Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Yesterday's Dystopian Fiction Is Today's New World Order, N Korea: We Are Ready For Pre-Emptive Nuclear Strike On U.S.

Yesterday's Dystopian Fiction Is Today's New World Order

Many of the things that are happening this very moment have direct parallels in literature of the past.  Whether it is an account such as the “Gulag Archipelago” by Solzhenitsyn or a work of “fiction” such as “1984” by George Orwell is irrelevant.  Elements of the history or the storyline (regarding the former and the latter works) are now becoming thoroughly inculcated into the fabric of modern reality.
All of the measures taken by the Soviet Union to crush and control its population are beginning to manifest themselves today in the United States.  The courts are “stacked” to reflect the decision of the regime and not to rule by law.  The Military Industrial Complex contracts are still being shuffled, along with government policies that just happen to substantiate those business interests with kickbacks for all.  Laws serve political and corporate interests, and the lawmakers themselves do not represent any of their constituents: they are self-serving thieves, selling out their country and its populace for money and power.
The police departments have (for all intents and purposes) been “federalized,” with budgets and marching orders becoming increasingly dependent upon federal and not local or state policies.  Sheriffs who follow their appointed roles as duly-elected law enforcement officials upholding Constitutional guidelines are being “phased out” of existence.  The changed demographics of “forced” insertions of illegal aliens and “refugees” into populations are rapidly negating the remainder of the two-party system to ensure that the Democratic party takes control ad infinitum.
Orwell envisioned it.  His work is labeled a work of fiction, although all of the measures Oceania pursued are either currently in place in the United States or they’re being developed.  There is mass surveillance, increasing by the day.  The “internet of things,” as coined by former General David Petraeus, is almost primed to allow “telescreens” to watch our every movement, and a camera on every corner to back them up.  Orwell hated totalitarianism, having been exposed to it in his short but accomplished lifetime, and he knew man’s propensity was to move toward the enslavement of his fellow man.
The development of new weapons by DARPA and the MIC are not toward a foreign enemy so much as the purpose of using them against the citizenry.  Drones, robots, nanotechnology, and every other “gizmo” able to be employed are all being drawn from behind the black curtain to unleash upon the citizens.  Also, the world’s situation is directly paralleling “1984” as three great spheres of influence…Europe, Asia, and North America…are being created by the powers that be.  Global governance in “thirds” is probably the NWO end state, as outlined by Orwell for a very significant reason: control with as much ethnic and cultural homogeneity as possible.
It stands to reason that an Oriental (“Eastasia,” in “1984”) empire/totalitarian state would control the Oriental nations, rather than split it up between populations that are not as closely related linguistically and culturally.  We are seeing those shifts of influence into the divisions outlined by Orwell now, as the nations jockey for position and power.  Just as in “1984,” where it stated that even two of the super-states in alignment and concerted efforts could not together topple the third, perhaps the same is with our world.
The shift is toward totalitarianism, and the populations have been (and are being) conditioned to accept, if not embrace, collectivist thought and socialism.  A good example was a film called “the Mutant Chronicles,” in which there were four great super-states that were organized not as nations but as corporations, that made war with one another over resources.  We see the blending of government and corporation today in virtually every facet of life, with the illusion of elections and the illusion of choice upheld to keep the population around the dullard state of consciousness.
What will save us from this?  Will we be able to save ourselves from it?  The more and more one watches freedoms disappearing by the day, the more one must wonder if there is a way to stem the tide.  Orwell and Solzhenitsyn…visionary and historian…gave us blueprints to follow…checklists with which to use as frameworks of reference for what is befalling us daily.  Someday it may be that the brief period of freedom enjoyed by the American people may be categorized as a “work of fiction” in a future that may not even allow anyone to read it.

North Korea has once again asserted that it will use its nuclear weapons arsenal against the United States. Unlike previous statements, however, a note from the rogue state’s foreign minister on Monday insisted that North Korea is fully equipped and ready to use a nuclear weapon on the United States, not just willing to do so.

Foreign Minister Lee Su-yong insisted in a statement Monday that Pyongyang would not hesitate to use their nuclear weapons against America, and they now no longer needed to wait for their scientists to build the weapons necessary for such an attack. “In response to the US frenzied hysteria for unleashing a nuclear war, we have fully transferred our army from the form of military response to the form of delivering a pre-emptive strike and we state resolutely about the readiness to deliver a pre-emptive nuclear strike,” he said, adding that North Korea “faces the dilemma: a thermonuclear war or peace.”

It is not the first time (this month) that North Korean officials make similar threats. Most recently, the North Korean government released a propaganda video over the weekend depicting a nuclear attack on Washington D.C. The video is titled “Last Chance.”
Earlier this month, North Korean officials, through the nation’s state-run media outlets, threatened to use a hydrogen bomb on Manhattan. In February, North Korean state media identified all of the “mainland U.S.” as a nuclear target. Such threats have become more common following the January announcement that the North Korean military had successfully tested a hydrogen bomb, which was met with extreme skepticism by the world’s nuclear scientists given the small size of the quake caused by the bomb in question.
South Korean military officials report Tuesday that Pyongyang has followed up this threat with yet another projectile launch from its coast, this time hitting land but not causing any damage. “Given the trajectory and distance traveled, the military suspects the projectile might be North Korea’s new multiple rocket launcher system,” South Korean news agency Yonhap reported on Tuesday.

North Korean state media has made clear that this latest round of belligerent activity is a protest against a scheduled meeting between President Barack Obama, South Korean President Park Geun-hye, and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe later this week. The heads of state are scheduled to meet in Washington D.C. to discuss constructive approaches to curbing North Korean aggression. Park will meet with each head of state individually, as well, according to Yonhap. President Xi Jinping of China will also be in Washington this week and is expected to attend the larger Nuclear Security Summit.

Strict gun laws, asinine and superfluous regulations, a second-rate education system, domineering labor unions, unpayable public debts, rotting infrastructure, and mind-boggling housing costs. Which state are you thinking of right now? Is it California? I bet it’s California.
Over the years the People’s Republic of Kalifornia has developed quite the reputation for oppressive rules, dysfunction, and unsustainability; both financially and environmentally. Financially speaking the state has been on the precipice for some time. In recent years several of their cities have declared bankruptcy, and overall the state has one of the highest debt per capita ratios in America. It’s a big effing mess with no clear solutions in sight. There really isn’t any way that California, the biggest economic powerhouse in America, can sustain its current course.
California can however, hasten its demise with crackpot left-wing policies that are sure to ruin their economy, like raising the minimum wage.

A deal to raise California’s minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2022 was reached Monday by Gov. Jerry Brown and state legislators, making the nation’s largest state the first to lift base earnings to that level and propelling a campaign to lift the pay floor nationally.
The increase will boost the wages of about 6.5 million California residents, or 43% of the state’s workforce, who earn less than $15, according to worker group Fight for $15. The proposal had been headed to a statewide referendum. It’s now expected to be approved by the state assembly.

Will it raise the wages of 43% of the workforce, or kill that workforce? I’m betting on the latter. This will be the highest statewide minimum wage in the country. Seattle raised its minimum wage to $15 recently, as did Oregon, but in those cases the wage increases were focused on urban areas. And that’s one reason why California’s minimum wage increase is going to be so disastrous for the state’s economy. It’s going to be $15 an hour everywhere.

Wealthy West Coast cities can absorb the costs of higher wages (for the most part), but California’s policy is going to disproportionately affect its poor, rural, inland counties, of which there are many. These are regions that are just like any other rural part of America. They’re dominated by small businesses and mom and pop shops. Goods and labor are cheap because they have to be. Profit margins are already thin for everyone, and will be completely wiped out by this policy.
In any case though, the cities aren’t going to fare much better. It’s just that the rural areas are going to feel the heat first. In the long run it’s going to destroy jobs and raise costs all over the state, and contribute to countless other failed policies that California is reeling from.
The question is, will this policy add so much weight to Californa’s pre-existing problems, that it will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back? Forbes seems to thinks so. They recently made a compelling comparison to what California is planning to do, and what the unfortunate Greeks have already done.

It was a situation where the government was financially propping up both average citizens and big business, and it was just too expensive. When the debt crisis came, this entitlement system imploded. Greece’s high minimum wage indirectly helped bring that country to its knees (among other reasons of course). It’s precisely what happens to all socialist systems, and Commiefornia will be no exception. Once this law is in place, California will be on the Greek path, which there is no escape from.

Miller — who had been working for 
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
 at the time that Sessions led the conservative opposition to Obamatrade in the U.S. Senate— said that Cruz’s “lobbying” effort to fast track President Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership “was the difference maker” that enabled fast track to pass.

Like Sen. Cruz, Obama had been pushing for fast track to ensure the passage of TPP. Fast track lowers the 67 votes required to pass a treaty to a mere simple majority, it surrenders the 60 vote filibuster, and it forfeits individual senators’ ability to add amendments or changes to the trade deals negotiated by the president. As Sen. Sessions explained, “A vote for fast-track is a vote to authorize the President to ink the secret [TPP] deal contained in these pages—to affix his name on the Union and to therefore enter the United States into it.”
We talk about Club for Growth, we talk about these groups that are out there pushing offshoring, there’s a reason why they’re aligned behind Ted Cruz — and this needs to be understood: the reason why Obamatrade became law is because of Ted Cruz. During the early pivotal moments of the fight when Jeff Sessions — and I was working for him — was out there warning the country about the living agreement [of the Trans-Pacific Partnership], about the transnational commission [established by the TPP], about the loss of U.S. sovereignty, Ted Cruz not only wrote an op-ed with 
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
 giving the pact urgent needed momentum, but Ted Cruz also did media and interviews arguing against Jeff Sessions.

In the April 2015 Wall Street Journal op-ed — which Miller cited during the interview — Cruz and Ryan describe the TPP as an “historic” trade agreement that would “mean greater access to a billion customers for American manufacturers, farmers and ranchers.”

Similarly, in a June radio interview, Cruz defended President Obama’s trade agenda and claimed Sen. Sessions was misguided for opposing it. Sessions had raised concerns about TPP’s creation of a global governing commission that would have serious implications for U.S. sovereignty. Cruz, however, dismissed Sessions’ concerns: “It is simply false that the TPP trade agreement gives up our sovereignty. There is nothing in TPA or TPP that can give a foreign nobody the ability to make binding law in the United States of America,” Cruz said. “I like and respect Jeff Sessions very much. What he is describing there about what this will do is simply not accurate. I respect his views, but it’s not accurate. I have read this agreement… it is not accurate to say this is undermining our sovereignty… It is simply false to say this would create some trans-national body that could change U.S. laws.”
“I could not in good conscience vote against a bill whose most significant impacts will be jobs, growth, and opportunity for struggling American families,” Cruz wrote after voting to fast-track TPP on May 22nd. “By passing Trade Promotion Authority, we create a path for trade agreements to reduce government-created barriers to prosperity,” Cruz said in a statement that could only be interpreted as support for TPP, since that was the trade agreement that was going to be sent to Congress if fast-track was adopted, as indeed is about to occur. Cruz continued, explaining that his vote for fast-track “would enable both this President and the next to expand trade that benefits American workers.”

Breitbart News Daily host Stephen K. Bannon pushed back against Miller’s assertion and asked about the fact that when a procedural matter unexpectedly caused the fast track to come up for another vote in the Senate, Cruz eventually reversed his vote to oppose fast track. Bannon asked: “Because of the work of Sen. Sessions and others — didn’t he [Cruz] actually see the error of his ways? And then at the appropriate time — or at least later — say, ‘Hey, look 
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
 and the other guys lied to me.’ And he came out against TPA [trade promotion authority] and he’s coming out against TPP strongly.”

“No,” Miller replied. “He rallied support for the pact sufficient to ensure its passage and he cast the initial vote for its final passage when he and everyone else believed it was the final vote. All of the lobbying he did on behalf of the pact guaranteed its passage. If he had been silent, we probably would have defeated it. If he had lobbied against it — as he was morally bound to do — we would have defeated it. He was the difference maker.”

No comments: