newswars--2020-03-31--Iran-Turkey Gas Pipeline Stops Functioning After ‘Terrorist’ Attack – Report

A senior official with Iran ’ s state gas company has alleged that terrorists were behind an explosion and massive fire on the pipeline transporting natural gas from the Islamic Republic to Turkey .
“ This morning , terrorists attacked a natural gas pipeline inside Turkey near Iran ’ s Bazargan border with Turkey , ” National Iranian Gas Company ( NIGC ) Dispatching Director Mehdi Jamshidi Dana said on Tuesday , as cited by Reuters .
The official told IRNA that fighters from the Kurdistan Workers ’ Party ( PKK ) , a guerilla group active in eastern Turkey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past .
NIGC spokesperson Mohammad Asgari , meanwhile , described the blast as an “ incident ” without linking it to terrorism .
According to the NIGC , at least one person was killed .
The explosion rocked the pipeline near the Gurbulak border gate with Iran in Turkey ’ s eastern Agri Province around 6am local time .
Turkish media reported that the loud blast sparked a massive fire that could be seen by residents in local villages , with flames rising up to 40 meters ( 131 feet ) .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been cut off as Turkish officials are determining the cause of the explosion .
Turkish media did not report any fatalities on the ground .
The NIGC said that gas exports to Turkey will resume several days after the pipeline is repaired .
In early March , the PKK fired a rocket near the Gurbulak border gate , killing one person .
Rockefeller Foundation ’ s 2010 pandemic scenario of strong government/weak population is a precise script for today ’ s COVID-19 shutdown , except what they said would take years is being @ @ @ @

A senior official with Iran’s state gas company has alleged that terrorists were behind an explosion and massive fire on the pipeline transporting natural gas from the Islamic Republic to Turkey.
“This morning, terrorists attacked a natural gas pipeline inside Turkey near Iran’s Bazargan border with Turkey,” National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC) Dispatching Director Mehdi Jamshidi Dana said on Tuesday, as cited by Reuters.
The official told IRNA that fighters from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a guerilla group active in eastern Turkey, have attacked the pipeline in the past. NIGC spokesperson Mohammad Asgari, meanwhile, described the blast as an “incident” without linking it to terrorism. According to the NIGC, at least one person was killed.
The explosion rocked the pipeline near the Gurbulak border gate with Iran in Turkey’s eastern Agri Province around 6am local time. Turkish media reported that the loud blast sparked a massive fire that could be seen by residents in local villages, with flames rising up to 40 meters (131 feet).
The flow of gas in the pipeline has been cut off as Turkish officials are determining the cause of the explosion. Turkish media did not report any fatalities on the ground.
The NIGC said that gas exports to Turkey will resume several days after the pipeline is repaired.
In early March, the PKK fired a rocket near the Gurbulak border gate, killing one person.
Rockefeller Foundation’s 2010 pandemic scenario of strong government/weak population is a precise script for today’s COVID-19 shutdown, except what they said would take years is being done in weeks.


newswars--2020-03-31--Obama Drops Coronavirus Bombshell: It’s All Due to Climate Change!

Former President Barack Obama dropped a political bombshell about coronavirus on Tuesday , claiming the global pandemic a result of @ @ @ @ @ change .

Obama Drops Coronavirus Bombshell: It’s All Due to Climate Change! "We can't afford any more consequences of climate denial."


newswars--2020-03-31--Why Won’t Trump Replace Reporters With Small Business Owners at WH Pressers?

Why is President Trump wasting his time taking questions from reporters who are out to get him when he can instead answer questions directly from small business owners most impacted by the coronavirus ?
Why doesn ’ t he simply replace the White House press pool with working-class , middle Americans ?
Media pundits have already demanded corporate outlets to stop airing Trump ’ s pressers anyway , and a NPR station in Seattle has already done so .
Keep in mind that the press is not a special , regulated class – it ’ s simply an activity the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the First Amendment ( with emphasis added ) : Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech , or of the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble , and to petition the government for a redress of grievances .
So then , why shouldn ’ t President Trump deliver the news from his administration directly to small business owners , the people impacted the most ?
They ’ re the ones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employees what lies ahead .
And why won ’ t Trump conduct fireside chats to the American people like Franklin Roosevelt did , especially as the president is pushing a nationwide infrastructure bill that draws comparisons to Roosevelt ’ s New Deal infrastructure projects ?
“ The chats were influential in reformulating the American worldview from one of despair to one of hope during a time of multiple crises , including the Great Depression and World War II , ” according to Britannica.com .
“ Fireside Chats reinforced the importance of broadcast media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ language when addressing the American people.
” While Trump ’ s daily task force press briefings are effective , given his recent surge in approval ratings , he ’ s still talking to an audience of reporters he ’ s never going to please who just want to nail him to a wall .
CNN ’ s Jim Acosta does not represent the president ’ s base , or really even the American public as a whole given how CNN correspondents have belittled the president ’ s supporters , which consists of at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the president wasting his time getting into arguments with this guy when he could be taking questions from a restaurant owner who ’ s about to lay off his entire staff and possibly shut down for good ?
Acosta , on the other hand , is still going to have a job regardless of the coronavirus pandemic , and in fact it ’ s job security for him to get into verbal spats with the president .
Trump has little to gain combating Acosta .
The fact is , he got elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directly to the American people .
That shouldn ’ t stop just because Trump got inaugurated .
If he truly represents the American people , then he should speak to them directly without filtering it through a third-party such as the corporate media .
The American people should be his direct audience .
The mainstream media can still report on what he said , of course , but that shouldn ’ t be his target audience .
Weeks ago , reporter Savannah Hernandez revealed that business owners were taking steps to protect their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vandalism amid the coronavirus chaos .

Why is President Trump wasting his time taking questions from reporters who are out to get him when he can instead answer questions directly from small business owners most impacted by the coronavirus?
Why doesn’t he simply replace the White House press pool with working-class, middle Americans?
Media pundits have already demanded corporate outlets to stop airing Trump’s pressers anyway, and a NPR station in Seattle has already done so.
Keep in mind that the press is not a special, regulated class – it’s simply an activity the people can freely engage in as defined by the First Amendment (with emphasis added):
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
So then, why shouldn’t President Trump deliver the news from his administration directly to small business owners, the people impacted the most? They’re the ones who are going to report to their employees what lies ahead.
And why won’t Trump conduct fireside chats to the American people like Franklin Roosevelt did, especially as the president is pushing a nationwide infrastructure bill that draws comparisons to Roosevelt’s New Deal infrastructure projects?
“The chats were influential in reformulating the American worldview from one of despair to one of hope during a time of multiple crises, including the Great Depression and World War II,” according to Britannica.com. “Fireside Chats reinforced the importance of broadcast media and the use of common, everyday language when addressing the American people.”
While Trump’s daily task force press briefings are effective, given his recent surge in approval ratings, he’s still talking to an audience of reporters he’s never going to please who just want to nail him to a wall.
CNN’s Jim Acosta does not represent the president’s base, or really even the American public as a whole given how CNN correspondents have belittled the president’s supporters, which consists of at least half the nation:
Don Lemon’s ✌expert✌panel last night insinuated that Trump supporters are idiots that can’t read, write, use maps or do math. THIS is CNN… pic.twitter.com/T8vDi8j2rb — ForAmerica (@ForAmerica) January 28, 2020
So why is the president wasting his time getting into arguments with this guy when he could be taking questions from a restaurant owner who’s about to lay off his entire staff and possibly shut down for good?
Acosta, on the other hand, is still going to have a job regardless of the coronavirus pandemic, and in fact it’s job security for him to get into verbal spats with the president. Trump has little to gain combating Acosta.
The fact is, he got elected by bypassing the mainstream media to talk directly to the American people.
That shouldn’t stop just because Trump got inaugurated. If he truly represents the American people, then he should speak to them directly without filtering it through a third-party such as the corporate media.
The American people should be his direct audience. The mainstream media can still report on what he said, of course, but that shouldn’t be his target audience.
Weeks ago, reporter Savannah Hernandez revealed that business owners were taking steps to protect their stores from potential civil unrest or simple vandalism amid the coronavirus chaos.


newswars--2020-03-31--Adviser to Trump Warns: If Dems Win in November, “They’re Going to Crush Fox News”

