Britain is in a state of political turmoil. The government and the main opposition party have both lost their way and, together, they have completely lost the trust of the people. In the last few weeks we have witnessed a landslide exodus from both the Tory and Labour parties to the slightly more rational, principled and patriotic alternatives: the truly conservative wandered to the Brexit Party and the remainers, who previously voted Labour, migrated to the more humane Liberal Democrats.
Brits are critically divided over Brexit. It is fair to say that most do not fully grasp what Brexit is anymore. They were deliberately not informed of the political discussion over Brexit and what it would mean for the future. Brits feel betrayed by the political class and in truth, they have been subjected to gross and treacherous treatment by their politicians and media. Brits are not aware of the centrality of Israel and its interests that is at the core of the Brexit debate.
In February, I published a translation of a Ynet article which reported that Israel had located itself as post-Brexit Britain’s gateway to the world: “Once out of the EU, Britain will have to sign separate trade agreements with each state, and Israel will be the first,” Ynet wrote. Just to remove any confusion, it added “Israel has become Britain’s strategic ally.” And of course, “the British government totally disregard the boycott campaign against Israel. On a political level, they boycotted the boycott.” Britain under Theresa May has been reduced into a colony of Israel’s. Brits have become increasingly aware that 80% of their Tory MPs are members of the Conservative Friends of Israel, which is a foreign pressure group dedicated to the interests of another state.
Those who have been puzzled by the insane institutional Israel lobby campaign against Corbyn and the Labour party (BOD, Jewish Chronicle, CAA, etc.) can now figure out what the motivation behind it was: Corbyn in 10 Downing Street might well interfere with Israel’s plans for post-Brexit Britain.
The truth is starting to unveil itself. Theresa May, a staunch Zionist, has been working tirelessly to bring about a Brexit ‘deal.’ The Ynet article suggests that such a deal could work for Israel.
Aluminium is neurotoxic. Its free ion, Al3+ (aq), is highly biologically reactive and uniquely equipped to do damage to essential cellular (neuronal) biochemistry. This unequivocal fact must be the starting point in examining the risk posed by aluminium as a neurotoxin in humans. Apr 30, 2014
Source: What is the risk of aluminium as a neurotoxin?
Nothing explains the aluminum free ion Al3+ more intelligently than the following:
The likely principal antagonist in all such events is Al3+ (aq) and its mechanism of action will involve numbers of different agents or intermediates. For example, we know that aluminium is a potent pro-oxidant, its interaction with the superoxide radical anion establishing, fuelling and sustaining redox cycles. The potency of these effects are all the more significant in that the enhanced formation of reactive oxygen species may be accelerated at sites which are distinct and divorced from locations housing the cell’s anti-oxidant machinery. For example, aluminium sinks such as the extracellular senile plaques of Aβ42 and the intracellular chromatin of neuronal nuclei are both likely targets of aluminium-driven oxidative damage. Aluminium is an excitotoxin and a number of mechanisms have been described, whereby aluminium induces elevated and sustained levels of intracellular Ca2+ with significant implications not only for cellular energy metabolism, but also uncontrolled phosphorylation of biomolecules. The presence of biologically reactive aluminium imposes an immediate energy requirement upon a neuron, whether simply because of the need to produce more Ca2+-buffering proteins or because of the requirement to clean-up the consequences of hyperphosphorylation, for example, through autophagosomal activities. Aluminium is a mutagen and the phosphate-rich environment of the nucleus predisposes it to the accumulation of aluminium and subsequent alterations in the expression of genetic materials. The latter may be subtle but sufficient to bring about significant alterations in neuronal physiology over extended time periods. Aluminium is, of course, a powerful immunogen, being the preferred adjuvant in vaccination and immunotherapy. This activity as an adjuvant, and concomitantly as an antigen, at injection sites in skin or muscle must also be considered for focal accumulations of aluminium within the CNS and such reactivity may underlie aluminium’s suggested roles in autoimmunity.
The CAATSA (Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) sanctions concept of economically punishing countries that continue to purchase Russian and Chinese arms is about to become much more effective after the forthcoming global application of the “European Recapitalisation Incentive Programme”, which will see the US sanctioning states that don’t progressively transition away from their current multipolar suppliers to American ones instead.
Adding a carrot of sorts to the traditional sanctions stick, the US will help countries fund their new American purchases, which will supposedly incentivize them into complying with Washington’s demands. This new policy represents a much more muscular approach to “military diplomacy” than before and shows that the US properly understands the challenge that Russia and China’s own application of the same poses to its global interests.
To explain, military relationships aren’t the same as most trading ones where the customer simply purchases a product and that’s usually the end of the exchange. Rather, they usually imply long-term partnerships where the seller agrees to maintain the military wares for an agreed-upon length of time and train the end user in how to properly operate them, which lays the basis for more comprehensive and strategic relations between the two parties as a result of these trustful ties.
There are also billions of dollars to be made these deals too, to say nothing of any others that result from this exercise of “military diplomacy”. In addition, countries that have established these close “deep state” relations with Russia and China are generally more aligned with those two multipolar Great Powers and not as easily manipulated by the US, which is of course concerning from an American standpoint.
In response to the quiet expansion of Russian and Chinese influence all across the world through “military diplomacy” and the effect that it’s even begun to have on notional American allies such as Turkey, the US has decided to strike back in order to reverse the tide and regain its lost strategic ground.
Seeing as how America’s robust market is the world’s envy and the dollar is still by far the world’s main reserve currency, the Trump Administration realized that it could leverage these economic advantages to its favor by weaponizing them in pursuit of these military-strategic aims.
By Eva Galperin
If you are one of WhatsApp’s billion-plus users, you may have read that on Monday the company announced that it had found a vulnerability. This vulnerability allowed an attacker to remotely upload malicious code onto a phone by sending packets of data that look like phone calls from a number not in your contacts list. These repeated calls then cause WhatsApp to crash. This is a particularly scary vulnerability because the does not require that the user pick up the phone, click a link, enter their login credentials, or interact in any way.
Fortunately, the company fixed the vulnerability on the server side over the weekend and rolled out a patch for the client side on Monday.
What does that mean for you? First and foremost, it means today is a good day to make sure that you are running the latest version of WhatsApp. Until you update your software, your phone may still be vulnerable to this exploit.
Are you likely to have been targeted by this exploit? Facebook (which owns WhatsApp) has not indicated that they know how many people have been targeted by this vulnerability, but they have attributed its use to an Israeli security company, NSO Group, which has long claimed to be able to install its software by sending a single text message. The exploit market pays top-dollar for “zero-click install” vulnerabilities in the latest versions of popular applications. It is not so remarkable that such capabilities exist, but it is remarkable that WhatsApp’s security team found and patched the vulnerability.
Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter – Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom
Journalist Whitney Webb recently tweeted a 2010 video clip I’d never seen before featuring US National Security Advisor John Bolton defending the use of deception in advancing military agendas, which highlights something we should all be paying attention to as Trump administration foreign policy becomes increasingly Boltonized.
On a December 2010 episode of Fox News’ Freedom Watch, Bolton and the show’s host Andrew Napolitano were debating about recent WikiLeaks publications, and naturally the subject of government secrecy came up.
“Now I want to make the case for secrecy in government when it comes to the conduct of national security affairs, and possibly for deception where that’s appropriate,” Bolton said. “You know Winston Churchill said during World War Two that in wartime truth is so important it should be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.”
“Do you really believe that?” asked an incredulous Napolitano.
“Absolutely,” Bolton replied.
“You would lie in order to preserve the truth?”
“If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it,” Bolton answered.
“I don’t think we’re often faced with that difficulty, but would I lie about where the D-Day invasion was going to take place to deceive the Germans, you’d better believe it,” Bolton continued.
“Why do people in the government think that the laws of society or the rules don’t apply to them?” Napolitano asked.
“Because they are not dealing in the civil society we live in under the Constitution,” Bolton replied. “They are dealing in the anarchic environment internationally where different rules apply.”
“But you took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution mandates certain openness and certain fairness,” Napolitano protested. “You’re willing to do away with that in order to attain a temporary military goal?”
“I think as Justice Jackson said in a famous decision, the Constitution is not a suicide pact,” Bolton said. “And I think defending the United States from foreign threats does require actions that in a normal business environment in the United States we would find unprofessional. I don’t make any apology for it.”
So that’s a thing.
The Lies About World War II
Paul Craig Roberts
In the aftermath of a war, history cannot be written. The losing side has no one to speak for it. Historians on the winning side are constrained by years of war propaganda that demonized the enemy while obscuring the crimes of the righteous victors. People want to enjoy and feel good about their victory, not learn that their side was responsible for the war or that the war could have been avoided except for the hidden agendas of their own leaders. Historians are also constrained by the unavailability of information. To hide mistakes, corruption, and crimes, governments lock up documents for decades. Memoirs of participants are not yet written. Diaries are lost or withheld from fear of retribution. It is expensive and time consuming to locate witnesses, especially those on the losing side, and to convince them to answer questions. Any account that challenges the “happy account” requires a great deal of confirmation from official documents, interviews, letters, diaries, and memoirs, and even that won’t be enough. For the history of World War II in Europe, these documents can be spread from New Zealand and Australia across Canada and the US through Great Britain and Europe and into Russia. A historian on the track of the truth faces long years of strenuous investigation and development of the acumen to judge and assimilate the evidence he uncovers into a truthful picture of what transpired. The truth is always immensely different from the victor’s war propaganda.
As I reported recently, Harry Elmer Barnes was the first American historian to provide a history of the first world war that was based on primary sources. His truthful account differed so substantially from the war propaganda that he was called every name in the book. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/05/09/the-lies-that-form-our-consciousness-and-false-historical-awareness/
Truth is seldom welcomed. David Irving, without any doubt the best historian of the European part of World War II, learned at his great expense that challenging myths does not go unpunished. Nevertheless, Irving persevered. If you want to escape from the lies about World War II that still direct our disastrous course, you only need to study two books by David Irving: Hitler’s War and the first volume of his Churchill biography,
Ever since the 1980s I have been researching vaccine data, but I cannot seem to figure out – for the life of me – how many actual adverse reactions experienced by vaccinees are reported to VAERS, since there are so many data variables, plus estimated figures bandied around, as you will soon learn.
The vaccine adverse reactions reporting conundrum apparently gained some legitimacy with this report:
VAERS MAY ACCOUNT FOR ONLY 1 PERCENT OF ACTUAL VACCINE INJURIES [Nov 2, 2015]
But how many children have vaccine reactions every year? Is it really only one in 110,000 or one in a million who are left permanently disabled after vaccination? Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler  observed in 1993 that less than 1 percent of doctors report adverse events following prescription drug use. There have been estimates that perhaps less than 5 or 10 percent of doctors report hospitalizations, injuries, deaths, or other serious health problems following vaccination. The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act contained no legal sanctions for not reporting; doctors can refuse to report and suffer no consequences.
Even so, each year about 12,000 reports are made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System; parents as well as doctors can make those reports. However, if that number represents only 10 percent of what is actually occurring, then the actual number may be 120,000 vaccine-adverse events. If doctors report vaccine reactions as infrequently as Dr. Kessler said they report prescription-drug reactions, and the number 12,000 is only 1 percent of the actual total, then the real number may be 1.2 million vaccine-adverse events annually.  [CJF emphasis]
— Barbara Loe Fisher, Co-founder & President National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC)
Now here’s where things can get somewhat “squirrelly,” I think. In checking CDC/FDA and the feds websites, I find varying explanations and numbers for estimated yearly VAERS reports.
Since 1990, VAERS has received over 123,000 reports as of June 14, 2014
[VAERS-1 Form used from 1990 to June 30, 2017]
In recent years VAERS has received approximately 40,000 U.S.
The current “police state” actions being implemented regarding vaccination dissenters is due to the public’s mistrust of the CDC/FDA/Big Pharma consensus science regarding vaccines unknown viruses and neurotoxic ingredients causing adverse effects in children’s health, which has an historical, plus congressional hearing validation, anyone who values good health and well children must consider seriously.
