debate emerged over what caused heart disease. On one side, John Yudkin effectively argued that the sugar being added to our food by the processed food industry was the chief culprit. On the other side, Ancel Keys (who attacked Yudkin’s work) argued that it was due to saturated fat and cholesterol.

Note: a case can also be made that the mass adoption of vegetable oils lead to this increase in heart disease. Likewise, some believe the advent of water chlorination was responsible for this increase.

Ancel Keys won, Yudkin’s work was largely dismissed, and Keys became nutritional dogma. A large part of Key’s victory was based on his study of seven countries (Italy, Greece, Former Yugoslavia, Netherlands, Finland, America, and Japan), which showed that as saturated fat consumption increased, heart disease increased in a linear fashion.

However, what many don’t know (as this study is still frequently cited) is that this result was simply a product of the countries Keys chose (e.g., one author illustrated that if Finland, Israel, Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, France, and Sweden had been chosen, the opposite would have been found).

Fortunately, it gradually became recognized that Ancel Keys did not accurately report the data he used to substantiate his arguments. For example, recently an unpublished 56 month randomized study of 9,423 adults living in state mental hospitals or a nursing home (which made it possible to rigidly control their diets) that Keys was the lead investigator of was unearthed. This study (inconveniently) found that replacing half of the animal (saturated) fats they ate with vegetable oil (e.g., corn oil) lowered their cholesterol, and that for every 30 points it dropped, their risk of death increased by 22 percent (which roughly translates to each 1% drop in cholesterol raising the risk of death by 1%)—so as you can imagine, it was never published.

Note: the author who unearthed that study also discovered another (unpublished) study from the 1970s of 458 Australians, which found that replacing some of their saturated fat with vegetable oils increased their risk of dying by 17.6%

Likewise, recently, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world published internal sugar industry documents. They showed the sugar industry had used bribes to make scientists place the blame for heart disease on fat so Yudkin’s work would not threaten the sugar industry. In turn, it is now generally accepted that Yudkin was right, but nonetheless, our medical guidelines are still largely based on Key’s work.

However, despite a significant amount of data that now shows lowering cholesterol is not associated with a reduction in heart disease (e.g., this study, this study, this study, this review, this review, and this review) the need to lower cholesterol is still a dogma within cardiology. For example, how many of you have heard of this 1986 study which was published in the Lancet which concluded:

During 10 years of follow-up from Dec 1, 1986, to Oct 1, 1996, a total of 642 participants died. Each 1 mmol/L increase in total cholesterol corresponded to a 15% decrease in mortality (risk ratio 0–85 [95% Cl 0·79–0·91]).

Note: when people are diabetic (which leads to the liver having to process too much sugar) the liver will convert to fat and then create more cholesterol to transport some of that fat. In these instances, many argue the actual issue is an excess of sugar rather than elevated cholesterol levels it causes.

Statin Marketing

One of the consistent patterns I’ve observed within medicine is that once a drug is identified that can “beneficially” change a number, medical practice guidelines will gradually shift to prioritizing treating that number and before long, rationals will be created that require more and more of the population to be subject to that regimen. For example, consider what happened with blood pressure:

Because of this, blood pressure levels were enforced that are much more likely to harm than help the elderly (and likewise to create many debilitating side effects along the way).

In the case of statins, prior to their discovery, it was difficult to reliably lower cholesterol, but once they hit the market, research rapidly emerged stating that cholesterol was more and more dangerous, that lower and lower blood cholesterol levels were needed, and, hence that more and more people needed to be on statins.

As you would expect, similar increases also occurred within the USA. For example, in 2008-2009, 12% of Americans over 40 reported taking a statin, whereas in 2018-2019, that had increased to 35% of Americans.

Given how much these drugs are used, it then raises a simple question—how much benefit do they produce?

As it turns out, this is a remarkably difficult question to answer as the published studies use a variety of confusing metrics to obfuscate their data (which means that the published statin trials almost certainly inflate the benefits of statin therapy), and more importantly, virtually all of the data on statin therapy is kept by a private research collaboration which consistently publishes glowing reviews of statins (and attacks anyone who claims otherwise) but simultaneously refuses to release their data to outside researchers, which has led to those researchers attempting to get this missing data from the drug regulators.
Note: as you might have guessed, that collaboration takes a lot of money from the pharmaceutical industry.

Nonetheless, when independent researchers looked at the published trials (which almost certainly inflated the benefit of statin therapy) they found that taking a statin daily for approximately 5 years resulted in you living, on average, 3-4 days longer. Sadder still, large trials have found this minuscule “benefit” is only seen in men. In short, most of the benefit from statins is from creative ways to rearrange data and causes of death, not any actual benefit.

Note: this is very similar to Pfizer’s COVID vaccine trial which professed to be “95% effective” against COVID-19, but in reality only created a 0.8% reduction in minor symptoms of COVID (e.g., a sore throat) and a 0.037% reduction in severe symptoms of COVID (with “severe” never being defined by Pfizer). This in turn meant that you needed to vaccinate 119 people to prevent a minor (inconsequential) case of COVID-19, and 2711 to prevent a “severe” case of COVID-19.

Furthermore, a clinical trial whistleblower later revealed that these figures were greatly inflated as many individuals in the vaccine group who developed COVID-19 like symptoms were never tested for COVID-19. Likewise, these benefits were fleeting as it was shown the “efficacy” of vaccines rapidly waned (disappearing a few months after vaccination). Worse still at six months of follow-up in both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s trials, more vaccinated than unvaccinated individuals died, and similarly a peer-reviewed reanalysis of Pfizer and Moderna’s trial data showed that one was more likely to suffer a severe adverse event from the vaccine than a hospitalization from COVID-19.

In circumstances like these where an unsafe and ineffective but highly lucrative drug must be sold, the next step is typically to pay everyone off to promote it. For example, to quote Chapter 7 of Doctoring Data:

The National Cholesterol Education Programme (NCEP) has been tasked by the National Institutes of Health to develop guidelines [everyone uses] for treating cholesterol levels. Excluding the chair (who was by law prohibited from having financial conflicts of interest), the other 8 members on average were on the payroll of 6 statin manufacturers.

In 2004, NCEP reviewed 5 large statin trials and recommended: “Aggressive LDL lowering for high-risk patients [primary prevention] with lifestyle changes and statins.”

In 2005 a Canadian division of the Cochrane Collaboration [who were not paid off] reviewed 5 large statin trials (3 were the same as NCEP’s, while the other 2 had also reached a positive conclusion for statin therapy). That assessment instead concluded: “Statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.”

Note: the primary reason no cure for COVID-19 was ever found was that the guideline panel for COVID-19 treatments was handpicked by Fauci, comprised of academics taking money from Remdesivir’s manufacturers. Not surprisingly, the panel always voted against recommending any of the non-patentable treatments for COVID-19, regardless of how much evidence there was for them.

Likewise, the American College of Cardiology made a calculator to determine your risk of developing a heart attack or stroke in the next ten years based on your age, blood pressure, cholesterol level, and smoking status. In turn, I’ve lost track of how many doctors I saw proudly punch their patient’s numbers into it and then inform them that they were at high risk of a stroke or heart attack and urgently needed to start a statin. Given that almost everyone ended up being “high risk” I was not surprised to learn that in 2016, Kaiser completed an extensive study which determined this calculator overestimated the rate of these events by 600%. Sadly, that has not at all deterred the use of this calculator (e.g., medical students are still tested on it for their board examinations).

Note: one of the most unfair things about statins is that the healthcare system decided they are “essential” for your health, so doctors who don’t push them are financially penalized, and likewise patients who don’t take them are as well (e.g., through life insurance premiums).

So, despite the overwhelming evidence against their use, many physicians believe so deeply in the “profound” benefits of statins that they do things like periodically advocating for statins to be added to the drinking water supply.

Read the Whole Article

The post What They Don’t Tell Us About Heart Disease appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Johnny Kramer.

The Gateway Pundit

 

The post Trump Calls on Kamala Harris To Be Prosecuted appeared first on LewRockwell.

Ginny Garner wrote:

Lew,

“Party in the C.I.A.,” a song that cleverly exposes the brutal activities of the Agency, is being performed now on stages throughout the U.S. by Weird Al Yankovic on his Bigger and Weirder concert tour. Weird Al is known for his song parodies, using the melodies of hit songs (after getting permission from the original songwriters) and changing the lyrics. Here is the official video that now has 50 million views, followed by the lyrics: 

I moved out to Langley recently
with a plain and simple dream
Want to infiltrate some third world place (Whoa)
and topple their regime
those men in black with their matching suitcases
where everything’s on a need to know basis
agents got that swagger
everyone’s so cloak and dagger
I’m feeling nervous but I’m really kinda wishing
for an undercover mission
that’s when the red alert came on the radio
and I put my ear piece on
got my dark sunglasses on
and I had my weapon drawn

So I get my handcuffs
my cyanide pills
my classified dossier
tapping the phones like yeah
shredding the files like yeah
I memorized all the enemy spies I gotta neutralize today
yeah it’s a party in the CIA
yeah it’s a party in the CIA

I’ve done a couple of crazy things that have almost gotten me dismissed
like terminate some head of state who wasn’t even on my list
burn that microfilm, buddy, will you?
I’d tell you why but then I’d have to kill you
you need a quickie confession?
We’ll start a water boarding session

no hurry on that South American dictator
I’ll assassinate him later
that’s when he walked right in my laser sights
and my silencer was on
and my silencer was on
and another target’s gone

yeah we got our black ops all over the world
from Kazakhstan to Bombay
paying the bribes like yeah
plugging the leaks like yeah
interrogating the scum of the earth
we’ll break ’em by the break of day
yeah it’s a party in the CIA
yeah it’s a party in the CIA

Need a country destabilized (stabilized)?
Look no further we’re your guys (we’re your guys)
We’ve got snazzy suits and ties (suits and ties)
and a better dental plan than the FBI’s

better put your hands up and get in the van
Or else you’ll get blown away (Blown away!)
staging a coup like yeah
brainwashing moles like yeah
we only torture the folks we don’t like
You’re probably gonna be OK (You’re gonna be OK!)
yeah it’s a party in the CIA
yeah it’s a party in the CIA

 

The post Party in the C.I.A. appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Saleh Abdullah. 

Cremieux Recueil

 

The post Go Ahead And Have Kids appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm.

The Gateway Pundit

 

The post Feds reveal dozens of organ donors may not have been dead when ‘procurement’ processes started! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, Saleh Abdullah.

greekreporter.com

www.oann.com

The post Catholic and Orthodox Leaders Unite in Condemnation of Gaza Church Bombing appeared first on LewRockwell.