Challenging Biosolids in Farming

EPA  Sued for Allowing Sewage that Contains ‘Forever Chemicals’ to be Used as Fertilizer

‘Biosolids’ is sewage sludge that has been flushed down toilets and includes waste, chemicals, microplastics, heavy metals and more, and it is being used as fertilizer on American farmlands. The EPA estimates more than 2.4 million tons of biosolids are applied to land annually as fertilizer on farms, pastures, parks, home gardens, and other lands. A group of farmers and ranchers whose livelihoods and health were decimated after PFAS-laden biosolids from neighboring properties leached onto their land have filed a lawsuit against the US Environmental Protection Agency. PFAS are known as “forever chemicals” because they do not readily break down in the environment and they bioaccumulate in our bodies and biomagnify in the food chain.  Under the Clean Water Act, the EPA is required to identify toxic pollutants in biosolids and adopt regulations to prevent harm to human health or the environment, but it has failed to do so.

Dr. Kaufman has a video about how you can avoid biosolid pollution. Dr. Kaufman will be a speaker at G. Edward Griffin’s Red Pill Expo this weekend, June 15 and 16 in Rapid City, South Dakota. You can watch all of the Red Pill Expo speakers from the comfort of your home online by clicking on this link: https://redpilluniversity.org/expo-homepage/

In the video, Dr. Kaufman discusses how biosolids are poisoning our food supply (and ruining your health); How farmers have been tricked into using a “cost-effective,” yet toxic, fertilizer without knowing it; And how you can evade this synthetic pollutant and its dangerous effects once and for all.

Link for video:        https://rumble.com/v4hkt4u-healthy-living-livestream-biosolids-a-toxic-trick-played-on-farmers.html

.Washington, DC — Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) faces a federal lawsuit over its failure to prevent toxic per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in biosolid fertilizers from contaminating farmlands, livestock, crops, and water supplies. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) filed the lawsuit on behalf of a group of farmers and ranchers whose livelihoods and health were decimated after PFAS-laden biosolids from neighboring properties leached onto their land.

Biosolids is a term used to refer to sewage sludge. EPA estimates more than 2.4 million tons are applied to land annually as fertilizer on farms, pastures, parks, home gardens, and other lands. Biosolids are made from both municipal and industrial waste, and although they are treated to remove pathogens and some other materials, PFAS are not removed during treatment and EPA does not currently limit the amount of PFAS they can contain.

PFAS are known as “forever chemicals” because they do not readily break down in the environment and they bioaccumulate in our bodies and biomagnify in the food chain. When biosolids containing PFAS are land-applied, these dangerous chemicals leach into soil and ground water, and are then taken up by plants, which are then consumed by humans, livestock, and wildlife.

Under the Clean Water Act, EPA is required to identify toxic pollutants in biosolids and adopt regulations to prevent harm to human health or the environment. However, in the more than 35 years this law has been on the books, EPA has only promulgated nine sewage sludge regulations for land application despite having identified more than 350 pollutants, including at least 10 PFAS in biosolids for which, in PEER’s view, there is sufficient scientific evidence to regulate.

“EPA is avoiding its longstanding legal responsibility to protect our health and environment from PFAS in biosolids,” stated PEER Science Policy Director Kyla Bennett, a scientist and attorney formerly with EPA. “It is unconscionable that EPA has allowed these toxic chemicals to threaten our nation’s food and water supply.”

The plaintiffs in this case are just a few of the many farmers across the country grappling with agricultural contamination calamities linked to biosolids. Moreover, each subsequent application of biosolids increases the PFAS levels in soils and waters, thereby exacerbating existing problems.

In PEER’s discussions with EPA staff following the filing of its Notice of Intent to Sue this February, it became clear that the agency has no definitive timeline for regulatory action and that the scope of its current efforts would be inadequate. PEER believes that litigation is the only avenue for establishing a concrete and expeditious timeline for stemming what is becoming a threat to America’s food security.

“PFAS poisoning of farmlands is fast becoming a national agricultural emergency,” added PEER Staff Counsel Laura Dumais. “Farmers whose lands have been decimated by biosolids consistently ask, ‘why does EPA allow this?’ And they’re absolutely right. EPA needs to act immediately to protect farmers and our food supply from this toxic mess.”

Since the plaintiffs filed their notice of intent to sue EPA, several other groups have submitted their own notices of intent and are preparing to join the suit.

Read the lawsuit

See criminal investigation of PFAS biosolid contamination on Texas farms

View recent product liability suit on PFAS-biosolids

Look at public health risks to PFAS in biosolid fertilizers

Read full article here…

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2024/06/epa-sued-for-allowing-sewage-that-contains-forever-chemicals-to-be-used-as-fertilizer/

If You Are What You Eat, Then What are We?

Episode 460 – The Future of Food

by  | Jun 11, 2024 | PodcastsVideos | 2 comments

We all know the problems of the modern factory farming system. But, as bad as things are, they’re about to get even worse. New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself. This is The Future of Food on The Corbett Report.

Video player not working? Use these links to watch it somewhere else!

WATCH ON: ARCHIVE / BITCHUTE ODYSEE / RUMBLE / ROKFIN SUBSTACK or DOWNLOAD THE MP4


TRANSCRIPT:

If it is true that “you are what you eat,” as the old adage has it, then what does that make us?

As consumers of heavily processed, chemically treated, GMO-infested gunk, we in the modern, developed world have solved the problem of hunger that plagued our forebears since time immemorial by handing our food sovereignty over to a handful of corporate conglomerates.

The result of this handover has been the creation of a factory farming system in which genetically engineered crops are doused in glyphosate and livestock are herded into tiny pens where they live their entire lives in fetid squalor, pumped up with antibiotics and growth hormones until they are slaughtered and shipped off to the supermarkets and fast food chains.

There are plenty of documentaries and exposés detailing the dangers of this industrial farming system that we find ourselves beholden to. Any number of activists ringing the alarm about these problems. Numerous campaigns and marches organized to raise awareness about these issues.

Yet still, nation after nation gets fatter and sicker as traditional diets based on fresh produce sourced from local farmers are displaced by the fast food pink slime sourced from the industrial farms of the Big Food oligopoly.

But, as bad as things may be, they’re about to get even worse. As crisis after crisis disrupts the food supply, the “solution” to these problems has already been prepared.

New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself.

This is your guide to The Future of Food. You are watching The Corbett Report.

Food As A Weapon

So what is food, anyway?

To a normal human being whose head is screwed on straight, that sounds like a dumb question. Food is fuel for the body, obviously.

To read the rest of the transcript, go to the source:    https://corbettreport.com/future-of-food/

WHAT!!!! Increased CO@ Does Not Cause Climate Change?

Cows Do NOT Cause ‘Climate Change,’ Top Study Confirms

A bombshell new study has debunked the globalist narrative that emissions from cows are causing “climate change” while proving that cattle herds actually lower methane gas levels in the atmosphere.

In recent years, unelected foreign organizations such as the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN) have been demonizing the agriculture industry while calling for limits, or even bans, on the general public’s consumption of meat and dairy products.

The WEF, UN, and green agenda politicians argue that methane gasses from cattle, or “cow farts,” cause “global warming.”

This so-called “settled science” on alleged cattle emissions has led to increasing scrutiny of farmers around the world.

Global governments have responded by ramping up regulations for the agriculture industry in an effort to shut farms down.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that 11.1% of emissions worldwide come from livestock production.

The FAO released a report last year urging Americans to eat less meat.

The UN argues that if people “fight climate change” by eating less meat, there will be less demand for cows.

If there are fewer cows, there will be fewer emissions, according to the UN.

However, new research from Alltech and Archbold suggests that these anti-cow claims from globalists are a hoax.

According to the new study, blaming cows for methane emissions ignores cattle’s relationship with the land.

