London Bridge Attack and the Globalist Perspective

Lots of people are wondering why the governments of Europe refuse to address the issue of how Muslim immigration from the poorest Arab countries of the least educated people from those countries is effecting their nations. Your average conservative will say it is because they are letting radicals into their country and that is true to a degree; but, most of the people who committed terror attacks in England were second generation and were radicalized in the United Kingdom. Liberals will tell you we just have to be more tolerant of their cultures, to be multi-cultural rather than adopt English culture as the Indians and Pakistani's have in the past. They mayor of London has said that terror attacks are just the reality of life in modern European cities. On it's face that is insanity; but, he actually meant it because he doesn't believe in borders and he understands that will be one of the consequences.

The assumption I begin with in politics is that things come about because the people in power want them to. Who benefits must always be the question, follow the money that determines what happens. The perspective of all globalists and the European Union is that having many groups in constant conflict has a value beyond bringing in new cuisines. What is the value they find in it economically and socially? Lets start by looking at Theresa May's (the English Prime Minister) response to the murders on the London bridge by Muslim extremists.

Time - Read Prime Minister Theresa May's Full Speech on the London Bridge Attack.

What did she blame the attacks on? Firstly she blamed it on sectarianism (religion, any religion that people believe in). Her solution is constant and growing internal security and surveillance. The second cause she found for the violence was the internet. She said it allowed people to gather and discuss wrong ideas. Her solution is to internationally regulate what you can say online and monitor all your online communications to make sure your not a bad person. She then states that we must attack ISIS in Syria; but, Syria was not involved in ANY of the three attacks that England has experienced in the last three months alone or ever. Her fourth solution is longer detainment for people not found guilty of crimes but suspected of thinking about committing a terrorist act. In fact, there had been discussions and a trial balloon floated at the idea of suspending the English elections.

Daily Mail - Call off the election! Social media users call for vote to be postponed to 'prioritise the safety of the country' but government insists the polls WILL go ahead.

John Oliver of Last Week Tonight posted a clip from his show last night where he talked about the London bridge attack, he laughed and said the English way was to laugh it off and said the real threat was Putin. I saved the clip; but, it is no longer up, I am sure it will pop up somewhere. Yep, found another copy.

These things just don't disappear. He starts by saying that "In no way is Britain under siege", just upset. How many people were killed in the last three irritating events, how many at the Manchester bombing alone? He literally laughs at the idea that some Britain' s might be worried or concerned. He claimed that the Britain's are more upset by people making tea in a microwave than the terror attacks. He then shows a gay man in England whos says that he will keep doing what he does because he won't let the terrorists win. Fair enough; but, they didn't ask this gay man if he felt threatened by the extreme Muslims who attack gays. He ends by saying that the biggest threat to the United States is Putin and Trump and that Putin had said that some Russians could have been involved in hacking the DNC; but, that is not quite what he said, just how Oliver summarized it. 

After 9-11 happened Jon Stewart and others gave heart felt sorrow and expressions of love for their city, Oliver didn't do that, he laughed about what happened in London, watch the video, he made fun of it and then attacked Trump and Putin. This man has sold his soul and wants to sell you on the establishment agenda while appearing to be anti-establishment. He also thought Britain leaving the EU was the worst thing that has ever happened, yet he left Britain and the EU. Lets not forget that he works for one of the six multinational companies that own 90% of all the media in the United States.

Here is a few questions for you. If we are facing overpopulation then why increase the number of people in Europe by immigration? If we have a problem with greenhouse gasses in the west than why increase the number of people through immigration and thereby increase the greenhouse gas emissions from those same countries? If we cannot assimilate people without terror attacks than why bring in more people who don't agree with western beliefs and not require them to assimilate? What is the benefit? 

I want to focus on the media for a second. I am going to post a video by a guy I find amusing but frequently think oversimplifies things.

I will not post it; but, Alex Jones has an even longer copy of the tape of the staging of this event. Specifically CNN was involved in arranging a show of support from what we are told Muslims for London and against terrorists. They also made it appear to be spontaneous, which it wasn't.

