Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 545
July 1, 2022
“One Of The Worst Downturns In Recent History”: Zuck Warns Facebook Employees To Brace For Layoffs
Zero Hedge
One month ago we showed that while the BLS still revels in its seasonally-adjusted statistical nonsense to divine the monthly level of payrolls, the real world is seeing a wave of mass layoff the likes of which have not been seen since the covid crash
Fast forward to today when it appears that we are about to hit the motherlode of mass layoffs, after none other than Zuck sounded the alarm. According to Reuters, Facebook-owner Meta Platforms (which will likely be undoing its name change just as bitcoin bottoms) has cut plans to hire engineers by at least 30% this year, CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees on Thursday, as he warned them to brace for a deep economic downturn.
“If I had to bet, I’d say that this might be one of the worst downturns that we’ve seen in recent history,” Zuckerberg told workers in a weekly employee Q&A session, audio of which was heard by Reuters.
And while Zuck emphasized the lack of hiring – noting that it has reduced its target for hiring engineers in 2022 to around 6,000-7,000, down from an initial plan to hire about 10,000 new engineers, which comes amid a hiring paused announced month – he confirmed that layoffs are also coming saying the company was “turning up the heat” on performance management to weed out staffers unable to meet more aggressive goals.
“Realistically, there are probably a bunch of people at the company who shouldn’t be here,” Zuckerberg said, adding that “part of my hope by raising expectations and having more aggressive goals, and just kind of turning up the heat a little bit, is that I think some of you might decide that this place isn’t for you, and that self-selection is OK with me.”
Others made the message even more forcefully, with Chief Product Officer Chris Cox saying that the company must “prioritize more ruthlessly” and “operate leaner, meaner, better executing teams.”
“I have to underscore that we are in serious times here and the headwinds are fierce. We need to execute flawlessly in an environment of slower growth, where teams should not expect vast influxes of new engineers and budgets,” Cox wrote.
Most People Consume Plastic on a Daily Basis
Dr Mercola
This article was previously published May 2, 2018, and has been updated with new information.
Discarded plastic — both large and microscopic — circles the globe, choking our oceans and harming wildlife, ultimately finding its way onto your plate and into your body, where it can accumulate over time. A number of studies have now revealed we are both eating and drinking microplastic particles.
For example, one-third of the fish caught in the English Channel contain microbeads, as do 83% of scampi sold in the U.K.1 Except for Himalayan, most sea salt also contains plastic fragments.2
What the consequences might be are still largely unknown, but it’s unlikely to be entirely harmless, considering plastic may not be thoroughly eliminated from your body and cannot degrade inside your system. Many of the chemicals used in the manufacture of plastics are also known to disrupt embryonic development, dysregulate hormones and gene expression, cause organ damage, and have been linked to obesity, heart disease and cancer.
Plastic — A Most Harmful ConvenienceThe world produces about 360 million tons of plastics annually, and up to 12 million tons of it ends up in our oceans each year.3 Polycarbonate, polystyrene and polyethylene terephthalate damage the ocean floor, and plastic that floats, such as low-density polyethylene, high-density polyethylene, polypropylene and foamed plastics accumulate into massive floating islands of trash, known as “garbage patches.”4
Microfibers5 from clothing pose a serious threat to marine life and migrate into fields and onto our plates. These plastic fibers are released most readily during washing, to the tune of 1 million tons a year, and the irregular shape of these plastic particles renders them more difficult for marine life to excrete than other microplastics.
Microbeads, the tiny plastic pellets found in body washes, facial scrubs and toothpaste, also wreak havoc, traveling right through wastewater treatment plants, clogging waterways and filling the bellies of sea animals with plastic that acts as a sponge for other toxins.
According to a Cosmetics Europe report,6 an estimated 4,360 tons of microbeads were used in personal care products sold in the European Union in 2012, all of which were flushed down the drain.
One 2015 study7 estimated there may be as much as 236,000 tons of microbeads filling the water columns of our oceans. Whether you look at environmental or biological effects, our careless use of plastics really needs immediate attention and revision. After that study came out, the U.S. Congress enacted the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, banning products with microbeads as of July 1, 2019.8
A report by the U.K. Government Office for Science warns plastic debris littering the world’s oceans — 70% of which does not biodegrade — is likely to triple by 2025 unless radical steps are taken to curb pollution.9 At the rate we’re going, estimates suggest that by 2050, our oceans will contain more plastic than fish by weight.10 Already, in some ocean waters plastic exceeds plankton by a factor of 6-to-1.11
Other research12,13 suggests the Great Pacific Garbage Patch — a 1.6 million square kilometers (nearly 618,000 square miles) area of ocean between Hawaii and California — may actually contain anywhere from four to 16 times more plastic than estimated by earlier studies.
In all, this single garbage patch alone is thought to contain over 78,082 tons (79,000 metric tons) of plastic trash, and possibly as much as 142,198 tons (129,000 metric tons) — about 8% of which is thought to be microplastics.
[…]
Research Suggests You’re Eating Plastic DailyWith this much plastic debris polluting our ecosystem — and our homes — is it any wonder researchers are now finding humans are ingesting plastic particles on a regular basis? By placing Petri dishes with sticky dust traps next to the plates at dinner time, a team of researchers from Heriot-Watt University were able to capture up to 14 pieces of plastic at the end of each meal. The source? Household dust.
According to this study, the average person swallows an estimated 68,415 plastic fibers each year just from the dust landing on their plates during meals. The same team also concluded the average person ingests about 100 plastic particles each year from shell fish — remnants of microplastic water pollution.
Senior author Ted Henry, professor of environmental toxicology at Heriot-Watt University, commented on the findings,15 “These results may be surprising to some people who may expect the plastic fibers in seafood to be higher than those in household dust. We do not know where these fibers come from, but it is likely to be inside the home and the wider environment.”
According to Julian Kirby, lead campaigner against plastics at Friends of the Earth in England, Wales and Northern Ireland:16
Bottled Water Contaminated With Microscopic Plastic“Plastic microfibers found in the dust in our homes and the air we breathe can come from car tires, carpets and soft furnishings, as well as clothes such as fleece jackets. These are regularly shedding tiny bits of plastic into the environment as they are worn away.”
Recent tests have also revealed most bottled water contains microplastic pollution17 — contamination thought to originate from the manufacturing process of the bottles and caps. Researchers at the State University of New York tested 259 bottles of 11 popular bottled water brands — including Aquafina, Nestle Pure Life, Evian, Dasani and San Pellegrino — finding, on average, 325 pieces of microplastic per liter.
[…]
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/06/30/plastic-pollution-in-food.aspx
FDA Panel Advisor Admits Agency “LOST” Clinical Trial Data for Placebo Group Before Approving Experimental Vaccine for Babies and Toddlers
Posted BY: Julian Conradson
NWO Report
Earlier this month the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the mRNA vaccine for emergency use in young children, aged six months to five years old, after its advisory committee voted in favor of the experimental treatment, claiming that it has passed its clinical hurdles and is effective in preventing symptomatic infection without causing worrisome side effects.
However, in addition to ignoring the mountain of evidence showing the vaccines are regularly causing life-threatening injuries – especially in healthy children and young people, the FDA ‘experts’ have routinely skipped crucial steps in the testing process, allowing them to manipulate the data in order to suit their desired outcomes.
This inexcusable act of criminal malpractice was confirmed this month by the team leader of the FDA’s clinical review staff, Rachel Zhang, who explained during an advisory panel zoom call that the agency had lost the results from the placebo group during its clinical trials related to the decision to approve the experimental jab for America’s youngest children.
Without this data from the placebo group, the effectiveness of the vaccine cannot be measured against those who did not receive the treatment. Therefore, the clinical trial is meaningless. But the gaping hole in the results apparently doesn’t matter to the ‘experts’ at the FDA, who went ahead with the EUA approval anyway.
“There is no efficacy data,” Zhang explained. “I guess it will have to come from real-world effectiveness,” she added glibly.
In other words, babies and toddlers are essentially vaccine guinea pigs that will provide the lost data. Remember, Zheng is the team leader of the FDA’s clinical review staff, which oversees the approval of new medical treatments.
From Zheng:
Watch, via The Vigilant Fox:
“…We have lost the placebo groups, so we cannot really say anything about the duration of vaccine efficacy after that.
There’s no more efficacy data, basically, after that time point. So, unfortunately, we are limited to – in this study – would be the results that we have shown you in the slide with the data cut off. The latest one [placebo group data] would be the May 31st one, and that still is, unfortunately, very few cases…
…I guess it will have to come from real-world effectiveness.”
Considering the horrible results of the vaccine across the board when it comes to the basic job of preventing the spread of the virus, it is awfully convenient that the data which would confirm natural immunity in healthy young children is better than the failed experimental jab just happens to disappear.
Nevertheless, despite the myriad of issues, the FDA dutifully approved the vaccine for babies and toddlers just days after Zheng admitted the agency had “no efficacy data.” Because sCiEnCe!
Keep in mind that children have an astonishing 99.995% recovery rate from the virus. The vaccine itself is more than likely worse than the virus itself, as some estimates have pegged the number of children who have died from Covid, as opposed to with it, at zero.
Not only are children effectively in zero danger from this virus, but recent data has shown that they are actually more susceptible to long-term vaccine injury after taking the experimental mRNA jab, especially among young boys. Cases of myocarditis have exploded among young Americans, hitting unprecedented levels ever since the vaccine was made available to those aged 12-17.
They’re coming for your backyard chickens…
This chicken is a threat to the system
Kit Knightly
Offguardian
Since the “bird flu outbreak” first hit the headlines OffG has been predicting how the inevitable agenda would unfold.
The first impact was as obvious as it was predictable – the price of chicken and eggs went up, this was just another front in the war on food.
The second planned impact was less immediate, but just as predictable if you know how to read the media, and potentially far more harmful in the longterm – clamping down on alternative chicken farming. This includes both organic farms and individuals keeping their own chickens in their garden.
It didn’t take long for the media to prove us right. In fact the Guardian has done it twice in the last ten days.
Firstly, last Thursday, the Guardian ran this article: “Spread of ‘free-range’ farming may raise risk of animal-borne pandemics – study”
Sponsored by the NGO Open Philanthropy, this piece reports that organic and free-range farming could increase the risk of a zoonotic disease outbreak, and quotes the authors of this new study:
If we can’t dramatically cut meat consumption then intensive ‘factory farming’ may be comparatively less risky
…yes. they’re actually arguing that the corporate mega-farms are better at preventing pandemics than free-range or organic farms because they have “tighter biosecurity controls” (meaning their animals never go outside or interact with nature in anyway whatsoever).
Then, in this piece from June 19th, The Guardian asked…
Bird flu is on the rise in the UK. Are chickens in the back garden to blame?
Which quotes the head of virology at the government’s Animal and Plant Health Agency (Apha):
The more humans are in contact with birds in an uncontrolled way, the greater is the theoretical risk that people can get infected,”
“Uncontrolled” is very much the key word there.
This scare campaign is not new. Three weeks ago an outbreak of salmonella in the US was blamed on people keeping their own chickens.
Back in January, when there were barely any bird flu cases to report, The Conversation was already hosting articles claiming…
Bird flu: domestic chicken keepers could be putting themselves – and others – at risk
And calling for a new policy on backyard chickens:
This is why it will be important in the future for Defra and APHA to provide specific policy for backyard chicken keeping.
It’s pretty easy to see where this is going, isn’t it?
But why take aim at ordinary people keeping a handful of chickens in their back garden?
Well, partly because they simply want to cut the amount of natural food people eat – most especially meat, but also eggs and other dairy produce. They want people entirely reliant on mega-corporations for their processed cubes of “food”.
But they also want people entirely reliant on the state for permission to do…almost everything. And in, some ways, the Covid pandemic narrative was counterproductive in that cause.
One of the unintentional effects of Covid in general and lockdown specifically was re-awakening in people an urge to go their own way. The powers-that-be are keen to reverse that trend.
As the above Guardian article points out [emphasis added]:
This may be due to the growing number of people keeping chickens or ducks, Brown said. Many of these keepers do not have to register with any authority because of the small numbers of birds involved.
During lockdown there was a spike in people keeping their own chickens.
Under UK law, it is illegal to keep a flock of fifty or more chickens without obtaining a license from the Poultry Register (yes, that’s a real thing) – but the vast majority of private flocks are much less than fifty birds, and therefore totally unregistered.
This scare-mongering on “spreading disease” is preparing the ground for “regulation” of these small private flocks.
Will that mean an outright ban? Maybe. But at the very least, I would expect the minimum number requiring a license to begin dropping from 50, and the cost of obtaining a license to rise.
We have already seen an example of this process with homeschooling.
Nations all over the world saw huge spikes in homeschooling through 2020-2021, this surge continued even after schools re-opened.
Tens of thousands more people are homeschooling in the UK than were before the lockdown started. The government response has been to re-open their years-old war on homeschooling by creating a national register of homeschooled children, and threatening parents with fines or unspecified “sanctions” for refusing to sign-up for it.
The same exact process will likely be seen with backyard poultry.
That’s the specific and practical part of it.
More poetically put, the state resents them because they are free.
Keeping a few chickens in your garden may be a small, fragile, kind of freedom…but its freedom nonetheless, and power structures are easily petty enough to destroy even that modicum of independence.
At its heart, self-reliance of any kind is the antithesis of everything driving us toward the “new normal”.
No freedom. No independence. No living outside the carefully controlled machinery of the state. That’s their aim.
As we phase out of “Covid time” and career towards “world war 3 times” or “climate change times” or whatever the next stage of the grand narrative is, the gears of the state are intent on grinding up those pockets of resistance their relentless overreach has accidentally cultivated.
The good news here is that their ever-more tyrannical efforts to control people will only end up driving more and more people away.
Via https://off-guardian.org/2022/06/29/theyre-coming-for-your-backyard-chickens/
June 30, 2022
More Than 500 Flights Across the U.S. Are Canceled Today as Pilots Blame ‘Staff Shortage’ on COVID Vaccine Mandate
As Americans prepare for a patriotic Fourth of July weekend, they can expect airline delays and cancelations; critics blame the pilot shortage on vaccine mandates as travel chaos continues for the second week in a row. More than 500 flights have already been canceled and more than 2,000 delayed in the U.S. on Wednesday, with New Jersey‘s Newark Liberty topping the American list with 45 flights canceled.
A total of 1,800 flights have been canceled so far this week in the U.S., according to The Hill, and between June 16 and 20, there were more than 5,300 flights canceled, according to CBS News.
Pilots have also slammed airlines for creating a chaotic travel season due to COVID vaccine mandates. One Southwest pilot said during a protest — which saw 1,300 Southwest employees picketing outside of Dallas Love Field Airport earlier this month — that he thought the mandate was the main cause.
“I believe it’s because of the COVID vaccines — they’re still requiring the vaccination for all new applicants and if the new applicants say they’re not going to get vaccinated, their application is passed over,” Pilot Tom Bogart told News Nation.
[…]
Paradoxically, the Soviet Union, the ultimate symbol of communism, was created by international bankers
By Guilherme Wilbert for the Saker Blog
One of the great post-World War II myths, which is repeated like a mantra by starched college students with a syndrome of embracing all the causes of the world, is that the Soviet Union was built on the strength of the people and remained so during the years when it was a de facto country, but this could not be further from reality. Nothing could be further from the truth than that. What happens is that the Soviet Union was a great political-economic power project of a small international clan that had a certain fondness for the idea of dominating a country, especially one that was in tatters like Tsarist Russia.
It all begins, really, with Jacob Schiff, an international banker born in Frankfurt, Germany, in 1847 and who migrated to the United States when the American Civil War ended. There he joined the Kuhn & Loeb Co. and gradually worked his way into what would be known as the “Schiff Era. He became a director of the City Bank of New York, Wells Fargo and more. He was an ace with business.
In 1904 in New York when Jacob Schiff’s firm Kuhn & Loeb Company raises funds to make a loan to Japan, which would be used in the Russo-Japanese War against Tsarist Russia. Jacob did not support Tsarist Russia, in fact, all the people I will mention here did not even support the idea of Russia continuing along the lines of the Romanov Family.
So Schiff met with Takahashi Korekiyo, who was the Finance Minister of Japan during the Russo-Japanese War, and this was the bridge for his $200 million (equivalent to billions in 2016!) loan. He really spared no effort to finance the war that would be the beginning of the Russian downfall. It was simply half of what Japan had to use for the war. I mean, Japan was not doing well at that time either. But what could have been the reason for such generosity from Schiff? Well, not much is understood to this day, but some historians believe that because he dealt a lot with anti-Semitism at the time, he saw this loan as a kind of response to what Russia had been doing to the Jews in the Kishinev Pogrom, which today is Chișinău, Moldova. As well as thinking that gold at that time wasn’t worth much compared to the Japanese national effort to win a war.
Well, Japan won the war, the Treaty of Portsmouth is signed, and it is believed that it all happened thanks to the generous loan, since it was made possible for the country to buy more weapons with the borrowed money, and Schiff made his name. His and the Jewish people’s.
This loan had serious international consequences, since it became evident at that time how powerful the Jewish people (at least the bankers) were, and then, the 1903 writing, called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, came to light, showing that there was not only nonsense written in this book, but much that really happened and was witnessed at that time.
Jacob Schiff received from Japan the Order of the Sacred Treasure; and in 1907, the Order of the Rising Sun, the Gold and Silver Star, the second highest of the eight classes of that Order. Schiff was the first foreigner to receive the Order personally from Emperor Meiji at the Imperial Palace. Finally, the Japanese knew how to thank the German who helped them at that moment.
At this moment we are witnessing the Japanese victory in the Russo-Japanese War through a loan making it possible to buy more weapons to fight the Russians, here, it is 1905.
September 5, 1905 to be exact.
And then the First World War breaks out, on July 28, 1914. Gavrillo Princip had killed the Archduke of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Francis Ferdinand. The Austro-Hungarian Empire declares war against Serbia, Princip’s home country, and then, everything really begins. Remember: where there is war, there is money, and if there is money, there are bankers.
Jacob Schiff, knowing that the First World War had started, asked the President of the United States at the time, Woodrow Wilson, to try to stop the war as soon as possible, since his family was still in Germany, and would actively participate in the First World War. And so, another loan.
Schiff ended up lending money to France for “humanitarian causes”.
The banker made sure that none of his money went to Imperial Russia, the country did not even receive any help from the international banker during the Tsarist era. And it is obvious that the country was already in a bad way, in fact, the Russian people’s feeling towards the Tsar was not the best, but nobody had even considered assassinating what would be the last Emperor of Russia, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Finland, Nicholas II.
During the Romanov Empire in Russia, most of the Bolsheviks (who would be known as such years after the Tsarist regime fell) were exiled from Russia for criminal-political reasons and ended up going to countries satellite to Russia. Names like Kaganovich, Yagoda, Beria, Kamenev, Stalin, Yezhov, Lenin, Trotsky, Bukharin, Sverdlov, Rykov, Zinoviev, Molotov, Emakov, and more, who would come to help consolidate what would be known as the Soviet Union were in exile for crimes they committed in Nicholas II’s Russia.
It was 1918, the First War was over, and along with it came the year of the assassination of the Romanov Family, a dark year for Russia, which would lose its last emperor to the Bolshevik faction that would take power a few years later.
Well, it was not only Jacob Schiff who sympathized with the idea of ending Czarist Russia, Swedish air began to blow inside New York and Olof Aschberg, who had allegedly made a loan to Germany during World War I, which was bad for his image and forced him to change the name of his bank, which would be known as Svensk Ekonomiebolaget, also showed interest in overthrowing the Czar and setting up a new Russia, along Communist lines.
Olof was already a member of the Communist Party of Sweden and met, during a meeting at the Young Socialist Congress of Sweden in 1917, Willi Münzenberg, who was part of the Communist Party of Germany and advocated a reconstruction of Russia after the fall of the Tsar.
So there you have a sneaky history of the biggest and first communist empire after the fall of Romanov dynasty. Many are the sources.
Canada Day 2022: America’s Insidious Plan to Invade Canada and Bomb Montreal, Vancouver, Halifax and Quebec City (1930-39)
Global Research
“In 1934, War Plan Red was amended to authorize the immediate first use of poison gas against Canadians and to use strategic bombing to destroy Halifax if it could not be captured.”
[…]
First approved in 1930, Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan – Red was drawn up to defend the United States in the event of war with Britain.
It was one of a series of such contingency plans produced in the late 1920s. Canada, identified as Crimson, would be invaded to prevent the Britons from using it as a staging ground to attack the United States. (Globe and Mail, December 31, 2005, emphasis added)
The war plan directed against Canada initially formulated in 1924 was entitled “Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan — Red”. It was approved by the US War Department under the presidency of Herbert Hoover in 1930. It was updated in 1934 and 1935 during the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It was withdrawn in 1939 (but not abolished) following the outbreak of the Second World War.
“Though ostensibly for war against Britain Plan RED is almost devoid of plans to fight the British. The Plan is focused on the conquest of Canada, which was color- coded CRIMSON. The U.S. Army’s mission, written in capital letters, was “ULTIMATELY, TO GAIN COMPLETE CONTROL OF CRIMSON.” The 1924 draft declared that U.S. “intentions are to hold in perpetuity all CRIMSON and RED territory gained… The Dominion government [of Canada] will be abolished.”
The strategic bombing of Halifax, Montreal and Quebec City were envisaged under Plan RED. Moreover, the US Army had been instructed (in capital letters),
“TO MAKE ALL NECESSARY PREPARATIONS FOR THE USE OF CHEMICAL WARFARE FROM THE OUTBREAK OF WAR. THE USE OF CHEMICAL WARFARE, INCLUDING THE USE OF TOXIC AGENTS, FROM THE INCEPTION OF HOSTILITIES, IS AUTHORIZED…” (quoted by Floyd Rudmin, op cit).
In a bitter irony, General Douglas MacArthur who led US forces in The Pacific during World War II, not to mention the conduct of the carpet bombing raids against North Korea (1950-1953) was actively involved in the planning of war directed against Canada.
“In March 1935, General Douglas MacArthur proposed an amendment making Vancouver a priority [bombing] target comparable to Halifax and Montreal” (Ibid). See Screen Shot, Daily Mail
Today, Canada’s sovereignty as a Nation State is threatened by the Justin Trudeau government which is firmly aligned with Joe Biden’s military agenda, acting as a de facto US proxy.The article below (first published in June 2013) reviews in detail, the US plans to annex and wage war on Canada.The historical documents of Annexation (1866), Invasion of Canada “War Plan Red” (1930) and “War Plan Red” (1935) (95 pages) are contained in Annex.
These documents are part of our history. It is important that “War Plan Red” (1930 and 1935) be firmly acknowledged and debated in schools, colleges and universities across the land.
[…]
US War Department Plan to Invade Canada (1930)While the 1866 Annexation project was stalled upon the adoption of the British North American Act in 1867, US plans to annex and/or invade Canada militarily were contemplated in the 1930s.
In the late 1920s, Washington formulated a detailed plan to invade Canada, entitled “Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan — Red”. The plan was approved by the US War Department under the presidency of Herbert Hoover in 1930. It was updated in 1934 and 1935 during the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It was withdrawn in 1939 following the outbreak of the Second World War.
Secretary of War Patrick J. Hurley was largely instrumental in the formulation and approval of Plan Red by the US administration.
The plan to invade Canada consisted of a 94-page document “with the word SECRET stamped on the cover. It had been formulated over a period of more than five years (See full text in Annex).
In February 1935, the [US] War Department arranged a Congressional appropriation of $57 million dollars to build three border air bases for the purposes of pre-emptive surprise attacks on Canadian air fields. The base in the Great Lakes region was to be camouflaged as a civilian airport and was to “be capable of dominating the industrial heart of Canada, the Ontario Peninsula” (from p. 61 of the February 11-13, 1935, hearings of the Committee on Military Affairs, House of Representatives, on Air Defense Bases (H.R. 6621 and H.R. 4130). This testimony was to have been secret but was published by mistake. See the New York Times, May 1, 1935, p. 1.
In August 1935, the US held its largest peacetime military manoeuvres in history, with 36,000 troops converging at the Canadian border south of Ottawa, and another 15,000 held in reserve in Pennsylvania. The war game scenario was a US motorized invasion of Canada, with the defending forces initially repulsing the invading Blue forces, but eventually to lose “outnumbered and outgunned” when Blue reinforcements arrive. This according to the Army’s pamphlet “Souvenir of of the First Army Maneuvers: The Greatest Peace Time Event in US History” (p.2). ( Professor F.W. Rudmin, Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Comments on “War Plan Red”, see complete text in Annex III)
One of the updates to the 1930 invasion plan was the use of chemical weapons against Canadian civilians:
“In 1934, War Plan Red was amended to authorize the immediate first use of poison gas against Canadians and to use strategic bombing to destroy Halifax if it could not be captured.” (Ibid)
It is worth noting that in the course of World War II, a decision was taken by the War Department to retain the invasion plan on the books. War Plan Red was declassified in 1974.
[…]
9th Century AD: Mass Migration of Uighur Turks to China Leads to Rise of Seljuk Turks on the Steppes
Episode 21: The Rise of the Seljuk Turks
Barbarian Empires of the Steppes (2014)
Dr Kenneth Harl
Film Review
Harl asserts the real beneficiaries of the Battle of Talas (see How the 751 Muslim War with China Left Steppes Under Turkish Control) were the Turks. In 840 AD, a civil uprising in the Uighur Khanate led Uighurs to migrate en masse to China and the caravan cities of the Tarim Basin. The Abbassid Caliphate welcomed the emergence of new Turkish tribes on the steppes and the greater availability of Turkish slaves.
For two centuries prior to their conversion to Islam, Turks entered the Islamic world as imperial bodyguards, as well as slave and mercenary soldiers.
The first mass conversion of Turks (entire tribes) occurred in the 10th century. Kashgar would be the first caravan city to adopt Islamic culture, using a Persian version of Arabic script in the first Turkish literature.
After a long period of inter-tribal warfare, the Seljuk Turks became the predominant tribe on the steppes. In 1071 AD, (as agents of the Abassid Caliphate), they invaded and captured both Persia and Baghdad. From then on, the Abassid Caliphate would be ruled by Seljuk sultans.*
*Sultan is defined as a king or sovereign of a Muslim state
Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.
June 29, 2022
Father’s 20-Year Battle on Behalf of Vaccine-Injured Son Exposes Travesty of Liability-Free Vaccines
Yates Hazlehurst, who developed autism after receiving his childhood vaccines, was the first and only vaccine-injured plaintiff to make it to a jury. The 20-year process revealed major flaws in a system that is supposed to compensate children for vaccine injuries.
In a riveting legal battle spanning two decades, William Yates Hazlehurst (“Yates”) on Feb. 2, 2022, became the first vaccine-injured person with a diagnosis of autism to reach a jury since the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act of 1986 (the Vaccine Act) became law.In a medical malpractice case filed in the Madison County Circuit Court in Tennessee, attorneys for Yates argued the clinic and physician who administered Yates’ vaccines, including the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine on Feb. 8, 2001, should be held liable for medical malpractice and the neurological injuries Yates developed after being vaccinated.
Although the jury decided in favor of the physician — who Yates’ father said failed to adequately inform the parents of the risks of vaccinating Yates while he had an active ear infection — the case exposed major flaws in a system designed to protect children and shield pharmaceutical companies and physicians from liability for vaccine injuries.
“In the fight to end the autism epidemic, we were all hoping for the one knockout punch that would bring the truth to light and help end the autism epidemic,” Yates’ father, Rolf Hazlehurst, said.
“This medical malpractice trial was the only opportunity in the last 35 years for a jury to hear evidence in a court of law regarding whether a vaccine injury can cause neurological injury, including autism.”
Hazlehurst, who is a senior staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), said “unless the Vaccine Act is repealed, my son is probably the only vaccine-injured child with a diagnosis of autism who will ever reach a jury.”
The Hazlehurst case was a medical malpractice case against the doctor who administered the pediatric vaccines that, in the opinion of the world’s top experts, sent Yates, now 22, spiraling into the depths of severe, non-verbal autism.
Although the case was originally filed in 2003, it didn’t receive its day in court for 19 years because a separate case involving Yates’ injury first had to work its way through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).
When Yates’ medical malpractice case was finally heard, the trial exposed alarming evidence about autism and vaccines, the low standard of care practiced by physicians administering pediatric vaccines and financial conflicts of interests between pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines and government agencies entrusted with vaccine safety.
During the trial, the world’s top experts in the field of autism and mitochondrial disorder explained how the administration of “routine” childhood immunizations can cause autism, brain injury, and many other disorders.
According to the National Institute of Mental Health, autism is a neurological and developmental disorder that affects how people interact with others, communicate, learn and behave. Symptoms can be severe and usually manifest before a child turns 3, which coincides with the age children receive the most childhood vaccines.
Increasing evidence indicates a significant proportion of individuals with autism have concurrent diseases such as mitochondrial dysfunction, abnormalities of energy generation, gastrointestinal abnormalities and abnormalities in the regulation of the immune system.
Yates’ medical malpractice trial illuminated how vaccines can cause autism in children with mitochondrial disorder and showed how the Vaccine Act — which is designed to ensure informed consent and compensation to injured children — is an abject failure because it’s largely unenforceable.
Yates was normal until he received his 12-month vaccines
During the first year of his life, Yates developed typically and met all of his developmental milestones.
“He was a happy, healthy and normal child,” his father said.
After his 6-month shots, Yates experienced a severe screaming episode approximately 24 hours after receiving the DTaP, Prevnar, Hib and Hep B vaccines.
In the days following his vaccinations, Yates began to experience seizure-like shaking episodes.
But his parents didn’t realize their son’s symptoms were consistent with a severe vaccine adverse reaction because they were not given a Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) at their pediatrician’s office.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a VIS is an information sheet produced by the CDC that explains both the benefits and risks of a vaccine to recipients.
“Federal law requires that healthcare staff provide a VIS to a patient, parent or legal representative before each dose of certain vaccines,” the CDC website states.
Instead of providing the VIS, Yates’ physician told his parents any adverse event to a vaccine would be “almost immediate” — within 5 to 15 minutes after vaccination.
Before Yates’ first birthday, his mother and aunt took him to the doctor because he had been sick, and his parents wanted to make sure it was okay for Yates to have a birthday party.
Hazlehurst told The Defender this appointment was not a scheduled well-child check. It was a sick visit. At the appointment, Yates was diagnosed with an ear infection and prescribed an antibiotic.
As the pediatrician turned to leave, he stated Yates would receive his shots, as it was close to his first birthday. A woman returned to the room who portrayed herself to be a nurse, but Hazlehurst later found out was only a medical assistant.
Yates’ mother asked the “nurse” whether their son should receive his shots despite being sick and was told he should.
Once again, they were not given a VIS form informing them of the risks of vaccinating Yates while he had a fever and an active ear infection.
“By administering vaccines to a sick child, the doctor and his clinic could charge a “modified double bill” Hazlehurst said.
That day, on Feb. 8, 2001, Yates received the MMR, Prevnar, Hib and Hep B vaccines. Twelve days later, Hazlehurst said his son experienced a high fever, rash and vomiting consistent with a vaccine adverse reaction.
Hazlehurst called the clinic where his son received his vaccine and talked to the doctor on call who asked him which vaccines Yates received. Hazlehurst responded, “whatever you get when you’re a year old.”
Hazlehurst was told his son was having an adverse reaction to the antibiotic and the doctor wrote him a prescription for a different antibiotic and an anti-fungal medication.
Soon after, Yates began to lose the skills he once had and began developing abnormally. He lost his speech, started running wild, was constantly on the go and would knock things off the table.
[…]
Statins Increase Diabetes Risk by 38%
Dr Joseph Mercola
Story at-a-glanceData from one study showed people taking statin medications have a 38% increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. Scientists have identified several factors that may play a part in elevating risk, including impaired insulin sensitivity and the impact on epigenetics that influence insulin traitsData released in early 2021 have also shown that people taking statin medications have an increased risk of cardiovascular events in all but the highest risk groupIn a presentation at the University of Sydney and in a peer-reviewed narrative review, Maryanne Demasi looked at the evidence that has divided medical professionals over statins and shows how by simply revising definitions and hiding data, the industry has misled consumers and pocketed billionsInstead of relying on cholesterol numbers that have little benefit unless the total is over 300, consider evaluating your cholesterol-to-HDL and triglyceride-to-HDL ratios, as well as your ferritin and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) levelsAccording to a 2020 report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,1 34.1 million U.S. adults had diagnosed or undiagnosed diabetes in 2018. There were slightly more men than women, and more white, non-Hispanic people with diabetes than Black, Asian or Hispanic people combined.
Just two years later, these numbers have gone up, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,2 with 37.3 million people having diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes. A total of 96 million over the age of 18 have prediabetes, which is 38% of the U.S. adult population.
These numbers demonstrate that diabetes is already at epidemic proportions in the U.S. A study published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology3 found that adults taking statin medications to control cholesterol levels have a higher risk of developing insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes than the general population. However, researchers have repeatedly failed to find evidence that high cholesterol is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease.
As I have discussed in many previous articles, three factors have a far greater influence on your cardiovascular disease risk and, to some degree, are interrelated. These are insulin resistance,4 chronic inflammation5 and high iron levels.6 Unfortunately, these primary contributors are rarely the focus of cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment in conventional medicine.
Instead, statins, also called cholesterol-lowering drugs, are the go-to defense in Western medicine, which led to the drug once holding the infamous title of the most profitable drug. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick7 is a general practitioner in Cheshire, England, and the author of three books, including “A Statin Nation: Damaging Millions in a Brave New Post-Health World.” He estimates that the pharmaceutical industry has grossed more than $1 trillion from statins.
Statins Increase Risk of Diabetes by 38%A team at Erasmus University Medical Center in The Netherlands published the study found in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.8 The researchers wrote that several epidemiological studies had shown an association between statins and diabetes, but this team sought to analyze the associated glycemic traits with Type 2 diabetes.
They included 9,535 people in the Rotterdam Study who did not have diabetes at the start of the study. They followed the participants for 15 years and found those who used statin medications had a higher concentration of serum fasting insulin and insulin resistance as compared to those who had never used a statin.
This was associated with a 38% increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. The researchers concluded, “Individuals using statins may be at higher risk for hyperglycemia, insulin resistance and, eventually, Type 2 diabetes. Rigorous preventive strategies such as glucose control and weight reduction in patients when initiating statin therapy might help minimize the risk of diabetes.”
Unfortunately, the mechanism by which statins trigger Type 2 diabetes has not been fully identified and may not be related to obesity. Scientists have also identified a health condition called metabolically obese but normal weight (MONW),9 which is a subgroup of the population that has impaired insulin sensitivity and a higher risk of diabetes while being normal weight.
In this condition, the patient would appear to have a normal weight but have impaired insulin sensitivity, so weight reduction would not be an effective means of reducing the risk of Type 2 diabetes. Recent research has also found the same results — individuals taking statin medications have a higher risk of developing Type 2 diabetes.
Scientists have proposed multiple reasons10 for the increased risk of diabetes in those taking statins, including impaired insulin sensitivity and reduced secretion of insulin from pancreatic beta cells. One paper published in the International Journal of Molecular Science11 in 2020, reviewed the mechanisms by which statins appear to increase the risk. These included the impact on epigenetics through differential expression of microRNAs.
Another study12 published in the same year investigated the role of epigenetics by comparing DNA methylation in patients using statins against those who did not. They gathered evidence from five cohort studies that included 8,270 participants and found evidence that DNA methylation contributed to the effect that statin medications had on insulin traits.
Statins Also Raise Your Risk of Cardiovascular EventsA third retrospective cohort study13 looked at the results from 13,698 patients that were evenly split between statin users and non-statin users. Participants did not have atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or diabetes in 2005 when the study began. The group was followed until 2013 and evaluated for the risk of Type 2 diabetes.
The results revealed that statin users had a significantly greater risk of new-onset Type 2 diabetes than non-users. The researchers separated the risk by statin medication and found that five-year use was associated with a higher risk for those taking simvastatin (Zocor), followed closely by atorvastatin (Lipitor).14
In January 2021, when the pandemic media storm was in full swing, a study15 was published in the journal Atherosclerosis that showed people taking statin medications have a higher rate of cardiovascular events than those who were not on statins. This is significant since statins are supposed to reduce the rate of cardiovascular events.
[…]
Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/06/29/statins-increase-diabetes-risk.aspx
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