Merck’s premiere vaccine inventor, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, was astute enough to realize something was amiss with the production of vaccines, which he documents in the video below.
The Polio Vaccine Has Cancer Virus, SV40, According to Dr. Maurice Hilleman
When he spoke about bringing the monkeys over from Africa, which they used to manufacture the polio vaccine, he had this to say, “I brought African greens in. I didn’t know we were importing AIDS virus at the time.”
Dr. Hilleman stated, “Yellow fever vaccine had leukemia virus in it. This was in the day of very crude science. 
If you think the above was something “of a fluke” or a “figment of conspiracy theorists imaginations,” then you absolutely ought to read the U.S. Government Printing Office online published report of the September 10, 2003 Hearing of the Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness of the Committee on Government Reform of the House of Representatives of the 108th Congress wherein Congressman Dan Burton is on public record saying:
There is no dispute that millions of Americans received polio vaccines that were contaminated with the virus called Simian Virus 40, or SV-40. There also is no dispute that SV-40 is capable of causing cancer, but there is a major dispute as to how many Americans may have received the contaminated vaccine, with estimates ranging from 4 million to 100 million people. There is also a major dispute as to when the polio vaccine supply got cleaned up. In addition, nobody knows how many people got sick or died because of the contaminated vaccines.
Since I published my last article about about the idiotic “Assange isn’t a journalist” smear, this talking point has become more and more commonplace in online discourse. It’s very important to defenders of the political status quo for us all to believe that Assange is not a journalist, because otherwise that would mean they’re cheering for a dangerous precedent which would allow for the prosecution of journalists who exposed the truth about US government malfeasance. And that would mean cognitive dissonance, which all defenders of the political status quo spend most of their day-to-day mental energy running away from.
So in the past few days, editorials like this one from free press avatar Peter Greste have popped up all over the place with their own definitions of what journalism is in order to argue why that label can’t possibly apply to Assange. All of these definitions ultimately boil down to the argument that because Assange doesn’t publish leaks in a way that they feel journalism ought to be practiced, it isn’t journalism and therefore sets no legal precedent for journalists around the world. As though the US government is going to be consulting their feelings about what specifically constitutes journalism the next time they decide to imprison a journalist for doing what Assange did.
It doesn’t work that way, sugar tits. Assange is being prosecuted by the Trump administration for standard journalistic practices, he stands no chance of receiving a fair trial, and it is very likely that he will be hit with far more serious charges for his activities once on US soil. The next time the US government, under Trump or someone else, sees another journalist anywhere in the world doing something similar to what Assange did, there will be nothing stopping them from saying, “We need to lock that person up like we did Assange; they’re doing the same sort of thing.”
It’s just so amazingly arrogant how people imagine that the way their feelings feel will factor into this in any way. Like the US Attorney General might show up on their doorstep one day with a clipboard saying “Yes, hello, we wanted to imprison this journalist based on the precedent we set with the prosecution of Julian Assange,
SoftBank and AeroVironment are ready to conduct flight tests of its experimental solar-powered drone that can deliver 5G connectivity to anywhere in the world, reported Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
Dubbed Hawk 30, the drone is a curved “flying wing” design. Filings with the Federal Aviation Administration and the Securities and Exchange Commission show the drone has ten electric engines and an operational altitude of over 12 miles.
According to a Space Act Agreement signed with NASA last November, the drone could lift off from NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in California as soon as this month.
AeroVironment’s previous prototype drone, the Helios, was the largest winged horizontal aircraft in the world. The plane was wider than a Boeing 747 but weighed less than just one of the jet’s landing wheels.
Helios came to an abrupt halt in 2003, when NASA was testing the drone off the Hawaiian coast, high winds caused the plane to disintegrate in mid-flight.
In 2010, AeroVironment designed and built another prototype, called the Global Observer, for the Pentagon. The drone carried top-secret communications and surveillance payloads. The program ended one year later after a crash landing.
The technical difficulties surrounding AeroVironment’s drones did not prevent Facebook and Google from attempting to develop ones of their own.
“Google bought a company called Titan Aerospace in 2014, and carried out numerous tests of a 5G system called SkyBender at Spaceport America in 2016. Its parent company, Alphabet, eventually grounded the drones in 2017 to focus on Loon, which is now an Alphabet subsidiary delivering commercial Internet service from high-altitude balloons. Facebook also wanted to test its enormous, stratospheric Aquila drones at the Spaceport, but shelved its plans last year after fragile prototypes were damaged on landing,” wrote IEEE.
In January 2018, SoftBank and AeroVironment formed a partnership called HAPSMobile to develop a solar-powered HALE drone for commercial operations.
Wahid Nawabi, CEO of AeroVironment said, “For many years, we have fully understood the incredible value HALE unmanned aircraft platforms could deliver to countless organizations and millions of people around the world through remote sensing and last mile,
Vinnie Caggiano (aka Vincognito) joins us to discuss everyone’s favourite subjects: The Beatles and conspiracy theories. From the wacky to the laughable to the thought-provoking, join us for this surprisingly thorough dissection of conspiracy lore surrounding The Beatles and their place in the manufactured mass media universe.
CLICK HERE for show notes and mp3 audio for this conversation
Observers of developments in the Middle East have long taken it as a given that the United States and Israel are seeking for an excuse to attack Iran. The recently terminated conference in Warsaw had that objective, which was clearly expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it failed to rally European and Middle Eastern states to support the cause. On the contrary, there was strong sentiment coming from Europe in particular that normalizing relations with Iran within the context of the 2015 multi party nuclear agreement is the preferred way to go both to avoid a major war and to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.
There are foundations in Washington, all closely linked to Israel and its lobby in the U.S., that are wholly dedicated to making the case for war against Iran. They seek pretexts in various dark corners, including claims that Iran is cheating on its nuclear program, that it is developing ballistic missiles that will enable it to deliver its secret nuclear warheads onto targets in Europe and even the United States, that it is an oppressive, dictatorial government that must be subjected to regime change to liberate the Iranian people and give them democracy, and, most stridently, that is provoking and supporting wars and threats against U.S. allies all throughout the Middle East.
Dissecting the claims about Iran, one might reasonably counter that rigorous inspections by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirm that Tehran has no nuclear weapons program, a view that is supported by the U.S. intelligence community in its recent Worldwide Threat Assessment. Beyond that, Iran’s limited missile program can be regarded as largely defensive given the constant threats from Israel and the U.S. and one might well accept that the removal of the Iranian government is a task best suited for the Iranian people, not delivered through military intervention by a foreign power that has been starving the country through economic warfare. And as for provoking wars in the Middle East, look to the United States and Israel, not Iran.
So the hawks in Washington, by which one means National Security Adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and, apparently President Donald Trump himself when the subject is Iran, have been somewhat frustrated by the lack of a clear casus belli to hang their war on.
In recent times the international media, including many who promised to “resist” the dangerous commander-in-chief Donald Trump, have been awash with stories about Nicolas Maduro blocking US “humanitarian aid” reaching Venezuela. Maduro is said to have even blocked a bridge in his desperation to starve his own people (see, for example, CNN, CBC, Associated Press, BBC, NPR, ABC, Bloomberg, The Guardian). A constant flow of stories such as this have served to establish a narrative of a dictator blocking a benevolent US government from helping its desperate people. Something must be done!
Virtually unreported in the humanitarian aid story are several inconvenient truths that contradict the official US government narrative the media is so closely parroting. Firstly, the “aid” is not recognized as such at all. For shipments to qualify as aid, they must be given indiscriminately. The US “aid” appears destined only for Juan Guaidó, the US-backed self-appointed president. The Red Cross and the United Nations have refused to help the US or to recognize Trump’s shipments as aid. Indeed, the United Nations has formally condemned the US’ actions in Venezuela. For their part, the Venezuelan government has been very eager to accept genuine aid, and is currently working with the UN to distribute supplies.
The UN Human Rights Council denounced Trump’s sanctions (illegal even under OAS law), noting that they specifically target “the poor and most vulnerable classes”, calling on all member states to break them and even began discussing reparations that the US should pay to Venezuela. The sanctions have had a devastating effect on the country’s economy, reducing its oil output by 50 percent, according to the opposition’s own economics czar. Furthermore, Trump has threatened anyone breaking the sanctions with up to 30 years imprisonment. One UN special rapporteur described the sanctions as akin to a medieval siege and declared them a “crime against humanity.” Thus, much of Venezuela’s crisis is actually manufactured in Washington, though you would be extremely hard pressed to understand that from mainstream coverage.
So far much of the discussion over what is driving the bizarre Trump Administration intervention into Venezuela centers around the comments of National Security Adviser John Bolton to claim it’s about oil. In a previous analysis we looked at the prospects of the huge Chavez Basin, formerly the Orinoco Basin, said to hold the world’s largest reserves of oil by some definitions. Now it’s becoming clearer that this de facto war is about far more than control of the heavy oil of the Chavez Basin in Venezuela.
First it’s important to look at which oil companies were already staking various claims on the region’s oil prospects. Within Venezuela, Chinese oil companies led by China National Petroleum Corporation, and the Chinese government have been playing a major role since the Chavez era. In fact the role has become so great Venezuela’s government owes China some $61 billion. Because of the financial problems of the Maduro government, China has been taking debt repayment in form of oil. Since 2010 the Russian state oil company, Rosneft has been involved in joint projects with the Venezuela state PDVSA, mainly in the Orinoco/Chavez Belt. Some years ago Rosneft extended some $6 billion in loans to Venezuela to be also repaid in oil. A recent statement from Rosneft says that $2.3 billion is due by end of this year. Rosneft has participation in five oil projects and 100 percent in a gas project. In addition to CNPC and Rosneft, France’s Total SA, Norway’s Equinor, and US Chevron all hold minority stakes in Venezuela projects, with most vowing to stay despite the political crisis. That raises the question what they know beyond the well-documented heavy oil of Venezuela.
The real prize?
The real prize that these powerful international oil giants are eyeing likely lies well to the east of the Orinoco heavy oil fields where they now operate. The real prize is the ultimate control over one of the best-kept secrets in the oil industry, the huge oil reserves of a disputed area straddling Venezuela, Guyana and Brazil. The region is called Guayana Esequiba. Some geologists believe the Esequiba region and its offshore could contain the world’s largest reserves of oil, oil of far better quality that the heavy Orinoco crude of Venezuela.
The first eight months of WWII with no fighting – was called The Phoney War. Using millimetre waves as a fifth-generation or 5G wireless communications technology is a phoney war of another kind.
This phoney war is also silent, but this time shots are being fired – in the form of laser-like beams of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from banks of thousands of tiny antennas – and almost no one in the firing line knows that they are being silently, seriously and irreparably injured.
In the first instance, 5G is likely to make people electro-hypersensitive (EHS). Perhaps it was sitting in front of two big computer screens for many of the 18 years I worked at the UN that made me EHS. When the UN Office at Vienna installed powerful WiFi and cellphone access points – designed to serve large, public areas – in narrow, metal-walled corridors throughout the Vienna International Centre in December 2015, I was ill continuously for seven months.
I did my best for two and a half years to alert the UN staff union, administration and medical service to the danger to the health of UN staff of EMR from these access points, but was ignored. That’s why, in May 2018, I took the issue to the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres [transcript]. He is a physicist and electrical engineer and lectured on telecommunications signals early in his career, yet asserted that he knew nothing about this. He undertook to ask the World Health Organization to look into it, but seven months later those public access points remain in place. I received no replies to my many follow-up emails.
As a result, I welcomed the opportunity to join the effort to publish an International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space because it was clear to me that, despite there having been 43 earlier scientific appeals, very few people understood the dangers of EMR. My experience as an editor could help ensure that a new 5G appeal, including the issue of beaming 5G from space, was clear, comprehensive, explanatory, and accessible to the non-scientist. The International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space is fully referenced,
12 February 2019 (German)
Even in Venezuela, regime change is not about the oil.
