The Most Revolutionary Act

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

The Most Revolutionary Act

Author Archives: stuartbramhall

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.

British Medical Journal: COVID Booster Mandates for Young People Will Cause Net Harm

Posted on by
Reply
covid booster mandates young adults feature

Photo credit: Merrimack College/flickr

Any potential benefits of the COVID-19 booster fail to outweigh the harms for young people ages 18-29, according to a peer-reviewed study published Monday in The BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics.

Researchers performed a risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis using data from Pfizer, Moderna and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). They concluded that “booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm.”

More than 1,000 U.S. universities and colleges mandate the COVID-19 vaccine for residential students and more than 300 mandate the booster. Students who do not comply risk disenrollment.

The authors of the BMJ study concluded universities should not enforce booster vaccine mandates.

The researchers estimated that over a six-month period, 31,207 to 42,836 young adults ages 18-29, previously uninfected with COVID-19, would have to receive a third mRNA vaccine — a booster — in order to prevent a single hospitalization.

They also anticipated there would be at least 18.5 serious adverse events among the boosted group during that time, including in males, 1.5-4.6 booster-associated cases of myopericarditis, typically requiring hospitalization.

For 32 hospitalizations prevented, there would be 593.5 serious adverse events.

The researchers also anticipated that for every hospitalization averted there would be 1,430 to 4,626 cases of adverse events serious enough to stop people from carrying out regular daily activities.

Any vaccine mandate must be based on the public health principle of “proportionality” — the benefits must outweigh the relevant risks — the authors said. Until now, no risk-benefit assessment had been done.

In April, Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine advisory board, writing in the New England Journal of Medicine called on the CDC to conduct a risk-benefit analysis of vaccines for young people.

The CDC has not yet carried out such a study. In response, lead author Kevin Bardosh, Ph.D., explained on Twitter that their team of bioethicists, epidemiologists, legal scholars and clinicians “took up the challenge.”

Building on their empirical risk-benefit assessment, the authors argued mandates are “unethical” because they may result in a net expected harm to young people.

They added that the mandates aren’t based on updated, age-stratified risk-benefit assessment and that expected harms don’t outweigh the public health benefits “given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission.”

The mandates also violate the reciprocity principle, the authors said, because vaccine harms are not reliably compensated and vaccines may result in wider social harms, including social ostracization of unvaccinated people and loss of faith in public institutions.

The authors of The BMJ study concluded that:

“General mandates for young people ignore key data, entail wider social harms and/or abuses of power and are arguably undermining rather than contributing to social trust and solidarity.”

‘Mandates have caused backlash, resistance & anger’

Controversy surrounds vaccine mandates at colleges and universities, particularly for the boosters, with some arguing the mandates are based on politics, not medicine.

Last year an FDA advisory committee voted overwhelmingly against boosting the general population, including healthy young adults, but the Biden administration and the CDC overruled this recommendation.

“There’s actually a controversy, a fundamental controversy among experts in the world of vaccinology, about the appropriateness of boosters in younger people,” Bardosh told The National Desk.

“Most people have had COVID and that provides very durable protection that’s on par with two vaccines or even three vaccines if you haven’t actually had the virus,” he added.

In February, the CDC estimated that 63.7% of adults ages 18-49, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, had infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

This, combined with increasing evidence of serious adverse effects for young people from the vaccine, which CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky and Pfizer both acknowledged does not stop transmission, led many to question the mandates.

Bardosh tweeted:

Calls to end the mandates have grown. The study reported that more than 50 petitions were filed against the mandates, with substantial support. Petitions on Change.org call out institutions including Stanford, George Mason, UMass, University of Scranton, University of Notre Dame, University at Buffalo, SUNY Stony Brook, Siena College, Manhattanville College, Le Moyne College, Merrimack College, DePauw University, Virginia State University, Salve Regina University, Montclair State University, and California State University.

Some university professors have filed open letters to their institutions, including a letter from University of California administrators in late November demanding an end to the booster mandate.

Last week, Yale alumni, Rhodes Scholar and journalist Dr. Naomi Wolf spoke at a rally against Yale’s vaccine mandates. “Putting Yale on notice,” she said if Yale continues to mandate the COVID-19 boosters, it will:

“have blood on its hand for damaging young healthy women and men. mRNA Covid Vaccines do not stop transmission but do cause multiple irreversible harms, so they do not make any sense to mandate.

“Yale, DO NOT coerce minors and young adults into damaging their lives and submitting to an illegal dangerous, injection that violates the Geneva Convention, that violates the Nuremberg Code, that violates basic human rights …

“Coercion is not consent!”

This week Ohio Republican State Rep. Scott Lipps introduced a bill that would ban COVID-19 vaccine mandates at Ohio colleges and universities. Lipps told the House Higher Education and Career Readiness Committee:

“By requiring vaccines and discriminating against individuals who choose not to receive one, we are not only making very intimate health decisions for our students, but we are showing them that their education, choice, and autonomy are less meaningful and not of their own control.”

On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation that included rescinding the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for the military. The Senate still has to pass the bill. President Biden, who said he opposed eliminating the mandate, has not said he will veto it.

