Tiny Fraction Of Global Elites Emit As Much Carbon As Bottom Two-Thirds Of Humanity

Critics who rail against the hypocrisy of wealthy global elites jet-setting on carbon-spewing private planes while pontificating about the need for the rest of us to cut our climate footprints just got a boost from a new study.

It turns out that the world’s richest 1 percent emit about the same amount of carbon as the world’s poorest two-thirds, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Oxfam International.

This means that a small sliver of global elites, or 77 million people, have produced as much carbon as the 5 billion people that make up the bottom 66 percent by wealth, per the study.

The study also estimates that it would take roughly 1,500 years for someone in the bottom 99 percent to produce as much carbon as the wealthiest billionaires do in just one year.

The study was based on research compiled by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and examined the emissions of various income groups up to 2019. In summary, it suggested that the private jet-setting class of global leaders and policymakers, who take private planes to lead summits addressing the assumed dangers of climate change, may warrant charges of hypocrisy.

The analysis was published as global leaders prepare to meet for climate talks at the COP28 summit in Dubai later in November, where, much like other climate conferences, some elite participants will likely pontificate on the need for ordinary folk to end their reliance on cheap fossil fuel energy to make their ends meet.

Keep reading

ITALY DEALS A BLOW TO WEF AND BILL GATES’ AGENDA WITH HISTORIC BAN ON CULTIVATED MEAT

Italy has just delivered a devastating blow to the controversial agenda of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and billionaire magnate Bill Gates for global food control, with the historic approval of a ban on the production and sale of cultivated meat. The Chamber of Deputies voted 159 in favor, 53 against, and 34 abstentions in support of the bill presented by Minister of Agriculture Francesco Lollobrigida.

The legislation, representing a significant turning point, prohibits the production and market introduction of foods and feeds derived from cellular cultures or tissues of vertebrate animals. Italy thus positions itself as the first country in Europe to adopt such a radical measure.

The debate in the Chamber was heated, with the Democratic Party choosing to abstain, while the 5 Star Movement and Forward with Hope voted against the measure. The decision has sparked mixed reactions, but it is undeniable that this move puts a brake on Gates’ ambitions in the food sector.

The tech magnate had recently heavily invested in the research and development of cultivated meat, arguing that it represented the sustainable future of food production. However, Italy has now clearly voiced its opposition, rejecting Gates’ vision and thwarting his attempt to dominate the global food market.

Minister of Agriculture Francesco Lollobrigida defended the measure, stating that the decision aims to protect the identity and quality of Italian food products, preserving the country’s culinary tradition. “We will not allow our traditional meat to be replaced by artificial products and cellular cultures,” declared Lollobrigida.

Keep reading

UN & Bill Gates Launch “50in5” Global Digital Infrastructure Plans

Last week the United Nations Development Program officially launched their new initiative promoting “Digital Public Infrastructure” (DPI) around the world.

The “50in5” program – so-called because it aims to introduce DPI in fifty countries in the next five years – began with a live-streamed event on November 8th.

For those of you unsure what “Digital Public Infrastructure” is, the 50in5 website is quite clear:

Digital public infrastructure (DPI) – which refers to a secure and interoperable network of components that include digital payments, ID, and data exchange systems.

There’s nothing new there, for anyone who has been paying even the slightest bit of attention. Digital identity and digital payment systems are self-explanatory (and we’ve covered them before). “Data Exchange Systems” essentially means national governments will share identity and financial records of citizens across borders with other nations, or indeed with global government agencies.

The key word is “interoperable”.

As we have written before, the “global government” won’t be one single health care system, identity database, or digital currency – but dozens of notionally separate systems all carefully designed to be fully “interoperable”.

As well as being a project of the UNDP, UNICEF, and the Inter-American Development Bank, the 50in5 is funded by various globalist NGOs and non-profits including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and (indirectly through an NGO called “Co-Develop”) the Rockefeller Foundation.

The eleven counties taking part in the program so far are Bangladesh, Brazil, Estonia, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Moldova, Norway, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, and Togo. A careful spread from every continent, including first, second, and third-world nations.

It is a list noteworthy for including NATO, EU, and BRICS members. Interesting implications on supposed “multipolarity” there.

In related news, on the exact same day the 50in5 program launched, the European Parliament and Council of Europe agreed on a new framework for a region-wide European Digital Identity (eID) system.

Keep reading

Elon Musk Announces “Thermonuclear” Lawsuit Against Media Matters

In a bold statement issued early Saturday, Elon Musk announced his intention to take aggressive legal action against Media Matters, a non-profit organization that pushes for online censorship. He accused the group and its associates of grossly distorting the user experience on his social media platform, X.

