Dear Reader,

Last week was pretty hectic for me.

My wife had to head overseas on short notice. We don’t have family in Melbourne, so that means I had to do the school runs and afterschool activities, as well as write to you and my subscribers each day.

Working single parents, I take my hat off to you…

On Friday morning, I was at the school with my six year old. She was playing on the equipment and I was impatiently waiting for the morning bell to go so I could head into the office.

A mum I know saw me standing there and came over to talk. We chatted about how our older kids were coming back from a school camp that afternoon, and that we hoped they’d had fun.

Small talk took us to ‘what are you up to today’. For me, work. For her, finishing up at 1pm to join the climate strike.

Uh oh…

This was dangerous territory for me.  

I don’t believe we face a climate ‘emergency’. And I don’t believe we should be inciting fear in our kids about it either. Promoting fear and anxiety at such a young age is detrimental to their longer-term health.

Adults, on the other hand, can do what they like. If they want to strike about the climate, that’s fine with me. That’s what a free society is all about.

But when she mentioned she was joining the climate strike, I felt like I couldn’t mention it. I certainly didn’t want to endorse her decision. But likewise, I felt like I couldn’t argue against it either.

Mercifully, the bell went and I scampered off.

But the point I wanted to make is that we have got to a stage where there can be no rational discussion about the man-made effects of climate change. If you disagree, you are a ‘denier’ and some sort of Nazi racist scum.

There is no nuance. You either believe or you don’t. And if you don’t, you’re an outcast.

The belief in climate change has reached fever pitch. If you question the new orthodoxy, you are shut down and ridiculed.

For example, the taxpayer funded, and ironically named ‘The Conversation’, recently made the decision to censor those questioning the new climate religion.

As Gerard Henderson wrote in The Weekend Australian:

‘The most recent version of what was once termed the authoritarian personality can be found in the decision by taxpayer-funded online publication The Conversation concerning the climate debate. On Tuesday, Misha Ketchell, its editor and executive director, advised that from now on he would adopt “a zero-tolerance approach to moderating climate change deniers and sceptics”.

‘Now it’s true that a large number of climate scientists, many of whom work in universities and government agencies, share Ketchell’s view that failure to act on climate change immediately “will ultimately destroy the planet”. But not all. Yet everyone, including the occasional climate scientist, who does not share Ketchell’s eco-catastrophism will be de-platformed with respect to The Conversation.

‘Editors cannot be expected to publish all contributors. And there are the trolls who, irrespective of what side of the debate they are on, do not fit in a publication such as The Conversation. But Ketchell has decided to cease being an editor making decisions concerning research, writing style and the like. Instead he has embraced the role of censor. This does not make sense, even from an eco-catastrophist perspective. For in this area it should be possible to enter a discussion about the extent of the urgency and timing of what needs to be done. And then there is the wisdom of knowing what those who disagree with you are saying and writing.’

So The Conversation is banning conversation. It’s a standard tactic of the left. If you can’t win an argument with reasoning, shut the argument down.

Another tactic is the use of kids and actors to promote an agenda. Greta Thunberg is the poster child of the climate movement. Kids are innocent. Kids are believable. Those trying to push their climate change agenda are shamelessly using her.

You simply don’t get as much airtime as she does without a powerful someone making it happen.

Hollywood is in on the ruse too. Actors — who make their living from being someone else — are all singing from the same song sheet. But they’re all phonies. They’re the biggest emitters of all. And they are owned. Their ongoing success depends on them towing the Hollywood line.

So whenever there is a coordinated global action to make us believe something, I question it. It just smells fishy to me. And we should absolutely question the climate narrative.

You may be familiar with ‘the big lie’. It’s a propaganda technique made famous by the Nazi’s, and Joseph Goebbels quote in particular:

‘If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.’

The rest of that quote is even more important:

‘The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.’

Goebbels, in turn, was inspired by Hitler’s despicable mind. From Mein Kampf:

‘All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

‘It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.’

The point to note, dear reader, is this:

Just because you would never make up something so outrageous, doesn’t mean someone else wouldn’t. There are dark forces that operate in this world. And they prey on your kindness and good nature.

Don’t forget, a free society thrives when it questions everything. When dissent is shut down, you know you’re getting close to the truth.

To put the current day scare campaign into context, take a look at past scare campaigns here, and see how they’ve worked out. That coming ice age scare was a bit of a dud…

And finally, let’s ask: Why? Why would such a huge scare campaign exist? In short, fear is a great tool of control. And division. If people are divided and opposed, then no one notices their pockets being picked.

The climate change movement represents a massive transfer of wealth via taxes and climate change ‘funds’. This opens up a huge opportunity for corrupt officials.

Call me cynical, but the bottom line is that the climate change movement is a huge money spinner for the 1%. We’re all being conned.

I know this is a hot topic, so I’d welcome your thoughts on it. Let’s start a conversation, not shut it down. Send me an email at cs@portphillippublishing.com.au.

Regards,

Greg Canavan, Editor, The Rum Rebellion

Nothing Sells News Like a Good War
By Bill Bonner

São Paulo looked a little grim when we arrived on Saturday. Or maybe it was just us.

In addition to a non-performing left hand, we came with a nasty cold.

Experts estimate that European diseases killed as many as 90% of the precolonial population of the Americas. We feared our Irish virus might finish off the rest of them.

So, we kept to ourselves on Saturday, just looking out at the gray world beyond the hotel’s window…and catching up with the news…

Corruption contest

The big question inquiring minds wanted answered over the weekend was: Who’s more corrupt?

The first contenders were the Biden’s. The Hill was on the case:

‘In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. […]

‘“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired […],” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations event. […]

‘But Ukrainian officials tell me there was one crucial piece of information that Biden must have known but didn’t mention to his audience: The prosecutor he got fired was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings that employed Biden’s younger son, Hunter, as a board member.

‘U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden’s American-based firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers into one of its accounts — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Vice President Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine and its tense relations with Russia.’

But the weekend competition for ‘Most Corrupt’ status was intense.

Hard on the heels of the Biden’s was the Trump family. Many are the allegations against the Trumps — père, fille, and fils — for the usual sort of double-dealing, but last week brought a new and clearer charge. CBS:

‘President Trump admitted Sunday that he discussed Joe Biden in a phone call with newly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July, seemingly confirming reports that he discussed a potential investigation into a domestic political opponent with a foreign leader.

‘“The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, with largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place and largely the fact that we don’t want our people like Vice President Biden and his son [contributing] to the corruption already in the Ukraine,” Mr. Trump told reporters at the White House before departing on a trip to Texas.’

Cast your vote

We can end the contest right now. Who do you think is really corrupt? A) Joe and Hunter Biden or B) Donald Trump and his boys?

If you answered either A or B, you’re not thinking hard enough. Because, if the stories told in the press are true, the best answer is C) all of the above.

The Biden’s appear to have taken advantage of an opportunity for financial gain engendered by a degenerate, full-spectrum empire. (It may cost taxpayers a trillion a year, but at least some Americans make a profit from it. That, of course, is why we have a Deep State empire.)

Donald Trump saw his opportunity from another angle. If he could get a foreign country to snoop on the Biden’s, it might up his own chances of holding on to power. ‘Sleepy Joe’ might soon become ‘Dirty Joe’ and lose the votes of those who expect their presidents to be clean.

Here at the Diary, we condemn neither man. Presidents, like plumbers, are rarely unsullied. And if we were in their positions, we might do the same.

So, we turn away from indignation and look at how their positions came to be…

Always greedy

Man is easily corrupted; that will not come as news to anyone. He is always greedy. Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal…it hardly matters. He is always ready for a little hanky-panky if he thinks he can get away with it.

But in a more honest period, a Ukrainian gas company has little need for an American lawyer who knows little about natural gas and can’t speak the national language.

But in comes a big, big empire with a deep, deep state…and the doors are unlocked, the liquor brought out, and the maidens tied to their beds.

And nothing provides richer targets of opportunity, with so little personal risk, as overextended, reckless overseas meddling.

Contracts are let. Experts are hired. Think tanks are engaged. Warplanes are commissioned. And the media trots behind like a camp follower.

What is better for selling the news than a good war? Besides, the nation’s honour and credibility are at stake!

Not enough

What is really at stake is money. Money is spent to destroy a nation…and then more is spent to build it back, pretty much as it was before.

And the common people have no idea what is going on. They don’t know what the foreign entanglements are really about and wisely don’t care.

Iran…yes, the ayatollahs look menacing, but so do the Saudis.

Russia…Putin is a ‘strongman’. Is that bad or good?

China…wasn’t it nice of them to send us all this cheap stuff? Hope they don’t ask us to pay for it…

It is all ignorance and irrelevance to the public. But to the insiders, every intervention has dollar signs on it. Power corrupts, goes the saying. And as the power of an empire matures, corruption spreads.

‘Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac’, said Henry Kissinger. Is it any wonder that the Bidens and the Trumps feel a little randy?

You can’t be too cynical about politics. Instead, the challenge is to make sure you have enough cynicism. You’re going to need a full tank of it just to get through the next few years.

Regards,

Bill Bonner, For The Rum Rebellion