A Qanon conference held in Las Vegas last weekend saw far-right conspiracy-mongers lay out their ambitious plans to “take back the secretaries of state offices around the country,” according to Jim Marchant, who’s running for Nevada secretary of state. Marchant was among a handful of political hopefuls who’ve formed a coalition in hopes of solving the nonexistent issue of voter fraud.
“I can’t stress enough how important the secretary of state offices are. I think they are the most important elections in our country in 2022,” Marchant said at the “For God & Country Patriot Double Down” event. “And why is that? We control the election system. In 2022 we’re going to take back our country.”
The mastermind behind the coalition appears to be a fringe figure known by the name Juan O. Savin, whom many in the QAnon world believe to be JFK Jr. Savin rarely shows his face except for by accident while filming live streams, so it came as a surprise when he appeared at the conference and held court for upwards of an hour. Emcee Andre Popa pushed the theory despite the fact that yet another person suspected to be JFK Jr. was in attendance.
Somehow Savin has the ear of prominent QAnon believers like Jim Caviezel, who welcomed Savin to the stage over the weekend with a warm embrace. It was Savin and Marchant who initially met shortly after the 2020 election to hatch their plan. They held their first meeting as a coalition in May, alongside backers like MyPillow and election fraud fetishist Mike Lindell, former Maria Butina lover and disgraced former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne, and Gateway Pundit founder Jim Hoft.
Though the group appears to have lots of money behind it, there’s not a chance all four candidates who attended the conference—Rachel Hamm, Kristina Karamo, Mark Finchem, and Marchant—will win their elections.
Hamm is running for secretary of state in California, where she is largely predicted to lose simply because the state is so blue. She’s likely not helping her candidacy efforts by continuing to espouse her “prophetic” dreams that involve killing alleged witches and likening Donald Trump to a doting father trying to teach the country a lesson.
Marchant was previously endorsed by Trump during his failed 2020 bid for House representative in Nevada. He has yet to receive an endorsement for his Nevada secretary of state bid. Karamo, meanwhile, already has Trump’s blessing in her bid for Michigan secretary of state, as does Mark Finchem, who currently serves as an Arizona house representative and sees the secretary of state position as a way to help thwart alleged election wrongdoings.
There are 26 states with secretary of state positions up for election on the 2022 ballot. Now more than ever is a great time to get into politics and combat the fringe views of QAnon Republicans. Otherwise, these folks could be running an election in your own community.
Read more at:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/10/27/2060513/-QAnon-coalition-wants-to-control-the-election-system
Showing posts with label Control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Control. Show all posts
9/24/21
Global Food Supplies: : Small-scale farmers must control our food system
The Food Systems Summit in New York is supposed to come up with a global strategy to fight hunger and feed a rapidly growing world population.
But it's focused too much on the big agro-industry. Corporate interests are taking center stage and expanding their influence in the UN system to an alarming extent, undermining democratic decisions. The concerns of peasant farmers like myself, who produce over 70% of the world’s food, are sidelined even though we provide a vital contribution to the food agenda through ecological and fair farming methods. Paula Gioia taking out a honeycomb from one of her beehives.
Paula Gioia is a farmer in Germany active in the international peasants movement.
We face increasing problems all over the world. Land rights are neglected; land grabbing remains rampant, and big industrial players and their production methods harm biodiversity and livelihoods. And it's not just the Global South facing these threats. Small farms in Germany and other European countries are struggling to survive. Thousands have shut down in recent years. In the EU alone we lost about 4.2 million farms between 2005 and 2016, most of them under 5 hectares (12 acres).
Read more at: Opinion: Small-scale farmers must control our food system | World | Breaking news and perspectives from around the globe | DW | 23.09.2021
But it's focused too much on the big agro-industry. Corporate interests are taking center stage and expanding their influence in the UN system to an alarming extent, undermining democratic decisions. The concerns of peasant farmers like myself, who produce over 70% of the world’s food, are sidelined even though we provide a vital contribution to the food agenda through ecological and fair farming methods. Paula Gioia taking out a honeycomb from one of her beehives.
Paula Gioia is a farmer in Germany active in the international peasants movement.
We face increasing problems all over the world. Land rights are neglected; land grabbing remains rampant, and big industrial players and their production methods harm biodiversity and livelihoods. And it's not just the Global South facing these threats. Small farms in Germany and other European countries are struggling to survive. Thousands have shut down in recent years. In the EU alone we lost about 4.2 million farms between 2005 and 2016, most of them under 5 hectares (12 acres).
Read more at: Opinion: Small-scale farmers must control our food system | World | Breaking news and perspectives from around the globe | DW | 23.09.2021
3/31/19
Middle East: Arab league rejects Israel Control over Golan hights
Arab League rejects US recognition of Israeli control over Golan Heights Arab leaders slammed the US decision to recognise the Golan Heights as Israeli territory at a summit in Tunis on Sunday, but struggled for further unity as Qatar's emir left the meeting early.
Read more at:
1/11/19
USA TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: The Evangelical grip on the Trump Administration
‘Brought to Jesus’: the evangelical grip on the Trump administration
Read more at:
12/15/18
EU - Parliamentary Elections: Taking back control: How European citizens are slowly gaining power
The news site Politico Europe recently produced one of many inevitable
end-of-year rankings, “The women who shape Brussels – class of 2018”. It
was interesting to see that, in a European Union that is widely
perceived as undemocratic, MEPs were up high on this list. Among them,
the so-called “tech MEP gang” scored highest. This “sisterhood”, as
Politico calls them, includes influential MEPs such as Marietje Schaake,
Eva Kaili, Mady Delvaux, and Pilar del Castillo Vera. They help shape
European laws on robots, blockchain, intellectual property rights, and
privacy. These women are feared in Silicon Valley. And in many European
capitals too.
It is ironic that the only ones who don’t really seem to care about this powerful “gang” are the European voters they are supposed to represent, and in whose names they wage their fierce political battles. Many Europeans do not read Politico. What MEPs do – be they men or women – does not interest them in the least. Brussels, for them, is too far away. They perceive “Europe” as an elite project: “let’s take back control.”
This is a pity, because things have really changed a little in recent years. Citizens often associate MEPs with a toothless, expensive parliament that no one has any control over, but this perception is somewhat outdated. Under the 2010 Treaty of Lisbon, member states have given the EU additional powers in aspects of external relations such as trade agreements, foreign policy, and the EU’s position within the United Nations.
The European Parliament has gained power in these fields too. This follows a democratic logic: if one takes policy to a higher level, democratic control should follow. Although it is far from perfect, the treaty expanded democratic participation a little. And the “female tech gang” has made full use of it. By asking questions, vetoing draft proposals, and putting forward amendments to such proposals, MEPs from across the EU have influenced – for example – agreements on data exchange and counter-terrorism with the United States in a way that was impossible before.
According to a Eurobarometer survey published in September 2018, just 41 percent of European citizens know when the next European Parliament elections will be held (May 2019). Only 51 percent declare an interest in them. A poll taken in April this year found that “a great majority think that people would abstain [from voting in the elections] because ‘they believe that their vote will not change anything’, ‘they distrust the political system’ or ‘are not interested in politics or in elections in general’.” The prevailing assumption is still that the European Parliament is useless because citizens “aren’t heard anyway”.
European Parliament is useless because citizens “aren’t heard anyway”.
Read more: Taking back control: How European citizens are slowly gaining power | European Council on Foreign Relations
It is ironic that the only ones who don’t really seem to care about this powerful “gang” are the European voters they are supposed to represent, and in whose names they wage their fierce political battles. Many Europeans do not read Politico. What MEPs do – be they men or women – does not interest them in the least. Brussels, for them, is too far away. They perceive “Europe” as an elite project: “let’s take back control.”
This is a pity, because things have really changed a little in recent years. Citizens often associate MEPs with a toothless, expensive parliament that no one has any control over, but this perception is somewhat outdated. Under the 2010 Treaty of Lisbon, member states have given the EU additional powers in aspects of external relations such as trade agreements, foreign policy, and the EU’s position within the United Nations.
The European Parliament has gained power in these fields too. This follows a democratic logic: if one takes policy to a higher level, democratic control should follow. Although it is far from perfect, the treaty expanded democratic participation a little. And the “female tech gang” has made full use of it. By asking questions, vetoing draft proposals, and putting forward amendments to such proposals, MEPs from across the EU have influenced – for example – agreements on data exchange and counter-terrorism with the United States in a way that was impossible before.
According to a Eurobarometer survey published in September 2018, just 41 percent of European citizens know when the next European Parliament elections will be held (May 2019). Only 51 percent declare an interest in them. A poll taken in April this year found that “a great majority think that people would abstain [from voting in the elections] because ‘they believe that their vote will not change anything’, ‘they distrust the political system’ or ‘are not interested in politics or in elections in general’.” The prevailing assumption is still that the European Parliament is useless because citizens “aren’t heard anyway”.
European Parliament is useless because citizens “aren’t heard anyway”.
In a remarkable inaugural
lecture at the University of Amsterdam in early November, European law
professor Christina Eckes challenged that assumption. Eckes pointed out
that “while transferring powers to the EU limits the unilateral autonomy
of national governments, it increases control for EU citizens over
central aspects of international relations, such as the conclusion of
international agreements.” In other words: the transfer of power to
Brussels may weaken member states, but it empowers citizens. Why?
Because the European Parliament now has a key role in negotiating and
finalising international treaties. As a result, it can exercise more
control over institutions that implement these treaties – since they are
European – than national parliaments can. In this way, Eckes argues,
“European integration allows European citizens to retain control over
international policies in a globalised world.”
Read more: Taking back control: How European citizens are slowly gaining power | European Council on Foreign Relations
1/29/17
Russia-USA Relations: Trump and Putin’s New "Oligarchic International" - by Alexei Bayer
His targets range from the Mexicans to the Chinese and include plenty of Americans, from actress Meryl Streep to Rep. John Lewis.
The one man who can do no wrong by Trump is Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
It may seem like a strange affinity between a fat cat real estate developer and an ex-KGB colonel who devoted the first half of his life to the cause of burying capitalism.
There have been claims that Putin holds “kompromat” on Trump – damaging materials such as sex tapes – forcing the new U.S. president to sing to Putin’s tune.
While such kompromat material may exist, there is a less conspiratorial explanation why the two are bromancing together — and what kind of world order they are starting to build jointly.
“The working men have no country,” Marx and Engels declared in their Communist Manifesto back in 1848. They famously called for the proletariat of the world to unite because they regarded nationality was a fake distinction. What truly mattered, they said, was class solidarity.
The first Socialist International was founded in London in 1864 and “The Internationale” became its anthem.
The global super-rich class emerged nearly four decades ago. Its members hail from different countries and different walks of life. They have different professional backgrounds and earn their money in a variety of legal, semi-legal and criminal ways.
They ranged from the heirs of the Rothschilds to wildly successful tech entrepreneurs and the investors who backed them.
The class includes financial speculators, bankers, heads of publicly traded companies, with their huge bonuses and golden parachutes, sports and entertainment superstars and so on.
And, of course, let’s not forget the kleptocrats, the oil sheiks and the drug barons.
Each in his own way, Trump and Putin are extreme exemplars of this group. Putin is probably the world’s richest – and most shameless – kleptocrat. He has turned Russia into the world’s first nuclear armed mafia state.
His policy of destabilizing the United States and the European Union and whipping up nationalism at home has been designed with one purpose in mind – to keep himself and his super-rich cronies in power.
Putin claims to be a Russian patriot, but he is bleeding Russia dry and shamelessly, but effectively corrupting all of its institutions.
Trump is not just a billionaire himself (even though no one knows for sure whether he is, because he tends to exaggerate his net worth). His business model also directly caters to them, since his buildings attract the super-wealthy.
Contrary to his sloganeering, Trump doesn’t give a damn about America (and “making it great again.”) Short of finally triggering an American Revolution – an event for which the world is still waiting — America can hardly be any “greater” for him and his ilk than it is right now.
n fact, Trump seems to hate the United States, to judge from how viciously he attacks other Americans and how he is now debasing a proud American institution, the Presidency. Needless to say, like any true oligarch, he has paid no taxes for years.
Trump may wear a stars ‘n’ stripes lapel pin, but his loyalty lies elsewhere — with the nation of the super-rich. He and Putin are countrymen.
It has been asserted that once he assumes the presidency, Trump will sacrifice American interests in favor of Russian ones. It is a mistake to make that assumption.
Putin cares as little about Russia as Trump does about America. The two only care about making the world safe for themselves and all the other super-rich. They might was well adopt a common slogan: Oligarchs of the World Unite!
