- Globalists Suggest "Finance Shock" And Climate Controls To Launch Their Great Reset
Globalists Suggest “Finance Shock” And Climate Controls To Launch Their Great Reset
Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,
At the end of June government leaders and think-tank power brokers from around the world met at the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris. Participants include United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva and World Bank President Ajay Banga.
The supposed purpose of the summit was to find financial solutions to the goals of tackling poverty while simultaneously curbing “planet-heating emissions.” As with all climate change related events the discussion in Paris inevitably turned to international centralization of power and the formation of a global consortium to fix the problems that they claim sovereign nations cannot or will not fix.
However, what I’m seeing more and more in the past couple years is a convergence of narratives – Central banks and international banks are now suddenly more concerned with carbon taxation and global warming than they seem to be concerned with stagflation and economic collapse. Likely because this was the goal all along and economic collapse is part of the plan.
Globalists are now combining the climate change issue with international finance and monetary authority. In other words, they aren’t hiding the fact that the climate change agenda is part of the “Great Reset” agenda anymore. They are even suggesting that the threat of climate change be used as a springboard for giving global banks more power to dictate the circulation of wealth and for deconstucting the existing system so it can be replaced with something else.
French President Emmanuel Macron told delegates at the Paris summit that “the world needs a public finance shock” to fight global warming while also creating “equity” for less wealthy nations. He also argued that the current system was not well suited to address the world’s challenges.
Presenters at the event noted that the international economic framework had been battered by a number of crises, including the pandemic and the war in Ukraine, but focused on “the spiraling cost of weather disasters intensified by global warming” as a reason for the ongoing destabilization of financial systems.
This is obviously nonsense, but it fits with the narrative programming that globalists are trying to engineer by linking economic decline to climate change. In reality, there is ZERO evidence that global weather events are any worse today than they were over a hundred years ago before carbon producing industries were widespread. There is no proven connection between carbon emissions and any specific weather phenomenon. The claim is a fraud. There is no man-made climate crisis, as I have outlined and evidenced in previous articles.
But how many people will be fooled into thinking that there is a climate crisis, and what can that hysterical fear be exploited for?
Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley (like many globalists) advocated for re-imagining the role of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund in an era of climate dangers. She argues: “What is required of us now is absolute transformation and not reform of our institutions…”
UN leader Antonio Guterres said the global financial system, which was conceived at the end of World War II under the Bretton Woods Agreement, was failing to rise to modern challenges and now “perpetuates and even worsens inequalities.” In other words, he is angling for a new woke Bretton Woods.
“We can take steps right now and take a giant leap towards global justice,” he said, adding that he has proposed a stimulus of $500 billion a year for investments in sustainable development and climate action. There was also a plan presented to use the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket as a mechanism to boost global liquidity.
Keep in mind that the fiat stimulus measures of central banks and the interest rate policies of global bankers are what caused the current economic crisis to begin with. It wasn’t covid, it wasn’t the war in Ukraine and it certainly wasn’t climate change. It was the banks and their use of monetary manipulation that triggered 40 year high inflation, and this has led to central banks hiking interest rates into economic weakness. This strategy has consistently caused debt implosion and stock market disasters in the past. The bankers and the globalists are the source of the problem, they should not be put in charge of fixing it.
Yet, here they are, trying to take control and institute a sweeping Reset plan for the calamity they created. But where is all of this leading?
Last year the UN suggested that developed and emerging economies like the US and China would have to pay a kind of wealth/emissions tax of at least $2.4 trillion a year into a fund for climate change developments, and this wealth would be redistributed to poorer nations. Redistributed by who? Well, the globalists, of course.
Other ideas on the table include taxation on fossil fuel profits and financial transactions to raise climate funds. Meaning, they plan to tax oil and gas until prices become so high that the general public will not be able to afford them.
Macron in particular backed the idea of an international tax on carbon emissions from shipping, ostensibly to make overseas freight more expensive in order to reduce manufacturing demand. This expands on the strict carbon rules already being implemented on European agriculture.
These all seem like disjointed plans to simply inflate prices through different forms of taxation and force the public to consume less goods, but there is a much bigger scheme at play here. It’s important to understand that climate change is nothing more than a vehicle to deliver a fully centralized global economic system, likely under the control of the IMF, BIS, World Bank and the UN.
The annual payments by wealthier nations into global institutional coffers is an act of tribute, a show of fealty. It’s also a way for groups like the IMF to create a system of greater interdependency. If vast sums of money are flowing through globalist institutions and they become the arbiters of how that wealth is redistributed, they can also build a system of rewards and punishments. They can punish countries that don’t follow their dictates and they can give advantages to countries that toe the line.
In terms of a new Bretton Woods, I suspect that this is all culminating in a currency crisis which the globalists will use as an opportunity to finally introduce their CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) model. And once CBDCs are implemented their ability to dominate the populace will be complete. A cashless system with no privacy in transactions and the ability to shut down the buying power of individuals and groups at will? It’s a totalitarian’s dream scenario.
It’s no mistake that the public is being constantly bombarded with global warming propaganda these days – The powers that be need an existential crisis as a fear generator. When people are afraid they don’t think rationally and will often turn to the worst possible leaders for relief. And a global threat requires a global response, right?
Climate change disaster narratives (if the public embraces the propaganda) will allow for a wide array of systemic changes that have nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with financial dominance.
National wealth taxation and redistribution. The imposition of the IMF and World Bank as a mediator for global funds. The use of the IMF’s SDR basket as a defacto global currency umbrella. The injection of CBDCs and a cashless society. None of these things would have any bearing on climate change even if it was a legitimate threat.
But what about the scorched earth model? If the ultimate intent is to destroy the economy to the point that most industry dies, trade retracts and the population plummets because survival becomes untenable, then one might argue that the globalists are “saving the planet” by getting rid of people. I suppose if you think keeping the population in perpetual third-world status will save us from global warming, then you might support such an agenda.
Whether the goal is simply economic micro-management or the forced liquidation of production, the outcome would be more power for internationalists and less freedom and prosperity for everyone else.
They can spin it however they want, but when the elites call for a “financial shock” they are really calling for a dramatic throttling of the system so that it can no longer maintain the existing populace. When they call for global taxation and tribute in the name of “equality” they are not trying to make everyone equally rich, they want everyone equally poor.
And when they call for the centralized oversight of nations for the sake of saving the planet, what they really want is global governance.
* * *
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 23:40 - 'Help' Or 'Harm' – Visualizing Global Sentiment On AI
‘Help’ Or ‘Harm’ – Visualizing Global Sentiment On AI
Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a revolutionary force with the potential to transform many aspects of our daily lives.
So understanding how the average person feels about this technology is essential as it integrates further into society.
In the graphic below, Visual Capitalist’s Alan Kennedy and Sabrina Fortin, using data from Lloyd’s Register Foundation, we explore the findings of the World Risk Poll 2021: A Digital World.
The World’s Opinion is Divided
In the poll, which had 125,000 respondents in 121 countries, people were asked if AI would ‘mostly help’ or it would ‘mostly hurt‘ people in their home country over the next 20 years.
We’ve looked at the ratio of these responses below.
A higher ratio above 1.0 indicates that more people think AI could ‘mostly help’, while a ratio below 1.0 suggests that the population has more skepticism towards the technology.
Globally, the average ratio is 1.4, but significant differences can be seen when looking at each individual region.
Notably, public opinion among the biggest economies appears split.
When we dug into the data, we saw that the U.S. showed skepticism towards AI with a ratio of 0.9. In this case, the potential loss of jobs could possibly be the leading cause of apprehension.
On the other hand, China expressed a ratio of 4.5, meaning for every 1 respondent that believes AI will ‘mostly harm’, 4.5 said AI would ‘mostly help’.
Why is AI So Polarizing?
AI has always been a divisive subject, and even the media can’t settle on whether AI is akin to the chaotic and malevolent Ultron or the caring and cat-obsessed Lt. Cmdr Data.
Consequently, it’s not just a person’s nationality or media consumption that impacts their stance on AI. A person’s life experience may also play a role in their perception of AI, more notably when it comes to religious views or access to the internet:
Artificial intelligence has many philosophical ramifications, so it’s no surprise that only 32% of those who consider religion important believe AI will help. Conversely, 48% of non-religious people believe AI will ‘mostly help’.
In 16 countries, the percentage of people who say AI will ‘mostly harm’ was higher among those who had experienced discrimination based on their race/nationality, skin color, or sex, compared to those who had not. Notably, these include three Northern European countries where overall perceptions of AI are among the most positive in the world: Norway, Denmark, and Sweden.
An Uncertain Future
Even though 39% of global respondents believe AI will ‘mostly help’ in the next 20 years, only 27% of those people believe they would feel comfortable behind the wheel of a self-driving car. This suggests that while people may be ready for AI as a tool, they may not be ready for it to control large parts of their life.
With this in mind, understanding public opinion is crucial for policymakers and industry leaders to then shape the development and deployment of AI technologies in a manner that addresses these concerns.
Lloyd’s Register Foundation has created the World Risk Poll 2021 to help engineer a safer world, but the scope of this study goes beyond AI and personal data. In part two of this series, we’ll explore the World Risk Poll 2021: Safe At Work and unearth some startling trends regarding workplace harassment.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 23:20 - Biden's ATF Sued For "Zero Tolerance" Policy Towards Gun Dealers
Biden’s ATF Sued For “Zero Tolerance” Policy Towards Gun Dealers
Submitted by Gun Owners of America,
Earlier this year, Gun Owners of America leaked internal ATF documents, highlighting an unprecedented rate of Federal Firearms Licenses revoked by the Biden administration’s ATF.
In fact, since the enactment of ATF’s Zero Tolerance policy, there has been a 200% increase in FFL revocations. This is due to the agency’s new interpretation of the word “willful.”
Congress has made clear that, when revoking a license, ATF is required to prove that an FFL “willfully” violated the law before the statutory punishments can be levied.
This deliberate addition to the law by Congress presented a problem for ATF, as virtually all gun dealers are well-intentioned, law-abiding people who always attempt to comply with the law.
Therefore, to claim “willfulness” to violate the law by people who almost uniformly try to follow the law — ATF had to get creative.
Now, ATF claims that a single manual, potentially given to an FFL decades ago, proves that the FFL knew the law and thus “willfully” decided to violate it.
Whereas prior to the adoption of the Zero Tolerance policy, ATF would give a warning conference to firearms dealers who made mistakes on forms. Now, according to the new policy, the default action is to revoke the dealer’s license.
In other words, under the Biden Administration, ATF has changed its focus from regulating the gun industry to destroying it by whatever means possible — eliminating access to firearms by putting as many gun dealers as possible out of business.
In 2022, GOA & Morehouse Industries, a firearms business from North Dakota, filed a lawsuit against the ATF’s Frame and Receiver rule.
