Financial blacklisting doesn’t just rob you of a chance to spread your message: it robs you of your ability to do business, your livelihood, your very means of functioning in a capitalist society. Thanks to the encroachment of progressive ideology into the financial industry — including major credit card companies like Visa, Discover, and Mastercard — it has now become a reality.

...The liberal Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), bluntly warned that banks and credit card companies had become “de facto internet censors.” That even liberal groups had raised the alarm signaled the seriousness of the problem.

Since then, financial blacklisting has only gotten worse. In August, Mastercard and Discover deplatformed conservative and Islam critic Robert Spencer. In the same month, Visa and Mastercard ceased service to David Horowitz. While credit card processing service to Horowitz was eventually restored, Spencer remains financially blacklisted. Visa, Mastercard, Discover and Patreon did not return requests for comment.

The policing of language is soon going to reach its apex — and it’s not going to be pretty. Language has a powerful effect on the way we think and feel. The erasure of male identity in language signifies a much greater problem than just battling so-called gender bias. Recall Ayn Rand’s Anthem, a dystopian fiction novel in which the notion of individuality has been erased entirely; gender-specific pronouns are not used. There is no “I,” only “we.”

Gender is closely tied to one’s identity as a person. The slow erasure of gender in our everyday language can, and will, erode individualism and sense of self. While the powers that be say they are increasing “equality” through neutrality, what they aren’t saying is they want us all to be equal slaves. Perhaps it sounds a bit far-fetched, but every path begins with a single step — including the path to tyranny. Indeed, if the globalists have their way, we’ll all soon be a herd of genderless, mindless sheeple who are unable to defend ourselves or fight back.

But as bad as 2018 was, the year that has just started threatens to greatly surpass it. Let’s start by talking about politics. According to Axios, Donald Trump is currently the subject of 17 different investigations. Yes, you read that correctly. We have never seen anything like this in American history. Even during the Nixon era there was some measure of restraint, but at this point they are trying to come up with any angle that they possibly can to get rid of Donald Trump. We are rapidly getting to the point where America will be ungovernable. Our political institutions are breaking down, and faith in the system is at an all-time low.

But at least economic conditions have been relatively stable, and this has done much to pacify most Americans in recent years. Unfortunately, economic conditions are really starting to slow down, and big corporations are beginning to announce large scale layoffs. Just like we saw during the last recession, eventually there will be millions of Americans that lose their jobs, and mortgage defaults will spike dramatically once again. And just like in 2008, the stock market is starting to plunge in a major way. 2018 was the worst year for the stock market in a decade, we just witnessed the worst month of December for Wall Street since the Great Depression, and at this point approximately 12 trillion dollars of global stock market wealth has been wiped out.

History has shown that tough economic conditions make military conflict more likely, and the world continues to teeter on the brink of war. In the Middle East, Turkish tanks have been lining up along the Syrian border in anticipation of a possible invasion, and Syrian forces have been massing to defend against a potential attack. Elsewhere, Hezbollah and Hamas seem to be in a race to see who can start a war with Israel first. If war does break out, Israel may find themselves fighting both of them simultaneously.

As for the United States, our relationships with both Russia and China are rapidly deteriorating. The Russians continue to prepare for a coming military conflict with the United States, and the Pentagon is officially freaked out by the new hypersonic missiles that the Russians have just developed.

Meanwhile, the trade war with China continues to escalate and one Chinese general just suggested that the Chinese military should not be afraid to “sink two US aircraft carriers”. And let us not forget Iran, North Korea and the potential for a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Sadly, I have a feeling that there is going to be a whole lot less “peace on Earth” by this time next year.

On top of everything else, the crust of our planet appears to be getting increasingly unstable and climate conditions are changing at a very rapid pace. Dozens of volcanoes are currently erupting, and one expert is warning that about 100 others could be on the brink of erupting. Massive earthquakes have been striking along the Ring of Fire with increasing regularity, and major storms just keep getting larger and more intense.

