This week we'll be, once again, discussing the situation in Ukraine but this time in the context of international politics and if the pathocrats really are insane enough to push the world to the brink of all-out war.

Ukraine's population is split, roughly 50/50, between those who are "pro EU/US" and those who are "pro Russia". The recent "revolution" and change of government in Ukraine has exacerbated political, ethnic and religious divisions (as all US-inspired provocations do, and are designed to do) among the Ukrainian people. At present, the US-backed government in Kiev and its supporters in Western Ukraine are lobbying the UN security council and NATO (the US military mainly) to "look at all ways to protect its territorial integrity." At the same time, the newly declared 'independent' parliament in the Crimean peninsula has called on Russia to protect its 'integrity'. All of which appears to shape up as the opening gambit in a possible soon to come military confrontation between the USA and Russia. So, is the real war that never came during the 'cold war' about to kick off?

We'll be giving our perspective on this interesting question. We'll also be looking at recent worldwide weather and 'environmental' anomalies and bringing you a new theory of cloud formation and its link to "global warming" and a never before heard explanation of what is causing those pesky sinkholes that have been swallowing cars and people for the past several years. We'll also be explaining why, given that there has been a stark reduction in solar activity in recent years, there have been more severe storms on the planet, when, according to official science, less solar activity should mean a quieter planet, weather-wise.

Running Time: 02:04:00

Download: MP3

Here's the transcript:

Joe: Hi and welcome to another edition of SOTT Talk Radio. I'm Joe Quinn. With me in the studio are my co hosts tonight, Niall Bradley and Pierre Lescraudon.

Niall: Hello!

Pierre: Bonjour!

Joe: As you can probably imagine this week, unless you have read the blurb about the show, this week we are going to be talking about Ukraine again. In the sense that... on the context of which... the context in which the situation has expanded and grown since last week to become well maybe a third world war type scenario?

Niall: According to some people.

Joe: Because what we are looking at is a potential ultimate conflict a la rocky, you know, East vs. West - the new Cold War...

Niall: Between...

Joe: ....nukes on the horizon. Duck and cover, get under your desk...

Niall: Between the US of A which is most of the world...

Joe: Yeah.

Niall: And the Great Bear.

Joe: The Great Bear of Russia. Those damn commies, they never went away. You see that's the...

Niall: I knew it! I knew they were hiding something, they pretended...

Joe: Yeah, it's all a big scam. They were just pretending to have... kind of collapse in the Soviet Union but behind it, they were plotting and planning...

Niall: And scheming.

Joe: ...for their stay. So is that what is really going on? I don't know. Well I have an idea. We have an idea but I won't get into that. But we are also going to be talking a little bit about what's going on elsewhere in the world because these kinds of things are always related to other things that are happening in the world. And especially not just in terms of politics because politics very often is and always has been a cover for - and in a certain sense a distraction - for the people. To keep the people, you know, usually afraid or distracted in some way or other. And also enthrall to their authorities so essentially in that way ensuring that the authorities' positions in power are safeguarded because obviously to be in a position of authority and command the people, you have to have the people's allegiance. And very often the way you get the people's allegiance is through fear or the sense of the people needing you - instilling the sense into the people that they need you, their leaders, to protect them as we found that the movie V for Vendetta explained. Uh okay so...

Pierre: We are having technical problems?

Joe: No, we are just getting a report that nobody is hearing anything. I'm not sure if it is...

Pierre: Oh.

Joe: ...true or not but...

Pierre: That's not good for our listeners.

Joe: ...we'll keep going. Anyway...

Niall: Maybe we should begin the kind of recap around what is happening, the latest in Ukraine? So it was after... last time I think, where were we left at? Yeah that's it, the Olympics had just ended.

Joe: Mhmm.

Pierre: The President had just left and nobody knew where he was. That was the last point we developed last week.

Niall: He since popped up - surprise!

Niall and Pierre: In Russia!

Niall: Were you surprised? I wasn't.

Pierre: No.

Niall: Well he gave a press conference and gave his side of the story...

Pierre: And he said that actually it was a coup and a...

Niall: Coop.

Pierre: Coup?


Joe: Like a chicken coop.

Pierre: It was a coup that was organized and orchestrated by Western powers...

Niall: He hasn't even...

Pierre: ...and he hasn't called for violence but he wants to cover his right and his legitimacy to be reestablished.

Niall: I think that narrative...

Pierre: Because he...

Niall: a hell of a lot more accurate than what the entire Western media has been saying. So he came up in Russia and said "I'm here." I... he said, "I still consider myself the legitimate president." That's kind of... I don't see any way back from this point. I mean - absent, a major crisis - that he might eventually come back to Ukraine on top of...?

Pierre: He didn't say he left for political reasons. He said... depending on what you call political reason. He said he left because actually his life and life of his family members was endangered.

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: That's the level of pressure he was facing in his own country. He was president of Ukraine. He was facing these kinds of conditions.

Niall: Yeah. In addition many members of the security force that were involved in the initial conflicts on the street from Kiev, they are also turning up. Many of them have family there or they are closely connected. Anyway but they are turning in Russia and being given free passports. They are essentially being... they were the first - if you like - political refugees.

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: Is that it?

Pierre: 600,000 refugees. We are talking about big numbers because...

Niall: No no no. Well yeah... we are talking about, I'm talking about a few... specifically here a few of the security forces...

Pierre: Ah. Leaders.

Niall: ....involved. They left under the same... the same... they gave the same reason that Yanukovich had given. Pressed for their personal safety and their families, they felt they couldn't live in Kiev anymore, of course.

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: Now that's another issue: the refugees. There are a lot of figures out there, as far as 800,000. I don't think so. The most prevalent Russian estimate is that, they said these are based on the most recent data they couldn't provide, is that a hundred-and-forty-something thousand...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: ...people have applied...

Pierre: Asylum

Niall: ....over the past 2 weeks since this crisis...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: ...exploded.

Pierre: And while they...

Niall: However the Russians, even short of, you know, NATO airstrikes - whatever is coming down the pike - they will be a lot more people...

Pierre: Yeah, exactly...

Niall: ...pouring over the borders.

Pierre: ...because they were several people to escape from Ukraine and join Russia. They was the ongoing violence and civil war. And... now I mean, if you are pro-Russian, I mean even if you speak Russian, it's not a good time to live in Ukraine when you see the composition of the new ministry cabinet.

Niall: Yeah. Let's not forget their very first action was to outlaw... not outlaw. I mean, to remove Russian as the second language...

Joe: Yeah.

Niall: ...and there currently were some 45% or something that speaks the language as their mother tongue. That right there made it clear from the beginning that they had no intention whatsoever, no kind of reconciliation or reconciliatory approach to solving the crisis.

Let's have a look at some more... I mean, things are happening so fast. This is just from today. So Russian troops have surrounded at least 2 military bases in Crimea. Apparently they are trying to get... they are surrounding others as well. Negotiations are going on with the Ukrainian troops inside. I think, from the Russian point of view, with a view to getting them to surrender the weapons and or leave the base and return to mainland Ukraine.

Pierre: So there are some communiqués stating that one ship, one Ukrainian ship, join the Russian fleet and some Ukrainian troops located in Crimea join the Russian forces. What do you think about that?

Niall: Yes. So I first heard this in I think The Guardian, an English paper, and of course it was poopoohed as Russian propaganda. But actually turns out to be true. Listen to this: "The Ukrainian prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, yeah - a communist guy who Victoria Nuland then said, "Yeah, we'll have him."

Pierre: And it worked.

Niall: And he said, "Russia has declared war on Ukraine." This isn't just a threat from Moscow, he warned, we are on the brink of disaster. He allegedly mobilized Ukraine's reserve troops. As you will see, it is very unlikely he is mobilizing anyone because yesterday he appointed at a press conference the new commander of the Ukrainian navy because of course they are kicking out their old guard because their not sure where their loyalties lie. So the new commander of the Ukrainian navy, Denis Berezovsky, today he defected. He was... he accepted the post yesterday and I think that must be the ship you are talking about that has essentially mutinied.

Pierre: Yeah this story there was a mission and he didn't come back to the port answering the Russian fleet.

Niall: It does give some beef to what the Russian are saying that, you know, "Look..."

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: "...both ordinary people and the military across the Ukraine, not just in Crimea, across Ukraine - especially in the southern and eastern parts aren't... are, they would... their loyalty... they would sooner live inside a country called Russia...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: ...than accept what has taken place.

Pierre: And you mentioned south and east because in Ukraine there is not a perfectly homogenous population and the south and the east of Ukraine, which include Crimea, has very strong historical, cultural and linguistic and in a certain sense geographic ties with Russia for centuries and centuries.

Niall: In Ukraine, there is a very old historical nation of Ukraine but it has changed so many times. The modern boundaries, oh they go back to about 1950's, which, you know, if they are going to start getting into, "Oh we want to return to when our country was like..." they can pick any time period, whichever side, so that's silly. But where the Russians have the most solid claim to the place, or at least claim to more cultural connections with the place is actually much more reasons.... I will... I'm going to get to it in a minute. It's to do with what happened inside Russia in the early 90s and then subsequently in the Ukraine.

So just before, here is some more recap on what is going on. John Kerry, warmonger. He warned that, "Russia would be expelled from the G8 and face economic sanctions..." I mean, economic sanctions are a declaration of war so if they go above Level 12, technically they are at war. "....unless Putin halts his incredible acts of aggression... incredible, yes indeed." He also mentioned VISA bans, asset freezes, trade isolations and so on and so on. The NATO security general accused Russia of threatening peace in Europe by his actions and violating the UN charter. Who does that? Violating the UN charter?

Joe: Have you violated the UN charter?

Pierre: Never happened.

Niall: Before..

Pierre: Only Iran...

Niall: It's disgusting.

Joe: That's terrible, I mean...

Pierre: Only terrorists do that.

Joe: It is just as well that the US didn't violate it when they invaded Iraq in 2003 either, you know. Because it would be extremely hypocritical for Kerry to actually mention that, you know. A part of... not to mention aiding, bombing, aiding terrorists, Al Qaeda, imposed terrorist in Syria and generally speaking breaking every international law that has ever been written in the past 100 years. But actually Kerry, yeah, what's amazing about Kerry is... Mr. Death Head himself is that a...

Niall: Skull and bones.

Joe: Yeah, he looks like a sculp...

Pierre: Skull and bones.

Joe: It's an interesting example of somebody's inner nature being appropriately or accurately reflected in the shape of their head.