Not long after that, ATF initiated its first-ever inspection of Morehouse’s FFL.
The ATF agent assigned to the Morehouse inspection, Jacob Temp, mentioned to the licensee that around his office, the other agents joked about how the inspection would look like retaliation for the lawsuit.
The ATF’s inspection resulted in ATF issuing a notice of license revocation to Morehouse Industries.
It’s important to note that the supposed violations being used as cause for revocation did not in any way impact public safety, risk the transfer of a firearm to a prohibited person, or harm law enforcement’s ability to trace any gun.
So, in response to ATF’s egregious abuse of power, Gun Owners of America and Morehouse Industries are suing the agency again — this time, over their illegal zero-tolerance policy.
Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:
“This zero-tolerance policy towards lawful commerce guaranteed by the Second Amendment is just the latest example of this Administration weaponizing federal agencies against their political enemies. It also is just one more compelling piece of evidence to support gun owners’ demands that Congress defund the ATF.”
Sam Paredes, on behalf of the Board for GOF, added:
“It’s ridiculous that good people trying to make an honest living are facing this assault on their livelihoods simply over inconsequential paperwork errors. GOF is proud to be lending our support in defense of Bridge City Ordnance and all of those small businesses facing devastating consequences if this Administration’s hostility towards firearms is permitted to go unchecked.”
Gun Owners of America has had major success in the courts fighting against Biden’s executive actions. In May, GOA won a preliminary injunction against ATF’s pistol brace rule, making GOA members immune from enforcement.
* * *
We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 23:00 - Aspen's Mansion Market Hit By 'Deep Freeze' As Normalcy Returns
Aspen’s Mansion Market Hit By ‘Deep Freeze’ As Normalcy Returns
Aspen, Colorado’s luxury real estate market has cooled after a surge of wealthy folks fled US cities during Covid to the mountain resort town 8,000 feet above sea level. Bloomberg states year-to-date dollar volume for mansion contracts is down a whopping 40% compared to the same period last year as real estate faces a headwind thanks to a series of interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve.
Tim Estin, a broker with Aspen Snowmass Sotheby’s International Realty, wrote in a new report that Aspen real estate has dramatically slowed in the first half of 2023.
“The market has returned to pre-pandemic “normalcy” of the 2016-2019 years, a theme mentioned throughout the year so far,” Estin wrote, adding “normalcy” means an “active market but not the explosive ‘urban exodus’ market of 2020-2022.”
Jennifer Banner, a Christie’s International Real Estate Aspen Snowmass broker, said, “Inventory is still historically low.”
Estin said there were 175 property listings as of June, an increase from record lows in 2022, yet still significantly below the June 2019 average of 318 listings.
“Aspen is unique. We have very limited supply and great demand. So when we don’t have a lot of inventory to sell, our sales decrease. It’s not necessarily the lack of interest in being here; it’s the lack of options for potential buyers,” Steven Shane, a broker with Compass Inc., who, at the end of May, sold a $65 million mansion in downtown Aspen.
Low inventory is the reason why prices have remained stable. Bloomberg said, “As of June 31, the average price per square foot of a single-family home in Aspen was $3,150, more than three times the figure in 2019: $1,048 per square foot. Between Q2 of 2022 and Q2 of 2023, the average home sale price per square foot was up 6%.”
Jonathan Miller, president and chief executive officer of appraiser Miller Samuel Inc., said, “Even though the majority of buyers pay in cash, Fed policy is reflective of not just mortgage rates, but also the financial markets. And this is a very affluent market. They watch the market, and it just adds a layer of uncertainty. As a result—whatever housing market you’re looking at in the US—nearly all of them have seen fairly large declines from unusually elevated levels in the past couple of years.”
Brokers said high-end homes over $10 million should experience continued strength this year. Some expect prices to cool but will never return to a pre-pandemic level. “I believe there’ll be an adjustment, but certainly not to pre-Covid levels,” Shane said.
So a combination of tighter financial conditions and mounting macroeconomic uncertainty has sent a deep freeze through Aspen’s mansion market.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 22:40 - China Perfecting Techno-Totalitarianism For Export Around The World: Rep. Gallagher
China Perfecting Techno-Totalitarianism For Export Around The World: Rep. Gallagher
Authored by Eva Fu via The Epoch Times,
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is perfecting a techno-totalitarian regime for export to the rest of the world, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) has warned.
Chairman of the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, Rep. Michael Gallagher (R-Wis.), speaks during an interfaith roundtable on the CCP’s threat to religious freedom in Washington on July 12, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)
The regime’s worsening repression of faith was in the spotlight at a roundtable hearing that the lawmaker hosted on July 12. One key takeaway, the chairman and other panelists of the House Select Committee on the CCP said, is that such abuses do not stop at Chinese borders.
“Across the board, we’ve seen the Chinese Communist Party leverage access to their market and their economic power in order to coerce American companies, international companies,” Mr. Gallagher told The Epoch Times’ sister outlet NTD.
The lawmaker made the comment in response to a question regarding a lawsuit against Cisco, accusing the California tech giant of aiding Beijing’s persecution of the spiritual group Falun Gong—which encourages people to live by the universal principles of truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance. Cisco allegedly gave the regime U.S. technology and components that allowed it to build a vast surveillance network. Over a dozen adherents, including one U.S. citizen, alleged that the resulting system tracked their Falun Gong-related activities online, leading to their arrest and torture in China.
Surveillance cameras in Hangzhou, in east China’s Zhejiang Province on May 29, 2019. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)
“The techno-totalitarian regime that the CCP is perfecting in China will not stay there. It’s a model increasingly they want to export around the world. And so we’re considering a variety of pieces of legislation to counter that,” Mr. Gallagher said.
At the roundtable, representatives for Chinese Christians, Tibetans, and Uyghurs also spoke about their suffering at the hands of China’s communist party officials, with some, in the case of house church pastor Pan Yongguang, continuing even after they fled China.
Pastor Pan Yongguang at Mayflower Church of China, who was granted asylum by the U.S. in April 2023, speaks during an interfaith roundtable on the Chinese Communist Party’s threat to religious freedom in Washington on July 12, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)
Mr. Pan and members of Mayflower Church in China’s Shenzhen city left China in October 2019. After arriving in South Korea, many from the group received threatening phone calls from CCP officials demanding they they return to China. Members were also followed in Thailand by suspected CCP agents, while their relatives in China faced harassment and interrogation, Mr. Pan said at the hearing. In February this year, he said that Chinese police officers visited his wife’s parents in central Chinese province Hunan in order to pressure her to urge Mr. Pan to return. The stress of the blackmail and concern for her elderly parent’s welfare caused Mrs. Pan to suffer a partial heart attack.
“The Chinese Communist Party wants to dominate the world. If they achieved their goals, then what you see happening in China is going to happen around the world,” Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.), a member of the House China Committee, told The Epoch Times.
Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.) speaks during an interfaith roundtable on the Chinese Communist Party’s threat to religious freedom in Washington on July 12, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)
He pointed to Hong Kong, where authorities arrested and later fined Cardinal Joseph Zen, 91, over a support fund for pro-democracy protesters. Incidents like this speak to the importance of speaking up about the regime’s abuses, Mr. Gimenez said, because what is happening in China right now could one day “be happening to you.”
“You have to be subservient to the Chinese Communist Party” and if “you pose a threat to the Chinese Communist Party in any way, you’ll be persecuted, you’ll be in prison, and sometimes, you may even lose your life.”
Multiple current and former U.S. religious freedom officials have already called attention to lobbying efforts on behalf of China that reach Washington, such as reports of big firms like Nike and Coca-Cola trying to weaken legislation banning imports from Xinjiang over forced labor concerns.
The U.S. government needs to pay closer attention to such lobbying activities and stop multinational corporations from assisting the regime’s oppression, said Frederick Davie, vice chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.
Oncologist Dr. Weldon Gilcrease at the University of Utah previously told The Epoch Times that the leaders of his school’s health care system had intentionally refrained from speaking out on forced organ harvesting out of fear of economic retribution by Beijing.
Frederick Davie, Vice Chair of U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom and Strategic Advisor to the President at Union Theological Seminary (NYC), speaks during an interfaith roundtable on the Chinese Communist Party’s threat to religious freedom in Washington on July 12, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)
To Davie, who earlier at the panel voiced concerns about the CCP using bilateral academic partnerships to make U.S. institutions “immune to the atrocities,” the incident was a case in point.
“It just proves the point of the level of influence that the Chinese economic reach has around the world and in the United States,” he told The Epoch Times.
American consumers have a part to play as well, noted Tony Perkins, former chair of the bipartisan religious freedom commission and president of the Family Research Council.
“China is actually more repressive today than they were two decades ago, and the reason is they can afford to be as American consumers fund their repression,” Mr. Perkins said at the panel.
Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, speaks during an interfaith roundtable on the Chinese Communist Party’s threat to religious freedom in Washington on July 12, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)
In his mind, the United States should have “no further economic transactions” with China until the human rights situation changes.
“Americans have become addicted to cheap goods—a very materialistic society—but they need to understand that the profits from that are coming back to influence policy, both here and abroad,” he told The Epoch Times.
“For our family, we read the label of where things are manufactured. And we do everything possible to keep from buying products from China, and we encourage others to do the same.”
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 22:20 - Dylan Mulvaney Flees US To Peru For 'Safety' Only To Return Days Later To Attend LA Event
Dylan Mulvaney Flees US To Peru For ‘Safety’ Only To Return Days Later To Attend LA Event
Transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney claimed to have fled the US earlier this week for a third-world South American country because ‘she’ no longer “feels safe” in a first-world country amid the demise of Bud Light following her disastrous TikTok advertising partnership in April.
Just for the sake of the ‘fact-checkers’ Peru is the 59th ‘safest’ country in the world for LGBTQ+ people, while USA is ranked 6th…
However, Mulvaney has since made her way back to the US.
The 26-year-old TikTok influencer who gets paid by ‘woke’ mega-corporations to promote their products while mocking women revealed Monday on TikTok she was at Machu Picchu.
Mulvaney said she is “solo traveling” in Peru to “feel something” — as to what that means, we have no clue. She said she left the US because she does not currently feel safe.
“I feel very safe here. It’s a little sad that I had to leave my country to feel safe, but that will get better eventually,” Mulvaney told millions of followers on the Chinese-owned social media platform.
“I came here to feel something. And I definitely have. I have done shaman ceremonies that were like 10 years worth of therapy, it was wild,” Mulvaney continued, adding, “I’ve seen a lot of llamas. The people here are so kind. I feel very safe here.”
And only days later, Mulvaney returned Stateside to attend a Thursday red carpet for Outfest in Los Angeles.
Days ago Dylan Mulvaney claimed to have fled the U.S. because he didn’t ‘feel safe.’
