Tuesday, May 31, 2022
2030 UNMASKED
La Premisa Inarticulada
May 29,
2030 UNMASKED DOCUMENTARY CONNECTING COVID19, MASKS, VACCINES, THE BANKING SYSTEM & THE GREAT RESET
Sunday, May 29, 2022
Saturday, May 28, 2022
Psalm 19
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.
The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.
Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.
Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.
The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.
Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.
Thursday, May 26, 2022
Smallpox, The most dangerous vaccine - 60 Minutes (2002) La Premisa Inarticulada
La Premisa Inarticulada
May 24, 2022
ANALYSIS: Global Rule by Experts is a Reality and a Risk to Self-Government
By Stefano Gennarini, J.D. | May 26, 2022
GENEVA, May 27 (C-Fam) The World Health Assembly has voted to give the World Health Organization significantly more money from member states. However, the body is still negotiating whether to give more powers to the agency’s experts in health emergencies.
The World Health Assembly adopted a budget decision earlier this week to increase “assessed” contributions to 50% of the organization’s roughly $5 billion annual budget, compared to less than 20% currently. But in a defeat for the Biden administration, countries are expected to postpone the consideration of U.S. amendments to the international health protocols for pandemics tomorrow at the World Health Assembly.
The changes to the International Health Regulations would give World Health Organization officials more powers in future pandemics, powers they would use to interfere in domestic politics on abortion and other hot-button issues.
The U.S. amendments are supported by the European Union and other western donors but met some resistance from African countries, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Iran among others. Governments asked for more time to consider the amendments plus open and transparent negotiations to discuss them more fully.
The changes to the budget were presented as a measure to reduce the influence of donors who earmark funds for specific projects. Bill Gates, the second largest single donor to the WHO, funds over 10% of the health agency’s budget annually at nearly $800 million. Only Germany gives more money to the global health agency. But the overall effect of increasing the regular budget will be to increase the funding and influence of the organization, without adding any transparency or reducing the impact of earmarked funds. In the long term, it may even indirectly boost Bill Gates’ influence, something that does not bode well for self-government.
In his latest book, Bill Gates describes a “team” of global health officials that can quietly quash a pandemic within hours of the outbreak. Gates imagines 3,000 officials and scientists with a $1 billion budget and the power to “declare a pandemic.”
Such a declaration would allow the experts to take control of the world’s governments, stop global travel, block all economic and social activity, and curtail civil liberties. After disrupting great part of the world’s political and economic structures the experts would oversee the rebuilding of a healthier, greener and more LGBT-friendly world through vaccine and diversity mandates and rake in billions in the process.
The irony is that this vision of global rule by experts is already in great part a reality, thanks to Bill Gates’ and Western governments’ heavy hand in global health governance. During the COVID-19 pandemic governments around the world were at the mercy of international health experts. Self-government was undermined as a result.
Rather than take responsibility for national health policies and suffer the political fallout of their decisions, nations fell in-line with the daily bulletins and press briefings of the World Health Organization. For their part, the risk-averse health experts crafted ever more draconian recommendations based on limited or inaccurate information, including unprecedented mandates of experimental vaccines. It took several weeks, for even the bravest of U.S. Governors to break with these edicts.
Small businesses around the world went bust. Entire political classes were economically wiped out. Technology giants like Amazon tripled in size. According to the best-selling book The Real Anthony Fauci by Robert F. Kennedy, billionaires increased their personal wealth exponentially during the pandemic. Bill Gates himself made $22 billion, according to Kennedy, including through investments in Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies who contributed to COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution.
This is not to say that COVID-19 was planned. Nor is it to say that international cooperation is not needed to address pandemics. It is to say that international health experts already have incredible powers, that players like Bill Gates contribute greatly to those powers and how global bodies make decisions, and that they do so without any real transparency.