A top Fox News personality and adviser to President Trump has warned that if the White House does nothing to roll back censorship , if the Democrats win in November , “ they ’ re going to crush Fox News.
” Speaking privately to Summit , the host was responding to news that fellow Fox commentator Laura Ingraham had been forced under threat of suspension to delete a tweet about the drug Hydroxychloroquine being a potential cure for coronavirus .
“ Lenox Hill in New York among many hospitals already using Hydroxychloroquine with very promising results , ” Ingraham tweeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was described as ‘ Lazarus ’ who was seriously ill from Covid-19 , already released.
” Ten days later , Twitter forced Ingraham to delete the tweet under threat of suspension , despite the fact that Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA and has proven successful at treating COVID-19 in several studies .
Twitter claimed that the tweet triggered their “ misleading information policy ” with its “ Heightened-risk health claims.
” “ The real test : How many “ journalists ” who have dismissed hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin in COVID patients would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seriously ill ?
” Ingraham asked earlier today .
As one Twitter user pointed out , while censoring tweets about an approved drug , Twitter is perfectly happy to let Chinese propaganda continue to circulate .
This occurred on the same day that Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro had his tweets deleted for questioning whether social distancing and quarantine measures were an overreaction .
Infowars ’ Google Play store app was also banned last week for the same reason .
The Fox News host and presidential adviser said all this once again illustrated how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been emboldened by the Trump administration ’ s lack of action on censorship and that this could spell disaster come the election .
“ If Democrats win in November , they ’ re going to crush Fox News just as they ’ ve crushed the NRA .
And we ’ re going to deeply regret letting it happen , ” said the adviser .
“ Everyone who thought it was fine that they deplatformed Alex Jones will look like a fucking moron , ” he added .
My voice is being silenced by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown .

A top Fox News personality and adviser to President Trump has warned that if the White House does nothing to roll back censorship, if the Democrats win in November, “they’re going to crush Fox News.”
Speaking privately to Summit, the host was responding to news that fellow Fox commentator Laura Ingraham had been forced under threat of suspension to delete a tweet about the drug Hydroxychloroquine being a potential cure for coronavirus.
“Lenox Hill in New York among many hospitals already using Hydroxychloroquine with very promising results,” Ingraham tweeted on March 20. “One patient was described as ‘Lazarus’ who was seriously ill from Covid-19, already released.”
Ten days later, Twitter forced Ingraham to delete the tweet under threat of suspension, despite the fact that Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA and has proven successful at treating COVID-19 in several studies.
Twitter claimed that the tweet triggered their “misleading information policy” with its “Heightened-risk health claims.”
“The real test: How many “journalists” who have dismissed hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin in COVID patients would say no to taking it themselves if seriously ill?” Ingraham asked earlier today.
The real test: How many “journalists” who have dismissed hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin in COVID patients would say no to taking it themselves if seriously ill? — Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) March 31, 2020
As one Twitter user pointed out, while censoring tweets about an approved drug, Twitter is perfectly happy to let Chinese propaganda continue to circulate.
One gets taken down, while the other is fine with Twitter. pic.twitter.com/g2YA6zdGe3 — Nick Short 🇺🇸 (@PoliticalShort) March 30, 2020
This occurred on the same day that Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro had his tweets deleted for questioning whether social distancing and quarantine measures were an overreaction.
Infowars’ Google Play store app was also banned last week for the same reason.
The Fox News host and presidential adviser said all this once again illustrated how the left and social media giants have been emboldened by the Trump administration’s lack of action on censorship and that this could spell disaster come the election.
“If Democrats win in November, they’re going to crush Fox News just as they’ve crushed the NRA. And we’re going to deeply regret letting it happen,” said the adviser.
“Everyone who thought it was fine that they deplatformed Alex Jones will look like a fucking moron,” he added.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-03-31--Democrats & MSM Say Coronavirus Trump’s 9/11, Blame Republicans As Death Toll Reaches 3,000

As the U.S. coronavirus death toll exceeds 3,000 , Democrats and the mainstream media want to make it abundantly clear that the pandemic has killed more people than the 9/11 terror attacks — and that it ’ s all President Trump ’ s fault .
Democrat operatives and members of CNN , MSNBC , Al Jazeera , The Atlantic , and others all made the false equivalence between a deadly pathogen from China and a radical Islamic terrorist attack on Tuesday , claiming Trump is responsible for the COVID-19 deaths .
“ The coronavirus death toll in the US has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has surpassed the 9/11 death toll ( under another reckless GOP president ) and also , perhaps more relevantly , the Hurricane Maria death toll in Puerto Rico ( also on Trump ’ s irresponsible watch ) , ” tweeted Al-Jazeera ’ s Mehdi Hasan .
Of course , many picked up on the false equivalence fallacy of comparing a virus pandemic to a terrorist attack .
If one uses the left ’ s logic , that would mean former President Obama is responsible for the 12,000 American deaths from swine flu during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can pin 3,000 deaths on Trump because of a virus , apparently not realizing that viruses like the common flu kill between 12,000 and 61,000 people annually , according to the CDC .
Is the blood from 40,000 car accident deaths annually also on Trump ’ s hands ?
How about the 610,000 deaths from heart disease ?
It ’ s clear the spread of the virus is ultimately the fault of Communist China , but once the virus reached American shores , all Trump could do is mitigate the spread , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and liberal health officials were calling for Americans to mingle in large crowds .
The rotting corpses handling the levers of power in the District of Criminals are still diverting their own hoax nonsense .

As the U.S. coronavirus death toll exceeds 3,000, Democrats and the mainstream media want to make it abundantly clear that the pandemic has killed more people than the 9/11 terror attacks — and that it’s all President Trump’s fault.
Democrat operatives and members of CNN, MSNBC, Al Jazeera, The Atlantic, and others all made the false equivalence between a deadly pathogen from China and a radical Islamic terrorist attack on Tuesday, claiming Trump is responsible for the COVID-19 deaths.
“The coronavirus death toll in the US has now crossed 3,000, which means it has surpassed the 9/11 death toll (under another reckless GOP president) and also, perhaps more relevantly, the Hurricane Maria death toll in Puerto Rico (also on Trump’s irresponsible watch),” tweeted Al-Jazeera’s Mehdi Hasan.
The coronavirus death toll in the US has now crossed 3,000, which means it has surpassed the 9/11 death toll (under another reckless GOP president) and also, perhaps more relevantly, the Hurricane Maria death toll in Puerto Rico (also on Trump’s irresponsible watch). — Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) March 31, 2020
More Americans have been killed from coronavirus than were killed on 9/11. Trump is the biggest pathological liar on the planet. — Scott Dworkin (@funder) March 31, 2020
coronavirus has already killed more Americans than the terrorist attacks by al Qaeda on 9/11 – and is just getting started https://t.co/QmK1RSmgUE — John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) March 31, 2020
American deaths from the coronavirus now exceed American deaths from 9/11. This is no big deal, according to the people who spent every day since 9/11 exploiting it for their purposes while being contemptuous for the communities directly affected by it. https://t.co/qyX69twdJW — Adam Serwer🍝 (@AdamSerwer) March 31, 2020
On the day the US death toll from coronavirus passed that of 9/11, the president of the United States told a reporter she should be congratulating him. — Adam Parkhomenko (@AdamParkhomenko) March 31, 2020
Foreign Policy: “It’s more glaring than Pearl Harbor and 9/11—and it’s all the fault of Donald Trump’s leadership.” https://t.co/3lKzFy6yiB — Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) March 31, 2020
Live updates: More people have died in the U.S. from the coronavirus than in the 9/11 attacks https://t.co/yhmqk6QRGf — Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) March 31, 2020
#COVID19 has taken over 3000 American lives – more than 9/11. I hope that means we’ll spend the next ten years fighting a war for public health & against climate change & poverty…like we launched a global #WaronTerror after 9/11. We could save lives, rather than take them. — Abdul El-Sayed (@AbdulElSayed) March 31, 2020
Of course, many picked up on the false equivalence fallacy of comparing a virus pandemic to a terrorist attack.
Wait so comparing coronavirus deaths to 9/11 in order to make the former seem scarier is okay, but it’s totally and completely illegitimate to compare coronavirus deaths to flu deaths? Great. Got it. Makes total sense. I mean not really, but fine. https://t.co/UPIrjIsAUi — Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) March 31, 2020
My reply to “COVID-19 has killed more Americans than the 9-11 attacks.” So what? So did the swine flu – four times as many. You can’t examine disease and terror attacks under the same lens. — Jay Caruso (@JayCaruso) March 31, 2020
If one uses the left’s logic, that would mean former President Obama is responsible for the 12,000 American deaths from swine flu during his tenure.
How does it compare to the swine flu? — Paul Sacca (@Paul_Sacca) March 31, 2020
I truly don’t understand why people are comparing a pandemic to 9/11??? Yes. There are a lot of things that have killed more people than a horrific singular terrorist attack. This is bizarre. https://t.co/7LlmJ7wl8k — Jason Howerton (@jason_howerton) March 31, 2020
The left thinks they can pin 3,000 deaths on Trump because of a virus, apparently not realizing that viruses like the common flu kill between 12,000 and 61,000 people annually, according to the CDC.
Is the blood from 40,000 car accident deaths annually also on Trump’s hands? How about the 610,000 deaths from heart disease?
It’s clear the spread of the virus is ultimately the fault of Communist China, but once the virus reached American shores, all Trump could do is mitigate the spread, which his administration has been doing while Democrats and liberal health officials were calling for Americans to mingle in large crowds.
Twitter: Follow @WhiteIsTheFury
Gab: https://gab.com/WhiteIsTheFury
Minds: https://www.minds.com/whiteisthefury
The rotting corpses handling the levers of power in the District of Criminals are still diverting their own hoax nonsense.


