RANDOM IMAGES #30

IS RUSSELL BRAND GAY?

He seems a bit camp, so I thought I’d have a look at some of his ex girlfriends…

 

Peaches Honeyblossom Geldof (2006)

Brand was linked to the late model and television presenter Peaches Geldof, the daughter of singer and philanthropist Bob Geldof, are said to have dated for a month, according the Daily Mirror. She died in 2014 from a heroin overdose. 

She is probably not the best one to start with here because she is the most feminine looking, but this list is chronological. Being the daughter of Bob Goldof with all his highly dubious connections she was likely to have been a victim of mind control.

Kate Moss (2006)

Supermodel Kate Moss was also linked to Brand with the pair an item for a short period when she was said to be on the rebound from Babyshambles singer Pete Doherty.

Moss was later briefly married to singer-songwriter Jamie Hince.

Georgina Baillie (2006)

One of Brand’s more controversial romances was with glamour model and burlesque performer Georgina Baillie, who was also the granddaughter of Fawlty Towers actor Andrew Sachs.

The pair met at a London party but the brief romance became controversial after Brand mentioned it on his radio show with co-host Jonathan Ross, leading both of them to get dropped.

Courtney Love (2006)

Singer of Hole and Kurt Cobain’s ex-wife Courtney Love is said to have had a brief tryst with Brand after the pair met at a London party.

Teresa Palmer (2008)

Australian actress Teresa Palmer, who is known best known for the Sky TV series A Discovery of Witches, embarked on a relationship with Brand while they were working on the Adam Sandler comedy Bedtime Stories.

He later told Conan O’Brien in 2013 on his talkshow: “I had sex with her and a relationship with her and eventually that does get it out of your system.

“I hope that doesn’t sound brutal but that is the nature of the chemical imperative to procreate. I’m sorry, I didn’t design the male libido.”

Palmer is now married to American actor Mark Webber after tying the knot in 2013 and they share five children.

Holly Madison (2009)

Brand is said to have dated Holly Madison, the ex-girlfriend of Playboy magnate Hugh Hefner and The Girls Next Door reality star, after they encountered each other at a party in Las Vegas.

She later married musician Pasquale Rotella with the couple having two children but then went their separate ways in 2019.

Katy Perry (2010)

Brand’s most high-profile relationship was his whirlwind romance and short-lived marriage to singer Katy Perry after the pair worked together on a movie before they got together at the VMAs.

They were married for 14 months before Brand called time on their union via a text message in 2011.

Geri Halliwell (2012)

The sparks are said to have flown between Spice Girl Geri Halliwell and Brand at the Olympics closing ceremony but the romance didn’t last long. Halliwell married Christian Horner in 2015.

Jemima Khan (2013)

Socialite Jemima Khan and Brand were romantically linked between 2013 and 2014 and spotted together at events.

Jemima was previously married to Pakistani politician and former cricketer Imran Khan before their split.

Laura Gallacher (2017)

Brand wed again in 2017, tying the knot with businesswoman Laura Gallagher, the sister of Kirsty Gallacher.

The couple have two daughters Mabel and Peggy born in 2016 and 2018.

Well all his ex girlfriends do all seem to have a certain look, but there is no accounting for taste!

"Speaking of fairies, it is hard to believe they ever tried to sell Brand as straight, supposedly dating or marrying Katy Perry, Jemima Goldsmith and others. In that video on youtube of Messiah Complex, he doesn't hide that he is flamboyantly gay, even going out into the audience to look for a new boyfriend — who he finds in a bearded trucker in a flannel shirt. He kisses and mugs the guy, stopping just short of dry humping him. So we even know what he likes" - Miles Mathis http://mileswmathis.com

WALK LIKE AN EGYPTIAN

The Bangles - With the benefit of hindsight it's not hard to see this 80's "girl" band was a bunch of men in wigs - "Walk Like an Egyptian"
The one in the black and white striped top might be the odd man out, but the other three are DUDES!

Is one of these not like the others?

 

But they scrubbed up OK!

 

 

FACEBOOK TRANSVESTIGATE GROUP

As a bizarre experiment, today I've set up a new FB group to expose the transgender deceptions going on in sport, politics, royalty, celebs, movies, Hollywood, and pop music. The transgender psyop is one of the biggest globalist agendas with connections between the usual players becoming more obvious by the day.

