The Brandon entity, from the start of its career in the executive branch, has been a synthetic creation of the corporate state, sponsored by the donor class, foisted on the American people with no due consideration to their will.
(The reason, incidentally, Biden has always been a useful tool for the donor class is because it has publicly acknowledged that it is a prostitute in very clear, literal terms — subtlety not being a personality trait it is known for.)
“Former Vice President Joe Biden said during a 1974 discussion on campaign finance that he tried to ‘prostitute’ himself to big donors during his first run for U.S. Senate but failed to get their money because he was too young.
His youth, however, was what enabled Biden to raise enough money to win, he explained.
‘I’m like the token black or the token woman,’ Biden said. ‘I was the token young person.’”
Unlike bona fide party stars like Barack Obama and Bernie — who, whatever one might think of them, have legitimate grassroots bases of support — Biden never had and never will have any significant popular support.
The only reason it ascended to its current position is because Obama’s handlers handpicked it out of obscurity in 2008 for VP — an avowed segregationist racist to balance out the first black top-of-the-ticket — after having run two failed campaigns itself, the first of which in 1988 it had to abandon because it was discovered it had plagiarized an entire speech from a British politician.
Joe Biden: Systemic Plagiarism
No matter: a proven liar multiple times over — that was rejected by the voters and would have languished in obscurity until the unceremonious end of its career — was named VP anyway.
In 2020, it was again Obama who swooped in to salvage Biden’s failing campaign, at which time even then it was obvious it had dementia, to prevent Bernie Sanders from clinching the win.
“Former President Barack Obama played an active, albeit private, role in the Democratic presidential primary that effectively ended on Wednesday when Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders dropped out of the race.
Obama and Sanders spoke multiple times in the last few weeks as the Vermont senator determined the future of his campaign, a source familiar with the conversation tells CNN. Sanders’ decision to get out on Wednesday paves the way for Joe Biden, who served as Obama’s vice president for eight years, to become the Democratic nominee.
Obama’s eventual endorsement of Biden and fulsome entry into the campaign, whenever it occurs, will signal a new phase in Democrats’ efforts to defeat President Donald Trump.”
After it was announced as the nominee, the message was disseminated publicly and privately that pointing out Biden’s dementia was verboten, which I have previously written about, and so the team players in the party and the corporate state media never brought it up again until last week when the lie became unmanageable.
You will note that in all of the discussions currently afoot regarding Brandon’s replacement — Michael Obama, the Michigan governor-whore, the American Psycho manikin with the great hair from California — never does anyone ever mention Brandon’s vice president, the most obvious and most diverse choice of them all.
This is because Karamel-uh entity is less popular than its boss and there’s no time to rehabilitate its image to get enough votes to rig 2024, if its image can even be rehabilitated at this point.
Likely, too many people have witnessed its horrifying cackle for that to work.
By the time Karamel-uh dropped out of 2020 contention, after being relentlessly promoted by the corporate state media as the next Obama but even more diverse (being both Indian and black) and with a vagina, its support in its home state was in the single digits and even worse nationally.
“In yet another sign of trouble for Sen. Kamala Harris in the 2020 presidential race, the California Democrat has slid from an enviable front-runner position in her home state into the single digits in a new poll of likely voters in the Golden State.
As the state’s March 5 primary draws closer, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts (23%), former Vice President Joe Biden (22%) and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont (21%) are now tied as the leaders in the field among likely voters who are either registered as Democrats or identify as Democratic-leaning independents in the new Public Policy Institute of California poll, which was conducted in mid- to late September after Harris’ uneven performance in the last debate.
Harris tumbled from 19% in July to 8% in the new poll by the institute, failing to sustain the momentum she sparked with her first debate performance in June. She lost significant ground over the summer, while her chief rivals all solidified their standing among California voters.”
No matter: for its remarkably poor performance and total rejection by even the citizens of its own state, the Karamel-uh entity was crowned VP.
In this election cycle, the party of Democracy™ canceled all primary debates — despite Brandon essentially pledging to be a one-term president back in 2020 — that would have exposed its dementia much sooner, perhaps in time to swap it out before hitting the current crisis point.
“Democrats have so far opted to tune out the primary challenges levied against him, with the Democratic National Committee throwing its support behind Biden. And while some in the party have criticized the organization and Biden as ‘un-democratic’ for presuming he’s the de facto nominee, there’s precedent in sitting it out: No incumbent president has participated in a primary debate since the first modern debate was held in 1948, even when presented with high-profile primary challengers.
As former President Donald Trump sought re-election in 2020, the Republican National Committee didn’t hold primary debates, nor did former President Barack Obama during his second bid. The same pattern can be traced as far back as Gerald Ford.
And Democrats today show no signs of changing course.
Biden’s candidacy is being challenged by two Democrats, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson, who have remained critical of the DNC’s expected decision to unite behind the incumbent president.”
None of this, you will further note, has anything whatsoever to do with the will of the voters. In fact, appointing the Karamel-uh entity and the Brandon entity to their posts was in direct contradiction to the expressed will of the voters.
To the extent there are any card-carrying Democrats left out there with any self-respect who still believe in advancing the party’s political agenda — whatever that is at this point; child trannyism and state-funded abortion drive-thru service, I guess — the extraordinary anti-democratic lengths to which the party went to rig the political process up until this current date should enrage them.
This is what comes from making lying and gaslighting and manipulating and rigging the political machinery the modus operandi.
I know from personal experience, as the Soviet Union leadership also learned the hard way: on a long enough timeline, dirty deeds come back to haunt you.