newswars--2020-03-31--Houston Mayor Tells Crooks, Criminals to “Chill” During Coronavirus Lockdown

Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner has asked criminals to comply with lockdown orders and stop the crime .
Amid announcements discussing how to keep police and first responders safe during the coronavirus crisis , Mayor Turner said the best way to protect city employees is not to commit crime in the first place .
“ For our police officers , the best way to help police officers : don ’ t commit a crime and then you won ’ t need us , ” Turner , a Democrat , stated during a press briefing Monday .
The mayor continued his inane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take a break.
” “ Let me just make my plea .
Until the Coronavirus is resolved , criminals take a break , okay ?
” Turner stated .
“ Stay home , okay ?
Stay home .
And don ’ t commit any crimes.
” “ And that way , they ’ ll stay safe and out of jail , and police officers will stay safe and go home to their families , okay ?
” “ So everybody chill .
Crooks , criminals , you chill .
Wait ‘ til the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then we ’ ll all be okay.
” Perhaps it ’ d have been easier for both citizens and criminals to “ chill ” if a bunch of felons hadn ’ t recently been released from Harris County jails .
Maybe it ’ s not such a bad idea to have a firearm during these times .
“ There has been no formal announcement from any group of Houston criminals on whether or not they are up to chillin ’ and taking a break at this time.
” notes the Eric Scheiner at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in-studio to break down CBS getting caught using footage from Italy to fake a need for action in NYC .

Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner has asked criminals to comply with lockdown orders and stop the crime.
Amid announcements discussing how to keep police and first responders safe during the coronavirus crisis, Mayor Turner said the best way to protect city employees is not to commit crime in the first place.
“For our police officers, the best way to help police officers: don’t commit a crime and then you won’t need us,” Turner, a Democrat, stated during a press briefing Monday.
The mayor continued his inane rant by pleading with criminals to “take a break.”
“Let me just make my plea. Until the Coronavirus is resolved, criminals take a break, okay?” Turner stated.
“Stay home, okay? Stay home. And don’t commit any crimes.”
“And that way, they’ll stay safe and out of jail, and police officers will stay safe and go home to their families, okay?”
“So everybody chill. Crooks, criminals, you chill. Wait ‘til the Coronavirus is over, okay, and then we’ll all be okay.”
Perhaps it’d have been easier for both citizens and criminals to “chill” if a bunch of felons hadn’t recently been released from Harris County jails.
Maybe it’s not such a bad idea to have a firearm during these times.
“There has been no formal announcement from any group of Houston criminals on whether or not they are up to chillin’ and taking a break at this time.” notes the Eric Scheiner at MRCTV.org.
Follow the author on Gab: https://gab.ai/adansalazar
On Twitter: Follow @AdanSalazarWins
On Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/adan.salazar.735
On Minds: https://www.minds.com/adan_infowars
Robert Barnes joins Alex Jones in-studio to break down CBS getting caught using footage from Italy to fake a need for action in NYC.


newswars--2020-03-31--Trump, Erdogan Stress Need for Ceasefire Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

In January , an international conference on Libya took place in the German capital , counting Russia , the United States , the European Union , Turkey , and Egypt among its participants .
The sides agreed to a ceasefire and for third parties not to be involved in the conflict .
US President Donald Trump and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan have spoken by phone about efforts to “ defeat the virus and bolster the global economy ” , the White House said in a statement .
The presidents underlined the need for ceasefires in Syria and Libya @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a White House statement .
Trump and Erdogan “ agreed it is more important now than ever for countries in conflict , particularly Syria and Libya , to adhere to ceasefires and work toward a resolution ” , the White House said .
A day earlier , United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Mark Lowcock called for lifting the sanctions against Syria that could undermine the country ’ s capacity to suppress the coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) outbreak .
Moscow has previously called for the lifting of US sanctions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country ’ s economic recovery and to create the necessary conditions for the return of Syrian refugees .
A ceasefire in the Syrian province of Idlib has been in place since 6 March after a deal was struck between President Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan amid rising tensions .
On 19 March , the GNA expressed support for the international call for a ceasefire in Libya , reaffirming its support for the UN Security Council ’ s Resolution 2510 , which calls for the cessation of hostilities between the parties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in February , the warring parties in Libya agreed to a draft ceasefire deal negotiated during the second round of 5+5 talks in Geneva that would allow for the safe return of civilians to their homes under the auspices of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya .
Rockefeller Foundation ’ s 2010 pandemic scenario of strong government/weak population is a precise script for today ’ s COVID-19 shutdown , except what they said would take years is being done in weeks .

In January, an international conference on Libya took place in the German capital, counting Russia, the United States, the European Union, Turkey, and Egypt among its participants.
The sides agreed to a ceasefire and for third parties not to be involved in the conflict.
US President Donald Trump and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan have spoken by phone about efforts to “defeat the virus and bolster the global economy”, the White House said in a statement.
The presidents underlined the need for ceasefires in Syria and Libya during the coronavirus pandemic, according to a White House statement.
Trump and Erdogan “agreed it is more important now than ever for countries in conflict, particularly Syria and Libya, to adhere to ceasefires and work toward a resolution”, the White House said.
A day earlier, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Mark Lowcock called for lifting the sanctions against Syria that could undermine the country’s capacity to suppress the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.
Moscow has previously called for the lifting of US sanctions on Damascus in order to aid the country’s economic recovery and to create the necessary conditions for the return of Syrian refugees.
A ceasefire in the Syrian province of Idlib has been in place since 6 March after a deal was struck between President Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan amid rising tensions.
On 19 March, the GNA expressed support for the international call for a ceasefire in Libya, reaffirming its support for the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2510, which calls for the cessation of hostilities between the parties to the conflict.
Prior to that, in February, the warring parties in Libya agreed to a draft ceasefire deal negotiated during the second round of 5+5 talks in Geneva that would allow for the safe return of civilians to their homes under the auspices of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya.
Rockefeller Foundation’s 2010 pandemic scenario of strong government/weak population is a precise script for today’s COVID-19 shutdown, except what they said would take years is being done in weeks.


newswars--2020-03-31--CNN Host Chris Cuomo Tests Positive For Coronavirus

Cuomo made the announcement in a lengthy Twitter post , stating he would continue to do his 9PM ET show from his home .
“ Sooooo in these difficult times that seem to get more difficult and complicated by the day , I just found out that I am positive for corona virus , ” Cuomo tweeted .
Cuomo , who has been referred to as “ Fredo , ” also described symptoms he experienced , including “ fever , chills and shortness of breath.
” “ I have been exposed to people in recent days who have subsequently tested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and shortness of breath .
I just hope I didn ’ t give it to the kids and Cristina .
That would make me feel worse than this illness !
I am quarantined in my basement ( which actually makes the rest of the family seem pleased ! )
I will do my shows from here .
We will all beat this by being smart and tough and united.
” Both friends and political foes of Cuomo wished him well on social media .
Discussing his brother ’ s affliction , New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is going to be fine.
” Robert Barnes joins Alex Jones in-studio to break down CBS getting caught using footage from Italy to fake a need for action in NYC .

