>Muhjoos
why are they "your jews"?
When government controls the means of supply and distribution and sets prices
https://twitter.com/ScottC20012/status/1702287736408043738
Chicago exploring creation of city-owned grocery store for food deserts
https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-food-desert-grocery-store-near-me/13780331/
>steal
every material desire costs life- in part, in terms of labor and resources, or in full, in terms of meat/skin/fur or plant material.
Musk no longer has control of Starlink, commandeered by US Govt, per Canadian Prepper Nate…
https://twitter.com/Terror_Alarm/status/1702634239093596641
Terror Alarm
@Terror_Alarm
🚨🇮🇳 Nipah virus (NiV), with a shocking case-fatality rate of up to 75%, is spreading in #India.
China is the main suspect.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/new-authoritarian-agenda-revealed-globalism-rebranded
The New Authoritarian Agenda Revealed (Globalism Rebranded)
In July of last year as the hype surrounding the Covid pandemic was finally dying out, I came across a video promoting a barely publicized project called the “Council for Inclusive Capitalism.”
The group, headed by Lynn Forester de Rothschild, is the culmination of decades of various globalist agendas combined to represent the ultimate proof of conspiracy.
Remember when people used to say that global governance by elitists was a paranoid fantasy?
Well, now it’s openly admitted reality.
The CIC is intimately tied to institutions like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but it is primarily an attempt to link all these organizations more closely to the corporate world in an open display of cooperation. The group pushes the spread of what they call “Stakeholder Capitalism.” This is the notion that international corporations are obligated to engage in social engineering. That’s another way of saying that corporations are required to manipulate citizens and governments with economic punishments and rewards.
We witnessed this agenda in action during the Covid lockdowns and the rush to enforce vaccine passports. These efforts would not have been possible without the cooperation of major corporate chains working hand-in-hand with national governments. Luckily, the strategy failed as local governments and the public fought back.
We have also seen stakeholder capitalism on display in the push for Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) guidelines among major companies. Most readers are probably familiar with ESG at this point, but keep in mind, the public was oblivious to the terminology until the past 2 years. Globalists have been developing ESG rules since 2005. As Klaus Schwab of the WEF notes in his book Stakeholder Capitalism:
The most important characteristic of the stakeholder model today is that the stakes of our system are now more clearly global. Economies, societies, and the environment are more closely linked to each other now than 50 years ago. The model we present here is therefore fundamentally global in nature, and the two primary stakeholders are as well.
…What was once seen as externalities in national economic policy making and individual corporate decision making will now need to be incorporated or internalized in the operations of every government, company, community, and individual. The planet is thus the center of the global economic system, and its health should be optimized in the decisions made by all other stakeholders.
The carrot and the stick
ESG was intended to be the tool that globalists and governments would use to force companies into the stakeholder capitalism model. It is a kind of social credit system, but for companies. The higher a company’s ESG score, the more access to capital and lending they would have (easy money).
Modern ESG started out in 2005, initially focused on climate controls – influencing corporations to participate in the carbon credit marketplace or face additional taxation.
p1
But, by 2016 it became something else. ESG widely adopted woke politics including Critical Race Theory, feminism, trans ideology, various elements of Marxism, etc.
This was the modern ESG that all of us are aware of today. It was an attempt to incentivize the business world to bombard the populace with woke messaging 24/7, and it worked, for a little while anyway.
The exposure of ESG is perhaps one of the greatest triumphs of the alternative media. It was proof that the “woke-ification” of our economy and society was not the result of some grassroots activist movement or the natural evolution of civilization. No, everything woke was a product, forced into existence by corporate and globalist interests.
It is with some disappointment I’m sure that Lynn Forester de Rothschild admitted the defeat of ESG at the B20 Summit in India recently. Though, as is usually the case, Rothschild admits that the goal will be to replace the term “ESG” with something else that the public is not as privy to while continuing to institute social credit scoring for companies as a means to dominate them.
It is typical for globalists to re-brand their projects whenever they get exposed. It’s merely a way to throw the public off the scent. However, I don’t think this tactic is going to work anymore. Researchers are locked on to the ESG dynamic and changing the name will not help the establishment avoid scrutiny.
Globalists go on the defensive
I want to point out here that there has been a dramatic shift in globalist circles towards a defensive posture, rather than the offensive posture they held a couple years ago. Apparently, something went very wrong for them during Covid. They were brazen with their rhetoric not long ago, basically admitting their intentions to establish a global authoritarian system. Now they are sheepish and much more careful in the things they say.
