“1.4.2. Global governance” from WEF’s book COVID-19: THE GREAT RESET, (June, 2020) by Klaws Swab is a confession of WEF’s business plan to establish a global top-down totalitarian communist government. The covid scam is presented as proof Americans need to renounce their national independence and surrender their democratic freedom. http://reparti.free.fr/schwab2020.pdfFrom Andrew(Excerpts by henrymakow.com) 1.4.2. Global governance p. 114 + “The more nationalism and isolationism pervade the global polity, the greater the chance that global governance loses its relevance and becomes ineffective. Sadly, we are now at this critical juncture. Put bluntly, we live in a world in which nobody is really in charge. + COVID-19 has reminded us that the biggest problems we face are global in nature. Whether it’s pandemics, climate change, terrorism or international trade, all are global issues that we can only address, and whose risks can only be mitigated, in a collective fashion. … In a nutshell, global governance is at the nexus of all these other issues. Therefore, the concern is that, without appropriate global governance, we will become paralyzed in our attempts to address and respond to global challenges, particularly when there is such a strong dissonance between short-term, domestic imperatives and long- term, global challenges. + COVID-19 tells just such a story of failed global governance. From the very beginning, a vacuum in global governance, exacerbated by the strained relations between the US and China, undermined international efforts to respond to the pandemic…. In a functioning global governance framework, nations should have come together to fight a global and coordinated “war” against the pandemic. Instead the “my country first” response prevailed and severely impaired attempts to contain the expansion of the first wave of the pandemic…. WHO is infinitely preferable to a non-existent one, an argument that Bill Gates compellingly and succinctly made in a tweet: “Their work is slowing the spread of COVID-19 and if that work is stopped no other organization can replace them. The world needs @WHO now more than ever.”
+ This failure is not the WHO’s fault. The UN agency is merely the symptom, not the cause, of global governance failure. The WHO’s deferential posture towards donor countries reflects its complete dependence on states agreeing to cooperate with it. The UN organization has no power to compel information sharing or enforce pandemic preparedness. Like other similar UN agencies, for example on human rights or climate change, the WHO is saddled with limited and dwindling resources: in 2018, it had an annual budget of $4.2 billion, miniscule in comparison to any health budget around the world. In addition, it is at the perpetual mercy of member states and has effectively no tools at its disposal to directly monitor outbreaks, coordinate pandemic planning or ensure effective preparedness implementation at the country level, let alone allocate resources to those countries most in need. +This dysfunctionality is symptomatic of a broken global governance system, and the jury is out as to whether existing global governance configurations like the UN and the WHO can be repurposed to address today’s global risks. For the time being, the bottom line is this: in the face of such a vacuum in global governance, only nation states are cohesive enough to be capable of taking collective decisions, but this model doesn’t work in the case of world risks that require concerted global decisions. + The world will be a very dangerous place if we do not fix multilateral institutions. Global coordination will be even more necessary in the aftermath of the epidemiological crisis, for it is inconceivable that the global economy could “restart” without sustained international cooperation. Without it, we’ll be heading towards “a poorer, meaner and smaller world”.
On the 12th of July 2021 violent protests which turned into mass looting and pillaging erupted all over South Africa. The narrative they hold onto as to being the reason for these acts was the imprisonment of our former president Jacob Zuma. These riots quickly descended into chaos as the protestors began targeting large malls and grocery stores and tore them apart looting and then burning them. It has been noted within certain circles and it is believed that the theft of electrical appliances and other useless merchandise is a cover up for the real target – the infrastructure which ensures food distribution. The average citizen in our country has food for three days and already close friends of mine in Kwazulu Natal have run out of food and are relying on parcels being delivered to them; and not only food but now there is now no fuel as the mob has stolen all the fuel in Durban (they literally are syphoning fuel out of the tanks under the ground) which renders the populace unable to get out. Warehouses have been burned down and countless trucks halted and burned. The local citizenry which includes blacks, whites, coloured and Indians have formed their own vigilanties and have had to take the law into their own hands as the police cannot cope with the mounting unrest. It’s incredible that Bheki Cele our Minister of the police himself tried recently to pass legislative law which prohibited the renewal of firearm licenses for the use of self defence recently (makes you think there was some sort of plan here in the making) advising all citizens to turn in their weapons for there safety – clearly, that will not happen anymore. The police over the past decade have been weakened and broken down. Some police officers themselves have been cornered by vigilante groups and have been caught with looted merchandise and groceries in their vehicles while in UNIFORM !! Threats have been made over social media that if Jacob Zuma is not released that farm murders (white and black farmers) will increase putting our authorities in an awkward position. The people that suffer the most ironically are the looters themselves as they lie dying from bullet and panga wounds inflicted by people who are fed up with this barbaric outburst. Some people in retaliation have even started burning squatter camps where they believe Zuma supporters live. All the taxi unions have united in some sort confederation and in thier own words have promised to assist the police and “deal with looters” in their own. When these Africans speak like this they mean what that say. Even in this turmoil there seems to be a light at the end of this tunnel as resistance has been fierce which clearly shows that South Africans will not tolerate the mob anymore. They have revealed their hand and their motives for their actions therefore disqualifying themselves from getting a sympathetic ear from the public ever again.
