Global Wheat Shortage / Hungersteine / Vegan Death Cult

From the appearance of “hunger stones” in the extreme drought conditions, to mainstream admission of the global wheat shortage, the signs of Peak Food are everywhere as the changes in our climate accelerate. Missouri regulates what you can call “meat.”‘ London’s first insect farm has opened. And the vegan death cult evidences itself to be equally venomous as the climate change cult. Christian breaks it down.

Advertisements

Breitbart
20 August 2018
Allum Bokhari

The purge of the right on social media was once a slow trickle, with high-profile bans happening only occasionally, and then subsiding. With just three months until the midterm elections, the Masters of the Universe in Silicon Valley have turned online censorship into a cascade.

Earlier this month, Alex Jones was blacklisted on virtually every major social media service, including Apple podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Facebook, and even Pinterest and Linkedin. Following pressure from CNN and Media Matters, Twitter eventually followed suit with a week-long suspension.

A few days after the mass-purge of Jones’ accounts, Twitter permanently banned libertarian commentator Gavin McInnes, and the official accounts of  his grassroots organization the Proud Boys, on bogus charges of “supporting violence.”

A few days later, Patreon, which has been ramping up its censorship of right-wingers (usually based on unsupported accusations of violence-promotion similar to those used by Twitter), kicked off Islam critic Robert Spencer, founder of Jihad Watch. It later emerged that Mastercard had pressured Patreon into making the call.

Then, last night, Twitter went on another mass-purge of right-wingers, with multiple conservative personalities reporting that their follower count had dropped by hundreds overnight. Among those purged was the account of Vey, a graphics designer who previously produced artwork for Breitbart News. He provided Breitbart with a screenshot of progressive activists targeting his account for mass-reporting prior to his ban.

Big tech CEOs like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey resolutely maintain that they do not discriminate on the basis of political views. In an election year, it would be suicidal to claim otherwise. But the mountain of evidence contradicting them renders their well-rehearsed media talking points almost comical.

The list of the conservatives, right-wingers and other critics of progressivism who have been kicked off at least one major online service is huge. Tommy Robinson (banned by Twitter), Gavin McInnes (banned by Twitter), Lauren Southern (banned by Patreon, Stripe), Britanny Pettibone (banned by Patreon), Proud Boys USA (banned by Twitter), Sargon of Akkad (banned by Twitter), Roger Stone (banned by Twitter), Milo Yiannopolous (banned by Twitter), Hunter Avallone (banned by Twitter), Prager University (censored by YouTube), congressional candidate Elizabeth Heng (campaign ads banned by Facebook and Twitter), Pamela Geller (repeatedly kicked off Facebook), Alex Jones (banned by almost every social media platform).

These individuals all had hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions of followers on their social media accounts prior to being banned. Their social media platforms served as organizing hubs for petitions, fundraisers, rallies, and other political activities of the grassroots right. The loss of their social media accounts will have a major impact on the ability of conservatives and right-wingers to organize its online supporters for the U.S. midterm elections and beyond.

The left, meanwhile, is virtually unrestricted in its ability to amplify its voice on social media. On the same day that it purged hundreds of accounts that followed prominent conservatives on social media, it verified Sarah Jeong, the newly-minted New York Times editorial board member who rose to infamy for using Twitter to engage in racist diatribes against white people.

Jeong described whites as “groveling goblins” who “mark up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants,” and boasted of feeling “joy” when being “cruel to old white men.” Not only did Twitter decline to ban her for hate speech, they didn’t even ask her to delete the offending tweets. And then they verified her — after her tweets became the subject of international attention.

This power imbalance on the most influential technology platforms on the internet is sure to have an impact on the midterm elections. One side of politics is allowed to mobilize online without being impeded, while the other is not.

For over a year, Democrats and the mainstream media have been caterwauling about Russian social media interference in the 2016 election. Yet, as even the Washington Post admitted, Russia spent a minuscule sum on Facebook ads in 2016. Voters observing the ads, according to research conducted by an academic who is no fan of Trump, were unlikely to have been affected. If Russia’s goal was to sow panic in American politics then they’ve succeeded, largely thanks to the Democrats. But direct influence on voters? Not so much.

The real attempt to bias the outcome of an election hasn’t come from beyond America’s borders, but from the San Francisco Bay Area. Shamed by Democrats and the Media for “letting Trump win” in 2016, social media companies have responded by utterly crippling the ability of the president’s supporters to organize on the web.

Free-market libertarians say “build your own platforms” — but replacing even if replacing Google, Twitter, and Facebook were possible (and that’s unlikely), it’s a project that would take many years, possibly over a decade, to complete. How many election cycles could Silicon Valley influence by then?

Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale, who masterminded the president’s digital operations in 2020, understands the problem. In an op-ed for the Washington Examiner last week, Parscale says “big tech is becoming big brother.”

“What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus,” writes Parscale. “The Left is losing at the ballot box, and there are some signs it is starting to lose the culture war too. The free and open Internet has been indispensable in spreading conservative ideas, and it was indispensable in getting Donald Trump elected president — and now the Left wishes to destroy it.”

If they want to save themselves, the rest of the Republican party must realize that the tech giants that have come to dominate so much of our lives are not the same as Christian bakers, and are crying out for regulation. Now is not the time for free-market platitudes. Democracy itself is at risk.

Teaching children to grow their own food greatly reduces obesity, study finds

Natural News
28 August 2018
Russel Davis

(Natural News) Teaching children the basics of gardening and food production may stem childhood obesity, according to a recent study published in the Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. To carry out the study, a team of researchers from the University of California, Davis examined more than 400 children aged nine to 10 years old at four schools in California. The children were stratified into two groups: one that received gardening lessons, and the control group.

The study was conducted under the Shaping Healthy Choices Programme, which instructed children to grow and harvest their own vegetables. The produce were then used in cooking demonstrations or were taken home. The school canteens were also instructed to use produce grown from the gardens, which were then featured in newsletters that were sent home to the children’s families.

According to the study, children who enrolled in a gardening class were more likely to shed pounds within a year. The research team also found that schools with gardening classes had lower proportion of obese students. The researchers inferred that gardening lessons may help curb obesity in children by teaching them about healthy foods such as fresh vegetables.

“The BMI and waist-to-height ratio were greatly improved in intervention groups, with the overweight or obese population declining from 55.6 to 37.8 percent at the Northern California intervention school. The dramatic decrease in BMI, although unexpected in this short time frame, demonstrated that the SHCP was effective due to positive health messages and reinforcing nutrition concepts throughout the school and home environments,” said lead author Dr Rachel Scherr in Daily Mail.

Studies show the importance of gardening against childhood obesity

A 2013 study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine revealed that a community gardening initiative resulted in a significant decrease in obesity rates among low-income Hispanic American children. The intervention, called Growing Healthy Kids Program, involved a weekly gardening session, a seven-week cooking and nutrition workshop, and social events for both children and parents. As part of the study, the researchers assessed pre- and post-program height and weight data from 95 children aged two to 15 years.

The research team found that 17 percent of overweight and obese children attained significant improvements in BMI classification. The study also revealed that 100 percent of children with a normal BMI at the start of the study were able to maintain their weight after the initiative. In addition, the availability of fresh fruits and vegetables grew by 146 percent following the gardening program. Furthermore, the researchers noted an increase in the children’s fruit and vegetable consumption.

“Findings from this pilot study are consistent with previous studies reporting an increase in availability and consumption of fruits and vegetables among families participating in community gardens. Although there are limitations because this is a pilot study, this strategy seems to be promising for addressing childhood obesity, particularly among low-income Latino immigrant families,” the researchers wrote.

In another study, researchers found that lack of access to gardens may increase the odds of childhood obesity. To carry out the study, a team of researchers from the VU UniversityMedical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands pooled data from the Millennium Cohort Study with a total cohort population of 19,000 children. The research team found that children who did not have an access to gardens between the ages five and seven years were 38 percent more likely to become obese by age seven. Living in a disadvantaged neighborhood and having a lower educated household were also found to raise the odds of childhood obesity. The researchers also noted that children belonging to higher educated households living in disadvantaged neighborhood were still at an increased risk of childhood obesity.

The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.

Sources include:

South Africa Leader Behind Land Theft Slams Trump

News Wars
23 August 2018
Dan Lyman

South African figurehead Julius Malema called President Trump a “pathological liar” after Trump formally addressed the unfolding seizure of white-owned lands and killing of white farmers.

“I have asked Secretary of State to closely study the South Africa land and farm seizures and expropriations and the large-scale killing of farmers. ‘South African Government is now seizing land from white farmers.’” President Trump tweeted, crediting the latter quote to Tucker Carlson of Fox News.

Malema, who leads the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), a Marxist political movement aiming to eventually control the South African government, responded to President Trump and the US government from the EFF Twitter account.

“Be that as it may, we must put it on record, unequivocally, that Donald ‘the pathological liar’ Trump, we are not scared of you and your USA or Western imperialist forces,” EFF wrote, quoting Malema. “We are not the generation that is going to kneel at the statue of Western imperialism and accept to live in the indignity of black landlessness.”