Musk’s planned lawsuit, which he describes as “thermonuclear,” targets not only Media Matters but also “all those who colluded” with them.

Musk’s response comes in the wake of a Media Matters report published on Thursday.

The report alleged that on X, advertisements from prominent companies like Apple, Disney, factions of NBCUniversal, IBM, Oracle, and Comcast were being displayed alongside content promoting “antisemitic conspiracy theories.”

In a fiery critique, Musk condemned these allegations as a blatant attempt to tarnish X’s reputation. He asserted that such attacks stem from a broader agenda to suppress free speech.

Musk views the actions of Media Matters and similar groups as part of a concerted effort by certain activist organizations and legacy media to stifle the freedom of expression on X.

According to Musk, these entities perceive X as a significant threat to their ideological narratives and the interests of their financial backers.

Further, Musk highlighted the tactics used by these groups, which he claims involve manipulating advertisers on X through deceptive means. By doing so, they aim to jeopardize the platform’s revenue streams.

Keep reading

Elon Musk’s Free Speech Stance Is “Dangerous”, Columbia Journalism Fellow Warns

A Columbia University journalism fellow said Elon Musk’s support for free speech on X, formerly known as Twitter, is both “immoral” and “dangerous.”

Anika Navaroli used to work on Twitter’s “Trust and Safety Team,” the unit within the company that censored information, oftentimes true. Musk eliminated the team. She now is a senior fellow at Columbia’s Tow Center for Digital Journalism.

“What has now become clear is that Musk’s vision of speech on X is one of the greatest dangers to democracy, especially leading into the 2024 elections,” Navaroli (pictured) wrote on Thursday in The Hill.

She praised workers like herself for “thanklessly” working behind the scenes to defend “institutions.”

Navoli and her co-workers, in her telling, “were one of the last defenses to American democracy leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021 mob attack on Congress” which “led ultimately to our deplatforming former President Donald Trump.”

She wrote:

Much like poll workers, social media trust and safety workers toil thanklessly and behind the scenes for years to protect the safety and integrity of our most vital democratic institutions. Rather than invest in that crucial work, Musk took a page out of Trump’s playbook, repeatedly and publicly attacking trust and safety workers. He unleashed the Twitter Files, which revealed the names, images, and contact information of former Twitter trust and safety employees.

The journalism fellow said speech is “evolving,” “complicated,” and “sticky.”

“It requires tradeoffs, flexibility, and tough decisions. It shouldn’t be dictated by an autocratic CEO with absolutist ideologies,” Navoli wrote, repeating prior statements she has made on the subject.

“Instead of asking just free speech versus safety to say free speech for whom and public safety for whom,” she previously said during a Congressional hearing.

“So whose free expression are we protecting at the expense of whose safety and whose safety are we willing to allow to go the winds so that people can speak freely.”

She is correct in that our conceptions of speech are complicated – I do not think there is some broad First Amendment right for the authors of pornographic books targeting kids to have their works in libraries.

Keep reading

Self-proclaimed AI savior Elon Musk will launch his own artificial intelligence TOMORROW – as he tries to avoid tech destroying humanity

Elon Musk is set to roll out the first model of his AI-powered system, xAI, on Saturday, one day after he proclaimed the tech is the biggest risk to humanity. 

The billionaire said Friday that he is opening up early access to a select group, but details of who has not been shared.

‘In some important respects, it (xAI’s new model) is the best that currently exists,’ the Tesla CEO said on Friday. 

Musk, who has been critical of Big Tech’s AI efforts and censorship, said earlier this year that he would launch a maximum truth-seeking AI that tries to understand the nature of the universe to rival Google‘s Bard and Microsoft‘s Bing AI. 

Musk revealed his startup on July 12, 2023 by launching a dedicated X account for the AI company and spares website.

The official website only shows an ambitious vision of xAI – that it was developed ‘to understand the true nature of the universe.’

Many of the founding members are skilled with large language models.

The xAI team includes Igor Babuschkin, a DeepMind researcher, Zihang Dai, a research scientist at Google Brain and Toby Pohlen, also from DeepMind.

‘Announcing formation of @xAI to understand reality,’ Musk posted on what was Twitter last year. 

He then shared another post highlighting how the date of xAI’s release is to honor Douglas Adams’ ‘The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.’

When adding up the month, day and year, you get 42.

The number is the answer a supercomputer gives to ‘the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.’

Keep reading

How Peter Thiel-Linked Tech is Fueling the Ukraine War

“A reluctance to grapple with the often grim reality of an ongoing geopolitical struggle for power poses its own danger. Our adversaries will not pause to indulge in theatrical debates about the merits of developing technologies with critical military and national security applications. They will proceed.

This is an arms race of a different kind, and it has begun.”– Alex Karp, Palantir CEO

These were the recent words of Palantir CEO Alex Karp, proclaiming in the New York Times that the world has entered a new era of warfare with the rapid acceleration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies. Playing on the recent release of the “Oppenheimer” movie by comparing the dawn of AI with the development of the atomic bomb, Karp argued that the growing role of AI in weapons systems has become “our Oppenheimer moment.”

In his op-ed, Karp states bluntly that this era is a new kind of arms race where inaction equals defeat, positing that a “more intimate collaboration between the state and the technology sector, and a closer alignment of vision between the two” is required if the West is to maintain a long-term edge over its adversaries. 

Karp’s words are timely within the context of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which – from the beginning – has been a tech-fueled war, as well as a catalyst for further blurring the lines between nation states and the companies that own and operate such technologies. From Microsoft “literally mov[ing] the government and much of the country of Ukraine from on-premises servers to [its] cloud,” to Boston Dynamics’ robot dog, Spot, sweeping mines on the battlefield, as I recently reported for Unlimited Hangout, “much of Ukraine’s war effort, save for the actual dying, has been usurped by the private sector.”

But, as Karp’s words suggest, the longer the conflict goes on, the more technologically advanced the weapons, and weapons operating systems and software behind them, will become. Indeed, the US Military is testing Large-Language Models’ (LLMs) capacity to perform military tasks and exercises, including completing once days-long information requests in minutes as well as  extensive crisis response planning. Ukrainian Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov, who commands Ukraine’s “Army of Drones” program in a made-for-film collaboration with Star Wars actor Mark Hamill, even recently proclaimed that the proliferation of fully autonomous, lethal drones are “a logical and inevitable next step” in warfare and weapons development. 

Indeed, AI tech and other major technologies are coming to the forefront of the war’s front lines. For instance, “kamikaze” naval drones equipped with explosives dealt heavy damage to the Crimean bridge in July, with the Washington Post also reporting that over 200 Ukrainian companies involved in drone production are working with Ukrainian military units to “tweak and augment drones to improve their ability to kill and spy on the enemy.”

As the conflict continues, corporations and controversial defense contractors, like data firm and effective CIA-front Palantir, defense contractor Anduril, and facial recognition service Clearview AI are taking advantage of the conflict to develop controversial AI-driven weapons systems and facial recognition technologies, perhaps transforming both warfare and AI forever.  

Critically, these organizations all receive support from PayPal co-founder and early Facebook investor Peter Thiel, a prominent, yet controversial venture capitalist intimately involved in the start-up and expansion of a bevy of today’s prominent tech corporations and adjacent organizations whose work, often co-developed or otherwise advanced by governments and the intelligence community, includes bolstering the State’s mass surveillance and data-collection and -synthesis capacities despite his professed libertarian political beliefs.

As such, these Thiel-backed groups’ involvement in war serves to develop not only problematic and unpredictable weapons technologies and systems, but also apparently to advance and further interconnect a larger surveillance apparatus formed by Thiel and his elite allies’ collective efforts across the public and private sectors, which arguably amount to the entrenchment of a growing technocratic panopticon aimed at capturing public and private life. Within the context of Thiel’s growing domination over large swaths of the tech industry, apparent efforts to influence, bypass or otherwise undermine modern policymaking processes, and anti-democratic sentiments, Thiel-linked organizations’ activities in Ukraine can only signal a willingness to shape the course of current events and the affairs of sovereign nations alike. It also heralds the unsettling possibility that this tech, currently being honed in Ukraine’s battlefields, will later be implemented domestically.

In other words, a high-stakes conflict, where victory comes before ethical considerations, facilitates the perfect opportunity for Silicon Valley and the larger US military industrial complex to publicly deepen their relationship and strive towards shared goals in wartime and beyond.

