One doesn’t have to have much medical knowledge to see that teetering Fake President Joe has a problem. Yes, there definitely is something ‘…very wrong with Joe Biden—mentally, medically, strategically—or all three.
Of course, he’s long been known as a tone-deaf gaffe-meister. Swearing on live mics. Patronizing politically. As head of administration transparency for Barack Obama, Biden closed the meetings.
Last year, as a candidate for the Democrat nomination, Joe spent much time looking lost in his own Delaware basement. All presidents since 1952 have used teleprompters, few more than Biden’s boss, Obama, who once comically used one standing in the dusty poop of a rodeo arena.
Those machines can be tricky, and the user is expected to appear to speak spontaneously and genuinely from the heart while robotically reading aloud every single word written by someone else scrolling before your eyes. Recall 2016 when Hillary Clinton, likely the worst modern presidential candidate, went on autopilot and even read aloud her parenthetical script directions “(PAUSE FOR APPLAUSE).”
Biden did overcome a childhood stutter. No easy task, but essential for politicians since the invention of radio. Biden’s problems, however, aren’t stuttering. He often appears confused, lost, unsteady, unprepared. Last fall he clearly had no idea what he wanted to say, so at times gave the teleprompter operator on-camera directions—“No, go back.” At one appearance Biden lost track of where he was, standing with his back to the camera.
He shunned spontaneous contact even with cooperative reporters, hardly taking questions. Aides, cupping his elbow for leverage, steered the 77-year-old (now 78) briskly through crowds. Before reducing personal appearances, Biden rambled, often without a point beyond being heard. One time when Jill Biden was speaking and gesturing, Biden put her hand in his mouth. Presumably, he was being silly, but it was a bizarre, worrisome action. Last month she interrupted one joint interview to finish her husband’s wandering answer.
Biden’s campaign days often ended by 9 a.m., while 73-year-old Donald Trump was doing four or five major rally speeches in multiple states daily. You might argue Biden’s absence was strategic to give an imploding Trump the full media spotlight. But it’s not the image of a sharp, fully competent chief executive confident and eager to lead the free world on the world stage.
At one town hall in Iowa, Delaware resident Biden asked audience members how the infrastructure was there in Ohio. Easterners do seem susceptible to confusing Iowa and Ohio. But that’s a dumb mistake casting doubt on mental acuity if you’re campaigning to be president of all Americans. Especially four years after your coastal party lost the election by ignoring most of the Heartland.
In office, Biden has been no model of action beyond photo-op signings. While a masked Kamala Harris stands stoically behind him, the oldest man to become POTUS sits at an empty impromptu desk with an immense presidential seal and his notes. On one Zoom conference with Democrats Biden offered to take questions. Boom! The video feed was instantly terminated. At another event the president couldn’t remember his defense secretary’s name, standing right next to him. While memory losses can occur ordinarily, they are also early signs of dementia, according to medical studies.
When Biden did get out of the White House, he had last week’s disastrous trip up the stairs of Air Force One, where he stumbled not once, not twice, but thrice. As my colleague Nick Arama and others have chronicled here, inept aides, who might have credibly dismissed the awful image as something that happens to everyone sometimes, blamed the wind. The wind? The President of the United States, who must face Xi Jinping, Kim Jung-un, and those murderous mullahs, was felled by the wind? This’s the best line Biden’s band of experienced aides can devise?
You saw much media attention last week on Biden’s exclusive network interview with a handpicked former Bill Clinton aide. It was taped Wednesday but not broadcast until Thursday. What you likely missed in the avalanche of adulation was a tiny italic note on ABC’s transcript—“Edited for Clarity.”
So, in those intervening 24 hours, Joe Biden’s potential confusions, mumblings, mistakes were edited for clarity? Seriously? By whom? Former presidential aides had never heard of such a thing. ABC didn’t answer an email request for clarification. But media does not clean up a president’s words for him. White House officials do not allow anyone else to play with presidential words. And you don’t let the White House change what’s on tape either, certainly not without a full public explanation.
Thursday’s scheduled live news conference should preclude such tinkering.
More importantly, exactly what did Biden confuse? Americans have a right to know without sympathetic media covering for him. And what might that reveal about his mental state? Most Americans know some elderly, even care for them. They understand old folks accidentally fall, forget daily details, confuse names. They’re sympathetic. It’s called aging; it happens to those of us who survive.
But elderly grandparents do not have the nuclear launch codes. They cannot send loyal sons and daughters in harm’s way for decades in distant lands on mission-creep operations. During his almost daily media encounters, Trump underwent nonstop scrutiny. He said and did many controversial things in those 1,461 days. But No. 45 launched no new military conflicts.
Biden has not held a solo news conference in his first two months, a modern record. Another dodgy piece of circumstantial evidence raising concerns about his cognitive condition among ordinary Americans, who may disagree on policies but covet confidence in any leader. Not to mention worried allies and opportunistic adversaries, who may see an opening.
Reminder: In 1962 the world came closest to Armageddon when the Soviet Union moved nuclear missiles into Cuba after Premier Nikita Khrushchev determined that John Kennedy was a weak president.
Biden’s first news conference is Thursday. But by seeking to hide what has become obvious infirmities, aides have not served him well so far. And media seem reluctant to press that issue hard. This has now gone beyond politics. The concerns must be addressed forthrightly.
‘Contrary to a widespread idea, President Biden does not intend to guarantee “equality in Law” of all Americans without distinction of race. On the contrary, he intends to be the champion of “racial equity”, that is to say a form of equality between, not individuals, but what he considers as distinct racial groups. In this article, Thierry Meyssan will use the term “racism” in its literal sense and not in the common sense of “discriminatory behavior”. He will show that by announcing their intention to extend “racial equity” to the whole world, President Biden and the Democratic Party are threatening world peace.
President Biden’s top priority is to impose the ideology of the “1619 Project” on US society and the world.
In a federal state, somewhere in the world, the Department of Education decided to teach in primary and secondary schools that humanity is divided into distinct races.
Although these races are distinct, it is possible to mate them and give birth to children. However, these children will be sterile, like the mules of a donkey and a mare. This is why federal government statistics include whites, blacks, etc., but no mixed-race children.
Since there is an implicit hierarchy between these distinct races and, unfortunately, half-breeds are not sterile, they are automatically counted as belonging to the inferior race. The superior race must be preserved from all defilement.
This federal state was the Nazi Reich, but it is also the United States of Joe Biden and his Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona.
We are witnessing the return of the “scientific racism” that caused the Second World War and its 70 million deaths. No one seems to be aware of the danger, however, and many people think that the U.S. Democrats are examples of openness to others.
Let us remember that the racism of the 1930s had all the trappings of science. It was researched in many scientific institutes and taught in universities in both the United States and Western Europe. To preserve the master race, many “modern” states had banned interracial marriages before World War I.
Racism is neither of the right nor of the left
In the collective imagination, racism would only develop in right-wing nationalist circles. This is absolutely false.
For example, at the end of the First World War, France occupied the Ruhr coal region militarily. Among the troops were Africans from Senegal and Madagascar for two years. Soon a protest movement developed in Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada to denounce the ignominy of the French who placed 20,000 blacks to dominate the German whites and rape their women. This racist movement was led by the main anti-racist figure of the beginning of the century, E. D. Morel [1], and gathered all the international feminist organizations in large demonstrations [2].
In France itself, socialists joined this racist movement, including Karl Marx’s grandson, Jean Longuet, a journalist at L’Humanité and future leader of the SFIO (Socialist Party).
It must be admitted that, in troubled times like the interwar period or the one we are living today, people follow their impulses whatever their ideas. They are often in complete contradiction with themselves and do not realize it.
Democratic President Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) was the designer of the League of Nations, the predecessor of the United Nations. He favored the Klu Klux Klan within his party and established racial segregation.
The slavery and racist past of the American Democrats
In the United States, slavery and racism were mostly defended by the Democrats against the Republicans.
The Democratic Party platforms of 1840, 1844, 1848, 1852 and 1856 asserted that abolitionism diminished the happiness of the people and endangered the stability and permanence of the Union. The 1856 program declared that the member states of the Union may or may not practice domestic slavery and write it into their constitutions. The 1860 program describes the efforts of abolitionist states that refused to arrest runaway slaves as subversive and revolutionary. The 14th Amendment granting full citizenship to freed slaves was passed in 1868 by 94% of Republican Party legislators and 0% of Democratic Party The 15th Amendment, which granted the right to vote to freed slaves, was adopted in 1870 by 100% of the members of the Republican Party and 0% of the members of the Democratic Party In 1902, the Democratic Party passed a law in Virginia removing the right to vote from over 90% of African Americans. President Woodrow Wilson instituted racial segregation of federal employees and mandated a photo on every job application. The 1924 Democratic National Convention at Madison Square Garden in New York City was called the “Klan-Bake” because of the influence of the Ku Klux Klan in the party.
Things did not really change until 1964, when, just after the Kennedys’ efforts, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law. This was a painful turnaround, as Democratic lawmakers managed to block the legislation for 75 days.
The “1619 Project” is an operation of the New York Times Magazine. It aims to rewrite American history.
The “1619 Project
The Biden administration claims to be anti-racist and no one doubts its good faith. But it is so in the manner of the Democratic Party of the years 1840-1961. That is, in practice, not at all. Quite the contrary.
Its educational decisions are designed to promote the ideology of the « 1619 Project ». According to this ideology, the United States was not founded by the War of Independence against the British Crown, but more than two centuries earlier, in 1619, with the idea of enslaving black people.
The “1619 Project” was marked by a series of supplements and then dedicated articles in the New York Times since 2019. In doing so, this daily newspaper has moved from trying to report the truth to becoming a propaganda tool for Puritan ideology. According to the NY Times, Native Americans were slavers like the Europeans. However, the Spaniards freed the Amerindian slaves who fled their masters on the condition that they converted to the true faith, Catholicism. In the end, the European colonies in the Americas only really developed after the arrival of black slaves from Angola on the territory of the current USA, in 1619. The War of Independence was not against the unjust taxes of the British Crown, but to preserve the slave system. This is why the United States is systemically racist. It is the duty of every white man to realize the undue privilege he enjoys and to redress the crimes of white patriarchy.
This theory does not rise from history [3]. It mixes slavery and racism (for example, Native Americans enslaved their enemies, but they were not racist). It ignores white slaves (among the first slaves in North America were Englishmen who were convicted by the courts). It despises the emancipation of the colonists from England. Finally, it was not the United States, but the Portuguese who brought slavery to the colonists and traded it. Moreover, this theory is American-centric and ignores the slavery of blacks and their systematic castration by the Arabs for a thousand years.
This theory is religious. It takes up the myth of original sin, which it transforms, and for which it makes every white man responsible. Like the iconoclasts, the Puritans or the Wahhabites, its supporters destroy the impure representations of those who have sinned, starting with the Southern generals.
Each lie begets a new one. Indeed, the Southerners were not defending slavery (which they abolished before the end of the Civil War), but the right of each Confederate state to have its own customs.
The supporters of the “1619 Project” acted exactly like what they intended to fight: men were no longer guilty for what they did, but at birth, by heredity.
Joe Biden’s institutionalization of racism
When the Biden administration’s Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, decided to promote the “1619 Project” in elementary and secondary schools, there was a nationwide protest.
The most interesting reaction was in Oklahoma. The local Congress passed a bill, which was immediately signed into law by Governor Kevin Stitt. The latter is a Cherokee Indian and a Jacksonian like Donald Trump [4]. This law, HB 1775 (download the text at the bottom of this page), prohibits anyone from teaching the following eight racist propositions:
1. one race or gender is inherently superior to another race or gender. 2. an individual, because of his or her race or gender, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, consciously or unconsciously. 3. a person should be discriminated against or treated adversely solely or in part because of his or her race or gender, 4. members of one race or gender cannot and should not attempt to treat others without regard to their race or gender. 5. the moral character of an individual is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex. 6. an individual, because of his or her race or gender, bears responsibility for the past actions of other members of the same race or gender. 7. any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anxiety, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or gender. 8. meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist or have been created by members of a particular race to oppress members of another race.
The legislation banning the teaching of all or parts of these eight propositions in Oklahoma schools was passed by 100% of Republican lawmakers and 0% of Democratic lawmakers.
We must measure the consequences of the “1619 Project” ideology that the Democratic Party and the Biden Administration intend not only to apply in the United States, but to spread throughout the world. It can only lead to massive violence.
[1] E.D. Morel denounced the cruel treatment of the Congolese by the Belgian king, Leopol II.
[2] “Black Horror on the Rhine”: Idealism, Pacifism, and Racism in Feminism and the Left in the Aftermath of the First World War, Peter Campbell, Histoire sociale/Social history, Volume 47, Number 94, Juin/June 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/his.2014.0034.
[3] The New York Times’ 1619 Project: A racialist falsification of American and world history, Niles Niemuth & Tom Mackaman & David North, World Socialist Web Site (2020). 1620: A Critical Response to the 1619 Project, Peter W. Wood, Encounter Books (2020).
[4] Democratic historiography holds President Jackson responsible for the genocide of the Cherokee Indians on the “Trail of Tears. Obviously this is not how Cherokke Kevin Stitt thinks.
Isaiah 46:13 I bring near my righteousness; it shall not be far off, and my salvation shall not tarry: and I will place salvation in Zion for Israel my glory.
‘Palestinian terror groups such as Hamas have a surefire strategy to win over the world’s sympathy: fire rockets into Israeli territory, trigger an Israeli response and wait for the global outrage against Israel’s response.
The strategy is effective because Israel is so darn good at protecting its citizens from missile attacks, thanks to ubiquitous bomb shelters and a sophisticated Iron Dome missile defense. So, if the terror rockets don’t kill any Jews, but the forced retaliations kill Palestinians, anyone biased against Israel will have a field day.
Consider, for example, Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN), who flipped the script and accused Israel of committing an “act of terrorism” with its airstrikes on the Gaza Strip on May 10, which resulted in the deaths of 20 Palestinians.
“Israeli air strikes killing civilians in Gaza is an act of terrorism,” Omar tweeted. “Palestinians deserve protection.”
Indeed, they do. They deserve protection from their murderous, corrupt and Jew-hating leaders who deliberately provoke Israel into retaliatory strikes that they know endangers the lives of their people.
Provoking Israel into killing Palestinians is the perfect diversion from the blatant failures of Palestinian leadership to improve the welfare of its people. Abbas canceling the PA elections? Israel’s fault. Trouble on Temple Mount? Israel’s fault. Chronic poverty and misery? Israel’s fault. A legal dispute over houses in East Jerusalem? Let’s fire rockets into Israeli cities and blame Israel for the reprisals.
Meanwhile, these cowardly leaders sit comfortably in their villas and bunkers basking in the world’s endorsement that, yes, it must be Israel’s fault.
If only more Jews would die during these rocket attacks, maybe the world would have more sympathy for the Jewish state. Does anybody doubt Hamas would love nothing better than to see thousands of Jews die from their rocket attacks? That’s their mission. They admit it. But because relatively so few Jews die from these rocket attacks, a pathetic international community simply sides with those with more casualties.’https://jewishjournal.com/commentary/columnist/editors-note/336478/while-terrorists-try-to-murder-jews-rep-ilhan-omar-flips-the-script/
Biden and his political mates around the world are simply following the bidding of the CCP. That’s one reason why they had to get rid of President Trump! This crazy Net Zero 2050 is their target to ruin the West and make us all slaves to the CCP. Conspiracy theory? NOT!! However, as a Bible believing Christian my hope isn’t in politicians but in the Lord Jesus Christ! Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.
I am surprised You Tube has not removed this video by now.
‘The Ominous Outlook for 2050
Narrator
There are two different visions out there of what the world ought to look like in 2050. One of them is called Net Zero, which says that within three decades the world must all but eliminate fossil fuel use, and get carbon dioxide emissions down to zero, net of the amount plants and trees absorb. So many politicians, business leaders, bankers and academics around the world are calling for Net Zero that you might think it’s solidly based on science.
John Robson
But it’s not. Many experts dispute the necessity of this 2050 plan and indeed its feasibility. They say the worst case scenario for the impacts of climate change over the coming 30 years won’t be nearly as costly as the impact of getting rid of fossil fuels. They say trying to get to net zero in such a short time could destroy our prosperity and weaken us internationally. And they say we couldn’t get there even if we tried.
Narrator
Despite these objections, and with virtually no public debate, governments throughout the western world are embracing the goal of net zero by 2050 and are preparing to impose the target, regardless of the costs. They’re not interested in the vision of cautious, evidence-based, adaptation to what the future brings.
John Robson
Which funnily enough isn’t even the other vision I want to talk about. You see, there’s yet another, very different idea of what the world should look like in 2050 that you may not have heard of. It’s not exactly a secret, but Western governments and journalists ignore it just as they ignore skepticism about Net Zero.
Narrator
This other vision is called The Hundred Year Marathon. And it’s like a mirror image of Net Zero, because it’s the Chinese Politburo’s elaborate and ambitious scheme to build up their nation’s economy and its global power so that by 2049, the hundredth anniversary of Mao Zedong’s seizure of power, China will be the world’s dominant superpower.
John Robson
Then, starting in 2050, the ideology that guides the Chinese Communist Party will spread around the globe, achieving what they like to call “harmony” though a better name would be “world domination”.
Narrator
You might be tempted to dismiss this warning as paranoia, some kind of warmed-over “Red scare”. But while Chinese leaders are careful not to say much to the rest of the world, they talk openly about this ambition among themselves. The plans are found in high-level speeches and strategy documents, and the implementation is progressing around the world, step-by-step, right in plain sight, including the so-called “Belt and Road Initiative” and the not-so-green investment in coal plants in many Third World nations as well as at home. But most Westerners still know nothing about it and find it hard to believe such a plan could even exist, let alone succeed.
John Robson
Unfortunately, the truth is that these two apparently disconnected visions of 2050 are two sides of the same coin. They both lead us to the same place, with the west hobbled and weak, and China powerful and dominant. And if our governments don’t know it, don’t want to hear about it, the Chinese government certainly does. I’m John Robson and this is a Climate Discussion Nexus Backgrounder on the Ominous Outlook for 2050.
First of all, let me assure you I’m not saying “climate change” is a communist plot. Or a globalist plot. Or a what have you plot. Climate change alarmism isn’t not a plot at all, even if it is mistaken. The whole discussion of carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect arose in Europe in the 1800s out of scientific inquiry, and lots of people believe in it sincerely, and it’s appropriate and necessary that we, in free societies, have a lively legitimate debate about its meaning and importance. Including the necessity and practicality of Net Zero.
Narrator
But we also need to have a discussion about the geopolitical implications of the green agenda, and the illegitimate uses to which it can be put. Including the strange coincidence that a global political movement has arisen that uses the threat of climate change to impose an agenda on the Western world that fits neatly with what The Hundred Year Marathon seeks to do. If it is a coincidence.
John Robson
You’ll notice, the endless chatter about “Net Zero” never seems to include China. They’re building hundreds of coal-fired power plants at home and abroad, buying up oil reserves around the world, including here in Canada, and they’re ramping up their economy as fast as humanly possible without regard for the human cost including due to real pollution as well as the “carbon” kind. And they have politely but firmly told the world to go jump in the South China Sea whenever discussion of global climate policy comes up. Except not always politely.
Sure they like to brag about the occasional solar panel they put up, or their internal carbon trading shell game, and last fall President Xi Jinping made noises to the UN about cutting emissions. That kind of talk always wins them praise from credulous western environmentalists. But the reality is, net zero is a western preoccupation and China isn’t part of it.
When I say “China” I don’t mean the geographical entity, of course. Nor do I mean the people who live there. It’s standard shorthand for a political organization called the Chinese Communist Party or CCP that rules China and its people in a thoroughly undemocratic, brutal manner.
Narrator
The CCP was formed in 1921, and after decades of military insurgency it won control of China in 1949 under the leadership of Mao Zedong. It is an authoritarian communist movement that aspires to be totalitarian and control all aspects of the lives of the Chinese people including their thinking. It now has about 90 million members, but not because it’s popular. Because you pretty much have to be a Party member to have a significant job in Chinese business or government. Until the Party turns on you, that is. And then there’s nowhere to hide, no matter how important, rich or well-connected you seemed to be. There’s no such thing as free speech in China, or separation of powers, or rule of law, or private property, or security of any kind. Westerners by and large have no idea how powerful the CCP is.
John Robson
For instance, China does not have a military the way normal countries do. Instead the so-called “Peoples’ Liberation Army” is the military wing of the Chinese Communist Party. Imagine the hoo-hah if Donald Trump had proposed having the US Army swear an oath of loyalty to the Republican Party instead of the US Constitution. But that’s what the CCP has done, and it now has the largest military in the world as its private enforcers.
China also does not have an independent court system, of course. Judges in China are CCP officials whose sole loyalty is to the Party if they know what’s good for them. The CCP controls the school system, the media, the universities, the internet, all local municipal governments, and of course the central government in Beijing. Leaders in any of those systems have to swear loyalty to the CCP and its ideology to hold their positions. What’s more, all Chinese companies are effectively branches of the state including under the National Intelligence Law that makes enterprises like, say Huawei, explicitly tentacles of Beijing’s espionage.
Narrator
It’s not accidental and it’s not because of any external threat and there is no intention of reforming it. China made a show of moving towards democracy in the 1990s, just long enough to win a membership in the World Trade Organization in 2001. But what was really going on internally was a purge of reformers in the wake of the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.
John Robson
By the time Xi Jinping took power in 2012 the hardliners had cemented their control. And in 2013 Chairman Xi delivered a confidential speech called Document Number 9, which outlines the seven “false ideologies” that the CCP must repress at all costs: Western-style constitutional democracy, the belief in ‘universal values’, civil society (or individual rights), free market economics, independent journalism, ‘historical nihilism’ (i.e. questioning Maoist doctrine), and anything that undermines the socialist nature of China.
Narrator
In that speech he also referred to “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. According to China expert Michael Pillsbury, this is code for righting the historical wrongs that have prevented China from reaching its destiny of being the dominant nation in the world. They don’t simply want to be successful, to be secure, to be an equal and respected partner in a multipolar world. They believe in the saying attributed to Confucius that “there can only be one sun up in the sky.” There can only be one dominant superpower.
John Robson
According to this chauvinistic, belligerent and frankly rather weird reading of history, China was destined to fill that role until its humiliation by the aggressive west in the 1800s. But by 2049 they will have righted that wrong and completed their rejuvenation. Or died trying. Along with anyone who gets in their way.
Delusions of grandeur, you might say. As we said of the Soviet Union and before that Hitler. Yes, I’m putting on that annoying historian’s mortar-board again and saying we’ve been there, we’ve done that and, you’d think, got the point. Instead while we’ve spent decades praising the CCP’s quest for social justice, building statues of Norman Bethune and praising Pierre Trudeau’s youthful visit to China, and indeed taking pity on China as a poor, weak developing nation to whom believe it or not Canada still sends foreign aid, they’ve become the world’s top producer and user of energy, steel, cement and chemical fertilizer (like Khrushchev’s U.S.S.R. before them with similar ambitions). They own over a trillion dollars’ worth of US government debt, they control over 90 percent of the world’s supply of rare earth minerals which gives them effective control over global electronics production, they took over the mobile phone infrastructure in Africa and are seeking dominance over the new 5G global communications network, and through that Belt-and-Road Initiative they have been acquiring vast amounts of transportation infrastructure around the world.
Narrator
The reach of the CCP is astonishing. They own Pirelli tires, Syngenta chemicals, 40 percent of the Philippines’ national electricity system, and ports in Rotterdam, Antwerp, Greece, Bilbao, Valencia, Panama, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nicaragua and elsewhere. In Canada they own Nexen Inc., one of Canada’s major oil and gas companies. And the Canadian government still hasn’t formally barred Huawei from the 5G network’s key infrastructure, the only one of the “Five Eyes” still determined to see no evil here.
John Robson
And bear in mind, we’re not talking about individual Chinese investors buying assets. These are Chinese state-owned, state dominated enterprises, all under the control of the CCP. No Chinese firm is independent of the Politburo no matter what the share certificates or formal laws say. What Chairman Xi wants, Chairman Xi takes, with the People’s Liberation Army to back him up.
Well, it’s not to stop climate change, that’s for sure. Throughout this drive for world domination in the name of communist dictatorship, which following Confucius’ policy of the “rectification of names” is exactly what it should be called, their use of fossil fuels, especially coal and oil, have soared, making them the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases by a very wide margin that grows wider every day.
Narrator
Which brings us back to the climate issue. Because a strange thing about Net Zero is that it was never really discussed anywhere, or voted on. It just one day seemed to become the policy of every government, everywhere. Except China, which is applauding us for it while moving relentlessly the other way.
Net Zero has even recently and rather suddenly been embraced by the global financial system. Groups like the World Bank and major private banks have all announced they won’t lend any more money to big fossil fuel-based energy projects, even in developing countries, including coal-fired power plants. Whereas China will.
And as numerous authors have documented, top leaders in the global finance sphere have been the targets for decades of careful, sophisticated influence campaigns run out of Beijing.
John Robson
Hold on a minute, I know what you’re about to say: this is all conspiracy-mongering, which you told us not to do. Besides surely it’s just a coincidence. But we already know that Russia operates this way, funding European green groups who have all but shut down energy development in the EU, forcing them to be utterly dependent on Russian gas exports. It stands to reason that China would use the same strategy. It’s not a conspiracy, they talk about it among themselves. And these days China’s resources vastly exceed those of Russia which, for all Putin’s thuggish delusions of grandeur, has been described with some justice as “a gas station for China.”
So how does this work? Well, as Toronto-based researcher Patricia Adams has documented, western green groups have been conspicuous in their fondness for the ruthless Chinese government. While everyone else has been growing increasingly alarmed at the proliferation of concentration camps, slave labour factories, crushing free speech including in Hong Kong and all the other hallmarks of totalitarian repression under the CCP, even genocide of the Uighur Muslims, environmental groups are conspicuously glowing about the Chinese leadership. As Adams says:
Narrator
The big exceptions – those who have yet to have their eyes opened to the dangers posed by the CCP – are Western environmentalists and their funders. Rather than becoming cautious about China’s role in the world, these groups lavish it with praise for its environmental efforts
John Robson
So do you think it’s just coincidence that, as Adams notes, some $330 million worth of funding for North American green groups can be traced to one single source, Energy Foundation China, which is managed by Ji Zou, a long-time senior official in the Chinese government?
Narrator
Zou, as a paymaster for the Western environmentalists, decides what projects to fund, enabling him to effectively solicit work desired by his former employers in Beijing from the Western environmental organizations, who give it their imprimatur of legitimacy.
Still, let’s keep the rose-coloured blinders on and say it’s all just a coincidence. It’s still remarkable, and worrisome, how it all happens to work to the CCP’s advantage. Where does the Net Zero doctrine leave developing countries who need to build up their electricity grids? China is now the only place most of them can look to for funding. And it’s a role China has enthusiastically embraced, since the terms they impose on the recipients lock in their control over those governments for decades to come.
So even if the CCP didn’t plan it, they couldn’t have arranged it any better. And nor could the people Lenin famously called “useful idiots” in the free world. Which apparently includes the entire EU leadership, which has decided not to criticize China’s dismal human rights record, intellectual property theft or geopolitical bullying lest it impede the flow of meaningless rhetoric on climate. And these coincidences keep appearing in other places too.
Narrator
Consider BlackRock Inc, the world’s largest financial firm with $6.5 trillion in assets under management. In 2019 its President, Larry Fink, announced a plan to ensure the company’s future growth by aggressively expanding in China. To do this he recruited a team of talented financial executives, headed by Tang Xiaodong, a banker and former Chinese government official, to lead BlackRock’s Chinese operations. And right on schedule, Fink just announced they’re going to use their massive financial clout to force companies they own to commit to net zero by 2050, or face being cut off from financing.
John Robson
Will BlackRock apply this rule to CCP-controlled enterprises, or the entire Chinese economy for that matter? Dream on. Once again, it’s only western companies that will be strangled and tossed in a ditch, after being plundered of their proprietary technology, while BlackRock and the CCP cash in on unrestrained growth in China driven by fossil fuels.
In other countries though, there is a conspicuous connection between governments being overly friendly with China and imposing Net Zero on themselves. Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his former Ambassador to China John McCallum have been positively giddy over the regime in Beijing, although McCallum did eventually have to be fired when his handling of a diplomatic row with China caused the Canadian press to wonder aloud where his loyalties lay because he was giving the Chinese advice on how to defeat the Canadian government, in public. Meanwhile Trudeau has, of course, announced that Canada is committing to Net Zero by 2050, notwithstanding the fact that it will wipe out our oil and gas sector and may split our country, while China is allowed to grow theirs without limit or reproach.
Narrator
In the UK, where Net Zero is now gospel, connections between the CCP and the social elite are particularly deep. The 48 Group Club is a Who’s Who of top UK government, banking, university and industry elite who regularly rub shoulders with a select group of high-ranking current and former Chinese officials, ostensibly for the purpose of developing trade relationships and business deals. But as Hamilton and Ohlberg detail in Hidden Hand, the 48 Group Club has really become an organ for the Chinese government to influence British public opinion and politics through their uncritical repetition of CCP propaganda.
In a scathing conclusion, Hamilton and Ohlberg write:
In our judgment, so entrenched are the CCP’s influence networks among British elites that Britain has passed the point of no return, and any attempt to extricate itself from Beijing’s orbit would probably fail.
John Robson
Well, I say try anyway. Especially if it’s all just a coincidence and those nice Chinese government agents are plying westerners with money and flattery, and sometimes other favours as well, out of the stunning benevolence of their hearts. But before accepting that preposterous assertion, or trying to hand me a tin foil hat, ask yourself this question: Suppose the CCP really did hatch the scheme of using its global influence networks to push Net Zero by 2050 on the rest of us as an integral part of its Hundred Year Marathon strategy. How would the outcome look any different from what’s been happening?
If the answer is that it wouldn’t, it’s either a plot or it’s a plan that’s getting a lot of venal, ideological or simply careless support from our side. Remember, Lenin didn’t say that the useful idiots were cynics, but he did say they were fools.
Narrator
Whatever the cause, the world is traveling on two paths towards 2050. And while they seem unrelated, with one all about saving the planet from supposed climate doom and the other a dark totalitarian ambition to rule the world, they converge in a remarkable spot where the West is hobbled economically, politically and militarily by climate alarmism and its misguided schemes to slash energy abundance and squash economic growth, while China’s communist regime secures unchallenged global economic, military and ideological dominance.
John Robson
The two visions are stereoscopic. Even if you close one eye, or the other, you see the same picture. But I want nothing to do it. I say it’s time to open our eyes wide and see what’s in front of us, surprisingly close, big and ominous.
For the Climate Discussion Nexus, I’m John Robson. I was an anti-communist before it was cool, I was an anti-communist while it was cool, I’m still an anti-communist when it’s not cool anymore, and you should be too.’https://climatediscussionnexus.com/videos/the-red-green-menace/
President Trump said ‘Over the past four years, my administration delivered for Americans of all backgrounds like never before. Save America is about building on those accomplishments, supporting the brave conservatives who will define the future of the America First Movement, the future of our party, and the future of our beloved country. Save America is also about ensuring that we always keep America First, in our foreign and domestic policy. We take pride in our country, we teach the truth about our history, we celebrate our rich heritage and national traditions, and of course, we respect our great American Flag.
We are committed to defending innocent life and to upholding the Judeo-Christian values of our founding.
We believe in the promise of the Declaration of Independence, that we are all made EQUAL by our Creator, and that must all be TREATED equal under the law.
We know that our rights do not come from government, they come from God, and no earthly force can ever take those rights away. That includes the right to religious liberty and the right to Keep and Bear Arms.
We believe in rebuilding our previously depleted military and ending the endless wars our failed politicians of the past got us into for decades.
We embrace free thought, we welcome robust debate, and we are not afraid to stand up to the oppressive dictates of political correctness.
We know that the rule of law is the ultimate safeguard of our freedoms, and we affirm that the Constitution means exactly what it says AS WRITTEN.
We support fair trade, low taxes, and fewer job-killing regulations, and we know that America must always have the most powerful military on the face of the Earth.
We believe in Law and Order, and we believe that the men and women of law enforcement are HEROES who deserve our absolute support.
We believe in FREE SPEECH and Fair Elections. We must ensure fair, honest, transparent, and secure elections going forward – where every LEGAL VOTE counts.’https://www.donaldjtrump.com/about
This guy NEVER did a days work in his life! He spent fifty years in Congress on the tax payer’s dollar having never achieved anything for the working person! What a LIAR and now Fake President!
This man is not fit to run a family let alone a country. The mainline media are silent on Biden’s mental capacity or lack thereof and the American people will pay the price! In this clip he cannot find his the mask that is usually hiding his face!
Have you “Disliked” your Biden’s White House video today? If not please do so as this may be the only way the average person gets to express themselves in a non-violent manner. Oh, by the way, are those two women behind the Fake President or two men identifying as women?
My wife and I didn’t watch or listen to the Fake President’s speech to Congress and perhaps you didn’t either. So, in case you wish to know a little of what the Fake President had to say I am sharing Mark Levin’s take on it. Enjoy!
The Democratic Party platforms of 1840, 1844, 1848, 1852 and 1856 asserted that abolitionism diminished the happiness of the people and endangered the stability and permanence of the Union.
whatyareckon 