Joe Biden's Big Adventure: The G20 Climate Summit and Meeting with Pope Francis

It seems we've entered a new stage of insanity as we go deeper and deeper into this dystopian rabbit hole. Take for example climate change.  We've been berated by Democrats and those on the Left for at least a decade about the dangers of global warming (rebranded under the name of "climate change").

 So, why is it that Biden goes to Scotland for an all important convocation of world leaders to discuss about climate change, and what do we see? Biden snoozing for all the world to see! True, he made a speech on climate change at the COP26 meeting which was far from inspiring as well as the usual glad handing and picture posing.

 Much of what he said has been said before, and as usual, ignored afterwards. We all know that nothing, and I mean nothing, will happen, at least in the United States, without the support of the corporate giants who just so happen to own the government. Besides, unless the world's worse polluter, China, isn't a 100% onboard and willing to put its yen where its mouth is, nothing anyone else does will amount to a hill of beans. 75% of all its lakes and waterways are unfit for human usage and wearing masks is common in the cities because of pollution which is six times world health standards.

China has the economic clout to completely derail any realistic chance to curtail climate change unless the West and other industrialized nations acquiesce to what it wants when it wants it. Key to its potential list of demands for any actual compliance to "clean up its act" would be cutting support of Taiwan and quite possibly "looking away" should Beijing decide to "incorporate" the island nation back into the fold.  Imagine how that would affect America's already damaged prestige abroad.

China, while not quite a global superpower on par with the U.S. is still too powerful economically and militarily to be bullied or intimidated by anyone, including the U.S.. At the same time, attempts by U.S. "chicken hawks" to rekindle the Cold War with Russia through sanitations, and propaganda, is only driving Russia closer to the China. Given Europe's dependence on Russian oil and gas, is that really a good idea? Besides, Russia is potentially the better friend where our dealings with China is concerned. 

Along with abandoning Taiwan, accepting the South China Sea as de facto Chinese territorial waters would be another demand.  I wouldn't be surprised if China also demanded concessions from the other power in the region. Both nations has engaged in posturing and the occasional gunplay along their common border for several years.

China has also become closer pals with India's archenemy to the west, Pakistan.  This present an obvious potential double edge sword given Pakistan's deep Islamic roots and connections to terrorist groups and China's troubles with its Uyghur Muslim population in the Xinjiang Province and "rumors" of some Uyghurs being imprisoned in concentration camps. The same can be said of China's and Iran's strategic arrangement, which may be based more on the idea of common enemy, the U.S., than anything substantial.

China's fishing fleet (with naval support) has also been inserting itself in India's traditional sovereign waters. It's also affected other nations dependant on sea harvests to feed their people and bolster their economies. The worst part of the Chinese intrusion is that they typically use huge shipping vessels which can scoop up more in a single catch than local fisherman catch in a year.  

The result is a depleted environment with fewer profitable catches, smaller fish, lobsters, and so forth. If this is allowed to continue, you'll see the economies of nations like Japan, India, both Koreas, the Philippines, and Indonesia deeply affected thanks to higher prices for less available fish---the staple of their diets, and the grim possible of rising poverty and even starvation if not curtailed. 

As an aside, China has also been busy buying up options on natural mineral resources throughout the world, most notably Africa and Latin America along with the rights to fresh water sources (not unlike a few American corporations). It's worth noting that they pay little concern to the environmental damage they cause. With what all that is at stake, you'd think Biden would want to take his naps elsewhere or have someone more "awake" sitting in on these discussions.

Another (we'll call it "interesting") episode took place just before the climate conference, and that was Biden's meeting with Pope Francis in Vatican City, ahead of the G20 Summit and his meeting with France's Macron. Biden, as most people know, is a devout Catholic which makes his stand, as a Democrat, on abortion rather precarious. Some conservative bishops have been calling for Biden's exclusion from communion because of it.

The meeting, Biden's fourth with Pope Francis, but first as President, started off with his usual tired old quip ("Hi, I'm Jill's husband"). Biden presented the Pope with a gold coin depicting the Seal of the United States on one side and outline of Delaware on the other and "the 261st unit" his son had served with (the 261st is a tactical signal brigade which provides command and control to other units).

Officially, the meeting had been scheduled to discuss  a variety of issues ranging from climate change, poverty, the COVID pandemic, and global economics. However rumors persisted that Biden's real agenda concerned whether or not he would receive communion. The Vatican has declined to comment.

It's should be pointed out that the 75 minute meeting (unusually long by Vatican standards) was to be televised live but for some reason, was shut down about halfway in without any comment beyond the Pope and Biden wanting to discuss issues "informally"...but that's not all that allegedly happened.

