Sadly, too many politicians and bureaucrats play the public for fools. ‘This is no laughing matter. A senior Oregon health official is going viral for dressing up as a clown to announce the latest coronavirus death toll. Claire Poche, a senior health adviser for the Oregon Health Authority, wore white and red face makeup along with a red tie with a polka dot shirt in the somber video announcement.’https://www.newsbreak.com/news/2091358070737/oregon-health-official-dresses-as-clown-to-announce-covid-19-death-toll
America
Philippians 2:15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world
‘The North Carolina pastor accused of urinating on a Delta airline passenger two weeks ago has been identified, authorities said Tuesday.
Daniel Chalmers was arrested by the Wayne Metro Airport police in Detroit after the Delta flight landed at the Detroit Metro Airport on Oct. 12, according to a police report.
The Wayne County Airport Authority provided the police report Tuesday to the Winston-Salem Journal after Freedom of Information Act request.
Chalmers’ age, hometown and cellphone number were redacted in the report obtained by the Journal.
Alicia Beverly, a passenger, told police that she was sleeping at 2:45 a.m. aboard the plane when felt someone standing over her, according to the report.
“So I woke up and looked to my right and seen this guy standing next to me,” Beverly said in her statement to police. “Shortly after I started to feel something warm and I jumped and screamed and I noticed he was shaking his penis like he was finished, and that’s when I felt my skirt was wet.”
Afterward, a flight attendant moved Beverly to another seat, the report said.
Wayne Metro Airport police boarded the plane after landed and they spoke to Beverly and Chalmers. Beverly told the officers that Chalmers urinated on her.
Chalmers initially denied that accusation, saying “I didn’t do it,” according to the report.
When the officer asked Chalmers what he didn’t do, Chalmers said, “Whatever it is she is accusing me of, I didn’t do it.”
Chalmers later told the officer that, “I’m a pastor, and that is out of my character and I didn’t do it,” the report said.
Chalmers then asked officer if there was any evidence that he urinated on Beverly, and the officer told Chalmers that Beverly’s clothing was covered in urine and her seat wet, the report said.
The officer also wrote in the report that he saw a wet spot in the groin area of Chalmers’ shorts.
Chalmers denied that he had been drinking, but the officer told him that he smelled of alcohol and his eyes was bloodshot, the report said. Chalmers admitted that he had taken medication, the report said. It also says Chalmers later told an officer he had a few drinks.
As officers escorted Chalmers off the aircraft, he told the plane’s captain that he intended to sue Delta Airlines for defamation of character for its treatment of him, the report said.
An FBI agent later issued a ticket or a federal court violation notice to Chalmers, and Chalmers was released from custody, the report said.
Multiple media reports identify Chalmers as a pastor who leads Love Wins Ministries in Raleigh and a staff member at Catch the Fire Raleigh-Durham church.’https://journalnow.com/news/state-and-regional/crime-and-courts/raleigh-pastor-idd-as-man-accused-of-urinating-on-airline-passenger/article_7e3b002a-1876-11eb-a853-bbfb7473eec6.html#:~:text=The%20North%20Carolina%20pastor%20accused,been%20identified%2C%20authorities%20said%20Tuesday.&text=Daniel%20Chalmers%20was%20arrested%20by,according%20to%20a%20police%20report.
In the evangelical world of religion there are leaders that are considered ‘celebrities’ and those who are just plain ole preachers. Well, the ‘celebrity’ preachers seem to be often caught out doing some very strange things such as when a woman reported ‘…that as she woke up on a red-eye flight, a man later identified as a “well-known North Carolina pastor” was allegedly peeing on her.
Alicia Beverly, a Detroit resident, says the incident happened on a Delta flight from Las Vegas to Detroit on October 12th.
She told Fox News Detroit that she was in the back of the plane, next to her sister. She had fallen asleep but suddenly woke up to a strange feeling.
She said, “It felt warm, like on the side of me I felt something warm.”
As the drowsy woman woke up a little more, she saw something she was not expecting.
“I jump up and I seen his private area out and I screamed and that woke everybody up,” said Beverly. “By that time I actually looked at him and I see him shake himself off and I’m like this man just peed on me! I looked and there was a puddle of pee in the seats!”
Not surprisingly, she then screamed, which got everyone’s attention. One of the other passengers was an off-duty police officer. He quickly came to the back of the plane and restrained the man, who has so far only been identified as a “well-known pastor from North Carolina.”
Beverly, who said she was grateful for the offer’s intervention, reported she had to sit in her wet clothes for several hours before landing in Detroit.
The man was taken into custody when the plane landed and charges against him are pending.
People close to the pastor said he had a reaction to a sleeping aid and didn’t do it on purpose.
As the incident happened in the air, the FBI will be handling the case. They have not yet announced how they plan to pursue the matter.’https://yourmileagemayvary.net/2020/10/15/well-known-pastor-urinated-on-woman-while-on-delta-flight/
Just in case you need some good advice on the upcoming Presidential election.
Here, in regional New South Wales, Australia we are able to now watch for free, yes for free, what the leftist loonies call Sky after dark. Sky at night includes Peta Credlin, Alan Jones, Paul Murray, Andrew Bolt and once per week Gary Hardgrave. Sky of course is a Murdoch enterprise and to the leftist loonies it is anathema but to the conservative it is fresh air for conservative views and news against the other stations which are unashamedly waaay left of center .
It could also be said concerning these Marxist/Communist leaning irreligious leftist loonies ‘…Rupert Murdoch truly is an, if not the, Antichrist. He has been so before Trump and is likely to be so after Trump is gone. This is one of the great political constants of the last four decades across much of the English-speaking world.
That Murdoch has “extremely polarised” our politics, or that he has “poisoned” our media, is really a shorthand for “he has dared to provide an alternative view” for that part of the electorate that is instinctively not left-wing. More so than any other media owners (most of them by now in any case gone, like Conrad Black), Murdoch has successfully worked to fill this rather big niche in the market.
Today, he and his media empire are the only thing standing in the way of the total monopolistic domination of the English-language media by the left-wing Public-Private Partnership of state-run and funded and various supported privatemedia outlets. That’s why the left hates him – if not for Murdoch, left-wing voices would be the only ones heard and read by the hundreds of millions of people in the United States, Great Britain and Australia.
The post-Marx, Gramscian/Frankfurt School left has seen the path to political power leading through the gradual take-over of the “commanding heights” of cultural production – if you can influence and control what people are taught, what they see, hear and read, what they feel and what they think, you will get your hands on the levers of power in a surer (and more peaceful) way than through a revolution and take-over of the means of production. This is in a way the reversal of classical Marxism where the economic power arrangements shape the culture of the people; for the new, cultural left, those who control the culture will in time hold the economic and political power too. This is not a conspiracy, just an ideological outlook that explains why our contemporary culture, education and the media overwhelmingly skew to the left.
But Rupert Murdoch remains a giant steaming Australian turd on the banquet table of the modern left.
Look at the United States. Of the biggest circulation daily newspapers, only two can be considered to the right of centre – “New York Post” and “The Wall Street Journal”, though the later more in its opinion pages than news reporting. Both are owned by Murdoch. The rest of the field offers various shades of conventional left. In 2016, only six newspapers endorsed Donald Trump (granted, a rather unconventional GOP candidate) for president, including such giants of print industry as “St. Joseph News-Press”, “Santa Barbara News-Press”, “The Waxahachie Daily Light”, Hillsboro’s “Times-Gazette”, “The Antelope Valley Press”, and (for a change in pace) “Las Vegas Review-Journal”. You get the drift. News and popular interest and lifestyle magazines – anything from “Time” to “Vanity Fair” — skews even more decisively to the left. On the small screen, Fox stands alone versus all the major free-to-air and cable channels. Radio is the only mass medium with a significant right-of-centre presence, talk radio having been an oasis of voices other than the progressive mainstream for at least 30 years now.
In Great Britain, Murdoch owns the tabloid “Sun” and the respectable “Times”. The former is actually pretty ecumenical both in reporting and in opinion. The only other major British daily more unequivocally associated with the right, “The Telegraph”, is not owned by Murdoch, which makes it a significant outlier in the English-speaking world. Murdoch’s Sky is the only counterbalance to the progressive bias on the silver screen, led, of course, by the taxpayer-funded BBC empire.
Australia is a newspaper outlier. This is where Murdoch’s media empire has started and this is where Murdoch owns just over half of daily newspapers, altogether accounting for about 70 per cent of the total circulation. The others, including the Nine newspapers, correspondingly lean to the left. If Australians at least have a better than elsewhere choice in print media, the television is pretty uniformly non-right, nowhere more so than at the state-owned (read: taxpayer-funded, left-run) ABC. As an alternative to it all there is only Sky, which as a subscriber-only service has a smaller reach compared to the free-to-air channels. Then there’s the trust-fund kids of The Guardian Australia, the abuse of union superannuation funds that is The New Daily, the left-wing Melbourne millionaires’ playthings such as The Monthly and the Saturday Paper and Crikey and that symbol of so much that is wrong with our universities, The Conversation.
Take away Murdoch then, and you have the mainstream media almost completely devoid of voices other than the conventional left-wing perspective in opinion and the crusading, politicised, biased reporting in the news. The alternative provided by most (but certainly not all) Murdoch’s outlets means that the progressive “education” of the population cannot be successfully concluded. As the popular observation goes, the left loves diversity in everything except opinion. The progressive utopia looks like United Colors of Benneton all singing from one catalogue. That we’re not there yet, despite the ginormous effort by the left, is largely due to Murdoch.
No wonder the left hates him so much. But he is 89 (though if it’s true you’re only as old as the woman you feel, thanks to Jerry Hall, he’s only 64). His children are no ideological warriors; they range from safely conventional to conventionally left-leaning.
So let’s enjoy Rupert while we still can – after he’s gone there is no one person to replace him in his role as the lone counter-point to the left’s domination of the media. We will need an army of Ruperts instead to stand athwart the narrative and call the bull…. And we better start planning for it soon.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/10/rupert-murdoch-doesnt-dominate-our-media-he-stands-in-the-way-of-total-left-control-hence-the-hate-campaign/
If you trust the UN then you are a Leftist. The UN is out to destroy the West. One of the UN’s leftist loony Marxist/Communist climate change scam programs is Agenda 2030 which is a UN ‘…plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan. We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet. We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind.’
The Agenda 2030 has 17 goals of which number 13 is to ‘Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*
* Acknowledging that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is the primary international, intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change.’ https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
Australia has swallowed the UN poison on the climate scam for which every Australian will dearly pay. For instance ‘The Cities Power Partnership is a free, national program that celebrates and accelerates local government climate solutions.
Having swiftly grown to 70 councils representing over 8 million Australians, the program works with councils to tackle climate change locally, from tiny rural shires through to the largest metropolitan councils.
Councils pledge to reduce their climate impact through renewable energy, energy efficiency, sustainable transport and other climate solutions.’https://sdgs.org.au/project/cities-power-partnership/
From the local level to the highest level of government the politicians have swallowed the climate change poison and the citizens will dearly pay.
Do you understand the Electoral College? Well, the Left want to do away with it but is that wise? ‘Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), says she’s “open to” the idea of eliminating the Electoral College. But what would that mean for how America elects her presidents?
Whenever election season rolls around, so does widespread confusion about what actually happens on Election Day every four years. So we spoke with an expert, author and attorney Tara Ross, about the Electoral College system.
Much of the problem, Ross explained, falls back to poor education.
“Nobody has taught us about this,” she said. “I was in my last semester of law school, so I’m in graduate school, and I realize, ‘Nobody’s ever really taught this to me.’ I thought I understood it, but I really didn’t.”
The way many teachers explain the Electoral College “is not flattering,” Ross said, arguing many never take the time to teach students “why it was created, why the founders considered it important, and what benefits it still provides today.”
Ross said it’s a “complete misperception” to think Election Day in America is one enormous election from coast-to-coast. In reality, it’s 51 smaller elections: one in every state and one in Washington, D.C.
“Each of these elections is purely democratic — one person, one vote,” she said. “Everything you hear people say they want in an election, that’s what’s happening. But it happens at the state level, not at the national level.”
The “Why We Need the Electoral College” author, who lives in Texas, used her own state to explain how the system works.
On Nov. 3, Americans aren’t really voting directly for President Donald Trump or Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden; they are voting for a slate of electors — Democratic or Republican — who will later cast their votes for the incumbent president or the former vice president.
Because Texas has 36 congresspeople and two senators, it has 38 electors. That same metric applies to every state.
“Our election on Election Day is not an election for president,” Ross said. “It’s an election for who is going to fill those 38 seats. It’s a statewide office that we are holding a statewide election for, presidential electors.”
Most states, she noted, allocate those spots in a “winner-take-all” fashion.
“So if the Republican candidate wins [Texas], 38 Republicans are elected to fill the statewide office of presidential elector,” Ross explained. “If the Democrat wins, then, of course, 38 Democrats are elected to fill the role of presidential elector for Texas.”
Those electors will then vote Dec. 14 for their respective states’ winning candidate, Trump or Biden. There are a total of 538 electors in the Electoral College, requiring candidates to secure 270 votes to win the presidency.
“So that’s how it works,” Ross said.
How does the Electoral College protect election integrity?
The Electoral College system protects voters in two ways.
Referring back to 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who won the country’s popular vote but fell short in the Electoral College, Ross pointed out that the former diplomat’s biggest error was focusing too much on large, urban areas while dismissing more suburban and rural parts of the country. In fact, according to Ross, Clinton’s greatest mistake came in the final weeks of the campaign, when her team was confident she’d win in the Electoral College but were concerned the popular vote could go to then-candidate Trump. To make up that perceived imbalance, Clinton spent a great deal of time in safe, urban areas in an effort to drive up the popular vote to match what she saw as a certain victory in the Electoral College. As we all now know, Clinton ended up beating Trump in the popular vote but losing with the Electoral College, where it really matters.
The Electoral College entices presidential candidates “to appeal to as many people as possible,” rather than spending the majority of their time doling out red meat to their respective bases in politically safe areas, Ross said.
“We’re supposed to do better than that,” she continued. “We’re supposed to focus on the things that bring us together as Americans, to get as many people under the umbrella as we possibly can. And historically speaking, the Electoral College rewards the candidate that does the very best job of that.”
Another way the Electoral College protects voters is by making election fraud and tampering more difficult.
Since Election Day isn’t actually one massive election but 51 local elections, it slows the process down and breaks it up into a lot of different and disconnected pieces.
“In the system that we have, you need several things to go your way before you can steal the election,” Ross said. “One is you need the national electoral vote total to be close, which doesn’t usually happen, actually. Two, you need a handful of states with the right number of electors to also be close, so that flipping those states would be enough. And three, you need to be able to predict in advance which states those are so that you can get it done before the election.”
Accomplishing all those things at once is not impossible, Ross noted, but it’s “very hard” to orchestrate it to give any given candidate the nationwide outcome he or she wants.
While stealing some votes in deeply blue or red precincts might not be as difficult, it’s ultimately unlikely to change the national outcome. The areas to look out for, Ross said, are places where the political makeup is more ambiguous.
Because the Electoral College system slows down the process of electing a president, Ross said, it allows time to “isolate” any problem areas.
“You don’t have to recount the entire country,” she said. “You can focus your attention on the subset of problems, figure it out, and move on to a certain outcome. That is way better than trying to recount the whole country.”
“There’s no perfect system,” Ross added. “But it makes it as difficult as possible to steal an election.”’https://www.faithwire.com/2020/10/23/what-actually-happens-on-election-day-electoral-college-expert-breaks-it-down/?utm_source=FWNL
Every Presidential election is IMPORTANT! However, this one in 2020 is of utmost importance! The leftist environmental climate change scammers were very happy with their ‘where am I’ candidate Joe Biden. When the subject of climate change came up in the last debate they said ‘It was encouraging to hear Biden start his answer with an acknowledgement that many of us had been waiting to hear on this stage: “Climate change, global warming is an existential threat to humanity. We have a moral obligation to deal with it, he said, adding that we were “going to pass the point of no return within the next 8 to 10 years.”
He elaborated on his climate plan, talking about how investments in clean energy, including building electric car charging stations on highways and retrofitting homes would “create millions of new good paying jobs” and move the US “toward net zero emissions” by 2035.’https://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/articles/entry/fossil-fuel-phaseout-fenceline-communities-environmental-justice-climate-change
If Sleepy Joe and his cronies gain control there will be CHANGE worldwide and not for the better!
Have you heard of Samuel Paty? If not you are the fulfilment of the title to this article. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, CNN and other Leftist news outlets would have us believe that Islam is a peaceful religion and that those who holler ‘allahu akbar’ while wielding a sword are not really Muslim! Well, tell that to Samuel Paty’s family.
‘Samuel Paty, a teacher at a school in a sedate suburb of Paris, was beheaded in the street last Friday by an 18-year old Chechen former asylum-seeker. The reason for this act of savagery was that Paty had shown cartoons of the prophet Muhammad to a school class, to illuminate a discussion about civic freedoms and the boundaries of debate.
In order to avoid unnecessary offence, he had allowed anyone who wished to avoid viewing the cartoons to leave the classroom. Afterwards, one Muslim pupil is reported to have told her father. He complained to the school and then is alleged to have launched a sustained and inflammatory online campaign against Paty and the school, aided and abetted by at least one well-known Islamist preacher and, according to France’s interior minister, Gerald Darmanin, activist organisations like the Collectif contre l’islamophobie en France (who deny their involvement).
The news took me back with a jolt to an evening in Riyadh in late May 2013, during my time as Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. I was dining with a group of Saudi friends when news appeared on my phone about a terror attack in Woolwich. It soon became clear that this was an attack on an unarmed, unsuspecting and off-duty British soldier by two violent British Islamists. Poor Lee Rigby had been savagely stabbed and almost decapitated. I felt sick, made my excuses and left.
We risk becoming desensitised to the sheer horror of all this. Equally importantly, we risk becoming confused about how we should react – indeed whether we should even do so. There are always those who argue that it’s all our fault. In the wake of the attack on Samuel Paty, there have been some extraordinary posts on social media which come close to justifying his murder because of the perceived insult to the prophet of Islam represented by the Charlie Hebdo cartoons.
The editor of the online magazine, 5pillars, for example, wrote,
‘Charlie Hebdo must now be shut down. This racist, Islamophobic rag is causing community relations to completely break down with its repeated provocations. They are literally crying fire in a crowded theatre. Freedom of speech isn’t worth civil war.’
He added ‘Western civilisation is in crisis and in dire need of reform. It has completely lost its moral compass and now only exists to worship materialism and to oppress others.’ Dana Nawzar Jaf, a Kurdish writer who received a British government scholarship to study at Durham University and has written for the New Statesman, in a tweet that has now been deleted, thought the most important point was to condemn the ‘French police’s brutal senseless murder of the Muslim suspect last night’.
The advocacy group CAGE drew a forced contrast between the French government’s entirely understandable reaffirmation that free speech is not an excuse for murder and a small fine it imposed on a man for insulting the national flag. There is more of this sort of garbage if you have the patience and the stomach to search for it.
Reporting of the crime in France has, of course, been massive and commentary agonised. Yet coverage in the British press has been low key in contrast. Why should this be so? It may be that such events have simply been normalised, made banal – and that we have collectively become desensitised. Another reason may be that the press in this country at least has been successfully intimidated by those who constantly complain about the alleged media misrepresentation of Muslims. For example, there has been pressure on editors not to give prominence to claims that Islamists use the takbir – the phrase ‘Allahu akbar’ – before or during an attack (as Samuel Paty’s murderer seems to have done).
Those who want to bury their heads in the sand could always take comfort from Neil Basu, the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police with responsibility for Counter-Terrorism, who frequently warns about right-wing and white-supremacist extremism, even while admitting that the vast majority of terror threats in the UK continue to emanate from violent Islamists within and outside the country. He thinks journalists need to be more ‘responsible’ in their reporting. Some of his colleagues seem also to think that the use of terms like ‘Islamism’ or ‘Islamist’ in connection with terror attacks is provocative. But if we can’t name something, we can’t report it properly.
It is precisely this failure of nerve that President Macron was trying to get at in his recent speech about Islamism, Islamist separatism and the weaponization of Islamophobia in France. This was prefigured earlier this summer by an excellent report issued by the French Senate on Islamist radicalisation, separatism, the weaponisation of Islamophobia, and the struggle over education. That report in turn had been foreshadowed by the equally excellent and disturbing report on attacks on secularism in schools written in 2004 for the Minister of Education.
Macron promises new legislation. There are demands for harsh action against known Islamists who seek to undermine republican values by their words or actions. Already the police are raiding addresses and making arrests. But we’ve seen this before: a flurry of action, and then a gradual relapse into apathy and defeatism as politicians realise that moving the levers of government, especially on an issue as contested as this, requires iron resolve, the patience of a saint and the hide of an elephant.
It is also difficult because the real issue is not the expulsion of a bunch of hate-preachers or would-be jihadis. It is about how we define and stand up for what politicians are fond of describing as ‘western values’. That means knowing what they are and then communicating them with subtlety, empathy but also pride. And at the heart of this is the question of history. We have allowed a penitential version of our history to prevail in much public discourse which sees it as uniformly oppressive, racist and deeply damaging to the rest of humanity. This is ignorant nonsense. All history is light and shade. Yet this gets lost these days in the mass hysteria on social media, in our universities and other national institutions about race, gender and other bogus Foucauldian constructs of power and oppression beloved of the western academy.
Both here and in France – and across Europe and the US (where the New York Times’ bizarre 1619 Project has at least provoked a proper backlash) – we need to confront and challenge those who promote such hucksterism. That’s not a job simply for central government. Without reversing the capture of vice-chancellorships, headships of colleges, university departmental chairs or the boards of quangos, no government will have sufficient allies. Without constantly challenging the online provocations of Islamists and their allies and subjecting their substantial and often-concealed funding to tracing, scrutiny and control, they will continue to set the tone of the debate about community cohesion and the limits of religious tolerance. Without backing and protecting teachers who want to promote proper educational standards, we shall continue to encourage a culture of slovenly reasoning. And without fundamental reform of the machinery of government, civil servants will continue to tell ministers that it’s all too difficult.
I’d add one other thing. When I was asked by David Cameron to lead the so-called Muslim Brotherhood review in 2014, once I’d avoided being knocked over by my FCO colleagues in their rush for cover, I concluded that if you were going to talk about British values, you really needed to articulate what they were. We have new enemies now. It’s about time we recognised that.’https://spectator.com.au/2020/10/weve-become-desensitised-to-terror/
President Donald Trump is one of the main human instruments that is keeping freedom loving people from the tyranny of the Left. The World Economic Forum and the UN have an agenda and President Trump is in their way. ‘Come January 2021, Professor Schwab’s Great Reset campaign will begin in earnest. Should his ideological opponent, US President Donald Trump, not be re-elected, a major obstacle to achieving his societal and economic revamp will be gone. Schwab is determined that a return to a post-Covid business-as-usual world ‘will not happen’.
Indeed, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations and its various agencies will use the current depressed economic environment, masked as it is by endless government support, together with renewed forecasts of apocalyptic climate change, to push for a ‘more inclusive social contract’, a decarbonised economy and a ‘control without ownership’ business sector, where companies ‘serve all stakeholders not just shareholders’.
Intense pressure will be applied to parliaments everywhere to pass enabling laws and to abdicate more responsibilities to unelected bureaucrats in global institutions. Crony capitalism is anathema to genuine market economies and, giving more leverage to those who encourage it is simply fascistic. No surprise that some of the organisations behind the ‘stakeholder capitalism’ push are accused of corruption, sexual harassment, cover ups and a general abuse of power. Still, the WEF’s oligarchy derives much of its extraordinary influence and wealth from these same institutions and no one should doubt their Big Brother intentions.
Indeed, anyone who fears big government and values free speech, freedom to choose and property rights, should be terrified. Yet, so far, political, business and church leaders, along with the mainstream media, seem oblivious to the threat and turn blind eyes to the dictatorial abuses already perpetrated in the name of the pandemic. There is even bi-partisan support for policies which, two decades ago, would have been considered politically and economically unthinkable.
Stripped of the propaganda, the Great Reset is not new. It’s another fascist experiment being pushed by controlling elitists. Economic growth and social mobility must be subordinate to the collective. Connections will be institutionalised and privilege perpetuated. History demonstrates the children of the elites will receive preferential access to higher education and elite positions. ‘Inclusion’ and ‘fairness’? Forget it. Think inequality, serfdom and misery.’ https://spectator.com.au/2020/10/dangerous-elites-planning-the-great-reset/
whatyareckon 