In our 2018 analysis on “The Logic of Imperial Wars” it was shown that US interventions of the last several decades were not “about the oil”: this is obviously true for Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Yemen (all of which own no oil), but also for Iraq, Libya and Syria. Indeed, in the case of Syria the “pipeline theory” was ultimately based on a single false report.
The oil narrative is now reappearing again in Venezuela’s case, as Venezuela owns the largest conventional oil reserves in the world. But the attempted regime change in Venezuela is not about oil either.
As a matter of fact, the US has already been the largest buyer of Venezuelan oil for years. And if the US wanted to physically “control” the oil, why is it that of all countries in South America, Venezuela (together with Bolivia) is the last one to be geopolitically independent of the US?
It is because the logic works just the other way round: Venezuela is independent because of its oil, and this independence is a problem from a US geopolitical point of view. On the one hand Venezuela is a political, economic and military gateway for Russia and China, on the other hand Venezuela supports additional „enemy states“ such as, notably, Cuba and Nicaragua.
It’s a geostrategic “masterstroke”: a regime change in Venezuela could neutralize this entire Russian-Chinese “Latino network” in one fell swoop, ideally without firing a shot.
John Bolton: Supporters and opponents of regime change in Venezuela (28 January 2019)
Proponents of the oil narrative often cite as “evidence” a FOX Business News interview about the situation in Venezuela with US National Security Advisor John Bolton. However, regarding oil Bolton merely stated that “socialist dictator” Maduro had allowed the oil industry to collapse, while the “new president”, backed by US industry, would boost investments again. A trivial statement.
Chinese automakers have been selling “mini-electric” vehicles hand-over-fist, selling more electric vehicles than the rest of the world combined according to QZ.
As early as next month, China’s Kaiyun Motors will begin selling its “Pickman” electric pickup truck in the US, Italy and Germany – with the base model starting in the US at $8,950 for a NHSTA-approved version that can legally operate on roads with speed limits under 35 mph, and $5,700 for a non-street-legal version.
These tiny electric cars are light on frills, but can take a family of three up to 75 miles on a single charge as long as they weigh under 1,000 lbs. They also take 10 hours to recharge and have a top speed of just 28 mph.
Compared to a Tesla Model S which can go over 200 miles on a single charge, have a top speed of 150 mph and can recharge in 75 minutes, the Pickman is clearly in a different league – for around $80,000 less.
These are not snazzy, high-end vehicles, and their marketing isn’t either. A promotional video for the Pickman features a young, hoodie-wearing Chinese narrator plainly explaining the car’s unique features. The pickup comes in six colors, boasts off-road capability, and can fit a “family of three,” according to the video. It has a range of 120 km (75 miles) on a single charge. The battery takes up to ten hours to charge. The Pickman’s top speed is 45 km per hour (28 miles per hour), and it has a payload capacity of 450 kg. –QZ
“Mini-electric vehicles are more than enough to meet consumers’ daily needs,” Kaiyun founder Wang Chao told Bloomberg. “There is a huge market out there around the world.”
The Kaiyun Motors Pickman is basically an all-electric take on the classic Jeep model that helped the US win WWII. pic.twitter.com/grihgc5Orp
— Jace Deloney (@JaceDeloney) February 4, 2019
Kaiyun told Bloomberg that they intend to sell 10,000 Pickman mini trucks in the US this year after they gain approval to market the vehicle.
1. All Cell Phones And Wireless Devices Emit Radiation.
Every wireless device is actually a two-way microwave radio that sends and receives a type of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation called radio frequency radiation RF – EMF. This machine-made radiation is millions of times higher than the natural electromagnetic fields (EMFs) our grandparents were exposed to.Numerous peer reviewed
studies shows that these made-made pulsed electromagnetic frequencies cause adverse biological effects and are very different than the natural electromagnetic fields that have existed in the environment for years. Research on humans has found an association between cell phone use and serious effects such as
damage to the
found that cellular radiation exposure during pregnancy led to increased hyperactivity and memory problems in offspring.
2. Our Brains And Bodies Are Penetrated By This Radiation.
When we hold a cell phone against our head to talk, the radiation from the phone moves into our brain. Likewise, when we use a wireless laptop, the radiation penetrates into our abdominal region, chest area and brain.According to the International Agency for the Research on Cancer:
“the average radio frequency radiation energy deposition for children exposed to mobile phone RF is two times higher in the brain and 10 times higher in the bone marrow of the skull, compared with mobile phone use by adults”.
(Read it on page 44 of the IARC Monograph on Radiofrequency Fields)
Research also has found that radiation from tablets penetrates more deeply into children’s brains (Ferreira 2015.) A 2018 study that considered the radiation dose into the brain of teenagers found that teens who used cell phones up to their head had decreased memory performance on researchers tests.
Trump gets flak for characterizing the mainstream press as purveyors of Fake News. But what about no news at all?
Isn’t lack of coverage even worse than biased coverage?
Well, how much news have you heard or read about the gilets jaunes – or “yellow vest” – protests in France?
CNN hasn’t got anything on its main page today (Jan. 9). Neither did NBC or CBS. Lots of the usual – endless – carpet-chewing coverage of Trump, though. And also of such important stories as “Want to Pay off Your Mortgage? Try Frugal Minimalism.”
You might think France, a major western European country, coming unglued – and on the verge of its government outright banning “unauthorized” criticism of its actions – might at least be . . . well, news.
Which is very interesting, given what the yellow vests are protesting. This being chiefly the purposely punitive taxes on fuel – diesel especially – imposed by the French President, Emmanuel Macron. In the name of “climate change” – but really in the name of squeezing average Frenchmen (and women) out of their cars. These taxes – already extortionate and brutally regressive – were on track to increase the cost of a gallon of fuel to more than $7.
This brought the French not to their knees – but to the streets. The yellow vests – which are reflective jackets every French motorist is required by law to keep in their vehicle, to be worn in the event of an emergency – were donned for a different kind of emergency.
And Macron buckled. The tax hike has been rescinded. But did you read about it?
Probably not – unless you went out of your way to look for it. Mainstream press coverage of this effective protest has been as scanty as its coverage of the reason for the yellow vest protests – which by the way continue, notwithstanding Macron’s retreat.
The reason being that Macron has not retreated in principle from resurrecting the tax,
A Reuters investigation published Friday charges that Johnson & Johnson, a multi-billion dollar company known for its healthcare products, knew for decades that its iconic talcum baby powder “was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos,” but concealed the information from regulators and the public.
Asbestos, “the name given to six minerals that occur naturally in the environment as bundles of fibers,” has been used in North America’s automotive, construction, and shipbuilding industries since the late 1800s, according to the National Cancer Institute. The World Health Organization (WHO) warns that “all types of asbestos cause lung cancer, mesothelioma, cancer of the larynx and ovary, and asbestosis (fibrosis of the lungs).”
Because asbestos sometimes occurs in the earth along with talc, contamination is possible. Reuters—along with attorneys for more than 11,000 plaintiffs currently suing Johnson & Johnson, claiming the company’s products caused their cancer—examined memos, internal reports, and other confidential documents as well as deposition and trial testimony.
by Ole Dammegard
Yolanda Yogapanda is a very smart and wise little panda bear. Together with her best friends, Toby Trunk and Leopold the stripy lion, she encounters various challenges in life – challenges Yolanda Yogapanda usually have great ways of solving. This is the first in a series of children’s books (age 5-95 years) based on the wisdom of ancient and timeless teachings of great yoga masters like Patanjali and Sri Swami Satchidananda.
That mountain of evidence, according to Reuters, revealed
that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors, and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public.
The documents also depict successful efforts to influence U.S. regulators’ plans to limit asbestos in cosmetic talc products and scientific research on the health effects of talc.
While, over the past two decades, some legal challenges claiming that Johnson &
(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It’s preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.
(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.
(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
bold text results in bold text
italic text results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
emphasized text results in emphasized text
strong text results in strong text
a quote text results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited results in:
a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
a heavier version of quoting a block of text…
a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.
and last but not least:
Name of your link results in
(4) No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:
You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The “Live Preview” appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.
(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.
FM: UN migration pact is designed to “legalise illegal migration”
Hungary has decided not to take part in the compact’s adoption process in order to make it clear that the document is not binding in any way whatsoever, says the foreign minister
The foreign minister has highlighted how the United Nations global compact for migration is designed to “legalise illegal migration”.
Péter Szijjártó, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, said the move is “utterly unacceptable” and harms the sovereignty of member states, including Hungary.
Minister Szijjártó said the Hungarian government considers the UN plan an “extremely biased pro-migration document, which is harmful and dangerous”.
The minister highlighted how the UN is about to make the same mistake as the European Union, “which has sought to base its migration policy on mandatory migrant quotas”.
“The UN package is even more dangerous because it is a global initiative,” he said. “Its impact will be greater than a continental policy and poses a risk to the entire globe.”
Minister Szijjártó said the main bone of contention is whether or not the package is compulsory, since the document contains the word “obligatory” eighty times, so the claim that the document only makes recommendations is false.
The minister states that countries should undertake to inform migrants about migration routes and run information campaigns for people who want to leave their homelands. It would also require countries to help migrants reunite with their families, he added.
The minister said the pack would ensure countries would have to offer the same services to migrants as they do to their own citizens.
“It is clearer than day that the global migration compact, just like the originally voluntary migrant quota, would become a point of reference and a binding basis for rulings in international law,” he said.
Minister Szijjártó noted that Hungary has decided not to take part in the compact’s adoption process in order to make it clear that the document is not binding in any way whatsoever.
Only Jews Can Tell The Truth About Israel
Imagine what would happen to Chomsky if he were a white gentile
Chomsky Warns of the Rise of ‘Judeo-Nazi Tendencies’ in Israel
November 12, 2018 “Information Clearing House” – Prominent Jewish intellectual Noam Chomsky has raised concerns over what he believes is the rise of “Judeo-Nazi tendencies” in Israel. Speaking to i24NEWS last week, the renowned political dissident, linguist and scholar repeated warnings given by Yeshayahu Leibowitz, an Israeli public intellectual, biochemist and polymath, concerning the dehumanising effect of Israel’s brutal occupation of Palestine on the victims and the oppressors.
Chomsky commented on remarks by Leibowitz who was nominated for the Israel Prize saying that “Leibowitz warned that if the occupation continues, Israeli Jews are going to turn into what he called, Judeo-Nazis”. Chomsky recognised the description was a “strong term” and that most people wouldn’t be able to get away with describing Israel in this manner but explained that Leibowitz’s status meant that he was able to speak about Israel without incurring fury.
Leibowitz who passed away in 1994 in Jerusalem, cautioned that the state of Israel and Zionism had become more sacred than Jewish humanist values and controversially went on to describe Israeli conduct in occupied Palestinian territories as “Judeo-Nazi” in nature.
Outraged by Israel’s killing of 60 villagers of Qibya in 1953, most of whom were women and children by the notorious Israeli commando Unit 101, known for its brutality and retribution campaigns, Leibowitz has been quoted as saying:
“We have to ask ourselves where this youth of ours emerged from; young people who had no mental inhibitions about committing this atrocity? What inner motivation for such acts could have been at work here? This youth is not a mob but the product of Zionist, humanist social education.”
Echoing Leibowitz, Chomsky said: “If you have your jackboot on somebody’s neck, you have to find a way to justify it.” Repeating Leibowitz’s warning he added that “blaming the victim was a direct reflection of the continued occupation, the humiliation of people, the degradation, and the terrorist attacks by the Israeli government”.
The former MIT linguist said that being critical of the occupation in Israel today means being labelled a traitor,
BUY YOUR COPY TODAY: https://www.corbettreport.com/shop/
In 9/11 Trillions and 9/11 War Games, The Corbett Report sheds light on two of the greatest 9/11 mysteries: The simultaneous war games that were taking place that morning and the trillion dollar money trail that leads back to the highest levels of government. Now for the first time you can own both of these feature length documentaries on a single DVD.
Our good friend Dave Hooper, who created the 2014 hit documentary The Anatomy of a Great Deception, is making a “Part 2.” He’s already filmed most of it, and it’ll be released in September 2019!
Millions of people around the world have seen “AGD 1.” If you’re one of them, you probably agree that it’s one of the best films ever made for waking up new audiences to the truth about the events of September 11, 2001.
Its power lies in Dave’s heartfelt tale of how he learned the awful truth that he’d been deceived about 9/11 — the most seminal event of the 21st century. He uses his personal process of discovery to guide viewers through an accessible but technically sophisticated presentation of the World Trade Center evidence.
Watch the trailer of The Anatomy of a Great Deception – Part 1
In AGD 2, Dave steps up his analysis by digging even deeper into how such a massive deception was pulled off. He also updates viewers on his personal struggles and victories, providing a powerful cathartic experience for 9/11 activists and a sympathetic, relatable portrait for people who have yet to go down this rabbit hole.
Dave’s first film was a smash hit by any measure. It received 30 million views on the Internet and sold tens of thousands of DVDs. But he’s aiming even higher for the sequel: theatrical, digital, and guerilla DVD distribution that will reach an audience of millions even before it’s posted online in 2020.
Watch the trailer of The Anatomy of a Great Deception – Part 2
Please go to Dave’s Indiegogo page, check out the new trailer videos, and donate whatever you can. With a contribution of $29 or more, Dave will send you an autographed DVD before the 9/11 anniversary. Invest $109 in his vision, and he’ll send you six autographed DVDs to share with friends and family — just as the film is premiering in New York,
via WeAreChange: “In this video, Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange gives you the latest breaking news on the China World Order and why it is here on purpose. We talk about the real news while exposing fake news media censorship on the topic of China with James Corbett of the Corbett report.”
CLICK HERE for mp3 audio and show notes for this video
Filed in: Videos
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Support My Work
Donate bitcoin (BTC):
Donate bitcoin cash (BCH):
Receive email updates
Enter your email address below to receive updates each time we publish new content.
Europe has had enough. Critical mass over the refugee crisis has been reached. Any sane person could have predicted what the influx of millions of asylum seekers and economic migrants would do to a cohesive European Union. And today, European citizens are astonished at how their trust in leadership has led to a growing catastrophe. It’s time for Europe to reassess the EU and the course for the future.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel was at the head of a cadre of European leaders that rammed ultra-liberalism down the throats of European Union citizens when the migrant crisis began. She was the poster girl for the liberal world order back in 2014 when the continent started being overrun with refugees. Today, Europe’s most popular leader looks like the sacrificial lamb the globalists will offer up to serve their destructive needs. The madness of importing millions of refugees from Africa and the Middle East will end up being all about Merkel and German idealism. But, her folly is only a bit part in the greater drama enacted by her colleagues in Brussels. Still, Merkel’s Bavarian CSU allies have given her until the end of the EU summit to reduce the burden of immigration on Germany. If she does not soften the impact of taking in 1.6 million migrants since 2014, she will certainly lose her job and reputation.
For those people who are astonished at the current situation, the logical question to EU leaders has risen; “What were they thinking?” And this is the right question for people of every country in the world. In Italy, Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has taken a stand. The Italians don’t want another boat from Libya to land ferrying African migrants. In Malta, the government has taken legal action against the German NGO Mission Lifeline responsible for delivering 234 migrants from Libya to its shores. The boat is at the center of a growing concern over human trafficking from those who say these German NGO efforts are not “rescue missions,” but virtual slavery endeavors instead. Where once Angela Merkel’s rare form of liberalism impressed average Germans, today there’s savage dissent.
The political crisis for the EU is most fittingly illustrated in statements from French President Emmanuel Macron, who said Mission Lifeline defied “all the rules and the Libyan coast guard” and “played into the hands of smugglers” when it picked up these migrants off Libya.
Despite a strong economy, about 40 percent of American families struggled to meet at least one of their basic needs last year, including paying for food, health care, housing or utilities.
That’s according to an Urban Institute survey of nearly 7,600 adults that found that the difficulties were most prevalent among adults with lower incomes or health issues. But it also revealed that people from all walks of life were running into similar hardships.
The findings issued Tuesday by the nonprofit research organization highlight the financial strains experienced by many Americans in an otherwise strong economy.
The average unemployment rate for 2017 was 4.4 percent, a low that followed years of decline. But having a job doesn’t ensure families will be able to meet their basic needs, said Michael Karpman, one of the study’s authors. Among the households with at least one working adult, more than 30 percent reported hardship.
“Economic growth and low unemployment alone do not ensure everyone can meet their basic needs,” the authors wrote.
Food insecurity was the most common challenge: More than 23 percent of households struggled to feed their family at some point during the year. That was followed by problems paying a family medical bill, reported by about 18 percent. A similar percentage didn’t seek care for a medical need because of the cost.
Additionally, roughly 13 percent of families missed a utility bill payment at some point during the year. And 10 percent of families either didn’t pay the full amount of their rent or mortgage, or they paid it late.
While startling data to some, it comes as no surprise to those Americans who are struggling to get by.
Debra Poppelaars of Nashville, Tennessee, underwent spinal fusion surgery last fall and was diagnosed with breast cancer shortly thereafter. Although she is insured, she owes roughly $19,000 for her portion of the medical bills.
Between disability, a job change and the mounting debt, she hasn’t been able to make ends meet and is now facing bankruptcy.
“It’s very hard at 64 years old, I look back and think I am in this position and I should be able to retire,” she said.
Jerri Wood of Renton,
If the US government prosecutes Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, it will mark a point of no return.
We’ll never know what “average” Germans thought on November 11, 1938, the day after Kristallnacht. Perhaps a few recognized it for what it was: a turning point, an acceleration of Germany’s descent into hell. America’s Crystal Night looms, and if it occurs, only a few will recognize it for what it is.
The fate of Julian Assange is the fate of one man, but it is also the fate of one of our most important freedoms. There won’t be shattered plate glass from vandalized businesses littering the streets, synagogues smashed, graves unearthed, or people herded onto trains. But his prosecution by the US government would destroy an inestimable value, one enshrined in the First Amendment, for which generations of Americans have fought and died: the right of the people and its press to inform the people and to hold their government to account.