C-Fam intern Victoria Gonzalez contributed to this Friday Fax from Geneva
Source
Wednesday, May 25, 2022
Freedom Convoy, Trudeau, and the World Economic Forum | Truth Matters
The Great Reset is the name of the 50th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, held in June 2020???
Tuesday, May 24, 2022
Monday, May 23, 2022
Sunday, May 22, 2022
Saturday, May 21, 2022
Friday, May 20, 2022
ICE spying on all Americans, new report says
by FELICIA J. PERSAUD
May 19, 2022
Is there really merit in the so-called liberal call to abolish ICE? Seems there clearly is.
A new bombshell report from the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology claims boldly that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency is spying on all Americans.
Yes, you read that right. No one seems to be free from the tentacles of this agency.
According to the new report, “American Dragnet: Data-Driven Deportation in the 21st Century,” ICE has often, without any judicial, legislative or public oversight, accessed datasets containing detailed personal records on the vast majority of people in the United States.
“Anyone’s information can end up in the hands of immigration enforcement simply by applying for a driver’s license; driving on the roads; or signing up with their local utilities to get access to heat, water and electricity,” Georgetown said in the report.
Since its founding in 2003, ICE was given sweeping powers to fight terrorism and enforce immigration law. Since then, the agency has collected data on hundreds of millions of Americans largely without much oversight or accountability, the report states.
“ICE has not only been building its own capacity to use surveillance to carry out deportations but has also played a key role in the federal government’s larger push to amass as much information as possible about all of our lives,” the report states. “By reaching into the digital records of state and local governments and buying databases with billions of data points from private companies, ICE has created a surveillance infrastructure that enables it to pull detailed dossiers on nearly anyone, seemingly at any time. In its efforts to arrest and deport, ICE has—without any judicial, legislative or public oversight—reached into datasets containing personal information about the vast majority of people living in the U.S., whose records can end up in the hands of immigration enforcement simply because they apply for driver’s licenses; drive on the roads; or sign up with their local utilities to get access to heat, water and electricity.”
The two-year investigatory report revealed the following startling facts:
■ ICE has scanned the driver’s license photos of 1-in-3 adults.
“ICE has used face recognition technology to search through the driver’s license photographs of around 1-in-3 (32%) of all adults in the U.S.,” the report states.
■ ICE has access to the driver’s license data of 3-in-4 adults and tracks the movements of drivers in cities home to 3-in-4 adults.
“The agency has access to the driver’s license data of 3-in-4 (74%) adults and tracks the movements of cars in cities home to nearly 3-in-4 (70%) adults,” the report said.
■ ICE could locate 3-in-4 adults through their utility records.
“When 3-in-4 (74%) adults in the U.S. connected the gas, electricity, phone or Internet in a new home, ICE was able to automatically learn their new address. Almost all of that has been done warrantlessly and in secret,” the Georgetown Law report says.
In a country with laws, it seems ICE is operating without any respect for state privacy laws and without the need for warrants. ICE, the report found, spent an estimated $2.8 billion between 2008 and 2021 on surveillance, data collection and data-sharing initiatives.
The report’s finding is based on thousands of pages of ICE documents obtained in response to hundreds of Freedom of Information Act requests, and a comprehensive review of ICE spending.
The report’s authors now want Congress to investigate and conduct oversight into ICE surveillance. They also offer state and local communities a set of concrete suggestions for dismantling this surveillance dragnet.
“I was alarmed to discover that ICE has built up a sweeping surveillance infrastructure capable of tracking almost anyone, seemingly at any time. ICE has ramped up its surveillance capacities in near-complete secrecy and impunity, sidestepping limitations and flying under the radar of lawmakers,” said Nina Wang, a policy associate at the Center on Privacy & Technology and a co-author of the study.
ICE has so far not commented on the report.
The writer is publisher of NewsAmericasNow.com – The Black Immigrant Daily News.
Is there really merit in the so-called liberal call to abolish ICE? Seems there clearly is.
