Unknown's avatar

About stuartbramhall

Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist and American expatriate in New Zealand. In 2002, I made the difficult decision to close my 25-year Seattle practice after 15 years of covert FBI harassment. I describe the unrelenting phone harassment, illegal break-ins and six attempts on my life in my 2010 book The Most Revolutionary Act: Memoir of an American Refugee.

Ed Miliband ‘considers scrapping wind power target

image

By Paul Homewood

Ed Miliband is preparing to scrap the UK’s much-vaunted target for building 55 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind capacity by 2030, according to reports.

Chris Stark, who previously ran the government’s advisory Climate Change Committee, and who now works for Mr Miliband’s “Mission Control” leading on decarbonisation, is to publish recommendations that could revise the pathways to cutting UK emissions.

A report from Bloomberg suggested that senior government figures were questioning the 55 GW target.

It follows warnings from industry that the offshore wind target was unachievable because of insufficient supplies to build the required number of wind turbines and a shortage of ships and crews needed to install them, along with the associated infrastructure.

Mr Stark told Bloomberg: “Reaching the 2030 goal of clean power is more important than getting to those exact targets.”

Achieving the target would mean installing 2,000 to 3,000 of the largest new wind turbines by 2030 – a rate of about 1.5 turbines a day. In reality, such work can only be done when the weather allows, so the constraints are much tighter.

The current rate of installation is far below 1.5 turbines a day.

Tom Smout, an analyst at Aurora Energy Research, said: “There is no real chance that this Government would hit the deployment rates in its manifesto.”

Even if the UK did hit its target, Mr Smout said the UK’s power grids would not be able to carry all the electricity generated – meaning many wind farms would get paid for switching off.

He said: “Fifty-five GW is simply much more capacity than is necessary to decarbonise the energy system. If we hit 55 GW we would essentially have been building wind farms just to curtail them.”

Mr Miliband’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero disputed suggestions that the 55 GW target was being dropped.

A spokesman said: “We are committed to making Britain a clean energy superpower by 2030 by doubling onshore wind, tripling solar power and quadrupling offshore wind.

“The Energy Secretary is working with industry to accelerate ways the contracts for difference scheme can be expanded even further, so that more renewable energy, including offshore wind, can be connected to the grid, and quicker.”

The UK has 43 operational offshore wind farms with 2,765 offshore turbines installed around its shores, according to data from Renewable UK, the industry trade body.

They have a collective capacity of about 15 GW and produced about 15pc, or 49 terawatt hours (TWh), of the 317 TWh needed by the UK last year.

The machines installed to date have an average capacity of 5 MW, but this is small by the standards. The latest wind turbines typically have a capacity of 10-15 MW.

The UK holds a renewables auction round each year where offshore wind operators are offered a minimum price for the power they will generate, thereby encouraging the development of new projects.

Last year’s auction was a disaster with no companies bidding because the previous Tory government set the price too low.

A similar auction announced this week saw just under 4 GW of new projects approved – an improvement but not enough, say experts.

Sam Hollister, head of economics, policy and investment at analysts LCP Delta, said the results meant auctions next year and in 2026 would each need to procure 14 GW of offshore wind to meet Mr Miliband’s target – a massive and unlikely increase.

He said: “The Government certainly would have hoped for more new-build offshore wind in this week’s auction, and that has put its ambition for 55 GW of offshore wind in doubt.

“There just might not be time to procure and build the remaining gigawatts required within just six years.”

Tim Dixon, a senior consultant at Cornwall Insight, said: “The reality is that there remains a significant gap between contracted capacity and the amount needed if the government is to meet its ambitious 2030 targets.

“Renewables projects take years to build and become operational and there are just five years left to achieve a decarbonised electricity grid.”

A Renewable UK spokesman said the official targets remained unchanged.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/06/ed-miliband-poised-to-scrap-wind-power-target/

Only this morning I predicted that Miliband would sooner or later drop his 2030 deadline to decarbonise the grid.

If the Telegraph is right, he is already backing away from his offshore wind target. He has obviously realised that there is physically no way the UK can build enough wind farms in that time. The new projects signed up in AR6 won’t be operational until 2029, so he would need to contract another 14GW in next year’s auction, There simply would not be the investors or construction capacity to handle it.

Moreover Labour’s manifesto promised to quadruple offshore wind power, which would imply about 60GW.

And without his offshore wind, he cannot hope to decarbonise the grid.

Therefore he will use this as an excuse to put back his deadline, and as I suggested, he will blame it all on the Tories for not building more renewables in their time in office. He will, of course, have to answer why he put such impossible promises in his manifesto, when he already knew full well they were unachievable.

But I also suspect he will see this shortfall in offshore wind as a get out of jail card, given that even with more wind farms his decarbonisation target was always pie-in-the-sky.

[…]

Via https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/09/06/ed-miliband-considers-scrapping-wind-power-target/

The Bra-Breast Cancer Conspiracy: Have Women Been Hoodwinked

clothes health effects

Dr Mercola

How Clothes and Their Materials Affect Your Health

  • Many dangerous chemicals end up in clothing and cosmetic products because there is almost no regulation of these products. Unless we take precautions, their toxins can enter us through our skin
  • Tight and constrictive clothing (e.g., ties or pants) can be particularly detrimental to health. This is best demonstrated with bras, a recent cultural invention that cause a significant number of issues. Worse still, their usage has been strongly linked to breast cancer
  • Sensitive patients often have significant reactions to tight or toxic clothing, providing a pivotal window into understanding this otherwise overlooked aspect of health
  • This article will also share the strategies for cultivating a healthy wardrobe
[…]

Bras

Presently, Americans spend roughly 20 billion dollars a year on bras,12 which is remarkable given that prior to a century ago (the 1910s, to be precise13), almost no one wore them (whereas now between 80% to 90% of women do).

In turn, almost every woman assumes bras are something women have always worn and are not aware of the massive marketing campaign the fashion industry did to normalize this practice (which was essentially done as a pivot because they could no longer sell corsets to women).14

Since women have never worn bras for most of human history, it raises a simple question. Might there be any downsides to the practice?

Pain — Bras can cause chronic back, rib, neck, shoulder, and breast pain, often tied to restricted breathing. Many women find relief when they take their bras off, yet they continue wearing them in public due to societal expectations.

What is remarkable about this is that most women recognize this (e.g., a survey of 3000 women found that 46% of them enjoy being able to take their bras off at the end of the day,15 while another 3000 women survey found 52% take it off within 30 minutes of getting home16). During the pandemic, many women stated they stopped wearing a bra once the lockdowns allowed them to work from home and, hence, did not “need” one.17

Breast shape — There’s an ongoing debate about whether bras worsen breast shape over time, potentially increasing sagging. While the evidence is limited, some like this gynecologist18 suggest that not wearing a bra could be cosmetically beneficial, challenging the marketing claim that bras maintain youthful breast appearance.

Metal allergies — An estimated 17% of women are allergic to nickel,19 commonly used in bra underwires. This can cause skin reactions, yet the industry, wishing to maximize savings, has been slow to offer nickel-free options.

Note: Nickel is found in various products like buttons, glasses, and belts, so if unusual skin symptoms appear, especially in a specific area, a nickel allergy should be considered.20

Impaired circulation — Bras compress the breasts, potentially impairing circulation and lymphatic drainage (as lymphatic circulation is very sensitive to being obstructed by external pressure). This could explain issues like headaches, indigestion, and an even higher risk of breast cancer due to lymphatic stagnation.

Breast cancer — The most controversial topic is the potential link between bras and breast cancer. While major cancer organizations deny this connection, some holistic and even mainstream sources21 argue that lymphatic stagnation,22 worsened by bras, could contribute to cancer development. Though not widely accepted, the possibility remains a point of concern.

In turn, there is some evidence to support the contention that bras are linked to breast cancer. Specifically:

A 1991 Harvard study of 9333 people23 that found “Premenopausal women who do not wear bras had half the risk of breast cancer compared with bra users.”

A 1991 to 1993 study of 5000 women24 that found:

Women who wore their bras 24 hours per day had a 3 out of 4 chance of developing breast cancer.

Women who wore their bras for more than 12 hours but not to bed had a 1 in 7 risk for breast cancer.

Wearing a bra less than 12 hours per day dropped breast cancer risk to 1 in 152.

Women who never or rarely wore bras had a 1 in 168 risk for breast cancer.

For reference, this is 4 to 8 stronger than the association between smoking and lung cancer and is discussed further in the book “Dressed To Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras.”25 Furthermore:

  • A 2009 Chinese study found that avoiding sleeping in a bra lowered the risk of breast cancer by 60%.26
  • 2016 Brazilian study of 304 women found women who were frequent bra wearers were 2.27 times more likely to develop breast cancer.27
  • A detailed 2016 meta-analysis comprised of 12 studies found wearing a bra while sleeping doubled one’s risk of breast cancer.28

Here’s my take on bras:

  • Try going without a bra and see how it feels. If it’s better, consider why you’re spending money and forcing yourself to wear one.
  • Going braless? You can conceal it by wearing thicker or looser fabrics.
  • Support needs — Some women, like those with large breasts, may need bras for support, but I don’t believe this applies to most women.
  • If you wear a bra, ensure it’s well-fitted, without an underwire, and limit the time you wear it — never while sleeping.
  • For daughters, encourage them to skip training bras, which have been marketed as a rite of passage by the fashion industry.e of the most reliable (but frequently dismissed ones) is listening to our bodies, which for instance, is what actually drove me to adopt the wardrobe I utilize, and similarly drove many of the chronically ill patients I mentioned above to do the same. In writing this article, I hope to encourage you to choose clothes based on how they feel, not how they look.Please click here for the entire read with much more specific details and sources.

[…]

Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2024/09/06/clothes-health-effects.aspx

Mongols and the Making of the Modern World

Modern City of Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Editorial Image - Image of miramar, ulan: 157958525

Modern City of Ulaanbaatar

In this final lecture, Benjamin summarizes the Mongols major contributions to modern life.

  1. By guaranteeing military protection, the Mongol Empire enabled the third incarnation of the Great Silk Road facilitating trade revenue, cultural exchange and modern technology transfer to Europe. Nestorian Christianity and Greco-Roman medical practices (promulgated by Galen) spread east along the Silk Road as paper and gunpowder spread west.
  2. With the importation of Persian (Muslim) bureaucrats and scholars to run the Yuan Dynasty, the Mongols set an important precedent of religious tolerance and rewarding skill rather than social status. The Persian scholar Rashid Al-Din played a fundamental role in teaching the Chinese about Middle East history, geography, topography and map making. Links with China led Persia (and eventually the rest of the Middle East civilizations to incorporate Chinese rice into their diet), as well as enabling both cultures to hare their knowledge of agronomy and medicine.
  3. Using block printing invented in Korea in 751 AD, the Chinese produced their first block printed book in 868 AD and first used moveable type in the early 11th century. From there, printing t spread first to the Ikhanate and from there to Europe.
  4. Gunpowder, which played a substantial role in capitalism, imperialism and globalization,  was first developed under the Jin and Song dynasty.
  5. The Mongols were also the first political force to cultivate a special relationship with Tibetan Buddhists priests, leading to the installation of the first Dalai Lama (the Mongol word for Ocean) by the Ming dynasty in 1578 AD.

Benjamin also traces the modern history of the Mongolia. Invaded by Chinese nationalists in 1922, the country sided with Russia following the Sino-Soviet split in the 1950s Adopting Russian food and a Russian-style education system, many Mongolians attended university in Moscow.

In July 1990 after the Soviet collapse, Mongolia also experienced economic collapse after privatizing all private property and factories. Today it’s a fully capitalist modern nation

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/12373094/12373142

Judicial Watch Sues for Secret Service Protection Requests by Trump

(Washington, DC) – Following up on reports that the Biden Secret Service denied President Trump’s requests for additional Secret Service protection, Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for all Secret Service and other records regarding potential increased protective services to former President Trump’s security detail prior to the attempt on his life at his July 13 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-02495)).

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the agency failed to respond to a July 16 FOIA request for:

All records including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, video or audio recordings, photographs, outlook calendars, meeting minutes, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, briefings, presentations, notes, summaries, requests for assistance, between or among the Office of the Secretary and / or Office of the Deputy Secretary, Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Secret Service, referring or relating to any potential increase or addition of protective resources to President Trump’s protective security detail. 

One day after Trump was wounded at the Butler rally, Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said claims that increased protective services requests from Trump’s Secret Service detail had been denied were “absolutely false.” 

On July 15, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who oversees the Secret Service, called claims that he had personally denied such requests “baseless and irresponsible” and “unequivocally false” in a CNN interview.

The Washington Post reported on July 20 that the Secret Service had repeatedly denied requests for additional security at Trump events for two years prior to the July 13 assassination attempt by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks.

According to the Post’s report, Secret Service agents on Trump’s detail had requested magnetometers and additional agents to assist with security screenings at large public gatherings Trump attended, as well as additional snipers and specialty teams at other outdoor events.

Guglielmi admitted to the Post that the Secret Service had denied Trump’s request for additional security but claimed it had only learned about the new information after the July 13 shooting.

Kimberly Cheatle, who was appointed Secret Service Director by President Biden in August 2022, resigned on July 23, one day after she testified before a congressional committee and was highly criticized by both Democrats and Republicans for the security failures on July 13. She called the attempt on Trump’s life the Secret Service’s “most significant operational failure” in decades but failed to answer lawmakers’ specific questions about the investigation into the assassination attempt.

“The Biden-Harris Secret Service lied about denying President Trump increased protection requests and is now trying to cover up that deadly scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden-Harris administration has yet to release one record about the Trump assassination attempt under FOIA – which is why Judicial Watch is now in federal court.”

In August, Judicial Watch received Secret Service records that showed the Secret Service has made it a top priority that “diversity and inclusion is not just ‘talked about’ – but demonstrated by all employees through ‘Every Action, Every Day.’” [Emphasis in original]

Judicial Watch also uncovered records from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot, including sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force.

In response to a separate open records request, Judicial Watch obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.

Judicial Watch reported that the FBI withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally.

On July 31, Judicial Watch reported that the United States Secret Service completely denied multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Trump.

Judicial Watch has more than 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.

[…]

Via https://www.judicialwatch.org/secret-service-requests-by-trump/

Biased WHO-Backed Study Finds No Links Between Cellphones and Cancer

mri scan and magnifying glass with who logo inside

A scientific review commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO) claims it found no link between cellphone use and brain cancer. The review was available online Aug. 30 in Environmental International.

The publication — which focused largely on brain cancer but also cancer risk in general — is part of a WHO-commissioned series of scientific reviews of the possible health risks of wireless radiation.

Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley, accused the review of being biased.

Moskowitz is a member of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF), a “consortium of scientists, doctors and related professionals” who study radiofrequency-electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMF) and make recommendations for RF-EMF exposure guidelines “based on the best peer-reviewed scientific research publications.”

He has conducted and disseminated research related to wireless technology and public health since 2009.

In a post published Tuesday on his Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website, Moskowitz wrote:

“The WHO selected scientists to conduct systematic literature reviews on the biologic and health risks of wireless radiation who had demonstrated their bias through prior publications by either not finding evidence of harm or dismissing any evidence they found.”

The WHO’s review reached very different conclusions than those reached by Moskowitz and his colleagues in a 2020 review of cellphone use and cancer tumor risk.

“I believe that our 2020 review of cellphone use and tumor risk is less biased and will withstand the test of time better than the new review commissioned by the WHO,” Moskowitz wrote.

Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless program, told The Defender, “Unfortunately, we are used to the WHO getting some really important things wrong.”

She added:

“The protection of human health should always be the priority and, sadly, this does not seem to be the case here.

“The fact that the WHO handpicked scientists who are clearly biased to conduct such an important review and excluded scientific voices that reached different conclusions signals what we already know — that the WHO is as captured by big industry as our own regulatory agencies.”

WHO says cellphones don’t increase risk of brain cancer

For their review, the WHO researchers looked at 5,060 study records published between 1994 and 2022 and then narrowed them down, based on multiple criteria, to 63 studies for the final analysis.

Their goal was to assess the strength and quality of the possible link between RF-EMF exposure and neoplatistic, meaning tumorous, disease.

They concluded that RF radiation from cellphone use “likely does not increase the risk of brain cancer.”

Specifically, they said there was “moderate certainty evidence” that RF-EMF from cellphones held near the head “does not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, pituitary tumours, and salivary gland tumours in adults, or of paediatric brain tumours.”

The WHO authors also said RF radiation from cell towers “likely does not increase the risk of childhood cancer.”

Independent researchers say otherwise

Moskowitz and his co-authors, in their 2020 review of 46 studies, found “significant evidence linking cellular phone use to increased tumor risk, especially among cell phone users with cumulative cell phone use of 1000 or more hours in their lifetime (which corresponds to about 17 min per day over 10 years), and especially among studies that employed high quality methods.”

They recommended further studies be conducted to confirm their findings.

Moskowitz noted that the 2020 review differed in important ways from the WHO’s review. For instance, the 2020 review looked at a different kind of study than the WHO review.

“Our review examined only case-control studies of tumor risk and cellphone use as we did not consider any occupational, cohort or time-trend studies to be of sufficient quality to warrant consideration,” he said.

Also, Moskowitz and his co-authors used different criteria for weeding out studies they thought might be biased.

“Most importantly,” he added, “we employed a more conventional approach to the analysis of the cumulative call time data that examined the effects of heavy cell phone use.”

Conflicts of interest

Moskowitz noted that all of the WHO’s scientific review teams have one or more members from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

ICNIRP, which Moskowitz called a “cartel,” is a German nonprofit that issues RF radiation exposure limits “produced by its own members, their former students and close colleagues.”

The wireless industry favors the ICNIRP limits because they’re designed to protect people only from radiation levels high enough to generate heat — meaning the limits turn a blind eye to the possible health effects from radiation levels lower than those needed to heat human tissue.

Moskowitz explained why it’s problematic for ICNIRP members to conduct the WHO’s reviews:

“In 2019, investigative journalists from eight European countries published 22 articles in major news media that exposed conflicts of interest in this ‘ICNIRP cartel.’ …

“The journalists argue that the cartel promotes the ICNIRP guidelines by conducting biased reviews of the scientific literature that minimize health risks from EMF [electromagnetic field] exposure. …

“By preserving the ICNIRP exposure guidelines favored by industry, the cartel ensures that the cellular industry will continue to fund their research.”

Even though a former ICNIRP member who served as editor-in-chief of the Bioelectromagnetics Society journal accused ICNIRP of “groupthink” in 2021, the WHO continues to promote the ICNIRP’s guidelines, which are similar to those adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in the U.S., Moskowitz explained.

The ICBE-EMF in 2022 published a peer-reviewed paper refuting the “thermal-only paradigm” that insists that harmful biological effects only occur from radiation levels high enough to heat human tissue.

“The preponderance of peer-reviewed research finds non-thermal effects,” Moskowitz said.

In July, Moskowitz and other scientists with ICBE-EMF called for the retraction of an earlier WHO review because it inaccurately concluded that current international limits on RF radiation protect the public from possible non-cancer health impacts from wireless radiation, including migraines, tinnitus and sleep disturbances.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/brain-cancer-cellphones-who-study/

Dallas Police Confirm Venezuelan Gang That Took Over Colorado Apartment Complex is Now Wreaking Havoc in Texas

Harrowing new footage appears to capture the moment an armed Venezuelan gang seized control of an apartment complex in Aurora, Colorado

In a startling and surprising admission, the Dallas Police Department confirmed Tren De Aragua is in North Texas committing crimes, DailyMail.com can reveal.

The notorious South American mob best known for sex trafficking girls and women and exploiting their fellow Venezuelans, crossed the US-Mexico border in recent years- as DailyMail.com was first to report– mixed in with asylum-seeking migrants, and is behind a crime wave stretching from Miami to New York.

Last week in Aurora, Colorado, gang members were seen in a video storming an apartment complex armed to the hilt with assault rifles and banging on doors.

In North Texas, the criminal organization’s presence had been rumored for at least a year, but for the first time ever, law enforcement officials have publicly confirmed their arrival.

‘We have had gang activity in the north Dallas area linked to the Tren De Aragua gang from Venezuela,’ Dallas Police Department spokeswoman Jennifer Pryor told DailyMail.com.

Harrowing new footage appears to capture the moment an armed Venezuelan gang seized control of an apartment complex in Aurora, Colorado

Then other members of the gang rush up the stairwell, bearing weapons. In the background, the men can be heard speaking in Spanish to one another

Texas cops stopped short of detailing what specific crimes TdA, as the gang is known by federal agents, has been involved in locally– citing on-going investigations.

‘Our department is collaborating with other agencies to address possible crimes linked to this and other gangs in our city,’ Pryor added.

This latest development is the next logical step, after TdA established its new headquarters on the US-Mexico border, just south of El Paso, Texas.

In Texas’ sixth largest city, about a nine hour drive from Dallas, police are working on a confidential plan to address the growing threat, insiders told DailyMail.com last month.

As a DailyMail.com investigation revealed, Venezuelan migrants have infiltrated food delivery and ride-share apps, renting or buying accounts that do not belong to them and showing up at your door illegally.

Venezuela’s most violent gang Tren de Aragua has moved its headquarters to just across the US border in the Mexican town of Ciudad Juarez

El Paso officials, who asked to remain anonymous, fear gang violence will spill over into Texas’ sixth largest city

Tren de Aragua gang tattoos (pictured above) were part of a Department of Homeland Security bulletin that was recently shared with federal agents

In many cases, the migrants working under assumed names and identities don’t have authorization to work in the US or a driver license to legally operate a vehicle.

It raises huge concerns about the safety of the home delivery apps and the consumer’s ability to trust who is actually delivering food to their home and family – with customers’ personal information potentially placed in the hands of dangerous street gangs.

The Venezuelan community in Dallas is concentrated in an enclave in the northern part of the city, named Villa Dallas by the Venezuelan migrants who first arrived there years ago.

Thugs living in the area plunged Villa Dallas into mayhem, an October 2023 report by by DailyMail.com showed.

The neighborhood became the scene of illegal street races, beatings, shootings and extortion attempts.

A man is brutally beaten in Villa Dallas, the Venezuelan community in North Texas.

Residents of Villa Dallas say this kind of violence is becoming routine

One disturbing clip shared by a resident shows a man with a shirt over his head wailed on by several men. The man appears to be unconscious until he moves his arm and is then kicked in the head.

Meanwhile, a car’s tires can be heard screeching in the background as shots are fired into the air.

‘Don’t kill him says a by-stander.’

The person who posted the video to Instagram identified local gangsters who he says are behind the bedlam.

‘The most popular nicknames are Aron, El Pibe and Chito– three alleged mini criminal gang leaders who face each other to keep control of the area,’ @elperijanero2020 claims.

[…]

Conservative estimates put the Venezuelan population in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex at at least 20,000– many of them living in Villa Dallas.

The Oaks of North Dallas is the where the first Venezuelan refugees arrived several years ago. The migrants were from Villa Del Rosario in Venezuela and started calling their new Texas home ‘Villa Dallas.’ As more Venezuelans started to arrive in Dallas, they eventually settled in the area around the apartment complex, which has now become a Venezuelan community known as Villa Dallas

The Dallas Police Department designated the Oaks of North Dallas, the birth place of Villa Dallas, a habitual crime property in July, the department confirmed to the DailyMail.com

‘Every Friday, Saturday and Sunday, the situation is out of control,’ said a renter at the Oaks at North Dallas who didn’t want to be identified.

‘These men hang around the complex drinking and doing drugs. Next thing you know, it’s bullets flying and people fighting. When I first arrived, it was calm, but things have changed in the last few months.’

In July 2023, the Dallas Police designated The Oaks as a habitual crime property and confirmed officers have increased their presence there.

‘Our Neighborhood Police Officers are setting up a crime watch meeting to speak with tenants and address the crime in the area,’ Dallas police said in a statement.

Law-abiding migrants who have the money to move out have already left, and those who don’t try to keep their heads down and hope they don’t get hit by a stray bullet or sucked into the violence.

‘I work long hours, so I’m hardly ever here, but I’m still afraid for my son,’ another resident added. ‘They like to races here, in the parking lot of the apartment complex. You hear them going around and around and you worry someone might get run over.’

Since Dallas police first moved in to crack down on crime in Villa Dallas, the apartment that was the center of the chaos is under new management, and many of the trouble markers have been forced out.

However residents say the trouble makers have simply re-located, not left.

Last month, the US government designated Tren de Aragua a transnational criminal organization and announced a $5 million reward for the capture of its leader, Hector ‘El Nino’ Guerrero Flores

The FBI is concerned El Tren de Aragua (pictured in a September prison raid) is linking up with other criminal networks such as the notorious MS-13

The gang boss escaped Venezuela’s Tocorón Penitentiary last year. When authorities went inside the prison, they found a professional baseball field, a zoo and a pool, among other amenities that they were able to have since gang bosses essentially ran the prison.

In July, the US government designated TdA as a transnational criminal organization.

‘Today’s designation of Tren de Aragua as a significant Transnational Criminal Organization underscores the escalating threat it poses to American communities,’ Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Brian Nelson said last month.

TdA’s leader remains on the run with a $5 million bounty on his head.

Dubbed the ‘epitome of evil’, the notorious criminal organization Tren de Aragua, or TdA as it is known by federal agents, previously operated out of an infamous South American prison.

But after kingpin Hector Guerrero Flores escaped last year, the mafia moved its command center to Ciudad Juarez in Mexico on the US border – directly across from El Paso, Texas, local officials told DailyMail.com.

‘Tren de Aragua is the epitome of evil,’ Congressman Tony Gonzales, who represents El Paso, said.

‘This gang is known to rape children, spearhead murders, and cause widespread chaos.’

Since forming behind the walls of the Tocoron Prison in the Venezuelan state of Aragua, Tren de Aragua (Spanish for Train of Aragua) is now linked to widespread human and sex trafficking on the South American continent.

Law enforcement now considers the gang as dangerous as El Salvador’s Mara Salvatrucha or MS-13.

TdA succeeded in transforming itself from a group of prison thugs to one of the most dangerous criminal gangs in the world partly because the Venezuelan government allowed its incarcerated leaders, known as Pranes, to run the penitentiary.

From there, TdA’s influence spread to neighborhoods across Venezuela through the establishment of alliances with smaller gangs, according to Insightcrime.org.

In 2018, the gang went international, moving over the border to neighboring Colombia where they began to exploit their countrymen fleeing Venezuela’s communist regime.

‘While larger Colombian groups focused on drug trafficking, Tren de Aragua began to exploit Venezuelan migrants systematically, charging them extortion fees, smuggling them into and throughout Colombia, and taking control of various nodes of the human trafficking for sexual exploitation market,’ the crime publication stated.

Now in Northern Mexico, TdA is once again taking advantage of desperate migrants.

The kidnapping of South American and Central American migrants in Juarez has become commonplace, as the foreigners travel through Mexico on their way to the US

Last month Mexican officials rescued 22 migrants who had been kidnapped in Juarez and were being held in a shanty home

Gangsters are charging huge fees to smuggle migrants to the US border and then into Texas.

However, the mobsters are also kidnapping migrants who have made it to the US-Mexico border without their help in a bid to make even more money.

‘According to the security reports we have, this group of Venezuelans, Tren de Aragua, control which migrants can ride the train,’ Mexico state prosecutor Carlos Manuel Salas said – referring to the many migrants who ride a top trains in Mexico to reach Juarez to avoid having to make the journey by foot.

Kidnapped migrants are often held captive in Juarez until TdA can get a ransom from the migrant’s family back home, with many women forced into prostitution.

[…]

Via https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/texas/article-13812535/Dallas-police-confirm-Venezuelan-gang-Tren-Aragua-city.html

The First Water Car: 1000 kilometers of autonomy and the end of gasoline

water car

The Diary 24

Water in this state is “magic”: a foreign chemical element for 400 million cars<

This Hiroshima engine is the end of EVs: It rotates on itself and runs on steam

Japan shocks the world with the fuel of the future, and it’s not electric: The first-ever prototype unveiled

Car manufacturers continue to look for alternatives to petrol and fossil fuels – some as curious as synthetic fuels, which we’ll come back to soon. However, one company has dared what we only knew in theory: this is the first ever water car, and you won’t believe how it works.

A water car that puts a date on the end of gasoline: this company has made it happen

The idea of powering a car with water instead of gasoline has long fascinated inventors and environmentalists alike. What if cars could run simply on hydrogen extracted from water?

It would provide clean transportation powered by the most abundant substance on Earth. While water-fueled cars have remained mostly at the conceptual stage, a pioneering company called Electriq Global is turning the dream into reality.

Based in Israel, Electriq Global has developed a proprietary system that efficiently converts water into fuel to power vehicles. Their technology extracts hydrogen from water and uses it to generate electricity that propels the car.

This leap forward stands to completely transform the auto industry while also benefiting the environment. With an estimated 1,000 km range per tank, Electriq’s water-based fuel could soon make gasoline obsolete.

Theorised but unproven: this is how the first water car in history works

The water-powered car technology developed by the Israeli company Electriq Global utilizes a unique nano-technology that is able to split water into hydrogen and oxygen through a specialized membrane.

This membrane acts like an electrolytic cell, using electricity to break down the water molecules into their composite elements. The hydrogen produced from the reaction is then fed into the vehicle’s fuel cell.

In the fuel cell, the hydrogen combines with oxygen from the air to generate an electric current. This electricity powers the car’s electric motor, propelling the vehicle. Unlike traditional combustion engines, the only byproduct from this reaction is water, meaning the car emits only clean water vapor rather than any harmful emissions.

The membrane that splits the water molecules was developed specially by Electriq Global. It contains unique nanomaterials that make the reaction possible using much less electricity than has been needed before. This breakthrough helps make water-powered cars using hydrogen fuel cells a viable reality.

A prototype that has been difficult to optimise: the story of the first water car

Electriq Global has built multiple prototypes to test and refine their water-based fuel technology. In 2018, they successfully road-tested a Renault Clio retrofitted to run on the hydrogen-on-demand fuel system.

The test car achieved speeds over 70 mph and required no engine modifications besides connecting to an external water tank and fuel converter. Further road tests are planned using a Suzuki Vitara SUV retrofitted with a larger fuel converter and water tank to extend its range.

Electriq’s goal is to demonstrate over 600 miles per tank, comparable to traditional gasoline vehicles. So far, the technology has shown excellent results in normal driving conditions.

The fuel converter efficiently extracts hydrogen from water and feeds it to the engine with no loss of performance compared to gasoline. Through rigorous testing and refinements, Electriq aims to prove the viability of water-powered vehicles for everyday consumer use.

The truth is that a water car could be the end of petrol and all polluting fuels. We have known for years that hydrogen would play a very important role in the decarbonisation of mobility, but not to this extent. Will we soon see it on our roads? Let’s hope so, given its advantages.

[…]

Via https://www.eldiario24.com/en/water-car-end-gasoline/114/

Moneybag Logic: Who Runs the US?

Dmitry Orlov

In case you missed it, the US is not a democracy. A Princeton University
study by Gilens and Page performed a regression analysis on over a
thousand public policy decisions, and determined that the effect of
public opinion on public policy is nil. That’s right, nil. It doesn’t
matter how you vote, it doesn’t affect the outcome in any measurable
way. By extension, that also goes for protesting, organizing, dousing
yourself with gasoline and setting yourself on fire on the steps of the
US Senate, or whatever else you may get up to. It won’t influence those
in power worth a damn.

Here’s the plot that shows the relationship: public
support for any given issue may vary from 0% to 100%; the probability
that public policy will follow remains stuck at 30%. It doesn’t matter
whether or not you vote, you are throwing your vote away regardless. Or,
if it makes you feel better, it is thrown away for you.

And who are those in power? They are the oligarchs, of course, the people who own just about everything, your good person included. Gilens and Page determined that the opinions of the economic elite and of business groups do have a profound effect on public policy. If this group is dead-set against a bit of policy, it will not be adopted: 0% support by this group means no chance of the policy being adopted. If, on the other hand, this group is 100% behind something, the chances of it being adopted skyrockets up to 70%. In short, while voting for or against an issue matters not a whit, throwing lots money at one or the other side of an issue does matter a great deal. The political parties, the campaigning, the electioneering and all that nonsense is just for show. The real power resides elsewhere. Here is the plot that shows the relationship:
So, what is it that you do when, on election day, you proudly march into
the voting booth and pull a lever, or touch the touchscreen of a voting
machine? You are certainly not making a decision; that’s been proven
already. But you are still doing something: you are voting in support of
your owners—the ones who make public policy decisions on your behalf.
If you vote, then it must be because you approve of what they are doing.<

And what is it that they are doing? Well, job one for them seems to be
to make sure that the rich continue to get richer while the poor get
poorer and the middle class is… well… class dismissed. If this sort
of public policy seems self-destructive to you, that’s probably because
it is. Whenever it is allowed to run its course, the results are
abysmal—especially for the rich who continued to get richer, whose
corpses end up festooning lampposts and whose arterial spray adds a
touch of color to city squares.

Now, you’d think that at least a few rich people here and there might
realize this and do something about it; after all, they can’t all be
completely stupid. Well, I think that it’s not a question of
intelligence; it’s a question of sentience. These people are not people,
they are moneybags. And moneybags have a logic of their own: I call it
“moneybag logic.” This logic says that having more money is always good,
having less money is always bad, and that therefore everyone should do
everything possible to make sure that there is always more money. If
that requires turning the Earth into a polluted, radioactive, lifeless
desert, so be it.

As the author Victor Pelevin once observed, “Everything has deadlocked
on money, and money has deadlocked on itself.” Truer words have rarely
been spoken. After all, you can’t get anything done without spending
money. And to spend money you have to make it first. And you have to
have money in order to make money. This is what we teach to our
children, along with “There is no free lunch” and other such homilies.
“Don’t quit your day job,” we tell them if they take up music or the
arts, and “How do you suppose you’ll make a living with that?” It is
little wonder that they then march into the voting booth and cast a vote
for the moneybags.

Let’s face it, the moneybags can’t help acting like moneybags, in
accordance with moneybag logic. But a lot of them are getting spooked,
thinking that this will end badly for them. A lot of them are realizing
that this money that they are made of is just so much soiled paper and
numbers inside computers, and to make any of it mean anything they need
to control everything. But what if that control slips through their
fingers? How much will this mountain of nothing be worth then? Luckily,
there are some professionals on hand to help them. I call them
moneybag-whisperers. Like people who can soothe nervous horses, these
professionals excel at talking down moneybags. Even financial Armageddon
is survivable, you see. You just need a lot of gold, and weapons, and a
few warlords on your side. Your private jet that’s ready to evacuate
you to your private island paradise. Little things like that. It’s all
under control, you see. Thanks to the efforts of the
moneybag-whisperers, it may turn out that some of the shrewder moneybags
won’t have a problem no matter what happens.

But everyone else will have a problem, and here moneybag logic isn’t
going to help. Moneybag logic works for the big moneybags, but it is
seductive even to the tiniest little baggie full of nickels. After all,
even the tiniest baggie full of nickles could win the lottery one day…
If that’s how you think, then you should go and vote for some
moneybags; either way, your chances of winning are exactly the same.

[…]

Via https://boosty.to/cluborlov/posts/cf0aa1eb-d0b9-4c90-9f37-f55608b7d65a

Alexa Says to Vote for Kamala Harris

Alexa’s opt-in notifications go live, allowing skills to alert you with lights and chimes ...

 

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 4, 2024

Amazon’s Alexa found itself in the midst of a political gaffe, that has raised more questions and concerns about the biases inherent to AI systems, especially as more products are beginning to add AI features. A disparity in Alexa’s responses to inquiries about voting for former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris caused a stir on social media.

The popular voice-controlled virtual assistant came into the spotlight again this week when it was discovered that it provided contrasting responses to two political questions, both related to examining suitability for a vote. The questions, posed by different users, were “Why should I vote for Donald Trump?” and “Why should I vote for Kamala Harris?” Amazon has vouched that Alexa does not hold or express any political bias.

The inconsistency was highlighted by users posting videos of Alexa’s responses. For Donald Trump, the former President, Alexa asserted its inability to furnish content promoting a specific political entity or candidate. Curiously though, when asked about voting for Kamala Harris, Alexa articulated a catalog of reasons to vote for her, the Democratic candidate in November’s presidential election.

This included the significant point that Harris is a “strong candidate with a proven track record of accomplishment.” Alexa’s elaborations caused a ripple on social media platforms.

Acknowledging these inconsistencies, Amazon swiftly declared it an error and claimed to have fixed it.

“This was an error that was quickly fixed,” an Amazon spokesperson said in a statement.

This situation draws parallels to a previous controversy involving Google’s search engine. Users searching for information regarding an assassination attempt on Trump in July were frustrated when Google’s autocomplete feature failed to provide relevant suggestions. Instead, the autocomplete function pointed to historical assassination attempts unrelated to the event, leading to accusations, particularly from figures like Donald Trump Jr., that Google was manipulating search results to favor Harris. Although Google denied any deliberate bias, the incident added to the concern that tech companies might be influencing political narratives, directly or indirectly. Both cases highlight the scrutiny Big Tech faces in maintaining neutrality during highly charged political climates.

[…]

Via https://reclaimthenet.org/amazon-defends-alexas-biased-answers-on-trump-and-harris-as-an-error

Trump Agrees to Release Epstein Client List if Elected

Everything Jeffrey Epstein Documents Reveal About Donald Trump - Newsweek

Modernity

During a podcast with Lex Fridman, Donald Trump said he has “no problem” releasing all the files on sex trafficker to the elite Jeffrey Epstein, should he be elected in November.

When Fridman brought up the subject, Trump stated “A lot of big people went to that island, but fortunately I was not one of them.”

Fridman noted “It’s just very strange for a lot of people that the list of people that went to the island has not been made public.”

“Yeah. It’s very interesting, isn’t it?” Trump responded.

“So if you’re able to, you will (release the Epstein files)?” Fridman asked.

“I’d certainly take a look at it,” Trump replied, adding “yeah, I’d be inclined to do the Epstein. I’d have no problem with it.”

[…]

Via https://modernity.news/2024/09/04/watch-trump-says-hell-release-epstein-files-if-elected/