Pierre: Is that what is happening on a magnetic scale? [00.12.54]

Joe: Yeah, exactly [laughter]. But no, Kerry talked... Kerry, I don't know, he doesn't have a hypocrisy sensor, censor within him. You know the way most people pretend to kind of, you know, they might be a but hypocritical now and again but they would rarely ever blatantly in front of a large number of people, stand up and point the finger at someone else for doing something that they themselves and everybody... that everybody knows they themselves are doing, you know. I don't know if there's a good analogy to come out with but just imagine some blatantly and massively hypocritical statement from someone in front of everybody and that's pretty much what Kerry said today on, was it "meet the press" or meet the nation or screw the nation. I don't know whatever the name of that show in the US is where they talk to politicians about things on Sundays. Anyway this is Kerry, let's hear what he said:

"...As this morning that Russians actions amount to a declaration of war and he says we are on the brink of disaster. Do you agree with that?

Kerry: Well it is an incredible act of aggression. It is really a stunning and willful choice by president Putin to invade another country. Russia is in violation of the sovereignty of Ukraine, Russia is in violation of its international obligations, Russia is in violation of its obligations under the UN charter, under the Helsinki Final Act, it's a violation of its obligation under the 1994 Budapest Agreement. You just don't, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext. So it is a very serious moment. But it is serious not in the context, Bob, of Russia, US. It's serious in terms of sort of the modern manner with which nations are going to resolve problems. There were all kinds of other options still available to Russia. There still are. President Obama wants..."

Joe: Blah blah blah. The guy is such a bare faced liar and hypocrite. I mean, he must think people are stupid. He just says that, you know, "in the 21st century, you do not go around invading other countries on trumped up charges." Okay...

Pierre: Where is the invasion?

Joe: One small example: Iraq and Afghanistan. 2003. 10 year and effectively ongoing occupation by US troops. Decimation of the country, deaths of millions of people - of citizens of those countries - yes, a trumped, provably and internationally recognized and known by every single person and their dog, a trumped up charge. Yellow cake? WMDs anyone? Kerry? I mean, he really thinks people are that stupid? Maybe they are, that's the worrying thing, maybe people are stupid and they have completely forgotten about that. But when he says, "In this 21st century, you do not go around invading countries on trumped charges", that's exactly what they did in Iraq.

Pierre: Well it's because ...

Joe: I mean it's not... there's no equiv... there's no wriggle room there. That's exactly what everybody in the entire world knows the US did in Iraq and he's now saying that nobody is allowed to do that. And he's criticizing...

Pierre: Including the US.

Joe: ...Russia for [not even] doing that.

Niall: But he's not even wrong because the Russians...

Pierre: ...

Niall: ...did invade...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: ...the long standing agreement that Russian troops have been based in Crimea.

Pierre: Yeah. 1783...

Joe: Well...

Pierre: Sevastopol, naval base, was founded in 1783 by Potemkin, the famous army of.... so we are talking about more than two centuries...

Niall: Yeah.

Pierre: ...they have assets in Crimea. The Crimea is a Russophile [00.16.55], have strong bonds with Russia and they are there and they have been there for centuries.

Joe: Well, the fair word is, is that he's pretty ... with his comment of - this John Kerry we're talking about. We just played a clip from him, if anybody has just joined us or just got the show to actually work. I know a bunch of you who are having trouble getting across. Anyway we just played a clip of Kerry from today on a news show in the US that... criticizing Putin and saying that you are not allowed to... nobody in this world is allowed to go around invading other countries on trumped up charges. And we have just been... we have just been discussing the massive hypocrisy in that statement and the fact that that's exactly what the US did in Iraq and in Afghanistan and really dozens of other places.

Anyway, well part of ... tell you ... where he was complaining that they were in breach of this treaty, that treaty. That's all completely irrelevant because all of those treaties were, if not explicitly, were, you know, agreed on in the understanding that... Ukraine would not be invaded by an outside force covertly i.e. the US, as has happened in recent weeks and essentially a democratic government overthrown by the US. If you do that, then all the treaties that have been signed are null and void...

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: far as I am concerned and justifiably so. So this claim that they are in violation of all these treaties is completely bogus.

Niall: The UN was created to do away with what was believed to be the cause of world wars, to stop the causes. The creation of alliances between nation states...

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: i.e. they would be international norms that would govern everyone, all or nothing.

Pierre: And you remember what Victoria...

Niall: The whole...

Pierre: Yeah, go on...

Niall: The whole dynamic at play here is NATO. NATO has slowly conquered. NATO's purpose is to be measure to the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is gone - what has happened since? NATO has slowly marched up to Russia's borders.

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: And you know that in Europe you have more than 40 countries and only 2 are not part of NATO, Russia and Cyprus.

Joe: In Europe?

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: Montenegro isn't.

Pierre: Okay. There are three but Montenegro...

Joe: I have to give an honorable mention that Montenegro isn't.

Pierre: Yeah, it's a very small country...

Joe: All with at least 600,000 people. [00.19.35]

Pierre: Because this is from online sources. I mean, they mention small countries that are not really very relevant politically. But it means that Russia is really alone. Alone and on the west, all the countries are together in this coalition with the US against Russia.

Niall: And everyone is talking about, oh, those Ruskies. They are returning to Soviet imperialism. And I'm thinking, what planet are these people on? Look at the empire. Everyone knows what the empire is, right?

Joe: Yeah. I'm going to check to see if we have a call here. [Muffling] Okay, sounds like you are listening right?

Caller 1: Hi, just listening.

Joe: Alrighty, so...

Pierre: Enjoy the show.

Niall: And the new Ukrainian government...

Pierre: Yes.

Niall: ...if I can call it that, the new regime...

Joe: Let's not...

Niall: Let's call it the new Ukrainian regime.

Joe: It's an interim government and it's illegitimate even by interim government standards, right? It's...

Niall: They are egging on the war, should it happen, under the pretext of saying, "Oh help, we are on the brink of total disaster." They want international i.e. the US, the EU - who are NATO - to come in.

Joe: Well I'm not sure if any of the... what they call him, Yatsenyuk, the new interim prime minister, I'm not sure he is... this is a pencil pusher economist who was shunted into power by Victoria Nuland and her Neo-con husband, as revealed by that conversation that was taped by the Russians and released a few weeks ago that we talked about. I'm not sure that overt members of this new intern, illegitimate essentially, government - because it doesn't represent all of the Ukrainian people and wasn't voted for so it is therefore illegitimate - I'm not sure they would actually want a war in the sense of an armed conflict. They may want help from NATO but they may want... I don't know if they want US military boots on the ground and stuff like that. It would be a bit foolhardy to wish for that if only they may want support in some way. But, you know, this guy - Yatsenyuk, you know, he's saying today that, "this is not a threat.." - it's yesterday he said this - that "this is..." referring to Russia's, you know, Russian troops in the Crimea. "This is not the threat, this is actually the declaration of war to my country and we urge president Putin to pull back his military." Well, you know what, sorry 'Yats' but you are the one who conspired with the regime changers in Washington to screw up your country. You are directly implicated because they had your name and obviously they didn't have your name without your consent. And they put you into power, as planned as revealed by that telephone conversation. You are illegitimate. The country is divided as a result of what they have done, the military is divided as... because of what they have done. You are looking into a far deeper economic black hole than you were before and essentially you, this interim prime minister, is directly responsible. So if he is crying now about the fact that he doesn't have any control and he wants, you know, he wants someone to come and save him and it's not fair and Russia's military is on the ground and can't somebody do something - if he wants to blame someone for that, look in the goddamn mirror, you asshole!

Niall: Absolutely and...

Pierre: And...

Niall: ...lay the blame where it's deserved.

Pierre: And notice that this quote-unquote "transition government", is exactly the way Victoria Nuland described it during this leaked phone conversation. You have Yatsenyuk that is prime minister now, you have Klitschko the...

Joe: boxing

Pierre: ...the boxing champion that was not nominated, you have Tyahnbok who didn't get a major cabinet from ....

Joe: From the periphery.

Pierre: Yeah. So it went... that's one more proof that all the... was staged.

Joe: Why are we even talking about that? That was released, you know.

Niall: Mmm.

Joe: That telephone conversation was released to the entire world and all the major media reported on that except they said, "Oh she said the F word." And totally ignored the fact that she was describing the government that has been put in place in the last week, US. And nobody in the western media is even referring to it. It's like, "Oh, what should we do about Putin? Is this a new Cold War? What are we going to do about them invading Ukraine?" I mean, it's just flagger stabbing.

Pierre: It is a painful flag to be stabbed with.

Joe: Flabbergasting really. I mean, I don't know what to say about it.

Pierre: And remember Victoria Nuland as well in this leaked conversation mentioning UN as the tool to provide this gloss of international legitimacy. And now John Kerry in this conversation we played, invoking the UN, invoking the international convention. So that's really double speak - on one side they bash the UN...

Joe: Do you know... do you know...

Pierre: Victoria's puppet and on the other side they invoke the, what is for them, they invoke the UN legitimacy.

Joe: Do you know who Ms. S.E.E.U. Nuland, Mrs. Victoria S.E.E.U. Nuland's husband is?

Niall: Yes. Kagan?

Joe: Yes, Robert Kagan. Who's he?

Niall: Notorious Neo-con.

Joe: He's a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century.

Niall: Bingo!

Joe: So there you go. Should... nobody should be surprised here after what's going on, really it was all written down just prior to the 9/11 in PNAC documents. And it is PNAC people now...

Niall: The new Pearl Harbor.

Joe: the centre of this... these policies. And it's all just propaganda that people are being subjected to. It is lies and propaganda.

Niall: Yeah. In terms of being able to pull out some farcical comments about Russia... well we don't know yet. I think we'll see what... like what in the build up to "new war with Syria" in August? There was a backlash and people rejected it. I mean, the British parliament had to persuade them and it was voted down. It was defeated essentially and that was because of a public backlash because of fear of what might have come upon...

Joe: I'm going to see if we have a call hear. Do we have a caller on the line? [Silence] No we don't, he just disappeared. Anyway that scared him off.

Niall: I was going to say that...

Joe: Carry on.

Niall: The ability to make these farcical comments about Soviet imperialism and Russian propaganda which is, it's just laughable, people. The western media is so dominant - online, traditional media as well. There is no such thing. Russian propaganda - you will never hear it. For example, CNN did an interview with Putin, oh, after the Georgian war/intervention in 2008. It was never aired. Russia Today, the so-called Russian English language propaganda outlet which it isn't, aired it afterwards because they got a copy of it but it was never shown to a western audience in which Putin said, "Well, you tell me, what would you do if you were in my shoes? I had the Intel that they were US military personnel on the ground assisting the Georgians shoving across the border into my country. What would you do?"

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: And of course that never even made the official narrative of what went on 4 years ago. 6 years ago.

Joe: Yet, you know, but history is written and created by the governments...

Niall: Exactly.

Joe: ...and presented to the media to disseminate at the time and that becomes official history and that's what's happening, as it's happening right now. And you see all these people discussing and arguing, you know, on blogs and on comments sections on major mainstream media news websites. And none of them have a clue about what's actually going on because none of them put them in context. None of them seem to be able to actually remember what went on 2 years ago let alone 10 years ago. So what is blatant hypocrisy and lying from these western leaders does not faze them, they don't remember. It's a lie, they don't recognize it as a lie because they... I don't know why. I mean, it's horrible. It's a horrible situation to watch, it's like a train wreck happening, you know.

