正在加载视频...
视频加载失败
Our 2026 NHL Draft Scouting Report series has started 🏒📊 In this feature, Chase Reid (Sault Ste Marie Greyhounds) gets the full breakdown from Brock Otten, including skating, shot, skills, and what to watch as the season continues 👀 Read the full report at McKeen’s Hockey 📖 🔴Soo Greyhounds... show more
10,092 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)
0 条评论
暂无评论
原始帖子的评论将显示在这里
![Catherine Austin Fitts: "Is... Epstein the father of programmable money? Of course, the answer [is] yes. Although he was an agent for what is described... as the Rothschild Network... [and re:] Bitcoin, [I] have been saying this is a prototype to create CBDC and digital money." This clip of Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, investment banker, and founder of the Solari Report (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts), is taken from the Children's Health Defense series Financial Rebellion (Children’s Health Defense) posted to Rumble on March 5, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "There's a new commentary at Solari called Is Jeffrey Epstein the Father of Programmable Money? Of course, the answer being yes, although he was an agent for what is described, I think very correctly as the— As the Rothschild Network. "So in America, many people say Rothschild. I was brought up, using the European Rothschild, but same network. And, the commentary at Solari points you to a series done by a writer, writing anonymously, anonymously under the name of ESC, ESC, as in Escape, and what our commentary does is it points you to all the posts from January 30th on, and in my opinion, this is the single best, after Whitney Webb, this is the single best description of the Epstein Network and the governance of the Epstein Network. "And the goal of the Epstein Network. If you study what Epstein was doing, he was, in my opinion, laundering money, including money coming out of the United States government. That's not what ESC focuses on. What he's focusing on is how Epstein reinvested that money as the equivalent of venture capitalist and philanthropist, seeding the development of programmable money. And seeding people, both in academia and business, in all aspects of life, building and operating the different pieces you need to prototype and create digital money, including Bitcoin. "So Carolyn and I, since the beginning of Bitcoin, have been saying, this is a prototype to create CBDC and digital money. And, you know, there's a wonderful group of freedom fighters in that community who've been very, I would say very negative towards us is the only way I can describe it. And I just had one of the top luminaries of that whole world write me and say, oh, my God, you were right. Will you be in our documentary? Like, thank you, Houston. We have contact. "Anyway, so ESC has done a marvelous job. I can't recommend it. Just read everything from January 30th on, and he describes how Epstein developed and ran this and sort of built a prototyping. And then, as Whitney Webb has told us, you know, once that all got institutionalized, you don't need Epstein anymore, particularly when you got FASAB 56, which we've talked about many times. "And so, you know, out Epstein goes because now we've institutionalized. And that's why, you know, Whitney will talk about Palantir as part of the now institutional capacity of what, you know, Epstein is a venture capitalist or philanthropist, helped seed and get started. But now it's being institutionalized. "And the important thing to think of is this is like a booster rocket. After the booster rocket gets you to a certain point and you can institutionalize, then you just eject the booster rocket and keep on going. And if you look at the, the, you know, if you look at the investment network, which are basically the equity pool around the central banks. "So I'll just talk about it as the people who control the central banks. Once you've got the central banks ready to implement digital assets and stablecoins as programmable money, you don't need Epstein. You can let it go. "And if you look at the lot of scandal of getting rid of the booster rocket, they're talking about the very lurid parts of Epstein, but they're not talking about the control grid and how to stop it with this exception. And I think this is why this substack series is so exceptional. And if you really want to understand what Epstein was up to, but more importantly what the structure that managed and controlled Epstein, whether it was the intelligence agencies or the investment money in and around the central banks that wants total digital control. "So Epstein was building the control grid, you know, prototyping, distributed ledgers was all part of that. He put a lot of money into mind control because the neuro warfare is a very, very important part of it."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2029751236510278106/amplify_video_thumb/2029748943412940801/img/wEv4kp2KnHTQy9yx.jpg)
![NEW: Ceasefire Talks Continue in Doha as Israel Proposes New Deployment Maps Israel’s Channel 13 claims that intensified ‘proximity talks’ between Hamas and Israel have resumed on Monday in Doha. Hamas negotiators told Drop Site Netanyahu is publicly paying lip service to a deal in order to “buy time” and eventually blame Hamas for failure—while continuing his scorched-earth campaign in Gaza. A senior Hamas official told Drop Site that the group will not accept an agreement that allows continued IDF presence in Gaza or maintains current aid “death trap” systems. “This offer will not be acceptable to us,” said Hamas official Basem Naim. “The movement insists on an agreement that leads to a cessation of the war, the withdrawal of hostile forces, and the allowance of aid entry.” Here are today’s latest developments: ➤ Israeli Channel 13 reported Monday that the new round of talks in Doha include Israel’s submission of updated troop deployment maps. An Israeli source reportedly told the outlet the discussions are now being held with “increased urgency.” ➤ In a statement, Hamas said: “Netanyahu is adept at thwarting one round of negotiations after another and does not want to reach any agreement… The longer the war continues, the more the occupation army sinks into the quicksand of Gaza and becomes more vulnerable to the resistance’s qualitative strikes.” ➤ Hamas negotiators told Drop Site News today that Israel’s delegation arrived with a mandate from Netanyahu to demand total capitulation — including Gaza’s full demilitarization and the exile of Hamas leaders. These conditions don’t appear in the Trump-backed ceasefire framework, which for two weeks, Netanyahu has continued to undermine publicly. ➤ According to Axios reporter Barak Ravid, a senior Israeli official said that Israel has