Follow by Email

Thursday, August 1, 2019

Debatable

Running Scared,

​ ​“Sen. Harris says she's proud of her record as a prosecutor and that she'll be a prosecutor president, but I'm deeply concerned about this record,” Gabbard said. “There are too many examples to cite but she put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.” ...
 Harris later dismissed the attack after the debate during an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper.
​ ​“I'm obviously a top-tier candidate, and so I did expect that I would be on the stage and take hits tonight, because there are a lot of people who trying to make the stage for the next debate,” Harris said.


​Tulsi was the mot-googled candidate after the debate again (Thanks to her lawsuit against Google, for disappearing her website at the last debate, people were able to access it this time.)

Dem Debate Post Mortem: Rivals Attack Biden, Harris; Gillibrand Says She'll "Clorox The Oval Office"
Some of the most searched and most tweeted moments are here.​ Grampa' Joe Biden was the designated pinata again in this debate, as Harris and Booker beat the candy (and Kool Aid) out of his belly with broom-handles​. He scored an own-goal with his final self-endorsement, by misnaming his website. Freudian-slip, I think. He can't enjoy this. He's still the zombie candidate. (Not noted here is that Democratic candidates can't break ranks about impeaching Trump, though there is no crime. That's a dangerous limb to be out on, come next year. They fail to acknowledge the DNC criminality revealed in the leaked emails from the last election. RIP Seth Rich.)

Tulsi Gabbard was pretty close to the bottom of the stack, in how much time she spoke last night, but here is the 9 minutes. No flailing.

Jeffrey Epstein wanted to seed the human race with his DNA, scientists claim​ 
Russian propaganda from Helen of Des​T​roy, whose blog got blocked to the world last month. ​This​ actually gets much weirder than the headline...

​Caitlin Johnstone discusses basics of crime-analysis:
 Don’t just ask “Cui bono?” of potential false flag events. Ask it about every belief in your head. Rigorously holding that candle up to the ideas in your own mind will reveal a lot of junk floating around in there that benefit other people, both the powerful and the not-so-powerful...
 From ground-level to the highest echelons of power, there are people who have been benefitting from the beliefs in our heads. Only by doing the necessary inner work and asking “Cui bono?” of all the ideas we believe about our world, our society, our community and ourselves can we sift apart the untrue from the true and construct a clear-eyed worldview which benefits no one but ourselves and our fellow man. Someone’s benefitting from the beliefs in our heads, and, very often, it ain’t us.


A US judge has ruled that WikiLeaks was fully entitled to publish the Democratic National Congress (DNC) emails, which means no law was broken. The ruling is highly significant as it could impact upon the US extradition proceedings against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, as well as the ongoing imprisonment of whistleblower Chelsea Manning.  
https://www.thecanary.co/us/us-analysis/2019/07/31/judges-ruling-throws-huge-spanner-into-us-extradition-proceedings-against-assange/  

J​im Kunstler: ​
Industrial growth is over, and with it the expectation that all the old debts can be paid back. A few economic commentators are predicting “stag-flation.” We’d be lucky if that’s all it turned out to be. But we’re unlikely to get a re-play of the 1970s. That was an era of geo-financial disturbance that resolved for a while with new oil from Alaska and the North Sea. That’s not going to happen again this time. Stag-flation was just a matter of going nowhere for a decade. The contraction ahead will be brutal, not going nowhere but rather going down hard to a lower and harsher standard of living.  
​ ​To explain this increase in infant mortality, certain experts blame it on ‘austerity’, fewer midwives, an overstrained ambulance service, general deterioration of hospitals, greater poverty among pregnant women and cuts that mean there are fewer health visitors for patients in need.
​ ​While all these explanations may be valid, according to environmental campaigner Dr Rosemary Mason, there is something the mainstream narrative is avoiding...
​ ​The poisoning of the UK public by the agrochemical industry is the focus of her new report – Why is life expectancy faltering: The British Government has worked with Monsanto and Bayer since 1949.

 Lost Cities and Climate Change
Some people say “the climate has changed before,” as though that should be reassuring. It’s not
... Cahokia was larger than London, centrally planned, the Manhattan of its day. Most people there would have come from somewhere else. There were defensive foundations, playing fields, and a magnificent temple. There would have been sacred ceremonies and salacious gossip. It must have been a very exciting place to live.
And then, relatively abruptly, it ceased to exist. We know of the city only because of the physical traces left behind. Few stories of Cahokia have survived; it disappeared from oral tradition, as if whatever happened to it is best forgotten. The archaeological record shows traces of the desperation and bloodshed that almost always accompany great upheavals: skeletons with bound hands, pits full of strangled young women.
 
Infographic: The World is Not Enough | Statista

​Ilargi at The Automatic Earth, links to solid research references:
​ Please note that in all that follows, there is ONE very obvious notion to keep in mind: nuclear energy is a huge economic loss-maker, no matter how and where you look.
 And that makes nukes, right from the get-go, completely unfit to replace anything fossil-fuel based, because coal and oil and gas are sources that do the opposite: they generate huge profits while nukes generate huge losses, i.e.: you can’t run your economy on nuclear. You can not run an economy on any energy source that generates economic losses. It does NOT get simpler than that. It’s the economics of energy, and for once economics are right (though not economists, name me one who understands this. Hi, Steve!).

Losing Energy

No comments:

Post a Comment