The Most Revolutionary Act

Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine

The Most Revolutionary Act
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.

GOP Senator Probing Trump Assassination Attempt Floats Second Shooter Theory

 
Modernity
 
Republican Senator Ron Johnson has released preliminary findings of his office’s investigation into the assassination attempt of Donald Trump, also floating the idea that there may have been more than one shooter.

Johnson appeared on Fox News Sunday to discuss the findings, and noted “Was it one rifle? Was it more than one? I’ve seen some pretty interesting video on the internet by experts that does certainly call into question what the FBI is telling us about a single shooter.”

Johnson did not say which video he was specifically referring to, but there has been speculation that a figure was filmed atop the water tower close to the rally site.

“So, are you questioning whether or not there was a second shooter?” host Maria Bartiromo asked, adding “Is that what you’re questioning, or if the shooter had a different gun?”

“I saw an extremely convincing video online, I know it’s all over the place,” Johnson replied, adding “There were three distinct shots early on, followed by another five in more staccato, more rapidly fired, and then the final one, which we believe took the shooter out.”

Aside from the speculation, Johnson noted that his findings include a revelation that the Secret Service did not attend a security briefing given to local SWAT and sniper teams on the morning of July 13.

Johnson, the ranking member on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, also related that Law Enforcement wasn’t even on the same security radio channel as the Secret Service, and the Sniper and Swat teams weren’t on the same channels as patrol officers, or Secret Service either.

Johnson also spoke about a mystery ATF agent who reportedly demanded to be provided copies of photos that the sniper team took of the body of the shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks.

Johnson stated that no one asked the individual for credentials, initially believing he was with the Secret Service, and investigators now cannot locate the ATF agent.

“We can’t trust the FBI and Secret Service to do an honest and open, transparent investigation. That’s just a very sad fact. We’ve got to rely on other sources,” Johnson urged.

As we highlighted this past weekend, law enforcement officials have leaked details of a briefing they received claiming that the would be assassin of Donald Trump was able to fly a drone over the site of the rally in the morning and get aerial footage.

Johnson’s office also provided a timeline of events in the report, which is reproduced below.

9 a.m. — Butler County Emergency Services held a briefing for the local SWAT and Sniper units from Butler County, Beaver County, and Washington County providing security for Trump’s rally. The briefing outlined the security perimeter for the event and areas of responsibility for each local unit as well as staging locations, including sniper locations, for each local unit and the Secret Service.

Attendees of the briefing said no Secret Service or other federal law enforcement were present for the briefing and that the Secret Service initially did not plan to provide sniper units before changing plans for unclear reasons. It is unknown why the Secret Service did not attend the briefing.
9:27 a.m. — Crooks enters a Home Depot in Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. Video footage of the store reportedly shows him entering alone.
9:41 a.m. — Crooks purchases a 5.5 FT Aluminum Dual Platform ladder.
9:42 a.m. — Crooks exits the Home Depot. Video footage of the parking lot reportedly shows him leaving in a vehicle, although the footage could not identify the make and model of the vehicle.
10:30 a.m. — Two local law enforcement snipers are in position on the second floor inside the AGR building.
5:10 p.m. — Crooks is first seen by one sniper (AGR sniper 1) at the AGR building.
5:14 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 takes pictures of Crooks.
5:28 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 takes a picture of a bicycle and what appears to be two bags near the AGR building, although it is unclear what happened to the bicycle and bags after the day of the shooting.
 5:32 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 observes Crooks looking at his phone and using a rangefinder.
5:38 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 messages the “Sniper Group” about Crooks.
5:40 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 is instructed to “call into command” about Crooks.
5:41 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 calls into command and offers a description of Crooks and the rangefinder, and says Crooks was “lurking around [the] AGR building.”
5:49 p.m. — Photos of Crooks were sent to Butler County Emergency Services Command.
5:55 p.m. — Butler County Emergency Services confirms the photos were received.
5:59 p.m. — Butler County Emergency Services asks which direction Crooks is moving. AGR sniper 1 is initially unsure which direction Crooks is moving.
6:05 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 later says Crooks has a backpack and is moving northeast “in the direction of Sheetz.”
6:06 p.m. to 6:12 p.m. — AGR sniper 1 moves to the ground floor of the building to meet local law enforcement patrol to notify them of Crooks’ presence.
Roughly 6:11 p.m. — Crooks start to open fire, and the Secret Service then returns fire and kills Crooks.
6:23 p.m. — Beaver County SWAT operators step onto the roof where Crooks was stationed and confirm he is dead. Local law enforcement from another county and at least one Secret Service agent also walked onto the roof.
6:46 p.m. — Crooks is patted down when law enforcement finds a transmitter device, Crooks’ phone and the rangefinder in his pockets.
7:45p.m. to 7:46 p.m. — As requested by the Allegheny Bomb Squad, local law enforcement sent pictures of Crooks and the items to an ATF agent. The ATF is reportedly using the pictures of Crooks to run facial recognition.

[…]

Via https://modernity.news/2024/07/22/gop-senator-probing-trump-assassination-attempt-floats-second-shooter-theory/

RFK Jr. Says Vance Is CIA, despite Having a Former CIA Member Running His Own Campaign

CIA Directors Fast Facts - CNN

HP McLovingcraft

RFK Jr. has warned that Trump’s new VP pick, JD Vance, is acting in the interests of the CIA, despite having a former CIA member running his own campaign.