 

 

I have no idea if a public group like this will work on Facebook, it might just get banned for hate speech, but with huge surge in interest generated by the Olympics, now could be a good time to set one up and see what happens! - Check out the group blog here

 

  

During August I want to cut back my FB use for the month so I won't be going too hard out on this, but the Olympics are just too good an opportunity to miss so feel free share all your dodgy photos on there.

Bone pain, joint pain, arthritis or fluoride poisoning

Most people don’t realise that 50% of fluoride ingested is stored in the bones and soft tissue. Accumulation of fluoride can cause a disease called skeletal fluorosis. The first symptoms of skeletal fluorosis are identical to osteoarthritis.

 
“Long-term accumulative exposures to fluoride even at low levels carries a risk of sub-clinical or stage-1 musculo-skeletal fluorosis presenting as joint pain or arthritis. Notably, arthritis is a leading cause of disability with 647,000 now affected in this country and annual costs exceeding $3 billion.” Dr Mike Godfrey, Journal New Zealand Medical Association.

It is completely unknown how many people in New Zealand are suffering from skeletal fluorosis, rather than arthritis, because doctors are not aware this could happen here so testing is never done.

What we do know is that the U.S. Government’s Institute of Medicine, Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride.(1997), have estimated “The development of skeletal fluorosis and its severity is directly related to the level and duration of exposure. Most epidemiological research has indicated that an intake of at least 10 mg/day for 10 or more years is needed to produce clinical signs of the milder forms of the condition”.

In 2013, the Hamilton City Council held a Tribunal Hearing on Fluoridation. One of the expert speakers promoting fluoridation was former chief oral health advisor, and now Medical Director for Health New Zealand, Dr Robin Whyman.

Dr Whyman explained to the councillors “You then swallow the fluoride and it comes down into the blood supply. Some of it is actually moves across to bone, we don’t disagree with that at all, and some of it will go to soft tissue.” But rather than stopping there and discussing what this means for bone health, and the health of our entire bodies, Dr Whyman, a dentist, moved on to talk about dental health.

Because fluoride accumulates, less exposure over longer periods can achieve the same result as high exposure over a shorter period. The intake established by the Institute of Medicine, 10 mg a day for 10 years, may be roughly the same as 5mg a day for 20 years or 2.5 mg a day for 40 years and so on. The Institute of Medicine say “Stage 1 skeletal fluorosis is characterized by occasional stiffness or pain in joints and some osteosclerosis of the pelvis and vertebra.” 

Could your bone or joint pain be caused by fluoride accumulating in your bones? Try avoiding all forms of fluoride. See Sources of Fluoride and New Zealand study on Fluoride and Tea.

“If I was an arthritic individual, I would be eliminating every source of fluoride exposure I could think of”. Phyllis Mullinex, PhD. 

Watch short video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwLAcR85iG4

https://fluoridefree.org.nz/bone-pain-joint-pain.../

 

 

THE USA TEAM IS PACKING HEAT

ARE THEY REALLY PACKING HEAT? - OK, I'm not going to keep going on about this for the rest of the Olympics - everyone will just have to make up their own minds...

Eat ze bugs

A Swedish company called Tebrito has been aiming to produce mealworms for insect proteins to put in human food like granola and protein bars. They got $4.2 million in investments to push this toxic "food".

 Now they have gone bankrupt because nobody wants to eat insects. In 2023 they only had a revenue of $49000 and lost almost $12.6 million.

In other words, nobody is buying their insects. People are REJECTING the globalist agenda.
 

And last week another Swedish company called Mycorena also went bankrupt. They got $27.8 million in investments to produce 3D printed fake meat made out of mycelium.
It is clear that even in liberal Sweden, people do not want to eat fake food.

Go woke, go broke.

 

Fluoridation is not about children’s teeth

Fluoridation is not about “children’s teeth,” it is about industry getting rid of its hazardous waste at a profit, instead of having to pay a fortune to dispose of it.

Only calcium fluoride occurs naturally in water; however, that type of fluoride has never been used for fluoridation. Instead what is used over 90 percent of the time are silicofluorides, which are 85 times more toxic than calcium fluoride.They are non-biodegradable, hazardous waste products that come straight from the pollution scrubbers of big industries. 

If not dumped in the public water supplies, these silicofluorides would have to be neutralized at the highest rated hazardous waste facility at a cost of $1.40 per gallon (or more depending on how much cadmium, lead, uranium and arsenic are also present). Cities buy these unrefined pollutants and dump them–lead, arsenic and all–into our water systems. Silicofluorides are almost as toxic as arsenic, and more toxic than lead.1, 2

The EPA has recently said it is vitally important that we lower the level of both lead and arsenic in our water supplies, and their official goal is zero parts per million. This being the case, why would anyone recommend adding silicofluorides, which contain both of these heavy metals?3

On July 2, 1997, EPA scientist, J. William Hirzy, PhD, stated, “Our members’ review of the body of evidence over the last eleven years, including animal and human epidemiology studies, indicate a causal link between fluoride/fluoridation and cancer, genetic damage, neurological impairment and bone pathology. Of particular concern are recent epidemiology studies linking fluoride exposure to lowered IQ in children.”4

The largest study of tooth decay in America (by the National Institute of Dental Research in 1987) proved that there was no significant difference in the decay rates of 39,000 fluoridated, partially fluoridated and non-fluoridated children, ages 5 to 17, surveyed in 84 cities. The media has never disclosed these facts. The study cost us, the taxpayers, $3,670,000. Surely, we are entitled to hear the results.5

Newburgh and Kingston, both in the state of New York, were two of the original fluoridation test cities. A recent study by the New York State Department of Health showed that after 50 years of fluoridation, Newburgh’s children have a slightly higher number of cavities than never-fluoridated Kingston.5

The recent California fluoridation study, sponsored by the Dental Health Foundation, showed that California has only about one quarter as much water fluoridation as the nation as a whole, yet 15-year-old California children have less tooth decay than the national average.6
From the day the Public Health Service completed their original 10-year Newburgh and Kingston fluoridation experiment, fluoride promoters have repeatedly claimed that fluoride added to drinking water can reduce tooth decay by as much as 60 to 70 percent.

Adding fluoride to the water has never prevented tooth decay, it merely delays it, by provoking a genetic malfunction that causes teeth to erupt later than normal. This delay makes it possible to read the statistics incorrectly without lying. Proponents count teeth that have not yet erupted as “no decay.” Therefore, they claimed that the fluoridated Newburgh children age 6 had 100 percent less tooth decay; by age 7, 100 percent less; by age 8, 67 percent less; age 9, 50 percent less; and by age 10, 40 percent less.

Obviously, the only reduction that really counted was the 40 percent by age 10, but the Public Health Service totaled the five reductions shown, then divided by 5 to obtain what they called “an over-all reduction of 70 percent.”

Had the Health Department continued their survey beyond age 10, they would have found that the percentage of reduction continued down hill to 30, 20, 0, and eventually the children drinking fluoridated water had more cavities–not less. The rate of decay is identical, once the children’s teeth erupt. In other words, this “65 percent less dental decay” is just a statistical illusion. It never happened!7

EPA scientists recently concluded, after studying all the evidence, that the public water supply should not be used “as a vehicle for disseminating this toxic and prophylatically useless. . . substance.” They felt there should be “an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.” Unfortunately, the management of the EPA sides not with their own scientists, but with industry on this issue.8

There is less tooth decay in the nation as a whole today than there used to be, but decay rates have also dropped in the non-fluoridated areas of the United States and in Europe where fluoridation of water is rare. The Pasteur Institute and the Nobel Institute have already caused fluoride to be banned in their countries (France and Sweden). In fact, most developed countries have banned, stopped or rejected fluoridation.9

Several recent studies, here and abroad, show that fluoridation is correlated with higher rather than lower rates of caries. There has been no study that shows any cost-saving by fluoridation. This claim has been researched by a Rand corporation study and found to be “simply not warranted by available evidence.”10In fact, dentists make 17 percent more profit in fluoridated areas as opposed to non-fluoridated areas.11 There are no savings.

Meanwhile, the incidence of dental fluorosis has skyrocketed. It is not just a “cosmetic effect.” Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary says: “Fluorosis is poisoning by fluorides.” Today, in North America, there is an increased prevalence of dental fluorosis, ranging from about 15 percent to 65 percent in fluoridated areas and 5 percent to 40 percent in non-fluoridated areas.12 African-American children experience twice the rate of dental fluorosis as white children and it tends to be more severe.13 The widespread and uncontrolled use of fluoride in our water, dental products, foods and beverages (grown and processed in fluoridated communities) is causing pervasive over-exposure to fluoride in the U.S. population.
 

