Gold v Digital Fiat & Marxism


Armstrong Economics Blog/Gold Re-Posted Feb 2, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Hi AE…so gov’t “money” (fiat currency) will become just some abstract floating measurement of value, an electronic entry in an electronic account in the cybersphere. As these various so-called gov’ts become less reliable, even between themselves, do you see the possibility of them simply skipping their phony currencies, & trading directly in gold. Russia could ship a specific quantity of crude to China, for a specific amount of gold bars. Your argument about the impracticality of a gold-backed currency makes sense, but what about large transactions being settled in gold?

HS

ANSWER: The entire problem that people do not grasp with regard to any return to a gold standard is that if the money supply is FIXED in any way, that necessitates the collapse of SOCIALISM. The two are directly linked. Politicians only know how to run with deficits. Vote for me and I will give you this or that!

The Bretton Woods gold standard collapsed because they FIXED the price of gold at $35, but they continued to print money far beyond the supply of gold at that fixed price. In addition, you have a business cycle. There will be times when no matter what the money might be, there will be boom times when the value of money declines and the asset values rise.

This argument over gold v fiat is absolutely just nonsense. The wealth of any nation is the productive capacity of its people. For centuries, the business cycle has existed and that is the entire cause for the “inflation” in assets when money declines in value, and then the “deflation” in assets with the value of money rises. Arguing over what we use for money will NEVER stop the business cycle.

The cycle is also in part driven by all governments. It becomes a drug of power that is abused. It would not matter what we use for money right now, they want to create World War III so they can default, and escape from the abuse of this Marxism that they have turned into a system of borrowing every year with no intention of paying anything back. But we have reached the confrontation between Keynesianism where central banks are expected to prevent inflation by rising interest rates, but that has no impact on the government which has become the biggest borrower in the system.

We are going BUST not because of the money we use, but because of the abuse of power in government which has always existed since ancient times.

Trust me. Forget gold standards. They will never work because all governments act only in their own self-interest. You should have learned that with COVID. They will never admit any mistake EVER! It is far better to keep gold on our side of the table and we can then use it as a hedge against governments. They are seeking to move to digital currencies ONLY so they can track when you hired the 16-year-old girl next door to babysit for you so they can go after her for the government’s 50% share.

Even Bitcoin is fiat. There is no backing. People have dived headfirst into cryptocurrency on the entire proposition that they are limited. All they have done is proven my point. Money, historically, has been everything from seashells and cattle to bronze, silver, and gold. Of all the various forms of money, only bronze and cattle had any real commodity value based on utility.

The Egyptians really invented paper money for the farmers would deposit their grain and receive a receipt which was a bearer instrument used in trade. They also used raw metal, not coins, and traded based on weight, as it stated in the Bible. Here is a piece of pottery from Egypt recording a complaint about taxes written in Greek. It stated the sum amounted to a total of 90 talents of silver with 15 talents of tax on the transfer of land – 16.6%.

For thousands of years, Egypt had no coins until it was conquered by Alexander the Great, and upon his death, his general Ptolemy I (305/304 – 282 BC) took the throne and it was his Greek line from which Cleopatra VIII came – not Egyptian.

Our system is starting to implode. Never in the history of human civilization have governments demanded taxes on income requiring reporting every year. This was the gift of Karl Marx. Just as this Egyptian tax on the transfer of land, we see that property taxes and a form of sales tax were the norms.

The American Constitution was intended to give thenational government greater power to raise revenue because the previous Articles of Confederation had been a fiscal disaster. Nevertheless, most people remained fearful of taxation by governments. Indirect taxes were to be the way to secure our liberty from tyrannical governments. It was generally understood that indirect taxes meant taxes on consumption like a retail sales tax and/or excise taxes on imports. It was believed that indirect taxes did not lend themselves to abuse by tyrannical governments. Consequently, the general belief was that “direct taxes” has to be taken off the table. Incomes taxes, throwing out the window of all the wisdom of the ages, were imposed by the new age of Marxism in 1913.

Our computer warns that 2025 will be the turning point in Marxism.

Who is America’s Enemy? Russia or the other Political Party?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Jan 18, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

In writing the Greatest Bull Market in History, published in 1986, I had to do all the original research. I read all the newspapers daily year after year to come to the realization that attitudes shift back and forth. It became very obvious that before FDR and the introduction of Marxism to the United States, the focus was on markets. With Roosevelt, he weaponized the Federal Reserve and just about everything else to further his agenda. Roosevelt demonized Pierre du Pont for he made a lot of money providing the weapons for World War I. Roosevelt called him the Merchant of Death, but then suddenly needed him again for World War II.

The nation is dividing significantly. This is why the United States cannot stand divided. The latest poll demonstrates that the forecast made by our computer is unsurpassed. The question presented was who is our enemy?

For Democrats, the top three results named Russia (31 percent) as our “greatest enemy,” followed by Republicans (26 percent) and China (16 percent).

For Republicans, the top three are China (35 percent), Russia (33 percent), and Democrats (12 percent).

We now are starting to see that we have an enemy within – the opposite political party. This is absolutely essential for it confirms the forecasts of our computer that have been common since our 2011 WEC.

Science is ONLY Possible with Constant Inquiry


Armstrong Economics Blog/Understanding Cycles Re-Posted Jan 3, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Everybody seems to be up in arms over Musk turning Twitter into a real social media platform. When Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum ban Twitter, you know Musk is doing a great job. Bringing an end to all the propaganda from disease to Putin is such a breath of fresh air. Pray for Elon Musk. You can bet they are trying to come up with a disease or a fancy way they can claim he committed suicide.

When I was researching at the Firestone Library at Princeton University, I back friends with a professor there. One day he said to me that I reminded him of Einstein. Was shocked. I said that’s not possible. He said to me that Einstein always attributed his achievements to being curious. He said I had that same curiosity but in economics. I began to understand that ALL scientific inquiry DEMAND curiosity. If we are never curious, we will never discover anything no matter what the field.

No matter what field, you MUST always challenge the status quo. If we do not do that, besides the fact this becomes belief and not science, we will NEVER advance as a society. No matter what the field, without that freedom to inquire, society will collapse just as Communism did. If people are herded into pens like cattle and told they cannot challenge the accepted norm, they are killing humanity. This is why the government has been behind the curtain instructing social media to censor individuals and ideas all for them to desperately retain control. But they feel the world is slipping away. This is why they are fighting so hard to try to stop this trend for they know in the end – this is the decline and fall of western forms of republican governments.

TIR Introduction 1988 London


Armstrong Economics Blog/Armstrong in the Media Re-Posted Sep 24, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

A Curious Case of Transferred Battery Technology


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on August 6, 2022 | sundance

Every once in a while, you come across an article that seems like one thing but is actually another thing entirely.  The NPR story of how “The U.S. made a breakthrough battery discovery — then gave the technology to China“, is one such article.

Several people sent this to us for opinion and review; however, the background of the article reveals something quite different. Then again, perhaps that’s exactly why NPR wrote it.

[READ THE STORY HERE]

It is important to read the story as presented by NPR, because it is oddly written as if someone is trying to use the outlet to get out ahead of something else.

The issue surrounds a new product technology called a vanadium redox flow battery.  Essentially the U.S. government funded scientists to develop an advanced battery that could store energy without degrading.  After success, the technology was then sent to China for manufacturing.  China then invested heavily in the product and used the technology to mass manufacture the battery for the global market. The United States is now behind in the product development and manufacture.

As the story is told in NPR, “the Chinese company didn’t steal this technology. It was given to them — by the U.S. Department of Energy. First in 2017, as part of a sublicense, and later, in 2021, as part of a license transfer.”  Except that’s not what happened at all.  There is some major ‘ass-covering’ in that false narrative.

The lead scientist working on the vanadium redox flow battery project was a man named Gary Yang.  Mr. Yang was born in China and emigrated to the U.S. becoming a U.S. citizen.  Yang worked with U.S. scientists to develop the technology and was funded by a multi-million research grant from the Dept of Energy.

After their initial success, according to NPR, “in 2012, Yang applied to the Department of Energy for a license to manufacture and sell the batteries.”  The Dept of Energy license was granted, and Yang launched UniEnergy Technologies as the parent company to develop the commercial application of the product.

It’s 2012 and Gary Yang was now looking for investors and manufacturing in the commercial sector to produce the battery.

