Subscribe to the Daily Anti-New York Times and Stay on Top of World Events

RE-RUN

It’s that most frightening time of the year again when the trumpets of holy Mount Olympus summon us all to obedient attention. Hush up and drop to your knees, boys and girls, the “scientists” who unveil the corny-as-can-be “Doomsday Clock” ™ have a dire warning for us all.

From the article:

“The Doomsday Clock, a potent symbol of scientific concerns about humanity’s possible annihilation, was advanced by 30 seconds on Thursday, to 2 minutes to midnight, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists announced in Washington.”

Be afraid, boys and girls. Be very afraid.

“Science” has spoken: If the nukes don’t fry you, the melting ice caps will drown you!

Back during the days when school children were terrorized with “Duck and Cover” drills, the “Doomsday Clock” ™ was introduced (1947) by Globalist scientists who used it to sell the sheeple on the idea that all nations should one day hand over control of armaments to the U.N. as the only way to avoid “doomsday.” Though that radical proposal — originated by the communist Robert Oppenheimer (cough cough) and cryptically proposed by President Eisenhower (here) — never came to fruition, the fear of “the bomb” was in fact successfully used by the Globalists to expand America’s “leadership role in the world” ™, consolidate “the free world” ™;  build the framework for today’s European Union; and strengthen NATO.

With the end of the Cold War, the “Doomsday Clock” ™, though still “calculated” each year, faded into irrelevancy. But now, thanks to America’s “withdrawal from world leadership,” the Globalist-manufactured “North Korean crisis” ™, and Trump’s abdication of responsibility for “Climate Change” ™, the minute-hand of the commie cuckoo-clock has been moved ahead by an additional 30 seconds from last year’s advance.

 The origin of the “Doomsday Clock” ™ coincided with the “Duck and Cover” idiocy of the 50’s & 60’s. Then, as now, the purpose was to frighten the weak-minded into accepting Globalism as the “solution.” In the age of Trump, the pathetic game is rapidly losing its effectiveness.

Doing the honors at this year’s unveiling were “scientists” Sivan Kartha, of the Stockholm Environmental Institute; Lawrence Krauss (cough cough) of the Arizona State University Origins Project; Robert Rosner (cough cough) of the University of Chicago; and Sharon Squassoni, of George Washington University. According to the article, an apparently defensive Krauss, the ring leader, made a telling acknowledgment.

From the article:

“Krauss acknowledged that in the  fake news era, some critics were likely to accuse the scientists of having a political agenda.”

Well, count Sugar and me, er, “The Editorial Board of The Anti-New York Times as among those “critics,” professor! Sadly, the libtarded simpletons who worship Sulzberger’s Slimes are more likely to buy such preposterous Globalist bullshit simply because politicized “scientists” are the ones selling it – as if “scientists” are infallible and incorruptible.

Three generations of high and mighty (and oh-so-serious-looking) “scientists” have had their cuckoo-clock at minutes-to-midnight for 70 years now. The goofy game is up — time to find real jobs, professors!

We hold true men of science in very high regard. However, not all those claiming to be practitioners of science know what the heck they are talking about. Their ignorance can be even more pronounced when they wander off into to matters political and philosophical. Apart from the fact that many of these academic ass-clowns are just well-paid liars, there is also a whole category of “scientists” that fit the observation once made by James Watson – a co-discoverer of the DNA double-helix structure:

“One could not be a successful scientist without realizing that, in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers and mothers of scientists, a goodly number of scientists are not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.”

Tell it, Professor Watson, tell it!

On an unrelated but very interesting note, that’s the same James Watson that the usual suspects blacklisted, drove into poverty and forced to auction off his Nobel Prize for Science because he stated that DNA differences among races impact intelligence and achievement. (here) Fortunately, Russian billionaire and friend-of-Putin, Alisher Usmanov paid $4.8 million for the Nobel medal — and then promptly returned it to Watson! (here)

1. The contribution to science made by James Watson — a critic of “stupid scientists” and co-discoverer the double-helix structure of the DNA molecule — dwarfs that of fools such as Einstein or the “Doomsday Clock” ass- clowns. 2. The winning bidder, Russia’s Alisher Usmanov, saved Watson from poverty and then returned the Nobel medal to him. 3. Usmanov is also buddies with Vladimir Putin.

Boobus Americanus 1: I read in today’s New York Times that a group of highly distinguished scientists are now so concerned about Trump’s climate denial, belligerent rhetoric and abdication of world leadership that they have moved the famous Doomsday Clock to two minutes to midnight. 

Boobus Americanus 2: Two minutes to midnight?! Wow! Now that’s getting too close for comfort.

Sugar:  Come here Boobuss! I’ll sshove that frickin’ clock up your butt-hole!

 Editor: That would cause brain damage.

*

COMMENTS / FEEDBACK / INSULTS / KUDOS

greattomatobubble2@gmail.com

 deal January 26, 2018 – China protests Japan’s claims over islands January 25, 2018 – Oil breaches $70 a barrel January 24, 2018 – Russia calls US claims of Syria chemical attacks ‘unacceptable’ January 24, 2018 – Modi a counterweight to Trump’s protectionism January 23, 2018 – South African retail sales soar by 8.2 per cent y/y in November

A Brighter Future for BRICS
September 2, 2017, 11:11 am

The 9th BRICS summit in Xiamen, China is not a routine meeting because it comes at a time when the bloc is entering a new stage of intensive development.

Moreover, it is the place for China to demonstrate its new role in international relations and the global economy.

The summit also comes at a time of increased political tensions in different areas, both close to the venue itself – that is, the Korean peninsula – and faraway Syria and the Middle East.

At the same time, US policy seems to be in disarray and there is no clear understanding of how US President Donald Trump’s inward looking economic policy would be coordinated with the aggressive interference in other countries, which still remains the trademark of his administration’s activities despite his intention to withdraw from many regions.

The Alternative

BRICS, therefore, should demonstrate its role as an alternative source of power, derived from the combination of global rising powers that can contribute to the stability of the world order and introduce new rules of behavior, and new rules of cooperation on an international scale.

Regional security issues are acute. The BRICS mechanism has already proved its efficiency in becoming a channel for finding solutions in the bilateral and intra-BRICS political arena.

It was during a BRICS High Representatives meeting in China when Chinese and Indian officials found compromise to the Doklam territorial issue.

For most of this summer, Indian and Chinese troops were engaged in a tense military standoff in the Doklam area on the Sikkim sector of the India-China border.

Their compromise to disengage on August 28 was implemented just in time so as to not aggravate the BRICS summit.

BRICS will also be united on issues like the Korean peninsula and the need for a diplomatic solution to this problem, and on the fight against terrorism as well as other hot issues of today’s world.

BRICS is in fact presenting a clear-cut strategy of creating a just world order which facilitates an increasing role for developing nations, including the bloc.

In fact, BRICS is becoming the meeting place for developing countries and the platform for South-South cooperation.

The “BRICS-plus” concept introduced by China (to invite five other nations to attend the Summit) is the innovation that brings to the BRICS process other regional powers on a permanent basis, and not on a case-by-case basis which it was before.

We hope that it is not a one time event and in the future a sort of “BRICS friends club” will emerge that will help these countries to cooperate with BRICS on various economic and political bases.

Financial Redesign

BRICS is particularly interested in the financial architecture of the world, and the Xiamen Summit will help develop the new approaches to increasing the influential role of BRICS and other developing countries in structures like the IMF and World Bank.

A demonstration of this financial vigor is nowhere more evident than in the increasing activity of the New Development Bank.

It has adopted its long-term strategy; it just opened its branch office in Johannesburg (South Africa) and is scheduled to open such branch offices in other BRICS countries.

The Bank has already disbursed $1.5 billion in the first seven credit lines for all BRICS countries and now is planning to disburse another $2.5 to 3 billion this year for projects as different as Russian judicial system informatisation and Chinese ecological projects.

The BRICS summit will surely defend the bloc’s position on the observation of WTO rules, will strongly stand against protectionism and economic discrimination, sanctions and attempts to downgrade the ratings of BRICS countries.

It is also vital that BRICS brings new ideas into the information security sphere, suggesting to sign a new intra-BRICS agreement on international information security.

This is a very logical sphere of BRICS’s interest because the five nations comprise the greatest number of internet users in the world and access should not be a national regulated enterprise but the sphere of necessity for all mankind.

This is part of where BRICS can demonstrate a new level of cooperation in humanitarian and people exchange in the science and technology, civil sector, youth, women etc.

China’s hosting of the summit, in line with the Beijing leadership’s commitment to increase multilateralism and globalization, will help BRICS move further intensively and extensively by pushing from the project inception stage to discussions, from discussions to signing the agreements and the real “on the ground” implementation.

That will help consolidate BRICS’s role as a vital player in global governance.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the publisher’s editorial policy.

Share37