Posts for: pafret
Feb 3, 2019 09:28:37 #
(Main)
Unrest in France: No End in Sight
by Guy Millière
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13660/france-unrest
The third group is extremely large: it is the rest of the population. The upper class treat them as regrettable dead weight and expect nothing from them except silence and submission. Its members often have a hard time making ends meet. They pay taxes but can see that a growing portion is being used to subsidize the very people who drove them out of their suburban homes.
For the moment, Macron does not seem to want to recognize that these people even exist.
When Macron lowered the taxes of the wealthiest but increased the taxes of these "peripherals" by means of a fuel tax, it was seen as the last straw -- in addition to his arrogant condescension.
"Today, most of those who protest do not attack the police. But instead of acting to bring down the violence, the police are receiving orders pushing them to be very violent. I do not blame the police. I blame those who give them orders". — Xavier Lemoine, the mayor of Montfermeil, a city in the Eastern suburbs of Paris where the 2005 riots were extremely destructive,
Police scuffle with a yellow vest protester on December 18, 2018 in Biarritz, France. (Photo by Gari Garaialde/Getty Images)
Saturday, January 26th 2019. "Yellow vests" protests were being organized in the main cities of France. Mobilization was not weakening. Support from the population had decreased slightly but was still huge (60%-70%, according to polls). The main slogan has remained the same since November 17, 2018: "Macron must resign". In December, another slogan was added: "Citizens' initiative referendum".
The government and French President Emmanuel Macron have been doing everything they can to crush the movement. They have tried insults, defamation and have said the demonstrators were both "seditious people" wishing to overthrow the institutions and fascist "brown shirts". On December 31, Macron described them, as "hateful crowds". The presence of some anti-Semites led a government spokesman (incorrectly) to describe the entire movement as "anti-Semitic".
The Minister of the Interior, Christophe Castaner, ordered the police to resort to a degree of violence not seen since the time of the Algerian war (1954-62). During the two last decades in France, other riots have taken place many times. In 2005, for instance, when the whole country was subjected to arson and riots for weeks, the number of wounded rioters remained low. But violence has consequences. In just the last few weeks, 1,700 protesters were wounded, some seriously. Nineteen lost an eye; four lost a hand. Although French police officers do not use lethal weapons, they do use rubber ball launchers and often fire at protesters' faces -- a target prohibited by the current rules of engagement. The French are also the only police force in Europe to use Sting-Ball grenades.
Macron has never treated protesters as people who have legitimate claims, so he has never paid attention to their claims. He only agreed to suspend the additional fuel tax, which was to have been begun in January, and to grant a slight increase in the minimum wage -- all of which he did only after weeks of protests.
Journalists say that Macron thought the movement would fade away after the end-of-year break; that police violence and desperation would induce the demonstrators to resign themselves to their fates, and that the support of the general population would collapse. Nothing of the sort took place.
It is clear that Macron does not want to meet the main demands of the protesters; that he will not resign, and that he refuses to accept a citizens' initiative referendum. He has apparently decided that if he dissolved the national assembly and called for legislative elections to end the crisis -- as President Charles de Gaulle did it to put an end to an uprising in May 1968, as allowed by the French Constitution -- he would suffer a scathing defeat. He can see that an overwhelming majority of the French people reject him, so apparently he has determined to seek a way out:
Macron called for a "great national debate" to address the problems facing the country. It soon became clear, however, that the "great debate" would be unconventional, to say the least.
Macron wrote a letter to all French citizens inviting them to "participate", but saying explicitly that the "debate" would not change anything, that the government would continue in exactly the same direction ("I have not forgotten that I was elected on a project, on major orientations to which I remain faithful."), and that everything that was done by the government since June 2017 would remain unchanged ("We will not go back on the measures we have taken").
He then entrusted organizing the "debate" and drafting its conclusions to two members of the government, and requested that "registers of grievances" be made available to the public in all town halls.
Macron then launched the "debate" by meeting mayors of many cities, but not in public. He seems to have been concerned that if he organized meetings open to the public, he would be immediately chased away by crowds.
The first two meetings took place in small cities (with 2000-3000 inhabitants), and with mayors whom the organizers -- chosen by Macron -- allowed to come. The organizers also selected the questions to be asked, then sent them to Macron to be answered at the meeting.
