Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

THE RESISTANCE TO THE ILLEGITIMATE (MENTALLY CHALLENGED OCCUPANT) BIDEN ADMINISTRATION ...


JakeHolman
 Share

Recommended Posts

American Greatness logo

Hillary vs. Trump Redux?

2024 could be a bizarre replay of America’s most unique presidential election in modern history
 
 
April 11, 2022
 

Former President Barack Obama last week made his triumphant return to the White House. It was a moment for the corporate left-wing media to relive its glory days; the event was treated with fanfare similar to that of the end of World War II. Yet it was a humiliating event for the current White House occupant, Joe Biden. 

While at the White House, Obama delivered a speech that was dismissive of his Democratic Party successor. At one point, he “jokingly” referred to Biden as “Vice President Biden.” 

When the speech ended, it was time for an ebullient photo-op with sycophants and Democratic Party functionaries alike. Smiling and in press-the-flesh campaign mode, both Obama and Kamala Harris appeared to box out the current president. Meanwhile, Biden, looking more like a nursing home patient than president of the United States, looked about the room for someone to notice him. 

 

Kamala Harris ’24? 

Clearly, Obama was signaling to all that the future of the Democratic Party is in the hands of Harris. Biden was merely meant as a placeholder; a convenient cudgel to knock former President Trump out of the way in 2020 and then to be discarded callously once this purpose had been fulfilled. 

But can Harris achieve the great victory she’d been tapped by the Obama cabal to accomplish for her party? 

This is, after all, a woman who couldn’t win the primaries of her party even though she was the darling of all its kingmakers. The purported “future” of the Democratic Party ultimately needed Mr. Magoo, Joe Biden, to save her flailing political career as it was crashing and burning in 2020. 

Today, Harris’ favorability rating is dangerously low for someone aspiring to be the next president. She has been tasked by the Biden team to handle some of the most difficult—insurmountable, from a Democrats’ point of view—issues. And from immigration to the current Ukraine crisis, Harris has handled none of them well. Arguably, she has exacerbated the crises by her mere presence. Her public appearances, at times, suggest she is even more incoherent than her reputedly senile boss! 

And for all the talk about Democrats readying to push Biden out and to force Harris upon an unwitting (and otherwise unenthusiastic) American public, Harris’ abysmal ratings and poor showing as a leader over the last two years suggest that whatever the party grandees may want, Harris is not up to the task. Therefore, much like Joe Biden currently, if Harris were to replace Biden in the middle of his term, she could also serve as a placeholder for someone else preparing to supersede her.

Could it be someone whose cackle is even more legendary than that of Harris? 

Enter Hillary 

Given these clear weaknesses on the part of Harris, it is possible that former First Lady Hillary Clinton is readying to run once more. 

Already, Clinton has been making the rounds on the major “news” networks to share her “wisdom” about the Russia-Ukraine crisis (which she helped to foster as Obama’s first secretary of state). Meanwhile, she and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have restarted the controversial (and notoriously corrupt) Clinton Global Initiative (CGI). Founded after President Clinton he left office in 2000, CGI was designed for only two things: laundering foreign cash to the Clintons while laying the groundwork for Hillary’s “inevitable” presidency. 

While Hillary Clinton has kept a relatively low-profile in public since her disastrous 2016 defeat, she has not given up the ghost entirely. Instead, Clinton has been working quietly to restore the network that was shattered by Trump’s presidential win. By 2024, enough pieces will have been put in place for her to announce her third run for the White House. 

This is all but certain if Kamala Harris assumes the Oval Office after the expected disastrous midterm elections and predictably flounders. With little talent available to replace Harris as the frontrunner in 2024, Hillary will offer herself as the only one capable of running things; a steady hand to walk the country into the third decade of the 21st century. 

This, of course, will cause fissures and much backbiting within the Democratic Party. 

We’ve known since Edward Klein’s reporting years ago that the Clintons and Obamas don’t particularly care for one another. It was Hillary Clinton’s campaign, remember, that created the “birther” conspiracy in 2008 about Obama’s Kenyan lineage—a smear that, to this day, Republicans are wrongly accused of having crafted. 

After the nasty 2008 Democratic Party presidential primary in which Obama defeated Clinton, it was Michelle Obama who insisted her husband not nominate Hillary as his vice president (for obvious reasons) but instead give it to Biden and make Clinton his secretary of state. And throughout the Obama Administration, the two powerful families never truly got along. They merely tolerated and used each other for their own Machiavellian purposes. The last thing that either family wants is to see the other rise to dominate the DNC. 

From the moment she announced her run for president in 2020, Kamala Harris was the Obamas’ preferred pick. When she could not achieve victory, the Obamas shifted to Biden. But Biden’s presidency was never really the endgame for the Obamas. He was too old and too senile for them. Harris remained the bedrock of their strategy for the future of the Democratic Party. 

The Clintons, however, likely have other plans. And with Harris’ awful showing, there is a chance not only to wrest the DNC away from Obama’s Chicago clique, but possibly to restore the Clintons primacy in the party. Yes, Hillary will be 77 by then but, sadly, these days being old is not a limiting factor for running—and becoming—president.

The Trump Factor 

The only hitch for Hillary will be whether her old Republican nemesis, Donald Trump, opts to run for reelection. Just as in 2016, Hillary likely could beat any Republican nominee she goes up against—other than the gonzo real estate magnate-turned-reality-television-star-turned-president, that is. It is my belief that, unless the current spate of investigations into his finances and other accusations the Left has lobbed at the 45th president stick, Trump will absolutely run for a second term. 

For those wishing for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to run, if Trump is running, he will not

Trump has made it clear that, if 2016 was the political portrayal of his first bestselling book, The Art of the Deal, 2024 would be the real-world portrayal of his second book, The Art of the Comebackand how fitting would it be for the billionaire to go up against his old rival, Clinton, once more? 

Thus, 2024 could be a bizarre replay of America’s most unique presidential election in modern history. Only this time, Trump will be angrier and out for even more revenge than he was in 2016. 

Should Trump run again (which seems likely at this point), and should things continue deteriorating under the Democratic Party’s leadership as they presently are, then there is simply no way that Kamala Harris could make a serious run for president. At that point, lacking another viable, younger alternative, Clinton becomes the most likely Democratic Party nominee. 

And both she and Trump have unfinished business. 

Should Clinton run against Trump, it will be ratings gold and a made-to-order television spectacle. Yet, one can expect very similar results to 2016, if only because the Democrats will have so badly botched the previous four years. One thing is certain: 2024 is shaping up to be as wild of an election cycle as 2016 was. 

About Brandon J. Weichert

Brandon J. Weichert is a geopolitical analyst who manages The Weichert Report. He is a contributing editor at American Greatness and a contributor at Asia Times . He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower (Republic Book Publishers). His second book, The Shadow War: Iran's Quest for Supremacy (Republic Book Publishers) is due in Fall of 2022. Weichert is an educator who travels the country speaking to military and business audiences about space, geopolitics, technology, and the future of war. He can be followed via Twitter: @WeTheBrandon.

Hillary vs. Trump Redux? › American Greatness (amgreatness.com)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The Epoch Times

Never Trumpers Are Whistling Past the Graveyard
Conrad Black
 April 25, 2022 Updated: April 26, 2022

Commentary

Peggy Noonan, though it’s the last honor that she would seek, has become the human barometer of the most civilized and amiable Biden media apologists.

Her opinions are interesting not only because they’re usually thoughtful and elegantly formulated, but also, because she’s perceptive and civilized, she may be relied upon to put the most plausible face on the beleaguered Republicans-for-Biden faction.

She wasn’t an early Never Trumper in 2016 and recognized Trump’s novel and powerful appeal, though she found him too demagogic, loose with the facts, and simplistic in his treatment of complicated issues to be a candidate for any support from her. She reported on the 2017 inauguration of Trump with commendable fairness and a particularly gracious description of Melania Trump on that day. Her coverage of the Trump presidency, while generally antagonistic, was always well within the bounds of fair comment, stopped well short of the desperate snobbery of most anti-Trump Republicans, and never really took the bait on the worst of the Democratic-media fraudulent allegations against the president: Russian collusion and the Zelenskyy telephone call impeachment.

But gradually and perceptibly to her readers, Trump revolted her. It was hard not to identify to some degree with those Republicans and moderate Democrats who acknowledged some agreement with many of Trump’s policies but couldn’t abide what they considered the often rampant egotism, reckless over-simplicity, and boorishness of Trump’s public personality. The presidency of the United States, as a fusion of world historic lore with contemporary influence in the world, has no close rivals as the most exalted position on earth. The papacy, to use Stalin’s metaphor, has many divisions, but little impact on economics or the correlation of forces between the great powers (despite Pope John Paul II’s important role in the Western victory in the Cold War). Reservations about some of the foibles of the former president are understandable.

But for reasons that Peggy Noonan never explicitly clarified to her readers, in the course of 2019 she veered sharply away from sensible Trump-distaste to the vanguard of Trump-hate, describing him as a “malignancy metastasizing in the Oval.” She cut any civilized connection that she had with the Trump Republicans and bet her ranch on Joe Biden. As she saw the strength of the anti-Trump coalition, her confidence that Biden would win always seemed to be quite high, though she did volunteer to me in a cordial exchange of emails we had just before election day that Trump was, “considering the forces opposed to him, formidable.” Given that Noonan is, though a hard-hitting commentator, a very decent and kindly person, one might have expected her, feeling vindicated by the election, to have been a force for conciliation.

However, she’s one of those who will never be the same after Jan. 6, 2021. She seems not to have noticed the obvious impact of doubtfully legal changes to the voting and vote counting methods in key states supposedly to facilitate voting during a pandemic, or to have attached much importance to Mark Zuckerberg’s contribution of $400 million to assist in collecting votes, or to the appearance of over 4 million harvested ballots that could not be verified, or even by the refusal of the judicial system to consider any of the constitutional questions.

But scores of millions of people are concerned by these facts, and thought a large demonstration at the Capitol was an excellent idea. Few people approve of trespass or vandalism, but it was hard to imagine that adequate security would not have been provided, and many found the presence of the lunatic in the Wagnerian Norseman costume and other absurd characters in Statuary Hall rather amusing. Congress is terribly pompous and has fully earned its very low approval rating with the public. In the circumstances, Trump’s own remarks to the large audience of his followers on Jan. 6 were reasonably moderate. Certainly the last thing he sought was an invasion of the Capitol by an unruly mob claiming to support him. But Noonan flipped her cork and started referring darkly to “1/6” as if it bore any resemblance to 9/11.

It soon became evident that the Biden administration was grossly misguided in every policy area, and almost completely dominated by the Sanders-Ocasio Cortez socialist wing of the Democrats (which Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) himself admits is only about 30 or 35 percent of it). Instead of urging a course correction, though her concern was evident, Noonan beat the war drums on “1/6” almost to the Afghanistan debacle, and since then has been the losing sides’ second half cheerleader in a 30–0 game. Biden just had to do a few things differently, prepare better, be more relaxed, be less “self-referential.” And why couldn’t Trump just lose with dignity like Richard Nixon did in 1960? (Nixon got no credit for his patriotic view that the country couldn’t undertake a serious recount in the middle of the Cold War, and the 1960 election wasn’t remotely as dubious a result as that of 2020.) This past Saturday in the Wall Street Journal she advised Biden on his messaging.

She and all the Never Trumpers are whistling past the graveyard. Whatever his stylistic shortcomings, Donald Trump repositioned the Republican Party out of the country clubs to where it could poach heavily from the long-untouchable Democratic fiefdoms of African-American and Hispanic voters. He enacted a stroke of political genius in transposing celebrity to the highest elective office, and he was somewhat artistic in putting the capitalism of William McKinley and Calvin Coolidge to work incentivizing new employment in economically disadvantaged areas: He used pure capitalism to eliminate unemployment without inflation.

The idea that Trump was a freakish, meteoric fly-past and that the Republicans would go meekly back onto the slow conveyor belt to the left on which the Bushes, and McCain and Romney were happy to ride, was bunk. But Biden was never presidential material—a journeyman from the pocket borough of Delaware who defamed Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas, always had truthfulness and plagiarism problems, whose first two campaigns for the presidential nomination were farcical; it was never clear what possessed Barack Obama to select him for vice president. Robert Gates pointed out that he was always mistaken, and Jonah Goldberg spoke for most knowledgeable observers when he wrote about 10 years ago that Biden had “a hot-air balloon” for a head.

On top of his basic limitations, Biden is clearly slipping mentally and is promoting authoritarian socialism that the country didn’t vote for and doesn’t want. He’s a completely unfeasible president, long past Noonan’s pointers to sharpen his performance. It’s now a race between Biden becoming convinced that the best course is to invoke the ravages of age and make an honorable midterm parting that would be covered by the civility normally accorded to the elderly; or whether he waits until revelations of the Biden family’s sticky-fingered financial activities make it practically impossible for the president to continue.

In their irrational hatred of Trump, Noonan and her kindred spirits are complicit in covering up a rigged election that inflicted the most incompetent administration in American history on the country and the world. There’s no early way back into the Republicans for the Trump-haters, and the Democratic strategists who produced this sequence of disasters will be feeling the pain for a long time.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

 
Follow
Conrad Black has been one of Canada’s most prominent financiers for 40 years and was one of the leading newspaper publishers in the world. He’s the author of authoritative biographies of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Richard Nixon, and, most recently, “Donald J. Trump: A President Like No Other,” which has been republished in updated form. Please follow Conrad Black with Bill Bennett and Victor Davis Hanson on their podcast Scholars and Sense.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^

The Bush Neo-con faction of the party is attempting to take back power and reinstate its vision of Nation Building in the World. Once Trump takes power again, he must not put Bush Republicans in his administration -- only America First conservatives.

JH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2022 at 7:57 AM, JakeHolman said:

^^

The Bush Neo-con faction of the party is attempting to take back power and reinstate its vision of Nation Building in the World. Once Trump takes power again, he must not put Bush Republicans in his administration -- only America First conservatives.

JH

Trump's people are nationalist populists. There is very little about them that can be termed conservative in either the political or personal senses. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

rcp-logo-ss-red-250.png

A Big Night for Vance and Trump
By Susan Crabtree - RCP Staff

Read >> A Big Night for Vance and Trump | RealClearPolitics

 

Vance Win More Proof That Trump Is King of the GOP

Sarah Longwell, New York Times May 4, 2022

Trump hasn't endorsed all Republicans, but almost all have endorsed Trump.

Read Full Article »

 

Big Win for Vance a Big Loss for Beltway Neocons

Tiana Lowe, Washington Examiner May 4, 2022

Until the end of April, J.D. Vance's storied career as a self-made Middle-American memoirist, conservative firebrand, and venture capitalist risked sputtering out as a third-place also-ran in Ohio's Republican Senate primary. All of that changed with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a single debate,…

Read Full Article »

 

 

 

See the source image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Jake, you just made reference to "Biden's war on White America" in another of your threads but I don't see even a passing reference made by you to the murdered black victims of a Buffalo white supremacist. No one has to guess why.

new-york-shooting.JPG

new-york-shooting.JPG

buffalo-supermarket-shooting.jpg

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

LewRockwell.com

anti-stateanti-warpro-market

 

The Great Reset Snakes Are Slithering Together in Davos
By Dr. Joseph Mercola

Mercola.com

June 2, 2022

View >> The Great Reset Snakes Are Slithering Together in Davos - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

In the video above, which is part of a larger “Great Reset” documentary series, Rebel News highlights the origins of the World Economic Forum1 (WEF), its founder Klaus Schwab, and other key players, and the WEF’s central role in The Great Reset, which promises (read: threatens) to overturn society and life as we know it in ways that are hard to imagine.

In summary, The Great Reset involves the demolition and radical overhaul of several interlocking pillars of civilization: technology, society, economy, environment and geopolitics. Food and health also fall within these categories. Through control of these core pillars, the WEF and its globalist allies intend to seize control of all the nations of the world and centralize all power and wealth.

The WEF’s Plan

As noted by Rebel News, the WEF is an organization that profits from famine and disease; it uses tragedies and fear to further its own agenda — “one that dictates what you eat, what you own, what you think, under the guise of a ‘sustainable future.'”

According to the WEF, capitalism is dead and we can no longer allow for free markets. Instead, we need a top-down governance, a New World Order, that can ensure “fair and equitable” distribution of dwindling resources, including energy and food. What they’re really saying, however, is that soon-to-be-useless people are gobbling up “their” resources. They see us — you and me — as an existential threat to their luxurious lifestyle.

So, their decades-old plan is to seize control of it all, transfer all wealth and private ownership into their own hands, and centrally control who gets what and when. It’s important to realize that this WEF-led cabal believes in transhumanist and technocratic principles.

What Is Technocracy?

Technocracy is at its core an economic system, not a political one. However, it’s wholly unnatural, and therefore also requires unnatural means to keep it going. Rather than being based on common pricing mechanisms such as supply and demand or free commerce, the economy of technocracy is based on energy resources, which then dictate the types of products being produced, bought, sold and consumed.

The technocratic system requires extensive surveillance and artificial intelligence-driven technologies to keep everyone in check.

In essence, energy replaces the concept of money as a commodity. That’s strange enough, but it gets stranger still. Technocracy, which emerged in the 1930s during the height of the Great Depression, the brainchildren of which were scientists and engineers, also requires social engineering to work.

If people are allowed to do what they want, consumer demand ultimately drives commerce, but that won’t fly in a technocratic economy. Instead, consumers need to be directed, herded if you will, to consume that which the system needs them to consume, and in order for that to happen, they need to be more or less brainwashed. As a result, the technocratic system requires extensive surveillance and artificial intelligence-driven technologies to keep everyone in check.

Understanding the Mind of the Technocrats

View >> The Great Reset Snakes Are Slithering Together in Davos - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

As Schwab himself has declared on many occasions, they want a society in which humans are merged with machine and artificial intelligence (AI). They look forward to extreme longevity, if not immortality through technological means.

They place no value on spiritual ideas such as the survival of the soul. They don’t believe in the nonlocality of consciousness. If they did, they wouldn’t believe consciousness can simply be uploaded into a synthetic body. They believe that, through technology and AI, they will be able to replace God and the natural order with reengineered lifeforms of their own creation, including a reengineered humanity.

They actually believe they’re better, more evolved than the rest of us, and this superiority gives them the right to decide the fate of mankind. They also reject the notion of free will.2 Once you understand this basic mindset, it’s easier to understand why they think nothing of stripping you of your freedom and ability to make choices for yourself. As noted by Tessa Lena in “The Mind of a Technocrat: What Drives Them?“:

“To a technocrat, a human being is an imperfect machine, a humble meat bag that is operated by software, which is produced by the brain. The technocrat’s understanding of life is based on a very primitive, linear vision; it’s void of spiritual mystery …

The force driving the mind of a technocrat is the overbearing emotional need for total control, combined with mistrust for other people in general. They seemingly look to compensate for their emotional poverty. (In other words, there is no reason to admire their successes as their successes are based on theft of other people’s right to free will.)

The technocrats’ desire to fully control their surroundings is anxiety-driven. They simply can’t stand the feeling of uncertainty that comes with allowing other people’s subjective choices to play any role. They don’t trust others to do the right thing, much like a very neurotic parent doesn’t trust his child’s ability to choose wisely without supervision — but far less benevolently.

Their desire for control is intensely neurotic. They are sitting on needles, so to speak (a Russian idiom and a pun in the light of today) — and in order to dampen their anxiety, they resort to trying to implement their controlling ambitions …

Technocrats may think they are the cream of the crop. They may think that their brilliant vision is good for the world. But regardless of whether they believe themselves to be the good guys or the bad guys, their thirst for total control is a pathological, anxiety-driven expression. They can’t stand being dependent on other people’s free will, and so they aspire to squash it, which is not existentially right.”

Annual Meeting in Davos

Each year, the WEF holds a meeting in Davos, Switzerland. Thousands of global movers and shakers fly in on private jets to decide how best to stop the working class from driving gas-powered cars, heating their homes and eating meat. Does anyone still believe that a bunch of billionaire “elites” can make life “fair and equitable” for everyone?

Attendees include corporate executives, bankers and financiers, heads of state, finance and trade ministers, central bankers, policymakers, the heads of international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, the Bank for International Settlements, the United Nations and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Many academics, economists, political scientists, journalists, cultural elites and celebrities are also invited.

This year’s meeting took place May 22 through 26.3 On the first day, participants were treated to an immersive experience of the metaverse in their own digital avatar. Essentially, this is where they want to bring the masses of mankind — into a digital reality where enjoyment of resources doesn’t involve actual use of real-world resources. For example, rather than buying clothes for your biological body, you’ll spend digital currency on a wardrobe for your digital avatar.

Day 2 included a discussion about how manufacturing companies can accelerate their implementation of automation. The idea is to replace most of the human workforce with robotics and AI. As you might expect, this will render large portions of humanity superfluous and “useless.” What to do with them all? Professor Yuval Noah Harari, a Schwab adviser, has stated he believes the answer will be a combination of “drugs and video games.”4

Haves and Have Nots Among Journalists

 

 

Among the journalists invited to the 2022 meeting was New York Times managing editor Rebecca Blumenstein. Rebel News reporter Avi Yemini confronted Blumenstein in Davos (video above), asking how the public is supposed to trust the NYT’s reporting on the event when she’s an invited guest. Blumenstein refused to answer the question, thereby cementing the impression that she’s really not there as an independent journalist. She’s part of the event. She’s part of the club.

Additional evidence that not all journalists are equal was evidenced by the attempt by armed WEF police officers to detain conservative journalist Jack Posobiec (video below).5 When other journalists got involved and started filming and asking questions, the police took off. The fact that the WEF has ITS OWN police force should be a wakeup call. Clearly, they’re far more than just another nongovernmental organization (NGO).

Sustainable Development Is Technocracy

Many of the terms we’ve heard more and more of in recent years refer to technocracy under a different name. Examples include sustainable development, Agenda 21, the 2030 Agenda, the New Urban Agenda, green economy, the green new deal and the climate change movement in general.

They all refer to and are part of technocracy and resource-based economics. Other terms that are synonymous with technocracy include the Great Reset,6 the Fourth Industrial Revolution7 and the slogan Build Back Better.8 The Paris Climate Agreement is also part and parcel of the technocratic agenda.

The common goal of all these movements and agendas is to capture all of the resources of the world — the ownership of them — for a small global elite group that has the know-how to program the computer systems that will ultimately dictate the lives of everyone. It’s really the ultimate form of totalitarianism.

When they talk about “wealth redistribution,” what they’re really referring to is the redistribution of resources from us to them. The WEF has publicly announced that by 2030, you will own nothing. Everything you need you will rent — from them — and deciding factors for what you’re allowed to rent will include things like your carbon credits and social credit score.

Gone will be the days of putting in a day’s work, receiving a paycheck and spending it to your heart’s content. No, the digital currency will be programmable, so the issuer can decide when and what you can spend it on, based on the data in your digital identity. This will all be automated and run by AI, of course, so there won’t be anyone to complain to.

What the Green Revolution Is All About

While “going green” sounds and feels like the right thing to do, it’s becoming imperative for people to understand what the green agenda is really all about. Shocking as it may sound, the green agenda was invented, fabricated, by the Club of Rome (a scientific think tank allied with the WEF) to justify a depopulation agenda.9

The need for population control is described in the 1972 book, “The Limits to Growth,”10 which warned that “if the world’s consumption patterns and population growth continued at the same high rates of the time, the earth would strike its limits within a century.”

Then, in the 1991 book, “The First Global Revolution,”11 the Club of Rome argued that depopulation policies might gain widespread support if they could be linked to an existential fight against a common enemy. An excerpt from “The First Global Revolution” reads:12

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill.”

So, in plain English, the intended result of “going green” is depopulation. This intention is now finally becoming visible when you consider the implications of eliminating oil and gas production without having viable alternatives in place, which is what Biden and other global leaders are in the process of doing.

Not only do you need oil to make fertilizer, but we also don’t have farm equipment that can run on solar or wind power. So, food production essentially grinds to a halt. Heavy construction machinery also can’t run on these alternative sources of energy, so there go the infrastructure and home building businesses.

To many, it seems these global leaders are acting out of ignorance, but it’s quite possible their actions are intentional. It’s just that no one wants to consider that the intention is to harm as many people as possible — to actually rid the planet of soon-to-be “useless” people.

It may be quite chilling to realize that the climate change threat narrative was cooked up in the late 1980s for the sole purpose of being able to implement a global depopulation agenda without stirring up excessive resistance. But depopulation and eugenics are at the heart of what the WEF and its allies are trying to achieve.

The WEF even admits they’re using the Club of Rome’s “planetary emergency plan” to provide “a new compass for nations” to follow.13 So, the WEF and its allied nations are all following a plan that has depopulation as an admitted intended end result.

Phase 2 of the Great Reset: War

As I discussed in “Phase 2 of the Great Reset: War,” the drums of war are also part and parcel of The Great Reset plan. Why? Because war will accelerate the economic collapse required before nations can “Build Back Better.”14 The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is helping to catalyze The Great Reset in a number of different ways.

For starters, supply chains of all kinds are being disrupted at an unprecedented level and pace by the war between Russia and Ukraine. Fuel shortages and inflation are also taking off. Geopolitical tensions may also trigger stagflation, an economic situation in which inflation and unemployment rates are high while economic growth slows.15

It’s a precarious dilemma for economic policy, because strategies that help lower inflation can also make unemployment worse. You can learn more about this in the March 10, 2022, Conversation article, “Why Stagflation Is an Economic Nightmare.”16

The end result is increased dependence on government subsidies, and this is a clear goal of The Great Reset. Universal basic income is one planned strategy that will create dependency. It will also ensure we’re all equally poor and unable to threaten their monopoly on power and wealth.

Universal poverty is really what they mean when they talk about making the world “fair and equitable.” No one will have anything. Everyone will be equally poor and dependent, without hope of ever being able to rise into the “elite” technocratic class.

The Ukraine war is also reducing Europe’s reliance on Russian energy, thereby reinforcing the urgency of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. In lockstep with The Great Reset, policymakers around the world are using the sanctions against the Russian energy sector to accelerate the transition to “green” energy, the intention behind which is what I just discussed.

Russia’s decision to block exports of fertilizer and food crops in response to being deplatformed from the Swift system will also create food shortages, and this too plays right into the Great Reset plan. In recent years, we’ve been urged by Great Reset front men like Bill Gates to stop eating real meat and switch to synthetic lab-grown meat instead.

Making people reliant on patented synthetic food will benefit the globalists in more ways than one. People will get sicker, and hence more reliant on government aid. They’ll be dependent on food produced by monopolies and hence easier to control. And, over time, as people forget how to grow and raise food, the ability to control the global population will increase.

In addition to all of this, media are chumming the waters with fearporn about monkeypox — just in time for the push to relinquish national sovereignty to the World Health Organization, which is also allied with the WEF.

In closing, Michael Osterholm’s report from the 2010 Davos meeting, which was aflame with talks about pandemic planning, having just gone through the 2009/2010 swine flu pandemic is quite telling. All those years ago, he wrote:17

“I learned much in Davos, but I was troubled by the complete lack of attention to such critical questions as:

  • How do we protect global supply chains when we face another inevitable pandemic that could bring about widespread, severe illness? …
  • How do we take the lessons we’ve learned from our experience with H1N1 and embed them into our organizations so they’re not forgotten?

Instead, the tenor of the conversations at Davos was about globalization …”

Twelve years ago, the Davos billionaires, bankers and heads of state had the opportunity to prove they were capable of stewarding this Earth ship. But after the swine flu pandemic, they didn’t solve the problems that had become apparent.

They didn’t solve the supply chain issues, and we had the same but worse issues when COVID came along. The only thing they solved was how to silence the critics. Back then, there was talk that “heads should roll” because of mismanagement of the pandemic.

Well, no heads rolled. Everything stayed the same, and now we’ve gone through two years of the worst pandemic mismanagement imaginable. Now, the globalist cabal is pushing for the inept WHO to become the sole decision-maker in pandemics, which the WHO would be able to declare at will, based on its own definitions. We’re at a very dangerous crossroads.

We have to remember, though, that the fate of the world is not for Schwab and the Davos crowd to decide. It’s ours. If we do not resist their plans, we’ve made the choice to accept their version of the future.

Sources and References

The Best of Dr. Joseph Mercola

 

Copyright © Dr. Joseph Mercola

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...