redtoe-skipper 2 points ago +2 / -0

DOwnloaded and filed.

First line:

The National Institutes of Health hereby awards a grant in the amount of $666,442

Look at the third 6. It is a different font, and placed rather awkward. I do hope no-one put his fingers on the scale to change the file.

redtoe-skipper 4 points ago +4 / -0

patience, and revealed all will be.

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0

No idea. I just followed the link provided and tried it.

And indeed. It may be the obsolete version of Chat-gpt.

Given the fact it is a language algorithm, I would presume that prepositional sentences without coloration are not part of its design.

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0


What do you know about parse-Syntax-Grammar? ChatGPT

As an AI language model, I have knowledge about these three terms:

Parse: It is the process of analyzing the sentence or code and breaking it down into parts (such as noun and verb for a sentence or tokens for code).

Syntax: It is the set of rules for constructing a valid sentence or code in a given language.

Grammar: It is the set of rules governing the structure of sentences or code in a language.

In essence, these three concepts are closely related since parsing requires knowledge of syntax and grammar. The goal of parsing is to understand the structure of a sentence or code so that it can be executed or interpreted correctly. Therefore, a parser needs to apply the syntax rules and grammar rules of a language to identify the syntactic constructs and their relationships within the input text. You

What are the 10 parts of speech? System

unknown You

What is coloration of language? ChatGPT

Coloration of language refers to the use of language to describe and convey emotions and attitudes. It is the way in which language reflects the speaker's feelings, values, and beliefs. Coloration of language can be expressed through tone, word choice, and even grammar structures. It is an important aspect of communication as it can impact the interpretation of the message by the listener. You

What is a fact and how would you construct this in a sentence? ChatGPT

A fact is a piece of information that is known to be true or proven through evidence, research, or direct observation.

Sentence: The moon orbits around the Earth once every 27.32 days, and this is a fact that has been confirmed through scientific observation and experimentation. You

For the moon is with the circumvention of the earth with the 27.32-days by the looking and calculations of the scientists. Would in your view this sentence make factual sense? ChatGPT

Typing ... [waiting for an answer since 10 minutes and counting]

this is a trick question .....

Update: it's more than half an hour now. Still no answer and still typing. Poor chat. Has not been accustomed to prepositional sentences in the now without coloration and bastardization.

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0


Chat is rather slick wouldn´t you say, in explaining why he would not mention Jesus or Sidharta gautama for that matter.

Critical self analysis stops at the point of reiteration: i dunno what you mean. So, Chat also knows about denial, it seems.

redtoe-skipper 2 points ago +2 / -0

From Spain:

Eres tan fea:

Tu halitosis mato al doberman del vecino
A doscientos marinos de un barco aleman
En el zoo no te dejan entrar
Las mofetas han dicho que hueles fatal

Eres tan fea, que cuando enviaste la foto por E-mail la detecto el antivirus
Eres tan fea, que el medico dijo al nacer Si no llora es un tumor
Eres tan fea, que fuiste a un concurso de feas y dijeron que no aceptaban Pofesionales
Eres tan fea, que cuando naciste te metieron en una incubadora con cristales tintados Eres tan fea, que tu madre en vez de darte el pecho te daba la espalda
Eres tan fea que hacias llorar a las cebollas


redtoe-skipper 5 points ago +5 / -0

Funny. The latter is lighter than the former: Dark to light.

redtoe-skipper 6 points ago +6 / -0

Of course derivative exposure is a financial time-bomb of nuclear dimensions waiting to be detonated. And when it does .... o boy ... I bet that there should be no windows in office buildings above the ground level.

However, every bank plays along in the system. At least they are exposed to issues surrounding treasury-bonds and maybe much more.

With every system, there comes systemic risk. To assess those risk, there are risk manager who should be great at answer the question: what if, then what?

But as always, just like with the COVID-scamdemic, these people kept their mouths shut tight.

In the covid case, it is quite obvious from a risk approach, the RPN, or risk priority number was max 20 on a scale of 1000, with very limited fall out. Yet, the pushed for solutions where in themselves the biggest contributors to a rising RPN.

With the financial system it is exactly the other way round. Playing around with treasury bonds used to be rather boring and low risk. However, the proliferation of treasury bonds together with a changing interest environment causes strange effects to happen.

With an increasing interest rate, the treasury bonds on the books, though on paper only, become lower in value. According to the GAAP, General Accepted accounting rules, such changes need to be reflected in the books.

Say for instance there is a treasury bond of a 1000 on the books, yielding 1%.

Normally, a book entry would follow at the acquisition.

a.1.treasury bonds 1000 on the debet side.
a.2.account balance for the payment: 1000 on the credit side.
b.1.expected interest to be received: 10 on the debet side.
b.2. results to be achieved: 10 on the credit side.

The moment the interest payment is done, a subsequent book entry is made. b.1 and b.2 are reversed. Then a new entry for the receipt of the interest is made: c.1.account balance for the receipt of the interest: 10 on the debet side. c.2.received interest payment: 10 credit side.

To better comprehend what went on here, you can check the balance sheet (BS) and the profit and loss sheet (PnL).

a.1. BS debet 1000 (debtors, other) a.2. BS credit 1000 (usually hidden in the balance of the bank account) total = 0

b.1.BS debet: 10. (debtors short term) b.2.BS credit: 10. (reservation on the balance sheet)

c.1. bank account balance: debet +10 .
c.2. received interest on the PnL: +10.

So far no heavy shit has happened. However, when the situation in the market changes, the books should reflect these changes.

Let's say the interest paid on treasury bonds ups to 2%. What happens to this bond? In practical effect, nothing, as the US government will pay this bond no matter what, even if the FRN is driven into the ground.

However, all of a sudden, the value of that treasury bond has changed on paper, since, when needs be, this bond has to be sold, in order to meet customer demand.

So, let's assume that the value of the bond is reduced to 50% to create a market in which this bond can easily be exchanged for cash. What happens?

Well, all of a sudden the bank has to "write off" some value. In the first instance we saw that the bank made a little profit of 10. Watch what happens:

d.1. write off: 500 debet on the PnL. d.2. correction value of treasury bonds. 500 credit on the balance.

Now we have the "correct" assessment of the value of that bond in the book, yet we have to report a loss on paper of: 490 (-500 + 10).

Where does the risk manager come in? Well in this phase. Smart as he is, he proposes to price risk into the books and in this way safe for a rainy day. In all his benevolence, this risk manager cannot in any way shape or form guess what the FED or the international situation with the dollar will be. Guestimates are his best bet.

Let's assume this bank has followed the advice of this riskmanager and saved for a rainy day 10% of the interest amount.

e.1.risk reservation BS on the credit side: 1.
e.2.risk costs PnL on the debet side: 1.

As you can imagine, to cushen these kind of wild swings, savings such as these won't help. And what is often forgotten, such a riskmanager does costs a lot of money too. So in actuality, more loss in terms of risk aversion.

With this in mind, are we fucked? Yes, big time. But this is exactly what the FED is for.

Patman Argues for Payment in Money," Dallas (TX) Morning News, January 16, 1933, sec. 1, pg. 4, col. 6. This appearance includes only the first part of the quotation ("If the American people ever allow the private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered")

Thomas Jefferson also was not a fan.

And I sincerely believe with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale

With all this info, how ca you proceed? Well, the same as the risk manager with one simple question: What if, then what?

SO, you are looking at bonds? What determines the value of the bond. What happens if the interest goes to x, y, z, in 5, 10, 15 years, or 2,6,10 months?

And do not take: that will never happen for an answer. Why? Murphy's law.

And if you want to discuss these things, be sure to prime yourself with Dilbert.

redtoe-skipper 3 points ago +3 / -0

I would agree.

I feel though that we are discussing two things.

As per the constitution, Congress has the power to regulate coin. That's it. They failed so far.

Now the fed, on the wings of an EO, or rather the EO covering the FED moves, tries to establish a CBDC, a central bank digital currency at the expense of all other forms of currency, including private coins/token. It also covers the connection of your identifiable data to that coin. It would also put a lot of power in the hands of the banking industry in term of what you can buy or sell with that currency (think guns, ammo, etc).

It is of interest to note how this debate is raging elsewhere, for instance in The Netherlands. Under pressure of the Nederlandsche Bank, the dutch Central Bank, banks like ING, ABN-AMRO, Volksbank (regio bank + SNS) and Rabo-bank were said to be put under "pressure" to enhance the Anti-Money Laundering and anti-terrorism financing by pooling their resources in checking every transaction above 100-€. It also means that in transgression of the law "protecting" personal data, this data is now shared within the banking industry. It is also a transgression against monopolies.

The banks on their part point towards the Nederlandsche Central Bank, who is then pointing to the ECB, who is pointing to the council of finance Ministers of the European Union. This Council consists of all Finance Ministers of the Member States of the European Union. And of course the Finance Ministers, are the ones overseeing the local Central Banks. This makes the square round, does it not?

Meanwhile, while everybody is pointing at everybody and nobody takes responsibility and steps up to the plate, the train moves at high speed.

On the backend, all data is already tied together. The data of the banks, the data of the bailif, the data of the public prosecutor, police, municipalities, Fiscus, healthcare, etc, it is one big data collection scheme. The moment this was achieved some 4 years ago, the EU came up with the plan of a European Identity Card. The Covid scamdemic only exacerbated the issue because all of a sudden more people woke up to the prospect of a digital prison.

Of course, the moment it is deployed a currency crisis will occur, the same as with Covid, to push the population into adopting the apparent safety of a CBDC.

Do you think the US is free from this pervasive influence?

When looking at the States, the question is whether or not States have the right to ban a CDBD?

It smells of a debate raging in the past where the question was of the Federal Government had the right to establish a bank, while States were perfectly within the bounds of their power to have a central bank. Of course, this debate was put to rest in the supreme court. And yes, by a long and winding opinion it was thought to be perfectly constitutional.

So, what is the constitutionality of CBDC? Can a State prohibit the deployment of a CBDC?

From this point of view, I would posit that a CBDC is unconstitutional as only gold and silver is constitutional money. States are bound to settle debts in gold and silver. A CBDC also transgresses against the 1st, 2nd, 4th, amendment to the Constitution.

This leads me to view a prohibition of a CBDC by the State as perfectly logical and lawful.

Despite this view, I am also very conscious about what these kind of debates have on the consciousness of people. It mold and programs us to think digital solutions are in any way shape of form helpful to maintain freedom.

I think it does exactly the opposite. At least within the confines of the current landscape. Maybe, at a later date under different circumstances as part of a private contract.

Then there are private currencies like BTC, ETH, Monero, and others. The list is almost endless. In essence, there is also the URA, based on a number of hours per person. In effect, anyone could create their own currency, and based on their reputation, gain or lose value against others.

And indeed, I have no qualms to agree with you, governments have no business in restricting access or use of private coins. Except maybe gold and silver, to check whether those coins in circulation do adhere to the required standards.

So if a silver or gold coin is to be of a certain make and model, as defined by Congress, then that is the way it is. And rightly so, they wold prosecute scammers.

redtoe-skipper 3 points ago +3 / -0

Within the framework as it is now, it could be a nice present, despite maybe the chances of it being grandstanding and image-building to draw people away from Trump.

On the other hand, what of it if they introduce a CDBC? As Nigeria has shown, it may not be to the central governments advantage, and then they play the only card they have left: force and they bring guns.

But whatever the issue, for smart people, like with the plandemic, it is inconceivable to take this CBDC.

Yet, there is a fast difference between the US and Nigeria. The infusion of government into private lives of people, which is more extensive in the US than in Nigeria. So, people on foodstamps, and other .gov grants may be forced to take it, lest they forfeit the support.

I am sure this will lead to challenges, of course. I find it interesting they would first try it in Nigeria, with an abysmal adoption level. This way they can tweak introductions elsewhere.

It is also quite clear .gov will abuse any loophole to enforce this CBDC. For instance, farmer protests accompanied by their tractors, are a thorn in the side of the lefty animal protectors (PvdD), who would gladly break and enter into Farmers-houses and barns. They even promote it loudly. Yet, when it comes to protests, under the guise of evading dangerous situations, they want to outlaw tractors during demonstrations.

Ridiculous, but nevertheless, it is a small token of what they want. So, they could tinker around the traffic laws in order to make it difficult to use a tractor duding demonstrations.

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, it is not the first time he is showing such. So, what is the reason your were struck by this sight?

redtoe-skipper 5 points ago +5 / -0

Exactly. Hence, it would be a good thing to prevent the fed from scamming everybody.

The thing is: once you use a non-fiat currency, like private crypto, it cannot be used as a determiner to impose jurisdiction. See: Rome-II.

redtoe-skipper 2 points ago +2 / -0

As they say: there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

redtoe-skipper 16 points ago +16 / -0

CBDC's are not alternative currencies.

Blocking the deployment of these CBDC in Florida is quite interesting, as long as ¨private"coins are left outside of this bar

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0

Same thing.

See, A friend of mine choose to take the vaxx, despite all the warnings, because he wanted to fly out into holidays.


He called me to say, now he is in such pain for failing lungs. The local doctors don't want to say it, but of course it is vaxx related. The fact that the spike bio-distribution has infested everywhere, has not even crossed my friends mind.

So, WHO choose to take it?
and the second question: was my friend pursuing his rights or his interests?

And here lies the difference between correctness and incorrectness. And therein lies your why. Life's full of lessons, and this one, truth be told, is a very tough one.

I do hope, natto, NAC, egg-yoke, dewormer will put him on his feet again. And I would expect my friend to be on a special regimen for the next 7-10 years to clean up. But, this whole plandemic was a landscape within a trauma-issue. The landscape was toxic, and the trauma, well .... still ongoing.

Hardly Trumps or white hat fault.

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0

There was no pandemic. If you still maintain their vernacular, your mind is still programmed.

It was a plandemic. And anons have said so from the get-go.

black hats control:

  1. the reporting, and registration of the cause of death.
  2. the medical protocols as the major cause of "covid"deaths..
  3. certain cities and governorship to prohibit healthy behavior & medication
  4. FDA/NIH, etc.
  5. access to medication in high risk cases.
  6. printing press & television press &: social media.
  7. production of the vaxx and the contents (produced pre-2020);
  8. deployment of so-called PCR-tests, which are useless.
  9. schoolboards and teacher-unions.

The logical conclusion is that there was no pandemic, only a plandemic, an orchestrated attempt at putting the population under their control. If this after 3 years and exposure to factual information has not reached your grey matter, your question is simply:"WHY-ning" for being a 4%-er, or worse: lazy.

redtoe-skipper 3 points ago +3 / -0

He is orally defecating in public ...

Tsk, tsk. Bowing down to the masters-Priests, are we, Markus Levi - N.

redtoe-skipper 7 points ago +7 / -0

Wrong headline:

FBI scientists calculate a 6% survival rate for victims of armed citizens stopping our false flags.

redtoe-skipper 1 point ago +1 / -0

Note the strategically placed word: Potentially.

It has nothing to do with potential in the sense of power, but what is projected as in could be. No facts, just fiction. In this case not of the quality of the Grimm Brothers, but Science Fiction.

view more: Next ›