Chris Cuomo tested positive for coronavirus, the CNN host revealed Tuesday morning.
Cuomo made the announcement in a lengthy Twitter post, stating he would continue to do his 9PM ET show from his home.
“Sooooo in these difficult times that seem to get more difficult and complicated by the day, I just found out that I am positive for corona virus,” Cuomo tweeted.
Cuomo, who has been referred to as “Fredo,” also described symptoms he experienced, including “fever, chills and shortness of breath.”
“I have been exposed to people in recent days who have subsequently tested positive and I had fever, chills and shortness of breath. I just hope I didn’t give it to the kids and Cristina. That would make me feel worse than this illness! I am quarantined in my basement (which actually makes the rest of the family seem pleased!) I will do my shows from here. We will all beat this by being smart and tough and united.”
Both friends and political foes of Cuomo wished him well on social media.
Discussing his brother’s affliction, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Chris “is going to be fine.”
WATCH: Gov. Cuomo reveals his brother, CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, has coronavirus “He is going to be fine. He’s young, in good shape, strong, not as strong as he thinks, but he will be fine.” “It’s my family, it’s your family, it’s all of our families.” pic.twitter.com/1bzfpt8jcX — Yahoo News (@YahooNews) March 31, 2020
Robert Barnes joins Alex Jones in-studio to break down CBS getting caught using footage from Italy to fake a need for action in NYC.


newswars--2020-03-31--Coronavirus Spread a Perfect Storm of Malnourished Americans, Big Pharma Control

As COVID-19 continues to spread , speculation is mounting that chronic mineral deficiencies contribute to the mortality rate of the virus .
Specifically , zinc has been identified by researchers as a critical mineral .
How did the general population get to this state of chronic deficiencies ?
The truth is that the modern medical system was created by the Rockefeller family and other 20th-century robber barons to ensure the dominance of “ technological medicine ” above natural medicine .
E. Richard Brown , UCLA professor and former president of the American Public Health Association , wrote in Rockefeller Medicine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ played a major role in forming the medical establishment in the United States .
These elites ( The Carnegie Foundation , Rockefeller Foundation and others ) crafted the medical system in such a way that it would , by its very nature , support technological medicine over any other form of treatment .
Brown warned that , “ …a growing interest group within the corporate class has a direct financial stake in the dominance of technological medicine.
” Over 100 years of technological medicine has placed Americans in a chronic state of deficiencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the symptoms of deficiency , and further deplete the body of vital nutrients .
We have become more susceptible to disease as a result .
President Trump needs to be made aware of this entrenched system .
Just like the deep state , the same globalist interests were involved in setting up this medical system .
Rockefeller Foundation ’ s 2010 pandemic scenario of strong government/weak population is a precise script for today ’ s COVID-19 shutdown , except what they said would take years is being done in weeks .

As COVID-19 continues to spread, speculation is mounting that chronic mineral deficiencies contribute to the mortality rate of the virus.
Specifically, zinc has been identified by researchers as a critical mineral.
How did the general population get to this state of chronic deficiencies?
The truth is that the modern medical system was created by the Rockefeller family and other 20th-century robber barons to ensure the dominance of “technological medicine” above natural medicine.
E. Richard Brown, UCLA professor and former president of the American Public Health Association, wrote in Rockefeller Medicine Men (1979) that tax-exempt foundations played a major role in forming the medical establishment in the United States.
These elites (The Carnegie Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and others) crafted the medical system in such a way that it would, by its very nature, support technological medicine over any other form of treatment.
Brown warned that, “…a growing interest group within the corporate class has a direct financial stake in the dominance of technological medicine.”
Over 100 years of technological medicine has placed Americans in a chronic state of deficiencies, exacerbated by pharmaceutical drugs that mask the symptoms of deficiency, and further deplete the body of vital nutrients. We have become more susceptible to disease as a result.
President Trump needs to be made aware of this entrenched system. Just like the deep state, the same globalist interests were involved in setting up this medical system.
Rockefeller Foundation’s 2010 pandemic scenario of strong government/weak population is a precise script for today’s COVID-19 shutdown, except what they said would take years is being done in weeks.


newswars--2020-03-31--The Truth About Social Distancing

The Truth About Social Distancing

The same world leaders now demanding we follow “ social distancing ” were , as little as 3 weeks ago @ @ @ @ @ in huge crowds .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths @ @ @ @ @ .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for the free @ @ @ @ @ me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost @ @ @ @ @ comedown .

The same world leaders now demanding we follow “social distancing” were, as little as 3 weeks ago, encouraging people to congregate in huge crowds.
Why?
Please share this video: https://youtu.be/WslBRY9B-n4
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-03-31--UK mood shifts after first week of lockdown as Brits blast ‘overzealous’ police

After clamoring for stricter measures , some in the UK have started complaining about a “ police state.
” Transport minister Grant Shapps admitted some officers had been “ heavy-handed ” but insisted most have been doing a “ good job .
The mood of most Britons seems to be shifting , just one week after Boris Johnson announced a coronavirus lockdown .
Following a raft of calls for more draconian measures , and criticism of the government for not imposing stricter controls , the country now appears tobe concerned about a loss of civil liberties and about the hugely-damaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slammed for being ‘ over-zealous ’ in enforcing the new rules , brought in to slow the spread of Covid-19 .
Stories of cops using drones to shame walkers in rural areas , dyeing a lake black to put people off going swimming , even officers instructing shops to stop stocking Easter eggs , have all faced a backlash .
# PoliceState started trending on Twitter in the UK as users blasted security forces for going too far .
Secretary of State for Transport Shapps said there had been “ one or two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement measures on social distancing .
He told Sky News : “ I am sure there are individual examples where perhaps you look at it and think that is perhaps a bit further than they should have gone but in general terms I think the case is that , if people help everybody out , including the police , by staying home and the rest of it , then there will be no problems.
” Shapps also warned that the UK had to be careful to ensure that the “ cure ” wasn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself .
He said : “ One of the things we need to be careful not to do is completely crash our economy to the point where it is impossible or very difficult to pick up again afterwards .
“ Otherwise , we will be in a position where we can ’ t re-start the economy and millions of people will be forced into a poverty situation that would do more harm than the virus itself .
That ’ s really the balance.
” Yesterday former supreme court justice Lord Sumption branded Derbyshire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the new controls .
He told the BBC : “ The tradition of policing in this country is that policemen are citizens in uniform , they are not members of a disciplined hierarchy operating just at the government ’ s command .
“ This is what a police state is like .
It ’ s a state in which the government canissue orders or express preferences with no legal authority and the police will enforce ministers ’ wishes.
” However , despite the criticism , the UK ’ s chief scientific adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ starting to work .
At a Downing Street press conference , Patrick Vallance expressed cautious optimism that the “ dramatic ” reductions in travel and contact were making a difference .
He said : “ The measures are in place .
They are making a difference , they are decreasing thecontact which is so important to spread the disease , and we ’ re doing a good job at cutting that down .
”

After clamoring for stricter measures, some in the UK have started complaining about a “police state.”
Transport minister Grant Shapps admitted some officers had been “heavy-handed” but insisted most have been doing a “good job.
The mood of most Britons seems to be shifting, just one week after Boris Johnson announced a coronavirus lockdown.
Following a raft of calls for more draconian measures, and criticism of the government for not imposing stricter controls, the country now appears tobe concerned about a loss of civil liberties and about the hugely-damaging economic fallout.
Police have widely been slammed for being ‘over-zealous’ in enforcing the new rules, brought in to slow the spread of Covid-19.
Stories of cops using drones to shame walkers in rural areas, dyeing a lake black to put people off going swimming, even officers instructing shops to stop stocking Easter eggs, have all faced a backlash.
#PoliceState started trending on Twitter in the UK as users blasted security forces for going too far.
Secretary of State for Transport Shapps said there had been “one or two instances” of police being heavy-handed with enforcement measures on social distancing.
He told Sky News: “I am sure there are individual examples where perhaps you look at it and think that is perhaps a bit further than they should have gone but in general terms I think the case is that, if people help everybody out, including the police, by staying home and the rest of it, then there will be no problems.”
Shapps also warned that the UK had to be careful to ensure that the “cure” wasn’t more harmful than the pandemic itself.
He said: “One of the things we need to be careful not to do is completely crash our economy to the point where it is impossible or very difficult to pick up again afterwards.
“Otherwise, we will be in a position where we can’t re-start the economy and millions of people will be forced into a poverty situation that would do more harm than the virus itself. That’s really the balance.”
Yesterday former supreme court justice Lord Sumption branded Derbyshire Police “disgraceful” over their handling of the new controls.
He told the BBC: “The tradition of policing in this country is that policemen are citizens in uniform, they are not members of a disciplined hierarchy operating just at the government’s command.
“This is what a police state is like. It’s a state in which the government canissue orders or express preferences with no legal authority and the police will enforce ministers’ wishes.”
However, despite the criticism, the UK’s chief scientific adviser revealed that the social distancing measures were starting to work.
At a Downing Street press conference, Patrick Vallance expressed cautious optimism that the “dramatic” reductions in travel and contact were making a difference.
He said: “The measures are in place. They are making a difference, they are decreasing thecontact which is so important to spread the disease, and we’re doing a good job at cutting that down.”


newswars--2020-03-31--This Is Not a Recession—This Is a Government-Imposed Shutdown of the Private Sector

Economists and Wall Street analysts are using the word recession to describe the looming plunge in output in the US economy .
We ’ ll just make the point early that economists , exhibiting the typical emptiness of their failed science , can ’ t even agree on the definition of recession .
Undeterred by lacking a definition , the geniuses at Goldman Sachs and elsewhere on Wall Street are unrestrained in predicting the imminent arrival of the condition they can ’ t describe .
As is always the case , people understand the condition that economists can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lost jobs and wages , the reduction in activity at the businesses where they work .
They understand fewer shifts , fewer hours , a smaller paycheck , or layoffs or furloughs , unemployment , and the need to ask the government for handouts to get by and to feed their families , when they ’ d rather be helping themselves .
They understand uncertainty and disruption .
They feel the fear of not knowing their own economic future .
Recessions , like all economics , are subjectively experienced in the human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in communities .
We have an understanding of why recessions occur cyclically ( although economists can ’ t agree , of course ) .
Business growth , the opposite of recession , is driven by savings and investment in new capacity , new and more productive machines , new software , new roads , bigger ships , and all the capital that people put to work to produce more goods and services .
Investment is a calculated bet on time : if a business spends this money now on new production that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calculate a positive return on that investment .
Recessions occur when governments get in the way and distort the calculation .
They issue too much credit at too low a price , and the business calculus misfires .
The low cost of credit entered into the investment calculation gives a false positive .
When the investment is actually undertaken , it fails to deliver the expected profit .
Projects are shut down .
Jobs are lost .
We have seen this cycle many times .
The failed investment calculus may apply to dot-com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 2008 ) , or one or more of many other sectors .
Typically , the malinvestment is quickly shaken out and economic growth resumes .
But wait .
The coming recession in 2020 , so coldly and unfeelingly computed in the cloud by Goldman Sachs , is not like this .
We are about to enter a production slowdown—a collapse , really—not because some businesses miscalculated their investments , but because government intervened drastically and without warning to shut down all businesses .
How did they do that ?
By taking away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and application drive economic growth .
Government told them to stay home .
Don ’ t go to work .
Don ’ t go to bars and restaurants and cinemas .
Don ’ t take your kids to school .
Don ’ t build cars or airplanes or computers or houses .
Don ’ t provide hospitality at hotels .
Don ’ t perform the tasks that constitute a growing economy , where everyone who works serves everyone who consumes and everybody thrives .
Let ’ s leave aside for the moment the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do this—to withdraw our economic freedoms with such damaging consequences .
Let us try to understand the thinking and the motivations behind this tsunami of government hubris .
First , it is based on the worst error of government : central planning .
Despite all repeated evidence to the contrary , and despite their endless failures , governments believe they can predict and change the direction of the future based on mathematical modeling of the human condition .
The models are computed using the government experts ’ own assumptions , thereby achieving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right , because they ’ re right .
In the current case , the government experts input a wide range of unproven assumptions about coronavirus incidence and infection rates and the exchange of infection between individuals .
They arrive at predictions of infection for the population .
There are wildly fluctuating model outcomes and predictions , so they pick the worst case .
The second step is the giant leap from the theoretical output of the models to the fantasy that government action can be taken against real people in order to change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates too high ?
Order people to change their behavior to get no closer to each other than six feet ( another assumption from some model somewhere ) .
Tell them to stay home and abandon all economic activity .
Lock down the state .
Lock down the country .
Why are they doing this ?
Because they can .
They have not actually given a reason .
To save lives ?
Whose ?
Why now and not in previous flu seasons , which are much more deadly ?
To reduce pressure on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do it .
Which one of us has been asked whether he wants to sacrifice his livelihood in return for a theoretically reduced probability of a COVID-19 infection ?
They have the models , and they have the political power to order us around .
Control and power over individuals is the only justification .
Worse , this escalation in the power of government , which has reached the point where they can order us not to leave our homes and enforce the order at the point of a gun , will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to unremember what they did to us .
It will be indelibly recorded in history .
Governments will point to this instance to justify future , worse instances .
We must start to resist .

Economists and Wall Street analysts are using the word recession to describe the looming plunge in output in the US economy.
We’ll just make the point early that economists, exhibiting the typical emptiness of their failed science, can’t even agree on the definition of recession.
Undeterred by lacking a definition, the geniuses at Goldman Sachs and elsewhere on Wall Street are unrestrained in predicting the imminent arrival of the condition they can’t describe.
As is always the case, people understand the condition that economists can’t even describe in theory. They understand the lost jobs and wages, the reduction in activity at the businesses where they work. They understand fewer shifts, fewer hours, a smaller paycheck, or layoffs or furloughs, unemployment, and the need to ask the government for handouts to get by and to feed their families, when they’d rather be helping themselves. They understand uncertainty and disruption. They feel the fear of not knowing their own economic future. Recessions, like all economics, are subjectively experienced in the human mind, in individuals, in families, in communities.
We have an understanding of why recessions occur cyclically (although economists can’t agree, of course). Business growth, the opposite of recession, is driven by savings and investment in new capacity, new and more productive machines, new software, new roads, bigger ships, and all the capital that people put to work to produce more goods and services. Investment is a calculated bet on time: if a business spends this money now on new production that will occur in the future, they calculate a positive return on that investment. Recessions occur when governments get in the way and distort the calculation. They issue too much credit at too low a price, and the business calculus misfires. The low cost of credit entered into the investment calculation gives a false positive. When the investment is actually undertaken, it fails to deliver the expected profit. Projects are shut down. Jobs are lost.
We have seen this cycle many times. The failed investment calculus may apply to dot-com companies (2000), home mortgages (2008), or one or more of many other sectors. Typically, the malinvestment is quickly shaken out and economic growth resumes.
But wait. The coming recession in 2020, so coldly and unfeelingly computed in the cloud by Goldman Sachs, is not like this. We are about to enter a production slowdown—a collapse, really—not because some businesses miscalculated their investments, but because government intervened drastically and without warning to shut down all businesses. How did they do that? By taking away the freedoms of the people whose energy and application drive economic growth. Government told them to stay home. Don’t go to work. Don’t go to bars and restaurants and cinemas. Don’t take your kids to school. Don’t build cars or airplanes or computers or houses. Don’t provide hospitality at hotels. Don’t perform the tasks that constitute a growing economy, where everyone who works serves everyone who consumes and everybody thrives.
Let’s leave aside for the moment the monumental error we made in allowing government to do this—to withdraw our economic freedoms with such damaging consequences. Let us try to understand the thinking and the motivations behind this tsunami of government hubris.
First, it is based on the worst error of government: central planning. Despite all repeated evidence to the contrary, and despite their endless failures, governments believe they can predict and change the direction of the future based on mathematical modeling of the human condition. The models are computed using the government experts’ own assumptions, thereby achieving a self-referential circularity. They’re right, because they’re right.
In the current case, the government experts input a wide range of unproven assumptions about coronavirus incidence and infection rates and the exchange of infection between individuals. They arrive at predictions of infection for the population. There are wildly fluctuating model outcomes and predictions, so they pick the worst case.
The second step is the giant leap from the theoretical output of the models to the fantasy that government action can be taken against real people in order to change the inputs to the model. Reinfection rates too high? Order people to change their behavior to get no closer to each other than six feet (another assumption from some model somewhere). Tell them to stay home and abandon all economic activity. Lock down the state. Lock down the country.
Why are they doing this? Because they can. They have not actually given a reason. To save lives? Whose? Why now and not in previous flu seasons, which are much more deadly? To reduce pressure on the healthcare sector? Find other ways to do it. Which one of us has been asked whether he wants to sacrifice his livelihood in return for a theoretically reduced probability of a COVID-19 infection? They have the models, and they have the political power to order us around. Control and power over individuals is the only justification.
Worse, this escalation in the power of government, which has reached the point where they can order us not to leave our homes and enforce the order at the point of a gun, will prove irreversible. We won’t be able to unremember what they did to us. It will be indelibly recorded in history. Governments will point to this instance to justify future, worse instances.
We must start to resist.


newswars--2020-03-31--The Political Management of the Coronavirus Crisis

We may currently be facing the biggest economic crisis of all time , because it is a multifaceted crisis : first , there is the pandemic with its disastrous direct consequences for tourism , the service sector , and trade .
Secondly , there is an oil price shock with a geopolitical background .
Third , there is a shock caused by supply chain disruption due to heavy reliance on just-in-time production and distant producers .
Fourth , there is a crisis of confidence due to differing risk assessments and disagreements about whether Western governments are guilty of negligence or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Finally , the ultimately inevitable correction of an overstretched “ everything bubble ” in which the traditional instruments of monetary policy have been exhausted .
We are dealing with a stroke of fate , but not with a “ Black Swan ” event .
None of the crises were unpredictable in themselves , least of all the pandemic .
In 2012 , a study commissioned by the German Bundestag had already analyzed and done detailed calculations about the scenario of a pandemic caused by a SARS-like virus , with alarming results .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issuing urgent warnings for many years .
The current shock thus points to deeper-seated problems—namely , the decline in society ’ s ability to learn .
This decline could sharpen even further throughout the crisis intervention , and that represents the greatest danger in the long term .
Of course , the economic shock caused by travel and curfews also has an impact on health—a fact that many overlook .
Public Health and the economy are not mutually opposed .
The main driver of longer life expectancies with a higher quality of life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ romanticization of earlier lifestyles said to be “ in harmony with the environment.
” The consequences of impoverishment due to the measures taken are invisible and are therefore easily overlooked .
Economists may be inclined to make calculations—but in this case nothing can be calculated .
One could compare the economic damage with the potential death toll , but this is a comparison that few would find morally justifiable .
However , it is not so easy to dismiss : it is indeed a true dilemma .
On the one hand , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact on life expectancy and will certainly claim some lives due to complex effects : e.g.
, suicides and murdered wives , an increased health burden due to lack of sunshine , lack of exercise , unbalanced diet , which is only partially mitigated in some places by a decreasing health burden due to improving air quality .
On the other hand , this damage is more linear than the opposite side being compared : the scenarios of non-intervention in the current , incomplete state of knowledge .
The Exponential Increase in Intensive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compares only the current deaths in the West , the damage of the interventions to life and limb is certainly higher .
But all contrarians who make such comparisons ignore the traumatizing experience on the epidemic front : The problem is not the direct lethality of the virus , but the clearly exponential increase in intensive care patients .
Due to the extreme speed of infection without consistent contact avoidance—primarily social , less state intervention—doctors on the front lines of the epidemic are suddenly confronted with having to decide who to let die @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk groups , but the sudden rise of old relatives suffocating in full consciousness , without being able to say goodbye to parents or grandparents , is such an intense experience that the pressure is to intervene—at all costs !
This may seem uneconomic , but it is ethically and epistemologically imperative .
Precisely because we still know so little , containing exponential drama of this kind is the order of the day .
Nonetheless , the fact that it could come to this is due to a low level of social learning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period should have been enough to follow the success stories of Singapore and Taiwan , which today have much fewer constraints on public life and correspondingly fewer economic sacrifices that are directly attributable to the pandemic .
If there is currently no alternative to the interventions , which could change at any time with new findings , then the question of limiting the economic damage arises .
Since interventions are ordered by policymakers , almost everyone is now thinking of economic and monetary policy measures to reduce the damage .
But this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the current policy interventions .
Western politicians rarely initiate something new , but rather jump on social trends with a delay .
Here the pressure clearly comes from society .
This is not only the case in Europe , as proven by the Wuhan-Whistleblowers , the conditions in Iran ( an interesting case , since it is an authoritarian state ) , and the actions of the municipalities in Lebanon ( in a dysfunctional central state ) .
From a purely rationalistic point of view , the attitude of averting visible , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long-term distributed suffering in return may seem “ irrational.
” However , to act on the basis of such pure rationality would itself be an unreasonable error of judgement , which the majority of the population will never subscribe to , even with the best arguments and the most zealous persuasion .
Politics can only allocate what arises from current or future productivity .
Damage reparation through policy can therefore only work based on one of the following premises : First , politicians are better able to assess the situation and the future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instruments can already generate future tax revenues today , and earlier use saves higher costs or means greater prosperity later .
The two alternatives therefore mean : current redistribution of poorer use of funds by private decision-makers to better use of funds by political decision-makers , or temporal redistribution of poorer use of private or political funds later to better use of funds today .
At present , it does not seem very likely that the first premise holds .
Compared to Asian models , the extreme measures , taken seemingly out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an incorrect assessment of the situation by politicians .
Certainly , society was not much more forward-thinking either , but redistribution can of course never go from the more short-sighted to the more far-sighted within society .
Logic dictates that it can only go from those who still create value today to those who no longer create value today .
Therefore , the only alternative—politics seems to be sure about this—is the second premise : Averting the emergency with new debt .
But since de facto interest-free government bonds have become the increasingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the creation of money .
We have become accustomed to responding to every price correction with new money creation .
The traditional instruments of monetary policy have long since been used for this purpose , and the central banks have either fallen or are falling into the zero-interest rate trap .
The consequence of these interventions was further distortion of the economic structure and further postponement of learning processes .
Certainly , the current catastrophe is not easy to sit out .
It is much easier to stop production processes than to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ price slumps and corporate bankruptcies allow the production structure to pass into the hands of those who have better anticipated the future .
Today , this means in the hands of those who are more liquid and robust , who can deal with new situations more flexibly and recognize potential before others .
Airlines can vanish into thin air , aircraft—apart from some strange exceptions— can not .
Currently , far too much of the production structure is controlled by actors who use it incorrectly , such as the so-called zombie companies : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the current and future needs and plans of people .
But crises are always an indication of negative surprises—in other words , most people were wrong in their assessment , which can lead to shock .
The less agile and adaptive a society is , the more severe its impotence in a crisis .
In this situation , capital structures could be destroyed too quickly because the influx of new and better entrepreneurs and investors falters .
The greatest danger lies in the fact that a far underestimated ( because it is invisible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air : knowledge .
Developed production structures are far more mental than material .
Stalled production could threaten the necessary transfer , increase , and preservation of knowledge .
Economically relevant knowledge needs practical application to stay fresh , or it can quickly become obsolete .
Income Comes from Productivity , Not from Redistribution Unfortunately , most people overlook this mental aspect .
It does not mean that jobs have to be preserved at all costs .
Due to the distorted economic structure , many jobs are far from being knowledge work , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and innovative economy .
A growing proportion of jobs persist because of the inertia of distorted production structures , which often no longer represent net production but net consumption—i.e.
, the real value added is lower than the costs , especially when opportunity costs are considered .
Another part of the jobs serves process control and continues to exist in de facto technically stagnant economies due to the inertia of technical development : thus , it requires people only because no one has yet had the reason and competence to optimize processes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ assigned sources of income , as permission to receive a salary .
In fact , all income must come from productivity , from the use of activity in conjunction with capital to better satisfy the needs of others .
Redistribution , especially the hidden—but more important—monetary redistribution , hides this need , but does not eliminate it in the long run .
What if productivity suddenly drops to zero in your own area because a catastrophe interrupts production ?
Such challenges are an unavoidable fact of life .
Death is certain , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period of declining productivity .
This is the reason for retirement provision , supplemented by accident and illness prevention .
The traditional way of this provision is saving : the conversion of income into assets .
This path has been made so difficult and is so severely punished by monetary and fiscal policy that only a few people still travel it .
This leads to increased redistribution dependency , which must eventually lead to a disastrous lack of provision due to demographics .
We are currently getting a taste of this .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living from monthly salary to monthly salary while also having negative assets ( debts ) is evidence of the dwindling sustainability of the economic activity to date .
If incomes then suddenly collapse due to unemployment , displacement by competition , poor entrepreneurial decisions , illness , age-related problems , or even an unexpected catastrophe , existence is immediately threatened .
The basic question that now arises in view of the pandemic is therefore : can such a provision gap be filled by monetary policy ?
Fiscal Policy and Monetary Policy Are Already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ term .
After all , the provision gap has grown because of monetary policy .
Fiscal policy has been replaced by monetary policy .
This then leads back to the first premise : the demand for a return to fiscal policy .
Monetary policy should then no longer redistribute wealth to the wealthy but should serve as an instrument and facade for redistribution from the haves to the have-nots .
Unfortunately , monetary policy replaced fiscal policy precisely because the former had already been exhausted .
Western countries are all at the upper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ redistribution leads to the disappearance of the cake to be distributed .
Germany and France are at the forefront of a reverse brain-drain : entrepreneurial and wealthy people emigrate in droves or give up entrepreneurship and asset accumulation .
It is naive to assume that extraordinary monetary policy measures such as helicopter money will allow a more sustainable redistribution .
The more extraordinary the measure , the fewer people will correctly anticipate the consequences , and thus the fewer will benefit from it .
In an economy distorted by monetary policy , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those who , consciously or subconsciously , best anticipate the consequences of central bank policy .
A basic income for everyone created by monetary policy sounds charming , but it suffers from the fact that basic purchasing power for everyone can not be created by monetary policy , but only by productivity .
The path of helicopter money leads directly to stagflation with price controls , then capital controls , followed by economic collapse .
At best , this does not apply to the U.S. , because after the global currency , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the event of a crisis : dollar allocations to citizens are thus de facto transfers of purchasing power from foreigners ( late dollar recipients ) to nationals ( early dollar recipients ) .
This works well until the dollar is no longer a world currency—and world currencies are never eternal .
Nearly all monetary , fiscal , and economic policy measures—if they are geared toward fixing damage , rewarding an inability to learn , thwarting structural adjustment and further undermining sustainable foundations of productivity—lead to a spiral of intervention .
The only sensible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need and prevent disasters in capital consumption .
All other measures by nature spring from society in a voluntary manner—but can of course be stimulated , accompanied , and supported by politicians who are part of society .
These measures treat the catastrophe as an opportunity .
After all , it is not a black swan event .
It points to catastrophic shortcomings which most people have overlooked .
We Are Faced with a Learning Opportunity Now we have the opportunity to achieve the reality of a globally networked world with new challenges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is often relativized in comparison to influenza .
In fact , the comparison shows the trauma of influenza , which we accept in a defeatist manner instead of reacting through innovation .
The infection rate in kindergartens is completely unacceptable during the flu season ( in addition to more and more other diseases ) .
The fact that this has not yet led to decisive technical , educational and institutional measures shows the stagnation of our supposedly modern societies .
The iatrogenic diseases in hospitals are also completely intolerable .
For many elderly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after a harmless fall becomes a death sentence .
Outpatient clinics of the European health care system were often overcrowded before the epidemic , to the extent that patients generally wait many , many hours in cramped conditions with other contagious patients—because there are no incentives to optimize processes .
Especially in Austria , it seems that nothing can be learned from history .
Ignaz Semmelweis was once ridiculed by the experts of his time !
The current epidemic is exposing the still dramatic carelessness in hospitals ( which in no way calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctors—especially now ) .
But perhaps it is time to question the concept of “ hospital ” altogether .
This is where the most bitter lessons of our time are to be learned : lack of protective equipment , lack of structural flexibility , weak leadership , poor processes , and lack of innovation .
Good workshops today have 3D printers because sometimes suitable components are not available .
What hospital has a 3D printer , even though a missing component costs lives ?
Suddenly it becomes possible to work from home , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of redundancy with simultaneous process optimization is recognized .
The best compensation for damage would be that in which the currently bitter learning process leads to an evaluation and improvement of processes , structures , technical solutions , companies , and institutions .
To compensate now , for example , for stationary retail trade or mass tourism upscaled with loans through subsidies will only create greater problems in the future .
The best and most urgently needed policy measure at present would be : Immediate tax exemption of all labor income related to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of all business turnover related to the production of technical aids for pandemic management .
This would be systematically extended to further dramatic shortages and , instead of a braking effect , would activate incentives , such as additional doctors accepting personal risk and burden , and production capacity not standing still , but being restructured as quickly as possible .

We may currently be facing the biggest economic crisis of all time, because it is a multifaceted crisis: first, there is the pandemic with its disastrous direct consequences for tourism, the service sector, and trade.
Secondly, there is an oil price shock with a geopolitical background. Third, there is a shock caused by supply chain disruption due to heavy reliance on just-in-time production and distant producers. Fourth, there is a crisis of confidence due to differing risk assessments and disagreements about whether Western governments are guilty of negligence or fearmongering to massively restrict civil liberties. Finally, the ultimately inevitable correction of an overstretched “everything bubble” in which the traditional instruments of monetary policy have been exhausted.
We are dealing with a stroke of fate, but not with a “Black Swan” event. None of the crises were unpredictable in themselves, least of all the pandemic. In 2012, a study commissioned by the German Bundestag had already analyzed and done detailed calculations about the scenario of a pandemic caused by a SARS-like virus, with alarming results. No less than Bill Gates himself has been issuing urgent warnings for many years. The current shock thus points to deeper-seated problems—namely, the decline in society’s ability to learn. This decline could sharpen even further throughout the crisis intervention, and that represents the greatest danger in the long term.
Of course, the economic shock caused by travel and curfews also has an impact on health—a fact that many overlook. Public Health and the economy are not mutually opposed. The main driver of longer life expectancies with a higher quality of life is increasing prosperity, contrary to the romanticization of earlier lifestyles said to be “in harmony with the environment.” The consequences of impoverishment due to the measures taken are invisible and are therefore easily overlooked. Economists may be inclined to make calculations—but in this case nothing can be calculated. One could compare the economic damage with the potential death toll, but this is a comparison that few would find morally justifiable. However, it is not so easy to dismiss: it is indeed a true dilemma.
On the one hand, the economic damage has an invisible but direct impact on life expectancy and will certainly claim some lives due to complex effects: e.g., suicides and murdered wives, an increased health burden due to lack of sunshine, lack of exercise, unbalanced diet, which is only partially mitigated in some places by a decreasing health burden due to improving air quality. On the other hand, this damage is more linear than the opposite side being compared: the scenarios of non-intervention in the current, incomplete state of knowledge.
The Exponential Increase in Intensive Care Patients Is the Problem
If one compares only the current deaths in the West, the damage of the interventions to life and limb is certainly higher. But all contrarians who make such comparisons ignore the traumatizing experience on the epidemic front: The problem is not the direct lethality of the virus, but the clearly exponential increase in intensive care patients. Due to the extreme speed of infection without consistent contact avoidance—primarily social, less state intervention—doctors on the front lines of the epidemic are suddenly confronted with having to decide who to let die helplessly. This death initially only affects risk groups, but the sudden rise of old relatives suffocating in full consciousness, without being able to say goodbye to parents or grandparents, is such an intense experience that the pressure is to intervene—at all costs! This may seem uneconomic, but it is ethically and epistemologically imperative. Precisely because we still know so little, containing exponential drama of this kind is the order of the day.
Nonetheless, the fact that it could come to this is due to a low level of social learning and institutional failure. The early warning period should have been enough to follow the success stories of Singapore and Taiwan, which today have much fewer constraints on public life and correspondingly fewer economic sacrifices that are directly attributable to the pandemic.
Limiting the Economic Damage: Political Misjudgments?
If there is currently no alternative to the interventions, which could change at any time with new findings, then the question of limiting the economic damage arises. Since interventions are ordered by policymakers, almost everyone is now thinking of economic and monetary policy measures to reduce the damage. But this is a misjudgment by both supporters and opponents of the current policy interventions. Western politicians rarely initiate something new, but rather jump on social trends with a delay. Here the pressure clearly comes from society. This is not only the case in Europe, as proven by the Wuhan-Whistleblowers, the conditions in Iran (an interesting case, since it is an authoritarian state), and the actions of the municipalities in Lebanon (in a dysfunctional central state). From a purely rationalistic point of view, the attitude of averting visible, suddenly escalating suffering and accepting invisible, long-term distributed suffering in return may seem “irrational.” However, to act on the basis of such pure rationality would itself be an unreasonable error of judgement, which the majority of the population will never subscribe to, even with the best arguments and the most zealous persuasion.
Politics can only allocate what arises from current or future productivity. Damage reparation through policy can therefore only work based on one of the following premises: First, politicians are better able to assess the situation and the future than private decision-makers. Second, debt instruments can already generate future tax revenues today, and earlier use saves higher costs or means greater prosperity later. The two alternatives therefore mean: current redistribution of poorer use of funds by private decision-makers to better use of funds by political decision-makers, or temporal redistribution of poorer use of private or political funds later to better use of funds today.
At present, it does not seem very likely that the first premise holds. Compared to Asian models, the extreme measures, taken seemingly out of shock, are a clear indication of an incorrect assessment of the situation by politicians. Certainly, society was not much more forward-thinking either, but redistribution can of course never go from the more short-sighted to the more far-sighted within society. Logic dictates that it can only go from those who still create value today to those who no longer create value today.
Dangerous Debt Policy in Times of Over-Indebtedness
Therefore, the only alternative—politics seems to be sure about this—is the second premise: Averting the emergency with new debt. But since de facto interest-free government bonds have become the increasingly important central bank asset, this means the creation of money. We have become accustomed to responding to every price correction with new money creation. The traditional instruments of monetary policy have long since been used for this purpose, and the central banks have either fallen or are falling into the zero-interest rate trap. The consequence of these interventions was further distortion of the economic structure and further postponement of learning processes.
Certainly, the current catastrophe is not easy to sit out. It is much easier to stop production processes than to get them running again. In principle, price slumps and corporate bankruptcies allow the production structure to pass into the hands of those who have better anticipated the future. Today, this means in the hands of those who are more liquid and robust, who can deal with new situations more flexibly and recognize potential before others. Airlines can vanish into thin air, aircraft—apart from some strange exceptions—cannot.
Currently, far too much of the production structure is controlled by actors who use it incorrectly, such as the so-called zombie companies: by incorrectly I mean in disagreement with the current and future needs and plans of people. But crises are always an indication of negative surprises—in other words, most people were wrong in their assessment, which can lead to shock. The less agile and adaptive a society is, the more severe its impotence in a crisis. In this situation, capital structures could be destroyed too quickly because the influx of new and better entrepreneurs and investors falters.
