The goals of global 1% in killing Western religions---bringing back 3000BC HINDI-BRAHMIN paganism will not only happen in Western Hemisphere, but Eastern Orthodox Catholic religion goes away as well. Below we see global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS KNIGHTS OF MALTA creating the distance between PUTIN now because PUTIN is bringing on continuous wars WW3 and returning Eastern block to far-right wing global corporate fascism----STALINIST MARXISM no religion.
So, the religious leaders have known what MOVING FORWARD would look like several decades ago----these religious leaders know the goals of ending the religions THEY LEAD-----as 5% freemason/Greek FAKE religious players.
“This is a victory of good over evil, light over darkness.” That’s how Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko described the announcement Thursday that the Orthodox Church’s Istanbul-based leader, Patriarch Bartholomew, will grant Ukraine’s Church independence from Russia'.
These are the geo-political/religious structures that led to WW2-----it was all planned as it is today-----the global banking 5% freemason/Greek players as FAKE religious leaders and civil unrest/civil war players.
Bartholomew's position today in MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1% is different than those Russian Orthodox Catholic leaders during TROTSKY/LENIN/STALIN MARXISM killing religion in Eastern block-----today, BARTHOLOMEW, as POPE FRANCIS are directly involved in killing the Catholic religion altogether.
Ukraine’s Spiritual Split From Russia Could Trigger a Global Schism
For Moscow, the crisis is geopolitical as well as religious.
Oct 11, 2018
“This is a victory of good over evil, light over darkness.” That’s how Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko described the announcement Thursday that the Orthodox Church’s Istanbul-based leader, Patriarch Bartholomew, will grant Ukraine’s Church independence from Russia.
In televised remarks, Ukraine’s president dubbed this a “historic event,” which it undoubtedly is: For more than three centuries, Ukraine and Russia have been religiously united within the Russian Orthodox Church. It was a union Poroshenko characterized this summer as a “direct threat to the national security of Ukraine,” given his view that the Russian Orthodox Church fully supports Kremlin policy; he said then that it was “absolutely necessary to cut off all the tentacles with which the aggressor country operates inside the body of our state.”
Now, four years after Russia annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, Ukraine is asserting its territorial independence by demanding its own national Church. For Russia, the crisis is geopolitical as well as spiritual. The stakes are so high that in order to protest Ukraine’s religious autonomy, Russia may respond harshly enough to trigger a deep schism in the Christian world.
At the core of this issue is a fundamental question of both religious and territorial identity, as Russian actions in eastern Ukraine aimed to undermine the country’s very independence. The Ukrainian Church had sought independence from the Russian one for decades, but it only became “inevitable after the Russian military excursion in eastern Ukraine, no question about it,” said Aristotle Papanikolaou, a co-chair of Orthodox Christian studies at Fordham University. Ukraine will join several other countries that have their own independent national Churches, among them Serbia, Greece, and Romania.
FORDHAM UNIVERSITY IS OF COURSE A GLOBAL BANKING 1% FREEMASONRY SCHOOL----NOT RELIGIOUS ---NOT TELLING THE TRUTH.
The Russian Church claims that Ukraine and its backers are the ones pushing the Church to the brink of catastrophe. A top Russian Church official said that by supporting Ukraine’s bid for an independent Church, Istanbul “threatens the global Orthodox world with a schism.” That schism would have an outsized effect on Russia: Severing ties between the Russian Church and its parishes in Ukraine would strip Moscow of a crucial component of its sphere of influence to its west. George Demacopoulos, the other chair of Orthodox Christian studies at Fordham, told me an independent Ukrainian Church would strip the Russian Church of a third of its jurisdiction, and Russia would “symbolically suffer a very big blow because they have been presenting themselves as the leaders of the Orthodox world in the 21st century.”
The Moscow Church “is frequently accused of being a tool of the Kremlin,” Katherine Younger, who directs the Ukraine in European Dialogue program at the Institute for Human Sciences in Vienna, told me. She said she believes that’s why Poroshenko portrayed the issue of Church independence “as a matter of state security”— it’s “a way to weaken a major ideological interference and source of Russian propaganda.” Poroshenko’s apparent concerns have some basis in fact: The Russian hackers indicted by the U.S. special prosecutor in July have tried for years to access private correspondence from top Orthodox Church officials, according to an investigation by the Associated Press. And beginning with the 2014 invasion of Crimea, the Russian Orthodox Church--which is not technically affiliated with Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin--has been accused of spreading “misinformation” about Ukraine.
There are a few different ways Russia could react to Patriarch Bartholomew’s announcement. It could withhold recognition of Ukraine’s Church, which would be a purely symbolic statement of disapproval. Or, according to Demacopoulos, Russia might take “the nuclear option of breaking sacramental unity,” which means people who belong to Orthodox Churches aside from the Russian one could not receive communion while in Russia. That might not sound like much to outsiders, Papanikolaou said, but “it’s a pretty severe step.”
The fight over the Church goes back to a single event that took place more than 1,000 years ago. In 988, Vladimir the Great, the prince of an empire known as Kievan Rus (and Putin’s namesake), converted to Christianity in what is now Ukraine. Russia claims that empire as the birthplace of its historical heritage as a nation. But Ukraine does, too, and Ukraine is the country that actually has Kiev in its territory.
In 2014, Russia annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea. In a speech at the Kremlin, Putin argued that Crimea belongs in Russia, since ethnic Russians form a majority there. His reasoning also extended beyond Crimea: He seemed to declare that Ukraine and Russia (and Belarus, a smaller player in the ongoing geopolitical tensions) have always been joined together as “one people” through the Church. “Kiev”—the Ukrainian capital city, in the middle of the country, far from Crimea and Russia—“is the mother of Russian cities,” Putin said. All of this, he explained, stemmed from Prince Vladimir’s “spiritual feat of adopting Orthodoxy” more than a millennium ago.
If this battle of religious and national autonomy has been raging for so long, why is it reaching its climax right now? Ukraine first sought Church independence in 1921, after World War I, but the movement has steadily grown since the 1990s, when the Soviet Union fell and Ukraine again became a sovereign nation. Now, Younger explained, “the catalyst is a calculation by Poroshenko,” who can leverage Thursday’s announcement—for which he spent months lobbying—in the lead-up to presidential elections next March. “The creation of a canonical … Church in Ukraine would be a major win for [Poroshenko],” Younger said. “I get the sense that the administration is casting about for a win.”
A spokesperson for the Moscow Church, Vladimir Legoyda, said last month that Russia “will break the Eucharistic communion” with the Church’s central body in Istanbul if Ukraine receives independence. Despite Russia’s stern warnings, Demacopoulos and Papanikolaou, the Fordham professors, don’t think it will take that severe step. Instead, they believe the other independent Churches will slowly line up to recognize Ukraine’s Church, even though it might take Moscow several generations. “You have to understand,” Demacopoulos said, “that this is a 2,000-year-old Church, so that’s not that much time.”
The Orthodox Church might recover, but Russia-Ukraine tensions will likely deteriorate even further. It boils down to whether Russia can continue to be, as Putin portrays it, the standard-bearer of the Orthodox tradition, even with far fewer adherents and far less territory than it previously enjoyed. Framing himself as “the political defender of Christians” has helped Putin rally national support, Demacopoulos told me. It’s no surprise that he isn’t prepared to relinquish that part of his image.
