Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 365
September 20, 2023
Statin Use Linked to Dementia
Dr Mercola
Story at-a-glanceHaving lower levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is linked to a higher risk of dementia, according to a study of nearly 4,000 people aged 50 and overA high level of LDL cholesterol was found to be inversely associated with dementia in the study participants, even after controlling for other factors that might increase risk, including demographic characteristics, health behavior, mood assessment and medical historyThe association was so strong that researchers concluded a high level of LDL cholesterol may be considered as a “potential protective factor against cognition decline”Your brain contains up to 30% cholesterol, which is an essential component of neurons and necessary to develop and maintain neuronal plasticity and functionWorldwide, someone develops dementia every three seconds, and by 2030 it’s estimated that 75 million will be living with the condition.1 In the U.S. alone, 5.7 million Americans are living with Alzheimer’s disease, the most common form of dementia, and someone develops the disease every 65 seconds.2
Meanwhile, the use of statin cholesterol-lowering drugs doubled among U.S. adults from 2000 to 2011,3 and by 2019 U.S. doctors were writing 818 million prescriptions for such drugs every year.4 In the fervor to lower cholesterol levels — a misguided strategy still being mistakenly promoted to reduce heart disease risk — might health care professionals be increasing dementia risk?
So suggest the results of a study published in the journal Frontiers in Neurology, which looked into the relationship between cholesterol and cognitive function.5 While cholesterol is still largely vilified, and statin use still heavily promoted, the study found that having lower levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is linked to a higher risk of dementia.
High LDL Cholesterol Protects Against Cognitive DeclineThe study involved data from nearly 4,000 residents aged 50 years or over in an urban community in China. A high level of LDL cholesterol was found to be inversely associated with dementia in the study participants, even after controlling for other factors that might increase risk, including demographic characteristics, health behavior, mood assessment and medical history.
What’s more, the researchers noted, “There was a significantly higher proportion of participants with low levels of total cholesterol (TC) and … [LDL] cholesterol in the dementia group than in groups without dementia.”6 The association was so strong that they concluded a high level of LDL cholesterol may be considered as a “potential protective factor against cognition decline.”
This may come as a surprise for those who have been told that cholesterol is more of a liability than an asset, but other studies have also found cholesterol to be protective to the brain. For instance, cholesterol levels in the high-normal range were associated with better cognitive performance in people aged 65 years and over.7
Those researchers concluded, “[L]ow cholesterol may serve as a clinical indicator of risk for cognitive impairment in the elderly.” Lower cholesterol levels were also associated with worse cognitive function among South Korean study participants aged 65 and over, and were considered to be a “state marker for AD [Alzheimer’s disease].”8
A U.S. study of more than 4,316 Medicare recipients aged 65 and over also revealed that higher levels of total cholesterol were associated with a decreased risk of Alzheimer’s disease, even after adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors and other related variables.9
Other studies have found higher HDL cholesterol to be associated with better cognitive function,10 with researchers suggesting, “Further exploration of the protective effect of HDL-C [HDL cholesterol] on cognitive function in aging is warranted through follow-up, longitudinal studies.”11
Why Higher Cholesterol Levels May Be Good for Your BrainYour brain contains up to 30% cholesterol, which is an essential component of neurons and, as stated by the researchers of the featured study, “of great importance to develop and maintain neuronal plasticity and function.”12 In fact, cholesterol is critical for synapse formation, i.e., the connections between your neurons, which allow you to think, learn new things and form memories.
Beyond this, it’s been suggested that high cholesterol could be an indicator of overall good nutritional status and health, whereas low cholesterol has been linked to a higher risk of mortality and is often seen alongside malnutrition and chronic diseases, including cancer.13 In one study, women with high cholesterol actually had a 28% lower mortality risk than women with low cholesterol.14
The Frontiers in Neurology study authors also suggested that, as a major component of the brain, decreasing cholesterol levels could be associated with cerebral atrophy, “a typical anatomic syndrome of dementia,” and other factors more directly related to your brain health. They continued:15
“Another speculation is that high LDL-C could reduce neurons’ impairments or facilitate compensatory repair of injured neurons. The inhibitions of dendrite outgrowth and synaptogenesis, and the acceleration of neurodegeneration have been observed when neurons was a short of cellular cholesterol or cholesterol supply.
Statins Linked to Neuromuscular DiseaseBesides, cholesterol plays an important role in the synthesis, transportation and metabolism of steroid hormones as well as lipid-soluble vitamins, both of which have an impact on synaptic integrity and neurotransmission.”
While the featured study didn’t look specifically at statin use, it stands to reason that using such drugs to lower your cholesterol to artificially low levels could backfire in the form of degenerating your brain health. Previously, statins have been linked to the neuromuscular degenerative disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease.
The World Health Organization (WHO) Foundation Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring receives safety reports associated with statin medications and has noted a disproportionately high number of patients with upper motor neuron lesions among those taking statin medications.16
The lead researcher, Ivor Ralph Edwards, is an expert in toxicology, acute and chronic poisoning and adverse drug reactions. He stated, “We do advocate that trial discontinuation of a statin should be considered in patients with serious neuromuscular disease such as the ALS-like syndrome, given the poor prognosis and a possibility that progression of the disease may be halted or even reversed.”17
Should You Think Twice Before Taking Statins?If you’ve been told you need a statin drug to lower your cholesterol levels, you may want to think carefully before filling the prescription — for a few key reasons. Side effects are one of them. Aside from an increased risk of dementia, statins deplete your body of Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), which accounts for many of their devastating results.
CoQ10 is used for energy production by every cell in your body. Its reduced form, ubiquinol, is a critical component of cellular respiration and production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP). ATP is a coenzyme used as an energy carrier in every cell of your body. The depletion of CoQ10 caused by statins can actually increase your risk of acute heart failure.
While this can be somewhat offset by taking a Coenzyme Q10 supplement (if you’re over 40, I would recommend taking ubiquinol instead of CoQ10), statins still come with a risk of other serious side effects, including:
Diabetes18Cancer19Cataracts20Musculoskeletal disorders, including myalgia, muscle weakness, muscle cramps, rhabdomyolysis and autoimmune muscle disease21Depression22Statins also inhibit the synthesis of vitamin K2, which can make your heart health worse instead of better, and reduce ketone production. Ketones are crucial nutrients to feed your mitochondria and are important regulators of metabolic health and longevity.
The other major issue is that the payoff for taking on this heightened risk of side effects is very small, as there is far more that goes into your risk of heart disease than your cholesterol levels.
If you look at absolute risk, statin drugs benefit just 1% of the population. This means that out of 100 people treated with the drugs, one person will have one less heart attack.23 Keep in mind also that statins reduce your total cholesterol number, without addressing your HDL, LDL, very low-density lipoproteins (VLDL) or triglyceride levels.
While your total cholesterol number gives you a general overview, it isn’t the information needed to evaluate your risk of cardiovascular disease. Instead, you’ll need to compare your HDL, LDL, VLDL and triglyceride numbers against your total cholesterol.
A review of three large industry-funded studies even found LDL cholesterol does not cause cardiovascular disease,24 raising serious concerns about the continued push for statin drugs to lower cholesterol.
[…]
Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/09/20/statin-dementia-risk.aspx
Why Barack Obama Can’t Shut Up
UK Prime Minister David Cameron and Barack Obama in 2014, three years after they and others destroyed Libya. (Photo: PA Images)Margaret Kimberly
Black Agenda Report
Barack Obama devastated millions of people all over the world and speaks of his actions as if they were committed by someone else. It is a masterful performance by a man committed to deception.
“If you’re looking to help people impacted by the floods in Libya, check out these organizations providing relief”
Barack Obama
If it can be said that one person is responsible for the awful death toll from the recent flooding in eastern Libya, Barack Obama should be named as the culprit. If nothing else, Obama certainly has a lot of nerve. The person who was determined to destroy the Libyan state did just that. His personal hench lady, aka Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, carried out the dirty work. Along with allies like the UK and France, she made the case for a “no fly” zone, which prevented Libya’s army from being protected by its air force. For good measure she whipped up a phony human rights case, complete with claims about troops taking viagra in order to commit mass rapes.
The end result of these criminal machinations was a destroyed nation, a race war against African migrants and darker skinned Libyans, the murder of the president, and the beginning of a migration crisis which continues to this day. Obama can’t stop himself from commenting on that either. After the U.S. waged a war of aggression against Libya with the help of jihadist groups, the Obama administration then turned to Syria and tried to do the same thing. The Syrian state lives on but is diminished by the displacement of millions of people, sanctions, the U.S. theft of its oil, and its own migration crisis.
Citizens of western Asia and African nations flee instability on boats and rafts that are not seaworthy in hopes of reaching asylum in Europe. These risky trips result in terrible tragedies, as happened in June 2023 when an overloaded ship carried more than 700 migrants from Libya, trying to reach Greece. The boat sank and only 104 survivors were rescued.
There were no such conditions before the U.S. and NATO destroyed Libya, but Obama didn’t disappoint. He pondered why there was more news about the sinking of a small submersible at the site of the Titanic than about the migration tragedy. That question would be normal for anyone else, but not for a man who played a leading role in creating the conditions for some 20,000 people to die while trying to cross the Mediterranean between 2014 and 2023.
“Right here off the coast of Greece we had 700 people dead, 700 migrants who were apparently being smuggled into here. It’s made news but it’s not dominating in the same way. In some ways it’s indicative of the degree to which people’s life chances have grown so disparate. It’s very hard to sustain a democracy when you have such massive concentrations of wealth. And so part of my argument has been that unless we make people feel more economically secure and we’re taking more seriously the need to create ladders of opportunity and a stronger safety net that’s adapted to these new technologies and the displacements that are taking place around the world, if we don’t take care of that, that’s also going to fuel the kind of mostly far right populism, but it could also potentially come from the left that is undermining democracy because it makes people angry and resentful and scared.”
It isn’t just the Libya disaster that Obama opines upon as if he were uninvolved. In one fell swoop he managed to connect two disasters which were created entirely by him. Under his administration, the Federal Reserve’s Quantitative Easing transferred more than $1.5 trillion to Wall Street banks, fattening the pockets of the 1% in the biggest transfer of wealth in history while working people languished in precarity.
Yes, people are scared of wars and unemployment and so they flee wherever they can. But if democracy is being undermined it isn’t because anyone departs from the two-party duopoly. Obama explained why the system is lacking in legitimacy but then points the finger elsewhere as if were uninvolved in all these crises.
Obama does what other former presidents do. He gives speeches and has a foundation and he is building a library. He also reappears when Biden needs cover for his disasters. When the Ukraine war was instigated by the U.S. in 2022, Obama was suddenly giving speeches in which he claimed concern for “disinformation” when he was really advocating for big tech censorship.
Obama can’t seem to be quiet. George W. Bush is also a war criminal who devastated Iraq and Afghanistan, two of the nations whose citizens are among those fleeing their homelands on rickety boats. But Bush paints pictures of puppies and acts like a grandfatherly figure. He doesn’t usually weigh in on the issues of the day. Aside from Donald Trump, who is now fighting a torrent of legal troubles, former presidents get a pass and are thought of in positive ways no matter how much damage they did.
Obama is made of sterner stuff than Bush or his other predecessors. He is dedicated to being the errand boy of the 1% for the rest of his life. He impoverished millions of people, destroyed countries, but now falsely appears bewildered about the conditions he brought about. He knows exactly what he is doing though. He has pledged lifelong devotion to capitalism and imperialism. Obama even stopped a nascent NBA strike in 2020, keeping Black athletes in line even in his quasi retirement.
[…]
Via https://www.blackagendareport.com/why-barack-obama-cant-shut
Civilizations of Sub-Saharan Africa in 1215
Ruins from 13th Century Great Zimbabwe
Episode 9 Civilizations of Sub-Saharan Africa
1215: Years That Changed History
Dr Dorsey Armstrong (2019)
Film Review
In this lecture Armstrong covers three ancient kingdoms of sub-Saharan Africa, Mali, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe, that came to the height of their power in 1215.
Ethiopia
The Ethiopian empire evolved from the Aksumi Empire which first appeared in the 1st century AD. Although an officially Christian state, it openly welcomed Muslim refugees being persecuted in Europe. It became immensely wealthy during the 13th century due to its booming trade in gold, frankincense, ivory and slaves. Although it was illegal to sell Christians as slaves, it was perfectly legal for Christians to kidnap non-Christians and sell them into slavery.
Ethiopia had a feudal structure like Europe, with a rigid hierarchical structure based on bonds of loyalty, protection and service.
Mali
The rulers of the Mali Empire belonged to the Keita Dynasty descended from the Muslim traders who first brought Islam to Africa in the 7th century. Prior to the 11th century, there were several African cities-states in the region of modern-day Ghana. A rural backlash against their mass conversion to Islam would culminate in the formation of the Mali Empire. It was the second largest kingdom in world history (only the Mongol Empire was larger), incorporating modern day Malia, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Senegal, Guinea, Mauritania and Gambia.
It supported itself through vigorous coastal and overland trade in ivory, gold and salt and rich agricultural production in the Niger River flood plain. Timbuktu would join Cairo and Baghdad as Islamic centers of learning, leaving behind hundreds of thousands of manuscripts in both public and private libraries.
Mali made its greatest global impact when Emperor Mansa Musa made a pilgrimage to Mecca with a retinue of 60,000 people and hundreds of camels carrying gold, which he gave away freely to dignitaries and bystanders alike.
