Category Archives: World government

Our Democracy™: In Counting There is Strength

Posted on by
3

Electoral fraud is a venerable tradition in these United States, with a history going all the way back to the founding of the Republic.

With control of the public purse, representative government provided lucrative opportunities for both elected officials and the corporations that did business with them. Baroque levels of corruption became the norm, and public policy was devised to maximize profits for all involved while concealing the dirty deals behind a scrim of public rectitude.

Controlling the outcome of elections was essential for the smooth operation of the political machinery, in order to make sure that lucrative enterprises continued to generate lucre for everyone involved. The political cartoon below by Thomas Nast features William M. “Boss” Tweed, the head of Tammany Hall and the most powerful man in New York City in the late 1860s and early 1870s. Boss Tweed was able to guarantee results through an elaborate patronage network, lavish bribery, and his control of the ballot-counting process.

So how has the ballot-counting process evolved in the century and a half since the heyday of Boss Tweed?

There is widespread concern among elite opinion-makers that the current electoral process poses a threat to Our Democracy™. One of the most recent public figures to sound the alarm is Rob “Meathead” Reiner, according to Variety:

“It’s time to stop f***ing around,” Reiner wrote. “If the Convicted Felon wins, we lose our Democracy. Joe Biden has effectively served US with honor, decency, and dignity. It’s time for Joe Biden to step down.”

Whether Joe Biden steps down or not, it’s obviously important to elect the Democrat, whoever that might be. Our Democracy™ is in danger if voters are allowed to vote for the wrong candidate (in this case, Donald Trump). With so much at stake, we must do whatever it takes to ensure the election of the approved candidate.

In my previous posts I highlighted the role that propaganda and the suppression of dissent play in this process. But these alone are not sufficient to guarantee the desired outcome — hence the imperative to control the voting process itself.

This requires a multi-pronged approach. The traditional emptying of the cemeteries to produce votes on election day is still part of the effort. But the implementation of the widespread use of absentee ballots and “mail-in voting” — for which we can thank the Wuhan Coronavirus — created an opportunity for ballot fraud at an unprecedented level. The vote-counting process in major cities is controlled by Democrats, with vestigial or non-existent Republican supervision. The Democrat precinct workers — in most cases part of the African-American political machine — are able to ensure that a reliable supply of ballots marked for the correct candidate can be delivered as needed.

The methodology used to produce the necessary results is complex. To gain a better understanding, I highly recommend Conservative Tree House, where Sundance has done extensive research on the intricacies of the ballot-counting process. Here’s an excerpt from a recent post:

Continue reading →

Our Democracy™: Alternatives to the Ballot Box

Posted on by
8

I posted on Friday about the consternation expressed by bien-pensants all across the West about dangers to “our democracy”. If you pay attention to what the globalists who claim to represent our interests tell us, the survival of Our Democracy™ requires us to follow the directives of people and organizations that are collectively identified as “stakeholders”. Stakeholders include a fairly large cabal of organizations, political leaders, and representatives of various corporations, NGOs, and charitable foundations. It goes without saying that ordinary voters are not considered stakeholders.

“Stakeholders” is a buzzword that has emerged in the last couple of decades to describe the dirigistes who plan for the future of Our Democracy™. If we were referring to Russia, they would be called “oligarchs”, or further afield in the Third World, perhaps “warlords”. But since these estimable folks are here in the enlightened West, they are simply “stakeholders”.

And we know, of course, that they have our best interests at heart.

The problem is: those pesky voters don’t always understand what their best interests are. When confronted with the difficult issues posed by our advanced technological society, they often make the wrong decisions. That’s why they need the help of those stakeholders, who are better informed about the nuances of our high-tech 21st-century civilization.

On the other hand, it’s important to maintain the polite fiction that the ignorant voters are the ones making the decisions. They’re guaranteed a voice by the universal franchise that was so painstakingly won more than a century ago. It is their right and duty to decide the direction of their affairs via the ballot box.

So what is to be done?

The stakeholders have developed three major strategies for directing the hoi-polloi in their electoral choices.

1. Propaganda

Up until 2016 this was the principal method used to generate the desired result in any given election.

First of all, it’s crucial that the major media be brought under stakeholder control. In Europe and Canada the process is simplified by state ownership of all the major television and radio outlets. In the USA the situation is somewhat more complicated, since most media are ostensibly in private hands. Funnily enough, however, all the major outlets move in lockstep on the most important issues, reliably promoting the line pushed by the stakeholders. Even Fox News is controlled opposition — it is set up as the despised right-wing alternative, yet it never veers far from the acceptable center. And that center has been moving inexorably leftwards since the end of the Second World War.

Various agencies of the permanent administrative state can bring pressure to bear on media outlets to persuade them stick to the preferred narrative. The explosion of official media regulations over the past few decades has guaranteed that every media corporation is breaking multiple laws every day, whether it intends to or not. Selective prosecution is an effective tool to keep the MSM in line. Those who stay within the accepted boundaries are left unmolested, while any outfit that strays too far from the narrative risks being hauled into court and tied up for months or years for violating various FCC regulations. The federal government’s pockets are bottomless, and any media corporation that runs afoul of it will eventually be slapped with a big-time fine, and will have to pay its own legal expenses. So it’s much easier just to stick within well-understood limits.

That’s the stick. The feds can also deploy multiple carrots: subsidies, tax breaks, lucrative contracts, concessions granting exclusive coverage of major public events, etc.

I don’t know all the exact ins and outs of this control system. All I can say with certainty is that the results are obvious: we have compliant media that move in lockstep on every important issue. This was made abundantly clear during the COVID-19 “pandemic”, when all major print and broadcast media simultaneously got with the CDC/NIAID/WHO program and never veered from it. It was uncanny.

The media control system generally worked well up until 2016. One of the legacies of the Second World War was that people had developed an ingrained trust of their national governments, which were perceived as beneficial institutions. As long as that reservoir of good will was still sufficiently deep, people could be herded and “nudged” into the desired behavior patterns, and would vote for candidates that were considered acceptable. The cherished illusion of the ballot box in Our Democracy™ could thus be maintained without having to resort to obvious coercion and fraud.

During every election the democratic process ran its course. The stakeholders would guide the selection of the candidates, and voters would be allowed to choose between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. It didn’t matter which one they voted for — both were considered acceptable to the Powers That Be, otherwise the stakeholders wouldn’t have put them in place.

Relentless media propaganda would always demonize one of them as “far right”, however — otherwise the center couldn’t be pushed relentlessly to the left. Statistically speaking, the media barrage had its intended effect: on balance, voters opted for more state control, more socialist policies, and more destruction of traditional cultural practices. And the bright shiny progressive Utopia thus drew ever closer.

Unfortunately for the stakeholders, the usual process got derailed in 2016. Tweedledum and Tweedledee were supposed to be Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush. Hillary would have won easily, but it wouldn’t matter if the voters resisted the leftward ratchet and chose the “far right” Jeb instead — the latter was fully captured, and posed no threat to the system.

But Donald Trump upset the applecart. He was not under the stakeholders’ control, and it wasn’t supposed to be possible for him to win the nomination, let alone the general election. When he did, the system was threatened. A tremor ran through the foundations of Barad-dûr.

And Mr. Trump wasn’t the only threat: Brexit also caused the earth to shake under the rules-based order of the West. The ignorant, turbulent voters on both sides of the Atlantic had gone against their programming and made choices they weren’t supposed to make.

The stakeholders closed ranks after 2016 and pulled out all the stops to make sure that nothing similar could ever happen again. In the process they were forced to reveal themselves — they had to step out from behind the curtain and wield an iron fist with its velvet glove removed. It was a salutary moment: what had once been a vague outline in the shadows now stood out sharp and clear, red-eyed and fanged.

People became aware they had been manipulated. As a result, the customary propaganda began to lose its effectiveness. It was no longer so easy to fool the Lumpenproletariat. Different tools for control needed to be selected from the stakeholders’ toolbox, which brings us to…

Continue reading →

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 9

Posted on by
12

Below is the ninth chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 9: How It Started

This chapter is a little out of kilter. It should have been chapter one, but I wanted to expose the fraudulent reporting and engineering of purported Covid-19 deaths first. Once everyone understands this criminal fraud, every other fraud relating to Covid-19 falls into place.

We don’t know when plans were first hatched to engineer a viral pandemic in 2020. We do know about Event 201 in October 2019, though, which was hosted by Johns Hopkins University and organised by the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Event 201 centred around a hypothetical global outbreak of a lethal virus and the subsequent response by governments around the world. It laid the groundwork for lockdowns, masking, and social distancing. None of these tyrannical measures had been part of pandemic health policies before. All the centuries-old, tried-and-trusted viral pandemic response plans were torn up and discarded in favour of targeting the healthy, rather than quarantining the ill.

On the whole, people don’t want to be locked up at home for the best part of a year and instructed to behave as though they were a lethal danger to all living things. Therefore, they had to be conditioned to obey the New Normal rules and regulations related to Covid-19. In short, they had to be terrorised into compliance.

Enter Neil Ferguson, pandemic modeller extraordinaire of Imperial College London. Ferguson predicted Covid-19 could kill half-a-million people in Britain and two million in America. The international media shrieked these headlines to the world. The politicians gravely warned us we were facing apocalyptic events. The World Health Organisation declared a Global Pandemic. Governments declared national health emergencies. And so began the lockdowns. And so began tyranny.

Neil Ferguson had modelled pandemic scenarios before. In 2005 he predicted two hundred million people could die globally from Bird Flu. In reality, only three hundred people died.

In 2009 he predicted sixty-five thousand deaths in the UK from Swine Flu. Only a few hundred died. In 2002 he predicted up to fifty thousand deaths in the UK, resulting from eating beef infected with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy — otherwise known as Mad Cow Disease. In reality only one hundred and seventy people died.

In 2001 Ferguson’s Imperial team produced modelling on foot and mouth disease suggesting animals should be culled without evidence of infection. This led to the slaughter of more than six million perfectly healthy cattle, sheep and pigs.

Continue reading →

Saving Our Democracy

Posted on by
10

In the past few years the phrase “our democracy” has gained near-universal currency in the West. Politicians and media talking heads continually invoke “our democracy” when urging or discouraging action on this or that significant political initiative. Every crisis is a “threat to our democracy.” Any reformer with a conservative agenda is charged with “attempting to overthrow our democracy”. Major political leaders sound the alarm about the need to “save our democracy.”

But what does saving Our Democracy™ actually involve?

In Ukraine, to cite one example, democracy is saved by not holding elections. President Volodymyr Zelensky’s term expired a while back, but there will be no new elections until the war with Russia is over. Somehow the West managed to hold elections during World Wars One and Two, but the Ukrainians are incapable of doing something similar.

Democracy is also being saved in Ukraine by banning opposition political parties, closing down Russian Orthodox churches, and jailing Mr. Zelensky’s political opponents. Evidently democracy can only thrive in a one-party state where all dissenting points of view are suppressed.

But that’s Ukraine, which is not, strictly speaking, Western. What about the bastions of the Free World that lie further west and across the Atlantic pond?

Opposition to mass immigration is the most frequently cited “danger to democracy” in Western Europe, Canada, and the United States. Those who want to close the borders and stop illegal immigration are identified as “far right” and denounced as “populists”. But populists are political leaders who want to do what is popular, that is, what the people want. Why isn’t that seen as the very essence of democracy? What could be more democratic than the popular will?

Ah, but you don’t understand what real democracy is. Real democracy isn’t about what the people want, but what the people need. Which, unfortunately, they are too stupid and too ignorant to figure out on their own. They need the help of their betters — who are not “populists” — to determine what is best for themselves.

The esteemed worthies who make those decisions are loosely classified as “stakeholders”. The system which uses their inputs and preferences to guide public policy is referred to in WEF-speak as “stakeholder capitalism”. Under stakeholder capitalism, a group of loosely-affiliated policy wonks collectively makes the decisions about what people will produce and consume, where they may live, how they must travel, and what their attitudes must be towards various protected identity groups.

Who are the stakeholders?

Continue reading →

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 6

Posted on by
5

Below is the sixth chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 6: Manipulating the Death Rate Data

If you have studiously ploughed through all the facts and figures so far, you must be wondering how on earth Western governments got away with the colossal fraud entailed in persuading us that Covid-19 deaths were enormously high throughout 2020. Ditto, that we were all equally threatened with death if we disobeyed the various ludicrous and tyrannical edicts crashing down upon us from the political, media, scientific and medical establishments.

What they did was actually very simple. Beautifully simple, in fact. They just applied the label of “Covid-19 death” to perfectly natural and normal deaths of the old and the ill, along with the deaths by terminally unfortunate accident of the young and the healthy.

Before PCR Testing became the norm, doctors were advised — without the actual necessity of looking at the recently departed — to label the death as a Covid-19 death if the deceased had shown any symptoms of Covid-19 such as breathlessness, fever, cough, cold etc. Needless to say, most old and ill people who die exhibit many of those symptoms.

After the PCR Testing regime became the norm, all deaths were labelled as Covid-19 if the deceased had tested PCR Positive. This included those who were dying from cancer, heart disease, stage-4 kidney disease etc. Mr X actually died of cancer, but Covid-19 was the label attributed to his death, simply because he had tested PCR positive two months earlier.

Even worse, a perfectly healthy twenty-one-year-old who died in a motorcycle accident was labelled a Covid-19 death if he had tested PCR positive three months previously. The government took some stick over this obviously fraudulent manipulation of mortality data, and decided to become less fraudulently insane by stating the PCR Positive Test must have taken place within twenty-eight days of the death.

This lessened the distortion to a degree, but nonetheless a fit and healthy twenty-five-year-old who died in a para-gliding accident was still labelled a Covid-19 death if he had tested positive at any point over the twenty-eight days between PCR test and para-glider plummet. All of this was criminally fraudulent, obviously, but it laid the groundwork for even more criminal insanity with regard to the future vaccines.

I don’t want to get into the whole vaccine issue in this article, but bear the following in mind: Fit and healthy thirty-year-old Mr Y was injected with the mRNA vaccine on Jan 1st, 2022. A few days later he felt a bit iffy and toddled along for a PCR test on January 5th which returned a positive result. On January 10th, 2022, poor old Mr Y suffered a heart attack whilst cycling and was pronounced dead at the scene.

The cause of death was listed as Covid-19. His family protested and said he had been feeling perfectly OK up to the date of the mRNA vaccine injection. Could the vaccine be responsible for his death, they asked the doctor. Of course not, she scoffed. Mr Y was technically unvaccinated, you see.

Continue reading →

Presidential Senility: An Italian Perspective

Posted on by
6

“The leader of the Free World” is obviously an advanced dementia case, leaving the Free World to coast along on autopilot. Fortunately for the West, the obscure oligarchs who rule us seem to be perfectly capable of handling the job without any input from mere elected leaders.

Below is an Italian take on President Biden’s performance at the G7 in Italy. Many thanks to Gary Fouse for translating this article from Il Giornale:

“He gets distracted…”

The video at the G7 and those new doubts on Biden’s health

The latest alarm bell on the condition of the US president: Here is the curtain call at the Borgo Egnazia summit

by Massimo Balsamo
June 14, 2024

There is great worry among the Democrats of the Stars and Stripes and it could not be otherwise. The reference is obviously to the state of health of Joe Biden who reverted to an incredible series of gaffes and blunders a few months from the presidential election against Donald Trump. Yesterday, during the G7 summit at Borgo Egnazia in Puglia. he created a scene that was anything but edifying. The 81-year-old and the other leaders attended a ceremony of the flags of the 7 nations and that of the European Union, dropping from the sky with soldiers of Folgore from two planes. At a certain point during the parachutists’ jump, Biden became distracted and wandered away from the group.

The videos available don’t leave large margins of interpretation. Following the exhibition of the parachutists, Biden moved a few meters and began to direct his appreciation to the parachutists with the thumbs-up gesture. Realizing what was happening, Giorgia Meloni approached the US president and called him back by touching his shoulders. A moment of great embarrassment added to those recorded in the past weeks. And on social media, Trump supporters also went wild, considering the absence of the Democrat at the gala dinner with President Sergio Mattarella and the other world leaders.

The sequence of what happened at Borgo Egnazia went viral, but in the States, it is hard to hide a certain worry. The testimony has multiplied regarding Biden’s alleged cognitive decline to the point that it could compromise his institutional functions, especially during such a delicate phase at the international level. Dozens of Republican and Democrat legislators and collaborators have spoken to the Wall Street Journal about the president’s public blunders, but also about his strange behavior in private meetings.

Many have stressed the palpable slowness of the president or the increasingly marked tendency to follow the suggestions of assistants. “He is no longer the same person as before,” is the fear that winds its way around the White House. An extremely complex situation just less than five months before the elections…

Debunking the Prebunkers

Posted on by
1

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has been grappling with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe for more than twelve years. Below is her report from this year’s supplementary meeting in Vienna.

First, the videos of her interventions. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for uploading these videos.

Intervention Day 1:

Intervention Day 2:

Debunking the Prebunkers

by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is to this day the only international organization permitting the input of civil society in its meetings in the human dimension (human rights) realm, which are organized by ODIHR (pronounced “oh dear”), Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. The main conference, the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, takes place in early fall in Warsaw, while the three supplementary meetings take place in Vienna. The second OSCE Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting, which addresses a topic chosen by the current Maltese chairmanship — pardon me, in 2024, it’s “chairpersonship” — focused on the urgent need for media literacy to foster democracy.

In original OSCE lingo:

The second Supplementary Human Dimension meeting will focus on […] the interlinkages between media literacy and democracy. It will provide a forum to explore challenges and opportunities in today’s online information environment and their impact on democratic participation, discussing the role of media freedom and information literacy in promoting active citizenry and social resilience, especially in an important election year like 2024.

Session I explored the role the media plays in strengthening social resilience amidst technological advances. The annotated agenda noted the need for the “fostering of data-based journalism that provides a counterbalance to misinformation […]. New fact-checking initiatives have been established with the aim to provide well-researched facts instead of false information.” One of the so-called introducers to the session was a young woman from Correctiv, yes, the “fact-checkers” that broke the sensational story of an innocuous meeting of like-minded people to discuss the future of Germany, a meeting that was likely infiltrated, either in person or with listening devices or both. Correctiv reiterated the urgent (!) need for fact-checkers, especially in light of the right-wing actions “we are currently witnessing.” Another introducer discussed “good” and “bad” info, as well as the “challenges” associated with this type of information.

In my first intervention I focused on the question of who decides what is good or bad information, who decides what a “false narrative” is, and whether “challenges” aren’t just “contradictory views” that are not pleasing to the Powers That Be. In addition, I asked how we, the citizenry, can form an opinion if we cannot access information or an alternate view if media outlets such as Russia Today are banned in the European Union. Furthermore, I addressed the Representative of the Freedom of the Media, who in her speech spoke about the necessity of protecting freedom of speech. I said: “However, the concern is more that the media reports something that goes against the prevailing narrative and that is immediately subjected to labeling, such as conspiracy theory or misinformation.” I quoted Elle Purnell, assistant editor at The Federalist: “Misinformation is the perversion of information; information doesn’t have a moral component.” I then turned to Correctiv: “It is the perfect example of government outsourcing censorship efforts to evade finger-pointing and accusations of censorship. How do I know that Correctiv is doing the dirty work of the German government? Because in the presentation, there was a reference to Correctiv sponsors, one of whom is the German ministry of culture.” I also told Correctiv that it is not the job of so-called “fact-checkers” to decide whether the opinions and assessments of other journalists, or anyone else, are correct.

For the entire intervention, click here.

Having skipped Session II, which “provide[d] a focused discussion on the role of media literacy in the context of elections” due to meetings, I returned to Session III, which “explore[d] the nexus between media freedom and media literacy and their positive contribution to wider democratic processes and security.”

So, now it’s all about “media literacy” and “prebunking”. The former term sounds familiar, but the latter is wholly novel in my world. In an age of rampant “information disorder”[1] with its fill-in-the-blank (mis/dis/mal) information,[2] the antidote is not seeking the truth by allowing more speech and more ideas, but to prebunk before we debunk. And, of course, more than ever, we need media pluralism, according to the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media. How there is media pluralism in the OSCE region when alternative media such as Russia Today are banned, she and others did not elaborate on.

The introducers noted that media literacy is a crucial skill in the 21st century as it enables democracy and security and urged the rebuilding of trust in the media. Thus, definitions are now called for:

Media Freedom Literacy: “The knowledge and skills that enable citizens to appreciate the democratic functions of the media, both online and offline. This includes understanding the significance of a pluralistic, well-functioning media landscape serving the public interest, along with the ability to critically evaluate and ethically produce media content.” (OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media)

Prebunking: “The approach to educate people preventively (sic!) about the mechanisms of disinformation is called Prebunking. While debunking involves correcting specific false reports after they have spread, prebunking has a preventive effect. This provides an opportunity to proactively combat misinformation before it spreads. By providing information and analytical tools, resilience to misleading content is strengthened. (Prebunking — protection against disinformation (klicksafe.de) [3])

Perhaps I am ignorant and/or naive, but prebunking to my simple mind appears to be another word for pre-censorship, that is, censoring an idea or a thought before it even has a chance in the marketplace of ideas. How does that square with the OSCE’s noble idea of “promoting and fostering freedom of expression”? I argue that it doesn’t, and this is surely intentional.

Continue reading →

Tweet, Tweet

Posted on by
1

Yesterday’s European elections must have sent a shiver of dread through the salons of the globalist oligarchs who rule over us.

“Those right-wing extremists are a threat to democracy! Don’t people know better than to vote for them?”

The Lumpenproletariat obviously cannot be trusted.

Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic the Trump juggernaut is gaining momentum. It’s clear that a mere criminal conviction in a kangaroo court is not enough to stop Orange Man. He can’t be permitted to get his hands on the levers of power. Something must be done.

One possible something is H5N1, better known as the Bird Flu. It’s already being hyped bigly by the news media. Fear porn about it is being ginned up.

Like COVID-19, H5N1 appears to be the product of gain-of-function research. Also like COVID-19, “vaccines” for it have been prepared in advance, and are waiting in the wings.

Between now and November we can expect lockdowns, mandatory masking, school closures, work-from-home, needles for everyone, vaccine passports, and…

Universal mail-in voting!

Problem solved.

The Enemy’s Chatbot Spills the Beans About the Endgame

Posted on by
5

Our Hungarian correspondent László sends the summary of a very interesting encounter with Machine Intelligence.

The Enemy’s Chatbot Spills the Beans About the Endgame

by László

“More power to the One World Government” seems to be part of the endgame of the Ukraine war — as ChatGPT put its foot in its mouth by suggesting that a peace process should be overseen by “international mediators” like the UN (which is a camouflage for the World Government).

From this perspective, the whole “Ukraine war” and “WW3” Line of Effort and narrative attacks are parts of a classic Problem / Reaction / Solution strategy. At the moment Europe seems to be in the Problem phase, with some (such as Hungary, demanding peace) already displaying the Reaction. Then, later on, we will most probably get the Solution.

How much the hoi polloi of the West will be made to suffer from a potentially escalated war, and the fearmongering opportunity that comes with that potential, before they start demanding the Solution is another issue.

So that you don’t have to read all the artificial gobbledygook, I highlighted (in bold) in the article below the most relevant parts the AI let slip. But it may be worth reading in its entirety, as it’s a kind of text that Vlad of Vlad Tepes blog calls “initiate language”. For instance, “non-aggression” means, in my opinion, that only our globalist overlords are entitled to aggression. Where the small-font part is that we, the peasants, and our nations are entitled only to submit.

Translation of the article from Pesti Srácok:

Artificial Intelligence has come up with a surprising peace plan to settle the Ukrainian-Russian war

Artificial intelligence is often mistaken for a sentient, thinking robot. This is perhaps the furthest from the truth. These “robots” do not think, but they can interpret text and draw logical conclusions in a split second. We could ask them to write a computer program for us, analyse it or create a poem, a picture, etc. We have just asked ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, to come up with a peace plan for the Ukrainian-Russian war. The result was surprising.

It’s important to note that although ChatGPT, Gemini and Alexa are all quite liberal-minded, if we phrase our questions cleverly, they miss the underlying intent. If you ask ChatGPT to analyse a family photo, for example, it will say that it contains both men and women. However, if you ask how it knows their gender if it hasn’t asked them before, it will apologise and change its answer.

We now asked ChatGPT what is the key to peace in Ukraine. Since he is a logical “robot”, he gave a logical answer. His peace plan looks like this:

1.   AN IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE
    Both sides should commit to an immediate and complete ceasefire. International observers should ensure that this is respected.
2.   THE START OF PEACE NEGOTIATIONS
    Peace talks should begin immediately in a neutral venue, with both parties represented and international mediators (e.g. UN, OSCE).
3.   SETTLEMENT OF TERRITORIAL ISSUES
    Develop a long-term plan to settle the status of disputed territories, taking into account the views of the local population (e.g. through a referendum).
4.   HUMANITARIAN AID
    Organise immediate humanitarian assistance in conflict-affected areas, including food, water and medical supplies.
5.   ECONOMIC RECOVERY
    Initiate economic recovery in war-affected regions, including reconstruction and job creation, with international support.
6.   SECURITY GUARANTEES
    Ensure international treaties and guarantees to avoid future conflicts, including respect for borders and non-aggression.
7.   LONG-TERM COOPERATION
    Develop mechanisms to promote long-term cooperation and confidence-building between the parties concerned, including cultural and economic relations.
 

We also asked ChatGPT what happens when neighbouring countries continue to support one of the warring parties with arms, to which it gave an interesting, but most importantly, logical answer:

Continue reading →

Sleepwalking Into World War Three

Posted on by
15

Despite the title of this post, we’re not really sleepwalking into World War Three — at least our leaders aren’t. For whatever reason, they’re marching with eyes wide open into a war with a major nuclear power.

I can’t pretend that I understand why the Powers That Be think that war with Russia is a good idea, but it’s obvious that they are hoping for one. Almost all NATO countries are discussing contingency plans for conscription, accelerated arms production, and preparing citizens for the hardships and privations of war. Possibly nuclear war.

It’s insane.

Few Western political leaders are willing to resist the pressure to jump on the war bandwagon. Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico was one, but he got shot. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is another. So far he hasn’t been shot, or stabbed, or blown up by a would-be assassin. But if I were he, I’d definitely have a food-taster on the payroll.

Mr. Orbán makes an appearance on Hungarian state radio every week to discuss relevant issues of public importance. Below are excerpts from his talk on May 24, in which he focuses on the difficulties Hungary faces in its stance against participation in the Ukrainian war.

Many thanks to László for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading →

Liberal Hegemony

Posted on by
3

Karl-Olov Arnstberg is a Swedish writer, ethnologist, and retired university professor. His essays are posted at his blog, Invandring och mörkläggning. Below is today’s installment of his “Sunday Chronicle”. Many thanks to our Swedish correspondent LN for the translation:

Sunday chronicle: Liberal hegemony

by Karl-Olov Arnstberg

At the international level, the liberal order is characterised by economic openness, i.e. low barriers to trade and investment, relations between states being regulated by laws and institutions such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and multilateral alliances such as NATO.

At the national level, the liberal order is synonymous with:

  • Democratically elected leaders
  • The rule of law
  • Market economy
  • Religious and social tolerance
  • Human rights

Proponents of a liberal world order do not believe that this dream society arises spontaneously or automatically sustains itself. On the contrary, they believe that the liberal order requires active leadership. They also agree the United States, as the only superpower, is uniquely qualified to take the lead. Because it faces no threats in the Western Hemisphere and is shielded from the rest of the world by two vast oceans, it can intervene in distant countries without jeopardising its own survival. The two fundamental beliefs of liberal hegemony:

  • The United States must remain far more powerful than any other country.
  • It should use its superior military power to defend, spread and deepen liberal values around the world.

In the 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, history seemed to be moving in the US direction and it was considered easy to spread the American version of liberalism. The victory in the Cold War, the so-called Velvet Revolutions in Eastern Europe and a wave of democratic transitions in Latin America convinced many that liberal democracy was the only logical end point for modern or even postmodern societies.

US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright called the United States ‘the indispensable nation that sees beyond what others do.’ The Washington Post hailed US foreign policy as ‘the landmine that protects civilisation from barbarism.’ Only so-called rogue states, led by dictators and international troublemakers, opposed the exercise of US power, but they were comparatively weak and politically isolated. In any case, they were assumed to be heading for the dustbin of history.

The political scientist Francis Fukuyama captured the zeitgeist perfectly when he argued that the great ideological battles of the past were now behind us and that humanity had reached the end of history. In the future, he said, there would be no struggle or conflict over major issues and consequently no need for generals or statesmen. Fukuyama warned that boredom could be the greatest danger of the future.

The enlargement and deepening of the EU in 1992, and the introduction of the euro as the single currency, fitted into this optimistic narrative. The EU was further proof that democracy, and the gradual development of international institutions, could bring lasting peace between countries that had previously fought bloody wars with each other. Overall, the future seemed bright not only for the United States but also for much of the world. Liberal values were on the rise and seemed to be inexorably pulling the world in the direction American leaders wanted it to go.

Continue reading →

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 1

Posted on by
1

Paul Weston has kindly given me permission to serialize his recently published book, Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Below is the first chapter.

Mr. Weston includes this prefatory note: “The point of the book is to lay out the colossal fraud in such a way as to be easily read and understood by the average person. Without their understanding what has happened, it becomes so much easier for it to happen again. If the majority realised the extent to which they’ve been conned they would be marching on our government buildings by now, with pitchforks in hand.”

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 1: Introduction

Four years after the Covid-tyranny began, the jury is pretty much out. The whole world became a gigantic film-set, produced by Bill Gates, and directed by the World Health Organisation. Our politicians, scientists and journalists acted out their leading roles whilst all of earth’s citizens became unimportant, disposable extras in a global Truman Horror-Show.

The organisation involved to make this happen is staggeringly vast. It must have taken years to plan, and it must have cost unimaginable sums of money, all of which has been repaid many times over by now. What an investment that turned out to be. As Bill Gates has repeatedly mentioned, the returns on vaccines are up to twenty times the initial investment.

I don’t believe such a gigantic operation was ever going to be just a one-off. I am convinced another pandemic is just around the corner. The WHO and Bill Gates have both talked about the inevitability of another one, and the WHO is currently engaged in a power grab designed to put it completely in charge of sovereign nations when the much-anticipated next pandemic arrives. Disease X is just a matter of time, I believe.

In order to stop this from happening, or at least to try to stop this from happening, it is essential that the majority of people understand what happened post March 2020. I have written a short, succinct book in order to get my message and warning out. It is easy to read, but also highly detailed in its exposure of the global fraud involved in driving the last so-called pandemic.

The book basically answers the following questions:

Continue reading →

Mathieu Slama: “Europe is This Place Without Identity, Without Culture”

Posted on by
7

Mathieu Slama is a French political journalist and essayist who teaches at the Sorbonne. In the following video he discusses his vision of Europe as a cosmopolitan paradise where all citizens are identity-free, and where evil nationalism can gain no traction. He acknowledges that current events are trending against him, and specifically mentions Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán as representing the forces of identitarian reaction.

From his tweet that accompanied the video:

@MathieuSlama

The identity of Europe is to be without identity. It is to be the place of human rights and openness. Which is the complete opposite of what it is today.

Renaud Camus, who posted the video on Twitter, remarked:

Here is the speech of the Genocidal Bloc in one of its purest versions. Just as France has no culture, Europe has no identity. Disappearance is its essence, its destruction is a non-crime by definition without a criminal.

Many thanks to HeHa for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading →

The Great Vaccine Leap Forward

Posted on by
Reply

An earlier version of this essay was first published in Norwegian at the website Document.no.

The Great Vaccine Leap Forward

by Fjordman

The people of China have repeatedly been used as pawns in grandiose plans. Authoritarian leaders have wanted to carry out major upheavals in society, without considering the suffering this could inflict on individuals.

In The Great Leap Forward under the Communist dictator Mao, China was to become an economic superpower through the collectivization of Chinese agriculture. People were treated as faceless means of production. The result was disastrous.

One of the frightening things about our age is that Western leaders are now inflicting great suffering on their populations by subjecting them to grandiose social and medical experiments.

Several specialists warn against what they call turbo cancer. Different types of cancers are now suddenly behaving more aggressively and developing faster than they normally would have done just a few years ago. Many young people are also affected by this.

This phenomenon seems to have begun after hundreds of millions of people across much of the world were injected with mRNA-based so-called coronavirus vaccines.

One of the experts who directly links the increase in aggressive cancer to the so-called corona vaccines is Ute Krüger from Germany. She has worked in Sweden for a long time and speaks Swedish well. Krüger is a specialist in pathology with more than 25 years of experience. For many years, she has also conducted cancer research at Lund University.[1]

Since the fall of 2022, she has been warning against the emergence of a new type of fast-growing “turbo tumors”. Many different types of cancer are showing a strong increase over the past few years, in both men and women.[2]

She has sounded the alarm in the scientific community, but has not received the response she had hoped for. No one in Kalmar, Sweden, where Krüger was employed, was interested in the study she proposed.

Despite increasing documentation of serious and potentially life-threatening side effects, criticism of mRNA-based injections has been dismissed as conspiracy theories for several years. Ute Krüger has now resigned as a senior physician and runs a private clinic.[3]

Continue reading →