Yet last night he appeared at an LGBT event red carpet in Los Angeles showing off his ‘breasts’ and nipples. pic.twitter.com/aq2Vp39eLl
— Oli London (@OliLondonTV) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Remember all those celebrities who have said they’re fleeing America for good for whatever reason — but never do. Add Mulvaney to that list. As to the hype she was promoting about ‘not feeling safe’ — seems like the transgender influencer might have been peddling misinformation considering her return to the States was only days later.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 22:00 - Targeted For Tyranny: We're All Suspects Under The Government's Pre-Crime Program
Targeted For Tyranny: We’re All Suspects Under The Government’s Pre-Crime Program
Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rurtherford Institute,
“There is now the capacity to make tyranny total in America.”
– James Bamford, journalist
We’re all being targeted now.
We’re all guilty until proven innocent now.
And thanks to the 24/7 surveillance being carried out by the government’s spy network of fusion centers, we are all now sitting ducks, just waiting to be tagged, flagged, targeted, monitored, manipulated, investigated, interrogated, heckled and generally harassed by agents of the American police state.
Although these precrime programs are popping up all across the country, in small towns and big cities, they are not making us any safer but they are endangering individual freedoms.
Nationwide, there are upwards of 123 real-time crime centers (a.k.a. fusion centers), which allow local police agencies to upload and share massive amounts of surveillance data and intelligence with state and federal agencies culled from surveillance cameras, facial recognition technology, gunshot sensors, social media monitoring, drones and body cameras, and artificial intelligence-driven predictive policing algorithms.
These data fusion centers, which effectively create an electronic prison—a digital police state—from which there is no escape, are being built in partnership with big tech companies such as Microsoft, Google and Amazon, which helped to fuel the rise of police militarization and domestic surveillance.
While these latest expansions of the surveillance state are part of the Biden Administration’s efforts to combat domestic extremism through the creation of a “precrime” crime prevention agency, they have long been a pivotal part of the government’s plans for total control and dominion.
Yet this crime prevention campaign is not so much about making America safer as it is about ensuring that the government has the wherewithal to muzzle anti-government discontent, penalize anyone expressing anti-government sentiments, and preemptively nip in the bud any attempts by the populace to challenge the government’s authority or question its propaganda.
As J.D. Tuccille writes for Reason, “[A]t a time when government officials rage against ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ that is often just disagreement with whatever opinions are currently popular among the political class, fusion centers frequently scrutinize peaceful dissenting speech.”
Indeed, while the Biden Administration was recently dealt a legal blow over its attempts to urge social media companies to do more to combat so-called dis- and mis-information, these fusion centers are the unacknowledged powerhouses behind the government’s campaign to censors and retaliate against those who vocalize their disagreement and discontent with government policies.
Already, the powers-that-be are mobilizing to ensure that fusion centers have the ability to monitor and lockdown sectors of a community at a moment’s notice.
For instance, a 42,000-square-foot behemoth of a fusion center in downtown Washington is reportedly designed to “better prepare law enforcement for the next public health emergency or Jan. 6-style attack.” According to an agency spokeswoman, “Screens covering the walls of the new facility will show surveillance cameras around the city as well as social media accounts that may be monitored for threatening speech.”
It’s like a scene straight out of Steven Spielberg’s dystopian film Minority Report, set in 2054, where police agencies harvest intelligence from widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, precognitive technology, and neighborhood and family snitch programs in order to capture would-be criminals before they can do any damage.
Incredibly, as the various nascent technologies employed and shared by the government and corporations alike—facial recognition, iris scanners, massive databases, behavior prediction software, and so on—are incorporated into a complex, interwoven cyber network aimed at tracking our movements, predicting our thoughts and controlling our behavior, the dystopian visions of past writers is fast becoming our reality.
Our world is now characterized by widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, fusion centers, driverless cars, voice-controlled homes, facial recognition systems, cybugs and drones, and predictive policing (pre-crime) aimed at capturing would-be criminals before they can do any damage.
What once seemed futuristic no longer occupies the realm of science fiction.
The American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick have all been rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
In this way, the novel 1984 has become an operation manual for an omnipresent, modern-day surveillance state in which ordinary Americans find themselves labeled domestic extremists for engaging in lawful behavior that triggers the government’s precrime sensors.
The technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate and then classifying you as a danger.
Computers now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks, all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
In this way, with the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s also a setup ripe for abuse.
For instance, an investigative report by the Brennan Center found that “Over the last two decades, leaked materials have shown fusion centers tracking protestors and casting peaceful activities as potential threats. Their targets have included racial justice and environmental advocates, right-wing activists, and third-party political candidates.”
One fusion center in Maine was found to have been “illegally collecting and sharing information about Maine residents who weren’t suspected of criminal activity. They included gun purchasers, people protesting the construction of a new power transmission line, the employees of a peacebuilding summer camp for teenagers, and even people who travelled to New York City frequently.”
In one Florida county, police have been using their precrime program to generate “lists of people it considers likely to break the law, based on arrest histories, unspecified intelligence and arbitrary decisions by police analysts.” Then, according to the Tampa Bay Times, deputies are deployed “to find and interrogate anyone whose name appears, often without probable cause, a search warrant or evidence of a specific crime. They swarm homes in the middle of the night, waking families and embarrassing people in front of their neighbors. They write tickets for missing mailbox numbers and overgrown grass, saddling residents with court dates and fines. They come again and again, making arrests for any reason they can.”
The goal? “Make their lives miserable until they move or sue.”
This is how the government is turning a nation of citizens into suspects and would-be criminals.
This transformation is being driven by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency notorious for militarizing the police and SWAT teams; spying on activists, dissidents and veterans; stockpiling ammunition; distributing license plate readers; contracting to build detention camps; tracking cell-phones with Stingray devices; carrying out military drills and lockdowns in American cities; using the TSA as an advance guard; conducting virtual strip searches with full-body scanners; carrying out soft target checkpoints; directing government workers to spy on Americans; conducting widespread spying networks using fusion centers; carrying out Constitution-free border control searches; funding city-wide surveillance cameras; and utilizing drones and other spybots.
Twenty years after being formed in the wake of 9/11, the DHS is a massive, costly, power-hungry bureaucracy working hard to ensure that the government is all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful.
Yet here’s the thing: you don’t have to do anything illegal or challenge the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
In fact, all you need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious to a neighbor, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
The following activities are guaranteed to get you censored, surveilled, eventually placed on a government watch list, possibly detained and potentially killed.
Use harmless trigger words like cloud, pork and pirates. Use a cell phone. Drive a car. Attend a political rally. Express yourself on social media. Serve in the military. Disagree with a law enforcement official. Call in sick to work. Limp or stutter. Appear confused or nervous, fidget, whistle or smell bad. Allow yourself to be seen in public waving a toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun, such as a water nozzle or a remote control or a walking cane, for instance. Stare at a police officer. Appear to be pro-gun, pro-freedom or anti-government. Attend a public school. Speak truth to power.
It’s just a matter of time before you find yourself wrongly accused, investigated and confronted by police based on a data-driven algorithm or risk assessment culled together by a computer program run by artificial intelligence.
Before long, every household in America will be flagged as a threat and assigned a threat score.
Without having ever knowingly committed a crime or been convicted of one, you and your fellow citizens have likely been assessed for behaviors the government might consider devious, dangerous or concerning; assigned a threat score based on your associations, activities and viewpoints; and catalogued in a government database according to how you should be approached by police and other government agencies based on your particular threat level.
Combine predictive policing with surveillance, overcriminalization and precrime programs, then add in militarized police trained to shoot first and ask questions later, and as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, you’ll be lucky to escape with your life.
If you’re not scared yet, you should be.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 21:40 - There Could Be 24 CBDCs Live By 2030: BIS
There Could Be 24 CBDCs Live By 2030: BIS
Authored by David Attlee via CoinTelegraph.com,
According to a survey by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), 93% of central banks are already researching central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and there could be up to 15 retail and nine wholesale CBDCs in circulation by 2030.
Published earlier this week, the survey of 86 central banks was conducted from October to December 2022. It asked central banks whether they were working on a retail, wholesale or both types of CBDC, how advanced the work was, and their motivations.
There could be as many as 24 live CBDCs by 2030. Source: BIS
According to a survey, over half of the world’s central banks are conducting experiments or working on a CBDC pilot. Almost a quarter of all central banks are already piloting their retail CBDC projects, and the number of wholesale CBDCs in the works is much lower.
Geoeconomically, nations within emerging markets and developing economies are leading CBDC adoption.
Their share in piloting the retail (29%) and wholesale (16%) CBDCs almost doubles that of advanced economies, which stands at 18% and 10%, respectively.
Both developing and advanced economies mostly share the motivation behind their CBDC projects — financial stability and cross-border payments efficiency. However, developing countries are more often driven by financial inclusion reasons.
The share of central banks likely to issue a retail CBDC within the next three years grew from 15% to 18% in 2022. At the same time, 68% of central banks still state their unreadiness to issue a retail CBDC “any time soon.”
To date, there are still only four CBDCs in circulation: in the Bahamas, the Eastern Caribbean, Jamaica and Nigeria. Yet, based on the central bankers’ answers, the survey predicts 15 retail and 9 wholesale CBDCs will be live by the end of this decade.
At the end of June, the Reserve Bank of India reported ongoing negotiations with at least 18 central banks worldwide regarding the possibility of cross-border payments via its CBDC, the “digital rupee.”
In July, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Innovation Center completed its proof-of-concept of a regulated liability network for a CBDC.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 21:20 - Lott: Guns Are Not the Leading Cause of Children’s Deaths
Lott: Guns Are Not the Leading Cause of Children’s Deaths
Authored by John R. Lott Jr. via RealClear Wire,
A favorite talking point from the Biden White House is that guns are the leading cause of death of children. The problem is that it is false.
“The number one cause of death of the children in America is gun violence,” Vice President Kamala Harris claimed on June 2.
Later the White House tweeted, “Guns are the #1 KILLER of CHILDREN.” President Biden has made the same claim multiple times this year.
The Washington Post parroted this claim, running the headline: “Why guns are America’s number one killer of children.” Similarly, the NPR headline says: “Firearms overtook auto accidents as the leading cause of death in children,” and even the BBC got in on the act: “Gun deaths were the leading killer of US children in 2020.” Fact-checkers from Newsweek to Snopes also push these claims.
The first question is: What is a child? For those under 18, vehicle deaths are consistently greater than those from firearms. Adding homicides, unintentional deaths, and suicides together shows 2,443 total deaths from vehicles and 2,218 from firearms. In 2021, there were again 2,668 vehicle and 2,519 firearm deaths. When we exclude justifiable homicides that are committed in self-defense, that number falls by several hundred.
So, even if we are counting 17-year-old gang members as “children,” the White House’s claim is incorrect. In 2019 and 2020, more minors died from suffocation.
Homicides for all ages have been on the upswing across the country starting in 2020. Democrats blame this increase on guns while ignoring police budget cuts, refusal to prosecute violent criminals, bail reform, and mass release of many young, healthy inmates during the pandemic.
Many people would even define children at even younger ages. But the claims by gun control advocates like Biden and Harris are only possible if they define everyone under 20 as children.
For those under 20, firearm deaths exceed vehicle deaths for 2020 and 2021 when you use the CDC firearm homicide data. When you use the FBI data, the vehicle deaths exceed the firearm deaths for 2019 and 2020, and likely 2021, though the FBI data isn’t available for that year. The bottom line is that about a third of the firearm deaths for those under 20 involve homicide, where the victims are 18 and 19 years old. Approximately 20% involve homicides for 15, 16, and 17-year-olds. These deaths are largely gang-related, and even banning guns is unlikely to stop drug gangs from obtaining guns to protect their extremely valuable drugs.
Nor does it make sense to blame rising suicides on guns. When gun bans are enacted, there are many other effective ways to commit suicide, such as hanging, walking in front of a train, jumping from a height, using explosives, or taking cyanide. Indeed, while gun bans are associated with drops in firearm suicides, there is no change in total suicides.
With the FBI data, firearm suicides make up about 40% of all firearm deaths. So, for example, in 2020, for those under 20, removing suicides would reduce the number of firearm deaths – using the numbers from the CDC – from 4,253 to 2,960, and – using the FBI murder rate data – from 3,405 to 2,112.
Banning guns might reduce firearm suicides and cases of self-defense, but it won’t reduce firearm murders. Indeed, a ban on guns, even a handgun ban like the ones we’ve seen in Washington and Chicago, inevitably makes things much worse. After every gun ban, murder rates have gone up.
One would think that just once, out of simple randomness, murder rates would have gone down or remained the same after a ban. But whenever crime data are available from both before and after a ban, we can see that murder rates have gone up (often by huge amounts).
Gun control advocates will tell you that Washington and Chicago weren’t fair tests. They will point out that criminals could still get guns in Virginia or Maryland, or in Illinois or Indiana. While that might explain why murder rates didn’t fall as promised, it doesn’t explain why murder and violent crime rates went up.
Even island nations have fared no better. After the UK banned handguns in January 1997, its homicide rate rose by 50% over the following eight years. The rate returned to earlier levels only after a 14% increase in the number of police.
Even more dramatic post-ban surges occurred in Jamaica and Ireland, with six or sevenfold increases in homicide rates.
Democrats can’t accept their responsibility for increased violent crime in 2020 and 2021. They want to blame guns, and there’s no better way to do so than to keep claiming that guns are the number one killer of “children.”
John R. Lott Jr. is a contributor to RealClearInvestigations, focusing on voting and gun rights. His articles have appeared in publications such as the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, New York Post, USA Today, and Chicago Tribune. Lott is an economist who has held research and/or teaching positions at the University of Chicago, Yale University, Stanford, UCLA, Wharton, and Rice.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 21:00 - The Achilles' Heel Of The JFK Assassination
The Achilles’ Heel Of The JFK Assassination
Authored by Jacob Hornberger via The Future of Freedom Foundation,
The autopsy that the U.S. national-security establishment conducted on President Kennedy’s body has always been the Achilles heel of the assassination. That’s because the autopsy was fraudulent. But because the military “classified” the autopsy, forcing enlisted personnel to sign secrecy oaths and threatening them with court martial or criminal prosecution if they ever revealed what they saw or did, the military was able to cover up much, but certainly not all, of its autopsy fraud for decades. That cover-up came to a screeching halt during the 1990s during the term of the Assassination Records Review Board.
When I began delving into the JFK assassination many years ago, I naturally read lots of books. Gradually, I became convinced that the assassination was a highly sophisticated regime-change operation orchestrated and carried out by the U.S. national-security establishment. I became convinced that it was no different in principle from other regime-change operations, especially ones that involved state-sponsored assassinations based on “national security,” such as those operations that targeted Iranian leader Mohammad Mossadegh, Congo leader Patrice Lumumba, Chilean Gen. Rene Schneider, Cuban leader Fidel Castro, and Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz.
But I was trained as a lawyer. My professional career began as a trial attorney. I practiced law for 12 years. I tried both civil and criminal cases in both state and federal courts. These consisted of both jury and non-jury trials.
While I became convinced that the Kennedy assassination was, in fact, a regime-change operation, I also believed that I could never walk into a courtroom and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof required in a criminal case. I didn’t think that any of the assassination researchers had provided sufficient evidence to meet that burden. After many years of studying the assassination, I still believe that to this day.
To be sure, there are lots of suspicious aspects to the assassination, such as the so-called magic-bullet theory. But for me, all those suspicious aspects, while convincing me of criminal culpability, were still not enough to convict beyond a reasonable doubt.
Thus, in my opinion, those who cry “Conspiracy theory!” when one focuses on what happened in Dealey Plaza are essentially saying, “You don’t have enough evidence to convict the national-security establishment of this offense beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Not so, however, with the autopsy. Once I came to the realization that the military establishment had conducted a fraudulent autopsy, it was “game over” and “case closed” for the national-security establishment.
The fraudulent autopsy is the “back door” that establishes beyond a reasonable doubt criminal culpability of the national-security establishment in the Kennedy assassination.
The reason for this is that there is no innocent explanation for a fraudulent autopsy. None! No one has ever come up with one and no one ever will. A fraudulent autopsy necessarily equates to cover-up. And the only entity that the national-security establishment would be covering up for would be itself, especially since the scheme for the fraudulent autopsy was launched at Parkland Hospital at the moment that Kennedy was declared dead. That was when a team of Secret Service agents, brandishing guns and stating that they were operating under orders, knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately violated Texas state law by prohibiting the Dallas County medical examiner, Dr. Earl Rose, from conducting an autopsy on the president’s body.
That Secret Service team forced its way out of Parkland and took the president’s body to Dallas’ Love Field, where the new president, Lyndon Johnson, was waiting for it. Johnson transported the body to Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, where it was delivered into the hands of the military.
Keep in mind something important: This was a murder case under Texas law. No federal agency, including the Pentagon, the CIA, the Secret Service, the FBI, or the Justice Department, had jurisdiction over this crime. Nonetheless, the military, which by this time had became a dominant force in American life, took control over the autopsy.
The military’s autopsy fraud is detailed in my two books The Kennedy Autopsy and An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story.
The following are three examples of the autopsy fraud:
1. The ARRB discovered the existence of a Navy petty officer named Saundra Spencer, who worked in the Navy’s photographic lab in Washington, D.C. She worked closely with the White House in the development of social photography. Spencer was the epitome of professionalism, competence, and integrity. Jeremy Gunn, the general counsel for the ARRB, stated that of all the witnesses who came before the ARRB, Spencer was the most credible of them all. No one, either in or out of the military, ever questioned her professionalism, competence, and integrity.
Spencer told the ARRB a remarkable story. She said that on the weekend of the assassination, she was asked to develop the photographs of Kennedy’s autopsy. She was told that the operation was “classified.” She had kept her secret for more than 30 years, until the ARRB released her from her vow of secrecy.
When the ARRB showed Spencer the official autopsy photograph showing the back of JFK’s head to be intact, she stated that that was not the autopsy photograph that she developed. The photograph she developed showed a massive hole in the back of JFK’s head. That, of course, would imply a frontal shot, which was contrary to the official narrative.
Spencer’s sworn testimony matched the statements of the treating physicians and several other witnesses at Parkland Hospital as well as witnesses at the Bethesda morgue, where the autopsy was carried out. I quote many of these witnesses in my book An Encounter with Evil. They stated that Kennedy had a massive, exit-sized wound in the back of his head. For example, Dr. Robert McClelland, one of the treating physicians stated, “I said, well, there is a wound in the back of his head here in the right side that’s at least five inches in diameter — a circular wound far in the back of his head.” Another example: Parkland Hospital physician Dr. Charles Carrico: “There was a large — quite a large — defect about here on his skull [pointing to the back of his head].”
If Spencer, Dr. McClelland, Carrico, and all the other witnesses were telling the truth — and I’m convinced they were — then there is only one inescapable conclusion that can be drawn — that the military’s official photograph showing the back on President Kennedy’s head to be intact was fraudulent.
2. The ARRB also discovered the existence of a man named Roger Boyajian, who, like Spencer, told the ARRB a remarkable story. He said that on the day of the assassination, he was a Marine Sergeant serving at the Bethesda National Naval Medical Center. He was ordered to go to the Bethesda morgue to provide security.
Boyajian, who, like Spencer, had been sworn to secrecy, told the ARRB that the president’s body was brought into the morgue at 6:35 p.m. That presented a problem because the undisputed official narrative is that the president’s body was brought into the morgue at 8 p.m., almost an hour-and-a-half later, in the heavy, ornate casket into which it had been placed at Parkland Hospital.
Boyajian had reported this early introduction of the president’s body in an “after-action report” that he delivered to his superiors the week following the assassination. That military never turned over that report to the ARRB, as it was required to do under the law. But Sergeant Boyajian had kept a copy, which he delivered to the ARRB.
At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the military had to be up to no good in sneaking the president’s body into the Bethesda morgue and then, an hour-and-a-half later, reintroducing the entry of the body into the morgue.
Was there corroboration for Boyajian’s extraordinary claim? Actually there was, and I detail it in The Kennedy Autopsy and An Encounter with Evil. Several Navy enlisted men stated that they carried the president’s body into the morgue in a light “shipping casket” rather than the heavy ornate casket into which the president’s body was placed in Dallas. Moreover, Lt. Col. Pierre Finck stated two times, including once under oath, that he was telephoned by Commander James Humes, the lead pathologist in the autopsy, at 8 p.m. inviting Finck to come to the morgue to assist with the autopsy. During that conversation, Humes told Finck that they already had x-rays of the president’s head. Since the undisputed official entry time of the president’s body was at 8 p.m., the only way that they could already have x-rays of the president’ head was if they were taking them after they sneaked the body into the morgue at 6:35 p.m.
3. The ARRB also discovered that there were two separate brain examinations in the Kennedy autopsy, one of which could not possibly have been the brain belonging to the president. Again, the details are set forth in my books The Kennedy Autopsy and An Encounter with Evil. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, when the military is falsely claiming that there was only one brain exam and when the military is falsely representing a brain to be that of President Kennedy, it would be difficult to find a better example of autopsy fraud than that.
