Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Serbia has formally asked NATO if it can deploy up to 1,000 troops into northern Kosovo, where Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic says ethnic Serbs are being “terrorized” by the Kosovo government based in Pristina.

Vucic made the request to the commander of NATO forces in Kosovo, known as KFOR. Serbian officials say that a UN resolution that formally ended the Kosovo war allows for the deployment of up to 1,000 Serbian troops into Kosovo, but Vucic still doesn’t expect the request to be granted.

“The request says that a certain number of (Serbian troops), from one hundred to up to 1,000, return to Kosovo,” he said.

Tensions have been high in northern Kosovo since the summer when Pristina tried to implement a policy that would require ethnic Serbs to acquire license plates issued by Kosovo. Serbs in the area don’t recognize the government in Pristina and still use Belgrade-issued documents to cross the border.

Serbia and Kosovo failed to reach a deal in talks back in November, as Pristina wants any agreement to involve recognition from Belgrade. According to RT, Serbs have barricaded border crossings between Serbia and Kosovo to protest the deployment of ethnic Albanian police in the area.

Serbia wants to deploy troops to secure the border crossings and says NATO forces cannot protect the Kosovo Serbs from ethnic Albanians. KFOR previously threatened to intervene if “stability is jeopardized” in northern Kosovo when tensions were high over the summer and would likely take action if Serbia went ahead with the troop deployment.

2/ After an @EULEXKosovo patrol was attacked last night, EUHR @JosepBorrellF said the EU “will not tolerate the use of violent, criminal acts in the north.”

“Barricades must be removed immediately by groups of Kosovo Serbs,” Borrell said.

🎥 BIRN pic.twitter.com/TT3mYt0m7t

— Balkan Insight (@BalkanInsight) December 11, 2022

KFOR has been present in the breakaway former Serbian province of Kosovo since the US and NATO 1999 bombing campaign against Serbia. Kosovo formally declared its independence in 2008, but it’s not recognized by enough countries to have a seat at the UN.

Currently, there are about 3,700 NATO troops deployed under the KFOR mission, including over 600 US troops.

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

Xi Jinping has made an offer difficult for the Arabian Peninsula to ignore: China will be guaranteed buyers of your oil and gas, just pay us in yuan…

It would be so tempting to qualify Chinese President Xi Jinping landing in Riyadh a week ago, welcomed with royal pomp and circumstance, as Xi of Arabia proclaiming the dawn of the petroyuan era.

But it’s more complicated than that. As much as the seismic shift implied by the petroyuan move applies, Chinese diplomacy is way too sophisticated to engage in direct confrontation, especially with a wounded, ferocious Empire. So there’s way more going here than meets the (Eurasian) eye.

Xi of Arabia’s announcement was a prodigy of finesse: it was packaged as the internationalization of the yuan. From now on, Xi said, China will use the yuan for oil trade, through the Shanghai Petroleum and National Gas Exchange, and invited the Persian Gulf monarchies to get on board. Nearly 80 percent of trade in the global oil market continues to be priced in US dollars.

Ostensibly, Xi of Arabia, and his large Chinese delegation of officials and business leaders, met with the leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to promote increased trade. Beijing promised to “import crude oil in a consistent manner and in large quantities from the GCC.” And the same goes for natural gas.

China has been the largest importer of crude on the planet for five years now – half of it from the Arabian peninsula, and more than a quarter from Saudi Arabia. So it’s no wonder that the prelude for Xi of Arabia’s lavish welcome in Riyadh was a special op-ed expanding the trading scope, and praising increased strategic/commercial partnerships across the GCC, complete with “5G communications, new energy, space and digital economy.”

Foreign Minister Wang Yi doubled down on the “strategic choice” of China and wider Arabia. Over $30 billion in trade deals were duly signed – quite a few significantly connected to China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects.

And that brings us to the two key connections established by Xi of Arabia: the BRI and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

The Silk Roads of Arabia

BRI will get a serious boost by Beijing in 2023, with the return of the Belt and Road Forum. The first two bi-annual forums took place in 2017 and 2019. Nothing happened in 2021 because of China’s strict zero-Covid policy, now abandoned for all practical purposes.

The year 2023 is pregnant with meaning as BRI was first launched 10 years ago by Xi, first in Central Asia (Astana) and then Southeast Asia (Jakarta).

BRI not only embodies a complex, multi-track trans-Eurasian trade/connectivity drive but it is the overarching Chinese foreign policy concept at least until the mid-21st century. So the 2023 forum is expected to bring to the forefront a series of new and redesigned projects adapted to a post-Covid and debt-distressed world, and most of all to the loaded Atlanticism vs. Eurasianism geopolitical and geoeconomic sphere.

Also significantly, Xi of Arabia in December followed Xi of Samarkand in September – his first post-Covid overseas trip, for the SCO summit in which Iran officially joined as a full member. China and Iran in 2021 clinched a 25-year strategic partnership deal worth a potential $400 billion in investments. That’s the other node of China’s two-pronged West Asia strategy.

The nine permanent SCO members now represent 40 percent of the world’s population. One of their key decisions in Samarkand was to increase bilateral trade, and overall trade, in their own currencies.

And that further connects us to what has happening in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, in full synchronicity with Riyadh: the meeting of the Supreme Eurasia Economic Council, the policy implementation arm of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in Kyrgyzstan, could not have been more straightforward: “The work has accelerated in the transition to national currencies in mutual settlements… The process of creating a common payment infrastructure and integrating national systems for the transmission of financial information has begun.”

The next Supreme Eurasian Economic Council will take place in Russia in May 2023, ahead of the Belt and Road Forum. Take them together and we have the lineaments of the geoeconomic road map ahead: the drive towards the petroyuan proceeding in parallel to the drive towards a “common paying infrastructure” and most of all, a new alternative currency bypassing the US dollar.