The day before each meeting, the selected city was placed under the administration of legions of police. All access roads to the city were closed, and anyone found wearing a yellow vest or carrying one in his car was fined. All protests in the city were flatly forbidden. The police made sure that the road used by Macron's convoy to reach the city was empty of any human presence for several hours before the convoy arrived.
Television news channels were asked to broadcast the entire meetings, which lasted six to seven hours. Only a few journalists, also selected by Macron, had permission to attend.
Several commentators stressed that pretending to "debate" is nonsense, and that entrusting the organization of the "debate" and the drafting of its conclusions to members of the government, and the way the meetings were organized, clearly show that these performances are a sham.
Some commentators pointed out that the term "register of grievances" has not been used since the time of absolute monarchy, that mayors are treated as waxworks and that placing the cities Macron visits in a state of siege is unworthy of a democracy.
A French economist, Nicolas Lecaussin, who grew up in Romania, wrote that these meetings reminded him of those in Romania during communism.
The author Éric Zemmour said that Macron is desperately trying to save his presidency but that the attempt will be useless:
"Macron has lost all legitimacy. His presidency is dead... For three months the country stopped economically; and Emmanuel Macron, to try to save his presidency, inflicts on the country two months of additional economic stagnation, and two more months of demonstrations. When people understand that they have been deceived, anger could increase... France is already a country in very bad shape."
The French economy is, in fact, sclerotic. The Index of Economic Freedom created by the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal ranks it 71st in the world (35th among the 44 countries in the Europe region) and notes that "the government spending accounts for more than half of total domestic output". The Index also reveals that "the budget has been chronically in deficit"; that "corruption remains a problem and that "the labor market is burdened with rigid regulations" leading to a high level of unemployment.
France has lost almost all its factories (industrial jobs account for only 9.6% of total employment). Its agriculture is in ruins, despite huge European subsidies: 30% percent of French farmers earn less than 350 euros ($400) a month and dozens commit suicide each year. In the high-tech sector, France is essentially absent.
A brain drain has started that show no signs it will stop.
In parallel, each year, 200,000 immigrants from Africa or the Arab world, often without skills, arrive. Most are Muslim and have been contributing to the Islamization of France.
When a talk show host recently asked Zemmour why Macron is not placing the country's interest higher by taking the reality on the ground into account, the author replied:
"Macron is a technocrat. He thinks he is always right. He was programmed to do what he does. For him, France and the French people do not count. He is at the service of technocracy. He will do exactly what is wanted by the technocracy and a higher class, [who are] totally disconnected from the bulk of the country's population... Those who want to understand have to read Christophe Guilluy."
Guilluy, a geographer, published two books: La France périphérique ("Peripheral France") in 2014, and, just weeks before the outbreak of the uprising, No society. La fin de la classe moyenne occidentale ("No Society. The End of the Western Middle Class"). In them, he explains that French population today is divided into three groups. The first group is a ruling upper class, totally integrated into globalization, made up of technocrats, politicians, senior civil servants, executives working for multinational companies, and journalists working for the mainstream media. The members of this class live in Paris and the main cities of France.
The second group lives in the suburbs of the main cities and in no-go zones ("Zones Urbaines Sensibles"). It consists mainly of immigrants. The French upper class, who rule, recruit people to serve it directly or indirectly. They are poorly paid, but highly subsidized by the government, and increasingly live according to their own cultures and standards.
The third group is extremely large: it is the rest of the population. It is this group that is called "peripheral France." Its members are made up of low-ranking civil servants, blue collar workers and former blue-collar workers, employees in general, craftsmen, small entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, farmers, and the unemployed.
For the ruling upper class, they are useless. The ruling upper class treat them as regrettable dead weight and expect nothing from them except silence and submission.
Members of "peripheral France" have been driven out of the suburbs by the influx of immigrants and the emergence of no-go zones. These "peripherals", for the most part, live 30 kilometers or more from the big cities. They can see that the upper class dismisses them. They often have a hard time making ends meet. They pay taxes but can see that a growing portion is being used to subsidize the very people who drove them out of their suburban homes. When Macron lowered the taxes of the wealthiest, but increased the taxes of the "peripherals" with a fuel tax, it was seen as the last straw -- in addition to his arrogant condescension.
In a recent interview on the British web magazine Spiked, Guilluy said that the "yellow vests" movement is a desperate awakening of "peripheral France". He predicted that despite Macron's efforts to displace the problem, the awakening will last, and that either Macron "will recognize the existence of these people, or he will have to opt for a soft totalitarianism".
For the moment, Macron does not seem to want to recognize that these people even exist.
According to François Martin, a journalist for the monthly Causeur, Macron has placed himself in a stalemate:
"He must make decisions and he can no longer take any decision without making things much worse... Macron should agree to resign, but will not do it, and would prefer to go to the end, and hit a wall... The next three years will be hell for the yellow vests and for the French".
At the end of the protests in Paris on January 26, thousands of "yellow vests" had planned to gather peacefully on one of the main squares of the city, the Place de la République, for a "debate" and to provide responses to the "debate" organized by Macron. The police were ordered to disperse them brutally; they once again used rubber ball launchers and Sting-Ball grenades to do just that.
One of the leaders of the "yellow vests" movement, Jerome Rodrigues, was shot in the face while filming police officers in a square nearby, the Place de la Bastille. He lost an eye and for several days was hospitalized. Other protestors were wounded.
In the spring of 2016, leftists had organized debates in the same locations and were allowed to remain there for three months with no police intervention.
In an article describing the events of January 26, columnist Ivan Rioufol wrote in Le Figaro: "Repression seems to be the only argument of the caste in power, faced with a large-scale protest that will not weaken".
Why today's events are especially ugly, according to Xavier Lemoine, the mayor of Montfermeil, a city in the Eastern suburbs of Paris where the 2005 riots were notably destructive, is that:
"In 2005, the police were clearly the target of rioters, and they showed restraint in the use of force to bring down the violence. Today, most of those who protest do not attack the police. But instead of acting to bring down the violence, the police are receiving orders pushing them to be very violent. I do not blame the police. I blame those who give them orders".
The next day, Sunday, January 27, a demonstration was organized by Macron's supporters, who called themselves "the red scarves". The demonstration was supposed to show that an impressive number of people were still on Macron's side. Organizers said that ten thousand people came. Videos, however, show that the number seems to have been far lower.
Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.
by Guy Millière
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13660/france-unrest
The third group is extremely large: it is the rest of the population. The upper class treat them as regrettable dead weight and expect nothing from them except silence and submission. Its members often have a hard time making ends meet. They pay taxes but can see that a growing portion is being used to subsidize the very people who drove them out of their suburban homes.
For the moment, Macron does not seem to want to recognize that these people even exist.
When Macron lowered the taxes of the wealthiest but increased the taxes of these "peripherals" by means of a fuel tax, it was seen as the last straw -- in addition to his arrogant condescension.
"Today, most of those who protest do not attack the police. But instead of acting to bring down the violence, the police are receiving orders pushing them to be very violent. I do not blame the police. I blame those who give them orders". — Xavier Lemoine, the mayor of Montfermeil, a city in the Eastern suburbs of Paris where the 2005 riots were extremely destructive,
Police scuffle with a yellow vest protester on December 18, 2018 in Biarritz, France. (Photo by Gari Garaialde/Getty Images)
Saturday, January 26th 2019. "Yellow vests" protests were being organized in the main cities of France. Mobilization was not weakening. Support from the population had decreased slightly but was still huge (60%-70%, according to polls). The main slogan has remained the same since November 17, 2018: "Macron must resign". In December, another slogan was added: "Citizens' initiative referendum".
The government and French President Emmanuel Macron have been doing everything they can to crush the movement. They have tried insults, defamation and have said the demonstrators were both "seditious people" wishing to overthrow the institutions and fascist "brown shirts". On December 31, Macron described them, as "hateful crowds". The presence of some anti-Semites led a government spokesman (incorrectly) to describe the entire movement as "anti-Semitic".
The Minister of the Interior, Christophe Castaner, ordered the police to resort to a degree of violence not seen since the time of the Algerian war (1954-62). During the two last decades in France, other riots have taken place many times. In 2005, for instance, when the whole country was subjected to arson and riots for weeks, the number of wounded rioters remained low. But violence has consequences. In just the last few weeks, 1,700 protesters were wounded, some seriously. Nineteen lost an eye; four lost a hand. Although French police officers do not use lethal weapons, they do use rubber ball launchers and often fire at protesters' faces -- a target prohibited by the current rules of engagement. The French are also the only police force in Europe to use Sting-Ball grenades.