To show how far in advance all these geo-political decisions are made BEFORE war has started-----we saw a decade ago the maps of HOLY LAND/MIDDLE EAST-------maps of this UKRAINIAN CRIMEAN region in what will be THE FINAL SOLUTION. These maps a decade ago showed NO STATE OF ISRAEL in HOLY LAND ----it was handed to MUSLIM STATES. Now, if our 99% of WE THE REAL MUSLIMS think this is a win for them ----they need to know global banking 1% TRIBE OF JUDAH KNIGHTS OF MALTA understand the entire region of near and middle-east will be a DUST BOWL and uninhabitable. So, no doubt our 99% of REAL religious Jewish citizens will be forced to fight in WW3 to protect a Jewish HOLY LAND that will not even exist on POST-WAR maps.
Meanwhile, as Eastern Orthodox Catholic leader exits Russia for UKRAINE moving our 99% of REAL Catholic citizens into what will be the most brutal atrocity-filled war zone to include CRIMEA -----we will see who those global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS TRIBE OF JUDAH KNIGHTS OF MALTA place in harm's way. 99% REAL Catholic and Jewish citizens FOR SURE.
Remember, this flipping of economic axis from West to East was ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE all of last century. This is why WIZARD OF OZ had a Wicked witch of WEST and EAST. Who did the house fall on and kill? Witch of EAST. Who did EMPIRE DOROTHY kill? Witch of WEST. Who is EMPIRE ALICE killing today? Our Western nations including America....that's CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.
To understand Crimea, take a look back at its complicated history
By Adam Taylor
February 27, 2014
When President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev this week, it was tempting to assume that Ukraine's crisis was over: Euromaidan had won, and the forces of Western-style democracy had prevailed over Yanukovych's Kremlin-led repression.
If only it were that simple. For the past few days all eyes have been on southern Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula, and things don't look so rosy. Crimea, which is not only populated by 60 percent Russian speakers but is the base of Russia's Black Sea Fleet, has seen some worrying developments in the past few days: On Thursday gunmen reportedly seized government buildings in the capital, Simferopol, barricading themselves in and raising Russian flags.
Crimea's situation is, as with many things in Ukraine's political crisis, compounded by a complicated history. For most in America and Western Europe, however, that history is likely obscure -- wasn't there a war or something there? Let's take a look back.
What even is 'the' Crimea?
It's revealing that Crimea is, much like Ukraine, often prefaced with a "the" when referred to in English. As I wrote late last year, the once-widespread use of "the Ukraine" has often angered Ukrainians, many of whom believe that the implication is that Ukraine is a region, not a country, that could be conquered by greater powers. The same logic could be applied to Crimea: For centuries the Crimean Peninsula, which occupies a strategically important location on the Black Sea and has arable land, has been fought over by various outside forces.
Before it was even known as Crimea, for example, the peninsula was known was "Taurica" by the Greek and Roman empires, both of which at points incorporated the region into their empires. These weren't the only outside forces that dominated Crimea, and at other points in its past it has been invaded or ruled by Gothic tribes, the Kievan Rus' state, the Byzantium empire and the Mongols, among many others. From the mid-1400s it existed as the Crimean Khanate, a protectorate of the Ottoman Empire, during which time it became the center of a roaring slave trade.
The modern name "Crimea" seems to have come from the language of the Crimean Tatars, a Turkic ethnic group that emerged during the Crimean Khanate. The Tatars called the peninsula "Qırım." While Russia, which annexed the state in 1783, officially tried to change the name back to Taurica, Crimea was still used informally and eventually reappeared officially in 1917.
In "The Tatars of Crimea: Return to the Homeland: Studies and Documents," Edward A. Allsworth explains that its name may been derived from the peninsula's strategically rugged landscape and may have meant "fortress" or "stronghold." If that's accurate, it's apt that Crimea is perhaps best known in the English language for the Crimean War, which began in 1853 and involved three years of bloody fighting between Russia and an alliance of the Ottoman Empire, France, Britain and Sardinia. While Russia eventually lost the war and Crimea suffered significant damage, it remained part of Russia.
The peninsula had a very tricky 20th century
After the October Revolution ended the Russian Empire in 1917, Crimea briefly found itself a sovereign state. That didn't last long, however: It was quickly dragged into the Russian civil war, where it became a stronghold for the White Army. Following a succession of governments in a few short years, Crimea eventually became the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in 1921, part of the Soviet Union. It remained like this until 1945, when it became the Crimean Oblast, an administrative region of Russia.
Like much much of the Eastern Front, Crimea's experience in World War II was incredibly traumatic: It was occupied by Nazi Germany, and the port city of Sevastopol was almost destroyed in the fighting. Once the Red Army retook Crimea in 1944, it forcibly deported the entire population of Crimean Tatars to Central Asia as punishment for collaboration with German forces. Almost half are believed to have died along the way. The Tatars, who had been on the peninsula for centuries, were not allowed to return to Crimea until the end of Soviet Union. They wouldn't forget their hardships, however.
With the Crimean Tatars deported from the peninsula, along with large numbers of Greeks and Armenians, Crimea was a very Russian place. Then, in 1954, something unusual happened: Russia gave it to Ukraine.
Why exactly did Premier Nikita Khrushchev transfer the Crimean Oblast to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic?
In an informative post over at Slate, Joshua Keating picks up on a few possibilities. For one, the award of Crimea -- a strategically important place also great for agriculture -- was seen as a "gift" for Ukraine, whose people had suffered terribly during World War II. Peasants from Crimea could now be rewarded with land in Ukraine. Khrushchev, though Russian himself, had worked his way up through the Ukrainian Communist Party and likely felt a tie to the region.
It also probably didn't feel like a big deal at the time: Back in the days of the Soviet Union, the difference between Ukraine and Russia perhaps felt nominal. By 1991 and the Soviet collapse, things were obviously a little different. While many apparently expected new President Boris Yeltsin to demand that Crimea be returned to Russia, it never was. (As a side note, when hard-liners tried to force President Mikhail Gorbachev out in a coup in 1991, the Soviet leader was at his vacation home -- in Crimea).
When Ukraine held a referendum on independence in December 1991, 54 percent of Crimean voters favored independence from Russia. It was a majority, but the lowest one found in Ukraine. Following a brief tussle with the newly independent Ukrainian government, Crimea agreed to remain part of Ukraine, but with significant autonomy (including its own constitution and legislature and – briefly – its own president). In 1997, Ukraine and Russia signed a bilateral Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership, which formally allowed Russia to keep its Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol.
So why does this matter now?
The Euromaidan protests have frequently been portrayed as a battle between the pro-European West and the pro-Russian East, a legacy of Ukraine's own history of Russian domination. That could be something of an oversimplification, sure, but it's an idea that resonates with many, both abroad and within Ukraine.
Given that Crimea has a modern history intrinsically linked with Russia, contains the largest population of ethnic Russians within Ukraine, and harbors a significant portion of Russia's navy in Sevastopol, Crimea is clearly an important place in that narrative. Add a minority Crimean Tatar population (12 percent in 2001) that has pretty good reason to be wary of Moscow, plus a lot of Ukrainians, and the situation could easily look explosive.
Of course, Crimea's history doesn't automatically mean conflict. While the Russian nationalists in Crimea have been given a lot of attention in the past few days, some say they aren't a coherent force. Ellie Knott, a doctoral candidate at the London School of Economics who conducts research in Crimea, has argued convincingly that the Russian nationalist and Crimean separatists are in practice hindered by their own internal divisions, and that many ethnic Russians in Crimea have a more complicated sense of national identity than might first appear. And while Russia has shown itself willing to get involved in the affairs of post-Soviet states, most recently with Georgia over the breakaway state of South Ossetia, few are predicting it will openly get involved in a dispute with Ukraine anytime soon.
If there's one thing you can say about Crimea's history, it's that it's been full of surprises. Its future might be, too.
Here we have THE LEGACY author PHILLIPS who we identified as creating FAKE HATE for our 99% of REAL Jewish citizens by suggesting to be against CORBYN is to be ANTI-SEMITIC when CORBYN is not a religious JEW and is not working in interests of UK LABOUR PARTY. CORBYN is global banking 1% killing 99% of UK citizens and new to UK workers------NOT LEFT social progressive 99% populist. The reason global banking 1% creates its FREEMASON STARS---in this case LITERARY STAR---is to make that STAR a mouthpiece for FADS and propaganda----sadly, our 99% WE THE PEOPLE listen too much to those STARS----as in US.
So, what global banking 1% TRIBE OF JUDAH has been MOVING FORWARD for a decade or so is this FAD of feeling the ZIONIST DREAM is dying. Rather than say TRIBE OF JUDAH IS KILLING JEWISH RELIGION AND TORAH-----TRIBE OF JUDAH SEES NO HOLY LAND----they are now PRETENDING there are conspiracy theories all around with goals of ANTI-SEMITISM. It is Christian and Muslim anti-semiticism pushing our 99% of Jewish citizens out of HOLY LAND and not the MASTER PLAN MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD flipping from West to East created over a century ago.
'Worse yet, however, is Britain’s Jewish leadership. It refuses to call out Palestinianism for its intrinsic antisemitism and to hold up its supporters for deserved obloquy in the public square. Instead — astoundingly — it bashes Israel with the ignorance and distortions of its enemies'.
MELANIE PHILLIPS today would have been the person in pre-Weimar Germany creating all kinds of religious tensions harming all 99% of WE THE PEOPLE Jewish, Protestant, Catholic.
BOTH GLOBAL 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH AND THE FAKE 5% RELIGIOUS LEADERS ARE LYING, CHEATING, AND STEALING OUR FUTURES, FREEDOMS, AND RELIGIONS.
This article is in what is the same CAPTURED GLOBAL BANKING 1% media outlets-----this being JEWISH media---JEWISH CHRONICLE.
UK Jewish community leaders lose the plot on antisemitism, hate and lies
August 5, 2018 Melanie anti-Zionism, antisemitism, Board of Deputies, jews
It's only fair to share...The Jewish community leadership has been pleading with the Labour Party to deal properly with antisemitism and become again the party of moral decency.
Surely no-one in the Jewish leadership believes this will happen? Even if the party adopts the full International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition, does anyone really think its antisemitism will then go away?
The core problem goes way beyond Labour. It is that the new antisemitism, expressed through virulent anti-Israelism, is now the defining motif for “progressive” circles.
This attitude intrinsically repudiates the unique right of the Jews to self-determination in the land which was only ever the national kingdom of the Jews — a right which is not just the basis of Zionism but Judaism itself.
It is a campaign of demonisation and delegitimisation applied to no other people. It is based on systemic falsehoods and distortions, obsessional malice and deranged conspiracy theory. It blames Israel for crimes of which it is not only innocent but is the victim. It defames it as a unique agent of global harm. These are the characteristics of antisemitism through the ages.
The progressive world attacks Israel because its signature cause is Palestinianism. That in turn is based on destroying Israel and repudiating Judaism. You can see this from the supposedly moderate Palestinian Authority: from what its leaders actually say, from its maps and insignia which show the whole of Israel as “Palestine”, and from its educational materials and media which incite the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews.
Led by Mahmoud Abbas who boasts a doctorate in Holocaust denial, the “Palestinians” base their fictional identity on writing the Jews out of their own national story in the land.
They pump out an unstoppable torrent of antisemitism — demented conspiracy theories about Jewish bankers controlling the world, Jews subverting American foreign policy, Israelis as wanton child-killers.
So why should anyone be surprised when their British cheerleaders in the Labour Party and beyond reproduce exactly the same disgusting tropes? How, indeed, can anyone claim to be against antisemitism if they support Palestinianism at all?
Tragically, this progressive animus against Israel has poisoned the minds of too many British Jews as well. Not just the kind who say Kaddish for Hamas terrorists or provide cover for Jeremy Corbyn by promoting their own pathological hatred of Israel.
There are other Jews who circulate the same venomous lies and distortions about Israel but who say they support its right to exist (well, thanks) or even call themselves Zionists.
Worse yet, however, is Britain’s Jewish leadership. It refuses to call out Palestinianism for its intrinsic antisemitism and to hold up its supporters for deserved obloquy in the public square. Instead — astoundingly — it bashes Israel with the ignorance and distortions of its enemies.
Thus the Board of Deputies Senior Vice President Sheila Gewolb denounced Israel’s new nationality law for its “regressive steps”. She didn’t clarify; but presumably she was channelling the Israeli and British left who storm that the new law is “racist” , turning Israel’s minorities into second-class citizens.
But this is totally untrue. Minorities will continue to have equal rights as Israeli citizens. The only thing reserved to Israeli Jews alone is, as always, the right to national self-determination. If they didn’t have this right, Israel wouldn’t be a Jewish state at all.
“Being Jewish is a wonderful thing, but this should not lead to doing down others,” said Gewolb. That is jaw-dropping. Israel isn’t “doing down” anyone.
There’s nothing wrong with having one national Jewish flag, one official language which is Hebrew and one set of national holidays which are Jewish. That’s because Israel is a Jewish nation state. Does Gewolb have a problem with that? Or is she merely ignorant of what a nation state actually is?
Worse still, she said: “The lesson of Jewish history is that societies are stronger when minorities are affirmed, and they decay when minorities are degraded”. What? Was she really suggesting that Israel’s behaviour is akin to that of the Nazis? Isn’t this precisely the kind of antisemitic insult of which Labour members stand accused?
So the Board of Deputies is not only failing to call out the wellspring of anti-Jewish bigotry. It is promulgating some of the very falsehoods that incite people to hate Israel and the Jews – while simultaneously shouting about Labour party antisemitism.
Has there ever been a community less suited to an existential battle than this one?
We have discussed in detail GLOBAL POPULATION public policy describing what EASTERN HEMISPHERE ECONOMICS-----the old silk and spice trade routes of 1000BC-----and how this plays with FINAL SOLUTION. If we look at a map tied to this article we would think EASTERN HEMISPHERE included AFRICA and NEAR/MIDDLE EAST-----when MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD for only the global 1% does NOT include AFRICA AND NEAR AND MIDDLE EAST.
When we read today's media about geo-political and economic tensions we see RUSSIA and BRIC BEING that EASTERN HEMISPHERE economy. BRIC is BRAZIL/RUSSIA/INDIA/CHINA----no Africa or near/middle east. BRAZIL will be taken to colonial status as all THE AMERICAS----so, it will see global 1% OLD WORLD PORTUGUESE/SPANISH KINGS suck all wealth from Brazil and abandon it as a DARK CONTINENT.
So, BRIC will soon be RIC------will be the EASTERN HEMISPHERE AXIS.
'So All most the whole Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia come under Eastern Hemisphere'.
Remember, all those global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS, Asia, Europe, Arabia are BFF-----working for ONE WORLD for only the global 1% they are not enemies TODAY----so, Western European OLD WORLD KINGS could care less Western Europe is being thrown under the bus-----Western European KINGS tied to US operated by foreign sovereignty of MALTA CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA--NOW TRUMP ---could care less about THE AMERICAS going under the bus. ARABIC OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS being placated with loss of near/middle east making room in MUSLIM nations surrounding CRIMEA could care less those ARABIC regions are going under the bus. Global 1% ARABIC are busy building global corporations inside US AND WESTERN EUROPE FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES---and dreaming of building PLANETARY MINING SLAVE COLONIES ----MOVING FORWARD.
Please don't look at old maps to understand what flipping the Earth's economic axis means regarding what is WESTERN HEMISPHERE---what is EASTERN HEMISPHERE.
We are SURE all those global banking 5% freemasong/Greek players tied to AFRICA and ARABIA are already pointing at old world maps saying LOOK, WE ARE THE EASTERN HEMISPHERE-------oh, really???????
What are some countries in the eastern hemisphere, and what sort of governments do they have?
ad by Quora for Business
Reach more of the 300 million monthly visitors on Quora.
Saurav Majumder, Close observer of countries, culture, international politics
Answered Aug 13 2015 ·
The Eastern Hemisphere is a geographical term for the half of the Earth that is east of the Prime Meridian (which crosses Greenwich, England, United Kingdom) and west of 180° longitude. See the map for a better understanding
Map Courtesy " mapsofworld.com
So All most the whole Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia come under Eastern Hemisphere. There are few countries which are in both the Eastern and Western Hemisphere. These countries are : Algeria,Burkino Faso,Ghana,France,Mali, Spain,Togo, and the United Kingdon (UK) intersected by the prime meridian and Fiji, Kiribati, Russia, and the United States intersected by the 180th Meridian. Take a look at the map :
Image Courtesy : worldatlas.com
Now back to the countries in Eastern Hemisphere :
You can get the full list of countries in Eastern Hemisphere here : List of countries by easternmost point till Ghana (i.e the 143rd entry in the list) all the countries are in Eastern Hemisphere. Click on the links attached to country name and you can know more about that country like their government, geography, ethnicity of the country etc.
Now in a nutshell 72 % of all the countries are in this hemisphere which includes countries like: UK, France, Germany, Russia, Turkey, Syria, Iraq, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Egypt, Israel, South Africa, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, China, Kazakhstan, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia, Newzeland etc. (Note, i have just mentioned about few countries, there are lots of other countries which share the Eastern Hemisphere).
If you talk about the type of government the countries have, there also you can find lots of diversity. While most of the countries are Democratic or Republic like the UK, France,Germany, India,Japan countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bunei etc have monarchs. China, the most populous country of the world ruled by a single party The Communist Party of the China. India the second most populous country is the largest Republic of the world. North Korea which claims to be a Democratic state is actually a hermit kingdom. It also has the world's only eternal president Kim-ill-Sung. This is pretty much about the countries and government in the Eastern Hemisphere.
'The story of the BRICS—or technically, BRIC countries (South Africa joined in 2010)'
How did BRIC go BRICS? And when will BRIC say goodbye to B----BRAZIL?
The reason South Africa and Brazil are included in what will become the REAL EASTERN HEMISPHERE ECONOMIC AXIS is the need to use AFRICA as FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES ----happening in BRAZIL as well. Global banking 1% intend to drain both AFRICA and THE AMERICAS of all natural resources and use these continent's 99% WE THE PEOPLE as slave trade.
These smiling faces are of course AFRICA'S global banking 5% freemason/Greek players LIVING FOR TODAY ----not caring that 99% of African and US black citizens are being thrown into global slave trade distribution system.
YOU SAY BRICS----WE SAY RIC-----LET'S CALL THE WHOLE ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE THING OFF.
With all these PROGRESSIVELY changing global geo-politics -------we are seeing BRIC-A-BRAC-------Please look at the long-term goals to understand what a FINAL SOLUTION will look like.
The Mixed Fortunes of the BRICS Countries, in 5 Facts
The president of the Brics New Development Bank, KV Kamath, is seen with President Jacob Zuma, Malusi Gigaba and Maite Nkoana-Mashabane during the launch of the bank at the African Regional Centre on August 17, 2017 in Sandton, South Africa
The Times—Getty Images
By Ian Bremmer
September 1, 2017
This weekend, the BRICS countries—Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa—will convene in the Chinese city of Xiamen for their annual summit. It wasn’t long ago that the BRICS were heralded as the future of the globalized economy. Then, for a variety of reasons, the group lost a bit of its luster. Now’s the time to check back in with them.
1. BRICS straddle one quarter of the world
The story of the BRICS—or technically, BRIC countries (South Africa joined in 2010)—begins with Goldman Sachs chief economist Jim O’Neill, who wrote a paper in 2001 arguing that these were the emerging superstars most likely to dominate the 21st century globalized economy. Taken together, these five countries cover 40 percent of the world’s population and more than 25 percent of the world’s land. The sky seemed the limit.
They delivered on some of that promise—between 1990 to 2014, these countries went from accounting for 11 percent of the world’s GDP to almost 30 percent. Yet, the global financial crisis inflicted lasting damage, and Goldman Sachs shut down its BRIC investment fund in late 2015 after its assets plunged in value by 88 percent from their 2010 highpoint. But the group continues to meet and to talk up an ambitious common agenda.
Roughly speaking, the BRICS can be broken into two groups—those that took advantage of globalization’s march to integrate themselves into global supply chains (primarily China and India) and those that took advantage of globalization to sell their abundant natural resources (primarily Brazil, Russia and South Africa).
2. China and India’s middle classes are surging
Let’s start with global supply chains, and their biggest success story: China is now the second-largest economy in the world by GDP and poised to overtake the US for #1 over the next few years. In 1990, China produced less than 3 percent of the world’s manufacturing output when measured by value; by 2015, it produced roughly 25 percent. And as went China’s manufacturing prowess, so went China’s middle class. In 1990, China made up zero percent of the global middle class; by 2015 it comprised 16 percent, and another 350 million Chinese people are expected to join by 2030.
India is a similar story, but instead of focusing on manufacturing, it went the services route instead. Today, services account for roughly 61 percent of its GDP, with a particular emphasis on IT—at $108 billion, India is one of the world’s leading IT services exporters. And the rise of India’s middle class resembles that of China’s; Indians went from 1 percent of the global middle class in 1990 to 8 percent in 2015, with another 380 million Indians expected to join by 2030.
3. The collapse in commodity prices has threatened the other BRICS nations
The picture is decidely mixed, meanwhile, with the other BRICS countries, who rose mainly on the back of their vast natural wealth. Brazil sells commodities like soybeans, iron ore, and crude oil on global markets. Combining that financial windfall with innovative social programs helped lift 29 million Brazilians from poverty between 2003 and 2014. As a group, Brazil’s poor are arguably the largest beneficiaries of globalization in the Western hemisphere.
South Africa also used its natural wealth—in this case rare gems and metals like gold, diamonds and platinum—to help get its economy on track following apartheid. In 1990, the country exported $27 billion worth of goods; by 2011, that number had increased nearly five-fold. And then there’s Russia, which spent the 1990s rebuilding itself from the rubble of the Soviet Union. Thankfully, the country is blessed with abundant energy sources—crude oil, natural gas, metals and minerals—that helped it find its footing. In 2000, 29 percent of Russians lived below the poverty line; by 2012, just 11 percent did.
But the fall in commodity prices of recent years has done significant damage in all three countries— where Brazil’s 3-year average GDP growth between 2005-2007 was 4.41 percent, the last three years have seen an average growth of -2.29 percent. Over the same time periods, South Africa’s growth rate has fallen from 5.41 percent to 1.09 percent; Russia’s from 7.69 percent to -0.77 percent.
4. Corruption is still endemic within the BRICS
All of these five countries have been held back by corruption, in varying ways, but their rising importance to the global economic system ensures the spotlight now shines brighter than ever. Yet some of the BRICS countries have handled it better than others.
Brazil’s spiraling corruption investigations have already felled former president Dilma Rousseff and threaten the current administration of President Michel Temer. On the bright side, these same corruption investigations have made Brazil the gold standard of judicial independence and rule-of-law in Latin America. In South Africa, corruption allegations continue to pile up against the ruling ANC party and the country’s president Jacob Zuma, who is awaiting a supreme court hearing in September to see if 783 criminal charges against him will be reinstated. Thanks in part to a campaign by opposition activist Alexei Navalny, 47 percent of Russians now believe “corruption has significantly taken hold in the Russian government.” Don’t expect much change there, however, even after the 2018 presidential election.
India and China have made bolder attempts to combat corruption. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India’s government decided to do away with 500 and 1000 rupee notes (86 percent of the currency in circulation at the time) in a bid to clamp down on tax evasion and the black market. And while early returns haven’t been great, Modi has gotten even more ambitious with the introduction of a biometric ID system, intended to bypass corruption and fraud by distributing public subsidies and unemployment benefits directly. Despite privacy concerns, more than a billion people have signed up.
China’s President Xi Jinping, meanwhile, is using a massive multiyear anti-corruption drive (nearly 300,000 Communist Party officials were punished for corruption offenses in 2015) both to consolidate power ahead of a major leadership transition around Xi this fall and to restore the ruling party’s image as defender of the Chinese people.
5. The “winners” remain at risk
It would be easy to label India and China as the clear winners among the BRICS, but it’s not that simple. Yes, India and China have the fastest growth rates of any major economies in the world, and citizens of these countries remain optimistic about the future. But nearly 50 percent of Indians remain vulnerable to a slide back into poverty, and China’s economy has slowed as higher wages make manufacturing more expensive. Both countries are especially vulnerable to technological changes that bring automation into the workplace on a larger scale. The World Bank estimates that 68 percent of all existing jobs in India are “at risk” from automation. In China, the figure is 77 percent.
Even the sturdiest of BRICS isn’t as strong as it used to be.
We speak often of the corruption of our US PROTESTANT religions by global banking 1% OLD WORLD institutions like OXFORD------TRINITY EVANGELICAL DIVINITY-----having our US DIVINITY schools located on global hedge fund former IVY LEAGUE campuses like HARVARD, YALE, HOWARD ------all of today's US religious leaders have known what MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD FLIPPING THE EARTH'S ECONOMIC AXIS----ONE WORLD ONE RELIGION being 3000BC HINDI-BRAHMIN paganism-----just as WE KNEW.
Our Jewish religion has been corrupted as well------who training and appoints leadership roles for RABBIS----in US---in Western and Eastern Europe---in near and middle-east? These are how we know the 5% freemason/Greek religious players staging the coming TRAIL OF TEARS-----WAR BRUTALITY AND ATROCITIES.
We know our Catholic leadership BARTHOLOMEW of Eastern Orthodoxy and FRANCIS of Roman ---these are those global banking 1% FAKE religious leaders working to advance ONE WORLD for only the global 1% 3000 BC HINDI-BRAHMIN PAGANISM.
Here are the ROMAN POPES having worked all last century in MOVING FORWARD flipping the Earth's economic axis knowing the goal would be killing our Western religions and continuous wars
List: Popes of the 20th and 21st centuries
14 March 2013 — 8:10am
The Roman Catholic Popes of the past 135 years:
Pope Francis — March 13, 2013-
Benedict XVI — April 19, 2005-Feb. 28, 2013
John Paul II — Oct. 16, 1978-April 2, 2005.
John Paul I — Aug. 26-Sept. 28, 1978.
Paul VI — June 21, 1963-Aug. 6, 1978.
John XXIII — Oct. 28, 1958-June 3, 1963.
Pius XII — March 2, 1939-Oct. 9, 1958.
Pius XI — Feb. 6, 1922-Feb. 10, 1939.
Benedict XV — Sept. 3, 1914-Jan. 22, 1922.
Pius X — Aug. 4, 1903-Aug. 20, 1914.
Leo XIII — Feb. 20, 1878-July 20, 1903.
What Does It Mean to Be a Rabbi?
The traditional rabbinate harks back to ancient practice, but is an evolving institution.
My Jewish Learning is a not-for-profit and relies on your help
A rabbi is a teacher of Judaism. The word itself literally translates from Hebrew to “my teacher” or “my master.”
For most of Jewish history, the primary qualification for this title was sufficient learning to render decisions in Jewish law. While one generally must be a rabbi to sit on a beit din, a panel that adjudicates Jewish legal disputes and that is present at a conversion, rabbis are not strictly required at other Jewish events.
While civil laws may require specific training or certification for weddings and circumcisions, nothing in Jewish tradition prevents lay people from officiating at weddings, leading prayer services or performing other rituals.
History of the Rabbinate
In the earliest stages of Jewish history, the ability to rule in matters of Jewish law was handed down orally from teacher to student in an unbroken lineage going back to Moses. Only in the early modern era did rabbis receive formal ordination from academies of advanced study and begin to carry out a wider range of communal functions, including issuing guidance in daily ritual practice, overseeing synagogue services, preaching and serving as the spiritual leader of a community. Today, the rabbinic portfolio is wider still. Contemporary rabbis perform a vast range of activities under the aegis of their rabbinate, including social justice activism, education, Jewish outreach and chaplaincy.
While the use of rabbi as a formal title does not appear until the (a first-century compendium of laws and teachings that, together with the , makes up the ), the first rabbi in Jewish history is often considered to be Moses, who is referred to in the Talmud asRabbeinu — Moses, our teacher. At God’s command, Moses ordains Joshua as his successor to lead the Jewish people and render judgments, a process he effects by laying his hands upon him. According to a sequence laid out in the first chapter of Pirkei Avot (which is part of the Mishnah), the line of authority was directly transmitted from Joshua down to successive generations all the way to Hillel and Shammai, two leading sages of the Mishnaic period — thereby establishing a direct link between the rabbis of the Talmud and Moses. Though this chain was disrupted in the wake of the destruction of the ancient temple in the first century of the Common Era, the modern use of the word semichah (literally, “laying of the hands”) for rabbinic ordination implies some kind of continuity between the rabbis of today and the earliest sources of Jewish communal authority.
The early form of semichah through direct transmission from one person to the next— sometimes called classical semichah — ended some time in the post-talmudic period. Attempts were made at various points in Jewish history to restore classical semichah, but none garnered sufficient consensus among the rabbis of Israel to succeed. The conferral of the title rabbi today is essentially an agreed convention, asserted by the authority of the ordaining institution and ratified by communal consent. The language of the semichah document conferred by Yeshiva University, the leading Modern Orthodox rabbinical school, makes no claims of lineal authority, but rather — in a manner similar to academic diplomas — attests to a student’s having successfully completed a course of study in particular areas that qualifies them as a decisor of Jewish law.
Prior to the establishment of modern rabbinical academies, many people who functioned as Jewish religious authorities and spiritual leaders carried the title rabbi despite lacking formal ordination. According to Ephraim Kanarfogel, a Yeshiva University historian, evidence of formal ordination certificates can be found as early as Spain in the 11th century. Efforts to professionalize and certify rabbinic training later gained traction across Europe, driven both by the influence of European Christian universities that conferred such formal titles on their graduates, as well as the requirements of modern statecraft.
“Modernity changed the whole face of ordination, because one of the things that happened in modernity was the rise of the state,” said Kanarfogel. “You needed a document, a degree, a license.”
The Rabbinate Today
Today, the rabbinate is a profession, and rabbis are almost always graduates of recognized rabbinic seminaries, though some do receive so called “private semichah,” the authority of which rests on the rabbi who gives it. The main Jewish denominations in the United States all have rabbinical seminaries associated with them. There are also a number of major ultra-Orthodox rabbinical academies, as well as non-denominational schools that are not affiliated with any of the major movements and whose graduates typically serve non-Orthodox or communal institutions.
The Emergence of Women Rabbis
Although the first female rabbi is believed to be Regina Jonas, who was ordained in Germany in 1935 and was murdered in the Holocaust, women rabbis were not regularly ordained until the 1970s. Sally Priesand became the first American woman formally ordained as a rabbi in 1972, when she graduated from the Reform movement’s Hebrew Union College; two years later, Sandy Eisenberg Sasso became the first female Reconstructionist rabbi. The Conservative movement’s Jewish Theological Seminary ordained its first female rabbi in 1985.
In the Orthodox world, women rabbis are still prohibited; however expanded religious leadership roles for women have opened up in recent decades. Yeshivat Maharat in New York has significantly pushed the boundary on female spiritual leadership within Orthodoxy, going so far as to take the controversial step of granting semichah to Orthodox women, though the school does not confer the title of rabbi. A similar program was started in Israel by the liberal Orthodox Rabbi Shlomo Riskin.
How Rabbis are Trained and Ordained
Typically, formal ordination is conferred after the completion of a multi-year course of study, followed by an examination. Successful candidates receive an ordination certificate, sometimes called a Semichah Klaf, which may be written on a scroll of parchment by a scribe and signed by the ordaining rabbis.
Contemporary rabbinic training programs have significantly expanded the range of expected competencies beyond mere expertise in Jewish law and texts. Today’s rabbis are expected to be proficient in a range of pastoral and professional skills, including nonprofit management, counseling, public speaking and Jewish communal leadership. The precise mix of training in traditional texts and contemporary rabbinic functions varies from school to school and among the various denominations. Growing numbers of rabbis today are finding employment beyond traditional pulpit positions — as activists, educators, chaplains, outreach professionals and more.
POPE FRANCIS is simply a global banking 1% JESUIT ---NOT RELIGIOUS ----assigned to kill the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH as these orthodox Catholic popes know. The EASTERN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC popes also already know MOVING FORWARD flipping to Eastern Hemisphere bringing ancient KIEVAN KINGDOM in Russia/Crimea will end in killing that EASTERN ORTHODOXY-----all this media tied to religious discussion is FAKE NEWS.
When we see media tied to religious discussions creating tensions between religious sects---whether within same religion or with other religions MOVING FORWARD ----we KNOW those people are global banking 5% freemason/Greek religious players trying to create civil unrest---civil war-----NOT RELIGIOUS.
So, the goal of MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE will kill all Western religions ----JEWISH, MUSLIM, CHRISTIAN as well as Eastern sects of each.
DOES THAT MAKE HINDI-BRAHMIN RELIGION A WINNER? WELL, IF WE TAKE TODAY'S HINDI-BRAHMIN BACK TO 3000BC----WHEN 99% OF REAL HINDI CITIZENS WERE GREAT BIG LOSERS.
Today's religious media is as corrupt and filled with FAKE NEWS as our national and international FAKE NEWS media------please don't allow all these civil tensions break our 99% WE THE PEOPLE into harming one another.
Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa
NewsCatholic Church, Faith
Fri Mar 2, 2018 - 7:48 pm EST
On EWTN orthodox Catholic author warns Pope Francis has deliberately created confusion
amoris laetitia, catholic church, lost shepherd: how pope francis is misleading his flock, phil lawler, pope francis, raymond arroyo, the world over
WASHINGTON, D. C., March 2, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) - Pope Francis has deliberately created confusion to allow for Catholic teaching to be circumvented, a longtime Catholic commentator has said, and Francis’ inner circle contains people more radical in their beliefs than him.
Further, five years into Francis’ papacy, the mandate the pope was given to reform the Curia and Vatican finances has not been satisfied, Catholic World News Editor Philip Lawler said, because it’s not high on Francis’ agenda.
Intervention is needed in the direction Francis is taking the Church, Lawler said in a discussion on The World Over centering on some of the confusing and controversial aspects of the Francis pontificate. (Interview with Lawler begins at 23:05 in the video below)
EWTN anchor and Managing Editor Raymond Arroyo welcomed Lawler Thursday for a discussion of Lawler’s just released book “Lost Shepherd: How Pope Francis is Misleading His Flock” (2018) Regnery.
“Pope Francis has created enough confusion so that there is a huge space for maneuver for people who want to one way or another take an end around around Church moral teachings,” Lawler told Arroyo at the start of their conversation. Arroyo assented this has been done through the Francis pontificate’s much-touted notions of accompaniment and mercy.
Released February 26, Arroyo pointed out the book has earned criticism for Lawler. Others noted prior to his book’s release the significance of Lawler, not at all known as an explosive Catholic observer, feeling compelled to write in criticism of the pope.
Lawler clarified for Arroyo that he did not want to write the book critical of Francis when asked what moved him to do so. It came after an essay he’d written a year ago for CatholicCulture.com when he’d reached a boiling point of frustration with the confusion.
Significant resonation with the frustration
Titled “This Disastrous Papacy,” Lawler recounted that the post prompted more reaction than anything else he’s written in 30 years of journalism. In working on the book, Lawler said he found people in need of reassurance amid the concerning direction of the papacy, along with being beset by the question of whether they were alone in feeling this.
“And I said, that tells me there’s a hunger out there,” recalled Lawler. “There are people who are very much confused and dismayed and feeling betrayed, and wondering, “Is something wrong with them, is something wrong with the faith?”
“And I found that as I spoke with these people, oddly enough they felt reassured by what I was saying,” Lawler said. “Because if you say, “No you’re not crazy, yes, there is a problem, we have a problem with the pope,” (people then understand it’s not just them thinking this).
The pope’s apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia was the final straw for Lawler, who told Arroyo he was originally very enthusiastic about Pope Francis, but over time became more and more concerned, dismayed and disoriented.
"When I saw what happened with the manipulation of the Synod and then with Amoris laetitia coming after it, I said, “This is more than simply imprudence in expression,”' Lawler explained. “This is a deliberate effort to confuse.”
AL achieves the opposite of the Synod’s expressed intent
“The problem is that Amoris laetitia is intentionally unclear on the one question that everybody had topmost in their mind going into both meetings of the Synod,” Lawler reminded Arroyo, “which is, “Will the Church change her perennial teaching that Catholics who are divorced and remarried illicitly cannot receive Communion?”'
“The general impression certainly created by the apostolic exhortation is that the Church has changed her teaching,” stated Lawler.
Arroyo and Lawler discussed the conflicting interpretations of the pope’s document throughout the world, with some bishops saying the Church’s pastoral practice has changed and others saying it had not - and the faithful being left in the middle. They talked as well about how, when pastoral practice is changed, the result is doctrine no longer matters anymore because "the lived doctrine" has become unrecognizable – which is the same end result as changing Church teaching.
“That’s precisely the point,” Lawler told Arroyo. “Why else would Pope Francis have declined to answer the dubia - the perfectly legitimate questions from four cardinals asking him for clarity?”
“Why would you not want clarity?” asked Lawler. “Unless your intent was to provide that fuzzy space in which people can maneuver around Church teaching.”
Arroyo asked Lawler to respond to comments made in 2015 by one member of the pope’s circle, Archbishop Victor Fernandez, that Francis is aiming at irreversible reform in the Church.
Lawler responded that he didn’t know why Francis would have this as his goal.
“But there’s something inherently wrong with the idea of irreversible reform unless what you mean by reform is back to the fundamentals of the Catholic faith,” he added, “because the role of the pope is inherently to conserve, to protect the deposit of the faith.”
Arroyo quizzed Lawler on the provocative nature of his book and its title, and whether he was at all reticent about it.
“I don’t enjoy criticizing the pope,” Lawler told him. “But there’s a point at which in a loving family, if the father has a problem, you have to confront it. Eventually there has to be an intervention - And we need an intervention.”
The men talked about the odd nature of the Francis’ election, and whether there’s any validity to rumors that his election was orchestrated.
Lawler said some cardinals had given the clear impression that they were lobbying for Francis, which is not licit. This did not shock him, and he wished it weren’t the case.
Sharing an excerpt from the book in which Lawler details coming to the troubling conclusion that Francis was a radical leading the Church away from the ancient sources of the faith, Arroyo asked Lawler why Francis would think he could get away with this, or whether the problem is more one of his advisors and confidants.
“I do believe there are people surrounding this pope who are much more radical in their beliefs than he is,” Lawler said. “It is suggestive, again, that with Amoris laetitia Pope Francis does not directly contradict Church teaching - it’s in footnotes, it’s in the space between the lines.”
Because of the confusion that has spread throughout the Church, Lawler shared with Arroyo that people in the last week since his book has come out have asked him a lot of questions about whether the Church has changed its teaching on various things.
“And I say, No,” Lawler said. “But they had that impression; Why? Because the lid is off.”
An absence of authentic reform
Asked by Arroyo if there was a conflict between Francis’ public persona and the means of governing under his pontificate, Lawler said, "yes".
The cardinals before him were talking about the need for reform of the curia and the economic workings of the Vatican, said Lawler, and for accountability and responsibility.
“But as far as the mandate for reform - it simply hasn’t happened,” he stated. “The curia has not been significantly reformed. There have been some shuffling of responsibilities, but we’re now five years in, and there’s not substantial reform. As far as the economic reform that has tumbled and fallen apart completely.”
“He had a mandate for reform and it’s not happening,” added Lawler. “It’s not at the top if his agenda. He’s doing different things.”
What’s unfortunately happened, he said, is that the old guard at the Vatican has become even more entrenched, “And there’s less accountability than there was five year ago.”
Lawler called upon Catholics to pray, both for the pope and for those around him.
“And as a practical matter, you ask your own bishop to stand up and help bring clarity back in an age of confusion,” Lawler concluded. “If that means saying unpopular things, I’m sorry, well, say unpopular things.”
It is very hard for our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown to educate BROADLY across all public policy categories in LIFETIME LEARNING. What our US citizens lost with MOVING FORWARD CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA was local REAL POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS open and broad-based PUBLIC FORUMS where all 99% of citizens in city/county could find REAL INFORMATION with discussions being REAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. Global banking 1% CORRUPTED all US political philosophy discussions -----pretending RIGHT WING WAS THE REAL LEFT WING. Corporatizing our US public K-university so we had no broad-based public discussions---only the voices of FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING political stances were heard.
THE GOALS OF OUR 99% WE THE PEOPLE MUST BE TO REBUILD THOSE LOCAL PUBLIC FORUMS FOR POLITICAL AND PUBLIC POLICY DISCUSSIONS WITH REAL INFORMATION AND REAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY STANCES.
We have known all last century MARXISM was FAR-RIGHT WING AUTHORITARIAN-----tied to extreme wealth extreme poverty---it was only global banking 1% FAKE NEWS MEDIA making MARXIST rebels-----LEFTISTS---making INDUSTRIAL COMMUNISM LEFT when we always knew it to be FAR-RIGHT AUTHORITARIAN ENSLAVEMENT.
Below we see to what EYE OF TIGER song was referring---if we were watching ROCKY movies we would think it was about lifting oneself up as a fallen US 99% of citizens.
When you listened to EYE OF TIGER video or watched ROCKY movies did you know they were symbols for killing our US sovereign economy moving all US corporations overseas to ASIAN FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES?
Development & globalisation
Development Globalisation The Asian Tigers China & India
The Asian Tigers
The Asian Tigers are made up of four countries in east Asia - South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong. They all went through rapid growth by going through industrialisation since the 1960s when TNCs looked for areas with cheap labour and low costs for other things. They are considered as the first generation of NICs. Japanese TNCs were among the first to seek new areas for their operations so they chose their less developed neighbouring countries, particularly South Korea and Taiwan as a host nation for factories and manufacturing.
The Asian Tigers were heavily industrialised by manufacturing TNCs in particular.
The advantages of these countries to be the host countries for large TNCs were:
A reasonably well-developed level of infrastructures such as roads, railways and ports.
Relatively well-educated population with existing skills.
Cultural traditions that appreciate education and achievement.
Good geographical location - Especially for Singapore as it is situated between the Indian and Pacific Ocean, which made it perfect for trading, imports and exports.
Government support, for example, offering low-interest rates in bank loans.
Less rigid laws and regulations on labour, taxation and pollution than in home countries of TNCs, allowing more profitable operations. (Low-cost manufacture with cheap labour)
As the Economies of The Asian Tigers grew, large local firms began to grow, helped by the economic climate and government aid. Samsung of South Korea is one of the largest consumer electronics producers in the world and Samsung mobile phones have now become the major competitor of Apple's iPhones. All four of The Asian Tigers countries are now considered as developed countries.
Although South Korea lacks natural resources, it had plentiful cheap and flexible workforce. The government realised that agricultural production was not the route to economic growth and so attracted large TNCs such as Sony from Japan and encouraged FDI from the US. South Korean firms were also produced by high import taxes which ensured sufficient market for goods and stimulated further production. The government also developed its own research and development of high-tech goods. Firms were attracted by a large consumer market of the South East Asia such as China. This has resulted in South Korea producing world-leading products and technologies. Hyundai, Samsung and Daewoo are some of the South Korean TNCs.
Taiwan was also targeted by large TNCs. In the late 1960s the American toy company Mattel (famous for their Barbie dolls), wishing to lower its labour costs, moved its main factory to the island of Taiwan from Japan. This was one of the first movements of such large scale manufacturing factory by TNCs that was to make eastern Asia the workshop of the world. At one point, the Taiwan factory produced over half the Barbie dolls made. However, in the late 1980s, the rising incomes in Taiwan led Mattel to move on to countries with a cheaper labour force. Barbie dolls are currently manufactured in China, Indonesia and Malaysia.
The Taiwanese economy has benefited further from globalisation and are thriving with their high-tech industries. Many of Taiwanese companies make world's laptops, personal organisers and MP3 players.
When Singapore became independent from Malaysia in 1965, the population faced high levels of unemployment and poverty. GDP per capita was US$516 and half the population was illiterate. In response to this, the Singapore government established the Economic Development Board to make Singapore an attractive destination for FDI. Within the following decades, FDI increased rapidly and by 2001 foreign companies accounted for 75% of manufactured output and 85% of manufactured exports. The strategically located deep-water harbour is the ideal trade position linking routes from Europe to Australia and the west coast of the Americas. It now has a highly developed trade-oriented market economy and has the most open economy in the world. Singapore is now the highest ranked Asian country in the HDI (7th in the world) and have GDP per capita of US$55,182 (World Bank 2013).
In the 1960s, the manufacturing industry opened a new decade employing large sections of the population. The construction business was revamped and it also used the textiles industry to boost its economy. Hong Kong is said to have the most attractive business environment within East Asia, in terms of attracting FDI. This has led Hong Kong to be the third largest recipient of FDI in the world. Using its profit, the government has built roads, schools, hospital and other infrastructures and services. Wages in Hong Kong are also relatively flexible. This has resulted in the GDP to grow 180 times between 1961 and 1997. Skilled labour force with modern British business methods (link to Britain due to former colonisation) and technology ensured that opportunities for external trade, investment and recruitment were maximised. It now has one of the largest port in the world.
As the economies of these NICs grew, wage levels and the cost of operating within those countries began to increase. Therefore, the Japanese, US and European TNCs looked for second generation countries such as Malaysia and Thailand. TNCs from the first phase NICs also moved their manufacturing tasks to their neighbouring countries. China and India have emerged as targets for FDI by TNCs (as third phase NICs) and since 1990, both countries have shown rapid growth.
Those global 1% freemason/Greek players tied to being WINNERS during this EYE OF TIGER expansion overseas are now those TAPESTRY PRINCES soon to become MEN IN TATTERED CLOTHES-------then reverting from PRINCE-----to TOAD.
This is how we KNOW----those global labor pool 99% from Asia newly rich------are being sent to US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----to be made MEN AND WOMEN IN TATTERED CLOTHES----soon to become those TOADS.
This is how we know all those US global banking 5% freemason/Greek players who chose to LIVE FOR TODAY------going overseas to be that EYE OF THE TIGER-----are now MOVING FORWARD to COMING BACK TO AMERICA as it is being turned into an AUSTRALIAN PRISON LABOR colony as existed back in 1500-1600s. These US global banking 5% freemason/Greek players enriched these few decades will be those MEN AND WOMEN IN TATTERED CLOTHES-----turning from PRINCES to TOADS.
Our global labor pool 99% being brought today from third world nations do not understand these POLITICAL FREEDOMS that came with being an AMERICAN CITIZEN and that ALL 99% WE THE PEOPLE are CITIZENS.
Japan Officially Gets Leapfrogged by the Four Asian Tigers
on November 9, 2015 at 11:10 am
Throughout the decades in the 1950s and 1960s, the Japanese economy was envied for its unrelenting growth.
Dubbed the “Post-War Miracle”, this period of time saw Japan become a global center of manufacturing and exports. Japanese brands such as Toyota, Sony, Honda, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, and Canon would become household names worldwide. By the 1960s, Japan catapulted to become the second largest economy in the world.
Today, Japan has the third largest economy in terms of total nominal GDP, and the fourth largest by GDP adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). This doesn’t seem so bad on paper, but Japan also has nearly 130 million people.
What do those amounts look like per capita? It turns out to be not so good.
After over two decades of economic stagnation, the most recent GDP per capita (PPP) numbers for 2014 by the IMF had the Japanese economy in 29th place globally. As you saw in the opening chart, even more recent projections from another source show that all four Asian Tigers have now all officially leapfrogged Japan in terms of GDP per capita (PPP).
The “Four Asian Tigers”, a term used to reference the highly free-market and developed economies of Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan, have continued to grow despite Japan’s struggles. Singapore, a significant Asian banking center, passed Japan in GDP per capita (PPP) back in 1979. Hong Kong would be the next to do so in 1993, and Taiwan would jump ahead during the Financial Crisis. The last of the leapfrogging happened when South Korea passed Japan this year.
This shouldn’t be too surprising, as the struggles of Japan over the last 25 years have been well-documented. However, a point of interest may be the context of how these challenges began.
In the mid-80s, the yen had basically doubled in value against the dollar. For a manufacturing and exporting nation (similar to how China is today), this was less than ideal. While this was happening, the Bank of Japan intervened with five sessions of monetary easing starting in January 1986 to weaken the yen, cutting interest rates from 5.0% to 2.5% in just one year.
During this time, monetary growth was much quicker than anticipated. More-than-sufficient liquidity and ultra low interest rates fueled speculation, which helped lead to inflate a classic asset bubble. In the early 90s, the BOJ hiked rates to counter speculation and curb inflation.
The asset bubble popped, and Japan’s economy would be sent into the “Lost Decade” – a “decade” which has lasted 25 years.
Japan now has the world’s highest debt-to-GDP ratio of 243% as well as the world’s highest debt-to-revenue ratio.
Despite this, they’ve started an even more potentially dangerous experiment known as Abenomics, which is the three-headed beast of unprecedented quantitative easing, monetary stimulus, and reforms.