And... getting back to the actual... to the actual situation in Ukraine, there is a little detail that there is... back in February 5th so almost a month ago - this was just before the beginning of the Olympics. There were 2 US Navy warships that are stationed in Italy sailed into the Black Sea supposedly to provide security assistance ... the Olympics winter games in Sochi. This is while at the same time Obama is not attending, the western and Cameron - UK leader - is not attending. They are all boycotting the Olympics. They are all pooh-poohing Putin and his Olympics. And the media is trashing Putin and the Olympics in the press yet for some reason they are well disposed enough towards them to sail 2 US Navy warships into the Black Sea to protect the Olympics. Like the Russians can't protect themselves? This is obviously a bullshit narrative that this is why it was happening. It was under the guise of "protect the Olympics" but, and I'm sure the Russians and Putin realized that. And they probably saw it as a heads up to what was actually going to happen because the Ukraine thing had been an ongoing thing at that stage but they probably saw it as a heads up to the timeframe of when they were going to set the torch paper alight in Ukraine and have this revolution that was going to be right in the middle of the Olympics to do as much damage to Russian reputation as possible. And it was going to be when these 2 ships, US Navy ships, were stationed in the Black Sea because they were there for officially the period of the Olympics, including the Paralympics, which is actually ongoing but it started just recently.

So the timeframe for them being there was going to be February 7th to March 16th so there are still there for another 2 weeks or so. So for me that, that suggests to me that this... everything that we have all seen happen for the past few weeks considering Ukraine and Russia was known. Obviously planned well in advance by the US and the EU by certain individuals but also known about, in more or less, well all of the details by the Russians as well based on what was happening. Because, you know, these kinds of movements of ships about the place - the reasons that people are given for why they are there is usually or is often mostly never the real reason. And for 2 ships, 2 US Navy ships, to sail into the Black Sea just before the Olympics on the premise of protecting the Olympics is nonsense given the context. And given what we have seen happen since, it's pretty obvious why they were there.

Niall: I have a report here from earlier this week. Well it's only come out now but it concerns something that was going on at the height of the crisis in Kiev. So they didn't just go and sack downtown Kiev and then, of course, the president's residence which he shared with a lot of other people.

Anyway, they also specifically targeted the homes of the MPs. Some of whom were not affiliated with the government. They were, let's says, centre... from centralist parties all over Ukraine. And yeah, they didn't just sack them out of some fit of rage because they were all little neo-Nazis. They were specifically looking for documents in their homes.

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: And the Russians are saying that they captured a few of them, I think, trying to cross over back into Russia. Because some of them are Russian, some of these people doing the actual looting. And there is a testimony from a guy who said that there were American military personnel and... plain clothes who members of the right sector, in the neo-Nazis, would then hand the documents over to. I thought that that was interesting. Of course, that will go down as Russian propaganda but it's one of many stories about direct foreign involvement on the ground in these last few weeks.

So that's one. The other one is: an IDF unit was in charge of one of the militias on the streets in Kiev. I always wondered about that, you know. It was so organized. We really have never seen it before. One minute a fire starts, the next thing these guys are... well they took over the city. I mean that kind of organization level?

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: You saw some of the equipment they had. Of course they got guns because they raided a police or military the west of the country and took weapons into the city. But I wondered, there must... there must be people there who'd been there before or knew what they were doing? Turns out there is an Israeli. They said, "Former member of the IDF led one of these militias throughout the duration in protest in Kiev." Oh and by the way, him and 6 other former Israelis defence forces...

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: ...troops.

Joe: Well, the Israelis are well trained and well practiced. And they have a lot of experience with a kind of urban warfare on the streets of Palestine so they would be an ideal - former members of the IDF - the ideal members of that kind of a phony paid uprising of a fascist neo-Nazis. I mean, that's pretty much what the Israelis are so good job. Let me just check to see if we got... do we have a call on the line?

Caller 2: Hi.

Joe: Hi. Are you a caller or are you just listening?

Caller 2: Yes, I'm a caller. Great discussion! The impacts of so many of the powerful regions affect the entire planet. I am concerned that the United Nations, which was created after America would not support the League of Nations, has such a stranglehold on many aspects of our global political movements when the Security Council, which I was posting in the chat room, is basically comprised of nations that had nuclear weapons with 1 or 2 nations that's chosen. It's synonymous to a school with a powerful gang with the biggest bat that they are the ones that get to make all of the decisions when in actuality in America, and probably in Russia, the average person just wants, you know, clean air, a good school for their child etcetera. It's so alarming. It seems as though our political system is hijacked globally. Not just in America, in so many nations. And we end up, our children, fighting the wars for people who don't care about the environment or, you know, our children.

Joe: Mhmm. Absolutely...

Caller 2: I'm in America and I think... I don't - I haven't been to Russia but I get the impression, I could be wrong, that the average Russian is not living in the, you know, luxury nor is the average American.

Joe: Now.

Caller 2: But there are billionaires in Russia and there are billionaires in America...

Joe: Mhmm.

Caller 2: ...financially billionaires. So somewhere in the middle - even in China, you have billionaires in China but the average Chinese person is not really reaping those benefits. I just feel as though we are all being played in every nation. I mean, 1 group comes up and says they care about us, whether it's a political group or a religious group, but in actuality it's just they... like a store putting out a sign. If they think you like pizza, they put pizza up. If they think you like chicken, they put chicken up. But when it boils down to it, each of our nations are being raped by the same globalist. That's just the way it looks the more I look at, you know, what's happening in our world.

Joe: Well that's pretty much the way it is and has been for a long time in history. It seems to me that there has always been an elite or for a long time there has been an elite on this planet in terms of a wealthy elite in whatever format be it the church or kings and queens or our modern day political elite. Their goal seems to be to maintain their positions as the elite, the wealthy elite, and the only way they can do that is to make sure the masses below them remain controlled and, you know, relatively poor and keep producing. Doing the work, you know, they are producing the sweat of their brow...

Caller 2: Mhmm.

Joe: ...that produces all of the things that are necessary apparently for civilization and a country to operate and they basically reap the benefits. And, you know, they tell themselves that, you know, they are doing this as a service to us because, you know, the ordinary people, they need leadership.

Caller 2: Yeah.

Joe: And that may be true but ordinary people need good leadership. Not greedy, selfish, psychopathic leadership, you know. And ...

Caller 2: [Laughter]

Joe: And yeah, I think your analysis of it is pretty much on the money, you know.

Pierre: And actually the 2 elements you mentioned are not mutually exclusive. If the elites ... one world government, the world... the old world is lead, is controlled by these elites but it doesn't preclude the possibility for fake or real oppositions to some extent between some factions. And actually can be even complementary because wars is a good way to hysterise the population and stimulate this feeding, this sentiment among citizens that yeah they should be afraid and there is a threat and we need the elites even more than before because a war is looming and we have to be protected.

Caller 2: And also a way to transfer more financial cash, capital, to the firm then upholders that are making. Helping to make the military, you know machines. I can tell by the accents that we have all of us come from, it sounds like, Ireland, maybe France, am I correct?

Joe: Uh-huh.

Pierre: Yeah.

Caller 2: Yeah so here we are. I'm in America, you know, I have a different accent. We are saying the same things just with different accents. But for thousands of years we have been going through this. At some point... I mean, when are we... not you and I. We are trying our best - but when are we as a humanity going to get it. And listen, these folks don't care about us. Let's come together and, you know, break out the peace pipe and whoop some booty, you know. Put them out of office. Tie them up to a tree, whatever we have to do to get them out of there.

Joe: Yeah well I mean, it can be done but as you can imagine the elite are aware of that threat and that potential among people to do that. And they go to a lot of effort to make sure it doesn't...

Caller 2: Mhmm.

Joe: ...happen, you know. I mean, are you from New York by any chance?

Caller 2: Yeah. Mhmm.

Joe: Because maybe you are aware...

Caller 2:..right near the United Nations..

Joe: Maybe you are aware of the Occupy Wall Street situation that went on a couple of years ago. I mean, you saw what happened at that. I mean it was just kind of like pretty much beaten down and made to go away.

Caller 2: May I give you a few seconds on Occupy Wall Street. Like the Tea Party, I think at the core there is a positive that could have come out of it. The problem with the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movements are they wanted a piece of the slave master's pie. It doesn't matter that women are oppressed and that African Americans and third world regions are being raped by Wall Street. It doesn't matter that Native Indians died and continue to die and struggle on reservations. Those movements in my opinion are just trying to get their share. They are not saying we have fundamental flaws in our economic system that takes advantage of other people and creates wars to make more money. So I didn't support the Occupy Wall Street movement for that reason. I am a black African American male and I didn't see a 'me' to just continue to agree that it's okay that if the 1% share with the 99%. My position is no, the whole system is f----d up! We have to change it from the bottom to the top totally.

So they have a core that I believed in but they had weaknesses because it bucked the real issue. Meaning if you share all of the stolen resources, people are still hurting in Nigeria, in the Caribbean, in Harlem, you know, in south central Ireland, and in much of China.

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: That's true.

Joe: Absolutely. It's a problem and it's a perennial... it's a problem that has always been around, you know. People have written multiple very long tomes in trying to figure out what the solution to it would be, you know, reforming the political system, reforming the social system. And to date nothing has really changed, you know. It has maintained itself in this format of an upper class, an elite class and essentially the rest of us, you know. And I'm not sure if there is a... there is a solution from an idea point of view in terms of an ideology that... I mean, it's probably very simple to put together the framework for a society that would be egalitarian and everybody would be happy and peaceful and content. But it's never going to happen, as we understand it, when you have the problem of essentially psychopaths in... amongst normal human beings who are kind of pretty fundamentally different in the way they are made up and the way they think and the drives and the goals that they have. And they tend to rise to positions of power and that happens over and over again. And until people really wake up to that fact and realize that that is really the core problem. There is one thing that is stopping a normal, decent, peaceful human society from developing on this planet and it's the agenda of people who don't want that kind of a society. That's not in them to produce and to live in that kind of a society. What's in them is to dominate and control and in some cases to destroy. They are just insanely or insatiably greedy and they can't change because they haven't changed, you know. I mean, the... testimonies to the fact that they are very different is that they have never changed. They have always risen to the top and they have always exerted their power and influence to the detriment of ordinary people. So I think history bears out, in the absence of any actual scientific evidence that this is true - that psychopaths has ruled us forever - I think history in a circumstantial way bears that out.

Caller 2: Hopefully we can - those of us speaking and listening that believe - come together meaning we have right now a captive audience of people that probably feel the same way. That may mean us saying "Hey, once a month, why don't we have a, you know, a chat." There is a group that we have called S.O.S. Earth Avengers. It's SOS like "save our souls" earth avengers. And we have been trying to bring in post buddies that have these sentiments. Here's why: we could share resources. I'll give you an example. I do tons of research, right? There isn't the need for other people to do the same research, they are wasting their time. I could say, "Hey, here's a file. Information I found out about homelessness in New York and how it relates to Ireland for example" or, "Hey, I'm doing an event in New York about poverty and if you are in New York and you are doing an event, we can share the microphones. Or we can share the cost of printing flyers." We have thousands of groups and shows, we need a mechanism where we don't have to agree on everything but we can say, "Okay, share resources." So if any of you are interested: SOS Earth Avengers and I'll post you a link on some of my social media and...

Joe: Okay.

Caller 2: ...hopefully we can save this planet from some of these sociopaths and psychopaths, including president Obama who it just a puppet meant as a distraction.

Joe: Absolutely. Yeah, post a link on the chat room there and we'll have a look at it.

Caller 2: Thank you brothers.

Niall: Same to you.

Caller 2: My kids and I...

Niall: Thank you too for calling.

Caller 2: ...will be listening in as I cook for my children. Thank you so much.

Joe: Alright.

Caller 2: Stay strong! We're going to do it.

Joe: You too.

Niall: Thank you, bye.

Pierre: Thank you.

Caller 2: Thank you bro... [Line cuts]

Niall: Yeah he... he cut to the chase huh?

Joe: Yeah, people need to... if any... I mean, nobody is going to save the world because there is far too many people who don't want the world to be saved and are happy with it the way it is. They need an authority and they will take any authority at the end of the day. And the authority that they will always get will be the one who is willing to do the most heinous and despicable acts to maintain themselves in power and people therefore... a lot of people, probably 50% more - 60 or 70% maybe, I don't know how many. A lot of people in this world will be happy with that kind of authority because any authority is better than no authority. And they are happy with it and they are not moved to change it. But as our caller just said there are people who are interested and those people should think about what he just suggested, which was forming kind of communities together - if only kind of in terms of sharing information and getting together. You don't have to necessary go and kind of start a commune or anything like that but take the first steps towards basically you know taking control of your own futures and your own lives back from the system type of thing that you have become dependent on. And just follow that and see where it goes.

And also crucially need to be aware of the nature of the system, and that's going to look unfavorably on that kind of a thing, and to protect yourself. Protect yourselves and whatever community you might of... type of community that you develop. You need to be aware of the threats to it and the nature of the system in which we live in. And that's probably the best you can hope for. The people who are interested in doing it should do it. It's not about imposing a utopia on the entire world because it's an impossible task given that the majority of people aren't interested. And that's a hard thing to come to terms with that and to accept but that's seems to be the nature of the world.... or maybe people... not that people aren't interested but simply aren't willing to do the work that is necessary to change the world in that way. They are not motivated enough. So face facts and do what you can in your own sphere of influence. And take what comes. See what happens - to infinity and beyond.

Niall: Yes indeedy. To say a few things about some historical context...

Joe: Lay it on us there.

Niall: So Russia was completely shattered in the 1990s. You had the IMF, the vulture capitalist. They had lists of specific cities, industries, factories. They were going to go in - clean up. Basically take over Russia. Okay, that more or less happened. Yeltsin eventually put a stop to it but it wasn't until Putin comes into power that things start to change. What's going on there, is Putin resisting? The program... is he not with the program? Is he trying to find his own niche within the program? I don't know but let's look at what happened within the first 10 years.

So I think for me the first red flag of Putin not being on board was the build up to the Iraq war. He got France and Germany to agree - their 2 leaders then, Chirac and Schröeder - to agree not to support an invasion of Iraq if they could not provide, the US could not provide evidence of WMDs. As a result of that little alliance, the US and UK had to drop. Up to that point they were negotiating, "Will we go to the UN? Yes or no, we are going to seek UN approval to do this." They dropped it at that point when they realized that Russia, France and Germany would not support the war.

Just after that, months after, you had the first clash with the oligarchs in Russia, Berezovsky. Putin decided to nail him for tax evasion but what he was really doing is something that has helped solidify his control of Russia. He had said to the oligarchs, "Look, you can keep what you pillaged in the 90s so long as you don't interfere with what I'm trying to do. In other words, you stay aligned with the government. I'm not even going to come after you for back taxes, I'm not going to nationalize." He didn't do the mistake a lot of other leaders made in other countries in the world. They come in, they have... maybe they have, okay, "An idea of how we can make things fair for the little people. Let's nationalize everything." So that the income from their own natural resources, at least some of it goes towards helping lift them out of poverty.

He... Putin didn't even go that far. He just said, "Well just play ball, you can keep doing what you doing." But that already set off one of the men... in the end he want after Berezovsky. Then the next guy came up, Khodorkovsky, Mikhal Khodorkovsky - he was arrested in October 2003. It was the same war as the Iraq war started. He went one step further than Berezovsky who had fled to London. Khodorkovsky had started his own kind of George Soros style open society. I think his was called Open.,. I think his was called Open Society or something or that's...

Joe: Open Society. Yup.

Niall: ...that's the name of... Anyway he modeled a kind of democratic movement for change within Russia based on the existing NGOs that had been in Russia since the 1990s. Of course Putin... he broke Putin's cardinal rule. You don't get involved with politics. You can keep... you stay with business. Let me handle what's going on in Russia. That's where the trial came about - he got him on tax evasion and sent him to prison.

In the meantime Putin is rearming Russia. Totally modernized their whole military but he did it... he actually I think... the Russian military was something like half a million strong in terms of military personnel. He slashed that right down - it's just over 100000. He reduced the army. But completely rearmed it. Then he passed what... something that was castigated in the west: the anti-extremism law, which was pretty vague to be honest, but the intention was clear. He was going to go after all of these NGOs that had been set up in Russia by the national endowment for democracy, which is basically a CIA front. So he... it was clear that he was going after the mechanism through which the globalists capture a country and try to exert control from within.

Joe: Mhmm.

Pierre: Subvert.

Niall: At the very least it shows that he knows how their system works and he would resist it. Now it terms of has anything actually changed... for ordinary Russians, are things better or worse than they were in 1999 for example? Yeah, they are. You still have oligarchs. You have massive disparity between the wealthy elite and the impoverished people...

Joe: Like everywhere else.

Niall: everywhere else. But get this: by the West owned statistical counts, I think it's the OC.. OECD or whatever, Russian unemployment now after this great big global financial crisis is 5.6%.

Pierre: Yeah. There are less poor's and the poor's are less poor as well.

Joe: The average...

Niall: The official unemployment rate in America is 6%.

Joe: Yeah.

Niall: But last week a Wall... I mean, a Wall Street analyst said, "Yeah right. The real unemployment rate in the US is 37%."

Joe: Yeah. I mean, under Putin things obviously, clearly did improve, by anybody's kind of analysis, you know. The living conditions of people improved so, you know, given the nature of this world where you don't have a utopia and you have to deal with the system as it is and live within it, by any standards Putin has down well by the Russian people. And there is no call whatsoever for there being any mass discontent within Russia to... you know, in the absence of there being mass discontent in America for example. There should be... if there is mass discontent in Russia, it should apply to America and probably even more so to America. So and this is where all of these supposedly NGOs, non-government organizations, funded by the west - funded by America - have gained a foothold within Russia and are being funded to rabble rouse and to try to destabilize the government through popular revolt and uprising and things like, that ridiculous group Pussy Riot and various other individuals and groups who - according to Russia and justifiably according to Russian government - are just a bunch of agents of a foreign power who are unjustifiably trying to stir things up for no good reason. And if that happened in America or any European country, they would be reacted to in exactly the same way as Putin has reacted to them.

So what everybody... we're seeing this whole debate about Russia and Putin and, you know, kind of draconian measures and dictatorship and that kind of stuff, it's all lies. It's all bullshit lies made up by the Western press for the consumption of the Western population. And many people are sucking it up. And, you know, to their own detriment because they are believing a bunch of lies about and those lies will ultimately lead them to give support to a pretty evil kind of regime or group of countries i.e. the US and various European countries who are simply determined to ensure that the elite remain the elite and for people to remain effectively slaves and workers and, you know, it's ridiculous so...

Niall: Well that's a key, that's a key way of describing it - remain so. In the narrative you will hear the corporative media, "The situation arose in Ukraine. Oh dear, someone mishandled the Ukrainian economy. Oh dear they are in great debt. Oh dear we need to lend them money." And then that this crisis sparked in November last year when the EEU of Washington and Brussels said, "No it's either or. You either take money from Moscow or you take it from us i.e. the IMF."

Nobody is talking about how the situation came about. Ukraine joined the IMF in 1992. It was relatively prosperous to what it is now. It had its own industry. It was completely destroyed just like Russia. I have got a report from the ministry. It says, "The real amount of debt Ukraine is in right now is at least 145 billion", which is at least 100% of its GDP.

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: This is idea that the crisis began with, "Oh who is going to loan them the money?" ignores 20 years of the IMF giving them these loans they never needed to begin with along with the conditionality's that come with an IMF loan. They were told privately, "trust us, just privatize everything. Sell it all. And have your currency float freely on the international exchange rate. Open everything up." The country was devastated.

Joe: Mhmm. That's what happens. That's what happens... has happened time and time again.

Niall: I submit that a genocide took place in both Russia and Ukraine in the 1990s. The population of Ukraine in 1992 was 56 million people. The population today is officially 45 million. But they do a little fiddling with the statistics even there because 7 million of those permanently work across the border in Russia where there are jobs and send the money home. The real rate of... the actual number of people living in Ukraine today is 38-some million. At least a third of the country was either... either died from starvation and or died from...

Joe: Or emigrated.

Niall: A whole swathe of elderly people just died of malnutrition and disease in the 1990s. And then, the other half, have to go to Russia to find any work. And it is in this context of the extent to which Ukraine, the facts from the ground that this is why they are dependent on Russia. This is why you have so many people who live on the borderland between, who are of course Russia. Even if they are Ukrainian, for 20 years they have been depending on Russia to survive because their idiot leaders from 20 years ago put them in this mess. And now the IMF/EU is coming in to save the day?

Joe: Yep.

Niall: We'll just ignore what happened before that?

Joe: Yeah so the truth behind it is that the IMF has been pillaging and plundering and eviscerating the Ukrainian economy. And it has culminated in the events of last year, late last year and this year, where basically people had had enough. Where they had been ground down to the point where, you know, they were willing to get out in the streets and protest in large numbers - 250 thousand or 200 thousand - but peacefully protest. And their problem was basically the state of the economy. And this had nothing to do with Yanukovich, the guy who was ousted, because he was only... he has only be there for 4... he left in 4 years. But this goes back 20 years and is directly responsible or is directly attributable to the IMF. And that essentially which is America's bank and the bank of the major Western nations. And they go around the world pillaging and plundering countries through their dodgy loans and their free market policies.

So that's what's caused the problem. That is what's led to the protests...

Niall: Mhmm.

Joe: ...of Ukraine. But the US with their foreign agents and foreign groups and foreign funding and foreign training, including Israel, came in and, you know, radicalized that... those protests. Small numbers of them and started... and created the scenes that we have all seen on television. And used that to usher in a government that would continue to allow the IMF to continue to control and pillage and plunder the Ukrainian economy...

Niall: Mhmm.

Joe: ...and pose austerity measures and just squeeze the people.

Niall: Mhmm.

Joe: There's no, there's no... not in any context is there any suggestion that... that the IMF or the West being in control of the Ukrainian government would ever have improved the lot of the people by any measures that they were planning to implement. They were simply going to squeeze the people even further. And that's what they do. That's the truth behind it but officially the Western media and the Western government narrative is that it is all Putin's fault, which is a complete lie. And it is a monstrous lie. And that's, you know, a la Hitler or Goebbels - whoever said it - it's the big lie, the big giant lie. You basically, if you are going to tell a lie, you say it exactly... you know, you create...

Pierre: Mhmm.

Joe: ...a narrative that is diametrically the opposite. That is so far away from the truth that no one would ever think that you would have created such a lie...

Niall: Mhmm.

Joe: ...and told such a lie therefore they believe it. And it is a plausible reality.

I mean just to give people an example in terms of the hypocrisy. Puerto Rico is a... a kind of... it's a known/non [01.02.38] incorporated territory of the United States. It is essentially owned by the United States, Puerto Rico in the Caribbean. So this, what's happening in the Ukraine, is more or less like the US having, as it does, having military bases in Ukraine and a lot of investment and industrial or economic investment in... sorry, in Puerto Rico. And becoming aware that Russia had, you know, extended its influence all the way across the Atlantic and started fostering groups within Puerto Rico to... to lobby for and to protest for essentially the removal of Puerto Rico from America's control and influence since they are part of America. And what's expected to happen, based on John Kerry's and US government's logic, is that in that situation where Russia was doing that to a part of American territory, the American's would just have to sit back and say, " Okay, no problem. We are just going to let it happen because it's the democratic will of the Puerto Rican people" knowing very clearly that the Russians are involved in creating that situation and trying to steal that piece of American... essentially American territory away from America. And does anyone believe that America would sit back and take that? No. But Russia is expected to sit back and take it.

So it's a complete farce. It's a complete farce and a complete... just... I keep getting back to this word, hypocrisy. The level of hypocrisy and lies is staggering.

Niall: It's staggering. Now are we going to try and answer the question: are we on the eve of WWIII here?

Joe: No. Because if you look at history and stuff, people tend to think... the official narrative and what people believe about wars, let's say, at least wars within the last 100 or 120... 130 years, whatever. That those wars, like look at the WWII and the WWI for example, that those wars actually happened as a result of people just, you know... different countries having an argument and sending their armies in and then it's just like, "Well...

Niall: "How dare you insult my mistress?"

Joe: [Laughter] Exactly.

Niall: "Right, I'm going to send my army up."

Joe: Exactly. And then the actual battle, the actual war, is, you know, it's undecided. It's... it's just chaotic and who knows what... who know what will happen, you know. It's kind of like 2 boxers in a ring, you don't know which one is going to win, you know. And that's what people think... most people think that's the way wars have happened. The WWII and the WWI have happened and the Vietnam War and all the wars you can think of.

But that's not actually how they happen. Because wars... countries can only wage wars if they have enough money to continue to wage the wars and have the means of production to provide the tools of war. If you don't have an army or if you don't have fuel for you airplanes or factories to... and the means to technology to... to actually produce all the tools for a war, you can't actually wage a war. You going to bail out of it very quickly, you are going to lose it. So the only reason wars actually continue, and this is true of the WWII, is that they are financed by people who control the finances or control the...

Pierre: Mmm.

Joe: ...the economy. Control the supply of money essentially and those are bankers and they have been since... really since, you know the end of the 19th century and the 20... the early 20th century. That was established where international banking essentially was in a bankers were in a position to control the supply of money, control the flow of money to countries and to cut it off. And also in the case of America, America was in a position to provide technology or not to certain countries. And so the means to wage a war and to win a war is controlled by... fundamentally by the control of money and the flow of money. And that is controlled by bankers and has been for over 100 years.

So the idea that there would be some kind of a spontaneous WWIII as a result of this and that it is like, "Oh my god, what's going to happen?" isn't really accurate historically speaking. So... and it's no reason to believe that there isn't... the same rules don't apply today. So if there's going to be a war between America and Soviet Russia... or not Soviet Russia, between America and...

Niall: Joe!

Joe: [Laughter] Between America and...

Niall: And Free Russia.

Joe: ...and Free Russia, then it's an entirely manipulated affair and the outcome is already planned. That doesn't mean a lot of people won't die as a result. But, you know, don't worry that, you know, don't think or don't worry that it would be a nuclear war for example because that wouldn't be in the interest of people who control this planet so...

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: ...there's not going to be any nuclear war, that's just to scare people. But overall I think, generally speaking, my assessment would be that all of this - however real that might be at certain levels, at a kind of higher level - it is theater.

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: John Kerry and even Putin and stuff, none of them are sincere in their saber-rattling. And of course, apart from any actual war that might happen or any kind of skirmish or, you know... well, you see the way that countries are taken over by economics and by infiltration as we have been... just been describing, that's generally how wars are waged these days. They are not actually military wars really. There's... there are times there's a NATO bombing just to, you know, facilitate a regime change type thing. But there haven't been any all-out wars in that sense for quite a long time.

I mean, the Iraq war wasn't a war - it's a total misnomer. Iraq was a turkey shoot. I mean, the Americans went into Iraq knowing full well that they would just walk in and they'd be in Baghdad and...

Niall: Yeah, the CIA had...

Joe: And that...

Niall: The CIA had to create an opponent and sustain it...

Joe: Yeah, so...

Niall: Iraq and Afghanistan.

Joe: So apart from the actual benefits from doing that in terms of economic control of a country's resources and, you know, wealth flowing back out of the country to the elite in the West and stuff - from the point of view of the oligarchs in general or the elite in general in any country, the threat of war is very useful to them from the point of view of controlling the population and keeping the population poor. And this applies to Putin as well.

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: Because obviously Putin has a vested interest in being the president of Russia. And to continue to be the president of Russia he needs to keep people on his side. Now he can try to do that by genuine means but he is not going to look... to give caution to mouth in a certain sense. That in the... in terms of what has been offered to him now, which is to take action and to saber-rattle a bit and to put the troops in and stuff because that reflects very well on him in terms of the people...

Niall: Back home.

Joe: ...back home in Russia. They see him as a strong leader who is willing to stand up to the US. They are... generally speaking, Russians are going to be patriotic and pro-Russia so it reflects well on him to be seen to... to be standing up against the US and taking this action and maybe giving him a bloody nose type of thing. And so he's going to take that, you know.

And at the same time it's beneficial, even if nothing comes of it, it's beneficial also for the US just to have this threat of war, rumors of war and stuff. Because it keeps the American people and people in Europe afraid, because the threat of war scares them and it affects their sense of security. And what it does is that it simply makes them... throws them further and deeper into the arms of their government and their leaders to protect them. Because they are being made painfully aware of this threat by the media all over the place of this potential of, you know, "Is there going to be another world war? Is there going..." you know.

So ultimately the benefits to that, to even just suggesting that there might be a war, are many for people in positions in power, the elite of a sort.

Pierre: Maybe a parameter that was not present during the previous conflicts is that right now we have seen for months an increase in celestial activities, cosmic activities. So the only difference I can see compared to previous conflicts is that, because of this new cosmic context, we - the PTB - need a war in order to disguise celestial intentions. Because a war helps maintaining the fundamental illusion in which the power of the elite is based - that we need them and that they protect us. Well if they acknowledge the fact that cosmic intention is not very positive and that we are definitely under threat and they cannot do anything against it, a war is definitely better than acknowledging this negative evolution. That is...

Joe: Absolutely.

Niall: I think that's a big if. If the Powers That Be are aware.

Joe: Are even aware, yeah.

Niall: The way I was going to ask you this question was: so Pierre [laughter] how is all this stress - because this is increasing stress levels a... up a notch, you know - how is it all playing out?

Joe: What stress levels?

Niall: On the planet. Well the... the threat of global nuclear war.

Joe: Oh...

Niall: And, or, any kind of war...

Joe: Well I can...

Niall: ...between Russia and the US.

Joe: I can give you one breaking news example of how it's affecting the planet.

Niall: Bring it.

Joe: There has just, in the past hour or so, there has been an earthquake right off the coast of Crimea - a 4.5 magnitude earthquake off the coast of Crimea.

Pierre: Hmm.

Niall: Mmm... are there typically earthquakes there? Do we know?

Joe: Who knows but it is interesting timing.

Niall: Sure.

Pierre: I heard the Black Sea is not a super stable area. It's not so far away from Turkey, it's a....

Niall: But in terms of disguising intentions....

Pierre: Of course.

Niall: ...they'll... somebody will claim that that was an underground nuclear test by Russia.

Pierre: Yeah, an unknown weapon allowing them to trigger artificial earthquakes, yeah, possibly.

Niall: Yeah. I think whatever about to what extent they are aware of and aligning some kind of agenda to cosmic catastrophe and so-called earth changes, the two do, I think, work together in tandem. I mean, you get an in... the... your cli... your environment will reflect back to you what's going on. If there is chaos on the planet between people, the weather will be chaotic.

Pierre: Yeah, you can even enter some kind of negative feedback loops. If you imagine PTBs organizing or starting wars in order to hide celestial intentions and celestial activity, you can imagine that those wars and the amount of lies and suffering they induce would feed even more the cosmic intention the war was designed to hide, so...

Niall: Yeah.

Pierre: see, basically the war is reinforcing the symptom it is supposed to hide. So it can get worse and worse.

Joe: But tell me this.

Niall: Just...

Joe: We are in a solar maximum right now, aren't we?

Pierre: Yes.

Joe: But not really. We should be in a solar maximum but the Sun has been unusually quiet for a solar maximum, right?

Pierre: Amongst other things. Yeah, the solar cycle 24 - that is the solar cycle we are going through now - has reached its "maximum" quote-unquote but it is quite a peculiar maximum. In the sense that usually solar maximum are... they last about one month, two month. It goes up and then it goes down. And in this case there has been so far a double spike. And the minimum, like the maximum, for solar cycle 24 has been very long. So basically we are going through a very sluggish, long and we... and weak solar cycle with a maximum of about 70 sunspots a month. About 10 years ago we were reaching 200 sunspots a month. So yeah, it's weak.

