7 Days - Three Sides To Every Story




To read previously published chapters, click here...

Patrick Lee’s debut novel, The Breach, is the beginning of a series featuring Travis Chase, a man caught up in the chain of events surrounding the world’s most violently kept secret. Patrick’s website is

www.patrickleefiction.com.


 

Three Sides To Every Story

Nick saw the car just ahead, parked under an elm on Jefferson Drive. He and Ashleigh picked up their pace as they covered the last fifty yards to it.

Charlie Miles sat at the wheel, a silhouette in the near-darkness. He'd waited here while the two of them had gone to find Becktel in his hideaway office. Now Miles saw them coming, and Nick heard a soft thunk as the car's locks disengaged. Ashleigh opened the rear passenger door and Nick followed her through it, leaving Miles alone up front.

"Drive," Nick said, and gave directions to the place he had in mind: another cheap motel like the one he'd checked into earlier. Dirty, random, anonymous—safe.

Miles pulled away from the curb and took a left onto 3rd Street. The Capitol Dome slid by on the right; to the left, the broad swath of the National Mall slipped past.

Nick stared at the back of Miles's head and thought of the videotape he'd seen just days earlier. Women bound to tables, pleading for their lives, only to be executed while their husbands were made to watch. Miles had obviously played some role in those abductions and murders—after all, he'd known exactly where Ashleigh was being held when he'd staged his mock-rescue of her.

How involved was this guy? Neck deep? Waist deep?

Either way, he couldn't be trusted. Unfortunately, there was no real choice but to work with him for now: he had the connections the two of them needed. He also had the same enemies they had, and there was a kind of bleak reliability in that. It would do. For now.

"You get what you wanted?" Miles said.

Nick felt the shape of the USB drive in his pocket. "Yep. Every file."

Nick's laptop was in the gym bag at his feet, but he made no move to turn it on and upload what he'd copied from Senator Becktel's computer. There was something pressing harder on his mind just now: the words he'd seen on Becktel's monitor while the download was in progress.

Popov wants action.

The Brethren want the Apocalypse.

Putin wants Little Big Boy.

"We need to sort out who exactly we're up against here," Nick said. "Who and what. After all I've seen in these past few days, here's my read on it: there are three separate entities moving toward the same objective: control of some weapon system called Little Big Boy." He ticked off the three players on his fingertips: "Senator Becktel wants it, Putin wants it, and the Brethren want it."

"Are we assuming my father is acting independently?" Ashleigh said. "Given his real past... his origin... isn't it possible that he's just serving Putin's ends at this point?"

"Neither scenario is good," Nick said. "Let's just consider both to be plausible until we know more."

Up front, Miles cocked his head. "What are you saying about Becktel? He's working with the Russians?"

"Strictly speaking," Ashleigh said, "he is Russian."

In the rearview mirror, Nick saw Miles's eyebrows knit together. Saw the man's gaze darting back and forth, not over the traffic ahead but over some logical terrain in his own mind: a landscape of rivalries and double-crosses, of power and all its less-than-scrupulous suitors. He looked like a wolf who'd just learned of some new dynamic among the pack's leadership, assessing possible impacts on his own standing.

"Interesting," he said at last.

"The name Popov mean anything to you?" Nick aksed.

Miles expelled a breath that was almost a laugh. "I should've guessed," he said. "The son of a bitch. If Becktel really is still working for the Russians, Popov is his handler. Bank on it. But, like you said, even if the Senator is on their team, he might still be playing his own game. Maybe he has his own ideas for Little Big Boy."

"Why do you say that?" Ashleigh said.

"Because there's one thing that sets Senator Becktel apart from everyone else in this game: Putin, Popov, the Brethren, the three of us... we all know that Little Big Boy is a weapon of some kind. We know it has some relation to nukes, and we know that it's somehow related to the PRIMROSE system of radiation sensors. But that's all we know. We don't know what

Little Big Boy actually is, or what it does. But Becktel does, which is a hell of an upper hand to have and not take advantage of. Especially for a man like him."

