What the UN panel chose to ignore was the fact the debate was anything but "over." The Global Warming Petition Project, signed by over 31,000 American scientists states, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."  F William Engdahl

In his previous article, Valentin Vasilescu demonstrated that it was impossible for the Pentagon to establish an anti-Russian blockade in the Mediterranean nor anywhere else. In this article, he applies his thesis and he shows us that the US no longer has the capacity to lead a naval war against Russia in East Greenland. Moscow has already demonstrated the superiority of its weapons on the ground in Syria. Even if the clash between the two Great Powers has been avoided with care, what is clear, is that today, Russia no longer fears the possibility of a conventional US attack. (bolding added )

I want to be clear that companies such as Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook do not sell their product users' personal information directly to any third-party. However, these companies sell access to their users via intrusive and exploitative pre-installed ("rooted") content such as apps, widgets, and emojis. Additionally, third-parties can gain access to the connected-product user via intrusive and exploitative third-party content that is distributed through sources such as Google Play and the Apple App Store.

People need to understand that pre-installed and third-party content such as apps are primarily designed to enable the content developer with the ability to monitor, track, and data mine the user for financial gain 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.

Rex Lee

Spygate represents the biggest political scandal in our nation's history. A sitting administration actively colluded with a political campaign to affect the outcome of a U.S. presidential election. Government agencies were weaponized and a complicit media spread intelligence community leaks as facts. But a larger question remains: How long has the United States been subject to interference from the intelligence community and our political agencies? Was the 2016 presidential election a one-time aberration, or is this episode symptomatic of a larger pattern extending back decades ? The intensity, scale, and coordination suggest something greater than overzealous actions taken during a single election. They represent a unified reaction of the establishment to a threat posed by a true outsider-a reaction that has come to be known as Spygate.   Jeff Carlson

What is taking place these days, is simply an enormous clash between Western imperialism plus its propaganda, versus the determination of the Chinese and Russian people to live their own lives the way they choose. Or to put it into even simpler terms: the battle is raging between Western imperialism on one side, and democracy with ‘Chinese and Russian characteristics' on the other. The West is bashing China and Russia ‘left and right', literally. But it is definitely not winning !  Andre Vltchek

To understand that role, it helps to understand the particular difficulties posed by the forever war. The killing itself isn't particularly difficult. With a military budget larger than that of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, France, Britain and Japan combined, and some 800 bases around the world, the US has an abundance of firepower and an unparalleled ability to deploy that firepower anywhere on the planet. The US military knows how to kill. The harder part is figuring out whom to kill. In a more traditional war, you simply kill the enemy. But who is the enemy in a conflict with no national boundaries, no fixed battlefields, and no conventional adversaries ?  Ben Tarnoff

Last week, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that the UK's mass interception programmes have breached the European Convention on Human Rights. Six months earlier Britain's supreme court said the same. And what do we mean here? The state has taken compromising images of you and your family, stolen your private information including financial and employment details, your sexual and political persuasions and much more and shared it with all sorts of agencies. In what part of a functioning democracy does it say it's acceptable to construct a 360-degree architecture of surveillance so extreme that it resembles as one ex-MI5 agent describes it - an electronic concentration camp.  True Publica

Like Rachel Carson, those trying to raise awareness about this are often dismissed, ridiculed, ignored and even targeted by the Telecom Industry (aka Big Wireless) and their supporters. Outdated laws and guidelines protect "Big Wireless" - not science.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates "Big Wireless" and the FCC is not a health or environmental protection agency.  Adding insult to injury, The EPA is proposing to weaken radiation regulations as well.  B N Frank

The proposal, which is said to be meant to "strengthen efforts against illegal influence from foreign intelligence services," would introduce criminal penalties for perceived "meddling" in public debates and attempts to influence decision-making. Crimes committed during an election campaign would entail a maximum prison term of 12 years.  Sputnik News

The state investigated Phillips in 2014 after he refused to make a same-sex duo's wedding cake. The second prosecution came after lawyer Autumn Scardina, a man who says he is a woman, demanded of Phillips a cake celebrating transgenderism.  Kristen Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom, which has been working on Phillips' behalf, said, the state "is ignoring the message of the U.S. Supreme Court by continuing to single out Jack for punishment and to exhibit hostility toward his religious beliefs."  World Net Daily

It is true that the terrorist threat is no big prize for the defense industry. Opposing such big potential foes as Russia or China promises huge financial benefits for companies involved in military production. These never-ending and provocative exercises are needed to keep tensions high and justify the allocations of funds. This state of constant confrontation with Russia and China rakes in profits. The ends justify the means.  Alex Gorka

The "free market" can't do anything about it. Google has cornered over 92 percent of the search engine market-a higher market share percentage than Standard Oil at its peak. Big Tech has made sure that Gab, a free speech alternative to Twitter, is barred from ever posing a serious challenge. And no one wants to use a "conservative" Facebook. [Hate speech crackdown spreads to behind-the-scenes tech, by Tony Romm and Elizabeth Dwoskin, Washington Post, August 10, 2018] Big Tech has manipulated the free market to benefit its own interests and power. Tech execs know they don't have to worry about conservative competition putting an end to their malpractices. That leaves only one serious alternative:   government intervention. "Washington Watcher"

"Human beings hate two things," says New York psychiatrist Michael Dulchin - who has dealt with Trump anxiety in his practice. One is "to look to the future and think you don't have enough energy to succeed and live up to your expectations. The other is to not be able to predict the environment." Tyler Durden

Despite a complete lack of evidence of any bias or wrongdoing, the University of Oklahoma conducted a secret investigation of Professor McCall, solely on the basis of his religious and social views.  The investigation completely exonerated the professor.  So what happened?  Professor McCall was punished!  He was pressured into resigning his position as associate dean for academic affairs.  The man was accused, therefore he must be guilty.  When the real crime is not one of behavior, but one of conscience, facts do not matter.  David Deming

Seriously, why do people think revolution happens? Why do they believe their ideas have a chance of winning out over the existing paradigm? There are many who espouse dissident opinions more as a sort of ideological fashion statement than because they actually want to change the world, but presumably a lot of the people promoting Marxism, libertarianism, anarchism etc are doing so because they genuinely would like to see a world in which the status quo is overturned and replaced with something more wholesome. But why would that happen? Why would millions or billions of people overturn existing power structures and replace the current system with something drastically different in a world where plutocrats buy up massive amounts of media influence to convince everyone to keep everything the same ?  Caitlin Johnstone