5 Facts On Cancer That Conventional Medicine Is Now Aggressively Claiming Are Myths+ Amish Have Lower Rates Of Cancer, Ohio State Study Shows April 8 2016 | From: PreventDisease / InternalMedicine According to the conventional wisdom of mainstream medicine, the world's leading health practitioners in alternative, complementary and integrative medicine have it all wrong and are misinforming millions in practice and on the internet with a barrage of myths and misconceptions they claim are causing more harm to cancer patients.
Could this initiative to sway opinion by leading cancer authorities possibly, just possibly be related to the revolution that is happening around the world - highlighting the dangers and ineffectiveness of toxic chemotherapy and radiation, bringing cancer cures such as cannabis to the forefront, or the emerging mass markets now creating awareness on the reality of our food and the consequences of the cancer industry itself?
Fact #1: The Rise In All Types of Cancers Are Due To Our Modern Society Diets, Lifestyles and Environment
Why The Cancer Industry ClaimsThis Is a Myth
The claim is that our genes are responsible, combined with the fact that people are living long enough now to develop cancer. It's because of our success in tackling infectious diseases and malnutrition that we now get cancer.
It's perfectly normal for DNA damage in our cells to build up as we age, and such damage can lead to cancer developing. Cancer has existed as long as humans have.
The only reason that people around the world today believe that our ancestors did not live past 100 years is because the official data has been sparse. There are very few records that show (officially) the age of our ancestors before then 18th century, but there is a reasonable amount of evidence suggesting there were many people living hundreds of years in prehistory and beyond.
In all the skeletons collected in the history of paleoanthropology, scientists have only been able to identify a mere 200 possible cancer sightings dating to prehistoric times, and these identifications are far from certain.
Despite the numbers, when you look at the remains, it seems to indicate that malignancies were a "striking rarity" in ancient times, but that evidence is hardly conclusive. We just don't know for sure, so to use any type of argument that cancer existed or did not exist to any extent in prehistory involves making a great deal of assumptions.
So let's just focus on what has transpired in the last century alone: According to the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics of the United States, from the early 1900s alone up to an including 2011, there was a greater than 3 fold increase in cancer death rates.
According to a 2013 featured report compiled by the American Cancer Society and other government and cancer advocacy groups, progress has been made in the “war on cancer.” But what kind of progress? Declining mortality rates are not due to decreases in incidence. More people are getting cancer, but they're staying alive longer.
What the cancer industry does not point out is that the trends clearly show that we haven't eliminated cancer to any extent, but we have managed to be able to diagnose it and treat it and thus profit from the actual disease itself.
Diagnosis and treatment are the money makers in this industry. Actual prevention is not. So when it comes to prevention, conventional medicine has stuck its head in the sand.
Overall, cancer deaths began dropping in the 1990's, with death rates declining by 1.8 percent for men and 1.4 percent for women between the years 2000-2009, according to the featured report. Children's death rates from cancer are also declining at a pace of 1.8 percent per year, although incidence is still rising by about 0.5 percent annually.
Other cancers are also still on the rise though, including liver and pancreatic cancer and melanoma (among men).
A 2008 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science demonstrated how nutrition alone can have a tremendous impact not only on prevention, but even on the treatment of cancer once you've been diagnosed.
This type of information is never emphasized by the medical community because they do not believe cancer can be treated without either cutting, poisoning or burning cancerous tumors.
Fact #2: Super-foods and Herbs Can Prevent Cancer
Why The Cancer Industry ClaimsThis Is a Myth
The claim is that specific fruits and vegetables you choose don't really matter. There's no such thing as a 'super-food' or medicinally powerful herb and any assertion has no scientific basis.
This one is just embarrassing for them. While there is not one super-food or herb that may cure all cancers, to suggest that super-foods don't exist or that herbs are not medicinally powerful is reaching deep in the pits of ignorance. In fact, there is so much evidence that super-foods exist and have anti-cancer properties, that any claims suggesting the opposite are a good measure of where the credibility lies among many of these industry quacks that make such preposterous statements.
As of the date of this article, The American Cancer Society (ACS) appears to have removed references to "super foods" or "super-foods" off of their website. Yet, several authors have written extensively about previous recommendations of the ACS, specifically regarding the potential of super-foods to prevent cancer.
Cancer Research UK also discredits and discourages the use of super-foods On this page it states: "you shouldn't rely on so-called super-foods to reduce the risk of cancer," and that super-foods "are unlikely to give you added health benefits over and above what you would get from eating a varied and healthy diet."
One irritating problem that confuses the public is that most dietitians have no foundation of practical knowledge in nutrition.
They propagate mainstream opinion on the validity of the food pyramid - that bread, cereal and grains should be the mainstay of our diets and that fruits and vegetables are all equal.
Most dietitians I know don't use the term super-food because they're not taught what super-foods are in school. The only thing they are taught is that "super-foods" are non-medical terms popularized in the media to promote unsupported health-promoting properties in foods.
A super-food can be summed up as any multi-tasking food with higher than average concentrations of disease-fighting nutrients, which are usually in abundance among the antioxidant and phytonutrient rich profiles. Some suggest they are also low in calories but that does not always apply to all super-foods
Even WebMD.com, a very pro mainstream medical website lists 10 Everday Super Foods. Here they list foods such as broccoli, berries, quinoa, beans, nuts, eggs and others which few can den are very nutrient dense foods with anti-cancer properties.
It's not necessary, however, to spend any large sums of money for heavily promoted super-foods such as noni, acai, mangosteen and other juices in an attempt to prevent cancer.
The top six foods with the highest antioxidant values on the ORAC (Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity) scale are cheaper and more readily available than the more expensive alternatives and they all are proven to prevent cancer. They include cloves, sumac, cinnamon, sorghum, oregano and turmeric.
Studies on animals with lung and skin cancers show that eugenol in cloves can stop cancer cells from multiplying. Clove oil extract was found in one study to have maximal cytotoxic activity on cancer cells.
Cancer societies would certainly like cannabis to disappear because there is so much evidence that it prevents cancer.
There are dozens of studies which prove cannabis cures cancer. A quick search on Pubmed for "cannabinoid" will yield almost 18,000 results.
The reason cancer societies are now turning their heads to the power of super-foods and herbs is because they work. So they must try and sway opinion in an attempt to convince millions who are now converting back to nature to prevent and cure disease.
Fact #3: Acidic Diets Cause Cancer
Why The Cancer Industry ClaimsThis Is a Myth
This is biological nonsense according to the cancer industry. The pH of the blood is tightly regulated by the kidneys within a very narrow and perfectly healthy range. It can't be changed for any meaningful amount of time by what you eat. There's no evidence to prove that diet can manipulate whole body pH, or that it has an impact on cancer.
Part of the problem with this notion is that there has been a lot of misinformation spread around by so-called health gurus in trade shows attempting to convince people that you can make dramatic shifts in the pH of your body through foods and alkaline water. The truth is, you can't make huge shifts in blood alkalinity or acidity, but you can small shifts that are significant enough to reverse cancer.
The pH of your blood is tightly regulated by a complex system of buffers that are continuously at work to maintain a range of 7.3 to 7.41, which is slightly more alkaline than pure water.
If the pH of your blood falls below 7.3, the result is a condition called acidosis, a state that leads to central nervous system depression. Severe acidosis - where blood pH falls below 7.00 - can lead to a coma and even death. If the pH of your blood rises above 7.45, the result is alkalosis.
The bottom line is that if you're breathing and going about your daily activities, your body is doing an adequate job of keeping your blood pH somewhere between 7.3 to 7.41, and the foods that you are eating are not causing any wild deviations of your blood pH.
However keeping your body closer to an alkaline state by even a few points up .05 can make a significant difference in how well cancer grows or suppresses. Cancer cells can't live in an alkaline environment.
The reason acidosis is more common in our society is mostly due to the typical American diet, which is far too high in acid-producing animal products like meat, and dairy, and far too low in alkaline-producing foods like fresh vegetables.
Additionally, we eat acid-producing processed foods like white flour and sugar and drink acid-producing beverages like coffee and soft drinks. We use too many drugs, which are acid-forming; and we use artificial chemical sweeteners like NutraSweet, Equal, or aspartame, which are extremely acid-forming. One of the best things we can do to correct an overly-acid body is to clean up the diet and lifestyle.
Dr. A. Keith Brewer explained that in alkaline environments and high pH condition, the acid toxins of the cancer cell are neutralized and rendered nontoxic. Acidic toxins, and not the tumor lump per se, is what brings about the death of the host. In the high pH condition, the life of the cancer cell is short. The dead cancer cells are readily absorbed by the system and eliminated. "I am convinced that it is food that causes cancer, but it is the food we don't eat and not the food we do eat."
This condition forces the body to borrow minerals - including calcium, sodium, potassium and magnesium - from vital organs and bones to buffer (neutralize) the acid and safely remove it from the body. Once a person is diagnosed with cancer, the most effective way of reversing the disease is to move towards an alkaline diet and shift blood pH towards the 7.41 range.
This is accomplished most effectively with raw fruits and vegetables and daily greens which maximize phytonutrients and enhance the immune system's potential to reverse cancer. No, the body will not dramatically shift blood pH, but it doesn't need to for cancer cells to die. Even a small shift will reverse cancer and prevent the body from borrowing minerals from organs and bones to compensate for a nutritionally deficient diet. That's where alkalizing agents come in.
I have seen stage IV cancer patients with tumors the size of footballs recover using alkalizing agents. It is beyond the scope of this article to explain how alkalizing agents and pH therapy can eliminate cancer, however if you seek the assistance of any Naturopathic Physician well-versed in cancer treatment, the protocols are fairly common although inconsistent.
The bottom line is that the body can achieve the metabolic accomplishment of keeping blood pH towards the alkaline spectrum where cancer will not proliferate. The immune system can then thrive and signal recovery which is facilitated through nutritional mechanisms and alkalizing agents to maximize recovery and make treatments such as chemotherapy, radiation or surgery completely unnecessary.
Fact #4: Sugar Feeds Cancer
Why The Cancer Industry ClaimsThis Is a Myth
They claim there is no evidence that cancer cells use glucose and produce energy in a different way from healthy cells. The "sugar feeds cancer" myth distorts sensible dietary advice which must be based on nutritional and scientific fact.
Understanding cancer cannot result from the view on a single cancer event, but must consider the combined action of all cellular triggers in a given cellular background. There is little doubt in the scientific community that the high rate of carbohydrate ingestion contributes to various metabolic diseases, including the development of aggressive cancer.
The medical establishment may be missing the connection between sugar and its role in tumorgenesis. Consider the million-dollar positive emission tomography device, or PET scan, regarded as one of the ultimate cancer-detection tools. PET scans use radioactively labeled glucose to detect sugar-hungry tumor cells. PET scans are used to plot the progress of cancer patients and to assess whether present protocols are effective.
Domestic animals (e.g. cats and dogs) which usually consume western diets with a comparatively high glycemic index, frequently suffer from aggressive cancer, whereas carnivore animals and herbivore animals do have a low rate of metastasizing cancer and rarely die from this disease.
Both carnivores and herbivores predominantly live from proteins and fat/oil. Although herbivores ingest large amounts of complex carbohydrates (cellulose and other fibres), these are fermented to fatty acids by bacteria within the gastrointestinal tract and therefore exhibit an extremely low glycemic index. Limited release or even absence of glucose during digestion may explain the low rates of cancer-caused mortality in herbivore and carnivore animals.
A four-year study at the National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection in the Netherlands compared 111 biliary tract cancer patients with 480 controls. Cancer risk associated with the intake of sugars, independent of other energy sources, more than doubled for the cancer patients.
Furthermore, an epidemiological study in 21 modern countries that keep track of morbidity and mortality (Europe, North America, Japan and others) revealed that sugar intake is a strong risk factor that contributes to higher breast cancer rates, particularly in older women.
In Europe, the "sugar feeds cancer" concept is so well accepted that oncologists, or cancer doctors, use the Systemic Cancer Multistep Therapy (SCMT) protocol. Conceived by Manfred von Ardenne in Germany in 1965, SCMT entails injecting patients with glucose to increase blood-glucose concentrations.
This lowers pH values in cancer tissues via lactic acid formation. In turn, this intensifies the thermal sensitivity of the malignant tumors and also induces rapid growth of the cancer. Patients are then given whole-body hyperthermia (42 C core temperature) to further stress the cancer cells, followed by chemotherapy or radiation.
SCMT was tested on 103 patients with metastasized cancer or recurrent primary tumors in a clinical phase-I study at the Von Ardenne Institute of Applied Medical Research in Dresden, Germany.
Five-year survival rates in SCMT-treated patients increased by 25 to 50 percent, and the complete rate of tumor regression increased by 30 to 50 percent. The protocol induces rapid growth of the cancer, then treats the tumor with toxic therapies for a dramatic improvement in outcome.
For metastatic cancer cells, a shift towards growth is facilitated by an evolutionary novel microenvironment within the body, which is characterized by a permanent availability of high amounts of glucose due to a nutrition with a high glycemic index, the absence of periods of starvation, as well as reduced physical activity.
Fact #5: Conventional Cancer Treatment Kills More Than It Cures
Why The Cancer Industry ClaimsThis Is a Myth
The medical community insists that surgery is still the most effective treatment we have for cancer. Radiotherapy helps cure more people than cancer drugs. Yet chemotherapy and other cancer drugs have a very important part to play in cancer treatment - in some cases helping to cure the disease, and in others helping to prolong survival. Chemotherapy does not encourage cancer.
Doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money from it. That's the only reason chemotherapy is still used. Not because it's effective, decreases morbidity, mortality or diminishes any specific cancer rates. In fact, it does the opposite.
The reason a 5-year relative survival rate is the standard used to assess mortality rates is due to most cancer patients going downhill after this period. It's exceptionally bad for business and the cancer industry knows it. They could never show the public the true 97% statistical failure rate in treating long-term metastatic cancers.
If they did publish the long-term statistics for all cancers administered cytotoxic chemotherapy, that is 10+ years and produced the objective data on rigorous evaluations including the cost-effectiveness, impact on the immune system, quality of life, morbidity and mortality, it would be very clear to the world that chemotherapy makes little to no contribution to cancer survival at all.
No such study has ever been conducted by independent investigators in the history of chemotherapy. The only studies available come from industry funded institutions and scientists and none of them have ever inclusively quantified the above variables.
Why? Money, greed and profits run the cancer industry - nothing else.
The cancer establishment must retreat from the truth to treat cancer because there will never be any profit for them in in eradicating the disease. There is no governing body in the world that protects consumers from being subjected to these toxic therapies or even known carcinogens in our foods our environment, because that too, will prevent the profits from rolling in. It's a business of mammoth proportions and must be treated as such.
According to official statistics, one person out of two is claimed to recover from cancer through conventional methods. Although dramatic, the information nevertheless contains a certain amount of hope, as implicitly it provides something positive for both scientists and patients.
To the scientists it says: continue the research because it is producing results; do not try preventive, alternative theoretical or therapeutic roads, nor get discouraged by the fact that patients keep on dying every day. To the patients, on the other hand, it provides a warning: you have a 50 percent chance of making it, as long as you follow the conventional therapeutic protocols without trying what they claim are the useless alternatives.
So, in the early stages of tumors (the dubious ones) the recovery rates are extremely high, while in the following stages - that is, where they certainly are tumors - the rates are barely above zero. The reason for the discrepancy is the qualification of the data and how a patient is assessed in terms of recovery.
Immune reconstitution and tolerance, organ and metabolic toxicities, endocrine challenges, functional outcomes, quality of life, and neurocognitive outcomes are NEVER inclusively assessed in any clinical study discussing the long-term survival and recovery rates of cancer patients.
The damage to these systems slowly develops after chemotherapy, however if often does not begin to manifest throughout the body until several months or even years have passed. It takes time, but within a 3-5 year period, most chemotherapy patients begin to have many more symptoms of disease than they every had before their diagnosis, due to and as a direct result of cytotoxic drug intervention.
Adjuvant chemotherapy is often given to patients who might not really need it at all. Oncologists do not consider the whole spectrum of chemotherapy risks versus benefits and thus compromise quality of life for every patient they treat.
A study in the Annals of Oncology is one of few which assessed the different potential long-term adverse events associated with adjuvant chemotherapy in cancer, with a particular focus on long-term cardiac toxicity, secondary leukemia, cognitive function, and neurotoxicity.
The authors stated that the adverse events are frequently overshadowed by the well-demonstrated clinical efficacy and/or reassuring short-term safety profiles of the different chemotherapy regimens commonly used today.
Another study in the American Society of Clinical Oncology determined whether long-term survivors of metastatic testicular cancer have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity more than 10 years after chemotherapy. They observed a significantly increased risk for occurrence of cardiac events accompanied by a persisting unfavorable cardiovascular risk profile likely due to chemotherapeutic agents.
A 12-year meta-analysis published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology observed adults who had developed cancer and treated with chemotherapy. The 12-year study looked at adults who had developed cancer as an adult. 97% of the time, chemotherapy did not work in regressing the metastatic cancers.
Amish Have Lower Rates Of Cancer, Ohio State Study Shows
When Ohio State University cancer researchers first began studying a large sect of Amish living in Ohio, they theorized they would find higher incidence rates of cancer.
That’s because Amish religious beliefs and traditions limit contact with mainstream society, and intermarriage within this relatively small population could increase the incidence of cancer-related gene mutations.
Instead, they found just the opposite, said Dr. Judith Westman, division director of Human Genetics at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC-James).
The study of Amish suggests that clean living can lead to healthier life. Overall cancer rates in this population were 60 percent of the age-adjusted rate for Ohio and 56 percent of the national rate. The incidence of tobacco-related cancers in the Amish adults was 37 percent of the rate for Ohio adults, and the incidence of non-tobacco-related cancer was 72 percent.
"The Amish are at an increased risk for a number of genetic disorders but they probably have protection against many types of cancer both through their lifestyle – there is very little tobacco or alcohol use and limited sexual partners – and through genes that may reduce their susceptibility to cancer,” said Westman, who co-authored the study with OSUCCC-James researcher Amy K. Ferketich, who specializes in epidemiology.
The findings were reported in a recent issue of the journal Cancer Causes & Control. The study, which spanned 1996-2003 and is the first of its kind, looked at the incidence of 24 types of cancer in the Amish population. Of the 24 types of cancer studied, the incidence of seven of them – cervical, laryngeal, lung, oral cavity/pharyngeal, melanoma, breast and prostate – was low enough compared with the Ohio rate to be statistically significant.
Westman and Ferketich chose to study the Amish to gain a better understanding of the contributions of environment and genetics to developing cancer. Ohio is home to the largest Amish population in the world, and of the approximately 26,000 Amish living in Holmes County, all descended from the same 100 people who immigrated here 200 years ago.
Researchers interviewed 92 Amish families as part of a cross-sectional household survey and charted their family cancer histories obtaining cancer information on all relatives back three generations and as far forward as possible. For example, researchers interviewing a set of grandparents could gather cancer information on both their ancestors and descendants, said Ferketich.
The study population consisted of 9,992 Amish adults residing in the Holmes County area. Researchers also collected death certificates and cross-checked cancer cases reported to the Ohio Cancer Incidence and Surveillance System. Between 1996 and 2003, there were 191 incident cancer cases identified.
“Because this is a small, relatively closed population, we needed to interview just 92 families to cover 90 percent of the population in Holmes County,” said Ferketich.
The low cancer incidence in the Ohio Amish may be partially explained by lifestyle factors such as limited tobacco consumption and lack of sexual promiscuity. The Amish, as a whole, consume very little tobacco and alcohol, and they lead active, labor-intensive lives as farmers, construction laborers and factory workers.
"One of the things we can learn from the Amish is that they don’t typically smoke or use tobacco products,” Westman said.
“They have limited sexual partners and monogamous relationships, so they don’t have some of the cancers that are related to sexual promiscuity.”
Even skin cancer rates are lower for Amish, despite the fact though many Amish make their living working outdoors where they are exposed to sunlight and UV rays.
"They are typically covered and dress to work in the sun the way that is recommended by wearing wide-brimmed hats and generally wearing long sleeves to protect their arms,” Westman said.
Other Ohio State researchers involved in the study include Steven N. MacEachern, J.R. Wilkins III, Robert T. Pilarski, Rebecca Nagy, Stanley Lemeshow, Albert de la Chapelle and Clara D. Bloomfield. The study was funded by the Ohio Division of the American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health and the Leukemia Clinical Research Foundation.
The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center- Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute is one of only 40 Comprehensive Cancer Centers in the United States designated by the National Cancer Institute.
Ranked by U.S. News & World Report among the top 20 cancer hospitals in the nation, The James (www.jamesline.com) is the 180-bed adult patient-care component of the cancer program at The Ohio State University. The OSUCCC-James is one of only five centers in the country approved by the NCI to conduct both Phase I and Phase II clinical trials.
For Sale: 40 Billion Litres Of Canterbury's Purest Water April 7 2016 | From: Stuff A council in the drought-prone Canterbury plains is selling the right to extract 40 billion litres of pure, artesian water to a bottled water supplier.
The Ashburton District Council is selling a section in its business estate, known as Lot 9, for an undisclosed sum. It comes with a valuable resource consent that allows abstraction of water from aquifers beneath the town.
The council has refused to publicise information about the deal, which is understood to be with an overseas company.It has outraged some residents, who say water is desperately needed locally.
The area's artesian water is increasingly popular in overseas markets such as China, with its New Zealand origin often featuring in branding and marketing.
The consent allows the holder to take 45 litres of water a second from local aquifers, totalling more than 1.4 billion litres a year. It expires in 2046, meaning the buyer will gain access to more than 40 billion litres of Ashburton's pure water.
It was approved in 2011 by Environment Canterbury and includes a recharge consent, meaning all water taken must be replaced from other sources.
In a statement, the council confirmed it was in the process of selling the site;
"The parcel of land includes an existing consent for water abstraction from local aquifers," it said.
"The prospective buyer is interested in setting up a water-bottling plant."
Council chief executive Andrew Dalziel would not answer questions about the sale, citing commercial sensitivity. Standing orders prevented councillors from discussing the sale, which is expected to be finalised in June.
It is understood there has been no consultation with ratepayers or other interested parties, such as iwi, about the deal.
Sir Mark Solomon, chairman of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu, said it was "disappointing" the iwi had not been informed.
"Twenty years ago the Ashburton region had reasonably good water quality, but it is now an over-allocated catchment and faces some of the most pressing water quality challenges in our takiwa [tribal region]," he said.
"It seems incredible that the council wouldn't think more broadly about the future of its existing consents."
A premises in the Ashburton Business Estate, where the Ashburton District Council is in the process of allowing a bottled water company to extract 40 billion litres of water.
Ashburton resident Jen Branje is leading community opposition, and said the lack of transparency raised alarm bells.
"We live in a drought-prone area - farmers aren't given consent to bore for water for their crop-growing, so why on Earth are we selling it off-shore?"
The Ashburton groundwater zone is over-allocated, meaning water allocated to consent holders exceeds the amount available for use. New groundwater consents are difficult to acquire, making existing consents more valuable.
Branje said a lack of consultation did not give locals faith the sale was in their best interest.
"This whole thing has gone on behind the ratepayers' backs. No-one has any clue about it whatsoever.
It's a blimmin' lot of water, and it shouldn't be allowed to go off-shore. If anything, that water should be sustaining our own economic backbone."
Ashburton often has issues supplying water during the summer. In some areas, water restrictions banned residents from using hoses to water their gardens.
When applying for the consent, the council came to an arrangement with meat processor Silver Fern Farms, allowing it to deepen its bore if Lot 9's water abstraction caused groundwater levels to reduce.
This Is Why Putin Is The Most Unpredictable Politician In The World April 7 2016 | From: Sputnik / Geopolitics Almost one month has passed since President Vladimir Putin's surprise announcement that Russia would begin withdrawing the main part of its military forces from Syria.
Volumes of analyses have already been written on the subject, but there's one important thing most of them seem to miss.
Putin announced that the Russian air operation in Syria had largely achieved its objectives, and that Russia would begin a withdrawal of its main forces from the country.
"With the participation of the Russian military…the Syrian military and patriotic Syrian forces have been able to achieve a fundamental turnaround in the fight against international terrorism, and have taken the initiative in nearly all areas to create the conditions for the start of a peace process," Putin said, in a working meeting with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.
Since then, volumes of analysis have been written, both in Russian and foreign media, on what the move really means.
For his part, Russian television journalist Vladimir Solovyov suggested that what many analysts have missed, and what they should go back and review, is the promise Putin made at the very beginning of Russia's air campaign.
In an interview with Solovyov recorded on October 10, Putin, asked how long the operation would last, offered an answer which some will find eerily prescient today.
"The success of the Syrian army offensive, Putin said, "depends above all on the Syrian army itself and on the Syrian authorities. We cannot commit ourselves to more than is reasonable and have never done so.
I said from the start that the active phase of our operations on Syrian soil will be limited in time to the Syrian army's offensive. Coming back to your earlier question, our task is to stabilize the legitimate government and establish conditions that will make it possible to look for political compromise."
With a Moscow-Washington brokered ceasefire in place, Syria's government stabilized and Daesh and Nusra Front terrorists on the run, it becomes instantly clear what the president meant when he said that Russia's objectives have been "generally fulfilled."
In other words, Solovyov wryly noted, "it's not by accident that Putin is called the most unpredictable politician in the world, because he constantly does what he says he is going to do."
Just Being Putin Being Just
Putin’s leadership is unequaled around the world. He deals in black and white whether in domestic front, as well as in international affairs.
Giving people back Russians’ livelihood while their employers play the usual businessman’s dirty excuses is not so difficult as Putin threatens a government takeover in front of the corporate owners.
Corporations are given no preferential treatment…
In international scene, he doesn’t take a back seat when his “partners from the West” forgot the decency to avoid interfering other countries’ affairs.
“Who gave coalition forces in Libya the right to eliminate Gaddafi? That’s the question Vladimir Putin’s been asking, during an official visit to Denmark. The Russian Premier also said NATO’s effectively joined one of the warring sides in the conflict. And more responsible action should be taken instead.”
His advice is pretty short and simple…
Not used to peaceful resolution to conflicts they themselves started, the West were unprepared for Russia’s withdrawal in Syria.
They are now busy formulating stories and “real reasons” behind Russia’s decision to fly fighter planes home after successfully destroying Daesh Islamic State. oil smuggling enterprise, the most blatant Khazarian Crime Mafia plunder on natural resources of a sovereign state so far.
But, is Putin’s agenda in Syria not black and white enough?
Fifteen years ago, on March 26, 2000 Vladimir Putin was first elected to the post of the President of Russia. After coming to power in difficult times, he not only managed to keep the country united. 15 years later we can say: we have again become a superpower with a developed economy, industry, a powerful army and navy.
And may be not everything is smooth today. But then, 15 years ago, many people actually thought that the country was finished. However, Putin has managed to prove to the Russians and the whole world that we can not be easily defeated.
In fifteen years, thanks to the “swift tiger,” as President Vladmir Putin is called by Chinese journalists, our country is once again referred to with respect.
We have decided to make our own rating of achievements of Vladimir Putin and his team in the last 15 years, helped by experts from “Nightly Moscow”:
1. The Salvation of Russia from Disintegration
Alexei Mukhin, political scientist, Director of the Center for Political Information:
Putin’s role in preserving the unity of Russian Federation is primary. The change in the territorial-administrative division of Russia, the creation of seven federal districts allowed to first slow down and then reverse the processes that were leading to a direct collapse of Russia into several pseudo-state entities.
Fortunately, Boris Yeltsin timely sensed what was happening, and resigned as President. And Vladimir Putin in time identified existing threats and took a number of preventive measures.
2. The End of the War in Chechnya
Viktor Murakhovsky, chief editor of the journal “Arsenal of the Fatherland”:
Remember Putin’s famous phrase: “Will smash in the toilet” [“If we find them in a toilet, we will smash them in the toilet” – KR] .
As we remember, he was referring to the terrorists in North Caucasus. And Putin has played a huge role in that the First Chechen campaign, culminating with the Khasavyurt capitulation, was forgotten.
But the Russian army regenerated and played a decisive role in the defeat of terrorists. The key factor was not only the effectiveness of the armed and internal forces, but that the leadership of the country expressed a political will.
3. Strengthening the Role of Russia in the International Arena
Mikhail Panchenko, political scientist:
Over the last fifteen years from a country ranking in the twenties-thirties by the degree of influence on world politics, we confidently moved into the top three – along with the US and China.
To watch this historical speech click here
The first ideological imperatives were laid down in the Munich speech of Vladimir Putin in 2007. But the first “applied” case when we showed iron will took place in August 2008 in South Ossetia. In essence Russia then stood up and said: “Tomorrow we will live by new rules!”
4. The Creation of a Socially Orientated Budget
Maxim Safonov, Doctor of Economic Sciences, professor:
Over the past 15 years serious steps were made and the budget of our country has become truly socially oriented. But there is no limit for improvement, and I think we should not stop there. A good example is the joy of the inhabitants of Crimea after becoming a part of Russia.
Because the level of pensions and social benefits there instantly rose to nationwide levels. Yesterday I was at a general meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences, where Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev was speaking. And he clearly said that the social obligations will be fulfilled, despite the economic difficulties.
5. Early Repayment of State Debts
Vladislav Ginko, economist, Professor of the Russian Academy of National Economy and State Service:
Under Vladimir Putin, Russia has managed to significantly reduce the arrears to international financial institutions. Currently Russia, of course borrows in the foreign market, but in relation to the gross domestic product, this amount is small. First of all, it gives us the opportunity to pursue an independent policy.
Because loans from international organizations are very often accompanied by certain encumbrances. Which are often hidden behind vague wording. But often, after such “reforms” the standard of living of the population drops – we see it today in Ukraine. And, of course, if our debts were higher, the sanctions would hurt us more.