To this end, most of the honest discussion on globalism is no longer found in the statements of the WEF or the halls of the Davos forums. Rather, the true agenda is discussed at less prominent climate change events such as B20 in India or the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris which I covered in July. These are the events where globalists now feel increasingly free to talk about what they really want.
Another admission by Rothschild at B20 should be noted as she suggests that Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act” is one of the best representations of incentivizing climate controls.
This just confirms what we already suspected; the Inflation Reduction Act had nothing to do with inflation. Rather, it was a way to divert taxpayer funds into government subsidies for carbon taxation and green tech. Taking money out of your pocket and handing it over to corporations who toe the ESG line.
The CIC wants to dictate global mandates that force companies to adopt ESG-like policies using trillions of dollars in climate funds ($7 trillion per year, to be exact).
p2
Think of it this way:
Any company that “volunteers” to use less efficient green tech and to promote climate ideology gets access to government funds – they get rewarded.
Any company that refuses to go along with the plan will ultimately face heavy taxation while trying to compete with their subsidized peers – they are forced out of business.
Sound familiar? It’s not your imagination…
This is, essentially, the early stages of a global communist/collectivist economic regime.
“Inclusive capitalism” is a hoax
And here we get to the crux of the issue.
There is no “inclusive capitalism.”
There is no “stakeholder capitalism.”
There is no “ESG.”
Climate change is not an existential threat.
Covid was never as severe as they wanted you to think.
What do these things have in common? All of these issues represent smoke and mirrors, a way to distract the populace from the root intent to create total centralization in the hands of a select few elites. The prize for them is to convince the public to embrace economic micromanagement. This is what ESG was all about. This is what Inclusive Capitalism is all about.
The globalists want to hand-pick winners and losers. Worse still, they want to use your money to reward the faithful and punish the skeptical. Their goal is to build a global economic panopticon, an unescapable prison where every transaction is monitored, evaluated, authorized or denied and (of course) recorded.
A central bank digital currency (CDBC) is a crucial milestone in their progress toward this goal. Just imagine how much easier this will be when the 100 or so largest, most influential corporations in the world are on-board and enthusiastic about such a development…
I wrote about this not long ago:
All privacy in trade will be gone, except for those people engaging in barter, black markets and commodity-based transactions. This is one of the main reasons global central banks have persistently killed the idea of intrinsically-sound money, like physical gold and silver, for the last 50 years. Remember, barter and black markets are more or less by definition off the books. Untaxed, unregulated and untrackable.
But don’t be misled – this is much more than an issue of privacy.
Implementation of CBDCs would also mean that ownership of money and the ability to transact, to participate in the economy, will become privileges, not rights.
In communist China, use of digital payments is tied to a social credit system. Want access to your checking and savings accounts? Better not say anything critical of the Party, or you could be reported by a neighbor (or a stranger) using the tattletale function on their smartphone. Digital money can disappear in seconds. Want your money back? Prove that you are “loyal” to the Party. There are many subtle levels between “upstanding citizen” and “outlaw,” though, and the CCP adjust their citizens’ financial statuses constantly. Bad social credit might mean taxis won’t even stop for you. That you’re prevented from purchasing from upscale shops. (Insufficiently healthy? Your e-yuan won’t even let you buy junk food at 7-11. Seriously!) The citizen is guilty until proven innocent.
Once the economy is locked into an ideological prison and access to private trade can be denied by a handful of bureaucrats working with corporations, the establishment then has the means to dictate all of society.
Our behaviors, our beliefs, our principles, our morals.
For if the government has the power to determine whether you and your family eat or starve, they have the power to compel you to do anything.
3 of 3
Blue Tree ELD Systems Hacked, impacting >3M trucks/truckers, service down
(Electronic Logging Devices)
Discovered Sept 6, announced yesterday.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ransomware-attack-hits-orbcomm-bt-210530339.html
Orbcomm, a major provider of ELDs to the trucking sector, is dealing with a ransomware attack that has limited the ability of its customers to use its Fleet Manager offering, which includes its Blue Tree ELD systems, the company has confirmed.
Resolving the issue may take up to two weeks.
“On September 6, 2023, ORBCOMM experienced a ransomware attack that is temporarily impacting our FleetManager platform and BT product line, which is used by some of our customers to track and monitor their transportation assets,” Michelle Ferris, the company’s vice president of corporate communications, said in response to an email query from FreightWaves. “Upon discovering the issue, industry-leading external cybersecurity experts were retained to conduct a thorough investigation. Importantly, all of our other systems and service offerings remain completely operational, and customers are using them as normal. We remain in contact with all impacted customers and will continue to provide timely updates as our recovery and investigation processes progress.”
