consentfactory | No, credit where credit is due to GloboCap. At this point, not only
the United States, but countries throughout the global capitalist
empire, are in such a state of mass hysteria, and so hopelessly
politically polarized, that hardly anyone can see the textbook color
revolution that is being executed, openly, right in front of our faces.
Or … OK, actually, most Trump supporters see it, but most of them,
like Trump himself, have mistaken Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and the
Democratic Party and their voters for the enemy, when they are merely
pawns in GloboCap’s game. Most liberals and leftists cannot see it at
all … literally, as in they cannot perceive it. Like Dolores in the HBO Westworld
series, “it doesn’t look like anything” to them. They actually believe
they are fighting fascism, that Donald Trump, a narcissistic,
word-salad-spewing, former game show host, is literally the Return of
Adolf Hitler, and that somehow (presumably with the help of Putin) he
has staged the current civil unrest, like the Nazis staged the Reichstag fire! (The New York Times
will never tire of that one, nor will their liberal and leftist
readers, who have been doing battle with an endless series of imaginary
Hitlers since … well, since Hitler.)
I’ve been repeating it my columns for the last four years, and I’m
going to repeat it once again. What we are experiencing is not the
“return of fascism.” It is the global capitalist empire restoring order,
putting down the populist insurgency that took them by surprise in
2016. The White Black Nationalist Color Revolution, the fake apocalyptic
plague, all the insanity of 2020 … it has been in the pipeline all
along. It has been since the moment Trump won the election. No, it is
not about Trump, the man. It has never been about Trump, the man, no
more than the Obama presidency was ever about Obama, the man. GloboCap
needs to crush Donald Trump (and moreover, to make an example of him)
not because he is a threat to the empire (he isn’t), but because he
became a symbol of populist resistance to global capitalism and its
increasingly aggressive “woke” ideology. It is this populist resistance
to its ideology that GloboCap is determined to crush, no matter how much
social chaos and destruction it unleashes in the process.
“2020 is for all the marbles. The
global capitalist ruling classes either crush this ongoing populist
insurgency or God knows where we go from here. Try to see it through
their eyes for a moment. Picture four more years of Trump … second-term
Trump … Trump unleashed. Do you really believe they’re going to let that
happen, that they are going to permit this populist insurgency to
continue for another four years? They are not. What they are going to do
is use all their power to destroy the monster, not Trump the man, but
Trump the symbol. They are going to drown us in impeachment minutiae,
drip, drip, drip, for the next twelve months. The liberal corporate
media are going to go full-Goebbels. They are going to whip up so much
mass hysteria that people won’t be able to think. They are going to pit
us one against the other, and force us onto one or the other side of a
simulated conflict (Democracy versus the Putin-Nazis) to keep us from
perceiving the actual conflict (Global Capitalism versus Populism). They
are going to bring us to the brink of civil war …”
OK, I didn’t see the fake plague coming, but, otherwise, how’s my prediction holding up?
tomdispatch | Let’s say you live in a country where the government responded
quickly and competently to Covid-19. Let’s say that your government
established a reliable testing, contact tracing, and quarantine system.
It either closed down the economy for a painful but short period or its
system of testing was so good that it didn’t even need to shut
everything down. Right now, your life is returning to some semblance of
normal.
Lucky you.
The rest of us live in the United States. Or Brazil. Or Russia. Or
India. In these countries, the governments have proven incapable of
fulfilling the most important function of the state: protecting the
lives of their citizens. While most of Europe and much of East Asia have
suppressed the pandemic sufficiently to restart their economies,
Covid-19 continues to rage out of control in those parts of the world
that, not coincidentally, are also headed by democratically elected
right-wing autocrats.
In these incompetently run countries, citizens have very good reason
to mistrust their governments. In the United States, for instance, the
Trump administration botched testing, failed to coordinate lockdowns, removed oversight from the bailouts, and pushed to reopen the economy over the objections
of public-health experts. In the latest sign of early-onset dementia
for the Trump administration, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh
McEnany declared this month that “science should not stand in the way” of reopening schools in the fall.
Voters, of course, could boot Trump out in November and, assuming he
actually leaves the White House, restore some measure of sanity to
public affairs. But the pandemic is contributing to an already
overwhelming erosion of confidence in national institutions. Even before
the virus struck, in its 2018 Trust Barometer the public relations firm
Edelman registered an unprecedented drop in public trust connected
to... what else?... the election of Trump. “The collapse of trust in the
U.S. is driven by a staggering lack of faith in government, which fell
14 points to 33% among the general population,” the report noted. “The remaining institutions of business, media, and NGOs also experienced declines of 10 to 20 points.”
And you won’t be surprised to learn that the situation hadn’t shown signs of improvement by 2020, with American citizens even more mistrustful of their country’s institutions than their counterparts in Brazil, Italy, and India.
That institutional loss of faith reflects a longer-term trend. According to Gallup’s latest survey,
only 11% of Americans now trust Congress, 23% big business and
newspapers, 24% the criminal justice system, 29% the public school
system, 36% the medical system, and 38% the presidency. The only
institution a significant majority of Americans trust -- and consider
this an irony, given America’s endless twenty-first-century wars -- is
the military (73%). The truly scary part is that those numbers have held
steady, with minor variations, for the last decade across two very
different administrations.
How low does a country’s trust index have to go before it ceases
being a country? Commentators have already spent a decade discussing the
polarization of the American electorate. Much ink has been spilled over the impact of social media in creating political echo chambers. It’s been 25 years since political scientist Robert Putnam observed that Americans were “bowling alone” (that is, no longer participating in group activities or community affairs in the way previous generations did).
The coronavirus has generally proven a major force multiplier of such
trends by making spontaneous meetings of unlike-minded people ever less
likely. I suspect I’m typical. I’m giving a wide berth to pedestrians,
bicyclists, and other joggers when I go out for my runs. I’m not
visiting cafes. I’m not talking to people in line at the supermarket.
Sure, I’m on Zoom a lot, but it’s almost always with people I already
know and agree with.
Under these circumstances, how will we overcome the enormous gaps of
perception now evident in this country to achieve anything like the
deeper basic understandings that a nation-state requires? Or will
Americans lose faith entirely in elections, newspaper stories,
hospitals, and public transportation, and so cease being a citizenry
altogether?
Trust is the fuel that makes such institutions run. And it looks as
though we passed Peak Trust long ago and may be on a Covid-19 sled
heading downhill fast.
wrongkindofgreen | (wrong kind of green dollar-dollar-bill-y'all is just entirely too clever)
“The ruling class exists, it’s not a conspiracy theory.
They operate as a class, too. They share the same values, the same
sensibility and in Europe and North America they are white. They act in
accordance with their interests, which are very largely identical. The
failure to understand this is the single greatest problem and defect in
left discourse today.”
— John Steppling, Author, Playwright
“This report is crucial reading for anyone interested in creatively
considering the multiple, divergent ways in which our world could
evolve.”
— Judith Rodin, President of the Rockefeller Foundation
torytelling. Dystopian scenarios. Not Huxley, Orwell, Bradbury or Brunner.
Scenario planning for corporate strategy was pioneered by Royal Dutch
Shell in the 1970s. [Further reading on scenario planning: The Art of the Long View]The
following excerpts are highlights from the May 2010 “Scenarios for the
Future of Technology & International Development” report produced by
The Rockefeller Foundation & Global Business Network. Not just the
more known “Lock Step” scenario, but all four scenarios.
Following “Event 201”
(Oct 18, 2019), we must concede that the ruling class has been gifted
with phenomenal and prophetic intuitions and insights. (They truly are
the chosen ones.) Thus it is worthwhile, even mandatory, to study their
scenario exercises and simulations.
“We believe that scenario planning has great potential
for use in philanthropy to identify unique interventions… scenario
planning allows us to achieve impact more effectively.” [p 4]
“The results of our first scenario planning exercise demonstrate a
provocative and engaging exploration of the role of technology and the
future of globalization.” [p 4]
“This report is crucial reading for anyone interested in creatively
considering the multiple, divergent ways in which our world could
evolve.” [p 4]
“*I offer a special thanks to Peter Schwartz, Andrew Blau, and the
entire team at Global Business Network, who have helped guide us through
this stimulating and energizing process.” [*Judith Rodin, President of
the Rockefeller Foundation] [p 4]
“*I hope this publication makes clear exactly why my colleagues and I
are so excited about the promise of using scenario planning to develop
robust strategies.” [*Judith Rodin, President of the Rockefeller
Foundation][p 5]
Peter Schwartz is an American futurist, innovator and co-founder of
the Global Business Network (GBN), a corporate strategy firm,
specializing in future-think & scenario planning. Founded in 1987,
GBN was “a membership organization comprising executives from many of
the world’s leading companies alongside individual members from
business, science, the arts, and academia.” The proprietary list of
GBN’s corporate members included “more than 100 of the world’s leading
companies, drawn from virtually every industry and continent.” Members
paid an annual subscription fee of $35,000. [Source]
Following an acquisition by Monitor in 2000, GBN then specialized in
scenario-based consulting and training. GBN ceased to be active
following the acquisition of the Monitor Group by Deloitte in 2013.
“Perhaps most importantly, scenarios give us a new,
shared language that deepens our conversations about the future and how
we can help to shape it.” [p 7]
“How can we best position ourselves not just to identify technologies
that improve the lives of poor communities but also to help scale and
spread those that emerge?” [p 8]
The Four Scenarios
“Once crossed, these axes create a matrix of four very different futures:
LOCK STEP – A world of tighter top-down government control and more
authoritarian eadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen
pushback
CLEVER TOGETHER – A world in which highly coordinated and successful
strategies emerge for addressing both urgent and entrenched worldwide
issues
HACK ATTACK – An economically unstable and shock-prone world in which
governments weaken, criminals thrive, and dangerous innovations emerge
SMART SCRAMBLE – An economically depressed world in which individuals
and communities develop localized, makeshift solutions to a growing set
of problems”
“Each scenario tells a story of how the world, and in
particular the developing world, might progress over the next 15 to 20
years,… Accompanying each scenario is a range of elements that aspire to
further illuminate life, technology, and philanthropy in that world.”