Joe: And isn't... I mean, we have been having a lot of - as many people listening will know - there has been a lot of very strange weather over the past, you know, this winter. Let's say, in the past 3 or 4 months. And the official understanding I think is that solar radiation provokes weather. And particularly in the case of chaotic and strange weather, violent weather as we have been having around the world, that would... surely that would be associated with a high number or high level of activity from the Sun.

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: So does that theory have to be thrown out?

Pierre: Yes and no. Historically, there is a correlation between solar activity and temperature variation and level of chaos - frequency of hurricanes, frequency of tornadoes - there is a correlation. Now the correlation is not necessarily positive and correlation is not a causation. Seeing that the curves of solar activity and, for example, hurricane frequency go up and down together, in the opposite way, doesn't show... doesn't prove that the Sun is the cause for hurricane. Actually the Sun and hurricane could be two effect of another third unknown factor.

Joe: Right. Like what?


Pierre: You know, like.... So where I am going to is, because the following question we'll read somewhere, "Is there a causation?" And...

Joe: Yeah or...

Pierre: Or, "Is the causation working?" So I am hacking the question. And...

Joe: Hack the question, yeah.

Pierre: Yeah and for... for a long time it was kind of puzzling because the correlation between cooling phases, ice age and weak solar activity was clearly demonstrated.

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: And... so one obvious hypothesis was, "okay, the Sun is shining less". You see in winter when you go out, compared to summer, it's less hot. So there is less radiation and that's why there is a global cooling. Actually it's not really true because scientists measure what they call irradiants - radiation, solar radiation, on the surface of the planet when there is no cloud. And between the solar maximum and the solar minimum, the irradiants' variation is about 0.1%. So that's not the variation - radiation, solar radiation - that can explain cooling and warming.

However there is another mechanism that seems to partly explain the process. It involves cosmic rays and clouds. So maybe I should explain a bit more about what are cosmic rays and what are clouds.

Okay. Cosmic rays basically seize protons flying from stars generated by far supernovas including our Sun, so positive protons flying in the space. Our Sun generates such cosmic rays but weak ones. Protons but they don't go very fast. They don't have a high level of energy unlike the cosmic rays coming from supernovas and big stars. So on one side we have cosmic rays - that we know a bit more about now - and the other side we have clouds.

What we have to know about clouds is that clouds are net coolers. Clouds reflect sun rays more than they reflect earth radiation. So the more clouds you have, the more the planet cools down. And now you have the work of... there is a bit more about clouds. For clouds to form you need 3 factors basically. First you need temperature to cool down enough for the gases, for the water vapor to reach dew point, b) you need a nucleation... a nucleus, nucleation agent - some kind of dust in the atmosphere around which the water droplet would agglomerate. And third, when we talk about it, there is some electrical influence that catalyzes this nucleation process, the formation of droplets i.e. the formation of clouds. Okay?

And now you have the... this scientist from Denmark, Svensmark, who showed that - and here is the causation - when solar activity is low, the magnetic shield of the Sun that is all around the solar system is weak. It creates high energy cosmic rays, generated by big stars and supernovas can enter our solar system and reach our planet more easily. Okay?

So it is kind of counterintuitive. But it means... less solar radiation, less solar activity, means more cosmic rays. More high energy with cosmic rays because, of course, the Sun generates less cosmic rays, less solar winds, but the solar winds are low energy cosmic rays. They don't manage to bring to the Earth atmosphere so they have no influence on cloud formation unlike the high energy cosmic rays. The higher energy cosmic rays, to put it simply, along the path within the atmosphere generate electrons. And those electrons are catalysers of cloud formation. Basically they will agglomerate free molecules, mostly oxygen molecules and sulfur molecules that are in suspension in the atmosphere. They will agglomerate them so they will become particle big enough to become nucleus for droplet formation for cloud formation.

Okay, so that's one of the... that's one of the processes. You understand - low solar activity, more incoming, high energy cosmic rays, more cloud cooling because low altitude clouds are net coolers.

Joe: Why is there more high energy solar radiation with... when there is less sunspots and less solar flares?

Pierre: Because if solar activity is reduced, the... let's call it the magnetic shield around the solar system is reduced that protects us...

Niall: The heliosheath.

Pierre: Yeah. Or... yeah, the heliosphere or heliosheath, protects us less from high energy cosmic rays coming in from space. So the result is that here within the Earth atmosphere you have more of those high energy cosmic rays coming in, generating more electrons along their path, stimulating the formation of clouds - the electrons being nucleation agents.

Joe: So you are saying that when there is solar activity of a low energy nature... I didn't quite understand why when the Sun is quiet...

Pierre: Yeah...

Joe: ...there is more high energy.

Pierre: Yeah, it's counterintuitive because the sun generates low energy radiation...

Joe: In the form of solar flares? Like...

Pierre: In the form of solar winds, yeah.

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: Protons at low energy, low speed solar winds or cosmic rays that don't have enough energy to enter the Earth's atmosphere...

Joe: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...and to trigger cloud formation, particularly low altitude cloud formation, who are the main net coolers as far as Earth's temperature is concerned.

So you have this first factor: lower solar activity results in more comic ray... winds and therefore more clouds and cooling. But there are other factors because remember when I was describing clouds, I was saying that for clouds to form you need dust around which the water droplets...

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...will agglomerate,condensate. And, as evidence suggests strongly, there has been a strong increase in cometary activity. New moons acquired by our... by nearby planets within the solar systems. New asteroids being, regularly discovered, new comets...

Niall: New moons, which would in fact be captured asteroids or planets into the orbits of the planets. That's what you mean there?

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: Okay.

Pierre: Exactly. Because when you... actually there is no obvious difference between an asteroid and a moon. Both are piece of rocks in the space, a moon being simply an asteroid that was caught in a revolutionary orbit around the planet. And, so all those evidence - increase in fireballs, the global dimming as well, increase in atmospheric dust, all those elements - evidence points towards a increase in cometary dust in the atmosphere. And this cometary dust acts as nucleation agent, nucleus, for cloud formation. So you have this second factor that increases the cloudiness, global cloud cover.

And actually since around 2000 you can see that the cloudiness indeed has been increasing overall around the planet.

Joe: So that's just cloudiness... not storms?

Pierre: Oh. Well, that's something else.

Joe: Because we've had this spectacular array of storms storming across the Atlantic over the past two months, hitting the UK, which is kind of unprecedented in recent... in recent history. I mean, I don't think there... I think most people, most meteorologists all said that they can't remember it ever happening in such an intense and consistent way.

Pierre: Okay.

Joe: As far back as they can remember.

Pierre: 250 years, since the beginning of the records, in UK. Well there are at least two factors here. The first factor is basically the reduced solar activity leads to overall - here I'm not differentiating high energy and low energy cosmic rays - but overall there are less cosmic rays reaching the ionosphere, the Earth's ionosphere. So if you close your eyes you can imagine the planet. Around the planet the ionosphere and the ionosphere is positively charged by the solar winds. Okay?

So, you have this positive ionosphere and this negative planet, Earth. Okay? So between both, within the atmosphere, you have an electric current, an electric field. Okay? Now dust, atmospheric dust, reduces the conductivity of the atmosphere. So there is something we call fair-weather circulation, which is basically electrons - since the planet is more negative than the ionosphere - you have electrons that fly up in the sky to rebalance this charge difference between this positive atmosphere... the positive ionosphere and the negative Earth surface, alright?

That's the fair-weather circulation. Now if you factor in this increase in cometary dust, you have an atmosphere that is less conductive. You have a limited fair-weather circulation. Imagine again this electron and the Earth's surface that is pulled... that is pulled by the positive ionosphere. Instead of raising up and reaching the ionosphere and rebalancing the charge. It will be caught by some of those dust particles that are not mobile compared to electrons. They are big, they have inertia. When you see these electrons, they are going up. They go up and are caught by this dust more and more.

And that's how we have cloud formation and creation of atmospheric regions with a strong negative potential. Okay?

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: And this is one of the causes for hurricanes or depressions, storms, lightening or even rain. It's basically... those phenomena are basically rebalancing phenomena. Hurricane, lightening, rains balance this charge difference between some regions of the atmosphere and the...

Niall: And the ground.

Pierre: ...and the Earth's surface, yeah. And lightening is a typical case. Lightening... remember what I was saying the... where I stopped, the... this phenomena, this description where you have electrons accumulating up in the ionosphere...

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...binding to floating atoms... cometary dust. It's negative. It's electrons that fire getting more and more negative. And those electrons come from the Earth's surface. So the Earth's surface is getting less and less negative.

In the end, a lightening basically, it's a sudden discharge of electrons that go back from where they have come from - from the Earth, from the negatively charged cloud to the ground; same for a hurricane, same for rain that bring back this charge within the droplets.

That's the first factor. Increase in dust in the atmosphere increase... reduces the conductivity of the atmosphere. So instead of having this fair-weather circulation - progressive eventless transfer rebalancing of charge between the ionosphere and the Earth's surface - you have accumulation of charges in the atmosphere leading to sudden discharges - all those extreme... some of these extreme weather events.

And there is another factor that we mentioned previous... in a previous show. There's a... for what Joe was talking about, extreme weather in the UK and extreme weather in the US. And actually they are both due to the same cause I think, which is the Jet stream.

Now the Jet stream you can picture out as a ring, positively charged ring, circling around 50 or 60 degrees north latitude above Scotland, above Canada. Okay? Turning eastward, very fast - 100, 150mph - it's turning because, as hypothesized by some scientists, it is electrically charged. And a charge... a proton for example or a charged particle subjected to an electric field. And before we mentioned this electric field atmospheric energy share erudition [01.30.02] between the ionosphere...

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...and the Earth. And the particle subjected as well to magnetic field. We know the Earth has a magnetic field. It is a geomagnetic field. So charged particles subjected to an electric field and a geomagnetic field is subjected to a force, a mechanical force called a Lorentz force. And that's what this electric... this combination of electric field and magnetic field, through the Lorentz force, that's what feeds the Jet stream.

So now the Jet stream usually is very... the Jet stream is what separates basically the Arctic air from temperate latitude air which is much warmer...

Niall: Yeah, it's kind of a dividing front...

Pierre: Yeah, and the...

Niall: ...more or less in the same place.

Pierre: And the driver of low altitude weather. It separates air regions, atmospheric regions. So when solar activity is strong, you have a strong electric current, a strong electric field between the atmosphere and the Earth's surface. So there's a... the Lorentz force is very strong and the Jet stream is turning very fast and very straight, alright? Now if you reduce the solar activity, what we have been going through for about 10 years now, this electric current is reduced, the Lorentz force is reduced and the Jet stream instead of going fast and straight starts meandering...

Niall: Up and down.

Joe: North and south.