Throughout my childhood, I grew up watching fairytales such as Cinderella and others that were full of romance and love. I dreamed about this and wanted it for myself someday.
During the summer of 1974 when I was 15 years old, I spend a lot of time at the beach with a tall, handsome guy from school. My mom told me that I had to be 16 years old to date, so we couldn’t go on dates yet. I wore a tiny bikini at the beach, yet I never felt fully comfortable in them. I wasn’t one to walk around the beach seeking attention. I never felt comfortable having guys ogle me, but now I know that they do any ways. The more flesh shown, the harder it is for them not to ogle.
On my 16th birthday, I was finally able to date, so this handsome guy picked me up in his family’s big station wagon for my first date. He drove me to the outdoor movie theater. Soon after the movie began, he was on top of me and trying to take my clothes off. I told him to stop! He drove me home like a maniac and almost got us in a car accident. He never spoke to me again after this. I had been enticing him in my bikini with something I was not willing to give him.
I wanted romance with a guy, not sex! I wanted flowers, snuggles, hand holding, and kisses, NOT sex. Guys may give romance in order to get sex. Girls give sex in order to get romance. We must understand the differences between men and women!
The next guy I dated, I enjoyed being with. We had a lot of great conversations. He wanted sex too, but he at least gave me some romance and never forced himself upon me. I didn’t give him sex and that was okay with him. He wanted to marry me, but we were still very young. On February 14, 1975, I woke up and didn’t like him anymore, and it was on Valentine’s Day! I broke his heart. I never had any intention of marrying him. I saw dating as just having fun and something to do in high school.
The next guy I dated was the varsity football quarterback. My mom was so excited! He was very handsome. On the night of our first date, he was an hour or so late picking me up. He honked his horn, so I went to his car. He was completely drunk and drove me to a wild party. Once there, he led me to a bedroom. I sat on the corner of the bed and told him to take me home. He did. We ended up dating for a year and a half. He wanted to marry me, but I never had any intention of marrying him. I saw dating as having fun, but it wasn’t fun for me in hindsight. (Oh, and he didn’t drink again while we dated and NEVER picked me up drunk again!)
When I went off to college, I dated a lot, but the guys I liked didn’t like me and the guys who liked me, I didn’t like. (I think it was God’s protection over me.) I met my husband at the beginning of the second semester of our senior year in 1980. He actually romanced me! He would write me funny love letters and slip them under my door.
We were married in December of 1980. On my honeymoon night, all I could think of was that I was thankful that I had reserved sex for the man I married. It’s NOT something that I would have wanted to do with just anybody. It’s so intimate, personal, and private. For most women, it’s not fun nor enjoyable the first few times. It hurts! It’s not like what they show in Hollywood movies.
Through my experiences with dating, I saw the harm of dating just to date and looking for romance. There’s WAY too much sexual temptation, and the heartbreak that follows is playing games with others’ hearts and emotions. It doesn’t end up being fun playing with each other’s emotions when marriage isn’t in the picture. Any type of dating should be to find out if the guy you’re dating is marriage material. If he is, then spend time getting to know him and his family. Don’t allow sex to happen, since it will cause great guilt and is against God’s will for you. God commands that we FLEE fornication, not play around with it. It’s playing with fire. Sex is meant for the wedding night. Having it before marriage can actually harm the chances of getting married and having a life long marriage. ALL of God’s commands are for our good.
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. 1 Corinthians 6:18
President Biden implores us that climate change is an “existential threat” to humanity.
Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry preaches to us that “[t]he climate crisis as a whole is a national security threat because it is disruptive to the daily lives of human beings all over the world.”
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez warns us that in 2030, “the world is going to end … if we don’t address climate change.”
Hold on to your wallet.
The Left’s Global Warming Chicken Littles Insist That The Sky Is Falling But Don’t Want You To Know Six Key Facts:
First, in his new book “Unsettled,” Obama Administration Department of Energy chief scientist Steven Koonin shows that the models relied upon by the Left to predict future global warming are so poor that they cannot even reproduce the temperature changes in the 20th century.
If these models cannot reproduce past temperatures already known when the models were developed, how can they possibly reliably predict temperatures decades into the future?
Second, Koonin’s book also documents that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s own analysis indicates that any negative economic impact that global warming eventually may have will be so modest that it warrants no action.
Third, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the UN IPPC do not claim that a link has been established between global warming and natural disasters.
In 2020, the NOAA stated: “it is premature to conclude with high confidence that increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations from human activities have had a detectable impact on Atlantic basin hurricane activity,” and “changes in tropical cyclone activity … are not yet detectable.”
The UN IPPC, the Wall Street Journal reported, “says that it too lacks evidence to show that warming is making storms and flooding worse.”
Fourth, as the earth’s temperature has risen, natural disasters have become far less deadly.
Since 1920, the planet’s temperature has risen by 1.29 degrees Celsius and world population has quadrupled from less than two billion to over seven and half billion – yet EM-DAT, The International Disaster Database, reports that the number of people killed by natural disasters has declined by over 80 percent, from almost 55,000 per year to less than 10,000 per year.
Fifth, some of the world’s best scientists believe that global warming will be beneficial rather than harmful.