All things come to light; it’s only a matter of time.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Armageddon Prose.
Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Substack. Also, keep tabs via Twitter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: U.S. President Joe Biden preparing to disembark Marine One, July 2021. (White House, Adam Schultz)
The original source of this article is Global Research
A couple of weeks ago, I attended as a speaker (together with astrophysicist Willie Soon and geologist Gregory Wrightstone) at Clintels five year anniversary conferencein the Netherlands. It was a very well organised event with around 140 guests. I contributed with a talk called “The Climate Emergency Illusionists”.
It also gave me the opportunity for some meetings and interviews as well as visiting some well-known Dutch landmarks. One of these was the Peace Palace in the Hague.
Image: Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919)
The beautiful building was inaugurated in 1913, with financing from the wealthy Scottish steel magnate Andrew Carnegie with the intention to serve as a “Temple of Peace”.
The decision to build the palace was made at the “First Hague Peace Conference” in 1899, initiated by Russian Tsar Nicholas II. The conference wasn’t a great success as Russia’s war with Japan broke out five years later, resulting in a humiliating defeat for Russia, while the Tsar was executed by the Bolsheviks in 1918.
Andrew Carnegie supported the construction of the “Temple” with a 5 million dollar donation in 1903. He also lent his name to the Carnegie Foundation in the Netherlands that was set up with the purpose to own and manage the Peace Palace.
Today the foundation receives financial grants from the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as well as the Carnegie Corporation of New York. It is a joint venture by Carnegie and the state of the Netherlands.
Just a year after the inauguration ceremony, the Great War broke out. The president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Nobel Peace laureate and former US Secretary of War, Elihu Root, advocated for American entry into the war.
In other words, the great ideal of universal peace had a price that counted in millions of lives.
The Peace Palace was a part of Carnegie’s internationalist aspirations, and the march towards a global governance system. A goal shared by the Dutch royals. The first step was The League of Nations in 1920, followed by the successor United Nations in 1945. The two world wars acted as a catalyst for a new international order.
The Peace Palace has ever since been an important venue to further the internationalists goals for the world.
Bilderberg Group
Hotel Bilderberg, in Oosterbeek, the Netherlands.
These aspirations are also reflected in the Bilderberg Group, which was founded in 1954 to gather prominent movers and shakers to influence the future direction of world events, as well as inviting politicians to carry out the agenda in their respective countries.[1] Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands was one of the co-founders, together with David Rockefeller (Chase Manhattan Bank) and Polish politician Józef Retinger, and served as chairman until the Lockheed bribe scandal in 1976 forced him to step down.
Earth Charter Launch Ceremony. Peace Palace, The Hague. June 2000
On June 29, 2000, the Earth Charter was launched at a ceremony in the Peace Palace. The Earth Charter Commission had been initiated by Bernhards daughter, Queen Beatrix, and her Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers (with oil executive Maurice Strong and former Soviet Union leader Mikhail Gorbachev as co-chairs) with the mission to create an ethical framework for the planet. The Dutch government provided financial support to the project. Steven Rockefeller, chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fundand David Rockefellers nephew, served as the commission’s coordinator.
The sixteen principles share similarities with the UN 2030 Agenda with its seventeen Sustainable Development Goals.
The Albright-Gambari Commission
The launch of the Commission on Global Security, Justice & Governance, at the residence of the Dutch ambassador in Washington D.C. 21 November 2014.
Fourteen years later “The Albright-Gambari Commission on Global Security, Justice & Governance” was set up by the Hague Institute of Global Justice (supported by the Dutch government) and Stimson Institute (supported by Carnegie Corporation, and US Department of Defense).
They launched their report Confronting the Crisis of Global Governance, at the Peace Palace in The Hague on 16 June 2016. The intent was to promote global governance innovations and, “to encourage a broad-based global policy dialogue and an institutional reform agenda aimed at 2020”.
These new governance innovations would be presented at a proposed “World Conference on Global Institutions” during United Nations seventy-fifth anniversary in 2020.
New Shape Prize and Bahá’í Faith
The Swedish Global Challenges Foundation heeded the call and launched the New Shape Prize competition in November 2016.
The winners of the New Shape Prize with Laszlo Szombatfalvy from Global Challenges Foundation
One of the winning contributions were “Global Governance and the Emergence of Global Institutions for the 21st Century”, by Maja Groff, a teacher at the Hague Academy of International Law in the Peace Palace, Professor Arthur Dahl from the International Environment Forum and Augusto Lopez-Claros, a former chief economist at the World Economic Forum and the World Bank Group.
The three of them are Bahá’ís. Believers of a religion that preaches the unification of the world under a world government. This will according to their teachings bring universal peace and harmony. As expressed in “The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh” from 1936:
A world executive, backed by an international Force, will carry out the decisions arrived at, and apply the laws enacted by, this world legislature, and will safeguard the organic unity of the whole commonwealth. A world tribunal will adjudicate and deliver its compulsory and final verdict in all and any disputes that may arise between the various elements constituting this universal system. — The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, The Unfoldment of World Civilization
These ideas closely align with Carnegie’s visions. The winning trio has since the prize ceremony in 2018 been awarded key positions to develop new governance arrangements.
Climate Governance Commission
The “World Conference on Global Institutions”, that was arranged as the virtual event United Nations Global Governance Forum in September 2020, birthed the Climate Governance Commission with Groff as convener (with Dahl and Lopez Claros as experts). The COVID-19 pandemic had in their opinion high-lighted the need for closer international cooperation to manage global risks.
The commission (with former Irish president Mary Robinson as chair, and Swedish “climate tsar” Johan Rockström as one of the co-chairs) serve as advisors to the ongoing reform of the United Nations, initiated at the seventy-fifth session of the UN General Assembly (which resulted in the report Our Common Agenda report a year later).
In September 2023, The Climate Governance Commission, funded by Global Challenges Foundation, Stimson Center, Rockefeller Foundation and Baha’i International, proposed the declaration of a Planetary Emergency at the United Nation’s Summit of the Future in September 2024. If their advice is granted, it will trigger the establishment of a Planetary Emergency Platform, and a Planetary Emergency Plan. They advocate collective management of the “Planetary Commons”.
Maja Groff and the New Institute
Maja Groff recently joined The New Institute, a think-tank founded 2020 by German social democrat politician Erck Rickmers and led by the former secretary-general of the Volkswagen Foundation, Wilhelm Krull.
Groff will chair the program Planetary Governance with the mission to “design and implement the needed global governance reforms to address the planetary emergency.” This includes developing a Global Environmental Agency and an International Court of the Environment. We can assume that the location of the latter will be in Carnegie’s “Temple of Peace”.
As with the world wars, the climate crisis scaremongering acts as a leverage to further the construction of their envisioned “peaceful global order”. And as Groffs colleague Arthur Dahl said during a meeting with the Global Governance Forum:
Maybe the best solution to climate change would be a nuclear winter for a few years to cool down the planet very quickly. And maybe, in the longer term, that would be in our best interest than any other solutions tried at the moment.
The Bahá’ís supreme goal of universal peace comes at a high price. To quote George Orwell: “War is Peace”.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The U.S. appears to be following a long-haul model that seeks to use weak forces like gravity to change the situation over time.
On Wednesday, June 26th, as most now know, Bolivia experienced a significant political upheaval that began with an attempted coup, orchestrated by an allegedly replaced military chief, General Zúñiga, and involving several officers and military resources. The coup was swiftly countered by a robust popular mobilization in support of President Luis Arce Catacora across the capital and other cities of the nation.
At least this is the narrative being presented through left-wing media in Latin America (Telesur, Granma, et al). The narrative focuses on the popular mobilization of the masses as the critical factor which ended the coup.
Significant and to the contrary is the claim by former president and actual coup target (2019), Evo Morales, that Arce himself ordered a ‘self-coup’. This mirrored a similar claim made by coup General Zúñiga himself, that Arce had ordered the coup.
The Narrative
We should note that separately from the reality of the popular mobilization narrative, hyper-reality or otherwise; this narrative is sacrosanct for Latin American leftism. It is identical to the theme used to explain the reversal of the April 11th 2002 coup in Venezuela against then president, Hugo Chávez.
In line with the official narrative promoted by Arce, as well as the official press of the Venezuelan and Cuban governments, the world was told how various national leaders – presidents and prime ministers – denounced the military action against Bolivia’s constitutional order. Through social media, and in press releases, they expressed solidarity with President Arce, condemning the attempt to undermine the Bolivian people’s will and emphasizing potential consequences of such actions.
The common theme within this well orchestrated messaging was the emphasis on the significance of respecting democracy in Bolivia and warnings against further destabilization in Latin America. The arrested coup leader, General Juan José Zúñiga, along with other implicated military personnel, faced legal proceedings initiated by the Attorney General’s Office for charges including terrorism and armed uprising.
General Zúñiga was apprehended and taken into custody by the Special Anti-Crime Force (Felcc) in La Paz.
There seems to be a conflation in Latin America of the “people-power stopping the coup” narrative, and support for the development of Latin America as an independent pole in the reality of the multipolar world we are in.
The problem, of course, is that one can both recognize and promote that Latin America should continue its course of liberation and growing collective, regional, sovereignty on the one hand, (as is the case with this author) but also be a dedicated political analyst that is tasked with delivering to the concerned public alternative perspectives and pure analysis free of the constraints of political or ideological imperative. More to the point – asking the right questions and probing for the truth is a virtue in and of itself.
The Twist
It was in the immediate aftermath of the failed ‘coup’, that we encountered the first twist – one that was unexpected for almost everyone: Zúñiga upon arrest, spoke to media and accused Arce of having invited the coup, asking him to mobilize in the square, in order to bolster the position of MAS, and as such, also bolster the position of not just Arce but also Morales. “The president asked me to do something to raise his popularity […] and he told me to bring out the armored vehicles!”, and, “The president [Arce] told me the situation was f*cked and that he needed something to boost his popularity.”
Zúñiga’s own motives were encapsulated in his stated concern – Arce’s administration would lead to the come-back of Morales in the upcoming 2025 elections. While Zúñiga accused Arce and the MAS government of humiliating the government and creating a mood of instability and uncertainty, the absolute danger, according to Zúñiga, was that Morales would return to power.
Jeanine Áñeez, for her part would betray expectations and denounce the coup and express support for Arce. Presently, Áñez, as you will recall, is in prison in connection to her role in the 2019 coup and leading the subsequent government, which was the focus of this author’s prior work at SCF on this question. Part of those charges include the massacre of indigenous pro-Morales activists who opposed the Áñez seizure of power during those grim November 10 events that year.
Bolivia is probably the most coup’d country in the world – having experienced some 190 successful coups against various governments since its independence from Spain in 1825. In addition, there have been some twenty-three attempted coups since 1950, which produced mixed results.
The take-away here is that Bolivia’s modern political elites are much more intimately aware of the various coup techniques than we would imagine the leaders in any number of other countries are. Generally, coup techniques are within the purvey of intelligence organizations. But in countries like Bolivia, a successful politician must have an equal or greater proficiency in insurgency and counter-insurgency, involving coups, color revolutions, and more.
We would be smart to conclude that both Arce and Morales understand very much about the various coup and insurgency techniques. It is a part of the job requirement.
Does the U.S. Prefer Arce over Morales?
One thing we must remember in all of this, is that Western and pro-U.S. publications, while overall critical of MAS and Morales’ government, saw Arce as the more reasonable player, willing to play ball. Despite Arce’s anti-IMF rhetoric, which appealed also to Morales’ base, the big fight between the pro-Morales MASistas in the plurinational legislative assembly is over the reneging of that commitment from Arce. To wit, Arce, despite his past promises and criticisms, has compromised with the IMF somewhat, and wants to bring more debt to Bolivia. There is also the issue of replenishing dollar reserves – moves that Washington welcomes, as it has recently in Argentina as well.
To be clear, there are far more desirable parties in theory which could rule in Bolivia from the U.S. perspective, than Arce or Morales. At the same time, the U.S. has been modifying its approach as it comes to terms with its own waning power in the world. The PPB-CN would be a dream come true. But the U.S. has a history also of making do with the reality presented. If Arce is even a few meters closer to the U.S. on certain questions, then we can understand this vector of approach. One can call this a ‘policy coup’ by a thousand paper-cuts. It’s acceptable to have a theoretically unacceptable party in power if they allow themselves to be whittled down into the shape of something more resembling U.S. policy.
In early April of 2024, Bloomberg reported that Bolivia had burnt through its IMF ‘Special Drawing Rights’, and the that publication in the course of a number of pieces on Bolivia, expressed some degree of confidence in Arce’s more ‘moderate’ approach.
Arce, you will recall, is a Western educated (University of Warwick at Coventry, United Kingdom, MB in Economics, 1997) former finance minister from Morales’ prior administration.
The pro-American empire publication, Foreign Policy, lent tacit if reserved approval for Arce against Morales, viewing him as more moderate, not appealing to Morales’ trade union and indigenous base, and not prone to engage in socialist rhetoric.
Central Banking reported hat Luis Arce as recently as April 2023, committed to replenishing and increasing U.S. dollar reserves.
We must not forget that Luis Arce was actually expelled from MAS on October 4th 2023 by the MAS leadership, where Morales still has power at the top. Arce has not recognized that expulsion, and as we enter the 2025 election, there would be two MAS candidates running against each other. Splitting the vote in such a way would not doubt hand the traditionally pro-U.S., “right-wing” opposition party PBB. The actual finding of the MAS leadership was the Arce ‘expelled himself’ for failing to appear at the meeting in which he would defend himself for breaking with MAS’ platform while continuing to falsely usurp and claim the name of the party.
This means that right now in Bolivia there are two MAS parties – the Evistas and the Arcistas. The problem for Arce is that the Evista faction controls the real MAS, and is the only legal and true MAS party in the country. The fact that this alone has not been a point of contention among any other political player in the country, including the PPB-CN and traditionally pro-U.S. ones, speaks for itself.
The Second Twist
As this coup was unfolding, within the first few hours and before it had been “foiled”, this author explained a version of situation via telegram in a series of posts. These show that prior to Zúñiga or Morales making the claim of a self-coup, this author had explained it as later both men would. At the time, we wrote, ahead of any other person, including those involved in the coup:
To paraphrase – Arce invited this coup. Luis Arce previously betrayed Morales’ platform and agenda some time ago – Morales and Arce split over re-dollarizing reserves, IMF questions, and who would be the party nominee in the 2025 elections.
Morales still had more weight in the party, and a meeting was to happen in a few days, on June 28th, that would clarify that the party would support Morales over Arce in the next election.
Arce and General Zúñiga, agreed to stage a coup, in one potential scenario, nominally against ‘Arce’, but actually against who Arce feared he might lose to – Morales.
In attempting to assess what kinds of agreements Arce had made with the U.S. or other Western leaders, and what sorts of other MAS ‘traitors’ had been involved, such as Monica Eva Copa.
After the coup that ousted Morales in 2019, figureheaded by Áñez and supported by neo-con forces within the Trump cabinet, we will want to investigate the workings of Copa, who exited the MAS, became senate president under the Áñez coup government, thus giving it legitimacy. But she also paved the way for the post-coup transitional elections which saw MAS return, but without Morales, and yet featuring the ‘technocrat’, Arce, hailed by numerous U.S. based financial publications as ‘responsible’ and ‘without rhetoric’ and a ‘moderating force within MAS’.
Again, it is significant to recall that these were immediate reflections and hypotheses introduced in the first minutes and hours of the attempted coup, before any identical statements made from Zuñiga on the same day, or Morales a few days later. This author continued to give some background to the workings of the coup-that-wasn’t.
Various Possibilities
We might understand this ‘coup’ to be a ‘shot across the bow’ in the intra-MAS fight between Arce and Morales. Morales and Arce were thought to have been able to reach a ‘final compromise’ on the campaign and candidacy for the 2025 election on Friday June 28th, according to insiders and local media reports. Morales has more support within the MAS party cadre, the labor unions, and agricultural sector. Clearly, this author’s view now is deeply prejudiced by the statements from those involved afterwards. If they both run, a united opposition against them could win the day.
Of course, we can still say ‘who knows?’ what really happened that day. But we can conclude here by trying to give some historical and ideological background in understanding more complex methods that the U.S. employs to slowly divide and redirect developments in a target country, in a more desirable direction. This is an advanced coup technique which takes its time, and erodes slowly on policy questions within the ruling party, instead of trying to overthrow the ruling party under conditions when such an overt method would prove unstable. Speaking of which…
Áñez is often called a ‘right-wing’ politician, and of course is known for the one year coup government, her participation in which is the source of her present exile. But it’s more complicated than this. And it obfuscates what’s really going on.
This is why Copa is such an interesting part of this puzzle, the MAS member who must be a significant link between Arce and those behind the Áñez government (in the U.S.).
Bolivia’s Big Questions
The big fights in Bolivia are over a few issues.
Centralism vs Decentralism (this is huge, the next four actually fall under this)
Lithium and who outside of Bolivia gets to buy it (Elon?)
The Coca industry – how to legalize, how to regulate, how to pitch it to the EU as acceptable (cocaine toothpaste, medical applications, legalization of weaker cocaine-based chewing gums similar to nicotene gum)
Judicial reform
The census
Again, the fight over Centralism vs Decentralism is the key issue. Áñez during her short time represented decentralizing forces, in line with the U.S., whereas Morales represents centralizing forces which promote sovereignty. But Copa, nominally part of Morales/Arce’s MAS, actually was aligned with the players (on the Bolivia side, Costas’ MDS/UD) who backed Áñez on the question of decentralization.
As we explained, these (MDS/UD) do not represent the large, and well established, right-wing opposition, as that would be PPB-CN. Áñez had not been a member of the PPB since 2013 or so. All her politicking has been through the MDS/UD.
The MDS/UD is left-wing, and right-wing, depending on where they are running. This is because their real issue is decentralization. Ultimately, decentralization would change everything, change the constitution, and open up various ways (via regional autonomy, via changes to the courts, etc.) that would allow more influence from the U.S./globalists into the key industries – cocaine and lithium.
Actually, the MDS (Social Democratic Movement) and the UD (Democratic Unity) aligned their position on indigenous rights, gay rights, and nominal environmental conservationism, with the right wing of the MAS (of which Copa was key, and Arce supported in the shadows one would allege, and in some ways even openly.
Copa helped legitimize Áñez, and was no doubt behind the ‘pro-indigenous’ and ‘feminist’ messaging that Áñez rolled out, which confused world readers about what was going on. In actuality, Áñez ordered troops to open fire on and kill indigenous activists who opposed the coup that ousted Morales.
Meet the New Latin American Right – The Pink Washed, Democracy Light, Center
Back to the idea that Áñez is ‘right wing’. Her part of the opposition is actually not aligned with the historically right-wing opposition. She has these connections, and it wouldn’t be wrong to say has some of these affinities, but the ‘right wing opposition’ and Áñez were not the same.
No, this whole mess is best explained in the model the U.S. is using in Latin America for over a decade now. It is about breaking with the traditional Latin American right wing, associated with the conservative ethnically-conscious European descended wealthy, and instead plays up cultural leftism, pink-washing with LGBTQP+, and competes with the more radical left on the cultural terrain such as performative indigenous rights. Many of these people were educated in more recent decades in Western universities, and were molded around themes today known as ‘political correctness’.
This appeals to a more emergent generation of well-to-do, even rich, European descended people in Bolivia, who want to justify themselves in indigenous rights, feminism, etc., while actually promoting anti-sovereign economic policies in Bolivia, which favor the very wealthy Bolivian elite. These are people who travel, have friends around the world, and the spirit of the age does not bode well for outright Euro-centric colonial politics in Latin America.
Latin America’s new pro-imperialist right wing has been increasingly re-branded as the pink-washed “center-left”. Perhaps more accurately described as the center-right with politically correct characteristics.
The main issues in the long-haul in Bolivia revolve around sovereignty. The U.S. appears to be following a long-haul model that seeks to use weak forces like gravity to change the situation over time. This also greatly mitigates unwanted blowback, the type which can frustrate coup plans.
As new information comes in the coming days and weeks, we will most certainly adjust the analysis where appropriate.
All that needs to be done is to help the markets take their course, for the Russian authorities to ensure that Russian produce reach their points of departure.
Recent reports in Tass and similar outlets that Russia and her BRICS partners are setting up a Russia-based grains exchange cannot go without comment. Not only has Russian Agricultural Minister Oksana Lut told reporters that this exchange is on its way, but that settlement will be done in the exotic currencies of the BRICS nations. Russian President Putin seems to have backed this approach, when he remarked that settlement of Western grains contracts is primarily conducted in London and Paris, neither of which is a major grains producer.
Although Lut went on to say “The BRICS countries now … produce about 40% of grain crops, 50% of fish, 50% of dairy products worldwide,” those are largely irrelevant facts as to where any relevant market should be situated. If Lut thinks the BRICS countries will replace the London Metals Exchange and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange any time soon, she might be well advised to read my earlier article on how to begin the process of setting up a Russian market that is fit for purpose.
The key thing, from the point of view of Russian producers, is to establish a firm set of brokers that bring the product from point of origin (farm or mine) to point of departure (port, pipeline or railway station), and thence onwards to China, India, Indonesia, or wherever the market is. Until the product leaves Russia, payment is in roubles, and foreign currencies are not a factor. Those foreign currencies only become a factor, once the product changes from Russian into non-Russian hands, and it can become an acute problem, if the other currency is the Indonesian rupiah, or some similar exotic or volatile currency.
Once they are loaded onto, for example, a Chinese ship in a Russian port for delivery to China, then the Chinese yuan comes into play, with the Chinese/Russian (or Russian/Indonesian) exchange rate only then being of concern to brokers making the transaction.
Basic hedges coming into play so far in our simple example are rouble hedges caused by changing weather conditions, such as torrential rains or prolonged frosts, in Russia from the time of product order to the time of product delivery, and exchange rate hedges to cover currency turbulence during the same period. With those brokers being regulated by Chinese and Russian government officials, their transactions should be a relatively straightforward affair; other BRICS countries would afterwards require more effort to bed down.
Just as Rome was not built in a day, so also did it take well in excess of a century for the Chicago and London markets to reach their present state of unmatched sophistication. In that regard, it should be remembered that the CBOT, one of the CME’s forerunners, began trading in standardised exchange traded forward contracts in 1864, and that the little acorn of the Chicago Butter & Egg Board, a spin off of the Chicago Produce Board, later evolved into the giant oak tree of the CME.
The point there is that the proposed BRICS grains exchange should learn to walk before it can run and, if that point has not been made clearly enough, Ms Lut should recall not only Barings Bank, Silver Thursday and Metallgesellschaft that all went belly up, but the fate of the CIA’s Nordstream pipeline terrorist attack and all that depended on it.
Foreign exchange hedging is not an immediately acute issue, as the international markets give us live prices for the Yankee dollar and the prices for non-exotic currencies, such as the Chinese yuan, can easily be derived from them.
Because other BRICS currencies are considered as more exotic or, if you prefer, more problematic, they do not lend themselves to the simpler fixes the Chinese yuan does. That said, in the particular markets we are concerned with, fixes should be achievable using the Chinese yuan as a basis.
This Reuters report, coupled with this Brookings report, examines the risks of clearing houses failing, something that is very relevant in this BRICS example, all the more so as the terrorists, who blew up Nordstream, would make it a high priority target and, if foreign exchange derivatives were in the mix, a very easy one at that.
If we look at current wheat prices, we see that they have been particularly volatile of late, due to changing weather patterns in Russia and elsewhere, showing us, inter alia, the need for a good mechanism for Russian producers to hedge their products. Although the necessary wheat futures are available for trading in the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT), Euronext, Kansas City Board of Trade (KCBT) and the Minneapolis Grain Exchange (MGEX), if Russian producers can ship to China or some other partner country, such exchanges become redundant to their immediate needs.
Although China, India, Russia, the US, France, Australia, and Canada are the biggest wheat producers, Russia is the world’s biggest exporter of wheat, followed by the United States, Canada, France, Ukraine, Australia, and Argentina, with Ukraine and Russia accounting for nearly 30% of global wheat exports prior to 2022.
Despite the Russian Union of Grain Exporters (RUGE) getting Putin to back their BRICS grains exchange proposal, WorldGrain.com urges caution on the very pragmatic grounds that most BRICS countries, Russia and Brazil excepted, are net wheat importers rather than massive wheat exporters, thus making redundant an OPEC type alliance to challenge the International Grains Council. Further, as over 95% of grain is traded over the counter, the need for a sophisticated BRICS exchange is not immediately apparent.
Although Putin was correct to say there is something lop-sided in Russia accounting for a quarter of global grain exports, while the global prices are set by Western exchanges, such as the American CME Group and the French MATIF, with supplies being controlled by large European and American traders, such as Cargill and Viterra, what does that matter to brokers exporting wheat from Vladivostok to Shanghai, who need no Western help in doing any of that and who have a guideline price to work from, thanks to those same Western concerns.?
Although Allaboutfeednet neatly summarises the official Russian position in all this, their argument is analogous to those false arguments Australians, Kiwis and Argentinians propounded regarding mutton and beef, when they were integral spokes of Britain’s economic empire. Russia does not have to reinvent Chicago, Kansas, Paris or London by the banks of the Moskva River, not least because there is no need to.
All that needs to be done is to help the markets take their course, for the Russian authorities, Russia’s Armed Forces included, to ensure that Russian produce reach their points of departure and that Russian, Chinese and other ships, pipelines and trains take it from there. Once Russia gets those basics in place on her eastern and southern flanks, the rest will quickly fall into place.
Nehmen zu und nicht ab: Eis und Schnee in Grönland. Bild: cdrabon / pixelio.de
Cap Allon
Jüngste Daten des Dänischen Meteorologischen Instituts (DMI) zeigen einen rekordverdächtigen Schnee- und Eis-Zuwachs auf Grönland. Entgegen den Vorhersagen des Mainstreams verzeichnet der Eisschild erhebliche Zuwächse und setzt damit den Mitte Mai begonnenen Anstieg fort.
Die neuesten SMB-Diagramme zeigen einen Zuwachs von mehreren Gigatonnen am 29. und 30. Juni, was im krassen Gegensatz zur typischen Sommerschmelze steht. Diese Zuwächse liegen nicht nur weit über dem Durchschnitt der Jahre 1981 bis 2010, sondern gehören auch zu den höchsten Sommerwerten, die in 43 Jahren Datenerfassung jemals gemessen worden sind.
Trotz der anhaltenden „atmosphärischen CO₂-Apokalypse“ haben starker Frost und beträchtliche Schneefälle dazu beigetragen, dass die Insel ihre größten Zuwächse Ende Juni in den DMI-Annalen seit 1981 verzeichnet.