A new bombshell report from the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology claims boldly that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency is spying on all Americans.
Yes, you read that right. No one seems to be free from the tentacles of this agency.
According to the new report, “American Dragnet: Data-Driven Deportation in the 21st Century,” ICE has often, without any judicial, legislative or public oversight, accessed datasets containing detailed personal records on the vast majority of people in the United States.
“Anyone’s information can end up in the hands of immigration enforcement simply by applying for a driver’s license; driving on the roads; or signing up with their local utilities to get access to heat, water and electricity,” Georgetown said in the report.
Since its founding in 2003, ICE was given sweeping powers to fight terrorism and enforce immigration law. Since then, the agency has collected data on hundreds of millions of Americans largely without much oversight or accountability, the report states.
“ICE has not only been building its own capacity to use surveillance to carry out deportations but has also played a key role in the federal government’s larger push to amass as much information as possible about all of our lives,” the report states. “By reaching into the digital records of state and local governments and buying databases with billions of data points from private companies, ICE has created a surveillance infrastructure that enables it to pull detailed dossiers on nearly anyone, seemingly at any time. In its efforts to arrest and deport, ICE has—without any judicial, legislative or public oversight—reached into datasets containing personal information about the vast majority of people living in the U.S., whose records can end up in the hands of immigration enforcement simply because they apply for driver’s licenses; drive on the roads; or sign up with their local utilities to get access to heat, water and electricity.”
The two-year investigatory report revealed the following startling facts:
■ ICE has scanned the driver’s license photos of 1-in-3 adults.
“ICE has used face recognition technology to search through the driver’s license photographs of around 1-in-3 (32%) of all adults in the U.S.,” the report states.
■ ICE has access to the driver’s license data of 3-in-4 adults and tracks the movements of drivers in cities home to 3-in-4 adults.
“The agency has access to the driver’s license data of 3-in-4 (74%) adults and tracks the movements of cars in cities home to nearly 3-in-4 (70%) adults,” the report said.
■ ICE could locate 3-in-4 adults through their utility records.
“When 3-in-4 (74%) adults in the U.S. connected the gas, electricity, phone or Internet in a new home, ICE was able to automatically learn their new address. Almost all of that has been done warrantlessly and in secret,” the Georgetown Law report says.
In a country with laws, it seems ICE is operating without any respect for state privacy laws and without the need for warrants. ICE, the report found, spent an estimated $2.8 billion between 2008 and 2021 on surveillance, data collection and data-sharing initiatives.
The report’s finding is based on thousands of pages of ICE documents obtained in response to hundreds of Freedom of Information Act requests, and a comprehensive review of ICE spending.
The report’s authors now want Congress to investigate and conduct oversight into ICE surveillance. They also offer state and local communities a set of concrete suggestions for dismantling this surveillance dragnet.
“I was alarmed to discover that ICE has built up a sweeping surveillance infrastructure capable of tracking almost anyone, seemingly at any time. ICE has ramped up its surveillance capacities in near-complete secrecy and impunity, sidestepping limitations and flying under the radar of lawmakers,” said Nina Wang, a policy associate at the Center on Privacy & Technology and a co-author of the study.
ICE has so far not commented on the report.
The writer is publisher of NewsAmericasNow.com – The Black Immigrant Daily News.
Thursday, May 19, 2022
Wednesday, May 18, 2022
Dow tumbles 1,160 points in worst trading day since June 2020
By Nicole Goodkind, CNN Business
Updated 5:47 PM ET, Wed May 18, 2022
New York (CNN Business)The old joke goes like this: Two friends are at a resort and one says, "The food here is really terrible." The other replies, "And the portions are so small!" Today, it's investors who dislike the taste of the Federal Reserve's interest rate hikes — but seemingly want more anyway.