Zimbabwe
The Kingdom of Zimbabwe was formed in 1220 by the Mapungubwe people, best known for their skill in stone carving and the magnificent stone monuments and buildings they constructed. The mined gold and traded with Europe, the Far East and the Arab world.
Using cattle as currency, they created an efficient centralized administrative structure in which a central “zimbabwe” ruled over numerous smaller “zimbabwes.”
The city of Great Zimbabwe was 1800 acres of extensive dry stone masonry (ie built without mortar) walls and buildings.
Film can be viewed free on Kanopy with library card.
https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/12392969/12392988
September 19, 2023
Congressman Jim Jordan Subpoenas FBI Agent Who Flagged Tweets
By Christina Maas Reclaim the NetCongressman Jim Jordan, acting as the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has formally summoned FBI agent Elvis Chan via a subpoena, demanding he come forth and share information about the FBI’s active involvement in online censorship.
This move comes amidst escalating concerns around freedom of speech, and as a potentially significant case regarding the same issue is hovering on the doorstep of the Supreme Court.
We obtained a copy of the subpoena letter for you here.
Accusations lobbied by Jordan point towards potential intimidation and collaboration between the Executive Branch and larger corporate bodies in order to suppress speech. Chan, who served as the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force liaison to companies like Facebook and Twitter, was expected to cooperate with Jordan, but his refusal to appear without having either his personal or an FBI lawyer present paved the way for the issuance of the subpoena.
Representative Jordan’s stern stance reflects concerns about initial censoring of topics due to perceived threats of foreign influence or misinformation, when such topics later claimed legitimacy. The involvement of Chan with social media giants during the period leading up to the 2020 Election backdrop heightens the sense of urgency around the investigation.
The landmark case,Missouri v. Biden, might soon find itself under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny. It encapsulates the contention by Missouri and Louisiana against the federal government’s alleged influence on social media platforms to remove certain content, particularly that related to COVID-19.
Controversy ignited over the federal government’s overreach in pressuring these platforms to censor content that was initially deemed misinformation but later gained credibility.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals backed a ruling by Judge Terry Doughty which argued that the government exceeded its boundaries while edging companies to censor content. Doughty further established an injunction halting federal authorities from causing further deletion of constitutionally shielded speech.
Supporters of free speech argue that the fundamental principle of the First Amendment is being jeopardized by veiled government tactics that seemingly transgress constitutional bounds and impose a selective form of censorship. Jordan’s point to Chan is that it’s an abuse of constitutional safeguards if governmental officials exploit private entities to engineer outcomes that they cannot achieve directly.
[…]
Via https://reclaimthenet.org/jim-jordan-subpoenas-fbi-agent-who-flagged-tweets
‘All Eyes on the WHO’: Critics Warn of Power Grab on Eve of UN Pandemic Declaration Vote
By Tessa Lena
Amid objections from civil society groups worldwide, the United Nations is poised to hold a consequential “Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response” vote tomorrow that would greatly expand the World Health Organization’s powers during public health emergencies.
Story at a glance:
In May 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted amendments to International Health Regulations (IHR), time for individual countries to turn around and reject them is running out.A whole new set of potentially dangerous amendments is in the works, the latest draft is not available to the public and the available drafts are nefarious.On Sept. 20, the United Nations (U.N.) plans to adopt a “Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response” promoting the need to spend an additional 30 billion every year on “global health emergency preparedness.”In May 2024, the 300+ new amendments and the WHO CA+ Framework Convention (formerly known as the “Pandemic Treaty”) are scheduled to be adopted.The time to let our opinions be heard and say no to neofeudalism is now.[…]
Four treacherous tracks
Right now, the efforts by the WHO to scam the people of the world and to make our lives worse are happening on four different tracks, as documented by James Roguski and Nass on their respective Substacks and on the new dedicated website, Door to Freedom.
Here are the four tracks that are important to pay attention to right now, per Roguski:
The Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response.The amendments to the IHR adopted in May 2022 need to be rejected by the end of November of this year.The new set of amendments to the IHR that are currently being worked on are expected to be submitted for consideration as a draft in January 2024 and adopted in May 2024.The WHO CA+ Framework Convention (formerly known as the “Pandemic Treaty”).Roguski points out four quickly approaching deadlines:Sept. 20 — The U.N. plans to adopt a “Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response.”Dec. 1 — Deadline to REJECT the amendments to the International Health Regulations that were adopted on May 27, 2022.Mid-January, 2024 — Deadline for input to the 300+ amendments to the International Health Regulations that are currently being negotiated in secret.May 2024 — Scheduled date for adoption of the 300+ amendments and the WHO CA+ Framework Convention (AKA: “Pandemic Treaty”).Exit the WHO
One way to solve all the WHO woes is to exit the WHO.
[…]
Amendments to International Health Regulations
The IHRs were originally adopted in 1969. As described on the Door to Freedom website, the WHO members adopted a set of principles termed the International Health Regulations in 1969 to guide the conduct of nations during health emergencies affecting more than one country, especially malaria and smallpox.
The IHR was amended in 2005. The WHO states:
“The International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) provide an overarching legal framework that defines countries’ rights and obligations in handling public health events and emergencies that have the potential to cross borders.”
There are two sets of IHR amendments that we need to pay attention to. One set was adopted in May 2022 at the Seventy-Fifth World Health Assembly (pages 59-62 of the PDF). The deadline for the U.S. to reject them is Dec. 1.
Another set of amendments was submitted by 94 countries around September 2022. The last publicly available draft was published in February 2022, we are kept in the dark as to what the real latest draft looks like.
That final draft of those amendments has to be formally submitted by an internal committee around January 2024 to be adopted in May 2024 (or so they hope).
Let’s look at the convoluted amendments plot in more detail. IHRs are legally binding but originally, the language of the regulations didn’t ask for too much.
The member states are now required to monitor their epidemiological situation and report qualifying developments to the WHO. If done honestly and without overreach, one could argue that it’s a sensible thing.
Like it is with everything in life though, the devil is in the detail. Let us use a metaphor. Membership in the WHO and being legally bound by their regulation are like a marriage.
One could say that marriage is a good thing. Yes, it could be — but what if your spouse is abusive? Then it’s obviously a bad thing. Same with the WHO.
It is lovely to have an honest international body helping with various matters of public health. Yes, it is lovely if that is actually what’s going on.
But if instead of being an honest organization, they are a mob that is running endless money laundering schemes for various wealthy folks and constantly trying to stick needles into people’s arms while knowing that the products they are trying to inject may be causing harm, then the story far from lovely. It is then not lovely at all.
So, we’ve been humming along, and then in January 2022, the U.S. submitted a number of nefarious amendments to 13 IHR Articles that, upon some display of discontent and noise raised by the African and some other member states ended up “disappearing” and going nowhere.
Instead, in May 2022, more innocuous amendments (to five articles) were adopted.
The amendments that ended up being adopted in May 2022 were submitted just a couple of days before they were adopted, despite the requirement to submit them at least four months in advance. Here is how it all went down:
Roguski wrote an excellent analysis of the amendments adopted in May 2022 in his downloadable PDF booklet here:
[…]
Since the adoption of the amendments on May 27, 2022 (during the 75th World Health Assembly), no signatures by any Presidents or Prime Ministers have been obtained and no approval by the Senate, Congress or any Parliament has been obtained in order to “ratify” the amendments to the International Health Regulations. Such approval is NOT needed.
In Roguski’s opinion, the fact that legally binding amendments were adopted without any mainstream publicity or national legal oversight is a disastrous situation. Many of us agree.
Another set of IHR amendments set to be adopted in 2024
A brand new collection of amendments is set to be adopted in May 2024. Door to Freedom:
[…]
“The proposed Amendments would allow the WHO Director-General to assume the authority to direct healthcare around the world whenever he declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. He has already declared 3 (for Ebola, COVID-19 and monkeypox) during his six years in office.
“Among the new provisions in the proposed IHR amendments are the following:
Vaccine passports.The guarantee of human rights has been struck out, removing the words “with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamentals freedoms of persons,” which are present in the current version of the IHRs.The potential to enforce certain medical treatments and ban others.A requirement for biological surveillance (such as PCR [polymerase chain reaction] tests) to be performed on humans and animals in search of pandemic pathogens.The requirement to monitor social media and allow only the WHO’s narrative on public health to be transmitted.The ability to commandeer medical supplies within one country for use by another.The requirement to share genetic sequences of pathogens, even though this could result in proliferation of biological weapons, which is banned by existing treaties such as Resolution 1540 (2004) of the UN Security Council and the Biological Weapons Convention (1972).[…]
“The proposed IHR amendments raise the possibility of a global health dictatorship, called at the whim of the WHO leadership or the whim of the WHO’s major funders. Why the WHO should take on these powers, when its performance during COVID-19 was far from stellar, is an important question.
“The proposed amendments will be considered for adoption at the 77th World Health Assembly during the last week of May 2024.”
[…]
‘Pandemic Treaty’
The fourth track is the WHO CA+ Framework Convention. This track (formerly known as “Pandemic Treaty”) was initiated in December 2021.
It has to do with creating a new international legal framework that would theoretically coordinate the activities of different member states but in practice, would likely coordinate more money laundering schemes at our expense.
[…]
The ‘swine flu’ precedent and long-term planning
I wrote about the planning strategies around the time when the information about the “Pandemic Treaty” was first coming out:
“Thing is, the WHO already tried to pull off a huge vaccine-selling health crisis more than ten years ago but it didn’t quite work. The vaccine-selling part did work very well because they managed to activate the purchasing agreements — but the ‘scaring the public’ part kind of ‘flopped’ that time around.
“All that happened was that the pandemic was solemnly declared, the agreement-participating counties purchased relatively large batches of subpar vaccines (see ‘narcolepsy fiasco’), and then the entire thing went away.”
[…]
“A joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that raises troubling questions about how WHO managed conflicts of interest among the scientists who advised its pandemic planning, and about the transparency of the science underlying its advice to governments.
“Was it appropriate for WHO to take advice from experts who had declarable financial and research ties with pharmaceutical companies producing antivirals and influenza vaccines?”
[…]
WHO is deeply corrupt
Here is a very brief look at just how corrupt the WHO is:
Rather than putting public health first, such as pushing for safety studies into vaccination, WHO’s history clearly illustrates its allegiance to Big Pharma and other industries. WHO, for instance, has downplayed the health effects caused by the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, stating that only 50 deaths were directly caused by the incident and “a total of up to 4,000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure” from the disaster.WHO signed an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is “promoting peaceful use of atomic energy,” in 1959, making it subordinate to the agency in relation to ionizing radiation.WHO’s response to the Fukushima radiation disaster in 2011 was also criticized, with evidence of a high-level coverup.WHO once again downplayed the risks, stating “The predicted risks are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated.”WHO also received more than $1.6 million from opioid giant Purdue from 1999 to 2010 and used industry-supported opioid data to incorporate into its official pro-opioid guidelines. According to the Alliance of Human Research Protection, WHO’s collaboration with Purdue led to expanded opioid use and global addiction.Due to its acceptance of private money, a review in the Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy went so far as to say the corruption of WHO is the “biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time,” particularly as it relates to WHO’s drug recommendations — including its “list of essential medicines” — which it believes is biased and not reliable.[…]
Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/who-united-nations-pandemic-vote-power-grab-cola/
‘Creating a Digital Prison’: WHO Rushes Ahead on Global Digital Health Certificates
The World Health Organization is already working on a Global Digital Health Certification Network — an interlinked, global technological system that would be used to recognize the validity of health certificates and vaccine passports. Experts told The Defender the system is designed to restrict people’s freedom to travel.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is moving ahead with a Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) — an interlinked, global technological system that would be used to recognize the validity of health certificates and “vaccine passports” — according to independent journalist James Roguski and others who spoke with The Defender.“In reality, the WHO is not waiting for the negotiations to be finalized,” Roguski said. “They are already moving forward with the construction and implementation of a global system that is designed to restrict your freedom to travel.”
The “negotiations” is a reference to next month’s meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, where the WHO’s Working Group on Amendments to the International Health Regulations (WGIHR) is set to begin negotiating proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR).
The IHR is a binding international law governing public health and global health emergencies. The WGIHR is composed of representatives of 196 nation-states negotiating proposals for amendments to the IHR.
In all, 307 amendments have been proposed for the IHR by 16 entities, on behalf of 94 countries — including amendments to formalize the creation of a globally interlinked system of health certificates that would be recognized by all WHO member states.
Roguski, who has investigated the workings of the WHO and the proposed IHR amendment negotiations and “pandemic treaty,” said that while the pandemic treaty has garnered more attention, it is the IHR amendments that contain proposals for such “certificates.”
[…]
The proposals under consideration
The provisional agenda and draft program for the Oct. 2-6 WGIHR meeting list “consideration of proposed amendments” to IHR articles regarding “points of entry” and “public health measures” — specifically with regard to travel and conveyances, — and “health documents” as the main topics of discussion.
Roguski said the WGIHR proposals are not limited to vaccine passports, but also encompass prophylaxis certificates, testing certificates, recovery certificates, passenger locator forms and travelers’ health declarations.
According to Roguski, the key proponents of such proposals include the 27 EU member states and the member states of the Southern Common Market — whose full members are Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union (including Russia), and India and Indonesia.
“The EU has taken the lead in putting this infrastructure in place for the people of the EU,” Gaffney said. But the World Economic Forum, Bill Gates, Big Pharma, “and, not least, the United States government, the WHO and the U.N.” are also proponents of a global system of health certificates and passports.
Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., professor of international law at the University of Illinois and a bioweapons expert who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, told The Defender the Biden administration is playing a significant role in this process.
Boyle referred to his forthcoming book, “Stopping the Globalists: WHO Worldwide Totalitarian Medical Police State,” where he wrote:
“In order to circumvent and then to repress and quash this massive American COVID civil resistance movement, the Biden administration decided to go to the WHO in Geneva in order to procure from them there both a treaty and an international agreement that it could then use here in the United States to defeat the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution that gives control over Public Health to State and Local democratically elected officials and to the American people themselves.”
According to Roguski, “Interestingly, the 47 members of the African region of the WHO did not submit any proposed amendments regarding the GDHCN.”
Roguski compiled a list of all the proposed IHR amendments for global health certificates in any form, including a proposal from India regarding “Article 23: Health measures on arrival and departure” calling for “documents containing information for a lab test in digital or physical format.
Meanwhile, Russia’s proposal for Article 23 calls for:
“information concerning the traveller’s itinerary to ascertain if there was any travel in or near an affected area or other possible contacts with infection or contamination prior to arrival, as well as review of the traveller’s health documents if they are required under these Regulations including documents containing information for a lab test in digital or physical format including documents containing information on a laboratory test for a pathogen and/or information on vaccination against a disease, including those provided at the request of the State Party in digital /electronic form.”
An Indonesian proposal for “Article 31: Health measures relating to entry of travellers” suggests states could require “medical examination, vaccination or other prophylaxis or proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis whether in paper based or digital format … when necessary to determine whether a public health risk exists.”
And a proposal by the Czech Republic on behalf of the EU’s member states for “Article 36: Certificates of vaccination or other prophylaxis” states: “Other types of proofs and certificates may be used,” such as “test certificates and recovery certificates,” for diseases “where a vaccine or prophylaxis has not yet been made available.”
The Czech Republic and EU member states also proposed that “Persons undergoing vaccination or other prophylaxis under these Regulations shall be provided with an international certificate of vaccination or prophylaxis … in the digital or paper form.”
WHO failed to define ‘vaccine’ and ignored safety standards
According to Roguski, Article 21 of the WHO Constitution gives the WHO the authority to adopt regulations — but this authority is being abused.
“They may attempt to adopt such vague language that their ‘regulations’ would enable them to ‘approve’ whatever ‘certificates’ they wish,” Roguski said.
“In my view, the word ‘regulation’ means to make regular, to set standards, to define terms. You define the nomenclature and how you diagnose a disease or how you do something.”
However, Roguski said, “They are about to fail miserably in the crafting of regulations to define standards. One of the things they’re supposed to do is ensure the safety of treatments and they’ve completely ignored it.”
[…]
Similarly, Dr. Meryl Nass, an internist, biological warfare epidemiologist and member of the Children’s Health Defense scientific advisory committee, told The Defender, “If you don’t have effective vaccines that stop casual person-to-person transmission, how can they be justified?”
[…]
[…]
Google, Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, Oracle and the Mayo Clinic are among the backers of the SMART Health Card via their participation in the Vaccine Credential Initiative.
[…]
For Gaffney, “the vaccine passport ‘brand,’ shall we say, is one way of characterizing various kinds of digital identification models,” which are “all designed for a similar purpose, which is not only to surveil the populations but to be able to control them.”
According to Roguski, the proposed amendments will also legitimize “biological weapons research under the guise of health.”
[…]
Globalists ‘intend to suppress all opposition’ to ‘totalitarian medical edicts’
Roguski and Gaffney agreed that the WHO’s proposals also put national sovereignty at risk by placing public health decision-making in the hands of global entities like the WHO, and by restricting global freedom of movement.
[…]
According to Roguski, “Over 50 members of Congress have co-sponsored the WHO Withdrawal Act” (H.R.79), adding that he is “working to have the Senate consider companion legislation.”
[…]
Again quoting from his forthcoming book, Boyle said: “This time, the globalists fully intend to suppress any and all opposition to their totalitarian medical edicts here in the United States and elsewhere,” via “bluewashing their entire totalitarian police state project through the WHO.”
If approved, the pandemic treaty and IHR amendments will “constitute international agreements under the terms of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,” Boyle said, adding that it will then be argued that they are “‘the supreme law of the land’ under Article 6 of the United States Constitution … in conjunction with the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act.”
According to Boyle, this will then “override all opposition by state governors, state attorneys general, state general assemblies, all publicly elected officials … your public health authorities, and even your primary care physicians.”
Roguski said that while it is difficult to oppose the GDHCN directly because it is, at its root, simply a technological platform, the inputs into that platform — such as vaccines and PCR tests — can be challenged.
On his Substack, Roguski listed several instances where scientists and peer-reviewed research questioned PCR tests.
“The focus that I have is on the validity of the certificate, not the software system that enables people to access whether or not you have a certificate,” he said. “The garbage coming into the system is untrustworthy. The PCR tests as a diagnostic, the jabs being something that could restrict travel though they don’t stop transmission or infection.”
Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/who-global-digital-health-certificate/
Will Germany be the first to ditch its net zero commitments?
By Paul Homewood
Which country will become the first to rat on its net zero target, to find some of putting it off, watering it down – or changing the definition of what counts? There must be a lot of money on it being Germany.
Things are not going well in Germany’s bid to reach net zero by 2045, five years earlier even than Britain’s own unrealistic target. For months, the German government has been trying to devise a way to save its heavy industry from high energy prices which are sending production fleeing to Asia. Just last year, chemicals giant BASF announced that it would invest in a new £10 billion plant in China rather than Europe, thanks to the cost of energy.
Now, the government seems to have found a way. It is going to raid its £200 billion climate transition fund, which was supposed to invest in green technology. The fund was also meant to compensate householders who have been groaning under the expense of policies such as next year’s proposed ban on new gas boilers.
Instead, some of the money will be going towards subsidising cheaper energy for heavy users (although householders may end up paying more). Needless to say, some of the subsidies will be disappearing into the pockets of the owners of coal-fired power stations – given that some of these have had to be fired up again to cope with the disappearance of Russian gas.
At the same time, Germany is pushing back against EU proposals for new reporting requirements on climate and other environmental issues. It wants to change the rules so that they affect only companies employing more than 500 people, rather than 250. The German car industry has already succeeded in watering down an EU ban on petrol and diesel cars from 2035 – internal combustion engines will still be allowed if they are capable of being run on synthetic ‘e-fuels’ manufactured from hydrogen and carbon dioxide. Given that you can make synthetic fuels to any recipe you like, this effectively means that the car industry will be able to continue making internal combustion engines pretty much as now.
So how did Europe’s most ambitious nation on net zero turn into a laggard (without so far actually ditching the increasingly unreachable 2045 target)? Reality, that’s what.
For years, Germany pursued a policy of relying on cheap Russian gas while hoping that some solution to the problem of intermittent renewables would magically appear. This is a policy which it continued even as Putin lined up his tanks on Ukraine’s borders – three nuclear power stations were closed prematurely on New Year’s Eve 2021.
Now, the costs are becoming clearer. Wind and solar are not going to deliver sufficient energy that is cheap and reliable enough to replace all fossil fuels – at least not without some as-yet unclear technology to allow the affordable storage of vast quantities of energy. The inevitable result of trying to plough on with net zero will be yet more sections of German industry disappearing off to South Asia, which is unencumbered by legally-binding targets.
The question is, which country will become the first to rat on its net zero target, to find some of putting it off, watering it down – or changing the definition of what counts? There must be a lot of money on it being Germany, although it may still take a few years before any government feels brave enough to admit the inevitable.
Given that the FDP are already rebelling against Germany’s climate policies, there is in my view a very real possibility that they will join with the Christian Democrats after the next election to begin the unravelling of the climate agenda.
[…[
Cut, Poison, Burn — Is Radiation Treatment on the Way Out?
Dr Mercola
Story at-a-glanceUnder the cut, poison, burn model, cancer remains a top killer worldwide; by 2040, it’s expected that 29.5 million new cancer cases will occur each year, along with 16.4 million cancer-related deathsResearchers are realizing that in some cases, radiation may be causing more harm than good — and leaving it out of cancer treatment entirely may not change the outcomeA 2022 study found no difference in outcomes among those who received radioactive iodine after surgery for thyroid cancer and those who did not after three yearsIn many low-risk cancer cases, omitting radiation from treatment did not have an effect on survival ratesRadiation therapy also increases the risk of solid tumors, including lung, thyroid, bone, pancreatic, stomach, liver and colorectal cancers, which often develop 10 years or more after the treatment; recent research also suggests cancer risks from low-dose radiation exposure may be underestimatedModern medicine’s go-to strategies for cancer treatment are archaic, based on the “cut, poison, burn” model — or surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. The idea of using toxic therapies to destroy tumors should represent a last resort, if used at all, not a first-line treatment.
By their very nature, chemotherapy and radiation have devastating effects on the human body and the healing process, leaving providers to walk a fine line between issuing a dose strong enough to destroy the tumor without killing the patient. Often, basic supportive strategies designed to target cancer’s root causes — and boost the body’s capacity to heal — are ignored in favor of radiation and all of its significant side effects.
“The conventional approach seems to follow the logic ‘destroy to heal,’ and I just don’t know where that really occurs in nature outside conventional cancer treatment. Healing has to be your focus and goal to achieve healing. You have to heal to heal,” Dr. Nathan Goodyear explained in our 2022 interview.1
Under the cut, poison, burn model, cancer remains a top killer worldwide. By 2040, it’s expected that 29.5 million new cancer cases will occur each year, along with 16.4 million cancer-related deaths.2 The tide may be slowly turning, however, with some in the field suggesting radiation treatment for cancer may be fading out.3
Radiation for Cancer — A Focus on Omission or De-EscalationSpeaking with STAT, Corey Speers, vice chair of radiation oncology at the University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Case Western Reserve University, stated that radiation may be on the way out in many cases of cancer treatment:4
“We are in an era of radiation omission or de-escalation. Radiation is perhaps one of the most precise and most effective cancer therapies we have, so it will always play an important role in cancer management, but there are situations now on an individual patient basis where radiation may not be needed.”
The fact is, using radiation to kill cancer cells without causing extreme side effects in the patient is not an exact science. “The balance has always been the question — is reducing the intensity of treatment going to impact the long-term effectiveness? People didn’t know what to do starting off, so they decided to treat people until they had to stop — until they couldn’t take it anymore,” Abram Recht, a radiation oncologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, told STAT.5
Now, however, researchers are realizing that in some cases, radiation may be causing more harm than good — and leaving it out of treatment entirely may not change the outcome.
“There’s also been this long history of trying to reduce the morbidity of radiation in different ways, and the big thing that people think about is the best way to reduce morbidity is to not give it at all,” Recht said.6 For example, in certain low-risk cases involving lymphoma,7 thyroid cancer8 and others, omitting radiation from treatment did not have an effect on survival rates.9
If You Don’t Need It, ‘You Shouldn’t Receive It’Radiation is often offered as a failsafe to patients after surgery, to catch any cancer cells that may be left behind. But only recently have scientists begun to show that outcomes are often the same whether a patient receives radiation or not. This seems to be the case for low-risk cases of thyroid cancer.
After surgery, “It’s almost a given that once patients have their thyroid taken out, they get radioactive iodine,” David Cooper, an endocrinologist at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, told STAT. “Recently, people have been wondering whether it really does what it’s supposed to, whether its potential harms are worth the potential benefits.”10
The radioactive iodine is taken in by thyroid cells and thyroid cancer cells alike, resulting in cell death. But a 2022 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found no difference in outcomes among those who received the radioactive iodine and those who did not after three years. In other words, receiving radiation therapy is useless in these cases:11
[…]
In 2012, scientist and oncologist Dr. Sophie Leboulleux and colleagues conducted a study that found a much smaller dose of radiation than was the norm at that time could manage low-risk thyroid cancer, noting, “The administration of the smallest possible amount of radioiodine would improve care.”12
This led the team to conduct the 2022 New England Journal of Medicine Study. Leboulleux told STAT, “For low-risk [thyroid cancer] we felt there might not be any need for it. So we decided to do another study to see if radioiodine therapy was even useful.” Indeed, it turned out it was not. “Radiation is just one more worry for a patient. Once you know that you don’t need it, I don’t think you should receive it,” she said.13
Radiation Treatment Can Cause CancerRadiation treatment should be avoided as much as possible, since it’s toxic by nature. The side effects vary depending on the area of the body being treated. Along with fatigue, which is a near universal side effect of radiation therapy, you may experience any of the following:14
Hair lossMemory problemsNausea and vomitingSkin changesHeadachesBlurry visionSwelling and tendernessThroat problems, including trouble swallowingCoughShortness of breathMouth problemsTaste changesLess active thyroid glandDiarrheaSexual problemsFertility problemsUrinary and bladder problemsThere’s also a risk that radiation therapy will lead to the development of a second cancer. Radiation exposure is a risk factor for most types of leukemia, along with myelodysplastic syndrome, a type of bone marrow cancer that may turn into leukemia.
Radiation therapy also increases the risk of solid tumors, including lung, thyroid, bone, pancreatic, stomach, liver and colorectal cancers, which often develop 10 years or more after the treatment. In one study of 52,613 patients who received radiation therapy, an increased risk of second cancer was found even after 40 years compared to the general population.15
“Radiotherapy has been considered as a double-edged sword as it has a well-established role in the management of solid cancers but unfortunately it is likely to induce cancers years after the treatment,” researchers explained in Radiation Oncology Journal.16 Chemotherapy is also linked with the development of second cancers.17
Susan Wadia-Ells, Ph.D., was inspired to write “Busting Breast Cancer: Five Simple Steps to Keep Breast Cancer Out of Your Body” after losing several friends to recurrent metastatic breast cancer, meaning cancer that was “successfully treated” at an early stage, only to later return as a terminal stage or metastatic disease.18
If you are going to submit your body to radiation, it’s best to protect your body with molecular hydrogen, probably two tablets twice a day for three days before and after the treatment. It would also be helpful to make sure you are taking 50 mg of niacinamide three times a day and methylene blue 50 mg once a day for a few days before and after the treatment.
Even Low-Dose Radiation Exposure Increases Cancer DeathsEfforts to eliminate radiation therapy altogether may be necessary to protect cancer patients from subsequent cancers. A study that investigated workers in the nuclear industry in France, the U.K. and the U.S., who are exposed to low doses of ionizing radiation over longer periods of time, found an increased risk of cancer mortality.19
A linear increase in the relative rate of cancer was found with increasing radiation exposure, and risk of solid cancers increased by 52% for every unit of radiation each worker absorbed.20 The cancer risks from low-dose radiation exposure may, in fact, be underestimated.
[…]
Dr. Nasha Winters is a naturopathic physician who specializes in supporting patients with cancer. She also trains clinicians and consults with those treating cancer patients. Winter is the coauthor of “Mistletoe and the Emerging Future of Integrative Oncology,” and is herself a cancer survivor, so this topic is close to her heart.
Mistletoe Can Be Used as an Adjunct for All CancersAccording to Winters, mistletoe is likely to be useful as an adjunct therapy for all cancers, and she, along with several other doctors, has been training physicians on how to use mistletoe for several years now.
[…]
Mistletoe Modulates Immune FunctionYour immune system and metabolic function are both integral parts of addressing cancer, and mistletoe works on both. It’s important to recognize, however, that it’s not a magic bullet. If you’re eating a standard American diet and are metabolically dysfunctional, mistletoe is not going to be as effective as for someone who is also eating a healthy whole food diet and supporting their health in other ways.
That said, mistletoe is an immunomodulator. Immune therapies are all the rage right now, with a majority of research dollars being funneled into them. Yet the effectiveness rate for these therapies is less than 20%. In other words, they’re hardly a cure.
[…]
Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/09/19/radiation-treatment.aspx
UK Pilot Explains Chemtrails
Rhoda Wilson
The Expose
“Chemtrails are nothing new. We’re just starting to notice them, that’s the shock for us,” a commercial airline pilot said during a recent interview.
“They’ve been doing it for years. It was pioneered in the [United] States. It’s something the Rockefellers were involved with in sponsoring. A lot of it is being done out of the back of military aircraft, particularly military transport aircraft.”
The airline pilot said the above during an interview with Drake Michigan host Ant Critchley. To protect the pilot’s anonymity, for purposes of the interview he was given the name Mark.
Mark has been a pilot for 34 years and in that time has flown more than 26 different aircraft types. His experience ranges from flight testing to flying specialist cargo, and he has also flown aircraft for the military as well as commercial airlines.
[…]
Drake Michigan: Don’t Look Up! – Airline Pilot Exposes Truth about Chemtrails, 16 August 2023 (110 mins)In the video above, Mark explained that many years ago, he had a first officer that spoke to him about chemtrails. At the time Mark completely dismissed it saying it was “utter nonsense, they would never do that.” And he never gave it another thought until about three years ago.
About three years ago, he was meeting friends at a café out in the country when he saw a line in the sky running north-south, which he estimated was 10 miles long, with 13 shorter two or three-mile-long lines traversing it. “The curious thing is that they stayed there for 40 minutes,” Mark said.
He contacted a colleague at the local airport who had an Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast (“ADS-B”). ADS-B is a surveillance or tracking software that relies on aircraft or airport vehicles broadcasting their identity, position and other information derived from an onboard system.
Mark asked his colleague if there was an aeroplane over the airport flying at around 12,000-13,000 feet “doing squiggly lines.” Mark’s colleague answered ”No, but there is one at 10 [thousand feet.]” Mark then recalled the conversation with the first officer years before and realised that the lines he had seen were chemtrails.
What Are Contrails?There’s a difference between a contrail, condensation trail, and a chemtrail, chemical trail. To understand the difference, we need to understand how contrails are formed, Mark said.
“As we go higher, about every thousand feet the temperature drops about 2 degrees Celsius. And it goes down to about minus 63 degrees Celsius, sometimes 65. Those temperatures are found at around about 37,000/38,000 feet. Contrails can only physically start [forming] at 28,000 feet, which is around about minus 40 degrees Celsius. A contrail is water vapour. In fact, it’s trillions and trillions of ice crystals,” Mark explained.
[…]
On the other hand, chemtrails are applied anywhere between 10,000 and 12,000 feet.
Why Are Aeroplanes Not Showing on Flight Radars?All aircraft have transponders. “You cannot get airborne without one, it’s the law,” Mark said. Transponder signals are picked up by air traffic flight radars so that any particular aircraft can be positively identified. Before an aeroplane takes off, the pilot is assigned a four-digit code. When the air traffic controller sees the code on his radar, he knows what aeroplane it is, whom the plane is registered to, the flight plan and also other information such as a reading of the captain’s altimeter.
“But what is perplexing people is that when they switch on their Flightradar24 or their ASD-B app on their phone or smart device, they can’t see these aeroplanes [that are chemtrailing] … that’s because there’s been a software fix [to the transponder] so that whenever there’s a bank of these transponder codes and they’re assigned, we cannot see them,” Mark explained. “That’s why we are having trouble physically tracing these aeroplanes.”
The CAA Knows What They’re DoingOn the day he saw the long north-south trail crossed by 13 others, Mark was able to obtain a registration for the aircraft from his colleague at the local airport. Using the registration, Mark’s research led to the British company 2Excel Aviation Broadsword.
2Excel was started by two former Royal Air Force pilots and its CEO is Andy Offer. Offer previously had a business partner who has “ducked out,” Mark said. Adding that the former business partner has since had his reputation completely destroyed with fallacious claims.
2Excel has two Boeing 727s brought over from the United States. “They were already cargo aeroplanes so they lend themselves nicely to conversion,” Mark said. “These aeroplanes have seven lateral tanks across the aircraft from front to back … and there is a fixed boom at the back of the aircraft which goes underneath [ ] two [of the] engines,” Mark said.
According to 2Excel’s website, the company responds to oil spills, by spraying detergents on oil. But Mark couldn’t understand why the company needed two aeroplanes for oil spills. “How many oil spills have we had around the UK in the past 20 years? Why do they need two?” Mark thought to himself. It’s expensive to maintain and fly these planes but there was supposedly no income. “So, that got me immediately suspicious,” he said.
2Excel has two air operator’s certificates (“AOCs”) granted by the civil aviation authority (“CAA”). One is to fly low level over the sea, as it would be expected to enable them to spray detergents over oil spills. But the other is to fly over forested areas. But they weren’t flying over forested areas, 2Excel was flying over London, Birmingham, Glasgow or Manchester. “So, that is in gross violation [of its AOC],” Mark said.
People have complained to the CAA that 2Excel is violating its AOCs but the response has been the usual “conspiracy theory” accusations.
[…]
Mark then explained in more detail about the process at the CAA to obtain various licences and the CAA inspections that 2Excel would have to pass to be able to operate. For the sake of brevity, we have not described these processes here.
[…]
There is another company called RVL Aviation based at East Midlands Airport. It is a Danish-registered company that has twin-engine light aircraft. The company does surveillance, coastguard work, monitoring and air sampling. “These [aircraft] are not doing the spraying but these are the ones that you can occasionally see on flight radar that are doing these either race track patterns – all these patterns where they go up and down, up and down, up and down and they eventually cover a large area. What they’re looking at, what they’re surveying, I have no idea,” Mark said. Their activity has been on the increase, particularly in the last 18 months.
RVL is a smaller operation than 2 Excel. RVL bought at least two Boeing 737s from cargo operator Western Atlantic. These 737s are part of a group of aeroplanes that are painted all white and so are referred to as “whitetails” and have been spotted spraying chemtrails over Cornwall. RVL’s aircraft operate out of Newquay, Southampton, Stansted, Teesside, Prestwick and Liverpool airports.
There are other companies – such as Delta Airlines registered in Atlanta, Georgia – but 2Excel and RVL are doing most of the chemtrailing in UK’s skies.
The Pilots Know What They’re Doing[…]
The crew have to be licensed by the CAA to fly that particular aircraft. Virtually all of these pilots are ex-RAF, Mark said. “This is key because the RAF guys are used to doing, shall we say, clandestine operations – unusual operations … and they also, crucially, signed the Official Secrets Act which means they don’t talk … Interestingly enough, almost exclusively, the engineers that maintain [2Excel’s] two 727s are also ex-RAF.”
[…]
In the United States, people have managed to obtain samples of chemtrails and used a mass spectrometer to determine the contents. “If you look at the contents of the chemtrails … the three main ingredients tend to be barium, strontium and aluminium oxide – all of which are carcinogenic. And the aluminium causes autism and Alzheimer’s,” Mark said.
[…]
Via https://expose-news.com/2023/08/20/uk-governments-nefarious-chemtrail-programme-exposed/
September 18, 2023
Bill Gates Pumps Millions Into Legalizing Pedophilia: ‘Kids Are Sexual Beings’
The Blogging Hounds
Globalist billionaire Bill Gates has been exposed pumping tens of millions of dollars into the campaign to remove the age of consent around the world, arguing that children are “sexual beings”, and essentially making young children fair game at the hands of pedophiles.
Bill Gates comes from a long line of eugenicists and his father Bill Gates Sr. served on the board of Planned Parenthood. Now Bill Gates has been exposed funding the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), a group that is also campaigning for kids to be sexualized from an early age.
The IPPF was originally created by Planned Parenthood’s original founder, Margaret Sanger, a eugenicist and proponent of depopulation, in the 1950s.
This group has been operating in the shadows for years, influencing governments and educational institutions, and it’s time to bring their activities into the light.
Before we begin, make sure to subscribe to the channel and join the People’s Voice Locals Community to support the channel and gain access to uncensored and exclusive content.
So what is it exactly about removing the age of consent around the world and decriminalizing sex with children that Bill Gates, Jeffrey Epstein’s old friend, finds so appealing?
Gates has pumped $80 million into the IPPF in recent years as they continue the push to convince the world that children are “sexual beings” and it’s unfair to deny them their right to experience sex.
Bear in mind, the only lesson Gates said he could draw from the notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s demise is that “we have to be more careful.”
Watch:
Does Gates have our children’s best interests at heart? It’s highly doubtful considering he can’t stop smirking whenever he talks about children dying.
In 2017, Gates’ IPPF released a toolkit which provided a revealing insight into their depraved agenda and demonstrated exactly how they are attempting to teach sex education to children around the world.
The shocking toolkit was first flagged by Nicole Solas of the Independent Women’s Forum.
Planned Parenthood has a toolkit for schools to teach kids ages 10 and under that prostitution is normal interpersonal relationship.
That’s Comprehensive Sex Education.
See toolkit: https://t.co/7vQB4VMLNS pic.twitter.com/QY58M6rxsU— Nicole Solas Domestic Terrorist! (@Nicoletta0602) April 16, 2023
According to the IPPF, children under 10 must be taught that they were “born sexual” and they should know that sex comes in many forms, including prostitution.
“Sexual activity may be part of different types of relationships, including dating, marriage, or commercial sex work, among others.”
The toolkit said that children under 10 should also be told: “As you grow up, you might start to be interested in people with diverse gender identities.”
“[S]ex positivity acknowledges that human beings, including adolescents and young people, are autonomous sexual beings,” the NGO adds.
But it gets even worse. According to Bill Gates’ IPPF, educators must have an “Understanding of young people as sexual beings” because “[A]ll people are sexual beings with sexual rights, regardless of their age.”
As a consequence of this twisted logic, the IPPF is arguing that we must remove the age of consent, as a matter of urgency, around the world.
Young children must have “the right to say yes or no to sex; the right to express sexuality, including the right to seek pleasure; the right to enjoy bodily autonomy…”
And Bill Gates can’t stop quietly donating huge sums to this organization that is obsessed with the sexuality of children.
Should we be surprised? Or is Gates hiding in plain site? After all, this is the man whose wife divorced him because he refused to end his friendship with the most notorious pedophile of our era.
Bill Gates’ support for IPPF wouldn’t be such a problem if the organization didn’t wield significant influence on global sex education, comprising 120 independent organizations in over 146 countries.
The globalist elite have been working behind the scenes for decades to construct the reality we are living in right now and Bill Gates is not the only member of the elite working to remove the age of consent around the world and decriminalize sex with children.
The World Economic Forum in Davos has made it a central tenet of their evil agenda and they are using their leverage with corrupt and infiltrated governments to create a world that is not safe for our children.
[…]
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