The Muslims did not crash the world economy, neither did the gays, the jews, xenophobes, Nazi's or Putin or Trump or Melania or Ivanka or the illegal aliens. Nope, it was the western banks that crashed the economy and rigged the markets afterwards. It was after the worldwide markets crashed that we attacked Libya, Syria and everyone else in the middle east. A distraction. By sending them to the west we have brought in a new boogie man so that we will ignore the real boogieman, our wealthy and our leaders.

"Last Man Standing", Writing for Profit and God. Thats an Interesting Combo Isn't It?

I am still retired. I am not even going to end up getting paid for the correspondence I just wrote. As a result of the position I took in the document I ensured I would not get paid. I had agreed to only get paid if the outcome was slightly different; but, I wrote what needed to happen even though it meant I would not get paid. I could have written it differently; but, I won't help people I don't want to and don't agree with in business and if I do help someone I do what is best for them in my estimation.

When I am asked for my business opinion or assistance I am righteous ass. If you don't take my suggestion I don't give you them. I am not your friendly neighborhood consultant kissing rear-ends for pennies. I wasn't a kiss up when I had a real job. When I had a real full time job they had all the managers get a psych test, an attitude test. My results said stand 3 feet away from if I work for you and just tell me what you want and leave. That was the advice the specialists gave my bosses and it surprised nobody. They scared of me and smart enough to follow it and reaped the benefits. I treated those who worked for me as family because I saw us all in it together and I didn't care if they hated me for it. I don't want to be kids friends, I sought to be their father even if it pissed them off sometimes. My goal was to help them find their way and be themselves, I think I did that or at least the best I could. You are responsible for your employees just as if they were your kids because you have the power. If you discipline, make sure it is in their best interest not just to get out anger.

I got irritated at the people I am helping. I wasn't upset because I will not get paid. To tell you the truth they don't even understand that my agreement means my solution results in my not getting paid. I love my work. LOL. When I take on a job I find the answer to the question I was asked to address, I feel a fiduciary duty (you really need to look up the word fiduciary, it means so much) when I agree to help someone. I got irritated about the people I am helping because they felt entitled to my best effort and forgot I owe them nothing and am doing them a favor and always knew I might not get paid. You should never expect things from others if you are looking to only get from them without ever giving anything back.

"Last Man Standing" is Tim Allen show, he was the guy behind "Home Improvement". I never watched the show until about a week ago. It got cancelled a couple of weeks ago and I didn't really know about it before then. Hey, I didn't know what a Snookie was till it wasn't. I didn't watch much television until I retired. I found out about the show because they cancelled it. Some said it was cancelled because it was too conservative. The network said that even though it was their third highest rated show they were killing their comedy night. I think they lied because it is the funniest show I have ever seen. I have been splitting a gut for the past week as I binge watch it. Maybe he reminds me of me except I am a socialist. Now, I am only on season 4 and am hoping Tim's character does not decide to get a sex change in season 5 or do something else I find out of character.

I really like this show and I want to talk about why. The show is about family and integrity, I like those issues. The show is about a real dad who actually cares for his family and pushes his daughters to be the best they can be while still viewing them as different than boys. I actually like the show more than I liked "Home Improvement". The messages it makes are about love, mercy, generosity, hope and innocence. There are no bad guys in the show, just people working through things and trying to figure out the balancing act that is life.

I told all my employees the same thing, "Do the right for the right reason and you cannot make a mistake that I cannot fix". I wrote a new correspondence today and it is great and will be very effective and I reminded the people I am helping that can't help them if they don't take care of their problems. To fix problems you have to address them when the opportunity arises. Sometimes it doesn't come up; but, when asked for help it has already come up. People ask for my assistance when all other answers have failed and they don't know what to do. That is exactly when they should ask for my assistance, when they are willing to listen and are desperate because I am a pain in the ass and make sure they know they have screwed up.

Sometimes I think God is like that. I think God waits until we really mean it, that we are searching for a solution and have screwed up badly. I think maybe we only hear him when we can see that all of our choices didn't find the right answer. We call him much more earnestly when we are desperate than when we are comfortable. Maybe he is always talking to us but we ignore him until he is our last chance to find a better way.

I should not have been irritated with the people I am helping, maybe I should have appreciated the fact they came to me in the end and trusted that I could and would help when nobody else had the answer. That is the kind of message I saw time and time again on "Last Man Standing". Tim Allen does not need more money, he is doing fine and always will. When he was young he made a lot of mistakes and then asked God what to do. I don't drink beer, I drink wine and only red wine because it keeps my blood cells from coagulating and giving my that all important third heart attack. I don't think I will be coming back from that one. I would be happy to have a beer with Tim Allen and ask him why his show was so spiritual, there are no others like that on the air.

Media Avoidance and Bilderberg

I wrote a motion for a legislator today. It was pretty good and we will see if it achieves it's goal. The person who is making the motion has never met me and probably never will. I was asked to write it by someone else. I was told what everyone was attempting to achieve and just put it into words and provide background as an expert in the area in question. I enjoyed writing it and while I don't write these types of things very often anymore, it was still really easy for me. I don't get writers block and am very fast and strategic in my business writing.

Oddly enough one might expect that my business writing would not be as good as it once was; but, the truth is that this blog keeps me current and my writing limber. It feels good to know I still have it. My readers know that I read everything and I do it everyday. I know my readers don't have the free time to spend all day following the details of every news event so I try to do it for them and then provide links so they can check me and read the source documents if they so choose. That is the responsibility of anyone trying to inform people. I don't use unnamed anonymous sources because you cannot check them yourself.

The Bilderberg Group met today and that barely made the news. I didn't see the New York Times or the Washington Post talk about it. I think the first time the Washington Post wrote about it was in 2012 and the group has been meeting since 1954. For 63 years this group has been meeting with the biggest power players in the world and most people still have not heard about it. The media floods you with news about the Kardashians; but, almost nothing about these meetings.

The number of Democratic and Republican politicians who have attended this over the years is stunning and the number who have discussed it with the country is zero, also stunning. George H. W. Bush was a participant as was Bill Clinton and later Hillary Clinton. Gerald Ford was a participant and all of them did it before they became President and none of them talked about it. Many famous members of the media have attended these meeting; but, they haven't talked about the meetings either. They have time to report on what Trump ate for breakfast but not what the leaders of the world think about where we should all be headed.

Kings and Queens attend Bilderberg along with politicians, members of the media, academics and business leaders. The Bohemian Grove is a collection of the same types in a social setting. Bilderberg is not a social meeting, it is all business. So what is the avowed purpose of the Bilderberg Group? According to Andrew Kakabadse, ".The theme at Bilderberg is to bolster a consensus around free market Western capitalism and its interests around the globe". If you want to see what they talk about read their agendas, they are posted online and I posted their current agenda yesterday on this blog. Here is my question, if they believe the things they discuss are the most important issues then why don't they let everyone see and hear their discussions?

Bilderberg 2017 and the Logan Act.

Today the Bilderberg Group publicly listed a number of people scheduled to attend this year's meeting. The meeting will be held June 1 to 4, 2017 in Chantilly, Virginia. A list of participants can be found on their site. Bilderberg 2017 Participants. The Finnish Minister of Transport and Communication will be their along with Tiankai Cui, the Chinese ambassador to the United States, Sandro Gozi, the Italian State Secretary for European Affairs, Senator Lindsey Graham, Christine LeGarde (Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund) and assorted other officials from foreign countries. Their agenda is as follows:

1. The Trump Administration: A progress report
2. Trans-Atlantic relations: options and scenarios
3. The Trans-Atlantic defence alliance: bullets, bytes and bucks
4. The direction of the EU
5. Can globalisation be slowed down?
6. Jobs, income and unrealised expectations
7. The war on information
8. Why is populism growing?
9. Russia in the international order
10. The Near East
11. Nuclear proliferation
12. China
13. Current events

Remember when it turned out that General Flynn had talked to a Russian ambassador and the media started saying he had violated the Logan Act which forbids unauthorized people from negotiating with foreign governments. Heck, newspapers called for Trump's impeachment for violating it. Well, I wrote that I would bring up the issue again when Bilderberg met next. That is now. Let's play who can we put in jail. John Brennan of the Kissinger Associates, Senator Tom Cotton, Kenneth Griffin of the Citadel Group, David Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group, Eric Schmidt of the Alphabet Inc formerly called Google, and a variety of other Americans going there to discuss foreign affairs with foreign diplomats in private.