According to a tweet from Amy Tarkanian, the former Nevada Republican State Chairwoman and wife of Republican Attorney Danny Tarkanian, the meeting with the Pope ran usually long because...how to say this politely...President Biden had a "bathroom incident" which had to be dealt with first.  Ms. Tarkanian even managed to post a picture to backup her tweet. Almost instantaneously, the tweet and the picture went viral. Not unexpectedly, comments (and snarky remarks) poured in.

Here's the problem as I see it. While I'm not a big fan of "Slow Joe" by a long shot, we need to remember that Biden is an "well worn" 78 year old with a lot of health issues (he'll be 79 on November 20th). Never mind the rumors and allegations of dementia or other cognitive illnesses, Biden has suffered two brain aneurysms (one actually ruptured) and developed deep vein thrombosis along with pulmonary embolism.  Brain aneurysms can lead to strokes and be possibly fatal if left untreated. 

In watching Biden's speeches from the "get-go" of his presidential campaign, it appears obvious to just about everyone (even anti-Trumpsters) that something is wrong with Ole Joe. It appeared he was being coached and fed answers practically every step of the way in his speeches (especially during debates where wires from an ear piece could be seen under his jacket and Biden doesn't wear a hearing aid).

When Biden speaks without a teleprompter, his remarks are often muddled and occasionally incoherent, but then again, Obama's speeches weren't worth a damn without a teleprompter either.  It's been reported that he requires questions be submitted in advanced when being interviewed, and he's always got someone there off camera coaching him. Often he doesn't even take unscripted questions from reporters; he just makes his comments and walks off stage. Clearly there's something very wrong.

This leads to another observation. Without Ms. Tarkanian's tweet and picture I would have chalked this is up just another partisan low, albeit an especially cruel one. But there was a picture, which if real, just makes me feel sorry for Biden (the picture I saw looks like it was taken on a golf course and you can't see the man's face, which seems phony to me). It's also a sad commentary on society in just how fast everyone was to make fun of an obviously sick old man...President or not. Democrat or not.

It's obvious, or should be, to everyone that Joe Biden should never ever had been made president. Yes, he was qualified (more so than Obama or Trump). However, he also had a questionable past which included admissions of plagiarism, wanting to cut Social Security (which he called an "entitlement"), support for the Hyde Amendment (which prohibited using Medicaid dollars for abortions under any circumstances), support of NAFTA and claims of being a "fair trader" (anti-union), and so on.

Face it, if anybody, and I mean anybody but Trump was the Republican nominee, Joe Biden wouldn't be president right now, such was the visceral hatred for the man. Given the pandemic, the vaccination revolt and resulting labor shortage plus China's growing clout and aggressiveness, signs of inflation,rising prices, the Afghanistan debacle, and America's deep (and largely manufactured) divisions, Biden is the wrong man at the wrong time in American and world history.

Nevertheless, Trump was the GOP nominee just when America is more divided than at any time since just before the Civil War. China is on the move, as are many of the terrorist organizations who perceive a weak America. Several intelligent agencies now predict a major terrorist event in the U.S. within the next five to ten years. Biden also just recently made another gaff when he "apologized" to world leaders for the Trump Presidency and its policies.

Folks, in case you didn't know, there are several things the former and sitting presidents have informally agreed to do and not to do. One of those "rules" is to never openly criticized another president or their policies, but he did. In doing so, Biden in affect disavowed the Trump Presidency. If you want to bring the country together, that's not how you do it. All Biden succeeded in doing was throwing gasoline on a raging bonfire.

It's worth noting that there was no hue and cry from the Republican Establishment or the corporate controlled media since all sides see the Trump Presidency as nothing more than an aberration; a folly created by the unwashed and uncouth masses who didn't know any better than not to play the game---vote for a pre-vetted cardboard cutout on the Right, ignored the pre-vetted rich "socialist" insider on the Left, and finally allow Hillary her long overdue coronation (and stay tuned for one "Benghazi" of a presidency!). But that's not how it happened.

What happened was that the Establishment was challenged, albeit a bit haphazardly, by a non-politician. This was more than the usual campaign rhetoric and meaningless promises we've all come to expect. This was real. Despite every underhanded and dirty trick they could conjure, "The Donald" remained. But as the reelection loomed, Nancy Pelosi herself said that Trump "won't be allowed to be president again". Allowed? Isn't that our decision? As it turned out, apparently not.

Joe Biden was elected (or "selected" if you prefer) as a his reward for years of dedicated service to the party and the ruling Oligarchy. However, more and more it appears that he's little more than a placeholder. If you agree with that premise, you by default would agree that the American President has become hollow; a figurehead or puppet.

