Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 77
May 5, 2025
Yemen declares air blockade against ‘Israel’ until Gaza genocide halts
Al Mayadeen English
The Yemeni Armed Forces announced a full air blockade on “Israel”, targeting Ben Gurion Airport in response to its escalating aggression in Gaza, according to spokesperson Yehya Saree.
The Yemeni Armed Forces announced that it will enforce an air blockade on “Israel” in a statement published on Sunday, in their latest escalation against the Zionist entity in support of Gaza.
“In response to Israel’s escalating aggression and expanded military operations in Gaza, the Yemeni Armed Forces have declared a full air blockade on Israel,” YAF Spokesperson Brigadier General Yehya Saree said in a statement.
“The Yemeni Armed Forces will enforce the aerial blockade by repeatedly attacking airports, with Ben Gurion Airport, known as Lod Airport in Israel, as their primary target,” he emphasized.
The statement called on all international airlines to take this threat seriously from the moment of its issuance and cancel all flights to Israeli airports to preserve the safety of their aircraft and passengers.
“The proud, free, and independent Yemen will not accept the continued violations that the enemy seeks to impose by targeting Arab nations like Lebanon and Syria. This nation [Yemen] does not fear confrontation and rejects submission and surrender,” the statement added.
This comes amid a widespread cancellation of flights to “Israel” by major foreign airlines following the Yemeni ballistic missile that landed just 200 meters from the Ben Gurion Airport on Sunday.
[…]
US court backs Trump move to defund Voice of America
FILE PHOTO: The US Agency for Global Media website displayed on a mobile phone. © Jonathan Raa / NurPhoto via Getty ImagesRT
A US appellate court has rejected a ruling that would have re-opened the government-funded media outlet Voice of America (VOA) after it was shuttered by US President Donald Trump.
In March, Trump cut funding for the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the parent organization that oversees several entities delivering Washington’s messaging to foreign audiences. In April, a federal judge in Washington issued an injunction requiring the government to continue financing VOA and its affiliates.
On Saturday, however, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit sided with the government’s argument that the district court lacked jurisdiction over USAGM’s personnel and funding matters. The 2-1 ruling said the Trump administration “is likely to succeed on the merits” in the ongoing litigation.
Judge Cornelia Pillard dissented, warning that the stay order “all but guarantees that the networks will no longer exist in any meaningful form by the time this case is fully adjudicated.”
USAGM senior advisor Kari Lake praised the outcome, posting on X, “Turns out the District Court judge will not be able to manage the agency as he seemed to want to.”
Earlier in the same day, the international organization Reporters Without Borders (RsF), which is advocating for the preservation of VOA, celebrated what it called a “victory against the Trump administration” on Saturday. RsF referenced a message from USAGM informing that the accounts of “1,406 employees and contractors” had been reactivated and that VOA programming is expected to resume “next week.”
The Trump administration seeks to cut excess government spending in order to address chronic federal budget deficits. In the first 100 days of his second term, the US president ordered the suspension of various agencies involved in foreign policy operations, which his cabinet accused of funding excessive projects and harboring potential corruption.
[…]
Via https://www.rt.com/news/616796-court-trump-voa-operation/
Farage’s party making big gains in local British elections
RTReform UK has won control of ten of 23 local authorities up for grabsReform UK party leader Nigel Farage is seen celebrating with supporters after Reform UK took control of Durham County Council after winning more than half of the seats at the Big Club on May 2, 2025 in Durham, England. © Ian Forsyth / Getty ImagesThe right-wing Reform UK party has won 677 out of more than 1,600 seats in England’s local elections, while the Labour and the Conservative parties suffered heavy defeats across the country.
As results began to trickle in on Friday, the party led by firebrand and Brexit proponent Nigel Farage emerged as the strongest performer in contests held in 23 local authorities across England, winning control of ten councils. These included eight taken from the Conservatives – Derbyshire, Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, North Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire — along with Doncaster from Labour and Durham, where no party previously had a majority.
Reform also won hard-fought parliamentary by-elections in Runcorn and Helsby, snatching victory from Labour by just six votes after a recount. As a result, the party now controls five seats in the UK Parliament.
According to a BBC projection, if a general election were held today, Reform UK would receive 30% of the vote, ahead of Labour at 20% and the Conservatives at 15%. However, the next general election is not due until May 2029. The last one was held last year and saw Labour secure a landslide victory, riding a wave of public dissatisfaction with the economic policies of the Tories.
Commenting on his party’s strides, Farage remarked: “In post-war Britain, no one has ever beaten both Labour and the Tories in a local election before. These results are unprecedented… Reform can and will win the next general election.”
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that while he felt a “sharp edge of fury,” he said he understood the voters’ choice while promising to “go further and faster in pursuit of… national renewal.” Meanwhile, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch bluntly acknowledged that the elections were a predictable “bloodbath,” stressing that the Tories must continue work to rebuild trust in the party.
Reform UK’s rise has been driven by voter frustration over high levels of immigration, the rising cost of living, and what many see as years of mismanagement by both major parties. The party campaigned heavily on promises to cut migration – including by small boat crossings – lower taxes, and reduce council spending, positioning itself as the only alternative to what it calls “a failed political establishment.”
[…]
Via https://www.rt.com/news/616692-farages-party-big-gains-local-elections/
The Long Campaign to Decolonize Burkina Faso
Offensive Agricole: Burkino Faso
Al Jazeera (2025)
Film Review
In 2014, Burkina Faso finally toppled dictator Blaise Compaoré, responsible for the 1987 coup that killed the Che Guevara of Africa Thomas Sankara (see Thomas Sankara: Africa’s Che Guevara).
The country really struggled between 2016 and 2022 with (western sponsored) Al-Qaeda terrorists controlling 60% of the its territory and internally displacing two million residents.
In January 2022, a populist coup brought Caitaine Ibrahim Traoré to power. With 90-99% of the population rural, Traore felt compelled to respond directly to their needs to retain power. He authorized the purchase of 500 tractors to plow farmers’ land for free, in addition to subsidizing the price of fertilizer and improved seeds. His plan was to reduce terrorism by keeping young people continually engaged in successful agriculture projects.
The filmmakers visit a woman’s cooperative of 460 members who have been growing rice in the three years since a government tractor cleared their land. They have also planted trees. They produce enough rice to sell the surplus for their children’s education. Another cooperative of seven hundred women buys and sells rice in addition to growing it. Following the rice crop, they will plant onions, peanut and black eyed peas.
Insufficient water remains an issue. Women have to carry it from a distance, which reduces productivity. They’re organizing to pressure the Taoré government to dig bore holes and wells into an abundant aquifer
At present 80% of Burkina Faso’s population work in agriculture, which is responsible for one-third of the county’s GDP. With the introduction of gainful employment, emigration rates have dropped significantly.
May 4, 2025
The US/EU/NATO Regime Change Playbook for Burkina Faso and Captain Ibrahim Traoré
Ann Garrison, BAR Contributing Editor
The U.S. increases pressure on Burkina Faso through military propaganda, as Africans rise to protect the developing project.
On April 3, US Africa Command (AFRICOM) Commander Michael Langley testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee during an excruciating two hours obsessively devoted to the ill-fated project of preserving US hegemony. Langley’s testimony was all about stopping Russia and China’s advances on the continent. Some Senators expressed concern that Trump had dispensed with the soft power—their term—projected by USAID and worried that China is stepping in to fill the breach.
Alarm bells went off in Africa, the African diaspora, and peace and justice communities all over the world when he turned attention to Burkina Faso and its leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, accusing him of using the gold reserves he nationalized “to protect his junta.”
It would be challenging, of course, to come up with a more arrogant, illogical, and downright idiotic assertion. The head of AFRICOM, a military command openly devoted to securing US interests, with a $2 billion dollar annual budget, accuses an African leader of devoting his own country’s resources to its security?
In a pathetic attempt to give this a bit of humanity or legitimacy, Langley complained that Traoré was using the country’s gold to finance his own security rather than for the benefit of his people, as though there were some universe in which this was a plausible US concern. In the same breath he described North Africa as “NATO’s southern flank.”
Since mid-April a slew of social media posts have reported that the Burkina Faso diaspora, particularly in France, have been protesting and demanding that Captain Traoré step down, accusing him of being a dictator, with some even calling for his arrest. None of these posts are conclusively evidenced, and their scale, sometimes described as “hundreds” or a “small group,” varies across reports. No major news outlets seem to have reported such protests, but real or not, they’re a classic element in the Western regime change playbook.
Human Rights Watch has been playing its usual role as well, reporting that Burkina Faso has cracked down on dissent and that some members of its civilian militia, Volunteers in Defense of the Homeland (VDH), have killed members of the Fulani ethnic minority. It seems likely that there is some incidence of VDH violence against the Fulani, but this is an internal problem for the Burkinabe people and their government, not cause for the “humanitarian intervention” that’s usually on the US/EU/NATO drawing board before these reports are published. Watch out for the emergence of the word “genocide.”
Volunteers in Defense of the Homeland are civilian self-defense militia organized to defend communities against the jihadist violence unleashed by the US/EU/NATO destruction of Libya. In response to Ibrahim Traoré’s mobilization call, the numbers of volunteers increased to 90,000, well beyond the goal of 50,000, according to ACLED .
These are Western playbook moves for overthrowing any government that actually tries to do something for its people in the Global South.
Traoré’s Crimes, in the Eyes of the West
What are Traoré’s crimes in the eyes of the West? As Langley alleged, he nationalized much of the country’s gold reserves. Imagine that. In November 2023, he approved the construction of Burkina Faso’s first refinery to process gold domestically, halting the export of unrefined gold to Europe and advancing the industrialization and skills development needed to create a prosperous domestic economy and lift the Burkinabe people out of the imperialist extractive economy trap.
He suspended export permits for small-scale private gold production to combat illicit trade, such as smuggling, and to regulate the artisanal gold sector.
He renegotiated mining contracts with foreign corporations, demanding greater percentages of ore extracted and favoring local participation, again developing skills needed for a complex, prosperous domestic economy.
He prioritized local processing in other sectors, such as agriculture and cotton. He established two tomato-processing plants and a second cotton processing plant, alongside the National Support Center for Artisanal Cotton Processing, to enhance local value addition and further reduce reliance on exporting raw materials.
In a broader push for economic autonomy, he invested in agriculture to achieve food self-sufficiency, providing farmers with modern machinery and improved seeds, leading to a 2024 harvest of nearly six million tons of cereal.
He expelled French military forces from Burkina Faso. In January 2023, he announced the termination of a 2018 defense agreement with France, giving French forces one month to leave. This followed public protests in Ouagadougou demanding their departure. They’d been stationed in the country for over a decade to combat jihadist insurgencies, which had only gotten worse. By February 2023, French forces had withdrawn , marking the end of their failed Operation Sabre.
He established military sovereignty and diversification of military partnerships, including partnerships with Russia.
Upon assuming the presidency, he announced that he would continue to live on his army captain’s salary.
He appealed to the Pan-Africanist ideals of Burkina’s revolutionary leader Thomas Sankara, who served as its president from 1983 to 1987 before being assassinated in a French-backed coup d’état. He erected a new statue of Sankara on the site where he was assassinated,
Africa, the African Diaspora, and Peace and Justice Communities Rise in Response to Langley’s Threat to Traoré
On April 22, Burkina Faso’s Security Minister Mahamadou Sana told press that security forces had foiled a “major plot” to assassinate Captain Ibrahim Traoré, with the army alleging the plotters were based in neighboring Ivory Coast. He said they had aimed to “sow total chaos and place the country under the supervision of an international organisation.” This is one of many coup plots reported since Traoré assumed the presidency, and heavy security has been instituted around him.
AFRICOM’s annual Operation Flintlock is underway now, until May 14. This year it’s based in Burkina Faso’s Ivory Coast, the alleged site of the foiled coup plot, whose president, Alassane Ouattara, could not be a more dedicated US/EU/NATO collaborator.
Commander Michael Langley arrived for its outset on April 24-25 .
When Commander Michael Langley identified Captain Traoré as an enemy of US interests to the Senate Armed Services Committee, alarm bells went off in Africa, the African diaspora, and peace and justice communities worldwide. There have since been cries that there must never be another Libya all over social media, including countless YouTube channels. A global rally in support of Captain Traoré and Burkina Faso was called for April 30, the date of this publication. News and video will no doubt be available across the Web.
[…]
The Anglo-Nazi Global Empire That Almost Was
1938 Munich
Kit Klarenberg
As VE Day approaches, Western officials, pundits and journalists are widely seeking to exploit the 80th anniversary of Nazism’s defeat for political purposes. European leaders have threatened state attendees of Russia’s grand May 9th victory parade with adverse consequences. Meanwhile, countless sources draw historical comparisons between appeasement of Nazi Germany throughout the 1930s, and the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to strike a deal with Moscow to end the Ukraine proxy conflict.
As The Atlantic put it in March, “Trump Is Offering Putin Another Munich” – a reference to the September 1938 Munich Agreement, under which Western powers, led by Britain, granted a vast portion of Czechoslovakia to Nazi Germany. Mainstream narratives of appeasement state that this represented the policy’s apotheosis – its final act, which it was believed would permanently sate Adolf Hitler’s expansionist ambitions, but actually made World War II inevitable.
Neville Chamberlain’s triumphant return from Munich
Appeasement is universally accepted today in the West as a well-intentioned but ultimately catastrophically failed and misguided attempt to avoid another global conflict with Germany, for peace’s sake. According to this reading, European governments made certain concessions to Hitler, while turning a blind eye to egregious breaches of the post-World War I Versailles Treaty, such as the Luftwaffe’s creation in February 1935, and Nazi Germany’s military occupation of the Rhineland in May the next year.
In reality though, from Britain’s perspective, the Munich Agreement was intended to be just the start of a wider process that would culminate in “world political partnership” between London and Berlin. Two months prior, the Federation of British Industries (FBI), known today as the Confederation of British Industry, made contact with its Nazi counterpart, Reichsgruppe Industrie (RI). The pair eagerly agreed their respective governments should enter into formal negotiations on Anglo-German economic integration.
Representatives of these organisations met face-to-face in London on November 9th that year. The summit went swimmingly, and a formal conference in Düsseldorf was scheduled for next March. Coincidentally, later that evening in Berlin, Kristallnacht erupted, with Nazi paramilitaries burning and destroying synagogues and Jewish businesses across Germany. The most infamous pogrom in history was no deterrent to continued discussions and meetings between FBI and RI representatives. A month later, they inked a formal agreement on the creation of an international Anglo-Nazi coal cartel.
British officials fully endorsed this burgeoning relationship, believing it would provide a crucial foundation for future alliance with Nazi Germany in other fields. Moreover, it was hoped Berlin’s industrial and technological prowess would reinvigorate Britain’s economy at home and throughout the Empire, which was ever-increasingly lagging behind the ascendant US. In February 1939, representatives of British government and industry made a pilgrimage to Berlin to feast with high-ranking Nazi officials, in advance of the next month’s joint conference.
As FBI representatives prepared to depart for Düsseldorf in March, British cabinet chief Walter Runciman – a fervent advocate of appeasement, and chief architect of Czechoslovakia’s carve up – informed them, “gentlemen, the peace of Europe is in your hands.” In a sick twist, they arrived on March 14th, while Czechoslovakian president Emil Hácha was in Berlin meeting with Hitler. Offered the choice of freely allowing Nazi troops entry into his country, or the Luftwaffe reducing Prague to rubble before all-out invasion, he suffered a heart attack.
After revival, Hácha chose the former option. The Düsseldorf conference commenced the next morning, as Nazi tanks stormed unhindered into rump Czechoslovakia. Against this monstrous backdrop, a 12-point declaration was ironed out by the FBI and RI. It envisaged “a world economic partnership between the business communities” of Berlin and London. That August, FBI representatives secretly met with Herman Göring to anoint the agreement. In the meantime, the British government had via back channels made a formal offer of wide-ranging “cooperation” with Nazi Germany.
‘Political Partnership’
In April 1938, journeyman diplomat Herbert von Dirksen was appointed Nazi Germany’s ambassador to London. A committed National Socialist and rabid antisemite, he also harboured a particularly visceral loathing of Poles, believing them to be subhuman, eagerly supporting Poland’s total erasure. Despite this, due to his English language fluency and aristocratic manners, he charmed British officials and citizens alike, and was widely perceived locally as Nazi Germany’s respectable face.
Herbert von Dirksen
Even more vitally though, Dirksen – in common with many powerful elements of the British establishment – was convinced that not only could war be avoided, but London and Berlin would instead forge a global economic, military, and political alliance. His 18 months in Britain before the outbreak of World War II were spent working tirelessly to achieve these goals, by establishing and maintaining communication lines between officials and decisionmakers in the two countries, while attempting to broker deals.
Dirksen published an official memoir in 1950, detailing his lengthy diplomatic career. However, far more revealing insights into the period immediately preceding World War II, and behind-the-scenes efforts to achieve enduring detente between Britain and Nazi Germany, are contained in the virtually unknown Dirksen Papers, a two-volume record released by the Soviet Union’s Foreign Languages Publishing House without his consent. They contain private communications sent to and from Dirksen, diary entries, and memos he wrote for himself, never intended for public consumption.
[image error]
Documents And Materials Relating To The Eve Of The Second World War Ii21.6MB ∙ PDF fileThe contents were sourced from a vast trove of documents found by the Red Army after it seized Gröditzberg, a castle owned by Dirksen where he spent most of World War II. Mainstream historians have markedly made no use of the Dirksen Papers. Whether this is due to their bombshell disclosures posing a variety of dire threats to established Western narratives of World War II, and revealing much the British government wishes to remain forever secret, is a matter of speculation.
Immediately after World War II began, Dirksen “keenly” felt an “obligation” to author a detailed post-mortem on the failure of Britain’s peace overtures to Nazi Germany, and his own. He was particularly compelled to write it as “all important documents” in Berlin’s London embassy had been burned following Britain’s formal declaration of war on September 3rd 1939. Reflecting on his experiences, Dirksen spoke of “the tragic and paramount thing about the rise of the new Anglo-German war”
“Germany demanded an equal place with Britain as a world power…Britain was in principle prepared to concede. But, whereas Germany demanded immediate, complete and unequivocal satisfaction of her demands, Britain – although she was ready to renounce her Eastern commitments, and…allow Germany a predominant position in East and Southeast Europe, and to discuss genuine world political partnership with Germany – wanted this to be done only by way of negotiation and a gradual revision of British policy.”
‘German Reply’
From London’s perspective, Dirksen lamented, this radical change in the global order “could be effected in a period of months, but not of days or weeks.” Another stumbling block was the British and French making a “guarantee” to defend Poland in the event she was attacked by Nazi Germany, in March 1939. This bellicose stance – along with belligerent speeches from Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain – was at total odds with simultaneous conciliatory approaches such as Düsseldorf, and the private stances and utterances of British officials to their Nazi counterparts.
In any event, it appears London instantly regretted its pledge to defend Poland. Dirksen records in his post-mortem how subsequently, senior British officials told him they sought “an Anglo-German entente” that would “render Britain’s guarantee policy nugatory” and “enable Britain to extricate her from her predicament in regard to Poland,” so Warsaw would “be left to face Germany alone”.
In mid-July 1939, Horace Wilson – an extremely powerful civil servant and Chamberlain’s right hand man – approached Göring’s chief aide Helmuth Wohlthat during a visit to London. Wilson “outlined a program for a comprehensive adjustment of Anglo-German relations” to him, which amounted to a radical overhaul of the two countries’ “political, military and economic arrangements.” This included “a non-aggression pact”, explicitly concerned with shredding Britain’s “guarantee” to Warsaw. Dirksen noted:
“The underlying purpose of this treaty was to make it possible for the British gradually to disembarrass themselves of their commitments toward Poland, on the ground that they had…secured Germany’s renunciation of methods of aggression.”
Elsewhere, “comprehensive” proposals for economic cooperation were outlined, with the promise of “negotiations…to be undertaken on colonial questions, supplies of raw material for Germany, delimitation of industrial markets, international debt problems, and the application of the most favoured nation clause.” In addition, a realignment of “the spheres of interest of the Great Powers” would be up for discussion, opening the door for further Nazi territorial expansion. Dirksen makes clear these grand plans were fully endorsed at the British government’s highest levels:
“The importance of Wilson’s proposals was demonstrated by the fact that Wilson invited Wohlthat to have them confirmed by Chamberlain personally.”
During his stay in London, Wohlthat also had extensive discussions with Overseas Trade Secretary Robert Hudson, who told him “three big regions offered the two nations an immense field for economic activity.” This included the existing British Empire, China and Russia. “Here agreement was possible; as also in other regions,” including the Balkans, where “England had no economic ambitions.” In other words, resource-rich Yugoslavia would be Nazi Germany’s for the taking, under the terms of “world political partnership” with Britain.
Dirksen outlined the contents of Wohlthat’s talks with Hudson and Wilson in a “strictly secret” internal memo, excitedly noting “England alone could not adequately take care of her vast Empire, and it would be quite possible for Germany to be given a rather comprehensive share.” A telegram dispatched to Dirksen from the German Foreign Office on July 31st 1939 recorded Wohlthat had informed Göring of Britain’s secret proposals, who in turn notified Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop.
Dirksen noted elsewhere Wohlthat specifically asked the British how such negotiations “might be put on a tangible footing.” Wilson informed him “the decisive thing” was for Hitler to “[make] his willingness known” by officially authorising a senior Nazi official to discuss the “program”. Wilson “furthermore strongly stressed the great value the British government laid upon a German reply” to these offers, and how London “considered that slipping into war was the only alternative.”
‘Authoritarian Regimes’
No “reply” apparently ever came. On September 1st 1939, Nazi Germany invaded Poland, Britain declared war on Germany two days later, and the rest is history – albeit history that is subject to determined obfuscation, constant rewriting, and deliberate distortion. Polls of European citizens conducted in the immediate aftermath of World War II showed there was little public doubt that the Red Army was primarily responsible for Nazi Germany’s destruction, while Britain and the US were perceived as playing mere walk-on roles.
[…]
Donald Trump fired national security adviser Mike Waltz for ‘plotting with Israel’s leader to bomb Iran’
By Caroline Graham
President Donald Trump sacked his national security adviser Mike Waltz because he was plotting with Israel‘s leader to attack Iran, it was claimed last night.
Waltz, 51, was thought to have been fired because he accidentally added a journalist to a Signal chat about plans to attack Yemen’s Houthi terrorist group, causing global embarrassment for the Trump administration.
But last night the Washington Post reported the real reason for Trump’s ire was that Waltz huddled with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the latter’s White House visit in February and ‘appeared to share the Israeli leader’s conviction that the time was ripe to strike Iran,’ according to a source.
Trump was angered that Waltz ‘engaged in intense coordination with Netanyahu about military options against Iran ahead of an Oval Office meeting between the Israeli leader and Trump.’
The source said: ‘Waltz wanted to take US policy in a direction Trump wasn’t comfortable with because the US hadn’t attempted a diplomatic solution.
It got back to Trump and the president wasn’t happy with it. You can’t do that. You work for the president of your country, not the president of another country.’
Waltz, a former Green Beret, was sacked from his position as head of the National Security Council (NSC) on Friday and will now become ambassador to the United Nations, a ‘massive downgrade move to save face’, according to one Trump insider.
[…]
FDA Failed to Warn Parents About 70,000 Side Effects of Puberty-Blocking Drugs
by Dr. Joseph MercolaSide effects from puberty blockers range from headaches to serious conditions like brain swelling and vision loss. The safety of puberty blockers and other gender-affirming care has not been established, and parents should research risks before making decisions.
Story at a glance:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) failed to prioritize over 70,000 adverse event reports related to puberty-blocking drugs, raising concerns about regulatory oversight of these medications.Side effects from puberty blockers range from headaches to serious conditions like brain swelling and vision loss.Puberty blockers disrupt normal development, causing long-term harm to physical development and psychological health in children.The FDA’s handling of puberty blockers demonstrates inconsistent regulatory standards and inadequate public warnings about significant risks.The safety of puberty blockers and other gender-affirming care has not been established, and parents should research risks before making decisions.Imagine you’re handed a medicine for your child that promises to pause puberty, but no one’s fully checked if it’s safe. Puberty blockers are drugs that delay puberty, often used for children questioning their gender.
But recent reports show over 70,000 side effects — from headaches to brain swelling — haven’t gotten the attention they deserve from the people in charge.
Whether you’re a parent, a teen or just curious, this matters to you. Your health — or your loved one’s — could hinge on understanding the risks and who’s looking out for you.
Pausing puberty — A quick guide to these powerful drugs
Puberty-blocking drugs are given to children who have not yet entered puberty. These drugs delay the onset of sex characteristics associated with the gender you were at birth.
Often, the adults steering children toward gender reassignment don’t make it a point to thoroughly inform them about the difficulties they might face. Puberty-blocking drugs are strong, but they’re not magic, and that’s why you need to know more.
How do puberty blockers work? Puberty blockers hit pause on your body’s changes. They stop it from releasing hormones like estrogen and testosterone, which kickstart things like growing taller or getting a deeper voice.Who uses them? You might think puberty blockers are just for children who hit puberty too early, but today, they’re often used by teens exploring their gender identity.What’s the catch? Here’s the thing: pausing puberty isn’t as simple as pausing a video game. Your body’s a complex machine, and stopping hormones causes trouble. Think of it like pausing your phone’s updates — eventually, glitches stack up. There are risks, both physical and psychological, and not everyone’s shouting about them. You deserve to know what could go wrong before jumping in, so let’s dig into that next.Why you should be concerned about puberty-blocking drugs
In the last 20 years, over 70,000 reports of trouble have been tied to puberty blockers. That’s huge — like filling a football stadium with people who’ve had issues with these drugs.
The safety of puberty-blocking drugs and other forms of “gender-affirming care” has not been established. If you’re considering this for your child, this should make you sit up and pay attention.
How serious are these side effects? Some side effects are serious enough to change your life. Children have reported brain swelling, which brings brutal headaches or trouble thinking. Others have lost vision out of nowhere or developed “tumor-like masses” in the brain. These are big red flags you shouldn’t ignore.Why is safety being questioned? Some experts say stopping hormones throws your body off balance, like hitting the brakes and gas on your car at the same time. Your brain and bones need those hormones to grow right, and pausing them harms long-term development.Why aren’t the warnings louder? The FDA, the group that’s supposed to keep you safe, knew about these risks but didn’t make a fuss. With other drugs, they’d sound the alarm, but here? It’s been more like a whisper instead of a siren. You’d expect them to shout if 70,000 adverse event reports came up, but they didn’t. That lack of action is why you need to ask questions and dig deeper yourself.Why safety slipped through the cracks
The FDA is supposed to spot trouble with medicines and keep you safe. Think of them as lifeguards at the pool, watching for danger so you don’t drown. When a drug is risky, they should blow the whistle and let you know loud and clear. That’s their job, and you count on them to do it right.
How did they miss this? With puberty blockers, the FDA dropped the ball. They didn’t focus on those 70,000 reports, even though they vilified other drugs like hydroxychloroquine. It’s like fixing a leaky faucet while your basement floods. You’d think that many side effects would light up their radar, but they stayed quiet. That’s a problem when you’re trusting them to protect you.Why should you care? If the FDA isn’t warning the public about risks, you’re left in the dark. It’s like buying a car with no crash test rating — would you drive it? You need clear info to decide what’s safe for your family, but right now, it’s murky. That’s why you’ve got to take charge and not just hope someone else is watching out for you.How to stay safe and informed
If puberty blockers come up, don’t be shy — speak to your children about the health risks. By using puberty-blocking drugs or taking hormones to feminize or masculinize the body, you’re wreaking total havoc on your entire system. The only predictable outcome is health problems.
Affirm children’s biology from the start — It’s important for parents to affirm the biology of their children from the start. By teaching them the value and permanence of their biological sex, you effectively “inoculate” them against ideas being brought in later.Become educated on transgender ideology — “Lost in Trans Nation,” written by Dr. Miriam Grossman, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and board-certified medical doctor, provides parents with the required knowledge and tools to protect their children from the transgender ideology contagion. While I believe the transgender movement poses a severe threat to mental, emotional and physical health, it can be counteracted by level-headed discourse and the sharing of truthful information.Understand the transhumanist agenda connection — Many believe the trans movement and gender-affirming medical care for youth is a stepping stone in the transhumanist agenda. Ultimately, the goal is to get rid of flesh and blood bodies altogether and have our existence either within a synthetic body or as disembodied avatars in cyberspace, or both. Turning humanity into misgendered people incapable of natural reproduction is a first step in that direction.Demand the truth — You deserve straight answers about safety, not vague promises. If something feels off, speak up. Your voice matters, and it could help make sure the truth comes out about puberty-blocking drugs.FAQs about puberty-blocking drugs
Q: What are puberty blockers?
A: Puberty blockers are drugs that stop your body from making hormones like estrogen and testosterone. These hormones stop puberty — think of growth spurts or voice changes. They’re often used for children questioning their gender or hitting puberty too soon. These medications are powerful and their effects are not always reversible.
Q: Are puberty blockers safe?
A: They carry significant risks. There are over 70,000 reports of side effects like headaches, mood swings and brain swelling. Many worry about long-term damage to their bones and brain. The long-term effects on fertility and overall health are still largely unknown, adding to the concern. This lack of transparency undermines public trust and highlights the need for independent research and scrutiny.
Q: Why didn’t the FDA warn us?
A: The FDA knew about the risks but didn’t make them a priority. They focused elsewhere, even with 70,000 reports of harm piling up. Leadership changes didn’t help either. That’s why you’ve got to dig for the truth yourself.
Q: How can parents affirm their child’s biological sex and protect them from harmful ideologies?
A: Parents can affirm their child’s biological sex by consistently reinforcing the value and permanence of their birth sex from an early age. This includes open and honest conversations about biological realities and healthy development.
To protect them from harmful ideologies, parents should educate themselves on these ideologies, foster thinking skills in their children and provide access to diverse perspectives. Resources like Dr. Miriam Grossman’s “Lost in Trans Nation” offer valuable insights.
Q: What is the connection between gender-affirming care and the transhumanist agenda?
A: Some individuals believe that gender-affirming care, particularly medical interventions for youth, is a step toward a transhumanist agenda. This perspective suggests that the ultimate goal is to transcend biological limitations and eliminate the need for traditional human bodies.
[…]
Houthi missile hits Ben Gurion Airport after interception fails; 6 injured, none seriously
Screen grab from CCTV footage shows impact of ballistic missile near Ben Gurion Airport on May 4, 2025 (Screen grab from social media used in accordance with Clause 27a of the Copyright Law)
By Emanuel Fabian, Nurit Yohanan, Sam Sokol, Sharon Wrobel and Lazar Berman
First time Houthi fire has impacted at airport; IDF says it failed to intercept ballistic missile after several attempts; airport reopens after an hour, but most foreign airlines suspend flightsA ballistic missile fired by the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen impacted on the grounds of Ben Gurion Airport on Sunday morning, injuring six people, none of them seriously. The blast occurred in a grove of trees alongside an access road close to the airport’s main Terminal 3, several hundred yards from the airport control tower.
The military said it made several attempts to intercept the missile but failed to shoot down the projectile. “An impact was identified in the area of Ben Gurion Airport,” it said.
The attack marked the first time a Houthi missile had impacted within the grounds of the airport. A Hezbollah missile hit a parking area on the airport’s perimeter in November.
Both the Israeli Air Force’s long-range Arrow air defense system and the US’s THAAD system failed to intercept the Houthi missile, defense sources said. The Israeli Air Force’s aerial defense array was investigating the failure.
Those hurt in the attack included a man in his 50s in good-to-moderate condition with trauma to his limbs and two women, aged 54 and 38, in good condition who were hit by the shockwave, the Magen David Adom ambulance service said in a statement.
A man, 64, was lightly hurt after he was hit by an object that flew from the impact site, and two more women, aged 22 and 34, were lightly hurt while running for shelter, MDA said.
Another two people were treated for acute anxiety.
The wounded were taken to hospitals in central Israel.
Surveillance camera footage showed the moment the missile impacted in a grove adjacent to an access road, within the airport’s perimeter.
Sirens sounded across central Israel at 9:22 a.m. Preceding the sirens by some five minutes, an early warning was issued to residents, alerting civilians of the long-range missile attack via a push notification on their phones.
The new alert system, which was recently activated, has undergone teething pains of either not sending alerts or sending out warnings over a wider area than the sirens cover.
Initiating routine procedure, Ben Gurion Airport halted takeoffs and landings following the launch of the ballistic missile. It reopened its airspace about an hour after the missile hit.
Still, the German Lufthansa carrier group, which includes Lufthansa, SWISS, Austrian Airlines, and Brussels Airlines, canceled all flights Ben Gurion Airport scheduled for Sunday, according to its website.
Spanish airline Air Europa also said it was canceling flights between Tel Aviv and Madrid.
By late afternoon, most foreign airlines had suspended services.
Yemen’s Houthis claimed responsibility for the launch, the group’s military spokesperson Yahya Saree said in a televised statement.
Saree reiterated a warning to airlines that the Israeli airport was “no longer safe for air travel.”
Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a senior Houthi official, told the Qatari Al-Araby TV channel that the rebel group had demonstrated its ability to strike sensitive targets in Israel on Sunday morning.
He added that the Iran-backed group has “no red lines” in its fight against Israel.
After the attack, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was set to hold a meeting by telephone with Defense Minister Israel Katz and other top defense officials at 3 p.m. to examine potential responses, including a direct Israeli strike on Houthi assets in Yemen.
At 7 p.m., Netanyahu will convene his security cabinet in person to discuss the expansion of the military campaign in Gaza, fighting in Syria, the Houthi attack, and more.
In a terse statement following the attack, Katz said, “Whoever harms us, we will strike them sevenfold.”
Israel has avoided striking in Yemen in response to recent Houthi attacks as the United States wages a major campaign against the Iran-backed group.
Security officials told the Kan public broadcaster that “after the hit at Ben Gurion Airport, from our perspective, there are no restrictions” for a response against the Houthis.The opposition National Unity party chairman Benny Gantz called on the government to hold Iran accountable for the attack.
“This is not Yemen, this is Iran. It is Iran that is firing ballistic missiles at the State of Israel, and it must bear responsibility,” wrote the former defense minister on X.
“The Israeli government must wake up,” he said, arguing that fire on Israel “must lead to a severe response against Tehran.”
Sunday’s attack came one day after the last launch, when a ballistic missile fired by the Houthis triggered sirens in Jerusalem and some parts of southern Israel. The IDF successfully intercepted the projectile.
Since March 18, when the IDF resumed its offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the Houthis in Yemen have launched some 27 ballistic missiles and several drones at Israel. Only around half of them triggered sirens in the country and were shot down, while the others fell short.
The sirens have sent hundreds of thousands of Israelis rushing to shelters at all hours of the night and day, causing a number of injuries in the scramble. The sirens are a precaution against falling debris from intercepts, which have occasionally caused injuries, death and damage.
[…]
May 3, 2025
Ansar Allah triumphant: US facing Red Sea defeat again
By Kit Klarenberg
On April 28th, Western media outlets became abuzz with news that the USS Harry S. Truman – which is leading the Trump administration’s effort to dismantle Ansar Allah’s anti-genocide Red Sea blockade – lost an F/A-18E fighter jet and tow tractor, while executing a hard turn to evade fire from the Resistance group. While a US Navy press release on the incident made no reference to Ansar Allah’s assault, nameless American officials have briefed several mainstream journalists that the losses were Yemen’s doing.
Reporting on the disaster by dependably servile CIA and Pentagon propaganda megaphone CNN was extraordinarily candid. “US Navy loses $60 million jet at sea after it fell overboard from aircraft carrier”, its headline read. The outlet explicitly acknowledged this resulted from an Ansar Allah “drone and missile attack” on USS Harry S. Truman. CNN went on to note the aircraft carrier has “repeatedly been targeted in attacks” by Yemen, while suffering a series of shameful blunders since its deployment to the Red Sea in September 2024.
In December that year, a US fighter jet posted to USS Harry S. Truman was shot down while conducting a refueling mission over the Red Sea in a friendly fire incident. The USS Gettysburg, which was escorting the aircraft carrier, blasted the jet with a missile for reasons unclear. This gross misadventure remains subject to official investigation. Then, on February 12th this year, USS Harry S. Truman was extensively damaged after colliding with a commercial vessel near Egypt’s Port Said, at the Suez Canal’s northern end.
The aircraft carrier returned to service after a period spent in Greece’s Souda Bay for repairs. The US Navy refused to release details about the cost of these repairs, or the total damage USS Harry S. Truman sustained in the collision. Whether further repairs were required was also not clarified. However, the accident was apparently considered so catastrophic within the Pentagon that the carrier’s chief, Dave Snowden, was fired from his post on February 20th, “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command”.
These humiliating developments were completely ignored by the media. Concurrently, however, mainstream outlets were engaged in a concerted effort to rehabilitate Operation Prosperity Guardian, the embarrassingly failed Biden administration attempt to smash Ansar Allah and end the Resistance group’s righteous Red Sea blockade. Launched with much hype following the Gaza genocide’s eruption, a vast US flotilla led by USS Eisenhower spent nine months getting battered by a relentless barrage of Ansar Allah drones and missiles to no avail, before scurrying back to the US.
‘Defensive Systems’Throughout Operation Prosperity Guardian, current and former US military and intelligence officials expressed disquiet at the enormous “cost offset” involved in battling Ansar Allah. The US Navy squandered countless difficult-to-replace missiles costing hundreds of thousands of dollars – if not millions – daily to shoot down the Resistance group’s low-cost drones. As Mick Mulroy, a former DOD official and CIA officer, bitterly told Politico:
“[This] quickly becomes a problem because the most benefit, even if we do shoot down their incoming missiles and drones, is in [Yemen’s] favor…We, the US, need to start looking at systems that can defeat these that are more in line with the costs they are expending to attack us.”
There was no sign of this “cost offset” having been remediated by the time Operation Prosperity Guardian fizzled out in July 2024. Official US Navy figures on the “unprecedented” engagement suggest the USS Eisenhower-led carrier group fired a total of 155 standard missiles and 135 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, while accompanying fighter jets and helicopters “expended nearly 60 air-to-air missiles and released 420 air-to-surface weapons” – 770 munitions in total – over the nine-month-long conflict.
Independent analysis suggests these figures are likely to be even higher. Moreover, the US Navy did not provide a breakdown of the costs involved in Operation Prosperity Guardian. Even if one accepts the official figures, a single Tomahawk alone costs around $1.89 million, meaning firing 135 cost a staggering $255,150,000. There is also the enduring question of whether this astonishingly expensive arsenal failed to protect USS Eisenhower from direct Ansar Allah attack.
In February 2024, a cruise missile fired from Yemen penetrated so many layers of the aircraft carrier’s defences it was seconds from impact, forcing USS Eisenhower to employ the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System – its “last line of defense”. It marked the System’s first-ever recorded use in battle. Then in June that year, the USS Eisenhower inexplicably withdrew from its sphere of operations in the Red Sea at maximum speed, immediately after Ansar Allah announced it had successfully struck the carrier.
As Al Mayadeen recorded at the time, multiple Western news reports painted a dire picture of Operation Prosperity Guardian in its aftermath. Associated Press revealed that participating sailors and pilots had found the experience “traumatizing”, as they “weren’t used to being fired on.” Many had repeatedly come within seconds of being struck by “Houthi-launched missiles”, before they were destroyed “by their ship’s defensive systems.” The Pentagon was thus considering providing “counseling and treatment” to thousands of US Navy employees suffering from “post-traumatic stress”, and their families.
‘Supplemental Funds’Fast forward to February 2025, and Business Insider published a curious article, claiming, based on documents exclusively obtained by the outlet, that in fact the US Navy had successfully “fended off” Ansar Allah’s Red Sea blitzkrieg throughout Operation Prosperity Guardian, “without firing a shot”. Instead, “undefined” and “unspecified” methods and weapons of a “non-kinetic” variety were “successfully” employed to protect “Navy and coalition warships and commercial vessels”. This was, of course,e at total odds with literally everything the mainstream media had hitherto reported on the debacle.
With hindsight though, the report’s propaganda utility was clear. It served to rehabilitate the US Navy’s performance in its war on Yemen at a time the Trump administration was preparing to kickstart hostilities against Ansar Allah again. So it was on March 15th, US airstrikes began raining down on Sanaa anew, while the USS Harry S. Truman-led carrier force thrust stridently into the Red Sea. US officials have talked a big game about the fresh assault continuing “indefinitely”, and Trump has bragged that Ansar Allah is “decimated”.
The April 28th loss of an F/A-18E fighter jet due to Yemeni attacks amply demonstrates such boasts to be entirely untrue. In the meantime, on April 4th, the New York Times reported Pentagon officials were “privately” briefing that Trump’s belligerence was failing to graze Ansar Allah, while costing in excess of $1 billion to date. This not only meant “supplemental funds” for the operation needed to be mustered from Congress, but doubts about continued ammunition availability gravely abounded:
“So many precision munitions are being used, especially advanced long-range ones, that some Pentagon contingency planners are growing concerned about overall Navy stocks and implications for any situation in which the United States would have to ward off an attempted invasion of Taiwan by China.”
The New York Times also noted the Trump administration had offered no explanation as to “why it thinks its campaign against [Ansar Allah] will succeed”. Almost a month later, clarity on this crucial point remains unforthcoming. We can perhaps surmise then that the flurry of mainstream interest over the USS Harry S. Truman’s recent troubles is indicative of a determination by the Pentagon to end Washington’s renewed malevolence against Yemen before Ansar Allah inflicts yet another historic defeat on the US Empire.
[…]
The Most Revolutionary Act
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's profile
- 11 followers
![[image error]](https://www.blackagendareport.com/sites/default/files/2025-04/845%20x%20442%20Langley%20and%20Traore%CC.jpg){kind=link}