Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 136
January 11, 2025
BlackRock Leaves Net-Zero Banking Alliance
Jordan SchachtelBlackRock announced on Thursday that it is leaving the Net-Zero Banking Alliance. The asset management behemoth becomes the latest U.S. megacorporation to leave the ESG climate narrative coalition after President-elect Trump defeated Kamala Harris on Election Day.
The move follows the departure of the six biggest U.S. banks—Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Citi, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, and JP Morgan—from the group after Election Day.
Charles Gasparino of the New York Post, who first broke the BlackRock news, remarked on X that it represents a “massive blow to the ESG investing movement.”
The Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) was established in April 2021, at the height of Covid hysteria, under the auspices of the United Nations. Initially, the NZBA attracted 43 major global banks, representing a significant portion of the world’s banking assets.
Members of the NZBA committed to a set of anti-human principles that included transitioning to “net-zero” emmisons, or rolling back human progress for the sake of the climate hoax narrative. The initiative was launched with the goal of aligning the banking sector’s lending, investment, and capital markets activities with the objective of achieving “net-zero” greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner. They set to achieve “targets” by claiming, based on the opinions of carefully selected “climate scientists,” (think: those on the payroll of the cartel) that humanity had the ability and the resources to dial back the temperature a few degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels. Of course, what they never reveal is that such maneuvers will harm the entire world’s population for the sake of the climate narrative mafia.
The NZBA amounted to a massively powerful banking cartel that pushed a poisonous set of incentives to harm human flourishing. Not only was it insanely destructive to human progress, it represented a series of initiatives that sought to undermine economic freedom and national sovereignty. This “global governance” aspect of the agenda put American banks at odds with the interests of their American customers and partners. Extreme ideological U.N. environmental policy was essentially dictating domestic banking practices.
It served as an ideological imposition on the financial sector. The NZBA sought to distort the free market, by committing banks to following specific ideological goals, forcing financial institutions to prioritize political objectives over economic reality. Capital was consistently being misallocated towards destructive but “greener” projects, and we will see the remnants of this junk for decades to come. Instead of lending based on the viability and profitability of projects, they were forcing clients and partners to meet arbitrary “environmental” (political) benchmarks. Of course, this had disastrous impolications, it stifled innovation, and destroyed growth in traditional sectors (oil, gas, etc) and companies run by non-aligned boards that were deemed not ESG friendly.
Trump’s victory has had a global domino effect. And with the NZBA collapsing, the American economy can become more free from undue government or international organizational influence set by anti-human, one-world government globalist freak show bodies like the United Nations.
[…]
Via https://www.dossier.today/p/net-zero-esg-banking-cartel-continues
Kremlin Welcomes Trump’s Readiness To Negotiate – Russians Have No Preconditions – Both Sides Now Preparing the Meeting
Paul Serran
While the outgoing Joe Biden administration from hell is still trying to escalate the military conflict in the Ukraine, there’s already a lot of diplomatic work in progress, and a meeting between Donald J. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be an upcoming reality – confirmed by both Trump and by the Kremlin.
The Russian Government says it welcomes Trump’s readiness to meet with Putin, a senior Moscow official confirmed yesterday (10).
Associated Press reported:
“Russia attaches no conditions to the possibility of face-to-face talks, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters during a conference call.
Trump said Thursday that ‘Putin wants to meet’ and that a meeting is being set up. He indicated that efforts to end the almost three-year war between Russia and Ukraine were behind the overtures for talks. ‘We have to get that war over with’, Trump said when referring to his possible meeting with Putin.”
Watch: Trump says he is setting up a meeting with Putin.
JUST IN:
US President Trump says he is setting up a meeting with Russian President Putin.
"He want's to meet and we're setting it up." pic.twitter.com/cTJLJwAwW8
— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) January 10, 2025
Trump has been a fierce critic of U.S. participation in Ukraine’s war effort, while calling for peace.
He has called Putin ‘pretty smart’ for engaging Ukraine militarily during the weak Biden regime, and has acknowledged Russia’s military might both today and in historical conflicts.
Biden has ramped up money and arms deliveries in his final stretch in office, trying – in vain – to strengthen Ukraine’s position for peace talks.
“’We are aware that the (Biden) administration will try to leave as difficult legacy in bilateral relations as possible for Trump and his team’, Peskov said.”
Watch: Putin says he is open to a meeting or summit with Trump at any time.
https://x.com/i/status/1870724275424076281
[…]
Killing the Constitution at Gitmo
When British kings wanted to dispose of troublesome enemies — real or imagined — they often had them or their colleagues arrested on pretextual charges and then brutally tortured until confessions were extracted. The confessions were then read aloud during so-called trials; and, of course, the defendant was convicted of whatever crime was the subject of the confession.
All this was done in order to satisfy the political, and in many cases the personal, desires of the monarch by creating the impression of due process.
Often the torture occurred in remote places, so remote that there was no government there, and the king and his counselors could argue that the protections of the British traditions of fair play — the British do not have a written Constitution, but rather a set of traditions — was not violated because the torture occurred in a place where the traditions did not apply.
When one of the victims of this practice was an official who had previously engaged in perpetrating it, the House of Commons, many of whose members feared becoming victims of the monarch’s desires, adopted the principle of habeas corpus. That ancient right compelled the jailer of any person anywhere to bring the jailed person before a neutral magistrate and justify the confinement.
Due process has numerous definitions and aspects, but for constitutional purposes it basically means that all charged persons are presumed innocent and entitled to a written notice of the charges, a speedy and fair hearing before a neutral fact finder, a right to appeal; and the entire process imbued with fairness and a profound recognition of personal innocence until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Due process also explicitly prohibits the use of torture.
In order to ensure that due process and habeas corpus would trump the whims of government officials — stated differently, to ensure that the British system of torture and confession and conviction did not occur here — James Madison and the Framers crafted protections in the Constitution to which all in government needed to swear allegiance and support.
Fast forward to the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and you can see the constitutional system turned on its head.
This George W. Bush-crafted American Devil’s Island, which costs $500 million a year to operate, once held 780 prisoners, allegedly there due to their personal involvement in the war on terror against the United States. Not a single one of them has been convicted of 9/11-related crimes, and only one former detainee is currently serving time in an American federal prison.
Nearly all the prisoners were tortured, and most were captured by roving militias and sold to American forces for bounties. Last week, under cover of darkness, the Biden administration released 11 detainees, all of whom had been at Gitmo for 20-plus years and none of whom had been charged with a crime.
The best known of the remaining 15 prisoners is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, whom the government claims was the mastermind of 9/11. Mohammed was scheduled for trial when the military judge in his case retired. The new judge — the fifth on the case — was confronted with the daunting task of reading 40,000 pages of transcripts and documents concerning the torture of Mohammed by U.S. personnel.
At the same time, a new team of military and civilian prosecutors was assigned to the case and the new prosecutors told their bosses in the Pentagon and the new military judge that unlike their predecessors — who sought to mitigate the 183 torture sessions U.S. personnel administered to Mohammed — they were prepared to acknowledge it and decline to use any evidence obtained from it in the courtroom.
This remarkable turnaround — one that rejected the premises upon which Gitmo came into being — resulted in the prosecutors commencing plea negotiations.
The Bush-inspired premises of Gitmo were that since it is located in Cuba, federal laws don’t apply, the Constitution doesn’t apply and federal judges can’t interfere. In five landmark decisions, the Supreme Court rejected all these premises, and the new team of prosecutors and the new judge recognized as much.
The prosecutors basically said that they cannot ethically defend torture, they will not offer evidence derived from it in the case, and the case is difficult to prove without evidence derived from torture. This is a remarkable lesson to be learned. Instead of cutting holes in the Constitution, follow it. Instead of using torture, use acceptable investigative techniques. Instead of crafting a Devil’s Island, use the systems in place that have basically worked.
The settlement negotiations produced an agreement for a guilty plea that removed the death penalty from the case, required Mohammed to answer truthfully all questions put to him under oath and in public by prosecutors, defense counsel and lawyers for 9/11 victims’ families, and life in prison at Gitmo; not America’s hellhole in Florence, Colorado.
The plea was approved in writing by all, including the retired general in the Pentagon in charge of Gitmo prosecutions — herself a former military appellate judge. When Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin learned of the plea agreement, he instructed the military prosecutors to move to vacate the agreement they had instigated. The trial judge denied this unique request. Last week, a military court of appeals upheld that denial. Mohammed’s courtroom plea will now take place before President Joe Biden leaves office.
None of this jurisprudential mess would have occurred if Bush had allowed the criminal justice structure to proceed unimpeded. The use of torture, rotating judges and prosecutors, and incarceration for 20 years without charges or trial are all hallmarks of an authoritarian government. If justice consists in convicting the guilty using established norms and fair procedures, Gitmo has been an unjust unhumanitarian disaster. But if justice consists in the king getting whatever he wants, then the Constitution is useless as a protector of freedom.
[…]
Via https://ronpaulinstitute.org/killing-the-constitution-at-gitmo/
Lost Kingdoms of Africa Bunyoro and Buganda (aka Uganda)
Lost Kingdoms of Africa Bunyoro and Buganda (aka Uganda)
BBC (2013)
Film Review
The ancient kingdoms of Bunyoro and Buganda (both presently provinces of Uganda) were dominated by Lake Victoria, the world’s largest tropical lake. With prolific agricultural systems, the two kingdoms fought for two centuries over control of East Africa. The region was also very densely populated by pastoralists, who maintained vast herds and engaged in selective breeding.
Some Bunyoro chieftains controlled territory as far south as Tanzania. John Hanning Speke, who seeking the source of the Nile (Lake Victoria) was the first European to make contact 1858. He wrote at length about the two kingdoms in his memoirs. Both were at the height of their power and wealth in the 16th and 17th century.
The Bunyoro believed they were evolved from the Kitare, who created the Chwezi gods and who Ugandan still worship as spirits in Uganda. In Ntusia, a 1000-year old archeological site, artifacts indicated their ancestors were making iron tools and pottery a 1000 year ago. Likewise Bunyoro women have been harvesting salt from the hot springs near Lake Albert at the western edge of the kingdom for 900 years, which as valuable as any precious metal (in 1600), was the foundation of Bunyoro’s economy. Bunyoro salt and metal weapons and tools were traded as far away as Africa’s east coast.
In contrast Buganda’s economy was founded on bananas, their primary inland export, and Buganda ancestor used the plant’s leaves for their huts, its fiber for cord and it’ stems for fences. Drums were especially valued in Buganda, with each clan having its own distinctive rhythm. Until the 18th century, artisans worked the bark of fig trees for distinctive bark cloth cloaks for kings and others of high rank. By 1700, all residents were wearing, and Buganda had to increase their territory to accommodate more fig plantations.
To conquer new island territories and ensure absolute control of Lake Victoria trade, built a network of roads to accommodate inland trade and a sizeable navy of massive canoes accommodating 60-100 rowers. The latter escorted traders from the east coast directly to Buganda. Swahili and Arab traders from the eat coast mostly sought ivory and slaves. These traders brought guns to the region, enabling hereditary kings to establish a standing army.
Buganda began occupying parts of Bunyoro (where power was less centralized and chieftains) to cut its traders off from Lake Albert and the salt fields. In the 18th century, trying to reverse Bunyoro’s economic and political decline, King Kabalega also obtained guns and sought Henry Morgan Stanley’s help in inviting British missionaries from the east coast.*
Concerns about about Bunyoro’s military power, led Bungunda’s king to plead for British military intervention. In 1894, Britain made Buganda a British protectorate. In 1896, they expanded the protectorate to include Bunyoro. The latter subsequently lost 3/4 of its population, with tens of thousands killed in military skirmishes and event more dying of famine or fleeing the kingdome. Bunyoro and Buganda eventually (and unsuccessfully) united against the British in 1897.
*Stanley convinced him divine intervention was necessary to end recurrent epidemics and squabbling between clan chieftains.
January 10, 2025
Israel Warned to Prepare for War with Turkey
The ousting of Syrian President Bashar al Assad has put the United States, Israel and Turkey on a fast-track to a broader and more violent conflagration. By removing Assad and obliterating the state, the coup managers created a power vacuum that has been filled by the proxy armies of the most vicious and aggressive nations in the world all of whom are now prepared to intensify the fighting in order to determine the final borders of the New Middle East. The gravity of the situation has not been lost on the media which is sounding increasingly hysterical with every passing day. Consider, for example, a few of the headlines that appeared in newspapers on Wednesday:
Israel must prepare for war with Turkey, gov committee warns, New ArabGovernment Report: Israel Must Get Ready for War With Turkey, The European ConservativeTurkey-backed Syria may be bigger threat than Iran, says Israeli government panel, Middle East Eye‘Be Ready For War’: Not Iran, Israel Says Turkey-Backed Syria Is Now Bigger Threat, Times of IndiaErdogan’s policies in Syria bring Turkey and Israel closer to confrontation, Jerusalem PostIsrael incites war with Türkiye after Syrian revolution, Daily SabahGet the picture? Now that Assad is gone, the mask has been stripped away, and the competing agendas of the various actors are becoming more apparent. In this new paradigm, the US, Israel and Turkey are not allies attempting to achieve the same objective (toppling Assad), but bitter enemies determined to impose their own strategic vision on the entire region. This is where Washington’s ambitious plan to control the region’s pipeline corridors and critical resources meets head-on with the expansionist Zionist plan for Greater Israel and Turkey’s dream of a new Ottoman empire. The Middle East is simply not big enough for multiple hegemons attempting to control the main levers of regional power or to imposing their own security architecture on their far-flung neighbors. ‘Something’s gotta give.’ Sooner or later, there’s going to be a flashpoint followed by years of bloodletting. This is from an article at the Middle East Eye:
Turkey could pose a greater threat to Israel than Iran in Syria if it supports a hostile “Sunni Islamist” force in Damascus, an Israeli government commission said on Monday. Ankara has emerged as a major beneficiary of the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria last month, after a rebel offensive led by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and other Turkish-backed Syrian groups….
The “Committee for the Evaluation of the Defence Establishment Budget and the Balance of Power”… was established in 2023… to develop recommendations for the defence ministry regarding potential areas of conflict Israel could face in the coming years…
“…. it must be considered that Israel may face a new threat arising in Syria, which in some respects could be no less severe than the previous one. This threat could take the form of an extreme Sunni force that would also refuse to recognise the very existence of Israel,” the committee said.
“Furthermore, since the Sunni rebels will wield political power by virtue of their central control in Syria, a greater threat may emerge from them than the Iranian threat, which has been limited due to Israel’s ongoing actions, as well as the restrictions placed on Iran by the sovereign Syrian state.”
The committee warned that the problem could intensify if the Syrian force effectively became a Turkish proxy, “as part of Turkey’s ambition to restore the Ottoman Empire to its former glory”….The presence of Turkish proxies – or Turkish forces – in Syria could increase the risk of a direct Turkey-Israel conflict, its report assessed….
The committee further cautioned that the distinct geopolitical instability in the region could heighten tensions between Israel and Turkey… Turkey-backed Syria may be bigger threat than Iran, says Israeli government panel, Middle East Eye
“Geopolitical instability in the region”?? Israel –that has launched multiple airstrikes on five different countries in the last few months– is worried about “geopolitical instability”?
Give me a break.
In other words, some level-headed Israeli analyst is beginning to wonder if the random toppling a government that posed no security threat to Israel might not have been the best possible strategy.
What’s so shocking about the excerpt is that it proves that neither Israel, Turkey nor the United States had a plan for the “day after” Assad was gone. The political leaders and their respective intelligence agencies were so maniacally focused on deposing “the tyrant”, they never considered the unintended consequences of their action. They just blundered ahead into a situation that can only end in war. And it’s taken these so-called experts nearly a month to figure out what should have been obvious from the very beginning, that if you overthrow a government and plunge the country into chaos, the outcome might be worse than what you started with. Here’s more from the Jerusalem Post:
[image error]
Israel must prepare for a direct confrontation with Turkey, according to the Nagel Committee’s latest report on the defense budget and security strategy. The committee, established by the government, warns that Turkey’s ambitions to restore its Ottoman-era influence could lead to heightened tensions with Israel, possibly escalating into conflict. The report highlights the risk of Syrian factions aligning with Turkey, creating a new and potent threat to Israel’s security.
“The threat from Syria could evolve into something even more dangerous than the Iranian threat,” the report states, warning that Turkish-backed forces might act as proxies, fueling regional instability. The committee’s assessment comes amid Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s increasingly assertive policies in the region, which some analysts view as antagonistic to Israel’s interests….
Netanyahu addressed the report, stating, “We are witnessing fundamental changes in the Middle East. Iran has long been our greatest threat, but new forces are entering the arena, and we must be prepared for the unexpected. This report provides us with a roadmap to secure Israel’s future.”…
Bolstering military capabilities
To prepare for a potential confrontation with Turkey, the committee recommended the following measures:
Advanced weaponry: Acquiring additional F-15 fighter jets, refueling aircraft, drones, and satellites to strengthen Israel’s long-range strike capabilities.
Air defense systems: Enhancing multi-layered air defense capabilities, including the Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow systems, and the newly operational Iron Beam laser-based defense system.
Border security: Constructing a fortified security barrier along the Jordan Valley, which would mark a significant shift in Israel’s defensive strategy despite potential diplomatic ramifications with Jordan. Israel must prepare for potential war with Turkey, Nagel Committee warns, Jerusalem Post
War?? The Jerusalem Post thinks there could be a war between Israel and Turkey?
How is it that the editors of the Post are only figuring this out now, when Muammar Gaddafi figured it out more than a decade ago. Take a look:
“Their plan is to remove Lebanon and Syria so that the borders of so-called Israel are with Turkey rather than with Arab countries. You will see this achieved, if not in our era, then in our children’s era… Syria will become 5 small states.” — GADDAFI
https://x.com/upholdreality/status/1868441850534822115
https://x.com/i/status/1868441850534822115
Let me get this straight: Gaddafi grasped that Israel’s plan to splinter Syria would create a hard border in the north with Turkey, but no one at the CIA, Mossad or Turkey’s MIT could draw that same obvious conclusion?
WTF?!?
Keep in mind, these are the same “experts” that were back-slapping and high-fiving just last week when Assad was ousted . Now these same spooks and pundits have gone into full-panic-mode demanding that Israel “bolster their military capabilities” to confront an enemy more formidable than Iran.
And, in the north, the situation is even more ominous due in large part to Washington’s continued support for Kurdish separatists (SDF) who have carved out their own state in the heart of the Arab world. Try to image Biden’s response if Putin decided to send troops and weaponry to a group of separatists in Texas who declared themselves independent of the US and seized all the oil wells across the state. What do you think Biden’s reaction would be?
[image error]Turkey’s President Erdogan is doing nothing that Biden wouldn’t do under the same circumstances. He’s building up his forces and threatening to attack Washington’s allies in northeastern Syria which dramatically increases the probability of war breaking out between two members of NATO. This is from an article at The Cradle:
Turkiye’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on 6 January that Kurdish militias in Syria will soon be driven out of the country and that Ankara will not agree to any policy allowing them to maintain a presence there. Fidan said it was a “matter of time” before the Peoples Protection Unit (YPG) gets “eliminated,” stressing that it must lay down its weapons “as soon as possible.”
The YPG is the Syrian branch of Ankara’s sworn foe, the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). The YPG is considered the backbone of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Washington’s Kurdish proxy in Syria.
“Conditions in Syria have changed,” Fidan stated. “PKK’s empire of violence built over Kurdish people is on the verge of collapsing.”
Under the pretext of securing its borders and pushing away Kurdish militants, t he Turkish military has been illegally occupying northern Syria since 2017 and supporting a coalition of armed factions called the Syrian National Army (SNA) – made up of several extremist groups such as Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham.
The SNA has incorporated scores of ISIS fighters and commanders into its ranks over the years. It played a significant role in the 11-day shock offensive, which ended with the collapse of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government on 8 December.
Since the fall of Damascus, the SNA and SDF have been engaged in fierce clashes with one another. The clashes have escalated in recent days, as a US-brokered truce has failed.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported on 5 January that over 100 fighters from both sides have been killed in the last few days. The clashes are focused in the northern city of Manbij in the Aleppo countryside….
SDF forces remain in control of large chunks of northeastern Syria and part of Deir Ezzor governorate, in particular, the eastern bank of the Euphrates River. The Kurdish militia, created with the support of the US in 2015, has helped Washington retain control of Syria’s oil and wheat-rich regions since 2017. Turkiye vows ‘imminent eradication’ of Kurdish militias as death toll skyrockets in north Syria, The Cradle
So, while developments in the south are increasingly ominous, in the north, the fighting has already begun. Erdogan is going to prevent the emergence of a Kurdish state whatever the cost and even if his actions put him in direct conflict with US forces. From a national security point of view, Turkey cannot allow a hostile separatist entity to occupy strategic outposts along its southern border. This is not a negotiable issue. The Kurds must settle for partial autonomy under the auspices of the new Syrian state. That is the only mutually palatable remedy.
What do these three articles tell us?
They tell us that the situation on the ground in Syria is deteriorating fast and that all the main players are being dragged inexorably towards war. They tell us that Turkey and Israel are likely to clash over undetermined borders in the south and over Israel’s absurd claim that it can conduct airstrikes in Syria whenever it wants.
[…]
Via https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/netanyahu-committee-says-israel-must-prepare-for-war-with-turkey/
Biden Promises Fauci Preemptive Pardon for ‘Crimes Against Humanity’
>
Sean Adl-Tabatabai
President Joe Biden has promised to give Dr. Anthony Fauci a preemptive pardon for “crimes against humanity” to shield him from prosecution when Trump gets into the White House.
According to Politico, Biden is also considering blanket pardons for Rep. Liz Cheney and Senator-elect Adam Schiff.
Dailymail.co.uk reports: Biden – who has been busy dealing with the fallout from his decision to pardon his son Hunter over gun and tax crimes – hasn’t been brought into the discussions yet, the outlet said.
White House officials fear that doling out pardons to people who haven’t been charged with a crime could suggest impropriety.
But there’s also a worry that if Kash Patel is successfully elevated to head of the FBI, Trump could truly go after his critics, as Patel has suggested.
Cheney was one of only two Republican members of the House’s select committee on the January 6 Capitol attack.
The daughter of former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney, she became the face of the ‘Country over Party’ movement during the 2024 election cycle, campaigning alongside eventual Democratic nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris.
Trump has pushed that Cheney ‘should go to Jail along with the rest of the Unselect Committee!’
Schiff has been a longtime foe of Trump due to his involvement in the Russia investigation as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
The California Democrat was also the lead impeachment manager during Trump’s first impeachment, which involved a pressure campaign on the Ukrainian president.
Trump nicknamed the outgoing congressman, who will be sworn-in as California’s newest senator come January, ‘Shify Schiff’ and ‘pencil neck.’
Fauci, the former head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, received much of the brunt from conservatives for the Trump administration’s bungled response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
One of Trump’s top allies on Capitol Hill, GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, has repeatedly called on Fauci to be jailed.
‘You should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. You belong in prison, Dr. Fauci,’ she said during one Congressional hearing.
During Trump’s first run at the White House, his supporters repeatedly chanted ‘lock her up!’ about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over her decision to use a private email server while serving as secretary of State.
But Trump never took action once in office.
In 2024, however, Trump ran on a platform of ‘retribution’ and revenge.
Politico reported that ‘the beneficiaries know nothing’ about being considered by the Biden administration for a preemptive pardon.
Schiff said that he wouldn’t want to be a recipient.
‘I would urge the president not to do that,’ Schiff told Politico. ‘I think it would seem defensive and unnecessary.’
[…]
Experts Raise Questions About SIDS After Study Shows Vaccinating Preterm Babies Greatly Increases Risk of Apnea
by Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.Hospitalized preterm infants had a 170% higher incidence of apnea within 48 hours of receiving their routine 2-month vaccinations compared to unvaccinated babies, according to the data in a new study.
The study, published Jan. 6 in JAMA Pediatrics, defined apnea “as a respiration pause greater than 20 seconds or a respiration pause greater than 15 seconds with associated bradycardia” — or low heart rate of less than 80 beats per minute.
Noting that preterm infants receive their routine vaccinations at the same time as full-term infants, the study sought to determine whether routine 2-month vaccinations resulted in an increased risk of apnea.
The authors concluded, “The similar number and duration of apneic events and lack of serious adverse events suggest that current vaccination recommendations for hospitalized preterm infants are appropriate.”
However, Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense, said the authors arrived at their conclusion “by ignoring the risks” evident in their own data.
“A premature infant experiencing apnea will likely have a longer neonatal intensive care unit stay, further exposing them to hospital-acquired infection,” Jablonowski said. “This is on top of the other risk factors for apnea like death, respiratory failure, long-term lung problems and failure to thrive.
In a Substack post, cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough suggested that “it is conceivable” that with seven vaccines at age 2 months and 16 vaccines at 12-15 months, “combination vaccination could be associated with significant unmonitored apneas, febrile seizures, or both resulting in sudden infant death syndrome [SIDS] at home.”
Biologist Christina Parks, Ph.D., an expert in how vaccines affect the immune system, told The Defender the study confirms “what previous studies on premature infants have shown — that vaccination induces cardiorespiratory stress that manifests as the slowing of heart rate (bradycardia) and respiration as well as the cessation of breathing (apnea) for brief periods of time.”
Parks said the fact that “the known risks have not been implicated as potential causes of SIDS is inexcusable at this point.”
Study suggests ‘one-size-fits-all approach to vaccination’ not appropriate for preterm infants
Research scientist and author James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., told The Defender the study “is a wake-up call” that highlights how routine vaccinations, particularly in preterm infants, may carry overlooked risks.
“The increased incidence of apnea in vaccinated preterm infants suggests that the one-size-fits-all approach to vaccination may not be appropriate for such a vulnerable population,” Lyons-Weiler said. “It underscores the need to consider individual physiological differences — especially in those with underdeveloped systems — and tailor vaccination practices accordingly.”
Lyons-Weiler said the study’s authors appear to prioritize the broader public health benefits of vaccination over the individual risks demonstrated in the study. He said:
“They assume that the short-term apnea risks are outweighed by the long-term protection against infectious diseases. However, this conclusion overlooks critical questions about long-term outcomes for these infants, particularly if apnea episodes have lingering neurological consequences. They did not, however, really think this through. What is a pre-term infant’s life worth?”
Parks noted that the study did not present an analysis of what the potential causes of the increased incidence of apnea in vaccinated infants might be. “The complete lack of interest in the mechanisms by which vaccination is increasing cardiorespiratory distress in infants is also somewhat shocking.”
Jablonowski noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s childhood immunization schedule has expanded since the study was conducted, from 2018 to 2021.
“Had this study been performed today, with the rapidly expanding CDC immunization schedule, the infants would have received Prevnar 20 instead of Prevnar 13 — so, seven additional antigens for pneumococcal, the rotavirus vaccine — up to five more antigens, and a monoclonal antibody for RSV,” Jablonowski said.
Four vaccinated infants had suspected cases of sepsis
Jablonowski also highlighted a less-emphasized outcome of the study: Four vaccinated infants had suspected cases of sepsis — a condition where the body responds improperly to an infection. By comparison, only one unvaccinated infant has a suspected case of sepsis.
Jablonowski said:
“The most startling finding of this study was not its primary or secondary outcomes, but an exploratory outcome concerning sepsis.
“No one versed in vaccine adverse reactions would be surprised that four vaccinated infants — compared to one unvaccinated infant — presented with fever. Everyone should be surprised that four vaccinated infants — compared to one unvaccinated infant — had blood cultures or were administered antibiotics over a concern for sepsis.
“Did the onslaught of the study’s five vaccines, covering 19 antigens, simultaneously administered, mimic sepsis symptoms or degrade the immune systems so severely to allow a pathogen to gain a foothold?”
Previous studies have confirmed the risk of infant sepsis after vaccination, Parks said.
“Traditionally, doctors assumed that infant sepsis was due to bacterial infection and treated with antibiotics even when no bacterial infection could be identified. However, these previous studies demonstrated that it was actually vaccination that led to this potentially life-threatening hyper-inflammatory state,” Parks said.
According to French independent scientist Hélène Banoun, Ph.D., the study confirms a French medical thesis published in 2013. That study examined 144 preterm babies, finding that 68% of newborns experienced significant cardiorespiratory events after vaccination.
“Taken together, all of these studies show that vaccination causes extreme, and possibly life-threatening, stress to the infant body and the tinier the body, the less resources it has to withstand that stress,” Parks said.
Aluminum-containing vaccines may pose a particular risk to preterm infants
Lyons-Weiler said that the study’s results also provide an indication of the risk involved with administering multiple vaccines at the same time or within a short period — particularly in babies and young children.
“Preterm infants already have underdeveloped immune and neurological systems, and the cumulative aluminum burden from multiple vaccines could exacerbate risks like apnea,” he said. “This study suggests that combination vaccination in such populations needs to be carefully reevaluated.”
He also noted that some vaccines routinely administered to infants contain aluminum. He analyzed the potential risks of administering such vaccines to babies on his Substack.
“Aluminum adjuvants are known to trigger immune activation and inflammation, which could impact respiratory and neurological stability in preterm infants,” Lyons-Weiler said. “Unfortunately, the study did not explore specific mechanisms, such as aluminum adjuvants, that might explain the observed increase in apnea. This is a significant oversight.”
Aluminum salts “are potent immune activators and could trigger systemic inflammation, disrupting respiratory control,” Lyons-Weiler said. He said infant vaccination could also spur cytokine production, “which may interfere with the immature neurological pathways responsible for regulating breathing.”
“Simultaneous administration of multiple vaccines increases the immune activation burden and cumulative aluminum exposure, compounding risks,” Lyons-Weiler said.
Writing on Substack, Lyons-Weiler called for vaccines that do not contain aluminum to be prioritized. He also called for the delayed vaccination of infants “not at immediate risk of Hepatitis B infection, or who have respiratory or cardiac episodes following vaccination” and proposed weight-based dosing “to account for the smaller body mass and underdeveloped renal function of preterm infants.”
[…]
Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/sids-study-vaccination-preterm-babies-apnea-risk/
What Jeffrey Sachs and Tucker Carlson get right and wrong about the post-9/11 wars
Piers Robinson & Ted Walter
In a major interview last month with Tucker Carlson, Professor Jeffrey Sachs spelled out in unambiguous terms the nature and reality of the current seismic shifts occurring in the Middle East.
Back in 2018, in a remarkable MSNBC interview, Sachs wrong-footed his interviewers by revealing the US’s covert involvement in the war in Syria. In a debate framed around the question of whether the US should intervene in Syria, Sachs shocked the table of talking heads by informing them it was already intervening via a covert and completely illegal ‘regime change’ operation, called Timber Sycamore, aimed at overthrowing the Syrian government. Finally, a little bit of truth about US policy in Syria had been brought to the attention of MSNBC’s viewers.
In this week’s interview with Tucker, with the world trying to make sense of the rapid collapse of the Syrian government and its takeover by the extremist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Sachs goes even further. He places events in Syria in the proper context of the post-9/11 ‘global war on terror’ and its associated ‘regime change’ war policy.
Citing Wesley Clark’s famous 2007 claim on Democracy Now, Sachs informs Tucker of the US plan to overthrow seven countries in five years and identifies the targeted countries as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finally, Iran. Others besides Clark have testified to the existence of such plans while documented communications between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George W. Bush in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, in which multiple ‘regime change’ wars were discussed, have been in the public domain since 2016.
If there is one point of difference we have with Sachs, it is that he describes these ‘regime change’ wars as ‘Netanyahu’s wars’, fought by the US ‘on behalf of Israel’. We regard them as being as much about US imperialism or ‘primacy’, a concept referred to and decried by Sachs in the interview, as about Israeli primacy in the region (aka ‘Greater Israel’).
Notwithstanding Sachs’ take on the driving force behind these wars, the kind of clarity and context he provides is absolutely essential. The Syrian government did not fall just like that. It was destroyed as part of the ‘regime change’ war policy that was implemented in the wake of 9/11 and that has led to massive suffering and deathas the US-led campaign has moved through its target states: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Lebanon. Sachs did not mention Afghanistan in the list of ‘regime change’ wars, but the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was undoubtedly such a war, toppling the Taliban government while Osama bin Laden and thousands of Al-Qaeda fighters, ostensibly the target of the US and its allies’ operations, were allowed safe passage into Pakistan. Thus, the ‘regime change’ campaign really began in 2001.
The context offered by Sachs is also essential because it provides an opportunity for Tucker’s audience to start to make sense of the remarkable fact that the group now in charge in Syria and its leader, Mohammed al-Jolani, are designated as wanted terrorists by the US government. Jolani was previously a key player in the terror groups al-Nusra front in Syria and, prior to that, Al-Qaeda in Iraq. A purported ‘global war on terror’ against non-state group ‘Al-Qaeda’ leads to the destruction of multiple countries and ends up placing an Al-Qaeda-linked group in charge of Syria. The contradictions are glaring, and obvious questions are begged: Was Al-Qaeda, in fact, always on ‘our side’ and what would be the implications of that for understanding what actually happened on 9/11?
Later in the interview, the opportunity arises to provide an answer. Tucker asks Sachs if he expects classified documents on 9/11 to be released by the incoming Trump administration. Having just warned of how perilously close we are to nuclear war because of repeated US provocations — ‘we are trying to survive at a time of maximum global peril’ — Sachs declares that massive disclosures have the power to change everything about our current course. ‘If it could only be, this would change so much’, Sachs exclaims.
The door is wide open at this point in the interview to address the proverbial elephant in the room: Was there an alliance between the US and Al-Qaeda and was 9/11 actually a surprise attack on the US by Islamic terrorists?
Tucker, unfortunately, makes a noticeable misstep at this point by suggesting that large-scale declassification might reveal why Al-Qaeda decided to attack the US. This falling back by Tucker takes the viewer straight back to a thesis, articulated by Noam Chomsky in 2001, that 9/11 was a case of ‘blowback’, prompted by decades of unjust and violent US foreign policy. This thesis has been particularly effective over the years at setting the boundaries of acceptable criticism and debate when it comes to 9/11.
Fortunately, Sachs takes his answer in a different direction and, instead, emphasizes the long history of covert CIA operations, only ever scrutinized once during the Church Committee in 1975. He points out that when that single instance of partial scrutiny occurred, it revealed ‘evil’ such as multiple assassination plots and the MKUltra mind control operation. He testifies to being aware of further ‘secretive operations’ since then, to having experienced US-sponsored coups, and to the fact that the US has repeatedly gone to war on ‘false pretenses’. In a remarkable statement, which we at IC911 endorse unreservedly, Sachs tells Tucker:
Whether any of this is ever found, I don’t know. But if it is, it would change the course of America back to a true republic. Because what happened in this country is that we were overtaken by the security state and we became a system of confidentiality and unaccountability. And it’s a big, massive machine, and a lot of people are paid to keep quiet or to salute whatever the military industrial complex or the intelligence agencies are doing without asking questions. Because when you have one and half trillion dollars a year spent on that, you’re a pretty big business. And it has affected the universities, the think tanks, of course, the Congress, which asks no questions of any serious kind. And so major, major events of fundamental significance for our insecurity take place without any truth-telling at all.
He then notes that the most important thing Trump can do is to embark on a policy of wide-ranging declassification.
At this point it seems clear that the conversation is on the very cusp of acknowledging what is, for the mainstream bubble, a still unthinkable thought: that 9/11 itself was a self-inflicted wound, a so-called ‘false flag’ or ‘manufactured war trigger’. But neither Sachs nor Tucker seem able to go to there. They fall at the last hurdle.
We are inclined to view this interview, now seen by over 30 million people on X, as a moment when a potentially revolutionary truth was almost delivered to a large swath of the American public. It is the truth that the deep state is out of control, as departing US President Eisenhower warned in 1961; that a string of assassinations, including the CIA’s murder of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, has determined the course of US history; and that all of America’s wars have been fought on lies. What Sachs left out is that 9/11, the very catalyst for the series of ‘regime change’ wars he described, was no exception to the rule. Indeed, it was a brazen deception that America was attacked on 9/11 by a band of young Muslim men who remarkably succeeded in hijacking four airliners, evading US air defenses, and bringing down three skyscrapers in New York.
This truth, if known by enough of the American people soon enough, would indeed change the course of history. And, as Sachs hints, this may very well be necessary in order to avoid a catastrophic global conflict.
In the final analysis, people in positions of influence, as Sachs and Tucker undoubtedly are, need to go that extra mile and spell out the true nature of 9/11, what has happened to the world since, and what this means for our safety and security and that of future generations. The boy who cried out that the emperor had no clothes needed to actually say it, otherwise the spell could not be broken.
If Sachs and Tucker still need to find the requisite courage and knowledge, they could perhaps look to the life and work of the late Professor Graeme MacQueen, documented in our film Peace, War and 9/11.
For the truth to finally set us free, we need more from the likes of Sachs and Tucker. They and many others have done much in recent years to enhance public understanding and raise awareness. They must now find the courage within themselves to take that final step.
It is not just in Trump’s hands. Prominent voices amplified by the independent media of today also have the power, if properly harnessed, to change the course of history.
[…]
Pfizer faces legal battle over misrepresentation of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and censorship efforts
Dr Eddy Betterman
Texas AG Ken Paxton appeals a dismissed lawsuit accusing Pfizer of misleading the public about COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and conspiring to silence critics.Kansas joins Texas with a similar lawsuit, alleging Pfizer concealed safety risks and earned $75 billion while misrepresenting the vaccine.The lawsuits claim Pfizer misrepresented the vaccine’s 95% effectiveness rate and suppressed adverse event data, including risks like myocarditis and failed pregnancies.Pfizer denies allegations, stating its vaccine claims were “accurate and science-based.”The cases could set precedents for corporate accountability and transparency in public health.Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is doubling down on his fight to hold Pfizer accountable for deceptive practices surrounding its COVID-19 vaccine. In a high-stakes legal battle, Paxton has filed an appeal after a federal district judge dismissed his lawsuit against the pharmaceutical giant in December 2024. The lawsuit alleges that Pfizer misled the public about the vaccine’s effectiveness, suppressed criticism, and conspired with social media platforms to silence dissent. Kansas has also joined the fray with a similar lawsuit, accusing Pfizer of concealing critical safety and efficacy data.
The case underscores growing scrutiny of Pfizer’s role during the pandemic, particularly its claims about the vaccine’s ability to prevent transmission and its efforts to suppress public discourse. As the legal battles unfold, questions about transparency, corporate accountability, and the balance between public health and free speech remain at the forefront.
Pfizer’s alleged misrepresentation of vaccine efficacyAt the heart of Paxton’s lawsuit is the claim that Pfizer misrepresented the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine, particularly its widely cited 95% effectiveness rate. According to the lawsuit, this figure was based on “relative risk reduction” from Pfizer’s initial two-month clinical trial, a metric that the FDA has criticized as misleading. The lawsuit argues that Pfizer knew the vaccine’s protection waned over time and failed to prevent transmission but continued to market it as a durable solution.
“Pfizer repeatedly and knowingly misrepresented the effectiveness and safety of their COVID-19 vaccine and pressured Americans to take the shot without full knowledge of the risks,” Paxton said in a statement. “When consumers questioned the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine, Pfizer sought to silence them—prioritizing profits over the truth.”
The lawsuit also highlights how Pfizer allegedly conspired with social media platforms to label criticism of the vaccine as “misinformation,” effectively censoring dissenting voices. This, Paxton argues, was part of a broader effort to protect the company’s financial interests rather than uphold public health.
Kansas joins the fight against PfizerTexas is not alone in its legal battle. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach has filed a similar lawsuit, accusing Pfizer of violating the state’s consumer protection laws. The 69-page complaint alleges that Pfizer concealed critical safety information, including risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and failed pregnancies, while earning record revenues of $75 billion over two years.
“Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID-19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth about its vaccine’s safety risks, waning effectiveness, and inability to prevent transmission,” the Kansas lawsuit states.
Both lawsuits raise concerns about Pfizer’s transparency, particularly its handling of adverse event data. Kansas alleges that Pfizer maintained a separate database of adverse events that was not publicly disclosed, raising questions about what the company knew and when.
Pfizer has denied the allegations, stating that its representations about the vaccine were “accurate and science-based.”
Despite the dismissal of Paxton’s initial lawsuit, the Texas Attorney General remains undeterred. “I will not stop until Pfizer is held accountable for deceptively pushing its COVID-19 vaccine on consumers,” he vowed.
As the legal battles continue, the cases could set important precedents for corporate accountability and public health transparency. For millions of Americans who trusted Pfizer’s vaccine, the outcomes of these lawsuits may offer long-awaited answers—and, potentially, justice.
[…]
Via https://dreddymd.com/2025/01/10/pfizer-legal-battle-misrepresentation-vaccine-efficacy/
January 9, 2025
LA Officials Complain There Aren’t Enough Firefighters – After Firing 100s Who Refused to Take COVID Vaccine
By Ben Kew
As fires rage across Los Angeles, city officials are complaining there are not enough firefighters to manage the situation.
Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, Los Angeles County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone said that the department was incapable of managing such a massive natural disaster.
“There are not enough firefighters in all of Los Angeles County to address four separate fires of this magnitude,” he said.
“The LA County Fire Department was prepared for one or two major wildfires, but not the four. This is not a normal red flag alert.”
While their lack of manpower is completely understandable given the incredible ferocity of the fires, it is worth noting that many firefighters were fired for their refusal to take the COVID vaccine.
As pointed out by the popular End Wokeness account X, local news media even ran reports back in 2021 about how firefighters had their employment terminated after refusing to provide proof of vaccination or requesting an exemption.
[…]
Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/l-officials-complain-there-arent-enough-firefighters-after/
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
![[image error]](https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/IsraelTurkeyWar2-MW.jpg){kind=link}
![[image error]](https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/IsraelTurkeyWar4-MW.jpg){kind=link}