6. The Creation of the Stabilisation Fund and the National Welfare Fund
Boris Shmelev, Professor, head of the Center of Russian Foreign Policy Institute of Economy, RAN:
The creation of these financial institutions was largely initiated by Vladimir Putin himself. Huge amounts of money was directed there – about two trillion dollars that the country made from the sale of oil and gas in favorable market conditions.
And this money allows us now in the situation of economic crisis to mitigate its effects. In many respects the Stabilization Fund will be focused on supplementing government’s social obligations.
7. Reform of the Army and the Military-Industrial Complex
Igor Korotchenko, chief editor of “National Defense” magazine:
Today we have qualitatively new armed forces. It is no exaggeration to say that today our army is one of the best in the world. It is recognized by all, including our opponents. It is under Putin, that our armed forces again became respected.
Over the past 15 years we’ve been through a restructuring of the military-industrial complex. On the initiative of the President powerful vertically integrated holding companies were created, each of which brings together the entire chain of developers and manufacturers. As a result, Russia ranks second in the world in the export of weapons.
8. Creation of Integration Associations in the Framework of the Union of Independent States
Sergei Markov, director of the Institute for Policy Studies, a member of the Public Chamber of Russia:
The creation of such associations is a key to sustainable economic development. Here is the emergence of new markets, and the possibility of joint development of technologies. But generally speaking, it is in fact the will of our people.
The Russians want to stay close to those peoples who lived with us in the framework of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. And, very importantly, we see a positive response from our partner countries. The initiators of integration associations are, without a doubt, the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin and the President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev.
9. The 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi
Yelena Isinbayeva, two-time Olympic champion in the pole vault, the mayor of the coastal Olympic village-2014:
A major achievement is not only that we had a great Olympics from the point of view of organization, but that people from all over the world have discovered a new Russia: strong, modern and victorious. I worked with people, saw it from the inside and noticed how their mood changed from suspicion to amazement.
But how many were skeptics at first! Remember how in 2007 thanks to the personal speech of Vladimir Putin at the meeting of the organizing Committee in Guatemala, we were able to tip the scales in our favor to host the games.
10. Reintegration of Crimea Into Russia
Dmitry Orlov, political scientist, Director of the Agency for Political and Economic Communications:
Reintegration of Crimea into Russia was of great importance for the whole country. From a political point of view, it helped to create and expand a new coalition supporting the government.
Emerged the phenomenon of patriotic mobilization of public opinion, which continues to this day. It is also called the “Russian Spring”. Today, according to research centers, this effect has not been yet exhausted. Of course, reintegration of Crimea was a very significant step, but, importantly, this is just one of the episodes of the era of Vladimir Putin.
Key Says Clark Has 'Skills And Experience' For UN's Top Post April 6 2016 | From: NationalBusinessReview Prime Minister John Key has officially kicked off Helen Clark’s campaign to become the next UN secretary-general.
The nomination means Ms Clark can present her credentials to the UN General Assembly along with other candidates in a beauty parade from April 12.
Related:New Zealand - A Blackmailer's Guide
Ms Clark, who has been administrator of UN Development Programme for the past seven years, will be up against Bulgaria’s Irinia Bokova, who runs another major UN agency, Unesco, among half a dozen or so other declared candidates.
"I'm running because I believe my style of leadership is needed and will help the United Nations face the serious challenges ahead," she told a media conference in New York this morning.
She says she is not campaigning as a woman but because she is "the best person for the job."
"Our world is facing so many crises and challenges and I think the background, experiences, pragmatism and focus I have are what the UN needs right now.
The UN needs to be organisationally effective if it has to carry out its mission. As an administration it can be a little old-fashioned and clunky. I think I can bring a modernising touch to that."
Backing for Campaign
Announcing the nomination, Mr Key says the campaign will be backed by New Zealand diplomats and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
“Helen has the right mix of skills and experience for the job," he says.
“She is well placed to bridge divisions and indeed to get results. There are major global challenges facing the world today and the United Nations needs a proven leader who can be pragmatic and effective."
Ms Clark was prime minister for three consecutive terms from 1999 to 2008.
“She has a vast amount of experience in international affairs which will be hard for other candidates to match. She’s a great listener and communicator, and I know she will make a difference if elected.”
Mr Key has submitted New Zealand’s nomination letter to the presidents of the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council.
The new secretary-general will be appointed at the end of the year by the UN General Assembly on the recommendation of the UN Security Council.
The Very Nasty Truth About The Panama Papers? April 6 2016 | From: ZeroHedge This is a curly one. This topic is incredibly devisive and so this informaiton is offered only for your consideration. The truth will out eventually. Given to the Mossad... to seed, fabricate and censor... just like Wikileaks?
Last week when VT published information gotten during the interrogation of a Turkish intelligence agent, Sawash Yeldiz, captured by Popular Party of Kurdistan (PPK) militia inside Syria, information tying Turkish President Erdogan to the Brussels terror attacks, we saw how real leaks are dealt with.
The conduit for this information, European Department for Security and Information (DESI) Secretary General Haissam Bou Said, was threatened by Israeli security agents who may have had a part in the Brussels attacks and, moreover, DESI, an EU organization was threatened with sanctions for the leak. This is real investigative journalism…
"The Panama Papers are a scam". This is one claim, another is that this is that: "They are clearing house. The people on the top are cleaning out the bottom and raising a lot of hell while at it."
These 'leaks" always seem to target the US Dtate Department's foreign policy enemies. Any prominent Americans noted? No.
Real documents turned over to a Mossad run organization that now has dirt on even more people and more power to make a very nasty world an even darker and nastier place. This is what Wikileaks was and is, as exposed by VT and Zbigniew Brzezinski in December 2010.
The filth of the world will be protected and the innocent, should such things exist, can be targeted in the name of “investigative journalism” as teams seed phony material in and launder out damage to the politicians, names like Netanyahu and Bush, Cheney and Guiliani, Hollande and Blair, Kasich and Snyder, Gingrich and Romney, especially Romney.
The Panama Papers are a leak to a German newspaper of tens of thousands of corporate records from a law firm in Panama that ran much of the world’s money laundering.
When a German newspaper received this dump over a year ago, they turned, unknowingly, to an organization actually run by intelligence agencies, in fact those with the most to risk from the leak itself, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.
The entire time this trove has been available it should have been in the hands of forensic accountants working for an agency or authority that none of us can name as such an agency simply doesn’t exist. There is no international authority without an agenda to serve drug cartels and money launderers.
“As observed earlier, the Panama Papers looked more like a poor propaganda retaliation against Putin and Assad than anything else, for the successful interruption to the Greater Israel plan of the Rothschilds."
For the last year, lists of owners of thousands of phony corporations used to launder money, have been reviewed by dozens of “journalists.” The result thus far has been to mention soccer officials, attack Russian president Putin and to smear the reputation of a well known worthless chiseler, Ian Cameron, father of slimeball David Cameron, long a blackmail victim tied to the News of the World “phone hacking scandal.
I am not going to begin to repeat what was found out about David Cameron, but “sick” is an understatement. From Craig Murray:
“But why focus on Russia? Russian wealth is only a tiny minority of the money hidden away with the aid of Mossack Fonseca. In fact, it soon becomes obvious that the selective reporting is going to stink.
The Suddeutsche Zeitung, which received the leak, gives a detailed explanation of the methodology the corporate media used to search the files. The main search they have done is for names associated with breaking UN sanctions regimes. The Guardian reports this too and helpfully lists those countries as Zimbabwe, North Korea, Russia and Syria.
The filtering of this Mossack Fonseca information by the corporate media follows a direct western governmental agenda. There is no mention at all of use of Mossack Fonseca by massive western corporations or western billionaires – the main customers. And the Guardian is quick to reassure that “much of the leaked material will remain private.”
What do you expect? The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity.
Like Britain’s pedophile scandals, this one will lead the same way, the very old or targeted folks who got “out of line” will be thrown to the wolves. The Mossad loves this dump, it gives them dirt on thousands of political leaders around the world they can now control even better.
As a real investigative journalist, with real sources in government, with first person sources watching drugs being smuggled out of Afghanistan, biological and chemical weapons out of Georgia or who has, with the team at VT, broken more stories in the past decade than all other publications combined, I know something about these things.
I also worked in banking as senior officer of an offshore banking operation and as a UN representative working with currency and “development” issues. I saw it all first hand and know the mechanics very well. I could teach this and probably should.
We know who the biggest players are in the Panama Papers. The real list doesn’t start with David Cameron’s dad or a FIFA (soccer) official. Bain Capital and Mitt Romney, followed by the Walton family of Walmart fame, the Canadian Bronfmans, Sheldon Adelson and, perhaps most newsworthy of all, several thousand corporations that tie the world’s drug cartels to American political leaders, including members of congress, state governors, city mayors, members of the US Supreme Court and a handful of former presidents. Craig Murray goes further in his analysis:
“The corporate media – the Guardian and BBC in the UK – have exclusive access to the database which you and I cannot see.
They are protecting themselves from even seeing western corporations’ sensitive information by only looking at those documents which are brought up by specific searches such as UN sanctions busters. Never forget the Guardian smashed its copies of the Snowden files on the instruction of MI6.
What if they did Mossack Fonseca database searches on the owners of all the corporate media and their companies, and all the editors and senior corporate media journalists? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on all the most senior people at the BBC? What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every donor to the Center for Public Integrity and their companies?
What if they did Mossack Fonseca searches on every listed company in the western stock exchanges, and on every western millionaire they could trace?
That would be much more interesting. I know Russia and China are corrupt, you don’t have to tell me that. What if you look at things that we might, here in the west, be able to rise up and do something about?
And what if you corporate lapdogs let the people see the actual data?”
Back in 2012, two months prior to the presidential election, a former senior FBI official, actively employed by the FBI, came to us. He had a story to tell. He said that Mitt Romney, working with a series of financial organizations in the US including banks owned by the Walton family, maintained accounts overseas for hundreds of American political leaders.
The story of these accounts, not whose name was on them, but confirming they existed, hit the newspapers only a few short days before, citing Romney as having thousands of secret bank accounts in the Cayman Islands.
We were told of how Romney and Carlos Salinas, former president of Mexico, met at Harvard Business School, and together built an empire out of the drug cartels that, through buying 5 US Supreme Court Justices who passed “Citizens United,” legalized drug cartel bribery, done through corporations set up by a law firm in Panama with offices around the world.
The FBI had audio and video tapes of Romney with Maria Perez, his mistress in Cuba, daughter of former KGB chief Yuri Andropov and his Cuban mistress. The tapes told of drug running and money laundering and more, so much more.
The source of the tapes was Mexican intelligence that had been after Salinas for years and had worked with our FBI source who had been the liaison between the US and Mexico on drug investigations through the 1990s. Of course we have all of these interviews recorded, some of them on YouTube.
The Pentagon missing trillions investigation died with the entire DC Able Danger team called in for an emergency meeting that day
The biggest single set of interlocking corporations that should have been exposed are tied to the nearly 3 trillion dollars missing from the US Department of Defense, money “disappeared” when the investigative records were mysteriously the victim of an aircraft accident on 9/11/2001 at the Pentagon, one of the most defended buildings on earth.
Not only were all the records destroyed but the 35 investigators were killed as well, having been asked to gather for a meeting with a White House official who never showed up. But that’s another story.
Snowden seems on board?
What we are saying is this, when former crimes were erased there was a reason. Bigger crimes were planned. Nearly every defense and intelligence contractor, from “Google Idea Groups” to the Blackwater network and hundreds more, were all tied to interlocking Panamanian corporations with ownership by members of congress, key Federal judges, and all of this run through a legal advocacy group known as the Federalist Society.
The Panama Papers could eventually expose certainly who is really behind 9/11. In 2014, we were given documents out of Russia that included a preliminary report on 9/11 by the US Department of Energy, outlining that event as “nuclear” and not as the result of terrorism, not as it is typically defined. The term “false flag terrorism” would apply, however.
Wikileaks Reveals International Monetary Fund Plan To "Cause A Credit Event In Greece And Destabilize Europe" April 5 2016 | From: ZeroHedge One of the recurring concerns involving Europe's seemingly perpetual economic, financial and social crises, is that these have been largely predetermined, "scripted" and deliberate acts.
This is something the former head of the Bank of England admitted one month ago when Mervyn King said that Europe's economic depression "is the result of "deliberate" policy choices made by EU elites.
It is also what AIG Banque strategist Bernard Connolly said back in 2008 when laying out "What Europe Wants"
To use global issues as excuses to extend its power:
Environmental issues: increase control over member countries; advance idea of global governance
Terrorism: use excuse for greater control over police and judicial issues; increase extent of surveillance
Global financial crisis: kill two birds (free market; Anglo-Saxon economies) with one stone (Europe-wide regulator; attempts at global financial governance)
EMU: create a crisis to force introduction of “European economic government”
This morning we got another confirmation of how supernational organizations "plan" European crises in advance to further their goals, when Wikileaks published the transcript of a teleconference that took place on March 19, 2016 between the top two IMF officials in charge of managing the Greek debt crisis - Poul Thomsen, the head of the IMF's European Department, and Delia Velkouleskou, the IMF Mission Chief for Greece.
In the transcript, the IMF staffers are caught on tape planning to tell Germany the organization would abandon the troika if the IMF and the commission fail to reach an agreement on Greek debt relief.
More to the point, the IMF officials say that a threat of an imminent financial catastrophe as the Guardian puts it, is needed to force other players into accepting its measures such as cutting Greek pensions and working conditions, or as Bloomberg puts it, "considering a plan to cause a credit event in Greece and destabilize Europe."
According to the leaked conversation, the IMF - which has been pushing for a debt haircut for Greece ever since last August's 3rd Greek bailout - believes a credit event as only thing that could trigger a Greek deal; the "event" is hinted as taking place some time around the June 23 Brexit referendum.
As noted by Bloomberg, the leak shows officials linking Greek issue with U.K. referendum risking general political destabilization in Europe.
The leaked transcript reveals how the IMF plans to use Greece as a pawn in its ongoing negotiation with Germany's chancelleor in order to achieve the desired Greek debt reduction which Germany has been pointedly against: in the leak we learn about the intention of IMF to threaten German Chancellor Angela Merkel to force her to accept the IMF's demands at a critical point.
From the transcript:
THOMSEN: Well, I don't know. But this is... I think about it differently. What is going to bring it all to a decision point? In the past there has been only one time when the decision has been made and then that was when they were about to run out of money seriously and to default. Right?
THOMSEN: And possibly this is what is going to happen again. In that case, it drags on until July, and clearly the Europeans are not going to have any discussions for a month before the Brexits and so, at some stage they will want to take a break and then they want to start again after the European referendum.
VELKOULESKOU: That's right.
THOMSEN: That is one possibility. Another possibility is one that I thought would have happened already and I am surprised that it has not happened, is that, because of the refugee situation, they take a decision... that they want to come to a conclusion. Ok?
And the Germans raise the issue of the management... and basically we at that time say "Look, you Mrs. Merkel you face a question, you have to think about what is more costly: to go ahead without the IMF, would the Bundestag say 'The IMF is not on board'? or to pick the debt relief that we think that Greece needs in order to keep us on board?" Right? That is really the issue.
* * *
VELKOULESKOU: I agree that we need an event, but I don't know what that will be. But I think Dijsselbloem is trying not to generate an event, but to jump start this discussion somehow on debt, that essentially is about us being on board or not at the end of the day.
THOMSEN: Yeah, but you know, that discussion of the measures and the discussion of the debt can go on forever, until some high up.. until they hit the July payment or until the leaders decide that we need to come to an agreement. But there is nothing in there that otherwise is going to force a compromise. Right? It is going to go on forever.
The IMF is also shown as continuing to pull the strings of the Greek government which has so far refused to compromise on any major reforms, as has been the case since the first bailout.
As the Guardian notes, Greek finance minister Euclid Tsakalotos has accused the IMF of imposing draconian measures, including on pension reform. The transcript quotes Velculescu as saying: “What is interesting though is that [Greece] did give in … they did give a little bit on both the income tax reform and on the … both on the tax credit and the supplementary pensions”.
Thomsen’s view was that the Greeks “are not even getting close [to coming] around to accept our views”. Velculescu argued that “if [the Greek government] get pressured enough, they would … But they don’t have any incentive and they know that the commission is willing to compromise, so that is the problem.”
The International Monetary Fund has been caught, red handed, plotting to stage a “credit event” that forces Greece to the edge of bankruptcy, using the pretext of the Brexit referendum.
No, this is not the plot of the next Bond movie. It is the transcript of a teleconference between the IMF’s chief negotiator, Poul Thomsen and Delia Velculescu, head of the IMF mission to Greece.
Released by Wikileaks, the discussion took place in Athens just before the IMF walked out of talks aimed at giving Greece the green light for the next stage of its bailout.
The situation is: the IMF does not believe the numbers being used by both Greece and Europe to do the next stage of the deal. It does not want to take part in the bailout. Meanwhile the EU cannot do the deal without the IMF because the German parliament won’t allow it.
* * *
Let me decode. An “event” is a financial crisis bringing Greece close to default. Just like last year, when the banks closed, millions of people faced economic and psychological catastrophe.
Only this time, the IMF wants to inflict that catastrophe on a nation holding tens of thousands of refugees and tasked with one of the most complex and legally dubious international border policing missions in modern history.
The Greek government is furious: “we are not going to let the IMF play with fire,” a source told me.
But the issue is out of Greek hands. In the end, as Thomsen hints in the transcript, only the European Commission and above all the German government can decide to honour the terms of the deal it did to bail Greece out last July.
The transcript, though received with fury and incredulity in Greece, will drop like a bombshell into the Commission and the ECB. It is they who are holding E300bn+ of Greek debt. It is the whole of Europe, in other words, that the IMF is conspiring to hit with the shock doctrine.
The Greeks are understandably angry and confused; As Bloomberg reported earlier, "Greece wants to know whether WikiLeaks report regarding IMF anticipating a Greek default at about the time of the U.K. June 23 referendum on its EU membership is the fund’s official position" government spokeswoman Olga Gerovasili says Saturday in e-mailed statement.
For its part, an IMF spokesman in e-mail Saturday said it doesn’t "comment on leaks or supposed reports of internal discussions."
Two side observations:
1. has a "Snowden" leaker now emerged at the IMF; if so we can expect many more such bombshell accounts in the coming weeks; or perhaps the reason for the leak is less nuanced: a bugged hotel.
Credit Suisse Group is a Switzerland-based multinational financial services holding company, headquartered in Zürich, that operates the Credit Suisse Bank and other financial services investments. The company is organized as a stock corporation with four divisions: Investment Banking, Private Banking, Asset Management, and a Shared Services Group that provides marketing and support to the other three divisions.
Credit Suisse was founded by Alfred Escher in 1856 under the name Schweizerische Kreditanstalt (SKA, English: Swiss Credit Institution) in order to fund the development of Switzerland's rail system. It issued loans that helped create Switzerland's electrical grid and the European rail system.
It also helped develop the country's currency system and funded entrepreneurship. In the 1900s Credit Suisse began shifting to retail banking in response to the elevation of the middle-class and the growing popularity of savings accounts. Credit Suisse partnered with First Boston in 1978.
After a large failed loan put First Boston under financial stress, Credit Suisse bought a controlling share of the bank in 1988. In the 1990s, Credit Suisse acquired the Winterthur Group, Swiss Volksbank, Swiss American Securities Inc. (SASI) and Bank Leu among others. In the year 2000, it added the U.S. investment firm Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette.
The company restructured itself in 2002, 2004 and 2006. It was one of the least affected banks during the global financial crisis, but afterwards began shrinking its investment business, executing layoffs and cutting costs.
During the period between 2008 and 2012, Germany, Brazil, and the United States began a series of investigations into the use of Credit Suisse accounts for tax evasion. In May 2014, the company pleaded guilty to decades of conspiring to help US citizens "hide their wealth" in order to avoid taxes, and agreed to pay $2.6 billion in fines.
CS CEO Tidjane Thiam admitted in a video interview that the bank had followed a Pursuit of Revenue “At All Costs” policy which had facilitated traders secretly holding high risk illiquid positions. Losses may eventually run into billions of dollars. Updates hereand here point to fractured internal communications.
The drama is unfolding of a massive amount of illiquid debt scrip. (Illiquid scrip or illiquidity refers to investments for which there is no market, i.e. no buyers. Forced sales can result in massive price drops.) Credit Suisse wants to unload $90 billion of thinly traded debt scrip in unfavourable conditions.
CS’s weak position is an ironic reversal for a bank which often strove to exploit weaker counterparties. Thousands of those exploited by the bank’s greed will regard it as due comeuppance. Lisa Abramowicz’s video report on Credit Suisse’s woes highlights poor risk management by senior officers.
The bank’s capital ratio was already down to 11.4% – after the $6 billion capital raising. Those investors lost badly in the massive drop in CS’s share price. The bank can hardly expect further capital from that source.
Credit Suisse said it suffered a 1.5 billion Swiss franc outflow of client funds. The bank has set aside 250 million Swiss francs in provisions for litigation related to the banker’s case, a person familiar with the matter said.
Bank Ignored Warnings for Years
We repeatedly warned the bank of a similar situation in Credit Suisse – but they refused to accept our reports and covered up the illegal activity instead.
An account manager who had no relevant experience, but was chosen because he could speak the right language.
In our case, his banking ignorance was convenient because there was a huge securities scam going on between various bank people and entities in organized crime (outside the bank).
The Swiss accomplice had an arrest warrant out for him for wire fraud and money laundering. However, the Swiss ignored the US arrest warrant.
He joined Credit Suisse at age 40 with no prior banking experience, and almost immediately got some big clients, including Georgian politician-tycoon Bidzina Ivanishvili.
"Around April-May, I told myself that all my clients had to make profits so they would stop annoying me with their criticism about lack of performance,” he told bank investigators.
Can you imagine? Mr. X is new to banking, he’s good at client relationships, he picks up some big clients, he has fun going out to dinner with them or whatever.
“Within weeks, he said, he was actively trading without permission, using Ivanishvili’s credit line to buy about $100 million in Russian stocks and bonds.” And: “With markets around the world surging, he had soon more than made up the missed gains, he said.”
But: a trade lost money, there were margin calls to clients who weren’t aware they were trading on margin, and the whole thing unraveled. He told investigators he could have prevented the margin calls with more unauthorized trading. But he was trying to enjoy the last day of his Italian vacation, he said. “I had had enough of this situation that had upset me so much.”
Was It Pursuit of Revenue or Illegal Profit – “At All Costs”?
It is apparent that the bank’s criminal convictions, its fractured internal communications and its bloated distressed debt were intimately intertwined. The burning question is:
Were they all caused by policies designed to protect corporate crime – through ingrained deliberate ignorance and wilful blindness?
The bank suffered $258 million of writedowns this year through March 11, and $495 million of losses in the fourth quarter, because of its holdings of distressed debt, leveraged loans and securitized products.
Considering that the bank ignored repeated warnings of rogue activity, is it naive to suggest that the bank should read its mail?
Dutch Investigators Raid Shell Headquarters In Multinational Corruption Probe April 4 2016 | From: HumansAreFree The Royal Dutch Shell has been drawn into a multinational corruption probe related to the 2011 Nigerian oil deal, British media reported Wednesday.
British and Italian authorities placed Shell and Italy’s Eni under investigation for the $1.1 billion joint purchase of the oil block in mid-2014.
"Representatives of the Dutch Financial Intelligence and Investigation Service and the Dutch public prosecutor recently visited Shell at its headquarters.
The visit was related to OPL 245, an offshore block in Nigeria that was the subject of a series of longstanding disputes with the federal government of Nigeria," Shell said in a statement quoted by The Financial Times daily.
The company confirmed earlier reports of being under investigation by prosecutors in Milan relating to the same purchase, noting that it is cooperating with officials in both countries.
Most of the $1.1 billion is believed to have gone to the Nigerian government’s bank account in London. Prosecutors, however, are investigating whether the ultimate beneficiary was a fake company allegedly set up by Nigeria’s former Petroleum Minister Dan Etete.
The Wall Street Journal cites Italian court documents as saying Italian prosecutors are investigating whether Shell and Eni had been aware of the money’s final destination. The OPL245 is estimated to contain 9 billion barrels of oil.
New Solar Panel Charge Kicks In April 4 2016 | From: RadioNewZealand Hawke's Bay lines company Unison is introducing an extra charge for solar panel users, in a move Greenpeace says is wrong.
People install the panels to reduce their power bills. But Unison fears this will reduce its income and make its assets hard to maintain, so it is bumping up its charges to make up the difference.
The electric lines industry has said many times that people using solar panels and batteries pay lower power bills, making less money available to pay for the electricity grid. Yet most solar panel users still need that grid to be available as a fallback when solar power dries up overnight or on cloudy days.
Senior Unison manager Nathan Strong said his firm was acting now to protect its income and make sure the customer got a good idea of the real cost of providing an electricity network.
"Currently it costs us about $900 a year to serve a typical residential customer," he said.
"Under our old pricing approach, someone putting a solar panel on a roof would reduce their contribution by $300 and that $300 would have to be made up by someone who does not have solar panels on their roof."
Mr Strong said changing the rules brought fairness. Unison said it was still calculating the exact figure, but network charges could rise by up to $150 each year.
From today, the scheme would affect the company's 110,000 consumers in Hawke's Bay, Taupo and Rotorua who put solar panels on their roof. It would only happen if they used their panels to generate surplus power and feed it back into the national grid.
Greenpeace's Russel Norman said Unison was doing the wrong thing.
"The impact of Unison's solar tax is to change the economics around the installation of solar panels, when in the interests of climate change what we want to do is make it easier."
The move was incompatible with recent international pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Mr Norman said. But the idea of charging solar power users extra money was an anathema to the Sustainable Electricity Association of New Zealand.
Chairman Brendan Winitana called the Unison action a solar tax.
"That solar tax is a 26 percent increase in a lines charge and we believe that is a very strong move to make, especially when the Electricity Authority called for submissions on distribution pricing," he said.
Unison said that was not correct and people would still save money on their power bills.
Solar panel installation company Solar City chief executive Andy Booth said Unison was being disingenuous and imposing an unfair tax.
"Customers who use low-energy light bulbs and energy efficient fridges to reduce their consumption aren't getting taxed, customers who put solar systems that generate power to reduce their energy consumption are. We believe fundamentally that's anti-competitive," he said.
Unison would be the first lines company to do something like this, but others were understood to have similar plans in train. The company is a member of the the Electricity Networks Association and Its chief executive Graeme Peters said Unison was acting within its rights.
"Distributors are entitled to make their own decisions about pricing in their own areas," he said. "But collectively, we are trying to bring about a menu of pricing options they can choose from."
There are 28 lines companies in New Zealand all facing falling revenue and static fixed costs.
CIA Agents To Troll Alternative Media Sites In Huge Propaganda Program April 4 2016 | From: HumansAreFree The CIA are expanding an existing program that influences mainstream media outlets to promote fake propaganda stories, by having agents troll internet forums, social media, and website comment sections – in an effort to disrupt alternative media sites.
In an expansion of Operation Mockingbird, the agency are now creating fake user accounts on various internet forums and social media channels, arguing politics with real users in an attempt to stifle and subvert genuine communications between users.
According to RT news, agents have up to “10 fake shill accounts” used to troll and create the illusion of having a genuine network of friends.
"They will defend current administration decisions with relentless irrational stubbornness that one can only be paid to do.”
Abby Martin, from RT’s “Breaking the Set,” reported on an up to date Operation Mockingbird with the sole purpose of misleading the public on-line.
In the congressional hearing from 1976 (below) listen to how many agents are in the media to write false stories.
According to the Congress report published in 1976:
By the year 1953 Operation Mockingbird dictated information in over 25 newspapers and wire agencies.
These organizations were run by people with well-known right-wing views such as William Paley (CBS), Henry Luce (Time and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Alfred Friendly (managing editor of the Washington Post), Jerry O’Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham, Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor).
Even Rolling Stone claimed that journalist Joseph Alsop was under the control of Operation Mockingbird in 1977.
His articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists alleged by Rolling Stone Magazine to have been willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), Charles Douglas Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (The Miami News), Herb Gold (The Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times).
According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman), these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner, creator of the program.
The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.
Are All Vitamins Safe? April 3 2016 | From: TheDoctorWithin After you have finished reading this article, you will know more about vitamins than 95% of clinical nutritionists, doctors, supplement sales force, or bodybuilders.
Natural Whole Food Vitamins: Ascorbic Acid Is Not Vitamin C
If that sounds arrogant or overstated, it really isn’t my fault. I’m just a messenger; a purveyor of information. Either I’m right or the 95% are right; can’t be both.
Without further ado, here’s the kernel: ascorbic acid is not vitamin C. Alpha tocopherol is not vitamin E. Retinoic acid is not vitamin A. And so on through the other vitamins. Vast sums of money have been expended to make these myths part of Conventional Wisdom. If you have several college degrees and all this is news to you, don’t feel bad. Unless you think your education ended at Commencement. Which is generally true.
Wheels Within Wheels
Vitamins are not individual molecular compounds. Vitamins are biological complexes. They are multi-step biochemical interactions whose action is dependent upon a number of variables within the biological terrain. Vitamin activity only takes place when all conditions are met within that environment, and when all co-factors and components of the entire vitamin complex are present and working together.
Vitamin activity is even more than the sum of all those parts; it also involves timing.
Vitamins cannot be isolated from their complexes and still perform their specific life functions within the cells. When isolated into artificial commercial forms, like ascorbic acid, these purified synthetics act as drugs in the body. They are no longer vitamins, and to call them such is inaccurate.
A vitamin is:
“A working process consisting of the nutrient, enzymes, coenzymes, antioxidants, and trace minerals activators.”
- Royal Lee “What Is a Vitamin?” Applied Trophology Aug 1956
Dr. Royal Lee was the pioneer researcher in the field of whole food vitamins. For decades he documented the basic facts summarized in this chapter. His work has never been scientifically refuted. Anyone who seriously undertakes the study of vitamins today corroborates Lee’s work. His story is a fascinating study in itself, a study of indomitable perseverance in the pursuit of true principles. Jensen tells us that Royal Lee’s work will not be appreciated until the next century.
Hasn’t happened yet.
Lee felt the full weight of organized drugs/medicine bearing down on him. Reading like something out of Schindler’s List, we learn that the FDA not only persecuted Lee for challenging the economics of synthetic vitamins, produced by giant drug companies, but that he was actually ordered by a court to burn all his research of the past 20 years! Burn his research! When has that ever happened in this country? They didn’t even do that to Larry Flynt.
Going off on a tangent, ever wondered how the FDA attained its present position as attack dog for the drug companies and food manufacturers? It’s another whole story in itself. The precursor of the FDA was the Bureau of Chemistry. Up until 1912 the Bureau of Chemistry was headed up by a man named Dr. Harvey W. Wiley. Here’s a quote from Dr. Wiley that illustrates where his interests lay:
“No food product in our country would have any trace of benzoic acid, sulfurous acid or sulfites or any alum or saccharin, save for medical purposes. No soft drink would contain caffeine or theobromine. No bleached flour would enter interstate commerce.
Our foods and drugs would be wholly without any form of adulteration and misbranding. The health of our people would be vastly improved and the life greatly extended.
The manufacturers of our food supply, and especially the millers, would devote their energies to improving the public health and promoting happiness in every home by the production of whole ground, unbolted cereal flours and meals.”
– The History of a Crime Against the Pure Food Law, 1912
Now obviously we can’t have a dangerous lunatic like this in charge of the public nutrition, can we? Dr. Wiley actually filed suit against the Coca-Cola company in an attempt to keep their artificial product out of interstate commerce, and off the market.
Fortunately Wiley was eventually replaced by a saner individual, more attuned to the real nutritional needs of the American people, as determined by the experts who knew what was best for us: the food manufacturers. This was Dr. Elmer Nelson, and in his words we get an idea of the change in philosophy that marked the transformation of the Bureau of Chemistry into the FDA:
“It is wholly unscientific to state that a well-fed body is more able to resist disease than a poorly-fed body. My overall opinion is that there hasn’t been enough experimentation to prove that dietary deficiencies make one susceptible to disease.”
- Elmer Nelson MD, Washington Post 26 Oct 49
Bernard Jensen illustrates how the tobacco industry and the food giants like Coke were indirectly behind the legal persecution of Royal Lee. Cigarette ads in the 40s and 50s showed medical doctors promoting the digestive benefits of smoking Camels. Or the advertising of Coke and other refined sugar foods stating that “science has shown how sugar can help keep your appetite and weight under control.” (Empty Harvest)
During this same period, Royal Lee was kept in courts for years, fighting to keep the right to advertise his vitamin products, because he was a threat to the food manufacturers. Lee knew they were poisoning the American public. He proved that refined sugars and devitalized, bleached flours were destroying the arteries and the digestive system, causing heart disease and cancer.
Whole versus Fractionated
OK, natural vs. synthetic. Let’s start with Vitamin C. Most sources equate vitamin C with ascorbic acid, as though they were the same thing. They’re not. Ascorbic acid is an isolate, a fraction, a distillate of naturally occurring vitamin C. In addition to ascorbic acid, vitamin C must include rutin, bioflavonoids, Factor K, Factor J, Factor P, Tyrosinase, Ascorbinogen, and other components as shown below:
A s c o r b i c A c i d
V i t a m i n C
In addition, mineral co-factors must be available in proper amounts.
If any of these parts are missing, there is no vitamin C, no vitamin activity. When some of them are present, the body will draw on its own stores to make up the differences, so that the whole vitamin may be present. Only then will vitamin activity take place, provided that all other conditions and co-factors are present.
Ascorbic acid is described merely as the “antioxidant wrapper” portion of vitamin C; ascorbic acid protects the functional parts of the vitamin from rapid oxidation or breakdown. (Somer p 58 “Vitamin C: A Lesson in Keeping An Open Mind” The Nutrition Report)
Over 90% of ascorbic acid in the US is manufactured at a facility in Nutley, New Jersey, owned by Hoffman-LaRoche, one of the world’s biggest drug manufacturers. Here ascorbic acid is made from a process involving cornstarch and volatile acids.
Most U.S. vitamin companies then buy the bulk ascorbic acid from this single facility. After that, marketing takes over. Each company makes its own labels, its own claims, and its own formulations, each one claiming to have the superior form of vitamin C, even though it all came from the same place, and it’s really not vitamin C at all.
FRACTIONATED = SYNTHETIC = CRYSTALLINE = FAKE
The word synthetic means two things:
Occurs nowhere in nature
From the outset, it is crucial to understand the difference between vitamins and vitamin activity. The vitamin is the biochemical complex. Vitamin activity means the actual biological and cellular changes that take place when the stage is set for the vitamin complex to act.
Think of it like gas and a car. Pumping the gas into the tank doesn’t necessarily mean the car is going anywhere. Other conditions and factors must be also present, in order for Activity to occur.
The gas line to the carburetor must be clear, the carburetor jets must be set, there must be an exact mixture of air flow, the ignition must be turned on, the spark plugs must be clean, the exact amount of gas must reach each spark plug right before it fires, no gas must be left over in the cylinder after the plug fires. Getting the idea? If any of this stuff is missing, there’s no Activity: the car doesn’t run, or at least not very well.
Amazing as it may sound if you’re hearing this for the first time, vitamins are more than the synthetic fractions we are commonly taught they are. The ascorbic acid you buy at the grocery store every few weeks, thinking you are buying Vitamin C, is just a chemical copy of naturally occurring ascorbic acid, which itself is still only a fraction of the actual Vitamin C.
Real vitamin C is part of something living, and as such, can impart life. Your synthetic, fractionated chemical ascorbic acid never grew in the ground, never saw the light of day, never was alive or part of anything alive. It’s a chemical, a cornstarch derivative, a sulfuric acid by-product. In your body it’s just another drug. Synthetic vitamins have toxic effects from mega-doses and actually can increase the white blood cell count.
Vitamins are only necessary in minute quantities on a daily basis. Whole food vitamins, by contrast, are not toxic since the vitamin is complexed in its integral working form, and requires nothing from the body, and triggers no immune response.
Scurvy is a disease caused by vitamin C deficiency. Scurvy is characterized by bleeding gums, slow wound healing, softening bones, loose teeth, ulcerations of the mouth and digestive tract, general weight loss and fatigue. From 1650 to 1850 half of all seamen on transoceanic voyages died of scurvy.
It was discovered by ship surgeon Thomas Lind in the early 1800s that British sailors were spared the disease altogether simply by a diet rich in citrus fruits. Since limes travelled well, they were the common choice during the early years, and thus the expression “limeys” was coined to describe British sailors. It was later found both at sea and in prison fare that potatoes were equally successful in preventing scurvy, and much cheaper to obtain. (Lancet. 1842)
We find that there is less than 20 mg of ascorbic acid in a potato. Yet this small amount, since it is complexed in a food source, is all the body needs not only to prevent scurvy, but also to cure it, even in its advanced state. Such a remedy is described in detail in Richard Dana’s amazing journal Two Years Before the Mast, written in 1840.
Whole food vitamin C as found in potatoes, onions, and citrus fruits is able to quickly cure any case of scurvy. By contrast, the fractionated chemical ascorbic acid has been shown to be insufficient in resolving a scurvy condition, simply because it does not act as a nutrient. (Lancet 1842)
Ascorbic acid simply cannot confer vitamin activity, as taught by the discoverer of vitamin C himself, another Nobel Prize laureate, Dr. Albert Szent-Georgi.
Szent-Georgi discovered vitamin C in 1937. In all his research however, Szent-Georgi found that he could never cure scurvy with the isolated ascorbic acid itself. Realizing that he could always cure scurvy with the “impure” vitamin C found in simple foods, Szent-Georgi discovered that other factors had to be at work in order for vitamin activity to take place.
So he returned to the laboratory and eventually made the discovery of another member of the vitamin C complex, as shown above: rutin. All the factors in the complex, as Royal Lee and Dr. Szent-Georgi both came to understand, ascorbic acid, rutin, and the other factors, were synergists: co-factors which together sparked the “functional interdependence of biologically related nutrient factors.” (Empty Harvest p120)
The term “wheels within wheels” was used to describe the interplay of co-factors.
Each of the other synergists in the C complex has a separate function:
P factors for blood vessel strength,
J factors for oxygen-carrying capacity of red cells,
Ttyrosinase as an essential enzyme for enhancing white blood cell effectiveness.
Ascorbic acid is just the antioxidant outer shell – the protector of all these other synergists so that they will be able to perform their individual functions.
Now I can hear you asking, what about Linus Pauling, double Nobel Prize laureate, and his lifetime espousal of megadosing on ascorbic acid – up to 10 grams per day. He lived to be 93. Are we saying that he took a synthetic vitamin all that time?
Yes, that’s exactly right. Bernard Jensen suggests that ascorbic acid has an acidifying effect in part of the digestive tract, making an unfriendly environment for viruses, Candida, and pathogenic bacteria.
Pauling’s good health was not the result of synthetic vitamin activity. Good genetics and maintaining an internal bioterrain not conducive to inflammation are likely what brought longevity to Linus Pauling. He eventually died of cancer at 93, but then who wants to live forever?
Dr. Royal Lee’s phrase “biological wheels within wheels” always comes up in any discussion of whole food vitamins. Essentially it means that individual synergists cannot function as a vitamin in a chemically isolated form, like ascorbic acid.
Vitamins are living complexes which contribute to other higher living complexes – like cell repair, collagen manufacture, and maintenance of blood circulation.
Ascorbic acid is not a living complex. It is a copy of a part of a living complex known as vitamin C. Ascorbic acid is a fractionated, crystalline isolate of vitamin C.
Why are you a high school graduate or a college graduate or a doctor, and you don’t know this? Because drug manufacturers like things clean and simple and cheap to produce. To this simple fact add the politics which always comes into play when anyone mentions the word “billions,” and you are beginning to get the idea about where to begin your investigation. Burned his research?
Most vitamins cannot be made by the body. They must be taken in as food. The best sources then are obviously whole foods, rich in vitamins. Because of soil depletion, mineral depletion, pesticides, air pollution, and erosion, it is common knowledge that foods grown in American soil today have only a fraction of the nutrient value of 50 years ago.
That means a fraction of the vitamins and minerals necessary for normal human cell function. Royal Lee described the American diet as the cultivation and production of “devitalized foods.” Dr. Weston Price describes these empty products as the “foods of commerce.” Think it’s gotten better or worse since their time? Thus the necessity for supplementation.
Vitamins and minerals are not functionally separable. They make each other work. Example: vitamin D is necessary for the body to absorb calcium. Copper is necessary for vitamin C activity. And so on. Mineral deficiencies can cause vitamin deficiencies, and vice versa. Epidemic mineral deficiency in America is a well-documented result of systematic soil depletion. (See Minerals chapter: thedoctorwithin.com)
So that is the other prime difference between whole food vitamins and synthetics: whole food vitamins contain within them many essential trace minerals necessary for their synergistic operation. Synthetic vitamins contain no trace minerals, relying on, and depleting, the body’s own mineral reserves.
Following the German agricultural methods of Von Leibig in the mid-1800s, American farmers found that NPK (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) was all that was necessary for crops to look good. (Frost p7) As long as NPK is added to the soil, crops can be produced and sold year after year from the same soil.
They look OK. But the trace minerals vital for human nutrition are virtually absent from most American soil after all these years.
Many of these minerals, such as zinc, copper, and magnesium, are necessary co-factors of vitamin activity.
Depleted topsoil is one simple, widespread mechanism of both vitamin and mineral deficiency in produce today.
This doesn’t even take into account the tons of poisonous herbicides and pesticides dumped on crops. According to the UN, two million tons of pesticides are used worldwide annually. (Jensen, p69)
Agri-business has one motive: Profit.
Such a focus has resulted in an output of empty produce and a nation of unhealthy people. The earth’s immune system is its soil. To be vital and capable of growing vital foods, soil must be rich in both minerals and soil-based organisms – life forms.
Healthy produce naturally resists insects. Insects are like bad bacteria in the body: They are attracted to diseased tissue, though they do not cause it.
The Foods of Commerce
And we’re still only talking about people who actually eat raw fruits and vegetables, which is a minority. Processed food composes the majority of what most Americans eat. The only nutrients in most processed foods are “enriched” and “fortified” as described below.
When a doctor says that food supplements are all unnecessary because we can get everything we need from our food, that doctor is lacking basic information published and agreed upon by his own peers. Whether or not we need supplementation is no longer an issue, except for one who is totally out of touch. The issue is what kind and how much.
Vitamin and mineral deficiency can be tagged to practically ANY disease syndrome known to man.
DW Cavanaugh, MD of Cornell University actually concluded that:
“There is only one major disease, and that is malnutrition.”
Malnutrition of the affluent is the natural result of the foods of commerce.
The best vitamins are called whole food vitamins.
It will be difficult finding this out on the Internet, however, because the Web is dominated by mainstream nutritional theory, which means pharmaceutical underwriting.
In the area of vitamins, the Internet is 99% marketing; 1% actual information.
But then again, this isn’t Mission Difficult. This is Mission Impossible, Mr Hunt.
There are about 110 companies who sell vitamins in the US. Less than 5 of them use whole food vitamins. The reason is simple: whole food vitamins are expensive to make.
A few of the largest pharmaceutical firms in the world mass produce synthetic vitamins for the vast majority of these 110 “vitamin” companies, who then put their own label on them, and every company claims theirs is the best! It’s ridiculous! Americans spend over $9 billion per year for synthetic vitamins. (Frost p2)
Whole food vitamins are obtained by taking a vitamin-rich plant, removing the water and the fiber in a cold vacuum process, free of chemicals, and then packaging for stability. The entire vitamin complex in this way can be captured intact, retaining its “functional and nutritional integrity.” (DeCava p.23.) Upon ingestion, the body is not required to draw on its own reserves in order to complete any missing elements from the vitamin complex.
Mainstream marketing of vitamins and minerals has successfully created the myth that vitamins and minerals may be isolated from each other, that correct amounts may be measured out, and then we can derive total benefit from taking these fractionated chemical creations. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Vitamins and minerals, and also enzymes, work closely together as co-factors for each other’s efficacy. If one part is missing, or in the wrong form or the wrong amount, entire chains of metabolic processes will not proceed normally. Result: downward spiralling of health, probably imperceptible for long periods of time.
Marketing and Promotion
What is the marketing philosophy behind the prevalence of the type of synthetic vitamins available in the supermarket and mall vitamin stores? Simple: profit above all else. Once the public is shown that vitamin supplementation is necessary, the rest is marketing.
Marketing is the art of persuading by suspending logic and twisting data into junk science. Example: what’s the actual difference in composition between Wheaties and Total, two cereals put out by the same company? Total is advertised as being much more nutrient-rich than “ordinary” Wheaties. Look at the labels. What justifies the extra $1.30 for a box of Total? Answer: 1.5¢ worth of synthetic vitamins sprayed over the Wheaties.
That’s it! That’s what “vitamin enriched” always means. The other trick word is “fortified.” Generally that means that the food itself is devoid of nutrients or enzymes, so they tried to pump it up a little with some “vitamins.”
Cheap synthetic vitamin sprays are all that is required for the manufacturer to use labels like “enriched” and “fortified.” These words are red flags – if a food needs to be fortified or enriched, you can bet it was already dead.
The mega-vitamin theory doesn’t really hold when it comes to synthetics: If A Little Is Good, More Is Better. Macro doses of vitamin E, and also vitamin D have been shown to decrease immune function significantly. (DeCava) It stands to reason. Vitamins by definition are necessary in phenomenally small doses. The discoverer of thiamine, a B vitamin, and the man who came up with the word vitamin, Dr. Casimir Funk, has this to say about synthetics:
“Synthetic vitamins: these are highly inferior to vitamins from natural sources, also the synthetic product is well known to be far more toxic.”
Nutrition authority DeCava describes it:
“Natural food-source vitamins are enzymatically alive. Man-made synthetic vitamins are dead chemicals.”
– The Real Truth About Vitamins p 209
Oxymorons: military intelligence, rap music, synthetic vitamins.
The marketing of fractionated crystalline synthetic vitamins has been so successful that most nutritionists and doctors are unaware that there is something missing from these “vitamins.” Vitamin manufacturers compete for customers with identical products – they all bought their synthetic vitamins from the same couple of drug companies.
To differentiate their product, each makes claims of “high potency.” Our vitamins are higher potency than theirs, etc. The point is, the higher the potency, the more the druglike effects are present. Natural whole food vitamins are very low potency.
Remember the 20mg of vitamin C in a potato that was able to cure a patient of scurvy? That was low potency. Low potency is all we need. Low potency is enough to bring about vitamin activity. High potency overshoots the mark – the chemical is very pure and refined, like the difference between white sugar and the type of sugar that’s in an apple.
The Milligram Game
Generally speaking, if milligrams are being discussed at length, the author has no clue about vitamins. Synthetic vitamins are refined, high potency chemicals, and therefore may be accurately measured in milligrams, just like drugs.
This has nothing to do with vitamin activity or nutrition, except in a negative way.
Half the Story
The same type of incomplete action can be seen with any synthetic vitamin. Let’s take beta carotene for a minute, which the body can turn into vitamin A.
Now you’ll remember that vitamin A is necessary for good eyesight, DNA synthesis, and protects cells from free radicals. A study reported in Apr 94 in the NEJM of some 30,000 Finnish subjects showed conclusively that synthetic vitamin A had no antioxidant effect whatsoever.
A true antioxidant helps to protect heart muscle, lungs, and artery surfaces from breaking down prematurely. In this study, the subjects who received the synthetic beta carotene actually had an 8% higher incidence of fatal heart attacks, strokes, and lung cancer than those who got the placebo (sugar pill).
Stands to reason: the synthetic brought no vitamin activity to the tissues that needed it. As a dead, purified chemical introduced into the body, the synthetic further stressed the immune system, the liver, and the kidneys which all had to try to break down this odd chemical and remove it from the body. It would be bad enough if they were harmless, but synthetic vitamins actually have a net negative effect.
Vitamin A was first discovered in 1919. By 1924, it had been broken down and separated from its natural whole food complex: “purified.”
By 1931, LaRoche – one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, even today – had succeeded in “synthesizing” vitamin A. That means they had created a purely chemical copy of a fraction of naturally occurring vitamin A.
Naturally occurring vitamin A is found associated with an entire group of other components:
- Vitamins and Minerals Somer 1992
Isolated from these other factors, vitamin A is a fraction which cannot perform its biological functions. Taken as a synthetic, it must then draw on this list of resources already in the body in order to complete its make-up. Whole food vitamin A, by contrast, is already complete and ready to go.
Most synthetic vitamin A consists only of retinal, retinol, or retinoic acid. The well-publicized potential for toxicity with mega doses of vitamin A involves one of these three.
Vitamin A toxicity, known as hypervitaminosis, always results from an excess of synthetic, “purified” vitamin A, and never from whole food vitamin A. (DeCava, p 86)
Effects of vitamin A toxicity include:
Extreme dryness of eyes, mouth and skin
Enlargement of liver and spleen
Beta Carotene is a precursor the body can convert to vitamin A. Unfortunately, as a supplement, synthetic beta carotene is usually “stabilized” in refined vegetable oils. In this trans fatty acid form, oxidation occurs and the chemically “pure” beta carotene can no longer act as a nutrient, because it was changed. Almost all synthetic beta carotene is produced by the Swiss drug giant Hoffman-LaRoche. This form can no longer be converted to vitamin A. The best it can be is worthless, and the worst is toxic.
Natural vitamin A and beta carotene are well known as immune boosters and cancer fighters, in their role as antioxidants. Synthetic vitamin A by contrast has actually brought about significant increases in cancer. The same Finnish study we saw above provided smokers with large doses of synthetic beta carotene. Lung cancer incidence increased 18%! (NEJM Apr 94 “The Alpha Tocopherol Beta Carotene Cancer Prevention Study Group”)
These findings were corroborated two years later in another study written up in Lancet. Pharmacologic doses of synthetic beta carotenes were found to block the antioxidant activity of the other 50 naturally occurring carotenoids in the diet. Anti-cancer activity was thus blocked by the synthetic. (Lancet 1996)
With the vast outpouring of wrong information about vitamins A and C, the findings of a 1991 article in Health Counselor are no surprise: 50% of Americans are deficient in vitamin A and 41% are deficient in vitamin C.
Synthetic vitamins cannot prevent deficiencies.
Fake Vitamin B
In one experiment, synthetic vitamin B (thiamine) was shown to render 100% of a group of pigs sterile! 100% would be considered a significant finding. (Dr. Barnett Sure, Journ Natr 1939) Perhaps the fact that synthetic vitamin B comes from coal tar, maybe that has something to do with it, you think? Then there’s vitamin B12, which comes from activated sewage sludge. (Frost p 60)
Been shooting blanks since you started on those multi’s?
For the licensed dieticians and clinical nutritionists reading this in disbelief because it is too “unscientific,” consider the way Theron Randolph MD delineated between natural and synthetic:
“A synthetically derived substance may cause a reaction in a chemically susceptible person when the same material of natural origin is tolerated, despite the two substances having identical chemical structures.
The point is illustrated by the frequency of clinical reactions to synthetic vitamins – especially vitamin B1 and C – when the [same] naturally occurring vitamins are tolerated.”
Always keep this idea in mind when confronted with the marketing hook “bio-identical.”
According to Los Angeles naturopath, Dr. Jack Singh, all commercial lecithins in supplements, as well as most vitamin D, comes from irradiated vegetable oils. That’s rancid, oxidizing trans fatty acids! A birthday party of free radicals.
This is the precise mechanism for arterial wall breakdown prior to plaque deposits, then arteriosclerosis, then heart disease. I thought we were supposed to be taking vitamins to stay healthy!
Why is this information so difficult to find? It’s in none of the “alternative” health ‘zines, or any of the mainstream media. Alternative-Lite guru Julian Whittaker, in his summer 1998 newsletter actually had the temerity to state outright “Synthetic vitamins and whole food vitamins are identical.”
I’m sure his synthetic vitamin company and all its retailers were reassured by this incredibly arrogant and flagrantly inaccurate pronouncement. But who is objecting? Only those clients of the 5 companies who know enough to take whole food vitamins, because they have become educated to realize the difference. These are the vast minority, having no control of the media.
Royal Lee and Harvey Wiley lost. Nobody knows who they are today, except we few. This is no accident. What everybody does know is Pepsi and Viagra and Wonder Bread and prednisone and Double Whoppers with Cheese and Zantac and Baskin-Robbins and Long’s Drug Store. And grocery store vitamins: synthetic vitamins.
That’s the world, today as the product of yesterday. Control of information today is one of the most sophisticated systems of influence ever devised. The simple ideas contained in this chapter are simply not available to the mass consciousness. The documentation is out there, but you really gotta dig.
100 years ago if a medical doctor saw a case of cancer he would call all his colleagues to come and have a look, telling them it was unlikely they would see another case, as cancer was so rare. People rarely died of heart attacks; in fact the term heart attack itself didn’t even exist. There was no incidence at all of atherosclerosis. Diabetes was practically unheard of.
What did they eat? Fruits, vegetables, meat, butter, and lard. But none of it was processed with drugs and chemicals.
Today one in three dies of cancer. One in two dies of heart disease. Diabetes is the seventh leading cause of death in the U.S. (Vital Statistics) For anyone born after 2003, there is a one in 3 chance of Type 2 diabetes. Is that progress?
If you are a food manufacturer it is, and especially if you are a drug manufacturer. In 2007 the WHO ranked the US as #39 in the world in infant mortality. Male sperm count is less than 20% of what it was in 1929. (1981 University of Florida report, Natural vs. Synthetic) Infant mortality is up; birth defects are up.
We spend $1.5 trillion per year for health care, most of which goes for administration and executive salaries. Who are the largest advertisers for TV and the printed media?
Right: drug companies and food manufacturers.
Do they want to keep the ball rolling? You bet. Will they kill you to do it?
You bet. Do they want people to take charge of their own health by natural inexpensive foods and supplements?
A cure for cancer has been “right around the corner” since Nixon.
People are starting to ask questions; they’re less inclined to believe the slick ads coming every 10 minutes on TV and in Newsweek.
Perhaps Hippocrates did not envision doctors as detail men or drug reps. He most likely thought like Henry Bieler, MD:
“Nature, if given the opportunity is always the greatest healer. It is the physician’s role to assist in this healing, to play a supporting role.”
– Finding the Right Cure for You
So what do you do? Well, you may now have some insight that your vitamin needs are not being met by the Walgreen’s generics. Wallach used to talk about expensive urine from these unmetabolized grocery store synthetic placebos.
The water soluble vitamins are best obtained through organic produce grown in mineral-rich soil. The best supplements in this category are the top-shelf green foods, like David Sandoval’s Best of Greens, and its equivalents.
The fat soluble vitamins, A, E, and D are best obtained through fish, raw dairy, avocado, raw nuts, raw coconut, and clean meats. High end supplements like Udo’s Choice, MOR, and Nordic Naturals can round out your EFA requirements
Beyond this it’s MLM marketing roulette, and if you can’t spot the mark in the first 5 minutes, baby, it’s you.
Dr. Kelly Brogan's Takedown Of Big Pharma's SSRI Anti-Depressant Drug Lies Hits Bestseller Lists April 2 2016 | From: NaturalNews Pharma-controlled press desperately tried to censor this book, but failed. Just like Del Bigtree made a dangerous film called "VAXXED," Dr. Kelly Brogan wrote a dangerous book.
How dangerous? So dangerous that the prescription drug cartel in America -- you know, Big Pharma -- ordered media outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post to blackball the book in the hope that no one would read it.
Natural News has learned that all the major media outlets obediently agreed to censor the book and its author. No reviews - not even negative ones - would be published.
No interviews with the author, no TV appearances, no debates, nothing. A literal conspiracy against a book was hatched in secret and militantly followed by the entire media.
The book is called "A Mind of Your Own," and if you're wondering what's so dangerous about it, the book totally exposes the science FRAUD of Big Pharma's antidepressant drugs. It empowers readers with knowledge they can use to take back their mental health using food, nutrition and natural therapies that don't earn huge profits for the drug company cartels.
The author, Dr. Kelly Brogan, is giving away the first chapter of the book for free on her website. Click this link to go there now and download the first chapter, and you'll find out just how "dangerous" this book really is. (Hint: It threatens a $10+ billion drug industry that preys upon the mental health of citizens while keeping them all sick or addicted...)
Exploding in Popularity Across Independent Media, Bypassing the Corrupt, Pharma - Controlled Mainstream Media
Now, thanks to the efforts of independent media websites like GreenMedInfo.com, the book has become Amazon's #1 best seller in the "Depression" category and has also achieved a #1 best seller ranking in the category of "Holistic Medicine."
As GreenMedInfo now reports, "Since then, A Mind Of Your Own soared to #20 in Amazon's 8.8 million title inventory, selling out within only two days of its March 15th launch date.
Then, yesterday, it broke through all three of the top bestselling book lists: USA Today, Publisher’s Weekly, and #10 on the prestigious NY Times bestsellers list's most hard to crack category: Advice, How-To, Misc."
In other words, the very same book that the NY Times and USA Today desperately tried to silence has now broken through the censorship and achieved statistical rankings on their own bestseller lists. (Question: Will the NY Times deny the book its proper ranking and blackball it from the NY Times Bestseller list? They've done it before...)
He reluctantly complied with the demands of the media science trolls and vaccine totalitarians, memory holing the documentary and making sure no one gets a chance to see it at the festival.
Media Censorship in Full Force Against Truth:
Psych Drugs, Vaccines, GMOs - You Name it!
On all these topics - psychiatric drugs, vaccines and GMOs - the entire mainstream media operates as a pharma mafia censorship goon squad. The media is, of course, funded largely by Big Pharma and biotech agricultural giants like ADM, DuPont and Monsanto. Because so much money flows into the mainstream media from these corporate giants, the corporations literally write the marching order memos for media to follow.
When these corporate giants order the media to censor a book, they censor a book. When they are ordered to attack Robert De Niro, they attack Robert De Niro. And when they order the media to silence Dr. Kelly Brogan and try to make her book a total failure, they follow those orders with absolute obedience (combined with a total disregard for the truth on any of these matters).
The Mainstream Media Actively Plots Against you, Seeking to Deny you Access to Transformative Knowledge
Yet more and more citizens all around the world are waking up and realizing that the mainstream media actively plots against you learning anything that's true about psychiatric drugs, vaccines and GMOs. Vindictive, treacherous, truth-hating rags like Forbes.com specialize in spreading corporate disinfo while pursuing a quasi-journalistic agenda of defaming, slandering and discrediting all who speak out against the holy trinity of poison and death: Big Pharma, Big Biotech and Big Vaccine.
Dr. Kelly Brogan likely had no idea how all this worked until she authored her own book. Operating under the belief that the mainstream media was actually interested in sharing information that would help empower and uplift readers, Dr. Brogan was absolutely shocked to discover that her book -- and her message -- was being systematically silenced and censored by the media.
Unexplainable Discovery: Ancient Indian Mandala Found At Peru’s Nazca Lines April 2 2016 | From: AncientCode The Nazca lines of Peru are, without a doubt, the most enigmatic and mysterious geoglyphs ever discovered on the planet, but the discovery of an Ancient Indian Mandala makes the Nazca lines, even more, mysterious.
Many of us have wondered, together with countless scholars, what the exact purpose of the mysterious lines is… yet no one has been able to fully understand, nor answer, the exact purpose of these mysterious lines.
Were these giant figures meant to be seen from above? Do hey mimic constellations in the sky? What were the ancient’s trying to say to future generations? Were the Nazca lines mere ancient art? If so… why would ancient mankind create art that cannot be fully appreciated from the ground?
These are some of the questions that have been asked for decades, yet no one has been able to answer them. There are over 800 straight lines, 300 geometric figures and 70 animal and plant designs also called biomorphs.
The largest figure found at Nazca stretches about 200 meters across. Interestingly, the Longest glyph found at Nazca goes for 9 miles.
There are some scholars that have discovered curious patterns in the numerous designs and they suggest that the Nazca might be one of the earliest known examples of applied geometry.
According to some claims, scientists from the University of Dresden researched the Nazca lines, measuring the magnetic field and electric conductivity and discovering that electric conductivity was 8000 higher on the Nazca lines than next to them.
But perhaps one of the most enigmatic depictions of Nazca is what is known as the Mandala. Depicted in an extremely remote area, it sits atop an arid mountain plateau, causing confusion among those who have been able to observe it directly.
The Mandala is considered a ritual symbol in Indian religions and represents the universe. Today, the mandala has become a generic term used to describe any diagram, chart or geometrical pattern that represents the cosmos. The Mandala also symbolizes the notion that life is, in fact, a never ending cycle. But what is it doing in Peru? Who created it… and for what purpose?
The Mandala at Nazca seems to have been carved with extreme precision and detail, created on the ground measuring around 180 feet across, with an inner circle of the same diameter. In addition, several other smaller circles, approximately 20 feet in diameter are etched in the landscape along with a series of strategically placed holes.
The Ancient Hindus were among the first people on the planet to use a Mandala spiritually, but the most famous Mandala most of us know are in fact made by Buddhists. In Ancient Sanskrit, mandala means ‘circle’, even though the depiction of the symbol may be dominated by a set of squares or triangles, the mandala as a whole is a concentric creation.
Archeologists today have failed to understand, or even ask, how an ancient symbol, that originated half-way around the world, got to a remote, arid mountain near Nazca.
Interestingly, according to some local legends, the mysterious Incan creator god Viracocha, commissioned the Nazca Lines and glyphs in the past. These lines are said to be created by the Viracocha himself. He was the great teacher God of the Andes.
Viracocha was one of the most important deities in the Inca pantheon and seen as the creator of all things or the substance from which all things are created, and intimately associated with the sea.
According to the myth recorded by Juan de Betanzos, Viracocha rose from Lake Titicaca (or sometimes the cave of Pacaritambo) during the time of darkness to bring forth light.
You can see many more examples of Naca lines images on a simple image search.
Green Climate Fund: Where Big Banks Profit Again from Crisis They Helped Create April 1 2016 | From: CommonDreams Letting big financial institutions manage climate adaptation funds 'would pose serious reputational and moral risk' to global body
"There is no profit to be made in building the resilience of those adversely impacted by climate change," says Sam Ogallah of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance.
As the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the financial mechanism for the UN climate agency, meets this week in South Korea, more than 170 civil society groups are calling on the international body to reject bids from big banks HSBC and Crédit Agricole to receive and manage funds to help poorer nations tackle climate change.
Comment: This is poetry. A farce within a farce. Zombie banks, completely unnecessary fossil fuels and fraudulent man-made climate change (minus the chemtrails) all mixed up into a NWO clusterf*ck.
Given their role in financing climate pollution and their poor records on human and environmental rights, approving the financial giants' applications would run counter to the Fund's goals, the groups say.
"Creating new business for big banks with large fossil fuel portfolios and poor records on human rights and financial scandal would undermine the very purpose of the Fund,"said Karen Orenstein of Friends of the Earth U.S. on Monday.
"There is no profit to be made in building the resilience of those adversely impacted by climate change," added Sam Ogallah of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance.
"Public funds must be used to support local communities in developing countries, not to subsidize big banks."
What's more, "accrediting HSBC and Crédit Agricole would be inconsistent with...the Paris Agreement," said Annaka Peterson of Oxfam, referring to the deal hammered out at the COP21 climate talks.
"Any private sector partner of the GCF must have a credible strategy in place to make its entire portfolio and operations consistent with keeping global temperature rise to no more than 2 °C, let alone well below 1.5 °C."
Friends of the Earth, Pan African Climate Justice Alliance, and Oxfam are just three of 172 NGOs that released a statement (pdf) earlier this month arguing that offering accreditation to HSBC and Crédit Agricole:
"Would pose serious reputational and moral risk to the GCF" due to the banks' historic conduct.
Well-documented involvement in recent money laundering or other fiduciary mismanagement scandals;
Large exposure to the coal industry and other climate polluting sectors; and
Poor-quality policies and weak compliance arrangements meant to manage the social, gender, and environmental impacts of their lending, and consequent harm on-the-ground.
For example, a report from BankTrack has shown that HSBC and Crédit Agricole provided $7 billion and $9.5 billion, respectively, to the coal industry between 2009 and 2014, "and their coal financing does not show a clear downward trend," notes BankTrack's Yann Louvel.
The Fund's board meeting runs Tuesday through Thursday in Songdo, South Korea. GCF executive director Héla Cheikhrouhou told the Thomson Reuters Foundation last week that she will ask for an increase of between 80 and 120 new staff in order to meet its targets. She also said it was too early to say whether the Fund could meet the board's goal to allocate $2.5 billion in 2016.
This isn't the first time the Fund has engendered criticism from climate justice groups or frontline communities, who say developed nations, despite their role in driving global warming, have been slow to pony up the necessary - and just - financing.
Last year, environmental and social justice organizations expressed outrage when the Fund accredited Deutsche Bank, one of the world’s largest financiers of coal, to receive and distribute climate adaptation and mitigation funds.
"We want the Green Climate Fund to succeed," groups wrote at the time. "But for it to do so, it needs to change direction away from accrediting controversial big banks that are heavily invested in fossil fuels and thus actually exacerbating climate change. If the [Green Climate Fund] continues in such a direction, this would reinforce our fears that in the near future we may have to protest an institution we have thus far been supportive of and integral to creating."
Devil Music: A History Of The Occult In Rock & Roll April 1 2015 | From: Medium
From The Beatles and the Stones to Led Zep, Alice Cooper and Black Sabbath, how the dark arts cast a spell on popular music.
On June 1, 1967 the most famous musicians in the world released a new long-playing record whose jacket depicted a gallery of unconventional personalities and one individual whose unconventionality was infamous.
The Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band was a widely anticipated album that confirmed the band’s status as the defining tastemakers of their time. It was the soundtrack to the blissful “Summer of Love,” it firmly established the primacy of psychedelic rock music, and it was hailed as a musical breakthrough that offered a mass audience a representation of the marijuana and LSD sensation in sound.
Today Sgt. Pepper is remembered as the classic album of the classic rock era, notable for its pioneering recording techniques and enduring Beatle songs (“With a Little Help From My Friends,” “Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds,” “A Day in the Life”), although the group’s earlier and later music has aged more successfully.
Even the album’s cover is considered a landmark in the field of record packaging from the years when music was actually presented on physical discs in physical sleeves and millions of fans studied the jacket photo and the puzzling assembly of figures it depicted.
Photographed by Michael Cooper, the Sgt. Pepper cover shot had taken place on March 30, 1967. The Beatles, innovating with every step, decided on a layout that broke with their habit of simply posing the quartet alone in a single portrait. Designer Peter Blake, a rising star in London’s Pop Art world, later recalled conferring with the Beatles and art gallery owner Robert Fraser on a different approach to the design:
“I think that that was the thing I would claim actually changed the direction of it: making a life-sized collage incorporating real people, photographs, and artwork.
I kind of directed it and asked the Beatles and Robert (and maybe other people, but I think it was mainly the six of us) to make a list of characters they would like to see in a kind of magical ideal film, and what came out of this exercise was six different sets of people.”
The result was a group shot of almost seventy people, with the four costumed Beatles as the only live bodies in the picture. Among the selections picked by the Beatles, Blake and Fraser were admired contemporaries Bob Dylan and writer Terry Southern; movie stars Fred Astaire, Laurel and Hardy, Tony Curtis, Marlon Brando and Marilyn Monroe; and a number of artistic and literary outlaws Edgar Allan Poe, William S. Burroughs, Aubrey Beardsley, Dylan Thomas, and Oscar Wilde. And in the top left corner of the collection, between the Indian yogi Sri Yukteswar Giri and the nineteen-thirties sex symbol Mae West, glared the shaven-headed visage of a man once known as “the Wickedest Man in the World.”
The original Aleister Crowley shot used for the cover of
Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club
His name was Aleister Crowley.
Most accounts name Paul McCartney as the Beatle who picked Crowley, although the foursome’s more controversial choices of Adolf Hitler, the Marquis de Sade, and Mahatma Gandhi were dropped from the collage.
What McCartney knew of Crowley was probably superficial; his subsequent life and work makes no reference to Crowley whatsoever, but in 1967 the Beatle was highly attuned to the prevailing vogues of young Britain and America and the burgeoning counterculture.
At the same time, Peter Blake’s specialty was in “found” pictures from decades past: the Pop sensibility of exhibiting rediscovered advertising and newspaper illustrations with a distancing layer of irony.
Together the musician and the designer were sensitive to the revival of Victoriana that characterized British graphics and style in the later sixties (seen, for example, in the uniforms of the Sgt. Pepper bandsmen and the circus poster that inspired the lyrics to the album’s “Being For the Benefit of Mr. Kite”), and Aleister Crowley, born in 1875, was part of that revival.
The Crowley photo used by Blake had been photographed by Hector Murchison in 1913 and, thanks to its promotion by the Beatles, became the most recognizable image of him.
Like three of the other cover subjects, the “decadent” artist Aubrey Beardsley, the proto-surrealist author Lewis Carroll, and the scandalous writer Oscar Wilde, Crowley’s reputation was gradually being rehabilitated for a more tolerant time. He was no longer an affront to Britannic majesty but a martyr to moral hypocrisy.
Born into a brewing fortune and raised in a fanatically religious household, Edward Alexander Crowley was, in some ways at least, a typical product of his class. He was wealthy enough to avoid regular employment from youth onwards; studied at Cambridge and travelled broadly (sometimes on perilous climbing expeditions in Britain, Europe, and Asia); wrote and self-published prose and poetry; adventured sexually with women and men; and freely partook of alcohol, stimulants, and opiates.
Had this been all there was he might have been remembered as just another fin-de-siècle libertine, but Crowley had another pursuit that was not merely the vice of a privileged dandy but an all-consuming passion. Such was his irreverence and appetite for transgression, obvious even as a child, that his mother labeled him as “the Great Beast,” taken from the apocalyptic Book of Revelation.
For the remainder of his life Crowley adopted and sought to live up to the designation, preaching and practicing his abiding tenet: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of law.”
Aleister Crowley’s earthly exploits were a story of substantial literary gifts and metaphysical scholarship in service to an arrogant and abrasive personality. He could both impress with his brilliant mind and intimidate with his vicious head-games.
“I took an immediate dislike to him,” recounted the novelist Somerset Maugham of his meeting Crowley in Paris in the early 1900s, “but he interested and amused me. He was a great talker and he talked uncommonly well…
He was a liar and unbecomingly boastful, but the odd thing was that he had actually done some of the things he boasted of. Crowley told fantastic stories of his experiences, but it was hard to say whether he was telling the truth or merely pulling your leg.”
Maugham would go on to base the villainous title character of Oliver Haddo in his The Magician on Crowley.
Aleister Crowley’s The Book of the Law
Intelligent and cultured yet selfish and domineering, Crowley had joined the Order of the Golden Dawn mystical sect but fell afoul of its leadership and formed his own circle, the Order of the Silver Star; his “Great Operation” was the transcription of The Book of the Law, as dictated by the spirit Aiwass through his wife Rose in Cairo in 1904.
A succession of spouses, lovers, disciples and intimates passed through his life.
He exiled himself to America during World War I, formed a ragtag cult of believers at a Sicilian abbey in the early nineteen-twenties, and lost a much-publicized libel suit in 1933.
At his height he was a figure of international notoriety for the diabolic excesses of his lifestyle and his gleefully blasphemous writings and art (he even signed his name with an unmistakably phallic A), but his money and press appeal gradually ran out.
Crowley’s voluminous treatises on yoga, chess, poetry, Tantric sex, mountaineering and the lost arts of what he always called “magick” drew a steady audience of devotees, yet by the end of his life only a few remained committed.
He died in a boarding house near Hastings, England, in 1947, addicted to heroin and largely forgotten by the countrymen he had once so shocked. To one witness, his last words were, “Sometimes I hate myself.”
But it was Crowley’s “Do what thou wilt” that the youth of 1967, both the members of the Beatles and the group’s countless listeners across the globe, most appreciated. To them, Crowley was not a wicked man but one well ahead of his time, who anticipated the later generation’s rejection of outmoded pieties of duty and restraint.
What Crowley stood for, ultimately, was self-gratification: no mere aimless indulgences but the healthy and liberating pursuit of one’s deepest will and desires against the soulless and shallow expectations of authority.
Crowley’s elaborate credo of Thelema (Will) gave young people’s enjoyment of sex, drugs, and rock ’n’ roll a dimension beyond their immediate pleasures; from a Crowleyan perspective, such joys could be considered sacred.
“We suppress the individual in more and more ways,” ran Crowley’s 1938 introduction to The Book of the Law.
“We think in terms of the herd. War no longer kills soldiers, it kills all indiscriminately. Every new measure of the most democratic and autocratic governments is Communistic in essence. It is always restriction. We are all treated as imbecile children.”
These sentiments underlay the complaints voiced by the marchers and demonstrators of the sixties. Though Crowley is but a footnote in the Beatles’ legacy, it was inevitable that many of the buyers who scooped up Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and gazed through expanded minds at its cover would investigate his biography and apply his teachings to their own circumstances.
If Aleister Crowley had incidentally also conducted animal sacrifice, vociferously denounced Christianity, and claimed to have called up demons out of the nether worlds, well, those too became part of his legend. That baleful face on the jacket of a milestone collection of popular music was to be the one which launched a million trips.
The Beatles’ nearest rivals in rock ’n’ roll were the Rolling Stones. It was the Stones who really seemed to symbolize the dangerous glamour of the genre and the time. They had no need to put Aleister Crowley on a record cover when they already seemed to live by his dicta.
From their earliest successes they had been cast as a dirty, brutish counterpoint to the happy and lovable Beatles; their music was more aggressive and more obviously derived from the snarling grit of American blues.
The month of Sgt. Pepper’s release, three Stones (Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, and Brian Jones) were in London courtrooms on drugs charges, and by the end of 1967 their psychedelic equivalent of the Beatle album had been released, its title a sneering parody of the royal preface on British passports: Their Satanic Majesties Request. It was only a pun, but it was the first time the Prince of Darkness had been named on a major pop record.
The Stones’ LP Their Satanic Majesties Request (1967) and the single “Sympathy For The Devil” (1969)
Over the next couple of years the Rolling Stones became more associated than any other entertainers with a personal depravity that surpassed that of just hard-partying rock stars. There had been mavericks, bad boys and tough guys in show business before, but the Stones took those prototypes to a deeper level of outrage.