In a notice to Orbcomm customers Wednesday, supplied to FreightWaves by an Orbcomm customer, the company said under the heading “Rebuild and Restore” that it is “targeting to restore full use of our BT product line and the supporting platforms as well as RCOM Reports by September 28.”
The service interruption affected the BT product line, which is the core of Orbcomm’s ELD offering, as well as a reporting service known as RCOM Reports. Specifically, the outage impacts Blue Tree ELD models BT500 and BT504.
The notice said in conjunction with that date, users of the BT system have received an exemption from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to continue to use paper logs through Sept. 29, unless the BT system comes back online prior to that.
The FMCSA exemption allows the users of those ELD systems to continue using paper “graph grid” records or logging software until that date. The exemption could end earlier if the ransomware attack is thwarted and the systems come back online.
“Our internal and external teams will be working diligently on restoration over the coming weeks, and we know we will learn more as we bring certain systems and applications back online, but we wanted to share our target date with you,” the notice stated. “We will keep you updated on our progress against this goal.”
The Wednesday note added that Orbcomm had not found any signs “indicating that our customers’ proprietary networks are or were at increased risk as a result of this incident.”
In a discussion about the outage in the r/trucker subreddit on Reddit, the irony of drivers lamenting the loss of the ELD system to be replaced with paper logs — which many drivers strenuously objected to as the ELD mandate went into effect in 2019 — seemed to be summed up in what read like a tongue-in-cheek comment by one person in this posting.
“Hope you all enjoy your paper logs,” the commenter wrote.
Only US city named Phoenix is in AZ. Need fire/ashes for Phoenix birth.
"A bird in Egyptian mythology that lived in the desert for 500 years and then consumed itself by fire, later to rise renewed from its ashes."
>So with everyone
and businesses.
all use some or all of the following:
MS Office/outlook/excel/ppt
Skype
webex
gotomeeting
zoom
salesforce.com
LMS systems
Talent management systems
EMR
etc…
and a few database and cloud services
Oracle
SAP
AWS
etc…
First time in history the UAW is striking against all big three automakers
Detroit
CNN
—
The United Auto Workers union is on strike against General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, the first time in its history that it has struck all three of America’s unionized automakers at the same time.
Workers on Friday walked out of three plants – one each from the Big Three automakers – in Missouri, Michigan and Ohio. Picketers were met with cheers from sign-waving union members.
The UAW referred to its targeted strike of three plants as a “Stand Up Strike,” which it called a strategic “new approach” to walking off the job.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/15/business/auto-workers-strike/index.html
https://twitter.com/tim_cook/status/1701732427897491578
Tim Cook
@tim_cook
At Apple, we believe that climate change is one of the world’s most urgent priorities and we are deeply committed to doing our part. Today we had a special guest—a real force of nature—stop by to check on our progress.
https://twitter.com/gregg_re/status/1701647729363947770
Gregg Re
@gregg_re
apple is currently announcing their new iPhone. they have begun their presentation with a black woman identified as "Mother Nature" who is explaining how apple is solving climate change
The case against pets: is it time to give up our cats and dogs?
A growing number of people argue that owning pets is unethical - and that animals can never really have a good life in a human home
Troy Vettese has a parrot in his family. She gets paid a lot of attention, but she wants more. Parrots are clever and social. Vettese says: “She needs to be entertained all the time, otherwise she really is suffering.” He sees a possible different life for her: “She could be living with her friends and family in a forest, very happy – but she’s not, and that’s unfair to her.”
If that sounds sensible, but you don’t see what it has to do with the fluffy, well-exercised and frequently fed love of your life at home, bear with me. Of course, when it comes to owning pets, there are varying shades of grey. On one end of the spectrum: the poor snake I spotted at a party recently, being worn as a necklace. At the other might be your rescue pup, or my rescue cats, one with a damaged cerebellum and the other with one eye; they wouldn’t have survived long on the streets. But I still find myself wondering whether it is fair keeping them at all.
We may think that we are giving our companions rounded lives and putting them first when we rise early for walkies or clean up another accident. But Vettese, an environmental historian who specialises in animal studies, says the suffering of his family’s much-loved bird is evidence that pet ownership is not about the animals.
“If people really cared about animals, we would only engage in rescues and helping animal sanctuaries’ wildlife rehabilitation – things that we find fulfilling, but that also help the animal,” he says. Instead, “we only like relationships where they are easy, where the pets are well maintained, where we can hire a dog walker, where it impinges as little as possible on our life and we are extracting as much emotional support as we want from them”. To his mind, it is definitely “a very selfish relationship”.
Trends in pet ownership could be taken as evidence of this: 24% of all owners in the UK got their pet in the past two years, with a total of 5.4m pets acquired since 2020, according to a recent report by the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals. During Covid lockdowns, people were bored at home, allowed out only to take walks – on which a dog provided company. In the immediate aftermath, as people went back to work and realised a musclebound American bully XL dog wasn’t going to love being alone in a flat all day, lots of animal shelters were overrun; many continue to be, as a consequence of the cost of living crisis.
A one-eyed black cat sitting in front of a white background
But, at least in the “traditional west”, keeping animals such as dogs and cats seems to be the norm, says Jessica du Toit, a doctoral student in philosophy at Western University in Ontario who studies animal ethics. She grew up with pets and takes every chance she can to spend time with her parents’ elderly dog, Oliver. In fact, she says, “so many people nowadays consider these animals to be their companions, or a part of their respective families, that we have things such as Uber Pet [which allows you to order a taxi that will take you and your four-legged friend]; restaurants, hotels and workplaces stating that they are pet-friendly; and people earning good incomes as pet walkers, pet sitters and pet psychologists”.
Jessica Pierce, a bioethicist and the author of Run, Spot, Run: The Ethics of Keeping Pets, says: “We’re at a really weird place, and definitely a place that is unlike any we’ve been in the past.” She cites a new report on the pet industry in the US that puts the figure of US households with pets at 70%: “That’s unbelievable!”
It isn’t just the scale of pet ownership that has mushroomed in recent years, Pierce says, but also what she describes as the “intensity” of pet ownership: “They are much more intensively captive than they have been in the past.” She takes the example of dogs, which, in general, “have less and less freedom to move around the world and be dogs”.
p1
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/sep/13/the-case-against-pets-is-it-time-to-give-up-our-cats-and-dogs
The way we breed animals now – for traits that we find cute, docile or hypoallergenic – is at dizzying new heights. “Dogs and cats are more and more treated like objects, products, a substrate, not like beings,” says Pierce, who grew up with dogs, cats and “a bunch of other pets”. It was when history repeated itself and her young daughter had her own menagerie that she “started to really look at the ethics of it”. She points to breeds such as “pugs and boxers, which have lifelong quality-of-life compromises”.
Then there are the ways they are much more intensely “ours” than once they might have been – another member of the family in a way that is loving, but not very animal. Our pets have become like our children. We buy them bow ties for their birthday and take them for tea-tree oil pawdicures. Professionals paint portraits of them to hang on our walls, or we do it ourselves; I spent a particularly silly afternoon creating lino likenesses of my cats.
The global pet industry is vast – worth $320bn, according to one report – and increasingly humanised; products cash in on our desire to spoil animals and shower them with a very human, consumerist kind of love. The psychology is complicated, and pet owners might feel they are indulging their animals, but how much is that high-concept toy really about your hamster?
“The level of emotional dependence humans have on their companion animals is different from any time in the past,” says Pierce. “People are seeing dogs as emotional aids, whether or not they are officially therapy animals.” This is, she thinks, taking its toll. If you look at veterinary literature, she says, the levels of “acute anxiety in dogs are off the charts”.
We are asking animals to fill a very human need, says Vettese: “People are looking for unconditional love.” But that love “is predicated on this absolute domination of the pet’s life – what they eat, their sexuality, their love, their activity – and you can’t disentangle these two things”. If pets had more autonomy, he says, “they would not necessarily have this unconditional love”.
For pet owners, this is an uncomfortable concept. Would my cats still nuzzle me with wild abandon if I weren’t such a reliable cat-treat dispenser? I shudder at the thought.
“The problem with unconditional love,” says Ed Winters, the author of This Is Vegan Propaganda (And Other Lies the Meat Industry Tells You), is that it comes at a price. “How are they going to feel when we go into the shop and they’re whining at the door? They’ve become so reliant on us that even just a few hours of separation can cause distress.” He has only ever had one pet – a hamster called Rupert whose personality was so winning that he was a catalyst for Winters to become vegan.