[p 17]
Scenario #1: LOCK STEP
“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been
anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new
influenza strain — originating from wild geese — was extremely virulent
and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly
overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly
20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven
months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had
a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and
goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and
breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and
office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and
customers.” [p 18]
“The pandemic blanketed the planet — though
disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central
America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official
containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was
a challenge. The United States’s initial policy of “strongly
discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not
just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did
fare better — China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick
imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as
well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved
millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in
other countries and enabling a swifter postpandemic
recovery. [p 18]
The Great Reset was laid out a decade ago by the Rockefeller Foundation(showed you the rabbit hole last saturday, but nobody went in head first)
“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been
anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new
influenza strain — originating from wild geese — was extremely virulent
and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations
were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world,
infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8
million in just seven months…”
Then the scenario gets very interesting:
“The pandemic also had a deadly effect on
economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a
halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply
chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and
office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.” This sounds eerily familiar.
“During the pandemic, national leaders around the
world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and
restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to
body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train
stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more
authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities
stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the
spread of increasingly global problems — from pandemics
and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty —
leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”
At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty-and their privacy- to more paternalistic states in for greater safety and stability. Citizens
were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight,
and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they
saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many
forms: biometric IDs for all citizens,
for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability
was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries,
enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements
slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly,
economic growth.
Because I've cultivated a baseline of vague digust until disproven or aesthetically overcome - the social distancing for health program doesn't work on me at all. But I'm curious to know if any of you feel any differently about these humans after several months of the social distancing programme? Part of this I really do understand, because for me personally, disgust is the immediate and acute precursor to violence. If you can make these humans all a priori disgusted with one another....,
off-guardian | Western civilization, led by the US government and
media, has embarked upon a campaign of mass psychological terrorism
designed to cover for the collapsing economy, set up a new pretext for
Wall Street’s ongoing plunder expedition, radically escalate the police
state, deeply traumatize people into submission to total social
conformity, and radically aggravate the anti-social, anti-human
atomization of the people.
The pretext for this abomination is an epidemic which objectively is
comparable to the seasonal flu and is caused by the same kind of
Coronavirus we’ve endured so long without totalitarian rampages and mass
insanity.
The global evidence is converging on the facts: This flu is somewhat
more contagious than the norm and is especially dangerous for those who
are aged and already in poor health from pre-existing maladies. It is
not especially dangerous for the rest of the population.
The whole concept of “lockdowns” is exactly upside down, exactly the
wrong way any sane society would respond to this circumstance.
It’s the vulnerable who should be shielded while nature takes its
course among the general population, who should go about life as usual.
Dominionist-technocratic rigidity can’t prevent an epidemic from cycling
through the population in spite of the delusions of that religion,
especially since Western societies began their measures far too late
anyway.
So it’s best to let herd immunity develop as fast as it naturally
will, at which time the virus recedes from lack of hosts (and is likely
to mutate in a milder direction along the way). This is the only way to
bring a safer environment for all including the most vulnerable.
The fact that most societies have rejected the sane, scientific route
in favor of doomed-to-fail attempts at a forcible violent segregation
and sterilization is proof that governments aren’t concerned with the
public health (as if we didn’t know that already from a thousand
policies of poisoning the environment while gutting the health care
system), but are very ardent to use this crisis they artificially
generated in order radically to escalate their police state power toward
totalitarian goals.
The whole concept of self-isolation and anti-social “distancing” is
radically anti-human. We evolved over millions of years to be social
creatures living in tight-knit groups. Although modern societies
ideologically and socioeconomically work to massify and atomize people,
nevertheless almost all of us still seek close human companionship in
our lives.
(I suspect most of the internet police-state-mongers are not only
fascists at heart but are confirmed misanthropic loners who couldn’t
care less about human closeness.)
This terror campaign seeks to blast to pieces any remaining human
closeness, which means any remaining humanity as such, the better to
isolate individual atoms for subjection to total domination. Arendt
wrote profoundly on this goal of totalitarian governments, though even
she didn’t envision a state-driven cult of the literal physical
repulsion of every atom from every other atom.
So far the people are submitting completely to a terror campaign
dedicated to the total eradication of whatever community was left in the
world, and especially whatever community was starting to be rebuilt.
pjmedia | If you listen to the mainstream media (and I don’t recommend it) it’s
safe to say you’re probably not getting a balanced picture of the USA’s
coronavirus situation. They go for the headlines, the stuff that looks
bad, in the hopes they can pin everything on Trump, or deflect criticism
from Cuomo in New York, and generally make people afraid. But there’s a
lot of stuff happening that doesn’t make it into the headlines or is
ignored. So, I’ve compiled some graphs, charts, etc., that show you
what’s been going on lately that might not be getting the attention it
deserves. Some of it is good news, some of it is bad, some just puts
things into context, but it all matters.
Last Saturday, I booked passage for one and all on the waaaayback machine to the earliest draft of the Panicdemic I have thus far been able to put my hands on. Population-Consumption-Climate-Control - The .00001%'s No Lives Matter Movement The lack of response leads me to know that nobody took the bait, followed the links, read the article and from there took the deep dive into the source material itself. The vintage on that scenario, as well as the quadrant that this panicdemic is modeled after are revelatory.
exiledonline | What, you thought you were safe? You’d get through the big “Cancel Culture” war without me popping off?
