Category Archives: Technology

Happy New Year 2023: Technocommunism, Pandemics, Climate Change & The Great Reset, by 2nd Smartest Guy in the World

It is important to realize that the dysfunctional mayhem happening now has antecedents stretching back many decades. From 2nd Smartest Guy in the World at 2ndsmartestguyintheworld.substack.com:

Interconnecting some of this substack’s greatest hits of 2022.

What’s past is certainly prologue, and to see the revolution of the future means that we must look into these transhumanist seeds of recent times.

Nearly three decades after funding the NAZI eugenics program, the very same Rockefeller crime syndicate established their Club of Rome organization under the false pretense of “climate change” alarmism. Club of Rome’s slogan was, “The common enemy of humanity is man.”

Two decades prior to the founding of Club of Rome, Major George R. Jordan testified in front of Congress and exposed the One World Government. He detailed his role in the unconstitutional and anti-American wartime Lend-Lease program. As the Lend-Lease control officer with the rank of captain in the U.S. Army Air Corps, Major Jordan had been responsible for the shipments of plates, inks and paper to the Soviet Union two full years before WW2 ended. The Russians promptly printed up hundreds of millions of US dollars that had served to not only rebuild the Soviet empire, but had deliberately further devalued the dollar, and thus further impoverished the average American through the stealth tax of inflation. Those very same American communists that had funded Hitler and then the Soviets were by then entrenched in the all of the various American governmental agencies as well as within the highest echelons of the military.

Having had finally started to make the connections in realizing that there had been a silent communist takeover of America, Major Jordan to his great horror began to keep a detailed diary itemizing the wholesale transfer of nuclear technology and materials, weapons, and top secret military patents to the Soviets.

Continue reading→

What Will the FBI Not Do? By Victor Davis Hanson

Is the FBI ever stopped from doing whatever it wants to do? From Victor Davis Hanson at amgreatness.com:

Who watches the watchers?

The FBI on Wednesday finally broke its silence and responded to the revelations on Twitter of close ties between the bureau and the social media giant—ties that included efforts to suppress information and censor political speech.

“The correspondence between the FBI and Twitter show nothing more than examples of our traditional, longstanding and ongoing federal government and private sector engagements, which involve numerous companies over multiple sectors and industries,” the bureau said in a statement. “As evidenced in the correspondence, the FBI provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers. The men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public. It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.”

Almost all of the FBI communique is untrue, except the phrase about the bureau’s “engagements which involve numerous companies over multiple sectors and industries.”

Future disclosures will no doubt reveal similar FBI subcontracting with other social media concerns of Silicon Valley to stifle free expression and news deemed problematic to the FBI’s agenda.

The FBI did not merely engage in “correspondence” with Twitter to protect the company and its “customers.” Instead, it effectively hired Twitter to suppress the free expression of some of its users, as well as news stories deemed unhelpful to the Biden campaign and administration—to the degree that the bureau’s requests sometimes even exceeded those of Twitter’s own left-wing censors.

Continue reading→

President Snow Will Drive an EV, by Eric Peters

The goal is to eliminate personal automotive transportation for everyone but the elite. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

It’s not so much that the future is “electric.” It is that in the future they have planned for us, only the affluent will drive electric cars.

Everyone else will not be able to drive.

If that sounds extravagant, consider two facts. The first is that – aside from a very few, very small models like the Chevy Bolt and Nissan Leaf – the entry price point of the typical electric car is about $50,000. Most “transact” – that is, sell – for considerably more than that. Leaving aside the fact that we are talking about electric cars, that price point defines luxury cars – which are cars that by definition are bought by affluent people only.

And there are only so many of those.

The price of these electric luxury vehicles is going up, too. Not down – as the electric car propagandists have insisted they would, when they were selling the gullible public on EVs.

They are not going up because of the devaluation of the buying power of money – what is glibly styled “inflation” by those who either do not understand or wish to hide the fact that the buying power of money is being devalued; i.e., that it is the result of deliberate policy.

It is because of natural market forces.

Continue reading→

When the Lights Go Out . . ., by Eric Peters

Once in a while there’s a power outage. What do you do if your electric car is your only mode of transportation? From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

 
 

When the power goes out, the lights go out. Break out the flashlights and candles. But it rarely means you cannot go out.

Unless, of course, you have an electric car – and you assumed the power would be on, to charge it up. Then – per the Toothless Man in Deliverance – you ain’t a goin’ nowhere, city boy.

On the other hand, a power outage has zero effect on your car or truck’s ability to take you somewhere – like to work, for instance – if it is not an electric car (or truck). Even if its “range” is low because you only left a couple gallons in the tank, it’s not a problem – especially if you had the foresight to keep a few gallons of gas in a jug for just-in-case.

It is effectively impossible to keep on hand for just-in-case the energy equivalent of five gallons of gas in the form of electricity, to get a discharged electric vehicle going when there’s no power to get it going.

Continue reading→

The Microwave You Drive? By Eric Peters

You will inevitably be bombarded by elecromagnetic frequency radiation every time you sit in an electric car. The potential risks and hazards remain unstudied. From Eric Perters at ericpetersautos.com;

 
 
You may not listen to AM radio – which for the generations preceding the Millennials was what many of us listened to on lonesome road trips out in the sparsely populated areas of the country, where FM signals couldn’t reach but AM signals could.

But you might be interested in why AM is going away.

Well, it’s not actually going away. AM continues to broadcast. But a growing number of new cars cannot receive what is broadcast via AM.

Electric cars.

And electric trucks like the Ford F-150 Lightning this writer just spent a week test driving (you can read more about that if you like, here). They have satellite radio and FM radio – but not AM radio. Their audio systems have had the capacity to receive AM signals deleted.

How come?

Continue reading

Tucker Carlson Asks the Right Question: “Could It Be That Twitter Is Actually an Intelligence Gathering Apparatus and Propaganda Tool”, by Sundance

Twitter is an adjunct of the intelligence community. From Sundance at theconservativetreehouse.com:

Tucker Carlson hits the bullseye in a late show segment discussing the framework of the Twitter social media company.   Stunningly, Carlson is the first person to ask the question that we have outlined for years, it is the essence of how Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop evolved. {Direct Rumble Link}

“It’s all pretty weird. Could it be that while the rest of us imagined that Twitter was a social media site … could it be that Twitter was actually, maybe primarily, a propaganda tool and intelligence gathering apparatus for a variety of intel agencies?”  ~ Tucker Carlson

Yes. Exactly this. Yes.  It’s not that DHS had a factual portal into Twitter, now confirmed.  It’s the likelihood that DHS took over the operation of Twitter and controlled every element of it.  That would explain why profits and losses were never part of the viability equation.  DHS controlling background Twitter operations is the essential baseline for Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop.   Well done Tucker Carlson. WATCH:

Once you change your reference point and review the Twitter File release from a different perspective, things make sense. DHS doesn’t operate on the backbone of Twitter, in this scenario Twitter is operating on the backbone of DHS. The information and content on Twitter exist, or not, by the permission and authority of the national security state, DHS.

Influencing public opinion takes on the priority. Created narratives, established by media partners, can be enhanced or throttled (think Russiagate). Public perceptions can be uplifted or deemphasized. Political candidates can be boosted or dismissed.

Continue reading→

Twitter Trust And Safety Team Found Trump Tweets Did Not Violate Policy: THE TWITTER FILES, by Bari Weiss

Twitter File # 5, by Bari Weiss, has been released. From Bari Weiss at twitter.com via zerohedge.com:

After an unexplained delay, journalist Bari Weiss has dropped the third installment of THE TWITTER FILES: The Removal of Donald Trump. Parts 1 and 2 can be found here and here.

The new drop reveals that Twitter employees did not believe former President Trump had violated Twitter’s policies.

“I think we’d have a hard time saying this is incitement,” wrote one staffer in an internal message, adding: “It’s pretty clear he’s saying the ‘American Patriots’ are the ones who voted for him and not the terrorists (we can call them that, right?)…”

Another staffer agreed, writing: “Don’t see the incitement angle here.

“I also am not seeing clear or coded incitement in the DJT tweet,” wrote Anika Navaroli, a Twitter policy official. “I’ll respond in the elections channel and say that our team has assessed and found no vios”—or violations—“for the DJT one.”

Continue reading→

To End Climate Lunacy, Stop Treating Warming & C02 Hysterically, by David Simon

It won’t be the end of the world if the temperature goes up a degree or two. In fact, it may well be beneficial. From David Simon at realclearmarkets.com:

 

Those who oppose economically destructive “climate” policies – like those promoted by the Biden administration and at the recent United Nations COP27 conference – will continue to fail to stop the advance of these policies so long as they continue to accept the false claim that warming of the planet and carbon dioxide emissions are harmful.

They are not. On balance, global warming and CO2 emission are beneficial.

Before getting to why that is, however, it is crucial to understand why accepting the false climate claim is so harmful.

When the destructiveness of climate policies is shown, the response is that the policies nevertheless are necessary to address what President Biden refers to as the “existential threat” of global warming and increased CO2 emissions.

When it is noted that these climate policies will at most microscopically and insignificantly reduce temperatures and CO2 emissions, climate policy mandarins push for even more draconian policies.

The result has been that since the 1990s, climate policies have become increasingly destructive and wasteful. Even worse, their continued intensification appears unlikely to be stopped until the public and policymakers are persuaded that global warming and CO2 emissions are not harmful. As Margaret Thatcher famously said: “First you win the argument, then you win the vote.”

To win this argument, it is necessary to focus on the scientific facts.

A warming planet saves lives. Analyses of millions of deaths in recent decades in numerous countries, published in the British medical journal The Lancet, show that cooler temperatures killed nine times (July 2021 study) to seventeen times (In May 2015 study) more people than warmer temperatures. The planet’s recent modest warming (by 1.00 degree Celsius on average since 1880, as calculated by NASA) thus has been saving millions of lives.

Continue reading→

China: The World’s First Technate – Part 2 (with link to Part 1), by Iain Davis

Western governments don’t stand in opposition to the Chinese government; they want to emulate it. From Iain Davis at iaindavis.com:

In Part 1, we discussed the historical background of Technocracy Inc. that briefly found popularity in the US in the 1930s during the turmoil of the Great Depression. Technocracy was rooted in socioeconomic theories that focused upon the efficient management of society by experts (technocrats). This idea briefly held the public’s attention during a period of sustained recession, mass unemployment and growing poverty.

The technological capabilities required for the energy surveillance grid, essential for the operation of a Technate (a technocratic society), were far beyond the practical reach of 1930s America. Consequently, for that and other reasons, public interest in the seemingly preposterous idea of technocracy soon subsided.

However, in recent decades, many influential policy strategists—most notably Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger—and private philanthropic foundations, such as the Rockefeller Foundation, recognised that advances in digital technology would eventually make a Technate feasible. As founding and leading members of the Trilateral Commission, a policy “think tank,” they saw China as a potential test bed for technocracy.

We will now consider their efforts to create the world’s first Technate in China.

These articles build upon the research found in my 2021 publication Pseudopandemic, which is freely available to my blog subscribers.

Continue reading→

The B-21: another Air Force diva that can’t deliver? By Andrew Cockburn

It looks really cool, though. From Andrew Cockburn at responsiblestatecraft.org:

The glitzy debut of the next-gen Northrop Grumman bomber belies a payload of military industrial disappointments.

Consistent with today’s trend to render all defense as performance art, the unveiling of the new Northrop Grumman B-21 “Raider” bomber at the Northrop plant in Palmdale on December 2 was designed with the care and production values of a Superbowl commercial. 

The blue backlighting, the sonorous music (One Day, by Caleb Etheridge) the shiny shroud strip-teased off the partly hidden aircraft by shadowy figures, the flyover by the bombers the B-21 will allegedly replace, were military-industrial showmanship at its best, giving us not a scintilla of worthwhile information about the plane. Fittingly, its primary selling point, according to its promoters, is “stealth” – a supposed ability to remain invisible to radar and other sensors. Given that earlier systems advertised as being cloaked from radar scrutiny, such as the F-22 and F-35 fighters, have turned out to be visible after all especially to decades-old low frequency radar systems, the prospects are not hopeful. We do however know that it has the most important characteristic of stealth: invisibility to the taxpayers.

The Political Engineering Was Never a Secret

For many years the Air Force declined to release a cost figure for the B-21, claiming the figure was classified on grounds that our enemies would learn valuable secrets if they knew just how much of a wallop it was going to be on our pocketbooks. Now, thanks to Tony Capaccio of Bloomberg, we know the official estimate of the projected cost to develop, produce and operate 100 B-21s for thirty years is a cool $203 billion. However, back when the Air Force were telling us we had no right to know exactly what we were paying for, they did release the most important fact of all: the major corporations – Pratt & Whitney, BAE Systems, Orbital ATK, and others – who would be the major subcontractors in the Northrop-led program. By absolutely no coincidence at all, these turned out to be in congressional districts and states represented by senior figures on important defense committees in the congress. This is known as “political engineering” in which defense programs are rendered politically invulnerable to cancellation or funding shortfalls thanks to the salting of key constituencies with rich contracts. Brazenly, the Air Force announced at the time it was naming the prime contractors on the bomber “in a sign of transparency to gain public trust.”  

Continue reading→