I think in a few years we'll discover the same foreign funding is responsible for the degrowth movement in Europe
It's a trick to make your rivals poor and backwards so you can then outcompete them
We know for a fact the nuclear power plant closures in Germany where due to activists funded by Russia (even the European Parliament published the evidence for that!)
The anti-AI, anti-AC, pro-low quality immigration and general anti-growth is a perfect movement to amplify for foreign countries to make Europe become poor and backwards, beware!
When Western politicians talk about human rights, free speech and democracy, just remind them about how they treated Julian Assange and how much they hate the truth.
(Footage released by WikiLeaks. Reuters journalists Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen gunned down by a US Apache helicopter)
Read the hilarious but 100% true OPERATING MANUAL FOR SPACESHIP EARTH™ to understand everything that’s happening in the world and what’s going to happen in the next 100 years. Link below.
Kære regering, ophæv nu bare det forbud mod kernekraft!
Mandag traf vores svenske naboer en beslutning, der i dén grad fortjener opmærksomhed herhjemme: Vattenfall – det svenske, statsejede energiselskab, der er blandt verdens største på havvind – har valgt britiske Rolls-Royce til at bygge tre små modulære atomreaktorer (SMR), hvor det første anlæg ventes i drift allerede midt i 2030'erne.
Det er præcis den type reaktorer, som vi i Liberal Alliance foreslået, men som er blevet afvist som urealistisk og fjern fremtidsmusik, helt op til klimaministeren, der kaldte vores forslag om at indføre det, som svenskerne nu altså har valgt, for "helt væk".
Jeg hæfter mig nemlig ved, at det er et af Nordens mest seriøse, grønne energiselskaber, der efter års grundige analyser og en vurdering af over 70 mulige leverandører er landet på SMR. Det burde ærlig talt være et vink med en vognstang.
Danmark opfandt den moderne vindmølle. Det ville være ærgetligt, hvis vi ender som landet, der siger nej, mens mere ansvarlige og visionære nabolande bygger fremtiden.
Lad os i stedet lære af svenskerne: ophæv forbuddet mod kernekraft med det samme, og kom i gang med at sikre Danmark en fremtid, der er både god, grøn og gavmild.
Og skulle nogen – eksempelvis i en nydannet regering – mangle ideer til, hvordan man i praksis implementerer SMR i Danmark, kan man med fordel lade sig inspirere af LA's udspil fra 2025, som man kan finde herunder.
Kom nu i bare i gang.
The hardest problems are rarely solved by adding more complexity to the solution -- they are solved by reframing the question until a simpler, clearer answer reveals itself.
Du ser ingen medier fortælle det her, for fra 2028 venter der også direkte EU-støtte til medierne. Dobbeltstøtte. Både statsstøtten - hundreder af millioner - OG direkte EU-finansiering for milliarder. Mange millarder.
Vi taler en stigning fra et ubetydeligt antal millioner euro til mange milliarder euro.
De har meget snart ikke brug for kunder længere.
De får BOKSEN fra magten, eliten og dem, der frekventerer Davos.
De er "vagthunden".
Du ved godt, hvad EU har besluttet i dag (17/6), ikke? De gjorde det.
Fra 2028 ved du ikke længere om din tomat er en regulær tomat eller en GMO-tomat.
Du ved ikke længere, om din olivenolie er en regulær olivenolie eller en GMO-olivenolie.
Det er nu besluttet.
Du er imod GMO, ikke? Ligesom alle andre?
Følger du med i danske medier? Og har intet hørt?
Nej dog.
LBJ during the USS Liberty Attack:
“I don’t give a damn if every man drowns and the ship sinks. I will not embarrass our ally Israel.”
That quote is the whole doctrine:
American sailors were expendable.
Isræl’s image was protected. 2/8
Since some new followers have joined us recently, I thought I’d share my personal experience with organ procurement.
Back in the late 1980s, during residency training, I came in for night call and was told to go up to ICU and prepare a young man for organ harvesting. I believed my authorities when they told me that the brain dead young man I was to anesthetize for organ procurement was dead. Even though he had a normal blood pressure, heart rate, great oxygen saturation, was warm and with good color, and was making urine. In fact, he was more stable than most other ICU patients I had anesthetized. I was so brainwashed that I wasn’t even going to give him actual anesthesia, just a paralyzing drug and meds to keep his blood pressure and heart rate controlled so as not to damage the organs. But when I presented my anesthetic plan of care to my supervisor, he said I should give a consciousness blocking drug “just in case.” I did as I was told, and the young man responded to surgery just like anyone else, requiring the same types and amounts of anesthesia. When I told this story to a pathologist friend, she said that when she removes organs during an autopsy, she doesn’t need to give any of these drugs.
This bothered me enough that eventually I did my own research. I discovered that there have never been any facts, studies, or evidence that these people are dead. Doctors, lawyers, philosophers, and scholars have been debating the veracity of brain death for nearly sixty years in the medical literature, but the public is never told that there is any controversy. I wrote a book, “The Brain Death Fallacy,” and maintain a website Respect for Human Life, to provide fully informed consent for the general public on these issues.
The new American Academy of Neurology brain death guideline now explicitly states that brain death can be declared in the presence of ongoing brain function. It has long been known that 20% of people declared BD still have electrical activity on EEG, and over 50% have ongoing function of a part of the brain called the hypothalamus. BUT the Uniform Determination of Death Act stipulates that there be an irreversible cessation of ALL functions of the entire brain for a legal diagnosis of brain death.
It is troubling that not only is the brain death concept unproven, but also the way doctors are diagnosing it does not comply with the law. That’s why I do what I can to give the public a place at the table in this debate.