Here’s where it gets interesting…. According to Yang, “he couldn’t persuade any U.S. investors to come aboard. “I talked to almost all major investment banks; none of them (wanted to) invest in batteries,” Yang said in an interview, adding that the banks wanted a return on their investments faster than the batteries would turn a profit.” This is Yang’s justification for what he did next.

After he couldn’t find U.S. investors (which I will say up front seems like an excuse), Yang then took the technology to China to have them manufacture the product.

The Chinese embraced the technology, created entire manufacturing eco-systems around it and now corner the market on the technology behind vanadium batteries.  However, giving the technology to China for manufacturing and development is a violation of the license Chang was given.

Yang even admits he knew it was not allowed. “Yang’s original license requires him to sell a certain number of batteries in the U.S., and it says those batteries must be “substantially manufactured” here. In an interview, Yang acknowledged that he did not do that.” Now we start to look a little more skeptically at the claims by Gary Yang, because a whole bunch of stuff just doesn’t add up.

As noted by NPR, five years after getting the license from the Dept of Energy, “in 2017, Yang formalized the relationship and granted Dalian Rongke Power Co. Ltd. an official sublicense, allowing the company to make the batteries in China.”

After China had fully developed the technology, they obviously no longer needed Gary Yang to go global with the product.  As a result of what can only be considered as ‘getting cut out’, Yang -still holding the original DoE license- then turned to Europe.

Gary Yang not only sublicensed Chinese manufacturing, supposedly without DoE notification, in 2021 he sold the license to the Netherlands.

“In 2021, Yang transferred the battery license to a European company based in the Netherlands. The company, Vanadis Power, told NPR it initially planned to continue making the batteries in China and then would set up a factory in Germany, eventually hoping to manufacture in the U.S., said Roelof Platenkamp, the company’s founding partner.

Vanadis Power needed to manufacture batteries in Europe because the European Union has strict rules about where companies manufacture products, Platenkamp said.  “I have to be a European company, certainly a non-Chinese company, in Europe,” Platenkamp said in an interview with NPR.”

Before moving on, let me recap because things are going to start making sense about why this story has some major ramifications.  Also, don’t overlook the timing of events and keep in the back of your mind what you know about Hunter Biden (remember, ‘energy sector’ with no experience) and Biden’s deals with China being made in/around this same timeframe.

♦ 2006 – Pacific Northwest National Laboratory original grant. “It took six years and more than 15 million taxpayer dollars for the scientists to uncover what they believed was the perfect vanadium battery recipe.

♦ 2012 – The lead scientist, Gary Yang, asks the Dept of Energy for a license.  He then creates UniEnergy Tech.

♦ 2013/2014 – Unable to find investors in the U.S., Gary Yang enters a manufacturing and development agreement with China.

♦ 2017 – Gary Yang officially grants a sublicense to Dalian Rongke Power Co. Ltd in China.

♦ 2021 – Gary Yang then sells his license to Vanadis Power in the Netherlands.

Tell me again how this NPR sentence makes sense: “the Chinese company didn’t steal this technology. It was given to them — by the U.S. Department of Energy. First in 2017, as part of a sublicense, and later, in 2021, as part of a license transfer.

Do you see anywhere in this reformatted outline where the U.S. Dept of Energy gave the technology to anyone, except Gary Yang?

The only entity responsible for transferring the technology to China was Gary Yang.

Now, with all that in mind, check out the date on the picture that NPR uses in their article:

2015

Keep the guy on the left, Imre Gyuk, in mind as we move forward.  Note the date of “2015” with Imre Gyuk and Gary Yang. They are standing together.

Remember in the NPR article, the baseline for why Yang took the technology to China was that he couldn’t find investors to manufacture in the United States.

The vanadium battery license in question would have come from Imre Gyuk’s office.  Now, in addition to being the Director of Energy Storage Research in the Office of Electricity, of the Dept of Energy, Gyuk also held another role:  “As part of the program he also supervises the $185M ARRA stimulus funding for Grid Scale Energy Storage
Demonstrations” {Citation}

The ARRA funds referenced were the Obama-era stimulus funds; the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds; the shovel ready jobs funds.  Yet, Gary Yang cannot find investors?