Markets have plummeted over the past month as the Federal Reserve telegraphed that it would regularly hike interest rates by half a percentage point for the foreseeable future to combat persistent inflation. On Wednesday, the Dow (INDU) shed more than 1164 points, or 3.6%, its biggest loss since 2020. The broader market lost 4%, putting the S&P 500 (SPX) on the precipice of bear market territory. The Nasdaq Composite lost 4.73%.
Now, investors are asking for more. They're calling for a three-quarter-point rate hike at the conclusion of the Fed's June meeting, despite Fed Chair Jerome Powell's assurances that an increase that high isn't on the table.
Bank of America analysts wrote in a note that they fear there will soon be a wage-price spiral in the US because of risks that "the Fed hikes too little." The current market reaction, they said, suggests that "investors see the Fed as moving too slowly on the inflation fight: a 75 [basis point] hike might have been feared but it appears it would have been preferred."
Nomura Securities has predicted that the central bank will hike the fed funds rate by three-quarters of a point in June and July after the half-point rise in May.
Fed Chair Jerome Powell: We won't hesitate to raise rates to tame inflation
"We recognize Fedspeak has not outright endorsed a 75 basis point hike yet, but in this high inflation regime we believe the nature of Fed forward guidance has changed — it has become more data dependent and nimble," said Rob Subbaraman, Nomura head of global markets research, in a note.
The Fed could hike rates to 5% by the time it ends the current bout of tightening, Deutsche Bank's chief economist said. That would be the highest level since 2006.
Fed-funds futures traders see a 9% likelihood that the Federal Reserve will raise its main policy rate target by three-quarters of a point in June, to between 1.5% and 1.75%, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.
St. Louis Fed president James Bullard has stoked the flames for a potential three-quarter-point hike this year in public speeches and Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland President Loretta Mester told Japan's The Nikkei that a 0.75 percentage point hike could not be ruled out later this year in an interview Monday.
A screen shows a press conference with Jerome Powell, the Chair of the Federal Reserve of the United States, following news about the Federal Reserve decision to raise interest rates by half a percentage point on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange on May 4, 2022.
So why are markets fighting the Fed chair's assurances that a larger hike won't come in June — and hurting themselves by predicting it will?
"When a Fed official suggests a 50 basis points hike, markets immediately start trying to price in 75 basis point hikes," said Jamie Cox, Managing Partner for Harris Financial Group. "It's madness really."
The Dow has fallen 5,095 points, or 14% in 2022. The S&P 500 has dropped over 18% and the Nasdaq Composite has lost about 28%.
"Powell tried to take the 75 basis point hike off of the table at the last press conference," said David Lebovitz, a global market strategist at J.P. Morgan Asset Management.
But the following week, the Consumer Price Index, a key measure of inflation, shot up 8.3% for the year. The measure was lower than March's 8.5% increase, but higher than the 8.1% increase economists expected.
The Fed has a new plan to avoid recession: Party like it's 1994
The issues between markets and the Fed may have less to do with an eye toward self-flagellation and more to do with a growing mistrust of the institution. The old-time mantra of "don't fight the Fed" has morphed into "don't believe the Fed."
"People start to lose faith in the idea that the Fed really does have its arms around inflation," said Lebovitz. "It's all about getting a grip on what the Fed is going to do and unfortunately, given the lack of clear guidance from them, and an inflation report that surprised to the upside, investors are a little bit uncomfortable."
Even former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke seeded some doubt this week when he broke the unspoken edict amongst former Fed chairs to not speak ill of their successors. The Fed made a mistake in delaying their decision to raise rates, he said during an interview on CNBC's Squawk Box Monday.
"And I think they agree it was a mistake."
Tuesday, May 17, 2022
Monday, May 16, 2022
JFK's Cryptic Message
“The very word secrecy is repugnant, in a free and open society. For we are, as a people, inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret proceedings and to secret oaths.” … “For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence– on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.”
John F. Kennedy's secret society speech on April 27, 1961 (murdered on November 22, 1963).
"Traditional" Catholics and white nationalist "groypers" forge a new far-right youth movement
Salon: "Traditional" Catholics and white nationalist "groypers" forge a new far-right youth movement - May 13, 2022
Written by Kathryn Joyce, and PRA’s Ben Lorber.
Read here.
Sunday, May 15, 2022
Saturday, May 14, 2022
The mRNA red flags fly ever-higher
Omicron is surging in highly vaccinated states; data from Vermont show the jabbed are now MORE likely to need hospitalization than the unvaccinated
Alex Berenson
May 10
Vermont is as European as American states get: mostly white, slow-growing, and left-leaning. It even has a socialist senator.
Vermont has European rates of Covid vaccination, too. About 90 percent of adults over 30 in Vermont are have been jabbed. Most of those are boosted - including about 85 percent of adults over 65.
Yet Vermont is now suffering its second major outbreak of Omicron in five months. Since late March, Covid hospitalizations have soared to the second-highest level ever in the state, trailing only the initial Omicron peak. The number of patients in intensive care is up even more.
Covid hospitalizations in Vermont (because Vermont is so small, 100 hospitalizations statewide translates into about 53,000 for the United States):
SOURCE
The surge is occurring almost exclusively in vaccinated people.
Each week, Vermont reports data on hospitalizations by vaccination status. They have shown a remarkable change in the last several weeks.
In the spring and summer of 2021, the happy vaccine valley, almost no vaccinated people were hospitalized statewide. Only a handful even contracted Covid.
During the Delta wave in the fall of 2021 and the first Omicron surge in December and January, hospitalizations jumped in both the unvaccinated and vaccinated and reached a roughly 50/50 split. But because so many more people were vaccinated, vaccinated people still had a much lower risk per-person.
Not anymore.
In March, as the first Omicron wave ended, hospitalizations in both unvaccinated and vaccinated people plunged. But since Omicron surged again in April, almost five times as many vaccinated people have been hospitalized.
Even accounting for the relative population sizes, vaccinated people were more likely to be hospitalized than the unvaccinated, state data show. (Those figures do not adjust either for age or the relative health status of the vaccinated.)
SOURCE
—
During the first two years of Covid, Vermont had relatively few deaths, possibly because it is so rural, like most other states low on the Covid death charts. Other Northeastern states, notably Massachusetts, on Vermont’s southern border, and New York, to the west, performed much worse.
But all those states have very high vaccination rates. And the differentials between them have nearly vanished. The new Omicron wave has hit them all hard.
Cases in Massachusetts are rising so quickly that the Team Apocalypse stalwarts in the media are all-but-begging for new mask mandates.
Death rates are rising too, although the spike in infections has occurred so quickly that they have not yet caught up. And as the winter surge demonstrated, Omicron is less dangerous than earlier variants to vaccinated and unvaccinated alike (a recent study that purported to show otherwise was hugely flawed because it failed to account properly for the shift to at-home Covid testing).
That said, Omicron still can do significant damage to the same groups that were vulnerable to earlier Covid variants - notably people over 75 and the morbidly obese. All-cause mortality spiked in December and January in both the United States and Europe, during the first Omicron wave.
—
But what is particularly troubling about the newest Omicron wave - not just in the United States but worldwide - is that it appears to hitting highly vaccinated states and countries much more heavily than less vaccinated areas.
In this chart from the New York Times, redder states and nations have higher infection rates; greener states and nations have higher vaccination rates. The correlation is so obvious that it is clearly visible at both the state and national level, no complex regression analysis needed.
Neither geography nor seasonality nor prior infection rates seem to matter - the post-vaccine epidemic is sweeping from Taiwan to Australia to Italy to Vermont. Meanwhile, in countries that did not use mRNA vaccines, Sars-Cov-2 has all-but-vanished - following the natural course of other respiratory epidemics, which rarely lasted more than one year or two at most.
So what comes next? It is nearly impossible to know, because the answer depends both on whether the mRNA shots retard the development of long-term post-infection immunity and how virulent the next variant might be.
At the moment citizens and politicians in the highly vaccinated countries have correctly decided they can live with this level of death and hospitalization from the coronavirus - not that anyone has a choice, since every control measure has now completely failed.
But the warning signs here are real, and global, no matter how much the media and public health establishment and politicians who cajoled or forced more than 1 billion people to get the mRNA vaccines want to ignore them.
At the moment citizens and politicians in the highly vaccinated countries have correctly decided they can live with this level of death and hospitalization from the coronavirus - not that anyone has a choice, since every control measure has now completely failed.
But the warning signs here are real, and global, no matter how much the media and public health establishment and politicians who cajoled or forced more than 1 billion people to get the mRNA vaccines want to ignore them.
Woe to them that give suck in those days
And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Matthew 24:19-21.
---'---'---'---
Related:
Friday, May 13, 2022
Thursday, May 12, 2022
Wednesday, May 11, 2022
The S&P 500 is having its worst year so far in six decades: DataTrek
Ihsaan Fanusie
May 10, 2022, 4:53 pm
The S&P 500 (^GSPC) rebounded ever-so-slightly on Tuesday, but failed to recoup losses from Monday’s ugly session and hovers closer to a bear market in the midst of sky-high inflation and a hawkish Federal Reserve looking to end easy money at last.
Recent analysis from DataTrek Research, a market research firm, revealed how the index's performance this year looks in the larger historical context.
“While there’s still 3 weeks of trading left in May, 2022 has been the worst year-to-date return (-16.3 pct) so far relative to overall down years for the index save 1962,” Jessica Rabe, co-founder of DataTrek Research, wrote in an email newsletter.
Based on past data, it is likely that the index will continue to underperform throughout the year, Rabe noted.
May 10, 2022, 4:53 pm
The S&P 500 (^GSPC) rebounded ever-so-slightly on Tuesday, but failed to recoup losses from Monday’s ugly session and hovers closer to a bear market in the midst of sky-high inflation and a hawkish Federal Reserve looking to end easy money at last.
Recent analysis from DataTrek Research, a market research firm, revealed how the index's performance this year looks in the larger historical context.
“While there’s still 3 weeks of trading left in May, 2022 has been the worst year-to-date return (-16.3 pct) so far relative to overall down years for the index save 1962,” Jessica Rabe, co-founder of DataTrek Research, wrote in an email newsletter.
Based on past data, it is likely that the index will continue to underperform throughout the year, Rabe noted.
Electronic screens display stock market information at the New York Stock Exchange NYSE in New York, the United States, May 5, 2022. U.S. stocks plunged on Thursday as heavy selling intensified on Wall Street. The Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 1063.09 points, or 3.12 percent, to 32,997.97. The S&P 500 fell 153.30 points, or 3.56 percent, to 4,146.87. The Nasdaq Composite Index shed 647.17 points, or 4.99 percent, to 12,317.69. (Photo by Michael Nagle/Xinhua via Getty Images)
“Even if the S&P were able to recover some losses by the end of this month, it’s likely YTD negative return would still fit the pattern of a down January-May period that’s highly typical for losing S&P years,” she wrote.
The S&P 500 entered a free-fall last week, augmenting analysts’ forecasts for a bear market. The index has endured five consecutive weeks of decline, the most since 2011. By midday Tuesday, the S&P 500 was trading at 4,025, slightly up from Monday’s close. If the index drops below 3,854, this would represent a 20% decline from the intraday high, which experts warn could qualify as a bear market.
Losses accelerated last week as investors priced in the Federal Reserve’s decision to raise the target interest rate by .50%, the most aggressive rate hike in 20 years. The move adds to what has already been an extraordinarily hawkish year for monetary policymakers, who have been struggling to slow 40-year high inflation levels that have increased every month.