However, that doesn't mean the presidency itself has become equally hollow. It remains the "Imperial Presidency" except it's those behind the scenes, by whatever name you care to give it--- the "secret cabal", "deep state", the "shadow government", the "Corporate State", or simply the Oligarchy who remain firmly in charge of all the apparatuses of real power in and out of government. 

It's up to us regardless of party, race, gender, orientation, religion, or any other artificial divisions to restore the government of our Founders. But, rest assured, time is quickly running out and our enemies aren't waiting around to see what we decide. So, I ask you, what will you do? 

 

How China's Expanding Fishing Fleet Is Depleting the World's Oceans

China and Iran: Economic, Political, and Military Relations

Why 'Poopy Pants Biden' Memes Trended After POTUS Meeting with Pope Francis

A Closer Look At Joe Biden's Health

 

 

 

The Terrorist Attack on San Bernardino: Aftermath

On December 2, 2015, two individuals went on a murder spree. Both individuals, a husband and his wife, were Moslem. He was born here in the States, though his family is Saudi. She was born in Pakistan and grew up in Saudi Arabia. They had known each other for about three years; having met on a Moslem dating network. He had flown to Saudi Arabia, where they married about two years ago and had a six month child. They lived in a small non-descript apartment in San Bernardino, California, which is just a few miles from Los Angeles. He was said to be quiet, introverted, and was often teased goodheartedly for his patchy beard. She largely kept to herself, even from her in-laws.

Both were described as having few friends. On the day of the incident, he had attended a Christmas Party with fellow employees from the San Bernardino Health Department, located at a small business campus which worked with handicapped children and adults as well as with other health issues.

While attending the party, the man, now identified as Syed Farook, supposedly got into a brief argument with a fellow employee, a converted Jew, which prompted him to leave. He apparently returned home which was only a few miles away; the couple had previously dropped off their six month old at his parent's house. Farook, now accompanied by his wife, Tashfeen Malik, returned to the party, both dressed in black, complete with hoods, and outfitted with body armor and armed with assault weapons embarked on their campaign of carnage, leaving 14 co-workers dead and 21 wounded. According to witnesses, both causally strolled away and got into their black SUV and slowly drove away as police and emergency personnel began to arrive to find the grizzly scene...along with a parting gift...an apparent bomb...left behind by the couple.

A few hours later, while slowly cruising, the couple were engaged in a brief firefight by the trailing police, which included throwing homemade pipe bombs from their vehicle at the police amid the intense gunfire. The end result was predictable. Both suspects were killed in a barrage of bullets, all covered in detail by the news media. Images appeared a short time later on the Internet showing close-up stills of the aftermath for the curious.

The images portrayed the obvious. Law enforcement authorities quickly converged on the apartment, later described as a "bomb making factory" and booby trapped. A dozen or so pipe bombs and bomb making supplies were found side by side with a baby crib, next to toys, or laying beside baby shoes, not mention at least 2500 rounds of extra ammunition. Their computer hard drive was smashed, though authorities discovered the wife's allegiance to ISIS, posted online just before the killing spree began. Reaction was, of course, immediate. There were shouts of outrage that such a thing could happen amid all the security; in a "gun free" zone; as well as the "vetting" process used to screen the wife, which obviously failed. A few blamed radical Islam. A few more blamed the guns as if they had somehow acted independently of their owners. ISIS disagreed apparently and posted a message of praise and called the couple "martyrs" for Islam.

President Obama, while expressing his condolences to the victim's families, used the occasion to call for increased gun control, including "voluntary" surrender of guns as if somehow, those intent on slaughter or crime would be stymied by "gun free" zones like all the ones which had come before, including Sandy Hook. At the same time, Obama hedged calling this a "terrorist" event as he often has before. Implying that this was perhaps just another violent "workplace" incident like Ft. Hood, and far be it that he would equate radical Islam with the attack. A few in the media initially reported it being conducted by a white hate group. Not unexpectedly, the public knew better. They understood the magnitude of what had happened and what the underlining cause was, even if the President and those in the corporate media wouldn't admit it; as if either still retained any serious credibility with the American People.

This, unfortunately, wasn't the only recent terror attack in recent days. There have been others. In London, a man was attacked at the Leytonstone Underground, a subway station just outside of central London, by a knife welding man. Two others who suffered minor cuts. Before the attack, he had shouted "this is for Syria", a reference to England's bombing campaign in Syria against ISIS sites, and as he exited the station, shouted "that's for fucking with Mother Syria". While the victim's throat was slashed, he'll live and as expected, his assailant was quickly apprehended. Of course, Paris was the scene of a brutal killing spree just a few weeks earlier, on November 13, by supporters of ISIS's radical version of Islam, which left 129 dead and 352 wounded. Since then, there has been 10 additional attacks (not including the San Bernardino attack) conducted by Moslem terrorists affiliated with radical Islam. Most of these have been in Israel, although there has been three suicide bombing committed by members of Boko Haram which killed or wounded approximately 96 individuals in Nigeria and Chad (Boko Haram burst on the scene in 2014 with its kidnapping to 279 young schoolgirls which were to be used for sex slavery or sold as "virgin wives"). The most recent attack (as of December 6, 2015) was conducted by ISIS in Yemen which killed a Yemini governor and his six bodyguards with a car bomb. Since 9/11, there has been over 26,008 acts of violence committed adherents of radical Islam throughout the world. It should be noted that while the majority of those murdered have been Christians (mostly Eastern Orthodox), there have been a significant number who were Jewish, Hindu, Buddhists, Zoroastrianism and those who professed no religious adherence at all. In short, no one is safe.

What the West, and indeed the world, seems incapable or unwilling to accept is that this is a religious war no different than any other religious war which merges both politics and faith. It's a hard concept to grasp knowing that we are in the 21st Century and, at least here in the West, long ago consigned such wars to a more primitive past of stunted intellectual growth and superstition while placing our trust in reason, logic and the rule of law. Previous wars or conflicts were over ideology, though more recently they have been over control of resources and assets on behalf of global corporations through the power of State ("regime change" comes to mind).

Religious wars, however, are generally the bloodiest and most enduring since one is fighting on behalf of their respective god, and how does one explain compromise, surrender or defeat to God? If they win, they are justified in their actions, no matter how ruthless, by God. If they lose, they still believe they will receive some otherworldly consolation reward for their commitment. Therefore, anyone engaged in a war which incorporates religion into its strategy must acknowledge that it will be brutal and that everyone everywhere are potential players. There are no non-combatants.

Thus, it should be fought with overwhelming military superiority on the battlefield and with the same level of brutality in order to end it as quickly as possible. It must also be waged in the heart and minds by demonstrating in the most convincing manner possible that their particular interpretation being is flawed, and that is where non-radicalized Moslems have failed Islam miserably. For while they privately condemn the use of their religion to justify the bloodshed, they say little or do nothing publically. This can be seen only as acquiescence through silence. They must step up and openly denounce the hijacking of their faith and reclaim it for their own. Only then can the bloodlust be stopped. In addition, the West, as well as the world, must publically acknowledge this war for what it is and stop hiding behind political correctness and non-threatening phrases. We can no longer pretend the war is anything but what it is or that it will remain "over there". Sadly, many of our elected leaders of both parties lack the courage or foresight to lead, nor to speak honestly to the American People. This goes for the corporate media as well as a number of our so-called community leaders. It's time we face up to what is happening and why America. It's time we demanded leadership and honesty.


A List of Terrorist Attacks from 2015
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2015.htm


Knife attacker slashes man in London 'terror incident'
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-stabbing-idUSKBN0TO0RA20151206#d5PlP74DJUMhoZs5.97


Boko Haram
http://www.theguardian.com/world/boko-haram


Africa Check: Explaining Nigeria's Boko Haram
https://africacheck.org/factsheets/factsheet-explaining-nigerias-boko-haram-and-its-violent-insurgency/

Assault on Mumbai

The terror assault on Mumbai appears to be over. For over 60 hours, Muslim terrorists went on rampage in this financial center of India, formerly known as Bombay. In their wake some 195 innocent men, women, and children were murdered, including a rabbi and his family, and close to 300 others were wounded. 20 of the dead were Indian soldiers. These killers attacked approximately 10 civilian targets in various locations, but mainly in areas frequented by Western tourists. Of the hostages taken, these cowards focused primarily on unarmed Americans, English, and Jews. According to the Maharashtra government spokesman, Bhushan Gagraini, 11 of these murders were killed by Indian soldiers and commandos, and one was taken alive (hopefully that situation will be corrected quickly after his intense interrogation).

While the world will morn for the innocent lives lost and curse those souls of those who committed these brutal acts of cowardice, this represents just one more black mark against Islam, a religion of peace, which appears to have been hijacked by madmen. Over the past 25 or so years (beginning with the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut in 1983), extremists have all but silenced the voices of reason and compassion in the region in favor of a distorted interpretation of the Koran. Presumably theirs is out of fear of losing whatever authority they feel they may. As an example, the Islamic extremists believe that women should not be educated. So, instead of confining their beliefs to their own family or communities, they attempt to intimidate and bully others, including throwing acid in the faces of young girls on their way to school. But what they don’t realize is that every girl’s scares serve a public testament of their fears. But it doesn’t stop there. Women are forbidden to show their faces, legs, arms, or anything else. Why? I suppose it's because the men fear women. So rather than deal with their own insecurities, they impose their fear on others. And equal rights? Forget it. As a woman, you have none whatsoever. No job; no money; no education outside the home; no driving; no going anywhere without a male escort; and owning nothing. A son can have near complete power to control his mother’s life in the absence of the husband.

So what do these people want? Well, the answer is rather simple really, though completely unrealistic. They want to either convert or murder all Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, Pagans, and followers of Confucius, the Native American religions, not to mention atheists and agnostics. They want to substitute common law with strict religious Sharia Law. They want to return to a world of Caliphs and the so-called “Golden Age of Islam”. Seriously. There is no serious negotiating or compromising with these individuals, and why should they?

What Americans, and indeed, the world, doesn’t understand is that this is a war not about land or resources, though that’s apart of it, but a war of religion. When you have G-d on your side, and they completely believe they do, there is no need to negotiate or compromise with anyone (besides, from their perspective, negotiation and compromise are emblematic of weakness). What the West (and the Asian East for that matter) has failed to learn is that this war is never-ending so long as “infidels” remain. No sacrifice or horror is too terrible. No loss of life, theirs or ours, is too great. They don’t want to live with you. They want to destroy you, albeit be by mass murder or using our existing laws to force accommodate for them under the guise of religious and political freedom, and later, to outlaw ourselves. If Nazism was the politics of hate, then radical Islam is the religion of hate (I should add that extremism by any group is just as dangerous). What these zealots have failed to understand is that the Golden Age of Islam represented extreme religious tolerance, not hatred. Islam represented the cultural and scientific apex of civilization of the time.

However, what we saw in Mumbai isn’t representative of that Islam. There are those who are moderates. They accept the rights of women and tolerance of other cultures and religions. However, they have remained largely silent. Radical Islam must be defeated by Rational Islam. Neither the West nor Asian East can do it by military or economic force. They can, however stand as bulwark against the spread of the extremism. This means taking a hard line against terrorist. In hostage situations, it means cutting off all supplies and especially media coverage to the terrorists (which is, after all, what they’re after). It means providing them with an opportunity to allow the hostages to go free---but not them. It means killing one of theirs (either a terrorist or prisoner) every time they kill or harm a hostage. And most importantly, it means denying the terrorists a Moslem burial. This takes the religious equation out of the picture. It makes their deaths meaningless, and with that, fewer recruits willing to die for an empty cause.

It also means aggressively promoting human rights globally, including complete religious tolerance and the right to practice the religion of your choice as well as equality for women and the right of all citizens regardless of gender to attend school. It means too helping Islamic moderates develop modern governing systems, which includes creating a solid middle class (I say “systems” because not all countries want or need democracies). Too many of these extremists come from countries where there is only the very rich ruling class and the poor masses. Workers should be free to form unions of, by, and for the betterment of the working class which should be free from government interference. Moderate or rational Islam must be nurtured and allowed to blossom and both the West and Asian East must aggressively encourage and support it.

This war will not be won in matter of a few years, or with the changing of an American president. It will not be won based on the brave acts of the Indian military or the courage of lone Buddhist monks. It will not be won by on the strength of Israel. It will be won by people of the world over standing up and say “no” to fear and intimidation; By people determine to go on with their lives; By people not standing by when someone canes a woman, girl, or man for refusing to go along with their hateful dogma; By people who refuse to give up or give in; By people willing to shine the light of truth into the eyes of those who see only intolerance and shout “freedom” at those preach hatred.. When we do this, we’ll see these madmen run back into the shadows like the cockroaches they are.


Poll Results

Our two poll results were amazing, and the results were somewhat surprising. The first question asked where you considered yourselves on the political spectrum. 16 of you said you were either conservative or very conservative, and 8 said they were center Right. 8 (four each) were either moderate or center Left, and 18 of you were Liberal or Far Left!

As for which political party best represented you, 20 of you said Democrat while 11 said Republican. 4 of you lean Libertarian, while 6 of you considered yourselves non-Republican conservatives, and interestingly, no one listed themselves non-Democratic Left leaning.

So what does this say about AO? Well, here at AO, we try to remain an independent free thinking editorial site (how dangerous is that?), and it looks we’ve nailed it! Our readers seem to cover the full political spectrum from Left to Right, and just about everyone in between. Thank you as always dear readers!