For a long moment they all rode in silence. No one could argue against that point.

Nick's hand returned unconsciously to the USB drive.

"It's time we had that advantage ourselves," Nick said.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

They reached the motel five minutes later, checked into two adjacent rooms on the second level, and gathered in the one Nick and Ashleigh had taken. It could've doubled for the place Nick had stayed in earlier, right down to the constellation of drop-burns on the ragged carpet.

Nick took the laptop from his gym bag, opened it on the bed and, within a few minutes, had the USB drive's contents uploaded to it. Then the three of them went through the files one by one, opening each of them and scanning them closely, no matter how innocuous they looked. It was an old trick to bury sensitive information deep inside an otherwise-boring document.

Their shovels hit pay dirt on the seventh file. It was a JPEG image, an optical scan of a memo with the Defense Secretary's letterhead at the top. It was almost entirely redacted, not with magic marker like in the old days, but with digital processing. Neat black rectangles, maybe right out of Microsoft Paint, had been dragged to cover all but one paragraph in the middle of the document:

The Secretary would like to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss security measures surrounding LBB (formerly Whiskey 7). This is

a matter of some urgency.

Nick heard Miles's breath catch, and then the man's hand shot to the computer screen. His fingertip traced an underline below the words LBB (formerly Whiskey 7).

"L-B-B," Miles whispered. "Little Big Boy... Whiskey Seven. Holy hell..."

He stood upright and paced to the window overlooking the parking lot, plowing his hands through his hair. Nick and Ashleigh watched him, trading a quick look between themselves.

"I know what it is," Miles said. "I've known all this time, and didn't even realize."

"Tell us," Ashleigh said.

For a moment, Miles didn't reply.

Then, still looking away over the sodium-lit sprawl, he nodded.

"Early in my career I did a stint with DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. I did security and monitoring for a special division designated Engineering Unit W, though everyone just called it Whiskey. Probably the scariest people I ever met. A dozen engineers, not one of them able to hold a conversation like a human being. None of them had a wife or kids, or even a friend in the world. These men had all faked their deaths—as if they had lives to start with—to come and work for DARPA, designing things that weren't even possible to build."

"What would be the point of that?" Ashleigh said.

Miles turned from the window. "I should've said, ‘things that weren't possible to build yet.' Whiskey's role was to design ahead of present technology. Develop weapons that would only become feasible ten or fifteen years down the road, with predicted advances in computing power, scaling-down of chip sizes, all that stuff. Project Seven seemed like the least realistic thing Whiskey ever came up with—on any timeline."

"What was it?" Nick said. "What is it?"

Miles paced. Somewhere out in the night, a car horn blared. Voices yelled, laughed.

"At a glance, it's a missile," Miles said. "Man-portable. Hell, it's probably child-portable. It's about the size of the tube inside a roll of paper towels. It flies just above the ground, fast as a .30-06 bullet, and then it kicks out a little drag chute and sets down right beside its target, soft as if it fell off a couch."

"And then what?" Ashleigh asked, not sure she wanted to hear the answer.

"It opens and releases its payload,

which is the part I thought could never

be built." He stopped pacing and stared at them. "The payload is a swarm of remote aircraft, each one about the size of an apple seed. They communicate wirelessly with each other, and with a chip inside the rocket casing. The rocket, in turn, communicates with the operator, who controls the device from a wireless terminal with a range of 10 miles. That person directs the swarm to enter the target through air ducts, wiring ports, plumbing or any other available opening."

Miles shook his head. "Nope, only one kind. A nuclear missile silo."

Nick felt his pulse begin to press against his eardrums. He thought he could guess the rest of what Miles would say.

Miles saw his expression and nodded. "The swarm takes control of the nuke. Seeks out the key access points in the arming electronics, hacks in within a few minutes. At that point, the remote operator who fired the little rocket has full command of the silo."

"When you say the swarm controls the nuke," Ashleigh said, "you mean the remote operator could actually launch the damn thing?"

"Not only launch it, but re-target it to any coordinates he chooses. He could also detonate it right there in the silo, or just fry all the circuitry and render the nuke useless. The last option is probably what the guys at Whiskey had in mind. Use it against some upstart nuclear power like Pakistan or North Korea. Send in teams of Force Recon marines to stake out every silo in the country, and then in one coordinated night, eliminate their entire arsenal."

Nick thought about it. His eyes went to the laptop, and the one paragraph that hadn't been redacted.

"Becktel helped the Defense Secretary establish security for Little Big Boy," Nick said. "Which means he knows the security inside and out. If he decides to make a move to get control of the system... he can probably do it. God knows what he has in mind for this technology."

"Or what Putin or The Brethren would do," Ashleigh said, "when and if they learn its capability. This could get out of control. Rapidly."

"Right," Miles replied, "and there's one more thing: PRIMROSE is useless against this. Think about it…our network of radiation sensors have to be pre-programmed with the locations of our current nukes, otherwise there'd be constant alerts."

Before Nick could reply, his phone rang. He took it out and checked the display.

Koleson Fletcher.

Nick answered, then listened for several seconds as Fletcher spoke. He'd just arrived at the White House, having recovered from Miles's tazing a half an hour earlier. And there'd been news waiting for him when he reached his office. Lots of it. Nick remained silent while he relayed it, and then they ended the call.

He glanced at Miles and then Ashleigh.

"Russian military forces worldwide just stepped up to a heightened level of readiness," Nick said. "The president is about to move us to DEFCON 3 in response. So we can drop the future tense. Whatever this thing is, it's already happening."



<< Return to the October 2010 Index

 

Tapping the brakes on transgenderism in 2023

Hunter Martin / Contributor | Getty Images

2022 was the year of the emperor’s new clothes—where we were supposed to pretend that someone like Lia Thomas is a woman, legitimately beating actual women in swimming competitions. This carpet-bombing of common sense won’t be letting up anytime soon. Just before the New Year, the World Boxing Council announced that it’s going to create a separate category for transgender boxers. The WBC president said:

we are doing this because of safety and inclusion. We have been the leaders in rules for women’s boxing—so the dangers of a man fighting a woman will never happen because of what we are going to put in place.

After all the insanity you’ve been told to accept about transgender athletes in recent years, his statement is remarkable. He’s admitting what common sense people have been saying all along—that trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages (from the fact that they’re actually male), and that those natural advantages could endanger biological women.

Trans athletes identifying as women still carry natural physical advantages.

The WBC president went on to say:

In boxing, a man fighting a woman must never be accepted regardless of gender change. There should be no gray area around this, and we want to go into it with transparency and the correct decisions. Woman to man or man to woman transgender change will never be allowed to fight a different gender by birth.

Maybe the WBC is on to something here. Maybe the only way to solve the stupidity of letting biological males play female sports is to create a separate transgender category in every sport. That would make competition fair again. However, the trans agenda will never accept this because it doesn’t validate their transition—in fact, it admits that these are not authentically female athletes.

There is some rare, good news on this front. In late December, the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted to uphold a Florida school-board policy that requires transgender students to use the bathroom of their biological sex. Of course, the Left won’t accept this, so this case will probably go to the Supreme Court sooner than later. You’re supposed to always believe the science, except when it comes to your own body parts.

You’re supposed to always believe the science, except when it comes to your own body parts.

And by the way, if the Left truly cared about unbiased science as it pertains to transgenderism, they’d listen to their favorite European country, Sweden. Sweden’s national board of health recently updated its guidelines on treating children with gender dysphoria. Unlike the Biden administration and the U.S. medical establishment right now, Sweden’s new emphasis is caution:

the scientific data is INSUFFICIENT to assess the effects of puberty-inhibiting and gender-sensitive hormone therapy of children and young people.

The Swedish guidelines also mention the prevalence of de-transition cases as another reason for tapping the brakes on sex-change surgeries for children.

Common sense apparently does still exist, even in places like Sweden. If only America would listen.

Glenn wants to dive deep into different philosophical topics this year. As CRT and woke curricula are demonizing the "western tradition," it is vitally important that we preserve the tradition that gave birth our nation and gives context to the culture we live in today. Here are the top 11 books to give you a crash course in the western philosophic tradition. If you don't have the time to read them, you can find an overview to each of the books below!

1. Plato's Republic

The first titan of Greek philosophy, Plato articulated the set of questions that would drive the future western philosophical tradition. The pre-eminent question among Greek philosophers was "what is the thing that explains everything." In philosophical lingo, this question is framed as "what is the logos or the good." Plato argued that reality could be explained in terms of the "forms." For example, when you see multiple examples of a "courageous" act, then, Plato would argue, there is such a thing as "courage." The form of "the good" is the form that gives meaning to all of reality. Humans use their rational minds to contemplate what is good and then align their desires to "the good" in order to pursue it.

2. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

The second titan of Greek philosophy was none other than Aristotle, who was a student of Plato. Aristotle deviated from his teacher's claims about "forms" and instead argued that every single thing has a purpose, a telos. For example, the telos of a chair is to provide a place for someone to sit. In the same way that a chair's purpose is to provide a place for someone to sit, Aristotle argues that the telos of human beings is to pursue happiness.

In the first page of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle claims that every action is done for the sake of pursuing happiness, although, all too often, our actions are misplaced. We often pursue things we believe will make us happy when, in reality, they are fleeting, momentary pleasures that result in despair, heartbreak, or pain. Rather than conforming the world around us to fit our momentary desires, Aristotle argues that we achieve happiness by understanding the nature of the world around us and how we fit into it by actively cultivating virtues in order to make our soul "fit to be happy." Work and action, therefore, are not mere moral "to-do lists," but rather bring us fulfillment.

3. Augustine's City of God

If Plato is the first titan of ancient philosophy, then Augustine is the first titan of medieval philosophy. Medieval philosophy begins with the re-discovery of ancient philosophical texts that had been lost throughout the Roman Empire. As Christianity had taken root and spread across the western world, medieval philosophy integrated these newly-discovered texts into Christian theology. Augustine is the pre-eminent medieval Neo-platonic philosopher, incorporating Plato's philosophy into Christian theology.

Augustine claimed that God himself is the ultimate "form" or "the good" from which all of reality derives its meaning and existence. A thing is "good" insofar as it coalesces with the way God intended it to be. When a thing stays away from God's intention, it is "not good." From this, we get the Augustinian definition of "evil" as a "privation" or "absence of goodness," which ultimately corresponds to God's nature and character.

4. Aquinas' Summa Theologica

Just as Augustine incorporated Plato's philosophy into Christian theology, the second medieval titan, Thomas Aquinas, incorporated Aristotelian philosophy into Christian theology. Building from Aristotle, Aquinas argues that Christ is our happiness, the longing of every human heart and the object of every human action. Though we may think we are pursuing happiness outside of Christ, our this pursuit is misplaced and will result in fleeting pleasure and pain. True happiness and fulfillment, Aquinas argues, is found in Christ himself and the pursuit of his nature.

**Note: Aquinas' Summa is one of the largest works ever written and contains arguments about many different subjects--there are concise versions that will save you a lot of time!