Pierre: ...up and down. And then instead of neatly separating Arctic air from temperate latitude air - warm - it starts to create hot pockets and cold pockets. Alternating hot pockets and cold pockets. And this alternate of warm moist air and cold dry air is one of the main contributor to what we have seen in Europe and what we see in the US. In the US you have basically a cold drop, what they call now Arctic vortex. You have a cold drop so the... the Jet stream is meandering down over the US territory, exposing the US territory...

Niall: Yeah.

Pierre: literally Arctic air.

Niall: It's going down as far as Florida.

Pierre: Yeah, exactly, or Caribbean's. And so you have these amazingly cold temperatures for weeks and on the other side of the Atlantic you have the same meandering Jet stream...

Niall: Yeah. It is looping back up and targeting... appears to be targeting the UK.

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: With storm after storm, one after the other.

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: I see. It's interesting because in Norway, which is now above, it's on the other side of this meandering Jet stream...

Pierre: Yeah?

Niall: ...they have been having drought conditions relative to the heavy rainfall they are used to having...

Pierre: Mhmm.

Niall: the winter, which brings me to another crazy weather phenomenon that has been going on. Beginning in January I noticed that, mmm, in the depth of winter in the Himalayans, there were at least three large wildfires. More or less surrounded by snow, warm enough for what you might think of as normal summer conditions. Vegetation gets dry so all it takes is a lit cigarette and boom, you got a wildfire.

It didn't just... they didn't just create small fires. They devastated three famous monasteries over pretty large areas in Tibet.

And then in Norway they had peat fires pretty high up. Nearly in the Arctic circles on the coast with cold, cold northern winds even though they are... they haven't been getting their usual weather, it's still pretty cold up there. And they had such devastating wildfires that people were evacuated from villages or hamlets. And the number of buildings that were destroyed... of course, that reminds me of something that happened in Scotland last year April, where they were wildfires burning in marshy boggy areas again after a wet, wet winter.

And also recently in the US, they have been having a record number of fires... wildfires. Mostly they are on the other side. The warm side of this big polar vortex, they call it where it drops down. Most of them have been on the west and southwest of the US. But some of them have actually broken out inside this so-called polar vortex. And they are less well reported but I found the one broke out in Iowa actually destroyed someone's home. It came on so quickly. While there is - I don't want to say... I don't know if there was ice on the ground but there was in the time, when the place was in it.

There have been hundreds. California did a comparison with last year. I don't how... what the stats are like going back over a longer period but in January last year in California, the number of wildfires...

Pierre: Mmm.

Niall: ...was zero. This year I think there were 400.

Pierre: In the middle of winter. And actually on February 24th, in March, along Lake Okeechobee in Florida, you had about 500 acres fire burning. And then in my eyes I would picture a colored pictured of the fire. And the interesting thing is along the lake, and all around the burn area, is greenery, which is some kind of proof that the vegetation was not dry, it was green. So how can green vegetation burn? The question...

Niall: There were wildfires in Alaska last month...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: the middle of winter. There was a funny one in Oregon were local firefighters couldn't get it under control. But a little footnote at the end of the local's news article said, "Well it was okay in the end. It went out because it reached the frozen creek."


Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: It's that cold...

Pierre: Well...

Niall: know?

Pierre: I find the paradox. And the point is that if indeed the vegetation is frozen or, and/or green, it means that the energy provided by the fire...

Niall: Or...

Pierre: ...not only needs... you don't only need energy for the fire to occur but you need even more energy to burn green grass or frozen grass. If you try one day to burn green grass or frozen grass, you need a lot of energy.

Niall: They are trying to explain it as a result of drought conditions, warm weather on the warm side of this polar drop. But it's still not that warm. But the drought condition - they are having to bend the rules of physics here a bit because...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: ...they are saying, "Well, the vegetation is freeze dried. That's how combustible it is." It makes no sense. In between two massive storms hitting Wales in the UK there was a big fire on the coast.

Pierre: Yeah, when the ground is saturated with water.

Niall: Yeah. Again that's... that's kind of bog land area.

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: So Pierre, explain this: what do you think is going on?


Pierre: You didn't tell me you would ask me that question.

Joe: This is a surprise question.

Pierre: Well, the hypothesis is obviously it's not the vegetation that is spontaneously burning like in usual summer forest fire with a... involving dry wood and strong wind and warm temperatures. So obviously there are other factors involved and there are not mutually exclusive. There might be some out gassing.

Niall: Out gassing of what, something from below?

Joe: It could be... it could be a function of the kind of... because the Earth, there was a story on the news just recently about the rotation of the Earth noticeably slowing, I think they're talking about 25...

Pierre: ...millisecond a month.

Joe: ...yeah. That basically the Earth is basically and observably slowing and has been for quite a long time.

Pierre: Yeah, true, yeah. Actually it was observed first by Ptolemy in 140.

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: ...I think. It's a very old phenomenon but there's more to it than that. Maybe we can talk about this opening up process that we have been... probably been hypothesizing for a while. So Earth opening up will be indeed an elegant explanation for why there is this sudden gas release and some unexplained phenomena that we can talk about later. But if there is indeed the Earth opening up, it would be due to two main factors: one, the slowdown of the Earth and two, a reduction of the electric field between the Earth's surface and the ? [01.39.19]. And we are going to talk about those two things separately and try to make it simple and understandable.

The slowdown of the Earth, as Joe said, yeah, it is something that's documented for centuries. However this slowdown has not or is... has never been constant. Okay?

Niall: So the Earth's... the rate the Earth spins at varies slightly a little bit faster or a little bit slower?

Pierre: No, no, no.

Niall: No.

Pierre: It keeps going... with time it keeps going slower.

Niall: Okay.

Pierre: But sometimes much slower or less slower.

Niall: Okay.

Pierre: Okay? But the actual day is always longer than the spherical day. I'm not sure, between 0.1 in 2 or 3 year, in milliseconds. It's small but it's not neglectable. And now the first thing is that the... this slowdown has not been just only on our planet but on other planets. Mainstream science explains the slowdown of the Earth because of what they call the moon tidal forces. So basically the way the moon around the planet pulls the planet slows down the planet unit spin. Okay?

The only problem with this explanation is that, where for example, Venus is slowing down as well. But Venus has no moon. So that's a problem I think.

Where now we have Robert G. Currie, a scientist who demonstrated that there was a correlation, a very clear correlation, between Earth's rotation cycles - spin rate - and solar cycles, interestingly. And you have other scientists, particularly proponents of the electric universe, who have suspected for a while indeed a correlation, an electric dimension to the spinning of the Earth.

And this correlation between solar activity and the spin rate of the Earth was demonstrated as well in a paper published in 1972, in 1973, in Nature. This continuous change in Earth's spin rate following great solar storm of August1972 and Gribbin the scientist noticed that the spin rate of the Earth around this date was quite constant. And all of a sudden when there was this big, this great solar storm, the spin rate of the Earth showed a spike. So the sun somehow modulates the Earth's spin rate. And what we hypothesized is that somehow the Earth acts like, you know, like an electrical motor - an electric model. To make an analogy you have the Earth that would act as the rotor, the rotating part, and you would have the ionosphere which would act as a starter. The most use avenue ? [01.42.28] in increasing solar activity, the starter or the ionosphere is more positively charged. You have more electric field between the motor and the starter and you have the Earth's spin rate that accelerates.

And if solar activity decrease, which is the case since the turn of the century, you would have the spin rate that would slow down after. Would you say that is spoken English?

Niall: Yeah. That makes sense.

Pierre: Okay. And interestingly, you should check the US Naval Observatory data that measure every day the duration of the day. You notice that since 2002 indeed the measured day length has been getting longer than usual. The average was +0.3 millisecond in 2003. And now it is more than one millisecond per day longer. So, you follow me here?

Joe: Yeah, yes.

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: The Earth that is spinning slower because the reduced solar activity, alright? The electric model basically solar phase is spinning slower because you reduce the juice that comes from the electric current. Alright now the Earth is not a perfect sphere because of the centrifugal force, it's wider at the equator and it's flat at the poles. So now if you imagine this planet Earth and you imagine that its spin rate is decreasing, therefore you have reduction of the centrifugal force, particularly at the equator. So the equator will get smaller, less extended. It will compress while the high latitudes around the pole will tend to extend. It will go back from an oval shape, or ellipsoidal shape...

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: a spherical shape.

Niall: Yeah.

Pierre: So that's the first factor that can explain this opening up phenomena. It means everything is moving a lot. The tectonic plates, all the thin crust over this big mass of magma is submitted to a lot of mechanical forces, deformation, twisting. Okay?

That's the first factor that can... that's the mechanical factor that can explain the opening up of the Earth.

Now there's another factor. Remember when we talked about the reduced solar activity, it leads to a reduced positive charge...

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...within the ionosphere. Now the positive charge of the ionosphere, remember we are talking about those electrons those free electrons flying up from the Earth's surface during the fair-weather circulation.

Niall: Okay.

Pierre: So if you reduced solar activity, you have less positive charge on the ionosphere and the electrons within the Earth are not pulled as much towards the surface of the Earth. Okay?

Joe: Okay.

Pierre: Because positive attracts negative. A low, a reduced solar activity, you have less potential difference between the core of the Earth and the surface, less electrons go up this surface.

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: Okay? So now you can imagine the Earth with a negatively charged surface, because the positively charged ionosphere pulls the electrons up to the surface...

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...and a relatively positively charged core, right? This negative surface and this positive core, they pull each other. They are opposite charge.

Joe: Okay.

Pierre: So when you reduce solar activity, you reduce this pull, this electric field between the surface and the core. So now you can imagine, to give an analogy, imagine a magnet. The core of the planet is a magnet, an electromagnet. And you have all this iron filling which is basically the soil and the tectonic plate that are attracted and brought together and coherent...

Niall: The actual crust, the tectonic plates of the...

Pierre: Yeah! And the dust and the dirt and the rocks and the, you know.

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: It's macro... on a micro level layer, it is tectonic plates. And the earthquake and volcanic eruption but at micro level, it is smaller entities like rocks, like dirt and subsequent sinkholes maybe and out gassing. Anyway reduce this field between the core and the Earth's surface basically it's as if you've switched off or you reduce the magnetic force generated by your electromagnet. And all of a sudden all your iron filling, your washers, your nuts that were held together don't have this binding force anymore. They become loose.

So on one side, you have the slowdown of the planet deforms the planet, bringing it back to its spheroidal shape. And on the other side you have this strong binding force that was all this crust together that was reduced as well. So literally you have an opening up of the planet.

Niall: Okay, so it's like the planet's crust that would normally be held together by a stronger force. Due to a weaker electro force, it's held together less strongly.

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: And as a result we get what, sinkholes, increased earthquakes, increased volcanic activity? This is what you mean by the Earth opening up?

Pierre: Yeah. And you mention volcanic activity. While there are many fac... many causes...