Even if our pets aren’t depressed, perhaps they aren’t living their best lives. “There are certainly some animals who do very well in the care of certain human beings,” says Du Toit. “But many human beings, even when they are kind and conscientious custodians of their animals, underestimate the needs and desires of their companions.” Even if you have the basics covered, “most dogs and cats also need adequate cognitive stimulation, and opportunities for play and socialisation with compatible conspecifics [animals of the same species] if they are to have minimally decent lives.” Without it, she says, they experience frustration, loneliness and sometimes separation anxiety.
p2
“The boredom of animals is intense,” says Vettese. He looks to parrots again – two in five African grey parrots exhibit “feather-damaging behaviour”, or plucking themselves, out of boredom. Fish are increasingly thought to be bored or stressed by tank life. My cats have a garden and toys in the shape of mackerel to play with, but I would hazard that they would cause a lot less “mischief” if I had more time to better occupy them with feline-oriented games.
Regarding uncaged domesticated animals, Pierce still says that “captivity is the main ethical problem … because even dogs and cats are captive in important ways and captivity has a whole range of physiological and neurological ill effects on animal brains and bodies”. Cats are often free to come and go as they please – mine frequently do, coming back smelling of woodsmoke and another person’s perfume – but, when push comes to shove, they are captive broadly to my will. That said, Pierce argues that “agency and a really broad sense of control over their own lives” counteracts at least some of the negativity of captivity for dogs and cats.
There are other ethical acrobatics involved in pet ownership. Take the damage pets do to other animals and habitats. Cats, for instance, kill a huge amount of wildlife and have contributed to the extinction of 63 species worldwide. Then there is their carbon footprint. While we are increasingly aware of how our diets affect the planet, Winters argues that we view our pets separately; I can’t be the only pescatarian who feeds their cat meat. It might not always be thus – according to the largest study to date, vegan diets are healthier and safer for dogs than conventional meat-based diets, as long as they are nutritionally complete. But if US pets were a country, they would rank fifth globally for meat consumption, ahead of Germany.
So, is there a way to own pets ethically? Yes and no, Pierce says. “There’s no such thing as perfect … but we can do our best and do pretty well.” She has a dog called Bella – “a mix of some sort … she’s super-cute” – who has some physical disabilities, “so she can’t walk very well, but she has a lot of fun in life”. They take her hiking in a backpack. Taking care of her is, she says, a big responsibility; Pierce feels constantly as though she is not doing enough for her. Whereas previously she thought Bella had behavioural issues, she now sees that it is her job to adapt more thoughtfully to her needs “and not make her do all the work”.
It would be good, says Pierce, “to see us doing more work to adapt ourselves to our dogs”. Take our homes: it should be obvious, she thinks, when we enter the house of someone who has dogs or cats. “Let it be a house full of dog, with beds that smell like the dog, because that’s going to be comfortable for the dog. Toys lying around, hair on the couch, muddy footprints.”
Adopting animals from shelters rather than buying them from breeders is one obvious step, but perhaps we need to reframe our relationship with pets altogether. “We understand that they have emotions and thoughts, because that’s one of the ways that we find them wonderful companions,” says Pierce. “But at the same time, we fail to see them for who they are. We see them for who we think they are, who we want them to be.” I can’t honestly deny the joy of seeing a yorkshire terrier dressed as Wonder Woman, but I am pretty sure it’s not a dog’s idea of a good time.
Du Toit makes a distinction between owning pets and keeping them. The former, she argues, may “foster or reinforce problematic attitudes towards the animals we keep as companions … we are very unlikely to think of ourselves as having onerous moral duties to that which is our property”. By shifting our thinking and language to “‘caring for’ or ‘keeping’ companion animals” says Du Toit, “we are much more likely to treat our companion animals in a manner that is appropriate, given their inherent moral worth”.
3 of 3
>Cohen
Kohen (Hebrew: כֹּהֵן, kōhēn, [koˈ(h)en], "priest", pl. כֹּהֲנִים, kōhănīm, [koˈ(h)anim], "priests") is the Hebrew word for "priest", used in reference to the Aaronic priesthood, also called Aaronites or Aaronides.[1] They are traditionally believed and halakhically required to be of direct patrilineal descent from the biblical Aaron (also Aharon), brother of Moses, and thus belong to the Tribe of Levi.[2]
During the existence of the Temple in Jerusalem (and previously the Tabernacle),kohanim performed the Temple sacrificial offerings, which were only permitted to be offered by them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohen
indeed. vaping is disgusting poison, taking life.
who told you about vitamins? exactly.
your 'needs' are largely programmed illusions designed to control you.
vice has consequence.
"medicine" is temporary, consuming anything habitually and without end is merely committing to a new imbalance.
one's choices and path chosen are all of one's self.