5. Francis Bacon's Novem Organum

If medieval philosophy is defined by the incorporation of ancient philosophy into orthodox Christian theology, then the Enlightenment is defined as the rejection of both. English philosopher Francis Bacon kicked off the Enlightenment with a total rejection of the Aristotelian view of reality. The title of his book, the Novum Organum, or "the new order," is a deliberate tease of Aristotle's Organon, or "the order of things." Bacon's "new order" purports that, contrary to Aristotle, there is no inherent "nature" or "purpose" in reality. Rather, reality is something that we can conquer by means of knowledge and force, dissecting nature to its fundamental parts and reconstructing it into what we want. Bacon is considered the father of the scientific method, creating a testable means through which we can understand, break down and re-construct nature.

6. Descartes' Discourse on Method

Descartes is best known for his famous assertion, cogito ergo sum, or "I think, therefore, I am." In Discourse on Method, Descartes embarks on a rigorous endeavor to doubt anything that can be doubted. He postulates that all of reality can be doubted; however, the one thing that cannot be doubted, he concludes, is that there must be someonewho is doubting. Though we may think that we are in the matrix, we are thinking, therefore, we must exist.

Descartes's rigorous skepticism introduced a brand-new burden of truth. In order for something to be true, it must be beyond all reasonable doubt. Many continue to use Descartes' skepticism as a way to challenge religious belief. According to these modern-day skeptics, unless you can prove that God exists beyond any reasonable doubt, there is no way to actually know whether he exists. The severing of knowledge and faith is often attributed to Descartes.

7. David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature

Scottish philosopher David Hume took aim at both Plato and Aristotle. One of his most famous and consequential claims about human nature is, "reason is and always ought to be slave of the passions." This took direct aim at Plato's view of human nature. Plato argued that our reason or "rationality" should always rule our passions so that we will desire what is good. Hume flips this on its head, claiming that our reason is helplessly enslaved to our passions and will inevitably justify what we will already want. From this, Hume introduced a new articulation of moral relativism, claiming that humans are not able to choose between what is good and what is evil, but rather will choose what they want over what they don't.

8. Kant's Contemplation on the Metaphysics of Morals

Hume's moral relativism sparked panic within German philosopher Immanuel Kant. If we will inevitably do what we desire, how can we ever choose to do something good and moral for its own sake? We must, according to Kant, separate morality completely from the passions if it's to be saved. Kant, therefore, argues that duty is the highest good that man can aspire to. We do the right thing, not because we want to--on the contrary, we do the "right thing" because it's our duty to do so, especially when we don't want to. This breaks away from the Aristotelian notion that our happiness is inextricably intertwined with the pursuit of "the good."

9. Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil

Nietzsche wasn't convinced by either Hume or Kant's efforts to retain some semblance of civility or relativistic moral standard. According to Nietzsche, if there is no such thing as transcendent morality, then "moral maxims" are reduced to meaningless words purported by the people in power. Morality, therefore, becomes a game of persuasion at best, coercion and force at worst. People are reduced to winners and losers, opressors and victims, and whoever comes out on top gets to impose their desired view of the world on the losers. Therefore, the goal of the individual is to cultivate the "will to power," to become the powerful "ubermensch" or "superhuman," or else you will be reduced to a victim susceptible to other people's coercion and oppression.

10. C.S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man

After the Enlightenment ends in a grand, destructive finale with Nietzsche, Christian philosophers in the 20th century attempt to pick up the pieces and resurrect the ancient and medieval philosophies that had been cast to the side. In The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis famously laments that mankind has become "men without chests." This is a direct reference to Plato's view of human nature--there is nothing linking our mind to our heart. Intellectually, we have dissected all of reality into its individual bits, stripping it of its holistic beauty, while also succumbing to our whims and passions with no notion of a transcendent moral law. Lewis calls for the re-marriage of our minds and our hearts, so that we will not only pursue what is good, but moreover, we will desire to do so.

11. Alasdair McIntyre's After Virtue

The latter part of the 20th century saw the resurgence of Aristotelian ethics after being largely dismissed over the past 400 years during the Enlightenment. Scottish Catholic philosopher Alasdair McIntyre was and continues to be one of the foremost leaders of this movement. In his magnum opus, After Virtue, McIntyre takes aim at the entire Enlightenment project itself and shows how it ultimately fails by its own standards. If reality is a mere power dynamic, as Nietzsche argues, and if morality is an act of persuasion and passion, as Hume purports, then we have no reason to take their views seriously. If all of reality is relative, then the statement "reality is relative" is itself relative. It becomes victim of the self-refutation of its own standards. Transcendent morality, he argues, must exist, because there must be some standard by which we judge reality and can say with determination, "this is good" and "this is evil."

The Biden Admin EXPANDED abortion access because they DON'T believe in the Constitution

Joshua Lott / Stringer, JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

This month has already produced an extreme example of why we need a functional and more conservative Congress in order for America to have a chance at moving forward—because the Left does not believe in the Constitution.

Sure, if you confronted a Democrat in Congress, they would probably claim some sort of allegiance to the Constitution—but as a practical matter, they do not believe in it.

Instead, the Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch. Why? Because it has the furthest reach through all the various departments, and it can move the fastest—in short, because it’s the most dictatorial. It only takes a department head to write a new memo, or even better, the President to sign a new executive order to carry the force of law.

The Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch.

Do you recall any of the Left’s favorite Supreme Court decisions over the years—something like gay marriage for example—and how Republicans immediately tried to subvert it, using the executive branch to try to nullify the decision? Yeah, that never happened. But that is exactly what Democrats have done in recent weeks to expand abortion access.

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions. When the miraculous overturning of Roe v. Wade happened last summer, President Biden called it “a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions.

Recently the FDA approved local pharmacies to issue abortion pills. For the first 20 years after these pills were developed, they were not treated like typical prescription drugs. They had to be dispensed in-person by a doctor. That in-person requirement is now gone.

Keep in mind that the Left’s go-to line is that abortion is always about the health and safety of women, yet a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions. Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of abortion-related ER visits following use of the abortion pills increased by 507 percent.

Chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions.

And now the Biden administration is making these less-safe abortions much more accessible. Thanks to the FDA’s rule change, Walgreens and CVS have already agreed to dispense abortion pills in states where abortion is legal—effectively turning these stores into new abortion clinics.

As for states that have abortion bans, "Team Biden" announced a new way around those too. Three weeks ago, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal. What’s their rationale? That the sender cannot know for sure whether the recipient will use the pills illegally or not. So it’s totally okay.

The U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal.

Georgetown Law professor Lawrence Gostin told the Washington Post that this Justice Department opinion is “a major expansion of abortion access in the United States.”

So, to recap—the Biden administration has used the FDA, the Justice Department, and the Post Office, which all fall under the executive branch, to provide an end-run around the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Expanding abortion was easy—simple policy tweaks and declarations that carry the force of law without an ounce of input from actual lawmakers in Congress—all because it comes from the grotesque, bloated, apparently pro-death executive branch.

Glenn is one of the most outspoken critics of the World Economic Forum and their vision to use crises to reconstruct the world order known as The Great Reset. The recent WEF summit in Davos confirms what Glenn has long warned about: globalist elites seek to upend our democracy, freedoms, and way of life to achieve their utopian climate goals. Here are 15 quotes from the 2023 Davos Summit, revealing their true intentions in their own words:

1. Saving the planet

When you hear the word, "Davos," the first thought that should pop into your mind is an elite group getting together to save the world from imminent climate disaster... at least they think of themselves that way. According to John Kerry:

I mean, it's so almost extraterrestrial to think about saving the planet.

2. Private jets

What most people think when they hear the word "Davos" is a group of global elites flying in on private jets to talk about climate change... and yes, John Kerry does own a private jet, no matter how many times he denies it:

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

You always hear some weird, dystopian projects coming out of WEF, like "The Global Collaboration Village," a new metaverse community aimed at strengthening "global cooperation." It sounds like the next installment of Brave New World. According to Klaus Schwab, Founder and President of the WEF:

The Global Collaboration Village is the pioneering effort to use the metaverse for public good, to create global cooperation and to strengthen global cooperation in the metaverse or using metaverse technologies. For me, it's a dream coming true because the village allows the Forum to create a more larger and open platform where everybody can participate.

4. Climate revolution

However, the core theme throughout WEF summits is the immediate need for a climate revolution and how businesses are selfishly blocking the revolution because they want to make an extra buck. Here's how John Kerry summed up the sentiment:

How do we get there? The lesson I have learned in the last years [...] is money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

5. Do or die

This often turns into alarmist language, like having to choose between wealth and our planet's survival... Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at University of Amsterdam, said it eloquently:

If we do the minimum at this pivotable moment in our history, then we and our children – even if we are rich – will live in the danger zone. But if we – business people, governments, citizens, cities – take action today, then we and our children will have a future worth looking forward to.

6. Colossal risks

Potsdam Institute's director Johan Rockström, used similar language, claiming we are "taking colossal risks with the future of civilization":

We are taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth, we are degrading the life support systems that we all depend on, we are actually pushing the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization, pushing Earth outside of the state that has supported civilization since we left the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago.

7. Rain bombs

"Colossal risks" like... rain bombs? We didn't make that up. Ask Al Gore:

That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs.

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

How do we secure our survival? According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we have to "end our addiction to fossil fuels." This entails wiping out our entire energy industry, displacing millions of workers, and relying on global governments to usher in a new green industry. In his words:

So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap, and that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution, to end the addiction to fossil fuels, and to stop our self-defeating war on nature.

9. Complete transformation

It isn't hyperbolic to argue that the globalist climate goals will completely transform the world economy. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted:

The net-zero transformation is already causing huge industrial, economic and geopolitical shifts – by far the quickest and the most pronounced in our lifetime. It is changing the nature of work and the shape of our industry.

10. Scientific necessity

Of course, to bring about this "net-zero" transformation, we will have to override small, "political expediencies" like democracy to do what is "scientifically necessary." According to Zurich Insurance Group’s head of sustainability risk John Scott:

We’re living in a world right now where what’s scientifically necessary, and what is politically expedient don’t match.

11. Illegal hate speech

Doing away with "political expediencies" would also require the censorship of dissent, which would likely manifest in hate-speech laws. When asked by Brian Stelter how the discussion of disinformation relates to everything else happening today in Davos, European Commission VP Věra Jourová shared this prediction:

Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.

12. Climate first

We will also have to forego national interests on the international stage. America won't be able to advocate for policies and interests that benefit Americans. Instead, we will sacrifice national interests for the sake of global climate interests. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said:

The key question is not China First, US First, Europe First. The key question for all of us is Climate First.

13. The role of war

We can also expect globalist leaders to use crises, like the war in Ukraine, to expedite the "net-zero transformation." Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz said:

Ultimately, our goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 has been given an additional boost by Putin’s war. Now we have even more cause to move away from fossil fuels.

14. Blame game

Globalist leaders will continue to blame ALL of the crises in our society on climate change to justify the "net-zero transition," from the energy shortage to "mistrust, selfishness [and] xenophobia." Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez said:

Our present struggle is not only against Putin or the energy shortage. It is also against fear, mistrust, selfishness, xenophobia, and environmental disaster. And its outcome will define life in the West and beyond for decades to come.

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

While we sacrifice our national interests for the sake of the "greater global good," we can expect our foreign enemies, like China, to benefit. Suisse Chairman Axel Lehmann said:

The growth forecasts now for China is 4.5%. I would not personally be surprised when that would be topped.

Conclusion

Glenn has been clear about the distinction between wanting to transition to green practices on your own accord and being forced into that transition by globalist, unelected elites. Leaders at Davos will continue to use alarmist language to justify their crackdown on democracy and freedom to bring about their leftist utopia. We have to cut through the alarmist language and in order to protect our freedoms.