Is Data REALLY The New Oil? - Questions For Corbett #043

03/02/201962 Comments

So, is data really the new oil? Are polar bears invading Russia due to climate change? Where's the membership list of Chatham House? These and other viewer questions are answered in this edition of Questions For Corbett.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download)

Watch this video on BitChute / DTube / YouTube or Download the mp4

What Really Happened in Douma?

BBC producer says hospital scenes after 2018 Douma ‘chemical attack’ were staged

The 2nd Annual REAL Fake News Awards


No, Data Is Not The New Oil

Data Is The New Oil

Google's Selfish Ledger)

A ‘mass invasion’ of polar bears is terrorizing an island town. Climate change is to blame

Polar bears walking the streets on Novaya Zemlya are habituated garbage bears, not victims of climate change

Indiscreet (1958))

The History Of The Modern “Climate Change” Scam

Imaginary Climate Change In Australia

Chatham House Corporate Members

Know Your Enemy: The Royal Institute of International Affairs

The Anglo-American Establishment

Malwarebytes relying on anonymous academics to create (biased) "clickbait" list

Filed in: Questions For Corbett
Tagged with:

Comments (62)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Corbett says:

    Since recording this podcast, the OPCW released their final report on Douma.

    It finds “reasonable grounds to believe the use of a chlorine weapon (2.17) but:

    2.8 Apart from the Schedule 3.B.17chemical triethanolamine and a Schedule 2.B.04 chemical known as “AmgardV19”, the presence of which was satisfactorily explained,5no other scheduled chemicals listed in the Annex on Chemicaltothe Chemical Weapons Convention, or their degradation products,were detected in the environmental samples analysed.


    2.9 From the analysis of the information gathered during the on-site visits to the warehouse and facility suspected of producing chemical weapons, there was no indication of either facility being involved in their manufacture. The information collected indicatesthat the activities at both locations were mostly related to the production of explosives.

    • mik says:

      Oh, yes, reasonable grounds to believe the use of a chlorine weapon..

      The same report, 8.15

      “The findings discussed in paragraphs 8.9 to 8.14 indicate that a substance, or a combination of substances (such as molecular chlorine, hypochlorous acid or sodium hypochlorite) containing a reactive chlorine atom was in contact with many of the samples collected at both alleged incident sites (Locations 2 and 4).”

      Hypochlorites are used for disinfection and bleaching, very common household chemical.

      So, if you get tear-gassed (chemically-attacked by some government), put some very diluted bleaching agent on yourself and sue them for chlorine attack (good luck from me).

      Paragraph 8.16 is also funny. Looks like forensic chemists cannot distinguish whether corrosion on metallic objects came from natural causes or is a product of reactive chlorine corrosive agent. Btw, chlorine is one of the most chemically reactive elements, it reacts almost with anything.
      I don’t buy this shit.

  2. Drazen says:

    Question for Corbett

    This is not a question so much, but an observation for your comment.
    I find it intriguing that various Mouths of Sauron in the establishment media preach democracy, democracy, all hail democracy. Yet when there is a popular issue that seemingly goes against establishment desires the same or other Mouths of Sauron proclaim, “we must find a way to counter populism”. Such as the Brexit situation and the rise of nationalist parties in Europe.

    Do these people not realize their hypocrisy here?
    Democracy = Populism
    Or am I missing something?

    (“we must find a way to counter populism”
    Not an actual quote, just paraphrasing the general sentiment.)

    • Duck says:

      Its not a great leap for them to hop between the two ideas because either they have no real moral compass and just act in whatever way happens to suit their best interest OR they are the kind of person who believes that their interests and desires are best for everyone because they are smarter, better informed, or some such.
      hiporisy is only felt by people who have an actual sense of right and wrong… most of the kinds of people who staff the mainstream media are of the kind CS Lewis talks about in Screwtape Raises A Toast- hollow jellyfish people animated not by any great wickedness but just their own petty appetites and force of habit.
      As for “democracy” itself… humans have always been creatures that tend to follow the leader and group dynamic set by the leaders. Its how we lived in our early days and our nature hasnt changed.

      • Drazen says:

        I agree.
        As far as moral compass goes, I sometimes refer to “mainstream” media personalities as “self-righteous finger wavers”. Referring to them as the Mouths of Sauron was probably giving them too much credit and hollow jellyfish seems more appropriate, but that doesn’t sufficiently convey their despicableness which mostly emanates from their vanity and vacuousness.

  3. Flatspokes says:

    My response to the investment question would be first and foremost, why do we buy into the brainwashing that we all can’t be business owners. All of us may not want to be a business owner but we all can be. It really wasn’t until the industrial revolution that getting a job was thing. Most people worked for themselves in some way or another. undoubtedly it’s more complicated to work for yourself these days but are we any less capable of doing so than people of 2 or 3 centuries ago? We are not less capable, we a just trained to believe we need jobs. “It’s hard to work for yourself and only certain people are cut out for it.” Its all BS. Jobs are convenient. Otherwise, a business is just a job. That’s all it is. You go to work and do your job. You just do it for yourself. If the common, uneducated person of the past could do it, why can’t the modern person? Just look up the amount of time Benjamin Franklin spent in school and study his business life and then ask why anyone today is limited in anyway other than buying into the brainwashing that only certain people can be self employed. They need us to work for them or their system will fall apart. Stop believing the lie that we need their jobs. Then we can start accumulating wealth as they do. Only we can choose just how ethical we should be in our own wealth accumulation.

    • generalbottlewasher says:

      Flatspokes Tommy. That’s an honest take on the American psychi. We have a lot of programming to counter.
      They do need us to work for them but if we get too uppity they shutter the factory and move it elsewhere. Or just the contrary , they import cheaper workers from elsewhere.
      Even the cheap import labor workers are like the locals, self employers. We all own our labor. We can participate in the give and take and balance the fruits of our labor with reason and fairness or fight the uncompromising greedy idealog who believes labor should not rise above slave statis. They would not tolerate any challenge to their elitist ruling class perceptions of what is fair and throughout history disputes have been routinely settled by violence.
      The ruling elite, for lack of a better term, seem to suffer from a programming as much as they program us to accept their twisted logic.

      • Duck says:

        “…The ruling elite, for lack of a better term, seem to suffer from a programming as much as they program us to accept their twisted logic….”

        Their logic is not twisted… its just not very nice. In the old days the tribe needed the driven and fearless to do things….and they needed to tribe to live. The Romans and the Greeks and the Vikings and everyone else had people like the elites who were ruthless and grasping but the elites needed “their” people and had to take at least SOME CARE of them even if it was just for their own needs.
        Kinda like Jon Ronson’s ‘psychopath test’ book points out psychopathic corporate leaders are just doing what their non-psychopath shareholders WANT them to do when they maximise profits
        Even an emperor used to need someone to play a game of chess with…. machines and wealth have advanced to the point that normal humans are just less important to the elite

    • mkey says:

      I like this line of thinking. And you’re 100% correct, the know how has been knocked out of people, only those most resilient to getting a job (i.e. being enslaved) look for other options. Which are few and far between, thanks to state meddling and over regulation.

    • mik says:

      First, I’m self employed.

      “Otherwise, a business is just a job. That’s all it is.”

      This statement is plainly false.
      It’s similar to say a particular person could do anything. No, for many reasons, knowledge, skills, capabilities, affinities, personal circumstances, environment circumstances…

      Jobs are in general more secure, even more for those willing to bent over really deeply and withstand savages behind. For having a business one must be able to bear more risk. Some people value security a lot, for whatever reason, they will refrain from having business.

      From abstract perspective, you proposed one-fits-all solution.
      That’s just not how things are and will never be.

      • HomeRemedySupply says:

        mik says:
        “…Jobs are in general more secure…For having a business one must be able to bear more risk. Some people value security a lot, for whatever reason, they will refrain from having business.”

        I agree.
        From having been self-employed for many years and trying different business ventures, there is risk and often ‘unpaid’ marathon hours involved. But it is nice to be your own boss, and also the ‘hope’ of reaching higher rewards.

        I have a perspective. In some ways, an individual is actually a “business owner of himself”.
        He markets himself to an employer (such as with a resume and job interview and networking). Then his “business” (himself) enters into a ‘contract’ with the employer when he is hired. The contract is typically an hourly or salary pay, plus benefits/perks, for labor performed. Some folks end up with a pretty good contract. Some don’t.

        An unfortunate scenario permeates our society in the U.S.
        These mega-corporations control and have influence on much of the labor market. If a potential employee wants to limit their exposure to mega-corporation influence, they are hard pressed for options. It is not like the pre-Walmart days, when independent business owners were plentiful, as were the options of employment.

        ‘Shelf Life’ of independent businesses
        When a person looks around at independently owned businesses, most are lucky to survive a decade or two. It is easy to overlook this fact, because they are no longer there. The void is difficult to see.

        • mik says:

          It’s amazing feeling to be your own boss. I always had problems with bosses. Probably it would have been easier if I knew that most of the time bosses just have to show who is in charge and nothing else.
          It is very harsh sometimes when I’m working for many many days in a row for 12 hours and more. Or making a bad deal and working for peanuts.

          I can’t see anything new a perspective “business owner of himself” brings regarding to employer-employee. Maybe it even hides true state of affairs.

          I any case, at the end it is just a matter of bargaining position/power. Some folks are in a position to decline to be corporate prostitute of any kind, but some are not.

      • mkey says:

        I wouldn’t agree with your assessment that running a business is a lot more than “just a job”. It’s a more demanding job, but that’s what it boils down to.

        While doing business is not exactly easy, especially on overegulated markets on which people are incentivized to enslave themselves, you stand to gain from your work.

        As an employee, you can do better, faster, innovate, be dependable and versatile, but when you look at your paycheck it will be less than rewarding. The better you do, more will your boss profit from your work. And he’ll be prepared to double down on stupid and see how long can you last before you finally break and quit.

        There’s another benefit, if you work for yourself you can try to position yourself where you expect to be most efficient. On the other hand, while on a job you can pretty much forget about moving from that position in which the employer wants you. Once you become proficient with dirty or shitty work, you can forget about getting out of that gutter.

        That’s at least my experience up to this point.

        As far as risk goes, there’s a whole lot of risk on both sides of this argument. In today’s job market, one can expect to change jobs every 2-4 years, if they’re lucky. That means about 15-20 jobs over a lifetime. Doesn’t that sound incredibly risky to you?

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          I have held more than 100 jobs in my lifetime so far.
          Interesting adventures and exposures.

        • mik says:

          “I wouldn’t agree with your assessment that running a business is a lot more than “just a job””

          I didn’t say that in any way.
          You should be aware it can be easy for someone, hard for the other, for someone unimaginable. We can say something conclusively just for a specific person.

          Job and business are not synonyms, these words have their own meaning, we should refrain from language perversion, that is in the domain of dark side.

          Business brings more responsibilities. You must have self-discipline, there is no one up there to kick your ass. Selling your products/services, devise a price, finding customers, withstanding pressures during bargaining to conclude it successfully…..
          man, for some people this is rocket science.

          Sure, jobs are not without risk. I’m a bit suspicious about your job statistics. Job change doesn’t necessarily means increased risk. Certainly I would not count job changes when this occurs on employees’ terms, like going from one “satisfying” job to better or similar.
          Risk is also a matter of perception, only an individual can decide what is acceptable for him.

          • mkey says:

            You disagree with this, so I’m not sure anymore what you’re agreeing with.

            “Otherwise, a business is just a job. That’s all it is.”

            Being a business owner is a job in itself. Some people I know do on their job something a business owner would do, that is running the business. The only difference being that they are not the ones making those final decisions and they don’t get the perks of being a business owner.

            In no means am I implying being a business owner is easy. Same goes for having a job.

            Nowhere have I implied that “job” and “business” are synonyms. “Running a business” and “having a job” can be similar, that’s what I was saying. Special emphasis on “can”, we’re not talking about the daily toil jobs but those where you’re so involved in certain aspects of running the business that you can see clearly how ill informed and obdurate the person in charge really is.

            I’m not sure what do you find suspicious about my job statistics. I can provide proof if need be. It’s a small enough sample, but numbers add up. The only job on which I lasted for more than 5 years is the one that made me understand I should have packed up shop years earlier than I did.

            Anyway, the risk thing comes from the surroundings: if there aren’t dozens of potential employers in your are of expertise in your area, you’re going to have to branch out. Not only do you have to quit or put your profession on hold, but you have to estimate in which direction to go forward. And then repeat the same every 5-7 years. That’s risky.

            • mik says:

              If you are not sure where I stand then ask me. Of course, if you are interested. I hope you read everything I wrote under this thread.

              Looks like you agree with: “Otherwise, a business is just a job. That’s all it is.”
              Please explain to me how these statements doesn’t imply that job and business are synonyms.

              But this debate went somewhere else, let’s go to the beginning, to Flatspokes’ post that started this debate. His claims:

              “All of us may not want to be a business owner but we all can be.”
              “….buying into the brainwashing that only certain people can be self employed.”

              I’m reading his post as an libertarian pamphlet encouraging people to start business/self employ. Excellent, I’m all for it, but just don’t preach things that are not true.
              It’s not for anyone I mentioned reasons before.

  4. nail says:

    I checked that blog (skimmed it) The History Of The Modern “Climate Change” Scam. I did not see this source and declassified document. It comes from the CIA library reading room. The information is somewhat the same though this document has a bit more to it, including competing theories for climate change of which C02 is listed as a competing theory. It’s author/sender Walter Orr Roberts it’s receiver Sol Buchsbaum/chairman science defense board. It is dated March 3rd,1975

  5. Duck says:

    I read the data is NOT the new oil article and my first thought was that they were answering Mr Corbett personally. Lol.
    Bryan Lunduke did “their watching you” at linuxfest (its on on Ytube) which is the best “normie” friendly level headed examinations of how huge the data industrial complex is.
    On that subject the ww1 conspiracy on YT is NOT age restricted on my browser… i never sign in but I bet YT knows me from my IP address

    • calibrator says:

      James said that parts 2+3 are age restricted and I can confirm that, at least for my person.

      The first part isn’t restricted…yet.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      YouTube changed my “corbettreport” algorithm

      In the past, when I would go to, towards the top would be categories of “Recommended Videos”. CorbettReport videos always were at the top, typically the most recent released video (which usually I had already watched.)

      Currently, this has changed.
      I don’t see CorbettReport videos at the top. At all. Nada. Zip. The shift in routine was noticeable for me.

      I have to strain very hard to find CorbettReport on the page. If I scroll down, way down, I might find a “Recommended Channel” of CorbettReport.

  6. HomeRemedySupply says:


    I have one piece of financial advice…
    “Never take my financial advice.”

    That said, I like to gamble. I know the markets are rigged, major bigtime.
    In fact, the entire societal system is rigged.
    So, my view is that ‘investing’ or even starting your own business (of which I have done many times) is a gamble. Life can be a gamble.

    I often listen to Mike Maloney (an anarchist) and also watch Kitco News.

    While the following video has a ‘used car salesperson tint’, it is a 20 minute fast paced video presentation on silver and silver mining stocks (stocks give higher leverage to silver prices, plus often pay dividends).

    Gold and Silver crashed Friday March 1, 2019 , but were on an up trend during January/February. On days that silver would go down, surprisingly some of the silver stocks went up.

  7. manbearpig says:

    Just for info, I’d linked a WUWT article (referencing Susan Crockford’s work) on those garbage scavenging-polar bears a while back on the “Won’t someone think of the polar bears” page that ends thusly:


    According to recent research results, despite low ice cover since 2016, the population of polar bears around Svalbard and presumably in the Barents Sea as a whole are still increasing, as they recover from decades of over-hunting in the 19th and 20th centuries (Aars 2018; Aars et al. 2009, 2017; Crockford 2017).

    This incident of winter problems with polar bears and others like it reported from the Russian Arctic, almost certainly reflect the confluence of a growing human presence in the Arctic and thriving polar bear populations, not lack of sea ice due to global warming.

    Recall that explorer William Barents and his crew, who became stranded on the shore of northeast Novaya Zemlya over the winter of 1596-1597, had endless problems with polar bears (back when polar bears and sea ice were really abundant). That story provides an important perspective on this year’s troubles…”

  8. brian.s says:

    NOTE: Apocalyptic fear – along with guilt-sacrifice as appeasement goes deep into our archetypture.
    I believe this comes to use from a terraformed past (pun intended) that goes a long way to account for the dissociated, conflicted, fragmented and deceitful state of possession and control that consolidates in the god-king idea – through priesthood elites and aristocratic ‘right to rule’ to corporate technocracy of replacing Life with a ‘defence system’ that of course costs not only the Earth, but our appreciation for the true wonder and beauty of a shared world.

    So there is an archaic mind that rationalism has glossed over with ‘millions if not billions of years of ‘uniformitarian gradualism’ – in other words the airbrushing out of a catastrophic past, and all that goes with it.

    But out of sight is NOT out of mind – but running with all the power of denial as shadow power. The surface ‘reality’ is intended to cover over and save us from a greater fear that lies beneath.

    The USE of this denial of fears and guilt by manipulative intent is also the raising of it to our awareness – depending on your current choice as to where you INVEST your safety. For lies can seem to promise protection and truth can seem to bring on persecution – but is an illusion of safety actually mind-capture (IE The matrix)?
    And the reply James gives in conventional terms re investment is no less relevant.

    The recognition that ideas are currency of the mind is also the responsibility as to what ideas we choose to accept or turn a blind eye to running, instead of dis-investing allegiance in the direct and curious desire to know the true – because it is true – and NOT because we get something for a self-specialness that may SEEM to be the only game in town.

    Catastrophiism is a recovering of lost history – along with a paradigm shift. Some of this is associated with Creationism as a defence against the use of ‘evolution’ as a mind-control weapon. But as with all research we need to be alert to our own existing investments that become visible in the flush of a self-inflation or the bust of a dis-illusion – as well as in the emotional reactivity of defending at expense of a genuine relational communication. is a portal into an appreciation of the Universe and our place in it that is not mainstream science.

    The science of discovered electrical laws is associated with technocracy (Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars) but not at the level of self sustaining complexities associated with plasma physics – which as I see it – pervades all levels of our existence as a ‘charge differentiation’ patterning very like as something I read in Plotinus – but now finding all manner of evidences that are not ‘seen’ or officially accepted because they break the Model.

    The Model can be called The Economy, The System, and equated with The World – but it is an extension of self imaged reality. To make image of Reality and take it as The Real is to conflict ourself with Life at Source-Nature – and the belief and resulting experience of having DONE so is the basis of a guilt that fears true exposure as ‘payback time’, or in other terms as all the denials that we thought to have outsourced and got rid of – coming home to roost. Because these fears run subliminally, they are not identifiable in our world EXCEPT as projected into the minds of Others.

    Loving our ‘enemy’, embracing our shadow or reintegrating the separative and conflicted sense of self, is an ‘upstream’ awakening from the shadows on the wall of Plato’s cave – and the choice not to invest in looking there for our fulfilment or as a compromised sense of loveless adaptation.

    For every en-trancing shadow is an illuminating light – according to the purpose we accept our own.

    The apocalyptic end of this ‘age’ might be the re-enactment of a past terror upon ourselves, because we have become in the image of the ‘gods’ that have structured our narrative or mythic consciousness – regardless the philosophical and rational overlay. To let our ‘avatars’ trash our system is to no longer desire the full embrace of life in the Earth Experience. That is to say – upstream to the personality adaptation or masking, is a core desire that may or may not be recognized and aligned in because of the taking on of a driven sense of mis-taken identity.

  9. 929raf says:

    I hope all are well. The investment question is answered quite well by Catherine Austin Fitts at In general, she recommends investing in your local small businesses. It has been a while since I read her posting but I remember her reasoning being quite solid. Sorry, do no have a specific link. Take care, Richard.

  10. Libertydan says:

    Indeed, investing in corporations that profit on war and the enslavement of the masses is highly profitable, however, at the end of the day what you have is “Blood Money”, and a less desirable world. Money has been said to be the root of all evil, yet it can be used for good. The thing is, that making money on money(Usury)is not likely to result in making the world a better place.
    The World Bankers have been successful in monetizing nearly everything. Their Corporate Courts place values on human life based on how much Money a person made. This is all done while the private owners of the Banks create new Money without limits. This why the value of paper money goes down and the value of real property goes up over time.
    None the less, the Bankers paper money does serve as a means of exchange (until we find something better), and thus there is a need to have some in order to function.
    As far as investing goes, I would say, invest in ones health, for without it all the money in the world is worthless. The corporations that profit on the demise of our fellow man will ultimately take down the investors who enabled them.

  11. manbearpig says:

    Saturday night yellow-gold investment fever

    Invest…? In Yellow vest? Invested in yellow-vested interests…? What’s colour’s your vest? Who do you vest with your interest? Would you turn investment into profit? Would you turn your vest for a profit? Would you turn a profit for vested interests? I’m interested in bets. I bet on personal interest. I don’t bet on Investments but I’m invested in vetting bets for interest. Interested in… investing in… ideas? in health? in love? in family? in Community? in movement? in movements? in vests? in your life? You vet your Life! How to vet your investments? How to rate interests to invest in…? I bet we don’t vet. I bet we don’t even rate. In fact, Interest rates. Money rates. Investment rates. But exchange rates too. So we must raise the interest to turn our investment. We need a return on investment. We must raise interest in turning the colour of our investments from vested interests in gold to yellow-vested interests…?

  12. Duck says:

    Best investment would be having a ton of kids, and spending money in your local community and time in church church… your right local companies are important but there is a reason the Rockerfellers targeted the mainline churches and funded a theology of social engineering.
    Dr. E. Michael Jones goes over how they helped to shift the catholic church and pushed birth control as part of population control and that various agencies have put money into Muslim fundamentalist groups isnt much of a secret either.
    Even people who are not religious should regret the break up of social cohesion that that went along with not having a post modern mindest

  13. bladtheimpaler says:

    Investment advice for James II, ‘Owning’ a piece of land is first on my list. Preferably with a good covering of soil and a southern exposure…you can guess where I’m going. If worse comes to worst you can grow huge amounts of food on a relatively small area of garden with good soil and sunlight. So start there. During the Great Depression my grand parents had their entire city lot in garden and the crop sustained them and hungry to starving guests.

    As for making money, landlords get rich tenants stay poor. The rent covering the mortgage if not independently wealthy.Real estate needs careful investigation as to value and retaining value for your buck.

    It is probably a good idea to have some small amount of gold coin or bars stashed as insurance. Silver as insurance is for the experts to answer but I own some.

    The stock market is completely fixed, up or down and as far as I’m concerned might be a real crap shoot. If I considered buying equities it would likely be in staple food producing corps. Thus avoiding too great pangs of conscience.

    Hope this helps.

  14. Hi James,

    Great stuff as always… as I was slogging through -The Anglo-American Establishment, I came across the name Percy Corbett of Prince Edward Island, Canada. Professor Quigley tells us that he was one of the three most important Canadian members of the Milner Group. Just wondering if there’s any family connection… fully aware of the old adage: You can choose your friends… but you sure can’t choose your family.

    Thanks for all your extraordinary work.


  15. mkey says:

    If one considers investing in the stock market, I think it’s by far better and cost efficient to just go to a bet shop or a casino. It’s basically the same deal but you don’t have to pay that many fees. Granted, bet shops probably created less millionaires than the stock market, but insider tips are just as worthwhile.

    There was an interesting investment idea I read about a while ago. It’s risky of course, as any other investment option. Basically, the deal is to purchase some land a plant a forest. The species to plant is the crux of the matter, something valuable should be chose, something you estimate will be in high demand in a few decades. Depending on a myriad of parameters, this could turn a profit. Inexpensive land, low property tax, lack of forest fires, undemanding trees, a spike in market demand and you could be rolling in the dough.

    Note that the lumber market crashes as often as other markets so you really need to get in between the crashes lol

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      I tend to agree.
      To me, often a casino is a better odds bet than the stock market.

      And plants…
      …free solar energy creates a product which can be exchanged or utilized. Well…as long as we still have CO2. 😉

      • mkey says:

        This made me think, maybe CO2 futures is the way to go. Build a giant greenhouse and charge people for their CO2. You’d know how much CO2 gets consumed in your greenhouse (a whole damn lot) and you could issue a certificate to your customers guaranteeing you have deposed of that much CO2 on their behalf. Of course, you’d feel incentivized to issue more certificates than you can cover with your greenhouse, but that’s just how the cookie crumbles.

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          Ha! I’m laughing. That’s pretty good. We’ll get rich. Don’t tell Al Gore or ManBearPig.

          This CO2 topic is a wild one.

          Here you buy a CO2 generator and pay for fuel to run it…
          (30 seconds) “Autopilot”…interesting name.

          In western Canada, they are trying to remove CO2 from the air.
          What if they meet their mission and deplete the CO2 in the atmosphere?…I guess we’ll all die of starvation.

          CarbonEngineering’s investors include Bill Gates, Murray Edwards, Oxy Low Carbon Ventures, LLC, and Chevron Technology Ventures. To date, CE has led projects funded by Sustainable Development Technologies Canada, British Columbia Innovative Clean Energy Fund, Climate Change and Emissions Management Corporation, Industrial Research Assistantship Program, and the US Department of Energy.

  16. dreg says:

    “…thoughts on the common may trying to invest” in today’s rigged economic system?
    In short, forget the idea of effortless, no-risk monetary-gain.
    That is gone…
    Minimizing “diminishing-buying-power” is the best we can do.
    Stashing cash is probably the most efficient and secure, 2nd being “saved” in a Credit Union, since fraud, theft-by-bank along with “negative interest rates” and “bail-in” have become widely discussed hazards of financial institutions who also may make your money available to unscrupulous manipulations (liens, garnishments, confiscations), however “legal” they may be presented.
    So, let me bring to our attention that we, (the vast majority of living persons), up until 2008 or thereabouts, lived in a financial-structure significantly based in institutional “usery” which allowed an average person who had managed to either accumulate or encounter an influx of “surplus” money, an opportunity to effortlessly increase that amount over time, as a matter of “interest”.
    Leave it with someone else who guarantees x% rate-of-return of the amount on-deposit with the total being protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
    The current financial-structure has eliminated that, as the questioner, James, noted.
    Savings-interest-rates are lower than “inflation” thereby rendering “Saving” a somewhat “losing” proposition, however, still protected by the FDIC against numerical-loss.
    We must, as a society, relinquish the idea that “convenient” and “safe” legal methods of increasing “surplus” monetary-holdings exist.
    A simple (though possibly awkward) adjustment to the knowledge that money, like many things, is subject to “loss” or reduced-servicability over time.
    “Saving” money (outside banks) is still viable as a method of retaining a significant percentage of relative monetary-power while keeping in mind that, although not obvious (usually), each newly “printed” dollar (“quantitative easing”) acts to (eventually) “water-down” the value of every other dollar. This has been going on in the extreme (with the U.S. dollar) since 2008, except that the newly “printed” money is limited to the “hands” of the .1% and not accessible to the general population. This selective-distribution-method delays and/or diminishes the watering-down (reduced buying power) effect.
    If you opt to put your money in a hole in the ground, coins are most durable.
    James Corbett, I will thank you in advance for any corrections to my mis-takes AND for (nearly) all the work you do… (I am always reluctant to align 100% with anyone.)
    I do have my own questions such as “recommended methods of adapting to changes-in-climate regardless of the causes?” I currently live on a bay on the Oregon coast in a home at 13 feet above sea-level. Although it is obvious to say “move” I really want to know what you think about the future of Earth for your children. Even IF changes in climate and resulting alterations in habitability of many areas are entirely “natural” for this planet, do you anticipate challenges from sea-level-rise, ocean-dead-zones, bleaching of coral reefs, warming oceans and arctic releasing methane, just for a few possible forthcoming changes.
    Thanks again…

  17. There was a brief mention of the Acxiom company, whereas I highly recommend Vienna Teng’s “The Hymn of Acxiom” (, I used it a bit in the close of my own video “Your privacy is lost – How it is done” (,How), but garnered little dialog on the subject.

    When it comes to investing, I can state that I have literally made a million dollars on the NYSE, and I suggest in the most reliable way possible. In the early 1990s for the last generation of CRT displays that littered the trading floor, I designed and my partner manufactured the devices that controlled those displays. It was over a million in sales with a high margin. Adjusted for inflation, I can honestly say I made a million on the market.

    Just after the close on April 17, 1991 I stood on the trading floor and interacted with several. One was a VP of SIAC, the company owned by Dow Jones that runs the technology. His statement to me sunk in to this day. He stated that the national news that night will be that we closed over 3,000 for the first time. Then followed by stating “we don’t care! What we care about is volume”. The stock market is just a fraud to make the small investor think he has a chance on a level playing field. It keeps people from fighting the system because they have hope for themselves in the system.

    I did a video, mostly to let my kids know about their dad’s history, that discusses this and other things: “A bit of my history – You cannot serve God and money” ( Be forewarned, it is overtly Christian.

    I suggest if you have resources to invest, invest local. Invest in your neighbor. Find local people or projects that may return to you monetarily, but will return to you in other ways.

    In years past I attempted to bring technology to the table to foster the local market with ShofarCity ( It failed, but one day perhaps I will try again. However, in the neighboring city of Chattanooga is Weekly Fig ( that does something similar in that they deliver local food to the local market, including me. It is a wonderful concept, requires investment, the return is great food which I suggest leads to great health, and is being hounding by the Federal Government. Surprised?

  18. MaryD says:

    After watching this it made me long for the good old days before the rise of the internet and everything “smart.”

    Being Offline is the New Luxury – a Documentary

  19. schnugee says:

    I am not a financial planner, but wanted to suggest a few ideas to James who asked about investing.

    I personally store value with precious metals (silver & gold), keep some cash (federal reserve note currency) on hand in case of electronic system failure, own firearms, and keep some food, water, and means of preparing them on hand. I live in an area where we’re subject to hurricanes, so having an emergency plan just makes sense to me. Besides that I have invested heavily in real estate education, so I can earn and grow wealth outside of my IT career. This is investing in myself first, with the goal of getting a financial return as a result. As I continue to earn from real estate, I’ll develop passive income streams, and purchase more of what I have mentioned above.

    If you have an emergency plan in place, then I recommend you think about investing from a fundamental standpoint. Is the enterprise legal, moral, ethical, well managed, and does it have good odds for success? Every dollar you invest will be a vote for the success of that enterprise. That being said, I say start small and local. Have any family members with high credit card debt? Buy their debt, and charge them a lower interest rate, if you think they will be responsible. (See Bill Bonner’s work on the famiy bank, or Catherine Austin Fitts work on Solari circles.) Is there a local mom and pop shop that is looking to expand? Learn their business and see if you can compete with a bank for their business. Robert Kiyosaki’s books “Rich Dad, Poor Dad” and “Rich Dad’s guide to Investing” are good place to start getting smart on investing, and understanding the risks vs. rewards.

    I hope this was helpful. God bless!

  20. dan_maryw says:

    Quite a number of people relate that the oceans are rising and Miami and NYC will soon be under water. NOAA posts many statements about the rising ocean levels and people relate this confirms climate change. What’s your take?

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      Maybe I should buy a boat in case the water comes to west Texas, or perhaps I could start on marketing my ‘beachfront’ property now.
      When the time comes, I wonder if the lobster fishing in Manhattan will be any good.

  21. GW says:

    Re: investments, in 2011 I began buying silver coins every few months when I had the extra cash. It was for a long-term investment, but I had been misled by the silver “gurus” who have a vested interest in getting you to buy their merchandise and therefore are always predicting “precious metals are going to skyrocket soon” mantra. I continued to stack for 5-6 years as I watched my silver lose value. I continue to hold though, and if I never see the USD collapse and precious metals finally rise, perhaps my children will.

    I wanted to invest in marijuana stocks some time back when it was obvious that that market was going to explode as more states legalize, but living abroad and with no way to invest easily without a broker and their fees, I never did. The money I have is peanuts, so it’s not so important.

    One thing I have invested in is equipment that will help my wife and I survive in the case of a SHTF scenario: that is, a mobile vehicle (RV), solar panels, gaz bottles, etc.

  22. zyxzevn says:

    Where does the money come from for Data collection? And why?

    A huge industry is forming around data and tracking. In that sense
    data is the new oil.
    This formed Google, Facebook. And Mircosoft and Apple added tracking
    to their systems.
    Rven cars and fridges are combined with tracking.

    Data is also used to develop smarter neural networks, which is used to improve tracking.

    But commercially, I do not see a way to get a return from this huge
    investment in data. We do not sell more cars or more computers or
    more phones by tracking every user.
    The only commercial validity is in finding a niche in the market,
    which you can profit off for a short while. But the market is so
    saturated that it will not give the huge profits that are needed
    to finance the investments.
    So in commercial sense this is a big hype, probably by advertisers
    to get a bit more money.

    From government side it makes sense to have some info about the people.
    That way the government can see and analyze problems in areas. And
    come with a solution.
    In reality this never happens. The government uses data to push
    certain policies, often combined with some companies getting extra
    funding. This measures often increase the problems.
    The people in the area often already know the solutions,
    and can work together to fix them. (like filling potholes, fixing water).

    So maybe the money comes from companies trying to profit off people
    by pushing the government towards a wrong decision with biased statistics.
    But this still does not account for the enormous amount of money in data.

    Trying to find the answer

    Looking deeper into the finance, it seems that most of this
    money comes from the government and agencies. Especially NSA and CIA are
    interested in tracking every person continuously.
    It costs a huge amount of money to track people, and this will
    not be available for normal basic (government-) security.
    So even in that area it does not make sense to have huge investments.

    Security is actually very simple. Have good borders. Check people that
    have too much money. Track criminals and their pals.
    This requires tracking only certain people.
    Instead the agencies are getting so much data that we can not even
    see the obvious criminals anymore (like those in government).

    For basic security tracking does not make sense.
    Criminals leave their i-phones at home (unless they are stupid).
    Policemen switch off their body-cams.
    CIA-operatives declare national security.
    This means that tracking will not catch any real criminals.

    Data still makes no sense

    So now I try to fill in the blanks..

    This tracking makes sense if you want to control people.
    Because the data shows how people resist against government
    policies, or against CIA-propaganda.
    You can also stage problems, find patsies.
    You can track and hunt witnesses and whistleblowers.

    And this is beneficial for the criminals in government.

    But what does James think?

  23. Azra says:

    Thank you so much James for this excellent episode. You’ve probably already seen this but just in case:

    “ClimateGate continues – the Mann Hockeystick University of Arizona emails are now public”: “After years of trying to suppress their release, and finally being ordered to be released by a judge, they are now public, and we have them here.”

  24. redrose says:

    I second the recommendation to listen to Catherine Austin Fitts. I listened to her explanation on investing in stocks in relation to “the popsicle index.” After that I stopped my meagre attempt in investing in stocks, and took my money out. Our neighborhoods are unsafe because of the stock markets. I will not attempt to explain, just listen to some of her talks. I did buy some gold and silver when gold was at $300-600. I have just started cashing it in as I need the money, so I am glad I did this, but gold is rigged and controlled, so do more research…
    JC’s sarcastic reply is right on. If you want to make money in the stock market, go right to the military stocks. In my opinion, they will have the same detriment on people as investing in corporations.

  25. n4x5 says:

    A question for James and / or anyone else who feels equipped to answer.
    Any opinion on TerraPower? Thorium molten salt reactors are currently under development by multiple firms across the globe and are widely heralded as a revolutionary solution — efficient, inherently safe plant design, fueled by a plentiful resource useless for the production of nuclear weapons. (The uninitiated can refer to past Corbett Report episodes The Thorium Solution with John Kutsch and Fukushima’s Biggest Secret.) Is it possible that TerraPower’s founder isn’t quite the villain he might appear to be, or is there a less benign agenda at work? The “low-carbon” language is there, but it isn’t immediately obvious how MSRs could be used for nefarious goals.

    • n4x5 says:

      My mistake. I posed the question without doing my homework. I was under the impression that TerraPower is involved in MSRs. Apparently, the traveling wave reactor (TWR) is a fundamentally different design. (Despite my physics background, I have only a modicum of nuclear reactor physics knowledge.) Still, the question suggests itself: genuine altruistic venture or sneaky globalist plot?

      • n4x5 says:

        Actually, it looks like their MCFR is a type of MSR. I guess my confusion arose from the fact that it’s a different acronym, plus the TWR, which will act as a complement for the MCFR (I think I previously thought it was to be a competitor to the MSR), plus the fact that the MCFR is an MSR but evidently not a thorium MSR. I think I have it correct now. Not sure why I had such trouble understanding this before.

    • mkey says:

      Generally, even if you had access to most beneficial technology of all (like an everlasting robot which can produce as much food your family can have with nothing but local resources and solar energy) time, the question which should be posed is: who owns it? Those who own it will reap the most benefit.

      To be more crass in partly answering your question, there’s an old Italian proverb going something like: soldi fan soldi, merda fa merda.

      • n4x5 says:

        The question, though, is how the owner(s) will benefit. Presumably someone at that elite level isn’t in it for more monetary gain as the ultimate goal, especially someone with that pedigree.

        • mkey says:

          Unlimited power? Cheap and widely available electricity doesn’t have to be cheap and widely available. Once the power grid collapses due to combating “climate change” Bill may be the one to swoop in and save the day. Maybe he wants to be the man who saved the world (i.e. the western way of life) the born again Jesus of the third millennium.

          Or maybe he wants to be the one who’ll call the shots and postulate who gets access to electricity and who doesn’t.

          Or maybe he’s indeed a do-gooder, like his multibillionaire friends…

          Do you think it’s… it’s fair that you as an individual have as much influence as you have

          No, it’s kind of strange that … uh… uh… you know, people that are super-successful … uh… often have more influence … uh… Now, if you have that and hopefully try to use it not just to increase your net worth or … uh… glory, but for broader causes. But, yeah, it’s an unusual system … uh… that … uh… very successful people have more influence.

          • manbearpig says:

            Mr Gates’ articulate response to that sneaky journalist’s treacherously tricky multi-billion dollar question clearly demonstrates a colossal mind, profound insight and an exquisite sense of repartee. Edifying.

            Oh, and I love Italian proverbs.

            Have to take a look at that Truthstream Media video one of these days…

    • mik says:


      Traveling wave reactor (TWR) is new approach to breeder reactors that have been unsuccessful in the past. Gates used at his TED presentation a deceitful infographic showing all fuel is burned. That is impossible because it is a case of Pu-139 fission and there is quite a lot of radioactive waste. Ok, it’s more efficient than U-235.

      MSR reactors and thorium cycle also need regular extraction of fission byproducts, but this is rarely mentioned in presentations and even then you can’t get much information. As far as I know technology for extraction is not developed yet and therefore no reliable estimates regarding radioactive waste can be made.

      Whenever nuclear energy is presented as a viable solution problem of nuclear waste is minimized, although there is still no solution for existing waste. Rather possibility of nuclear accidents is discussed that is no doubt a huge risk.
      Nuclear accidents are in domain of uncertainty, radioactive waste is certainty.

      Excellent documentary about nuclear industry

      • n4x5 says:

        Thank you for the reply. I’ll watch the documentary. However, given my rudimentary understanding of nuclear physics and engineering, I doubt I’ll arrive at any solid verdict on the merits and drawbacks of the various plant designs.

  26. CapheSuada says:

    Hi James,

    Have you ever heard of Unit 731?

    I did watch the episode “General Shiro” of the series “The Blacklist” (S06E07) the other day and was trigger by the name. Happens to be the Surgeon General Shirō Ishii; June 25, 1892 – October 9, 1959) a Japanese army medical officer, microbiologist and the director of Unit 731, a biological warfare unit of the Imperial Japanese Army involved in forced and frequently lethal human experimentation during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945), according to Wikipedia.

    Like many other former scientists at Unit 731, he was granted immunity and recruited by the United States to conduct more research after the Second World War ended. The Americans did not try the researchers so that the information and experience gained in bio-weapons could be co-opted into the U.S. biological warfare program. That’s another Operation Paperclip!

    Is there any other information about Unit 731 other information than what I can read at the Wikipedia page?

  27. HomeRemedySupply says:

    Mr. Corbett,
    Question about World War 1
    (“War of the Austrian Succession”)

    Joseph and CQ have a question…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top