A 1995 American Dental Association (ADA) chart shows that a certain fluoride drug should not be given to children under six months of age. It also shows that if fluoride is put into water, all children under six years of age will be getting an overdose.14

The FDA states that fluoride is a prescription drug, not a mineral nutrient. Who has the right to put a prescription drug in the water supply where there can be no control of dosage? People who drink a lot of water, like diabetics and athletes, will be overdosed, and studies have proven that 1 percent of the people are allergic to fluoridated water. Today, an unusual number of children in non-fluoridated areas are developing dental fluorosis!

Even if fluoride were good for teeth, shouldn’t the water be as safe as possible for everyone? Why should those who are against it be forced to drink it? What has happened to “Freedom of Choice?” We all know that fluoride is not “just one of forty chemicals used to treat water,” it is the only chemical added to treat the people! It is compulsory medication, which is unconstitutional. There are other alternatives that do not infringe on the rights of all consumers to choose their own form of medication.16

When the people have been given a chance to vote on this issue, more often than not, they have voted “no.” In the majority of cases, nationwide, it is the local city council that has forced it on the people. Fluoride promoters find it much easier to convince a few city council members than the general public. Here in America, we shouldn’t have to fight to keep a hazardous waste out of our water supply!

Bottom line: There are no benefits to fluoridation. We actually pay the phosphate fertilizer industries for their crude hazardous waste. Fluoridation contributes to many health problems and hither dental bills, and causes more (not less) suffering. Only big business wins with fluoridation–not our children (or us).

On Nov. 24, 1992, Robert Carton, PhD, a former EPA scientist, made this statement: Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time. Impossible? No, it’s not–look at how many years millions of people were fooled by the tobacco industries!

References

    George Glasser, Journalist, St. Petersburg, FL, “Fluoridation: A Mandate to Dump Toxic Waste in the Name of Public Health,” July 22, 1991.
    R.E. Gosselin et al, Clinical Toxicology of commercial Products, 5th ed., 1984. U.S. EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL) EPA/NSF Standard 60.
    San Diego Union Tribune, May 25, 2000, “EPA proposes stricter rules for arsenic levels in water supplies,” and Associated Press, Jan. 17, 2001, “EPA Orders Sharp Reduction in Arsenic Levels in Drinking Water,” by H. Josef Hebert.
    Letter of July 2, 1997, from J. William Hirzy, Ph.D. to Jeff Green. The union (now NTEU, Chapter 280) consists of and represents all of the toxicologists, chemists, biologists and other professionals at EPA headquarters, Washington, D.C.
    “New studies cast doubt on fluoridation benefits,” by Bette Hileman, Chemical & Engineering News,Vol. 67, No. 19, May 8, 1989. “Recommendations for Fluoride Use in Children,” Jayanth V. Kumar, D.D.S., M.P.H.; Elmer L. Green, D.D.S., M.P.H., Pediatric Dentistry, Feb. 1998.
    San Diego Union Tribune, Sept. 1, 1999.
    Konstatin K. Paluev, Research and Development Engineer, “Fluoridation Benefits–Statistical Illusion,” testimony before the New York City Board of Estimate, Mar. 6, 1957.
    J. William Hirzy, EPA Union Vice-President, “Why EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation,” May 1, 1999.
    Mark Diesendorf, “The mystery of declining tooth decay,” Nature, July 10, 1986, pp. 125-29.
    “The Truth About Mandatory Fluoridation,” John R. Lee, M.D. Apr. 15, 1995.
    The Journal of the American Dental Association, Vol. 84, Feb. 1972.
    K.E. Heller, et al, Journal of Public Health Dentistry, Vol. 57: No. 3 Summer 1997.
    National Research Council, “Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride,” 1993, p. 44.
    Pediatrics, May 1998, Vol. 95, Number 5.
    Food and Drug Administration letter dated Aug. 15, 1963.
    Abbot Laboratories, Scientific Divisions, North Chicago, IL, June 18, 1963.

https://www.westonaprice.org/.../fluoridation-the.../...

RANDOM IMAGES #29