As I stated above and as I have repeatedly emphasized over the years, there is no innocent explanation for a fraudulent autopsy. Once one concludes that the autopsy was fraudulent, he has automatically concluded that the assassination was orchestrated and carried out by the national-security establishment. There is no other reasonable conclusion that can be drawn.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 20:40 - House Approves Ban On Transgender Procedures In Military, Repeals Abortion Travel Policy
House Approves Ban On Transgender Procedures In Military, Repeals Abortion Travel Policy
Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
House conservatives are bundling the nation’s defense budget with “culture war” amendments they say are needed to reverse the Biden administration’s “woke” politicization of the military through “radical race theories” instituted in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
The U.S. Capitol in Washington on July 6, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times) In the span of 10 hours on July 13, the Republican-led House repealed the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) abortion travel policy, prohibited DOD health care programs from providing gender transition procedures, and introduced a host of other proposed add-ons targeting DEI programs—including several that failed—to a must-pass defense budget normally approved in bipartisan accord.
Democrats resisted fiercely, contending the nation’s defense budget is being held hostage by a relatively small cadre—the 40-member House Freedom Caucus—manipulating its pivot in sustaining the GOP’s narrow 10-seat chamber majority to impose an “extreme right-wing agenda” onto the Pentagon and, eventually, the nation.
That was the nub of repeated—and often heated—point-counterpoint exchanges during daylong deliberations on the House floor as the proposed $886.3 Fiscal Year 2024 defense budget, referred to as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), was introduced for adoption with 370 proposed amendments.
80 Hot-Button Amendments
Both House and Senate armed forces adopted their versions of the proposed NDAA last month. The House did so in a 58–1 vote and the Senate 24–1.
The annual defense budget is geared to be implemented when the new fiscal year begins on Oct. 1. The House is expected to formally adopt the NDAA by July 14 when it resumes deliberations at 10:30 a.m. after adjourning around 11:30 p.m. on July 13.
Both chambers’ defense spending plans top out at the $886.3 billion requested in March by the Biden administration, but the Senate version of the NDAA—which will be introduced on the Democrat-led chamber floor next week—does not include the amendments in the House version targeting “woke” policies.
Representatives in early afternoon began sorting through 80 proposed NDAA amendments dispatched to the floor by the House Rules Committee that morning. The day before, the panel had forwarded 290 proposed add-ons “en blanc,” meaning many are packaged for composite votes because they are not contentious.
Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) listens during a hearing with the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on Capitol Hill in Washington on July 11, 2023. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) DOD Abortion Travel Policy ‘Illegal’
Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) sought to repeal a DOD policy that reimburses expenses for service members who travel to obtain an abortion from a state where the procedure is restricted to a state where it is permitted. It was among the contentious add-ons adopted in a near-total partisan vote, 221–213.
Mr. Jackson maintained the policy was installed by the Biden administration in October 2022 “to sidestep” the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 Roe v. Wade repeal to “not only expand abortion access but also leave American taxpayers on the hook to subsidize abortion services.”
He said the policy is in direct violation of Section 1093 of U.S. Code Title 10 “which restricts funds made available to the DOD from being used for abortions.”
Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.) called the amendment “a dangerous health care travel ban” for women serving in the military, noting 46 percent are now based in states where abortion is restricted or banned.
A former Navy officer, Ms. Sherrill asked: “How am I supposed to recommend to young girls in my district that they should attend a service academy like I did when we know this amendment would mean they would be signing away their right to basic health care? This makes our service women pawns in [conservative Republicans’] extreme agenda and is a steppingstone to larger bans, restrictions, and wholesale disregard for women’s health care in America.”
Reps. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.)—in a theme Democrats would repeat all day and night—also argued the proposed amendment is “part and parcel” of a GOP plan to implement a federal abortion ban.
House Armed Services Committee Chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) said the amendment simply repeals an illegal policy.
“DOD’s abortion policy is a flagrant disregard to our moral principles. This is part of the Biden administration’s politicization of the military. It is completely unnecessary. It is clearly unlawful,” Mr. Rogers said.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), an Air Force veteran, called Democrats’ contention that repealing the policy is “somehow attacking women in the service” a “lie.”
“To say you would be somehow hurting someone’s rights in the military because you stand with life is pretty bizarre to me,” she said.
Read more here…
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 20:20 - Appeals Court Pauses Ban On Biden Admin's Censorship Of Social Media Companies
Appeals Court Pauses Ban On Biden Admin’s Censorship Of Social Media Companies
Good news: the senile occupant of the White House who occasionally moonlights as a president, will be allowed to order social media cos to censor any news about his crack-addicted son’s laptop again.
That clear violation of the constitution is what a federal appeals court ruled today when it temporarily halted an order that would bar Biden admin officials from communicating with major social media companies while it considers the government’s request for a longer-term pause.
Friday’s order came from a three-judge panel assigned to handle the government’s emergency request: Judge Carl Stewart, appointed by Bill Clinton; Judge James Graves, appointed by Barack Obama; and Judge Andy Oldham, appointed by Donald Trump. It didn’t note any dissents.
The Justice Department is arguing that it should not be forced to comply with the nationwide injunction while it pursues a full appeal in the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court said on Friday that it will put the ban on hold, also known as an administrative stay, while the government presses its case before the New Orleans-based circuit judges.
The appeal will be placed on an expedited schedule while a panel of judges assigned to the case will decide on the government’s request to keep the nationwide injunction on hold until the case is finished, according to Friday’s order. The court didn’t specify a schedule for those next steps.
As Bloomberg notes, if the 5th Circuit ultimately denies the Biden administration’s request for a pause, the Justice Department has signaled it will likely consider immediately petitioning the US Supreme Court to intervene, at which point Biden’s clear cut censorship of online content will become a critical issue.
If the ban is allowed to move forward, deep state government agencies such as the FBI as well as the Department of Health and Human Services will be barred from contacting social media companies for “the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”
The plaintiffs – the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri and individual users who say they faced repercussion for their online speech – have accused Biden administration officials of unconstitutionally coercing social media companies to take down unfavorable information about Covid-19.
Recent revelations courtesy of the Twitter files demonstrated that over the past three years – a period starting around the time 53 disgraced spies lied on the record to prevent Hunter Biden’s notebook from trending on twitter – saw the US government transform into regime where any inconvenient truths or online criticism prompted immediate censorship and retaliation by weaponized government agencies such as the FBI and DOJ, a response formerly reserved for banana republices and fascist dictatorships.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 20:00 - Why Are Republicans Greenhorns At Rounding Up Them Absentee Votes?
Why Are Republicans Greenhorns At Rounding Up Them Absentee Votes?
Authored by Steve Miller via RealClear Wire,
“I can’t begin to understand what ballot harvesting is,” Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the former Republican House Speaker, said in an interview in the wake of a 2018 political upset in Orange County, California. Democrats had swept the congressional seats in one of California’s few Republican strongholds, largely due to a well-executed strategy of harvesting, or the collection and submission of ballots by someone other than the voter.
Three election cycles later, Republicans are still on the backfoot when it comes to the nation’s recent embrace of absentee, mail, and early voting. But what critics call “election month” looks likely to endure indefinitely after taking hold in pandemic-prompted voting procedures widely adopted in 2020, ostensibly as a health precaution to promote social distancing.
After President Trump’s defeat in 2020, Republican-led legislatures worked to turn back the emergency voting measures in many states, to mixed success, and – after an expected GOP wave fizzled in 2022 – the Republican Party has turned away from Trump’s vilification of absentee voting to essentially say, “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.”
“We don’t want to wait till the fourth quarter to start scoring touchdowns when you have four quarters to put points on the board,” Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said last month in promoting the new strategy. “We have to change the culture among Republican voters.”
But a range of factors suggest that Republicans are a long way from implementing that change. This impression emerges from interviews with election veterans from both parties in a number of pivotal states; disclosures about the left’s prodigious fundraising for private assistance to local election offices; and Democrats’ reinvigorated focus on community organizing in dense urban areas. The latter is a tradition reaching back more than a century but exploited in recent cycles to overwhelm the GOP’s onetime edge in collecting absentee ballots from the elderly and members of the armed forces.
“The left is about 20 years ahead on getting these votes,” said Michael Bars, executive director of the conservative Election Transparency Initiative. “You can say it’s an absentee, get-out-the-vote model, an absentee ballot chase or ballot harvesting. But they’re ahead.”
And catching up isn’t easy, an RNC official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity in giving a grim assessment of a ground game still unfamiliar to the GOP.
“Strangers going door-to-door met with a ton of resistance from Republican voters,” the official said. He was referring to a strategy shift in 2016 when “the RNC changed its field structure to resemble the work that the Obama campaign did in 2008 and 2012 by focusing on training people to be organizers, to put together teams that were part of the community.” It turned out that, with Republicans tending to live in suburban developments, soliciting was frowned upon, and even prohibited, while the Democrats were, as ever, more welcome in urban settings, visiting apartment buildings, public libraries, and residential centers.
With even McDaniel still saying she doesn’t like absentee voting, not every Republican official is embracing the message.
“We promote in-person voting and we promote a message around in-person voting,” said Marci McCarthy, chairman of the DeKalb County (Georgia) Republican Party, in a jurisdiction that contains part of Atlanta and where President Biden won 83% of the vote in 2020. Nationally, 65% of the roughly 65 million absentee and mail-in voters said they voted for Biden in 2020.
The Golden State Lesson
After enacting new voting rules in 2016 that allowed harvesting, California Democrats in the 2018 midterms dispatched volunteers and paid staffers to neighborhoods rich in registered Democrats who had received an absentee ballot but had not returned it. Some of the agents collected up to 200 ballots at a time and turned them in for counting.
Results were delayed as the ballots trickled in – a harbinger of today’s prolonged ballot counts as more states rely on mail voting. But the result was eventually clear: a GOP drubbing in Orange County.
“We got our asses handed to us,” said Jessica Millan Patterson, chair of California’s Republican Party, whose 2019 election to office was in part based on her vow to embrace harvesting for the party and avenge the Orange County defeat. “Democrats in California have normalized what would be considered voter fraud in the rest of the country. If I had my way, harvesting would be illegal, but we have to win more elections if we want to change laws.”
After taking over the party’s ground game, she coordinated each county party’s street teams, assembling paid staffers and volunteers to knock on doors of registered Republicans or those who have not registered but may be open to voting.
By 2020, local Republicans were holding “ballot parties” as part of campaign events, where people could hand over their ballots, specified in social media invitations as a “secure location, “ to be delivered to the election office.
The Opposition
Progressives defended their advantage. They followed their California triumph in 2018 with widespread ballot collection efforts in 2020’s presidential election and the 2022 midterms, where they largely thumped Republicans nationally, including holding the Senate despite widespread predictions that Republicans would sweep both houses of Congress.
Conservative critics contend that illegal harvesting was behind Democrat wins in Georgia and Arizona in 2020, although investigations failed to find illicit activity.
What they did find, though, was a well-oiled progressive machine with roots in community organizing, working with like-minded state administrations on ballot design, drop-box placement, and deploying lobbyists to push progressive voting strategies.
These are funded in part by $1 billion from nonprofits and individuals, the most influential of which is the Center for Technology and Civic Life, led by Tiana Epps-Johnson, a former fellow at the Obama Foundation who is joined at the center by staffers who learned their politics in progressive advocacy groups.