Will MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times or the Washington Post be reporting on the possibility that international affairs will be discussed in violation of the Logan Act? Nope, they won't even barely report on the meeting. Flynn was the incoming Secretary of Defense and he spoke to the Russian ambassador and they called for his head. Why is Eric Schmidt allowed to meet in private with the Ambassador from China, he has never been elected to office, does he have President Trump's authorization? If not, he is violating the Logan Act.

ALL the people who called for Flynn's prosecution under the Logan Act will say nothing about it now. Why? Because they are hypocrites? No, because they are flat out liars and know the Logan Act probably would not stand up in court today, just like it hasn't been used in about 200 years. That is the essence of this whole Russia Trump media game. Come back in five days and we will go over all those who call for prosecuting the American attendees at Bilderberg. You won't find anyone in corporate media doing it, not even Keith Olberman.

Now lets discuss the agenda for this year's Bilderberg meeting. Item one is a discussion of Trump and his administration. Yes, a group of globalists are discussing what they think of a nationalist. I bet they don't like him. They will also be discussing whether or not globalization can be "slowed down" and why populism is growing (as opposed to elitism). You see, your betters don't like it when you don't vote the way they want you to, they don't like the idea of democracy. The most telling thing they will discuss is, "Jobs, income and unrealized expectation". Short answer is they are discussing that there will be fewer and fewer jobs, the concept of universal welfare and how people will be pissed when they have no opportunity to get ahead (unrealized expectations). They will be discussing the things I have been writing about for eight years that are not discussed in the mass corporate media. They will be discussing the future or all of us and you will not know what is specifically said because nobody takes notes or repeats what was discussed there.

I Have To Write a Document

I have to write something up by the weekend for someone. I said I would so I will but it won't be posted here, it is for a business. I don't have a lot to write about tonight because I have been on the phone all day. Literally, on the phone all day.

I guess the most talked about article of the day was Kathy Griffin's photo shoot of her holding Trump's bloody head as if she had decapitated him. Discussing what she did is like shooting fish in a barrel. To tell you the truth, I think she was just looking to become relevant for a day and saw an easy target; but, it backfired. I don't think she was anymore serious than the celebrities that promised to leave the country if Trump won and she may have been one of them. Yet, here they still live. Because she is so stupid, she is now an easy target. Lets all agree she is an idiot and sort of disgusting and move on to the real things that matter. Avoid all distractions and center on the issues. What happens when we lose half of all our jobs? That is much more important than whether or not Kathy Griffin is a skank or vile.

How many times must I repeat this. This country did not have an economic collapse because of gays, bigots, Muslims, illegal aliens, white males, blacks, jews, xenophobes or the ill informed or even Kathy Griffin. It was American corporations that sent manufacturing overseas and our banking institutions that bankrupted the country. Follow the money, not the unfunny.

We all get frustrated and we all get pissed. I know I do. We can stamp our feet, point out others personal short comings, victimize ourselves for sympathy or focus on the things that really are changing this world and we are not discussing. Chelsea Clinton came out and attacked Griffin for what she did, is this worth dogpiling up on? Going after this is like going after Trump for liking two scoops of ice cream. It is stupid. You say it once and move on.

I have to write this correspondence; but, I will reading the news and back with something more important than Ms. Griffin in a couple of days.

Kim Dotcom, Seth Rich and Why It Matters

On July 10, 2016 Seth Rich was shot to death from behind and died. We do not know why he was shot; but, the police said they suspect robbery. This is odd because nothing was stolen, not his very expensive watch nor his wallet or money. It is possible that this was a robbery; but, as of today we do not know the motive. According to reports he was shot in the back twice at 4:19 in the morning while talking to his girlfriend on the phone after having left a bar at 1:30. Okay, the bar was 1.8 miles from his house, where was he for those two hours? We don't know. Why was he calling his girlfriend at four in the morning, we don't know.

Seth Rich worked for the Democratic National Committee and was the Director of Voter Expansion Data. He was a systems person with a high clearance in the DNC. On August 9, 2016 WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward for the capture of his killer(s). Julian Assange, head of WikiLeaks, stated at the time that :

Julian Assange: Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks. As a 27 year-old, works for the DNC, was shot in the back, murdered just a few weeks ago for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington.
Reporter: That was just a robbery, I believe. Wasn’t it?
Julian Assange: No. There’s no finding. So… I’m suggesting that our sources take risks.

On October 7, 2016 WikiLeaks began publishing what became known as the "Podesta E-mails". Nobody knew what was in the e-mails until WikiLeaks began publishing them. Assange implied Seth Rich was the leaker in August two months before they released anything.

At NO point in time has Assange publicly stated that Seth Rich was the leaker of the e-mails; but, at no point in time has he denied Seth Rich was the leaker. WikiLeaks does not make claims they cannot prove and never has. We do not know why Seth Rich was killed and it may have been a robbery; but, we have a lot of reasons to believe that Seth Rich was the leaker of the Podesta e-mails. Those are two different issues and we should not confuse them.

Now we get to Kim Dotcom. He is the founder of a couple of internet companies that allow people to share information privately. He is worth hundreds of millions. His site allowed people to send mail to one another without being read by the government. I think the post office used to do the same thing, except now letting people converse anonymously is thought a crime, private conversations are thought a crime. The United Sates government wanted to jail Kim Dotcom for letting people talk in private, where the government couldn't read their conversations. Get it?

On May 22, 2017 Kim Dotcom stated that he could prove that Seth Rich was the person who provided the Podesta e-mails to WikiLeaks. A couple of days later he said that he would provide testimony to congress if they would promise that he could go home, New Zealand, afterword's. The place he is now. I present facts, not opinions.

Assume Seth Rich was killed in a botched robbery, assume blaming Hillary is political. Kim Dotcom has said he will tell what he knows on the condition he can go home. Why wouldn't you want to hear what he has to say? Watch the news and see if they ask him to come here and testify or if they don't want to know his answers.

Let the police determine who killed Seth Rich, give them time. Pastor Daniels case has not been answered yet. Ask for evidence, not theories. The question of whether or not Seth Rich was the person responsible for releasing the Podesta emails is a different one. Why is that a question the corporate media and the government do not want discussed?

I have told my readers to be careful what they post and to not post speculation. I have told my readers that I will not post accusations regarding the Pastor Carol Daniels case and to send them to the OSBI. Why would the government not want to hear what Kim Dotcom has to say about WikiLeaks and they got their information? I am pretty sure that an active investigation into how WikiLeaks got the emails from Podesta is going on. Why wouldn't they want to hear him when it costs them nothing, he did not ask for immunity.  They don't want to hear what he has to say. Why not? What are they afraid of him saying? It is not about Seth, it is not about Kim, it is not about the election, it is about the DNC.

Smoking and Restaurants.

So I just got back from a Chinese restaurant for pickup. While waiting for my food to be made I stood outside and had a cigarette. Now I know to be at least 20 feet away from doors and open windows while smoking in California; but, I noticed something funny. The sign on the door said you had to be 20 feet away to smoke; but, the ashtray was right next to the door. Look around next time you go out, you will find businesses tend to keep an ashtray next to the outside door; but, you are not allowed to smoke within 20 feet. Is that entrapment?

How did they come up with 20 feet anyways? Any real industrial hygienist will tell you that cigarette smoke is too dispersed to have any effect past one foot. What science was used to come up with 20 feet? The answer is none.