agreed to make “additional concessions regarding the extent of its military withdrawal from the Gaza Strip” as part of efforts to reach a captive exchange and ceasefire agreement. ➤The updated Israeli maps propose IDF forces remain in a corridor north of the Philadelphi Corridor (along Gaza’s border with Egypt) in an area about half the size that Israel’s original position called for. ➤ Saudi outlet Al-Hadath reports that mediators today reviewed the maps with the Israeli delegation in an effort to narrow gaps with Hamas. The Palestinian resistance movement has not publicly confirmed whether it has received the new maps. ➤ A Palestinian source told Al-Hadath that Egypt’s Intelligence Minister was expected to join the Doha talks, signaling deeper regional involvement in the negotiations. ➤ The same source claimed a key Hamas demand remains a full Israeli withdrawal from the Morag axis. The group, he said, calls this pullout “essential for completing the agreement.” ➤ A source familiar with the indirect talks between Israel and Hamas reportedly told AFP on Monday that mediators are exploring “innovative mechanisms” to “narrow the remaining gaps” between the two negotiating teams in Doha. ➤ A senior Hamas leader told Drop Site that, in the absence of a deal, intensifying the armed insurgency against Israeli forces in Gaza would be “the only effective way of dealing with all their plans.” ➤ Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, speaking on an Israeli podcast, reaffirmed Israel’s red line: “The minimum requirement is that Hamas doesn’t control Gaza. You can add emigration or annexation — but that’s the baseline and we will not retreat from it.” ➤ Yedioth Ahronoth (Ynet) reports that U.S. officials told Israeli hostage families that Netanyahu persuaded Trump to give him another week to strike a deal — effectively buying time to reach the end of Israel’s summer Knesset session. Trump, the report said, is growing tired of the war: “It is unclear what [Netanyahu] ‘paid’ in return, but the evidence is that [U.S. envoy] Witkoff has not yet arrived in Doha to finalize the matter.” 📎 Read the full Drop Site report 👇🏼](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1944855739077419480/amplify_video_thumb/1944855664104206336/img/GCo8Xp2rf_F3S5BU.jpg)
![“There’s a doomsday view of climate change,” said Bill Gates on Tuesday. “Fortunately for all of us, this view is wrong….People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future. Emissions projections have gone down, and with the right policies and investments, innovation will allow us to drive emissions down much further.” In truth, Gates significantly understates just how wrong the doomsday problem is, says one of the world’s most influential climate scientists. “The weakest part of the argument has always been that warming is dangerous,” says Judy Curry, professor emerita at Georgia Tech University, in a new podcast with me. “It isn’t really. More people die from the cold than the heat. So this is probably a net benefit globally. Where’s the danger here?” Some climate scientists say Curry is a global warming denier, hasn’t done the research that they have done, and participated in a Trump administration misinformation effort. But Curry recognizes that the Earth is warming and that humans are contributing. Curry points out that “the modern warming started in the mid-19th century, somewhere between 1820 and 1860, following the end of the Little Ice Age. We’ve been warming since then. Nothing particularly surprising or unusual in my opinion. Is increasing CO₂ contributing to that? Yes.” The fact that warming has been beneficial “doesn’t mean that we should ignore the problem” she stresses and “doesn’t mean that we should keep pouring junk into the atmosphere. And Curry’s qualifications are exemplary. She frequently testifies before Congress and was one of five American scientists who conducted an independent review of climate science for the Department of Energy. And has done significantly more climate research than many of her critics. “I’m the one who’s done more climate dynamics research,” she noted. In truth, scientists have for decades been exaggerating the human impact compared to what nature does. When asked what percentage of the warming she would ascribe to humans, Curry said, “I would say I wouldn’t go much more than 50%.” Curry says, “We’ve mischaracterized the contributions from the sun and also from internal variability of the large-scale ocean circulation.” As a result, she said, “We cannot control the climate. There’s a whole lot of complicated processes going on in the climate system that have been oversimplified or ignored and fall broadly under the rubric of natural climate variability.” Curry notes that science supporting the benefits of additional carbon dioxide and warming is strong and not in dispute. “There are lots of benefits in terms of agricultural productivity, greening of the planet, fewer cold events, more rain in certain regions that with high populations that could use it,” said Curry. We discussed the criticisms of her and four colleagues who wrote the independent review of climate science commissioned by the Trump administration. “They say, ‘Oh, it’s not just CO₂, it’s also warmer temperatures and more rainfall,’” she said, referring to one of the criticisms by other scientists in Carbon Brief. “‘Aren’t you telling us that’s also caused by CO₂?’ So I don’t get what the gripe is. We’re gone through that section and added some updated references, but the fundamental story is unchanged.” As I documented at length at Forbes in 2019, in Apocalypse Never in 2020, and here at Public since 2021, including earlier this week, climate scientists, activists, and journalists have grossly exaggerated climate change to such an extent that much of what they say today must be considered disinformation, in that they know they are leaving the public with false ideas. “Global greening gets very short shrift in the [United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] IPCC report,” she notes. “They don’t talk about the reduction in mortality from reduced number of cold events. They only talk about the mortality from heat events. It’s part of the rules – we’re only talking about dangerous human-caused climate change, not about any benefits from human cause.” But what is the reason for this? What explains why the scientific community has misled the public about the nature of the problem for so long? Please subscribe now to support Public's award-winning investigative reporting, read the full article, and listen to the entire podcast! FULL VIDEO AND ARTICLE CLICK BELOW](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1984003595080241338/amplify_video_thumb/1984001965953839110/img/XbIlSgE2iW3ADFmk.jpg)