Macron has never treated protesters as people who have legitimate claims, so he has never paid attention to their claims. He only agreed to suspend the additional fuel tax, which was to have been begun in January, and to grant a slight increase in the minimum wage -- all of which he did only after weeks of protests.
Journalists say that Macron thought the movement would fade away after the end-of-year break; that police violence and desperation would induce the demonstrators to resign themselves to their fates, and that the support of the general population would collapse. Nothing of the sort took place.
It is clear that Macron does not want to meet the main demands of the protesters; that he will not resign, and that he refuses to accept a citizens' initiative referendum. He has apparently decided that if he dissolved the national assembly and called for legislative elections to end the crisis -- as President Charles de Gaulle did it to put an end to an uprising in May 1968, as allowed by the French Constitution -- he would suffer a scathing defeat. He can see that an overwhelming majority of the French people reject him, so apparently he has determined to seek a way out:
Macron called for a "great national debate" to address the problems facing the country. It soon became clear, however, that the "great debate" would be unconventional, to say the least.
Macron wrote a letter to all French citizens inviting them to "participate", but saying explicitly that the "debate" would not change anything, that the government would continue in exactly the same direction ("I have not forgotten that I was elected on a project, on major orientations to which I remain faithful."), and that everything that was done by the government since June 2017 would remain unchanged ("We will not go back on the measures we have taken").
He then entrusted organizing the "debate" and drafting its conclusions to two members of the government, and requested that "registers of grievances" be made available to the public in all town halls.
Macron then launched the "debate" by meeting mayors of many cities, but not in public. He seems to have been concerned that if he organized meetings open to the public, he would be immediately chased away by crowds.
The first two meetings took place in small cities (with 2000-3000 inhabitants), and with mayors whom the organizers -- chosen by Macron -- allowed to come. The organizers also selected the questions to be asked, then sent them to Macron to be answered at the meeting.
The day before each meeting, the selected city was placed under the administration of legions of police. All access roads to the city were closed, and anyone found wearing a yellow vest or carrying one in his car was fined. All protests in the city were flatly forbidden. The police made sure that the road used by Macron's convoy to reach the city was empty of any human presence for several hours before the convoy arrived.
Television news channels were asked to broadcast the entire meetings, which lasted six to seven hours. Only a few journalists, also selected by Macron, had permission to attend.
Several commentators stressed that pretending to "debate" is nonsense, and that entrusting the organization of the "debate" and the drafting of its conclusions to members of the government, and the way the meetings were organized, clearly show that these performances are a sham.
Some commentators pointed out that the term "register of grievances" has not been used since the time of absolute monarchy, that mayors are treated as waxworks and that placing the cities Macron visits in a state of siege is unworthy of a democracy.
A French economist, Nicolas Lecaussin, who grew up in Romania, wrote that these meetings reminded him of those in Romania during communism.
The author Éric Zemmour said that Macron is desperately trying to save his presidency but that the attempt will be useless:
"Macron has lost all legitimacy. His presidency is dead... For three months the country stopped economically; and Emmanuel Macron, to try to save his presidency, inflicts on the country two months of additional economic stagnation, and two more months of demonstrations. When people understand that they have been deceived, anger could increase... France is already a country in very bad shape."
The French economy is, in fact, sclerotic. The Index of Economic Freedom created by the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal ranks it 71st in the world (35th among the 44 countries in the Europe region) and notes that "the government spending accounts for more than half of total domestic output". The Index also reveals that "the budget has been chronically in deficit"; that "corruption remains a problem and that "the labor market is burdened with rigid regulations" leading to a high level of unemployment.
France has lost almost all its factories (industrial jobs account for only 9.6% of total employment). Its agriculture is in ruins, despite huge European subsidies: 30% percent of French farmers earn less than 350 euros ($400) a month and dozens commit suicide each year. In the high-tech sector, France is essentially absent.
A brain drain has started that show no signs it will stop.
In parallel, each year, 200,000 immigrants from Africa or the Arab world, often without skills, arrive. Most are Muslim and have been contributing to the Islamization of France.
When a talk show host recently asked Zemmour why Macron is not placing the country's interest higher by taking the reality on the ground into account, the author replied:
"Macron is a technocrat. He thinks he is always right. He was programmed to do what he does. For him, France and the French people do not count. He is at the service of technocracy. He will do exactly what is wanted by the technocracy and a higher class, [who are] totally disconnected from the bulk of the country's population... Those who want to understand have to read Christophe Guilluy."