In a clip posted on social media, RFK Jr. excoriates Vance, and by extension Trump, for being corrupt and in thrall to the vested interests of the intelligence community and military-industrial complex.

“His pick as vice president is a salute to the CIA and to the intelligence community and to the military-industrial complex,” said RFK Jr.

“And their gravy train is going to continue.”

Social-media users were quick to point out that RFK Jr. has his own direct ties to the CIA—and they didn’t mean with regard to the assassination of his uncle and father.

Back in October, RFK Jr. replaced his campaign manager, former Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich, with his daughter-in-law, Amaryllis Fox Kennedy.

Amaryllis spent a decade working for the CIA in its “most elite and clandestine operations unit,” according to The National Pulse. In her memoir, she claims to have been deployed to 16 different countries in the hunt for the world’s most dangerous terrorists.

Senior members of the CIA have poured scorn on her account of her time with the organization. William Murray, a CIA operations agent, said, “You don’t go wandering around Karachi on your own… you’ll wind up in some warlord’s harem, or you’ll wind up dead.”

[…]

Via https://hellboundanddown.com/2024/07/22/rfk-jr-says-vance-is-cia-despite-having-a-former-cia-member-running-his-own-campaign/

Biden’s Election Withdrawal Shows Who is Actually Running America

Andrei Dergalin

The timing of Joe Biden’s sudden withdrawal from the presidential race raises questions, argues former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-weapons inspector Scott Ritter.

“There’s no doubt that Joe Biden is unfit to be president of the United States. No doubt. But here’s the question. If he’s unfit to run as the candidate of the Democratic Party, why did they put him up?” former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-weapons inspector Scott Ritter said, noting that signs of Biden’s frailty were visible during the G7 summit in Italy last month.

According to him, the fact that Biden is unfit to be the POTUS but was still allowed to “function” begets the question: who is really in charge in the United States?

“Who’s running America? Because it’s not Joe Biden. We don’t know who. It’s an unelected group of handlers who are drawn from what I guess we can call the establishment. Some people might refer to it as the deep state. And these are the people who are calling the shots,” Ritter stated, noting that “the critical decisions of governance” this group makes are made “for the American people, but not necessarily on behalf of the American people.”

He describes the 2024 presidential election in the US as “a test of American democracy” and a “contest between established elites that are found in the Democratic Party and this surge of populism in the form of Donald Trump who is taking control of the Republican Party.”

Yet while Americans are normally allowed to “have a say in the outcome” of this process, the Democratic Party and the “elites known and unknown” now opted to meddle in this process and “will be selecting who their candidate will be for the presidency in the 2024 elections,” which is “not the way it’s supposed to be,” he noted.

“America is in a crisis, a crisis of democracy, a crisis of identity. And it doesn’t look like we have a solution because for the most part, the American people have been confused and misled and manipulated by the mainstream media into somehow thinking that this is normal,” Ritter lamented.

[…]

Via https://sputnikglobe.com/20240722/scott-ritter-bidens-election-withdrawal-shows-who-is-actually-running-america-1119460529.html

Why is New Zealand one of only three countries with mandatory fluoridation?

Percentages of population receiving fluoridated water, both artificial and natural
Fluoride Free NZ

Up until 2021 local councils were responsible for deciding whether their area was fluoridated or not. However, in 2021 the Labour Government introduced the Fluoridation of Drinking Water Amendment to the Health Act. This put all decision making into the hands of the Director-General of Health.

This move happened as a result of increased debate around New Zealand and councils becoming increasingly uncomfortable about fluoridating and some councils were stopping fluoridation.

In 2015 Stuff reported DHB members comments:

Former Hutt City mayor and fellow board member David Ogden said the anti-fluoridation campaigners needed to be taken seriously. “Having been at a number of public meetings with the anti-fluoridation people there, they have some very strong arguments.

Hutt City deputy mayor David Bassett said the lobby was winning over more and more councillors. ”The whole vote is actually becoming closer and closer,” Bassett said.

And the situation summed up by another councillor:

They come with their own group of professionals, eminently qualified and respected people in their area and it places local politicians in a very difficult position,” Ken Laban said.

Councils that stopped:

2012  Ruapehu District Council decided to stop fluoridation of Taumarunui

2012 Central Hawke’s Bay District Council decided to stop fluoridation in Waipukurau

2011 fluoridation was stopped in New Plymouth

2009 the Far North District Council stopped fluoridation of Kaikohe and Kaitaia after a two year experiment

2002 fluoridation was stopped in Ashburton

Other towns had stopped in the 1980s but most had never started.

Councils request central Government take responsibility

In 2014 Fluoride Free New Zealand had a campaign in Kapiti Coast to get fluoridation stopped. The District Council opted to put a remit into Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) to request central Government take control of fluoridation. Their reasoning was that if the Government wanted fluoridation then they should be the ones responsible for the decision rather than putting pressure on the councils to do it.  What they should have done, obviously, was stop fluoridation. At LGNZ two thirds of councils agreed with Kapiti Coast and washed their hands of the issue.

Because of this the National Government took on the issue and introduced legislation in 2016 to shift decision making from local councils to the District Health Boards. A Select Committee Hearing, chaired by then National MP Simon O’Connor, was held in February 2017. 1200 people sent in submissions. All political parties supported the legislation, except New Zealand First that thought it should be decided by local referendum.

In November 2017 Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First formed a coalition after winning enough votes at the election. Mostly due to the efforts of NZ First MP, Clayton Mitchell, the Bill to shift decision making stalled for the whole three year term. Then in 2020 Labour won the election without needing to form a coalition with any other party, and pushed the legislation through. However, by that time, the Labour Government had also disbanded the District Health Boards, so decision making was given to the Director-General of Health (DGH).

The legislation allows the DGH to decide to fluoridate or not to fluoridate. Therefore, we need to remember that the DGH could decide to stop fluoridation for the whole country. Instead, Ashley Bloomfield and now Dr Diana Sarfati, have pushed fluoridation on communities that haven’t wanted it.

The only other countries with similar laws to this are Ireland and Singapore. Nowhere in continental Europe is fluoridated and all other countries that have it, allow the local councils to decide.

New Zealand is out-of-step with the world, out-of-step with human rights, and out of step with modern pharmacology. Listen to Arvid Carlsson, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine (2000) who helped to stop fluoridation in Sweden many years ago.

 

[…]

What the top UN court’s ruling means for Israel

What the top UN court’s ruling means for Israel

By Tarik Cyril Amar

Though non-binding, the ICJ’s rulings on the ongoing Gaza massacre strip away the Jewish state’s ability to obfuscate its crimes

The 15 judges of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the highest judicial organ of the United Nations, have issued what everyone agrees is a landmark finding. Legal Consequences Arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem,” is, in essence, a devastating condemnation of Israel’s policies and crimes in the territories which it conquered more than half a century ago, as a consequence of the Six Day War of 1967, which it still holds today.

The ICJ finding also, inevitably, means (whether the judges intend it or not) that not only Israel’s policy in these specific territories, but the Zionist project as such, is based on the irreparable injustice of violently depriving the Palestinians of their inalienable right to national self-determination. Make no mistake, this is not “merely” a blow to the crimes of Israeli occupation and annexation; it calls into question the foundations of Israel as a state, as it is built around the systematic defiance of justice, law, and elementary ethics.

One feature enhancing the impact of the ICJ finding is its comprehensiveness. The 80-page document is the outcome of a long and thorough process that started in late 2022, when the General Assembly of the UN requested what is known as an “advisory opinion.” Detailed and closely argued, the findings are based, among other things, on the combined expertise of some of the best jurists in the world and hearings that involved almost 60 states. (Israel, clearly aware that its position was less than promising and generally contemptuous of international law, shunned the opportunity to state its case, which adds to the absurdity of its current rage over the result.)

However, while similarly meticulous legal assessments tend to generate complicated outcomes, that is not the case here. As has been widely acknowledged, the findings are devastating for Israel and, at least in legal terms, a clear triumph for the Palestinians and Palestine. In the words of Erika Guevara Rosas, senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns at Amnesty International, the ICJ’s conclusion is loud and clear.”

The ICJ has recognized without qualifications that Israel’s holding of territories it seized during the Six Day War – including East Jerusalem (which Israel has officially though unlawfully annexed) and the West Bank (which it pretends to “occupy” but is, in reality, annexing) is illegal and needs to end asap.

In particular, the ICJ made it clear that all settlement must cease and that the settlers already on these territories must leave. That decision alone means that between 700,000 and 750,000 Israeli illegals (here, that term is, for once, exactly correct) should not be where they are. Not only do all of them have to leave the over 100 settlements they never had a right to establish; the Israeli state has an obligation to evacuate them. Moreover, Israel’s expropriations of land are also illegal, that is, simply put, theft. The ICJ has ordered it to return what it has stolen, that is, tens of thousands of acres.

The Israeli state is, of course, deeply implicated in the illegal acts the ICJ has ordered it to stop and even reverse. Israel’s longstanding policies of incentivizing its Jewish citizens – including de facto colonial settlers from anywhere in the world – to move into the illegally held territories and steal Palestinian land and resources is fundamentally criminal, among other reasons, because it is inconsistent with international law, particularly the humanitarian law enshrined in the Geneva Conventions.

Regarding the Gaza Strip, long a de facto concentration camp for its Palestinian inhabitants and since October 2023 the site of Israel’s ongoing genocidal massacre against them, the ICJ has clearly rejected the all-too-frequently heard Israeli argument that its forces retreated from it in 2005.

In reality, as honest legal experts have long maintained and the ICJ has now confirmed explicitly, Israel has always exerted so much stifling control over this area that it has remained an occupying power, with all the attendant obligations, whether its forces were on the ground inside the Gaza Strip or abusing its inhabitants while stationed around it.

The ICJ also clarified the issue of apartheid. As should be well known, apartheid is a recognized crime under international law (it is not merely a name for one specific criminal regime once practiced in South Africa). Under, for instance, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – not to be confused with the ICJ – the “crime of apartheid” is defined as a “crime against humanity” akin to, for instance, murder, extermination, enslavement, or torture. Also according to the Rome statute, what makes apartheid special is that it is “an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”

Put simply, apartheid is, literally, one of the worst crimes a regime and the people supporting and working for it can possibly commit. In the case of Israel, unbiased experts and various human rights organizations have long argued that it is committing this crime as well. The ICJ has addressed this issue, noting arguments “that Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory amount to segregation or apartheid, in breach of Article 3 of CERD,” that is, the “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination” (also known as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, ICERD).

Article 3 of the CERD imposes on states the duty not only to “condemn racial segregation and apartheid,” but also to “undertake to prevent, prohibit and eradicate all practices of this nature in territories under their jurisdiction.” The ICJ has concluded that Israel, by its “legislation” and “measures,” that is, really by everything it does as a state, is in breach of this key provision.

Israel is, in sum, a state practicing the crime against humanity of apartheid, de facto annexing and settling territories it has no conceivable legal claim on, and systematically denying a whole nation, the Palestinians, their right to self-determination. The court has also finished off any pretense that Israel can justify its continuing, pervasive criminality by alleged “security” needs. Those are only some of the ICJ’s key findings. Others concern Palestinian rights to restitution, return, and reparations, for instance. For anyone even vaguely familiar with how the Israeli state operates, it is obvious that these ICJ findings have declared its core principles illegal, as they are.

Many states, at least those with enough power, break international law, some quite habitually (the US, for instance), some “only” occasionally. Israel, however, is special: By virtue of its own, freely chosen policies informed by a nationalist ideology of supremacy and colonial settlement, it has made breaking international law its reason of state: without it, it is hard to even imagine how it can continue. Note, in this respect, that its minister of defense and its prime minister are on the verge of having warrants issued against them for crimes against humanity and war crimes by the International Criminal Court, while the ICJ has already found that genocide is a plausible possibility in Gaza and, since Israel has brutally disregarded all its injunctions, will most likely confirm that finding in a final judgment in the not-too-distant future.

One thing that the ICJ findings confirm is, of course, that the Palestinians have a right to armed resistance under international law. Another thing that follows is that many things that Israel and its Western backers pretend are up for negotiation are not: Palestinians have a right to get their land back; Israel has no right to use it, in any way, not even as a bargaining chip.

A third thing also follows, but from the Israeli response: The whole Israeli political spectrum, not only Prime Minister Netanyahu and the other extremists in his cabinet, has rejected the ICJ findings. Hence, the illusion that the problem with Israel is just a few radicals in power must be buried once and for all: Unfortunately, its delusions of domination and supremacy are widespread throughout its political sphere and its society. Israel is the worst rogue state in the world, and it is also a dead end. For that, it cannot, as its elites usually do, blame external enemies or “anti-Semitism.” In reality, its own arrogance and outrageous violence against the Palestinians and its neighbors are to blame.

Of course, these ICJ findings, as many cynics will remind us, will not compel Israel to change. Indeed, as UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese has pointed out, Israel’s usual response to being called out is to commit even more crimes, as if to make a point about its defiance of international law. Yet it is shortsighted to believe that the ICJ’s condemnation is irrelevant.

For one thing, the ICJ has been explicit that all other states have a duty to co-operate with the United Nations to bring about “an end to Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and the full realization of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.” In addition, the judges also reiterated, in great detail, that not only other states, but also “international organizations, specialized agencies, investment corporations and all other institutions” must not “recognize, or cooperate with or assist in any manner in, any measures undertaken by Israel to exploit the resources of the occupied territories or to effect any changes in the demographic composition or geographic character or institutional structure of those territories.”

In essence, the ICJ has put all governments on this planet on notice that they are not free to do as they please about Israel and its crimes, but that they are bound by laws to help stop them and to abstain from being accomplices. That, of course, is an aspect of the findings that should concern the many hypocrites and accomplices in the EU and the US, such as German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, for instance, who cannot see anything but a “comprehensive compliance with international law” when he looks at Israel. But then, that’s the same Olaf Scholz, of course, who can’t figure out who blew up his country’s gas pipelines. Likewise, the leaders of the UK, with “Labour-friend-of-Israel” and, embarrassingly, human rights lawyer Keir Starmer in the lead, and those of the US, in the process of co-perpetrating the genocide in Gaza, should feel at least some discomfort: Standing by Israel will not be cost-free much longer.

Ultimately, the single most important result of these ICJ findings has to do with the enormous role that systematic obfuscation – in plain language: lying – plays for the Israeli regime and its society. All those who have long named Israel’s systemic crimes and called for resistance to them, whether outside or inside Palestine, now have, in effect, the highest court of the world on their side. There is no more room for debate about what Israel is doing, and once that has been settled, there is no argument left for defending it. The ICJ findings won’t suddenly change the world, but when the world does change, they will have played an important role.

[…]

Via https://www.rt.com/news/601411-icj-israel-palestine-genocide/

Business Booming for New Zealand Funeral Directors

Business is Booming Six Feet Under FuneralPhoto Credit – © Canva Pro Content License<

NZDOS

As the devastating evidence of a worldwide death and disability crisis keeps on coming, another sector of the health workforce tells its story of increased mortality, and especial;y in younger people, predominantly from sudden cardiac deaths and cancers. But these aren’t doctors sending home chest pains with an anxiety diagnosis, or clot-busting occluded blood vessels. They aren’t even the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff – they are six feet under the bottom. If there really are excess deaths, someone would be disposing of the extra bodies, right?

Funeral directors and the booming business six feet down under

Recently we spoke to four New Zealand funeral directors (FDs).  Two employees at different firms just made contact with us, separately, so then we re-interviewed 2 owners we had first connected with in 2022 about the many deaths within 2 weeks of their first jabs, and the white rubber clots found after death during embalming.

One of the workers, let’s call her Diane, sent the following summary, which you will see corroborates strongly the accounts of the others.

“I started in the funeral director industry over a decade ago and trained as a Funeral Director / Embalmer.

Up until Cov19, my experience in funeral trade pretty much dealt with the elderly and expected deaths, nothing suspicious. Just the way it has been for years, there was the occasional younger person, which was generally due to vehicle accidents, suicide and unfortunately illness.

I had only dealt with two unexpected deaths for people under 70 during that time. The only reason I remember only two is because sudden deaths were so rare.

When covid hit, the local hospital had two excessively large, refrigerated containers, to store the promised and unprecedented number of deaths due to Cov19. But the refrigerated containers were never even switched on.

The limited number of grieving whanau that weren’t ‘allowed’ to be present at their loved one’s funeral, that was all wrong.

Then the vax roll out happened, everything changed.

As best as I can recall, the first weeks of the vax roll out, we looked after family deaths that had obviously been vax related. Then the dramatic increase in late term miscarriages, and still births, was very obvious. For example, we usually took care of up to three babies within a two-month period, (which is already too many; one of the hardest aspects of the job). The first week of the vax, we had three babies born dead in the same week! Were these partners of vaccinated border workers? I don’t remember the ‘safe in pregnancy’ message being pushed until after that.

It wasn’t long before the mandates, and in my situation it was no jab, no job. There was no way that poison was going to go near me, especially after what I was witnessing in the funeral home.

After a short stint doing various jobs, I was offered a job back in the funeral industry when the mandates were dumped.

This is where I first discovered these ‘calamari’ clots. The first one I pulled out was over 50cms long. Not all are that big. Never seen anything like these before. Like white rubber bands, a typical blood clot looks like a dark red jelly, and easily breaks apart. Not these bastards, they are tough, and will not break up easily. I am currently noticing these nasty clots in about 1 out of 3 embalmings, and they were definitely not there prior to the jab. Also, the number of sudden deaths is up sharply, the youngest person that I had to take care of was only 21 years (died while getting ready to play rugby, fit and healthy). Sudden deaths are spread across all ages and are showing no signs of slowing down.

The other noticeable difference is in cancer: much more but especially in the young. Before the vax, my observations were that the time between the first diagnoses and death was at least a year minimum (there were some exceptions), now the majority are less than 3 months. I looked after a younger person not so long ago, the time between diagnoses and death was 4 days….. there are no words……

[…]

Many funeral directors endorse Diane’s findings

[…]

These four workers are separated geographically but all have obervations in common, and are connected with other funeral home staff telling a similar story in private.

They are uniformly busy, with some months’ funerals up by as much as 50% since early 2021. Seasonal flow has gone; summers are just as busy.

They are seeing more younger people. One commented on the healthy look (sic!) to many of the suddenly dead bodies they collect now, compared to the usual elderly and chronically ill corpses, as well as the much higher stress of collecting from homes where a younger person has died suddenly. Another mentioned the knowing looks that emergency responders give each other these days.

They say the commonest demographic they now handle seems to be late middle age, but the overall spread is much wider. Young people are far more commonly represented then ‘usual’. Two noted with surprise how post mortems are often no longer done in these previously standout cases. NZDSOS has certainly complained about inadequate investigations by coroners.

Cancer deaths are far increased, as discussed by eminent oncologists, particularly in younger adults, and with a sad trend of families who do not even have time to plan funerals properly in the very short time between diagnosis and death. (A probate lawyer confirmed this with us too. He has never been busier, with increased disorganised estates and younger people dying intestate (without making a will). He knows the Public Trust is much busier with handling these cases).

In the same week as this is written, incidentally, we hear from a medical sonographer who confirms she is seeing a major increase in younger women presenting with ovarian cancer on their ultrasound scans. Typically this tends to present late so some of these women will die from these tumours.

A very alarming change for the ​​​​​​​funeral directors are that still births, where a baby dies during labour or before labour starts, any time from 22 weeks of pregnancy, have increased dramatically, with 1 owner and both employees estimating at least a tripling in numbers. (Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand has been asked for this data under the OIA but have refused to release it – the same HNZ that has marketed the covid jabs (egregiously and unprecedentedly) as safe and effective in all stages of pregnancy, in lying lockstep with other countries, like Canada. One worker cited a recent week with 2 stillbirths, both just a week before the due dates. The chance of this being random coincidence is very low indeed.

The latest Perinatal and Maternal Mortality report has recently been released and it covers data up to 2021 only!

One funeral director recently attended a trade convention in Australia and was surprised to find Aussie FDs much more open to acknowledging the jab campaign’s effect on their businesses, and the fact that many families were claiming a death benefit from the federal government’s vaccine injury fund. And yes, some are seeing the strange pale clots too.

Back in New Zealand however, the Funeral Director’s Association (FDANZ) is discouraging any such conversations.

the white thrombus clots keep on coming

In the US, ex USAF Colonel Tom Haviland found 70% of embalmers he surveyed are now seeing a brand new phenomenon in the dead vaccinated people. All four of our funeral professionals, too, have seen these new long rubbery white clots. Three are also embalmers, and agree that in around 30% of cases, where they try to inject embalming fluid to preserve the body, they have to extract these clots first, in order to get the formalin in. Found in veins and arteries, they are attached to the vessel walls and have propagated in the direction of the blood flow. These observations, along with risky work being done by international scientists to unravel the mystery, and accounts from interventional radiologists and catheter lab technicians, confirm that these highly abnormal structures were forming whilst the person was still alive, some certainly dying from their effects. We knew already that increased strokes, heart attacks, clots in the lungs, limbs, abdomen and brain are the new normal, and these grossly abnormal signs of a drastic change in the blood vessels are certainly a culprit.

We have asked that the Medical Council and speciality colleges, drug regulators and the Ministry of Health do their own investigations. You might think that, surely, autopsy pathologists would spot these clots quickly, but we have complained that very few cases of sudden, and we say suspicious, deaths get a post mortem these days, following deliberate changes to the Coroners Act last year such that deaths can be signed off as ‘presumed natural causes’. And pathologists do not usually open all the blood vessels, and even if they do find evidence of damaged blood vessels that oughtn’t to be there they may not pursue any explanation. Remember, they are doctors and were subject to the Medical Council’s instructions not to encourage vaccine hesitancy. Since the MCNZ quietly rescinded this “guidance” and delayed notifying doctors formally, many may think these threats to their licenses are still in effect.

the jabs do not discriminate

Back across the ditch, Dr Keryn Phelps, a past president of the Australian Medical Association – she and her partner both having significant vaccine damage – has made some strong comments about medicine’s failure to deal with the unprecedented jab fallout.

In yet another recent sad example, star Kiwi sportsman Connor Garden-Bachop, 25, played a professional rugby game, went to bed that night and was found dead by his cousin the next morning when he didn’t appear. But there was no post mortem! See this sad montage of other bright lives suddenly ended.

Connor’s death reminds us of the very clumsily-handled case of his Maori All Black colleague Sean Wainui who died in suspicious circumstances, without a post mortem, nor seemingly a proper police investigation.

funeral workers are the final witnesses

These professionals in after-death care provide yet another line of evidence that the jab campaign has caused unimaginable harms. Several have tried to speak about what they are seeing but have been censured or attacked. We thank the ones who shared with us. Perhaps the FDANZ may be ‘invited’ to give evidence, under oath, at the Royal Commission of Inquiry when it finally gets going properly in November.

We wonder if many of the recent rush of newly buried will be subjected to investigative exhumation in future years.

[…]

Via https://nzdsos.com/2024/07/16/business-is-booming-six-feet-down-under/

Trump tells Zelensky he’ll end war

Trump tells Zelensky he’ll end war

RT

Former US president Donald Trump directly told Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky that he will bring the conflict between Moscow and Kiev to an end – should he return to the White House – during a phone call between the two on Friday.

The Republican candidate for November’s presidential election wrote in a post on Truth Social that he “had a very good phone call” with Zelensky, who congratulated him on a “very successful” Republican National Convention and condemned last weekend’s “heinous assassination attempt.”

Trump went on to say that he appreciates Zelensky “for reaching out because I, as your next President of the United States, will bring peace to the world and end the war that has cost so many lives and devastated countless innocent families.”

Both sides will be able to come together and negotiate a deal that ends the violence and paves a path forward to prosperity

Zelensky said he had “agreed with President Trump to discuss at a personal meeting what steps can make peace fair and truly lasting.”

“I noted the vital bipartisan and bicameral American support for protecting our nation’s freedom and independence. Ukraine will always be grateful to the United States for its help in strengthening our ability to resist Russian terror,” he wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Friday night.

Trump said nothing about agreeing to a meeting with Zelensky, and neither he nor Kiev released any further details of the conversation. In 2019, Trump was impeached over a phone call with Zelensky, in which Democrats claimed he tried to get dirt on his rival, Joe Biden, in exchange for military aid.

Speaking to the BBC during a trip to the UK this week, Zelensky reiterated that his government seeks total victory in the conflict with Russia. “We have to finish with him,” he said, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

If Trump is reelected president in November, Zelensky expects him to lean on Kiev to end the conflict “in 24 hours,” as he has promised on the campaign trail. Zelensky described a worst-case scenario in which US sanctions are lifted from Russia under Trump and Putin celebrates victory: “We will never go on this, never. And there is no guy in the world who can push us to do it,” he said.

Zelensky’s own five-year presidential term, which he won in a landslide in 2019, expired in late May. He has refused to hold a new election, citing martial law, and reiterated to the BBC his intention to retain power at least until the hostilities end.

Moscow has argued that, under the Ukrainian constitution, the parliament remains legitimate, and presidential authority should have passed to its speaker when Zelensky’s term ended. Putin has also stated that he would order a ceasefire and start negotiations with Ukraine as soon as it pledges not to seek membership in NATO and withdraws its troops from all Russian territories, including the republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, and the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye.

[…]

Via https://www.rt.com/news/601372-trump-zelensky-phone-call/

The Origins of Eurasian Steppe Nomads

Episode 2 The Origins of Eurasian Steppe Nomads

The Mongol Empire

Dr Craig Benjamin (2020)

Film Review

For 95% of the 250,000 years the human species has been on Earth, we were hunter gatherers. The agricultural revolution, involving the domestication of wild plants and animals, occurred 11,000 years ago. The transition to nomadic pastoralism (in which herders regularly move their flocks depending on seasonal and climatic conditions) occurred even later, around 7,000 years ago. According to Benjamin, this “lifeway” only became possible with the “secondary products revolution,” as herders learned to exploit their herds for needs other than food (eg transportation and clothing). Prior to the advent of nomadic pastoralism, the Eurasian steppes were uninhabitable, owing to the inability to find or grow food.

According to Benjamin, the five great nomadic empires that preceded the Mongols originated around the Orkhon River Valley on the Mongolian Steppes. Consisting of 10% forest and 89% non-arable grassland, life here was too difficult to support the gender specialization found in settled agricultural communications in settled agricultural communities. The first nomadic pastoralists raised sheep, goats or horses and lived in small family groups to avoid overgrazing, According to archeological evidence, they were never totally self-sufficient and relied on trading or raiding settled communities for textiles, grains and metal weapons and tools.

The steppes earliest nomadic cultures:

  • Yamnaya – appearing late in the 4th millennium BC in the Caucasus region north of the Black Sea, they left behind include wheeled vehicles and weapons.
  • Afanasievo – appearing in southern Siberia around 3500-2500 BC.
  • Andronovo – appearing in western Siberia around 2,000-900 BC, building a few sedentary communities with up to 100 subterranean homes. Developed and used the first chariots.
  • Scythians – appearing around 9th century BC in Central Asia and migrating westward to area around southern Russia and Ukraine.
  • Xiongnu – appearing on eastern steppes north of China in 3rd century BC

According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the first military use of mounted nomadic archers occurred early in the first millennium. Large numbers of wild horses appeared on the steppes around the 5th millennium BC. which were gradually domesticated. According to archeological evidence (arrowheads dating 2100-1700 BC), steppe nomads developed the composite bow in the third millennium BC. Storing more potential energy than wooden bows, due to layers of pliant sinew and animal horn, was just as essential as skilled horsemanship to the military prowess of the pastoral nomads.

Nomadic warriors also used swords, axes, daggers and maces for close combat.

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

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/12373094/12373098

Secret German Government Documents Reveal There Was No Pandemic

Baxter Dmitry

In fact, according to the German government data, there was no pandemic at all, just a tightly choreographed military grade psy-op to brainwash the masses into accepting an experimental vaccine with disastrous consequences.  

These secret German government documents obtained via a Freedom of Information request and subsequent lawsuit have blown the lid of the global elite’s Covid lies and it’s vitally important that as many people as possible are made aware of the truth.

More and more people all over the world are waking up and seeing the global elite for what they always have been: deranged psychopaths hell bent on destruction and domination.

Germany is no different. The German population suffered some of the most brutal lockdowns and vaccine mandates in all of Europe and now the people are rising up and demanding accountability.

Step forward Paul Schreyer and Multipolar magazine who launched a Freedom of Information request and then launched a lawsuit against the German government when they tried every trick in the book to keep the secret documents under lock and key.

As Professor Steven Homburg explains, the results are stunning, and represent total vindication for everyone who dared to question the narrative of lockdowns and mask and vaccine mandates.

These facts are damning and prove the official narrative about Covid, pushed by world governments and mainstream media, is completely bogus.

Which makes the tyranny we experienced during the so-called pandemic even harder to swallow, as Professor Homburg explains.

The data also reveals that Sweden, which was the only European country free of masks and lockdowns, performed much better than Germany. Which raises the question, what were the tyrannical lockdowns and mandates really about?

Professor Homburg has the answer – and as it turns out, we were right all along.

Breaking down vaccine hesitancy through brutal lockdowns was always the goal of the global elite. Unfortunately, for those who did not see through the psy-op at the time, the health consequences are dire. Serious questions must be asked.

Unfortunately for the vaxxed, the bad news doesn’t end there. Japanese researchers have linked Covid vaccines to hundreds of diseases.

[…]

Via https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/german-govt-admits-there-was-no-pandemic/

What Was the Covid Multi-Trillion Dollar Debt Crisis Really About?

Colin Toddhunter

In 2021, an Oxfam review of IMF COVID-19 loans showed that 33 African countries were encouraged to pursue austerity policies. The world’s poorest countries are due to pay $43 billion in debt repayments in 2022, which could otherwise cover the costs of their food imports.

Oxfam and Development Finance International (DFI) have also revealed that 43 out of 55 African Union member states face public expenditure cuts totalling $183 billion over the next five years.

According to Prof Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, the closure of the world economy (March 11, 2020 Lockdown imposed on more than 190 countries) has triggered an unprecedented process of global indebtedness. Governments are now under the control of global creditors in the post-COVID era.

What we are seeing is a de facto privatisation of the state as governments capitulate to the needs of Western financial institutions.

Moreover, these debts are largely dollar-denominated, helping to strengthen the US dollar and US leverage over countries.

It raises the question: what was COVID really about?

Millions have been asking that question since lockdowns and restrictions began in early 2020. If it was indeed about public health, why close down the bulk of health services and the global economy knowing full well what the massive health, economic and debt implications would be?

Why mount a military-style propaganda campaign to censor world-renowned scientists and terrorise entire populations and use the full force and brutality of the police to ensure compliance?

These actions were wholly disproportionate to any risk posed to public health, especially when considering the way ‘COVID death’ definitions and data were often massaged and how PCR tests were misused to scare populations into submission.

Prof Fabio Vighi of Cardiff University implies we should have been suspicious from the start when the usually “unscrupulous ruling elites” froze the global economy in the face of a pathogen that targets almost exclusively the unproductive (the over 80s).

COVID was a crisis of capitalism masquerading as a public health emergency.

Capitalism  

Capitalism needs to keep expanding into or creating new markets to ensure the accumulation of capital to offset the tendency for the general rate of profit to fall. The capitalist needs to accumulate capital (wealth) to be able to reinvest it and make further profits. By placing downward pressure on workers’ wages, the capitalist extracts sufficient surplus value to be able to do this.

But when the capitalist is unable to sufficiently reinvest (due to declining demand for commodities, a lack of investment opportunities and markets, etc), wealth (capital) over accumulates, devalues and the system goes into crisis. To avoid crisis, capitalism requires constant growth, markets and sufficient demand.

According to writer Ted Reese, the capitalist rate of profit has trended downwards from an estimated 43% in the 1870s to 17% in the 2000s. Although wages and corporate taxes have been slashed, the exploitability of labour was increasingly insufficient to meet the demands of capital accumulation.

By late 2019, many companies could not generate sufficient profit. Falling turnover, limited cashflows and highly leveraged balance sheets were prevalent.

Economic growth was weakening in the run up to the massive stock market crash in February 2020, which saw trillions more pumped into the system in the guise of ‘COVID relief’.

To stave off crisis up until that point, various tactics had been employed.

Credit markets were expanded and personal debt increased to maintain consumer demand as workers’ wages were squeezed. Financial deregulation occurred and speculative capital was allowed to exploit new areas and investment opportunities. At the same time, stock buy backs, the student debt economy, quantitative easing and massive bail outs and subsidies and an expansion of militarism helped to maintain economic growth.

There was also a ramping up of an imperialist strategy that has seen indigenous systems of production abroad being displaced by global corporations and states pressurised to withdraw from areas of economic activity, leaving transnational players to occupy the space left open.

While these strategies produced speculative bubbles and led to an overevaluation of assets and increased both personal and government debt, they helped to continue to secure viable profits and returns on investment.

But come 2019, former governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King warned that the world was sleepwalking towards a fresh economic and financial crisis that would have devastating consequences. He argued that the global economy was stuck in a low growth trap and recovery from the crisis of 2008 was weaker than that after the Great Depression.

King concluded that it was time for the Federal Reserve and other central banks to begin talks behind closed doors with politicians.

That is precisely what happened as key players, including BlackRock, the world’s most powerful investment fund, got together to work out a strategy going forward. This took place in the lead up to COVID.

Aside from deepening the dependency of poorer countries on Western capital, Fabio Vighi says lockdowns and the global suspension of economic transactions allowed the US Fed to flood the ailing financial markets (under the guise of COVID) with freshly printed money while shutting down the real economy to avoid hyperinflation. Lockdowns suspended business transactions, which drained the demand for credit and stopped the contagion.

COVID provided cover for a multi-trillion-dollar bailout for the capitalist economy that was in meltdown prior to COVID. Despite a decade or more of ‘quantitative easing’, this new bailout came in the form of trillions of dollars pumped into financial markets by the US Fed (in the months prior to March 2020) and subsequent ‘COVID relief’.

The IMF, World bank and global leaders knew full well what the impact on the world’s poor would be of closing down the world economy through COVID-related lockdowns.

Yet they sanctioned it and there is now the prospect that in excess of a quarter of a billion more people worldwide will fall into extreme levels of poverty in 2022 alone.

In April 2020, the Wall Street Journal stated the IMF and World Bank faced a deluge of aid requests from scores of poorer countries seeking bailouts and loans from financial institutions with $1.2 trillion to lend.

In addition to helping to reboot the financial system, closing down the global economy deliberately deepened poorer countries’ dependency on Western global conglomerates and financial interests.

Lockdowns also helped accelerate the restructuring of capitalism that involves smaller enterprises being driven to bankruptcy or bought up by monopolies and global chains, thereby ensuring continued viable profits for Big Tech, the digital payments giants and global online corporations like Meta and Amazon and the eradication of millions of jobs.

Although the effects of the conflict in Ukraine cannot be dismissed, with the global economy now open again, inflation is rising and causing a ‘cost of living’ crisis. With a debt-ridden economy, there is limited scope for rising interest rates to control inflation.

But this crisis is not inevitable: current inflation is not only induced by the liquidity injected into the financial system but also being fuelled by speculation in food commodity markets and corporate greed as energy and food corporations continue to rake in vast profits at the expense of ordinary people.

Resistance  

However, resistance is fertile.

Aside from the many anti-restriction/pro-freedom rallies during COVID, we are now seeing a more strident trade unionism coming to the fore – in Britain at least – led by media savvy leaders like Mick Lynch, general secretary of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), who know how to appeal to the public and tap into widely held resentment against soaring cost of living rises.

Teachers, health workers and others could follow the RMT into taking strike action.

Lynch says that millions of people in Britain face lower living standards and the stripping out of occupational pensions. He adds:

“COVID has been a smokescreen for the rich and powerful in this country to drive down wages as far as they can.”

Just like a decade of imposed ‘austerity’ was used to achieve similar results in the lead up to COVID.

The trade union movement should now be taking a leading role in resisting the attack on living standards and further attempts to run-down state-provided welfare and privatise what remains.

The strategy to wholly dismantle and privatise health and welfare services seems increasingly likely given the need to rein in (COVID-related) public debt and the trend towards AI, workplace automisation and worklessness.

This is a real concern because, following the logic of capitalism, work is a condition for the existence of the labouring classes. So, if a mass labour force is no longer deemed necessary, there is no need for mass education, welfare and healthcare provision and systems that have traditionally served to reproduce and maintain labour that capitalist economic activity has required.

In 2019, Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty, accused British government ministers of the “systematic immiseration of a significant part of the British population” in the decade following the 2008 financial crash.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-capitalism-friedrich-boris/5785964