Web3 is often presented as the blueprint for a decentralised internet, supposedly handing power back to ordinary users by removing the grip of Big Tech and government authorities. Instead of tech giants like Google or Meta hoarding your data and raking in profits, Web3 promises a peer-to-peer system where you, the individual, own your digital life—your assets, identity, and interactions—through blockchain-based networks. Imagine Bitcoin replacing banks, Ethereum enabling smart contracts, or IPFS storing your files, all without intrusive intermediaries or a single choke point. The sales pitch is all about freedom: total control over your data, direct transactions, and privacy on your terms. Yet, here’s the bitter truth—globalist powerbrokers like JPMorgan and the World Economic Forum are muscling in, pushing their own “trusted” digital ID schemes and tightly regulated ecosystems. Their vision for Web3 isn’t about liberation; it’s a rebranding of the old surveillance playbook, using blockchain to build new tools for monitoring and controlling the masses. JPMorgan and the WEF now tout blockchain-based digital identity as the bedrock of the so-called next-generation internet. At a glance, it sounds like a libertarian’s fantasy—decentralised, user-run, shielded from Silicon Valley’s all-seeing eye. But scratch beneath the surface and it’s clear: this is just another high-tech leash for the global elite to track, control, and monetise every digital step you take. The promise of freedom is nothing more than a velvet-gloved surveillance trap.

JPMorgan and WEF Pushing Blockchain Digital ID as Cornerstone for Web3

Enter JPMorgan—the same global mega-bank notorious for raking in billions in fines for market manipulation and enabling large-scale fraud. Now, this financial juggernaut is making a hard play for control over the Web3 narrative through its blockchain division, Onyx, freshly repackaged as Kinexys. Their slick “Big Shift: Digital Identity in Web3” campaign, splashed across videos and articles, boldly proclaims that Web3 will completely upend how we create, store, and manage assets and identity—pushing everything onto “decentralised” blockchain rails. JPMorgan’s vision? A future where your digital identity is locked inside a blockchain “wallet,” supposedly giving you frictionless access to DeFi, the metaverse, NFTs, and more, all while you “prove” ownership without the need for centralised servers. On paper, this sounds like a utopian dream—full user control, selective data sharing, and tamper-proof security thanks to blockchain’s immutability. But when a titan like JPMorgan sells you on empowerment, it’s worth asking: who really benefits from this new system, and whose leash are you wearing?

JPMorgan’s Digital ID intentions are not at all altruistic

Don’t be fooled by the slick marketing—JPMorgan’s push into blockchain is anything but benevolent, no matter how much their videos spin it. Far from empowering individuals, the banking giant is building a permissioned blockchain, tightly controlled and compliant with government demands, ensuring they hold the keys to access. With over $300 billion in transactions already processed on this platform, they’re now eyeing digital identity wallets that will tether your assets, credentials, and even offline payments to their centralised system. JPMorgan parades claims of increased efficiency, faster loans, and reduced fraud, but let’s be honest: the only reason banks like JPMorgan innovate is to fatten their profits. This so-called “decentralised” identity is just another trap to siphon fees and data, funnelling it straight into their surveillance ecosystem. Here, they monitor every transaction, enforce know-your-customer surveillance, and hook seamlessly into global payment networks like JPM Coin. Forget user sovereignty—this is about cementing JPMorgan’s dominance, using blockchain as a glittering facade for their expanding financial empire. As Jordan Peterson warns, digital ID schemes pave the way for social credit systems that ultimately serve the interests of globalist elites, not the people.

JPMorgan is aggressively manoeuvring to dictate the direction of digital identity, but it’s essential to scrutinise whose interests they truly serve. Their Web3 ambitions aren’t about empowering everyday people—rather, they’re a strategic ploy to tighten their grip on the financial world and centralise control behind a shiny blockchain facade. As the bank accelerates its rollout of digital identity wallets and so-called “permissioned” blockchains, we must ask tough questions: Is this the path to genuine financial freedom, or just another scheme for globalist elites to lock us deeper into their surveillance web and profit off our every move? The consequences of letting a corporate behemoth like JPMorgan call the shots in Web3 could be dire for personal sovereignty and the future of finance itself.

Now enters the World Economic Forum, fanning the flames of concern around a top-down globalist takeover. With BlackRock’s Larry Fink and a cabal of unelected billionaire elites steering the ship, the WEF has long been at the forefront of championing blockchain as the backbone for their much-hyped “Great Reset”. Their 2019 Blockchain Toolkit isn’t subtle—it’s packed with modules pushing digital identity as the key to controlling every transaction, from supply chains to daily life. By pushing for so-called “trusted digital identities” that merge our physical and digital worlds, the WEF is mapping out a future where blockchain is the gatekeeper for every actor—be it governments, corporations, or IoT devices—all woven into a tightly regulated, interdependent web. Even Queen Máxima of the Netherlands is paraded out to justify why the WEF needs digital IDs: to monitor your health status, control your access to finance, and manage government handouts. The agenda is clear—surveillance and control under the guise of innovation.

The WEF’s Digital ID Initiative

The WEF’s Digital ID Initiative, as outlined in a 2023 article, paints a rosy picture of privacy-preserving systems built on so-called “decentralised” technologies — verifiable credentials and zero-knowledge proofs. They claim these will let users stash metadata on public blockchains and keep sensitive details locked in offline wallets, all in the name of security. The WEF even flaunts Vitalik Buterin’s “soul-bound tokens” as a way to permanently tie non-transferable identities to individual blockchain accounts. Supposedly, this is a remedy for global woes like the 850 million people without official IDs, promising access to banking, healthcare, and benefits, while supposedly protecting personal data. But scratch beneath the surface and it’s clear: the WEF’s real agenda is rolling out stakeholder capitalism worldwide. They’re aggressively pushing interoperable systems to standardise identities across borders, blending public blockchains with regulatory controls. The vision isn’t decentralisation—it’s a surveillance society where compliance, carbon credits, and more are tracked relentlessly. JPMorgan has eagerly joined forces, running pilot projects like Project Mariana and linking up with SWIFT to tokenise assets. Meanwhile, rumours swirl of Ripple’s XRP Ledger being roped in, with hush-hush deals hinting at BlackRock ETF schemes and health tech moves from the current US administration. It’s a tangled web, all designed to centralise power and tighten the leash on individual autonomy. Hear it for yourself in ‘The Agenda: Their Vision, Your Future’ by OracleFilms.

JPMorgan openly admits that digital identity is the cornerstone of Web3, while the World Economic Forum (WEF) is busy weaving it into everything from healthcare to compliance and global financial systems. The WEF aggressively markets its own reports on “trustworthy verification” of digital IDs, framing them as essential for a so-called sustainable technological future. But let’s be honest—this relentless drive for digital identity is anything but harmless. With behemoths like JPMorgan and the WEF steering the agenda, it’s clear this isn’t about empowering people or decentralising power; it’s about consolidating authority in the hands of unelected elites, all while selling a fantasy of tech-driven progress. Putting digital IDs onto blockchain doesn’t liberate anyone—it creates a permanent, inescapable record of every aspect of your life: finances, health, whereabouts, purchases—ready to be exploited by whoever holds the digital keys. Privacy would be obliterated, and total surveillance would become the norm, giving governments and corporations unchecked power to silence or punish individuals for their beliefs and actions.

The WEF’s focus on “redesigning trust” in supply chains is a euphemism for globalist micromanagement

The WEF’s push to “redesign trust” in supply chains is nothing more than a slick cover for top-down globalist control. Every exchange would be monitored, scored for ESG compliance, and scrutinised for carbon output—systematically undermining national autonomy and trampling on personal freedoms. The rollout of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) is part of the same playbook, handing governments and corporate giants the ability to dictate terms over our finances. JPMorgan’s blockchain experiments are just the beginning; a universal digital ID would usher in programmable money, where your funds could be frozen or made to expire if you step out of line. Despite the propaganda from JPMorgan and the WEF about “empowerment,” this is a digital trap designed to corral the public. The only real path forward is to reject this globalist digital leash—stand up for cash, demand authentic decentralisation, and fight to keep the internet open and free from mandatory IDs.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

THE WEF’S NOTORIETY BEGAN WITH ITS EFFORTS AT CRIPPLING NATIONS

The protruding trend of the decline of Davos’s influence, and we ought to begin with the crux’s of the WEF’s notoriety, because it certainly did not begin with Klaus Schwab’s scandals – if anything, Davos’s decline far predates the events of 2025 because its notoriety began with its interest in the destruction of nations in service of its agenda. And to give an accurate description of what this destruction entailed, we ought to look at Russia as a case study, particularly also to enjoy the contrast of how the WEF’s efforts have failed to replicate in modern politics, given Russia’s Christian, patriotic and effective leadership. That said, Russia’s history with the WEF tells us much about the lengths that the WEF is willing to go to capture leaders and cripple nations in pursuit of their interest.

So, what happened? In early 1996, Boris Yeltsin, Russia’s president since the Soviet Union’s collapse, faced a dire political crisis. His approval ratings had collapsed amid economic turmoil, rampant inflation, crime, and the fallout from painful market reforms. Polls placed him fifth among potential presidential candidates, with just 8% support. Leading the pack was Gennady Zyuganov, head of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, who commanded around 21% and appeared poised to win as the frontrunner.