Citation from 2014: “It’s not a given that lithium-ion batteries are the best batteries for electric cars, or for electrical grid storage. Other types of batteries today show promise, most of which you’ve never heard of: vanadium redox flow, zinc-based, sodium-aqueous and liquid-metal. Businesses looking to invest in batteries are deciding between these technologies and more. Market players will weigh the different technologies’ cost of manufacture, durability, usefulness.” {Citation} But Gary Yang couldn’t find U.S. investors? 

Citation from 2014: “The forever battery.” A Silicon Valley startup run by old-school technologists has invented an energy storage device that could take an entire neighborhood off the grid. This magic box is called a Vanadium redox flow battery. {CitationBut Gary Yang couldn’t find U.S. investors.

Citation from 2016: “Cost-effective, reliable, and longer-lived energy storage is necessary to truly modernize the grid,” said Dr. Imre Gyuk, energy storage program manager for DOE’s Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, of UET’s system. “As third-generation vanadium flow batteries gain market share, it is essential to increase our understanding of storage value and optimization to accelerate adoption of integrated storage and renewable energy solutions among utilities.” {CitationBut Gary Yang couldn’t find U.S. investors.  {Here’s another Citation}

Citation from 2018: “On January 23, 2018, the Chinese Academy of Sciences hosted a meeting on energy storage with distinguished guests Dr. Imre Gyuk, director of energy storage research at the United States Department of Energy, and Dr. Gary Yang, CEO of UniEnergy Technologies.  Dr. Gyuk and Dr. Yang were met by China Energy Storage Alliance Chairman and the Chinese Academy of Sciences Institute of Engineering Thermophysics Deputy Director Chen Haisheng, China Energy Storage Alliance Deputy Chairman and Beijing Puneng General Manager Huang Mianyan, and CNESA Standing Council Representative and general manager of State Grid Electric Vehicle Service Company Wang Mingcai.” (image below)

[SOURCE]

This meeting is important because Imre Gyuk and Gary Yang are together, in China in 2018.  The year after the Dept of Energy license given to Gary Yang was unlawfully sublicensed to the Chinese.

NPR is correct in that U.S. taxpayers funded six years of research and development for vanadium redox flow batteries (2006-2012), and once the product was successful the technology was transferred to China (2014-2017) as part of the commercial manufacture.  However, it was Gary Yang who gave it to them, and by all appearances he did so unlawfully.

There is going to be much more to this story…. Much more.  We have only just begun to dig.

[Support CTH Here]

.

Klaus Schwab – How to Rule the World – Maybe!


Armstrong Economics Blog/Civil Unrest Re-Posted Aug 3, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Klaus Schwab does not understand human nature or how the world economy functions. He preaches Stakeholder Economics which failed and was instituted during the Depression BECAUSE there were no government programs. The theory then was that companies should contribute to saving society. It failed because there was no coordination, for every company was independent, and they would contribute to what they saw or had a bias toward.  His “Stakeholder Economics” is not his own idea. He took it from Berle and Means.

Milton Friedman, back in 1970, exposed how Stakeholder Economics was inefficient and stupid. He laid out that such a role was that of government, not corporations, whose #1 fiduciary obligation was to its shareholder. Under Schwab, I could say, “OK I will go public; everyone sends in money. I will give you shares in return and then say — OMG, there are people starving in Africa!” So, I decide to give 50% of all the profits to them and not my investors. This is Stakeholder Economics.

The history of the Volkswagen brand began with the “Käfer”; development work on this Nazi prestige project began in 1934. On May 28, 1937, it was formally established. The name was changed to “Volkswagenwerk GmbH” in 1938. With the outbreak of war, it became the arms industry. But it was produced under the direction of Hitler was called the Volkswagen (“people’s car”). This is the Stakeholder Economics of Schwab today. I can tell you that, personally, Schwab is a control freak. He runs the WEF with an Iron Fist. Errors are not tolerated.

Schwab is actually advocating fascism where he wants to control the future by controlling the production of all corporations. His dream of world domination is much deeper than simply communism, where his hero remains Lenin.

Lenin nationalized all manufacturing and industry throughout Soviet Russia. This is what Schwab is advocating to get them to “voluntarily” surrender their fiduciary duty to his one-world government to end the potential war as was structured in the EU. Schwab pushed for that and his bedfellows, George Soros, poured money into Britain to try to storm BREXIT.

