Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 118
February 15, 2025
Jim Marrs’ “Population Control” warns of globalist plot to reduce world population to just 500 million
Dr Eddy Betterman
In Elbert County, Georgia, stands the Georgia Guidestones, often referred to as “America’s Stonehenge,” bearing inscriptions in twelve languages with cryptic messages and controversial directives, including reducing global population to fewer than 500 million.The Guidestones are part of a larger narrative involving influential figures, organizations and debates about population control, as explored in Jim Marrs’ book “Population Control: How Corporate Owners are Killing Us.”Notable figures like Prince Philip and Maxwell Taylor have expressed views on reducing global population, particularly in less developed countries, through controversial means such as disease, starvation and conflict.Researchers argue that the overpopulation threat is not about population growth but rather population density and resource distribution, questioning the validity of population control policies.The discussion of population control raises ethical and democratic questions, especially regarding the targeting of specific populations and the acceptability of methods, as seen in historical eugenics and forced sterilization programs.In the rural outskirts of Elbert County, Georgia, stands a mysterious granite structure known as the Georgia Guidestones, often referred to as “America’s Stonehenge.” Commissioned in 1979 by a man using the pseudonym Robert C. Christian, the Guidestones bear inscriptions in eight modern and four ancient languages, offering a blend of cryptic messages and unsettling directives.
Among these is a call to reduce the global population to fewer than 500 million, a directive that has sparked controversy and raised questions about the motives behind such an audacious vision. This plot is outlined in great detail by Jim Marrs in his book “Population Control: How Corporate Owners are Killing Us.”
The Georgia Guidestones are just one piece of a larger puzzle that intersects with a darker chapter in global history—a narrative involving influential figures, shadowy organizations and contentious ideas about population control. This story delves into how these ideas have shaped policies and sparked debates about justice, democracy and the future of humanity.
The Guidestones’ message is both fascinating and chilling. Among its ten major directives is a call for humanity to reduce global population levels to achieve a “perpetual balance with nature.”
At a time when the world population is nearing 8 billion, such a directive implies drastic measures, leaving many to wonder: Who decides which populations should be reduced, and by what means?
The Guidestones are not an isolated anomaly. Similar ideas have been championed by notable figures, including the late Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh. In a 1981 interview, Philip remarked, “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus.”
While some interpreted his statement as dark humor, others saw it as a part of a broader belief among some globalist leaders that overpopulation poses the gravest threat to humanity.
Prince Philip was not alone in this belief. Maxwell Taylor, the former chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, suggested in 1974 that reducing the global population – particularly in less developed countries – would require drastic measures, including the use of disease, starvation and regional conflicts. These ideas were echoed in the classified 1974 Kissinger Report, which warned that rapid population growth in poorer nations posed a threat to the national security of the United States. The report proposed covert strategies to limit population growth, including the use of birth control and, more controversially, war and famine.
Such policies may have influenced the wars and airstrikes in the Middle East, with some critics arguing that these conflicts were partially motivated by a desire to reduce population levels in the region.
Yet, the very premise of overpopulation as an existential threat has been challenged by researchers who argue that the issue is not one of population growth but rather population density and resource distribution.
For instance, according to the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, the state alone could theoretically accommodate over twice the world’s current population if each person were granted just 100 square feet of living space.
Despite such counterarguments, the narrative of overpopulation continues to be propagated by influential figures and organizations. In 2009, a group of prominent American billionaires, including Bill Gates, met in a private Manhattan home to form a group known as the “Good Club.” According to leaked reports, the group discussed concerns about human overpopulation and pledged to support strategies aimed at curbing population growth.
Such discussions are not confined to the private sector. The federal government has also been implicated in controversial population control measures.
In the early 1970s, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hinted that the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion, was partly motivated by a desire to reduce populations deemed “undesirable.”
Ginsburg was reportedly influenced by the writings of John Holdren, a leading figure in the population control movement who, along with Paul and Anne Ehrlich, co-authored the 1977 book “Ecoscience.” The book advocated for extreme measures, including involuntary sterilization and the use of sterilizing chemicals in water supplies.
While Holdren later distanced himself from these ideas, his past statements continue to raise questions about the ethical motivations behind population control policies.
The discussion of population control raises profound ethical and democratic concerns. Who decides which populations should be targeted? And what methods are deemed acceptable?
These questions are particularly troubling in light of historical examples of eugenics and forced sterilization programs, which have disproportionately affected marginalized communities.
Learn more about Jim Marrs’ book “Population Control: How Corporate Owners are Killing Us” by watching this video.
[…]
Via https://dreddymd.com/2025/02/15/jim-marrs-warns-of-globalist-plot-reduce-population/
Trump sends defense stocks crashing
FILE PHOTO. © Getty Images/K G Yon
Shares of Lockheed Martin plunge after US president threatens to halve military spending
US defense stocks took a sharp dive this week after President Donald Trump announced that he could slash military spending in half. The announcement came amid a wider cost-saving push by his administration.
Companies which saw share prices fall this week include aerospace manufacturers Lockheed Martin (-4.86%) and Northrop Grumman (-6.58%) as well as General Dynamics (-5.30%), according to Friday’s trading data.
Speaking at a White House press conference on Thursday, Trump said he planned to discuss a potential reduction in defense budgets with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
“At some point, when things settle down, I’m going to meet with China and I’m going to meet with Russia… and I’m going to say there’s no reason for us to be spending almost $1 trillion on the military… and I want to say let’s cut our military budget in half,” Trump said.
Defense firms have enjoyed increased demand for weapons and military equipment since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Lockheed Martin, the primary producer of the F-16 fighter jets and Patriot missile systems used in Ukraine, posted a 21% year-on-year increase in revenues in 2023.
The new US administration has so far sent mixed messages on military spending. Trump has tasked Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency with cutting federal costs, including at the Pentagon. The president has also pushed for a quick resolution of the Ukraine conflict, announcing imminent talks with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.
READ MORE: DOGE to audit PentagonThe current $1 trillion in annual US military spending accounts for about 3.4% of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said during his confirmation hearings at the US Senate in January that he wouldn’t want to spend less than 3% of GDP on defense.
Russia has criticized the US arms sector for fueling global instability. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed in September that soaring profits prompt defense firms to provoke new armed conflicts.
Meanwhile, claims have resurfaced in recent months about NATO weapons and ammunition being put on sale on the dark web. Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson alleged earlier this month that the Ukrainian military was selling American weapons systems on the black market, including to drug cartels.
READ MORE: Pentagon rules out Ukraine joining NATOIn January 2024, a US Department of Defense Office of Inspector General report revealed that the Pentagon was unable to fully account for over $1 billion worth of military aid to Kiev. In 2023, CNN reported that criminals and arms traffickers in Ukraine had stolen some Western-provided weapons and equipment intended for troops.
Trump Issues Executive Order to Suspend Funding from Schools Still Enforcing COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates
.Photo by James Watson AFP Staff
OAN Staff Blake Wolf
President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Friday, pulling federal funding from U.S. schools who still enforce COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
The order bans “federal funds from being used to support or subsidize an educational service agency, state education agency, local education agency, elementary school, secondary school, or institution of higher education that [still] requires students to have received a COVID-19 vaccination to attend in-person education programs.”
The order requires the department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to take the lead and “provide a plan to end coercive COVID-19 vaccine mandates.”
Although the vast majority of schools have already dropped COVID-19 vaccine mandates, the order fulfills Trump’s campaign promise to “not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate” — while also discouraging a similar scenario from happening in the future.
According to the National Academy for State Public Health, twenty-one states currently still have bans on COVID-19 mandates in schools.
The order follows after President Trump’s executive order last month, which pulled federal funding from K-12 schools teaching critical race theory (CRT), as it “Indoctrinate[s] [children] in radical, anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight.”
“Such an environment operates as an echo chamber, in which students are forced to accept these ideologies without question or critical examination. In many cases, innocent children are compelled to adopt identities as either victims or oppressors solely based on their skin color and other immutable characteristics,” the order continued.
[…]
February 14, 2025
Who is Investigating Elon Musk’s $Billions in Government Contracts? 5 Inspector Generals Who Were Investigating Musk’s Government Contracts Fired
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
As Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) continue to target agencies to eliminate “government spending waste”, apparently these agencies and programs that DOGE is targeting do not include the ones that have made Elon Musk into the world’s richest man through government subsidies.
Tesla became the best-selling EV in the U.S. largely, if not entirely, on government subsidies, as have many of his other companies, especially SpaceX, which ONLY sells its products (rockets, satellites, etc.) to the U.S. Government, and are 100% funded via U.S. taxpayer dollars.
The MAGA folks who adore Elon and are cheering his efforts to end USAID might be surprised to learn that Elon himself has received funding through USAID for his Starlink satellite company to provide Internet service to Ukraine in their war with Russia, as well as South Africa, his home country.
USAID Signed Off On $1 Million In Contracts For Elon Musk’s Starlink Terminals In The Last YearElon Musk wants to bring down USAID, calling it a “criminal” agency on his X platform. But he’s also done business with it.
Over the last four years, the U.S. government’s humanitarian and development arm has spent as much as $500,000 and signed contracts worth up to $1 million for SpaceX’s Starlink terminals, federal contract records show, bringing them to Zimbabwe and South Africa, the country where Musk was born.
Its most significant partnership, though, saw USAID working with SpaceX to send 5,000 Starlink terminals, worth some $3 million, to Ukraine for free shortly after the war broke out in 2022. (Source.)
As one the largest recipients of federal government funding in the U.S., Musk and his companies have been investigated by General Inspectors at these federal government agencies to account for how he has spent U.S. taxpayer funds, but one of the first things Musk had Trump do, was to fire all of the Inspector Generals who were investigating how his companies were spending U.S. taxpayer funds.
Listen to this Congressional hearing held yesterday (February 12, 2025) with DOGE members.
Of these 5 Inspector Generals who were investigating the use of federal funds in Musk’s companies and then fired that Texas Rep. Casar mentioned, one that was not mentioned by Casar was the Inspector General of USAID, who was also investigating Musk for funds he received through USAID.
He too was just fired, this week.
White House fires USAID inspector general following critical reportPresident Trump’s White House fired the inspector general for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) on Tuesday, a day after the watchdog office issued a report critical of the foreign assistance freeze, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Hill.
USAID Inspector General Paul Martin was reportedly fired around 6 p.m. EST. No reason was given for his termination, the source added. (Source.)
USAID Inspector General Paul Martin had apparently been investigating Musk’s use of USAID federal funds for his Starlink satellites in Ukraine since at least last year, under the Biden Administration.
Elon Musk came after USAID while it was investigating Starlink’s work in UkraineAs if Elon Musk’s ham-handed, potentially illegal, and potentially unconstitutional efforts to gut USAID gain more scrutiny, The Lever and Wonkette recently unearthed information that adds another wrinkle.
According to The Lever, USAID is delving into what Starlink, Musk’s satellite Internet constellation, was doing in Ukraine.
Elon Musk’s crusade to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development comes months after the agency announced a probe of his company’s Starlink terminals, according to pages that still remain on the agency’s website. An archived 2022 USAID press release — now inaccessible on the agency’s website — said the agency had delivered 5,000 of the terminals to the Ukrainian government “through a public-private partnership with the American aerospace manufacturer, SpaceX.”
Apparently this investigation was underway as early as September, when USAID Inspector General Paul Martin testified about it to Congress. Wonkette got its hands on what Martin said in that testimony. Martin revealed that his team was looking into—drum roll, please—“USAID’s oversight of Starlink Satellite Terminals provided to the Ukrainian government,” as well as USAID’s ongoing fight against “sexual exploitation and abuse in Ukraine.”
So let’s see if we have this right. USAID is investigating a company run by Musk, and Musk is now out to essentially gut USAID? Questionable, at best. (Full article.)
If you are not part of the MAGA cult and the spiritual deception that afflicts so many in the U.S. today, the evidence seems to be very clear that Musk’s goals to “reduce government waste in federal spending” has everything to do with Musk eliminating his competition and enemies so he can maintain his power and influence, and has nothing at all to do with what benefits the American people.
And now that Musk’s expensive “cyber trucks” have bombed in the U.S. consumer market because Americans for the large part don’t want them, the U.S. Government is poised to step in and rescue them by purchasing $400 million worth for the military.
State Dept. plans $400 million purchase of armored Tesla CybertrucksTesla, whose CEO, Elon Musk, has been advising President Donald Trump on how to cut government spending, is likely to receive a lucrative contract to supply armored versions of its Cybertruck pickup to the State Department, according to public documents.
The department’s procurement forecast for 2025, which details purchases the agency expects to make, includes $400 million for armored Tesla vehicles. The document does not specify which Tesla model, but the electric Cybertruck, which has a body of high-strength stainless steel, would be the most suitable vehicle.
Musk spent more than $250 million to help elect Trump, who then appointed him as the leader of a cost-cutting initiative that’s been called the Department of Government Efficiency.
The purchase of Cybertrucks, an atypical choice for government armored transport, is likely to raise conflict of interest issues, especially as Musk trumpets his own efforts to root out what he regards as unnecessary spending. (Full article.)
[…]
Trump Tells Xi, Putin ‘Let’s Cut Military Budget In Half’ – Says Russia Should Be Back In G7
Zero Hedge
On Thursday President Donald Trump continued to signal positive feelings about a future relationship with Russia and Putin, telling reporters that he’d like to see Russia invited back in to join the The Group of Seven major economies, or G7, which until 2014 was the G8 when Russia was included.
“I’d love to have them back. I think it was a mistake to throw them out. Look, it’s not a question of liking Russia or not liking Russia. It was the G8,” Trump said from the Oval Office upon announcing new US reciprocal tariffs.
“I said, ‘What are you doing? You guys – all you’re talking about is Russia and they should be sitting at the table.’ And he then added, “I think Putin would love to be back.”
The G7 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US. In 2014 these nations decided to expel Russia over the annexation of Crimea, but Moscow pointed out that Crimeans overwhelmingly voted to become part of the Russian Federation after a popular referendum.
Another highlight from the Oval Office press conference was when the president called on China and Russia to join the United States in agreeing to cut their enormous defense budgets in half. He said in the context of also urging the three major powers to restart nuclear arms control talks.
“One of the first meetings I want to have is with President Xi of China, President Putin of Russia. And I want to say, ‘let’s cut our military budget in half.’ And we can do that. And I think we’ll be able to,” Trump declared.
According to an Associated Press summary of the comments:
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump lamented the hundreds of billions of dollars being invested in rebuilding the nation’s nuclear deterrent and said he hopes to gain commitments from the U.S. adversaries to cut their own spending.
“There’s no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons, we already have so many,” Trump said. “You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons, and they’re building nuclear weapons.”
“We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully much more productive,” Trump continued.
Russia and the US have long had the world’s biggest nuclear arsenals, but China has in the last ten years been making strides to greatly bolster its strategic capabilities, which has alarmed the West. Trump warned that any future nuclear use by a global power is “going to be probably oblivion.”
Likely Moscow and Beijing will receive these words positively as an overture, especially on the nuclear front, but neither will actually heed Trump’s call to pledge a 50% reduction in defense spending – especially when Russia is at war in Ukraine and under US-EU sanctions. They might tell the Trump White House instead: ‘your move first’.
[…]
12 Facts About America’s Dindustrialization that Will Blow Your Mind
By Michael Snyder
The United States is rapidly becoming a “post-industrial” nation. All great economic empires eventually become fat and lazy and squander the great wealth that their forefathers left them, but the pace at which America is doing this is absolutely breathtaking. Nobody can deny that our economy is a complete and utter mess right now, and we only have ourselves to blame.
It was America that was at the forefront of the industrial revolution. It was America that showed the world how to mass produce everything from automobiles to televisions to airplanes. It was the great American manufacturing base that crushed Germany and Japan in World War II. In fact, the primary reason why we won World War II is because we simply outproduced our enemies.
But now we are witnessing the deindustrialization of America. Tens of thousands of factories have left the United States over the past several decades. Millions upon millions of manufacturing jobs have been lost during that same time period. The United States has become a nation that consumes everything in sight and yet produces very little. Do you know what one of our biggest exports is today? Waste paper. Yes, trash has literally become one of our top exports as we voraciously blow our money on whatever the rest of the world wants to sell to us.
The United States has become bloated and spoiled, and our economy is now just a shadow of what it once was. Once upon a time America could literally outproduce the rest of the world combined. Today that is no longer true, but Americans sure do consume more than anyone else in the world. If the deindustrialization of America continues at this current pace, what kind of a future are we going to be leaving to our children and our grandchildren?
Throughout history, every great nation has been great at making things. So if the United States continues to allow its manufacturing base to erode at a staggering pace, how in the world can the U.S. continue to consider itself to be a great nation? We have created the biggest debt bubble in the history of the world in an effort to maintain a very high standard of living, but the current state of affairs is not anywhere close to sustainable. Every single month America goes into more debt and every single month America gets poorer.
So what happens when our debt bubble finally implodes?
The deindustrialization of the United States should be a top concern for every man, woman and child in this country. Sadly, the truth is that most Americans do not have any idea what is really going on out there.
If you know people like that, take this article and print it out and hand it to them. Perhaps what they will read below will shock them badly enough to awaken them out of their slumber.
The following are 12 facts about the deindustrialization of America that will blow your mind…
#1 According to Google AI, our nation has lost almost 70,000 factories since the year 2000…
The United States has lost nearly 70,000 factories since 2000. This is part of a larger decline in the US manufacturing sector that has also resulted in the loss of over 5 million jobs.
#2 In July 1979, 19.5 million Americans had manufacturing jobs. Today, only 12.8 million Americans have manufacturing jobs even though our population is much larger than it was in 1979.
#3 According to a survey that was recently conducted by the Pew Research Center, 59 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. has lot more than it has gained from free trade.
#4 In 1959, manufacturing represented 28 percent of all U.S. economic output. At the beginning of the Great Recession in 2008, manufacturing represented only 11.5 percent of all U.S. economic output. Today, manufacturing represents just 10.3 percent of all U.S. economic output.
#5 More than a billion cellphones are sold worldwide each year. Only a few thousand of them are actually manufactured in the United States.
#6 The size of our trade deficit with China in 2024 was $295,000,000,000.
#7 At this point, China produces approximately 4 times as many vehicles each year than the United States does.
#8 In the early days of the industry, 100 percent of all semiconductors were manufactured in the United States. Today, that number is down to just 8 percent.
#9 Russia is producing three times as many artillery shells as the U.S. and Europe combined.
#10 The United States spends approximately $3.00 on Chinese goods for every $1 that the Chinese spend on goods from the United States.
#11 Our stores are absolutely overflowing with products that are made in China. Meanwhile, soybeans are the number one export from the U.S. to China.
#12 More than 36 million Americans are now living in poverty, homelessness in the U.S. is at an all-time record high, and demand at food banks in the U.S. is at record levels all over the nation.
Are you starting to get the picture?
How many more factories do we need to lose before we do something about it?
How many more Americans are going to lose manufacturing jobs before we all admit that we have a very, very serious problem on our hands?
How many more trillions of dollars are going to leave this country before we realize that we are losing wealth at a pace that is killing our economy?
How many once great manufacturing cities like Gary, Indiana and Youngstown, Ohio are going to become rotting, decaying hellholes before we understand that we are committing national economic suicide?
The deindustrialization of America is a national crisis. It needs to be treated like one.
Can anyone can out there possibly explain how a deindustrialized America has any kind of viable economic future?
[…]
America’s Second Class Citizens
Second Class Citizens
Press TV (2024)
Film Review
This is a fascinating Iranian-produced documentary about Contelpro and the FBI war on the Black Panther Party (BPP) during the 1970s. The Black Panther Party for Self Defense was formed in 1966, the same year that Marvel comics brought out a new superhero called Black Panther.* Their initial goal was to help protect Black men against arbitrary police violence. Members openly carried rifles to protect themselves and and other Black men against unprovoked police assaults.
The BPP gained national attention following a well publicized attack by Governor Ronald Reagan when they attended a California legislative hearing about a proposing law making making it a misdemeanor to publicly display a rifle. The wide publicity promoting the formation of BPP chapter across the country. By this point, they had a 10-point program to not only end police violence, but to guarantee African Americans equal access to health, education, housing, employment and justice (ie the right to a fair trial).
It also resulted in national media attention, with prominent Black intellectual Eldridge Cleaver appearing on William F Buckley’s Firing Line.
Fairly quickly the BPP shifted their focus to improving the wellbeing of African Americans, launching free clinics for women, children and addicts; educational programs for young people; meals for the poor; free breakfasts for school children and free acupuncture treatments for addicts. Their program for monitoring (often fatal) sickle cell anemia inspired Nixon to initiate a similar program.
In September 1967, the police framed BPP founder Huey Newton was for killing the cop who shot him (although the conviction was reversed on appeal). After nearly dying in the hospital, Newton spent three years in jail. When Oakland police killed a 17-year old BPP member two days after the 1968 assassination, BPP leader Eldridge Cleaver fled to Algeria.
The same year FBI director J Edgar Hoover proclaimed the Black Panther Party the single greatest threat to US domestic security, launching his his Cointelpro operation targeting BPP members nationwide with wiretapping, infiltrating their groups, framing them for fictitious crimes and planting negative news stories.
In April 2, 1968, 21 members of the New York Black Panther Party were framed for fake bomb plots. On December 8 1969, the Los Angeles police raided the Los Angeles BPP headquarters and arrested all its members. A day later, the Chicago police raided the apartment of BPP leader Fred Hampton and killed him in his sleep.
As mainstream media switched from covering their inspirational social programs to portraying them as terrorists, Marvel comics dropped their Black Panther superhero. Owing to successful infiltration, federal undercover agents assumed most of the party’s top leadership roles, BPP activities steadily declined. In 1982 the organization was officially dissolved.
Influenced by the Black Panthers community-based medical support programs, communities in Japan, India, German, France, South Africa and England all started similar community run medical clinics. Vietnam started the Yellow Panthers.
* In the US, the panther is a traditional symbol of Black empowerment. The Black Panthers DID NOT name themselves after the Marvel superhero.
February 13, 2025
Whangārei District Councilorsl risk imprisonment as they continue to defy government fluoridation order
WDC councillor Gavin Benney, centre rear in blue shirt, talks with anti fluoride campaigners at the council’s December meeting. (Source: Local Democracy Reporting)
1NewsWhangārei District Council is risking imprisonment for its politicians as it continues to defy a government fluoridation order, lawyers have warned.
At an urgent short-notice extraordinary meeting, the council today moved to continue its fight against fluoride.
The often testy two-hour plus meeting was called after a very sternly-worded letter from Director General of Health Dr Diana Sarfati.
In the letter, Sarfati threatened to step in with a High Court legal order enabling her to override Whangārei District Council (WDC)’s November decision not to add fluoride to the district’s drinking water.
Whangārei District Council must fluoridate its drinking water for 80,000 residents by March 28 or risk being charged with breaking the law.
Lawyers advising the council have warned politicians were at risk of imprisonment as a result of the council not fluoridating by then.
Other consequences included the government sacking the council and appointing commissioners or an observer.
These are alongside the prospect of councillors being individually liable for up to $200,000 in fines for defying the fluoridation directive, plus $10,000 a day for every day after that.
Whangārei Mayor Vince Cocurullo said the council was not yet breaking any law as there was still more than a month before the directive came into force.
Whangārei Mayor Vince Cocurullo. (Source: Local Democracy Reporting)
But Cocurullo said he would go to prison for democracy, if the consequences of not meeting the March 28 decision reached that point.
He said the community needed to be able to have its say on whether fluoridation should happen and this was not the case at present.
Today’s council vote comes as ratepayers face the prospect of $5 million in potential extra WDC costs after councillors voted against fluoridating.
Whangārei District is the only council in New Zealand refusing to fluoridate among 14 nationwide ordered to do so by outgoing Director General of Health Sir Ashley Bloomfield in 2022.
Whangārei District councillor Gavin Benney led today’s council’s recommitment to the decision not to fluoridate, made via a 7:7 split vote where Cocurullo again used his casting vote.
Deputy Mayor Phil Halse and councillors Benney, Jayne Golightly, Marie Olsen, Simon Reid and Phoenix Ruka also voted in favour of this.
Meanwhile, councillors Nick Connop, Ken Couper, Deb Harding, Patrick Holmes, Scott McKenzie, Carol Peters and Paul Yovich were against.
Taking the refusal to the High CourtThe council decided today to launch a High Court challenge against Sarfati’s fluoridation directive.
It will seek a declaration proceeding, which is a hearing where the court is presented with evidence on the safety or otherwise of fluoride from scientific experts and makes a judgement.
Cocurullo said the High Court should rule on the safety and science behind the government’s fluoridation push. There was science, including from New Zealand’s government science advisors, supporting both sides of the polarised argument.
It was up to the High Court to rule on what should be used as a basis for directing WDC to fluoridate.
The council will also seek “urgent interim relief” so it can delay its hands-on preparations for full fluoridation by the March deadline.
At today’s council meeting, Mayor Cocurullo ejected councillor Ken Couper — who voted against continuing with the anti-fluoridation stance — for 10 minutes for failing to stop his line of questioning during debate. Security was called and the meeting adjourned as Couper refused to depart.
The new legal moves decided on by the council superceded its mid-December decision to apply for an injunction, after lawyers indicated this was unlikely to succeed.
They will cost the Whangārei District Council at least $200,000 of unbudgeted funds with increased rates, or cutting planned council work.
Sarfati has requested a letter confirming today’s meeting decision before the end of the week.
Director General of Health Dr Diana Sarfati has warned WDC of major consequences of defying its fluoridation directive. (Source: Local Democracy Reporting)
She has signalled Whangārei District faces a High Court legal order known as a writ of mandamus if it continues to defy her fluoridation directive.
Cocurullo said the council’s resistance was for two reasons. The first was questioning the safety of fluoride.
The second was about democracy, where one person could order a council to fluoridate, without asking the public for its thoughts.
Whangārei District councillor Deb Harding today pushed for greater community say in the decision, via councillors supporting New Zealand First’s ‘Fluoridation (Referendum) Legislation Bill’ which seeks to repeal the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Act 2021 that grants centralised authority to the Direct General of Health and mandates the fluoridation of local water supplies.
The Bill would also amend the Local Government Act 2002 and Health Act 1956 mandating local authorities to hold a binding referendum on water fluoridation.
New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters said the Bill reinstated communities’ fundamental right to determine through democracy whether or not their water supply was fluoridated.
“Important public health measures such as this should be decided with transparency, debate, and local voices, not by overreaching Wellington-based bureaucrats,” Peters said.
[…]
New Report Contradicts Telecom Industry Claim Wireless Radiation Safe
Suzanne Burdick PhDThe basis for the wireless industry’s claim that radiation is safe for humans is scientifically erroneous, according to the author of a new peer-reviewed scientific report.
Paul Héroux, Ph.D., authored the report, which was published Jan. 30 in Heliyon, one of Elsevier’s journals on its ScienceDirect platform.
Héroux, an associate professor of medicine at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and a medical scientist in McGill University Health Center’s surgery department, has years of experience in physics and electrical engineering.
He is also vice chair of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF), a “consortium of scientists, doctors and researchers” who study wireless radiation and make recommendations for wireless radiation exposure guidelines “based on the best peer-reviewed research publications.”
Héroux told The Defender:
“Industry’s most important argument to deny the health impacts of electromagnetic radiation has been that these health effects are impossible based on solid physics, specifically that the radiation is ‘non-ionizing.”
Héroux detailed the scientific faultiness of that argument:
“Ionization by the radiation itself is irrelevant because life processes produce ionization within the body itself.
“In fact, the basic laws of physics (Maxwell’s Equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics) together with established biology confirm that health effects of electromagnetic radiation are in fact inevitable, and at levels much lower than those considered safe by industry.”
Dr. Robert Brown, a diagnostic radiologist with more than 30 years of experience and the vice president of Scientific Research and Clinical Affairs for the Environmental Health Trust (EHT), praised Héroux’s report.
Brown said the report “effectively outlines a mechanism by which non-ionizing radiation can disrupt the biology of living systems” — even at levels much lower than what’s needed to heat tissues.
Fariha Husain, manager of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless Program, called the report “groundbreaking.”
“Héroux’s report fundamentally challenges the flawed ‘thermal-only paradigm,’ which falsely claims that non-ionizing radiation — including radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted by Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, smart meters and cellphones — can harm biological tissue only via excessive heating,” Husain said.
The report is novel in that it systematically breaks down the flawed industry arguments used to justify the thermal-only paradigm.
“But the truth of the matter is that the harm caused by RF radiation has been known for decades,” Husain said. “Unfortunately, this knowledge has been intentionally suppressed by industry.”
The wireless industry and regulatory agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) andthe International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), contend that harm can occur only at radiation levels high enough to cause tissue heating.
Lawyers with CHD and EHT in 2021 successfully showed before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the FCC ignored massive scientific evidence suggesting that RF radiation has negative biological effects at levels currently allowed by the FCC.
CHD and EHT’s historic case alleged that the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its current RF exposure guidelines — which haven’t been updated since 1996 — adequately protect against the harmful effects of exposure to RF radiation.
The FCC has yet to comply with the court’s mandate to explain how the agency determined that its current guidelines adequately protect humans and the environment against the harmful effects of exposure to wireless radiation.
Studies on dead tissues can’t detect health effects
In the report, Héroux provides a scientific rationale for why biological harm occurs at non-thermal levels of RF radiation.
Brown summarized key parts of that rationale:
“Héroux initially explains the difference in physical distance between redox reactions occurring in inorganic matter and those occurring in living systems. The ongoing processes of glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation require electrons and protons to continually engage long pathways in mitochondria to produce chemical energy from the breakdown of sugars.
“He clearly details why it is this increased distance that makes living systems vulnerable to the effects of non-ionizing radiation.
“I believe Dr. Héroux has presented a compelling case that non-ionizing radiation can impact the path of these charged particles and affect not only the efficiency of energy production in the cell but also increase the production of reactive oxygen species, which can lead to cellular oxidative stress.”
Oxidative stress due to RF radiation exposure has been “clearly documented” in the scientific literature, Brown added.
Héroux said his report also shows that the FCC’s safety assessments of RF radiation failed to consider basic physics in addition to its biological effects.
The current regulatory limits “completely ignore” this science, Husain said. “The expansion of wireless technology is in direct conflict with protecting public health and the environment and it is long overdue for regulators to acknowledge the growing body of evidence and take immediate action to establish safety standards that protect both human health and the environment.”
The report also explains why health effects from non-ionizing radiation cannot be detected in experiments performed on dead tissue.
“No electron transport occurs in dead tissue, regardless of whether or not it is ‘fresh.’” Brown said. “Research performed on the effects of electromagnetic radiation on dead tissue has led to erroneous conclusions in many in vitro scientific studies.”
Scientists call out WHO-funded study for ‘serious flaws’
Héroux published his report just weeks after he and other scientists with ICBE-EMF published a scathing letter to the editor of Environmental International criticizing a recent systematic review funded by the World Health Organization (WHO) that claimed it found no link between cellphone use and brain cancer.
The study — part of a WHO-commissioned series of scientific reviews of the possible health risks of wireless radiation — was available online Aug. 30, 2024, in Environmental International.
In their letter, the IBCE-EMF scientists said the WHO’s study had “serious flaws” that undermined the validity of the study’s conclusions.
“It is dishonest to assure the public that cell phones and wireless radiation are safe based upon such a flawed review,” said Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., in an ICBE-EMF press release.
Moskowitz is director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, and an ICBE-EMF member.
The WHO commissioned 10 systematic reviews on the evidence of the health risks from wireless radiation, according to the ICBE-EMF.
So far, nine have been published. All “suffer from serious methodological problems and seem biased to dismiss the substantial evidence of health risk reported in the peer-reviewed scientific literature,” Moskowitz said in a Sept. 30, 2024, presentation.
Once all 10 are published, the WHO plans to use the reviews as the basis for updating its 1993 “Environmental Health Criteria Monograph” on RF-EMF, ICBE-EMF said.
“A monograph is a report which overviews the scientific evidence on biological effects, identifies gaps in knowledge to direct future research and provides information for health authorities and regulatory agencies regarding public health,” according to ICBE-EMF.
In a post on his Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website, Moskowitz noted that all of the WHO’s scientific review teams have one or more ICNIRP members.
ICNIRP, which Moskowitz called a “cartel,” is a German nonprofit that issues RF radiation exposure limits “produced by its own members, their former students and close colleagues.”
According to EHT, ICNIRP is an invite-only group with “deep industry ties” and no oversight.
Scientists in 2020 sent a letter to the WHO’s leadership asking how the research teams were selected but did not receive a response, according to EHT.
[…]
Musk Backs Ron Paul as Federal Reserve Chairman
HP McLovincraft
Former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) could make a great Federal Reserve chairman, Department of Government Efficiency task force leader Elon Musk suggested Monday.
Responding to remarks from TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk that Paul, who has for years questioned the legitimacy of the Fed, would “make a great next Chairman of the Federal Reserve,” Musk replied, “Great idea!”
The supportive comment was Musk’s second endorsement of the notion over the weekend.
That exchange was seen by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) who told his audience: “Raise your hand if you’d like to see @RonPaul as Federal Reserve chairman.”
[…]
Via https://hellboundanddown.com/2025/02/11/musk-backs-ron-paul-as-federal-reserve-chairman/
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