Zyuganov’s rise alarmed Western business elites and Russia’s emerging oligarchs. At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in February 1996, Zyuganov attended and presented himself as a moderate open to foreign investment and anti-corruption measures. Yet many attendees – particularly Russian business leaders – remained skeptical, fearing a Communist victory would reverse privatization, threaten their newly acquired wealth, and destabilize the post-Soviet economic order.

Russian tycoons, including Boris Bere-zovsky, Vladimir Gusinsky, Mikhail Khodor-kovsky, and others, saw Zyuganov’s potential triumph as an existential risk to their fortunes. Frustrated by Zyuganov’s polite reception in Davos and convinced that a Communist resurgence would undo their gains, these oligarchs set aside rivalries to unite. In informal meetings during the forum, they forged what became known as the “Davos Pact” – an unwritten alliance to back Yeltsin financially and through media control.

Key figures recruited Anatoly Chubais, a prominent reformer previously sidelined by Yeltsin, to overhaul the flagging campaign. The pact expanded to include Vladimir Potanin, Alexander Smolensky, Mikhail Fridman, and Pyotr Aven – forming a powerful group later dubbed the “Semi-bankirs-china” (which translates to the rule of the seven bankers). They poured massive resources into Yeltsin’s effort: funding advertising, securing favorable coverage on television networks they influenced (such as ORT and NTV), and coordinating strategies to portray Yeltsin as a stabilizing force against communist rollback.

The campaign shifted dramatically. Yeltsin, initially ailing and unpopular, benefited from heavy media dominance, tactical alliances (including with nationalist General Alexander Lebed), and promises of stability. Western leaders and institutions, wary of a communist return, offered indirect support through loans and diplomatic signals. In the June 16 first round, Yeltsin edged ahead with 35% to Zyuganov’s 32%. In the July 3 runoff, Yeltsin secured 54% to Zyuganov’s 40%, clinching re-election.

This meant that communism was (indeed) defeated – but the victory came at a steep price, and the steep price being Russian sovereignty and electoral integrity. And this is considering that the oligarchs’ backing involved media manipulation, unequal access, and alleged irregularities, while Yeltsin’s team rewarded supporters with lucrative state asset deals in privatization so-called “auctions”. This entrenched oligarchic influence, eroded public trust in democratic processes, and compromised Russia’s electoral integrity. As such, this case study and the Davos Pact symbolise how global financial interest, driven through the WEF and domestic tycoons could shape outcomes in a fragile democracy that prioritises the economic benefit of diabolical special interest groups over popular will. Which is why Yeltsin’s win averted a communist revival (sure) but set precedents for concentrated power and crony capitalism that defined Russia’s 1990s trajectory. This is what the WEF does: it destroys economies and cripples nations with its dirty theories.

THE RUSSIA 1996 CASE STUDY REVEALS THE COST OF COLLABORATING WITH THE WEF

Now, here’s why this glimpse into the historical archives of the WEF’s shadow government operations matters for leaders in the status quo, and even young individuals who are sold an idea of some alleged prestige in being associated with the WEF. The Russia 1996 case study reveals the great cost of association with the WEF – a cost that many nations are having to grapple with in the status quo too. Furthermore, it exposes the ambitions of Klaus Schwab’s great reset. And while Klaus Schwab simplified the essence of the Great Reset, with his notorious mantra, it is actually very diabolical in what it tries to accomplish for the purpose of robbing people of personal ownership and socio-political rights and agency.

For instance, the controversy surrounding what was called Ohio’s Issue 1 in the 2024 election centered on redistricting reform, which was really a covert attempt at a “great reset” in political power dynamics in the State. In essence, Issue 1 proposed amending the Ohio Constitution to establish a 15-member so-called “independent citizens’” commission – rather than politicians – to draw state legislative and congressional district boundaries. Supporters of this proposal argued that it would end gerrymandering, which has essentially become a practice of manipulating district lines to favour one party, and is an issue that had plagued Ohio and various other states for years; seen even with the Ohio Supreme Court having struck down multiple maps as unconstitutional gerrymanders.

But, while gerrymandering (also called redistricting) is a valid concern (in fact as we have this discussion, a Virginia state court just slammed the door on Democrat gerrymandering schemes, and struck down any attempt to redraw Congressional maps for extra blue seats in 2026 – which is good news!) HOWEVER, while gerrymandering is a valid concern, Ohio’s Issue 1 was actually an election manipulation tactic disguised as a gerrymandering solution. Democrats knew that they cannot win at the ballot box because Ohio has rejected their morally decadence and ineffective leadership, and because they couldn’t win at the ballot box, they wanted to control how district lines are drawn.

This was made apparent by opponents to the Issue 1 proposal, including Governor Mike DeWine, Secretary of State Frank LaRose, and Republican leaders, who exposed Issue 1 for the deceptive power grab by Democrats that it is. They exposed that the measure would mandate proportional representation that ironically required “gerrymandering” to guarantee seats for both major parties, overriding traditional principles like compact districts and community integrity. Meanwhile, ballot language described the proposal as requiring gerrymandering, thus confusing many voters who were led to believe that this proposal was supposed to get rid of gerrymandering. And so, the proposal THANKFULLY was defeated in November 2024. But, here’s more on the substantive challenges of gerrymandering in the US as a whole, including leftist media trying to make gerrymandering a Republican or Trump problem (which was well refuted by former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger), and even race-based gerrymandering, which thankfully seems to be on a trajectory to be struck down by the US Supreme Court this year.

But, now, beyond the substantive challenges with Issue 1, a key point of contention was also funding. The pro-Issue 1 campaign raised over $30–37 million, and roughly 85% of that came from out-of-state sources. This included significant contributions routed through groups like the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which received millions from a Swiss billionaire. And so, this highlighted external interference in American elections, where conglomerates and non-Ohio interests were allowed to influence state governance and undermine local voter agency. And herein lies the people of Ohio’s antipathy with the WEF. This is to say that this narrative ties into broader claims of a “great reset” agenda – echoing ideas from figures like Klaus Schwab – where so-called elite financial powers erode citizens’ socio-political control. By allegedly bypassing electoral losses in a Republican-leaning state, out-of-state money sought to reshape districts and dilute Ohioans’ voice, thus prioritising national progressive interests over local will.

This makes the mid-term election in Ohio very important to look at, especially because Issue 1 is quite linked to Vivek Ramaswamy’s 2026 bid for Ohio governor – and you’d recall he was tapped by president Trump to run DOGE alongside Elon Musk, after which he returned to his home state of Ohio, emphasizing restoring opportunity and countering perceived elite overreach. And so, Issue 1 not only exposes the applicability of the WEF’s great reset agenda into state or local politics, but its chronic dangers to the democratic will of the people, even in the modern context, seeing as the protection of local democratic will is among the key issues that Ohioans’ will take to the ballot at the midterms this year. But, here’s Vivek Ramaswamy speaking on Issue 1.

WHY THE WEF IS A POLITICAL & ECONOMIC LIABILITY IN THE MODERN CONTEXT

During the January 2026 edition of the Global Fasting and Prayer programme with the Man of God and President of Loveworld Incorporated, the highly esteemed Rev Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc DSc DD, he highlighted the the WEF is not worth listening, emphasising how this organisation has destroyed nations and their economies using their climate hoax, even plunging many nations into debts from which they will never recover. Taking a cue from the President of Loveworld Incorporated, we then ought to highlight (in the post Davos gathering period) why the WEF is a political and economic liability in the modern context – even beyond the WEF’s thwarted ideological influence in Ohio’s Issue 1.

The first reason that the WEF is a political and economic liability in the modern context is that it seems to require leaders to view sovereign affairs as a secondary (if not tertiary) consideration. In more detail, participation in WEF initiatives – whether through Davos summits, the “Great Reset” rhetoric, or partnerships on global governance – it tends to encourage policymakers to subordinate domestic priorities to supranational agendas. National interests, such as protecting local industries, safeguarding borders, preserving cultural identity, or prioritizing citizens’ economic security, get deprioritized in favor of alignment with elite-driven global frameworks. And as such, this dynamic fosters unaccountable influence, where unelected corporate and institutional voices shape policies that affect entire populations without direct democratic oversight – which is precisely what the WEF’s multistakeholderism philosophy is about – Klaus Schwab wanted to dilute the influence of sovereign nations, and replace that with the finances and influence of private corporations in a private-public partnership model, that is far more private than it is public.

Now, in recent years, this tension between sovereign affairs and globalist pursuits has intensified. Events like the 2026 Davos meeting highlighted clashes, with figures from the US and Argentine, for instance, decrying globalization’s failures – from hollowed-out industrial bases, worker displacement, and eroded sovereignty. This demonstrated that leaders pushing policies that put their nations first explicitly reject the WEF’s models, which (in contrast) place international coordination above domestic needs, ultimately driving dependency and weakened national control.

But, perhaps this was best demonstrated ironically by unelected European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen promulgating that she will be making European citizens pay for Ukraine’s security once again. Not only does this go against the desires of European citizens who are frustrated by a decaying standard of living in their respective countries, but it proves the dire nature of the WEF’s dependency model, seeing as how requesting such funds and loans has become synonymous with Zelensky’s presidency.

The second reason why the WEF is a political and economic liability today concerns the relationship between anarchy and insecurity and the WEF? The crux of the matter here is that the WEF’s great reset agenda requires disorder or insecurity in order to flourish. It is based on the realist notion that nations exist in a state of insecurity without a central governing body that rules over them all; and therefore, the WEF tries constantly to highlight a state of anarchy and insecurity. This is why in January, they are constantly announcing issues of focus that are an urgent threat. Well, the announcements of issues of focus are not an end in themselves. In fact, together with the UN, they are culpable for creating problems, all to condition nations to accept their message of inherent anarchy and the need to cede their sovereignty. And this is how the UN has predominantly existed under Guterres. It is a satellite organisation of the WEF – essentially functioning with the same motive. 

But, unfortunately, there are nations who’ve served as a case study for this modus operandi of the WEF to require anarchy and insecurity as prerequisites for their operations. Canada is one of them. Klaus Schwab bragged that the WEF had penetrated the cabinets of nations, naming former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau among the examples, and the essence of Justin Trudeau’s tenure was marked by a chaotic immigration system and a depreciation in the standard of living in Canada, climaxing in his resignation. Similarly, Ukraine’s leadership is heavily influenced by the WEF and the Open Society Foundation. For one, the co-chair of the WEF is Larry Fink (who is the CEO of BlackRock), and yet BlackRock has been acquiring Ukrainian land, enabled by the proxy war in Ukraine. Blackrock uses this transaction as a money laundering scheme, and was even said to have the audacity to ask that Ukrainian soldiers not be buried on its land in Ukraine.

The Open Society Foundation is the same, and it bears mentioning here because Alex Soros (who took over his father’s work) frequents the WEF. Well, in 2015, George Soros and WEF ‘Young Global Leader’ Chrystia Freeland, who I believe is now an unpaid economic adviser to Zelensky in Ukraine, they openly admitted that Ukraine’s leadership has ties to George Soros.

Then the third reason that the WEF is a political and economic liability pertains to the (frankly) satanic ESG model. Essentially, the World Economic Forum promotes deep economic integration through interconnected global systems, including tightly linked supply chains, unified digital governance frameworks, and the widespread adoption of ESG (or environmental, social, and governance) standards.

The issue with this is that heavy reliance on global supply chains has exposed countries to external shocks – such as geopolitical conflicts, trade disruptions, or concentrated resource dependencies – that can cascade rapidly across borders. Similarly, harmonised digital governance is nothing short of a dictatorial technocracy, especially when we consider plans towards central bank digital currencies, a unified ledger for those CBDCs curated by BlackRock, and even 15 minute cities. 

Additionally, ESG mandates, often pushed through international benchmarks, tend to impose compliance costs and redirect investment priorities away from domestic needs toward globally aligned goals, thus eroding sovereignty. Which is why globalisation is nothing short of a euphemism for colonisation ,and instead denotes woke capitalism.

“A LYING TONGUE IS BUT FOR A MOMENT”

Now, when we began today’s discussion, I highlighted that our focus is on the collision between the works of God and the wicked plans of men, in what ultimately amounts to Davos in decline. This was no mere statement. This was intended to capture a divinely orchestrated reality.

Now, for greater clarity, you’d be aware that in previous years, there have been numerous prophecy that have gone forth concerning the demise of the WEF, and truly we have seen that come to pass – from the WEF and associated platforms receiving compelling competitors (which we spoke of in light of the alternative multipolar system that has been created by the BRICS and now even the US, when it made this offer during the UN assembly last year, and partly reflected in the creation of the Board of Peace). We saw this concerning the internal implosion of the WEF itself when its chief architect left in disgrace.

But, if you noticed, during the January 2026 Global Fasting and Prayer programme, there was yet another prophetic emphasis and progression concerning the WEF, when the Man of God, Rev Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc DSc DD, proclaimed that the WEF is an organisation that should no longer exist. To me, and I believe so many of us, it was a re-emphasis of the truth that the lying tongue is but for a season, meaning it the lying tongue seems to gain influence just until we who bear the obligation of being truth protagonists arrive on the scene – in other words; the lying tongue is for a moment, until the manifestation of the truth and of the sons of God.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

Trump Crashes the Globalist Party

The big story today: President Donald J. Trump stormed into Davos with the largest American delegation ever and delivered a nearly 70-minute special address that had the elites squirming. He reminded the room that America is back – stronger than ever – and we will not be dictated to by foreign bureaucrats or multilateral traps. He blasted NATO for treating the U.S. unfairly: “We give so much and get so little in return.” He’s right. For decades, European nations have freeloaded on American defense spending while lecturing us on “global cooperation.”

President Trump just called out the World Economic Forum and destroyed one of its core beliefs. The WEF pushes mass migration as a moral duty to help the “developing world.” Trump said no. He used Minnesota as Exhibit A, proving importing failed societies doesn’t work in the West. He said, “The situation in Minnesota reminds us that the West cannot mass import foreign cultures, which have failed to ever build a successful society of their own.”

Trump ruled out military force for Greenland but demanded immediate negotiations

Trump ruled out military force for Greenland but demanded immediate negotiations – putting strategic assets front and centre instead of surrendering them to globalist “planetary” schemes. Reports say he mixed up Greenland and Iceland a few times, but the message was crystal clear: American interests first.

Trump: US avoided the catastrophic energy collapse which failed every European Nation that pursued the Green New Scam

The Climate Hoax was created by the WEF Losers and President Trump just called them out to their faces. “The United States avoided the catastrophic energy collapse which failed every European Nation that pursued the Green New Scam…perhaps the greatest hoax in History…”

Trump: “Homes are built for people, not for corporations.”

President Trump at Davos 2026 just took a direct swing at the infamous WEF slogan “You’ll own nothing and be happy”—rejecting it outright by banning large institutional investors from buying single-family homes. He signed an executive order to stop Wall Street giants from scooping up hundreds of thousands of houses (sometimes 10% of the market), driving up prices and turning America into a “nation of renters.”  Trump: “Homes are built for people, not for corporations.” He’s pushing Congress to make the ban permanent law and cap credit card interest rates at 10% for one year to help Americans escape 28–32% usury and actually save for a down payment. A clear “no” to the corporate ownership takeover of housing. 

Most importantly for markets: Trump declared loud and clear that America will remain the crypto capital of the world. Bitcoin dipped briefly to $87,000 on volatility but is already rebounding on this news. He teased major crypto legislation coming soon – unlocking “new pathways for financial freedom.” This is a direct slap to the central-bank digital currency crowd who want programmable money to control your spending. The globalists hate it. Trump’s presence alone exposed Davos for what it is: a club terrified of sovereign nations fighting back.

The Globalist Counterattack – China, Carney, and Multilateralism

While Trump spoke truth to power, the usual suspects pushed their one-world agenda. China’s He Lifeng warned against returning to “the law of the jungle where the strong prey on the weak.” They want a “rules-based order” – meaning rules written them and enforced by the WEF. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney – former Bank of England head and net-zero zealot – gave remarks pushing climate finance and “sustainable” growth. This is the same man who wants to force banks to punish fossil fuels and redirect capital to green fantasies that enrich insiders. Sessions included “When Food Becomes Security” – discussing how climate disruptions could turn harvests into weapons. Sounds reasonable until you realize their solution is always more global control: international food boards, trade restrictions, and carbon taxes on farmers. They’re laying groundwork to control the global food supply under the guise of “resilience.” This is why Davos is evil: it normalizes the idea that unelected bodies should override national parliaments on trade, finance, and security.

WEF: Market Impacts and the Financial War

Let’s talk money. Global stocks were mixed tonight. European indices dipped on Trump’s warning that “Europe is not heading in the right direction.” He’s right – decades of open borders, green regulation, and energy dependence on adversaries have hollowed out the continent. U.S. markets remain resilient, buoyed by Trump’s crypto pledge and tariff threats that protect American workers. Expect volatility if trade talks heat up, but long-term: America First policies will bring manufacturing home. The real financial story is the silent war: central banks vs. decentralized money. Davos elites want CBDCs to track every transaction. Trump’s crypto embrace is the counterpunch – keeping financial power with the people.

BlackRock CEO calls for single global blockchain to track all assets — ‘to reduce corruption’

Larry Fink told the WEF the world must accelerate toward fully digitized currencies on a unified blockchain, where every asset — stocks, bonds, real estate, cash — would be tokenized, fractionalized, and programmable. He outlines a vision where unprecedented system of financial centralization and control will allow total surveillance.

Randi Weingartner wants school curriculums to be written by WEF

Meanwhile, sessions on antibiotics resistance and innovation were classic WEF: scare tactics about global crises that only “multistakeholder” solutions can fix. They want public-private partnerships that give corporations immunity while governments foot the bill. Sovereign nations and individuals are waking up – moving assets out of reach of globalist confiscation schemes. Meanwhile, Randi Weingartner wants school curriculums to be written by the World Economic Forum. This means teaching sexual deviancy, sterilizing children, worshipping vaccines, promoting the climate hoax, embracing satanism.

Milei’s Liberty Speech and the Anti-Woke Resistance

Argentine President Javier Milei returned to Davos and delivered another monumental defense of freedom. He tore into socialism, regulation, and collectivism – reminding the room that Western values of individual liberty are the only path to prosperity. Milei’s message aligns perfectly with the anti-globalist fight: governments should serve people, not the other way around. His reforms are turning Argentina around, proving that rejecting IMF-style globalist austerity and embracing markets works.

Why the WEF Itself Is the Greatest Threat

This entire event is illegitimate. Unelected Klaus Schwab successors and their billionaire donors meet in secret, set agendas that filter into national policies, and push ideas no voter ever approved. From the Great Reset to 15-minute cities to ESG scoring – Davos is ground zero for anti-human control systems. They fly private jets to lecture you about carbon footprints. They push digital IDs while protecting their own privacy. They want open borders for cheap labor but walled compounds for themselves. This organization has no democratic mandate. It influences policy through back channels, funds activists, and grooms leaders. It must be exposed, defunded, and shut down. National governments should boycott it. Citizens should demand transparency on any official who attends.

We’ve covered Day 3: Trump’s triumph, Milei’s courage, and the globalists’ desperate pushback. But the bigger picture is clear – Davos represents everything wrong with top-down control. Stay vigilant. Protect your sovereignty. Invest in freedom: hard assets, decentralized finance, and leaders who put their nation first. The World Economic Forum must end – for the sake of liberty, prosperity, and human dignity.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

President Muse Bihi Abdi attended the annual gathering of global political and business leaders as part of a broader push to position Somaliland as a stable and investment-ready destination in the Horn of Africa. Somaliland, which declared independence from Somalia in 1991 following the collapse of Somalia’s central government, has operated with its own government, currency, and security forces for more than three decades but remains unrecognised internationally.

According to officials familiar with the meetings, President Bihi highlighted opportunities in infrastructure, energy, logistics, and ports, stressing Somaliland’s strategic location along key Red Sea and Gulf of Aden shipping routes. He also emphasized the territory’s relative political stability compared to the wider region, presenting it as a reliable partner for Western investors.

The engagement with Eric Trump came as part of informal discussions aimed at attracting U.S. private sector interest rather than formal government to government negotiations. Somaliland’s leadership hopes that greater business engagement could eventually translate into diplomatic recognition, particularly from the United States and its allies.

Somaliland has previously secured major foreign investments, including a port development deal with DP World at the port of Berbera, which has become a central pillar of its economic strategy. The government argues that increased international trade and investment would strengthen regional security and economic integration in East Africa.

While Somaliland continues to lobby for recognition, Somalia’s federal government maintains that the region remains an integral part of the country. International powers have so far supported Somalia’s territorial integrity, though analysts note that Somaliland’s long-standing stability keeps the recognition debate alive.

The Davos appearance underscores Somaliland’s determination to use global economic platforms to advance its political and economic objectives, even as formal recognition remains elusive.

Let’s talk derivatives. Taylor Kenney is sounding the alarm, warning that US banks are currently holding onto a staggering quarter of a quadrillion dollars in derivative exposure, which are essentially financial instruments that nearly toppled the global economy in 2008. According to Kenney’s analysis of official Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation data, the derivatives market wasn’t reined in after the Great Recession, but instead, it has grown into a more complex and massive entity, buried under layers of financialization designed to conceal its true risk. This complex web consists of interconnected bets built on debt, speculation, and extreme leverage, making it a ticking time bomb. The catalyst for the collapse of this new derivative pyramid may have already been triggered, with the recent consecutive collapse of three major sub-prime auto lenders potentially signalling the imminent arrival of a new Credit Crunch. However, this time around, the consequences would be far more severe. The FDIC insurance fund, which is supposed to protect savings, only has sufficient funds to cover a mere 1.3% of all insured deposits, which is barely enough to bail out one ‘too-big-to-fail’ bank or a few mid-sized ones. The alternative is a draconian FDIC ‘bail-in’, which would involve confiscating “your cash, your savings, and your deposits” to recapitalize the bank and save the system, effectively punishing innocent savers while letting the reckless gamblers who inflated the bubble off the hook.

The Powder Keg – Understanding the Derivatives Disaster

At its heart, this staggering $223.5 trillion crisis is a massive threat that overshadows the entire US economy, which is valued at around $28 trillion. So, what exactly are derivatives? Essentially, they’re high-stakes side bets that banks make on assets like interest rates, currencies, commodities, and stocks. While banks claim they’re a way to “hedge” against risks, the truth is that they’re incredibly risky gambles that have been fuelled by the Federal Reserve’s policies of near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing over the past decade. The notional value of these bets is the total amount that could be lost if everything goes wrong, and while the “net” exposure might seem lower, around $15-20 trillion, this is just an illusion – when panic sets in, these offsets can quickly disappear, as we saw in 2008 when credit default swaps led to a $10 trillion loss in wealth.

Today, four massive banks – JPMorgan, Citibank, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs – hold over 90% of these derivatives, creating a too-big-to-fail cartel that’s on steroids. The risk of one of these banks defaulting is very real, and it could trigger a chain reaction of failures, much like a row of dominoes. The reforms introduced by the Dodd-Frank Act have done little to address this issue, instead centralizing the risk in clearinghouses and relying on stress tests that assume everything will always go smoothly. Meanwhile, geopolitical tensions, such as the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, are driving up energy derivatives and inflation, eroding the savings of ordinary people. The Federal Reserve’s recent $29.4 billion injection of liquidity is just a temporary fix, a Band-Aid on a much deeper wound. The fact that precious metals bets have surpassed $5 trillion is a sign that investors are seeking safe havens, but this is just propping up an illusion – the value of physical gold and silver is screaming “safe haven” to those who will listen.

The trading revenue may be up, but so is the fragility of the system, with the Dallas Fed warning that “ample liquidity” is needed to prevent a meltdown – code for “we’re one mistake away from disaster.” This is eerily reminiscent of the 2008 subprime crisis, which sparked a derivatives inferno, but this time the stakes are three times higher. The pursuit of profit has punished prudence, and the threat of bail-ins, where depositors’ savings are used as collateral, is a very real one. The bottom line is that America’s banks are overextended empires, not invincible fortresses – they’re vulnerable to collapse, and it’s time we faced up to this reality.

The Dollar Crash Cascade: How Bank Bets Can Spark a Currency Cataclysm

We’re on the cusp of a derivatives explosion that could potentially incinerate the dollar, making the 2008 financial crisis look like a minor setback. The United States is sitting on a $223.5 trillion debt bomb, tied to a massive $740 trillion global derivatives pile, with interest-rate swaps totalling $579 trillion. US national debt stands at $33 trillion, with a staggering 97% debt-to-GDP ratio that’s projected to balloon to 118% by 2035. The dollar has already taken a hit, plunging 11% against major currencies in the first half of 2025, the steepest drop in 50 years. Foreigners hold 30% of US Treasuries, and if they sense trouble, they’ll hedge their bets through swaps, flooding the market with dollar sales and spiking the cross-currency basis.

The Treasury Department is facing a refinancing crisis, with $9 trillion in debt coming due next year amidst weak demand, which could lead to yields jumping by 0.2 points or more, and interest payments skyrocketing to $1 trillion annually. This could crowd out defense and entitlement spending, triggering a catastrophic chain reaction.

As the dollar’s reserve share craters by 2 points or more, investors are flocking to alternative assets, with emerging markets experiencing significant outflows. The BRICS nations are eyeing the yuan and gold as potential alternatives to the dollar.

Inflation is also on the horizon, with the Fed printing trillions of dollars, which could push net interest payments to over 5% of GDP by 2030 and debt-to-GDP ratios past 200% by 2047. This could lead to a doubling of grocery prices and a decimation of retirement savings.

Higher interest rates, slashed growth forecasts, and the tariffs are all contributing to the perfect storm. The $73 trillion in unfunded liabilities, including Social Security and Medicare, is a ticking time bomb. Experts are warning of a “coming US financial crisis” and a “financial tsunami” caused by policy mistakes. The rise of crypto derivatives, with $18 trillion in gross value, is adding fuel to the fire. A potential downgrade of US debt, with 50% odds at 120% debt-to-GDP, could shatter the “safe haven” myth, leading to a 9% plunge in the dollar.

The Puppet Masters: Unmasking the Globalist Cabal

This is not just a case of faceless greed; it’s a syndicate of central bankers, supranational institutions, and Wall Street power players hell-bent on borderless control. The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is the apex predator, born from Nazi gold laundering and now scripting liquidity traps through “innovation hubs” that standardize cross-border derivatives. The BIS is mapping FX/OTC bets to weaponize volatility, not fix it. Jerome Powell is merely an errand boy, executing the BIS’s plans, including slinging $29 billion in swaps last month.

The IMF and World Bank are tag-teaming with the BIS, saddling 190 nations with debt and pushing for a global currency to “stabilize” the chaos. Their 2025 Global Financial Stability Report admits that derivatives amplify shocks but demands more coordination, effectively surrendering national sovereignty to the globalist throne. The Big Four banks, with $60 trillion in notional value, are the street-level enforcers, suppressing gold and silver prices to the tune of $5 trillion. The “Big Three” asset managers – BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street – own 20-30% of banks and dictate risk models for synchronized blowups, perpetuating elite capture and ignoring net-zero swaps that inflate bubbles.

The grand design is to overload the system, crash it, and then “build back” with Basel IV, crushing small banks, and de-dollarization through tariffs and sanctions. The globalist fingerprints are all over the FDIC’s 2025 Risk Review, which nods to commercial real estate cracks caused by green deals. Soros and Rothschild are thriving on chaos, shorting from offshore while the average person foots the bill.

A Crisis by Design: Uncovering the Orchestrated Blueprint and Timeline

We’re witnessing a deliberate crisis, orchestrated by a blueprint that’s been set in motion. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is openly confessing to this controlled demolition in their 2025 manifestos. In their October Global Financial Stability Report (GFSR), titled “Shifting Ground,” the IMF is flagging “elevated risks” stemming from overstretched valuations, sovereign bonds, and nonbank leverage – the very bubbles they’ve inflated through quantitative easing and interconnectedness.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is also sounding the alarm in their June Annual Report, warning of “policy crossroads” as they work to consolidate cartel power through the harmonization of Basel IV. Meanwhile, the World Economic Forum (WEF) is proposing elite “frameworks” to govern the impending fragmentation of systems, which they claim will come at a cost of 5-10% of global GDP.

Let’s take a closer look at the timeline of events: In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, the Dodd-Frank Act was introduced as a mere fig leaf to hide the rot. Fast forward to 2025, and the IMF is warning of slashed growth forecasts, while the World Bank is nodding to emerging market debt traps that will require rescues. The swaps and foreign exchange markets are on the verge of explosion, with the BIS echoing the staggering $579 trillion notional value, which is eroding the dollar. The gold market is also showing signs of cracking, with COMEX records revealing the paper facade.

The globalist playbook is clear: they’re engineering a crisis to fragment the system and then govern the pieces. The real agenda is to implement SDR bailouts and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), consolidate power through Basel centralization, and suppress gold. The WEF’s “Fragmentation” white paper is a blueprint for this plan, which will come at a significant cost to the global economy.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

Peel back the glossy press releases, and a darker narrative emerges—one echoed in financial circles wary of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Great Reset” rhetoric. Independent researchers and African policymakers have revealed that GMO mosquitoes aren’t just about disease suppression; they’re a Trojan horse for depopulation and coerced medical interventions. The Gates Foundation, with its $50 billion endowment and deep ties to pharmaceutical giants like Pfizer and Moderna, has long been exposed of prioritizing population management over genuine aid. In a 2010 TED Talk, Bill Gates himself mused on reducing global population growth through vaccines, healthcare, and reproductive services. Fast-forward to today: Oxitec’s malaria-focused strains, developed with Gates funding, will deliberately target human fertility in high-birth-rate regions.

Bill Gates’ GMO Mosquitoes

Flying Syringes for Forced Vaccination and Global Control

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation invested a staggering $41 million in Oxitec, a British biotech firm, to develop these genetically modified mosquitoes that purportedly aim to eradicate malaria. However, numerous health experts have dubbed these creatures “flying syringes,” because their true purpose is to covertly vaccinate the general population with potentially hazardous vaccines that induce sterility in both men and women, without their knowledge or consent. This could lead to a significant increase in infertility, with women becoming barren and men becoming impotent on a massive scale, highlighting just one of the many risks associated with this technology.

Consider the “flying syringe” concept, a Gates-backed idea to engineer mosquitoes that deliver vaccines via bites. A 2008 Grand Challenges grant explored transgenic mosquitoes secreting malaria antigens into human saliva during feeding, turning insects into inoculators. This blurs the line between consent and compulsion. This tech could enforce compliance under the guise of public health emergencies. Financially, the payoff is staggering: The global vaccine market, projected to hit $100 billion by 2030, thrives on perpetual crises. Gates’ investments in mRNA platforms during COVID-19 yielded billions; GMO mosquitoes could similarly prime markets for next-gen shots, funnelling profits to elite stakeholders.

Back in 2008, Gates’ foundation doled out $100,000 to a Japanese scientist, Hiroyuki Matsuoka, to engineer mosquitoes that secrete malaria vaccine proteins in their saliva. Bite you? Boom – you’re “vaccinated.” No needle, no doctor, no choice. They called it a “flying syringe,” and it wasn’t some fringe fantasy; it was funded under Gates’ Grand Challenges Explorations, where he threw millions at 104 “bold ideas” for global health domination. Fast-forward, and outfits like Oxitec – backed by Gates cash – are releasing billions of GM bugs in places like Florida and Brazil, supposedly to fight diseases. But whispers from the lab? These could be tweaked to deliver anything: vaccines, gene therapies, or worse. These genetically engineered mosquitoes are not only being touted as a means to control population growth, but also as a way to inoculate people with vaccines without their explicit consent. As a seasoned finance analyst who has tracked the ways in which globalist billionaires transform “philanthropy” into lucrative business ventures, this initiative reeks of a depopulation agenda masquerading as a benevolent endeavor. Rather than saving lives, Gates is essentially attempting to playing god with people’s bodies, and the backlash from Africa is only the beginning. In essence, the hazardous and potentially deadly vaccines that people have been wary of and rejected can now be administered without their knowledge or consent, courtesy of these genetically modified mosquitoes. All it takes is a mosquito bite, and the vaccine is injected into the bloodstream, complete with untested and questionable substances, all without the individual’s permission. Why should any nation, proud of its heritage, allow Bill Gates and his associates to continue perpetrating their mass depopulation agenda on their soil? The very idea of allowing these “flying syringes” to infiltrate their ecosystems is a stark reminder of the need for vigilance and resistance against such insidious plans.

Bill Gates is Waging a High-Tech War on Mosquitoes

At What Cost to Humanity and the Environment?

Bill Gates’ ambitious plan to eradicate malaria is a complex combination of artificial intelligence, experimental vaccines, and genetic modification, known as gene drives, which are essentially “kill switches” for mosquitoes.

 At first glance, his plan appears to be a selfless act, aiming to save the lives of over 600,000 children under the age of five who die from malaria every year. However, beneath the surface of this seemingly altruistic endeavor lies a more sinister reality: Gates’ desire to control nature reflects the arrogance of the global elite, who view humanity and ecosystems as mere test subjects for their experiments. Gates portrays mosquitoes as malicious, but is he and his allies truly any different? Unlike mosquitoes, they have monopolized farmland, disrupted food supplies, and profited from crises under the guise of “charity” – actions that have had far more devastating consequences for human societies. The use of gene drives, the cornerstone of Gates’ mosquito eradication plan, poses significant risks to the environment and ecosystems. These irreversible genetic modifications have the potential to disrupt the delicate balance of nature in unpredictable ways. While mosquitoes can be a nuisance, they also play a crucial role in pollinating plants and supporting biodiversity. However, Gates’ solution to the malaria crisis disregards these essential roles, prioritizing short-term human intervention over long-term ecological stability. This reckless approach to genetic engineering is reminiscent of the same hubris that has plagued globalist experiments in agriculture, healthcare, and energy, which have often had disastrous consequences for the environment and human societies. The narrative surrounding the “war on malaria” also conceals a more insidious agenda: control.

Gates acknowledges that malaria research has been underfunded because its victims are “too poor to attract attention”, but who is responsible for perpetuating this imbalance if not the billionaires who profit from inequality? Gates’ projects are not about saving lives, but about consolidating power and using diseases as leverage to reengineer society and nature in the image of the global elite. The exploitation of the Global South by Western philanthropists and corporations has become a familiar pattern, with the beneficiaries of these “humanitarian” efforts often being the same biotech firms, AI companies, and elites who profit from controlling life at the molecular level. The use of gene drives as a tool for population control is a chilling possibility that cannot be dismissed as a conspiracy theory. Given Gates’ history of using the Global South as a testing ground for his experiments, it is not far-fetched to imagine the use of gene drives for more sinister purposes. The same individual who has treated people as lab rats now seeks to play god with the natural world, ignoring the catastrophic consequences that his actions could have for the environment and human societies. The growing resistance to Western “philanthropy” in the Global South is a testament to the fact that people are no longer willing to be treated as test subjects for the experiments of the global elite. Ultimately, if Bill Gates truly wants to eliminate parasites, perhaps he should start by targeting the ones that are monopolizing resources and exploiting humanity. Mosquitoes may carry malaria, but Gates and his allies are carrying the far more malignant disease of hubris, which has already had devastating consequences for the environment and human societies. The cure for this disease is not found in a lab, but in the growing resistance of people who are rejecting the control of the global elite and demanding a more equitable and sustainable future for all. Financially, this is a goldmine for the elite. Gates invests in biotech firms like Oxitec and big pharma players, then “donates” to projects that create demand for their patents. It’s vertical integration on steroids – fund the “problem” (engineered bugs), sell the “solution” (vaccines via bite), and watch royalties flood in while populations dwindle. Remember his TED talk where he released mosquitoes on the audience to make a point about malaria? That wasn’t a stunt; it was foreshadowing. And don’t buy the fact-check spin that his current projects aren’t for vaccination – the tech’s the same gene-editing toolkit, and history shows he’s funded the syringe concept directly.