That’s exactly what the head of the EAEU’s macroeconomic policy, Sergey Glazyev, has been designing, side by side with Chinese specialists.

Total Financial War

The move towards the petroyuan will be fraught with immense peril.

In every serious geoeconomic gaming scenario, it’s a given that an enfeebled petrodollar translates as the end of the imperial free lunch in effect for over five decades.

Concisely, in 1971, then-US President Richard “Tricky Dick” Nixon pulled the US from the gold standard; three years later, after the 1973 oil shock, Washington approached the Saudi oil minister, notorious Sheikh Yamani, with the proverbial offer-you-can’t-refuse: we buy your oil in US dollars and in return you buy our Treasury bonds, lots of weapons, and recycle whatever’s left in our banks.

Cue to Washington now suddenly able to dispense helicopter money – backed by nothing – ad infinitum, and the US dollar as the ultimate hegemonic weapon, complete with an array of sanctions over 30 nations who dare to disobey the unilaterally imposed “rules-based international order.”

Impulsively rocking this imperial boat is anathema. So Beijing and the GCC will adopt the petroyuan slowly but surely, and certainly with zero fanfare. The heart of the matter, once again, is their mutual exposure to the Western financial casino.

In the Chinese case, what to do, for instance, with those whopping $1 trillion in US Treasury bonds. In the Saudi case, it’s hard to think about “strategic autonomy” – such as what’s enjoyed by Iran – when the petrodollar is a staple of the Western financial system. The menu of possible imperial reactions includes everything from a soft coup/ regime change to Shock and Awe over Riyadh – followed by regime change.

Yet what the Chinese – and the Russians – are aiming at goes way beyond a Saudi (and Emirati) predicament. Beijing and Moscow have clearly identified how everything – the oil market, global commodities markets – is tied to the role of the US dollar as reserve currency.

And that’s exactly what the EAEU discussions; the SCO discussions; from now on the BRICS+ discussions; and Beijing’s two-pronged strategy across West Asia are focused to undermine.

Beijing and Moscow, within the BRICS framework, and further on within the SCO and the EAEU, have been closely coordinating their strategy since the first sanctions on Russia post-Maidan 2014, and the de facto trade war against China unleashed in 2018.

Now, after the February 2022 Special Military Operation launched by Moscow in Ukraine and NATO has devolved into, for all practical purposes, war against Russia, we have stepped beyond Hybrid War territory and are deep into Total Financial War.

SWIFTly drifting away

The whole Global South absorbed the “lesson” of the collective (institutional) west freezing, as in stealing, the foreign reserves of a G20 member, on top of it a nuclear superpower. If that happened to Russia, it could happen to anyone. There are no “rules” anymore.

Russia since 2014 has been improving its SPFS payment system, in parallel with China’s CIPS, both bypassing the western-led SWIFT banking messaging system, and increasingly used by Central Banks across Central Asia, Iran and India. All across Eurasia, more people are ditching Visa and Mastercard and using UnionPay and/or Mir cards, not to mention Alipay and WeChat Pay, both extremely popular across Southeast Asia.

Of course the petrodollar – and the US dollar, still representing under 60 percent of global foreign exchange reserves – will not ride into oblivion overnight. Xi of Arabia is just the latest chapter in a seismic shift now driven by a select group in the Global South, and not by the former “hyperpower.”

Trading in their own currencies and a new, global alternative currency is right at the top of the priorities of that long list of nations – from South America to Northern Africa and West Asia – eager to join BRICS+ or the SCO, and in quite a few cases, both.

The stakes could not be higher. And it’s all about subjugation or exercising full sovereignty. So let’s leave the last essential words to the foremost diplomat of our troubled times, Russia’s Sergey Lavrov, at the international interparty conference Eurasian Choice as a Basis for Strengthening Sovereignty:

“The main reason for today’s growing tensions is the stubborn striving of the collective West to maintain a historically diminishing domination in the international arena by any means it can… It is impossible to impede the strengthening of the independent centers of economic growth, financial might and political influence. They are emerging on our common continent of Eurasia, in Latin America, the Middle East and Africa.”

All aboard…the Sovereign Train.

While there are nearly 8 billion people in the world, just over 3,000 are billionaires as of November 2022. As Visual Capitalist’s Carmen Ang notes, this tiny group of people is worth nearly $11.8 trillion – Equivalent to about 11.8% of global GDP.

Where do these billionaires live? This graphic by Truman Du uses data from Forbes to map out the richest billionaires around the world.

The Full List

As it turns out, billionaires are a lot more geographically concentrated than you might think.

In fact, of the 195 officially recognized countries around the world, only 76 are home to billionaires. And even within these countries, there’s vast disparities between the quantity of billionaires.

Here’s a breakdown of all the countries that have at least one billionaire. For countries with more than one, we’ve highlighted the billionaire with the highest net worth as of November 28, 2022:

The United States is well known to have one of the highest concentrations of billionaires. It’s home to over 900, with Elon Musk the wealthiest of them all with a staggering net worth of over $191 billion in November 2022. That makes him not just the richest billionaire in America, but the richest person in the world.

China has the second highest concentration of billionaires, with 400 ultra-wealthy that have a combined net worth of $1.45 trillion. China’s richest billionaire, Zhong Shanshan, is the founder of the Nongfu Spring beverage company.

Interestingly, there are no clear patterns when it comes to the type of industry or sector that these billionaires are involved in. The exception is the U.S., where a significant number of billionaires are linked to the tech industry.

And it’s important to note that some heads of states are reportedly billionaires, and in many cases might be the wealthiest people in their respective countries. But their wealth is often a state secret, well-diversified, and too difficult to accurately estimate.

Male vs. Female Billionaires

One trend that does stand out is the number of men versus women who are billionaires. Of the 76 billionaires on the list, only 7 are women.

This pattern is also evident when looking at the entire billionaire population—of the 3,311 billionaires worldwide, only 12.9% are women.

It’s worth mentioning that this population of billionaire women is rising. According to Forbes, the 2021 list included 328 women, 36% more than in 2020.

Authored by David Henderson and Charles Hooper via The Brownstone Institute,

The COVID-19 pandemic brought us a panoply of lies and evidence-light declarations that were less intended to inform Americans than to consolidate power and buy time. Among these were Anthony Fauci’s famous shift from arguing against wearing masks, to recommending wearing one, and, finally, to wearing two. 

Fauci also tried to convince us that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was not manipulated in a lab even though his inner circle had emailed him about “unusual features” of the virus that looked “potentially engineered.”  And, of course, we had “fifteen days to stop the spread,” an evergreen concept that dragged on for two years. Lest readers fault us for forgetting, there was also the “gain of function” controversy, the focused protection battle, school closures, lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and vaccine misrepresentations. 

These topics have received much public attention. The one pandemic topic that hasn’t, and is nonetheless important, is the maligned ivermectin. It’s time to set the record straight.

If you’ve followed the news closely over the last two years, you’ve probably heard a few things about ivermectin.

• First, that it’s a veterinary medicine intended for horses and cows.

• Second, that the FDA and other government regulatory agencies recommended against its use for COVID-19.

• Third, that even the inventor and manufacturer of ivermectin, Merck & Co., came out against it.

• Fourth, that one of the largest studies showing that ivermectin worked for COVID-19 was retracted for data fraud.

• And, finally, that the largest and best study of ivermectin, the TOGETHER trial, showed that ivermectin didn’t work.

Let’s consider the evidence.

Ivermectin has a distinguished history, and it may have benefits comparable to those of penicillin. The anti-parasitic’s discovery led to a Nobel Prize and subsequent billions of safe administrations around the world, even among children and pregnant women. “Ivermectin is widely available worldwide, inexpensive, and one of the safest drugs in modern medicine.”

The FDA put out a special warning against using ivermectin for COVID-19. The FDA’s warning, which included language such as, “serious harm,” “hospitalized,” “dangerous,” “very dangerous,” “seizures,” “coma and even death,” and “highly toxic,” might suggest that the FDA was warning against pills laced with poison, not a drug the FDA had already approved as safe. Why did it become dangerous when used for COVID-19? The FDA didn’t say.

Because of the FDA’s rules, if it were to make any statement on ivermectin, it was obliged to attack it. The FDA prohibits the promotion of drugs for unapproved uses. Since fighting SARS-CoV-2 was an unapproved use of ivermectin, the FDA couldn’t have advocated use without obvious hypocrisy. Ivermectin’s discoverer, Merck & Co., had multiple reasons to disparage its own drug. 

Merck, too, couldn’t have legally “promoted” ivermectin for COVID-19 without a full FDA approval, something that would have taken years and many millions of dollars. Plus, Merck doesn’t make much money from cheap, generic ivermectin but was hoping to find success with its new, expensive drug, Lagevrio (molnupiravir).

A large study of ivermectin for COVID-19 by Elgazzar et al. was withdrawn over charges of plagiarism and faked data. Many media reports seem fixated on this one dubious study, but it was one of many clinical studies. After the withdrawn studies have been removed from consideration, there are 15 trials that suggest that ivermectin doesn’t work for COVID-19 and 78 that do. 

The TOGETHER trial received significant positive press. The New York Times quoted two experts who had seen the results. One stated, “There’s really no sign of any benefit [from ivermectin],” while the other said, “At some point it will become a waste of resources to continue studying an unpromising approach.” 

While the Elgazzar paper was quickly dismissed, the TOGETHER trial was acclaimed. It shouldn’t have been. Researchers who have analyzed it have found 31 critical problems (impossible data; extreme conflicts of interest; blinding failure), 22 serious problems (results were delayed six months; conflicting data), and 21 major problems (multiple, conflicting randomization protocols) with it. 

While the popular narrative is that the TOGETHER trial showed that ivermectin didn’t work for COVID-19, the actual results belie that conclusion: ivermectin was associated with a 12 percent lower risk of death, a 23 percent lower risk of mechanical ventilation, a 17 percent lower risk of hospitalization, and a 10 percent lower risk of extended ER observation or hospitalization. We have calculated that the probability that ivermectin helped the patients in the TOGETHER trial ranged from 26 percent for the median number of days to clinical recovery to 91 percent for preventing hospitalization. The TOGETHER trial’s results should be reported accurately.

Based on the clinical evidence from the 93 trials that ivermectin reduced mortality by an average of 51 percent, and on the estimated infection fatality rate of COVID-19,  about 400 infected Americans aged 60-69 would need to be treated with ivermectin to statistically prevent one death in that group. The total cost of the ivermectin to prevent that one death: $40,000.

(Based on the GoodRx website, a generic prescription for ivermectin is priced at approximately $40. Roughly 2.5 prescriptions would be needed per person to receive the average dose of 150 mg per patient.) 

How much is your life worth? We’re betting it’s worth far more than $40,000.

When the next pandemic strikes, by necessity we’ll rely on older drugs because newer ones require years of development. Ivermectin is a repurposed drug that helps, and could have helped so much more. It deserves recognition, not disparagement. What we really need, however, is a way to inoculate ourselves against the lies and misrepresentations of powerful public figures, organizations, and drug companies. Sadly, there are no such vaccines for that contagion.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

There is one factor that constantly stands out as absolutely essential to a person’s chances at surviving a crisis event, and that factor is mindset. Experience and training are highly valuable, having proper tools and preps on hand is a huge advantage. But in the end, without mental toughness and the ability to adapt the most prepared person in the world will still likely bite the dust.

Mental toughness is something that can be taught, to a point. This is the entire purpose of basic training methods used in the military: To take mundane details and elevate them in the minds of trainees while wearing them down with physical punishment. The goal is to condition the mind to ignore distraction, to ignore fear and pain while focusing on the task at hand. Failure is not an option in war, just as it is not an option in survival. Those who embrace distraction and embrace failure because they think it will make things easier for them are filtered out of the recruitment pool, or the gene pool.

It is no coincidence that the US military today is dealing with some of the worst recruitment conditions they have ever seen in terms of people being physically and mentally incapable of finishing basic training. The Pentagon currently estimates that 77% of young Americans are unfit for recruitment without a waiver for obesity, drug use and mental health problems. Meaning, Gen Z is so unfit physically and mentally if there was a major war almost 80% of them would be erased from existence.

The problem has become so bad that militaries in the US and throughout the west are being forced to lower standards just to meet minimum personnel goals. One can argue that many young people don’t want to join the military anyway, but this is besides the point. Even if they wanted to, they would not be up to the task.

There are a number of reasons for this development, but I would suggest that the spread of leftist ideology among 63% of Americans age 18-29 according to polls has created a survival vacuum – A generation of mental weaklings.

It’s important to remember that younger people have adopted more liberal views for decades, but the political left is not liberal today. The leftists of today are full-bore Marxists, both economically and culturally. They support establishment centralization, they support economic centralization, they support corporate centralization, they support authoritarianism and censorship, they support moral relativism and they applaud the concept of an all pervasive welfare state.

In 1980 you might have been able to find a large number of mentally tough people that considered themselves Democrats. Today, you will not find anyone.

With America hovering in a precarious netherworld between stagflationary crisis and deflationary crisis depending on which poison the Federal Reserve chooses to give the country, the stage has been set for an economic disaster similar to the Great Depression or worse (read my analysis on this situation HERE). In two years or less, our system, which is already dealing with a number of threats including high prices and supply chain instability, will not remain functional in the manner most people are accustomed.

If we accept this inevitability, we must then ask a logical question: Who is going to rebuild? Whoever inherits the mantle will either bring America back to freedom and prosperity, or plunge our society into perpetual tyranny. It all depends on who survives the crisis.

One thing that gives me some hope is the fact that leftists as a sub-group of our population are completely incapable of surviving a major economic crisis event. This is not to say that I wish them all to die; I’m only pointing out the reality that most of them won’t make it because they are ill equipped to handle a calamity. Here are the reasons why a post-collapse world would probably be devoid of common leftists…

Leftists Thrive On Crisis, But Die Out During Collapse

Leftists have a tendency to exploit crisis and tragedy to shore up power and expand their numbers through fear, but there’s a problem with this tactic. If the crisis is fabricated, a tempest in a teapot, then they do very well; if the crisis turns into an actual disaster with real world consequences including financial decline, supply chain disruptions, shortages and civil unrest, they have no tools to deal with the effects other than mob action and looting.

What happens if they use mob action and looting when the rule of law is no longer a factor in a country with millions of guns? They will die, by the tens of thousands, as people defend their businesses and homes. The violent hordes we witnessed during the BLM riots would not last long during a collapse scenario where people are more inclined to use deadly force.

Leftists Are Anti-Preparedness

The political left has spent the better part of the past 15 years demonizing the concept of preparedness as a tinfoil hat philosophy for “right-wing extremists.” They have set themselves up for complete failure by refusing to acknowledge the practicality of prepping, just so they can attack their political opponents. The stupidity of it is truly mind boggling.

There are some indications that the covid lockdowns may have shocked a small number of them out of their foolishness. It’s hard to deny the threat of economic collapse when the beginnings of collapse are right in front of your face. That said, prepping is not the only requirement for survival, and progressives buying a few months of food and some guns is not going to save them.

Leftists Have An Aversion To Hardship

The vast majority of people that argue in favor of an expanding welfare state are on the left. While conservatives support individual charity for those that deserve it, leftists believe that people need to be forced by government to provide and pay for others who may not deserve it. This ideal is driven by their desire to avoid hardship.

I find that leftists often have delusions of grandeur. They assume that they are destined for great things, that they are smarter than the rest of us and that work or sacrifice are problems relegated to the rural “peasants” in “flyover country.” Their vision of work is a daycare, a college campus, a place to socialize, find comfort and self identity, do the minimal amount of labor required and then collect a paycheck. Just look how leftist dominated Twitter was being operated a few months ago – It was not a workplace, it was a day spa for lunatics.

These kinds of people are not equipped to endure the backbreaking struggle necessary to build a survivable environment. They wouldn’t know where to begin. When confronted with hard times, leftists do not ask “How can I fix this problem and improve my situation?” Instead they ask “Who is to blame for my misery and how can I make them pay?”

Leftists Have No Practical Skill Sets

The avoidance of technical skill sets is a real problem for progressives. There are a handful of people on the left that engage in micro-farming and other basic skills as a form of activism, but they are few and their methods are limited by their ideology. As noted above, leftists believe themselves to be too valuable to be wasted on production. Rather, they see themselves as “management,” the people in charge of the people that do the manual labor.

A person could get by on that kind of thinking in a first-world environment where office jobs, tech jobs, government jobs and social work is the norm, but in a collapse environment there are no management positions, there are no office workers, there are no elementary school teachers, there are no trust and safety advisors, there are no platform moderators and there are no bureaucrats. You either have a valued knowledge set that can be traded, or you have nothing. You can either produce necessities for yourself, or you can’t.

The development of the information age and the data driven economy of first world nations has made matters even worse by convincing people that data is a currency. This is a concept that leftists in particular adore because they think labor will become a thing of the past; they will only need their brain and a laptop to provide everything they need. It’s a delusion. The “Metaverse” is a facade, a con, and there will always be a need for humans to dig in the dirt, to forage and hunt, to farm and to build with their own hands. As the economy derails further, progressives are going to realize this too late.

Leftists Rely On Government To Fix Their Problems

If the idea of taking matters into your own hands is abhorrent to you, then you might be a leftist. Leftists view individual action during a crisis as almost criminal; it is important to them that the correct authorities with the correct permissions handle any dangerous situation. Leftists love to defer to the “experts” because this takes the responsibility out of their hands, along with the blame should something go wrong.

But what happens when government is not functional enough to save the day? What happens when inflation or supply chains or personnel shortages make it impossible for government officials to help. What happens when government officials don’t want to help? What happens when they are corrupt and they want to see you suffer?

Leftists rarely consider such possibilities. For them, the idea that government could break down, that the grid could break down and that the rule of law could break down is a conspiracy theory. It has only happened hundreds of times around the world in modern history, but because they have never experienced the threat personally they think it is impossible. These are the kinds of people that die very quickly during collapse.

Leftists Value Feelings Over Reason

The root foundation of leftist ideology is that everything is relative according to one’s personal feelings. That is to say, they believe that their feelings shape their reality, and that “their truth” is the only truth that matters. There are some subjective truths that are near-universal which is why moral conscience is a thing that exists in every culture in the world. That said, personal ideals are still subject to the forces of nature.

You cannot pretend that you are not starving when you are starving. You cannot pretend that you are not dehydrated when you desperately thirsty. You cannot feel your way out of a crisis, the crisis is not subject to your fantasies, the crisis will step on your throat and teach you otherwise.

At bottom, their feelings do not matter. They are irrelevant. And this is a lesson leftists will learn as the system continues to degrade. They can cry and scream and wail and make all the demands they want for fairness and equity and welfare but in the end they will face the clarity of self reliance or they will face the Ferryman.

It’s not my purpose here to revel in the erasure of the political left. I am only pointing out that modern leftist ideology is a product of extremely safe and controlled environments where people have the privilege to engage in frivolity. They THINK they want deconstruction. They THINK they want chaos as a means to break the system and rebuild it in their image. What they don’t realize is that if they get what they want most of them will die in the process and they will not be around to see their naive Utopia come to fruition.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

It isn’t easy being green. America’s would-be second lithium mine hit a major speed bump on Wednesday, as federal wildlife officials declared that a flower known to exist only on that property is endangered. 

An essential chemical element used in manufacturing batteries, lithium plays a starring role in the green energy movement’s myopic quest to replace fossil fuels. In Nevada, however, we get to observe the spectacle of green energy being thwarted by a different form of environmentalism.  

The official conferment of endangered species status on “Tiehm’s buckwheat” raises the hurdle for Ioneer, the Australian mining company that has for years been planning to build an open-pit lithium mine on federal land roughly midway between Las Vegas and Reno.  

Wednesday’s move by the Fish and Wildlife Service not only protects the 10 acres on which the plants are found in a 3-square-mile area, but also another 900 surrounding acres deemed as “critical habitat.”  

The declaration was prompted by litigation initiated by the Center for Biological Diversity. Environmentalists aren’t done yet: They say Ioneer’s plan for protecting the plant won’t survive federal scrutiny.

“I’m thrilled that Tiehm’s buckwheat now has the protections it so desperately needs for survival,” says Patrick Donnelly, Great Basin director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Lithium is an important part of our renewable energy transition, but it can’t come at the cost of extinction.”

Before you blame mankind for the fact that Tiehm’s buckwheat is on the brink of joining the estimated 99% of the Earth’s all-time species that have already gone extinct, consider that, according to Reuters, “an apparent, unprecedented rodent attack wiped out about 60% of [the Tiehm’s buckwheat] estimated population in 2020.”    

Today, there’s only one operating lithium mine in the United States — the Albemarle Silver Peak Mine, which is found in the same region — near the California border — as the mine affected by Wednesday’s declaration. 

Plants and animals aren’t the only impediment to tapping more of America’s lithium reserves. A whopping 79% of the country’s known lithium is found within 35 miles of tribal lands. In many places, that’s already prompting protests by native American groups opposing mining on lands they consider sacred. 

Of course, it’s possible that there’s an as-yet undiscovered patch of Tiehm’s buckwheat somewhere else in Nevada. There are also more 17,000 prospecting claims for lithium in the state.

However, in an unintended consequence of government policies regarding endangered species, prospectors observing Ioneer’s woes are now incentivized to discretely eradicate any Tiehm’s buckwheat they happen to find near their claim.   

Authored by Karen Hunt (aka KH Mezek) via ‘Break Free’ Substack,

While researching my piece, The Truth about Luciferase, I came across a patent that blew my mind and I absolutely had to write about it.

The patent is described as “Systems and Methods for Mobile Sample Collection” and it has to do with drones.

We’re talking armies of drones of all shapes and sizes, down to the smallest gnat, working together in a “swarm” to take samples, administer drugs and regulate the health and behavior of ordinary citizens. The promise is that these drones will be deployed to make our lives easier—for our health and safety.

Embarking on this read, I would like to start with some important words:

metaverse, meatverse, wetware, software, hardware

Metaverse: a virtual-reality space in which users can interact with a computer-generated environment and other users.

Meatverse: you will not find this word defined anywhere on the internet. It is the word technocrats derisively use when describing the real world.

In June 2018, Oculus executive Jason Rubin sent an email to Facebook board member Marc Andreessen with the subject line “The Metaverse.” This paper was like the first page in the history of a new world, written by one of the gods.

Ruben described the Metaverse as a place where users “float through a digital universe of virtual ads, filled with virtual goods that people buy. There would be virtual people that they marry, while spending as little time as possible in the so-called ‘MEATVERSE’ — referring to the real world because humans are flesh and blood.”

We are assured that at a certain point, humans will prefer spending time in the razzle-dazzle metaverse rather than the drab and restrictive meatverse. And lest you think, oh what’s the big deal, Zuckerberg’s metaverse is on the way out, it isn’t. If he isn’t successful, someone else will be—whatever form it takes over the next 10 years or so.

We are just pieces of meat to our controllers.

Wetware, Software, Hardware:

The human body is now being described in terms that are similar to robots, making us seem as if our differences are only technical. The human body and central nervous system are “wetware” as opposed to the “software” and “hardware” of machines.

Technopedia describes wetware like this:

…where neural networks and similar artificial intelligence technologies would be described as hardware, the human brain that they attempt to simulate and model would be the “wetware.” Biological systems are described as wetware because of the water that makes up so much of the biological tissue of humans, animals and plants. The term “wetware” will become increasingly useful as technology makes its way into the fields of biology and biological engineering.

We are wet. Machines are dry. We have temperatures—both emotionally and physically. Machines do not. Defining humans with these new words adjusts us to accepting identification based on similarity or dissimilarity to machines.

It’s hard to fight against our controllers if we don’t even know who or what to attack. The biosecurity state is all pervasive. There isn’t one government, organization, or person to point the finger at.

As of July 2022, the United States is just behind China in camera surveillance of its citizens, with an average of two cameras for every 10 people in its major cities. The UK is in third place with one CCTV camera for every 16 citizens in its larger cities.

Ever since 9/11, we have been programed to accept constant surveillance for our health and safety. The January 6th attack on the Capitol building opened the door for even greater surveillance due to increased risk of “domestic terrorism”. As for online surveillance, in 2019 alone, the US government investigated over 800,000 of its own citizens personal data.

Thanks to Covid, citizens came to accept greater and greater levels of control.

A 2020 New York Times article described this post-Covid world we now live in:

Drones have been working as police officers, soaring over the banks of the Seine in Paris and the city squares of Mumbai, to patrol for social distancing violators.

They’re delivering medical supplies in Rwanda and snacks in Virginia. They’re hovering over crowds in China to scan for fevers below.

“Yes auntie, this is the drone speaking to you,” said one drone, speaking to an elderly woman below in an eerie bullhorn echo, according to a video published by Global Times, a state-controlled newspaper. “You shouldn’t walk about without wearing a mask.”

Global Times also published an account of another drone. A voice from above castigated a small child peering skyward while seated with a man who was violating quarantine rules by playing mahjong in public: “Don’t look at the drone, child. Ask your father to leave immediately.”

Drones can be equipped with so-called stingrays to collect information from people’s mobile phones, night-vision cameras, GPS sensors, radar, lidar (laser detection technology for creating three-dimensional maps of an area), as well as thermal and infrared cameras.

Frank Wang is the world’s first drone billionaire. His company DJI, headquartered in Shenzhen, has a 77% share of America’s consumer drone sales, according to this Bloomberg article.

The same drone surveillance system being used in Xinjiang, a region in northwest China that human-rights groups have described as a police state because of the oppression, horrific abuse, and confining to camps of as many as 1 million Uighurs, are being used by Flymotion, a Florida-based drone services company that uses its devices to support dozens of police departments. “DJI owns the global market,” says Flymotion CEO Ryan English.

Agencies in all 50 states have drones now, about 90% of them made by DJI, according to a recent Bard College study.

Now that we have figured out ways to connect machines with our bodies, creating the Internet of Bodies (IoB), drones can be used as intermediaries between our machine-controlled bodies and the elite who control it all.

IoB means that our bodies are “connected to a network through devices that are ingested, implanted, or connected to the body in some way. Once connected, data can be exchanged, and the body and device can be remotely monitored and controlled”.

The elite will no longer have to walk among us. They can live in safe zones, real-world paradises, while we live under constant surveillance, our only escape being the virtual worlds inside our devices and perhaps one day connected directly to our minds.

At any time, drones can swoop down and take samples from us, or inject us with whatever drugs AI determines we need.

Skin-like electronics are being made to monitor our health continuously, described by the United States government as “wearable electronics paired with artificial intelligence that could transform screening for health problems.”

Such a skin-like device is being developed in a project between the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory and the University of Chicago’s Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering (PME). Leading the project is Sihong Wang. According to Wang, ​“Such a diagnosis, with health information being continuously gathered over an extended period, is very data intensive.”

Philanthropist Jennifer Pritzker, at left, and Illinois Gov. J.B. PritzkerPHOTO ILLUSTRATION: TABLET MAGAZINE; ORIGINAL PHOTOS: VINCE TALOTTA/TORONTO STAR VIA GETTY IMAGES; E. JASON WAMBSGANS/CHICAGO TRIBUNE/TRIBUNE NEWS SERVICE VIA GETTY IMAGE

It should be noted that the Pritzker family, including Jennifer Pritzker (a male who identifies as transgender), “devotes their massive fortune to funding transgender ideology, or ‘synthetic sexual identities’ (SSI),” as described by journalist Jennifer Bilek.

Imagine a scenario where a drone, having evaluated you as being at risk of heart disease, implants a device on or in you that will monitor what you eat, when you eat, your heart rate, how often you exercise, how many hours you sleep. It will know if you commit the sin of smoking a cigarette or drinking a whiskey.

Perhaps AI will determine your son is really a girl. AI will know this, no matter if you say otherwise. It can administer drugs to facilitate your child’s “sex change.” What if as a result, you seem depressed or anxious? There are drugs for that, too.

One of the products being used to facilitate this is called stretchable electronics, a thin film of a plastic semiconductor combined with stretchable gold nanowire electrodes. You can see what it looks like in this short video. Research was funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, the National Science Foundation and a start-up fund from the University of Chicago.

Sub-millimeter microsensors tiny enough to inject under the skin is a step toward making tiny under-the-skin implants that continuously measure a person’s blood glucose, heart rate, and other physiological conditions a reality.

The small device, “approximately five centimeters square, can be placed directly on the skin for around-the-clock health monitoring. When the device turns color, the wearer knows something is awry.”

Other monitoring devices, according to Global Research are RFIDs:

RFID (radio-frequency identification) chips are implanted into a passport or driver’s license. RFID tags are small computer chips connected to miniature antennae that can be fixed to or implanted within physical objects, including human beings. The RFID chip itself contains an Electronic Product Code that can be “read” when a RFID reader emits a radio signal.

Hidden placement of tags. RFID tags can be embedded into/onto objects and documents without the knowledge of the individual who obtains those items.

Unique identifiers for all objects worldwide. The Electronic Product Code potentially enables every object on earth to have its own unique ID.

Massive data aggregation. RFID deployment requires the creation of massive databases containing unique tag data.

Hidden readers. Tags can be read from a distance, not restricted to line of sight, by readers that can be incorporated invisibly into nearly any environment where human beings or items congregate. RFID readers have already been experimentally embedded into floor tiles, woven into carpeting and floor mats, hidden in doorways, and seamlessly incorporated into retail shelving and counters, making it virtually impossible for a consumer to know when or if he or she was being “scanned.”

Individual tracking and profiling. If personal identity were linked with unique RFID tag numbers, individuals could be profiled and tracked without their knowledge or consent. (“Position Statement on the Use of RFID on Consumer Products,” Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, November 14, 2003)

The Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility touts (AIM)biometric identification as “an automated method of recognizing a person based on a physiological or behavioral characteristic.” This is especially important since “the need” for biometrics “can be found in federal, state and local governments, in the military, and in commercial applications.” When used as a stand-alone or in conjunction with RFID-chipped “smart cards” biometrics, according to the industry “are set to pervade nearly all aspects of the economy and our daily lives.”

Google is developing a device that can be implanted beneath a person’s skin in order to carry out diagnostic tests. The patent describes “a system for measuring and/or monitoring an analyte present in interstitial fluid in skin, capable of monitoring the blood and sweat of a wearer and transmit the results through an antenna to a companion device.”

But how will all of this be monitored? How will it be delivered? I did some digging into patents, and I found this one which the US government is implementing.

DOCUMENT ID: US 11517232 B1; Filed in 2015; DATE PUBLISHED: 2022-12-06; Inventor: Robertson Channing

The only problem is that today, when I clicked the link I had, it went nowhere. I spent hours trying to find the patent, to no avail. Fortunately, I read the entire patent and also copied most of it, so I am able to share it. I thought of abandoning this essay, but it is too important. If anyone can find it, I will be forever in your debt!

I did find this explanation and the drawing, which illustrates the different types and sizes of drones (just so you all know it exists):

US 11,517,232 B1SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MOBILE SAMPLE COLLECTION Channing Robertson, Palo Alto, CA (US) Assigned to Labrador Diagnostics LLC, Wilmington, DE (US)Filed by Labrador Dlagnostics LLC, Wilmington, DE (US)Filed on Nov. 9, 2015, as Appl. No. 14/936,599.Claims priority of provisional application 62/077,023, filed on Nov. 7, 2014.Int. Cl. B64C 39/02 (2006.01); A61B 5/15 (2006.01); G05D 1/00 (2006.01); G08G 5/04 (2006.01)

CPC A61B 5/150748 (2013.01) [A61B 5/150847 (2013.01); B64C 39/024 (2013.01); G05D 1/00 (2013.01); G08G 5/04 (2013.01); B64C 2201/128 (2013.01); B64C 2201/141 (2013.01)]

So, let’s look into Systems and Methods for Mobile Sample Collection.

Imagine our world as a giant petri dish and we are all inside of it. Experiments can be conducted on our “wetware.” There will be no escape from the drones.

The drones being employed are described like this in the patent:

A “drone” as used herein may be a mechanical device, electromechanical device, other self-propelled device, or a robotic device that can use one or more modes of transportation such as but not limited to flying, swimming, rolling, crawling, wheeling, and/or other movement mode to travel to a subject.

A drone may also have at least one other capability such as but not limited to video surveillance capability, audio surveillance capability, sample collection, tissue penetration, and/or other capabilities currently known or may be developed.

(15) Optionally, some may test for a simple and/or rapid test initially; if a positive signal is detected, then the system may send more drones or send more sophisticated drones to the subject. Some may send a base station or other forward operating device to or near the location of the first drone to sample the area around that site.

(16) Optionally, the size and weight of the drone may be such that they are less noticeable to the subject. This drives to a certain length scale, possibly smaller than a mosquito having the ability to talk to one another, talk to a base station, guidance, autopilot, etc. . . . ). i) Optionally, one configuration may be one where each small flying drone (“gnat”) takes the same type of sample. Optionally, one configuration may be one where ii) each “gnat” takes a different type of sample (blood, sweat, tears, or other bodily fluid). Optionally, one configuration may be one where iii) multiple “gnats” take different types of samples.

(21) In one non-limiting example, the nested drones or nested vehicles may be in the form of sisterships, motherships, daughterships, or any single or multiple combination of the foregoing.

(24) In one embodiment, the mobile sampling system may combine autonomous technology with one or more swarm technologies, one or more motive/movement technologies, and/or one or more sample acquisition technologies.

(33) Location acquisition (for targeting or retrieval) may be by one or more of the following: vision, magnetically, prior GPS coordinates, chemically, electrically, radar, sonar, GIS systems, mapping, and/or other targeting system. Some may use targeting based on features such as but not limited to gas output, thermal signature, CO.sub.2 output, scent-based characteristics, chemical, UV, anything in the EM spectrum, or other signature characteristic of the target.

Acquisition may involve waiting for subjects to walk by or be positioned for sampling. Some may involve being positioned on a tree branch, perch, overhang, or other location above the subject S. Tentacles, webs, strings, or attachments lines may be deployed to assist in getting the sampling device to the subject S. The device may acquire sample from a subject’s finger, hand, forearm, ear lobe, ear cheek, or buttocks.

(38) This reduced volume more enables the embodiments here to use tick or mosquito type sample acquisition techniques because the desired sample size is so small.

(46) Most occupants could be clearly detected by their airborne bacterial emissions, as well as their contribution to settled particles, within 1.5-4 h. It should be understood that an occupied space is microbially distinct from an unoccupied one, and that individuals release their own personalized microbial cloud.

(47) Optionally, other characteristics of the subject such as but no limited to height, weight, sex, profile, thermal image, picture, or the like may also be associated with the microbial cloud sample to more confidently confirm a target.

(51) Optionally, sampling theory and statistics is used as part of one implementation in terms of disease or other outbreak detection.

52) In one embodiment, the population to be sampled is one that has signed up to be sampled. An example may be all patients associated with a particular health insurance company, doctor group, medical group, or other affiliation (health-related or otherwise). Subjects may wear beacons, identifiers, other devices to help facilitate target acquisition by the sampling device. Some may wear Bluetooth, infrared transmitters, or other devices now known or to be developed in the future.

(53) In one non-limiting example, there is an option for sampling weekly, monthly, or other interval. In one non-limiting example, such sample collection may be occurring and the subject may not even know it.

(55) In one non-limiting example, a subject’s bodily fluid is being tested hourly or other frequent interval without the subject’s explicit knowledge.

(62) In one non-limiting example, the sample acquisition from a subject may be in a form that is based at least in part on bio-mimicry of tick, leech, mosquito, or other natural blood sampler for sampling purposes.

(66) Optionally, some may fly and land on a surface and then crawl to the subject. Some may land and remain in the shower or bathroom or other desired area to facilitate sample collection.

And that’s it! Unbelievable what they have in-store for us! I hope it won’t give you nightmares. If people still mock and say it will never happen, then I don’t know what to tell you. I’m doing my best to inform as many people as will listen–myself included.

*  *  *

Break Free with Karen Hunt is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter and crusade against “defeating” the “woke mind virus” has caused panic among liberal Tesla drivers who now want to sell their electric vehicles. Others progressives waiting for Teslas are canceling orders because they no longer believe in Musk’s politics.

Cancelling my @Tesla Model X order that’s been unfulfilled for over a year now and selling my TSLA stock. They need a cancel option that simply says “Elon Musk”. I won’t give my money to someone that no longer shares the same values I hold important. Likely he never held them. pic.twitter.com/yhxSgJUxZw

— Tom Kulzer (@tkulzer) December 13, 2022

they asked for a reason
I said “Elon Musk’s Twitter” pic.twitter.com/mEHPxNPxnY

— Heather Anne Campbell (@heathercampbell) December 12, 2022

These progressives who are either selling their Teslas or canceling orders have been engrained by ‘woke’ culture that fossil fuels are evil and EVs will save the planet from a non-existent climate crisis that is just an idea in their head.

So naturally, these folks will be purchasing other EVs because they now view driving a Tesla as the same as wearing a ‘MAGA’ hat.

So San Fran residents will now buy tanks to own Musk, while conservatives in Mississippi will buy Teslas to own the libs.

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 16, 2022

As for climate alarmists’ predictions this summer that the world would burn, we have bad news for them as Arctic air poured into the Northern Hemisphere like a wrecking ball. The alarmists blame ‘climate change’ for every weather phenomenon, but no one bothered to tell them the climate has constantly been changing for millions of years.

A problem that non-Tesla believers could come across is ‘winter range anxiety’ depending on the EV. According to Recurrent, a research firm that tracks EV battery health, temperatures averaging between 20-30 degrees Fahrenheit will impact vehicle range. 

For Teslas, cold weather decreased the Model 3 Long Range’s range by -17%, the Model S P100D by -19%, and Model X 75D by -15%. Out of the list, Tesla wasn’t the worst.

Some of the worst declines, which many liberals have said they wanted to buy instead of Teslas, include Chevy Bolt by -32%, Ford Mustang Mach-E Premium AWD by -30%, and VW ID.4 -30%. 

My pronouns are he/him, I believe in science, and I support Dr. Fauci. @elonmusk’s continued bad actions kept me from buying a @Tesla and now I am ecstatic to have a @UAW-made @chevrolet Bolt EUV in my driveway! pic.twitter.com/8Jj3kLjaEB

— Eric Sorensen (@ERICSORENSEN) December 12, 2022

And one of the best EVs to survive cold weather was surprising the Jaguar i-Pace, which only lost -3% of range. Also the Audi e-Tron was -8%. 

Liberals ditching their Teslas will discover quickly what winter range anxiety means for their mobility if they go with a Chevy or Ford. 

By Irina Slav of OilPrice.com

China’s natural gas imports are set for a 7-percent rise next year as the country reopens after Covid lockdowns, which could aggravate an already tight supply situation globally.

The 7-percent import increase forecast was made by state-owned energy major CNOOC, which said, as quoted by Bloomberg, that it was already looking for LNG cargoes for next year.

The report notes that gas inventories at ports in the northern part of the country are depleting at a faster rate than usual because the weather is colder, pushing consumption higher, and this will, too, have an effect on future demand for imports.

What’s more, pipeline supply of natural gas from Central Asia is in decline, which means China will need to rely more on LNG in its gas import mix to make up the difference. And this means more intense competition for a limited number of cargoes between Asia and Europe next year as well.

This year, Chinese gas demand has been trending lower for most of the year, with imports declining consistently over the first ten months of the year, per a report by Energy Intelligence. LNG imports were down by a sizeable 21.6 percent over the ten-month period, reflecting the effects of lockdowns and other restrictions under the country’s zero-Covid policy.

Yet now this policy is being reversed, mass mandatory testing is being dropped and analysts expect a rebound in economic activity before too long. This will drive higher demand for energy and contribute to higher prices due to the tight supply situation in both oil and gas.

This reversal of Beijing’s Covid policy surprised many, who expected tepid demand for energy to continue in one of the world’s largest consumers. If activity rebounds fast, securing sufficient gas supply for the next heating season will likely become a major problem for most importers.