Aside from armed resistance and revolution, the one defense individuals have against governments is intellectual: the concept of individual rights. There is an argument as to whether those rights come from our Creator (Thomas Jefferson) or from our basic nature as humans and the requirements of our survival (Ayn Rand). Despite starting from different premises, both arguments lead to the same conclusion: individuals have inherent, inalienable, inviolable rights, and the only legitimate function of government is to protect those rights.
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were explicit attempts to delineate a set of principles that recognized individual rights and tried to restrain government power. Though real-world implementation has fallen short, often far short, they were towering conceptual achievements.
In 1933, the year Hitler assumed power, the government began enacting laws that restricted Jews’ rights to earn a living, gain an education, or work in the civil service. In 1935, the Nuremberg Laws stripped German Jews of their citizenship and forbade them from marrying non-Jewish Germans.
Kristallnacht’s hooliganism was encouraged by the German authorities, and none of the perpetrators bore any legal consequences. More than 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and deported to concentration camps.
News that the Environmental Protection Agency pressured the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to suppress a study showing PFAS chemicals to be even more dangerous than previously thought drew outrage this spring. The EPA pressure delayed the study’s publication for several months, and a similar dynamic seems to have been in play this July in Michigan, where Robert Delaney, a state scientist who tried to raise alarms about the chemicals six years ago, was largely ignored. Delaney, who delivered a report to his superiors about high levels of the chemicals in fish and the dangers they presented to people, has been heralded as prophetic. And both delays are being lamented as missed opportunities for getting critical information to the public.
But the dangers presented by these industrial chemicals have been known for decades, not just a few months or years. A lawsuit filed by Minnesota against 3M, the company that first developed and sold PFOS and PFOA, the two best-known PFAS compounds, has revealed that the company knew that these chemicals were accumulating in people’s blood for more than 40 years. 3M researchers documented the chemicals in fish, just as the Michigan scientist did, but they did so back in the 1970s. That same decade, 3M scientists realized that the compounds they produced were toxic. The company even had evidence back then of the compounds’ effects on the immune system, studies of which are just now driving the lower levels put forward by the ATSDR, as well as several states and the European Union.
The suit, which the Minnesota attorney general filed in 2010, charges that 3M polluted groundwater with PFAS compounds and “knew or should have known” that these chemicals harm human health and the environment, and “result in injury, destruction, and loss of natural resources of the State.” The complaint argues that 3M “acted with a deliberate disregard for the high risk of injury to the citizens and wildlife of Minnesota.” 3M settled the suit for $850 million in February, and the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office released a large set of documents — including internal studies, memos, emails, and research reports — detailing what 3M knew about the chemicals’ harms.
I really do find it totally beyond belief how even Republicans, such as House Speaker Paul Ryan, are coming out to criticize Trump saying Trump should have blasted Putin for interfering in the US election. He said, “There is no question that Russia interfered in our election and continues attempts to undermine democracy here and around the world.” Ryan So if the emails were NOT altered and the voting machines were not altered, added: “The president must appreciate that Russia is not our ally.”
The USA has interfered in Canadian elections under Obama to get Justin Trudeau elected, the French elections, and stuck its nose in BREXIT vote threatening the British that they will be at the back of the line on trade for the USA will punish them if they leave the EU. Then, the US got caught tapping the private cell phone of Merkel and all other head of state among our “allies” in Europe. That was quietly hushed up with Germany announcing the NSA refused to provide enough evidence to criminal investigate them. Then Merkel was caught spying on France. I understand if this was a one-sided event where Russia hacked into the USA elections and the USA has never done such a thing. The CIA even practiced assassinating leaders they disagreed with. Hello! What about Project Northwoods when the CIA wanted to kill Americans and blame it on Cuba to justify an invasion? Project Northwoods is even on Wikipedia.
What is fair is fair. This selective memory is really absurd. We have to be honest and call the shots straight up. Even Obama came out and was desperate to blame Russia for hacking DNC files that exposed internal corruption. Nobody ever said that the emails that were hacked had been altered. They were real. Nevertheless, Obama’s Administration plainly said: “We stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people.”
So if the emails were real and the voting machines were not hacked, then the issue boils down to whoever hacked simply released emails that were self-damning and the election outcome was not altered by any hacking.
The only new part of the ongoing Trump Administration economic warfare, a calculated assault on friend and foe alike from Russia to China to Iran to Venezuela and the EU, via so-called tariff war, is a President who uses Tweets as a weapon to throw opponents off balance. Since at least the beginning of the 1970’s Washington has deployed similar tactics of economic blackmail and destabilization to force what has become a global domination not of US manufactured goods, but rather of the dollar as world reserve currency. For almost five decades, since August 15, 1971, Washington and Wall Street have used their dominant position to force inflated paper dollars on the world, cause financial bubbles and subsequently debt buildup to impossible levels, then collapse.
The most essential point to understand about the so-called Trump “trade wars” is that they are not at all about trade or correcting trade or currency imbalances with America’s export partners. That world was largely left behind in 1971 by Nixon and the advisers.
The US economy since 1971 has been turned into a financial revenue source, in effect turning the United States from a nation primarily producing industrial goods to one in which the sole aim of all investment is to make money from money. Companies such as General Motors which at the end of the 1960’s was the largest maker of cars and trucks in the world, the heart of the American economy, got lured into speculation using its GMAC auto loan financial arm to make bets in the world economic casino, bets which went badly wrong when the US real estate bubble burst in March 2007 and GM was nationalized while the Wall Street mega banks were bailed out by taxpayers and the Fed.
The process, which I describe in detail in my book Gods of Money, took place over decades. By 2000, Wall Street banks and investment funds essentially dominated the entirety of the US economy. Manufacturing jobs had been pushed offshore, “outsourced,” not by Chinese or German or other “greedy thieves” as charged, but by pressure from those same Wall Street banks that since the 1980’s had driven corporations to focus only on the value of their stock shares and not on the soundness of their products.