Bill Gates is actively utilizing insects as carriers for hazardous pathogens and recklessly dumping untested mRNA technology on impoverished communities, flagrantly disregarding fundamental conservative values such as informed consent, secure national borders, and unrestricted free markets. The Nuremberg Code, established to protect human rights, is being blatantly disregarded, while national sovereignty is being deliberately compromised. The potential consequences of these actions are alarming, ranging from ecological devastation and unforeseen genetic mutations to deliberately engineered pandemics designed to justify further authoritarian control. The state of Florida has already been transformed into a testing ground for these experiments, with billions of dollars being invested under the supervision of Governor DeSantis, despite the absence of comprehensive long-term studies to assess the safety and efficacy of these measures. We must reject this blatant attempt at technocratic domination and instead support courageous leaders like Traoré, who are taking a firm stance against these dangerous experiments. It is imperative that we invest in genuinely effective solutions, such as locally driven agricultural initiatives and traditional medicine, rather than relying on patented, potentially lethal products promoted by Gates. If we fail to take immediate action to halt these egregious practices, we risk being subjected to an unending barrage of experimental technologies concocted by globalist elites, as this sinister agenda is driven by an insatiable pursuit of wealth, power, and the systematic erosion of national sovereignty.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

The Proposal: Taxing Your Home to “Solve” a Crisis of Their Own Making

Australia is currently grappling with a severe housing crisis, as young families are being priced out of the market due to soaring prices and rents. The Albanese Labor government has made a commitment to construct 1.2 million new homes over the course of five years, but as of August 2025, they are already facing a significant shortfall of 250,000 homes, primarily attributed to construction delays, regulatory obstacles, and a shortage of skilled labour. In a bid to address this issue, property research firm Cotality has proposed a radical concept, known as the “spare bedroom tax”, which was recently presented at the government’s Economic Reform Roundtable in mid-August 2025, sparking a new wave of debate and discussion.

Eliza Owen and Cotality is pushing for a tax on unused bedrooms, claiming over 60% of Aussie households have just one or two people, yet most homes have three or more bedrooms. This proposed tax, potentially paired with scrapping stamp duty and introducing a land tax, aims to encourage downsizing and renting out spare rooms, supposedly shifting demand towards smaller units. However, critics argue that this tax won’t add new dwellings, instead punishing hardworking Aussies who’ve saved for their dream homes. The real issue, they claim, is years of unchecked mass immigration, foreign investor speculation, and stifling zoning laws, which have manufactured the housing crisis. The public is fiercely opposing the tax, with many calling it a “crazy idea” that targets retirees and families, rather than addressing the root causes of the crisis. Critics, including opposition figures, argue that the tax would hit middle-class asset holders hardest, pitting generations against each other, while foreign investors would snap up freed-up properties at inflated prices. With over 13 million spare bedrooms nationwide, taxing them won’t solve poverty or supply shortages, and instead, would be a regressive move that ignores real fixes like cutting immigration or easing building regulations. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is considering reforms, but the proposed tax has sparked outrage, with many calling for a reality check on the true causes of the housing crisis.

The Globalist Great Reset: Erasing Ownership for Elite Control

Here’s the bigger picture: the spare bedroom scheme is just the tip of the iceberg, exemplifying the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Great Reset” agenda, a master plan unveiled by WEF founder Klaus Schwab in June 2020 to radically transform global economies into a “stakeholder capitalist” model. The Great Reset is actively pushing for a major overhaul of taxes, regulations, and investments, prioritizing “equity” and sustainability, often at the direct expense of individual property rights. Klaus Schwab is using the pandemic as a catalyst to build back a greener and fairer world, with governments working together to implement wealth taxes, eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, and leverage cutting-edge technologies like AI and surveillance for what he calls the “public good.” Meanwhile, Klaus Schwab’s daughter, Nicole Schwab, is actively promoting the WEF’s ‘Great Reset’ plan, which is deliberately designed to exploit crises to gain control. Nicole Schwab explicitly reveals their strategy: use crises as a smokescreen to dismantle the existing economy and replace it with a so-called “sustainable” system, which would be firmly controlled by the elite.

Here’s the lowdown: the clique of powerful, unelected elites gathering at Davos is secretly orchestrating a massive power play, backed by over 1,000 gigantic corporations like Google, Apple, and BlackRock. Under the guise of combating inequality and climate change, they’re actually working to centralize control and reshape the global economy. The World Economic Forum’s infamous slogan, “You’ll own nothing and be happy,” is the smoking gun that exposes their true intentions. This mantra originated from a 2016 essay by Danish politician Ida Auken, published on the WEF’s website, which envisioned a world by 2030 where people would rent everything – from homes and cars to appliances and clothes – through shared services and drones. Auken painted a picture of a city where “I don’t own anything… everything you considered a product has now become a service.” The WEF amplified this idea in a video summarizing their predictions for 2030, sparking a global debate. Although Auken later backtracked, claiming it was just a thought-provoking scenario to discuss the pros and cons of technology, the damage was already done. Whether or not you believe in conspiracy theories, the fact remains that this concept perfectly encapsulates the Great Reset’s push for a subscription-based economy, where corporations own all the assets and individuals are forced to lease them, lining the pockets of Big Tech and finance giants while stripping away the security and freedom that comes with ownership.

The Great Reset ties directly to housing: Schwab’s plan emphasizes “green urban infrastructure” and ESG (environmental, social, governance) metrics to force denser living and reduce private land use, aligning with UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. In Australia, this manifests as the bedroom tax, which would coerce downsizing into high-rise rentals—echoing the UK’s failed 2013 “bedroom tax” that harmed vulnerable tenants without boosting supply. Pauline Hanson of One Nation have called Labor’s housing tweaks a “first step” toward this Reset, where government stakes in homes (up to 40%) morph into outright control. Globally, it’s the same script: Tax private property to fund “equitable” redistribution, while elites like amass billions during crises.  This isn’t about fairness—it’s about dependency. When you own nothing, you rent from the state-corporate nexus, losing the autonomy that homeownership provides. As property theory shows, ownership isn’t just financial; it’s tied to human dignity and happiness, fostering personhood and security. The Reset rejects that, promoting a “happy” serfdom where surveillance tracks your every move for “sustainability.” Ex-investment banker Catherine Austin Fitts says that the ‘Great Reset’ is a plan “to sell to people a vision of a world where the average person has a much smaller command on resources and assets and is subject to complete central control.”

Defending Personal Values Against Globalist Overreach

From a finance standpoint, homeownership has always been the great equalizer—building equity, hedging inflation, and passing wealth to heirs. Australia’s “homeowners’ welfare state” (as economists dub it) has fuelled middle-class prosperity, but the Reset views it as inequality’s root. Taxing spare bedrooms would accelerate wealth transfer from families to governments and corporations, widening the gap while claiming to close it. It’s politically suicidal—polls show Aussies cherish their quarter-acre dream—but globalists thrive on top-down imposition, bypassing democracy via forums like Davos.

The USA Housing Crisis: A Man-Made Supply-Demand Nightmare

But it’s not just Australia. This thing takes different shapes in different places. America’s housing market is in freefall for the average citizen, with affordability at its worst since the 2008 crash. As of mid-2025, the median sale price for an existing home stands at $435,300, a staggering 48% jump from June 2020’s $294,400. Rents average $1,382 monthly, consuming over 30% of income for half of all renters—a record high. And first-time buyers? In cities like Portland, Maine, a two-bedroom starter home lists for $400,000+, outbidding young families with cash-flush investors. The crisis spans urban, suburban, and rural areas: 76% of Americans see it worsening, with rural folks (80%) hit hardest by skyrocketing costs. At the heart is a supply shortage of 3.7-4.5 million units, per Freddie Mac and Zillow estimates. Construction starts for single-family homes dropped 6.9% in October 2024 to just 970,000 annually, far below the 1.5 million needed. Inventory sits at a 4.7-month supply—below the balanced 5-6 months—keeping prices elevated despite high mortgage rates (6.74% for 30-year fixed as of July 2025).

US housing market hijacked by BlackRock, Vanguard & State Street – RFK Jr.

The US housing market is being aggressively dominated by Wall Street giants BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. According to US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, inflation is only part of the problem, as these corporate behemoths are actively driving up prices by paying 20-50% over the asking price for single-family homes. BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street are quietly buying up every available property, with a clear goal of controlling a massive 60% of all single-family homes in the US by 2030. RFK Jr. sounded the alarm, warning that these giants are deliberately targeting the middle class as part of their “Great Reset” agenda, which aims to leave individuals with no assets and no control. The CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, is actively pushing this agenda as now the chairman of the World Economic Forum. The result is a deliberate and systematic takeover of the US housing market, with the middle class firmly in the crosshairs.

WEF and BlackRock’s public plans to ban single-family homes and private cars

The Reset rejects homeownership as “inequality’s root,” promoting “happy serfdom” via surveillance and shared assets. It destabilizes markets, forces renting, and widens gaps.  Elites benefit from scarcity; policies like zoning preserve it for the wealthy.

Ownership builds equity, hedges inflation—key to middle-class prosperity. The Reset views it as a threat, pushing dependency on small space rentals. It’s the Globalist plan to have you own nothing. Alex Jones also exposed the WEF and BlackRock’s public plans to ban single-family homes and private cars, tax families, and herd us into tiny “smart cities” using a fake climate emergency.

The WEF will not control the nations

Don’t let globalist mantras like “own nothing and be happy” become policy. Happiness comes from freedom and ownership, not enforced sharing. If Australia falls for this, it’ll be a cautionary tale for the world: The Reset isn’t reset—it’s regression to feudalism, where elites own everything, and we’re just happy to rent. Stand firm; your home is your castle, not their experiment.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

We have discussed severally how governments worldwide are attempting to erase the foundational principles of personal liberty and financial independence. The latest assault on these values is unfolding in Australia, where policymakers are floating a “spare bedroom tax” to supposedly “free up housing supply.” This isn’t just bad economics—it’s a blatant intrusion into private life that aligns eerily with the globalist blueprint of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Great Reset.” Let me break it down for you step by step, drawing on the facts and why this should concern every freedom-loving individual who values owning a home as the cornerstone of stability and prosperity.