“Furthermore, we want to send a strong message to the USA authorities, just like we did to the Australian authorities, stay out of South Africa’s domestic affairs.”

Malema, a staunch proponent for the seizure of white lands, asserts the ruling African National Congress (ANC) has already selected 150 farms for expropriation prior to the enactment of a proposed constitutional amendment, but he accuses the ANC of stealing credit for his scheme in order to gain local support.

“Thus, the ANC plan to expropriate 150 farms before a constitutional amendment is a populist move seeking to take credit in the eyes of public opinion,” Malema is quoted as saying. “So all white people who will be losing farms, it will be first the farms that they in the moment do not use or where there is actually no production taking place.”

“Then we will come for farms where there is actual production or business taking place for the purposes of black inclusion. In distributing those farms, there will be absolute prioritization of black people who are the natives of this land.”

The South African government has already begun to seize land, as reports surfaced this week about two farms targeted for expropriation.

“Government has begun unilaterally expropriating farms against which land claims have been lodged and where price negotiations with owners have stalled,” City Press reported on August 19th. “Two game farms in Limpopo appear to be the first properties that will be expropriated without following a court process.”

“A letter written to Akkerland Boerdery, owners of a luxury hunting farm in Makhado in Limpopo, read in part: ‘Notice is hereby given that a terrain inspection will be held on the farms on April 5, 2018, at 10 am in order to conduct an audit of the assets and a handover of the farm’s keys to the state.’

City Press also reports that 139 farms have been selected for expropriation without compensation by the ANC in the coming weeks.

My Conclusion: I glad when Donald Trump address about land grab in South Africa but the South Africa Government is not happy about Trump speaking out against Farmland garb in South Africa; it’s like they do not want any other countries speaking out about it.

South Africa begins seizing land from white farmers

‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ exclusive: South African president Cyril Ramaphosa has just begun the process of seizing land from his own citizens, without compensation, purely due to their skin color. That’s far more racist than anything Donald Trump has ever done, of course, but elites in America barely even care. #Tucker FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most watched television news channel for more than 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.

Mozilla / Firefox goes all in for EVIL… pushes corporate news collusion to silence independent media

Natural News
15 August 2018
Mike Adams

(Natural News) Remember the day you found out Google was steeped in pure evil? So you sought out a different browser to escape the evil overlords that run Chrome.

Many of us sought out Firefox from Mozilla, an organization with a strong history supporting free speech and open access to information.

But now Mozilla has joined the dark side. They’re jumping in bed with pure evil, pushing an “Information Trust Initiative” that would block independent media sources at the browser level while favoring corporate media giants like CNN, a cesspool of deliberately fake news.

Surprised? You shouldn’t be. The Mozilla Foundation also pushed for so-called “net neutrality,” a total sham agenda that the tech giants was crucial to make sure you would never be blocked from the information sources you wanted to visit. But today, it’s abundantly clear that tech giants simply de-platform anyone they want, instantly blocking that channel from all users, all while making a mockery of their “net neutrality” plea.

So which browsers are better alternatives? There are at least two good ones to check out right now:

BRAVE – Run by a pro-freedom group that supports small, independent publishers (and even has a mechanism for micropayments).

Vivaldi – Run by a small, independent group with no ties to deep state funding or the NSA.

It’s time to dump Firefox. Like all the other tech giants, Mozilla is going to abuse and exploit its position of market dominance to control what you read, watch and hear. That’s pure evil, and it’s the kind of evil we’ve all now come to expect from Google, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook. Now you can add Mozilla to that list.

My Conclusion: If Mike Adams is right about Mozilla Firefox joining the dark side I be disappointed about Mozilla because I have used and trusted Firefox for several years. To Mozilla Foundation “Please don’t join the dark side like what Google, Facebook, Twitter and many more platforms have done by not respecting freedom of speech and our right to our own opinions. Mozilla if still you still in freedom of speech, our right to our own opinion and right to access information you would join the dark side. As a blogger I have trust the Firefox browser for several years. I want Mozilla be honest and be supportive of freedom of speech our right to our own opinion and right to access information. It’s not too late if you haven’t join the dark side yet”. I hope Mozilla read this article from Natural News and change their minds about joining along side with the evil tech giants.

CO2 levels dangerously low for our planet; optimum levels of 800 – 1200 ppm would unleash reforestation, greening and food crop production

Natural News
13 August 2018
Isabelle Z.

(Natural News) Which planet sounds like a better place to live: One that is full of plants and trees and teeming with wildlife and biodiversity with plenty of food to go around, or a cold and barren one with a starving and dying-off population? If you’re like most people, you would choose the first option without hesitation. If you’re Carl Zimmer of the New York Times, however, it’s that second scenario that is inexplicably more appealing.

He wrote that “rising CO2 levels are making the world greener, but that’s nothing to celebrate.” It’s not? Reforestation, greening and food crop production are nothing to celebrate? Unfortunately, there is a lot of ignorance floating around about the topic of carbon and what it does to and in the environment. Climate change alarmists have been pushing the narrative that carbon is bad for the planet for so long that it’s frighteningly easy for the mainstream media to get away with expressing such ludicrous views. People read stories like Zimmer’s and simply nod in agreement because they think it’s what those who care about the planet should believe – never mind the fact that basic science tells us otherwise.

Respected ecologist Patrick Moore was quick to call out the article, calling the widely-read paper quote “a bad joke.” He believes the world is currently deficient in carbon dioxide compared to geological epochs in the past. He explained why he considers 800 to 1200 ppm of carbon dioxide to be the optimal level, pointing out that planting crops that are grown in greenhouses that have carbon dioxide pumped into them are ridiculously effective. Why would anyone use a greenhouse in the first place if carbon dioxide was actually bad?

He tweeted: “Try to tell a greenhouse grower that the effect of higher CO2 is “small.” They will laugh you out of the room with their 25-80% gain in yield.”

Even environmental journalist Andrew Revkin, who concedes that he has a lot of questions about carbon dioxide, said that Zimmer’s choice of the word “terrible” is without merit.

CO2 levels need to be higher, not lower

Plants simply can’t survive without carbon dioxide, and it’s already at dangerously low levels. If today’s levels were doubled, our planet would be lusher, with rain forests flourishing and deserts growing forests. This would lead to a more abundant food supply, better self-sufficiency and thriving life, as Mike Adams discusses in the must-see video “Carbon Dioxide: The Miracle Molecule of Life.”

Carbon dioxide is essential for life, and plants use it not only for breathing but to synthesize medicinal molecules like vitamin C, curcumin, and cannabidiol. It is not the enemy that it has been made out to be by those who don’t know any better.

Here is what would really happen if we didn’t have carbon dioxide on our planet: Plants would die, our food web would essentially collapse, and humans would become extinct. Those who are fighting the war against carbon are either completely clueless, blinded by greed because they stand to profit on some sort of global warming “solution,” or they simply want everyone to die.

Sources for this article include:

DailyCaller.com

NaturalNews.com

YouTube declares war on natural medicine, begins banning channels that promote botanical healing that might hurt the profits of Big Pharma

Natural News
14 August 2018
Ethan Huff

(Natural News) The censorship brigade over at YouTube is at it again, this time with a mass purge of all channels and content that dare to suggest that natural botanicals might contribute to human wellness and healing.

As our own Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, recently reported, YouTube has officially shut down the Natural News YouTube channel over a 43-second video that discussed the scientific properties of cannabidiol, or CBD, which is one of several dozen cannabinoid compounds found naturally in the cannabis plant.

The video contained a series of imagery of cannabis plants growing in a field along with text explaining how a woman was cured of terminal cancer using its oil. The video is positive, uplifting, and compassionate – which is apparently grounds for a ban over at YouTube.

After the video was scrubbed from the YouTube platform, Adams received a notice about its removal that claimed it was “inappropriate content.” In the first line of the “Video content restrictions” portion of the notice, YouTube explained that it:

“… doesn’t allow content that encourages or promotes violent or dangerous acts that have an inherent risk of serious physical harm of death.”

How does sharing the heartwarming story of a 52-year-old woman with terminal cancer achieving a healing breakthrough with a natural botanical contribute to violence and death, you might be asking yourself? Your guess is as good as ours. However, the next line in the notice offers some hints as to YouTube’s perverted philosophy of what constitutes inappropriate content:

“For example,” the notice adds, “it’s not okay to post videos showing drug abuse, underage drinking and smoking, or bomb making.”

CensorshipTube? That’s what YouTube has become

In other words, YouTube has apparently bought into some kind of deranged “Reefer Madness” idea about the cannabis plant, which it seems has been likened to “drug abuse” to the content police over at YouTube.

It’s a shocking position for YouTube to take, not only because cannabis is an herb that has nothing to do with “drugs” – a word that has no actual meaning, by the way – but also because CBD oil is completely legal in all 50 states, so long as it’s derived from the “hemp” cousin of cannabis.

But this is all just semantics at this point, and YouTube doesn’t really care about the details of what’s legal or isn’t legal – or even what’s moral and right, for that matter. YouTube allows all kinds of explicit content to stream across its platform every minute of every day. But a plant that heals? No way, Jose.

That’s because YouTube is completely in bed with Big Pharma, functioning as its ministry of propaganda to continue spreading lies about the “dangers” of “plants” that vested pharmaceutical interests want the world to believe are dangerous “drugs.”

There’s nothing even remotely dangerous about CBD oil, of course. It’s a highly effective cannabis extract that isn’t psychoactive but that’s been shown to provide incredible relief for a number of health conditions – and this seems to be precisely why Big Pharma has kicked things into overdrive when it comes to demonizing it.

Almost every subject under the sun is on YouTube, and that’s been the beauty of the platform since it was first created. But now that YouTube has decided to selectively censor content that the big boy lobbyists don’t like, it’s obvious that YouTube’s days are numbered.

Free-thinking people just aren’t going to stand for this kind of censorship, especially when some of the most evil content in the world continues to remain on YouTube – much of it completely monetized, it’s important to note.

That’s why Adams and Natural News have launched a new pro-liberty video site alternative to YouTube that isn’t riddled with censorship and double-standards.

Sources for this article include:

Before long, if you don’t agree with official climate change propaganda, you will be banned from YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter

Natural News
14 August 2018
Tracey Watson

(Natural News) Back in 2006, The Guardian published an article entitled, “A climate of censorship,” in which Brendan O’Neill warned that government officials in the U.K. were comparing climate change deniers to terrorists and arguing that both should be denied media air time. He warned that many such “deniers” were, in fact, scientists at respected British universities, and that no government official had the right to compare them to dangerous terrorists. He noted that there was an increasing push towards the censorship of free speech, including the right of such scientists and others to insist that man-made global warming does not exist.

O’Neill noted:

Increasingly, environmentalists are calling for the silencing of climate-change skeptics or deniers. The deniers’ words are so dangerous, we are told, that they must be censored for the good of humanity. Some have even claimed that in denying climate change, these individuals are committing a “crime against humanity” and should be put on trial.

I am not a scientist or an expert on climate change. But I am a free speech advocate. And this rising tide of intolerance and censoriousness in the debate about climate change should concern anyone who believes in free and open and rational debate.

A dozen years later, it is highly unlikely that The Guardian would even publish an opinion piece like O’Neill’s anymore. It has become commercially “dangerous” to suggest in any way, shape or form that man-made global warming might not be true – though these days you are more likely to encounter the term “climate change” than “global warming,” as temperatures have inconveniently refused to match up to the predicted highs of the so-called “experts.” In short, it would be financial suicide for any mainstream broadcaster or publication to give airtime to the evidence presented by anyone who denies global warming; their advertising dollars would simply disappear, and they would be mocked and decried as scientifically ignorant. (Related: Global warming debunked – NASA report verifies carbon dioxide cools atmosphere.)

YouTube censors any who dare to spread “climate misinformation”

BuzzFeed recently reported that the social media giant YouTube is now “fact-checking” any videos which dare to question climate change. The company has also taken the step of adding the following disclaimer to such videos:

Multiple lines of scientific evidence show that the climate system is warming.

Amazingly, this line is a direct quotation from a Wikipedia entry, as if Wikipedia can be referenced as an accurate source of scientific information!

Since March, YouTube has also been adding Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica entries next to “conspiracy theory” video clips, such as those claiming that the moon landing and Oklahoma City bombing never took place. By doing the same for climate change videos, they are directly censoring scientific information – in many cases presented by knowledgeable experts – and lumping it together in the public mind with completely unbelievable and historically unsound clips. (Related: The “global warming hoax – 30 years of failed predictions that never came true.)

There are respected scientists who insist global warming does not exist

What YouTube is doing would be acceptable if all the world’s most respected scientists were in agreement about the climate change theory. Nothing could be further from the truth, however, as was recently illustrated when the highly respected, retired German climatologist Dr. Werner Kirstein addressed the annual Anti-Censorship Conference.

In reference to global warming, Kirstein warned: “[T]he science has been seriously compromised by politics, power-hungry bureaucrats and politically motivated organizations, such as the WMO, IPCC and The World Bank. It all comes down to funding. It’s sad, but that’s how it works.” He added, “Climate science is totally politicized.”

So much for Wikipedia and its “Multiple lines of scientific evidence.”

Of course, YouTube’s actions mimic those of all the other social media platforms, all of which have been actively censoring the information they have access to. Pretty soon, censorship won’t be enough, and anyone who admits to skepticism regarding the mainstream global warming narrative will likely be denied access to these platforms.

Discover the uncensored real truth about climate change at Real.video.

Sources include: