In January last year, the Fed published a white paper on what a CBDC could look like. It asked for public comments on issues like potential risks and benefits a CBDC can have on the country. On April 20, the Fed released the responses in nine documents. Here are some of the various answers and concerns expressed by respondents, some of whom were named, others who were unnamed, as well as those whose names were redacted.

A student from Texas pointed to the breach of privacy, government overreach, and hacking as risks posed by CBDC. “With this digital currency, the government would be able to usurp freedoms without the knowledge/consent of the public.

“The best e-hackers and cybersecurity personnel don’t work for the government. They work in the private sector. It is naive to think, given the government’s track record, that it could ever be trusted to secure such an asset.” A CBDC might also trigger a “run on financial institutions,” the individual warned.

Andrew W. from Virginia warned that centralization of monetary policies can “easily be abused and cause unintended disruption.” CBDCs can further centralize monetary policies and “only increases the risk potential.”

Hollie Bishop from Indiana cited public mistrust as her number one concern about central bank digital currencies. “People are afraid of being constantly monitored. Also, our aging and elderly population pay bills in cash and may not know how to use this system, leaving them susceptible to hunger, bills not being paid, etc.”

Power Issues, Quantum Computing Hack

Lucas Vincent from Arizona warned that power consumption is a major issue. “The power consumption that provides the means of creating said digital currency, which has caused power outages in places like Kazakhstan and even New York, is an enormous risk that puts Earth at stake because of the environmental damage that digital currency mining causes,” he said.

Andy Garcia from Georgia notes that the dependence of CBDCs on electricity makes them vulnerable. “If the long-term goal is to get rid of paper currency, relying strictly on CBDC, the entire economic system will become vulnerable and susceptible to crippling cyber-attacks. There needs to be a fallback system that would work without electricity, much like paper currency does.”

Horacio Gasquet from Texas pointed out that with the advent of quantum computing, even the most sophisticated encryption algorithms can be cracked. As such, in order for a CBDC to be “truly secure,” the digital currency should be “rooted in quantum key encryption.”

A few of the comments highlighted purported benefits of CBDCs, like faster fund transfers and providing stability in case of hyperinflation.

Should the US Follow Other Nations?

The Fed asked, “How should decisions by other large economy nations to issue CBDCs influence the decision whether the United States should do so?”

An unnamed individual answered (pdf): “It should send warning signs to our country creating a CBDC. There’s a reason China implemented a CBDC, and it’s not for efficiency.”

Aaron Olszewski from New Hampshire also said, “A shift to a CBDC is a shift to push people away from using that nation’s currency.”

Brian Marshall from Idaho replied, “The United States should first worry about following the Constitution and preserving liberty, not trying to follow other countries in their descent into tyranny. Free markets will always provide the means to exchange one currency for another.”

JC Denton from California said that other nations adopting a CBDC does not mean the United States ought to do the same.

“Our financial purpose should be to focus on our own issues. If other nations wish to perform such actions, it is their choice. We don’t need to follow a bad idea just because other groups are doing it,” said Chad Rytting from Utah.

Phil Zobrist from Illinois said that the United States was “the standard” and it can remain so if “you maintain a strong dollar.”

Many of the respondents reacted negatively to the idea of the United States following other countries in adopting financial systems. A small minority voiced support for a CBDC, stating a goal of catching up to other nations.

The US Constitution

Many responses (pdf) to the Fed survey mentioned how the idea of a CBDC was antithetical to the U.S. Constitution.

When the Fed asked, “Should a CBDC be designed to maximize ease of use and acceptance at the point of sale?” Lawrence Raymond from Maryland replied, “No, because all transactions would become public, which goes against the freedoms outlined in the Constitution.”

When the Fed asked, “Could some or all of the potential benefits of a CBDC be better achieved in a different way?” Richard Hay from Texas said, “Yes, return to the constitutional definition of money, which is gold and silver.

“Fiat currencies continue to destroy the poor and middle class by endless expansion of debt and the money supply destroying the value of wages and savings of the vast majority of the population while enriching the owners of assets by driving asset prices higher via inflationary pressures caused by the expansion of credit. Our founders envisioned an honest monetary system.”

Hay added, “The CBDC would eventually be weaponized against political opponents and groups of people that differ from the beliefs of a centralized control governing system.”

Rodger Reed from California said: “Our economy must remain a function of the constitutional mandate created by the founders. By design, a CBDC does not serve the American people the way sound money does.”

When the Fed asked, “What additional potential benefits, policy considerations, or risks of a CBDC may exist that have not been raised in this paper?” Charles Dowling from Colorado said: “The people who are aware of reality do not respect the government whatsoever. And would probably not use your CBDC. And no one wants an illegal, unconstitutional government poking into their business.”

Privacy Concerns

During a recent speech in Washington, Federal Reserve Governor Michelle W. Bowman admitted that “safeguarding privacy is a top concern” with regard to the use of CBDCs. Bowman wants CBDCs to have enough protections to safeguard the privacy of customers and businesses while also being transparent enough to deter criminal activity.

“In thinking about the implications of CBDC and privacy, we must also consider the central role that money plays in our daily lives, and the risk that a CBDC would provide not only a window into but potentially an impediment to, the freedom Americans enjoy in choosing how money and resources are used and invested,” said Bowman.

“So, a central consideration must be how a potential U.S. CBDC could incorporate privacy considerations into its design, and what technology and policy options could support a robust privacy framework.”

An analysis by the Cato Institute warned that CBDCs pose a foundational threat to America’s economic systems. A U.S. CBDC will eventually “usurp” the private sector and endanger the core freedoms of American citizens, it said.

As such, CBDCs should have “no place” in the American economy, the institute stated. It called on Congress to “explicitly prohibit” the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve from issuing CBDCs in any form.

Article cross-posted from our premium news partners at The Epoch Times.

That’s nothing compared to the odd lack of concern from conservative and alternative media regarding the Pandemic Treaty with the World Health Organization. Last year, it was huge news from March until July when it was allegedly “defeated.” But as I’ve said since then, it was only delayed. Now, the deadline has quietly creeped up on us and Joe Biden will be signing onto it as early as February 27. Yes, next week.

Where’s the outrage? Where are conservative politicians who should be screaming about a president unilaterally signing away our sovereignty? Where are the conservative pundits and alternative media show hosts who were rightly apoplectic last year? Pandemic Treaty 2.0 is about to be signed and there’s barely a whimper coming from our best journalistic warriors.

On today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, I spent the entire time talking about the article below by Kevin Stocklin from our premium news partners at The Epoch Times. Why? Because this is the existential threat that’s sneaking past everyone and we need to take action against it immediately. In fact, it may be too late.

Biden Admin Negotiates Deal to Give WHO Authority Over US Pandemic Policies

New international health accord avoids necessary Senate approval

The Biden administration is preparing to sign up the United States to a “legally binding” accord with the World Health Organization (WHO) that would give this Geneva-based UN subsidiary the authority to dictate America’s policies during a pandemic.

Despite widespread criticism of the WHO’s response to the COVID pandemic, U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra joined with WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in September 2022 to announce “the U.S.-WHO Strategic Dialogue.” Together, they developed a “platform to maximize the longstanding U.S. government-WHO partnership, and to protect and promote the health of all people around the globe, including the American people.”

These discussions and others spawned the “zero draft” (pdf) of a pandemic treaty, published on Feb. 1, which now seeks ratification by all 194 WHO member states. A meeting of the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) is scheduled for Feb. 27 to work out the final terms, which all members will then sign.

Written under the banner of “the world together equitably,” the zero draft grants the WHO the power to declare and manage a global pandemic emergency. Once a health emergency is declared, all signatories, including the United States, would submit to the authority of the WHO regarding treatments, government regulations such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates, global supply chains, and monitoring and surveillance of populations.

Centralized Pandemic Response

“They want to see a centralized, vaccine-and-medication-based response, and a very restrictive response in terms of controlling populations,” David Bell, a public health physician and former WHO staffer specializing in epidemic policy, told The Epoch Times. “They get to decide what is a health emergency, and they are putting in place a surveillance mechanism that will ensure that there are potential emergencies to declare.”

The WHO pandemic treaty is part of a two-track effort, coinciding with an initiative by the World Health Assembly (WHA) to create new global pandemic regulations that would also supersede the laws of member states. The WHA is the rule-making body of the WHO, comprised of representatives from the member states.

“Both [initiatives] are fatally dangerous,” Francis Boyle, professor of international law at Illinois University, told The Epoch Times. “Either one or both would set up a worldwide medical police state under the control of the WHO, and in particular WHO Director-General Tedros. If either one or both of these go through, Tedros or his successor will be able to issue orders that will go all the way down the pipe to your primary care physicians.”

Physician Meryl Nass told The Epoch Times: “If these rules go through as currently drafted, I, as a doctor, will be told what I am allowed to give a patient and what I am prohibited from giving a patient whenever the WHO declares a public health emergency. So they can tell you you’re getting remdesivir, but you can’t have hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. What they’re also saying is they believe in equity, which means everybody in the world gets vaccinated, whether or not you need it, whether or not you’re already immune.”

Regarding medical treatments, the accord would require member nations to “monitor and regulate against substandard and falsified pandemic-related products.” Based on previous WHO and Biden administration policy, this would likely include forcing populations to take newly-developed vaccines while preventing doctors from prescribing non-vaccine treatments or medicines.

Circumventing America’s Constitution

A key question surrounding the accord is whether the Biden administration can bind America to treaties and agreements without the consent of the U.S. Senate, which is required under the Constitution. The zero draft concedes that, per international law, treaties between countries must be ratified by national legislatures, thus respecting the right of their citizens to consent. However, the draft also includes a clause that the accord will go into effect on a “provisional” basis, as soon as it is signed by delegates to the WHO, and therefore it will be legally binding on members without being ratified by legislatures.

“Whoever drafted this clause knew as much about U.S. constitutional law and international law as I did, and deliberately drafted it to circumvent the power of the Senate to give its advice and consent to treaties, to provisionally bring it into force immediately upon signature,” Boyle said. In addition, “the Biden administration will take the position that this is an international executive agreement that the president can conclude of his own accord without approval by Congress, and is binding on the United States of America, including all state and local democratically elected officials, governors, attorney generals and health officials.”

There are several U.S. Supreme Court decisions that may support the Biden administration in this. They include State of Missouri v. Holland, in which the Supreme Court ruled that treaties supersede state laws. Other decisions, such as United States v. Belmont, ruled that executive agreements without Senate consent can be legally binding, with the force of treaties.

There are parallels between the WHO pandemic accord and a recent OECD global tax agreement, which the Biden administration signed on to but which Republicans say has “no path forward” to legislative approval. In the OECD agreement, there are punitive terms built in that allow foreign countries to punish American companies if the deal is not ratified by the United States.

As with the OECD tax agreement, administration officials are attempting to appeal to international organizations to impose policies that have been rejected by America’s voters. Under the U.S. Constitution, health care does not fall under the authority of the federal government; it is the domain of the states. The Biden administration found this to be an unwelcome impediment to its attempts to impose vaccine and mask mandates on Americans, when courts ruled that federal agencies did not have the authority to do so.

“To circumvent that, they went to the WHO, for either the regulations or the treaty, to get around domestic opposition,” Boyle said.

According to the zero draft, signatories would agree to “strengthen the capacity and performance of national regulatory authorities and increase the harmonization of regulatory requirements at the international and regional level.” They will also implement a “whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach at the national level” that will include national governments, local governments, and private companies.

The zero draft stated that this new accord is necessary because of “the catastrophic failure of the international community in showing solidarity and equity in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.”

A report from the WHO’s Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response (pdf) characterized the WHO’s performance as a “toxic cocktail” of bad decisions. Co-chair Ellen Johnson Sirleaf told the BBC it was due to “a myriad of failures, gaps and delays.” The solutions proposed by that report, however, did not suggest more local autonomy or diversified decision-making, but rather greater centralization, more power, and more money for the WHO.

‘One Health Surveillance’ and Misinformation

The WHO pandemic agreement calls for member states to implement “One Health surveillance.” One Health is a concept that has been embraced by the UN, the CDC, the World Bank, and other global organizations.

“The term originally meant a way of seeing human and animal health as linked—they sometimes are—so that you could improve human health by acting more broadly,” Bell said. “It has become hijacked and now is used to claim that all human activities, and all issues within the biosphere, affect health, and are therefore within Public Health’s remit. So public health can be deemed to include climate, or racism, or fisheries management, and this is being used to claim that addressing carbon emissions is a health issue and therefore a health ‘emergency.’”

The WHO zero draft states that “‘One Health surveillance’ means …,” leaving the definition to be worked out in future drafts. Whatever One Health surveillance ultimately entails, however, the signatories must invest in it, implement it, and “strengthen” it. In September 2022, the World Bank approved a Financial Intermediary Fund (FIF) to finance, among other things, One Health surveillance.

Signatories also agree to support the official narrative when it comes to information about a pandemic. Specifically, they will “conduct regular social listening and analysis to identify the prevalence and profiles of misinformation” and “design communications and messaging strategies for the public to counteract misinformation, disinformation and false news, thereby strengthening public trust.”

This aligns with efforts by the Biden administration to, as former White House Press Secretary Jennifer Psaki put it, “make sure social media companies are aware of the latest narratives dangerous to public health … and engage with them to better understand the enforcement of social media platform policies.” Or as UN Undersecretary-General Melissa Fleming stated at a 2022 World Economic Forum panel on “Tackling Disinformation” in Davos, “We own the science and we think that the world should know it.”

The official narrative during the COVID pandemic included support for lockdowns, school closures, and masking—all of which have since proven to be ineffective in stopping the spread of the virus and damaging to public health. A group of more than 900,000 doctors, epidemiologists, and public health scientists jointly signed the Great Barrington Declaration in 2020, expressing “grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies.” This declaration was widely derided as dangerous misinformation and was censored on social media.

“The views that they crushed were orthodox public health,” Bell said. Up until 2019, public health guidelines “specifically said that things like prolonged border closures, closing stores, etc. were harmful, particularly for low-income people, and shouldn’t be done beyond a few weeks.”

Those who pushed for lockdowns “were very clear that what they were recommending for COVID was going to be extremely harmful, and that the harm would outweigh the benefit,” Bell said. “They were clear because they wrote that down before, and there’s nothing new in the idea that impoverishing people reduces life expectancy. Something dramatically changed their minds, and that something wasn’t evidence, so we can only assume that it was pressure from vested interests.”

In January, a survey presented at the World Economic Forum found that public trust in government has plummeted since the start of the pandemic, though attendees were at a loss to explain the reasons for the decline in trust. Instead, the discussion at the panel, titled “Disrupting Distrust,” focused on combating rogue news sources that challenged the central narrative.

America’s Membership in the WHO

In July 2020, then-President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from membership in the WHO. Citing the WHO’s dismal performance in responding to the COVID pandemic and its ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Trump said that U.S. funding of approximately half a billion dollars per year would also cease.

In response, then-presidential-candidate Joe Biden vowed: “On my first day as President, I will rejoin the WHO and restore our leadership on the world stage.” Biden kept his promise and took it one step further, negotiating the pandemic accord.

Today, GOP lawmakers are attempting to revive the effort to take the United States out of the WHO. On Jan. 12, House Republicans introduced the “No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act,” which was sponsored by 16 representatives.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Tex.), lead sponsor of the bill, stated: “Funneling millions of taxpayer dollars to the corrupt World Health Organization that serves the Chinese Communist Party is a slap in the face to hardworking American families struggling under record high inflation, and to all those whose lives and livelihoods were ruined and destroyed by the COVID pandemic. The WHO … praised China for their ‘leadership’ at the beginning of COVID-19 and has done nothing to hold the CCP accountable for the spread of COVID-19.”

The pandemic accord, a spokesman for Roy told The Epoch Times, “is just another reason to defund the WHO.”

Redefining Sovereignty and Human Rights

The zero draft of the accord states that national sovereignty remains a priority, but within limits. “States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health,” the draft declares, “provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries.”

The accord states that human rights are also important, and it mandates that “people living under any restrictions on the freedom of movement, such as quarantines and isolations, have sufficient access to medication, health services and other necessities and rights.” The accord presents human rights as “health equity, through resolute action on social, environmental, cultural, political and economic determinants of health.”

In line with this concept, countries like Austria went so far as to criminalize the refusal to take the COVID vaccine. Within the United States, places like New York City mandated vaccine passports for access to public spaces, dividing its residents into a privileged vaccinated class and a second-tier unvaccinated class.

However, others see human rights not in terms of collective health but rather as individual rights, to include such things as personal sovereignty, the ability of individuals to make their own choices, the right of people to have a voice in medical decisions that affect them, free speech, and freedom of movement and assembly.

Following the Second World War and the state-control ideologies of fascism, national socialism, and communism, “it was realized that there has to be a fundamental understanding that individuals are sovereign” Bell said. Human rights declarations after the war emphasized that, even during times of crisis, “we are born with rights, we’re all equal, and those rights are inviolable. That is being very much watered down or wiped away in order to do this.”

“I think this issue is much, much broader; it’s what sort of society we want to live in. Do we believe in equality or do we believe in a feudal system where we have a few people at the top, controlling society, telling others what to do? That’s the direction we’re going in.”

The WHO, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department, and the World Bank were contacted regarding this article but did not provide a response.

Within the Catholic Church itself, many otherwise lucid members put on blinders regarding the Pope because they believe his teachings and leadership cannot be anti-Biblical since he was chosen by God to lead the church.

I’m posting this as a commentary for The JD Rucker Show because it’s not only relevant at a time when globalism is rising, but also because Pope Francis represents a possible connection to the Biblical end times.

Here is a portion of the conclusion from the article at Liberty Sentinel:

The pontiff’s attacks on those who worship the “God of money,” or the “idolatry of money” shows the Pope’s ignorance about free markets having lived his entire life in Argentina, a country that has never implemented capitalism properly. The “savage capitalist system”, an “economy that kills”, and “idolatry of money” that the Pope constantly condemns, is the only solution to end poverty and hunger in the world. Capitalism, when properly implemented, has brought millions of people out of poverty. Socialism and communism that the Pope supports not only have brought the killing of millions, but also hunger, misery and increased poverty.

There are an increasing number of critics in Wall Street, the Tea Party, conservative media, and religious figures who have slammed Pope Francis as a poorly camouflaged Marxist. There are many disaffected U.S. bishops, priests and parishioners who complain that the Pope has not given them enough support against the Biden regime over infanticide, abortion, gender ideology and gay marriage.

Many Catholics in the United States and around the world are not aware that the Vatican has been infiltrated by communists. However, despite the cover-up by many cardinals, bishops and priests in the United States and other countries of the world, the truth will eventually come to light. Pope Francis is undermining the Catholic doctrine and will create a split in the Catholic Church among the anti-Communist favoring free-market economics.

We should all pray to God that the communists are expelled from the Holy See. Pope Paul VI once said, “The smoke of Satan has entered through some crack in the Temple of God. We need to pray to God that the Devil’s smoke of Marxism is forever expelled from the Holy See!”

There is very little that could be argued against in that conclusion.

Alternative Video Sources:

On today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, I’ll be discussing the ten things listed below that I believe the globalist elite cabal will roll out next year. By “roll out,” I mean these are things that are already in play but that will ramp up or become more clearly problematic as our world devolves toward tyranny and oblivion.

It’s important to recognize their goals so we can better understand the plans they have for us. At the core of their attacks on the people, the globalist elite cabal wants to destroy freedom in general and religious liberties in particular. This won’t just affect the faithful as religious liberties go in both direction. It’s not only about having the right to worship who and how we want. It’s also the right to NOT worship who and how the state wants. As they experience in Communist China and other oppressive nations, the people are forced to worship government and bow to whichever gods the state presents them. To my atheist and agnostic readers and listeners, do not think this attack by the powers-that-be will spare you.

As I’ve noted many times, the machinations that we face — The Great Reset, the 4th Industrial Revolution, Build Back Better, the Liberal World Order, or whatever you want to call it — are part of a depopulation and control agenda. They want many if not most of us dead and they want control over the remnant. God will separate the wheat from the tares in the end. I cannot say definitively that we are in the end times, but if we are then I would argue that what we’re seeing is a precursor to the spiritual separation that will take place soon.

Let’s dive into the ten machinations I believe will ramp up in the new year. Considering that many of these things are already at ludicrous levels, ramping them up will cause mass devastation. It behooves us all to get ready immediately.

Important note: Invariably someone will read the list below and say that I don’t give enough details. I hate making people watch or listen to my show to get the scoop but each of these topics would require their own long-form articles to even scratch the surface. I’ll discuss each of them with 7-10 minutes worth of commentary during the show but for the sake of this article I must keep the descriptions brief. Otherwise, this article would be a short book.

1. Medical Tyranny Will Strike Again, but for Different Reasons

We all experienced medical tyranny in the ugliest form we’ve seen in our lifetimes over the last three years. Lockdowns, slave masks, prohibited worship, and vaccine mandates have turned the world upside down as the powers-that-be do everything they can to keep us from following the science.

It’s going to get worse. It’s also likely to be different in 2023. New Covid variants will arise and they will be countered (enhanced, actually) by more rounds of booster shots both new and old. It is possible that they will roll out a completely different Plandemic as well. But where medical tyranny takes a very different turn will be in pharmaceutical shortages. We’re already seeing everything from children’s fever medication to a wide array of antibiotics becoming harder and harder to acquire.

The public-private partnership that’s loosely in place today between the CDC, FDA, and Big Pharma will be advanced in 2023. The people will call on government to “do something” so they will oblige by socializing pharmaceuticals for the sake of “equity.” It makes sense to stock up on whatever meds you can get today. For antibiotics, our sponsors ship them to you directly following a telehealth session. Use promo code “Rucker10” for a discount.

2. Joe Biden Will Be Propped Up for as Long as They Can Keep Him

When I’m wrong I say I’m wrong. Last month I predicted that Democrats would push Joe Biden out. That still may happen, but my contacts have informed me that the wishes of the Democrat Party do not align on this topic with the machinations of the globalist elite cabal.

The powers-that-be love Joe. He does exactly what they want him to do. Moreover, he is a perfect distraction to keep conservatives focused on his gaffes and various foibles rather than the deep corruption of his regime. One can argue that they wanted Kamala Harris at his side specifically to prevent people from getting too excited about giving him the boot. Imagine if someone like Michelle Obama was the VP right now. The calls to eject old Joe would be deafening. With Kamala as backup quarterback, few are excited about elevating her.

3. Groomers Will Continue to Emerge From the Shadows to Normalize Child Sexualization

This is obvious to pretty much everyone. We’re witnessing children being exposed by unhinged parents, activist educators, and woke corporations to the most hideous of depravities. Sadly, abominations like “Drag Queen Story Hour” from just a couple of years ago seem tame compared to the overt sexualization that children are being exposed to today.

My mind cannot even fathom what they have planned for 2023. All we know for sure is that the exposure will be more common, the depravities will be more heinous, and the gaslighting of sane parents will be boosted off the scale.

4. LGBTQIA+ Supremacy Will Be Integrated Into EVERYTHING

Having male swimmers competing against females is turning out to be the tip of the iceberg. While there has been some strong pushback in some states, most are still embracing the notion of allowing boys in skirts to sexually assault girls in school bathrooms. We see some outrage after the coverups are exposed, but this outrage has thus far translated into very little in the way of changes.

In 2023, we can expect absolute prioritization of members of the LGBTQIA+ community in every facet of life. They won’t just incentivize companies and organizations to hire and promote from this “oppressed” group. They are already starting to shame any organizations that do not meet the arbitrary quotas. This is a supremacy agenda. It’s one of the biggest indicators that the powers-that-be are targeting religious liberties above all else. This is the topic over which many of the battles will be fought. If you take the side of sanity and true equality of rights (versus equity of outcomes), then you will be labeled as a homophobic, transphobic, religious zealot and bigot. Sadly, many “conservatives” will bend as a result because labels are, for whatever reason, important to many people.

5. Wars and Rumors of Wars

We have war in Ukraine. We have rumors of war in Taiwan, India, and the Middle East, among others. I don’t know for sure if this is what Jesus referred to in Chapter 24 of the Book of Matthew, but if it is then we are at the beginning of sorrows:

⁶ And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

⁷For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

⁸All these are the beginning of sorrows.

⁹Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.

Both war and rumors of war are used as control mechanisms. We’re seeing this in the omnibus bill with $45 billion for Ukraine, and even with that massive amount Volodymyr Zelensky says it’s not enough.

In 2023, he’ll get more. Will China invade Taiwan? Will a new war break out in the Middle East? What about the half-dozen other hot spots across the planet? At a time when a majority of citizens across the globe are struggling to survive, throwing more wars into the mix would be devastating for everyone, even those not in a war zone.

6. False Flag Attacks Will Frame Patriots as Domestic Terrorists

January 6 neutered many patriots. It sent some of us into hiding. It sent others toward the “safe” middle where they won’t get harassed by the corrupt FBI. Unfortunately, it was only the beginning.

We must expect false flag attacks next year. The powers-that-be use these to drive their various agendas. Being able to label anyone with a conservative and/or Biblical worldview as “domestic terrorists” gives the Deep State carte blanche with their actions against us.

7. Deeper Food Shortages Will Prompt More Bugs and Frankenmeat

To understand why we’re seeing manufactured food shortages as well as the next two items on my list, let’s turn to the Godfather of Modern Globalism:

“Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world” — Henry Kissinger

Contrary to what some conspiracy theorists are saying, food shortages are not being manufactured to starve us. With an armed population, the powers-that-be would not try to act like Stalin or Mao against Americans because we would fight back before allowing our families to die of starvation. Instead, they want our needs to fall to the brink of desperation, at which point they’ll offer the solution of abundant fake food.

I will someday make the argument that lab-grown food of any sort is a complete abomination designed to destroy our bodies, minds, AND souls, but that will take more research. For now, just know that the globalist elite cabal wants all of the steak and eggs for themselves while we’re eating whatever government allows us to eat. I, for one, will be feeding my family from my increasing supply of long-term storage food (promo code “discern” at checkout for a discount).

8. More Energy Shortages Will Be Manufactured

Winter is here. Millions of Americans are already experiencing harsh conditions. But beyond the weather we’re also experiencing a series of global energy catastrophes that are driving up prices, forcing rationing, and pummeling the various means of energy storage and delivery.

It’s dramatically underreported that attacks on energy infrastructure are happening every single week. We’ve all heard about the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines but there are smaller attacks happening across the globe, particularly in America, that do not get much coverage. They’re whittling away at one of our most vulnerable points. If we see massive power shortages in 2023, it will be due in part to death by a thousand cuts against the grid. It is coordinated. It is manufactured. It is aligned with the globalist elite cabal’s agenda.

9. Tighter Economic “Squeezing” Will Turn Into Collapse Once CBDCs are Ready

The weak economy is getting weaker every day despite claims by corporate media and the White House that things are getting better. They’re not. You can torture the numbers until they say whatever you want. The White House has mastered this art in an effort to convince people things aren’t as bad as they seem. In reality, it’s far worse than most realize.

All that we’re seeing with the economy is driving us toward Central Bank Digital Currencies. The Digital Dollar is already being tested. When it’s ready, it will be implemented. This could happen as soon as 2023.

The vast majority of patriots are misinterpreting the 87,000 IRS agents the White House is hiring. Yes, this will result in more audits and financial tyranny for small businesses and the middle class, but they don’t need that many more IRS agents for that. The REAL reason to hire so many is so they can roll out the Digital Dollar. They will need a small army of boots on the ground to train the people, install the equipment and software, and facilitate the shift from paper fiat currency to digital fiat currency. It will be positioned as dumb luck that they had all these new IRS agents available when a financial collapse prompts the “need” for the Digital Dollar.

10. Climate Change Cult Will Drive ALL Policies

As I noted on Twitter:

The rapidly rising ranks of climate change cult members are the ultimate modern day religious zealots. They are the Westboro Baptist Church of fake science.

The rapidly rising ranks of climate change cult members are the ultimate modern day religious zealots.

They are the Westboro Baptist Church of fake science.

— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) December 22, 2022

Attacks on freedom of religion aren’t just about preventing us from worshiping who we want. It’s about forcing us to worship who we don’t want. Climate change is quickly becoming the world religion as we are being told to essentially worship the earth through all of our actions. They want us to save the world from the doom that’s coming in a decade. That same doom has been coming in a decade for the last five decades, but those are just inconvenient details the cult members ignore.

Some bristle when I call it a “cult” but is there really any better way to characterize them?

The roots of this cult are pagan and its ultimate goal is to separate us from our Creator.

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. – 1 John 2:15

When they can get people to make all of their life decisions around maintaining their social credit score that is deeply tied to their personal carbon footprint, they’ll be able to dictate every facet of life.

Final Note

Now is not the time for despair. As bad as things seem to be right now, we know one of two things will happen. We will either overcome and persevere, or we are at the end and we will soon be home. Either way, our path forward remains the same. We fight the good fight, speak the truth, and prepare ourselves to deny dependence on government for as long as possible. Don’t fret. Instead, do what you can to secure yourself and your family. Then, do what you can to secure your friends, neighbors, and community. The last thing we should do is look to Washington DC or the rising globalist leaders to find solutions. Whatever they have planned for us, it won’t be good. Stay frosty.

BlackRock is also a big player in companies developing digital vaccine passports and “digital wallets” that track and allocate carbon allowances and central bank digital currencies.  Its promotion of a “New World Order” legitimizes what many still try to dismiss as a “conspiracy theory.”

In BlackRock’s 2023 Global Outlook released two weeks ago, it was stated that “we’ve entered a new world order,” in which “geopolitical cooperation and globalization” are “evolving into a fragmented world with competing blocs.” The report noted that we are now in “the most fraught global environment since World War Two.”

According to a report by Truth Talk UK, BlackRock lists the World Economic Forum as one of its “key diversity partners,” which promotes mandatory vaccinations and lockdowns, abortion access, and the globalist “Great Reset.” As part of the elites’ global reset, humanity is being forced to rely on all things digital.

We are going to be expected to go along and be good little slaves, as most of us have been (voting, paying taxes, participating in the left vs. right paradigm lie) and do what we are told. This new system is going to be much like the one we live under now, without any hope that we can ever break free. Once they convince people to use the central bank digital currencies and tie your use of CBDCs to your behavior, the illusion of freedom will be gone.

• Abolitionists Understand True Freedom: It’s Time For The Rest Of Us To Understand It Too

The path to freedom isn’t through the slave system already in place on this planet. It’s through an understanding that we aren’t free, but we can be.

• The Path To Freedom & Abolishing Slavery

In March the World Government Summit 2022 asked the question, “Are We Ready for a New World Order?”

Article cross-posted from SHTF Plan.

It’s all of these, but it’s actually much worse than that. What the vast majority of hot takes and analyses of the impact of Big Tech gaslighting, censorship, and propaganda seem to miss is the most important reason the powers-that-be are doing it in the first place. Big Tech platform control is the key component of mass social engineering designed to usher in the one world government, the liberal world order, The Great Reset, or whatever you’d like to call the end goal of the globalist elite cabal. They don’t just need us compliant. They need as many people as possible to be begging to be ruled in the very near future.

The article below by Dr. Joseph Mercola highlights this in much more detail. It’s an important read because it will hopefully wake more people up to a realization of the stakes. We’re not just talking about control in Washington DC or a universal vaccine agenda. We’re not just talking about turning the people against each other to more easily eliminate the “undesirables.” This conspiracy is far greater than most realize and the only thing theoretical about it is the scope. We know it’s happening. Now, we’re getting a clearer idea of just how big it is.

Unfortunately, it’s massive. This is why I implore the faithful to learn what you can and to pray always for help in fighting this. We are ill-prepared to take this on without assistance from above because the Powers and Principalities we currently face are far stronger than any of us could fight alone. Even if we band together, we can only delay the inevitable. Only God can choose to prevent them from achieving their goals.

If we are in the end times, then this is almost certainly how the prophecies in the Bible are unfolding. If we are not in the end times, then this is just an echo of what may come in the future. But it will be God who moves us to overcome or to fall short. The good news is that our mission going forward remains the same whether we’re in the end times or not. We spread the Gospel. We make as many people aware as possible. We prepare ourselves for what’s to come. We fight against their plans. End times or not, that’s the path forward.

I often hesitate to write stories like these because I do not want people to lose hope. It’s easy for those who abide by scripture to appreciate that this bad news is actually quite exciting. Either we’re closer to going home or we’re going to win a tremendous battle. Many if not most Bible-believers fear the end times, which is understandable knowing the suffering that will happen. But we should not fear any of it knowing the story ends in the most glorious way possible. With all that said, here’s Dr. Mercola…

Shooting Starlings: How the Masters Curate the Flocks

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• Human behavior on social media is similar to that of starlings in a murmuration. Masses of people react to a stimulus, such as a social media post, seemingly as a cohesive unit without a designated leader and, as a result, something goes “viral”
• It appears to be a spontaneous event that no one can control, but it really isn’t. Curated information, pushed ahead of other information on people’s newsfeeds, can dramatically influence crowd behavior. It’s a form of social engineering
• This kind of social engineering has a drawback. Financial incentives have driven social media companies to promote any content with high engagement. Those who seek to censor certain types of information now struggle to determine how to get Big Tech to change their underlying design
• The Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is the key coordinator of illegal government censorship. Its original directive was to defend the U.S. against foreign cybersecurity threats. Now, CISA’s primary focus is domestic threats, i.e., Americans who challenge the government narrative
• CISA works with a collective called the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which does the actual censoring. The EIP consists of four social media monitoring groups: Stanford Internet Observatory, Washington University’s Center for an Informed Public, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and Graphika

In a recent essay,¹ Renée DiResta, who researches “pathological information systems”² and “the spread of malign narratives” at Stanford Internet Observatory,³ reviewed online crowd behavior in response to curated information. The metaphor she uses is that of a flock of starlings, in which thousands of birds fly in what seems to be an impossibly coordinated dance known as murmuration. As explained by DiResta:⁴

“In a murmuration, each bird sees, on average, the seven birds nearest it and adjusts its own behavior in response. If its nearest neighbors move left, the bird usually moves left. If they move right, the bird usually moves right.

The bird does not know the flock’s ultimate destination and can make no radical change to the whole. But each of these birds’ small alterations, when occurring in rapid sequence, shift the course of the whole, creating mesmerizing patterns …

It is a logic that emerges from — is an embodiment of — the network … The stimulus — or information — passes from one organism to the next through this chain of connections …

[C]omputational biologists and computer scientists who study them describe what is happening as ‘the rapid transmission of local behavioral response to neighbors.’ Each animal is a node in a system of influence, with the capacity to affect the behavior of its neighbors.

Scientists call this process, in which groups of disparate organisms move as a cohesive unit, collective behavior. The behavior is derived from the relationship of individual entities to each other, yet only by widening the aperture beyond individuals do we see the entirety of the dynamic.”

Are You Responding to Curated Bait?

According to researchers such as DiResta, human behavior on social media is strikingly similar. Masses of people react to a stimulus, such as a social media post, seemingly as a cohesive unit without a designated leader and, as a result, something goes “viral.”

It appears to be a spontaneous event that no one can control. But is it? As it turns out, curated information that is pushed ahead of other information on people’s newsfeeds can dramatically influence crowd behavior.

DiResta refers to it as “nudges” or “bait.” Curated information that gets pushed into our view ends up influencing what we think and do, thus influencing what goes viral and what doesn’t. It’s an incredibly subtle form of influence. At its core, it’s social engineering at its finest.

There’s a nudge (curated information pushed to the front of people’s feeds), individuals react, and suddenly, en masse, large numbers of people move in aggregate, creating a trend. Basically, social engineering and behavior modification works by steering our attention toward a specific target.

Echo Chambers and Directed Trends

In her essay, DiResta also describes how online platforms expanded individuals’ social networks using algorithms, connecting people with similar interests. Initially, this was done for commercial purposes, but in addition to matching advertisers to the appropriate markets, it has also had unintended consequences. Social networks have a tendency to become echo chambers, making “online murmurations” more likely. DiResta continues:⁵

“After the nudges to assemble into flocks come the nudges to engage … Twitter’s Trending Topics, for example, will show a nascent ‘trend’ to someone inclined to be interested, sometimes even if the purported trend is, at the time, more of a trickle — fewer than, say, 2,000 tweets.

But that act, pushing something into the user’s field of view, has consequences: the Trending Topics feature not only surfaces trends, it shapes them.

The provocation goes out to a small subset of people inclined to participate. The user who receives the nudge clicks in, perhaps posts their own take — increasing the post count, signaling to the algorithm that the bait was taken and raising the topic’s profile fortheir followers.

Their post is now curated into their friends’ feeds; they are one of the seven birds their followers see. Recurring frenzies take shape among particular flocks … even as very few people outside of the community have any idea that anything has happened.

Marx is trending for you, #ReopenSchools for me, #transwomenaremen for the Libs Of TikTok set. The provocation is delivered, a few more birds react to what’s suddenly in their field of view, and the flock follows …

We often deploy the phrase ‘it went viral’ to describe our online murmurations. It’s a deceptive phrase that eliminates the how and thus absolves the participants of all responsibility. A rumor does not simply spread — it spreads because we spread it, even if the system is designed to facilitate capturing attention and to encourage that spread.”

Social Media Companies Are in a Catch-22

While having something go viral can be beneficial for a given cause, it can also be disastrous if and when people react to something they don’t fully understand. The curating of likeminded individuals into networks also has the drawback of limiting opposing views, which might create a better balance, from entering into that network.

Many today insist that the answer to “misinformation” going viral is content curation, moderation and censorship. But that’s putting the cart before the horse, since it’s the design of the algorithms on social media that create these networks and online murmurings in the first place.

Social media companies profit by increasing engagement, thus they encourage expanding social networks with likeminded ideas and nudging networks into mass responses. High engagement means more exposure for advertisers, and hence greater ad revenue for the social media company.

According to DiResta, a better solution would be to “move beyond thinking of platform content moderation policies as ‘the solution’ and prioritize rethinking design.”

“For example, Twitter might choose to eliminate its Trending feature entirely, or in certain geographies during sensitive moments like elections — it might, at a minimum, limit nudges to surfacing actual large-scale or regional trends, not simply small-scale ragebait.

Instagram might enact a maximum follower count … These are substance-agnostic and not reactive … We might re-evaluate how platforms connect their users or how factors that determine what platform recommenders and curation algorithms push into field-of-view …

This could potentially have a far greater impact than battling over content moderation as a path toward constructing a healthier information ecosystem.”⁶

Who Is Renée DiResta?

Here, I’m going to change course a bit and ask you to consider DiResta’s essay within the context of what she’s really talking about, which is social engineering through better and more palatable forms of censorship. If you didn’t catch that angle, it’s in part because of the sections I chose to quote, but it’s also because you probably don’t know who DiResta is.

While her essay comes across as well-reasoned, readers would do well to consider whom she works for, who’s in her network, and why she might be proposing what she’s proposing.

According to DiResta, social media algorithms have created a landscape in which “misinformation” flourishes and spreads like wildfire. Worse, it’s a landscape in which wrongthinkers end up forming lasting ties — and join together with other wrongthinkers to form much larger groups that support each other.

“The networks designed years ago — when amoral recommendation engines suggested, for example, that anti-vaccine activists might like to join QAnon communities — created real ties,” she writes.⁷

In addition to the suggestions quoted above, she also suggests another option: “A mass exodus from the present ecosystem into something entirely new … the metaverse, perhaps.”

I’ve previously written about how the globalist cabal behind The Great Reset intends to drive us into digital identity, a social credit score, digital twins and an increasingly virtual reality. So, she actually tips her hand when suggesting a mass migration into the metaverse, because that’s where the globalist cabal ultimately wants us.

A New World Order Propagandist

So, who is DiResta? She’s the research manager for the Stanford Internet Observatory, founded in June 2019 to promote internet censorship policies and conduct real-time social media narrative monitoring. She’s a Mozilla Fellow in Media, Misinformation and Trust, an adviser to Congress and the State Department, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).⁸

CFR is financed in part by the Gates,⁹ Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie foundations,¹⁰ and has influenced U.S. foreign policy ever since its inception 95 years ago. Almost all U.S. secretaries of defense have been lifetime members, as have most CIA directors. This is of crucial importance, considering the CFR’s goal, from the start, has been to bring about a totalitarian one world government, a New World Order (NWO) with global top-down rule.

In 1950, the son of one of the CFR’s founders, James Warburg, said to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “We shall have world government whether or not you like it — by conquest or consent.”¹¹ Similarly, in 1975 CFR insider Admiral Chester Ward wrote that the goal of the CFR was “submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government.”¹²

According to Ward, the desire to “surrender the sovereignty and independence of the United States is pervasive throughout most of its membership,” and “In the entire CFR lexicon, there is no term of revulsion carrying a meaning so deep as ‘America First.'”

With Ward’s last comment in mind, published in 1975, it’s interesting to contemplate who has opposed President Trump’s America First agenda, and why. Many Americans, even if they don’t like or support Trump personally, agree that taking care of America and Americans’ interests first is a rational decision for any leadership, and they’ve been hard-pressed to rationalize how an anti-America First policy can be good for the nation.

Well, Ward gives us the answer. Those who oppose America First policies do so because they’re working on behalf of a network that seeks to eliminate nationalism in favor of a one-world government.

DiResta is a CFR member and a “misinformation specialist.” As such, her essay becomes an interesting example of subtle NWO propaganda. While some of her suggestions seem like they would have beneficial effects, what’s missing is a discussion of how a redesign of the algorithms on social media platforms can censor people and views even more efficiently.

You Are the Designated Enemy in World War III

What else do we know about DiResta? Well, we know she’s part of The Lancet Commission on Vaccine Refusal, Acceptance and Demand. At the end of 2021, she co-authored an article¹³ in The Lancet, along with Chelsea Clinton and Dr. Peter Hotez, among others, in which they discuss the impact of vaccine misinformation on COVID jab uptake.

In doing so, they present what they call in The Lancet “a coordinated, evidence-based education, communication, and behavioral intervention strategy that is likely to improve the success of COVID-19 vaccine programs across the U.S.”

She also has an integral role in the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) move to establish a domestic censorship bureau. In November 2022, the Foundation for Freedom Online published an extensive article¹⁴ detailing this transition, and the key players involved. As explained by Foundation for Freedom Online:¹⁵

“This story has two main institutional sides: the government within DHS and the non-governmental side consisting of a web of like-minded private sector and civil society partners. Together, this network forms the DHS public-private censorship network …”

On the government side, the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a sub-department of the DHS, is the key coordinator. When it was founded in 2018, its directive was to defend the U.S. against foreign cybersecurity threats like Russian hackers and foreign propaganda.

Since then, and especially in the last three years, CISA has morphed into a government entity focused almost solely on domestic threats, meaning Americans who challenge the government narrative — a narrative that, again, is in favor of a one-world government and firmly against American nationalism.

On the nongovernmental side, a collective called the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) is the main hub. The EIP consists of four social media monitoring groups: Stanford Internet Observatory, Washington University’s Center for an Informed Public, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and Graphika.

DiResta is directly connected to CISA’s censorship directorate through the Stanford Internet Observatory — where she’s a top lieutenant and directs research on misinformation and malicious narratives — which is part of the EIP. She’s also given a number of lectures at CISA disinformation summits.^16,17 But there’s more. Foundation for Freedom Online writes:¹⁸

“The prominent role Renée DiResta plays in EIP — a government-partnered Internet censorship consortium — is particularly worrisome and disturbing. Before DiResta became research manager at the Stanford disinfo lab, she was research director for a now-notorious, scandal-laden and disgraced political hatchet firm known as New Knowledge LLC.

In December 2018, the New York Times exposed that DiResta’s Democrat donor-funded small cybersecurity firm, New Knowledge, had clandestinely created thousands of fake ‘Russian bots’ (user accounts generated with a virtual private network (VPN) to simulate a Russian IP address) on Twitter and Facebook then mass subscribed those fake ‘Russian bots’ to opposition Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore’s campaign.

DiResta did this — or at least the small firm where she was a director did this — in the heat of the Nov. 2017 Alabama special election, which substantially decided the party control of the US Senate. It was a race in which Moore narrowly lost, and for whose loss New Knowledge – in its own report — took credit.

At the time, mainstream news genuinely thought Roy Moore was being backed by Russians. But it was just DiResta’s professional disinformation firm interfering in the election.”

Censoring to Secure a One World Government

Foundation for Freedom Online continues:¹⁹

“One common thread connecting these four entities is that each of their directors were involved in aggressively alleging (unsubstantiated) claims from January 2017 through early 2020 that Russian interference had helped Donald Trump win the 2016 election by using inauthentic bots and troll accounts on social media …

Each of the four entities comprising EIP is also deeply connected to the US military and foreign policy establishment … It is very helpful to understand EIP’s network and operations in depth, because it was through EIP that DHS built the infrastructure for its current role as government coordinator of takedowns and throttling of US citizen speech online.”

To get a better grasp on this censorship network, please refer to the original article, as I only have room to provide an overview summary here. In a nutshell, the EIP was created by the DHS/CISA as a way for government to circumvent the law and shield its illegal censoring of the American public behind the veneer of private corporations and nongovernmental organizations.

In an Atlantic Council interview, the leader of EIP, Alex Stamos (former security chief at Facebook), admits that the DHS-EIP partnership was set up to outsource censorship that the government could not do due to “lack of legal authorization.”²⁰

They coordinate the take-down of undesirable content using a real-time chat app that the DHS, EIP and social media companies all share. Specific platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, also have their own special portals where government officials can point to content they want removed.²¹

EIP Interferes in Elections and Controls COVID Narratives

The EIP first sprang into noticeable action to control the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, but controlling elections is far from its only focus. With the emergence of COVID-19, censorship quickly turned to all things COVID. Foundation for Freedom Online explains:²²

“… after the 2020 election, EIP changed its name and re-branded as an entity called the ‘Virality Project’ (VP). VP did the exact same government censorship job EIP did, except censoring COVID-19 instead of censoring elections …

VP ended up censoring, with its government partners, 66 unique social media narratives going viral online concerning COVID during the 2021 calendar year. Not 66 posts. 66 entire narratives. That had the effect of impacting millions of posts and potentially altering the entire political trajectory of the American citizenry’s response to the COVID pandemic.”

Understanding the Information Battlefield

Based on what we know about DiResta, we can now begin to see how her starling essay is an exposition on a) the social engineering role of Big Tech in the past, b) the drawback of Big Tech’s financial motivations when it comes to censoring NWO counternarratives, and c) how the NWO cabal wants Big Tech to shift methods in the future to limit the reach of undesirable content. It would behoove us to take note.

A great deal of the propaganda war involves people and organizations that say they’re one thing but do the complete opposite. For example, DiResta is the head of policy for Data for Democracy,²³ while at the same time taking part in a plot to directly circumvent the democratic election process.

From her membership in CFR, we can glean the intent behind such anti-democratic behavior. She is working on behalf of those who seek to establish a one-world government. To that end, she also works with organizations specializing in censorship on behalf of the government.

Illegal government censorship is bad enough, but it doesn’t end there. As discussed in “Censorship Wasn’t Enough, They Want to Destroy Us,” when censorship and deplatforming fails, the gloves come off and more destructive cyberwarfare tactics are deployed. Our government is literally waging war against the American public, and while information control is the preferred measure, they don’t shy away from more aggressive tactics.

The idea of government waging war on its own citizens seems completely irrational and inexplicable — until you realize that the CFR has controlled U.S. foreign relations for nearly a century, and its primary goal has always been to undermine U.S. sovereignty and abet the creation of a one-world government.

Today, there’s a vast network of individuals and organizations that work together to achieve this aim, including a long list of government officials. Before anything can change, the public needs to understand the battlefield and what the battle is really about.

The battle, really, is about the surrender of the U.S. unto a one-world government and, in a circuitous way, DiResta’s essay — with her background exposed — helps us understand how the war is being fought. They always have a goal, and a plan for getting there. Then, they fashion the narratives needed to implement that plan.

Now that the ultimate end goal is clear — the establishment of a one-world government — it becomes much easier to determine how a given narrative is being used to further that goal. As we move forward, as many as possible need to become adept at identifying how different narratives are being used to curate the flock and make people move in a desired direction.

• ^{1, 4, 5, 6, 7} Noema Magazine November 3, 2022
• ² Twitter Renée DiResta November 5, 2022
• ³ CNAS Renée DiResta Bio
• ^8, 11, 12 Wakeup-World August 31, 2016
• ⁹ Gates Foundation Grants to CFR
• ¹⁰ CFR Funding
• ¹³ The Lancet December 11, 2021; 398(10317): 2186-2192
• ^{14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22} Foundation for Freedom Online November 9, 2022
• ¹⁷ CISA.gov Cybersummit 2021
• ²¹ Twitter Lee Fang October 31, 2022
• ²³ PBS May 17, 2018

On Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron delivered a speech at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Bangkok even though France is not actually a member.

During that speech, Macron lamented the fact that rapidly deteriorating relations between the U.S. and China are tearing the world apart, and he boldly declared that what we really need is “a single world order”…

French President Emmanuel Macron called for world government in a speech Friday, claiming it would avoid conflicts between competing superpowers.

“We need a single world order,” Macron told the audience at the ongoing Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Bangkok, Thailand.

“Are you on the U.S. side or the China side?” Macron asked rhetorically. “Because now, progressively, a lot of people would like to see that there are two orders in this world.”

“This is a huge mistake — even for both the U.S. and China,” he added after comparing the two superpowers to “big elephants” in the geopolitical “jungle.”

Of course when he says that we need a “single world order” he is not suggesting one in which nations such as China and Russia are equal partners.

What Macron and other western leaders envision is a global system that is governed by western rules and western values.

As he delivered his line about a “single global order”, Macron slowed down and pronounced each of the words with special emphasis.

In case you still think it’s a conspiracy theory that our elites want a world order, here’s French President @EmmanuelMacron yesterday at the APEC summit:

‘We need a single global order’. pic.twitter.com/CFTMXUPy1R

— Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) November 19, 2022

I have a feeling that Macron can picture himself leading a “single global order” someday.

Such delusions of grandeur can be extremely dangerous.

Meanwhile, other western leaders such as U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin are warning that a truly multipolar world would be one that would inevitably lead to nuclear confrontation and nuclear conflict…

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin warned Saturday Russia’s invasion of Ukraine offers a preview of a world where nuclear-armed countries could threaten other nations and said Beijing, like Moscow, seeks a world where might makes right.

Austin made the remarks at the annual Halifax International Security Forum, which attracts defense and security officials from Western democracies.

Politicians all over the western world have been talking a lot about the threat of nuclear war lately.

I think that they are trying to use the threat of nuclear war as a scare tactic in order to advance their agenda, because if they were truly concerned about nuclear war they would be working really hard to stop one from happening.

But instead of pursuing peace with China and Russia through diplomatic means, western leaders seem to have decided that now is the time to get really tough with China and Russia.

Ultimately, our leaders would love to see both regimes collapse and be replaced by governments that are ready to embrace western values and a “single global order” that is led by the western nations.

Western politicians keep hoping that the war in Ukraine will lead to such an outcome in Russia, and I am sure that they are trying to figure out how to use the coming Chinese invasion of Taiwan to bring about such an outcome in China.

We have seen so many other governments get toppled over the decades, and now the western elite are going after the two biggest fish in the pond.

But by being so aggressive, they are literally bringing us to the brink of nuclear conflict.

Earlier this year, a study was released that concluded that a full-blown nuclear exchange between the United States and Russia would result in billions of deaths.

But only about 360 million people would be killed by the original nuclear exchange. That is the good news.

The bad news is that about 5 billion people would starve to death during the nuclear winter that would follow…

According to a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Nature Food in August 2022,^[139] a full-scale nuclear war between the United States and Russia, which together hold more than 90% of the world’s nuclear weapons, would kill 360 million people directly and more than 5 billion indirectly by starvation during a nuclear winter.^[140][141]

In the aftermath of a full-blown nuclear exchange between the United States and Russia, global temperatures would plunge dramatically because of all the soot that is injected into the atmosphere…

“A war between the United States, its allies and Russia — who possess more than 90% of the global nuclear arsenal — could produce more than 150 teragrams of soot and a nuclear winter,” the study reads.

A teragram is a unit of measurement equal to 1 trillion grams and models show that soot injections into the atmosphere larger than 5 teragrams would lead to mass food shortages in almost all countries.

In such an environment, very little would be able to be grown, and so global food production would soon fall to only a small fraction of what it is today…

In the scenario of a war between the United States and Russia, the global average calorie production from crops would decrease by around 90% within four years after the nuclear war. Nuclear war would also reduce the global fish supply.

People in most nations would consume fewer calories than their bodies burn at rest and more than 5 billion people would die by the end of the second year.

Western leaders are trying to convince us that the way to avoid such a fate is to embrace their vision of a “single world order” that is led by them.

And the truth is that there are a whole lot of people out there that would be more than willing to give up their freedoms for the security of a one world government.

Such people are just like the mindless sheep that were recently spotted “walking around in a circle for 12 days straight”…

Dozens of sheep have been eerily walking around in a circle for 12 days straight in northern China’s Inner Mongolia region.

The bizarre behavior, captured on surveillance video, shows the large flock continuously marching clockwise in a nearly perfect circle on a farm.

My hope is that we can get more “sheeple” to wake up while there is still time to do so.

We don’t want world government.

And we don’t want nuclear war either.

Unfortunately, we don’t always get what we want.

The western elite are really making a mess of things, and we are all going to suffer the consequences of their incredibly reckless decisions.

***It is finally here! Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael and my brand new book entitled “End Times” is now available on Amazon.com.  In addition to my new book I have written six other books that are available on Amazon.com including “7 Year Apocalypse”, “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America”, “The Beginning Of The End”, and “Living A Life That Really Matters”. (#CommissionsEarned)  When you purchase any of these books you help to support the work that I am doing, and one way that you can really help is by sending copies as gifts to family and friends.  Time is short, and I need help getting these warnings into the hands of as many people as possible.

I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions.

I encourage you to follow me on social media on Facebook and Twitter, and any way that you can share these articles with others is definitely a great help.  These are such troubled times, and people need hope.  John 3:16 tells us about the hope that God has given us through Jesus Christ: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”  If you have not already done so, I strongly urge you to invite Jesus Christ to be your Lord and Savior today.

Article cross-posted from End of the American Dream.

Yuval Noah Harari, who is described as Schwab’s “right-hand man,” is on a promotional tour right now shilling a new book he allegedly wrote. That manuscript asks questions like: What do we need so many humans for?

Now that the globalists have attained near-total control over pretty much everything, they appear ready to cull the herd of human slaves. It began in this latest installment with the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) plandemic, followed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

There is also skyrocketing inflation, supply chain failures, food shortages, crop destruction and other economic instability – all things that are swirling into a perfect storm of global shock and awe.

Referring to non-globalists as “common people” who are fully disposable, Harari’s latest leaked statements reveal a profound attitude of self-perceived superiority and globalist supremacy.

Harari says the common folk below him are right to be fearful about the future because their lives could end at any moment. And it would not be any great loss, he says, because non-globalists are “redundant.”

“We just don’t need the vast majority of you,” says Israeli globalist

In a future run by “smart people,” Harari went on to state, common people will naturally face increased feelings of anxiety and fear about being left behind. And he is technically right: those who refuse to board the ark of Christ will, in fact, be left behind in Harari’s globalist dystopia.

“We just don’t need the vast majority of you,” Harari stated out loud without shame, believing himself to be invincible.

As we previously reported, Harari, an Israeli historian and professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, openly admitted that he and the rest of his globalist cabal are unleashing transhumanism as their own personal “technological Noah’s Ark” – meaning they believe the lie that tampering with their DNA and genetic blueprints will somehow grant them eternal life while the rest of us are either eliminated or turned into their permanent slaves.

Talking about this kind of thing used to be scoffed at and labeled conspiracy theorism, but now we have the plan coming straight from the mouths of the globalist cabal itself – right out in the open with no shame.

Rockefeller Foundation official Alan Gregg is another outspoken globalist who recently declared that the world has cancer and that cancer is mankind – excluding himself, of course.

Prince Phillip, the late Queen Elizabeth’s husband, likewise believed that humanity is a cancer that he wished he could eradicate by dying and coming back to life as a killer virus.

The now-destroyed Georgia Guidestones revealed that the globalist plan for their envisioned “New World Order” involves reducing the current population of the world from roughly eight billion, the current number, to just 500 million.

Former President Bill Clinton, unbeknownst to many, signed a so-called “biodiversity” treat during his tenure that contains an explicitly stated goal of reducing the world’s population to one billion, at least as a start.

At the “grassroots” level, the globalists have done an exceptional job programming millions of Westerners into supporting mass genocide through abortion and even infanticide, the latter constituting the murder of a child after he or she has already left the womb.

“George Orwell warned us about these times,” writes Baxter Dmitry for Newspunch. “He said they would convince us that war is peace. How right he was.”

Want to keep up with the latest news about the globalists? Visit Globalism.news.

Sources for this article include:

• Newspunch.com
• NaturalNews.com
• NATURAL NEWS

Technology continues to advance as they find new ways to not only produce the “meat” but also to get it out to the masses. This is important to the powers-that-be who are pushing for “The Great Reset” because weaning people off of actual meat is one of their stated goals. They realize it will be a very slow process to get the masses moved to the most climate-friendly form of protein — insects — so they’re hoping to accelerate the process by improving on lab-grown protein products.

After finding limited success in the United States, they’ve now turned to Europe to be their launching point. It makes sense since food shortages from sanctions in the Russia-Ukraine war and supply chain disruptions across the globe are making Europeans more desperate. As they work to bring down costs and increase availability of “Frankenmeat” while simultaneously inflate prices of real meat, they will attempt to normalize non-meat protein as the primary component of diets for the masses.

But that’s not the endgame.

The globalist elites’ vision of Neo-Marxism — currently known as The Great Reset or the 4th Industrial Revolution — requires economic hardships for the masses in order to succeed. Even with technological advances, pseudo-meat could eventually become too expensive for average people, and that’s by design. This stepping stone will make it easier to make eating bugs more acceptable when it’s forced on the masses.

A short article from Zero Hedge and an accompanying video by Reuters highlight the push to eliminate actual meat as they advance us down the path toward tyranny. As Tyler Durden notes in his article, “would you willingly eat this?”

Israeli Company Introduces 3D Printed “Meat” As The Future Of Food

Despite plunging interest and falling stock prices, multiple companies around the globe are still attempting to promote fake meat substitutes into a highly limited market that does not want them.  Impossible Burger and Beyond Meat were the last failed attempts to use soy, bean and pea proteins to simulate the burger experience, going so far as to partner with fast food franchises like Burger King And McDonald’s, only to have these programs cancelled because of lack of sales.

Artificial meat and the removal of meat from the public diet has been an ongoing agenda of the UN for several years, based on the claim that animal farming releases too many greenhouse gases that contribute to “climate change.”  There is still no concrete scientific evidence to support this conclusion, given that the world’s overall temperature has only increased less than 1 degree Celsius in the past century according to the NOAA. Nevertheless, the establishment marches forward with its goal of a vegan population by 2050.

Israeli company Redefine Meat is entering the field in Europe with a method for 3D printed lab grown steaks instead of the typical burger alternative.  Besides the process looking rather grotesque and unnatural, it is highly unlikely that a meat paste substitute will ever come close to the taste of a real steak.  Ask yourself, would you willingly eat this?

His article below is an interesting read, as they normally are. I disagree with the conclusions that the United States is likely responsible for the release of Covid-19. There are plenty of reasons to believe members of the United States government, specifically within the permanent state bureaucracy and the Deep State intelligence apparatus, we involved; we know Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak were involved, among others. But I believe the more likely scenario is that the Plandemic originated from a globalist elite cabal comprised of the seemingly unlikely team of the Deep State, Chinese Communist Party (or their version of the Deep State), and globalists in organizations such as the World Economic Forum and Council for Inclusive Capitalism. For Rockwell and others to conclude from the evidence that this was the United States trying to weaken China, Russia, and Iran ignores evidence that this is not about one nation versus others. This is about a one-world government versus the rest of the world.

By no means am I denouncing or overly critiquing Rockwell’s article or those he quotes in it. If there’s one thing we know about the rise of the Liberal World Order, it’s that all we have are theories until their machinations become more apparent. It’s important that we take a sober look at what we know, speculate intelligently about what we suspect, and plan accordingly for what’s to come. Here’s Lew’s article…

We all know, to our cost, how the enemies of humanity used the so-called covid “pandemic” to try to destroy us. They imposed draconian shutdowns on the economy, pressured and in many cases ordered us to take killer vaccines and blocked young people from the contact with their friends they need to grow up properly. Some people, such as the monster “Dr.” Anthony Fauci, would like to shut us down again. See the great book on him by Robert Kennedy Jr, , and my review of it here.

But the situation is even worse than we thought. Michael Rectenwald has written a brilliant new book, The Great Reset and the Struggle for Liberty: Unraveling the Global Agenda, and in it he shows how the anti-human plotted to use a pandemic to impose totalitarianism on us. I’m going to talk about some of his findings, and then combine this with evidence that the “pandemic” was made in America. The implication of this is mind-blowing.

Rectenwald first identifies a person and the group he founded behind the “Great Reset.” The person is Klaus Schwab and the group is his World Economic Forum. Here is what Rectenwald says:

The Great Reset means, at the very least, reduced standards of living and carbon use for the vast majority. But Schwab and the WEF also define the Great Reset in terms of the convergence of economic, monetary, technological, medical, genomic, environmental, military, and governance systems. The Great Reset involves vast transformations in each of these domains, changes which, according to Schwab, will not only alter our world but also lead us to ‘question what it means to be human.’ In terms of economics and monetary policy, the Great Reset amounts to a great consolidation of wealth, on the one hand, and the planned issuance of universal basic income (UBI) on the other.

Its goals include a shift to a central bank digital currency (CBDC), including a consolidated centralization of banking and bank accounts, the possibility of immediate real-time taxation, negative interest rates, and centralized surveillance and control over spending, debt, and savings. The Great Reset consolidates capital flows from central banks and investment firms into the hands of preferred producers through ‘stakeholder capitalism.’ This would amount to a virtual oligopoly on top with ‘actually existing socialism’ for the majority below. How else are we to explain the promise, ‘you’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy?’

How does this tie in with the “pandemic.”? Rectenwald explains:

The WEF organized two events that eerily anticipated the covid-19 crisis. Covid-19 became the proximate inspiration for launching the Great Reset project. In May 2018, the WEF collaborated with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to conduct the CLADE X Exercise, a ‘tabletop’ simulation of a national response to a pandemic. The exercise simulated the outbreak of CLADE X, a novel strain of a human parainfluenza virus with genetic elements of the Nipah virus. According to Homeland Preparedness News, the CLADE X simulation demonstrated that ‘[t]he lack of both a protective vaccine and a proactive worldwide plan for tackling the spread of a catastrophic global pandemic resulted in the death of 150 million people across the Earth.’ Clearly, preparation for a global pandemic was in order.

A little over a year later, in October 2019, the WEF’s uncanny prescience was again on display, only this time with greater precision. Along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the WEF teamed up with Johns Hopkins University to stage another pandemic exercise, called Event 201. Event 201 simulated the international response to the outbreak of a novel coronavirus—just two months before the covid-19 outbreak became international news and a mere five months before the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic.

The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security’s summary of the exercise closely resembles the actual covid-19 scenario, including apparent foreknowledge of so-called asymptomatic … Event 201 simulates an outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic. The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms.

The CLADE X and Event 201 simulations anticipated practically every eventuality of the covid crisis, notably the responses by governments, health agencies, conventional media, social media, and elements of the public. The responses and their effects included worldwide lockdowns, the collapse of businesses and industries, the adoption of biometric surveillance technologies, an emphasis on social media censorship to combat ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation,’ the flooding of social and legacy media with “authoritative sources,” widespread riots, and mass unemployment. These premonitory exercises and other covid curiosities have contributed to the ‘plandemic’ narrative—speculation that the covid-19 crisis may have been staged by global elites centered around the WEF as an alibi for initiating the Great Reset…

Just months into the covid crisis, on July 19, 2020, and a mere month after the annual meeting, Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret published Covid 19: The Great Reset. Steve Umbrello, the Managing Director at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies at the University of Turin, wrote in his academic review of the manifesto: ‘Although not impossible, the speed at which a book on this particular topic, proposing these theses…was produced does play into the conspiratorial aesthetic that the book has since induced. Even though the authors are transparent about writing and publishing the book within a month’s time, this neither confirms the veracity of such claims nor dispels suspicion from those who question its expediency.’

The short interval between the Great Reset summit and the book’s publication is not the only factor that has fed ‘the conspiratorial aesthetic’ surrounding the Great Reset. Schwab’s writing with Malleret and other WEF statements have stoked the speculations. In Covid-19, the co-authors declare, without noting the irony, that covid-19 represents an ‘opportunity [that] can be seized,’ and ‘we should take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity to reimagine our world,; and ‘the moment must be seized to take advantage of this unique window of opportunity,’ and “[f]or these companies the pandemic is a unique opportunity to rethink their organization and enact positive, sustainable and lasting change,’ and “[f]or those fortunate enough to find themselves in industries ‘naturally’ resilient to the pandemic [like Big Digital Tech], the crisis was not only more bearable, but even a source of profitable opportunities at a time of distress for the majority.’ This last statement is suggestive of the Great Reset’s overall effects: profitable opportunity for the global elites and distress for the majority.

Now we have to ask the key question: where the covid virus originate? There is good reason to believe that the coronavirus epidemic is part of an American biological warfare campaign against China and Iran. The brilliant physicist Ron Unz, who has time and time again been proved right by events, makes this case in a scintillating analysis.

Unz notes that “[s]hortly before the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, that city had hosted 300 visiting American military officers, who came to participate in the 2019 Military World Games, an absolutely remarkable coincidence of timing. As I pointed out at the time, how would Americans react if 300 Chinese military officers had paid an extended visit to Chicago, and soon afterward a mysterious and deadly epidemic had suddenly broken out in that city? . . .

“Scientific investigation of the coronavirus had already pointed to its origins in a bat virus, leading to widespread media speculation that bats sold as food in the Wuhan open markets had been the original disease vector. Meanwhile, the orchestrated waves of anti-China accusations had emphasized Chinese laboratory research on that same viral source. But we soon published a lengthy article by investigative journalist Whitney Webb providing copious evidence of America’s own enormous biowarfare research efforts, which had similarly focused for years on bat viruses. Webb was then associated with MintPress News, but that publication had strangely declined to publish her important piece, perhaps skittish about the grave suspicions it directed towards the US government on so momentous an issue. So without the benefit of our platform, her major contribution to the public debate might have attracted relatively little readership.”

Unz adds a number of items that lend cogency to his analysis. First, this is by no means the first suspicious biological attack on China. “During the previous two years, the Chinese economy had already suffered serious blows from other mysterious new diseases, although these had targeted farm animals rather than people. During 2018 a new Avian Flu virus had swept the country, eliminating large portions of China’s poultry industry, and during 2019 the Swine Flu viral epidemic had devastated China’s pig farms, destroying 40% of the nation’s primary domestic source of meat, with widespread claims that the latter disease was being spread by mysterious small drones.

“My morning newspapers had hardly ignored these important business stories, noting that the sudden collapse of much of China’s domestic food production might prove a huge boon to American farm exports at the height of our trade conflict. . . . So for three years in a row, China had been severely impacted by strange new viral diseases, though only the most recent had been deadly to humans. This evidence was merely circumstantial, but the pattern seemed highly suspicious.”

In order to deflect attention from its own activities, the US government has hinted that the virus came from a biological laboratory in Wuhan, but it is hardly likely that the Chinese government would inflict a damaging disease on its own people. It’s a classic propaganda tool for the US government to deflect attention from its own activities by accusing the enemy of “starting it.”

Unz says, “Despite America’s growing economic conflict with China over the last couple of years, I had never considered the possibility that matters might take a military turn. The Chinese had long ago deployed advanced intermediate range missiles that many believed could easily sink our carriers in the region, and they had also generally improved their conventional military deterrent. Moreover, China was on quite good terms with Russia, which itself had been the target of intense American hostility for several years; and Russia’s new suite of revolutionary hypersonic missiles had drastically reduced any American strategic advantage. Thus, a conventional war against China seemed an absolutely hopeless undertaking, while China’s outstanding businessmen and engineers were steadily gaining ground against America’s decaying and heavily-financialized economic system.

“Under these difficult circumstances, an American biowarfare attack against China might have seemed the only remaining card to play in hopes of maintaining American supremacy. Plausible deniability would minimize the risk of any direct Chinese retaliation, and if successful, the terrible blow inflicted to China’s economy would set it back for many years, perhaps even destabilizing its social and political system. Using alternative media to immediately promote theories that the coronavirus outbreak was the result of a leak from a Chinese biowarfare lab was a natural means of preempting any later Chinese accusations along similar lines, thereby allowing America to win the international propaganda war before China had even begun to play.”

Unz points to another significant fact. After China, the next country to suffer from the virus was Iran, America’s main target in the Middle East. “As the coronavirus gradually began to spread beyond China’s own borders, another development occurred that greatly multiplied my suspicions. Most of these early cases had occurred exactly where one might expect, among the East Asian countries bordering China. But by late February Iran had become the second epicenter of the global outbreak. Even more surprisingly, its political elites had been especially hard-hit, with a full 10% of the entire Iranian parliament soon infected and at least a dozen of its officials and politicians dying of the disease, including some who were quite senior. Indeed, Neocon activists on Twitter began gleefully noting that their hatred Iranian enemies were now dropping like flies.”

When I read Unz’s analysis, it brought to mind an incident in the American bombing campaign against Serbia in 1999. The US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, and I thought at the time that the attack was deliberate. American military assaults on China go back a long way. Unz agrees. “The [British] Sunday Observer published a remarkable expos[é] in October 1999, citing several NATO military and intelligence sources who fully confirmed the deliberate nature of the American bombing of the Chinese embassy, with a US colonel even reportedly boasting that their smartbomb had hit the exact room intended.”

It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the whole “pandemic” was planned by the anti-humans, not only to provoke war with China but also to impose totalitarianism on us. Let’s do everything we can to expose them and drive them from office.

About the Author

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail], former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com. He is the author of Against the State and . Follow him on Facebook and Twitter.

Article cross-posted from Lew’s Blog.