In 2017, a group of eminent scientists – such as Richard Lindzen of MIT, William Happer of Princeton, and Judith Curry of Georgia Tech – wrote that “[o]bservations [over the last] 25 years … show that warming from increased atmospheric CO2 will be benign.”
Carbon dioxide, they noted, “is not a pollutant but a major benefit to agriculture and other life on Earth.”
Sixth, global warming saves lives. A study published in 2015 by the British medical journal The Lancet found that cold kills over 17 times more people than heat.
This study by 22 scientists from around the world – which examined over 74 million deaths in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States in 1985-2012, “the largest dataset ever collected to assess temperature-health associations”– reported that cold caused 7.29 percent of these deaths, while heat caused only 0.42 percent.
And small changes in the temperature matter: “moderately hot and cold temperatures” caused 88.85 percent of the temperature-related deaths, while “extreme” temperatures caused only 11.15 percent.
We must not let the Left bully us into draconian action with unfounded claims of a looming climate catastrophe. Know the facts. Global warming is not a problem.
In 1932-33, Communist Jews starved about ten million Ukrainian farmers and their families to death in a genocide called the “Holodomor.” According to Deagle.com, the US population is projected to decline by 225 million by 2025. Canada, France and Italy will be reduced by about 30% but Russia, China, Iran & India will hardly be affected. Germany and UK are reduced to 28 million and 15 million people respectively.
The Rothschilds are making an inventory of everything on the planet so they may own it. This includes food. Ex FEMA analyst Celeste Solum implies that this inventory might facilitate food shortages aka “supply chain disruptions.” Related—“Pandemic-Driven Hunger is Sweeping the Globe”
Back in 2005, the precursor to the Mark was introduced as a tracking mechanism for property and animals. It was known as the National Animal Identification System. It had three pillars: All property belongs to the government and will be issued an alpha-numeric country code. Electronic identification of all lifeforms on said property each being issued an alpha-numeric country code24/7 surveillance Courageous individuals and states introduced state legislation to block this intrusive regulatory proposal. Despite widespread opposition it was passed. A few years later becoming mandatory. As is the custom in government circles, when it became mandatory, the program changes its name to Traceability to harmonize with the international mandate from the United Nations. This program, from its inception, was applicable to humans as they are considered animals except in documents stating an exception. Here is a repost from Food Safety Newsupdating you on the program. It is critical to keep an eye on this as weaponized food was commanded and demanded in January by globalists, by the end of this year for all commercial available foods. –“The Traceability Challenge” “Tech-enabled traceability – the ability to quickly track a food throughout the food system, from when it leaves its source to when it lands on your plate – is one of the foundational core elements of the New Era of Smarter Food Safety blueprint. “Achieving end-to-end food traceability will involve everyone in the supply chain – from source to table. To achieve that level of participation, we need accessible tracing solutions for human and animal food companies of all sizes. “We’re asking food technology solution providers, public health advocates, entrepreneurs, and innovators across the human and animal food supply chain to present food traceability solutions that are affordable, create shared-value, and, thus, can scale to encourage widespread adoption. “When there’s an outbreak of food-borne illnesses, it’s critical to rapidly identify where the contamination originated. Doing so not only helps us prevent additional illnesses and potentially save lives, but it allows us to conduct better root cause analyses to prevent such outbreaks from happening again. It also may provide us with more detailed or specific information about the source of the contamination. “We also learned during the COVID-19 pandemic that further enabling a digitally traceable food system could help create the type of transparency needed to anticipate and help prevent supply chain disruptions in a public health emergency, thereby resulting in a more resilient food system. “The challenge will invite submissions for tech-enabled solutions that address traceability needs and challenges faced by primary producers (such as entities involved in farming, fishing, and animal agriculture), importers, manufacturers and processors, distributors, and retailers and foodservice. ————
Deagle population projections. Black 2017. Red 2025More here.
It appears as though there is a coordinated effort to introduce the idea of making the Covid-19 vaccines mandatory for the masses, as just last night French Prime Minister Macron announced that Covid vaccinations will become compulsory for all healthcare workers from July 21st.
Last night, Greece and France announced that Covid-19 vaccines will be mandatory for all healthcare workers and care home employees. / Image source: UW Medicine.
The new rules mean that all healthcare workers must be fully vaccinated by September 15th otherwise, they will not be allowed to go to work and will not be paid.
In a televised address to the nation, Macron said:
“We need to strive for having vaccination levels at near 100% across France because that is the only way that we will have a sound future. This is why for those health workers, those working in hospitals, clinics, retirement homes, people working in disabled care home facilities, anyone who works in a professional capacity or volunteer capacity working with the elderly, or the most fragile people at home; they will have to be vaccinated without waiting. It is compulsory for them. It is thanks to your sense of duty that you will do so. All of those people who will have to be vaccinated have until the 15th September to do so, and we need to start now.”
Macron warned that checks will be carried out from the 15th September and any healthcare workers who are not vaccinated will potentially face fines, and sanctions will be carried out.
The Prime Minister said that he has not ruled out making vaccines mandatory for the whole of France, adding that “we will probably have to think about the mandatory vaccination of all French citizens at some point.”
Along with this announcement comes new Covid rules for the French public, as vaccine passportsare set to become compulsory for bars, cafes, restaurants, transport, and other large events. Macron said that these tough new measures had to be introduced to curb the spread of the Delta variant.
From August 1st, the French citizens must prove that they are vaccinated or have tested negative for Covid via a vaccine passport before they can access most public spaces.
Macron said: “From the beginning of August, the health pass will apply to cafes, restaurants, hospitals, retirement homes, and long-distance transport: planes, trains, and coaches for long journeys.”
However, from July 21st the health pass will be required for places of leisure and culture, as Macron stated that:
“For all of our compatriots over 12 years old, it will be necessary to have been vaccinated or have a negative test to access a show, an amusement park, a concert or a festival.”
It seemed that France was not the only country to make Covid jabs compulsory for healthcare workers last night, as Greece introduced similar measures for their health staff.
Greece’s Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis announced that Covid-19 vaccines will become mandatory for all health workers and care home employees, as advised by the country’s Bioethics Committee. Those who fail to get vaccinated will be suspended from August 16th.
From September 1st, Covid vaccines will also be made mandatory for health professionals in the public and private sectors.
Mitsotakis said: “It is unthinkable, for example, for an unvaccinated nurse to care for an immunosuppressed cancer patient. I am sure that a large part of society agrees with this decision. I ask all parties to support it without any reservations.”
Mitsotakis also announced that the Armed Forces will not have to be vaccinated, but there will be incentives to get the jab.
Similar to France, Greece has adopted new rules for their citizens regarding the vaccine, as from Friday, July 16th until the end of August, indoor entertainment venues will operate strictly for vaccinated people.
This applies to the catering industry as unvaccinated people will not be permitted to eat at restaurants or cafes, therefore citizens must provide proof of vaccination via a digital passport before gaining entry.
The Prime Minister said: “Freedoms will be gradually restored with the vaccine passport and fixed basic rules: mask when we are with others, even outside, personal hygiene and many tests. The aim is for the end of the pandemic not to become a prelude to a new ordeal in the fall. We can, therefore, close the last chapter of the health crisis from today, and quickly. It is enough to have the Freedom vaccine in one arm.”
Disturbingly, these mandatory measures are set to be introduced in Australia and New Zealand too, showing that this appears to be a well-organised move to usher in Covid vaccines for all along with the vaccine passports.
In New Zealand, it was announced yesterday that all airport and port workers will be required to be vaccinated, or lose their jobs. This announcement follows the government’s move to force all border, isolation, and quarantine staff to be jabbed or face unemployment.
The country’s Covid-19 Response Minister, Chris Hipkins, said:
“I am extending the mandatory order to cover a further 1800 currently unvaccinated active border workers. This is necessary to lift the uptake of the vaccine among the wider border workforce and strengthen our ongoing response to Covid-19. All government employees covered by the order must have received their first dose of the Covid jab by August 26th.
“Border workers who remain unvaccinated after the requirements come into effect will need to discuss options with their employer. They will not be able to continue working in a high-risk border environment until they are vaccinated.”
In April, a health order mandated border workers to have had at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, although this did not cover “wider border workforce” such as airline staff and port workers.
The new order now covers those working in the airside area of affected airports and some other high0risk work at airports, ports, and accommodation services where specified aircrew members were self-isolating.
In Australia, the government made the decision on the 28th of June to make the Covid-19 vaccinesmandatory for aged care home staff, and measures to make the jab compulsory for all healthcare staff are currently under review.
The Minister for Health and Aged Care, Greg Hunt, said at a press conference on 5th July:
“I know there will be some who don’t support that. And we’ve done this because after having sought the medical advice on a number of occasions, that medical advice came back that endorsed the position which the Prime Minister had flagged sometime earlier.”
Unfortunately, it appears as though the UK is set to follow suit, as today – the 13th July – parliament will discuss and vote on whether Covid Vaccines should be made mandatory for all care home staff.
In June, the UK government announced that all care home workers will be required by law to be fully vaccinated to “protect residents.”
The new legislation is set to come into effect from October and will allow a period of time for staff to get vaccinated – excluding those who are medically exempt – before they face being suspended or losing their job.
It is interesting to see that these new requirements are being brought in all around the same time. Is it just a coincidence?
It appears as though the next stage of the Covid agenda has begun as there is a global effort to move towards introducing domestic vaccine passports to further restrict the freedoms of the masses.
Considering that the UK 19th July Freedom Day is just around the corner, it doesn’t seem too far-fetched to expect some form of vaccine passport to be introduced or other measures that isolate and restrict the freedoms of the unvaccinated. It is only a matter of time before a domestic vaccine passport hits UK soil and life for the unvaccinated becomes incredibly difficult, even harder than it already is.
Groups allied with the Biden administration are planning on working directly with cellphone network providers to ‘fact check’ private SMS messages if they contain “misinformation about vaccines.”
The revelation is made in a Politico article which explains how the White House is preparing to characterize “conservative opponents of its Covid-19 vaccine campaign as dangerous and extreme.”
The decision to ramp up the information war against vaccine skeptics was made after conservatives showed resistance to the Biden administration’s plan to go “door-to-door” to increase vaccination rates.
“Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages,” states the report.
“The goal is to ensure that people who may have difficulty getting a vaccination because of issues like transportation see those barriers lessened or removed entirely.”https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1414655500344565764&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fhumansarefree.com%2F2021%2F07%2Fdemocrats-plan-to-fact-check-private-sms.html&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px
The prospect of the DNC and other government-affiliated groups having access to Americans’ private text messages represents a chilling surveillance dystopia.
Interfering with and trying to ‘fact check’ people’s personal conversations is also utterly demented.
Recall that ‘fact-checkers’ infamously declared the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis to be a “debunked conspiracy theory” at the start of the pandemic, only to be forced into a humiliating reversal later on.
In doing so, they may have helped facilitate one of the biggest cover-ups in modern history, so what business such groups have in snooping on people’s private SMS messages is anyone’s guess.
If one were only limited to viewing or reading the US mainstream media the story of how President Joe Biden went down on his knees to honor two visiting Israelis would never have surfaced. Fortunately, the story did make considerable waves in both the Israeli and the alternative media, though not enough to convince the faceless editors at CBS news and elsewhere to run with it. The kneeling incident reportedly took place while Biden was meeting in the White House with soon-to-be retired Israeli president Reuven Rivlin. Rivlin was doing something like his victory lap, having presumably completed his term of office without being charged with corruption, which is what the Jewish state’s leaders have traditionally been noted for.
In fact, the good news re Israeli corruption is that recent ex-prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been dogged by corruption charges for years, no longer can claim immunity and just might now have to pay the piper and go to jail together with his lovely wife Sara. The thought of Netanyahu in the slammer brings tears of joy to my eyes, not only because he is dishonest and a thief, but also because he was part of an Israeli spy ring that obtained nuclear triggers to construct bombs, which was operating against the United States back when he lived here in the 1970s-80s. But that is another story for another day.
Rivlin was in town to say goodbye but also to discuss Iran. The Israeli view on Iran is that the Mullahs have a secret nuclear weapons program so any kind of agreement with them allows work to proceed clandestinely. Israel believes that allowing the United States to re-enter into 2015’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) would take the heat off Iran and would virtually guarantee that the Islamic Republic would wind up with a nuclear weapon, which would threaten the entire region, most particularly Israel and the Saudis. This line is, of course, being echoed by Israel’s many friends in the United States.
The other view, supported by both the United Nations and the US intelligence community, is that it is Israel rather than Iran that has a secret nuclear arsenal which is not subject to international inspection. Everyone but Israel believes that Iran, for its part, long ago gave up an exploratory program that might plausibly have led to a weapon. The only so-called evidence challenging that view consists of information on a lap top that was fortuitously discovered by some opponents of the Iranian government which had previously been fabricated by Israeli intelligence and placed so as to be found and exposed.
Biden, completely predictably, assured the Israeli president that his personal commitment to the Jewish state is “iron-clad.” No doubt Rivlin for his part passed the Israeli view regarding Iran on to Biden during their meeting, though there has been no subsequent document describing in any detail that aspect of their discussion. The White House press release described their interaction as follows: “President Biden conveyed his unwavering support for Israel’s security and his commitment to deepening the cooperation between the two countries across all fields. The leaders discussed the many challenges facing the region, including the threat posed by Iran. The President emphasized that under his administration, Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. He also assured President Rivlin that the United States remains determined to counter Iran’s malign activity and support for terrorist proxies, which have destabilizing consequences for the region.”
In reality, of course, it is Israel and the US that are nuclear armed and have been supporting terrorist proxies in the Middle East, but we’ll give that one a pass. Rivlin had with him his 45 year-old chief of staff, a Haredi Orthodox Israeli woman named Rivka Ravitz who has borne twelve children. Many Orthodox Jews apparently believe that procreating up to maximum capacity is a requirement that comes straight from Yahweh. Joe responded with something like delight at the report of the “cheaper by the dozen” offspring and he got so excited that he went down on one knee to honor the lady and, presumably, her boss. And to make matters worse, a photographer who accompanied the Israeli entourage was in the room with the beaming trio and was able to take a picture of Joe on one bended knee, though it also has been claimed that he might have gone down on both knees which raises the question how he managed to get back up at his age. Are Secret Service Agent required to lift up kneeling presidents?
So here we have the president of the United States down on one or two knees in front of two former Israeli government officials. Doesn’t look good, does it? But it could be a metaphor for what the entire United States government and Establishment choose to do when it comes to Israel. Too bad there is no recording of what Honest Joe was saying as he was going down. Was it the usual inarticulate mumble or something acknowledging the power and majesty of his visitors? As noted above, avowed Zionist Joe reportedly said either before or maybe after his prostration that the commitment to Israel is “iron-clad,” which one might suggest to be the unofficial motto of the United States Congress.
I know that Joe Biden and almost everyone else in Washington politics would not share my view of the Israel-US relationship, which to put it succinctly goes as follows: the United States relationship with Israel is a strategic liability that has been a major factor in US involvement in avoidable wars that have cost a great deal of money and have done terrible damage to actual interests, while also leading to the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians and American soldiers. On top of that, the US inexplicably gives Israel, a wealthy nation, billions of dollars each year and uncritical political support that has contributed to America’s sharply declining international standing. Finally, though the Israel Lobby that has brought all of this about through corruption of congress and the media includes a rabid Christian Zionist subset, the money and access to genuine political power nearly all comes from American Jewish groups and wealthy individuals who are guilty of dual loyalty, or actually singular loyalty to Israel. They should all be registered as “foreign agents” to make completely clear where their allegiance lies.
Biden is, to be sure, a funny bloke who wants to pretend to being a devout Roman Catholic while also supporting abortion as a form of birth control. He also appears to want to be President of the United States while giving “iron-clad” guarantees of loyalty to a foreign country. Given that, his kneeling to Israeli officials in the Oval Office is under the circumstances appropriate as it reflects who is actually in charge. Biden, like Nancy Pelosi and the other bottom crawlers that make up the US Congress, reflexively and automatically defers to Israel and to the powerful Jewish community on both foreign policy and many domestic issues. If one cannot accept that simple truth it will become impossible to understand what is actually at play.
Apart from a handful of liberals, who in the Congress is complaining about using readily and even illegally supplied American weapons to kill Gazans? What do we have to do to have a president that actually puts Americans first, since neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden seem prepared to do so? It is an unavoidable fact that on so many of these issues the American federal and even many state and local governments have been dominated by Israel’s interests. The only question is “What can be done to change that dynamic?” That’s the underlying problem, but change just might come if and when more Americans begin to realize the extent to which their president and governing system have been compromised and their tax dollars stolen by Israel!
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.orgaddress is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org
Years ago, Ken and I went to a counselor/psychologist in hopes of healing our marriage. He wanted to know all about my childhood and past hurts. In pondering this method and reading a book by Dave Hunt called “Beyond Seduction: A Return to Biblical Christianity,” I can now see why most psychologists and counselors don’t help. Instead of addressing sin in the couple’s lives, they want to find the source of the sin and deal with that instead.
Dave Hunt makes some remarkable observations about psychology:
“Christians who turn from God and His Word to psychotherapists for help with depression forsake ‘the fountain of living waters’ to drink from the polluted, unsatisfying, and even harmful ‘broken cisterns that can hold no water’” (Jeremiah 2:13).
I shared this on my Instagram and was hit with many angry women who vehemently disagreed with me. So, I tried to reason with them by writing the following:
King David had many times of great depression, but he didn’t heal his mind through drugs or running to a psychotherapist. No, he renewed his mind with truth. He reminded himself who was in control and that he could trust God Almighty with his life. He became thankful rather than fearful.
Our actions flow from our thought life. This is why God speaks about what we dwell upon and commands that we renew our minds with truth. Most of what you hear from the world are lies. Most are living in rebellion to God. This is why depression and suicides are skyrocketing.
Be immersed in God’s Word! Take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ! This is how we gain a sound mind (2 Timothy 1:7), not through anything the world has to offer.
If anyone could be depressed and suicidal, it would be me. Thirty year of severe pain, hundreds of sleepless nights (singing hymns in my mind over and over again got me through), almost died a few times, missing out on holidays, vacations, and birthdays, feeling poorly all throughout the years of raising my children, a radiated to death pituitary so zero hormone production, and a brain tumor that may eventually kill me.
Whenever I felt myself sinking into a pit of depression, I would renew my mind with truth. The joy of the Lord is my strength, and I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. This would immediately pull me out. His Word is powerful, women!
“As a result of the influence of psychology, the pure gospel and the practical application of the cross in daily life have been undermined” (Dave Hunt). As if man knows better than God our Creator. As if man’s ways are superior to God’s. “Christian psychology is an attempted balancing act, with one foot upon the solid Rock, Jesus Christ, and the other on the sinking sand of humanism.
“Instead of purging out the leaven, the church is granting increasing credence and honor to psychology. Christians are asked to accept psychology as a new source of truth and put it on an equal footing with God’s Word. Its psychology is as unstable as water. Its false gospel continually changes as its conflicting theories ebb and flow and its gurus come and go. Nevertheless, these illegitimate prophets who are worshiped in the secular world are influencing Christianity.
“In summary, by accepting a ‘new interpretation’ of the Bible that comes from outside and cannot be supported by the Scripture themselves, the church has embraced an alien gospel administered by a new class of priests supported by humanistic authority. With its own vocabulary and rituals and academic knowledge, this new clergy has gained authority over those who know only God and His Word and are thus no longer qualified to counsel from Scripture.” (Dave Hunt)
Many in the churches do need personal, marriage, and family counseling, but it must be biblical (speaking the truth in love) and not psychological. The more regular Christians like you and me study the Word and understand Truth thus growing in wisdom, the better we’re able to give biblically, sound counsel to those who are hurting. I mentor women on a daily basis. All of my counsel to them revolves around God’s Word, since I know His ways are higher than my ways.
Drugs for depression should be a last resort, since they are highly toxic to the human body and the side effects can be depression and suicide. Plus, they are very hard to withdraw from. There are people who are still having withdrawal symptoms from them years after going off of them. Seek to replace the lies you’re believing with truth instead. Eat as healthy as possible. Get exercise and sunshine. Do all you can to stay far away from the drugs.
According as his divine power hath given unto us ALL things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue. 2 Peter 1:3
For more than a decade, Joel Moskowitz, a researcher in the School of Public Health at UC Berkeley and director of Berkeley’s Center for Family and Community Health, has been on a quest to prove that radiation from cellphones is unsafe. But, he said, most people don’t want to hear it.
“People are addicted to their smartphones,” said Moskowitz. “We use them for everything now, and, in many ways, we need them to function in our daily lives. I think the idea that they’re potentially harming our health is too much for some people.”
Since cellphones first came onto the market in 1983, they have gone from clunky devices with bad reception to today’s sleek, multifunction smartphones. And although cellphones are now used by nearly all American adults, considerable research suggests that long-term use poses health risks from the radiation they emit, said Moskowitz.
“Cellphones, cell towers and other wireless devices are regulated by most governments,” said Moskowitz. “Our government, however, stopped funding research on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation in the 1990s.”
Berkeley News spoke with Moskowitz about the health risks of cellphone radiation, why the topic is so controversial and what we can expect with the rollout of 5G.
Berkeley News: I first heard you speak about the health risks of cellphone radiation at Berkeley in 2019, but you’ve been doing this research since 2009. What led you to pursue this research?
Joel Moskowitz: I got into this field by accident, actually. During the past 40 years, the bulk of my research has been focused on tobacco-related disease prevention. I first became interested in cellphone radiation in 2008, when Dr. Seung-Kwon Myung, a physician scientist with the National Cancer Center of South Korea, came to spend a year at the Center for Family and Community Health. He was involved in our smoking cessation projects, and we worked with him and his colleagues on two reviews of the literature, one of which addressed the tumor risk from cellphone use.
At that time, I was skeptical that cellphone radiation could be harmful. However, since I was dubious that cellphone radiation could cause cancer, I immersed myself in the literature regarding the biological effects of low-intensity microwave radiation, emitted by cellphones and other wireless devices.
After reading many animal toxicology studies that found that this radiation could increase oxidative stress — free radicals, stress proteins and DNA damage — I became increasingly convinced that what we were observing in our review of human studies was indeed a real risk.
Berkeley News: While Myung and his colleagues were visiting the Center for Family and Community Health, you reviewed case-control studies examining the association between mobile phone use and tumor risk. What did you find?
Joel Moskowitz: Our 2009 review, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, found that heavy cellphone use was associated with increased brain cancer incidence, especially in studies that used higher quality methods and studies that had no telecommunications industry funding.
Last year, we updated our review, published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, based on a meta-analysis of 46 case-control studies — twice as many studies as we used for our 2009 review — and obtained similar findings. Our main takeaway from the current review is that approximately 1,000 hours of lifetime cellphone use, or about 17 minutes per day over a 10-year period, is associated with a statistically significant 60% increase in brain cancer.
Berkeley News: One thing I think we should address upfront is how controversial this research is. Some scientists have said that these findings are without basis and that there isn’t enough evidence that cellphone radiation is harmful to our health. How do you respond to that?
Joel Moskowitz: Well, first of all, few scientists in this country can speak knowledgeably about the health effects of wireless technology. So, I’m not surprised that people are skeptical, but that doesn’t mean the findings aren’t valid.
A big reason there isn’t more research about the health risks of radiofrequency radiation exposure is because the U.S. government stopped funding this research in the 1990s, with the exception of a $30 million rodent study published in 2018 by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ National Toxicology Program, which found “clear evidence” of carcinogenicity from cellphone radiation.
In 1996, the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, adopted exposure guidelines that limited the intensity of exposure to radiofrequency radiation. These guidelines were designed to prevent significant heating of tissue from short-term exposure to radiofrequency radiation, not to protect us from the effects of long-term exposure to low levels of modulated, or pulsed, radiofrequency radiation, which is produced by cellphones, cordless phones and other wireless devices, including Wi-Fi. Yet, the preponderance of research published since 1990 finds adverse biologic and health effects from long-term exposure to radiofrequency radiation, including DNA damage.
More than 250 scientists, who have published over 2,000 papers and letters in professional journals on the biologic and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields produced by wireless devices, including cellphones, have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for health warnings and stronger exposure limits. So, there are many scientists who agree that this radiation is harmful to our health.
Berkeley News: Why did the government stop funding this kind of research?
Joel Moskowitz: The telecommunications industry has almost complete control of the FCC, according to Captured Agency, a monograph written by journalist Norm Alster during his 2014-15 fellowship at Harvard University’s Center for Ethics. There’s a revolving door between the membership of the FCC and high-level people within the telecom industry that’s been going on for a couple of decades now.
The industry spends about $100 million a year lobbying Congress. The CTIA, which is the major telecom lobbying group, spends $12.5 million per year on 70 lobbyists. According to one of their spokespersons, lobbyists meet roughly 500 times a year with the FCC to lobby on various issues. The industry as a whole spends $132 million a year on lobbying and provides $18 million in political contributions to members of Congress and others at the federal level.
Berkeley News: It reminds me of when the U.S. Surgeon General released a landmark report in 1964 that linked cigarettes with dangerous health effects, including cancer and heart disease. Even though the 10-person committee consulted more than 7,000 articles already available in biomedical literature, the report’s findings were very controversial when they came out.
Joel Moskowitz: Yes, there are strong parallels between what the telecom industry has done and what the tobacco industry has done, in terms of marketing and controlling messaging to the public. In the 1940s, tobacco companies hired doctors and dentists to endorse their products to reduce public health concerns about smoking risks.
The CTIA currently uses a nuclear physicist from academia to assure policymakers that microwave radiation is safe. The telecom industry not only uses the tobacco industry playbook, it is more economically and politically powerful than Big Tobacco ever was. This year, the telecom industry will spend over $18 billion advertising cellular technology worldwide.
Berkeley News: You mentioned that cellphones and other wireless devices use modulated, or pulsed, radiofrequency radiation. Can you explain how cellphones and other wireless devices work, and how the radiation they emit is different from radiation from other household appliances, like a microwave?
Joel Moskowitz: Basically, when you make a call, you’ve got a radio and a transmitter. It transmits a signal to the nearest cell tower. Each cell tower has a geographic cell, so to speak, in which it can communicate with cellphones within that geographic region or cell.
Then, that cell tower communicates with a switching station, which then searches for whom you’re trying to call, and it connects through a copper cable or fiber optics or, in many cases, a wireless connection through microwave radiation with the wireless access point. Then, that access point either communicates directly through copper wires through a landline or, if you’re calling another cellphone, it will send a signal to a cell tower within the cell of the receiver and so forth.
The difference is the kind of microwave radiation each device emits. With regard to cellphones and Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, there is an information-gathering component. The waves are modulated and pulsed in a very different manner than your microwave oven.
Berkeley News: What, specifically, are some of the health effects associated with long-term exposure to low-level modulated radiofrequency radiation emitted from wireless devices?
Joel Moskowitz: Many biologists and electromagnetic field scientists believe the modulation of wireless devices makes the energy more biologically active, which interferes with our cellular mechanisms, opening up calcium channels, for example, and allowing calcium to flow into the cell and into the mitochondria within the cell, interfering with our natural cellular processes and leading to the creation of stress proteins and free radicals and, possibly, DNA damage. And, in other cases, it may lead to cell death.
In 2001, based upon the biologic and human epidemiologic research, low-frequency fields were classified as “possibly carcinogenic” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization. In 2011, the agency classified radiofrequency radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based upon studies of cellphone radiation and brain tumor risk in humans. Currently, we have considerably more evidence that would warrant a stronger classification.
Most recently, on March 1, 2021, a report was released by the former director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which concluded that there is a “high probability” that radiofrequency radiation emitted by cellphones causes gliomas and acoustic neuromas, two types of brain tumors.
Berkeley News: Let’s talk about the fifth generation of cellphone technology, known as 5G, which is already available in limited areas across the U.S. What does this mean for cellphone users and what changes will come with it?
Joel Moskowitz: For the first time, in addition to microwaves, this technology will employ millimeter waves, which are much higher frequency than the microwaves used by 3G and 4G. Millimeter waves can’t travel very far, and they’re blocked by fog or rain, trees and building materials, so the industry estimates that it’ll need 800,000 new cell antenna sites.
Each of these sites may have cell antennas from various cellphone providers, and each of these antennas may have microarrays consisting of dozens or even perhaps hundreds of little antennas. In the next few years in the U.S., we will see deployed roughly 2.5 times more antenna sites than in current use unless wireless safety advocates and their representatives in Congress or the judicial system put a halt to this.
Berkeley News: How are millimeter waves different from microwaves, in terms of how they affect our bodies and the environment?
Joel Moskowitz: Millimeter wave radiation is largely absorbed in the skin, the sweat glands, the peripheral nerves, the eyes and the testes, based upon the body of researchthat’s been done on millimeter waves. In addition, this radiation may cause hypersensitivity and biochemical alterations in the immune and circulatory systems — the heart, the liver, kidneys and brain.
Millimeter waves can also harm insects and promote the growth of drug-resistant pathogens, so it’s likely to have some widespread environmental effects for the micro-environments around these cell antenna sites.
Berkeley News: What are some simple things that each of us can do to reduce the risk of harm from radiation from cellphones and other wireless devices?
Joel Moskowitz: First, minimize your use of cellphones or cordless phones — use a landline whenever possible. If you do use a cellphone, turn off the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth if you’re not using them. However, when near a Wi-Fi router, you would be better off using your cellphone on Wi-Fi and turning off the cellular because this will likely result in less radiation exposure than using the cellular network.
Second, distance is your friend. Keeping your cellphone 10 inches away from your body, as compared to one-tenth of an inch, results in a 10,000-fold reduction in exposure. So, keep your phone away from your head and body. Store your phone in a purse or backpack. If you have to put it in your pocket, put it on airplane mode. Text, use wired headphones or speakerphone for calls. Don’t sleep with it next to your head — turn it off or put it in another room.
Third, use your phone only when the signal is strong. Cellphones are programmed to increase radiation when the signal is poor, that is when one or two bars are displayed on your phone. For example, don’t use your phone in an elevator or in a car, as metal structures interfere with the signal.
Also, I encourage people to learn more about the 150-plus local groups affiliated with Americans for Responsible Technology, which are working to educate policymakers, urging them to adopt cell tower regulations and exposure limits that fully protect us and the environment from the harm caused by wireless radiation.
