Criminal enterprises

Judge Napolitano (at the link below) says The Clinton Foundation is a criminal enterprise.

AGW is a criminal enterprise too. It is fraud and extortion to take billions of dollars from taxpayers and from donors (mail fraud) for years by threatening them with false and misleading information, for example climate models which have not ever been validated against known, real world climate conditions. Once upon a time, the FBI had an organized crime unit that took down criminal enterprises, for example the Mafia. Now the FBI and the DOJ participate in the coverup of organized crime. The Clinton Foundation is just one of many examples. There is ‘Fast and Furious’ gun running and murder. There is Benghazi. There is 9-11. There is the targeting of conservatives by the IRS. This list could go on for pages.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/clinton-foundation-criminal-enterprise-judge-123503263.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

NK, Musk and Rex

I mentioned to a few friends that Trump should deny China its massive exports to the U.S. electronics market if China does not contain its NK ally’s nuclear weapons ambitions.  Trump did much better.  He placed tariffs to protect U.S. rust belt products like steel, which has the same effect on China with regard to getting NK to the nuke negotiating table, and, at the same time, helps U.S. industries and workers that have been decimated by foreign trade.  Genius.

NK’s over-strategic great leader understood immediately.

Elon Musk understood immediately.

Good ole boy Rex Tillerson did not.

And now it appears that President Trump realized he was misled by his intel agencies on Syria’s supposed use of chemical weapons, the red line in the sand crossed by U.S. clandestine services but Syria did not.  Bombing Syria and other countries with more than 20,000 expensive drones helps the U.S. military industrial complex, but will not make America great again.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The climate-industrial complex

In his farewell address to the nation in 1961, President Eisenhower famously warned of a military-industrial complex that might gain unwarranted influence. But in the same speech he also pointed to a wider danger: that ‘public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite’. 

Half a century on, it seems clear that our public policy has been captured by a ‘climate-industrial complex’. In the field of economics, it distorts the truth, closing ranks and ignoring or distort dissent when its failures are brought to light. It justifies the squandering of astronomical sums of money – waste that has already added 20% to the energy costs of households and industry.

If it can be so reckless about the economics of global warming, is it not just possible that it may be exaggerating the dangers of global warming on which the whole case depends?

As Eisenhower spelt out:

…a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity…The

prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project alloca-

tions, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Having studied physics at Cambridge, I entirely accept the science of global warming: double the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the direct effect will raise the average temperature by about 1 ◦C.  But how much that will be amplified or dampened by clouds, water vapour, ice loss and other factors is far less certain. Indeed, the most recent IPCC report was for the first time unable to agree a most likely estimate of the overall effect, but did reduce the lower end of the likely range. Significantly, neither of those points were included in the Summary for Policymakers – presumably because the authors felt it their duty to report only facts that would stiffen policymakers’ resolve to tackle global warming. Most scientists remain scrupulously objective in their own work. But they know it is more than their career is worth to question exaggerated claims others may make of the scale, speed or impact of global warming. To adapt Upton Sinclair: ‘It is difficult to get someone to be critical of something if his salary depends on taking it for granted’. So, alarmist claims go unchallenged while evidence that we could adapt to global warming rather than try to prevent it is played down.

Dieter Helm exposed the fact that billions of pounds of public money have been wasted on renewables schemes, yet the climate-industrial complex has shrugged him off with barely a glance. [Professor Dieter Helm, one of our most respected energy economists, revealed that the government could achieve its target to reduce carbon emissions for a fraction of the £100 billion it has already committed, there was a deafening silence.  It is not as if Dieter Helm is a climate sceptic. Far from it.]  It is hard not to suspect that their flagrant disregard for sound economics may be mirrored in their approach to the science.

About the author: Peter Lilley was formerly the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in the governments of Margaret Thatcher and John Major and also Secretary of State for Social Security. He was one of only three MPs to vote against the passage of the Climate Change Act and is the author of several previous GWPF publications.  The above is excerpted from his full publication, pdf linked here:

 

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/03/HelmReviewS.pdf?utm_source=CCNet+Newsletter&utm_campaign=c9288b0e13-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_03_05&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fe4b2f45ef-c9288b0e13-36418213

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The deadly difference

Which organization buys more politicians/donates more money to politicians and how much more money, NRA or Planned Parenthood? Which organization caused the deaths of more children, and how many more children, NRA or Planned Parenthood? Which organization is directly funded by U.S. taxpayer dollars/debt, and how many taxpayer dollars/debt, NRA or Planned Parenthood? How many children has NRA or its members killed? How many children has Planned Parenthood or its members killed? Do you know where your children or grandchildren are? By that I mean, how would your children or grandchildren answer these questions?

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The more guns a nation has, the less criminal activity.

According to a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, which cites
the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and
the United Nations International Study on Firearms Regulation…

the more guns a nation has,
the less criminal activity.

In other words, more firearms, less crime, concludes the virtually unpublicized research report by attorney Don B. Kates and Dr. Gary Mauser.

But the key is firearms in the hands of private citizens.

Much more here in this blog post by Garrett O’Brien from 2015, including the pdf of the Harvard study.

https://decisiveliberty.wordpress.com/2015/10/12/harvard-university-study-reveals-astonishing-link-between-firearms-crime-and-gun-control/

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Politicization of the FBI. February 2018

“A pall hangs over Mueller, and a pall hangs over the DOJ,” says former US Attorney for the District of Columbia, Independent Counsel of the United States, Special Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, Chief Counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and Counsel to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (the Church Committee.)

“But the darkest pall hangs over the FBI, America’s premier federal law enforcement agency, which since the demise of J. Edgar Hoover has been steadfast in steering clear of politics. Even during L. Patrick Gray’s brief tenure as acting director during Watergate, it was not the FBI but Gray personally who was implicated. The current scandal pervades the Bureau. It spans from Director Comey to Deputy Director McCabe to General Counsel Baker. It spread to counterintelligence via Peter Strzok. When line agents complained about the misconduct, McCabe retaliated by placing them under investigation for leaking information.”

“From the outset of this scandal, I have considered Comey a dirty cop. His unfailing commitment to himself above all else is of a pattern. Throughout his career, Comey has continually portrayed himself as Thomas Becket, fighting against institutional corruption—even where none exists. Stories abound of his routine retort to anyone who disagreed with him (not an unusual happening when lawyers gather) during his tenure as deputy attorney general under President George W. Bush. “Your moral compass is askew,” he would say. This self-righteousness led agents to refer to him as “The Cardinal.” Comey is no Thomas Becket—he is Henry II.”

“A great disservice has been done to the dedicated men and women of the FBI by Comey and his seventh floor henchmen. A grand jury probe is long overdue. Inspector General Horowitz is an honest man, but he cannot convene a grand jury. We need one now. We need our FBI back.” ~ Much more at this link from Imprimis.

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/the-politicization-of-the-fbi/?appeal_code=MK218EM5&utm_campaign=imprimis&utm_source=housefile&utm_medium=email&utm_content=feb_2018_politicization_fbi&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9cBQWUacEAjQB2uh9CHMgrcr_EagLiLcd3GvchLq9v8TyvWioi8R62iF3MzndXQXKH-zZDYQZk9BA4IbRXGOwZ5t0Utw&_hsmi=61107704

Hillary behind bars

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

School shootings and the technological society

A friend asked, “Does the ability of a people to govern themselves effectively depend on the presence of a critical mass of mature, God fearing ADULTS who who have enough gumption to see that their children are EDUCATED, not merely warehoused by government employees providing a “free” babysitting service, subjected to one government funded “research based” fad after another?

And, “What happens if we let the mass go sub critical?”  His answer to both questions is, “Maybe we are about to find out.”  I agree.

He copied me on a message from one of his friends:

“In America, kids have been going to school since the Pilgrims and Puritans settled in Massachusetts nearly four hundred years ago, and guns have always been part of our culture.”

“If weapons are the problem, then why haven’t there been shootings in schools since the beginning?”

“Why is this a recent phenomenon of the past quarter century and not a consistent problem throughout our history?”

“The answer is simple, but our politically-correct Progressive leaders do not want to hear it.”

“From the 1620s forward, schools inculcated the virtues of patriotism, moral rectitude, and American exceptionalism into students. It was foundational to our entire educational system, and all of this was based on the value of the Judeo-Christian ethic. ”

“It worked well for more than three-and-a-half centuries, as evidenced by the fact that there were never mass shootings at schools until recently.”

“In the twenty-first century, the Judeo-Christian model is no longer taught.”

“In fact, it is being repudiated daily in favor of Progressive values that eschew patriotism, mock traditional morality, and repudiate the value of American leadership.”

“More than half of Millennials are ashamed of being an American, which is a complete reversal from what earlier generations of kids believed.”

“We are producing disconnected, alienated kids by the millions, while simultaneously being clueless about why they are so narcissistic.”

“We have created an entire generation of self-serving brats who have few work skills but believe they are entitled to wealth without earning it. The ones that aren’t drugged up have no coping skills, while those who are drugged up live in a perpetual fog.”

“Because we are unable, or unwilling, to place the blame where it belongs—on parents, progressive leaders, etc—we blame guns instead. The fools in our Progressive media insist that the problem will be solved by disarming Americans, but that will only make it worse.”

“Instead, what we need to do is return to the model that worked for centuries, but that’s not going to happen—not unless there is a complete transformation of our societal values.”

I agree.  I must add the following to this discussion:

You might enjoy the books, “The Fourth Turning” …one of a trilogy on the subject of the cycle of generational changes, and The Technological Society.

