The U S A Deliberately Destroyed The Two Nord Stream Pipelines

 

From Chris MacIntosh, Capitalist Exploits

8 March 2023

By destroying the two Nordstream pipelines, the United States broke the German and by extension European economy. They did this deliberately.

In Dubai, I was speaking with an escapee from Germany — a very wealthy industrialist, and what he told me was interesting and has been corroborated by many similar discussions.

Germany doesn’t want to fight Russia. Europeans don’t want to fight Russia. Their leadership is doing their damndest to drum up support for it, but on the ground Europe doesn’t want it. This makes perfect sense. Wars are fought by young ambitious powers. Europe is an old man.

Most telling however is that, as this man put it, “How can you believe America is your ally?”

Now, consider all of this just as Seymour Hersh published his research on the Nord Stream pipeline bombings. Here’s his extensive piece on the bombing.

Subsequently, we’ve been subjected to watching the captured media whores scrambling to discredit him, which simply has the Streisand effect and will only do more damage to their already collapsing credibility.

I mention this not only because the bombing was an act of war against both Russia but also against Germany.

Despite what the lamestreet media may be yabbering on about those in positions of power and influence will realise what has happened.

The distrust level will be rising and at some point here, the splintering of Europe will go hyperbolic.

- Chris MacIntosh
Capitalist Exploits | Glenorchy Capital Macro fund | Subscribe to Insider | Rebel Capitalist Pro

 EXPLORE OUR PAGES:


[Daily Stirrer] ... [ Our Page on on Substack ]... [Boggart Aboad] ... [ Ian Thorpe at Quora ] ... [ Greenteeth Home ] ... [ Greenteeth on Minds.com ] ... [ Here Come The Russians ] ... [ Latest Posts ] ... [ Blog Bulletin ]

Veganuary? Is The Healthy, Planet Friendly Diet Thing A Con?

 It may be Veganuary, but a plant-based lifestyle isn't better for your health and it certainly won't save the planet 

 

Vegan sausages: They look like fried turds so I passed on the taste test (Picture source: glutenfreeragina.com

Canola oil, yeast, acidity regulator, methyl­cellulose, corn oil thickener, starch, gelling agent. “Hmm, I don’t like agents in my food,” says Jayne Buxton.

We’re in the refrigerator aisle of a well-known, high-end health-food supermarket in Richmond, London, reading the backs of packets of vegan ­sausages, burgers et al. As far as vegan products go, we’re dining at the Ritz.

Pastrami-style slices, scrambled tofu, vegan chorizo slices, jackfruit rendang, a canister of No-Egg Egg for £4.99. “That’s more than a carton of eggs,” says Buxton as she scans the ingredients. Gum cellulose dextrose, “That’s sugar. Do you want sugar with your eggs?”

You would expect the quality here to be better than anywhere else, but nutritionally, says Buxton, it’s a wasteland of chemicals and oils where nutritious protein should be.

“Someone’s going to arrest us in a minute,” she jokes. It does feel subversive. Like we’re poking around in veganism’s knicker drawer.

In recent years, we’ve been told by Netflix documentaries, vegan activists and companies selling plant-based products that going vegan is the single best thing you can do to improve your own health, the planet’s and the wellbeing of the animals we share it with.

However, four years ago, Jayne Buxton started to question the received wisdom. What she saw in documentaries and news outlets, she says, was at odds with the very few facts she knew. “When the documentary Cowspiracy came out and said 51 per cent of emissions are from livestock, I knew that was not true. I knew that the official global number was 14.5 per cent, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. And even that is an exaggerated number.”

Jayne Buxton: eating plant-based foods is not going to save the planet Credit: Paul Grover for the Telegraph

Buxton, a former management consultant with an MBA, is trained to look at data critically. She began researching the topic of food, health and the environment (specifically, the impact of meat and plant-based diets on human and plan­etary health) and she realised the extent of the ­misinformation around both the health and environmental impact of meat-eating, and that the benefits of plant-only diets were being exaggerated.

“People are trying to do the right thing. And no wonder it’s hard, because they’re being given confusing messages.”

Buxton searched for the answers to these questions: is a plant-based diet better for your health? Will it save the planet? Who is pushing the plant-based diet and why? And how should we eat?

She decided to turn her research into a book: The Great Plant-Based Con. The “con” refers to the gradual conditioning of the public’s thought processes by a constellation of individuals and organisations, “who may well believe in the truth of the views they express, but present things that are far from certain as established fact”.

She’s not oblivious to the hornets’ nest she’s about to poke. However, she feels that hers is one of a growing number of voices pushing back against the “dogma” of veganism, citing the likes of food writer Joanna Blythman and shepherd and author James Rebanks. Many of the scientists she spoke to appreciated what she was doing. “They are often working at a distance from the lay person. There is debate happening at their level, but they can sometimes struggle to reach a popular audience.”

While she’s become known as “the Meat Lady” to friends and family, they have been supportive. Her children, 30, 27 and 23, are part of the generation who are lobbied about being plant-based every day. “I’m really proud of how they ask questions and aren’t set in how they think. “The zeitgeist is such that young ­people are frightened to stand up and say something different.”

Can veganism save the planet?

In 2018, researchers at the University of Oxford published a study that claimed cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual’s carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent.

The number was widely reported in the media, with little close questioning. Buxton, however, spent time ­picking apart the modelling used in the study. It, like other figures, such as those used in Cowspiracy, she says, advocates for plant-based diets by exaggerating GHG (greenhouse gas) numbers, ­failing to fully account for carbon sequestration, using a methane metric that overestimates the methane from livestock, and downplaying nutritional considerations.

Buxton wrote to Joseph Poore, the lead author of the Oxford study, early on to ask some questions about it. “I hoped it would start a dialogue. He did not reply.” When I approached the Vegan Society for comment about the study, a spokesperson said: “Of course there are many things to consider when it comes to sustainable food. Plant-based diets are consistently shown to be the lowest impact across a range of environmental measures.”

Lumping the UK in with global figures for countries with vastly different farming practices means that some of the good news gets lost. Beef cattle and sheep in the UK account for just 5.7 per cent of all UK emissions, but this is reduced to 3.7 per cent if carbon sequestration (storing of carbon in the soil) is taken into account. While she says it’s a cliché, “It really is the how, not the cow.”

Still, in a complex world, giving up meat can feel like a positive contribution we can all make relatively easily, compared with that more damaging flight to go on our annual holiday.

“This is why people have latched onto the plant-based idea with such vigour,” says Buxton. “It’s a supposedly pain-free way of helping the environment. It’s a kind of virtue signalling ­get-out clause that stops people from having to think about making more significant changes to their lifestyles.”

Buying less, flying less and doing less could make a more meaningful impact. “Just generally consume less. That’s not a good message in a capitalist economy, though. People don’t like it. They like this one because it drives the ­economy forward.”

Giving up dairy milk has become the ultimate act of virtue signalling, says Buxton. But if our food footprint is a maximum of 16 per cent of the total individual footprint and milk is a tiny proportion of that, the reduction of GHGs is minuscule. “It allows individuals to keep on with their other carbon-generating habits in a guilt-free way.”

Who is pushing the message?

Harmless hippies versus murdering meat-eaters – that’s the clichéd narrative dichotomy. Yesterday’s lentil-eating free-lovers, though, have been consumed by the big business of veganism.

The plant-based “meat” market alone is expected to be worth more than £25 billion by 2026, according to a study by Stephan van Vliet, of Duke University in the United States.

Conflicts of interest abound. Film director James Cameron was one of those behind the pro-plant-eating movie The Game Changers. He also used to own Verdient Foods, an organic pea-protein company that aims to be the largest pea-protein producer in North America.

Buxton also charts in her book how an anti-meat agenda started with the Seventh-day Adventists’ “Garden of Eden” diet in the 19th century, which advocated veg­etarianism. Meat-free proponent John Harvey Kellogg, of ­Kellogg’s Corn Flakes fame, championed the car­bo­hydrate-rich diet that dominates today. “They have been very influential in the dietary committees and forming the dietary guidelines that have been developed since.”

Buxton wants more people to be aware of how the targeted marketing that we might unwittingly parrot becomes “unquestionable dogma”.

Where do we go from here?

This isn’t a call to forks for you to head to your nearest all-you-can-eat­ ­steakhouse. Buxton would like to see everyone reduce consumption of meat from industrial farming and ­transition towards more sustainably raised meat, “which will likely mean consuming less”.

Before writing the book, she had always been more of a baked-potato-and-salad person, than a steak person. However, researching her book has made her appreciate meat and its health benefits. She now eats some animal-sourced foods (eggs, meat, cheese) alongside a variety of vegetables every day, including having meat for dinner three or four times a week, and a “nice 4oz steak” about once a week.

An ordinary, average British 4oz steak, Buxton worked out from numbers in an FAO report, is about 1.9kg of CO2e. “Estimates of the carbon cost of red meat vary widely. This is not an exact science at all.

So, for example, in Mike Berners-Lee’s book there’s an estimate of 2.9kg for British beef.” A hot bath is 2.5kg. Running a portable heater in your house for six hours is about 5kg. A veggie curry delivered on a scooter – five miles – is between 1.4kg and 2.7kg, depending on whether you’re ordering for one or for four. “It’s all about the choices we make.”

However, meat, the high-welfare kind that Buxton would like to see us all eating, is expensive. “That is because our food system is skewed. If I were designing policies to make it affordable to eat properly, I would tax the hell out of the processed stuff and the empty carbs and the junk and subsidise the regeneratively farmed eggs and meat, and well-raised fish. And I would support farmers with active policies to transition to the best farming practices.”

First off, though, the anti-meat rhetoric has to stop. Encouragingly, diets such as the Keto (high fat and low carb) are growing in popularity for treating an epidemic of obesity and diabetes. In many ways, it and veganism are antithetical.

For Buxton, it’s a sign that as a society we’re rethinking how a healthy diet might be one that is balanced, fresh and unprocessed. “Eventually, I really firmly believe that if we pursue the regenerative path, we will eventually see fully sustainable, healthful meat available for reasonable prices.”

Is a plant-based diet actually healthier? 

If you have a lingering feeling that meat, eggs and dairy are bad for you, you might be suffering from a hangover from the demonisation of cholesterol in the 1950s. Today, eggs and dairy in moderation are considered part of a healthy diet, yet the reputational damage to red meat remains, despite there being no studies that conclusively prove it is bad for our health.

“Red meat gets lumped in with processed meat, which some studies have proved to be harmful. However, recent studies in the Annals of Internal Medicine [2019], which conducted a meta analysis of the full body of research, concluded that there was insufficient evidence to recommend reduced consumption of red or processed meat,” says Buxton.

There have been several critiques of the WHO report on cancer (2015), which is responsible for the notion that eating processed meat causes cancer, including one from a member of the committee that produced the report, who felt that it was not evidence based.

“The thing about the data for red meat is that, via epidemiological studies, it has been lumped together with other aspects of an unhealthy diet, such as the excess consumption of processed carbohydrates. Is it the meat producing the results or the bun, fries and cola consumed alongside it?” questions Buxton.

When it comes to veganism, she is concerned that a diet requiring additional supplementation (plant-based diets are deficient in nutrients such as preformed vitamin A, B12 and D, iodine, iron, omega-3, several essential amino acids and zinc) can be held up as healthier than a balanced one that doesn’t.

Plant-based milks require fortification with calcium and other vitamins; breastfeeding vegan mothers are encouraged by the Vegan Society to take supplements of B12, iodine, vitamin D and omega-3, and to increase their intake (requirements are 80 per cent higher than for other adults) by eating calcium-fortified foods and calcium-set tofu. When we approached the Vegan Society for comment, a spokesperson said: “From a health point of view, a well-planned vegan diet can support healthy living in people of all ages, including during pregnancy and breastfeeding.”

A single egg, however, contains omega-3 essential fatty acids in DHA form, vitamins A, B6, B12, E, D and K, calcium, iron, zinc and many other healthy minerals. Take that, No-Egg Egg.

Then there is the higher consumption of seed oils, high in omega-6, associated with highly processed foods, such as those we found in the supermarket refrigerator.

“The amount of omega-6 in our adipose tissue has risen from something like nine per cent to 21 per cent in the past two decades,” says Buxton.

Her research led her to conclude that the belief a vegan diet will make you healthier is a myth. “Plant-based diets provide inferior-quality protein and are deficient in important nutrients while being abundant in potentially harmful compounds. However, if a person eats plant-based foods in the sense of lots of plants alongside small amounts of animal foods, the deficiencies will not be there.”

In 2020, the actor Liam Hemsworth had to rethink his vegan diet after an overload of oxalates (a naturally occurring compound in plants) gave him painful kidney stones that required surgery.

It seems even when a vegan diet avoids the pitfalls of processed food, you can have too much of a good thing. As ever, balance and moderation in all things is key.

The ethical argument for veganism 

Animal welfare is the issue that turns many off meat: full disclosure, it’s why I haven’t eaten it for six years. Buxton sympathises: “I understand that people are disgusted by the way we farm meat intensively. I am too.”

She thinks we should all be grateful to animal rights activists, vegans and vegetarians for highlighting these issues. “That’s a positive contribution. The solution is maybe where we part company.”

Buxton supports the transition towards farming regeneratively, which aims to restore soil quality and biodiversity while producing sufficient food of high nutritional quality. “British farming is going well compared with the rest of the world.”

She also questions whether a plant-based diet is cruelty-free, using the example of John Chester, a Californian farmer who was the subject of the 2018 documentary The Biggest Little Farm, who explained he has to kill 40,000 gophers a year to protect his 250-acre avocado crop.

In the UK, meanwhile, as wheat yields doubled between 1970 and today, the number of farmland birds decreased by 54 per cent, according to the National Biodiversity Network.

In New South Wales, Australia, over a five-year period up to 2013, rice farmers killed nearly 200,000 native ducks to protect their rice crops from the birds.

At the heart of this, Buxton says, is the fact that we have to get to grips with the fundamental reality that: “For us to eat, there will be death.”

She would rather that we come to terms with our biology, rather than trying to evolve beyond it by creating lab-grown meats. “You can eat grazing animals that have led a really good life and have been good for the soil.”

The case for UK-produced meat

In an extract from her book, Jayne Buxton says regeneratively farmed meat is what we should aim for: 

Very little meat consumed in the UK comes from systems that deplete rainforests and generate large amounts of emissions Credit: Getty Images

Meat produced in the UK is among the most sustainable in the world. Taking into account grassland sequestration (the process by which grassland draws carbon out of the atmosphere and stores it in the soil, of which more in a moment), cattle and sheep account for 3.7 per cent of UK emissions. Even excluding sequestration, cattle and sheep account for just 5.7 per cent of emissions. 

Very little meat consumed in the UK comes from systems that deplete rainforests and generate large amounts of emissions. Imported meat from Brazil, for example, make up just one per cent of UK beef imports. If the high-level, global numbers for emissions are misleading, so are the various claims about the carbon cost per kilo of beef.

Frank Mitloehner, an air-quality scientist at the University of California, explains this using a car analogy: “If I asked you about the emissions generated by a car, you would have to ask: what car are we talking about? A Fiat or an S-Class Mercedes or an electric car? Is it diesel or gas? How old is it, and who’s driving it? All these questions and more. It’s the same with cows. What breed is she? Where is she? What is she fed? Is there a veterinary system to treat her diseases? There are so many issues to consider. So, when you try to produce a global estimate and apply it to a specific region or farm, you are almost certainly going to be wrong, perhaps by 10, 15 or 20 times.”

The problem identified by Mitloehner goes some way towards explaining why estimates for the carbon costs per kilo of meat vary so widely. Sources I consulted gave estimates ranging from -4kg to +400kg of CO2 per kilo.

The research organisation Our World in Data, for example, has published two different estimates: 100kg and 60kg. The per kilo CO2 cost of beef in sub-Saharan Africa is estimated at 40-50kg CO2e, versus 5-10kg in Europe. A report by the National Farmers’ Union estimates the carbon cost of British beef at 17.2kg (as compared with 46kg for the rest of the world).

The claims in a BBC Horizon programme that aired in early 2021 were (according to the online material provided by the scientist who sourced the data for the programme) based on yet another emissions-per-kilo-of-beef number – 25kg of CO2e.

Clearly, where and how the beef is produced, and what factors are accounted for in the calculations, makes a difference, but it remains a fact that emissions in places such as the UK and the US are dramatically lower than is regularly claimed, and represent a very small part of the emissions pie. Yet the cumulative effect of the arguments put forward by plant-based food advocates is to condition people into thinking that swapping all animal foods will make a significant difference in our quest to reduce emissions and fight climate change.

A 2017 study by Mary Beth Hall, an animal scientist at the US Dairy Forage Research Center, in Wisconsin, and Robin R White, a professor of animal and poultry science at Virginia Tech, concluded that the impact of eliminating all meat consumption would be very small. Modelling a US food system without animals, they found that total US emissions would be reduced by just 2.6 per cent, and this at some considerable cost to nutritional adequacy.

A total of 2.6 per cent is not nothing, but it is not even close to the kinds of numbers that are regularly bandied about. Environmental economist Dr Bjorn Lomborg concurs with Hall and White, asserting that “eating carrots instead of steak means you effectively cut your emissions by about two per cent”. Lomborg, a vegetarian for ethical reasons, says: “There are many good reasons to eat less meat. Sadly, making a huge difference to the climate isn’t one of them.”

Professor Frédéric Leroy, a professor in the field of food science and biotechnology at Vrije University, in Brussels, confirms that the impact on the climate of adopting a vegan diet is very small and becomes even smaller if one also factors in such contextual factors as natural carbon cycles, carbon sequestration and actual nutritional value. Whatever the exact number is, he says: “It’s not big. It’s something, but not much, and what the data from Hall and White also suggest is that there is likely going to be a cost in terms of nutrition.”

Hall and White’s findings have been replicated at the level of the individual. An individual’s annual carbon footprint is about 12 tonnes of CO2, and their food footprint is estimated to be about 16 per cent of this, or two tonnes of CO2 (this number varies greatly by country).

The estimated reduction in emissions generated by a switch to a vegan diet is 0.8 of a tonne, representing a six per cent reduction in the total per capita footprint. When you compare this with the reduction in emissions resulting from one fewer return transatlantic flight (1.6 tonnes) or living car-free (between 1 and 5.3 tonnes), the benefit of switching to a plant-based diet looks relatively inconsequential, particularly when the negative impact on nutrition and health are factored in. Once any unintended consequences – sometimes referred to as rebound effects – are accounted for, the benefit of switching to a vegan diet looks more inconsequential still.

Giving up meat versus giving up flying 

These hard truths about carbon savings made possible by different individual actions makes a nonsense out of the frequently heard claim that eating a plant-based diet is “the most important contribution every individual can make to reversing global warming”.

For someone who regularly flies, forgoing just one transatlantic flight that they would otherwise have taken would make a far bigger contribution. (The data in Sarah Bridle’s Food and Climate Change: Without the Hot Air makes this abundantly clear: the emissions from a single transatlantic flight are 50 per cent more than those from an entire year’s worth of food consumed by the average individual.)

For someone who drives a car, ditching the car or driving it less often also constitutes an important contribution. Do both of these things and you could wipe 6.9 tonnes of carbon off your total footprint.

The comparison between the amount of CO2 saved by giving up all animal foods as compared to that saved by forgoing a single flight makes a mockery of publicity stunts such as that of Richard Branson, CEO of Virgin Airlines, who declared that beef would no longer be served on Virgin flights. Let’s look at the carbon costs of a serving of beef (say, 112 grams). Estimates range from -0.4kg (for grass-fed, regeneratively produced beef) to 11kg of CO2e.

Even if we take the highest estimate, the CO2 cost of a serving of beef is utterly dwarfed by the per-person CO2 cost of the flight (1.6 tonnes, or 1,600kg, for a one-way flight). Equally specious is the concept of the Hollywood elite demonstrating their commitment to combating climate change by taking meat off the menu at the Golden Globes while travelling to the awards ceremony by private jet.

 

U S Regional Bank First Republic Crashes As America's Banking 'Crisis In Confidence' Becomes Contagious

by Phil T. Looker.

Shares in America's First Republic Bank's crashed when the New York stock market opened for trading this morning. The crash was triggered by a statement issued on Sunday night that sought to ease investor worries about the bank's liquidity situation in the wake of the failure of Silicon Valley Bank. Shares in the San Francisco based regional bank are down 60% on last week's close.

Customers queue outside a First Republic branch hoping to get at least some of their money out.

In the Sunday night statement the bank claimed that it had more than $70 billion in unused liquidity to fund operations from agreements that included the Federal Reserve and JPMorgan Chase & Co.

"The additional borrowing capacity from the Federal Reserve, continued access to funding through the Federal Home Loan Bank, and ability to access additional financing through JPMorgan Chase & Co.increases, diversifies, and further strengthens First Republic's existing liquidity profile," the bank said, adding that more liquidity is available through the Fed's new lending facility. 

Unfortunately this information, coming only days after Silicon Valley Bank had issued similar assurances shortly before being declared insolvent, failed to assure investors and depositors.

Bloomberg's Ven Ram opined, "The plunge in its shares is classic market psychology at work, with investors starting to question the credentials of any lender that may be remotely in the same category of Silicon Valley Bank," . 

Zero Hedgepointed out over the weekend, "as a result of the SVB failure - one look at what is already taking place at some smaller, vulnerable banks such as this First Republic Branch in Brentwood should be sufficient to see what comes to morrow if the Fed makes the wrong decision today."

Despite the emergency lending program announced by the Fed and Treasury on Sunday to increase the availability of funds to meet bank withdrawals and prevent runs on other banks, fears have not been alleviated as other regional banks, which are sitting on some $620 billion in unrealized losses on all securities (both Available for Sale and Held to Maturity) at the end of last year, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp," continue to experience significant pressure."

How was this allowed to happen? I worked in a British financial institution and do not claim great expertise in the American way of doing things but one flaw in U.S. corporate law allows companies to skew their balance sheet with outmoded accounting methods which maintain asset values at the original level rather than using the more modern, (and better suited to current financial volatility,) mark to market, in which market values current at the closing of an accounting period are used. Thus a company may claim $100 billion in assets against only $75 billion in liabilities, but when assets are calculated to market values only have assets with actual worth of $70 billion thus being insolvent.

 

RELATED:

Britain is Breaking Down; The Economy Is Struggling, Living Standards Are Falling, Institutions Are Failing
Successive governments have brought Britain to its knees.This article will focus on Britain as representative of the general malaise that is afflicting almost all the developed world. Our current crop of politicians have discarded the resources that brought the country out of the post war decline ... In spite of being rich in energy resources Britain is now in an energy crisis, our leaders have sacrificed prosperity on the altar of Net Zero, committing the nation to our reducing our 1% contribution to harmful emissions still further ...

"Revolution Has Begun": 75,000 Brits Plan To Stop Paying Power Bills In Protest At Energy Rip Off
Resistance is growing to spiralling domestic energy costs in Britain as more than 75,000 irritated people in the UK have pledged not to pay their electricity bill this fall when prices jump again. 

If the government & energy companies refuse to act then ordinary people will! Together we can enforce a fair price and affordable energy for all," tweeted "Don't Pay UK," an anonymous group spearheading the effort to have more than one million Brits boycott paying their power bill by Oct. 1.

E U Central Bank Digital Currency Is The Death Rattle Of A Failed Experiment

The announcement from the European Central Bank (ECB) that is is to intrduce an official European Union digital currency spells the end of the European Single Currency experiment and with it the ambition of "ever closer union until the EU's member states were merged into a single political entity Digital Currencies might not quite be Ponzi schemes but on appearances the difference can be compared to that between a horse and a pony.

Negative Interest Rates - Final Nail In The Coffin Of Neoliberalism? Negative interest rates, in plain terms a situation in which we pay bankers for holding our money, are the latest ruse of politicians and economists to make uis start spending our investments and savings, thus kickstarting the global economy thy have screwed up.

Magic Money - How The Fractional Reserve Banking System Conjures Money From Fresh Air:
A look at how the fractional reserve banking system works and how it brought the global economy and many people's personal finances close to collapse. It's really all about pulling magic money out of fresh air.

Investors Ignore Triple Dip Regession As Stock Market Hits Four Year High
News that the British economy was staring an unprecedented triple dip recession in the face left investors unperturbed yesterday as shares on Britain's leading index hit their highest point in since the crash four-and-a-half years ago.

Corporate Banker's $1.5 Quadrillion Conspiracy: EU Accuses 13 Banks Of Operating A Derivative Trading Cartel Debt, how much of a threat to ordinary people is it? The truth might frighten you which is why bank bosses, government leaders and media pundits are not eager to tell the truth. What can we do? Not much in the short term, in the long term, reclaim the sovereignty of our nations and our individual sovereignty and tell the world view thinkers their crazy ideas have maxed out their credit.

Globalization and the Retrun To Serfdom
When the power elites promise something that will benefit people everywhere it can be taken what the world will get is the opposite. Thus when we were told globalisation would make everybody more prosperous, abolish poverty and narrow the gap between rich and poor, only a fool would have failed to regognize what was on offer comprised a return to medieval poverty and servitude for the masses while the rich became richer.

Another Reason To Get Out Of EU. UKIP MEP Hits Out At Fishing Policy That Penalises British Fishing Crews
As the General Election campaign starts to heat up, we try to shift focus away from the squabbling between Conservative and Labour about who can make the most promises they have no intention of keeping and to the real issues concerning jobs, social breakdown , mass immigration, and an often overlooked area in which our EU membership has perhaps done more damage than any other, the fishing industry.

De-Dollarization: Russia Ratifies $100 Billion BRICS Bank
A BRICS Bank - as an IMF alternative and to enable nations to become less dependent on the global reserve currency - was originally discussed at The BRICS Summit in 2012. Then at the 2014 BRICS Summit, the framework for The BRICS Bank was approved as "a system of measures that would help prevent the harassment of countries that do not agree with some foreign policy decisions made by the United States and their allies.

Henry Kissinger On The New World Order
OK, let the Politically Correct screechers screech 'conspiracy Theory'. Kissinger has of course been a long time advocate of corporatist global totalitarian government by elitis oligarchs and has himself used the phrase New World Order to describe what he sees as the best hope for the future and what those of us outside his small elitist clique see as fascism

IMF Chief Legarde Arrested? It's DSKja vu All Over Again.
Like her predecessor in the job, Domique Strauss - Khan, IMF Chief Christine Legarde feaces prosecution for criminality and is likely to be forced out of the job. Yet the dodgy episodes in Legarde's past were well known before she was appointed head of the IMF. So who put the kinfe in and why?

Get Ready For The Collapse Of The Global Economy
In the years we have been publishing, Daily Stirrer financial correspondent Phil T Looker has consistently predicted the refusal of the market rigging banksters to acknowledge that the developed worlds debt driven economy was FUBAR might delay the economic catastrophe but that would only make the final collapse worse when it eventually happened.

The Banksters Bullion Heist: How The Gold Market Was Hi Jacked And The Banksters Robbed Us All
The rapid drop in gold prices recently has been said by some to be a sign a new economic crisis is imminent while others say it is a sign economic confidence is returning and the slump is over. It is neither, but rather a demostration of how banksters rig the markets in gold, commodities, currency ans shares, and rob us all.

Washington Signals Fears Over Dollar
Over the past month there have been some bizarre movements in financial marketsthat can only be explained as a conspiracy to protect the US dollar from the inevitable consequences Federal Reserve’s policy of Quantitative Easing (QE) which has been going on since the financial crisis began in 2008.

[ Money & finance ] ... [ Corporate central banks? ] ... [ debt crisis ] ... [ dollar ponzi scheme ] ... [ the fiscal cliff of debt ] ... [ magic money ] ... [ money from fresh air ]

EXPLORE:
[Daily Stirrer] ... [ Our Page on on Substack ]... [Boggart Aboad] ... [ Ian Thorpe at Quora ] ... [ Greenteeth Home ] ... [ Greenteeth on Minds.com ] ... [ Here Come The Russians ] ... [ Latest Posts ] ... [ Blog Bulletin ]