We could keep going if you like. I haven’t even mentioned the potential for a global pandemic, the impending collapse of the European Union, civil unrest, terrorism, the death of our oceans or the horrible drought in the western half of the country. Yes, people desperately need hope, but giving them false hope by telling them that everything is going to be just wonderful in 2019 is not a good thing. Our world is in turmoil, and it is going to get even worse in 2019. So put on your seatbelts and get ready, because it is going to be a bumpy ride.

The official did not elaborate on Shanahan’s views on China, but said the acting SecDef told the leaders to follow the Pentagon’s 2018 National Defense Strategy guidance when it comes to Beijing. The strategy, written by Mattis, described China as “predatory” and a “strategic competitor” that, along with Russia, wants to “shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model.”

“Long-term strategic competitions with China and Russia are the principal priorities for the Department, and require both increased and sustained investment,” the strategy continued. President Xi Jinping demanded the US Navy cease “provocative actions” in the South China Sea late last year, and told the country’s military to get “prepared for war,” without elaborating further.

President Xi also said on Wednesday that Taiwan – currently an autonomous state – “must and will be” reunited with China, and that his government will take “all necessary measures” to make this happen. With military threats bandied about, things are not looking much better on the economic front, with China and the US spending much of 2018 locked into a trade war.

President Trump said: “I shouldn’t be popular in Europe. I want Europe to pay. I don’t care about Europe. I’m not elected by Europeans, I’m elected by American taxpayers, frankly.” Continuing the theme that his job was to serve the US, not the voters of other countries, he continued: “If I were popular in Europe, I wouldn’t be doing my job. I could be the most popular person in Europe, I could run for any office if I wanted to, but I don’t want to. I want people to treat us fairly, and they’re not.”

President Trump’s comment that “I want Europe to pay” was a reference to European allies who enjoy the benefits of NATO membership without paying the two percent minimum of GDP for defence they collectively promise to. The President again brought up Germany for not doing its part, saying of the economic powerhouse’s defence spending: “Germany pays 1 percent; they should be paying 4 percent.”

Attacking Germany’s poor spending and decade-long promised time frame to see any improvement, Trump observed: “Germany is just paying a bit over one percent, whereas the United States is paying in actual numbers 4.2 percent of actual GDP [towards defence]. We’re paying a lot of money to protect; this has been going on for decades… it’s very unfair to our country, it’s very unfair to our taxpayers… these countries need to step it up, not over a ten-year period, but immediately.”

After Apple announced that their sales during the first quarter are going to be much, much lower than previously anticipated, Apple’s stock price started shooting down like a rocket and by the end of the session on Wednesday the company had lost 75 billion dollars in market capitalization. Meanwhile, “flash crashes” caused some of the most violent swings that we have ever seen in the foreign exchange markets… It took seven minutes for the yen to surge through levels that have held through almost a decade.

In those wild minutes from about 9:30 am Sydney, the yen jumped almost 8 percent against the Australian dollar to its strongest since 2009, and surged 10 percent versus the Turkish lira. The Japanese currency rose at least 1 percent versus all its Group-of-10 peers, bursting through the 72 per Aussie level that has held through a trade war, a stock rout, Italy’s budget dispute and Federal Reserve rate hikes.

This is the kind of chaos that we only see during a financial crisis. There will be good days and there will be bad days in 2019. There will be ups and there will be downs. But it has become exceedingly clear that the downturn that so many have been anticipating has finally arrived, and the financial crisis of 2019 looks like it is going to be a doozy.

There’s so much evidence in support of 9/11 being an inside job, yet it’s still brushed off as a ‘conspiracy theory’ by many. Despite the mainstream narrative, so many people have come forward to share their truth regarding what happened that day including academics, scientists, architects, and engineers. Even family members of multiple victims and firefighters who were in the building that day have spoken out, yet somehow all of these statements have gone completely ignored by the US government. Perhaps in Trump’s presidency, things will change…

The European Court of Justice remains sovereign, as repeatedly stipulated. Perhaps most damagingly of all, we agree to sign away the rights we would have, under international law, to unilaterally walk away. Again, what follows relates (in most part) for the “transition” period. But the language is consistent with the E.U. imagining that this will be the final deal.

The top 40 horrors:

1. From the offset, we should note that this is an EU text, not a UK or international text. This has one source. The Brexit agreement is written in Brussels.

