Horrific new data reveals thousands of children mutilated under Biden regime

Steve Watson | ZeroHedge

New revelations from the Stop The Harm Database expose a grim reality: between 2019 and 2023, thousands of American children were subjected to life-altering surgeries, hormone treatments, and puberty blockers in the name of transgender ideology.

According to the data compiled by medical watchdog group Do No Harm, 5,747 minors underwent surgical procedures often described as mutilation, including mastectomies and other invasive operations.

Another 8,579 children received hormones and puberty blockers, chemicals that disrupt natural development and carry severe long-term risks like infertility and bone density loss.

In total, 13,994 minors endured some form of sex change treatment, while a shocking 62,682 prescriptions for these interventions were written for kids.

These numbers highlight the peak of the transgender push under the Biden administration, where progressive policies enabled hospitals and clinics to profit handsomely — raking in nearly $120 million from these procedures on vulnerable youth.

The database, drawing from insurance claims across the U.S., shows the majority of these cases occurred in liberal strongholds like California, Oregon, and Washington, where resistance to safeguards was fiercest.

This comes amid growing backlash against the transgender agenda targeting children.

As we previously detailed, a psychologist and surgeon faced a successful lawsuit for approving and performing a double mastectomy on a 16-year-old girl who later detransitioned. The case underscores how rushed approvals without proper safeguards have left countless lives in ruins.

Read more

The Great Feminization

Helen Andrews | Compact Magazine

 

In 2019, I read an article about Larry Summers and Harvard that changed the way I look at the world. The author, writing under the pseudonym "J. Stone," argued that the day Larry Summers resigned as president of Harvard University marked a turning point in our culture. The entire "woke" era could be extrapolated from that moment, from the details of how Summers was cancelled and, most of all, who did the cancelling: women.

The basic facts of the Summers case were familiar to me. On January 14, 2005, at a conference on "Diversifying the Science and Engineering Workforce," Larry Summers gave a talk that was supposed to be off the record. In it, he said that female underrepresentation in hard sciences was partly due to "different availability of aptitude at the high end" as well as taste differences between men and women "not attributable to socialization." Some female professors in attendance were offended and sent his remarks to a reporter, in defiance of the off-the-record rule. The ensuing scandal led to a no-confidence vote by the Harvard faculty and, eventually, Summers's resignation.

The essay argued that it wasn't just that women had cancelled the president of Harvard; it was that they'd cancelled him in a very feminine way. They made emotional appeals rather than logical arguments. "When he started talking about innate differences in aptitude between men and women, I just couldn't breathe because this kind of bias makes me physically ill," said Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at MIT. Summers made a public statement clarifying his remarks, and then another, and then a third, with the apology more insistent each time. Experts chimed in to declare that everything Summers had said about sex differences was within the scientific mainstream. These rational appeals had no effect on the mob hysteria.

This cancellation was feminine, the essay argued, because all cancellations are feminine. Cancel culture is simply what women do whenever there are enough of them in a given organization or field. That is the Great Feminization thesis, which the same author later elaborated upon at book length: Everything you think of as "wokeness" is simply an epiphenomenon of demographic feminization.

The explanatory power of this simple thesis was incredible. It really did unlock the secrets of the era we are living in. Wokeness is not a new ideology, an outgrowth of Marxism, or a result of post-Obama disillusionment. It is simply feminine patterns of behavior applied to institutions where women were few in number until recently. How did I not see it before? 

 

Read more

How Miami hawks hijacked Trump's foreign policy

Juan David Rojas | UnHerd

 

In dealing with Venezuela, the second Trump administration for months oscillated between dealmaking and regime change. More recently, however, an unprecedented military buildup in the Caribbean appears to be aimed at toppling Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro. The regime-change faction, in other words, has got the upper hand. But how? Blame the regime-change capital of the Americas, Miami, and its native son, Marco Rubio.

Early on, there was some hope that the White House would forgo the first term's amateur coup attempts and moralistic posturing against Maduro. Among his first acts in 2025, President Trump dispatched special envoy Richard "Ric" Grenell to broker an America First understanding with the Caracas regime.

Under the deal, Chevron could continue to export Venezuelan crude Stateside through the renewal of a Biden-era oil license. In exchange, Caracas agreed to accept deportation flights of its citizens — a vital priority given the subsequent suspension of Temporary Protected Status for some 350,000 Venezuelans in the US homeland. The administration thus made good on two campaign pledges: boosting fossil fuels and deporting illegal migrants.

Sadly, this understanding underwent a series of erratic twists in the ensuing months, a turn of events caused mostly by Miami's community of Right-wing Latin-American exiles.

Fly to Miami from the American heartland, and you'll find what can appear like a Right-wing foreign country, where Spanish prevails over English; and where denizens of Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, and, especially, Cuban extraction pray at the altar of neoconservative ideology. This, even as they have recreated the clientelist politics of their homelands within the city council.

Drug trafficking, money laundering, as well as state- and nonstate-sponsored regime-change operations across the hemisphere form part of the city's past and present mythology. Influencers like Alexander Otaola grandstand in the form of three-hour, Castro-esque rants on YouTube, offering any and all justification for toppling regimes from Havana to Tehran.

Unsurprisingly, Trump's initial pragmatism on Venezuela didn't play well in Miami.  

 

Read more 

Gaza Cease-fire Agreement Furthers Ongoing Age of Imperialism

Jeremy Kazmurov | Covert Action Magazine 

In October 9, Israel and Hamas announced the adoption of a cease-fire agreement involving the release of all hostages held by Hamas.

Israel, in exchange, agreed to allow for the entry of humanitarian aid, to release Palestinian prisoners, and to withdraw its forces to a so-called “yellow line” from which they will still control all land crossings into Gaza.

The U.S. additionally agreed to send 200 more troops to Israel to monitor and oversee the agreement.

New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman gushed that President Donald Trump deserved a Nobel Peace Prize for helping to broker the agreement. However, the World Socialist Web Site reported that the October 9 “peace” deal inscribes a return to the open colonial domination of the Middle East that prevailed in the 19^th century.

Gaza is now to be governed by a “Board of Peace” headed and chaired by Donald Trump and which will include former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.

The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) noted that the “peace agreement” was “steeped in colonial rhetoric” and that its “inclusion of an international ‘Board of Peace’…ensures the exclusion of Palestinian voices from the decision-making of Palestinian futures.”

A hidden U.S.-Israeli agenda has long been to control oil and gas fields off the Gaza coast that are estimated to be worth more than $500 billion.

Read more

The US-Israel plan for Gaza: a paradise for the ruling class and its business interests

Donde Vamos?

Since 7 October 2023, we have been watching, virtually powerless, as genocide unfolds live before our eyes, simply because our leaders are compromised by the Zionist lobby. Today, both Trump and Israel have a plan for Gaza, and once again we find the good old lobby behind Trump's ‘peace plan,’ rejected on Friday, 3 October by Hamas, which consisted of handing over the keys to Gaza to a delegation of globalists.  But beyond territorial conquest, this plan for Gaza is a globalist, authoritarian utopia, which probably foreshadows what our societies will be like tomorrow if we let this ruling class have its way.

In February 2025, Trump spoke of his Riviera project in Gaza, where nearly 2 million people were crammed together before the Zionists began their process of total destruction. The plan, developed with his Israeli friends and Tony Blair, called for the deportation of the remaining population to create a luxury tourism and high-tech development site, officially under US supervision for 10 years.


Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

Read more

How the Plastics Industry Is Fighting to Keep Polluting the World

Cryptogon

I’ve been seeing the bales of plastic piling up at my local dump and I thought, “Why not make building materials out of all this stuff?”

It turns out that there are some small moves being made in that direction. Here are a few examples:

Of course, these efforts are noise level in the scheme of things.

Plastic pollution is a grim and difficult problem which is made worse by the industry and crooked politicians.

Via: The Intercept:

The growing output of new cheap plastic further undermines the industry’s own argument that recycling can resolve the waste crisis. It’s already impossible for most recycled plastic to compete with “virgin” plastic in the marketplace. With the exception of bottles made of PET (No. 1) and HDPE (No. 2), the rest of the waste is essentially worthless. Around 30 percent of both types of plastic bottles were sold for recycling in 2017, though some of those may have wound up being landfilled or incinerated. The recent fossil fuel boom makes it even cheaper to make new plastic and thus, even more difficult to sell the recycled product. This, in turn, makes the plastics companies’ push for recycling that much more implausible — and their battle to kill efforts to limit plastics production even more desperate.

Read more + Videos

Gillette says it is “shifting the spotlight from social issues” after an ad about “toxic masculinity” caused a customer backlash.

Comment: Oops. A big lesson there for Gillette. Alienate your customers by buying into a cynical ad/marketing drive geared towards feminist bullshit then this is the result.

-------------------

News.com.au

Razor brand Gillette says it is “shifting the spotlight from social issues to local heroes” after an ad delving into “toxic masculinity” caused a customer backlash.

The new ad, which launched last week, stars Australian firefighter and personal trainer Ben Ziekenheiner. “I’ve been a firefighter for 19 years,” Mr Ziekenheiner says in the ad.

“People sometimes ask if it’s scary. It can be, but like anyone who has a job to do, you prepare — not just in terms of your equipment but also mentally and physically.”

The ad spruiks the brand’s SkinGuard range, highlighting the issue of sensitive skin for men who shave every day — including firefighters, who are required to be clean-shaven as it enables a proper seal for their breathing mask.

“We have a very clear strategy when it comes to how we authentically connect with our consumers,” said Manu Airan, associate brand director for Gillette Australia and New Zealand.

“We will continue to talk about what is important to Gillette and that is representing men at their best and helping men do their best. That is not changing. We will continue to do that and demonstrate it in different ways.”

Parent company P&G last month took a nearly $12 billion ($US8 billion) writedown in the value of the 118-year-old shaving business it purchased in 2005 for $84 billion ($US57 billion).

While the company blamed the writedown primarily on a strengthening US dollar, it said the non-cash impairment charge was also due to increased competition and a shrinking market for razors as men shave less frequently.

Mr Airan said while shaving frequency had been reducing, “for us it’s an opportunity”. “Despite shaving frequency decreasing our sales have increased (thanks to) the innovation we are bringing to consumers’ unmet needs,” he said.

Conservative critics were quick to connect the writedown to the brand’s recent push into progressive social issues, which rival Schick has pointedly mocked with a series of lighthearted ads taglined “The Man I Am”.

Read more

DEA tracked every opioid pill sold in the US. The data is out—and it’s horrific

arstechnica.com 

 

Between 2006 and 2012, opioid drug makers and distributors flooded the country with 76 billion pills of oxycodone and hydrocodone—highly addictive opioid pain medications that sparked the epidemic of abuse and overdoses that killed nearly 100,000 people in that time period. 

 

As the epidemic surged over the seven-year period, so did the supply. The companies increased distribution from 8.4 billion in 2006 to 12.6 billion in 2012, a jump of roughly 50%. In all, the deluge of pills was enough to supply every adult and child in the country with around 36 opioid pills per year. Just a 10-day supply can hook 1 in 5 people into being long-term users, researchers have determined. 

 

The stunning supply figures were first reported by the Washington Post and come from part of a database compiled by the Drug Enforcement Administration that tracked the fate of every opioid pill sold in America, from manufacturers to individual pharmacies. A federal court in Ohio released the data this week as part of a massive consolidated court case against nearly two-dozen opioid makers and distributors, brought by nearly 2,000 cities, towns, and counties. The local governments allege that the opioid companies conspired to saturate the country with the potent painkillers to soak up billions in profits. The companies deny the allegations, arguing generally that they were serving the needs of patients. 

 

According to an analysis of the data by the Post, just three companies made 88% of the opioid pills: SpecGx, Actavis Pharma, and Par Pharmaceutical, a subsidiary of Endo Pharmaceuticals. Purdue Pharma ranked fourth, making 3% of the pills. Just six companies distributed 75% of the pills: McKesson Corp., Walgreens, Cardinal Health, AmerisourceBergen, CVS, and Walmart. 

 

Read More

How American Corporations Are Policing Online Speech Worldwide

Gizmodo

The architects of Silicon Valley’s big social media platforms never imagined they’d someday be the global speech police. And yet, as their market share and global user bases have increased over the years, that’s exactly what they’ve become. Today, the number of people who tweet is nearly the population of the United States. About a quarter of the internet’s total users watch YouTube videos, and nearly one-third of the entire world uses Facebook. Regardless of the intent of their founders, none of these platforms were ever merely a means of connecting people; from their early days, they fulfilled greater needs. They are the newspaper, the marketplace, the television. They are the billboard, the community newsletter, and the town square.

And yet, they are corporations, with their own speech rights and ability to set the rules as they like—rules that more often than not reflect the beliefs, however misguided, of their founders. Mark Zuckerberg has long professed beliefs that representing oneself through more than one identity indicates a lack of integrity, and that conversations held under one’s real name are more civil—despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. As such, Facebook users are forced to use their “authentic identity”—a name found on some form of written ID—regardless of whether it puts them in danger, or at risk of exposing a piece of themselves that could put them in harm’s way. It prevents youth from exploring their sexuality freely for fear of being outed; people with chronic illnesses from engaging with support groups out of concern that insurance companies or employers might learn of their plight; and activists living under repressive regimes from organizing online.

Read more

Raytheon Technologies merger, power-hogging industry trends and the racket of war

Christian Sorensen
Dissident Voice

 Last week two giant war corporations, Raytheon and United Technologies, announced they would merge in early 2020. The new behemoth, to be known as Raytheon Technologies, is expected to have a combined value of over $100 billion in capitalist markets. Recent history provides context to understand today's war industry and the nature of this merger.

The nineteen-nineties witnessed a lot of mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. war industry. Some of the bigger moves were Boeing merging with McDonnell Douglas, Lockheed acquiring Martin Marietta, and Raytheon gobbling up Hughes Aircraft. These moves occurred in parallel to another phenomenon: Home and abroad, the Pentagon effectively doubled down on the corporatization of military functions. Jobs that once were carried out by the troops (e.g. mowing the lawn, serving chow, logistics, eavesdropping on governments, transportation, combat) were increasingly in the private domain, up for grabs to the shrewdest corporation.
The Clinton White House, a country club of neoliberal ideology, was fully onboard. It encouraged the corporatization of the War Department. This aligned well with President Clinton's other accomplishments in office: attacking sovereign nations (e.g. expanding sanctions against Iran's oil sector in 1995, and launching industry ordnance at Afghanistan, the Balkans, Iraq, and Sudan); brutalizing the destitute, working poor, and caged (via the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform & Immigrant Responsibility Act, the 1996 Prison Litigation Reform Act, the 1996 Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Act, and the 1994 Violent Crime Control & Law Enforcement Act); and aiding corporate greed (by passing NAFTA and the 1999 Financial Services Modernization Act and boosting spending on war). One of Clinton's most damaging achievements, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, complemented these activities by deregulating the telecoms and allowing cross-ownership in corporate media, clogging the information space with info-tainment and permitting corporate ideology to further dominate our perception of the world around us. Support for neoliberal economic polices, including the corporatization of war, is one of many traits that both parties in the D.C. regime share.

When the dust settled at the end of the 1990s, three beasts hogged about two-thirds of the power in the U.S. war industry: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon. These corporations set out to please shareholders and insatiable Wall Street investment firms. The Pentagon had less leverage over the war industry at this time, because, in part, these three beasts were nearly the only game in town. War corporations soon stepped up their game, influencing Capitol Hill with greater ferocity and creativity. Campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures increased. And more titans of capital cycled from war corporations through the Pentagon's leadership ranks. The war industry also pursued more foreign military sales, including increased sales to brutal regimes like Mubarak's Egypt, the House of Saud, and the Zionist Entity known as Israel. Enter 9.11. With Muslims to bomb and Asian countries to occupy, the Department of War acceded to full corporatization.

Read more

Monsanto paid American Council on Science and Health front group to hide evidence

Dr. Joseph Mercola
Mercola.com

Monsanto's new owner, Bayer, has been slammed with judgments in the first three Roundup lawsuits to go to trial. The verdicts, which have sided with plaintiffs in all cases so far, have found not only that Roundup herbicide caused the plaintiffs' cancers but also that Monsanto engaged in malice, oppression or fraud in their attempts to cover up Roundup's toxicity.¹

Some of the evidence brought to light during the trials has been particularly eye-opening, including internal emails showing that Monsanto paid an industry front group for the favor of publishing pro-glyphosate media, right around the time the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined it to be a probable carcinogen.²
 

Monsanto paid front group for glyphosate-favorable content

The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) is a nonprofit organization that claims to be a "pro-science consumer advocacy organization" with the focus of publically supporting "evidence-based science and medicine." Their website states:³

We do not represent any industry. We were created to be the science alternative to "news" that is often little more than hype based on exaggerated findings. We help policymakers see past scaremongers and activist groups who have targeted GMOs, vaccines, conventional agriculture, nuclear power, natural gas, and 'chemicals,' while peddling health scares and fad diets. We fight back against activists who have attacked the credibility of the overwhelming consensus of academic and private sector scientists who dispute their claims, undermining the integrity of the scientific enterprise.

ACSH also claims to be funded mostly by readers, but their financial statements do not reveal who, exactly, their more than $1 million in yearly revenue comes from.⁴ In 2015, however, internal emails revealed that Monsanto contributed to ACSH, with impeccable timing, as IARC's glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) was set to be released.

The emails were first revealed as evidence during Dewayne Johnson's Roundup lawsuit. The trial, the first to be heard, ended with Monsanto being ordered to pay $289 million in damages to Johnson, although the award was later reduced to $78 million.

The evidence made another appearance during the third Roundup case, in which a married couple, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, claimed they both developed Non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regular use of Roundup. The jury decided in the Pilliods' favor, ordering the chemical giant to pay $2 billion to its victims. 

Read more

Propaganda Is The Root Of All Our Problems

Caitlin Johnstone

Medium

A new article by Forbes reports that the CEO of Crowdstrike, the extremely shady cybersecurity corporation which was foundational in the construction of the official CIA/CNN Russian hacking narrative, is now a billionaire.

George Kurtz ascended to the billionaire rankings on the back of soaring stocks immediately after the company went public, carried no doubt on the winds of the international fame it gained from its central protagonistic role in the most well-known hacking news story of all time. A loyal servant of empire well-rewarded.

Never mind that US government insiders like Hillary Clinton had been prepping for escalations against Russia well in advance of the 2016 elections, and that their preexisting agendas to shove a geostrategic obstacle off the world stage benefitted from the hacking narrative as much as George Kurtz did.

Never mind that Crowdstrike is tied to the NATO narrative management firmknown as the Atlantic Council, which receives funding from the US government, the EU, NATO, Gulf states and powerful international oligarchs. Never mind either that Crowdstrike was financed with a whopping $100 million from Google, which has had a cozy relationship with US intelligence agencies since its very inception.

Never mind that to this day the DNC servers have not been examined by the FBI, nor indeed were they examined by the Special Counsel of Robert “Iraq has WMD” Mueller, preferring instead to go with the analyses of this extremely shady outfit with extensive and well-documented ties with the oligarchic leaders of the US-centralized empire. Also never mind that the Crowdstrike analyst who led forensics on those DNC servers had in fact worked for and was promoted by Robert Mueller while the two were in the FBI.

Read more

Military-Industrial Blockbuster: United Technologies To Buy Raytheon, Creating One Of World's Largest Defense Firms

Zero Hedge

United Technologies has agreed to buy Raytheon in an all stock deal, forming one of the world's largest aerospace and defense companies with more than $74 billion in revenue and $13.5 billion in EBITDA, through one of the industry’s biggest deals ever.



With $69 billion in pure A&D sales, the new company will be the third largest Aerospace and Defense company in the world after Boeing and Airbus.



Looking ahead, the combined company is expected to generate tremendous cash flow growth...

Read more

From Glyphosate to Front Groups: Fraud, Deception and Toxic Tactics

Colin Todhunter
Off Guardian

nvironmentalist Dr Rosemary Mason has just written to the Editor-in-Chief of the British Medical Journal and the British Medical Association Council Chairman, Chaand Nagpaul.

Her purpose is to not only draw attention to the impact of biocides, not least that of glyphosate, on health and the environment but also to bring attention to the corruption that allows this to continue.

Along with her letter, she enclosed a 13-page document. Readers can access the fully referenced document here: European Chemicals Agency classifies glyphosate as a substance that causes serious eye damage (or see the embedded version below).

It is worth reading in full to appreciate the conflicts of interest and the corruption that has led to the rise in certain illnesses and the destruction of the natural environment.

By way of a brief summary, the key points raised by Dr Mason and her claims include the following.

• The European Chemicals Agency classifies glyphosate as a substance that causes serious eye damage. There has been a massive increase in the use of glyphosate in recent years. An increase in cataracts has been verified by epidemiological studies in England and by a 2016 WHO report.
• There are shockingly high levels of weed killer in UK breakfast cereals. After testing these cereals at the Health Research Institute in Iowa, Dr Fagan, director of the centre, said: “These results are consistently concerning. The levels consumed in a single daily helping of any one of these cereals, even the one with the lowest level of contamination, is sufficient to put the person’s glyphosate levels above the levels that cause fatty liver disease in rats (and likely in people).”
• The amount of glyphosate in tap water in South Wales has increased tenfold in a very short period.
• Glyphosate is largely responsible for the destruction of biodiversity and an increase in the prevalence of many serious health conditions.
• There are massive conflicts of interest throughout various agencies in the EU that ensure harmful agrochemicals like glyphosate come to market and remain there.
• In fact, a global industry has emerged to give ‘advice’ on biocides regulation. This results in regulatory bodies effectively working to further the commercial interests of the pesticide industry.
• The European Food Safety Authority sanctioned increased maximum pesticide residue levels (MRL) at the request of industry (Monsanto in this case, to 100 times the previously authorised MRL).
• The Washington-based International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) is used by corporate backers to counter public health policies. Its members have occupied key positions on EU and UN regulatory panels. It is, however, an industry lobby group that masquerades as a scientific health charity. The ILSI describes its mission as “pursuing objectivity, clarity and reproducibility” to “benefit the public good”. But researchers from the University of Cambridge, Bocconi University in Milan, and the US Right to Know campaign assessed over 17,000 pages of documents under US freedom of information laws to present evidence of influence peddling.
• ILSI Vice-President, Prof Alan Boobis, is currently the Chairman of the UK Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (CoT) (2015-2021). He was directly responsible for authorising chemicals such as glyphosate, chlorothalonil, clothianidin and chlorpyrifos that are destroying human health and creating a crisis in biodiversity. His group and others have authorised glyphosate repeatedly. He and David Coggon, the previous Chairman of CoT (2008-2015), were appointed as experts on Science Advice for Policy by European Academies (SAPEA), a group allied with the agrochemical industry and is fighting for higher pesticide exposure.
• Jean-Claude Juncker the President of the European Commission who, against a petition from more than 1.5 million European citizens, re-authorised glyphosate in December 2017 for a further five years. He set up the Science Advisory Mechanism, aiming to put industry-friendly personnel on various committees.

Read more

GcMAF - The Persecution of David Noakes and Lyn Thyer

Ian Davis

In This Together

Recently business man David Noakes was released from prison having served six months following his conviction on four charges relating to the manufacture, sale and supply of an unlicensed medicine. Noakes pleaded guilty to all charges including one of money laundering. This is something the MHRA and the mainstream media (MSM) have been very keen to highlight because it casts Noakes as a ‘real criminal.’

Money laundering is an automatically levied charge if anyone ever sells an unlicensed ‘medication.’ Pleading guilty to selling an unlicensed medication automatically makes you guilty of so called ‘money laundering.’ David Noakes is no BCCI executive.

Over 6 years Immuno Biotech made £7.6 million selling GcMAF. Out of that they paid a staff team of 27 including 4 research scientists, 7 doctors, 2 ultrasound staff, 4 nurses and admin staff for 6 years. They paid for the laboratories, staff travel (a significant expense) and accommodation. Any additional revenue they pumped back into GcMAF research and development. The CEO of GlaxoSmithKline earns approximately £6 million every single year.

The alleged medicine is not a synthetic manufactured pharmaceutical. It is actually derived from naturally occurring human protein. It is called ‘Gc Protein-derived Macrophage Activating Factor,’ or GcMAf for short. How and why GcMAF is being withheld from the public, despite an abundance of supporting scientific evidence, reveals a system of corrupt corporate control designed to profit from our sickness and death.

The scientific evidence clearly shows that GcMAF is potentially the most effective cancer treatment ever discovered. At David Noakes trial Judge Nicholas Lorraine-Smith made it clear that GcMAF was not on trial. He accepted that Noakes had acted out of a genuine desire to treat people; he noted that GcMAF had been instrumental in successfully treating people who had been written off by the medical profession and added that he was looking forward to GcMAF being made available to the public. He then sentenced David Noakes to prison.

Read more

Public health officials in New Hampshire publicly admit that MMR vaccine causes measles

Ethan Huff
Natural News

There’s a pretty big chink forming in the armor surrounding the pro-vaccine narrative, as health officials in New Hampshire recently admitted that Merck & Co.’s combination MMR vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella was the true cause of a measles outbreak in the area that rabid pro-vaxxers were quick to blame on the unvaccinated.

When “individual one” from the city of Keene first contracted measles, it was assumed based on mainstream media propaganda that the only possible cause was that this individual wasn’t vaccinated with MMR. But as it turns out, this individual was vaccinated with MMR – and we now know that adverse reactions caused by MMR caused this individual to develop measles.

Tests conducted by local health authorities, who likely weren’t pleased with what they found, determined that individual one became ill as a consequence of being vaccinated with MMR – this eye-opening finding completely shattering the official narrative that MMR is 100 percent safe and effective always.

It’s important to note that, before these test results were released, public health officials in New Hampshire were busy drumming up maximum fear and hysteria about the need for a mass vaccination campaign. But once the truth came out, they quickly went silent, and even went so far as to deny that anything had even happened – in other words, just move along, folks.

“Therefore, [the Department of Health and Human Services] is suspending additional public health interventions,” reads a statement issued by DHHS after it was determined that Merck’s MMR vaccine had caused this case of measles. “There is no contagious measles known to be circulating in the community.”

Read more

GREEN WITH ENVY: Amazon Says It Will Buy Greenpeace USA In $212 Million Deal

 

realpolitik.com
via earthfirstjournal.org

– “…Amazon says that Greenpeace USA CEO, Annie Leonard, will remain in that role. “She can deal with all the calls from pissed-off hippies” said one unnamed Amazon communications official…“Greenpeace has been profiting off of grassroots environmental activism for years,” said Bezos, adding, “they’re doing an amazing job at it and we want that to continue”

SM: Hallelujah!…I’ve been saying Greenpeace stock is a major play for years…

Amazon Says It Will Buy Greenpeace USA In $212 Million Deal

Amazon is buying Greenpeace USA, in a merger that values Greenpeace USA at $212 million dollars. The internet retailer (and book seller, pharmaceutical company, grocery store, etc…) says it’s buying Greenpeace USA for the name recognition, industrial climbing skills, and their warehouses, but will be laying off about half of Greenpeace’s employees.

Greenpeace, which was founded in 1971 as a small direct action-focused environmental group, has expanded into a large multinational NGO with an operating budget of over 200 million dollars. Greenpeace USA is the US affiliate.

Amazon CEO and third creepiest man on earth, Jeff Bezos, justified the deal to investors, arguing, “Our marketing algorithms increasingly show that people are concerned about the decline of our Earth’s living systems, and I think any viable company would move to capture that widening demographic.” The sale, which has not yet been approved by Amazon shareholders, is expected to be concluded in the second half of 2019.

Amazon says that Greenpeace USA CEO, Annie Leonard, will remain in that role. “She can deal with all the calls from pissed-off hippies” said one unnamed Amazon communications official.

“Greenpeace has been profiting off of grassroots environmental activism for years,” said Bezos, adding, “they’re doing an amazing job at it and we want that to continue.”

Read more 

See also: COVER-UP: Greenpeace Co-founder – Global Warming A “Hoax And Scam” Pushed By Greedy Government Scientists

Scientists Are Pushing For A Super Vaccine—All Immunizations In One Shot

Yelena Sukhoterina
AltHealth Works

The number of childhood vaccines has grown exponentially in the last few decades creating a lot of controversy and debate.

This still growing list with an increasing number of side-effects, toxic adjuvants and chronic health concerns is being taken increasingly seriously by parents and adults who refuse to blindly trust the currently money-driven pharmaceutical industry. 


While many would prefer to go back to the only six or so shots their grandparents received, the researchers are now attempting to come out with a product that may be even more threatening to our health than the current vaccine situation.

A global team is working on lifelong, one-shot vaccines.

They are starting with one flu shot given at birth to last a lifetime, and predicting that all immunizations can come next in one shot.

The flu shot that would last a lifetime could be available to the consumers in as early as two years from now, reported 7NEWS Sydney. The research is run by the Human Vaccine Project, which is affiliated with medical centers, and also pharmaceutical and vaccine makers like GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer.

Ironically, the expert to lead this super vaccine research Tobi Kollman admits that “[the researchers] know vaccines work but [they] don’t know how they work.”

Flu vaccines work 50% or less percent of the time because the virus is constantly changing and is hard to predict. Yet even though the experts do not understand how vaccines work (and likely how they create under-reported side effects), and cannot make an annual flu shot that works well, they are determined to create one that is supposed to last a lifetime.


Kollman says the vaccine will be created because the team has a ‘can-do attitude’ and “[puts] their money where their mouth is.”

The consumers are finding all of this extremely problematic as evidenced from comments on the article.

Read more

Eliminating Free Speech The Smart Way

Jeff Thomas
International Man

Left-wing activists have recently been increasingly active in seeking to limit opposing political viewpoints, in order to create a more ubiquitous “groupthink.” One effort in accomplishing this has been to propose the creation of a “Human Rights Committee” in order to monitor the economic transactions of “white supremacist groups and anti-Islam activists.”

This should not be surprising, as, throughout the former Free World, collectivists are, increasingly, coming out of the closet and seeking to eliminate any and all opposition to their cause.

And this should not, in itself, be alarming, as it should be both predictable and understandable that any politically driven group, be it left-leaning or right-leaning, would seek to gain an advantage over its opposite number.

What may be a real cause for alarm, however, is that those whom they are trying to rope into their effort are banks and corporations… and that they’re succeeding without a shot being fired.

It might be hoped that those champions of industry and commerce would at least put up a perfunctory fight, but clearly, this is not the case. They’re not only caving in; they’re entirely on board.

As an example, MasterCard is considering the selective restriction of individuals from their services and funds. Those individuals would be the ones that held unacceptable political views.

But they’re not the first in the queue to economically force people to have “correct” views. PayPal and Patreon have barred selected individuals from receiving payments through their services when those individuals have been identified as holding “extreme views.” More alarmingly, they’ve been supported in this decision by the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Journalist Ben Swann has commented that this means that the US government has granted “big corporations the ability to control what voices are heard.”

Read more

“Manufacturing Dissent”: The Anti-globalization Movement is Funded by the Corporate Elites

Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global Research

This article was first published in 2010.

The author’s introductory quote was first formulated in 2001 in the context of the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City which was held a few months before 9/11

“Everything the [Ford] Foundation did could be regarded as “making the World safe for capitalism”, reducing social tensions by helping to comfort the afflicted, provide safety valves for the angry, and improve the functioning of government (McGeorge Bundy, National Security Advisor to Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson (1961-1966), President of the Ford Foundation, (1966-1979))

“By providing the funding and the policy framework to many concerned and dedicated people working within the non-profit sector, the ruling class is able to co-opt leadership from grassroots communities, … and is able to make the funding, accounting, and evaluation components of the work so time consuming and onerous that social justice work is virtually impossible under these conditions” (Paul Kivel, You Call this Democracy, Who Benefits, Who Pays and Who Really Decides, 2004, p. 122 )

***

“Under the New World Order, the ritual of inviting “civil society” leaders into the inner circles of power –while simultaneously repressing the rank and file– serves several important functions. First, it says to the World that the critics of globalization “must make concessions” to earn the right to mingle. Second, it conveys the illusion that while the global elites should –under what is euphemistically called democracy– be subject to criticism, they nonetheless rule legitimately. And third, it says “there is no alternative” to globalization: fundamental change is not possible and the most we can hope is to engage with these rulers in an ineffective “give and take”.

While the “Globalizers” may adopt a few progressive phrases to demonstrate they have good intentions, their fundamental goals are not challenged. And what this “civil society mingling” does is to reinforce the clutch of the corporate establishment while weakening and dividing the protest movement. An understanding of this process of co-optation is important, because tens of thousands of the most principled young people in Seattle, Prague and Quebec City [1999-2001] are involved in the anti-globalization protests because they reject the notion that money is everything, because they reject the impoverishment of millions and the destruction of fragile Earth so that a few may get richer.

This rank and file and some of their leaders as well, are to be applauded. But we need to go further. We need to challenge the right of the “Globalizers” to rule. This requires that we rethink the strategy of protest. Can we move to a higher plane, by launching mass movements in our respective countries, movements that bring the message of what globalization is doing, to ordinary people? For they are the force that must be mobilized to challenge those who plunder the Globe.” (Michel Chossudovsky,  The Quebec Wall, April  2001)

“Manufactured Consent” vs. “Manufactured Dissent”

The term “manufacturing consent” was initially coined by Edward S Herman and Noam Chomsky.

“Manufacturing consent” describes a propaganda model used by the corporate media to sway public opinion and “inculcate individuals with values and beliefs…”:

The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda. (Manufacturing Consent by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky)

“Manufacturing consent” implies manipulating and shaping public opinion. It establishes conformity and acceptance to authority and social hierarchy. It seeks compliance to an established social order. “Manufacturing consent” describes the submission of public opinion to the mainstream media narrative, to its lies and fabrications. 

Read more