Keep reading

You’re Not Supporting Ukraine Enough Until the Nuclear Blast Hits Your Face

What happened to Elon Musk this past week showcases how completely unhinged and dangerous U.S. policy to Ukraine has become. The condemnation began when the Washington Post published excerpts from a new biography on Musk revealing that he turned down a Ukrainian request to help launch a major sneak attack in September 2022 on the Crimean port of Sevastopol. There were numerous, legitimate reasons why Musk refused to activate his Starlink internet services for Ukraine to carry out the unprecedented, surprise attack on Russian naval vessels: Musk was providing terminals to Ukraine for free; he was not on a military contract at that time; the late-night request came directly from the Ukrainian—not American—government; and Starlink had never been activated over Crimea because of U.S. sanctions on Russia. Most importantly, Musk was concerned that enabling the attack could result in serious “conflict escalation.” He worried that he was being asked to turn on Starlink for a “Pearl Harbor like attack” and had no wish to “proactively take part in a major act of war,” possibly provoking a Russian nuclear response.

In response to this nuclear aversion, Musk was called “evil” by a high-level Ukrainian official and “traitor” by American war enthusiasts. Rachel Maddow on the Russia conspiracy network MSNBC said Musk was “intervening to try to stop Ukraine from winning the war.” Not to be outdone, CNN‘s Jake Tapper described Elon as a “capricious billionaire” who “sabotaged a military operation by Ukraine, a U.S. ally,” an act that demands “repercussions.” For his part, chief Iraq war salesman-turned-Democrat-darling, David Frum, said that Musk must be stripped of his U.S. government contracts for not reflexively acceding to the Ukrainian Starlink request, and former “progressive,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, called for an immediate Congressional investigation “to ensure foreign policy is conducted by the government and not by one billionaire.”

Keep reading

These Are The Richest Billionaires In Each US State

The number of billionaires in the U.S. increased 5% compared to last year, going from 720 super wealthy individuals to 775.

As Visual Capitalist’s Avery Koop details below, the richest of the rich are concentrated in states like Texas, California, and New York, but there is almost one billionaire in every single state.

According to Forbes, just four states are home to 61% of the country’s billionaires: California (179), New York (130), Florida (92), and Texas (73).

Keep reading

Billionaire Raped Teenager Inside Jeffrey Epstein’s Mansion: Lawsuit

A billionaire raped a teenager inside Jeffrey Epstein’s mansion in New York City, according to a new lawsuit.

Leon Black, the billionaire, raped the girl when she was just 16 inside Mr. Epstein’s residence on the Upper East Side, the civil suit alleges.

The girl, whose name has not been made public and is using the pseudonym Jane Doe, was allegedly instructed, and did, on multiple occasions give Mr. Epstein a massage that included sexual intercourse.

After learning the girl would follow instructions, Mr. Epstein often handed her off to other men to do the same, according to the suit, including at Mr. Epstein’s homes in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Palm Beach, Florida.

In 2002, the girl was transported to Mr. Epstein’s New York City home, where she was introduced to Mr. Epstein’s “special friend” Mr. Black, according to the suit. Mr. Epstein was quoted as telling the girl to give Mr. Black the same kind of “massage treatment” that she had given him.

Mr. Black allegedly violently assaulted the girl before raping her. He is accused of laughing at the girl’s attempts to flee from him.

The suit is not being linked because it contains graphic descriptions of what allegedly occurred.

“Although Epstein trafficked Plaintiff to other men, both before and after Black, she was never again taken to NYC. The violent and sadistic nature of Black’s rape left an indelible mark on her, both physically and psychologically. Plaintiff suffered internal abrasions in her rectum that continue to cause her pain,” the suit states.

“Sadly, Ms. Doe’s experience is one more in a long line of despicable and heinous experiences inflicted on a minor trapped in Jeffrey Epstein’s web—a web that extended to a group of powerful and influential men, including Leon Black,” it also says.

The suit was brought under a New York law that enables victims of sexual abuse to bring claims by the end of 2025 for older incidents.

It asks the court for damages.

“This is a frivolous and sanctionable lawsuit. Mr. Black has never met this individual. These vicious and defamatory lies, masquerading as allegations, have been intentionally manufactured by the Wigdor law firm as part of the firm’s vendetta against Mr. Black for vigorously and successfully defending himself over the past two years. Wigdor’s prior case against Mr. Black was recently thrown out by the Court and this one will be too,” Susan Estrich, a lawyer representing Mr. Black, told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

In response, Jeanne Christensen, a lawyer with Wigdor who is representing the plaintiff, told The Epoch Times in an email: “Black’s conspiracy theories and finger pointing are an obvious attempt to shift the focus away from his heinous acts. I do not think anyone will be fooled by such nonsense.”

Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender, was set to go on trial for sex trafficking of minors and other charges when he died in 2019. His death was ruled a suicide.

Keep reading