The voting strategy network is complemented by an impressive cadre of social media influencers. What was termed a “block by block street fight” by former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe in a 2020 book became a crusade for urban votes. Private funding distributed by the CTCL helped get-out-the-vote efforts in those areas by disproportionately allocating per-vote money to Democratic areas.
Ballot collectors go door-to-door in their targeted areas, working from a daily roadmap of “match backs,” or a list of voters who have received a mail ballot but have not yet cast it.
“In Washington, Republicans start each election at zero and Democrats at 90,” said Don Skillman, co-founder of Voter Science, a voter data group based in Bellevue, Washington. “Democrats know who donors and voters are and where they are. They have an eco-system with this non-profit outreach and know who they are talking to.”
Washington’s state Republican party did not respond to an interview request.
The New Order
The evolving hybrid voting procedures vary widely from state to state and, depending on the ways they came about, may or may not reflect the state autonomy envisioned in the U.S. Constitution’s stipulation that “the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”
Ballot harvesting is explicitly illegal in Mississippi, while 11 other states have no law addressing the practice. Some states permit designated people, such as a relative or housemate, to turn in ballots, while 19 states allow a broader form of collection where voters can choose the person they want to act as their agent.
Republican lawmakers around the country have enacted numerous state and local laws since the pandemic-panicked 2020 national election in efforts to curb mail ballots and undo rules that allowed unpoliced mail ballot drop boxes, mass mailing of ballots and applications, and private grants to elections offices that helped progressives get out the vote.
Recent GOP forays into ballot collection include public embarrassments, such as 2018’s debacle in North Carolina, where Republican U.S. house candidate Mark Harris enlisted a Democratic operative with ballot harvesting skills. The caper ended up in voter fraud convictions against the harvester and the election results being tossed out.
Last year, a Republican ward leader in Philadelphia was ousted after it was alleged his campaign went door-to-door signing up mail-in voters, then having their ballots sent to the campaign headquarters.
Colorado and Wisconsin
Other states are just starting to embrace the collection strategy. In Colorado, where lawmakers last year sought to return the all-mail voting state to traditional, voting day elections, Republicans are trying to incorporate ballot collection into their ground game.
“The 2024 election will be our first foray into ballot harvesting,” Colorado GOP party chairman Dave Williams told RealClearInvestigations. Williams is one of several state GOP leaders to confirm that voting mechanisms Republican voters were told just four years ago would ruin the integrity of voting will be embraced by conservative parties and candidates in 2024.
“It’s going to come down to getting enough money to ensure we can implement a [ballot collection] operation,” he said, adding that it will take “thousands” of volunteers to match the Democrats.
In Wisconsin, the Republican Party now sends mail ballot applications to its base voters as soon as early voting begins, encouraging them to cast their ballots from home. Harvesting in Wisconsin has been part of a legal back-and-forth and the courts will eventually determine its legality in the state, which has moved from swing state to reliably Democratic since 2018.
“If it is permitted, we will incorporate that into our ground game,” said Wisconsin state Republican Party executive director Mark Jefferson. “As much as we may not like the expansion of absentee and early voting, we have to use it.”
In a test for 2024, Jefferson said, the party used harvesting in the 2022 state Supreme Court race.
“We turned out our base effectively,” he said. But the party lost both the race and its majority on the court in a progressive voter backlash to the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, which had asserted a constitutional right to abortion.
“Over the course of several cycles, I think we can get there,” Jefferson said, optimistic that the party can use collection and other progressive tactics to win elections. “In the meantime, I think we have to push it, but we also need to look for any opportunity to ensure that ballot integrity is still protected.”
The Costly ‘Match Back’ Game
A well-funded harvesting operation has the money to obtain updated “match back” files almost daily during a voting period. These updated voter lists are available to anyone, although a connection or relationship with the election administration office helps pry them loose. The money to pay for them comes from parties and candidates, or in some cases the activist nonprofits deploying ballot collectors.
“Some groups can afford to buy that file every day, especially in the urban areas,” said Michael Der Manouel Jr., former vice chairman of the California Republican Party. “And they can do it from election administrators who care about the outcome of the election, and most of them are Democrats.”
Obtaining the files is eased by a good relationship with the local election administrator, he added. In Wisconsin in 2020, the quest by progressive agents to retrieve the voter file daily was chronicled in a report generated during the state’s legislative inquiry into the November election.
Progressive groups have gained influence over election administrations through private grants, conferences and the designing of election materials including ballot applications and election department websites, all with an emphasis on voter recruitment and repeating Democratic talking points, such as purported “misinformation” and alleged “threats to democracy.”
Speakers at the conferences include representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union and representatives from the progressive group Democracy Now.
Most recently, four progressive nonprofit foundations have pledged to distribute $125 million in grants as The Election Trust Initiative, a subsidiary of the Pew Charitable Trusts, to provide private funding to elections offices over the next five years.
Their mission is to “strengthen the nonpartisan evidence, organizations, and systems that help local and state officials operate secure, transparent, accurate and convenient elections,” according to a press release.
The Biden Administration Wades In
The federal government is bolstering its newly created Election Community Liaison office, an arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, offering a salary of up to $183,000 for hires to, in part, pursue “election offenses.”
A member of President Biden’s cabinet also has connections to the move to change voting. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm in 2020 was on the board of the National Vote at Home Institute, a progressive nonprofit that has successfully pressured states through lobbying and funding to adopt more permissive mail voting. The group has also privately funded public elections departments through its grant program. Her one year on the board coincided with an increase in the institute’s revenue from $1.1 million in 2019 to $8 million during Granholm’s tenure.
Several other Biden administration appointees worked for progressive elections operations including Michelle Obama’s When We All Vote and the Voter Registration Project.
These groups have been part of a push toward mail voting and looser rules regarding ballot collection, combating Republican efforts to limit or regulate those practices.
“Republicans used to own absentee voting,” said Paul Bentz, a political consultant in Arizona, referring to traditional GOP efforts to collect the ballots of the elderly and military service members. “But they’ve given up that advantage.”
Critics of the GOP’s newfound strategy of ballot collection contend that it may be too late, at least to win in 2024.
“The nature of the left is to never stop fighting and usually their fight is smart,” said Scott Walter, president of the conservative Capital Research Center, which studies the influence of nonprofits on politics. “They have multiple think tanks dedicated to nothing but winning elections. And there are no Republican counterparts.”
While Republicans will engage in the same practices as their foes, “harvesting for Republicans won’t work,” said Der Manouel, the former vice chair of the California GOP.
“Republican voters don’t need to have their vote harvested. The only reason it works for Democrats is because they could never turn out their voters. What’s going to happen is Republicans are going to start doing this and find that they don’t have nearly enough ballots to harvest to make a difference.”
Contact Steve Miller at smiller@realclearinvestigations.com
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 19:40 - "Hunter Is Checking": Ukrainian Oligarch Accused Of Bribin' Bidens Got Help With Passport
“Hunter Is Checking”: Ukrainian Oligarch Accused Of Bribin’ Bidens Got Help With Passport
Joe and Hunter Biden golf with Hunter’s business partner Devon Archer (far left) and unidentified man (August 2014) Hunter Biden and pals attempted to help Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky obtain a US Visa right after then-VP Joe Biden’s son became a board member for the Ukrainian energy firm, the Daily Caller reports, citing emails.
The emails in Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop archive show a coordinated attempt to obtain a visa for Zlochevsky while he was being investigated by Ukrainian authorities for corruption.
Biden and some of his associates were potentially “engaging in registrable lobbying activity,” and one email indicates that Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations could have been occurring outside of the exchanges, a FARA expert who reviewed the emails told the Caller.
Of note, Hunter worked with former Burisma board member Devon Archer, as well as Rosemont Seneca adviser Eric Schwerin, former Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP Partner Heather King and other business associates, to help Zlochevsky reapply for his visa after the State Department revoked it in 2014.
According to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), Zlochevsky is the “foreign national” who made 17 secret phone recordings of the Bidens as an insurance policy, and is involved in an alleged bribery scheme with the Biden family.
Greene was one of several House Oversight Committee members who viewed a redacted version of an FBI FD-1023 form, in which an informant is said to have detailed the $10 million scheme. According to Greene, FBI Director Christopher Wray redacted the foreign national’s name, but that it’s very clearly Zlochevsky, as “within the same sentence, it says ‘him/Burisma.’
“If you’re anyone who is familiar with the whole Burisma story and the information on the laptop, it’s easy to make the connection of who it is. It’s like a no-brainer … No one has refuted that it’s not him,” said Greene.
Trying to get Burisma boss into the US
In May of 2014, one month after Hunter was hired to sit on Burisma’s board for some $80,000 per month, Hunter and his partners interfaced with a Zlochevsky intermediary, Burisma board member Vadim Pozharskyi about the Zlochevsky’s visa application, according to the emails.
On May 7, 2014, Pozharskyi emailed Archer to ask about “Nikolay’s visa issue” as a follow-up to “previous communications” between them. According to the report, “Pozharskyi frequently used the “Nikolay” moniker to refer to Mykola Zlochevsky in correspondence with Hunter Biden and his associates.”
In late May of 2014, King, the former Boies Schiller partner, emailed Pozharskyi an update on Zlochevsky’s visa status from the Ukrainian embassy, saying that the embassy couldn’t reveal to a 3rd party why the visa had been revoked, but that “if Nikolai contacts them directly, they may provide him with further explanation.”
Pozharskyi told King in early June that Zlochevsky was “prepared to apply to US embassy for US visa” and said he needed a reason to travel to the United States. Pozharskyi asked King’s company to send Zlochevsky an invitation to be “signed by one of companies lawyer/partner, namely H. Biden,” emails show. -Daily Caller
“Two reasons for that, firstly having Hunters [sic] name on invitation will invite embassy [sic] to consider carefully that application. Secondly If [sic] he is denied in obtaining visa, then your company, that actualy [sic] invited Nikolay could work with state department on this,” wrote Pozharskyi in response.
Read the rest here…
Summing things up nicely is Charlie Kirk, who said in a tweet:
House Oversight member, Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, has confirmed that the “unnamed” foreign national who allegedly bribed Joe and Hunter Biden with $10 million, was none other than Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky.
The now infamous FBI FD-1023 form provide by Wray had redacted Zlochevsky’s name but detailed a $10 million bribe to the Bidens with someone connected to Burisma.
Putting it all together…
We know that Zlochesvsky was already paying Hunter an exorbitant sum, $83,000/mo, to sit on the board of his Ukrainian energy company.
We know Zlochevsky was facing a corruption investigation in Ukraine by prosecutor Viktor Shokin.
We know then-Vice President Joe Biden accused Shokin of corruption.
We know that then-VP Biden successfully threatened to pull a $1 billion US loan guarantee as leverage to push for Shokin’s removal.