AUSTRALIA FLOATS ‘SPARE BEDROOM TAX’ IN RADICAL HOUSING CRACKDOWN

The Proposal: Taxing Your Home to “Solve” a Crisis of Their Own Making

Australia is in the grips of a housing crisis, with skyrocketing prices and rents leaving young families locked out of the market. The Albanese Labor government pledged to build 1.2 million new homes over five years, but as of August 2025, they’re already 250,000 short due to construction delays, regulatory hurdles, and labour shortages. Enter the “spare bedroom tax”—a radical idea floated by property research firm Cotality at the government’s Economic Reform Roundtable in mid-August 2025.

Cotality’s head of research, Eliza Owen, argues that over 60% of Australian households consist of just one or two people (based on 2021 Census data), yet three-quarters of homes have three or more bedrooms. She points to “inefficiencies” like empty nesters clinging to family-sized homes, suggesting a tax on unused bedrooms to encourage downsizing or renting out spare rooms. This could be paired with scrapping stamp duty (a transaction tax on property sales) to make moving cheaper, while introducing a broad-based land tax that scales with property size. Proponents claim this would shift demand toward smaller units like apartments and townhouses—the so-called “missing middle” housing—and free up larger homes for growing families. Treasurer Jim Chalmers hasn’t ruled it out, calling Australia’s tax system “imperfect” and hinting at reforms in upcoming budgets.

 But here’s the reality check: This crisis isn’t caused by “underutilized” bedrooms; it’s manufactured by years of unchecked mass immigration (over 500,000 net arrivals annually under Labor), foreign investor speculation, and zoning laws that stifle new builds. Taxing spare rooms won’t add a single new dwelling—it just punishes hardworking Aussies who’ve saved and sacrificed to own a home big enough for their dreams, like space for kids, grandkids, or a home office.

Public backlash has been fierce, with social media erupting in memes and outrage.  Critics, including opposition figures like Sarah Henderson, call it a “crazy idea” that targets retirees and families, ignoring real fixes like cutting immigration or easing building regulations. From a finance perspective, this tax would hit middle-class asset holders hardest—empty nesters on fixed pensions who can’t afford to downsize without losing equity to high transaction costs or capital gains taxes. It’s regressive, pitting generations against each other while foreign investors snap up freed-up properties at inflated prices.  Australia already has over 13 million spare bedrooms nationwide, per earlier studies, but taxing them won’t solve poverty or supply shortages.

The Globalist Great Reset: Erasing Ownership for Elite Control

Now, let’s connect the bigger picture. This spare bedroom scheme isn’t isolated—it’s a textbook example of the WEF’s “Great Reset” agenda, a blueprint launched in June 2020 by WEF founder Klaus Schwab to “reset and reshape” global economies toward “stakeholder capitalism.” The Great Reset calls for overhauling taxes, regulations, and investments to prioritize “equity” and sustainability, often at the expense of individual property rights. Schwab’s vision included using the pandemic as a “rare window” to build back greener and fairer, with governments coordinating on wealth taxes, ending fossil fuel subsidies, and harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution’s tech (like AI and surveillance) for the “public good.” Let’s throwback to Klaus Schwab’s daughter as she pushed for the WEF’s ‘Great Reset’. The project isn’t about saving the planet — it’s about exploiting crises to seize control. Nicole Schwab, literarily unveiled their plan: use crisis to dismantle the old economy and replace it with a “sustainable” system (run by elites, of course?)

Sounds noble but let me tell you what it really is: a power grab by unelected global elites at Davos, funded by a consortium of over 1,000 mega-corporations like Google, Apple, and BlackRock, to centralize control under the guise of fighting inequality and climate change. The smoking gun is the WEF’s infamous mantra: “You’ll own nothing and be happy.” This stems from a 2016 essay by Danish politician Ida Auken, published on the WEF site, envisioning a 2030 world where people rent everything—from homes and cars to appliances and clothes—via shared services and drones. Auken described a city where “I don’t own anything… Everything you considered a product has now become a service.” The WEF promoted it in a video summarizing predictions for 2030, including that line, sparking global debate. Auken later tried to take it back saying  it was a provocative scenario to discuss tech’s pros and cons, not a utopia, but the damage was done. Conspiracy or not, it perfectly encapsulates the Reset’s push for a subscription-based economy where corporations own assets, and individuals lease them—profiting Big Tech and finance giants while stripping away the security of ownership.

The Great Reset ties directly to housing: Schwab’s plan emphasizes “green urban infrastructure” and ESG (environmental, social, governance) metrics to force denser living and reduce private land use, aligning with UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. In Australia, this manifests as the bedroom tax, which would coerce downsizing into high-rise rentals—echoing the UK’s failed 2013 “bedroom tax” that harmed vulnerable tenants without boosting supply. Pauline Hanson of One Nation have called Labor’s housing tweaks a “first step” toward this Reset, where government stakes in homes (up to 40%) morph into outright control. Globally, it’s the same script: Tax private property to fund “equitable” redistribution, while elites like amass billions during crises.  This isn’t about fairness—it’s about dependency. When you own nothing, you rent from the state-corporate nexus, losing the autonomy that homeownership provides. As property theory shows, ownership isn’t just financial; it’s tied to human dignity and happiness, fostering personhood and security. The Reset rejects that, promoting a “happy” serfdom where surveillance tracks your every move for “sustainability.” Ex-investment banker Catherine Austin Fitts says that the ‘Great Reset’ is a plan “to sell to people a vision of a world where the average person has a much smaller command on resources and assets and is subject to complete central control.”

Defending Personal Values Against Globalist Overreach

From a finance standpoint, homeownership has always been the great equalizer—building equity, hedging inflation, and passing wealth to heirs. Australia’s “homeowners’ welfare state” (as economists dub it) has fuelled middle-class prosperity, but the Reset views it as inequality’s root. Taxing spare bedrooms would accelerate wealth transfer from families to governments and corporations, widening the gap while claiming to close it. It’s politically suicidal—polls show Aussies cherish their quarter-acre dream—but globalists thrive on top-down imposition, bypassing democracy via forums like Davos.

The USA Housing Crisis: A Man-Made Supply-Demand Nightmare

But its not just an Australia. This thing takes different shapes in different places. America’s housing market is in freefall for the average citizen, with affordability at its worst since the 2008 crash. As of mid-2025, the median sale price for an existing home stands at $435,300, a staggering 48% jump from June 2020’s $294,400. Rents average $1,382 monthly, consuming over 30% of income for half of all renters—a record high. And first-time buyers? In cities like Portland, Maine, a two-bedroom starter home lists for $400,000+, outbidding young families with cash-flush investors. The crisis spans urban, suburban, and rural areas: 76% of Americans see it worsening, with rural folks (80%) hit hardest by skyrocketing costs. At the heart is a supply shortage of 3.7-4.5 million units, per Freddie Mac and Zillow estimates. Construction starts for single-family homes dropped 6.9% in October 2024 to just 970,000 annually, far below the 1.5 million needed. Inventory sits at a 4.7-month supply—below the balanced 5-6 months—keeping prices elevated despite high mortgage rates (6.74% for 30-year fixed as of July 2025).

US housing market hijacked by BlackRock, Vanguard & State Street – RFK Jr.

The US housing market is being aggressively dominated by Wall Street giants BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. According to US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, inflation is only part of the problem, as these corporate behemoths are actively driving up prices by paying 20-50% over the asking price for single-family homes. BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street are quietly buying up every available property, with a clear goal of controlling a massive 60% of all single-family homes in the US by 2030. RFK Jr. sounded the alarm, warning that these giants are deliberately targeting the middle class as part of their “Great Reset” agenda, which aims to leave individuals with no assets and no control. The CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, is actively pushing this agenda as now the chairman of the World Economic Forum. The result is a deliberate and systematic takeover of the US housing market, with the middle class firmly in the crosshairs.

WEF and BlackRock’s public plans to ban single-family homes and private cars

The Reset rejects homeownership as “inequality’s root,” promoting “happy serfdom” via surveillance and shared assets. It destabilizes markets, forces renting, and widens gaps.  Elites benefit from scarcity; policies like zoning preserve it for the wealthy.

Ownership builds equity, hedges inflation—key to middle-class prosperity. The Reset views it as a threat, pushing dependency on small space rentals. It’s the Globalist plan to have you own nothing. Alex Jones also exposed the WEF and BlackRock’s public plans to ban single-family homes and private cars, tax families, and herd us into tiny “smart cities” using a fake climate emergency.