Despite evolving data about young people’s low risk for severe COVID-19 and high risk of mRNA vaccine adverse effects, the CDC recently launched a new grant, offering $1.5 million in research funds for colleges to study how to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake among students.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-booster-mandates-young-adults/

‘Twitter Files’: A Tale of Censorship, Secret Blacklists, Shadow Banning and Government Collusion

Posted on by
Reply
 
twitter files government elon musk feature

Elon Musk credit: Samferdselsdepartementet/flickr

By  Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.

A second batch of “Twitter files” released Thursday reveals how the platform maintained “secret blacklists” and engaged in “shadow banning.” Files released previously included evidence of election interference and widespread censorship of COVID-19-related information that didn’t fit the accepted government narrative.

The second batch of “Twitter files” released Thursday reveals how the platform maintained “secret blacklists” and engaged in “shadow banning” of certain users despite prior denials.

This latest in a string of stunning revelations and large-scale changes at Twitter following Elon Musk’s takeover adds to prior revelations about election interference — including suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 U.S. presidential election — and widespread scientific censorship.

The “blanket amnesty” of previously suspended accounts and Musk’s reinstatement over the past month of many such accounts — including former President Donald Trump’s — drew fury from many Democrat lawmakers and left-wing entities, but enjoyed wide swaths of support from Republicans and Libertarians.

The outcry from Democrats, and from entities including the EU and private Big Tech and Big Media actors such as Apple and CBS, has further complicated Musk’s plans for Twitter, amid investigations against Musk’s companies and threats from the EU that it will be banned in the 27-nation bloc.

‘Secret group’ at Twitter made ‘politically sensitive’ decisions

In a series of tweets Thursday, Bari Weiss, founder and editor of The Free Press, revealed information about the “secret blacklists” and other censorship practices Twitter engaged in.

[…]

The Epoch Times reported that Weiss is working with Musk and independent journalist Matt Taibbi to disclose internal Twitter documents to the public, revealing the Big Tech platform’s practices prior to Musk’s takeover of the company.

Weiss revealed that among the user accounts previously targeted by Twitter was that of Dr. Jay Bhattacharaya, a Stanford University School of Medicine professor who criticized COVID-19 vaccines and countermeasures.

[…]

This arsenal of practices enabled Twitter to make it difficult for other users to search for such accounts, to make individual tweets more difficult to find, to prevent tweets from appearing in Twitter’s “trending” section and to block tweets from appearing in hashtag searches, “all without users’ knowledge,” according to Weiss.

Many decisions were made, according to Weiss, by a “secret group,” the Strategic Response Team-Global Escalation Team (SRT-GET), that consisted of former Twitter executives including Vijaya Gadde, head of legal, public policy and trust; Yoel Roth, head of trust and safety; and CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal.

[…]

Twitter took ‘extraordinary steps’ to suppress information about Hunter Biden 

The Gateway Pundit — part of a group of individuals and organizations suing several Biden administration officials over allegations they pressured social media platforms to censor content and individual users — on Dec. 2 republished a series of tweets by Taibbi revealing Twitter’s censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story, and the apparent reasons behind this practice.

[…]

Requests came from both parties and campaigns, Taibbi wrote, although he noted that “Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation, there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right.”

On Oct. 14, 2020, when the New York Post published “Biden secret e-mails,” about the dealings of Hunter Biden, “Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be ‘unsafe.’ They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography,” said Taibbi.

This decision led to the New York Post and then-White House spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany being locked out of their Twitter accounts — McEnany for a purported violation of Twitter’s “hacked materials” policy.

[…]

Also playing a key role in the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story in 2020, according to Taibbi, was James Baker, a former FBI lawyer who became Twitter’s deputy general counsel and who advised the company to continue censorship of the story because “caution is warranted.”

On Dec. 6, Musk announced that Twitter fired Baker, stating, “In light of concerns about Baker’s possible role in suppression of information important to the public dialogue, he was exited from Twitter today.”

[…]

After widespread censorship of scientific debate, new calls to add more voices

Twitter’s censorship practices targeting outspoken critics of official COVID-19 policies highlight broader practices that were the norm at Twitter prior to Musk taking control of the company.

[…]

And on Dec. 5, Dr. Simone Gold, another outspoken critic of COVID-19 vaccines and restrictions, tweeted an open letter to Musk on behalf of America’s Frontline Doctors, calling upon Musk to assemble a team of “honest, brilliant, courageous doctors to ‘fact check’” medical information on the platform.

[…]

White House, Congress, EU and others hit back at Musk and Twitter

Musk’s actions over the past several weeks have led to significant pushback, including from the Biden administration and the White House, members of Congress, local authorities in San Francisco — where Twitter is headquartered — the EU and various major corporate entities.

On Dec. 5, Reuters reported that Neuralink, a company owned by Musk, was under federal investigation in the U.S. “for potential animal-welfare violations amid internal staff complaints that its animal testing is being rushed, causing needless suffering and deaths.”

[…]

As previously reported by The Defender, the Biden administration in 2021 threatened Big Tech platforms, including Twitter, with antitrust proceedings over their enormous market share if those companies did not provide, per the White House’s demand, content related to “health misinformation” on their platforms.

The Biden administration’s attempts to censor alleged “misinformation” are part of the basis for a lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri.

On Dec. 8, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Cal.) tweeted:

“On Elon Musk’s Twitter: slurs against Black people have tripled, slurs against women are up 33%, slurs against Jewish people are up 61%, and slurs against gay men are up 58%.

“These numbers are abysmal — and unacceptable. Today, @RepMarkTakano and I are demanding action.”

Schiff did not provide a source for the data he cited. Musk, in response, cited statistics of his own, tweeting: “False, hate speech impressions are actually down by 1/3 for Twitter now vs prior to acquisition.”

[…]

Local authorities in San Francisco, where Twitter is based, are also investigating Musk, alleging he has turned offices into bedrooms at the company’s headquarters.

[…]

In response, Musk tweeted the following on Dec. 6: “So city of SF attacks companies providing beds for tired employees instead of making sure kids are safe from fentanyl. Where are your priorities[?],” tagging San Francisco mayor London Breed in the tweet.

The EU also set its sights on Twitter and Musk. According to a Nov. 30 Financial Times report, the EU, representing a bloc of 27 European nations, threatened to impose a ban on Twitter if its demands for an audit and for the non-reinstatement of banned accounts and rollback of loosening content moderation policies are not met.

[…]

The DSA also requires platforms to “flag hate speech, eliminate any kind of terrorist propaganda” and implement “frameworks to quickly take down illicit content.”

Companies violating the provisions of the DSA would risk fines of up to 6% of their total global annual revenue, while repeat offenses may result in the platforms being banned from the EU — despite the “open internet” principle professed by the principle of “net neutrality” enshrined in EU law.

[…]

In a move possibly connected to the EU’s threats, Musk closed Twitter’s offices in Brussels — where many EU institutions are headquartered — in late November, in an action framed by Euronews as one which is “raising fears Elon Musk may not comply with EU rules.”

Twitter and Musk also appear to have run into a potential confrontation with Apple — whose App Store makes Twitter’s mobile app widely available to users of Apple’s devices worldwide.

[…]

Big Media has also gotten into the act. On Nov. 18, CBS ceased advertising on Twitter “out of an abundance of caution.” However, the boycott lasted for only two days, as two days later, CBS resumed advertising on Twitter.

[…]

Republicans, Libertarians applaud Twitter revelations

In a Dec. 6 article, former presidential candidate and member of the House of Representatives Ron Paul said the release of the internal Twitter documents “blew the lid off government manipulation of social media.”

[…]

House Republicans, who secured a majority in November’s elections, have hinted at a potential investigation or other legal action in relation to the Twitter revelations.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/twitter-files-censorship-government-collusion/

Why America Aims to Deindustrialize Europe

Posted on by
3

 

Eric Zeusse

Prior to the 1991 end of the Soviet Union, America’s imperialism used its European colonies (called “allies” — and which any empire’s colonies or vassal-nations necessarily will be, since the colonies’ foreign policies are always controlled by the imperial nation) as providing military bases (locations to position imperial troops and weapons in order to further-expand the empire), and as being markets for U.S.-manufactured goods, not as being lands from which to extract resources (the traditional “banana republic” vassal-nations).

Military bases continued to be the top (#1) U.S. priority, despite the end of the Soviet threat and Russia’s adopting a democratic Constitution — a Constitution far more democratic than almost any in Europe — and this continued U.S. European military alliance, NATO, demonstrated, and actually proved, that America is imperialistic and had come to be the world’s dominant empire after the Soviet Union’s end. However, increasingly after that time (1991), the second priority, of using Europe as the biggest market for U.S. goods and services, declined. On 9 October 2018, the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank published “Understanding the Roots of the U.S. Trade Deficit” and reported three “Key Takeaways”:

1. Profound economic changes lie at the root of both the U.S. trade deficit and declining manufacturing employment.

2. The role of the U.S. dollar as an international reserve currency has helped finance domestic consumption of imported goods.

3. Labor productivity and a shifting of comparative advantage to developing nations explain the loss in manufacturing jobs.

U.S. manufacturing jobs were being transferred to places like China, not to places like Germany. The lowered labor-costs, by manufacturing in under-developed countries, were adding to the wealth of the owners of America’s international corporations (these being the individuals who funded the careers of successful national politicians — members of Congress, and Presidents — and thus control America’s foreign policies), but America’s weapons (products of Lockheed Martin, etc.) continued to be U.S. manufacturing jobs that are (producing products that are) going to places like Germany — NOT (like for consumer products) going to places like China. (Germany is a U.S. vassal-nation, but China is a U.S. target-nation.)

That same study also included this key passage, which pertained to President Richard Nixon’s having gotten America off the gold standard and onto its replacement, the oil standard (with the Saudis):

As saving and investment became mismatched, the saving gap (S[avings] – [minus] I[nvestment]) started to grow more and more negative around the early 1970s [the end of the gold standard], suggesting rapidly accumulating private debt and public debt in the U.S. Figure 2 shows that the cumulative saving-investment gap started to grow in the middle 1970s and ballooned to $11 trillion in recent years, suggesting roughly an equal amount of foreign holdings of U.S. currency and government bonds.

Figure 2

See this.

Therefore, the current international monetary system — based on the U.S. dollar as the dominant world reserve currency and U.S. government securities as the most-sought-after store of value — is the root cause of persistent trade deficits in the U.S.

Had the [gold-based] Bretton Woods system been kept in place, the U.S. ability to issue an astronomical amount of U.S. dollars and Treasuries as a substitute for gold in the global market would have been severely constrained, and U.S. trade would have been far more balanced.

However, though that explanation explains why the “Cumulative Saving Gap” didn’t exist, at all, prior to ending the gold standard, the explanation ignores one critically important aspect of the curve that is displayed in “Figure 2” and which aspect is an accelerated increase in that gap (increased downward turn) after around the year 2001.

What had happened in 2001? The 9/11 attacks and the effective elimination of Constitutional rule in the United States: the extreme militarization of America’s economy, and thus the INCREASED importance, to the American economy, of those manufacturing jobs which relied upon the CONTINUED and increasingly important European military market. (For a while, after 9/11, many of the main purchasers of U.S. weapons were in the Middle East, which is the #2 foreign profit-center for U.S. arms-makers, especially because it is heavily subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. But the war in Ukraine, which Obama started, has restored the Cold War to arms-trade dominance.)

America wouldn’t be able to sell to China the weapons that the U.S. was manufacturing to be placed in Europe. America’s NATO (the Cold-War relic) was Euro-American, not Sino-American. Consequently, America needed to increase yet further its grip over European Governments: it therefore must treat them more openly, and more boldly (such as America’s and UK’s joint operation of blowing-up the Nord Stream pipelines of Russia’s energy supplies into Europe) as being banana republics, and to do whatever is needed in order to get these Governments to comply with U.S. demands (such as to comply with Washington’s secondary sanctions against Russia and against Iran).

Whereas the 9/11 event ‘justified’ America’s emergency rule and its increased weapons-sales, this impetus was waning as an excuse for continuation of the empire; and, so, when Barack Obama came into office in 2009, he promptly re-oriented toward the old Cold War targets, anti-Russia and anti-China planning and policies (his TTIP, TISA, TTP, overthrow-Assad, and overthrow-Yanukovych, etc. — overthrow any nation’s leadership that is at all friendly toward Russia and/or China), and this required him and Joe Biden to force Europe to commit to anti-Russia and anti-China policies; and, so, it required to split the world into a renewed Cold War without any need for an ideological (anti-‘communist’) excuse.

The only way to do this is to deindustrialize Europe. So: that is now happening. Europe is to become more of America’s banana-republics. That’s why the Biden Administration is determined to take manufacturing jobs away from Europe.

The U.S. Government’s, and its think tanks’, many policy documents that focus upon an alleged need to continue and to expand U.S. global hegemony, are unapologetic about America’s zero-sum-game view that in order for the U.S. to succeed, the nations that it views as ‘competitors’ (by which they actually mean enemies) must be defeated.

And all other nations must continue to be dominated by America.

The U.S. is not treating Europe (other than Russia) as enemies; it isn’t threatening them as being targets of America’s bombs; but it is instead treating them as ‘allies’, or vassal-nations to be used as staging-areas for its ultimate invasions to defeat its ‘competitors’.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-america-aims-deindustrialize-europe/5801644

 

Unmasking the science: Studies find that N95 masks provide no statistically significant protection against covid transmission

Posted on by
2

Unmasking the science: Studies find that N95 masks provide no statistically significant protection against covid transmission

Dr Eddy Betterman

The verdict is in: even the most advanced of the face masks that was pushed on Americans during covid, the N95, is a dud when it comes to providing actual protection against disease transmission.

A multi-year study found that N95 masks, which are supposedly better than homemade cloth and those ugly blue masks, are largely useless, despite providing “the highest” level of protection.

The peer-reviewed, international randomized controlled trial (RCT) found no statistically significant real-world evidence of efficacy between N95 masks and surgical masks, and another study from Yale University found that mask efficacy at halting transmission is essentially zero.

The only thing masks do, as many have long claimed, is symbolize one’s allegiance to the religion of covid. Kind of like “shirts” and “skins” in junior high flag football, the mask simply shows that one aligns with the political left.

“In my not-so-humble opinion – an opinion many of us have shared for nearly two years – masks are largely virtue-signaling symbols worn by liberals, or others frightened into believing that masks are effective in preventing one from contracting the virus,” writes Mike Miller for Red State.

“Incidentally, if they did? Why did liberals’ hair catch on fire if they were wearing a mask and you weren’t? Rhetorical question, of course.” (Related: Remember when California Gov. Gavin Newsom was caught wiring billions of dollars to communist China in a massive face mask money laundering scheme?)

No credible studies have ever found substantiated benefits to masking

The paper, published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine (AIM), looked at two different kinds of “advanced” masks used at medical facilities across Canada, Pakistan, Egypt, and Israel. It was funded in part by the Canadian government and the World Health Organization (WHO).

The WHO, by the way, piloted its own face mask study in 2019 that came to similar conclusions about their worthlessness. This would explain why the United Nations (UN) body opposes masking young children, at least – though it should oppose all forms of masking, based on the evidence.

“Previous RCTs in the COVID era have found mediocre protection from face coverings at best,” the study explains. “A Danish study of 6,000 that had trouble getting published – and eventually landed in AIM – found no statistically significant difference between surgical and no-mask wearers.”

Researchers at Yale University conducted their own research as well, revealing that “based on the 95 percent confidence intervals, we do not even know if surgical mask efficacy is more than 0 percent.”

You might just say that the consensus across the spectrum of science is that face masks are a certifiable joke when it comes to doing anything against an alleged virus that we know has still not been isolated or proven to exist.

When asked during his recent seven-hour deposition about the “science” behind masking, Tony Fauci was unable to provide even a shred of evidence to back his pro-mask position. Fauci was also unable to explain why he went back and forth and back and forth about masks in the early days of the scamdemic.

“Another tidbit from Fauci depo: In Feb ’20 he emailed a friend advising her masks were ineffective. Confirmed again on Mar 31. On Apr 3 he’s adamant masks should be worn even though he couldn’t cite a single study to prove it. Mandates followed – Lives ruined,” tweeted Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt.

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2022/12/09/studies-find-n95-masks-provide-no-protection-against-covid-transmission/

Modern Eastern Civilization: Correcting the Record on Tiananmen Square

Posted on by
Reply

Tiananmen Moon: Inside the Chinese Student Uprising of 1989 | Cultural studies, Book cover, Student

Episode 48: The Enduring Ideas of Eastern Civilization

Foundations of Eastern Civilization

Dr Craig Benjamin (2013)

Film Review

The last of Benjamin’s 48-episode course, this lecture is meant to summarize the course. However Benjamin devotes most of it to the alleged Tienanmen Square “massacre” in 1989. Canadian historian Matthew Ehret* and others have carefully documented these protests were actually a failed “color revolution” orchestrated by philanthropist turned color revolutionary George Soros.

Soros was present in Beijing during the May 4, 1989 protest, where years earlier he had launched two “think tanks” years that interfaced closely with the National Endowment for the Democracy (aka: CIA). The NED set up two offices in China in 1988.

By 1989 Soros’ chosen replacement for the aging Deng Xiaoping, Zhao Ziyang, who the Western press nicknamed “China’s Gorbachev,” had reached the apex of political power as General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party.***

Despite acknowledging there is no photographic, video or documentary evidence of any civilian deaths at Tienanmen Square, Benjamin estimates there were 3,000.

According to Larry Romanov, who also asserts Tienanmen Square was a color revolution, the anarchists (ie mercenaries) who infiltrated the protests, were conveniently armed with clubs and gasoline bombs cocktails (despite strict gasoline rationing). It was mercenary thugs who initiated the violence against Chinese police and soldiers. Romanov has seen to photos of dead soldiers burned to a crisp, some strung up from lampposts, others lying dead n the street or on stairs or sidewalks where they died, others hanging out of the windows of burning buses and Armed Personnel Carriers.

The 1989 book Tiananmen Moon: Inside the Chinese Student Uprising of 1989 reports the death of “scores” of army and law enforcement personnel, with 6,000 wounded, and civilian casualties including roughly 200 deaths and 3,000 wounded.

*See George Soros, Gene Sharp and the 1989 Failed Color Revolution in Tiananmen Square

**See https://stuartbramhall.wordpress.Tianamen Square: The Failure of an American Instigated Color Revolutiontigated-1989-color-revolution/

***Following the uprising, Zhao Ziyang was place on house arrest until he died in 2005 and the NED, Soros and his think tanks were permanently expelled from China.

This film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/5808608/5808705

Elon Musk Fires Former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker

Posted on by
Reply

The Last Refuge

Yesterday, we speculated publicly the first set of “Twitter Files” released was heavily pre-filtered by internal stakeholders connected to DHS who hold a vested interest in controlling any evidence of Twitter’s former political activity.

Knowing there are multiple executives remaining within the company who previously aligned with the intents of government, specifically DHS officials, to control the platform, the prediction was not a stretch. Indeed, it just made common sense.

Former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker, a man of notoriously corrupt disposition, was one of those former government officials who started working for Twitter as general counsel.  James Baker (pictured below left) working as a government mechanism for filtration of damaging information was not a leap. Again, just common sense.

Today, as an outcome of internal discoveries that indeed Jim Baker did prefilter internal documents in order to mitigate sunlight and exposure [outline here], Twitter CEO Elon Musk fired legal counsel James Baker.

Mr Musk said through his Twitter account, “In light of concerns about Baker’s possible role in suppression of information important to the public dialogue, he was exited from Twitter today.”  Mr. Musk followed up a question about James Baker being asked to explain himself by saying, “His explanation was …unconvincing.”

Matt Taibbi provides the context:

Taibbi – On Friday, the first installment of the Twitter files was published here. We expected to publish more over the weekend. Many wondered why there was a delay.

We can now tell you part of the reason why. On Tuesday, Twitter Deputy General Counsel (and former FBI General Counsel) Jim Baker was fired. Among the reasons? Vetting the first batch of “Twitter Files” – without knowledge of new management.

The process for producing the “Twitter Files” involved delivery to two journalists (Bari Weiss and me) via a lawyer close to new management. However, after the initial batch, things became complicated.

Over the weekend, while we both dealt with obstacles to new searches, it was @Bari Weiss who discovered that the person in charge of releasing the files was someone named Jim. When she called to ask “Jim’s” last name, the answer came back: “Jim Baker.”

“My jaw hit the floor,” says Weiss.

The first batch of files both reporters received was marked, “Spectra Baker Emails.”

Baker is a controversial figure. He has been something of a Zelig of FBI controversies dating back to 2016, from the Steele Dossier to the Alfa-Server mess. He resigned in 2018 after an investigation into leaks to the press.

The news that Baker was reviewing the “Twitter files” surprised everyone involved, to say the least. New Twitter chief Elon Musk acted quickly to “exit” Baker Tuesday. (LINK)

[…]

Via https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/12/06/elon-musk-fires-twitter-general-counsel-james-baker-for-manipulating-and-filtering-twitter-file-release-his-explanation-was-unconvincing/

10 Most SURPRISING and DANGEROUS ingredients in vaccines

Posted on by
1

10 Most SURPRISING and DANGEROUS ingredients in vaccines, and the industry’s poor explanations for why they’re used

Dr Eddy Betterman

Are you aware that blood, cells, and organ tissue from cows, eagles, dogs, ferrets, chickens, and yes, human abortions, are used to manufacture the world’s most deadly vaccines? That’s why they’re called “dirty vaccines.” Most natural health advocates already know about thimerosal, which is 50 percent mercury, that crosses the blood-brain barrier thanks to the inclusion of aluminum (linked to dementia), found in multi-dose flu shots. But it gets much, much worse. What most people are not aware of are the surprising ingredients that, if found in food or beverages, most folks would use common sense and judgment to avoid at all costs.

These scary ingredients and volatile substances are termed “excipients,” “adjuvants” and “preservatives” by the vaccine industrial complex to keep the injected from having well-warranted concern and dismay.

No, vaccines are not “safe and effective,” and they never were. That myth has surely been debunked, especially now with those dreaded clot shots for Covid. People like to talk about cigarettes being so dangerous and damaging for your health, but vaccines are even worse. Why are these dangerous ingredients used in vaccines, and what health damage in the short and long term do these “excipients” and “adjuvants” inflict?

Did you know that almost every childhood allergy is tied to vaccine ingredients? This requires careful consideration. No medical doctor ever points towards vaccines when addressing childhood allergies, asthma, skin problems like psoriasis and eczema, or severe, life-threatening allergic reactions to certain antibiotics (yes, antibiotics are found in some vaccines).

Even peanut oil antigen is STILL present in many vaccines, and has been used since the 1960s. Did the school nurse fail to inform you? Just because peanut oil fails to “show up” in the final vaccine product or the warning inserts, doesn’t mean residuals are not found in the vaccine. Peanut oil is a “growth medium” used to grow the bacteria and viruses, like with the MMR jab and most flu shots. Got peanut allergies?

10 Most surprising and dangerous ingredients in vaccines, and the chronic health carnage inflicted by them

#1. Monosodium Glutamate – Found in vaccines for Adenovirus, certain flu shots, Vericella (chicken pox), and MMRV — used as a “preservative” and “stabilizer.” MSG is a concentrated salt that can give infants brain damage, and becomes a neurotoxin when injected, even in miniscule amounts, because it bypasses digestion.

#2. Human Serum Albumin – supposedly used to “prevent immunogens from adhering to the injection vial walls.”

human fetuses aborted(opens in a new tab)

#3. Madin-Darby Canine Kidney (a dog’s cell protein) – in flu shots, to grow flu viruses instead of fertilized hen’s eggs.

#4. Human Abortion Cells (MRC5) – unethical procedures are used to manufacture vaccines using cells derived from human fetuses aborted decades ago.

#5. Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle (Medium) – used in the Rotavirus vaccine.

#6. Squalene – found in flu shots.

#7. Embalming fluid – formaldehyde is found in most flu shots and the Anthrax jab.

#8. Polysorbate 80 – found in DTaP, Hep B, most flu shots, and HPV – used as surfactant to increase the solubility of one agent into another. Polysorbate 80 is derived from sorbitol using a chemical reaction, and can cause IBS because it metabolizes very slowly. Health concerns from consuming or injecting polysorbate 80 are linked to cancer (due to ethylene oxide and 1,4 dioxane), skin allergies, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity.

#9. African Green Monkey Kidney (vero cells) – harvested from infected, diseased primates – used in polio vaccines – used to propagate the virus over decades.

#10. Deadly porcine pathogen Circovirus – found in Rotateq Rotavirus jabs – Porcine circovirus DNA is a contaminant of an enzyme obtained from pig’s pancreas. No explanation has ever been given as to why this highly dangerous contaminant is purposely put in rotavirus vaccines.

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2022/12/08/10-surprising-dangerous-ingredients-in-vaccines/

Tucker Carlson: Why is President Zelensky Banning Christianity in Ukraine?

Posted on by
4

Posted BY: Bill | NwoReport

Given the background, it doesn’t come as a surprise.  Zelenskyy has previously made political opposition parties illegal and removed all media from Ukraine that is not state-authorized.   However, the move to ban Ukraine’s orthodox religion is still a considerable escalation into totalitarian extremes; all supported by the U.S. State Dept.

As Carlson notes in the latter part of his monologue, the insufferable propaganda has enmeshed the Ukrainian face of the western government, “It’s just a grotesque post-modern psy-op, and anyone still falling for this is brain damaged.”

 
 
Via https://nworeport.me/2022/12/08/tucker-carlson-asks-why-is-president-zelenskyy-banning-christianity-in-ukraine/

40 Year Study: Organic Farming Produces Better Yields During Droughts, Higher Profits for Farmers

Posted on by
4
rodale institute organic farming report feature

 

Organic systems achieve 3-6 times the profit of conventional production and 40% higher yields during stressful drought periods, according to the longest-running investigation comparing organic and conventional grain-cropping approaches in North America.

The longest-running — four-decade — investigation comparing organic and conventional grain-cropping approaches in North America is reporting impressive results for organic.

Recently announced in the Rodale Institute’s Farming Systems Trial — 40-Year Report are these outcomes:

  • Organic systems achieve 3-6 times the profit of conventional production.
  • Yields for the organic approach are competitive with those of conventional systems (after a five-year transition period).
  • Organic yields during stressful drought periods are 40% higher than conventional yields.
  • Organic systems leach no toxic compounds into nearby waterways (unlike pesticide-intensive conventional farming), use 45% less energy than conventional and emit 40% less carbon into the atmosphere.

Beyond Pesticides reported in 2019 on similar results, from the institute’s 30-year project mark, which have been borne out by another three years of the trials.

The current report builds on results from the Farming Systems Trial that were shared in the Rodale Institute’s 2020 white paper, Regenerative Organic Agriculture and Climate Change: A Down-to-Earth Solution to Global Warming,” which integrated the newest research data and offered action steps for consumers, policymakers, farmers and others.

That report asserted that a global switch to a regenerative food system could not only provide sufficient food for the world’s population, reduce chemical exposures and improve biodiversity, but also, could be key to mitigating the climate crisis.

Through its longitudinal Farming Systems Trial, the Rodale Institute has collected data that measure differences in soil health, energy efficiency, crop yields, water use and contamination and nutrient density across test plots of grains grown in organic and conventional systems and using different levels of tillage.

The project focuses on grains (including wheat, corn, soy and oats) because they represent 70% of U.S. crops.

On its 12-acre Pennsylvania parcel, the institute’s Farming Systems Trial uses 72 experimental plots, across which are applied three broad approaches:

  • Organic manure, representing a typical organic dairy or beef operation, featuring long rotations of annual feed grain crops and perennial forage crops, fertilized through legume cover crops and periodic applications of composted manure and using diverse crop rotations as primary defense against pests.
  • Organic legume, representing a typical cash grain operation, featuring mid-length rotations of annual grain crops and cover crops, deploying leguminous cover crops as the sole fertilizers and using only crop rotations as pest defense.
  • Conventional synthetic, representing a typical U.S. grain-producing enterprise, using synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and controlling weeds with synthetic herbicides (according to recommendations of Penn State University Cooperative Extension).

To what to attribute these demonstrated benefits of organic over conventional approaches? All these results, as Beyond Pesticides and the Rodale Institute have asserted for decades, begin with soil health.

“Healthy soil is that which allows plants to grow to their maximum productivity without disease or pests and without a need for off-farm supplements.

“Healthy soil is teeming with bacteria, fungi, algae, protozoa, nematodes, and other tiny creatures. Those organisms play an important role in plant health [by helping plants fight diseases and pests].

“Soil bacteria produce natural antibiotics that help plants resist disease. Fungi assist plants in absorbing water and nutrients. Together, these bacteria and fungi are known as ‘organic matter.’ The more organic matter in a sample of soil, the healthier that soil is.”

Healthy soil retains more moisture, boosting plants’ ability to survive periods of drought; it binds together, supporting soil structure that more successfully wards off soil erosion and runoff into waterways.

And because organic systems don’t use chemical inputs, toxic compounds are not deployed into the environment, and fewer fossil fuels are used (because synthetic pesticides and fertilizers are derived from petrochemicals).

It is well known that organic practices increase organic matter in soils; but Farming Systems Trial data show that organic matter (and thus, soil health) in organic systems increases continuously over time, whereas in conventional agricultural systems, this does not happen, and soil health remains essentially unchanged.

According to the Rodale Institute, such healthy, organically managed soils allow “15–20% more water to percolate through soils, replenishing groundwater and helping organic crops perform well in extreme weather. More organic matter also means more total microorganisms that make nutrients available to plants for strong growth.”

The metrics used to determine a soil’s health include: the number of microorganisms present in the soil; the ability of the soil to retain water during drought or dry periods; the number and variety of nutrients present and the quantity of carbon the soil is able to hold.

By contrast, a more conventional view of soil sometimes sees it as little more than an “empty matrix” to which (chemical) inputs are added so that plants can survive, rather than as a living, evolving and interactive ecosystem that provides a rich growing environment for plants and many other life forms.

The Farming Systems Trial stands out as a singular research approach for multiple reasons, but chief among them is its longevity.

The Rodale Institute explains, “Short-term studies that take place over only a few years can’t measure longer-term weather effects, like drought, that will inevitably occur, or biological changes to the soil, which can happen slowly. We need long-term studies to find real solutions to problems affecting the future of global food production.”

These results were good news three years ago; they emerge as even more important as the world grapples with a constellation of intersecting environmental and health crises.

Many of those are related to the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, and are showing up as degraded soils, biodiversity loss, widespread chemical pollution and compromised human and ecosystem health.

These toxic compounds also play a role in the exacerbation of the climate crisis. These realities challenge governments, institutions, businesses and human populations to change “business as usual.”

Yet we must change, and must influence decision-makers at every level and in every institution if we are to rescue the future of human life on the planet.

Regeneration International has issued a dire warning: at current rates of soil destruction — via erosion, desertification, decarbonization and chemical pollution — public health will be seriously damaged within 50 years.

Soil scientists are predicting, the organization says, health damage from a food supply with reduced nutritive value (including loss of important trace minerals), as well as no longer having “enough arable topsoil to feed ourselves.”

“Without protecting and regenerating the soil on our 4 billion acres of cultivated farmland, 8 billion acres of pastureland and 10 billion acres of forest land, it will be impossible to feed the world, keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius, or halt the loss of biodiversity.”

Regenerative organic agriculture has a potentially enormous role to play in the needed changes to business as usual in the agricultural sector, according to the Rodale Institute.

Regeneration International defines such agricultural practices as “farming and grazing . . . that, among other benefits, reverse climate change by rebuilding soil organic matter and restoring degraded soil biodiversity — resulting in both carbon drawdown and improving the water cycle.”

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/rodale-institute-organic-farming-report/

Congress Set to End Military COVID Vaccine Mandate

Posted on by
2
united states pentagon covid vaccine mandate feature
 

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote later this week to rescind the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, after Republican lawmakers threatened to withhold votes for the $858 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) unless the bill included removal of the mandate.

The news was confirmed Tuesday night, according to The Washington Post, which also reported that Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said the removal of the vaccination requirement “was essential for the defense policy bill to move forward.”

The legislation must pass the U.S. Senate before heading to President Biden. Biden, who along with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin opposes repealing the mandate, has not indicated that he will veto the bill, Politico reported.

The Pentagon would have 30 days to rescind the mandate of the bill passes as is.

Thousands of active duty service members have been discharged for refusing the shots since the Pentagon instituted the mandate in August 2021. The proposed legislation will not reinstate discharged service members or compensate those who lost benefits for refusing vaccination.

According to The Hill’s “Rising,” Tulsi Gabbard, a politician and U.S. Army Reserve officer, slammed the mandate:

“I know people personally who have been kicked out of the military, some who have served 10 years, 20 years, 25 years, all because of this mandate that makes no sense and frankly is based on a lie that [Dr. Anthony] Fauci and others continue to propagate as they have throughout this whole thing, which is these vaccines will prevent you from catching COVID, that it will prevent you from spreading COVID.

“The fact that it is even a question at this point whether or not to lift this DOD [Department of Defense] mandate, and that Secretary Austin is opposing it is just absolute madness.”

The policy became a point of contention between Democratic and Republican lawmakers during NDAA negotiations, but in a joint statement Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Reps. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), said they were “pleased to announce we’ve come to a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on this year’s National Defense Authorization Act,” The Epoch Times Reported.

This bipartisan group made up of top members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Armed Services Committee, urged Congress to quickly pass the bill and Biden to sign it afterward.

‘Make no mistake: this is a win for our military’

Republicans celebrated the victory, but cautioned it is only “a first step,” and called on the Biden administration to reenlist the service members discharged under the policy, according to the Washington Post.

“Make no mistake: this is a win for our military,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a statement late Tuesday night.

“The end of the vaccine mandate for troops will be a big win, and it’s happening because conservatives stood strong for what we believe in and didn’t back down,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) said.

The Democrats’ decision to compromise on the bill comes just days after the White House and Austin reiterated their support for the vaccine mandate.

“We lost a million people to this virus,” Austin told reporters Saturday, according to The Associated Press. “A million people died in the United States of America. We lost hundreds in the DOD. So this mandate has kept people healthy.”

John Kirby, White House National Security Council coordinator for strategic communications told reporters Tuesday, “The president actually concurs with the secretary that we need to continue to believe that all Americans, including those in the armed forces, should be vaccinated and boosted for COVID-19.”

But some Democrats agreed it may be time for the mandate to end. House Armed Services Chair Adam Smith told Politico last week that he was open to discussing an end to the mandate.

“I was a very strong supporter of the vaccine mandate when we did it, but at this point in time, does it make sense to have that policy from August 2021?” Smith asked.

“The politics on that have changed,” said Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas), another member of the Armed Services panel, according to The Hill. “If this were 2020, it would be a different story.”

The struggle isn’t over: ‘You can’t repeal without repair’

Republicans have called for an end to the military vaccine mandate since it was implemented in August 2021, citing concerns it would harm retention and recruitment of service members and negatively impact the readiness of the U.S. Armed Forces.

In September, a group of 47 Congress members wrote to Austin, urging the Pentagon to revoke the mandate, stating:

“The vaccine provides negligible benefit to the young, fit members of our Armed Forces, and the mandate’s imposition is clearly affecting the Department’s ability to sustain combat formations and recruit future talent.”

Last week, a group of 21 Republican governors wrote to congressional leaders again calling for immediate action to end the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all members of the U.S. Armed Forces.

The letter summarized reports by military officials confirming that thousands of service members were discharged following the mandate and the National Guard and the Army missed their recruiting targets by 10% and 25% respectively.

A bloc of GOP senators, led by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) announced on Nov. 30 that they would stall the defense spending bill in the Senate if there was no vote to end the mandate and reinstate troops.

Paul said the mandate didn’t make sense because the vaccine doesn’t stop virus transmission and it creates an elevated risk of heart inflammation for young people. Many service members have also already had COVID-19, granting them a form of protection against reinfection and severe disease.

Some Republican lawmakers said just repealing the mandate doesn’t go far enough.

“You can’t repeal without repair,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told Fox News Digital on Tuesday. “The repair has to be reinstating individuals who want to come back, correcting their records, allowing these individuals who have served honorably to be recognized that way.”

He said this issue will be a primary focus for the Republican House in January.

McCarthy also promised in a statement on Tuesday that when the GOP takes over the House next year, Republicans will “work to finally hold the Biden administration accountable and assist the men and women in uniform who were unfairly targeted.”

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/united-states-pentagon-covid-vaccine-mandate/