The greatest danger lies in the fact that a far underestimated (because it is invisible) part of capital disappears into thin air: knowledge. Developed production structures are far more mental than material. Stalled production could threaten the necessary transfer, increase, and preservation of knowledge. Economically relevant knowledge needs practical application to stay fresh, or it can quickly become obsolete.
Income Comes from Productivity, Not from Redistribution
Unfortunately, most people overlook this mental aspect. It does not mean that jobs have to be preserved at all costs. Due to the distorted economic structure, many jobs are far from being knowledge work, as would be necessary for a dynamic and innovative economy. A growing proportion of jobs persist because of the inertia of distorted production structures, which often no longer represent net production but net consumption—i.e., the real value added is lower than the costs, especially when opportunity costs are considered. Another part of the jobs serves process control and continues to exist in de facto technically stagnant economies due to the inertia of technical development: thus, it requires people only because no one has yet had the reason and competence to optimize processes.
Many are used to seeing jobs as assigned sources of income, as permission to receive a salary. In fact, all income must come from productivity, from the use of activity in conjunction with capital to better satisfy the needs of others. Redistribution, especially the hidden—but more important—monetary redistribution, hides this need, but does not eliminate it in the long run.
What if productivity suddenly drops to zero in your own area because a catastrophe interrupts production? Such challenges are an unavoidable fact of life. Death is certain, and it is usually preceded by a prolonged period of declining productivity. This is the reason for retirement provision, supplemented by accident and illness prevention. The traditional way of this provision is saving: the conversion of income into assets. This path has been made so difficult and is so severely punished by monetary and fiscal policy that only a few people still travel it. This leads to increased redistribution dependency, which must eventually lead to a disastrous lack of provision due to demographics.
We are currently getting a taste of this. The fact that more and more people are living from monthly salary to monthly salary while also having negative assets (debts) is evidence of the dwindling sustainability of the economic activity to date. If incomes then suddenly collapse due to unemployment, displacement by competition, poor entrepreneurial decisions, illness, age-related problems, or even an unexpected catastrophe, existence is immediately threatened. The basic question that now arises in view of the pandemic is therefore: can such a provision gap be filled by monetary policy?
Fiscal Policy and Monetary Policy Are Already Exhausted
This is impossible in the long term. After all, the provision gap has grown because of monetary policy. Fiscal policy has been replaced by monetary policy. This then leads back to the first premise: the demand for a return to fiscal policy. Monetary policy should then no longer redistribute wealth to the wealthy but should serve as an instrument and facade for redistribution from the haves to the have-nots. Unfortunately, monetary policy replaced fiscal policy precisely because the former had already been exhausted. Western countries are all at the upper end of the Laffer curve: fiscal redistribution leads to the disappearance of the cake to be distributed. Germany and France are at the forefront of a reverse brain-drain: entrepreneurial and wealthy people emigrate in droves or give up entrepreneurship and asset accumulation.
It is naive to assume that extraordinary monetary policy measures such as helicopter money will allow a more sustainable redistribution. The more extraordinary the measure, the fewer people will correctly anticipate the consequences, and thus the fewer will benefit from it. In an economy distorted by monetary policy, the greatest gains in wealth are always to those who, consciously or subconsciously, best anticipate the consequences of central bank policy. A basic income for everyone created by monetary policy sounds charming, but it suffers from the fact that basic purchasing power for everyone cannot be created by monetary policy, but only by productivity. The path of helicopter money leads directly to stagflation with price controls, then capital controls, followed by economic collapse. At best, this does not apply to the U.S., because after the global currency, the dollar, there is increased demand in the event of a crisis: dollar allocations to citizens are thus de facto transfers of purchasing power from foreigners (late dollar recipients) to nationals (early dollar recipients). This works well until the dollar is no longer a world currency—and world currencies are never eternal.
Nearly all monetary, fiscal, and economic policy measures—if they are geared toward fixing damage, rewarding an inability to learn, thwarting structural adjustment and further undermining sustainable foundations of productivity—lead to a spiral of intervention. The only sensible policy measures will temporarily cushion the greatest need and prevent disasters in capital consumption. All other measures by nature spring from society in a voluntary manner—but can of course be stimulated, accompanied, and supported by politicians who are part of society. These measures treat the catastrophe as an opportunity. After all, it is not a black swan event. It points to catastrophic shortcomings which most people have overlooked.
We Are Faced with a Learning Opportunity
Now we have the opportunity to achieve the reality of a globally networked world with new challenges, including epidemics. The new virus is often relativized in comparison to influenza. In fact, the comparison shows the trauma of influenza, which we accept in a defeatist manner instead of reacting through innovation. The infection rate in kindergartens is completely unacceptable during the flu season (in addition to more and more other diseases). The fact that this has not yet led to decisive technical, educational and institutional measures shows the stagnation of our supposedly modern societies. The iatrogenic diseases in hospitals are also completely intolerable. For many elderly people, their stay in the hospital after a harmless fall becomes a death sentence. Outpatient clinics of the European health care system were often overcrowded before the epidemic, to the extent that patients generally wait many, many hours in cramped conditions with other contagious patients—because there are no incentives to optimize processes.
Especially in Austria, it seems that nothing can be learned from history. Ignaz Semmelweis was once ridiculed by the experts of his time! The current epidemic is exposing the still dramatic carelessness in hospitals (which in no way calls into question the heroic work of many doctors—especially now). But perhaps it is time to question the concept of “hospital” altogether. This is where the most bitter lessons of our time are to be learned: lack of protective equipment, lack of structural flexibility, weak leadership, poor processes, and lack of innovation. Good workshops today have 3D printers because sometimes suitable components are not available. What hospital has a 3D printer, even though a missing component costs lives?
Suddenly it becomes possible to work from home, digitalization is required, and the value of redundancy with simultaneous process optimization is recognized. The best compensation for damage would be that in which the currently bitter learning process leads to an evaluation and improvement of processes, structures, technical solutions, companies, and institutions. To compensate now, for example, for stationary retail trade or mass tourism upscaled with loans through subsidies will only create greater problems in the future.
The best and most urgently needed policy measure at present would be: Immediate tax exemption of all labor income related to the care of intensive care patients and of all business turnover related to the production of technical aids for pandemic management. This would be systematically extended to further dramatic shortages and, instead of a braking effect, would activate incentives, such as additional doctors accepting personal risk and burden, and production capacity not standing still, but being restructured as quickly as possible.