Can Government Really Prevent War?


QUESTION: Martin,

So much common sense from you. But, re the almost total corruption of government, could this be the ONLY practical solution?

That is:
1. Elect Politicians directly, at random, from the general, law abiding population for a fixed term with no possibility of re-election
2. Pay them well, with jobs/careers guaranteed and severe prison time for any corrupt activity

Of course, lots of other issues, all surmountable – but these principles are sacrosanct.

Could it be any worse than the current appalling corrupt situation?

Regards
IW

PS I understand this system was tried in ancient Greece and Italy around WW1. We might be better at the logistics now?

ANSWER: No there is no other choice. Thrasymachus (c 459-400BC) put it best: all forms of government become the same as they all act in their own self-interest. We really need a bureaucracy to run, but they MUST be accountable to elected people who are by NO MEANS career politicians. The European Project and the entire theory of federalizing Europe has been to supposedly prevent war by devolving everything to a single government. If there are no career politicians, then this will do far more to reduce the threat of war than any other step we can take toward securing our future.

A single government that is still not answerable to the people will not cut it. This is precisely the design of the European Project to eliminate any democratic process because they assume the people are too stupid to understand their vision. Those who dictate the trend of Europe known as the Troika, rule without any accountability to the people. There is no democratic process that any of them have to face. This is the European Project – a single government free of any democratic check and balance all justified to prevent war.

Is Climate Change a Tool to Eliminate Democracy?


COMMENT: Your view on denying climate change is supporting the capitalist model. This shows you have no credibility.

OD

REPLY: Climate is changing and it is part of the normal cycle. You are actually correct that I support capitalism and freedom and am against authoritarianism and totalitarian systems. What you fail to understand is that climate change is an agenda to eliminate your freedom. The entire argument is to support a move toward an authoritarian state. You better wake up. This not truly about the climate, it is all about controlling society, eliminating democracy, and changing the entire economic model that changes society.


It’s a well-kept secret, but 95 per cent of the climate models we are told prove the link between human CO2 emissions and catastrophic global warming have been found, after nearly two decades of temperature stasis, to be in error. It’s not surprising.

We have been subjected to extravagance from climate catastrophists for close to 50 years.

In January 1970, Life magazine, based on “solid scientific evidence”, claimed that by 1985 air pollution would reduce the sunlight reaching the Earth by half. In fact, across that period sunlight fell by between 3 per cent and 5 per cent. In a 1971 speech, Paul Ehrlich said: “If I were a gambler I would take even money that ­England will not exist in the year 2000.”

Fast forward to March 2000 and David Viner, senior research scientist at the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, told The Independent, “Snowfalls are now a thing of the past.” In December 2010, the Mail Online reported, “Coldest December since records began as temperatures plummet to minus 10C bringing travel chaos across Britain”.

We’ve had our own busted predictions. Perhaps the most preposterous was climate alarmist Tim Flannery’s 2005 observation: “If the computer records are right, these drought conditions will become permanent in eastern Australia.” Subsequent rainfall and severe flooding have shown the records or his analysis are wrong. We’ve swallowed dud prediction after dud prediction. What’s more, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which we were instructed was the gold standard on global warming, has been exposed repeatedly for ­mis­rep­resentation and shoddy methods.

Weather bureaus appear to have “homogenised” data to suit narratives. NASA’s claim that 2014 was the warmest year on record was revised, after challenge, to only 38 per cent probability. Extreme weather events, once blamed on global warming, no longer are, as their frequency and intensity decline.

Why then, with such little evidence, does the UN insist the world spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on futile climate change policies? Perhaps Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN’s Framework on Climate Change has the answer?

In Brussels last February she said, “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.”

In other words, the real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook.

Figueres is on record saying democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China, she says, is the best model. This is not about facts or logic. It’s about a new world order under the control of the UN. It is opposed to capitalism and freedom and has made environmental catastrophism a household topic to achieve its objective.

Figueres says that, unlike the Industrial Revolution, “This is a centralised transformation that is taking place.” She sees the US partisan divide on global warming as “very detrimental”. Of course. In her authoritarian world there will be no room for debate or ­disagreement.

Make no mistake, climate change is a must-win battlefield for authoritarians and fellow travellers. As Timothy Wirth, president of the UN Foundation, says: “Even if the ­(climate change) theory is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

Having gained so much ground, eco-catastrophists won’t let up. After all, they have captured the UN and are extremely well funded. They have a hugely powerful ally in the White House. They have successfully enlisted compliant academics and an obedient and gullible mainstream media (the ABC and Fairfax in Australia) to push the scriptures regardless of evidence.

They will continue to present the climate change movement as an independent, spontaneous consensus of concerned scientists, politicians and citizens who believe human activity is “extremely likely” to be the dominant cause of global warming. (“Extremely likely” is a scientific term?)

And they will keep mobilising public opinion using fear and appeals to morality. UN support will be assured through promised wealth redistribution from the West, even though its anti-growth policy prescriptions will needlessly prolong poverty, hunger, sickness and illiteracy for the world’s poorest.

Figueres said at a climate ­summit in Melbourne recently that she was “truly counting on Australia’s leadership” to ensure most coal stayed in the ground.

Hopefully, like India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Tony Abbott isn’t listening. India knows the importance of cheap energy and is set to overtake China as the world’s leading importer of coal. Even Germany is about to commission the most coal-fired power stations in 20 years.

There is a real chance Figueres and those who share her centralised power ambitions will succeed. As the UN’s December climate change conference in Paris approaches, Australia will be pressed to sign even more futile job-destroying climate change treaties.

Resisting will be politically difficult. But resist we should. We are already paying an unnecessary social and economic price for empty gestures. Enough is enough

Project Veritas Outlines Risk of Weaponized Social Media…


There is more than a little connective tissue behind a series of Project Veritas undercover investigative reports on how Twitter surveillance data is utilized, and recent discoveries of how FBI contractors were weaponizing FISA surveillance data against political opposition.

In each example, private company or big government, surveillance data forms the basis for the weaponization.  In an era when people don’t think twice before engaging on social media platforms, the Project Veritas series presents a warning worth sharing.

Part I HEREPart II HEREPart III is below:

(San Francisco) Project Veritas has released undercover footage of Twitter Engineers and employees admitting that Twitter employees view all of your private messages on their servers and analyze it to create a “virtual profile” of you which they sell to advertisers.

The footage features four current Twitter software engineers–Conrado Miranda, Clay Haynes, Pranay Singh, and Mihai Alexandru Florea. (more)

The Blizzard of 1899


A lot of people are claiming that the extreme cold is part of Global Warming and human-induced climate change. Well, all we need do is look to the Blizzard of 1899. That is the record cold where it snowed also all the way into the capital of Florida, Tallahassee. It was snowing also in Tallahassee this season.

February 1899 was the coldest winter on record all the way up to 2017. All of these claims are just nonsense that this extreme cold is created by Global Warming or climat6e change caused by humans. We have been there and done that before prior to the invention of automobiles and massive expansion of the Industrial Revolution. Let’s see if we break the record come February. It is even 72 degrees in Abu Dhabi.

Greenhouses Gases Are a Product of Civilization for Thousands of Years


QUESTION: Do you believe we are going into an ice age?

ANSWER: No. At best we return to a mini-ice age. There are those who argue that a decline in solar activity, which they cannot deny, will not be enough to offset the human created Global Warming. There are so many things wrong with the Global Warming theories it is even hard to figure out where to begin. Long before the Industrial Revolution, the assumption was that our planet’s atmosphere was still untainted by human-made pollutants for it was somehow pristine. That assumption is dead wrong, but nobody wants to challenge it because if there were periods of human air pollution before, then perhaps their theory that this will destroy the planet and we will all burn to a crisp, as Christine Legard said, is nonsense.

All one has to do is read the contemporary accounts from ancient Rome. The residents of ancient Rome suffered from pollution that was primarily caused by burning wood to cook and stay warm rather than fossil fuels. There was a great smoke cloud they wrote about called gravioris caeli (“heavy heaven”). Others referred to it as infamis aer (“infamous air”). Complaints about this infamis aer and its effects can be found in classical writings. “No sooner had I left behind the oppressive atmosphere of the city [Rome] and that reek of smoking cookers which pour out, along with clouds of ashes, all the poisonous fumes they’ve accumulated in their interiors whenever they’re started up, than I noticed the change in my condition,” wrote in 61AD Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BC – 65AD) the philosopher, statesman, and adviser to Emperor Nero who ordered him to commit suicide.

Moreover, there were lawsuits over air pollution in ancient Rome. The Roman courts heard civil claims over smoke pollution. The Roman jurist Titus Aristo, who was also a member of the council of Emperor Trajan. He was an author of annotations to the works of some jurists of the Augustan period, declared that a cheese shop could not discharge smoke into the buildings above it. Pollution had become so bad that the East Empire in Constantinople even enacted the first known Clean Air Act. In 535AD, then Emperor Justinian proclaimed the importance of clean air as a birthright. “By the law of nature these things are common to mankind—the air, running water, the sea.”

Further evidence that refutes the Global Warming crowd is the discovery of bubbles trapped in Greenland’s ice which revealed that humans began emitting greenhouse gases at least 2,000 years ago. Célia Sapart of Utrecht University in the Netherlands led a team of scientists from Europe and the United States in a study that charted the chemi­cal signature of methane gas in ice samples spanning 2,100 years. The methane gas naturally occurs in the atmosphere but it is considered a greenhouse gas emitted landfills, large-scale cattle ranching, natural gas pipeline leaks and land-clearing fires.

Célia Sapart employed a 1,600-foot-long ice core sample extracted from Greenland’s 1.5-mile-thick ice sheet representing 115,000 years of history. The team chemically analyzed the methane in microscopic air bubbles trapped in each ice layer. They sought to prove global warming is a modern consequence of human activity. They assumed that they would be able to prove that the warmer climate since the 1700s was caused by an increase in methane gas levels.

The found that indeed methane concentrations went up. What they proved was the fact that the rise in methane gas did not correlate with warm periods. What they ended up proving was the simple fact that the theory of greenhouse methane gas was NOT the cause and that the rise in temperature must have been caused by something else. The focused then change and the “something else” was still attributed to human activity, of course, but it was then said to have been due to metallurgy and large-scale agriculture starting around 100 BC.

Indeed, the ancient Romans did keep domesticated livestock and their passing of gas in methane gas, a byproduct of digestion and in China the rice fields include a methane-producing bacteria. So methane gas is a natural part of the planet and the assumption that we should all commit suicide to save the planet is really just nuts. So the team turned to blacksmiths who produced methane gas when they burned wood to produce metal tools or weapons. They noted in the ice core samples that as civilizations collapsed following the fall of the Roman Empire, then there was a moderate decline in methane gas emissions.They concluded that between 100 BC and AD 1600, methane emissions rose by nearly 31 million tons per year. They argue that the United States alone generates some 36 million tons of methane per year.

Célia Sapart had to admit that such emissions of methane gas were by no means enough to alter the climate. The conclusion was still that humans were altering the atmosphere on a global scale in ancient times as well. The study has proved that the assumption that it has only been only of a modern invention that human activity has produced methane gas and the world was pristine before 1800 is just a fantasy. Ice Ages and warming periods have existed well before human civilization where they began to burn wood to stay warm. All they were able to accomplish was prove that greenhouse gases have been produced for thousands of years. If anything, this study shows that the end is not necessarily near based upon greenhouse gas.

Update: Mandalay Bay Massacre – Federal Judge Releases FBI Search Warrant Documents, Sheriff Announces Press Conference…


Speaking at a law enforcement appreciation event on Saturday January 13th, Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said he anticipates having a news conference in about a week regarding the investigation into the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.  However, according to attending media, “he doesn’t expect the update to include shooter Stephen Paddock’s motive”.

Last Friday a federal judge released more than a dozen search warrant affidavits filed by the FBI in the initial weeks following the Vegas shooting. The judge released the documents in response to a lawsuit filed by a group of media organizations.

The search warrants’ present a snapshot of the evidence investigators were looking into around the first two weeks of October 2017.  The shooting took place on Sunday October 1st around 10:00pm (local). Example release below:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/369136045/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-E3bWAWGpaH4lmJh2kqUA

President Trump: DACA Deal “Probably Dead” – Democrats Link Amnesty To Budget…


Congressional Democrats have staked out a position of shutting down the government if they do not get a DACA amnesty deal.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) was the Obama “executive action” that deferred deportation of illegal aliens placing them in a suspended status awaiting immigration legislation. DACA applied to ‘childhood arrivals‘.

DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans) applied to their parents and families. DAPA was determined by Federal Courts, including SCOTUS, to be unconstitutional.

A court challenge on DACA would likely find the same legal outcome as DAPA. Unable to defend DACA in court, President Trump gave congress six months to negotiate legislation to address the underlying issue prior to enforcement of existing law (deportation). The Democrat “fix” is to grant immigration amnesty to the DACA recipients.

Just How Fast Can Things Freeze?


When the weather goes against Global Warming, they flip it into volatility and claim cold is now the byproduct of Global Warming. Al Gore’s environmental group, Penn State University climate scientist Michael Mann wrote, “the unusual weather we’re seeing this winter is in no way evidence against climate change,” it’s “an example of precisely the sort of extreme winter weather we expect because of climate change.”

They offer no evidence that human have caused climate change, just constant opinion. Only they can possibly be right and dismiss any evidence that points to such rapid declines pre-1850. The frozen woolly mammoths discovered in Russia completely frozen and intact with plants still in their stomachs have long made many ponder just how fast the planet can freeze.

When woolly mammoths began to be discovered intact and frozen in Siberia back in 1772, this changed science forever. The sudden bitter cold took place long before humans were around driving cars. As always, such evidence is always ignored. This is the real inconvenient truth they cannot explain so it is best just to pretend it does not exist.

Some people have written in asking will Toronto or Chicago suddenly emerge under a sheet of ice without notice? The evidence from Siberia suggests that yes it can happen in the blink of an eye. However, there is no recorded history which we could put into the computer to answer that question in a precise manner.

This is the known record so far. This is very approximate and it is plotted in terms of millions of years. We really cannot make an accurate forecast that Chicago or Toronto would suddenly find itself under a sheet of ice in days, weeks, months, or years. What is certain overall is the trend. We are headed toward a bitterly cold period ahead. Does that mean we will see glaciers down into Spain or Texas? That may very well be the case, but we are also looking at a time frame measured in millions of years, which is not relevant to our immediate lifespan.

Taking this data and assuming 450 million years ago was a good date target, there is a 72-million-year cycle the computer has determined from this data set. Therefore, it would appear that we are headed toward the biggest glacial period in the history of the planet. However, we are probably looking at that in about 30 million years. Nevertheless, it will get colder in our lifespan and this initial bout with getting colder should be moving into 2028. You will still need heating pads and warm clothes if the power grids hold up.

The biggest problem with this cold is the fact that the environmentalists have stopped coal-generated power and they are not so fond of nuclear. Solar panels work if not covered in snow and wind turbine will freeze in place. That leaves wood and coal burning stoves. This winter in New England, found power companies struggling to provide power to meet the demands. Ironically, people like Al Gore and Michael Mann may end up responsible for killing more people than any war. Yes you can die from too much heat, but you can also die from too much cold

Iran Economic Decline = Rise in Protests


COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong; The economy is in a poor state at best because the government just does not know how to manage the state and this proxy war with Saudi Arabia is draining everything here in Iran. What is your view on the economy going forward?

REPLY: The lifting of economic sanctions under the 2015 nuclear deal with the USA did not result in any improvement in the Iranian economy. Iran’s economy has simply remained stagnant at best for we are in an overall economic contraction now into 2020. Inflation is running above 10% in Iran while many basic food items like eggs are up over 40%. Still, some 3 million people remain unemployed. The economic conditions since the Islamic Revolution have simply left about 35% of Iranians living below the official poverty line.

The protests in Iran are being instigated by economics as they are in Europe. The young Iranians, in general, are growing increasingly frustrated by corruption in government combined with economic mismanagement. Protests and instability are likely to continue over the next few years because of the government, like most others, is simply interested in retaining power – not reform.

Interesting Segment With Shannon Bream…


Last night on Fox News at Night with Shannon Bream, there was an interesting segment with a relatively unfamiliar face.  Policy Advisor and Author, Sidney Powell, appeared on the show to discuss the concluding DOJ Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, aspects to the current congressional investigations.

A very well briefed, and interestingly up-to-date, Mrs. Powell appears at 30:19 of the video discussion below. WATCH (prompted – just hit play):

.

All indications are Mrs. Powell was the author of the curiously correct Sean Hannity article “Creeps On A Mission” we enthusiastically noted last night – SEE HERE.

It provides optimism to see the full scale of accurate information being assembled by voices behind media pundits who can inform their audience on what is to come.

Team Wolverine is on the march…

.