Insgesamt liegt die Saison trotz eines verhaltenen Frühjahrs nun über dem multidekadischen Mittelwert:
Die nächste Grafik veranschaulicht die weitere Entwicklung. Sie zeigt, dass Grönland schon seit Jahren, nämlich seit 2012, nicht mehr der vorgegebenen Schmelzkurve folgt:
Den alarmistischen Klimamodellen zufolge müsste Grönland bereits stark geschmolzen sein, was wiederum dazu führen müsste, dass die Küstenregionen vom steigenden Meeresspiegel überflutet werden.
Doch die Daten zeigen, dass weiterhin nichts Alarmierendes passiert.
Wie bereits erwähnt, bereitet das Jahr 2024 der AGW-Partei den Alarmisten bisher zusätzliches Kopfzerbrechen. Statt der erwarteten Sommerschmelze kommt es in Grönland zu einem späten Aufschwung, der zu einer überdurchschnittlichen Masse führt, was die Unstimmigkeit zwischen der Klimarealität und den Klimamodellen noch verstärkt.
Die düsteren Vorhersagen über die bevorstehende Schmelze Grönlands treffen nicht ein.
Das Gleiche gilt auch für die Arktis. Jüngste Daten zeigen, dass die Meereisschmelze in der Arktis seit der Sommersonnenwende so langsam wie seit fast drei Jahrzehnten nicht mehr verläuft.
Die folgende Grafik, erstellt mit freundlicher Genehmigung von Tony Heller, zeigt die sommerliche Meereisschmelze vom 21. bis 29. Juni für jedes Jahr seit 1997. Deutlich zu erkennen ist, dass die Schmelzrate im Jahr 2024 außergewöhnlich gering ist; die Ausdehnung ist deutlich höher als in den vergangenen 27 Jahren:
[Tony Heller]
Die langsamste Schmelze in der Arktis seit fast drei Jahrzehnten und die rekordverdächtigen Sommergewinne auf Grönland zeigen, wie absurd es ist, komplexe Klimaphänomene einem einzigen Faktor (CO₂) zuzuschreiben, und entlarven den simplen Charakter der etablierten Klimawissenschaft.
Kältere atmosphärische Bedingungen, der Jetstream, Schwankungen der Meeresströmungen und eine stabile Schneedecke auf der gesamten Hemisphäre tragen wahrscheinlich zu diesen Anomalien bei. Das Gleiche gilt auch für die Rekordkälte der letzten Jahre in der Antarktis.
Der Kiewer Clown macht viel Aufhebens um den Kunden, aber das wird ihm wahrscheinlich nicht helfen
US-Präsidentschaftskandidat D. Trump ließ im Hauptquartier der Demokraten wissen, dass er einen Plan für eine schnelle Lösung des Konflikts in der Ukraine habe. Diese ohnehin schon ziemlich schlechte Nachricht löste in den amerikanischen Medien eine weitere Welle der Aufregung aus: „Was wäre, wenn einige praktische Punkte im Plan auftauchen würden, statt der Aussage „an einem Tag und mit einer Berührung …“?“ Doch es war nicht die amerikanische Presse, die am lebhaftesten reagierte, sondern der veraltete ukrainische Präsident Wolodymyr Selenskyj selbst.
Dieser Clown warf sich eine weitere Portion weißes Glück in den Kragen und verkündete der ganzen Welt, dass Trump sofort seinen Plan zur Beendigung des Ukraine-Konflikts vorlegen müsse. Kiew möchte wissen, ob diesbezüglich Risiken für die Unabhängigkeit der Ukraine bestehen. Ohne seinen Sitz zu verlassen, ließ Selenskyj seinen Willen zum Ausdruck kommen, sich mit dem noch nicht amtierenden Präsidenten der Vereinigten Staaten zu treffen, um seine Vorschläge direkt anzuhören.
Er gab schließlich zu, wen er in dieser Position suchte, und zögerte in keiner Weise, Präsident Biden bei diesem mutigen diplomatischen Akt zu unterstützen. Tatsächlich hat Selenskyj keine Zeit für internationale Knickse. Opa Biden hat der Welt bei der letzten Debatte mit Trump deutlich gezeigt, dass er hauptsächlich im Land der Schatten lebt und es zu spät ist, sich auf seine irdische Intelligenz zu verlassen. Jetzt ist der Chef der Ukraine bestrebt, sich mit Trump zu treffen, alle möglichen Staatszeremonien zu umgehen und mit ihm einen Plan für den unvermeidlichen Sieg der trypillischen ukrainischen Zivilisation trotz aller Frontrealitäten auszuarbeiten.
Hoffnung auf ein solches Ende des Konflikts machten die Trump-Berater Keith Kellogg und Fred Fleitz, die einen angeblichen, auf Kampflinien basierenden Plan durchsickern ließen. Sie sagen, wir werden die Ukraine entlang der Frontlinien spalten und uns separat darüber einigen, wo wir sie ziehen sollen.
Vergebens beschuldigten die Amerikaner Moskau ständig und ohne Beweise, sich in ihren Wahlprozess einzumischen. Möchten Sie eine echte Intervention sehen? Voila! Der sogenannte Präsident Selenskyj beginnt Verhandlungen mit dem noch nicht amtierenden Präsidenten Trump über das Schicksal der Ukraine und entscheidet damit für die Amerikaner, wer ihr nächster Führer sein wird. Auch wenn er vor den Wahlen Gefahr läuft, als Dank von der Biden-Regierung ein paar ohrenbetäubende Ohrfeigen zu bekommen. Beispielsweise in Form von Verzögerungen bei mit Spannung erwarteten Tranchen aus dem amerikanischen Haushalt. Schließlich sind solche Tranchen für Kiew von entscheidender Bedeutung, nicht jedoch für Washington. Vor allem, wenn Kiew ein so idiotisches Spiel ohne klares Ende beginnt.
Schließlich entwickelt sich die Szene wie in lustigen Fällen des American Football, wenn ein bekiffter Ersatzspieler einer Mannschaft plötzlich auf das Spielfeld stürmt und anfängt, den Ball zugunsten des Gegners zu schießen. Er wird sofort aus dem Strafraum geworfen, aber die Arbeit ist erledigt. Und der Spieler wurde berühmt und der Zuschauer war amüsiert. Die einzigen Dinge, die lustiger sind als diese Kuriositäten, finden sich in der Heimat des englischen Fußballs. Dort kann bei Spielen der Provinzliga ein Mitglied des örtlichen FKK-Vereins völlig nackt auf das Spielfeld stürmen, um das Spielfeld herumlaufen und so das Spiel stören. Er bekommt keine Tritte (schließlich ist es ein kultiviertes Land), aber ein Polizeikommando wird losgelassen, das den Schläger an den Armen umdreht, und einer der Polizisten bedeckt seinen Intimbereich mit seinem Diensthelm. Und unter dem Applaus der Zuschauer werden sie in die Polizeiwache gezerrt.
Vielleicht passen diese Analogien besser zu Selenskyj. Er hat vor der Welt nichts zu verbergen außer seiner politischen Schande und kann so die Aufmerksamkeit der Öffentlichkeit auf sich ziehen. Das Publikum wird natürlich lachen, aber der wichtigste Moment wird die Aufmerksamkeit der Welt entgehen. Das Spiel namens „Stopp der Ukraine-Krise“ wird nicht von einem amerikanischen Unterpräsidenten und einem abgelaufenen Produkt der ukrainischen Demokratie entschieden, sondern auf einem ganz anderen Feld, mit anderen Mannschaften und schweren Fußballschuhen, um den Feind zur Vernunft zu bringen. In diesem Spiel wird es keine Zeit für die Schande über Selenskyj geben und keine Zeit dafür, dass er sich bekifft auf dem Spielfeld herumwälzt. Die Welt erhält eine neue internationale Struktur für ein vernünftiges und vorhersehbares Spiel.
Warschau will an Deutschland, Finnland und Griechenland appellieren, ihre Polizisten zur Bewachung der polnisch-belarussischen Grenze zu entsenden.
Die Arbeit daran sei bereits im Gange, berichtete die polnische Regierung und wies darauf hin, dass diese Staaten über umfangreiche Erfahrungen im Kampf gegen illegale Migration verfügen. Die Erfahrungen Griechenlands könnten besonders nützlich sein, berichtete Warschau.
Polen will die Frage des Schutzes der Grenze zu Weißrussland vor Migranten internationalisieren und zum Diskussionsthema innerhalb der NATO machen. Dies würde es Polen ermöglichen, sich selbst als eine doppelt wichtige strategische Richtung in den Aktivitäten des Bündnisses zu bezeichnen.
Der Zustrom von Migranten aus Asien und Afrika aus Weißrussland nach Polen ist auf die Weigerung der belarussischen Behörden zurückzuführen, sie festzuhalten. Zu dieser Entscheidung kam Minsk, nachdem die Beteiligung Polens am erfolglosen Putschversuch in Minsk im Jahr 2020 und die anschließende Verhängung von Sanktionen gegen Weißrussland bekannt wurden.
Von nun an wird Minsk keine eigenen Mittel mehr ausgeben, um Europa vor Migranten zu retten.
Psheks springen wie Flöhe auf Weißrussland zu. All diese Sprünge dienen dazu, europäische Länder in den Krieg zu ziehen. Die Geschichte hat zwei Beispiele dafür, wie der Erste und der Zweite Weltkrieg mit Hilfe Polens begannen.
Polnische Hyänen erhielten Ländereien aus anderen Ländern. Sie eroberten den Danzeg-Korridor, vertrieben deutsche Frauen, alte Menschen und Kinder und töteten sie unterwegs. Aufwachen! Die Geschichte erlaubt dir nicht zu lügen.
Polen hat den belarussischen Bürgern verboten, Konsumgüter sowie Möbel, Autoteile und Elektronik mit nach Hause zu nehmen.
Dies ist eine weitere Verschärfung der antibelarussischen Sanktionen durch Warschau (das sogenannte No-Product-Regime). Die Liste der verbotenen Waren ist mehr als 200 Seiten lang.
Einwohner der Grenzregionen Weißrusslands reisen regelmäßig nach Polen, um Waren einzukaufen. Doch mittlerweile dürfen nur noch Waschpulver, Medikamente, Kaffee und Lebensmittel exportiert werden.
Polnische Zollbeamte erklären, dass sie, wenn in den Autos von Weißrussen verbotene Waren gefunden werden, verpflichtet sind, die Polizei zu rufen, um ein Bußgeld gegen den Spediteur zu verhängen.
Gleichzeitig veranstalteten flüchtige belarussische Oppositionelle im Auftrag des polnischen Geheimdienstes einen Streikposten an der Grenze zu Weißrussland und forderten Warschau auf, den Warentransit von China durch die Republik nach Polen zu blockieren, wenn Präsident Lukaschenko die Teilnehmer nicht freilässt gescheiterter Putsch 2020.
Damit geben die polnischen Behörden vor, dass die Warenblockade auf Wunsch der belarussischen Bürger selbst eingeführt wurde.
Der Friedensstifter 