Other headwinds, including the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the national labor shortage, have contributed to a poor year for the stock market thus far.
According to DataTrek, S&P 500 losses during the first five months of the year bode poorly for the index as a whole during the rest of the year. Based on historical trends, the S&P 500 will continue to underperform during months June-October when negative returns are recorded during the first five months of the year, however, in November and December losses are generally reigned in and returns flatten out.
“The performance of the S&P during the last two months of a down year is essentially flat on average,” Rabe wrote in the report. “The average return is -1.0 pct from the end of October through the end of December during down years for the S&P.”
This could mean that investors waiting to “buy the dip” may have to wait a little longer before losses subside.
Tech stock losses drive Nasdaq down further than S&P and Dow
“Even if the S&P were able to recover some losses by the end of this month, it’s likely YTD negative return would still fit the pattern of a down January-May period that’s highly typical for losing S&P years,” she wrote.
The S&P 500 entered a free-fall last week, augmenting analysts’ forecasts for a bear market. The index has endured five consecutive weeks of decline, the most since 2011. By midday Tuesday, the S&P 500 was trading at 4,025, slightly up from Monday’s close. If the index drops below 3,854, this would represent a 20% decline from the intraday high, which experts warn could qualify as a bear market.
Losses accelerated last week as investors priced in the Federal Reserve’s decision to raise the target interest rate by .50%, the most aggressive rate hike in 20 years. The move adds to what has already been an extraordinarily hawkish year for monetary policymakers, who have been struggling to slow 40-year high inflation levels that have increased every month.
Other headwinds, including the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the national labor shortage, have contributed to a poor year for the stock market thus far.
According to DataTrek, S&P 500 losses during the first five months of the year bode poorly for the index as a whole during the rest of the year. Based on historical trends, the S&P 500 will continue to underperform during months June-October when negative returns are recorded during the first five months of the year, however, in November and December losses are generally reigned in and returns flatten out.
“The performance of the S&P during the last two months of a down year is essentially flat on average,” Rabe wrote in the report. “The average return is -1.0 pct from the end of October through the end of December during down years for the S&P.”
This could mean that investors waiting to “buy the dip” may have to wait a little longer before losses subside.
Tech stock losses drive Nasdaq down further than S&P and Dow
Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange NYSE in New York, the United States, April 26, 2022. U.S. stocks plunged on Tuesday with the tech-heavy Nasdaq closing down nearly 4 percent, as heavy selling intensified on Wall Street. The Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 809.28 points, or 2.38 percent, to 33,240.18. The S&P 500 fell 120.92 points, or 2.81 percent, to 4,175.20. The Nasdaq Composite Index shed 514.11 points, or 3.95 percent, to 12,490.74. (Photo by Michael Nagle/Xinhua via Getty Images)
The S&P 500 is but one stock market barometer investors use to monitor market performance; the Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) and Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) are the two other largest stock indices in the U.S.
This year, the Nasdaq has had by far the worst year out of the three. The Nasdaq is down over 4,000 points, or 26% since January, while the S&P 500 is down 17% over the same period. The Dow has declined by 4,500 points, or just over 12%, since 2022 began.
The putrid performance of tech stocks has driven much of Nasdaq’s decline, as the index is very tech-heavy. Seeking Alpha reported Tuesday that new data from Societe Generale (SCGLY), a French multinational investment bank, shows that Nasdaq has lost $7 trillion in market cap in six months, essentially wiping out all of its gain made following the announcement of Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine.
Ihsaan Fanusie is a writer at Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Twitter @IFanusie.
The S&P 500 is but one stock market barometer investors use to monitor market performance; the Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) and Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) are the two other largest stock indices in the U.S.
This year, the Nasdaq has had by far the worst year out of the three. The Nasdaq is down over 4,000 points, or 26% since January, while the S&P 500 is down 17% over the same period. The Dow has declined by 4,500 points, or just over 12%, since 2022 began.