We know Shokin was replaced by Yuriy Lutsenko, who cleared Zlochevsky and Burisma of criminal charges in 2019.
We know that Zlochevsky and his associates were eventually charged in 2020 for attempting $6 million in bribes to halt the ongoing investigation (the guy has a history of bribes).
And we know that Zlochevsky was a rich, corrupt foreign oligarch who needed the type of help only connected, corrupt DC cronyism could deliver.
And it all points to one conclusion: Joe and James and Hunter were willing to sell out American interests to keep the Ukrainian money flowing.
And now hundreds of billions of your taxpayer money is flowing back to Ukraine.
Get it, now?
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 19:25 - Watch: Mike Pence Squirms As Carlson Dismantles Neocon Talking Points On Ukraine
Watch: Mike Pence Squirms As Carlson Dismantles Neocon Talking Points On Ukraine
Tucker Carlson utterly dismantled the necon talking points of Trump’s former Vice President Mike Pence, during an on-stage interview before a large audience of the FAMiLY Leadership Summit in Iowa on Friday.
Rather than respond to Carlson’s criticisms about why tens of billions of taxpayer dollars are being spent on far-away Ukraine (which Carlson note is a country “most people can’t find on a map”) rather than focusing on protecting and restoring American cities in decline, a visibly irritated Pence instead vaguely said he could “do both”. Watch Pence squirm below, as the crowd loudly cheered Carlson’s question…
Tucker Carlson asks Pence why he is more concerned with supplying Ukraine with tanks than the wellbeing of American cities…
Pence’s response? “American cities aren’t my concern.” pic.twitter.com/8uRE1Bnz8B
— Jackson Hinkle 🇺🇸 (@jacksonhinklle) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Pence certainly didn’t bring the crown over to his side, which didn’t so much as clap during his pat, scripted answer.
He also didn’t win any friends in bluntly stating (revealingly) that “American cities aren’t my concern.” Reporters with The National Review even noticed audible boos during Pence’s attempt at a response…
“I believe that it is in the interests of the United States of America to continue to give the Ukrainian military the resources they need to repel the Russian invasion and restore their sovereignty,” Pence said as several members of the crowd booed.
Pence then tried to turn it around on Tucker, taking a swipe a the former Fox host:
“Anybody that says that we can’t be the leader of the free world and solve our problems at home has a pretty small view of the greatest nation on earth. We can do both,” Pence said. “And as president of the United States we will secure our border we will support our military we will revive our economy and stand by our values and we will also lead the world for freedom under my administration.”
Carlson was undeterred in demolishing what has come to be the obvious establishment stance (one of escalation in Ukraine), whether on the Republican or Democrat side.
Heated Exchange Between Tucker Carlson And Mike Pence On Religious Liberty In Ukraine
Tucker: “I would think that you would have greater concern for religious liberty in Ukraine, and I’m surprised by your answer.”
Pence: “I told you I raised the issue of religious liberty.”… pic.twitter.com/MIQckt2jm4
— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
He took Pence to task on the Zelensky government’s crackdown on religious freedom in the wake of monks and priests being booted from their monasteries and churches for maintaining communion with the Russian Orthodox Church based in Moscow.
Apart from Ukraine, there were plenty of other moments where Carlson went gloves off, at one point laughing with scorn at the former vice president’s reluctance to deal with concerns of voter fraud.
JUST IN: Tucker Carlson laughs in Mike Pence’s face for being reluctant to agree that the U.S. should get rid of electronic voting machines.
Pence: “We do everything in our power to restore public confidence in the one person one vote principle.”
Tucker: “Why not just get rid… pic.twitter.com/LbpvRNTfYM
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Watch: Below is the full clip from the back-and-forth on Ukraine…
Absolutely incredible. Here is the entire Ukraine discussion between @TuckerCarlson and Mike Pence.
Tucker asks Pence about religious persecution in Ukraine, and he completely denies it. Tucker follows up, and Pence gets flustered. Pence then tells the ridiculous lie that Putin… pic.twitter.com/KA5FjqSKUM
— Liam McCollum (@MLiamMcCollum) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Kim Dotcom observed the following of the interview, specifically related to the moment Pence said coldly “That’s not my concern” when Carlson confronted him on most Americans wanting to solve serious problems at home first…
“Pence just committed political suicide.”
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 19:20 - Heat Is Radiating From A Huge Mass Under The Moon
Heat Is Radiating From A Huge Mass Under The Moon
Authored by Elijah Cohen via TheMindUnleashed.com,
In an unprecedented discovery, scientists have unearthed a colossal granite mass that has been gradually emitting heat, hidden beneath a lunar crater. This discovery is not a figment of science fiction, but a testament to the Moon’s volcanic past. While the Moon’s history of lava fields and eruptions is well-documented, the discovery of a more Earth-like volcano was a first, found beneath the Compton and Belkovich craters on the Moon’s far side.
Granite, a rock type rarely found outside of Earth, has sparked excitement among the scientific community. On Earth, granite forms deep beneath the surface, typically under a volcano, where magma cools down and crystallizes. The formation of granite is significantly aided by the presence of water and plate tectonics.
The research team utilized data from both Chinese and American lunar orbiters to uncover this heat-emitting mass beneath the lunar surface, revealing a volcanic process previously unseen on the Moon. “We used an instrument that observes microwave wavelengths, longer than infrared, sent to the Moon on both the Chinese Chang’E 1 and 2 orbiters. We found that one of these suspected volcanoes, known as Compton-Belkovich, was absolutely glowing at microwave wavelengths,” explained co-lead researcher Dr. Matt Siegler, of the Planetary Science Institute.
The data revealed a 20-kilometer-wide silicon-rich surface feature, believed to be the caldera of this ancient volcano.
The temperature in this area is 10°C warmer than its surroundings. However, this heat is not from magma beneath the surface, as the volcano’s last eruption was 3.5 billion years ago. Instead, the heat comes from radioactive elements trapped in the rocks.
“We interpret this heat flux as resulting from a radiogenic-rich granite body below the caldera,” Dr. Siegler said.
“We were a bit puzzled when we found it. Fortunately, my wife, Dr. Rita Economos, is the geochemist in the family, so with her guidance, we were able to piece together the probable geologic cause of the heat anomaly.”
Dr. Economos further explained, “This find is a 50km wide batholith; a batholith is a type of volcanic rock that forms when lava rises into the earth’s crust but does not erupt onto the surface. El Capitan and Half Dome, in Yosemite in California, are examples of similar granite rocks which have risen to the surface.”
The discovery of such a large granite deposit in an unexpected location suggests that there could be other areas of the Moon where granite can be found, and possibly in other parts of the Solar System as well.
The Moon’s volcanic activity is a fascinating topic that has intrigued scientists for decades. The Moon’s volcanic history extends back nearly 3 billion years, much longer than most planets in our solar system. The lunar volcanoes are not like the ones we have on Earth. They do not spew out a significant amount of lava, but instead, they release gases like radon and argon.
The Moon’s volcanic activity is believed to have played a crucial role in shaping its surface. The lunar maria, the dark plains seen on the Moon’s surface, are vast basaltic plains formed by ancient volcanic eruptions. These maria cover about 16% of the lunar surface, mainly on the near-side visible from Earth.
The discovery of the heat-emitting granite mass adds a new dimension to our understanding of the Moon’s volcanic activity. It provides a glimpse into the Moon’s dynamic past and opens up new avenues for exploring lunar geology. This discovery also raises the possibility of finding similar geological features on other celestial bodies, further expanding our knowledge of the universe.
The exploration of lunar volcanism also has implications for future lunar missions. Understanding the Moon’s geology can help in identifying suitable landing sites for spacecraft and potential resources for lunar bases. As we continue to explore the Moon and beyond, each discovery brings us one step closer to unraveling the mysteries of our solar system.
* * *
Like this article? Get the latest from The Mind Unleashed in your inbox. Sign up right here.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 19:00 - Cycling's Global Governing Body To Ban Trans Athletes From Women's Races
Cycling’s Global Governing Body To Ban Trans Athletes From Women’s Races
The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI), the governing body of sports cycling, announced on Friday that transgender female cyclists will not be allowed to compete in international women’s eventsif they have “transitioned after puberty.”
“From now on, female transgender athletes who have transitioned after (male) puberty will be prohibited from participating in women’s events on the UCI International Calendar – in all categories – in the various disciplines,” the statement reads, according to Fox News.
According to a press release published Friday, the UCI decided to adapt the rule during a July 5th meeting with athletes and other experts, including human rights, scientific, and legal experts.
“First of all, the UCI would like to reaffirm that cycling – as a competitive sport, leisure activity or means of transport – is open to everyone, including transgender people, whom we encourage like everyone else to take part in our sport,” UCI President David Lappartient said in the release.
“I would also like to reaffirm that the UCI fully respects and supports the right of individuals to choose the sex that corresponds to their gender identity, whatever sex they were assigned at birth.”
“However,” Lappartient noted – having got the politically-sensitive comment out of the way – The UCI “has a duty to guarantee, above all, equal opportunities for all competitors in cycling competitions.”
“It is this imperative that led the UCI to conclude that, given the current state of scientific knowledge does not guarantee such equality of opportunity between transgender female athletes and cisgender female participants, it was not possible, as a precautionary measure, to authorize the former to race in the female categories,” Lappartient said.
Common sense rules once again…
The UCI’s decision comes just a day after a South Korean man who identifies as a transgender female has competed and won a cycling race to make a point that trans athletes are physically stronger, deeming them “selfish.”
As The Epoch Times reports, Na Hwa-rin, 37, has undertaken gender reassignment surgery and was officially recognized as a woman in Seoul last year, including a reissue of his birth certificate in April. He competed and won a cycling competition at this year’s Gangwon Sports Festival in eastern Gangwon Province in the female category to prove a point, reported The Korea Times.
“I have no unresolved feelings over winning because that’s no longer what I want. My goal was to stir controversy and get my story heard by competing,” Mr. Na told the outlet on June 23.
South Korea’s Na Ahreum sprints to cross the finish line in 38th position during the women’s cycling road race of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games at the Fuji International Speedway in Oyama, Japan, on July 25, 2021. (Michael Steele/AFP via Getty Images) In seeking to prove a point, Mr. Na described feeling “more relieved than triumphant” when he crossed the finish line of the race. He set out to demonstrate that biological men are physically superior when it comes to transgender athletes competing in female categories.
Mr. Na outstrips his female competitors with his physicality, standing at about 5.9 feet tall and weighing roughly 158 lbs, with a skeletal muscle mass of 72 lbs, the outlet reported.
Feeling embarrassed about his win, he told the outlet that he offered the female cyclists who lost to him energy drinks by way of an apology for stealing their glory. Mr. Na, who comes from a Christian family, noted that he chose that competition because it was a provincial event, not a professional race that could harm the career of a professional female athlete.
