Jump to content
The World News Media

Organ Harvesting, Falun Gong, Tibet, etc. (The WEST vs. CHINA)

JW Insider

Recommended Posts

  • Member
21 hours ago, JW Insider said:

. It happens to the best of us, and by that I mean that there have been several documented examples even within and among our own religion. 

I have learned to live with it, and perhaps even acquiesce that it must be that way. Of course, I don’t know what examples you may have in mind, but...

Do you think I can persuade anybody that the (largely) atheist anti-cult movement is behind our woes in Russia? No. It is all the machinations of Babylon the Great is all anyone wants to hear. We are so hung up on Babylon the Great that we do not recognize that she is mostly licking her wounds these days, and a powerful atheist faction has arisen that would eradicate everyone clinging to worship of God—us no less than they. Yet we still, in the main, carry on as though publishers in Judge Rutherford’s day, announcing that religion is a “snare and a racket.” It is, but here in the West, it does not play as the most timely theme. The atheists and the skeptics perch above it all and ridicule the different religionists calling each other false. As rude as some trolls are here, I see brothers equally rude on social media with regard to tweets mentioning religion—appending insults that have little to do with the topic under consideration. Do they think themselves witnessing? It doesn’t leave a good impression. I could wish that we got training about social media besides the refrain to “be cautious” of it. 

Trained, we might be able to do some good with it. The articles posted on JW.org lately—about coping with anxiety, safeguarding children from the horror of world news, adapting them to “distance learning,” and so forth? These are excellent contributions—exactly what is needed today by anyone wishing to preserve sanity. It would take so little for ones who know how to use social media to judiciously spread this all over the internet, to the benefit of countless people. But we are advised to be cautious as to our use of it. We are not trained, and most of those who venture there with the idea of witnessing are horribly clumsy—saying outrageous things, oblivious to what their audience potentially might be.  It could be used to such powerful effect, but it is not in a nod to “caution.” 

Still, maybe the fixation on Babylon the Great, and turning a (it seems to me) blind eye to the atheists and skeptics is what one must expect of Bethel. They, more than anyone, strive to be “no part of the world.” Over time, they get to know little about it. They live primarily in the world of Scriptures, and the scriptures say that it is in the skirts of Babylon the Great (not the atheists or skeptics) that is found the blood of all those who have been slaughtered on the earth. Primarily, the sin is one of omission, not commision. Had religion not neglected to teach the Word of God, there would not be the bumper crop of atheists and skeptics of today. So who can say that Bethel is wrong to keep on harping over false religion—that picture is the overall picture, and the skeptics are but a resulting subset.

Another area of seeming bias is how we speak of ex-members—as though they are all train-wrecks, and will remain so until they come to their senses and return. This is a point of great ridicule among ex-Witnesses, who take bows before each other each time one emerges who is not a train-wreck. I mean, it really does seem an example of “confirmation bias” on our part.

Still, the Word indicates that those who leave after knowing the truth are like Vic Vomodog, whose name I changed from Vomidog to please @anna, who didn’t like the image. “A dog that returns to its own vomit” is how Peter puts it, so from there comes the notion that the world will “chew one up and spit one out.” If the brothers find someone who says it in exactly those words based upon his own experience, they eat it right up and cannot relay it quickly enough. 

It used to drive me nuts. It still does, a little, but it does so less. The brothers don’t know because they obey the Bible’s own counsel to not go where they might find out. “Keep an eye on those who cause division and stumbling and avoid them,” says Romans 16:17. So they do avoid them, and thus the only window they have to look upon them is that of scripture. 

Ah, well. I would like it if they didn’t do that, but who is to say they are wrong? It’s a little like God declaring that Adam and Eve will die the day they disobey. It the long run, it makes little difference whether that “day” is one of 24 hours or 1000 years. It’s a little like your spotting the glitch of the tablets long ago and saying “Who cares, really? Maybe it was that way.”



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Views 10.7k
  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have learned to live with it, and perhaps even acquiesce that it must be that way. Of course, I don’t know what examples you may have in mind, but... Do you think I can persuade anybody that th

Not quite having the resources just yet to plow through all of the above, just skimming it quickly instead, understand that what I say are but preliminary impressions. I know next to nothing about FG.

Posted Images

  • Member
On 9/9/2020 at 1:30 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

Can the Falun Gong make the same claim—that if the “right people” do not say something, it means nothing? They will have to state their own case—not me. For all I know, they are the nutcakes that people make them out to be, but when I see how the media butchers stories of Jehovah’s Witnesses, I do not assume that other “new religions” are given a fair shake.

It's not fair to label every new religion a "cult" just to make use of the pejorative connotations. Obviously, this has been used against us, too, and against many religions which were "new" at some point in time. I use it here for the negative connotations, of course. For purposes of this discussion, the important thing is whether the leader of a new religion is able to tell lies that followers will believe without question, even when those lies have resulted in harm or death to those same followers. The followers do not necessarily know the leader is telling lies, of course, but as evidence mounts up, the followers are such strong believers in their leader that they have been able to avoid/deny the questions about harm or death. In other words, the leader's lies are accepted as truth against the cognitive dissonance that followers are actually being harmed or killed.

So, does Falun Gong believe some crackpot ideas? Sure. But that's not what makes me use the term cult. The beliefs of most religions seem like crackpot ideas to some other religion, even the idea that God needed a human sacrifice to release us from the bondage of Adam's sin. And giving all one's spare time to volunteering for projects that promote Falun Gong does not make it a cult either.

However, can we show that Falun Gong's leader has told obvious dangerous untruths? Yes. And this does not depend on what other people ("enemies") have said about this leader, but what he himself has said.

Can we show that at least one of those lies unnecessarily results in harm or death to followers? Yes. (Of course, the primary one is the lie about curing cancer and other diseases with exercises alone, and the claim that using human medicine to help with disease is not effective and shows a lack of faith.)


Now, when a person is willing to lie to followers to keep a leadership position, we can work from that point and look at the reasons people will tell this kind of lie: money, ego, extreme negative religious or political ideology. I say extreme negative because few people would really say God wants them to lie for a cause, but they might easily say that God is OK with them lying for a cause AGAINST something, because the end justifies the means. Turns out that extreme political ideology against so-called "evil regimes" is also the best explanation for why Reagan, Bush I and Clinton and the CIA told absolute lies related to foreign policy objectives against "enemies." We now know from documentation that they made false claims enemies all the while knowing that these claims were not true.  In a few years, I'm sure we could have the same type of documentary evidence already claimed against Bush II, Obama, Trump, etc.

Telling the most vicious kinds of lies against an enemy is actually a typical political tactic, but it can also be documented in religious circles. For example, if you have an interest in Dr. Massimo Introvigne, watch what he says here  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBj-9iLiL-s) about the famous Mormon attacker, "Ex Temple Mormon," Bill Schnoebelen. Then, to get a glimpse of what Schnoebelen claimed about the Mormons, try here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-dQvdotiKI

Of course, if someone says that reptile like creatures on two legs walk in the basements of the Mormon Temples, there are many who would eat that up and start spreading it far and wide. And if you really believe it's true, you should do this. I think there are groups like those behind Bitter Winter who feel they must speak up because the vicious claims seem true. But Dr. Massimo Introvigne has to very carefully show why he has come to believe that men like Schnoebelen are pathological liars, even though it ruins the favorite beliefs some had about devil worship going on in Mormon Temples.

Men like the leader of Falun Gong and Adrian Zenz, the people behind claims of organ harvesting of millions and Uyghur torture of millions, are exactly the same kind of racist, hateful fundamentalist liars that Schnoebelen is. They all believe they are lying for the greater good, for God! And there will always be people to eat up these lies. Just like the followers of Falun Gong, when they see how some of these lies don't make sense, they will shift to other claims which may or may not be totally true. If someone doesn't believe that people are being killed by taking out their organs when they are alive, then they will shift to: it must be true because look how China tries to control water, or fishing, or language teaching, or coronavirus, or terrorism in HK, etc., etc., etc. Or look how many people Mao "murdered" by mismanaging a famine. Many won't seem to notice that some of these arguments become circular, or some are even contradictory.

(Like: China is murdering Uyghurs so that there will be no problems from Uyghurs when the BRI goes through the Uyghur province. (?!?!) Or, Jehovah's Witnesses in China are jailed for conscientious objection, therefore if FG claims that FG followers are being murdered for organ harvesting, then it must be true. Or, China is the second largest economy in the world, and might soon be the largest economy in the world, and it was well on its way toward a primary goal for this year to raise all Han Chinese and minority Chinese out of poverty; therefore it makes sense that they have a brisk industry selling body parts even to people from outside China who go travel to China on a secret "organ transplant" visa. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I have learned to live with it, and perhaps even acquiesce that it must be that way. Of course, I don’t know what examples you may have in mind, but...

I've given examples before, and any others I know I will keep to myself. But your take is quite reasonable in the overall post. I like that you can give some benefit of the doubt even if you are pretty sure things can be done differently. I think this is the right attitude for almost everything.

2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Still, the Word indicates that those who leave after knowing the truth are like Vic Vomodog, whose name I changed from Vomidog to please @anna, who didn’t like the image. “A dog that returns to its own vomit”

Your first instincts have probably been better than some of the counsel you get from others. I liked Vic Vomidog much better before the name change. And Anna might've liked the idea of representing the BV's as cumbersome family household teraphim. For me, though, it was like a bur in the saddle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I listened to an interview of a very high up government expert on China who currently serves on the Foreign Relations council (which by the way is pro-agenda 21).  These people are life-long government advisors because she also served under Obama etc.  Foreign relations council was given additional response to Agenda 21 by Busch.

I thought it was a well balanced interview. :   


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Vic Vomidog much better before the name change.

Fear not, they are brothers—Vic Vomidog and Vic Vomodog. 

It is similar to what I said about Tom Irregardless: Of course, that is not his real name but his acquired one in view of his favorite word. His real name is John.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

For me, though, it was like a bur in the saddle.

Fear not, I’ve given up horseback riding since the days of Mr. Ed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

powerful atheist faction has arisen that would eradicate everyone clinging to worship of God—us no less than they.

I agree - 


12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I see brothers equally rude on social media with regard to tweets mentioning religion—appending insults that have little to do with the topic under consideration. Do they think themselves witnessing?

I am not here to witness.  I am here to share thoughts since I do not believe that people come here to learn anything.  I like to learn what I can but not all have the same mindset.  I apologize if I have been rude.  I know I have been. 

12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Judge Rutherford’s day, announcing that religion is a “snare and a racket.

It was needed at that time because religion was still powerful.  Today it is not needed any longer.

12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

keep on harping over false religion—

The man of lawlessness is now being revealed as  christian churches go along with UN agenda 2030 (politics) and accepts LGBTQ... and 9 month abortions.  I listened to a podcast of a woman talking about how the extreme criticism has taken over many of the evangelicals and they lose faith in the bible.  They are going along with the immorality of this world.  Satan wants to compromise every single person on earth regarding MORALITY so they are not acceptable to Jehovah any longer.  That is why I stipulate that Satan will bring in a new morality (which he already has ) but he will go further.  He will use government (UN and its allies) to force all humans to follow it at peril of their lives.  The enforcer will be a totalitarian government like is happening in China.

12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

This is a point of great ridicule among ex-Witnesses,

If they have this attitude - they are not material for repentance..... They will mock no matter what one says.   They have the hate-OCD.   I have seen this attitude many times before. While I wish they will repent I do realize that the chances are slim.  They remind me of the high priest who went to Jesus on the stake and told him to get down and help himself .... same attitude.

12 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Keep an eye on those who cause division

I think more than ever that there is so much propaganda out there that it is better to just read the bible.....  Unfortunately I am inquisitive ..... and most in the world gobble up the propaganda being spewed out by satan and his demons (rev 16:14-16).  So I have found it handy in the field to know what is going on. The youth are very much tuned into the 4th industrial revolution and futuristic things.... so I have found it is good to acknowledge or validate their knowledge but to subtly correct their thinking where is clashes with Jehovah's thinking. It is nice for me to meet people who watch the world and usually they have some false notion.....They are usually very surprised to find a sweet little old lady who knows what they know and can direct them to the bible to see how it fits in with the purpose of Jehovah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Yes. (Of course, the primary one is the lie about curing cancer and other diseases with exercises alone, and the claim that using human medicine to help with disease is not effective and shows a lack of faith.)

Scientologists believe the same.  We do stigmatize them because so much money is involved in moving up the ranks.  people die because they do not take treatment... the same accusation against us for not taking blood.   However this does not merit government persecution and all that is going on in china. God gave us free choice to choose out own religion no matter how wacky.  

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

We now know from documentation that they made false claims enemies

It was the government apparatus behind them which gave false information - such as the propaganda before the Busch war against Iraq.

I listened to a program about CIA .....and their influence on media. Their influence in Hollywood etc. How they pay newspapers to place articles that are echoed and amplified over and over in all media.  Same old tactic as communist countries use.  We think governments are good...... they are mechanisms of Satan.... and USA is a dragon just like China.

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I've given examples before

USA has been sold out to China and middle east - the news items you quote most of the time are compromised..... so you also believe propaganda which puts Falun Gong in a bad light (say that the body parts story is false) and makes China into an innocent angel that has been maligned.  China was sterilizing women during the one child policy - they used the fetuses for these same purposes....... and later went onto using adult parts.   I have watched many videos of these forced abortions.    This government is ruthless - an instrument of Satan.... and it does not matter if it is 250 thousand Muslims in jail or one million....... the PRINCIPLE that they are doing this remains the same.  It can easily go from 1 million to 3 million.  There is air footage of large prisons going up all the time....... 

Watch the last video I posted.  This is a person who is part of the Council of Foreign relations - one of the top organizations in USA and one that is appointed to follow through on agenda 21.  What I like about her is that she is balanced. But when one listens carefully one sees what is going on.   You do not believe any of this because the propaganda in our media is controlled (you will be surprised by whom) but you do not accept this fact.....  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
10 hours ago, Arauna said:

I am not here to witness. 

I am. Well—not here, but on social media, yes. Not exclusively, though. You settle in social media like FB and Twitter just like you would settle in a physical neighborhood. As you interact with your “neighbors,“ by degrees people come to know of your faith and what makes you do what you do. I wish we did more of this, but in fact we do almost none. When we “friend” only those we personally know, whatever witnessing we do, barring some fluke, reaches only the brothers. 

I rather like it that the hour requirement of pioneers has been suspended, and yet people are still being appointed as pioneers—which begs off the obvious question of...well, you know what it is. Counting time inevitably leads to curious notions of being “on duty/ off duty.“ I don’t mind seeing it suspended, in favor of witnessing that is seamlessly integrated into our lives—sometimes distinctly “on duty”, sometimes, for the most part, “off duty,” but generally so seamless that it is hard to tell.

If I was to count all the time I spend on social media, primarily my own blogging, in that case I have been special pioneering for many years. But the notion of counting time is a provision of the organization, so it is for them to define how it Is to be done. Since they are decidedly unencouraging on witnessing via social media, I count none of it.

10 hours ago, Arauna said:

I apologize if I have been rude.  I know I have been. 

Not to worry. I wasn’t thinking of you at all. I wasn’t even thinking of this site. It is a given that people will lock horns here. Besides, I don’t consider you rude at all. A bit heated sometimes, maybe, when addressing JWI, but he takes hold of an idea by the lapels and shakes it to death like a dog with a rat—what can he expect?

There is a place for everything, but for the most part I favor your type of sources—real people that you have spoken with. Of course, he knows real people, too, but with regard to input of think tanks or career policy analysts, I’m dubious of them. The educated set tend to see what they want to see—I distrust pure academics. No one lies, ideally, but they are trained to look at the world from a certain point of view, and that is what they tend to find. Business interests, too, have their own motives in exploring things, and they tend to spot what is to their advantage and not notice what is not.

An old friend of mine used to marvel at how Awake would succeed where conventional news sources would strike out. The latter would send their wildly over-educated correspondents into this or that barrio, and the locals, thoroughly impressed, and not wishing to appear stupid, would tell them anything they wanted to hear. Awake would send in their peers and come away with a truer picture.

I’ve often cited a certain BBC example of this that I saw. “Who do you trust today?” a reporter asked some local citizen of some developing and chaotic country. “I trust in God,” the fellow replies. “Yes, you trust in God,” the reporter says, eager to get this useless bit of trivia behind him, “but what of politicians?” The man answers that he trusts some politicians, but not all politicians, and the reporter chases down his thoughts of this familiar path, even if it is plainly not what the man considers important. Awake would have pursued his first answer, taking for granted the general irrelevance of politicians in most people’s lives.

10 hours ago, Arauna said:

It [denunciation of Babylon the Great] was needed at that time because religion was still powerful.  Today it is not needed any longer.

The way that I have phrased it is: “Why kick the old lady when she is down? We kicked her while she was up.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
19 hours ago, Arauna said:

which by the way is pro-agenda 21

Governments typically don't get along very well. They act selfishly in their own interests, and especially in the interests of the elites who try to control them. They don't acknowledge the benefits of God's kingdom, nor do they give credit to the moral guidance of the Bible that, if followed, could result in better government, better equitable treatment of the poor, better distribution of resources, and employment in projects that improve standards of living, better health, better treatment of the sick, less infant mortality, longer lifespans, etc.

But even when officials running governments are non-believers, or sincerely believe in a separation of church and state, how would these governments show they are wanting to do the right thing, if this were possible?

What would governments of today be doing if they really wanted to work together to solve the most pressing problems facing the world today? How might they take advantage of positive or useful entities already in place? How would they show that they cared for the populations under their jurisdictions? Even if it were just a matter of showing common sense, without bringing religion into the picture, how could they show whether they were acting selfishly or actually had the best interests of their citizens?

If the Governing Body were tasked with writing a 100-page document to answer those questions, I think they would probably come up with something nearly identical to "Agenda 21." I just finally skimmed all of it, and finished reading the majority of it. This is a common-sense document that would even match the best practices that Witnesses would love to see followed in a post-Armageddon world. I found NOTHING in the document that doesn't seem like it could have come from a very intelligent committee of Jehovah's Witnesses.

In fact, I don't really think there is anything in it that you personally would strongly disagree with. There are a couple of things I would have done differently, and you too, I'm sure. But I think that most everyone here would think of it as an excellent document.

I am definitely pro-Agenda21, after reading almost all of it.

If you are not, please find something in it to show me why: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 9/10/2020 at 3:53 PM, Arauna said:

I listened to an interview of a very high up government expert on China who currently serves on the Foreign Relations council (which by the way is pro-agenda 21).  These people are life-long government advisors because she also served under Obama etc.

Are you sure this was the interview you intended to post?

I listened (and took notes) on the entire interview. It presents nothing about organ harvesting, nothing about Tibet (except to indicate that all boundary issues have been resolved between China and Tibet), nothing about control of water, nothing about Falun Gong, nothing about Uyghurs, nothing about problems in Mongolia, and almost nothing about problems in Africa, HK and Taiwan. China is presented merely as an ambitious economic power well on its way to becoming the number one economic power, which the West sees as a threat that must be controlled somehow. When she says that all border disputes are now resolved except for some tensions with India, it's the Washington Post interviewer that has to remind her that the South China Sea fishing still results in border disputes.

Although it's an attempt to imply otherwise, it really shows that there is nothing revolutionary about Xi, and admits that China's political situation is a "black box" that they really know very little about, and that most of the conclusions they have reached were based on rumors. When either of them went to China, they apparently got their information through meetings with intellectual elites. It's true that they try to paint Xi as someone more ambitious than Deng in terms of power consolidation, but even this is based on rumors surrounding the meaning of the idea that Xi is at the "core" of the party.

If you look elsewhere, the idea that Xi is asking for fealty to both himself and the party is little more than a Western interpretation of what it means to say that Xi is at the "core" of the party. You can hear that the WP reporter is well aware that this interpretation is about the meaning of "core." When the Economist magazine wanted to make this same point, its reasoning displayed the same weakness, and they slyly turned all statements of loyalty to the party as "fealty" to Xi himself:

  • Over the past few months a parade of dignitaries has professed undying allegiance to Mr Xi and the Communist Party he leads. The trigger was a party decision in October to anoint Mr Xi as the “core” of the leadership. Soon afterwards, his six colleagues in the Politburo’s Standing Committee began laying on the flattery with a trowel. In March one of the committee’s members, Yu Zhengsheng, said Mr Xi’s status as core reflected “the fundamental interests of the party and people”. Such statements remind many observers of the adulation once accorded to Mao Zedong.

Wow! One of the six Politburo Committee actually said that about his status as "core"? And this is the strongest one of the six they could quote? Of course, the point could be at least partly true, and I wouldn't be surprised. But it's comical how little evidence was shown as "proof" before using it as a firm foundation for some political punditry. And if that's all one needs as evidence, Trump would be a Napoleonic dictator (which he is but only in limited ways, imo). In the United States, millions of people carry images of their political candidate on their T-shirts, or their leader's slogans on their hats, cars, coffee cups, etc. This is considered cult fealty if seen in other countries.

I also thought it was funny that they both were ready to say that the trading ports which China has helped to build, upgrade and open up in many countries, (76 ports in 35 countries) especially countries in Africa were billed as non-military, but then, look, here comes a visit by a a Chinese navy ship! (They didn't say how many ports were visited, and said it in a way that showed they weren't ready to say it was even more than one or two, but the clear intent was to imply that this suddenly turns them into "Chinese military bases." At least they didn't embarrass themselves by belaboring this point. Also, the US has like 800 actual military bases where actual active weapons and bombs remain permanently.)

On the whole, I agree with the approach of the interview. It was very balanced, and surprisingly had absolutely nothing to say about supposed Chinese aggression and violence and atrocities that many sources push. Xi is treated as a political and economic figure, and China is treated the same. There were none of the typical attempts to drop even a hint that civil rights atrocities were ongoing. They did talk about a lot of arrests for corruption that Xi is known to have initiated, but this was treated as an actual valid anti-corruption campaign. In other places I have seen that these cases were numerous, but necessary, as many areas of China were lax in reigning in officials who cheat, and defraud and try to enrich themselves by taking advantage of the poor.

(On that point, I noticed that she apparently agreed that Xi was well on his way to raising the remaining few million out of poverty, that China owns only 5% of US debt, same as Japan, that China only takes over only a 2% interest in entrepreneurial companies, etc. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

nothing about control of water, nothing about Falun Gong, nothing about Uyghurs, nothing about problems in Mongolia

You missed quite a lot.  Even if you took notes.  She said that the other countries cannot expose the water problems or they will face backlash from China.  She also said that they are replacing local populations with Chinese,  forcing muslim women to marry Chinese.....

She said a whole lot of things like this which gives you the subtle nuances of what is really going on.  She named the shocking number of CHINESE dams that were built by China in these countries and this water is controlled by China. She named the destruction of the environment. She mentioned the islands built by China in the South China seas which were not supposed to be militarized..... and then were.   All this indicates that China is not to be trusted because they do not keep their contracts.  It is a well-known fact that China uses contracts which sound good to lure the victim - then when the deal is done they do not keep their side of the bargain.  

Indonesia is now refusing to pay their loan because of shoddy work done by China.  Australia had to remove their journalists...... many things happening every day.... and you still think that china is not part of the beast?    The entire beast is part of Satan's system - not just USA.  China is included in that beast.  They have been the silent part of the beast but because they have become mao-ist under Xi ping the world has now woken up to their long term "dragon-like" plans.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Hordes of small and mid-size banks are now in trouble, and that is really bad news because those institutions issue most of the mortgages, auto loans and credit cards that our economy runs on.  The other day, I asked my viewers to “imagine what our country will look like if the banking system implodes and the economy plunges into a depression”, because if our banks continue to collapse that is precisely where we are headed. JPMorgan Chase & Co analysts estimate that the “most vulnerable” U.S. banks are likely to have lost a total of about $1 trillion in deposits since last year, with half of the outflows occurring in March following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. There are more than 4,000 banks in the United States right now, and the vast majority of them are rapidly losing deposits. As a result, U.S. banks are being forced to turn to the Fed for help at a very frightening rate… Banks have been flocking to emergency lending facilities set up after the failures of SVB and Signature. Data released Thursday showed that institutions took a daily average of $116.1 billion of loans from the central bank’s discount window, the highest since the financial crisis, and have taken out $53.7 billion from the Bank Term Funding Program. Meanwhile, the banking crisis in Europe has taken another very alarming turn. Deutsche Bank shares fell on Friday following a spike in credit default swaps Thursday night, as concerns about the stability of European banks persisted. The Frankfurt-listed stock was down 14% at one point during the session but trimmed losses to close 8.6% lower on Friday afternoon. The German lender’s Frankfurt-listed shares retreated for a third consecutive day and have now lost more than a fifth of their value so far this month. The emergency rescue of Credit Suisse by UBS , in the wake of the collapse of U.S.-based Silicon Valley Bank, has triggered contagion concern among investors, which was deepened by further monetary policy tightening from the U.S. Federal Reserve on Wednesday. But what is going to happen to our economy when the flow of mortgages, auto loans and credit cards is greatly restricted? Our country is already being torn to shreds like a 20 dollar suit, and economic conditions are still relatively stable. So what is going to happen when we do fall into a very deep economic depression? These are such perilous times, and they are only going to get more difficult in the months ahead.
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.