The WEF will not control the nations

Don’t let globalist mantras like “own nothing and be happy” become policy. Happiness comes from freedom and ownership, not enforced sharing. If Australia falls for this, it’ll be a cautionary tale for the world: The Reset isn’t reset—it’s regression to feudalism, where elites own everything, and we’re just happy to rent. Stand firm; your home is your castle, not their experiment.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

The authorities are actively constructing a digital prison

Big Tech insiders are now exposing the alarming plan to confine humanity within smart cities, essentially creating a high-tech prison under the guise of security, convenience, and sustainability. Aman Jabbi, a whistleblower, reveals that our personal devices and smart appliances are constantly monitoring our every move, tracking our daily activities. As we step out of our homes, our cars are being tracked, and our smartphones, smartwatches, and other devices are being surveilled as we walk down the street. This pervasive surveillance allows for 24/7 data collection on every individual, effectively creating a digital prison. The concept of smart cities, which encompasses the idea of 15-minute cities, is designed to restrict our mobility and limit our access to resources like water, energy, and transportation. Moreover, initiatives like air monitoring, water management, and noise pollution are being used to ration our resources, limit our movement, and even surveil our speech. The notion of geofencing is also being employed, creating an invisible fence that restricts our movement and controls our access to digital currency, all tied to our face recognition, digital identity, and access control. In essence, our world has been transformed into a digital panopticon, where our every move is being watched, tracked, and controlled. The authorities are actively constructing a digital prison, and it’s imperative that we’re aware of the looming threat to our freedom and autonomy.

Surveillance capitalism erodes individual autonomy

Surveillance capitalists are actively manipulating users, stripping them of their autonomy by utilizing algorithms that predict and shape their behaviour, posing a significant threat to the very foundations of democracy. By concentrating power in their own hands, these surveillance capitalists are undermining democratic processes, leveraging their influence to mold public opinion and dictate policy. Furthermore, the unchecked wealth generated by surveillance capitalism is exacerbating economic inequality, as the corporations that own and control the data and algorithms are raking in profits, while users are being exploited as nothing more than free commodities, fuelling a system that perpetuates economic disparity.

Covid was meant to normalise biometric surveillance

But it even goes beyond that. Advisor to the WEF, Yuval Noah Harari admitted that Covid was critical because this is what convinces people to accept total biometric surveillance, which will enable the Stalins of the 21st century” to monitor and analyse the brains of all the population, all the time.

Understanding Smart Cities, 15-Minute Cities

In cities and towns across the word, our communities are being transformed by the implementation of so-called “smart” technologies said to create more efficient, safe, and sustainable environments. These smart cities use a range of devices such as cameras, sensors, and artificial intelligence to attempt central management of everything from traffic and public safety to environmental monitoring. Proponents of smart cities will sing songs about their efficiency. Traffic lights adjust in real-time to traffic conditions, reducing congestion and shortening commutes. Smart waste management systems notify city services when trash bins are full, optimizing collection routes and frequencies. Public safety could be enhanced by using networked cameras and environmental sensors that can detect crimes and so forth.

Moreover, the control and ownership of this data resides predominantly in the hands of corporations. This new era of surveillance isn’t just about privacy. It’s a profound shift in the power dynamics between the state and the individual. It tips the balance overwhelmingly in favour of the observer. In a society where everyone is watched, the watched are not free. This surveillance creates a chilling effect on behaviour, stifling dissent and discouraging participation in civil society. If you think about it, it’s a strange trade-off. We’re bartering away bits of our privacy for the convenience of not having to flip a light switch or remember where we parked the car. And the lessons from history are clear. Surveillance technologies, once introduced, are rarely rolled back. They tend to expand in scope and scale, often outstripping the original intentions behind their deployment. So we need to ask: Are we building a smarter world or just a more surveilled one?

The UN’s Diabolical Agenda for World Domination 

Under the United Nations’ plan for complete global control known as Agenda 21 (which Agenda 2030 is a mere milestone of), humans who once lived on farms and in rural areas are to be forcibly relocated into densely populated “smart” cities, known as “human settlements”. Watch this except from the documentary, ‘Unsustainable: The UN’s Agenda For World Domination’.

As we stand at the crossroads of technology and privacy, the choices we make today will define the legacy of our generation. It’s crucial that we strike a balance between leveraging technology for our own betterment and safeguarding the individual freedoms we hold so dear. The Documentary ‘The Agenda: Their Vision, Your Future’ by Oracle Films presents evidence that the global takeover is not only possible—it’s actually happening and has been decades in the making.”

Writtebn By Tatenda Belle Panashe

The 2025 Bilderberg Meeting: Depopulation and Migration on the Agenda

The term “Depopulation and Migration” has raised alarms, as it is evidence of a globalist agenda tied to population control and replacement migration. However, the Bilderberg Group operates under Chatham House Rules, meaning no detailed minutes or attributable statements are released, leaving the exact context of discussions unclear.

If you think the reference to “depopulation” may refer to declining birth rates and aging populations in developed nations, potentially linked to migration policies like the UN’s Replacement Migration concept, rather than a conspiratorial plot, you couldn’t be further from the truth.

Bilderberg attendes list, the who’s-who of the anti-freedom crowd

First of all, who was in the Room? The so-called “official” attendee list on bilderbergmeetings.org reads like a who’s-who of the anti-freedom crowd: NATO’s Mark Rutte, Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, Pfizer’s Albert Bourla, and Palantir’s Alex Karp rubbing elbows with Goldman Sachs suits and the King of the Netherlands. Swedish PM Ulf Kristersson was there too, conveniently left off the public list—because why be honest with the people? You’ve got Big Tech (Google, Anthropic), the military industrial complex (Saab, Anduril), big pharma and the banking cartel (Citigroup) plotting alongside left-wing democrats like Stacey Abrams.

The 2025 Bilderberg Meeting: Depopulation and Migration on the Agenda

Red flags are waving on the issue of depopulation and migration, and rightly so. The crux of the matter goes beyond merely declining birth rates – it appears to be a deliberate and calculated effort to reshape the very fabric of Western nations through the implementation of open border policies and stringent population control measures. The United Nations’ Replacement Migration plan is a notable example that comes to mind, where the ruling elite seek to supplant our native culture with a more controllable and malleable entity. Although the secretive nature of organizations like the Bilderberg Group has limited our access to concrete evidence, the available information hints at a more sinister plot. It’s essential to acknowledge that when globalist leaders discuss depopulation, their primary concern is not the preservation of our planet, but rather the consolidation of their power and control over the masses. Meanwhile check out this video of Club of Rome member Dennis Meadows.

The 2025 Bilderberg Meeting: War and AI on the Agenda

Here’s what’s also on their agenda: they’re actively targeting the US economy, meddling in Ukraine, pushing the boundaries of artificial intelligence, bolstering defense, and manipulating energy markets. In essence, they’re deliberately interfering with our financial systems, fueling endless wars, and aggressively investing in AI surveillance and militarized technology. With the Trump administration’s tariffs and “America First” policies significantly disrupting their globalist agenda, it’s no surprise that they’re now desperately trying to salvage their vision of a free-trade, open-border world. Their focus on energy and critical minerals is a clear attempt to counter China’s dominance over rare earths. Meanwhile, their involvement in Ukraine and the Middle East is leaving a trail of NATO’s fingerprints, dragging the US deeper into costly conflicts that are rapidly depleting our financial resources.

The Bildrberg meeting is epitome of the globalist establishment

It’s important to sound the alarm on the secretive Bilderberg gathering, which embodies the epitome of the globalist establishment, shrouded in secrecy and devoid of accountability. This elite clique, convinced of their intellectual superiority, has a notorious history of concocting disastrous policies, such as the Euro, and is now setting its sights on dismantling our borders, manipulating demographics, and eroding our freedom. The euphemistic term “depopulation” is being used as a thinly veiled code for implementing policies that systematically undermine our core values and national sovereignty. The fact that this year’s meeting is being held in close proximity to Sweden’s Grand Lodge only serves to further fuel speculation, with its unmistakable Masonic undertones seeming to mock the demands for transparency.

Make no mistake, this is not a baseless conspiracy theory, but a stark reality, given the organization’s steadfast refusal to allow even a glimmer of sunlight into their proceedings, leaving the public to wonder what exactly is being orchestrated behind closed doors. Contrary to this, private-public partnerships have been taking a more aggressive approach, driving the globalist agenda and depopulation efforts under the guise of promoting global health and pandemic preparedness. In reality, these funders and partners are spearheading the charge, deliberately crafting and manufacturing pandemics, rather than genuinely working towards preparedness. The term “pandemic preparedness” has become a euphemism, as it is now synonymous with the intentional creation, development, and construction of these global health crises, ultimately serving the interests of these powerful partnerships.

Proponents of Depopulation

For decades, powerful elites have openly discussed and promoted depopulation as a means to reshape society in their favor. From billionaires to policymakers, their words and actions reveal a disturbing agenda. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, during one of the World Economic Forum, stated that depopulation ACTUALLY GOOD as it makes it easier to replace humans with AI and automation.

US billionaire Bill Gates has grown an obsession over his vaccines. However, his vaccination programs in India have been linked to paralysis in at least 490,000 children. In a 2010 TED Talk, he controversially stated that vaccines could help reduce the global population by 10-15%.

Notably, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla is there, alongside top brass from the World Economic Forum and the chair of DSM-Firmenich, the company behind Bovaer, a technology eerily linked to “climate cow control”. Remember, the meeting took place under a strict media blackout, with no press coverage allowed. However, in a stunning contradiction, prominent corporate media figures are actually inside the meeting, but not as reporters – they’re participants. Specifically, journalists from esteemed outlets like The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Economist are rubbing shoulders with the elites, raising serious questions about the blurring of lines between journalism and cronyism.

Flashback from 2012: In a very telling and bizarre reaction, executive editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson, literally ran away from a question about the Bilderberg Group by Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange.

Writteb By Tatenda Belle Panashe