“I am not honored. I am not proud of myself at all. I believe other transgender athletes would feel the same way,” he said. “They may not want to admit it,” he added, referring to international trans athletes, “but they’re being selfish. There is no honor as an athlete in that.”
Mr. Na’s win drew support from LGBT advocates but sparked debate in South Korea about the fairness of men who identify as women competing against females in sports. His desire for fairness held him back from trying to qualify for the National Sports Festival.
“I don’t want to make an issue to the point where I harm other people,” he said.
Advocating for a ‘3rd Gender’ Sports Category
Mr. Na developed a love for cycling by riding his bike around nine miles to school every day. He later competed professionally as a cyclist, winning competitions in the men’s categories.
“The sport gave me a sense of thrill and accomplishment and the catharsis of overcoming my limitations,” he said.
He now advocates for a “third gender” category in sports competitions, believing that trans athletes should not compete alongside men and women.
“It could be like how we have many weight divisions in some sports,” Mr. Na said. “Under the current binary system, women athletes will be discouraged and their hard work might not be recognized due to the participation of transgender athletes.
“At the same time, trans woman athletes, no matter how hard they worked, will never be truly honored for their wins,” he continued. “Honor is the goal that all athletes aspire to attain, but this is a situation where nobody will be honored. I think that shouldn’t happen.”
Owing to the lack of gender-specific regulations for athlete qualification by both the Gangwon State Sports Council and the Korean Sports and Olympic Committee, Mr. Na was eligible to participate in the provincial competition, The Korea Times reported.
Mr. Na now works as an asparagus farmer in his hometown, Cheorwon, located roughly 43 miles northeast of Seoul, bordering North Korea.
He said that he began to experience symptoms of gender dysphoria at the age of 7. He would later, as a middle school student, be influenced by the country’s first transgender television celebrity to solidify his ideas of who he was and how he wanted to live.
The controversy surrounding transgender athletes led the U.S. House of Representatives in April to pass legislation to prohibit taxpayer-funded institutions from allowing transgender athletes to compete in women’s and girls’ sports in schools. The bill was considered dead-on-arrival in the Senate and was expected to be vetoed by President Joe Biden if it managed to receive final approval from Congress.
The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act sought to modify Title IX by defining sex as determined solely by an individual’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth. The bill bans federal funding recipients from allowing males to participate in women’s athletic programs or activities designated for females, to prevent sex-based discrimination in education.
Supporters of the bill, and similar state-level legislation, frame the issue as protecting the integrity of female sports competition. Opponents frame it as bullying the transgender community.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration has said that it will propose a regulation to largely prohibit bans on transgender sports participation. This came after around 20 states moved to ban transgender athletes from female sports.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 18:40 - In Allegheny County, Progressives Are Now The Establishment
In Allegheny County, Progressives Are Now The Establishment
Authored by Zach Kennedy via RealClear Wire,
A political powerhouse now rivaling Philadelphia as the bedrock of Democratic electoral strength in Pennsylvania, Allegheny County has been consistently trending more progressive. This past May’s primaries in Pennsylvania’s second-largest county added another layer of icing on a cake that’s been baking for nearly a decade: in Allegheny County, progressives are the new establishment.
The seeds of progressive ascendance were planted in 2018’s Democratic primary, when Summer Lee toppled 20-year incumbent state Rep. Paul Costa, the brother of longtime state Senate Democratic leader Jay Costa. It was the first major win for Allegheny County progressives. In that same primary, Sara Innamorato bested ten-year incumbent state Rep. Dom Costa, a former Pittsburgh police chief and another member of the Costa political family. Both Lee and Innamorato were endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America.
The following year, 2019, saw state Rep. Adam Ravenstahl, a four-term incumbent and brother of former Pittsburgh mayor Luke Ravenstahl, fall in the Democratic primary to 32-year-old challenger Emily Kinkead, while 20-year incumbent county councilman at-large John DeFazio lost his primary to Bethany Hallam, who campaigned on fracking bans and reforming the Allegheny County jail.
These progressive victories put the “establishment” on notice. In Pittsburgh, Ed Gainey’s 2021 mayoral primary win over two-term incumbent Bill Peduto solidified the rise of the party’s left flank, which was further bolstered by Lee’s 2022 primary victory to succeed 28-year incumbent U.S. Rep. Mike Doyle. Lee was quickly anointed to “The Squad” in Congress, joining the ranks of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib.
The progressive trend continued in May of this year, when Innamorato defeated longtime county treasurer and darling of the blue-collar trade unions John Weinstein, as well as 15-year incumbent city controller Michael Lamb (uncle of former U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb) for the Democratic nomination for county executive, the most powerful job in Western Pennsylvania. Innamorato cruised to victory on the back of endorsements from progressive politicians and labor groups such as U.S. Bernie Sanders and the SEIU.
The primary also saw public defender Matt Dugan defeat longtime district attorney Stephen Zappala Jr., propelled by nearly seven-figure support from progressive billionaire George Soros. Erica Brusselars defeated two-term city councilman and longtime ward leader Anthony Coghill for the Democratic nomination for county treasurer, scoring endorsements from left-leaning organizations such as the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers and the Young Democrats of Allegheny County.
And last summer saw establishment stalwart and chair of the county Democratic Party, Eileen Kelly, replaced as chair by Sam Hens-Greco, former chair of the powerful 14th Ward, the largest ward in the county and one of the most progressive. Hens-Greco’s running mate and now vice chair of the county Democratic Party, Morgan Overton, was the first black woman to chair the Young Democrats of Allegheny County.
Allegheny County progressives now hold the mayor’s office, the 12th District congressional seat encompassing the city of Pittsburgh, and the power structure of the county Democratic Party – and they are heavily favored to win the county executive and district attorney positions this fall. Taken together, these holdings constitute control over the region’s most influential elected positions.
Since 2018, we have seen a complete paradigm shift in Allegheny County politics, with progressives notching win after win and consistently taking more power from the party’s onetime establishment. After years of political organizing, the progressive wing has turned itself into the new establishment in Allegheny County government and politics.
Time will tell how long the progressive trend continues, but one thing is certain: as they struggle with problems ranging from a declining population to rising crime, homelessness to food insecurity, Allegheny County residents are in desperate need of strong leadership from their elected officials. The new progressive establishment will be expected to deliver results.
Zach Kennedy, a former Democratic operative, is a Pittsburgh native and has worked on high-level judicial, state, and federal campaigns in Pennsylvania.
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 18:20 - Liberals Lose It After Cornel West Tells CNN That NATO Is To Blame For Ukraine Crisis
Liberals Lose It After Cornel West Tells CNN That NATO Is To Blame For Ukraine Crisis
Left-wing activist and academic firebrand Cornel West appeared on CNN prime time Thursday night, and gave show host Kaitlin Collins a dose of reality not typically heard on the network when the issue of the Ukraine war is broached. West recently announced as a Third-party 2024 presidential candidate (seeking the Green Party’s nomination), so during the interview he was pressed on his foreign policy stance.
“If Russia had missiles in Mexico and Canada, the United States government would probably blow them to smithereens because that’s how empires behave. We had the same challenge in Cuba in 1962. So what we end up with is a criminal invasion,” West stated firmly in the interview segment.
Cornel West on CNN says NATO “provoked” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, calls for “concessions of territory” to stop the war, and says the US “bears significant responsibility.” But he adds that he’s not “pro Putin,” so there’s that. pic.twitter.com/SqIEwdiE9j
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
West then lashed out at the ‘establishment Left’ and mainstream Liberals in general…
“And I know that some of my left-wing comrades, ‘Oh it’s an invasion,’ but a criminal invasion provoked by the expansion of NATO, which is an instrument of U.S. global power,” he said. Collins then asked what practical steps he would take to resolve the Russia-Ukraine crisis:
Collins: “Practically speaking, what would you accept in Ukraine? Like what? I mean, Trump claims he could fix it. What would that look like for you?”
West: “Oh, what I would do, I would bring in the Chinese, the Turks, the African rulers. I would sit down with the Ukrainian leaders and say, we must stop this war, stop these war crimes, cluster bombs on a variety of different parties and make sure that we begin a diplomatic process for a just peace.”
He described robust negotiations which would inevitably lead to territorial concessions, to get Russian troops to leave…
“And that just peace is going to have some serious concessions across the board. Russian troops have to leave. There’s going to be debates over the territory. There going to be some kind of concessions over the territory, but stop the killing. Why?” West then answered his rhetorical question: “Because the Ukrainian brothers and sisters are precious and they are bearing so much of the suffering with this proxy war between the American empire and the Russian Federation.”
“So there’s responsibility and blame across the board. But the American empire does bear a significant responsibility here, even though it is not the sole or exclusive responsibility. And it’s in no way a pro-Putin [talking point,” he emphasized.
Perhaps entirely to be expected, the “outrage” and pile-one began as clips of the interview quickly went viral, with Mediaite declaring in a headline that the Ivy League professor was slammed by mainstream voices for being “No Different Than Trump, RFK Jr, Tucker Carlson”. Pundits at Politico and elsewhere naturally rolled out the ‘pro-Putin’ and ‘Kremlin agent’ trope, but without addressing the arguments.
Sounds pretty pro-Putin from where I sit. https://t.co/88zTBIm4CS
— Joshua Zeitz (@JoshuaMZeitz) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
But journalist Glenn Greenwald pointed out that it’s “Absolutely hilarious how angry and confused establishment liberals are than an actual, life-long, committed left-wing scholar would vehemently oppose the CIA/NATO proxy war in Ukraine.”
“They barely exist in the US and are so rarely heard from that liberals can’t comprehend it,” Greenwald added while underscoring that West’s breakdown of the situation is something mainstream media consumers are very rarely exposed to.
Anger and outrage!…
Whose territory!? His? Who the hell is he to offer Ukrainian land and the Ukrainian people on it to an invader because he is so ashamed to be an American that he sides with imperialist Russia massacring civilians in an unprovoked war of choice? https://t.co/7ERHSJdQWv
— Garry Kasparov (@Kasparov63) July 14, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
* * *
Remember when Christiane Amanpour began yelling at Wolf Blitzer about what you are allowed to say or not say concerning Ukraine over CNN airwaves?
Ed Snowden summarizes where things stand…
Remarkable how in every electoral cycle, major newspapers seem to produce the least reportage on the most interesting candidates, like Cornel West and RFK Jr, yet squander miles of ink regurgitating the vapid press releases of even the blandest cookie-cutter corporatists.
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) July 12, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
For another, albeit similarly fiercely independent angle…
Tucker: “All measures are relative. Russia’s bad. Putin’s evil. Got it. I don’t know anyone who’s been killed by Russia. I know people personally who have been killed by Mexico. The government of Mexico allows fentanyl to come over our border. The Mexican government is party to… pic.twitter.com/ghPXwoamDi
— TheBlaze (@theblaze) July 14, 2023
Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/14/2023 – 18:00
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