The loss of personal responsibility is the biggest societal transformation that has occurred in the past three generations.  This transformation must be reversed.  I agree with the points made by these two people.

Blaming the NRA for school shootings is “Newspeak” in action, that is, the opposite of the truth.

2017-11-07 22.06.48

I suggested to change in the friend’s message the word “Progressive” to “so-called progressive.”  Progressive, as the word is used today, is “Newspeak.”  That is, its true meaning is the exactly the opposite the definition of the word “progressive.”  For example “War is Peace” is elaborately illuminated by George Orwell in his book Nineteen Eighty-Four.”  Today, “so-called progressives” – and their saturation propaganda code words social justice, diversity, inclusive, sustainable, tolerance, etc. are not progressive.  In fact, they are regressive to the days of kings, queens, feudalism and fealty to lord and master.  There is nothing new in the collectivism of so-called progressives; collectivism is the ideological tool, the religion, used by elites in all societies to establish and sustain their wealth and power status, to institutionalize their tyranny.

The sure indication that “our 242 year old experiment in self-governance is drawing to a close” is that 48% of Americans favor guaranteed income, or Universal Basic Income (UBI).  Northwestern University and Gallup polled Americans about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on their lives and society.  Universal Basic Income (UBI) is exactly the opposite of the intentions and actions of the founders and framers of America, a group of well-educated or self-taught men and women.

The founders and framers of America were in direct contact with philosophers, economists and thinkers, for example Adam Smith in Scotland, author of The Wealth of Nations.  This now classic book is the revolutionary foundation of capitalism, private property and individual responsibility.  Universal Basic Income (UBI) is collectivist “Newspeak.” UBI contradicts natural law, rights, sovereignty and private property.

The heads of Silicon Valley technology firms and the oligarchs in Washington, D.C., New York and Hollywood as well as the oligarchs in the UN and EU, London, Paris, Berlin, Moscow and Beijing are all working vigorously to establish UBI.  They pose UBI as the solution to the pervasive loss of jobs which is and will be created by their current and foreseen technologies and products, especially artificial intelligence and robotics.  Their solution to the problem/the opportunity which they created is to enslave us all.

The intention of Universal Basic Income (UBI) is, and the result will be, solidification and institutionalization of social status/rank/status quo from the top of society to its bottom, guaranteeing a rigid, class-based oligarchy.  Movement up and down the economic and social ladder will be prevented, unless you are one of the chosen few.  Those who already have wealth and power will be institutionalized in their positions.  Non-elites will be stuck, enslaved, dependent on UBI for everything.  UBI experiments are underway.

The 242 year old experiment in self-government will be ended and once again the world will be in feudalism.  Resistance will be futile and deadly, and only rarely will anyone think of it.  History proves that when the intentions of oligarchs don’t work out, which has always been the case, the rest of us will be marched down the road to hell to fight and die in their wars.

So far, today, the brightest and the expensively educated of the millennial generation truly believe UBI is the yellow brick road to wonderland, the best road to their efficient future.  They are in the crisis of their generation, the barrel of the gun is in their face,  but they do not yet realize that they are merely the means to an end.

To be continued.  What do you think?

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Fire, ready, aim

“People are very surprised to learn that survey data show that guns are used defensively by private citizens in the U.S. from 1.5 to 3.4 million times a year, at least three times more frequently than guns are used to commit crimes” ~ imprimis.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Loose Molecules: What Has Ended and What Comes Next…

Excellent. But how far in the future?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Groupthink on global warming

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/02/Groupthink.pdf

Introduction by the author:

“Since we’ve now been living with the global warming story for 30 years, it might seem hard to believe that science could now come up with anything that would enable us to see that story in a wholly new light.”

“But that is what I am suggesting in a new paper, just published in the UK by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, thanks to a book called Groupthink, written more than 40 years ago by a professor of psychology at Yale, Irving Janis.”

What Janis did was to define scientifically just how what he called groupthink operates, according to three basic rules. And what my paper tries to show is the astonishing degree to which they explain so much that many have long found puzzling about the global warming story.”

“Janis’s first rule is that a group of people come to share a particular way of looking at the world which may seem hugely important to them but which turns out not to have been based on looking properly at all the evidence. It is therefore just a shared, untested belief.”

“Rule two is that, because they have shut their minds to any evidence which might contradict their belief, they like to insist that it is supported by a “consensus”. The one thing those caught up in groupthink cannot tolerate is that anyone should question it.”

“This leads on to the third rule, which is that they cannot properly debate the matter with those who disagree with their belief. Anyone holding a contrary view must simply be ignored, ridiculed and dismissed as not worth listening to.”

“What my paper does is look again at the entire global warming story in the light of Janis’s rules, and to show how consistently they explain so much of the way it has unfolded all the way through.”

~ Christian Booker, in Principia Scientific International

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment