What Does It Take to Convince You WHERE We Are In Time???

[Taken]

What Does It Take to Convince You WHERE We Are In Time???
OP ^

A Mass Plandemic Conspiracy
OF: a hierarchy
OF: Greed, Greed, Greed
effected BY, THROUGH, OF:
Fraud, Lies, Deception, Threats, Oppression...
FOR: “their” Gain.
FOR: “the” People’s Demise.

Isa 56:
[11] Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.

Prov 15:
[27] He that is greedy of gain troubleth his own house; but he that hateth gifts shall live.

Prov 1:
[19] So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.

 

[Bobby Jo]

.

I posted this because of the information at the top, -- not the bottom --, so that we know our RISKS and PRECAUTIONS.

Lke 22:36 ... let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one.​

Bobby Jo

.

 

[APAK]

 

[APAK]

 

[APAK]

 

[APAK]

Headlines for January 5, 2022
January 5, 2022

 

[APAK]

 

[APAK]

 

[Enoch111]

Fraud, Lies, Deception...

And when you expose the lies, you will be fired.
Reuters Data Scientist Fired After Nuking BLM Narrative, Exposing 'Significant Left-Wing Bias' In Reporting
Reuters Data Scientist Fired After Nuking BLM Narrative, Exposing 'Significant Left-Wing Bias' In Reporting | ZeroHedge

Reuters is no longer in the business of simply reporting. They are now in the business of Leftist Propaganda (just like all other MSM sources worldwide).

 

[APAK]

Nolte: 57% of Democrats Are Fascists Who Approve of Big Tech Censorship

Alex Wong/Getty Images
JOHN NOLTE10 Jan 20220
2:50


A clear majority of 57 percent of Democrats are fascists who approve of Big Tech censoring content on their platforms. Only 32 percent of Democrats disagree.

What’s crucial about this number is how Rasmussen Reports asked the question. Here it is in full: “Which is better — for the owners of social media like Facebook and Twitter to regulate what is posted to make sure people are not offended or to allow free speech without interference?”

Offended.

Offended!

Rasmussen didn’t ask if violent content or racist content or misinformation should be censored. Instead, the question was about saving people from being “offended,” which opens the door to censoring everything because people can claim to be offended by anything.

Overall, the news is not much better. Only 51 percent of those polled, a narrow majority, want Big Tech to leave us alone. Thirty-five percent say Big Tech should go ahead and censor us, while 14 percent are not sure either way.

These Big Tech Nazis roll into town and corner the market on political discourse by promising us free speech, and then after they’ve cornered the market, go the full Joe McCarthy in blacklisting people and opinions and ideas they deem “unapproved,” which includes a former President of the United States.


(ERIC BARADAT/AFP/Getty Images)


And only 51 percent of the public has a problem with that, and 57 percent of Democrats, the very people who once branded themselves as anti-blacklist, approve.

The good news is that this will not stand. Where there’s a market, there’s a way, and we’re already seeing competitors to these Nazis spring up. Rumble is a free version of YouTube. GETTR is a free version of Twitter, and so on…

There’s a lot of criticism of these sites, primarily as “conservative ghettos.” In other words, because leftists do not sign on, righties are primarily talking to themselves… Well, that might be true, but where these sites will matter, be crucial to our democracy, is the next time the Nazis in the corporate media and Big Tech attempt to snuff out legitimate news.

For example, if WikiLeaks were to release another cache of Hillary Clinton emails, the Big Tech Nazis wouldn’t allow it. But sites like Parler and Rumble would, so the information would get out there. And if the information is big and important enough, these sites will pick up millions of new users desperate to learn the truth.

Don’t forget that the censors and blacklisters always lose and always go down in the history books as the villains.

Also remembered as villains will be these Vichy Democrats who enable and applaud the censors and blacklisters.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

 

[BarneyFife]

.
An Interesting and Provocative Video calling for people to WAKE UP and become INVOLVED in the Challenges working against us:

TRUDEAU DOUBLE SAYS VACCINES DON'T WORK - CANADA LURING KIDS WITH ICE CREAM TO TAKE THE VAX
TRUDEAU DOUBLE SAYS VACCINES DON'T WORK - CANADA LURING KIDS WITH ICE CREAM TO TAKE THE VAX


First published at 22:39 UTC on May 28th, 2021 ​

This Woman posting this information has MORE INTEGRITY, TEMERITY, and PERSEVERANCE than MOST MEN. And l suspect that when a cataclysmic event occurs, these WOMEN PATRIOTS will know how to SURVIVE, while their Male Counterparts will perish as they sit in front of their TV.


... and these "men" will DESERVE to PERISH ...
Bobby Jo

.

One year ago you virtually shouted from the hilltops that God would never allow Biden to take office and that that was guaranteed in the Bible.

Snoozapalooza 2022, anyone?

I realize we have to endure this venom, lest we become free-speech assassins like Facebook, but sometimes it's sooooooo hard.

 

[APAK]

Crysler Announces Ambitions to Go All Electric By 2028. Software is Going to be Everywhere.
January 10, 2022

Chrysler has announced ambitions to go totally electric by 2028, with the first electric vehicle expected to hit the market in 2025.

According to The Associated Press, Chrysler announced the plans alongside a new AI-enabled vehicle system powered by a battery that the company claims can drive 350 to 400 miles on a single charge.

Chrysler is part of Stellantis, a European automaker that revealed last month a new goal to integrate AI-enabled software into millions of vehicles across its 14 brands. By 2030, Stellantis might earn $22.6 billion in annual income as a result of this.

This is all part of the push between automakers to deliver more fully electric and hybrid vehicles with more autonomous driving capabilities. Overall, this would signal a shift away from gasoline-powered engines in automobiles.


Chrysler, as one of Stellantis’ primary American brands, will be at the forefront of this transformation in the auto business in North America.

In a press announcement, Chris Feuell, CEO of the Chrysler brand, said, “Our brand will serve at the forefront as Stellantis changes to enable clean mobility and connected consumer experiences.”

According to Reuters, Feuell also stated that Chrysler plans to display the new Airflow concept vehicle at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, which will provide insight into the brand’s future design intentions and how it will rebrand itself.


“We are completely transforming the portfolio for Chrysler between 2025 and 2028, and beyond,” added Feuell. The name Airflow comes from a successful sedan produced by Chrysler in the 1930s.

According to Reuters, while Chrysler will be one of the first brands to make the switch, Stellantis also wants to make Alfa Romeo, another of Stellantis’ brands, completely electric in North America by 2027.

Chrysler, on the other hand, will undergo a complete rebranding as a result of its efforts. In recent years, the corporation has fallen short of what it was in the early 2000s.

Chrysler sold about 115,000 vehicles in the United States last year. Chrysler clearly needs a makeover, especially when compared to the 650,000 automobiles it sold in 2005. Producing elegant, modern electric vehicles may be the best way to accomplish this.

Meanwhile, Stellantis’ main ambition for electric vehicles is to make low-emission vehicles a big part of the auto markets in both Europe and the United States.

According to Reuters, this new plan might result in “more than 70% of sales in Europe and over 40% in the United States by 2030 being low-emission vehicles — either battery or hybrid electric.”


This is all part of a larger industry-wide shift toward electric and battery-powered automobiles. According to Consumer Reports, by 2024, the market will be flooded with hundreds of new electric vehicles from various manufacturers.

“These more affordable models have the potential to sway a significant percentage of the car-buying public toward buying an EV with their efficiency, performance, and lower ownership costs,” said Gabe Shenhar, assistant director of Consumer Reports’ Auto Test Center.

Chrysler is not the only North American brand on the path to producing more EVs. Consumer Reports also listed that Ford, BMW, Honda, Toyota, Jaguar, Volvo, Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz and more are also in the lineup to produce electric vehicles.

With nearly all major automakers jumping on the EV bandwagon, Chrysler won’t likely dominate the scene in any way shape or form. Considering GM has decided to dive head first going all electric contributing to the automated “utopia” that we’ll inevitably witness if war doesn’t break out. in a recent reuters article, GM CEO Mary Barra details her keen interest in flooding the market with the EV’s despite ongoing demand for gas powered vehicles.

Chief Executive Officer Mary Barra remarked during a virtual press event hosted by the Automotive Press Association that “we’re cautiously optimistic” about new car demand in the United States. “We’re hopeful that we’ll have a recovery because that’s good for everybody.”

After two months of lost production as automakers shut down plants to halt the spread of COVID-19, new vehicle dealers in the United States are running low on inventory, particularly in the high-margin pickup truck sector dominated by General Motors, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles.

In the “near term,” Barra expects GM to be “running full out” at sites that produce those popular vehicles.

Despite consumers’ continued fondness for gas-guzzling cars, especially in the United States, consulting firm AlixPartners has forecasted that major manufacturers will face a “profit desert” if they invest extensively in producing electric vehicles.

“We are very excited with the portfolio of EVs we have coming.” Barra said when asked about that projection.

“We’re going to continue on that path,” she stated. “We have a strong future ahead and I don’t see that desert.”

despite the current socioeconomic and political crises we’re experiencing, GM intends to flood the market with an EV platform that not everybody is asking for. Presumably these EV’s will come at a cheap cost considering they’ll be widely available but i have a growing bias against turning life into a technological symbiosis backed by a global warming narrative that i haven’t debunked myself but will surely look into the facts to provide speculation. Stay inquisitive in the word of God, and the world around you.

 

[APAK]

 

[APAK]

 

[APAK]

Carjacking Suspect in Critical Condition After Shootout with Armed Driver
1

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty
AWR HAWKINS14 Jan 20220
1:27


A teenage carjacking suspect is hospitalized in critical condition after a Thursday night shootout with an armed Philadelphia driver.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports a 16-year-old carjacker allegedly tried to take a 60-year-old man’s “white Pontiac at gunpoint…around 7:45 p.m. at Sharpnack and Cherokee Streets.”

The man, a concealed carry permit holder, pulled a gun and exchanged gunfire with the alleged carjacker.

The suspect was shot in the chest and in the leg.

NBC Philadelphia reports that a total of 17 rounds were fired in the gun battle.

There were 750 carjackings in Philadelphia during 2021 and “there have already been 90 in the city just 13 days into 2022.”

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio and a Turning Point USA Ambassador. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. Reach him at [email protected]. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

 

[APAK]

America is lurching from pandemic to major recession, after Biden's massive government spending programs released the inflation Kraken, writes ANDY PUZDER
By ANDY PUZDER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 10:45 EST, 17 January 2022 | UPDATED: 10:45 EST, 17 January 2022

As we emerge from the pandemic, Joe Biden's economic policy bungling is driving America into a brick wall of malaise and stagflation.

For those of us who lived through it, the comparisons to Jimmy Carter's failed presidency are hard to ignore.

So, why is the Biden administration so determined to ignore both the cause of Carter's economic failure and President Ronald Reagan's very successful formula for reversing it?

Absent such an economic awakening, it's going to be a tough three years.

Like Carter, the Biden administration is acting as though it can ignore fundamental economic problems forever. News flash – it can't.

The longer we wait to seriously address inflation, labor shortages, and supply chain problems, the worse the threat of an inevitable and deep recession becomes.

Case in point: On Wednesday Biden, claimed December's inflation report showed 'a meaningful reduction in headline inflation over last month' demonstrating that 'we are making progress in slowing the rate of price increases.' If you are a working or middle-class American that may have surprised you.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics' actual report on inflation showed that in December inflation hit 7 percent for 2021 – the highest inflation rate this country has seen in 40 years.

Rising inflation is drowning out wage gains and reducing the spending power of American workers, all while wiping out the value of savings people have spent a lifetime accruing. (Chart above) When the blue line is on top of the red line, it indicates that real wages are increasing. The chart shows inflation outpacing wage gains during the Biden administration.

The inflation Kraken was released in March and restraining it will take more than simply preventing the Biden administration from doing additional economic harm.

Most Americans have never lived through anything like the current inflationary surge. Those who have, recall all too well the ruinous consequences of applying failed Keynesian demand-side fiscal policies to a sluggish economy beset by rising inflation.

Simply put, increasing demand by infusing more money into an inflating economy results in hyper-inflation rather than economic prosperity. If common sense isn't enough to confirm this result, there is ample historical evidence.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon declared that he had embraced Keynesian economics.

By the middle of the decade, his successor, President Gerald Ford, was struggling – and failing – to 'WIN' (i.e., 'Whip Inflation Now') the battle against rising inflation.

President Carter criticized Ford for failing to beat inflation then doubled down on government spending.

After pledging to eliminate the federal deficit, Carter saw it increase during his term from $27.7 billion in 1979 to nearly $59 billion in 1980.

By the end of the decade, America was thoroughly mired in the nightmare of 'stagflation.'

Fiscal stimulus and easy monetary policy pushed inflation to astronomical levels that wiped out household savings and made basic necessities increasingly unaffordable for working families.

When Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, one of his first orders of business was to join forces with Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker to end this self-perpetuating cycle.

By that point, though, the only way to bring inflation down to a manageable level was to endure a sharp, painful recession. Mortgage interest rates reached the high teens.

But it was only after that economic hangover ended and economic fundamentals returned to a stable equilibrium that America was able to experience the economic miracle for which the 1980's are known.

Reagan's approach was politically courageous, given the tendency of American voters to punish the sitting president for economic downturns. It's called leadership, and he was ultimately rewarded with a landslide re-election victory in 1984.

President Carter criticized Ford for failing to beat inflation then doubled down on government spending. By the end of the decade, America was thoroughly mired in the nightmare of 'stagflation.' (Chart above) The period from 1965 to 1982 was marked by soaring inflation that topped 14 percent by 1980. Reagan took office in January 1981 and his strict policies helped drive down price increases

Today, President Biden is taking the opposite approach. Faced with the potential for rising inflation coming out of the pandemic, Biden opted to act as if nothing was wrong and bull ahead with his plan to 'fundamentally transform' the American economy with trillions of dollars in new government spending.

After Democrats and Republicans had already spent about $5.3 trillion on bipartisan COVID relief during the pandemic, Biden and his Democrat allies dumped another $1.9 trillion into the economy last March for no better reason than to claim credit for another unnecessary round of stimulus checks.

The impact was to juice already energized demand while reducing supply with government checks that encouraged leisure at a time when the pandemic was already slowing a labor force recovery.

With fewer people working and businesses having under-produced and under-ordered during the recession, soaring inflation was going to be the inevitable result.

It's not like they weren't warned, and not just by people on the right.

Leading economists from previous Democratic administrations, including Larry Summers and Steve Rattner, wrote extensively about how Biden's massive government spending was going to lead to a surge in inflation and eventually a recession. The data kept proving them right, but the Biden administration refused to pay heed.

Even as evidence mounted that inflation was here to stay – and getting worse by the month – Biden kept pushing for even more deficit spending in the form of the $3.5 trillion 'Build Back Better' bill.

 

[Enoch111]

Absent such an economic awakening, it's going to be a tough three years.

Who says Biden gets another three years? It would be criminal to allow him to remain in office after January 31. Where are the people who are supposed to protect the country?

 

[APAK]

Who says Biden gets another three years? It would be criminal to allow him to remain in office after January 31. Where are the people who are supposed to protect the country?

Well he needs his next 3 years behind bars, and then into a safe house away from these peoples of the US.

 

[APAK]

John McManus -- Our "Leaders" are all Globalist Traitors
January 27, 2022

THE SCAMDEMIC IS BEST UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF A SATANIC CONSPIRACY FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT TYRANNY
BASED ON THE UNITED NATIONS' AGENDA FOR THE 21 CENTURY. OUR "LEADERS" are chosen by Klaws Swab HAVE BETRAYED US.

This world government already exists.

This is manifested by the worldwide uniformity of the covid response as seen in California and Israel, or Iran, Nicaragua and Venezuela.


BELOW JOHN MCMANUS EXPLAINS THAT THE UN REALLY REPRESENTS COMMUNIST TYRANNY.
The World Health Organization IS AN AGENCY OF THE UN, FUNDED BY BILL GATES.

OF COURSE, THE ROTHSCHILD WORLD CENTRAL BANKING CARTEL IS BEHIND ALL OF THIS. (See Makow "What is Communism?")

It's called "money." They produce it out of thin air using our national credit cards. Everyone dances to their tune.

LATEST- How United Nations Funds Migrant Wave Flooding To The US
The United Nations is funding a migrant wave into the US and the evidence of this is frustratingly overwhelming. Unlike other efforts of immigration into the country, this one is significantly more organized.
How United Nations Funds Migrant Wave Flooding To The US - GreatGameIndia

"Top 10 Reasons to Get US Out! of the UN"

(from Nov 19, 2020)
by John F. McManus (JBS Bulletin Aug 2019)
Are You Aware?
Our nation's leaders have been working for decades to deliver the United States to the United Nations as the major step in building an UN-controlled New World Order.
Each year since the founding of the UN in 1945, the conspirators for global control have taken steps that threaten to destroy the independence of our nation and the freedoms of the American people.
Please read what follows and join in the campaign to Get US Out! of the United Nations.

(A member of the John Birch society, McManus cannot say world government is
Cabalist Jewish world tyranny, i.e. Jewish Supremacism.)

------------continued below-------------

 

[APAK]

1. Incompatibility of the U.S. and UN Systems of Government
U.S. System: Basic rights are given by God and cannot be overruled. Freedom prevails. (See U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776.)
UN System: Basic rights are granted by the UN government and can be canceled "by law." No recognition of God. The world body lists rights it recognizes and then claims power to abolish them "by law." (See the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, and the UN's International Covenant On Civil and Political Rights, 1966.)
2. UN Seeks to Disarm American Citizens and Cancel the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution
The UN has always sought to ban private ownership of weapons. For instance, the world body published Our Global Neighborhood in 1995, calling for "the disarming of civilians."
The UN Arms Trade Treaty (adopted by the UN in 2013) would ultimately disarm Americans. It was signed by the U.S. in 2013, but has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate.
3. The UN Is a Lawless Body; It Violates Article 2 of Its Own Charter
Article 2 of the UN Charter states: "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state [nation]...."
Examples of UN violation of its own Charter include: (a) forcing U.S. citizens to cancel plans to mine gold in Montana; (b) targeting U.S. law that permits capital punishment; (c) condemning the U.S. Border Patrol for efforts to bar entry of illegal immigrants; and (d) urging independence of Puerto Rico when even the people of that U.S. possession have repeatedly indicated they don't want their relationship to the U.S. changed.

(Alger Hiss)

4. Every UN Secretary-General Has Been Either a Communist or a Socialist
1945-46: Alger Hiss, Communist (United States)
1946-53: Trygve Lie, Socialist (Norway)
1953-61: Dag Hammarskjold, Socialist (Sweden)
1962-71: U Thant, Socialist (Burma, now Myanmar)
1972-81: Kurt Waldheim, Nazi Socialist (Austria)
1982-91: Javier Perez de Cuellar, Socialist (Peru)
1992-96: Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Socialist (Egypt)
1997-06: Kofi Annan, Socialist (Ghana)
2007-16: Ban Ki-moon, Socialist (South Korea)
2017- : Antonio Guterres, Communist (Portugal)
5. UN Charter's Article 25 Overrides U.S. Constitution and American Sovereignty
The complete text of Article 25 states: "The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the [UN] Security Council in accordance with the present Charter."
No President or member of Congress who has sworn a solemn oath to abide by the U.S. Constitution can permit Article 25 to dictate U.S. policy. However, most of America's elected officials believe our nation is obliged to deliver forces and arms when the UN calls for them.
6. Articles 39-51 of the UN Charter authorized the UN to direct U.S. participation in the "undeclared," "no-win" Korean War. Articles 52-54 of the UN Charter authorized creation of NATO and SEATO as UN "regional alliances," which led to U.S. involvement in "undeclared," "no-win" wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Established in 1945, the UN directed the Korean War (34,000 Americans killed and 92,000 wounded). This war has never been settled.
Formed in 1954, SEATO directed the Vietnam War (47,000 Americans killed and 153,000 wounded). The Vietnam War could have been won but for restrictions from on high. This war marked the first defeat in our nation's history.
Congress declared neither the Korean War nor the Vietnam War as required by the U.S. Constitution. United States involvement in these two wars was due to our membership in the UN and SEATO.
Established in 1949, NATO conducted the "undeclared," "no-win" war in Afghanistan from August 2003 to December 2014 as the leader of a UN-mandated coalition of 50 nations, which included the United States, and which at its height had 130,000 troops.
7. UN Leaders Oppose National Sovereignty, Favor a UN-Led World Government
U Thant (1970): "Lenin's ideals of peace are in line with the aims of the UN Charter."
Boutros-Ghali (1992): "The time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty has passed. It's time to rethink the question of sovereignty."
Kofi Annan (2000): "There must be new forms of global governance and global rules."

8. State Department Officials Bow to United Nations.
Secretary of State Dean Acheson, 1949: "NATO is designed to fit precisely into the framework of the United Nations."

Left, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, 1957: "I have never seen any proposal made for ... world government or for world federation which could not be carried out either by the United Nations or under the United Nations Charter."
State Department Official Richard N. Gardner, 1974: "In short, the house of world order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down [via] an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece...."
Secretary of State Colin Powell, 2001: "When it comes to our role as a member of the Security Council, we obviously are bound by UN resolutions and we're not trying to modify that."
9. Numerous Divisions of the United Nations Headquartered in Huge Buildings Throughout the World Continue to Build the UN's Power Over All of Mankind.

The UN's Organizational Chart shows the presence and indicates control of the world body in the fields of education, population, children, women, environment, trade, finance, health, agriculture, labor, military, science, culture, atomic power, telecommunications, aviation, industrial development, narcotics, refugees, immigration, property rights, and more.
10. Disarmament for All -- Except the United Nations.
In 1961, the U.S. State Department issued a 19-page booklet entitled "Freedom From War: The U.S. Program For General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World."
This document's plan, never withdrawn, called for "progressive steps" leading to UN-dominated new world order. It summarizes elements of this frightening plan as follows:
(a) "States would retain only those forces and non-nuclear armaments ... required for maintaining internal order."
(b) "The UN Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning."
(c) "The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the UN Peace Force.... All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes."
(d) The peace-keeping capabilities of the UN would be sufficiently strong ... as to assure peace ... in a disarmed world."
Resistance to this hellish proposal generated by The John Birch Society over many years has led to its non-implementation. But appropriate government officials have frequently admitted that it is still the fixed and determined policy of several U.S. agencies and departments.
CONCLUSION
The United Nations is not taking over the United States. What is occurring is that the United States is being delivered to the United Nations. This delivery must be stopped. The course is clear. Withdrawal from the United Nations must be accomplished while there is still time to do so. Get US Out! of the United Nations.
------
Related - The UN and the Origins of the Great Reset