Guilluy, a geographer, published two books: La France périphérique ("Peripheral France") in 2014, and, just weeks before the outbreak of the uprising, No society. La fin de la classe moyenne occidentale ("No Society. The End of the Western Middle Class"). In them, he explains that French population today is divided into three groups. The first group is a ruling upper class, totally integrated into globalization, made up of technocrats, politicians, senior civil servants, executives working for multinational companies, and journalists working for the mainstream media. The members of this class live in Paris and the main cities of France.
The second group lives in the suburbs of the main cities and in no-go zones ("Zones Urbaines Sensibles"). It consists mainly of immigrants. The French upper class, who rule, recruit people to serve it directly or indirectly. They are poorly paid, but highly subsidized by the government, and increasingly live according to their own cultures and standards.
The third group is extremely large: it is the rest of the population. It is this group that is called "peripheral France." Its members are made up of low-ranking civil servants, blue collar workers and former blue-collar workers, employees in general, craftsmen, small entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, farmers, and the unemployed.
For the ruling upper class, they are useless. The ruling upper class treat them as regrettable dead weight and expect nothing from them except silence and submission.
Members of "peripheral France" have been driven out of the suburbs by the influx of immigrants and the emergence of no-go zones. These "peripherals", for the most part, live 30 kilometers or more from the big cities. They can see that the upper class dismisses them. They often have a hard time making ends meet. They pay taxes but can see that a growing portion is being used to subsidize the very people who drove them out of their suburban homes. When Macron lowered the taxes of the wealthiest, but increased the taxes of the "peripherals" with a fuel tax, it was seen as the last straw -- in addition to his arrogant condescension.
In a recent interview on the British web magazine Spiked, Guilluy said that the "yellow vests" movement is a desperate awakening of "peripheral France". He predicted that despite Macron's efforts to displace the problem, the awakening will last, and that either Macron "will recognize the existence of these people, or he will have to opt for a soft totalitarianism".
For the moment, Macron does not seem to want to recognize that these people even exist.
According to François Martin, a journalist for the monthly Causeur, Macron has placed himself in a stalemate:
"He must make decisions and he can no longer take any decision without making things much worse... Macron should agree to resign, but will not do it, and would prefer to go to the end, and hit a wall... The next three years will be hell for the yellow vests and for the French".
At the end of the protests in Paris on January 26, thousands of "yellow vests" had planned to gather peacefully on one of the main squares of the city, the Place de la République, for a "debate" and to provide responses to the "debate" organized by Macron. The police were ordered to disperse them brutally; they once again used rubber ball launchers and Sting-Ball grenades to do just that.
One of the leaders of the "yellow vests" movement, Jerome Rodrigues, was shot in the face while filming police officers in a square nearby, the Place de la Bastille. He lost an eye and for several days was hospitalized. Other protestors were wounded.
In the spring of 2016, leftists had organized debates in the same locations and were allowed to remain there for three months with no police intervention.
In an article describing the events of January 26, columnist Ivan Rioufol wrote in Le Figaro: "Repression seems to be the only argument of the caste in power, faced with a large-scale protest that will not weaken".
Why today's events are especially ugly, according to Xavier Lemoine, the mayor of Montfermeil, a city in the Eastern suburbs of Paris where the 2005 riots were notably destructive, is that:
"In 2005, the police were clearly the target of rioters, and they showed restraint in the use of force to bring down the violence. Today, most of those who protest do not attack the police. But instead of acting to bring down the violence, the police are receiving orders pushing them to be very violent. I do not blame the police. I blame those who give them orders".
The next day, Sunday, January 27, a demonstration was organized by Macron's supporters, who called themselves "the red scarves". The demonstration was supposed to show that an impressive number of people were still on Macron's side. Organizers said that ten thousand people came. Videos, however, show that the number seems to have been far lower.
Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.
Feb 2, 2019 22:50:19 #
(Main)
Sicilianthing wrote:
>>>
Did you read most of it, that guys’ on Mexican CRACK !
Did you read most of it, that guys’ on Mexican CRACK !
I read it all. I wonder why his grandparents insisted that his father had to become an American. It seems he hasn't left Mexico.
Feb 2, 2019 20:55:06 #
(Main)
Common_Sense_Matters wrote:
Wow, fail to read much? I made no mention of the Washington Post. The only mention of the Washington Post I can detect is the previous sentence which is referring to the Channel being a Trump supporter, NOT that it spews conspiracy theories. Learn to read BEFORE making such outlandish accusations.
Best you go read the link you provided. You cited the paragraphand sentence with the damaging information but neglected to read any more to determine its source.
Feb 2, 2019 20:51:24 #
(Main)
Comment wrote:
To avoid being censored I will simply say , YES! I... (show quote)
There seems to be a specific effort targeting Conservatives on this forum. Perhaps it is time to depart.
Feb 2, 2019 19:44:50 #
(Main)
Common_Sense_Matters wrote:
* br br *Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On... (show quote)
You think the Washington Post is a credible source to accuse and indict a competitor for biased reporting, promoting falsehoods and conspiracy theories. This is a classic case of the pot calling thwe kettle "black ass".
If WAPO is an example of a legitimate and credible source than nothing further needs to be said because you are too brain dead for it to matter.
Feb 2, 2019 19:32:27 #
(Main)
Sicilianthing wrote:
This is the biggest bunch of Anti American CRAP I’... (show quote)
Accurate assessment!
Feb 2, 2019 11:38:23 #
(Main)
JFlorio wrote:
If true Britain is putting itself in an unattainable position. You can’t expand radical Islam and LBGT rights and not have a major problem.
The Brits have been known for homosexuality in their boarding schools. It was an expected phase of their adolescence as a result of bullying by older homos and separation from the protection of family. What it did to them when they became adults is problematic and may well be the root cause of the insanity displayed now.
Feb 2, 2019 08:53:48 #
(Main)
Common_Sense_Matters wrote:
President Trump and his team want to ‘open up’ li... (show quote)
There is news and then there is editorializing. When every utterance and action is subjected to a barrage of negative interpretations and lies are propagated overtly or by omission of key facts, then these media sources are not engaging in first amendment free speech.
The laws were altered regarding the merger of multiple media outlets in a given market area, allowing the six megacorporations that exist today to come into being. It was a mistake, which needs to be rectified. No one anticipated that the six would present a uniform bias on the news and suppress what did not suit their agenda. An uninformed populace is an easily manipulated populace and the media have proven to be disseminators of propaganda, not facts.
Feb 1, 2019 14:53:04 #
archie bunker wrote:
The ever lovely Mrs. B. recently had a bout of div... (show quote)
The honeymoon is over!
Feb 1, 2019 10:52:18 #
(Main)
debeda wrote:
Here we go again. Not bad enough black college students want separate dorms. Didn't we get over all of this?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/louis-farrakhan-calls-for-separate-state-for-black-americans-says-thats-what-god-wants
https://www.foxnews.com/us/louis-farrakhan-calls-for-separate-state-for-black-americans-says-thats-what-god-wants
Bikini Atoll has a group of uninhabited islands which would be eminently suitable for this purpose. Who can oppose the will of God?
Feb 1, 2019 01:51:31 #
(Main)
"The Economic Road Ahead"
by Gary Christenson
"Those Who Make The Rules: Rules help guide us through uncertainty. For perspective on Washington D.C. and Wall Street, we listen to wisdom and wit from Bill Bonner: “We look at the passing parade in Washington through a cynical lens. No situation is so hopeless, so absurd, or so disastrous that the feds can’t make it worse. No policy is too stupid, too counterproductive, or too corrupt that it can’t become the law of the land. And no man is too craven, too degenerate, or too much of an imbecile to be disqualified from public office.”
The public officials described above make the rules.
Media And Government Rules: These rules come from the (slightly edited) wisdom of Alasdair Macleod.
• Don’t believe what governments say, because they will tell you what they want you to believe.
• Don’t believe anything coming out of the intelligence services; if the information is good it is highly unlikely to come your way, and if good information does come your way, it will be indistinguishable from conspiracy theories. [Most of what they distribute to the public is a distraction or wrong…]
• Don’t believe conspiracy theories because they are almost never true. [A few conspiracy theories have become conspiracy facts. Others facts will be revealed in coming years.]
• Don’t believe government statistics. [A few come to mind… the CPI, GDP, unemployment, expected deficits, revenue projections, military spending…]
• Don’t believe western analysts, financial or otherwise, particularly when commenting on China or Russia.
• Don’t believe the mainstream media; it usually toes the establishment line. [People are beginning to understand some of our regular news is fabricated.]
• Don’t be swayed by nationalism or patriotism; remember Dr. Johnson’s aphorism, that patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.
Central Bank And Debt Rules: Central banks extract wealth from governments, businesses and individuals. They distribute that wealth to their owners and to the political and financial elite. Any appearance that the central bank is helping the middle class is a happy coincidence with a short life expectancy. All central banks and commercial banks devalue currencies, which reduces the purchasing power of currency units and raises prices for everyone. The process is intentional because it assists the transfer of wealth to the political and financial elite.
Some western central banks value gold, but only if they hold it and citizens don’t. One hundred years ago circulating currencies in the U.S. were gold and silver coins and paper bills backed by gold and silver. In 2018 circulating currencies, whether digital or paper, are debts of the Federal Reserve. A transition from real gold money to digital debts (funny money) accelerates the transfer of wealth to the political and financial elite. However, digital units are convenient for Americans addicted to plastic. The banking cartel takes a slice from every transaction which increases their profits and the prices we pay.
Inflate or die! Richard Russell understood the need for monetary inflation long ago. Deflation in an economy addicted to and overwhelmed by debt creates disaster! Central banks will do almost everything to avoid widespread deflation. They will continually inflate the currency supply. Either massive inflation or default will be needed to extinguish overwhelming debt. Pick your poison and remember the banking cartel created those choices.
Based On These Twelve Rules We Expect: Expect on-going inflation of the currency supply and increasing consumer price inflation. The inevitable consequences of creating (from nothing) $20 trillion dollars of central bank liquidity are much higher prices for stocks, bond, real estate and commodities. Stocks, bonds, and commodities: In late 2018 it appears stocks have peaked and are falling, perhaps for several years. Bonds peaked in 2016 and should fall for a long time. Commodities bottomed and will rise for many years as the banking cartel devalues currency units.
Our financial system benefits the political and financial elite. The bottom 95% struggle under heavy debt loads and higher prices as the banking cartel demands interest and extracts a slice from almost all transactions. Purchasing power of currency units has declined since 1913. That devaluation process will persist. The political and financial elite rig the US financial system for their benefit. They own congress and encourage corrupt legislators. The swamp will not be drained."
- https://deviantinvestor.com/
○
Jan 31, 2019 22:00:47 #
(Main)
woodguru wrote:
Hmmm...Kushner might be looking at similar extortion considering his pressuring Qatar twice for hundreds of million dollar loans for an over leveraged building investment...that was a horrible investment?
Kushner did this when? Was he governor of a major state when this occurred? Memeber of congress perhaps or a Federal Judge? At least tell me he was a local justice of the peace.
Jan 31, 2019 21:51:25 #
(Main)
proud republican wrote:
You get a life!!!!!...What they did was something ... (show quote)
That is an accurate assessment of Kevyn.
Jan 31, 2019 21:30:17 #
Rose42 wrote:
You know what's pretty amazing is science doesn't know as much about dogs as many people do. They have to do studies to validate what many of us already know.
A problem with scientists is they really don't understand dogs and approach them like any other animal. But they are not like any other animal in that they have a unique bond with humans. I do see major flaws in this study - such as using how fast they find treats to measure intelligence and cognitive ability.
A problem with scientists is they really don't understand dogs and approach them like any other animal. But they are not like any other animal in that they have a unique bond with humans. I do see major flaws in this study - such as using how fast they find treats to measure intelligence and cognitive ability.
We have several dog experts on this forum, maybe one of them will weigh in as well. I know next to nothing about them.
Jan 31, 2019 18:05:46 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
So, if the extremes of heat and cold, the severity of winds and storms are caused by global warming, are the really nice days when everything is perfect also caused by global warming????
Since this is a topic with much heat and little light, I have thought of what to me is an ideal solution. All those who do not accept that climate change or global warming is man made shall be issue an ID card with the words Non-Believer prominent across the top and with suitable photo plus what ever other information is needed. Those who oppose this and claim that those things are man made and need to be controlled will be issued a card with the logo Climate Supporter and all the other info.
Thereafter, whenever any purchase is made the card musty be presented and the transaction recorded. A suitable surcharge will be made to the Supporter group only, in order to combat global whatever. The Non-Believers will be charged the fees that they have racked up whenever it is proved that the surcharges and fees have reversed the warming trend. Both sides of the argument should be happy.