The putrid performance of tech stocks has driven much of Nasdaq’s decline, as the index is very tech-heavy. Seeking Alpha reported Tuesday that new data from Societe Generale (SCGLY), a French multinational investment bank, shows that Nasdaq has lost $7 trillion in market cap in six months, essentially wiping out all of its gain made following the announcement of Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine.
Ihsaan Fanusie is a writer at Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Twitter @IFanusie.
Tuesday, May 10, 2022
If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
1 John 2:15-17
The delusion called Fauci - by Jon Rappoport
by Jon Rappoport
May 9, 2022
This one was too good to pass up.
In an interview with the National Geographic, Tony Fauci made comments about “alternative views” of the origin of the coronavirus. But he was really talking about all unorthodox medical information:
“Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about—and it’s very difficult for the general public to distinguish. So, make sure the study is coming from a reputable organization that generally gives you the truth—though even with some reputable organizations, you occasionally get an outlier who’s out there talking nonsense. If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”
Right you are, Tony.
So, Tony, here is a very serious statement from a former editor of one of those “places,” the New England Journal of Medicine:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)
And here is another one, from the editor-in-chief of the prestigious journal, The Lancet, founded in 1823:
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
Why stop there? Let’s consult a late public-health expert whose shoes Fauci would have been lucky to shine: Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when Starfield revealed her findings on healthcare in America.
The Starfield review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:
Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people.
On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.
All in all, those parties who could have made effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.
On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.
Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?
A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.
Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?
A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).
Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?
A: NO.
Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?
A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.
Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?
A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!
—end of interview excerpt—
Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the heraldic published studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is completely unreliable, and impenetrable.
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON—ARE SAYING.
If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.
As in: DISASTER.
But please, continue to believe everything Fauci is saying. He must be right about the “pandemic.” After all, he has a very important position, and he’s on television.
So what if his policies have torpedoed the economy and devastated and destroyed lives across the country?
So what if he accepted, without more than a glance, that fraud Neil Ferguson’s computer projection of 500,000 deaths in the UK and two million in the US? In 2005, Ferguson said 200 million people could die from bird flu. The final official tally was a few hundred.
So what?
Fauci has an important position, and he’s on television.
And that’s the definition of science, right?
May 9, 2022
This one was too good to pass up.
In an interview with the National Geographic, Tony Fauci made comments about “alternative views” of the origin of the coronavirus. But he was really talking about all unorthodox medical information:
“Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about—and it’s very difficult for the general public to distinguish. So, make sure the study is coming from a reputable organization that generally gives you the truth—though even with some reputable organizations, you occasionally get an outlier who’s out there talking nonsense. If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”
Right you are, Tony.
So, Tony, here is a very serious statement from a former editor of one of those “places,” the New England Journal of Medicine:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)
And here is another one, from the editor-in-chief of the prestigious journal, The Lancet, founded in 1823:
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
Why stop there? Let’s consult a late public-health expert whose shoes Fauci would have been lucky to shine: Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when Starfield revealed her findings on healthcare in America.
The Starfield review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:
Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people.
On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.
All in all, those parties who could have made effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.
On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.
Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?
A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.
Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?
A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).
Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?
A: NO.
Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?
A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.
Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?
A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!
—end of interview excerpt—
Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the heraldic published studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is completely unreliable, and impenetrable.
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON—ARE SAYING.
If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.
As in: DISASTER.
But please, continue to believe everything Fauci is saying. He must be right about the “pandemic.” After all, he has a very important position, and he’s on television.
So what if his policies have torpedoed the economy and devastated and destroyed lives across the country?
So what if he accepted, without more than a glance, that fraud Neil Ferguson’s computer projection of 500,000 deaths in the UK and two million in the US? In 2005, Ferguson said 200 million people could die from bird flu. The final official tally was a few hundred.
So what?
Fauci has an important position, and he’s on television.
And that’s the definition of science, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)