The researchers found that, if grazing cattle were removed from pastures, emissions would actually go up, not down.

Besides trying to convince people to change their diets so we can get rid of more cows, other efforts seek to attack the emissions at the source.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation awarded a $4.8 million grant to a London-based company to develop gas masks for cows.

The masks are a similar concept to carbon capture technology.

Other research is looking into food additives that go into the cows’ feed.

Bill Gates is also pushing for cows to be genetically “modified” to advance this agenda.

The additives seek to reduce the amount of methane emissions coming out of the animal.

In Ireland, dairy farmers were looking at possibly having to kill a lot of healthy cattle in order to comply with the WEF’s “Net Zero” emission reduction targets.

Dr. Vaughn Holder, research project manager for beef nutrition at Alltech, and Dr. Betsey Boughton, director of agroecology at Archbold, studied the impacts that cattle production has on the ecosystem on a wetlands pasture at Buck Island Ranch.

The ranch is about 150 miles northwest of Miami, Florida.

The researchers found that 19%-30% of methane emissions were from the cattle.

However, the rest of the methane was from the wetland soils.

If the cows are removed, it actually increases the amount of methane the wetland ecosystems give off, the research shows.

Globalists argue that methane is more potent in terms of “greenhouse warming” than carbon dioxide.

Yet, methane only lasts about 12 years.

So reducing methane can have a more immediate impact on warming than reducing carbon dioxide, according to the study.

Cattle emissions are often demonized in a similar way to fossil fuel emissions, the researchers note.

When we burn fossil fuels, the emissions go into the air. So eliminating a coal-fired power plant, for example, removes an emissions source, which produces a drop in emissions.

“There is a far more complex process in agriculture than it is in fossil fuel systems,” Holder said.

Ruminants, as they’re called, which includes cattle and sheep, have a large chamber in front of their stomach that acts as a fermentation factory.

Inside are bacteria, yeasts, fungi, and other microorganisms that help the animals digest grasses that humans can’t.

Methane is a natural waste product of that process.

In a series of videos on the Buck Island research, Holder explains that cattle take a lot of plants humans can’t eat.

The cows turn them into edible proteins humans can consume, increasing global food security.

WATCH:

The animals also consume a lot of food byproducts that can’t be used for human consumption.

For example, orange pulp used in orange juice production can be fed to livestock.

Those byproducts can be used in composting, but composting increases emissions five times more than feeding it to dairy cows, Holder said.

If byproducts are disposed of in landfills, the emissions go up 50 times over feeding it to dairy cows.

It is possible to put additives in the cows’ diet to inhibit that methane production, but at about 30% inhibition, Holder explained, you start to see negative effects.

There are some viable strategies to reduce emissions with additives, but that can only go so far.

Additionally, cattle are part of a carbon cycle.

If studies only model the emissions coming from the animal, the rest of the ecosystem is being ignored, Holder said.

The study notes that the ecosystem is absorbing carbon as a result of the animals being on the land.

The research alliance between Archbold and Alltech is increasing their understanding of this process, Dr. Holder explained.

“We weren’t looking at food production from an ecosystem standpoint before we came together with Betsey’s [Boughton] group,” Holder said.

“So it really has adjusted our perspective on how big we need to be looking at these systems in order to get this right.”

When cattle graze on land, the plants prioritize root growth over the plant matter above the surface.

The deeper the roots, the more plants sequester carbon in the soil through the photosynthesis process.

Grazing also removes grasses from a pasture, reducing the dead plant matter that falls into the soil and decomposes, which also produces greenhouse gasses.

“It’s a natural process,” Dr. Boughton said.

“We’re not saying that’s bad. Wetlands are good.

“That’s just a natural part of a wetland.”

At the Buck Island Ranch, Boughton and her team measured the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted on a pasture that had no grazing.

They compared it to pasture that had grazing.

What they found is that cattle grazing ends up as a carbon sink, meaning there’s a net reduction in the amount of emissions from that pasture compared to pastures with no cows.

“From my perspective, it’s more of a proof-of-concept type evaluation,” Holder said.

“We’re showing that we need to be looking at more than just emissions if we want to have a decent idea what’s happening in those ecosystems and what the effects are on global warming or food security or whatever it might be.”

There’s a lot of carbon locked up in the soil, he said.

The exact impact of removing grazing from those lands isn’t fully understood.

“It’s sort of an unintended consequence if we pull animals off the land and we don’t know what effect the next land use is going to have on those carbon stocks,” Holder said.

The livestock industry has long held that it’s being unfairly demonized in the effort to stop “climate change.”

The Alltech-Archbold research is showing that farmers are correct and the globalist narrative is nothing more than a hoax.

This news comes after a recent peer-reviewed study provided conclusive scientific evidence proving that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in Earth’s atmosphere cannot cause “global warming.”

Dr. Jan Kubicki led a group of world-renowned Polish scientists to study the impact of increases in CO2 emissions on the Earth’s global temperatures.

However, not only did they find that higher levels of CO2 made no difference, but they also proved that it simply isn’t possible for increases in carbon dioxide to cause temperatures to rise.

Kubicki and his team recently published three papers which all conclude that Earth’s atmosphere is already “saturated” with carbon dioxide.

This saturation means that, even at greatly increased levels of CO2, the “greenhouse gas” will not cause temperatures to rise.

READ MORE – Top Study: Carbon Emissions CANNOT Cause ‘Global Warming’

from:    https://slaynews.com/news/cows-do-not-cause-climate-change-top-study-confirms/

and Now, Farming is Illegal?

UN Announces Plan to Ban Most Farming and Meat, Triggering Shortages and Starvation

The UN claims that starvation was caused from the COVID pandemic, but the cause was the lockdowns. There has been a 40% average increase in global mortality following the COVID shots. The UN should be rejected rather than trusted.

Link for video:    https://www.bitchute.com/video/OZjffE5INfJf/

Alex Jones said that when populations in the third world spend half of its money on food and energy, there is civil unrest; when 60% or more is spent on food and energy, the country is set for destruction. Most of the world is now spending more than 50% off its income on food and energy. He said that our food is soaked in glyphosate and that most breast cancer is caused by this herbicide poison. US mayors are selling out the American public by endorsing UN programs. Dr. Peter McCullough says authorities are doing mass PCR testing on animals and that the Bird Flu is an artificial crisis used for mass culling of poultry that will lead to food shortages. He said it will drive fear going into US elections.

.

John Williams explains how the UN WHO policies will affect the availability and cost of meat in the US. Ranchers are being pushed out of business and meat will become scarce, which will lead to skyrocketing prices. Some people will turn to “plant-based meat” that will cost a fraction of the price of meat. He explained that the business model for plant-based food as restaurants across the US are closing. New treaties are being introduced to change food production. Food quality is likely to drop in the US.

The Verge:      https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/29/24054325/food-sustainable-agriculture-diet-benefits-report

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2024/05/un-announces-plan-to-ban-most-farming-and-meat-triggering-shortages-and-starvation/

Coming Out of the Dark

Dark matter mysteries unraveled by researchers in underground South Dakota mine

In this 2019 image, components used to assemble the dark matter-search experiment LZ—including digital electronics developed at Rochester—are transported down a shaft and installed in the nearly mile-deep research cavern at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) in South Dakota. The dark-matter detector is now complete and initial data shows that it is the most powerful dark-matter detector to date. If LZ is able to detect elusive dark matter—as researchers expect it may eventually do—it will profoundly expand our understanding of the universe. (Sanford Underground Research Facility photo)

Rochester physicists are part of a team that has deployed the world’s most sensitive dark matter detector, which may profoundly expand our understanding of the universe.

Scientists around the world have attempted for decades to solve the mystery of dark matter, which accounts for about 85 percent of all matter in the universe. Proof of dark matter particles would fundamentally change our understanding of the makeup of the universe. However, researchers have so far only inferred dark matter indirectly by observing gravitational effects that cannot be explained by standard theories of gravity.

This may be about to change.

Students and researchers from the University of Rochester are involved in an international collaboration of about 250 scientists from 35 institutions, led by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (Berkeley Lab), assembling an innovative underground dark matter-search experiment called LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ). Nestled deep below the Black Hills of South Dakota at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF), the dark matter detector recently passed a check-out phase of startup operations and delivered its first data points. And this is only the beginning.

“We did not see any dark matter, but the first results of LZ show that it is currently the most sensitive dark matter detector in the world,” says Frank Wolfs, a professor of physics and astronomy at Rochester, who is overseeing Rochester’s efforts in the project. “LZ will collect data for about 1,000 days, significantly improving the sensitivity for dark matter detection that was achieved during the first data collection period.”

Large electronics arrays used to detect dark matter being prepared for installation.
Lower and upper photomultiplier tube arrays—shown here being prepared for installation for the LZ experiment—are connected to digitizing electronics developed at Rochester through more than 28 miles of coaxial cable. (SURF photo / Matt Kapust)

 

The quest for dark matter

Although dark matter particles have never actually been detected, researchers believe it will only be a matter of time; the countdown may have already started with results from LZ’s first 60 “live days” of testing. These data points were collected over a span of initial operations beginning at the end of December 2021, a period long enough to confirm that all aspects of the detector were functioning well.

Dark matter remains unseen because it does not emit, absorb, or scatter light, but its presence and gravitational pull are nonetheless fundamental to an understanding of the universe. For example, the presence of dark matter shapes the form and movement of galaxies, and it is invoked by researchers to explain what is known about the large-scale structure and expansion of the universe.

The Rochester team is responsible for designing and developing electronic components for LZ, an integral piece of the puzzle in detecting dark matter; the electronics enable the readout of signals from particle interactions.

“All of our electronics have been designed specifically for LZ with the goal of maximizing our sensitivity for the smallest possible signals,” Wolfs says.

Members of the Rochester group include Eryk Druszkiewicz ’17 (PhD), research engineer; Dev Ashish Khaitan ’19 (PhD), a postdoctoral research associate; graduate students Marcus Converse, Elise McCarthy, and Yufan Qie; and undergraduate student Andy Freeman ’25. The hardware used for the digital electronics was designed in collaboration with a local electronics company, Skutek Instrumentation.

An underground detector

SURF, the site of a former gold mine, is now dedicated to a broad spectrum of scientific research. All of the components for LZ were transported down a shaft and installed in a nearly mile-deep research cavern. The rock above provides a natural shield against much of the constant bombardment of particles raining down on the planet’s surface, which produce unwanted “noise” that could drown out dark matter signals.

LZ is particularly focused on finding a type of theoretical particle called weakly interacting massive particles, or WIMPs, by triggering sequences of light and electrical signals in two nested tanks. The tanks are filled with 10 metric tons of highly purified liquid xenon, which is among Earth’s rarest elements. The properties of xenon atoms allow them to produce light in certain particle interactions.

 

Dark matter experts with hard hats in a group photo.
In 2019, a team of Rochester researchers, faculty, and alumni completed the installation of the LZ dark matter experiment’s electronics and posed for a photo 4,800 feet below the surface, in Lead, South Dakota. These team members included, from left, Erik Druszkiewicz ’17 (PhD), now a research engineer; Dev Ashish Khaitan ’19 (PhD), now a postdoctoral research associate; Yufan Qie ’20, now a physics PhD student; Jean Wolfs ’18, now a physics PhD student; Frank Wolfs, professor of physics and astronomy; and Marcus Converse, physics PhD student. (University of Maryland photo / Douglas Tiedt )

The liquid xenon projection chambers contain about 500 photomultiplier tubes (PMTs). Particle collisions in the xenon produce visible flashes of light, which are recorded by the PMTs. More than 28 miles of coaxial cable connects the PMTs and their amplifying electronics to the digital electronics developed at Rochester. The electronics digitize the waveforms from the PMTs and carry out a preliminary waveform analysis in order to select events of interest.

“The signals from every WIMP that LZ detects will first be processed by electronics made in Rochester,” Wolfs says.

The University of Rochester’s contribution to LZ is the latest example of Rochester researchers developing technologies for groundbreaking projects that seek to understand the mysterious particles in our universe. Physicists Segev BenZvi and Regina Demina are involved in the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) project, a multi-institutional effort to create the most detailed 3D map ever made of the universe. Demina and Rochester researchers Arie BodekAran Garcia-Bellido, and Sergei Korjenevski were part of an experimental team whose results made possible the discovery of the Higgs boson. Wolfs was also involved in developing signal processing electronics for LUX, the predecessor to LZ.

LZ is supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High Energy Physics, and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, a DOE Office of Science user facility. LZ is also supported by the Science & Technology Facilities Council of the United Kingdom; the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology; and the Institute for Basic Science, Korea.

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this piece was published on July 22, 2019. It has been updated to reflect new developments in the LZ experiment.  

from:    https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/dark-matter-particles-experiment-south-dakota-390272/

What Are You Breathing In???

The Military Routinely Disperses Aluminum-Coated Fiberglass Into the Air

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola 
military disperses fiberglass in air

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Militaries around the world routinely disperse tiny bits of aluminum-coated fiberglass and plastic — known as “chaff” — into the air column, to shield aircraft and ships from enemy radar
  • Chaff has been used for decades, without clear evidence that it’s safe for humans and the environment
  • In response to a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report issued in August 2021, the U.N. announced it’s considering spraying sulfate aerosols into the Earth’s stratosphere to modify climate. The tiny reflective particles would act as reflectors, bouncing sunlight back into space instead of onto the Earth’s surface
  • The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is using “climate science” as a vehicle to promote socialist ideology
  • According to Dane Wigington, founder of Geoengineeringwatch.org, the risks of geoengineering are so immense, it poses an extinction-level threat to humanity, and the window of opportunity to save ourselves is rapidly closing

In addition to the weather modification1 going on around the world, militaries around the world are also routinely dispersing tiny bits of aluminum-coated fiberglass and plastic — known as “chaff” — into the air column, to shield aircraft and ships from enemy radar.2 Not surprisingly, this has been done for decades, without clear evidence that it’s safe for humans and the environment.

According to a 1998 General Accounting Office report3 and a 1999 follow-up report4 by the Naval Research Laboratory, the environmental, human and agricultural impacts of chaff used in military training scenarios at the time were “negligible and far less than those from other man-made emissions,” but does that really mean it’s safe? As explained in a 2001 Navy Medicine paper:5

“Radiofrequency (RF) chaff is an electronic countermeasure designed to reflect radar waves and obscure planes, ships, and other assets from radar tracking sources.

Chaff consists of aluminum-coated glass fibers (also referred to as dipoles) ranging in lengths from 0.8 to 0.75 cm. Chaff is released or dispensed from military vehicles in cartridges or projectiles that contain millions of dipoles.

When deployed, a diffuse cloud of dipoles is formed that is undetectable to the human eye. Chaff is a very light material that can remain suspended in air anywhere from 10 minutes to 10 hours and can travel considerable distances from its release point, depending on prevailing atmospheric conditions.

Training for military personnel, particularly aircraft pilots, in the use of chaff is necessary to deploy this electronic countermeasure effectively. As with most acquired skills, the deployment of chaff must be maintained by practicing in-flight release during training.

It is estimated that the U.S. Armed Forces dispense about 500 tons of chaff per year, with most chaff being released during training exercises within the continental United States.”

Is Chaff Safe?

According to the Naval Medicine investigation, inhalation of whole, intact chaff fibers pose “no risk” to humans due to their larger size. “If inhaled, dipoles are predicted to deposit in the nose, mouth, or trachea and are either swallowed or expelled,” the paper states.6

Note the use of the word “predicted,” however. Predictions are not evidence. They’re basically guessing. Open questions also remain about what happens when the fibers degrade.

“Several investigations have demonstrated that Al-coated dipoles are resistant to weathering and breakdown under desert conditions,” the paper states.7

“A 1977 US Navy-sponsored a study found no evidence to indicate that chaff degrades significantly or quickly in water from the Chesapeake Bay nor did this material leach significant amounts of aluminum into the Bay.

A recent study by our group found no evidence that 25 years of chaff operations at the Naval Research Laboratory detachment at Chesapeake Beach, MD resulted in a significant increase in sediment or soil aluminum concentrations (Wilson et al 2000).

However, additional studies are needed to determine the half-life of chaff dipoles in various soils and environmental conditions and whether dipoles breakdown to respirable particles …

Although there is no definitive evidence from the epidemiological literature that chaff exposure is not harmful, there is epidemiological information available on workers involved in the glass fiber manufacturing industry. Data from these studies suggests that exposure to fibrous glass is not associated with increased risk of death from respiratory disease.”

The problem with that is that fiberglass workers are equipped with protective gear, including respirators, Tyvek suits and safety goggles8 — gear that normal people don’t wear when they’re out and about. All this tells us is that chaff is unlikely to cause harm to public health, provided people are wearing respirators, which they don’t.

Remarkably, not much beyond these three reports exist. While all admitted the need for continued research, none appears to have been published, so there’s really no telling what the real-world impact might be. That said, common sense tells us that air dispersed aluminum and fiberglass is highly likely to have some sort of impact on the environment and human health.

Geoengineering Has Been Going on for Decades

Aluminum and fiberglass are not the only toxins being sprayed across our skies. As detailed by Dane Wigington, founder of Geoengineeringwatch.org, weather modification, also known as geoengineering, in which various toxic metals and chemicals are dispersed at high altitude, has been going on for more than 70 years, and is increasing rather than declining.

In response to a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report issued in August 2021,9,10 which called for radical measures to prevent further global warming, the Biden Administration launched a research effort in 2022 to determine the most effective way to dim the sun.11

One proposal involves injecting sulfur dioxide aerosols into the Earth’s stratosphere. The tiny reflective particles would bounce sunlight back into space instead of onto the Earth’s surface.12 According to Harvard researchers,13 this strategy is not only “technically possible” but also “remarkably inexpensive,” having a price tag that is “well within the reach of several nations.”

Earth’s climate is largely controlled by how much solar radiation reaches the Earth and how much is absorbed by its surface or reradiated to space. Cloud coverage and greenhouse gasses are examples of factors that influence the reflectance of solar radiation.14

“If geoengineering proposals are to influence global climate in any meaningful way, they must intentionally alter the relative influence of one of these controlling mechanisms,” Britannica explains.15

The U.N. report mentions solar radiation management and greenhouse gas removal as forms of geoengineering.16 Sulfate aerosols fall into the solar radiation management category. By reflecting more solar radiation back into space, the aerosols lower global temperatures but also have a serious “side effect” — they lower average precipitation.

As a result, additional geoengineering techniques — such as thinning out cirrus clouds in the upper atmosphere — would be necessary to counteract the decrease in precipitation. What could possibly go wrong?

Supercomputers have run models to predict how solar radiation management may affect different parts of the Earth, not only in terms of temperature but also rainfall and snowfall. Report author Govindasamy Bala, from the Indian Institute of Science, said “the science is there,”17 but it’s far from an exact one.

“I think the next big question,” Bala told Reuters, “is, do you want to do it? … That involves uncertainty, moral issues, ethical issues and governance.” As Reuters reported, “That’s because every region would be affected differently. While some regions could gain in an artificially cooler world, others could suffer by, for example, no longer having conditions to grow crops.”18

‘Catastrophic Risks’

Three months after the IPCC published its panic-inciting report, Australian and British researchers published an original research article warning that stratospheric aerosol injection carries “catastrophic risks” that may well lead us into “a fate worse than [global] warming”:19

“Injecting particles into atmosphere to reflect sunlight, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), represents a potential technological solution to the threat of climate change. But could the cure be worse than the disease? …

SAI plausibly interacts with other catastrophic calamities, most notably by potentially exacerbating the impacts of nuclear war or an extreme space weather event. SAI could contribute to systemic risk by introducing stressors into critical systems such as agriculture.

SAI’s systemic stressors, and risks of systemic cascades and synchronous failures, are highly understudied. SAI deployment more tightly couples different ecological, economic, and political systems. This creates a precarious condition of latent risk, the largest cause for concern …

A well-coordinated use of a small amount of SAI would incur negligible risks, but this is an optimistic scenario. Conversely, larger use of SAI used in an uncoordinated manner poses many potential dangers. We cannot equivocally determine whether SAI will be worse than warming. For now, a heavy reliance on SAI seems an imprudent policy response.”

In June 2023, the European Commission put out a call for “international talks on the dangers and governance of geoengineering,” warning that geoengineering schemes aimed at altering the global climate pose “unacceptable” risks. During a news conference, EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans stated:

“Nobody should be conducting experiments alone with our shared planet. This should be discussed in the right forum, at the highest international level.”

Time will tell whether such talks ever take place. In September 2023, the Climate Overshoot Commission, chaired by Pascal Lamy, a former World Trade Organization chief, called for a worldwide moratorium on solar radiation modification experiments “that would carry risk of significant transboundary harm,” and to focus instead on strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.20,21 But, as of yet, no such moratorium has been agreed upon.

Socialist Ideology, Not Climate Science

Zuzana Janosova Den Boer experienced Communist rule in Czechoslovakia before moving to Canada. In her article, “I Survived Communism — Are You Ready for Your Turn?” she detailed the “all-too familiar signs of the same propaganda” starting to permeate her adopted country.22

In relation to geoengineering, she points out that communism has been subverting the environmentalist movement since the 1970s, when then-chairman of the Communist Party USA, Gus Hall, published a book called “Ecology,” in which he stated:23

“Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible … We must be the organizers, the leaders of these movements.”

Den Boer writes:24

“This idea was incorporated into the U.S. Green Party program in 1989 … in which the fictitious threats of ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ are used to scare the public into believing humanity must ‘save the planet’:

‘This urgency, along with other Green issues and themes it interrelates, makes confronting the greenhouse [effect] a powerful organizing tool … Survival is highly motivating, and may help us to build a mass movement that will lead to large-scale political and societal change in a very short time …

First of all, we [must] inform the public that the crisis is more immediate and severe than [they] are being told, [that] its implications are too great to wait for the universal scientific confirmation that only eco-catastrophe would establish.’”

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Den Boer suggests, is promoting not climate science but socialist ideology, citing as evidence comments made by Ottmar Georg Edenhofer, former co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, who in a 2010 interview stated that climate issues are about economics, and that:25

“We must free ourselves from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy … We must state clearly that we use climate policy de facto to redistribute the world’s wealth.”

Geoengineering Poses Extinction-Level Threat to Humanity

Even without factoring in social control, the practical risks of geoengineering are impossible to ignore. According to scientific studies, the particulates dispersed during these geoengineering events “shred” the ozone layer. They also disrupt the hydrological (rain) cycle, which leads to another host of downstream effects, and this is in addition to spreading toxins across the entire planet surface.

So, while some of the planet might benefit from these programs, other parts could be decimated by droughts, raging forest fires, flooding or storms. Moreover, while global cooling is the stated aim of most of these geoengineering programs, as the planet warms, the laws of physics state you need more precipitation to cool it, not less, because the atmosphere carries more moisture as the temperature rises.

To cool the planet, you need to create more rain, but these programs have resulted in less rain, and the reason for the reduction in rain fall is due to the particulates in the atmosphere. In addition to deflecting heat from the outside, these particles also trap heat down below, making the overall heating of the planet massively worse.

The risks are so immense, Wigington warns geoengineering already poses an extinction-level threat to humanity. The window of opportunity to save ourselves is rapidly closing.

Unfortunately, if people really understood the totality of the situation — not just that the climate is being manipulated, but that as a result, the global climate systems have deteriorated to the point that the entire Earth is in serious trouble; in short, that these programs may have created a runaway extinction event — the emotional impact might be too great to bear for many. Wigington addressed this in an interview I did with him back in 2016:

“Our situation is far more severe than most people have any understanding of,” he said. “Climate engineering is making the situation worse, not better.

So [they must] try to keep the population from panicking because of the severity and immediacy of the climate implosion, and keep the population in the dark because the climate intervention programs have helped to accelerate this process and toxified every single one of us in the process.

Every single human subject we test is packed full of aluminum, barium — all the heavy metals we know are associated with these programs. It doesn’t matter where they live.

And we know it’s coming down in the precipitation in unimaginable quantities — quantities enough to change soil pH values in the Pacific Northwest 10 to 12 times total alkaline — that’s an unimaginable amount of metal coming down in the rain.

If populations understood, truly, what’s been done to them, what’s been done to the planet … they’d be taking to the streets with pitchforks and torches all over the globe.”

California Aquatic and Terrestrial Insect Life Has Been Decimated

Geoengineeringwatch.org lists a number of lab tests that have been performed on rain water, air sample and more, and their results. You can find them under the Tests section.

“In regard to the effect in the environment, in Northern California alone … what we’ve seen in the last decade … is a 90% decline in aquatic and terrestrial insect life — a virtual crash,” Wigington told me in 2016.

“There’s so much aluminum coming down the precipitation, affecting the soil pH, and — this is very important — the UV radiation level is off the charts, and that we can link directly to climate engineering … We’re seeing UVB levels about 1,000% higher than we’re being told. It’s burning the bark off of trees. It’s killing plankton. It’s affecting insect life …

[It increases UVB radiation] because it shreds the natural protection for the planet. When you put a particle in the atmosphere, it doesn’t matter whether it’s from a back of a jet or a volcano; it causes a chemical reaction in the atmosphere that destroys ozone. Period. So the more of these particles you put in the atmosphere, the more rapid the ozone destruction is.”

With all of that in mind, it’s highly unlikely that military chaff dispersements have no negative impact. An argument could be made that chaff is too important of a defense system to get rid of, and that may be true. But the climate-specific engineering is another matter altogether.

In years past, it was kept hush-hush, and dismissed as a conspiracy theory. Since then, however, governments around the world, and international bodies like the U.N. have become quite open about the use of geoengineering for climate control, and if the global public does not push back against these efforts, we might not survive to regret it.

Geoengineeringwatch.org has a list of action items you can review if you want to get involved and get the word out. I also recommend watching Wigington’s documentary “The Dimming,” below, to learn more.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2024/02/08/military-disperses-fiberglass-in-air.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20240208&foDate=true&mid=DM1528693&rid=2040057911

Who Owns the American Farmland?

As Chinese Purchases Of US Farmland Soar, It’s Impossible To Track How Much It Owns

Bloomberg noted that America “is seeing more and more of its most fertile land snapped up by China and other foreign buyers.” It is difficult to know just how much farmland China has bought due to problems with how the US tracks such data. According to Department of Agriculture data, foreign ownership and investment in US farmland, pastures and forests jumped to about 40 million acres in 2021, up 40% from 2016. The USDA’s data is flawed and depends on foreigners self-reporting their activity. Food supply lines may be at risk due to foreigners owning US land.

.The topic of China’s ownership of US farmlands is starting to boil over.

Six months after we reported that a “Bipartisan Bill Aims To Block Chinese Purchase Of US Farmland”, more are starting to pay attention yet as even Bloomberg notes that America “is seeing more and more of its most fertile land snapped up by China and other foreign buyers” the big problem remains: it’s difficult to know just how much farmland China has bought due to problem with how the US tracks such data.

Here’s what we do know: according to Department of Agriculture data foreign ownership and investment in US farmland, pastures and forests jumped to about 40 million acres in 2021, up 40% from 2016; but an analysis conducted by the US Government Accountability Office — a non-partisan watchdog that reports to Congress — found mistakes in the data, including the largest land holding linked with China being counted twice. Other challenges include the USDA’s reliance on foreigners self-reporting their activity.

As a result, foreign ownership of US cropland is drawing attention from Washington as concern rises about possible threats to food supply chains and other national security risks. And, as we reported last summer, lawmakers have called for a crackdown on sales of farmland to China and other nations.

 

  • Foreign investors own 37.6 million acres of U.S. agricultural land, which is 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land and 1.7% of all U.S. land.
(Source: USDA)

“Without improving its internal processes, USDA cannot report reliable information to Congress or the public about where and how much US agricultural land is held by foreign persons,” the report said.

Read full article here…

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2024/01/as-chinese-purchases-of-us-farmland-soar-its-impossible-to-track-how-much-it-owns/

Stand Up for Berkey!

How the EPA Is Attempting to Kill the Berkey Water Filter

By Derrick Broze

The U.S. EPA is attempting to label the popular Berkey Water Filters a pesticide in order to regulate the product under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

Over the last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been pursuing a case against the owner of the Berkey Water Systems which produces the popular Berkey filters. The EPA is attempting to classify the Berkey filters as pesticides because they incorporate silver in their design, a feature which the EPA claims qualifies the filters as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The move has already lead to one authorized dealer of the Berkey Water Systems being forced to shut down.

On August 9, New Millennium Concepts, Ltd. (NMCL) and the James B. Shepherd Trust, the owners of the Berkey Water Systems, filed a lawsuit against EPA, suing for violations of the Administrative Procedures Act and due process for their attempts to regulate the water filters. The NMCL said the EPA is labeling the filters a pesticide because of the use of silver to prevent biological growth inside the filters, a feature shared by many water filtration systems. NMCL says the silver does not leach into the water itself and thus the filters should not be regulated as a pesticide. Silver is currently a registered pesticide with the EPA.

NMCL notes that the EPA has not utilized this new re-interpretation to stop the sale of any other outdoor water filter. They go on to state that the “real issue” is that the EPA does not like that Berkey filters have been advertised as capable of removing the COVID-19 virus from your water.

In November, the case was dismissed after the judge claimed that the company doesn’t have standing in their claims. This means that Berkey Water Systems will likely face regulation as a pesticide unless appeals are successful.

“We are now in appeal because, amazingly, the district court ruled that New Millennium had not been harmed by the EPA issuing Stop-Sale orders to its dealers, its manufacturing facility and other vendors, and therefore had no standing in that court,” they wrote in a blog response.

In October, U.S. Congressman Matt Gaetz (FL-01) sent a letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan regarding the agency’s new ruling classifying the Berkey Water Systems as pesticides. Gaetz’s letter highlights the EPA’s unprecedented attempt to put Berkey out of business. Gaetz requested the EPA provide specific documents to his office showing the process the EPA used to determine its actions.

“At a time when Americans are increasingly unhealthy and their water filled with contaminants, such as endocrine disrupters, heavy metals, and ‘forever’ chemicals, such as PFAS, the EPA should be pursuing policies within its regulatory authority that incentivize increased use of water-filtration systems, not less,” the letter states.

“The EPA must end its attack on Berkey Water Systems immediately and focus on the job it was created to do – keep Americans safe – a job Berkey Water Systems has arguably done more effectively.”

Berkey Dealer Forced to Shut Down

In mid-December, BerkeyFilters.com, an official distributor of the Berkey water filter, announced that they would be going out of business as a result of the lawsuit against the EPA. BerkeyFilters.com is owned by James Enterprise Inc. (JEI). The company said they were the first Berkey dealer to receive a Stop-Sale Order from the EPA.

In a now deleted blog post on BerkeyFilters.com, the company explained their side of the story. They say the whole fiasco began in November 2022 with an “unannounced, unscheduled inspection of JEI facilities.” The blog notes that an EPA inspector also told JEI that the EPA is “cracking down” on virus claims because of COVID-19, and that “the EPA had stepped up its enforcement efforts, particularly in regard to anti-microbial devices.”

In January 2023, JEI says they removed all references and statements relating to the filters removing waterborne pathogens, or pests. The company spent “hundreds of hours” deleting content on websites, social media accounts, and packaging. However, the Stop-Sale Order has not been lifted and, according to JEI, their business has been negatively impacted. They say have been forced to fire employees, cease certain services, and pause third-party parternships.

In the end, JEI was forced to close their doors as an official dealer of the Berkey Water Systems.

The official Berkey Water Systems posted a blog making it clear that although BerkeyFilters.com is no longer an official dealer of the Berkey Filter, the company is still producing the filters and not closing down.

They acknowledge that BerkeyFilters.com was the first dealer to receive the Stop-Sale Order and that both parties attempted to work with the EPA. Berkey Filters said they worked with the EPA for eight months but could not reach a resolution.

“It became apparent that the EPA would accept nothing less than the bankruptcy of New Millennium, its dealers, and more importantly preventing you the public from being self sufficient in terms of cleaning difficult to remove contaminants from your drinking water,” Berkey Water wrote.

“Unfortunately, over the course of the past year the folks at BerkeyFilters.com have fallen victim to this overreach by the EPA. We wish them the best.”

NMCL says they are committed to “fighting the EPA’s overreach” and its attempts to “control and prevent the public from purifying their drinking water.”

While Americans are exposed to water filled with fluoridePFASendocrine disrupting chemicals, and other toxins, the federal government is doing their best to destroy, or at the least weaken, a company which has been providing clean water to millions of people in America. If the EPA had done their job and kept the water supply clean, Americans would not need to seek out filters like the Berkey Water System.

Source: The Last American Vagabond

Visit TheLastAmericanVagabond.com. Subscribe to TLAV’s independent news broadcast on iTunes. Follow on Facebook and Minds. Support with Bitcoin.

Derrick Broze, a staff writer for The Last American Vagabond, is a journalist, author, public speaker, and activist. He is the co-host of Free Thinker Radio on 90.1 Houston, as well as the founder of The Conscious Resistance Network & The Houston Free Thinkers.

https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/category/derrick-broze/

from:    https://www.activistpost.com/2023/12/how-the-epa-is-attempting-to-kill-the-berkey-water-filter.html

Is It the Cow Farts After All?

Vivek Ramaswamy Exposes Globalist Carbon Capture Plot to Shut Down America

Presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy criticized Republicans for supporting the global warming hoax and the carbon capture scheme that is being used to conduct eminent domain to seize land to build underground pipelines. He said that the US is subservient to the religion of climate and that “crony Republicans” are complicit in offering carbon capture subsidies in order to pass eminent domain laws that allow the seizure of farm land. People are affected every day by the climate cult.

 

Alex Jones reported that the Biden administration is spending $451 billion per year to pay for illegal alien and asylum seeker benefits to attract more people and then the benefits are cut off after a few months. Ramaswamy revealed that there is a federal law 287(g) that allows local law enforcement officers to serve warrants for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to help them remove illegal aliens in this country.

Check out the Video:

Link for video:          https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ty8JWo3cC2Iw/

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2023/12/vivek-ramaswamy-exposes-globalist-carbon-capture-plot-to-shut-down-america/

Using The Excuse of HEALTH to Enslave Humanity

Launch of a New Doorway to Freedom

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

Here is the lnk for the Video with Dr. Meryl Nass:

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The World Health Organization is laying the foundation to take control over all aspects of everyone’s lives, across the world, under the auspice of “biosecurity”
  • A new organization called Door to Freedom is being set up as a one-stop shop where everyone can learn what the plan is and what we can do to stop it. Door to Freedom also hopes to align freedom organizations around the world to act in concert to get the word out more widely
  • The global cabal that is trying to seize control over the world have access to loads of capital, but they’re also using our tax dollars. The U.S. government has spent some $5 trillion on the pandemic response. Much of that money went to bribe media, hospitals, influencers, churches, medical groups and other social organizations to push the official narrative
  • Current laws give immunity to a lot of bad actors, including the Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, everybody who works for the WHO and the UN, federal government employees as well as many private organizations. Vaccines and their manufacturers are also indemnified
  • We need to pass new laws that eliminate all of these indemnifications, so that we can retroactively take them to court for the crimes they’ve committed

In this video, I interview repeat guest Dr. Meryl Nass, who has a monthly podcast with journalist James Corbett on Children’s Health Defense (CHD) TV. Their show is focused on the implementation of the World Health Organization’s efforts to install global tyranny with respect to health and global governance.

The implications for public health are enormous and extremely troubling. The WHO is basically laying the foundation to take control over all aspects of everyone’s lives, across the world, under the auspice of “biosecurity.”

In this interview, Nass explains how the WHO is being set up as a central governing body for the world, and what we can do to stop it. She also details the price she’s paid for taking a stand against the false COVID narrative and offering early treatment.

Sacrificial Lamb

Nass was one of the doctors who, during the COVID pandemic, offered patients early treatment in Maine and Maryland. As a result, her medical license was suspended and the medical board forced her to undergo psychiatric evaluation. Apparently, in the present era, doctors who think saving lives is more important than following unscientific medical advice created by bureaucrats is considered insanity. She comments:

“This whole pandemic, and the takeover of the world by ‘elites, (global cabal)’ has been orchestrated primarily through fear, and one thing that’s necessary is to make doctors cooperate. To do that, the best way is to scare them, and the best way to scare them is to threaten their medical licenses …

In July and August of 2021, there were national news reports of several doctors who were prescribing ivermectin and [who] were being investigated, but none of them actually lost their licenses.

Apparently, this was not enough to stop doctors from prescribing ivermectin, and in states where it was allowed, hydroxychloroquine. These are both licensed drugs and the federal government had no legal authority to take them off the menu.

Licensed doctors could prescribe licensed drugs, as could nurse practitioners, PAs [physician’s assistants], et cetera. Neither one had a black box warning, neither one was a controlled substance. They were both safe, and they both had been used for a number of decades.

So, instead, it had to be done through the states — because states regulate medical practice in the U.S., and pharmacy practice — so, about 30 states issued either guidelines or rules to pharmacists and doctors telling them whether they could prescribe these drugs and under what circumstances.

That had happened in early 2020. In my case, the board got an anonymous complaint against me saying I was spreading misinformation — another charge that the government really needed to control people on. They couldn’t have the truth coming out about COVID, the drugs, the vaccines, and about this whole takeover.

So, they created this baloney concept of ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation’ and ‘malinformation’ and pretended that it was the law, that people who spread misinformation could be charged, and had to stop. A whole huge system was created within the federal government to surveil our online presence and go after people [who went against the narrative].

So, I was accused, initially, not of using these drugs, because I used them legally, but of spreading misinformation. And I think that the feds were looking for an excuse to really scare doctors … I was fairly well known.

So they went after me and said, ‘Not only are we investigating you, but we find, even before an investigation goes forward, even before any hearing, before the medical board even gets to see you and you get to say one word to them, we’ve decided that you are such a danger to the people of Maine, we must immediately suspend your license.’ They did that on January 12, 2022.”

Kangaroo Court

Nass has not been able to practice medicine since. Before the first hearing, the state medical board tried to get her to plea bargain and surrender her license voluntarily. She refused. By then, she was already working with CHD, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who founded CHD, offered to pay for her legal defense.

Of course, before the first hearing, they realized they couldn’t possibly take Nass to court for misinformation. After all, the First Amendment allows her to say whatever she wants. So, they dropped the misinformation charges and charged her with using medications off-label instead — only, that’s perfectly legal as well.

So, they dropped that charge, and instead argued she’d been speaking ill of the COVID vaccines. But that wasn’t a winning strategy either, because, of course, they didn’t want to defend the shots in court.

“So, basically, they went through my records and they tried to find little piddly things, like my records weren’t neat enough. I had been doing telemedicine and I hadn’t written down the vital signs for a patient, things like that,” Nass says.

“So in the hearings that have gone on so far, we’ve managed to shoot down all of those charges. There’s nothing substantive, there’s nothing left for them. In fact, the attorney general didn’t even question my last witness, who was Harvey Risch, an emeritus professor and M.D., Ph.D., from Yale, who blew apart the part-time ER doctor’s testimony that I hadn’t done things correctly.

So, that’s where we are. They don’t have a case, so what they want to do instead is drag this out forever, which will do two things that are good for them: One, prevent me from being able to say I won my case and get national attention for that, because they managed to put me in the national news when they took my license;

No. 2, they want to cost Children’s Health Defense a whole lot of money by just dragging it out, and it doesn’t cost them anything to drag it out. They’ve got the assistant attorney generals who are already working for the state managing the case.

Somebody up there is pulling the strings and figured out how to make this as painful as possible for myself and CHD. Well, I want to assure them that it’s not painful at all because we’ve had up to 180,000 people watching each hearing in real time.

CHD and Epoch Times have streamed every one, so everyone has been able to see what kind of kangaroo court this is, and the state of Maine has a black eye already. So let’s go forward. Let’s give them some more black eyes.”

Most Doctors Are Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Unfortunately, threatening a doctor’s medical license is an exceptionally effective way to ensure compliance, and an effective coercion to follow the rules even though they are wholly unlawful. The reason for this is simple economics. Most doctors owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans, and unless they’re independently wealthy, they can’t afford to go into private practice.

That means they work as an employee for a hospital or big clinic, where the rules are being set by hospital administrators. In addition to that, medical education is wholly captured by Big Pharma, and has been for the last 100 years. As such, medical students are being brainwashed from Day One. On top of that, you have peer pressure.

“We’re in the middle of a war,” Nass says. “It’s a war about who gets control of people, and doctors just happened to be a necessary chess piece for them. By doing this to me and others, the state has been very successful at getting most doctors to keep their mouth shut and go along, and comply with what they want.”

Indeed, it takes enormous courage and commitment to patient welfare to buck a system that has all these built-in pressures. In my estimate, perhaps only 5% of the 1 million doctors in America took a stand against the COVID tyranny.

“More than 75% of doctors are employed by somebody else, and that means they don’t have a say,” Nass explains. “If they’re employed by a hospital, the hospital bean-counters said, ‘Look, everybody who comes in is getting remdesivir, that’s it, if they’re admitted with COVID.’ And they can’t fight back.

There was so much money involved that people who tried to fight back lost their jobs. And this was what hospitals and employers were told to do by government and so-called ethicists like Art Caplan. You fire people and then everybody else goes along. So that’s what happened.

The other thing is … you can’t expect someone to believe something if their salary depends on their not believing it. So there’s that. The peer pressure is huge, for several reasons. One is malpractice. If you don’t go along with everybody else, you are liable for malpractice if your patient doesn’t do well.

So if I give someone hydroxychloroquine for COVID and they wind up dying, I can be sued for malpractice because I wasn’t following the standard of care. But if I gave them remdesivir and they die, I was following the standard of care, and I can’t be sued for that.

These are terrible things. This means that the entire profession has been pushed — through these rules and standards — to do things wrong. And all of this was probably thought of, or even planned, long ago, so that it would be relatively easy to control all the doctors.”

The Global Takeover Is Well Underway

As noted by Nass, most of you who are paying attention will have noticed that all kinds of crazy things are now happening all at once. We were mandated to get fast-tracked “vaccines” that turned out to be both ineffective and extremely dangerous, and even though the proverbial cat is now out of the bag, government is still trying to pressure people into taking additional boosters.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized vaccine manufacturers to make a third, bivalent, version of the mRNA shot, to be rolled out in the fall in combination with the flu shots.

“Why would that be, when everyone knows that after a few weeks, [the shots] make you more susceptible to get the disease, as well as have heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, et cetera, and sudden death?” Nass asks.

We’re also facing the rollout of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) and an international digital vaccine passport. We also know that the U.S. government was funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) to design more lethal coronaviruses. Why did they do that? To what end?

We’ve also seen stupendous changes within our school system. Transgender ideology now trumps everything else. We’ve seen a rapid growth of online schooling and the lowering of educational standards at all levels, all while using the right pronoun has become incredibly important.

We’ve also seen a radical shift away from true environmentalism in favor of a “green” agenda that forces the poor and middle class to lower their standard of living while the wealthy profit. The fact is, the destruction of our environment and the raping of underdeveloped countries for their natural resources was done by the same globalists that now blame all of these problems on the public.

“What’s going on now is that the ‘elites’ (global cabal) have somehow gained control of enough pieces of our culture and our education system, and certainly our mass media and government, to roll out these cultural concepts and convince people of their validity,” Nass says.

“The elites have decided — they’ve got the ability now, through surveillance, through control of media and control of governments — to take over much of the world. The simplest and most legal way for them to do that, without having to fight wars, is to take over public health, and wrap the rest of the world into public health.

So public health is not just between you and your doctor. Public health now involves wild animals … They want to control the interactions of humans and wild animals.

They also want to control what happens with our livestock … so, livestock have become part of health. Ecosystems have also become part of health, and so has everything else. The name for this is ‘One Health.’

The WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) — the world organization on animal health — and the UN Environmental Program, are all pushing for these things to be part of One Health and public health.

This didn’t happen by chance. It’s a scheme … funded by the Rockefeller Foundation around 2009. Many U.S. federal agencies are supposed to be using the One Health approach. This means that health problems have to be solved with a whole committee of people, not just doctors, not just veterinarians, but you need the ecologists, the plant pathologists, the livestock people, et cetera.

Everybody has to work together. But that’s not enough. You also have to throw in the police. You also have to throw in governments and legislators and everyone else into this concept of One Health.”

As noted by Nass, One Health is already enshrined in U.S. law in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), so there’s no question that U.S. agencies are all on the same track as the WHO.

Who’s Part of the Global Cabal?

In the interview, Nass goes on to name some of the organizations that are part of the global cabal that is reworking society for their own aims. Named players include the Rhodes organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and Chatham House, which is the equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations in the U.K.

All these groups, and many more, are linked to each other. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger cofounded the Trilateral Commission and was a Rhodes scholar and member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Kissinger selected Klaus Schwab to create the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 1971, and they’ve been working together ever since.

In 1993, the WEF founded a Young Global Leaders program to groom international heads of state. Today, Germany, France, Canada, Finland and other countries are led by graduates of this program.

“It’s not exactly a secret society, but Klaus Schwab and his group have managed to identify people who would go along with their program,” Nass says. “I suspect these are people who are not the most intelligent, who lack imagination and are very obedient.

Therefore, they have been convinced that climate change is a dire emergency, and that they need to take extraordinary measures to deal with it — even if they have to reduce the population, even if they have to reduce our standard of living, even if they have to impose 15-minute cities, get rid of air travel and … eat bugs.”

How the WHO Is Being Set Up as the Central Authority

As explained by Nass, from its inception in 1948, the WHO has been an organization that transferred money from wealthier countries to poorer countries to help them with health problems like tuberculosis, AIDS and malaria.

During the COVID pandemic, the WHO and diplomats from member countries decided that a comprehensive pandemic treaty was necessary. The justification was that COVID had been mismanaged, hence we need a central decision-maker.

“Of course, what was never said is that things were managed so poorly because most countries were following the WHO advice, which was absolutely awful,” Nass says.

If this pandemic treaty goes through, either a regional epidemic or global pandemic would authorize the WHO to step in and dictate how the matter should be addressed. WHO members are also working on amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs), which would strip member nations of their sovereignty to make health-related decisions.

And, recall that “health” is being redefined to include all aspects of life, under the already existing One Health paradigm. As Nass explains:

“What has been proposed is that either a regional director-general or the WHO director-general can simply declare a public health emergency of international concern, or the potential for a public health emergency of international concern.

Once they make that declaration, all these powers would then accrue to the director-general of the WHO, if it’s for all countries, or if it’s regional, to that regional director-general.

That person could then say, ‘OK, medicines in your country need to be shipped to this other country.’ Intellectual property on how to make vaccines need to go away. Let’s say Abbott has a vaccine to combat whatever it is. They have to now give the recipe to Rwanda so they can make that vaccine in their own country and use it for their own people.

They can close borders. The WHO director-generals could basically take control of anything. If they say, ‘Oh, people are getting this from animals,’ they can stop contact with animals, stop you eating chicken or whatever, because One Health has taken jurisdiction over ecosystems.

The entire planet is ecosystems, and that’s part of One Health. Animals and plants are also part of One Health. So, they can tell you what to eat, they can tell you where to go and where not to go. They can lock you in your home. They can put masks on you, they can mandate vaccinations — if these [IHR] amendments and the pandemic treaty are passed.

They’re still being negotiated. The final versions are not out. But we have certainly criticized and analyzed the early versions, and they will be voted on next May [2024], and could potentially go into force on a provisional basis. The treaty could go into force almost immediately.”

How These Instruments Alter the WHO’s Existing Authority

In many ways, it seems the WHO was already exercising these powers, or at least attempting to, during the COVID pandemic. So, how do these two instruments — the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty — alter their existing authority? Nass explains:

“There are existing international health regulations and they’ve been in existence since at least 1969 … Although the WHO claims that part of the IHRs that exist right now are binding, they aren’t binding. So, countries followed them, but there was no legal requirement for them to do so.

The International Health Regulations stated very clearly that the way they were to be carried out was with ‘full respect for freedom of persons’ dignity and human rights.’ In the new version that is being negotiated, they have struck that out. There is no longer a need to respect human rights, dignity or freedom of persons.

And, they have specifically said that these new regulations will be binding on countries, and countries are required to have a focal point that is required to carry them out and report back to the WHO how they’ve been carried out.

There are additional new provisions that countries are required to perform surveillance of their populations. They want you to think this is surveillance of only bacteria or surveillance of only social media, but it’s both. So, the WHO could require people to be swabbed in your country, whether or not they’re crossing a border.

Say there’s an outbreak. Everybody has to line up and get swabbed to see if they’re infected with X. And animals have to be surveilled as well, because they’re looking for pathogens that have the potential to be become pandemics. So that is supposed to happen.

Now, there’s a huge problem with that, and that is, you can always find viruses that have the potential to become pandemics … So, if you start surveilling for them, you’re going to find them, which means that would allow the director-general of the WHO to declare a public health emergency anytime he or she wants.

The other surveillance is they require countries to surveil their social media and mainstream media, and censor anything that goes against the public health messaging of the WHO. So this is big. This is huge.”

Is Global Tyranny an Inevitability?

While it may seem there’s no way to derail this proverbial bullet train, Nass remains optimistic. “This is a dystopian future that actually is not good for anybody. Even the people who want it are going to find it’s not good for them either,” Nass says.

Now, the global cabal that is trying to seize control have access to essentially unlimited capital. But they’re also using our tax dollars. As noted by Nass, the U.S. government has spent some $5 trillion on the pandemic response.

“That’s our money, not theirs,” she says, “and a lot of that money, most likely, went to bribe media.” Hospitals were also paid to go along with the narrative, as were celebrities, churches, medical groups and other social organizations.

“These very wealthy people do not want to spend their own money to take over the world. They want to spend our money or put us in debt. But are these expenditures justified and legal?

If we get governments of people who are responsive to normal life, we can investigate where that money went. What are these public officials doing? We can put them on trial, and we can probably even claw back a lot of this money.

Now, to do that might require some new laws, but if we had really good people in office — like Bobby Kennedy — we could potentially create the laws, very quickly, that will allow us to try government officials and others, heads of media, et cetera, if they’re doing things that are against the law.”

Why We Need New Laws

The reason we need new laws is because current laws give immunity to a lot of bad actors, including the Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, everybody who works for the WHO and the UN, and federal government employees as well as many private organizations.

Vaccines and their manufacturers are also indemnified. We need to pass new laws that eliminate all these indemnifications, so that we can retroactively take them to court for the crimes they’ve committed.

“This whole thing goes against the principles of the Constitution, the principles of natural law. This is a dystopian nightmare that was figured out by some very clever people in public relations and in consulting groups. We know the French government paid something like €1 billion or €2 billion to McKinsey to help manage the pandemic response.

So we can identify organizations that have brought these things on us and go after them. We also need to tell our members of Congress, our parliamentarians, and legislators, we don’t want this dystopia. Government doesn’t give us rights. We have rights. We are giving government authority. Government doesn’t have authority and own us. We own the government.

We’ve been led to believe that it’s the other way around, but it isn’t. And we can fix all this. There are about 50 members of Congress already who have signed on as co-sponsors to HR79 [the WHO Withdrawal Act1]. We need to get out of these international organizations.

The UN is trying to do something similar. The WHO was simply pulled in because there was an opportunity to gain control legally through the WHO because of the way its constitution exists, because of several Supreme Court cases, et cetera, there was an ability to use the WHO. The cabal may try to use other international organizations or other means to gain control.

But look, there’s a few thousand of them. There’s 8 billion of us. This is like a million to one. We can beat them. We don’t have to go along with any of it. If everybody says no, if the police don’t enforce, if the Army doesn’t enforce, it’s not going to happen. So people just need to realize what’s going on.”

Door to Freedom

To that end, Nass is working with a new organization called Door to Freedom. Their website, which will launch shortly, will contain all the relevant WHO and UN documents, criticisms of those documents, and both long and short explanations of what’s going on.

It’ll be a one-stop shop where everyone can learn what the plan is and what we can do to stop it. Door to Freedom also hopes to align freedom organizations around the world to act in concert to get the word out more widely.

Personally, I’m skeptical about the likelihood of winning this battle through legislative efforts because this cabal has been working on this plan for decades, if not centuries. So, they already have everything buttoned up, or close to it. Perhaps someone like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could get it done, but it will take a small miracle to get him into office as well.

What I do hold out hope for is that public resistance will block attempts of implementation. So, the key, I think, is to educate people. Henceforth, most of the day-to-day choices you make will take the world either closer to freedom, or closer to slavery, so it’s crucial to understand where we are, where the cabal intends to take us, and how they intend to get us there.

That way, you can make decisions and take actions that will move us in the opposite direction. Door to Freedom will be able to help you understand all of that, so please bookmark doortofreedom.org, and check back regularly.

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/16/who-global-tyranny.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20230716&foDate=true&mid=DM1433941&rid=1857121056