Niall: Sure.

Pierre: ...and many effects as you can see from the discussion and it's interacting. But yes you are right, and another effect of the Earth slowing down. You were mentioning volcanism and the eruption is that the crust density is about 3, 3.5. It's not very heavy compared to the mantle, the magma that is about 5 or 5.5.

It means, imagine the Earth is turning at a given speed and slowing down. At the moment when it slows down, the mantle since it is higher density has more momentum than the crust that is light. So it'll take more time to slow down. So when you have the Earth slowing down, notice what we said previously with the lengthening of the day, you have actually crust that is slowly down faster than the mantle. So you have crustal slippage.

Niall: Okay.

Pierre: So you have the planet that changes shape, that's a lot of con... of mechanical stress. You have the binding electric force between the core and the Earth's surface that is reduced. And in addition you have this crustal slippage where you have this millions of tons of magma that start to rip against the bottom surface of the crust. So yes, you can imagine as a result you will witness increase in earthquake frequency and volcanic eruption and in sinkholes. And that's actually what happens if you check the official data.

Around 2004 you had an increase in earthquakes with magnitude 6 or greater. And a bit later, or in the middle, in 1996, you have an increase in earthquake and eruption frequency.

Niall: Okay and the sinkhole phenomenon. I mean, that's taken off now to the point that people are noticing. It's... more or less, no sooner had this array of storms bashed into Western Europe - particularly the UK - that sinkholes started opening up all over the place.

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: I mean, they weren't particularly large compared to some of the ones we have seen in recent years. But they were large enough to get... to grab headline in the UK press.

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: I have lost count of them now. At first they was... they were saying, "There is one, there's two and then there were nine, ten." I mean, it's got to the point where they are having to try to explain to people what's going on.

What are they saying here in the UK?: "Sinkholes opening up all over Britain at a terrifying rate - five times the normal rate." Now they are putting that down to, well, all the water, the flooding that took place in southern England. The water loosened up the ground therefore you have sinkholes.

What you are suggesting is that, that may be a factor, but something else has fundamentally loosened up the bind of the crust itself. And so it will... the ground will literally plummet in places because everything is a lot looser.

Pierre: Yeah. These are not mutually exclusive causes. I mean, there are sinkholes for millennia. You have some sinkholes in the Devil's Millhopper from 20,000 years ago. You have another sinkhole in Mexico, Chiapas, with rupestre? [01.52.01] and rocking paintings so...

Niall: Of course.

Pierre: There's been...

Niall: Sinkholes happen all the time but...

Pierre: And for millennia.

Niall: But they don't happen like this. This was not normal ten years ago.

Pierre: The main cause according to official science is as you mentioned dissolution of rocks.

Niall: From rainwater or what?

Pierre: Yeah or underground water.

Niall: Okay.

Pierre: But keep in mind that not all rocks are soluble. It's only the... basically limestone and similar rocks. Granite and most rocks in the... metamorphic rocks in the mountains is not soluble in water. Now if the only cause for sinkholes was rock dissolution, how could we explain this sudden amazing increase in sinkholes? Rocks didn't decide all of a sudden to dissolve all over the planet in places when... where there is no fracking, in places where there is no flood, in places where there is not necessary soluble rock.

So from that we can deduce that that is another factor at play. Involving this factor... the effect of this factor has been growing lately because until 2007 sinkholes were pretty unheard of. And now it's... now it's an epidemic, you know. And you don't have data, I didn't find data - worldwide data - about sinkholes but sometimes there are some sources.

Like, Alabama has more than 6000 known sinkholes, 6000 only in Alabama. You have this little dam of Harrisburg in Pennsylvania with 41 sinkholes. So it's 10s of thousands, maybe 100s of thousands of sinkholes that formed over the last year... the past years.

Niall: Yep. There's one here from November. After, yeah, after a large earthquake in the Philippines, they said that they found a hundred sinkholes had opened up. And it got me thinking to what you are saying about this... the solar activity and the change in the electrical balances that take place between the atmosphere and the surface of the planet and in turn between the surface of the planet and the core of the planet.

And I made that connection there. Okay, well an earthquake will shake things up and there's less of a bind... a binding force holding things together so that's going to cause a lot more sinkholes to form, so...

Pierre: Yeah, there might... there's probably a correlation.

Niall: Yeah.

Pierre: Because remember the famous sinkhole that formed in Guatemala City. You remember the one that swallowed the...

Niall: Yeah in 2007...

Pierre: And...

Niall: Yeah.

Pierre: 2010. That swallowed a three-story building and roads actually, yeah. That was super deep. Actually this very same sinkhole appeared at the same time as the massive eruption of the Pacaya volcano occurred. It was just 30 miles south of Guatemala City. So again, again, like in the example you mention, you have this seeming correlation between earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sinkholes.

Joe: On the fires, we don't have an explanation but it is bizarre because we are really talking about wildfires starting in saturated, boggy, scrubby tracks of land and...

Niall: At a cold time of the year.

Joe: And in some cases where the land's frozen and you have these fires burning, low fires burning in the scrub on totally saturated with water land that is very cold so how to explain this?

We talked about out gassing and maybe a bit of, you know, maybe some release of a small level, a low level of release of some kind of... of natural...

Niall: Of methane or something.

Joe: ...of natural gases that just get ignited and maybe they run along certain faults in the ground that are opening up as a result of this. But it reminded me of the case back in Canneto - in Italy, in Sicily, 2004. When bizarre case of, over a period of several months, various appliances - electric cables that were unplugged, water pipes, refrigerators and washing machines - were bursting into flames in this village in Italy. And they had no explanation for it.

There was a report written and the report ultimately suggested, "The fires could have been caused by high power electromagnetic emissions..."

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: "...which were not manmade and reached a power of between 12 and 15gW (giga watts)." So anybody who's, you know, good at research, go and find some evidence on the net that NATO or... not NATO, the Pentagon has been or DARPA has been developing some kind of EM pulse weapon or a microwave weapon or radio frequency weapon, directed energy weapon. Unfortunately there is no official declaration or release on such weapons existing. Apart from like land based ones, there are microwave weapons and EM pulse weapons and stuff. But in terms of, as the report found in Italy, there was no... they didn't seem to be able to find any mobile devices in the area that could have caused this so that lead people to speculate that it was coming from a lot further away like a space-based satellite perhaps or something along those lines.

But that's all super secret stuff so good like trying to find some evidence for that. But that's just another theory. But I like the one about natural gas...

Pierre: While we...

Joe: ...but it's yet to be proven.

Pierre: The electricity... possibility is interesting too - but maybe not for...

Joe: Yeah.

Pierre: In another show we can talk about it. But just a long story short, if some of you are interested in it, you can type "Freund". T.F. Freund is a seismologist and a physicist who wrote a paper titled "Rocks that Crackle and Sparkle and Glow: Strange Earthquake Phenomena". And actually he describes and demonstrates quite brilliantly that rocks that are believed to be nonconductive electrically speaking, when subjected to some mechanical stress, it becomes highly conductive so from that we can deduce that within the ground you can have some earthquake and other phenomena, electric phenomena, that are quite similar to lightening you can seen in the atmosphere. Some strong discharges aiming at rebalancing some...

Niall: Yeah...

Pierre: ...charge disbalance.

Niall: For me the common thread here is, even if we can't explain exactly how each of these phenomena happen, the huge amount of energy required to start these fires or to set off...

Pierre: Yeah.

Niall: ...sinkholes that are 40 foot deep in the middle of downtown Ottawa and Detroit which happened in the last 2 weeks. 40 foot deep, we're talking - I'm pretty sure that we are talking about below the water mains. You can't blame a faulty pipe for that. Or the one in Kansas last year that is still growing - it is like the size of a lunar crater.

Joe: No, it's pretty clear that the ground is opening up and it's splitting apart underneath and...

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: I mean and that's the cause of the sinkholes, you know. As Pierre described, that's probably... his explanation for that is probably close to the mark.

Niall: Yeah.

Joe: And...

Niall: The common thread being that this... it changes in the distribution of electrical activity like, for example, when it comes to weather.

Pierre: Mhmm.

Niall: Normally there is a far-weather system where, you know, storms happen and there is lightening and this is the way of redistributing the balance...

Pierre: Mhmm.

Niall: ...between a positively charged atmosphere and a negatively charged renewed active and increases congruence? [02.00.20] and reduces solar activity. It is changing the way in which... that normal charge rebalance happens. It's got more punch...

Joe: Mhmm.

Niall: ...and it happens...

Pierre: More frequently.

Joe: Yeah.

Niall: More frequently.

Pierre: Yeah, more frequently. It's like a... basically you can picture; you can imagine the atmosphere as a condenser.

Niall: What's a condenser?

Joe: Something that condenses.

Pierre: A condenser is; imagine two electrodes, okay? And between these two electrodes you have a dielectric - an insulating material like wood. Okay? This condense in these electrodes, you build up charge, okay? You increase the charge between both of the electrodes. It goes up, up, up, up, up... and all of a sudden when you reach the... that in English is called, the breakout voltage, it discharges. It is like a bug zapper. Okay?

So, okay, imagine the atmosphere as a giant bug zapper with two electrodes. The Earth's surface is one electrode. The ionosphere is the other electrode. In between you have the dielectric, the insulating material, the atmosphere, okay? Now when you add this cometary dust in the atmosphere it becomes less conductive. Okay? So it's... since it's less conductive it will, instead of discharging, it will discharge more frequently...

Joe: But not to the atmosphere.

Pierre: ...because you don't have fair-weather circulation anymore, you have this leakage current, no?

Joe: So...

Pierre: Usually you have a leak... a progressive...

Joe: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...permanent leakage current between two electrodes. Even if you don't have a spark, they keep trying to rebalance and there is a electronic change. Here you don't have it because it's more...

Niall: That's right.

Pierre: ...insulating.

Niall: Mhmm.

Pierre: So....

Joe: So you have more frequent outbreaks of storms, electrical storms...

Pierre: Yeah. It doesn't rebalance through fair-weather circulation...

Joe: Mhmm.

Pierre: ...with a... through leakage current basically. And so it has to rebalance through discharges. The spark the bug enters the inter-electrode space.

Joe: Alright. On that shocking note, we will leave it there for this week. We hope you enjoyed the show. Thanks to our caller and our chat room chatters. Next week...

Niall: Next week we are going to be talking to John Perkins. He is the author of Economic... Confessions of an Economics Hitman so we're going to have... get the inside scoop on...

Joe: On how the economic...

Niall: ...of the IMF.

Pierre: Yeah.

Joe: The Ukraine.

Niall: The Ukraine.

Pierre: Russia.

Niall: West and Eastern Europe, Russia.

Joe: Yeah.

Niall: And pretty much most of the world.

Joe: Yep, okay. That will be a good one so tune in for that. As I said, thanks for listening, have a good one and...