The one-world government of the Roman Empire did not prevent civil war and uprisings. Julius Caesar said men believe what they want to believe. That certainly applies to Schwab and Soros. They only look at what they want to hear from the dead economic theories.

Lenin failed to understand human nature. He requisitioned surplus grain from peasant farmers to feed his Red Army in addition to nationalizing all manufacturing. These measures proved disastrous. Under the new state-owned economy, both industrial and agricultural output completely plummeted. The very people who understood how to run their companies or when to plant crops were capitalists who were typically killed or imprisoned. This policy led to an estimated five million Russians who died of famine in 1921 alone. The living standards across Russia plunged into abject poverty. This is the hero worshiped by Schwab!

There began a massive uprising, as we see in Sir Lanka. The civil unrest threatened the very existence of Lenin’s Soviet government. Lenin used the secret police (Cheka) to silence all political opposition. This was a rein of terror targeting both his opponents and challengers within his own political party. Schwab sees this as a necessary tool, and thus this is why he wants total digital ID to restrict movement using pandemics that will most likely be created for control. What they did with COVID may not have established a precedent. It may have hurt so many people that the attempt to initiate a repeat performance itself is more likely to erupt in civil unrest next year on a major scale.

Indeed, there was an attempted assassination on Lenin by Fanya Kaplan, who shot him in the shoulder and neck as he was leaving a Moscow factory in August 1918. Lenin was badly injured. This unleashed the Red Terror carried out by his secret police. They unleashed a campaign of mass executions against supporters of anyone who supported the czar. Russia’s upper classes and any Socialists who weren’t loyal to Lenin’s Communist Party found themselves on the target list.

Augustus (27 BC-14 AD) established the Praetorian Guard to protect the emperor. When Caligula was assassinated on January 24, 41 AD, the Praetorian Guard made Claudius Emperor, who had always been a Republican and played the role of the fool. He did not want to take the throne. He was advised by his Jewish friend Herod Agrippa to take it or he would be killed, for there were those in the Senate who would love to be emperor. So here you see a gold aureus of Claudius with the reverse showing the Praetorian camp. For you see, without an emperor, they were unemployed. They made Claudius emperor, and neither he nor the Senate had any choice.

Consequently, once Lenin created his Secret Police (Cheka), they were not about to let Russia slip back into a monarchy or a democracy, for that would have ended their power, as was the case with the Praetorian Guard upon the assassination of Caligula. The Cheka (Secret Police) is believed to have executed at least 100,000 so-called “class enemies” during the Red Terror between September and October 1918 following the assassination attempt of Lenin.

As a result, Lenin was forced to back down from his authoritarian government, instituting his New Economic Policy, which was a temporary retreat from complete nationalization. The New Economic Policy created a more market-oriented economic system, “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control.” Lenin’s Red Army eventually won Russia’s civil war, and then in 1922, he formed the USSR with a treaty between Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and the Transcaucasus (now Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan). Lenin thus became the first head of the USSR.

Between 1922 and his death in 1924, Lenin suffered a series of strokes that impacted his ability to speak, and it had been his charismatic delivery of speeches that gave him power, as was the case for Adolf Hitler. Both spoke with a passion that moved the crowds. This opened the door for Joseph Stalin, who was the Communist Party’s new General Secretary, and he quickly began to consolidate his power. Lenin resented Stalin’s growing political power and saw his ascendency as a threat to the USSR. Lenin’s Treaty for the USSR was one built upon mutual respect, whereas Stalin saw it all as one nation with all power at his fingertips.

Lenin died on January 21, 1924, at the age of 53. Knowledge of his death came after Stalin had already come to power. It was Stalin who stole all the food from Ukraine, killing some seven million, and he unleashed the Great Purge of 1936-38. He strengthened the Cheka (Secret Police) to firmly retain power in the same fashion that the Roman Praetorian Guard supported the emperor to retain their jobs.

Beware, this is the same power being crafted by Klaus Schwab. The digital ID for everyone and to create a “social” index of people is the exact way to instill control as well as fear.

Czech Republic to Seize All Russian People’s Assets


Armstrong Economics Blog/Uncategorized Re-Posted Mar 25, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Leading Czech politicians are calling for all property within the Czech Republic of all Russians to be indefinitely ‘frozen’ in violation of international law. The onus would be on the victims to “prove” that they are against the Putin regime. There are about 40,000 Russians living in the Czech Republic, plus others who have property or businesses there.

The EU is increasing being viewed as an evil, lawless, government. However, the Eastern European EU members are now even worse than the Western ones. They seem to go further violating international law trying to prove to the West that they are good little obedient vassals. Fischer is violating every principle of what the EU was supposed to stand for – human rights. The Czech Republic has clearly begun a new cycle which began with the COVID  Crash.

Clueless Celebrities Attempt to Worsen Energy Crisis


Armstrong Economics Blog/Climate Re-Posted Mar 21, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

City National Bank is considered Hollywood’s “bank to the stars” and was acquired by the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) in 2015. A group of over 65 clueless celebrities thirsting for attention are attempting to create a movement called “No Dirty Banks” to dissuade the RBC from investing in fossil fuels – period.

Their message is as follows:

As Canada’s #1 fossil fuel bank, and the fifth largest in the world, RBC is deeply implicated in the Canadian tar sands – one of the most toxic sources of oil on the planet, that has devastated Indigenous lands, and destroyed pristine boreal forest.

Though RBC claims to be a leader in climate-conscious banking, since acquiring CNB in 2015 RBC has spent over $160 billion, making it one of the world’s most aggressive financiers of the tar sands and fossil fuel extraction.

RBC and CNB must stop funding fossil fuel projects, especially fracking and tar sands. At the source of extraction, Alberta tar sands exacerbate the climate crisis, and are why Canada is unable to meet its international climate commitments.

Between the signing of the 2015 Paris Agreement and the end of 2020, the world’s 60 biggest banks, including RBC, financed fossil fuels to the tune of $3.8 trillion. Fossil fuel funding fuels climate chaos and threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions.

Bankrolling Coastal GasLink is just the latest example of RBC covering up their role in violating Indigenous rights, not upholding free, prior and informed consent as outlined in UNDRIP, and making the climate crisis worse.

These celebrities are known to live lavish lifestyles and are frequently spotted on private jets and yachts. They live in massive homes and drive numerous cars. The self-declared elite wants the peasants to curb their energy usage while they continue to consume far more than the average taxpayer. These people have no idea the implications of reducing funding for fracking and a pipeline amid a serious energy crisis. The average person feels the burden at the pump or while paying their monthly utilities, while the liberal Hollywood puppets do not. This is another example of the liberal stronghold on Hollywood as publicists continually ask their “stars” to promote the Build Back Better agenda in a twisted attempt to seem empathetic.

Ukraine & 911


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Aug 7, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: I have the deepest and highest respect for your work and your sources.If it was not the CIA orchestrating the Ukraine events who could all the Billions Obama and Nuland spent there have been going to and being used for??Nuland stating USA behind regime change on camera. Chevron Oil sign indicative?

UD

ANSWER: The Ukraine Revolution and 911 have a common thread. In both cases, they were instigated by non-CIA type parties. Yanukovich himself inspired the revolution when he passed a bill in parliament with a quick show of hands by his communist loyal MPs contrary to the usual system of electronic voting.

Yanukovich outlawed unauthorized tents in public areas as well as erecting stages or amplifiers in public places. Those who violate the law now face a hefty fine or detention. In addition, he outlawed more than five vehicles in “Automaidan” motorcades which prompted people to display signs I am the 5th car – do not follow.

He then outlawed free speech making it a criminal act to slander any government official, including himself. The penalty was one year of hard labor in prison.

This is what caused the uprising. The Western powers could not have pulled that off. Then Yanukovich brought in Russians for his police from the East and that resulted in the Western Ukrainian police supporting the people.

The US THREATENED the people who were NOT satisfied over the politicians who then stepped up to seize power for they were still part of the same system who claimed to see the light. Without those punitive actions by Yanukovich, the people would not have risen up in such mass. The CIA was not capable of getting Yanukovich to act so irrationally.

In the case of 911, the first World Trade Center bombers drew the twin towers with planes flying into them on the wall of their cell in Manhattan’s MCC.

In both cases, the government did not instigate the events, but they stepped in a used them for political advantage. I really do not care what they may think they did, I was actually advising the people in Ukraine, not the government politicians.