No such luck.
Public
morality should be pretty simple. When an oppressed group gets enough
power to make its oppressors behave, they will do so — and they should.
The
real problem, the kind of thing that would make De Niro in Casino
groan, “Amateur night!”, starts when people imagine that they can stop
immoral behavior by policing immoral characters, phrases, or scenes in
literature.
They’re looking for the wrong thing. They’re sniffing for depictions of immorality, when they should be scanning the silences, the evasions.
There’s
a very naïve theory of language at work here, roughly: “if people speak
nicely, they’ll act nicely” — with the fatuous corollary, “If people
mention bad things, they must like bad things.”
The simplest refutation of that is two words: Victorian Britain.
Victorian
Britain carried out several of the biggest genocides in human history.
It was also a high point of virtuous literature.
Because
they were smart about language. They didn’t rant about the evil of
their victims or gloat about massacring them, at least not in their
public writings. They wrote virtuous novels, virtuous poems. And left a
body count which may well end up the biggest in world history.
Open
genocidal ranting is small-time stuff compared to the rhetorical nuke
perfected by Victoria’s genocidaires: silence. The Victorian Empire was
the high point of this technology, which is why it still gets a pass
most of the time. Even when someone takes it on and scores a direct hit,
as Mike Davis did in his book Late Victorian Holocausts, the cone of
Anglosphere silence contains and muffles the explosion. Which is why Late Victorian Holocausts is Davis’s only book that didn’t become a best-seller.
Davis
was among the first historians with the guts and originality to look
hard at some of the Victorian creeps who killed tens of millions — yes, tens of millions — of people from the conquered tropics:
“The
total human toll of these three waves of drought, famine, and disease
could not have been less than 30 million victims. Fifty million dead
might not be unrealistic.”
An English radical of the
Victorian Era, William Digby, saw the scope of the horror: “When the
part played by the British Empire in the nineteenth century is regarded
by the historian fifty years hence, the unnecessary deaths of millions
of Indians would be its principal and most notorious monument.”
But
that didn’t happen. There was no wave of conscience among historians of
the British Empire in the 1920s (or 30s or 40s or, to end the
suspense, ever.)
Davis puts it bluntly: “[T]he famine children of 1876 and 1899 have disappeared.”
How did this happen? Why is it still happening? What are the lessons for those studying literature, propaganda, and ideology?
counterpunch | In the opening moments of their conversation, Taibbi repented for not
making a big stink over Weinstein’s ostracism and eventual resignation
from Evergreen over student protests. Suing the school for $3.8 million
in damage, Weinstein walked away with only a half-million.
One wonders if Taibbi looked into the case against Weinstein made by
three Evergreen professors that year on Huffington Post titled “Another Side of The Evergreen State College Story”.
One of them was Zoltan Grossman, who has written dozens of articles for
CounterPunch over the years. The three make an essential point:
In order for a propaganda campaign to succeed, it needs a
Big Lie. At Evergreen, the Big Lie is that Evergreen’s Day of Absence
demonstrated “reverse racism” as whites “were forced to leave campus
because of the color of their skin.” It is stunning to us how often this
“alternative fact” has been repeated until it has become unchallenged
truth. The truth is that the Day of Absence has long been an accepted —
and voluntary — practice at Evergreen. On the Day of Absence, people of
color who chose to do so generally attended an off-campus event, while
whites who chose to participate stayed on campus to attend lectures,
workshops and discussions about how race and racism shape social
structures and everyday life.
Once they got past the Evergreen business, Weinstein and Taibbi
settled into a litany of how bad things have gotten in the U.S. because
of uppity anti-racist students dragging the country down. They struck me
as two middle-aged men ready to write a book titled “The Decline of the
U.S.” after the fashion of Oswald Spengler. They probably could make
good money writing such a book since there is always a market for
screeds against political correctness, identity politics, and that sort
of thing. Usually written by conservatives like Allan Bloom (“The
Closing of the American Mind”), they also have their liberal
counterparts like Todd Gitlin, who wrote “The Twilight of Common Dreams:
Why America is Wracked by Culture Wars” in 1996.
Gitlin, who signed the Harper’s letter, described himself in the book
as sympathetic to blacks but was distressed by their retreat into what
he felt were self-absorbed, symbolic politics, according to a N.Y. Times
review. He wrote that “few political campaigns are launched against the
impoverishment of the cities” and that “The diversity rhetoric of
identity politics short-circuits the necessary discussion of what ought
to be done about all the dying out there.” He had come to the same
conclusions as Adolph Reed Jr., who also got the red-carpet treatment
from Taibbi and Halper.
Weinstein gushed over Taibbi’s long record of courageous journalism
as if writing take-downs of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump risked a
jail term. Yes, Taibbi is entertaining, but how far can you go stating
the obvious, even if scabrously. I’d prefer a little less scabrousness
and a lot more economic analysis. That’s one of the reasons I stopped
reading Taibbi after the good old “vampire squid” days ended.
bloomberg | Shuttering businesses,
grounding airlines and ordering people to stay home was hard enough the
first time. The thought of having to do it all over again is something
world leaders don’t want to even contemplate.
From Italy to New Zealand, irrespective of how well the virus was
contained, governments acknowledge that fresh waves of the deadly
coronavirus are likely and that the policy tools to mitigate the damage are limited. The hope is that localizing quarantines to towns, cities and regions will be enough to snuff out bouts of infections as they come.
U.K.’s Boris Johnson was reluctant to order a lockdown and then ended up in intensive care fighting for his life after contracting Covid-19. Yet he finds the idea of isolating the nation again so off-putting that he compared it to a nuclear deterrent: “I certainly don’t want to use it.” French Prime Minister Jean Castex, was equally blunt: “We won’t survive, economically and socially.”
At the other end of the globe, New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern has warned that it just takes one mistake to be exposed to the virus again. But even for her, reverting to a nationwide lockdown would be a “measure of last resort.”
It all speaks to the great elephant in the room: while scientists warn it could take years to control a deadly virus that has killed more than 630,000 worldwide, there is no appetite to sustain the hiatus on travel, work and leisure that has upended everyone’s lives in 2020. With the world facing its worst recession since the Great Depression and U.S. President Donald Trump fighting for re-election in November, voters are on edge.
Politicians of all stripes are looking for ways to ease the pain—not add to it—as fear morphs into anger and discontent. “Populations can be summoned to heroic acts of collective self-sacrifice for a while, but not forever,” political scientist Francis Fukuyama, author of “The End of History and the Last Man,” wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine. “A lingering epidemic combined with deep job losses, a prolonged recession, and an unprecedented debt burden will inevitably create tensions that turn into a political backlash—but against whom is as yet unclear.”
The political calculus is to try and it ride it out. Yet while efforts to get people back to stores, restaurants, bars and hairdressers demonstrate the urgency among governments of reviving economies, they also show the risks.
Google yielded two references to the name Gauhar, they both have similar meanings.
The name Gauhar is from Persian گوهر (gohar) meaning “jewel, gemstone”.
Gauhar The meaning of the name Gauhar is A Pearl. The origin of the name Gauhar is Arabic.
Peter Strzok was raised in Iran
Liza
Page’s mother is Iranian her name is Tamara Najarian
Huma Mahmood Abedin was taken by her parents to
Iran where she grew up. Her father founded the Journal of Muslim
Minority Affairs. After his death Abedin’s mother took it over.
TCH | Who was the internal coordinator for the legal and investigative crew? Who was the bridge? Answer:
Tashina “Tash” Gauhar, literally from the school and law firm of former Obama “wingman” Attorney General Eric Holder.
2009-
Tashina Gauhar is the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for
Intelligence. Ms. Gauhar has extensive experience working with the U.S.
Intelligence Community and has held a variety of national security
positions within the Department since 2001, including serving as an
Assistant Counsel in the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review and
later as the Deputy Chief of Operations in the Office of Intelligence,
and recently the Chief of Operations. Prior to joining the Justice
Department, Ms. Gauhar was an associate at the law firm of DLA Piper
(then Piper Marbury Rudnick and Wolfe, LLP). (link)
Tashina Gauhar was the Mid-Year-Exam (MYE)
team member who was on a September 29, 2016, conference call with the
FBI New York field office about the Weiner/Abedin laptop. Tash Gauhar
was directly at the center, no, the epicenter, of the most controversial time frame for the Mid-Year-Event team.
Tashina was one of only three MYE people
who actually had the responsibility to review the Clinton emails from
the Weiner/Abedin laptop. [The other two were Peter Strzok and the
unknown “lead analyst”]
Tashina is probably only eclipsed by Lisa
Page and Peter Strzok in the level of influence within the entire
Mid-Year-Team apparatus. “Tash”, as she was known to the team, is a hub
amid a very tight circle. Tashina Gauhar held a great deal of
influence. Suffice to say, the spawn of Eric Holder is a big deal in
the story.
You know what other decision Tashina Gauhar was influential in?
Note this meeting was on March 2nd, 2017. Which prompted this announcement:
WASHINGTON POST, March 2 2017
– Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Thursday that he will recuse
himself from investigations related to the 2016 presidential campaign,
which would include any Russian interference in the electoral process.
Speaking at a hastily called news conference at the Justice Department, Sessions said he was following the recommendation of department ethics officials after an evaluation of the rules and cases in which he might have a conflict.
“They said that since I had involvement with the campaign, I should
not be involved in any campaign investigation,” Sessions said. He added
that he concurred with their assessment and would thus recuse himself
from any existing or future investigation involving President Trump’s
2016 campaign. (link)
Yes, the DOJ lawyer at the heart of the
Clinton-email investigation; the DOJ lawyer hired by Eric Holder at his
firm and later at the DOJ; the DOJ lawyer who was transferred to the
Clinton probe; the DOJ lawyer at the epicenter of the Weiner laptop
issues, the only one from MYE who spoke to New York; the DOJ lawyer who
constructs the FISA applications on behalf of Main Justice;…. just
happens to be the same DOJ lawyer recommending to AG Jeff Sessions that
he recuse himself.
TheHill |The Washington press corps seems
engaged in a collective demonstration of the legal concept of willful
blindness, or deliberately ignoring the facts, following the release of
yet another declassified document which directly refutes prior
statements about the investigation into Russia collusion. The document
shows that FBI officials used a national security briefing of then
candidate Donald Trump and his top aides to gather possible evidence for Crossfire Hurricane, its code name for the Russia investigation.
It
is astonishing that the media refuses to see what is one of the biggest
stories in decades. The Obama administration targeted the campaign of
the opposing party based on false evidence. The media covered Obama
administration officials ridiculing the suggestions of spying on the
Trump campaign and of improper conduct with the Russia investigation.
When Attorney General William Barr told the Senate last year that he
believed spying did occur, he was lambasted in the media, including by
James Comey and others involved in that investigation. The mocking “wow”
response of the fired FBI director received extensive coverage.
The
new document shows that, in summer 2016, FBI agent Joe Pientka briefed
Trump campaign advisers Michael Flynn and Chris Christie over national
security issues, standard practice ahead of the election. It had a
discussion of Russian interference. But this was different. The document
detailing the questions asked by Trump and his aides and their
reactions was filed several days after that meeting under Crossfire
Hurricane and Crossfire Razor, the FBI investigation of Flynn. The two
FBI officials listed who approved the report are Kevin Clinesmith and
Peter Strzok.
Clinesmith
is the former FBI lawyer responsible for the FISA surveillance
conducted on members of the Trump campaign. He opposed Trump and sent an
email after the election declaring “viva the resistance.” He is now
under review for possible criminal charges for altering a FISA court
filing. The FBI used Trump adviser Carter Page as the basis for the
original FISA application, due to his contacts with Russians. After that
surveillance was approved, however, federal officials discredited the
collusion allegations and noted that Page was a CIA asset. Clinesmith
had allegedly changed the information to state that Page was not working
for the CIA.
Strzok is the
FBI agent whose violation of FBI rules led Justice Department officials
to refer him for possible criminal charges. Strzok did not hide his
intense loathing of Trump and famously referenced an “insurance policy”
if Trump were to win the election. After FBI officials concluded there
was no evidence of any crime by Flynn at the end of 2016, Strzok
prevented the closing of the investigation as FBI officials searched for
any crime that might be used to charge the incoming national security
adviser.
Documents show
Comey briefed President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden on the
investigation shortly before the inauguration of Trump. When Comey
admitted the communications between Flynn and Russian officials appeared
legitimate, Biden reportedly suggested using the Logan Act, a law
widely seen as unconstitutional and never been used to successfully
convict a single person, as an alternative charge against Flynn. The
memo contradicts eventual claims by Biden that he did not know about the
Flynn investigation. Let us detail some proven but mostly unseen facts.
NYTimes | Roy Den
Hollander sounded bitter and angry when he bumped into a former rugby
teammate in December at a library in Manhattan. He said he was so sick
from a rare cancer that he could die at any moment, wondering aloud if
he should sue his doctor for malpractice.
Things
kept getting worse for Mr. Den Hollander, a self-described
“anti-feminist” lawyer who was known for his misogynistic tirades and
the dozens of lawsuits he filed, many frivolous. A Manhattan judge
dismissed one of them in May, and a few weeks later, a federal judge in
New Jersey named Esther Salas canceled a scheduled hearing in a
different suit.
The delay followed
years of resentment that he had harbored against Judge Salas over his
unfounded claim that she was moving the case too slowly. That, in turn,
built upon a lifetime of seething hatred toward women: He accused his
mother of preventing him from having a girlfriend, and his ex-wife of
marrying him only to obtain a green card.
Mr.
Den Hollander’s rage turned to violence this month when he showed up at
Judge Salas’s home in New Jersey posing as a FedEx deliveryman and
opened fire, killing her 20-year-old son and wounding her husband,
investigators said. The judge, who was in the basement at the time, was
not injured.
Hours
after the shooting in New Jersey, the police found Mr. Den Hollander’s
body off a road in upstate New York with a single gunshot to the head.
In his nearby rental car, investigators found a list naming more than a dozen possible targets,
according to people briefed on the investigation. Aside from Judge
Salas and the rival lawyer, the list included the names of three other
female judges and two oncologists, at least one of whom had treated Mr.
Den Hollander.
An examination of Mr.
Den Hollander’s life shows how he represented the most violent elements
of a male supremacist movement whose discourse online has become
increasingly threatening toward women.
americanconservative | Apparently, there is great commercial value in understanding our
attributes and then using what is learned. Sometimes this is in our
interest, but many times it is not.
In the digital world,
companies dissect us and package us for commercial gain without
compensating us—and too often without our consent. That is not merely an
invasion of our privacy, but in actuality is a theft of our personal
property.
In
any free society, respect for the individual is predicated upon his or
her sovereignty. Our most important property right is our right
to ourselves. If we lose ownership of ourselves, we become the property
of others.
Social media companies, and other platforms that
sell or monetize our data without permission are appropriating aspects
of the sovereign individuals who are their users, and it is a
violation of our rights.
These companies really aren’t “social media.” They are not public
forums. An actual public forum respects the First Amendment, in spirit,
and does not monetize content or personal data. Google, Facebook,
Twitter and other tyrannical tech giants are private companies operating
opaquely in the digital domain, exempt from discovery or
accountability, gifted by Congress with a liability exemption that
allows them to do whatever they want. Including deplatforming you.
Rabbi Hillel said, “that which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow.”
If
you want the right to speak, to express your ideas and opinions, it
would be despicable to you if someone prevented you from doing so. You
would not want someone else to persecute, dehumanize, deplatform or
digitally exterminate you.
Such behavior is abhorrent to the
ideal of free speech. It is unfathomable that, in the twenty-first
century, “I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the
death your right to say it,” has, somehow mutated into, “I wholly
disapprove of what you say and will digitally exterminate you if you
dare try to say it.”
A true public forum eschews censorship of any
kind. Freedom of expression, and the exchange of knowledge that goes
along with it, can flourish only in an environment where there is no
authoritative entity or controlling party, where one speaks by right,
not by permission.
vice | As societies get richer, they consume more resources. That also means they
generate more pollution, driving climate change and destroying natural
ecosystems.
We
need to somehow break this link between material wealth and
environmental catastrophe. That’s why financial institutions and
governments have been focused on the idea of ‘decoupling’ GDP growth
from resource use.
The
assumption is that it is possible to continue growing the global
economy while reducing our actual resource use and material footprint,
perhaps by shifting to renewable energy.
This notion has been most recently articulated in the book More From Less: The Surprising Story of How We Learned to Prosper Using Fewer Resources—and What Happens Next,
by Andrew McAfee, principal research scientist at the MIT Sloan School
of Management. Financial and other data, McAfee argued, shows we can
actually easily reduce our material footprint while continuing to grow
our economies in a win-win scenario.
But
new scientific analysis by a group of systems scientists and economists
who have advised the United Nations seems to pull the rug out from
under this entire enterprise. The new research indicates that the
conventional approach is based on selective readings of statistical
data.
McAfee
argues, for instance, that as we are increasing wealth, the
productivity motor of capitalism is driving us to greater heights of
efficiency due to better technologies. This means we are able to make
stuff faster and smaller using less materials and in some cases less
energy. And that in turn implies we are causing less pollution. The
problem is that this story, according to the new research, ignores how
greater efficiency in certain regions or sectors is not slowing down the
overall consumption machine. Within the wider system these efficiencies
are enabling us to consume even greater quantities of resources
overall.
thelastamericanvagabond |The alleged gunmen who killed the son of Esther Salas,
the judge recently assigned to the Epstein-Deutsche Bank case, worked
for a company of corporate spies and mercenaries with ties to
intelligence and also to Deutsche Bank.
The news of the shooting of the husband and son of Esther Salas, the
judge recently assigned to oversee the Jeffrey Epstein – Deutsche Bank
case, caused shock and confusion while also bringing renewed scrutiny to
the Epstein scandal just a week after Epstein’s main co-conspirator,
Ghislaine Maxwell, was denied bail in a separate case.
The case Salas is set to oversee is a class action lawsuit brought by Deutsche Bank investors who
allege that Deutsche Bank “failed to properly monitor customers that
the Bank itself deemed to be high risk, including, among others, the
convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.” The case came after the New
York state Department of Financial Services had settled with Deutsche
Bank over the bank’s failure to cut ties with Epstein-linked accounts,
resulting in Deutsche Bank paying a $150 million fine.
Deutsche Bank, unlike other financial institutions, failed to close all
of its accounts linked to Epstein until less than a month prior to his
arrest last year, even though the bank had identified him as “high
risk” years before.
Beyond the tragedy of Sunday’s shooting, which claimed the life of Salas’ only child, the quick discovery of the death of the main suspect,
Roy Den Hollander, of a “self-inflicted” gunshot to the head before he
could be arrested or questioned by authorities has led to speculation
that there is more to the official narrative of the crime than meets the
eye.
With law enforcement sources now claiming that Esther Salas was not
the intended target of the attack and some media reports now suggesting
that Den Hollander’s motive was related to his dislike of feminism, it
appears there are efforts underway to distance Sunday’s tragic shooting
from Salas’ recent assignment to the Epstein case, which occurred just four days before the tragic shooting.
The most likely reason for any such “damage control” effort lies in
the fact that both U.S. law enforcement investigations and mainstream
media reports have consistently downplayed the connections of Jeffrey
Epstein’s sexual trafficking and financial crimes to intelligence
agencies in the U.S. and Israel. Similarly, Roy Den Hollander previously
worked for a New York firm has been described as a “private CIA” with
ties to those countries’ intelligence agencies and, also, ties to
Deutsche Bank.
Fist tap Dale | This is a condensed version of the three hour phone call between survivor Maria Farmer & investigative journalist Whitney Webb. I’ve included all of their discussion relating to Mossad, Mega Group, Les Wexner, and Israel. These are the key pieces of information that the mainstream media won’t touch and is in fact complicit in keeping this decades long blackmail operation continuing. Jeffery Epstein was not the head of the snake, he was only mid management and was assigned by Israeli Intelligence to work for Ghislaine Maxwell in the 80’s, who reported to billionaire Zionist Les Wexner.
*Alan Dershowitz decided to yet again attack another Epstein victim smearing Virginia wasn't enough, so he wrote a blast piece accusing Maria Farmer of being a bigoted anti-semite because of this phone call. This is inexcusable- Maria Farmer is a victim of racism by these fake Jewish supremacists INCLUDING Alan "I kept my underwear on" Dershowitz.
She is not the racist, her captors were. She clearly says she knows its not all Jews in this call, she accuses the elite & mafia for what happened to her & her sister & the other victims. This particular EDITED video is only focusing on the Zionist/ Israeli connections in the phone call, but please take the time to hear out the full 3 hour unedited call with Whitney Webb. Maria Farmer isn't the anti-Semite, nor is Whitney Webb. Alan Dershowitz and this band of criminals hiding behind a Jewish identity to get away with their wicked crimes are the anti-semites.
https://www.blacklistednews.com/artic...
I hope you guys listen to the full unedited phone call between Farmer & Webb, because there’s a lot I didn’t include in this video.
Whitney Webb is working on writing a book that covers the intelligence aspects of the story. Keep an eye out for her book in late summer! She’s amazing!
Please feel totally free to re-upload or share this video. I provided a download link because I want to encourage people to expose the criminal Zionist network. The more the REAL story gets out there, the more likely we can bring justice to the victims and put these gangsters away! Wexner, Maxwell, Barak, Netanyahu, Rothschild, Lauder, Bronfman, and Dershowitz are all villains who have been complicit in trafficking children around the world in order to blackmail the political elite to control them for Israel’s agenda. They must be exposed!
blacklistednews | Jeffrey Epstein's former defense attorney Alan Dershowitz on Wednesday
smeared Epstein victim Maria Farmer as "anti-Semitic" while she's in the
middle of undergoing treatment for brain cancer and struggling to
survive, let alone defend herself.
As the New York Times reported
last year, Maria Farmer and her younger sister Annie were the first
people to report Epstein to the FBI and NYPD all the way back in 1996.
Dershowitz on Wednesday evening posted an article he wrote for Newsmax titled, "Key Witness in Epstein Case Made Anti-Semitic Claims,"
where he took comments of hers condemning Ghislaine Maxwell's alleged
supremacist views completely out of context and accused her of sharing
"anti-Semitic canards" that sound like they came from "The Protocols of
the Elders of Zion."
In one particularly hilarious example, Dershowitz said Farmer was
anti-Semitic for saying Epstein and Maxwell were connected to "The
Rothschilds" -- even though Dershowitz himself told Fox News' Laura
Ingraham on Fox News late last year that he was introduced to Epstein
through Lynn Forester de Rothschild!
"Farmer claimed to have evidence that the Israeli Mossad hired
Jeffrey Epstein to video tape prominent American political leaders
committing acts of pedophilia so that Israel could blackmail them into
doing their bidding," Dershowitz said, "and that the entire conspiracy
was under the protection and direction of 'The Rothschild's.'"
Dershowitz also constructed this quote of hers where he compiled multiple of her statements into one:
"They are 'Jewish supremacists'" and they are "all
connected" through a mysterious organization called MEGA, which is run
by Leslie Wexner who is "the head of the snake."
EXCLUSIVE: Married Israeli politician Ehud Barak
is seen hiding his face entering Jeffrey Epstein's NYC townhouse as bevy
of young beauties were also spotted going into mansion - despite his
claim he NEVER socialized with the pedophile and his girlshttps://t.co/wQBJDkfVzt
For 100 minutes, not a single truth was discussed outside the truth that Abraham Cooper is supremely arrogant about being in a position of strength and control, and very explicitly says as much to the slobbering, grinning, and thoroughly chastened and humiliated negroe "celebrity".
Nick
Cannon's jaws and knees must really, really hurt after a hundred
minutes of grinning, bowing and scraping before this nasty little
Brooklyn mensch.
Finally, isn’t it in the nature of contemporary
culture, with its emphasis on entertainment, consumption, and sex, to be
the perfect environment in which to hide many “Invisible Gorillas”?
Isn’t it a whirlwind of fixations and distractions, replete with untold
numbers of “woke” viewers happy to report that they’ve been
enthusiastically counting passes and have the accurate number? Isn’t it
rather the axiom of our time that, from the idiotic Left to the idiotic
Right, Invisible Gorillas stroll freely and unhindered, laughing and
waving as they go, hidden in plain sight?
Rejuvenation Pills
-
No one likes getting old. Everyone would like to be immorbid. Let's be
careful here. Immortal doesnt include youth or return to youth. Immorbid
means you s...
Death of the Author — at the Hands of Cthulhu
-
In 1967, French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes wrote of
“The Death of the Author,” arguing that the meaning of a text is divorced
from au...
9/29 again
-
"On this sacred day of Michaelmas, former President Donald Trump invoked
the heavenly power of St. Michael the Archangel, sharing a powerful prayer
for pro...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...