2. [Mrs] May says her deal means the UK leaves the EU next March. The Withdrawal Agreement makes a mockery of this. “All references to Member States and competent authorities of Member States… shall be read as including the United Kingdom.” (Art 6). Not quite what most people understand by Brexit. It goes on to spell out that the UK will be in the EU but without any MEPs, a commissioner or ECJ judges. We are effectively a Member State, but we are excused – or, more accurately, excluded – from attending summits (Article 7).

3. The European Court of Justice is decreed to be our highest court, governing the entire Agreement. Article 4 stipulates that both citizens and resident companies can use it. Article 4.2 orders our courts to recognise this. “If the European Commission considers that the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties or under Part Four of this Agreement before the end of the transition period, the European Commission may, within 4 years after the end of the transition period, bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union” (Article 87).

4. The jurisdiction of the ECJ will last until eight years after the end of the transition period (Article 158).

5. The UK will still be bound by any future changes to EU law in which it will have no say, not to mention having to comply with current law (Article 6(2)).

6. Any disputes under the Agreement will be decided by EU law only – one of the most dangerous provisions (Article 168). This cuts the UK off from International Law, something we’d never do with any foreign body. Arbitration will be governed by the existing procedural rules of the EU law – this is not arbitration as we would commonly understand it (ie between two independent parties) (Article 174).

7. “UNDERLINING that this Agreement is founded on an overall balance of benefits, rights and obligations for the Union and the United Kingdom” No, it should be based upon the binding legal obligations upon the EU contained within Article 50. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.

8. The tampon tax clause: We obey EU laws on VAT, with no chance of losing the tampon tax even if we agree a better deal in December 2020 because we hereby agree to obey other EU VAT rules for **five years** after the transition period. Current EU rules prohibit 0-rated VAT on products (like tampons) that did not have such exemptions before the country joined the EU.

9. Several problems with the EU’s definitions: “Union law” is too widely defined and “United Kingdom national” is defined by the Lisbon Treaty: we should [never have] given away our right to define our citizens. The “goods” and the term “services” we are promised in the deal are not defined – or, rather, will be defined however the EU wishes them to be. Thus far, this a non-defined term so far. This agreement fails to define it.

10. The Mandelson Pension Clause: The UK must promise never to tax former EU officials based here – such as Peter Mandelson or Neil Kinnock – on their EU pensions, or tax any current Brussels bureaucrats on their salaries. The EU and its employees are to be immune to our tax laws (Article 104).

11. Furthermore, the UK agrees not to prosecute EU employees who are, or who might be deemed in future, criminals (Article 101).

12. The GDPR clause. The General Data Protection Regulation – the EU’s stupidest law ever? – is to be bound into UK law (Articles 71 to 73). There had been an expectation in some quarters that the UK could get out of it.

13. The UK establishes a ‘Joint Committee’ with EU representatives to guarantee ‘the implementation and application of this Agreement’. This does not sound like a withdrawal agreement – if it was, why would it need to be subject to continued monitoring (Article 164)? This Joint Committee will have subcommittees with jurisdiction over: (a) citizens’ rights; (b) “other separation provisions”; (c) Ireland/Northern Ireland; (d) Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus; (e) Gibraltar; and (f) financial provisions (Article 165).

14. The Lifetime clause: the agreement will last as long as the country’s youngest baby lives. “the persons covered by this Part shall enjoy the rights provided for in the relevant Titles of this Part for their lifetime” (Article 39).

15. The UK is shut out of all EU networks and databases for security – yet no such provision exists to shut the EU out of ours (Article 8).

16. The UK will be tied to EU foreign policy, “bound by the obligations stemming from the international agreements concluded by the Union” but unable to influence such decisions (Article 124).

17. All EU citizens must be given permanent right of residence after five years – but what counts as residence? This will be decided by the EU, rather than UK rules (Articles 15-16).

18. Britain is granted the power to send a civil servant to Brussels to watch them pass stupid laws which will hurt our economy (Article 34).

19. The UK agrees to spend taxpayers’ money telling everyone how wonderful the agreement is (Article 37).

20. Art 40 defines Goods. It seems to includes Services and Agriculture. We may come to discover that actually ‘goods’ means everything.

21. Articles 40-49 practically mandate the UK’s ongoing membership of the Customs Union in all but name.

22. The UK will be charged to receive the data/information we need in order to comply with EU law (Article 50).

23. The EU will continue to set rules for UK intellectual property law (Article 54 to 61).

24. The UK will effectively be bound by a non-disclosure agreement swearing us to secrecy regarding any EU developments we have paid to be part of. This is not mutual. The EU is not bound by such measures (Article 74).

25. The UK is bound by EU rules on procurement – which effectively forbids us from seeking better deals elsewhere (Articles 75 to 78).

26. We give up all rights to any data the EU made with our money (Article 103).

27. The EU decide capital projects (too broadly defined) the UK is liable for (Article 144).

28. The UK is bound by EU state aid laws until future agreement – even in the event of an agreement, this must wait four years to be valid (Article 93).

29. Similar advantages and immunities are extended to all former MEPs and to former EU officials more generally (Articles 106-116).

30. The UK is forbidden from revealing anything the EU told us or tells us about the finer points of the deal and its operation (Article 105).

31. Any powers the UK parliament might have had to mitigate EU law are officially removed (Article 128).

32. The UK shall be liable for any “outstanding commitments” after 2022 (Article 142(2) expressly mentions pensions, which gives us an idea as to who probably negotiated this). The amount owed will be calculated by the EU (Articles 140-142).

33. The UK will be liable for future EU lending. As anyone familiar with the EU’s financials knows, this is not good (Article143).

34. The UK will remain liable for capital projects approved by the European Investment Bank (Article 150).

35. The UK will remain a ‘party’ (ie cough up money) for the European Development Fund (Articles 152-154).

36. And the EU continues to calculate how much money the UK should pay it. So thank goodness Brussels does not have any accountancy issues.

37. The UK will remain bound (ie coughing up money) to the European Union Emergency Trust Fund – which deals with irregular migration (ie refugees) and displaced persons heading to Europe. (Article 155).

38. The agreement will be policed by ‘the Authority’ – a new UK-based body with ‘powers equivalent to those of the European Commission’ (Article 159).

39. The EU admits, in Article 184, that it is in breach of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which oblige it to “conclude an agreement” of the terms of UK leaving the EU. We must now, it seems, “negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship.” And if the EU does not? We settle down to this Agreement.

40. And, of course, the UK will agree to pay £40 billion to receive all of these ‘privileges’ (Article 138).

But the 2008 financial crisis, which left severely damaged the euro, and the Greek debt crisis of 2010 has left a sour taste in the mouth of some experts, many of whom believe the faltering currency will one day completely collapse. Richard Wellings, deputy research director at the free-market think-tank the Institute of economic affairs, said: “The euro has become a symbol of the EU’s economic malaise and internal divisions.

“The EU elite put the drive towards ever-closer union above the interests of citizens. One size fits all doesn’t work and the best policy now would be an orderly break up of the Eurozone.” Steve Keen, a professor of economics at Kingston University, said: “The Euro has brought low growth, economic instability, and political discord to Europe. Yet Europe’s unaccountable leaders spin it as an unbridled positive, at a time when ordinary citizens of Europe are donning Yellow Vests and bemoaning their plight.”

Pieter Cleppe, of the think-tank Open Europe, also believes the euro could one day collapse with national currencies being the preferred options. He said: “That’s not to say national currencies are ideal but as least the evil governments manipulating money to fund spending is more decentralised. The central bank of Greece would have never managed to burden citizens with so much debt without the euro. The ideal: private currencies. Will the euro collapse? I think so, at [some] point.”

Steel Dinosaurs? The United States’ enormous aircraft carriers are considered the centrepieces of its navy and highly visible embodiments of that nation’s power. At $US 8.5 billion ($A12 billion) each, they’re also a huge economic investment. And questions have been growing over their continued relevance to modern warfare.

As with the ‘gunboat diplomacy’ of huge armoured and heavily gunned battleships before World War II, some military analysts’ technological advances have made these ships obsolete. Both China and Russia have claimed they are rapidly bringing into service a new generation of hypersonic weapons which simply move too fast to counteract.