Read more: Trump and Putin’s New "Oligarchic International" - The Globalist
9/8/16
Israel: Has Israel Effectively Colonized the United States?- by Badruddin Khan
We normally think of colonizers as large countries, and the colonized as smaller and weaker nations. But this is not always the case. Colonization does not require occupation. It merely requires the subjugation of the colonized. With ambition, superior information and calculation, and the right mindset, smaller nations can (and have in the past) colonized and dominated larger and nominally more powerful countries.
India was successfully colonized by tiny Britain in the 18th century. The vehicle for colonization was the East India Company. It was only after the Indian mutiny that Britain acted directly and sent in troops to establish the British Raj. For the next 200 years India was drained of its wealth, its economy was restructured to support England’s needs and global ambitions, and its people militarized to fight and die on behalf of the British crown. The Indian leaders who remained were willing participants in this venture; those who felt otherwise were destroyed or marginalized.
In a similar vein, Israel today is in the process of colonizing the United States, which is vital to its global projection and exercise of power. The steps Israel is taking are visible to all (as was the case with British designs on India) and yet it is remarkably difficult to connect the dots while such a takeover is in process. Or, to do anything about it.
It means total control of what matters. The British were interested in Indian wealth, and a standing army of Indians willing to die for their wars. They couldn’t care less about India’s internal petty politics that did not directly or indirectly impact their mission. An effective “divide and conquer” strategy pit Indians against each other and discouraged any kind of coordinated response, or sedition. The British leveraged their “outsider advantage” to objectively collect data with which to calculate and coordinate which Indian princes to support in battles, and which to connive with. Like pieces on a chessboard, Indian leaders exhausted themselves through internal battles, and were prevailed to seek cover provided by the British. Small amounts of leverage can change outcomes (as the Israeli lobby AIPAC has shown, in its path to dominating Congress and regional/local US politics), and over the years the British were able control and align India to the British crown. Less than 10,000 English controlled colonial India, which at that time had a population of 300 million.
It is instructive to note that while there were relatively few white Englishmen, a class of local “brown sahibs” was developed, to actually run things. This elite class was educated in English ways, and rewarded monetarily and through social stature. Britain was too small a country to ultimately matter by itself, but by leveraging India the English could pursue their global ambitions. India was the “Jewel in the (British) Crown”.
Today, Israel has effective control of US policy in the Mideast, and similar goals. Much has already been written about Israel’s control of Congress. Israel is now edging towards control over the US Executive Branch, with both presidential candidates supported by billionaires whose #1 agenda is Israel (Saban and Adelson). The Supreme Court will be one-third Jewish, and justices have community ties and families. As Israel demonstrated through its successful intimidation of Judge Goldstone, jurists are human and everyone has their price.
Israel’s “occupation force” in the US has long included AIPAC as well as the dense network of community organizations at the State and local levels. Through relationships that have been developed over years and with unlimited funds at their disposal, the “Israel Lobby” ensures that votes go the right way, and that opponents are squashed when Israel demands unity. In 2003 at the onset of George Bush’s Iraq war this occupation force was multiplied through the inclusion of Christian Zionists.
Critics of the Israel Lobby are marginalized by whatever means available, including being called anti-Semitic. The Lobby has been effective in securing massive aid packages for Israel even though Israel’s per-capita GDP exceeds that of several European nations. Israeli insiders permeate the US government, and it is US policy that there be “no light” between the countries so that where Israel is concerned there is no debate. Israel’s top priorities are the top priorities of the US. There are of course instances where this does not happen (such as, Iran) but the direction points to a tighter colonial noose in the years ahead.
Read more: Has Israel Effectively Colonized the United States?
India was successfully colonized by tiny Britain in the 18th century. The vehicle for colonization was the East India Company. It was only after the Indian mutiny that Britain acted directly and sent in troops to establish the British Raj. For the next 200 years India was drained of its wealth, its economy was restructured to support England’s needs and global ambitions, and its people militarized to fight and die on behalf of the British crown. The Indian leaders who remained were willing participants in this venture; those who felt otherwise were destroyed or marginalized.
In a similar vein, Israel today is in the process of colonizing the United States, which is vital to its global projection and exercise of power. The steps Israel is taking are visible to all (as was the case with British designs on India) and yet it is remarkably difficult to connect the dots while such a takeover is in process. Or, to do anything about it.
It means total control of what matters. The British were interested in Indian wealth, and a standing army of Indians willing to die for their wars. They couldn’t care less about India’s internal petty politics that did not directly or indirectly impact their mission. An effective “divide and conquer” strategy pit Indians against each other and discouraged any kind of coordinated response, or sedition. The British leveraged their “outsider advantage” to objectively collect data with which to calculate and coordinate which Indian princes to support in battles, and which to connive with. Like pieces on a chessboard, Indian leaders exhausted themselves through internal battles, and were prevailed to seek cover provided by the British. Small amounts of leverage can change outcomes (as the Israeli lobby AIPAC has shown, in its path to dominating Congress and regional/local US politics), and over the years the British were able control and align India to the British crown. Less than 10,000 English controlled colonial India, which at that time had a population of 300 million.
It is instructive to note that while there were relatively few white Englishmen, a class of local “brown sahibs” was developed, to actually run things. This elite class was educated in English ways, and rewarded monetarily and through social stature. Britain was too small a country to ultimately matter by itself, but by leveraging India the English could pursue their global ambitions. India was the “Jewel in the (British) Crown”.
Today, Israel has effective control of US policy in the Mideast, and similar goals. Much has already been written about Israel’s control of Congress. Israel is now edging towards control over the US Executive Branch, with both presidential candidates supported by billionaires whose #1 agenda is Israel (Saban and Adelson). The Supreme Court will be one-third Jewish, and justices have community ties and families. As Israel demonstrated through its successful intimidation of Judge Goldstone, jurists are human and everyone has their price.
Israel’s “occupation force” in the US has long included AIPAC as well as the dense network of community organizations at the State and local levels. Through relationships that have been developed over years and with unlimited funds at their disposal, the “Israel Lobby” ensures that votes go the right way, and that opponents are squashed when Israel demands unity. In 2003 at the onset of George Bush’s Iraq war this occupation force was multiplied through the inclusion of Christian Zionists.
Critics of the Israel Lobby are marginalized by whatever means available, including being called anti-Semitic. The Lobby has been effective in securing massive aid packages for Israel even though Israel’s per-capita GDP exceeds that of several European nations. Israeli insiders permeate the US government, and it is US policy that there be “no light” between the countries so that where Israel is concerned there is no debate. Israel’s top priorities are the top priorities of the US. There are of course instances where this does not happen (such as, Iran) but the direction points to a tighter colonial noose in the years ahead.
Read more: Has Israel Effectively Colonized the United States?
10/17/12
Who controls the internet? by Jemima Kiss
Yet as it gears up for its first global conference in 14 years, the ITU has found itself under unprecedented attack. The first assailant is the powerful US technology lobby. Companies, including Google, are claiming that new ITU proposals would mean internet companies paying hefty fees to local telecoms companies, reigniting historic tensions between US internet giants and incumbent telecoms firms across the world.
But that's not the only battle that will be played out this December when the ITU's 193 member states gather in Dubai. Russia and China have been explicit in their goal of taking control of the internet away from the US, while developing countries feel the western technology hegemony is limiting their economic opportunities. With the world's internet population predicted to reach 3.4 billion by 2016, there is everything to play for.
The ITU has not helped its case. Suspected by some critics of encouraging the controversial proposals, comments by the eloquent secretary general Dr Hamadoun Touré seem designed to antagonise the US. He told Vanity Fair earlier this year: "When an invention becomes used by billions across the world, it no longer remains the sole property of one nation, however powerful that nation might be. There should be a mechanism where many countries have an opportunity to have a say."
The reaction to some of these new proposals, or ITRs, has been a comprehensive, well-organised and well-funded campaign by a cabal of powerful American corporates – including Google, Microsoft, Cisco, AT&T and Comcast. Much of the resulting media coverage of the ITU, particularly in the US, has ranged from dismissive to aggressive, labelling the low-profile union obscure and irrelevant and exploiting American animosity for the UN.
Western dominance is the one of the biggest challenges for developing nations, says Alice Munyua, a researcher and policy development expert, representing Kenya and Africa on forums such as Icann. "It is a big concern for African governments and stakeholders, and not just because of how the internet is governed, but how it is developed from a commercial and technical perspective," she said. "There is a feeling that we are not able to participate or contribute effectively because of the lack of capacity, skills and resources, so there's a digital divide in terms of access, but also in appropriating the internet for our own development."
Read more: Who controls the internet? | Jemima Kiss | Technology | guardian.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)