Much of this, certainly, was projected on them by critics and fans who wanted to ascribe to the group more significance than the members themselves wished. And some of their aura really came from their friends and hangers-on, who were already basking in the Stones’ outlaw status and adding their own personal predilections into the mix.
“There were a lot of Pre-Raphaelites running around in velvet with scarves tied to their knees… looking for the Holy Grail, the Lost Court of King Arthur, UFOs and ley lines,” recalled Keith Richards in his 2010 memoir, Life. Jaded aristocrats, bored Euro-trash, and striving Americans, the guitarist recalled, all showed off “the bullshit credentials of the periodùthe patter of mysticism, the lofty talk of alchemy and the secret arts, all basically employed in the service of leg-over.”
It was the famous Rolling Stones, not their lesser-known supplicants, who took the heat for this.
That said, the musicians were infected with the intellectual fashions of the counterculture, and suffused as they were in drug experimentation, they made willing ventures into some of the growing body of Occult literature then in currency: everything from the Taoist Secret of the Golden Flower (read by Mick Jagger while making Their Satanic Majesties Request) and collections of Celtic mythology, to the American Charles Fort’s compendium of reported natural aberrations
The Book of the Damned (1919) and Louis Pauwels’ conspiracy-tinged The Morning of the Magicians (1960). All such work played to the prejudices of the young, the disaffected, the hip, and the stoned.
They confirmed their views that the establishment was lying, middle-class morality was a sham, reality was subjective, and the world could be a magical place if you only knew where and how to look.
The Rolling Stones at an outdoor concert in Paris, 1967 | photo by Keystone-France/Gamma-Keystone
The Rolling Stones’ next album, Beggars’ Banquet, took the implications of Satanic Majesties even further, with its hypnotic and tribal single, “Sympathy For the Devil.” This longtime favorite, which remains a Stones anthem to this day, originated with Mick Jagger’s reading of Russian novelist Mikhail Bulgakov’s allegorical The Master and Margarita.
The literate and sensitive Jagger was given the book (written in 1939 but not published until the mid-sixties) by his then-girlfriend Marianne Faithfull.
“He devoured it in one night and spit out ‘Sympathy For the Devil,’”
Faithfull remembered in her own autobiography of 1994. “The book’s central character is Satan, but it has nothing to do with demonism or black magic… "
Mick wrote a three-minute song synthesized out of this very complex book.” Now considered one of the great Russian novels, The Master and Margarita is a wild satire of life in the darkest days of the Stalinist USSR, with echoes of the Faust legend and appearances by Pontius Pilate and St. Matthew.
With a working title of “The Devil is My Name,” “Sympathy For the Devil” was recorded by the Rolling Stones in the spring of 1968 (the sessions were filmed by Jean-Luc Goddard and incorporated into his eponymous film) and released in December.
Jagger sang his classic first-person narrative of Satan’s presence at crucial points in history including the crucifixion of Christ, the Russian Revolution, the Nazi Blitzkrieg and even the assassinations of John F. and Robert F. Kennedy, with the lyrics retouched to reflect the latter’s death on June 5.
It was a compelling song that, in a violent and tumultuous year, further stirred up an already fraught cultural mood. Yet, as Marianne Faithfull pointed out, Jagger’s devilish act was completely affected.
“The only reason that the Stones were not destroyed by the ideas they toyed with is that they never took them as seriously as their fans,” she recalled.
“Mick never, for one moment, believed he was Lucifer.” No, but plenty of others were far more credulous.
The Rolling Stones’ link to the Occult did not end with “Sympathy For the Devil.” Keith Richards’ partner, Anita Pallenberg, was a wickedly beautiful German model who, herself caught up in the vortex of drugs and debauchery in the band’s orbit, was rumored to be a practitioner of the dark arts. Faithfull again: “Anita eventually took the goddess business one step further into witchcraft.
There were moments, especially after Brian [Jones, original Stone] died, where she went a little mad.” It didn’t help that she was cast with Jagger in the film Performance, in which a London gangster (played by James Fox) changes identities with a decadent rock star (Jagger, naturally).
Keith Richards considered the director, Donald Cammell, “a twister and a manipulator whose only real love in life was fucking other people up,” but Pallenberg appeared to enjoy her nude scenes with Jagger and another member of their threesome, Michelle Breton.
It made for a twisted atmosphere of jealousy and orgiastic dissipation which, whether Pallenberg really was or thought of herself as a sorceress, definitely made the rumors plausible.
Still the Occult links deepened. The American underground filmmaker Kenneth Anger was in London and, via his connections with gallery owner and socialite Robert Fraser, approached the Rolling Stones to play in his latest project, Lucifer Rising. Anger was older than the Stones and their followers (he was born in 1927), a one-time Hollywood child actor and author of the vitriolic tell-all Hollywood Babylon, and not least of all a devout student of Aleister Crowley.
His low-budget shorts Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome, Scorpio Rising and Fireworks were unintelligible cinematic collages of Occult motifs, sadomasochism, pop appropriations, and gay male erotica. Anger described himself as a warlock and was deadly serious about his work; he corralled Mick Jagger into doing an abstract synthesizer soundtrack for one of his efforts, Invocation of My Demon Brother.
He also needed money and the attention the presence of the world-famous rock group would lend to Lucifer Rising.
“The only reason that the Stones were not destroyed by the ideas they toyed with is that they never took them as seriously as their fans,” she recalled.
“Mick never, for one moment, believed he was Lucifer.” No, but plenty of others were far more credulous.
“All the roles were to be carefully cast,” Anger said later, “with Mick being Lucifer and Keith as Beelzebub… The Occult unit within the Stones was Keith and Anita, and Brian. You see, Brian was a witch, too. I’m convinced. He showed me his witch’s tit. He said, ‘In another time they would have burned me.’ He was very happy about that.”
But the Rolling Stones, as they did with so many, were only toying with Anger as long as he tickled their druggy fancy. Their real occupation was recording and performing their own music, and they saw earnest outsiders like Anger as disposable nuisances, trying to ride on their coattails and absorb some of their marketability. “Kenneth Anger they thought laughable,” wrote Marianne Faithfull. “Mick and Keith were utterly contemptuous of his satanic hocus-pocus.”
The quintet’s reputation grew yet blacker in 1969, when the deaths of two men were popularly attributed to them. Brian Jones was discovered drowned in his Sussex swimming pool on July 26th.
Though he had founded the Rolling Stones, and chosen their name from a Muddy Waters song, Jones had never been able to cope with their fame and the consequent sexual, alcoholic, and chemical license afforded them. He was, in fact, a very vulnerable personality and suffered bouts of asthma on top of his heavy drinking and drug use; his suspiciously convenient arrests for drug possession at the hands of a head-hunting Scotland Yard did little to help his state of mind.
Jones was no more involved in the Occult than anyone in the Stones or their circle (his witch’s tit notwithstanding), but now the band appeared not just dangerous but potentially lethal. The band was definitely lethal for Meredith Hunter, a San Franciscan concertgoer who was killed by Hell’s Angels at the Stones’ December 6 concert at the Altamont Speedway in California.
Again, the cause of death was more banal than demonic; the weather was cold, the crowd was ugly, facilities were lacking, the show was late, the Angels were brutal and hallucinogens were everywhere. But Hunter, stabbed while the Stones played “Under My Thumb,” was another casualty for fans and foes to take in.
The funeral of Brian Jones
After the Altamont tragedy the Rolling Stones seemed to leave much of their recklessness, or in any case much of their sixties spiritual naivety, behind them. With their next public appearances in 1972, they had entered a jet-set materialism and were no longer considered by their young fans to be minstrels of an imminent revolution.
Their 1973 record Goat’s Head Soup did open with the seductive riff of “Dancing With Mr. D,” which described graveyard trysts, fire and brimstone, and the whiff of voodoo, but by then such references from the Stones were not as inflammatory as they had once been. During this decade other rock ’n’ roll acts had taken to spreading the Occult message, and spreading it more widely, and more loudly, than ever.
One overlooked musician whose music made emphatic allusions to Aleister Crowley was the British rhythm ’n’ blues keyboardist and vocalist Graham Bond. Unlike Mick Jagger or Keith Richards, Bond was no dabbler in the Occult.
He actually believed himself to be Crowley’s illegitimate son - Crowley’s acknowledged daughter died in childhood and he left no legal heirs - and his albums Holy Magick and We Put Our Magick On You listed songs with titles including “The Pentagram Ritual,” “The Magician,” and “The Judgement.”
Though Bond never scaled the peaks of fame and wealth as many of the contemporaries he influenced (his band the Graham Bond Organization became best-known as the source of the bassist Jack Bruce and drummer Ginger Baker in the superstar trio of Cream), his life and works are explicitly linked with the Occult. Drug and career problems, combined with mental instability, drove Graham Bond to kill himself under the wheels of a London train in 1974.
One of Led Zeppelin’s early group photos, 1968
In 1968 the former studio guitarist and member of the Yardbirds Jimmy Page formed his new quartet Led Zeppelin. Signed to the major label of Atlantic Records and abetted by the loyal and fiercely protective management of Peter Grant, Led Zeppelin quickly gathered a large following in the United Kingdom, Europe, and especially the United States, where their histrionic and very heavy brand of electric blues appealed to the restless post-Sgt. Pepper student cohort.
Led Zeppelin bothered little with the typical promotional tactics of earlier rock ’n’ rollers and their record and ticket sales suffered not at all, but what emerged from Page’s infrequent interviews was his dedicated study of the Occult.
“[Y]ou can’t ignore evil if you study the supernatural as I do,” he told a journalist in 1973.
“I have many books on the subject and I’ve also attended a number of seances. I want to go on studying it.”
Throughout the seventies Led Zeppelin was at or near the apex of the rock world, and Page, as leader, guitarist, and producer of the group, was dominant in the band’s Occult reputation. Indeed the other players Robert Plant, John Paul Jones, and John Bonham had no affinity whatsoever for Page’s tastes, but each became, in varying degrees, tarnished by association.
In 1970 Page, now with ample Zeppelin concert and royalty money flowing in, had moved from collecting Aleister Crowley books and other artifacts to purchasing a one-time Crowley home, the Boleskine House, on the shores of Scotland’s Loch Ness.
That same year Page and engineer Terry Manning inscribed the first vinyl pressings of the album Led Zeppelin III with Crowley’s adjurations “Do what thou wilt / Shall Be the Whole of Law” on the runoff tracks, instead of the usual serial numbers.
In 1971 Led Zeppelin’s fourth album was given no formal title but an identifying quartet of runic or alchemical symbols that were later displayed by all four band members in concert; Page’s was an unreadable sigil resembling the word “ZoSo,” which was eventually traced to the Renaissance Italian astrologer and mathematician Girolamo Cardano (c. 1490–1565) and two nineteenth century texts from France, Le Triple Vocabulaire Infernal and Le Dragon Rouge.
Plant’s symbol of an encircled feather stood for the purportedly lost Pacific kingdom of Mu. The gatefold of this album was illustrated with an adaptation of the Hermit card from a well-known 1910 edition of the Tarot deck.
Led Zeppelin’s fourth album and its accompanying quartet of alchemical symbols
In 1974 Page purchased a London Occult book shop called The Equinox, in addition to architect William Burges’s lavish neo-Gothic Tower House in the city’s exclusive Kensington district. When Led Zeppelin founded a boutique record label Swan Song, also in 1974, launch party invitations with the heading “Do What Thou Wilt” were distributed, and strippers dressed as nuns were part of the festivities.
The company’s logo was a stylized rendering of the mythical winged Icarus or, by other interpretations, Lucifer, the fallen angel. In 1975 and 1977 Page performed concerts in a black stage costume embroidered with astrological symbols, the ZoSo sigil, and a full-length twisting dragon.
In the 1976 Led Zeppelin film The Song Remains the Same, a solitary Page was shown on the wooded grounds of his English home; as he turned to the camera, his eyes were made to glow with an otherworldly light. Before Zeppelin’s outdoor Knebworth gigs in 1979, Page investigated the Occult antiques stored at the nearby mansion once home to Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Earl of Knebworth.
U.S. ad for Kenneth Anger and Jimmy Page’s “Lucifer Rising”
Trouble was brewing in the Led Zeppelin camp, however: singer Plant and his wife were seriously injured in a 1975 car accident, and Plant’s young son died of an infection in 1977, shortly after John Bonham, Peter Grant, and two other members of the group’s road crew were arrested for assault backstage at an Oakland concert.
By that time Jimmy Page himself, like many rock stars of the period, was caught up in a serious cocaine and heroin habit.
Page had also met Kenneth Anger at an auction of Aleister Crowley collectibles, where the rich guitar hero outbid the struggling cineaste, and Page had agreed to compose gratis a soundtrack for Anger’s ongoing Lucifer Rising project.
The two fell out, however, as Anger complained about Page’s delays in delivering usable music, while Page was annoyed that Anger had set up an editing room in the basement of his Tower House and was offering visitors unauthorized tours of the premises.
Anger publicly broke with Page in 1976, telling journalists of Page’s drug issues and threatening, “I’m all ready to throw a Kenneth Anger curse!”
Anger finally screened Lucifer Rising in 1980, with assorted shots of himself, Page, a heavily drugged Marianne Faithfull, and Mick Jagger’s brother, Chris.
The official soundtrack was credited to Bobby Beausoleil, an incarcerated murderer and member of the Charles Manson family.
Led Zeppelin formally disbanded in December 1980 after John Bonham drank himself to death in a binge at Page’s Windsor home three months earlier, a year after another young friend of the band was found dead of an accidental overdose in Page’s Sussex residence. In the band’s last years, and for well beyond them, both fans and American anti-rock religious zealots claimed to hear subliminal “messages” in Led Zeppelin’s famous “Stairway to Heaven” when the epic composition was played in reverse. Among the audible sounds therein, it was said, were the following phrases:
"There is no escaping
Whose path will make me sad, whose power is Satan
He will give you 666
Here’s to my sweet Satan"
By then the tabloid press in Britain and rock publications in America had begun to print stories of “the Zeppelin curse” that had wrought such misfortune on the quartet.
In addition to the “backward masking” rumors that attended “Stairway to Heaven” - which reached as far as a committee of the state legislature of California in 1982 - more conjectural whispers held that Page had actually sold his, Robert Plant’s, and John Bonham’s souls to the Devil in exchange for Led Zeppelin’s enormous popularity.
John Paul Jones, the low-key musician’s musician of the ensemble, refused to sign the infernal contract (so went the story) and thereby avoided the deaths and afflictions that struck the others.
These tales reflected Led Zeppelin’s enigmatic album covers, their loud, dramatic records and shows, Plant’s mystical lyrics, and the players’ notoriously profligate personal lives and violence-prone security backup, but they originated with Jimmy Page’s admitted interest in the Occult.
Yet as early as 1976 Page was backing away from the most speculative reports.
“I do not worship the Devil,” he asserted in a Rolling Stone interview that year. “But magic does intrigue me. Magic of all kinds.”
He went on to tell his interviewer, journalist Cameron Crowe, “I’m not about to deny any of the stories… I’m no fool. I know how much the mystique matters. Why should I blow it now?”
After the death of Plant’s child and the “curse” myth that sprang up, Page was more adamant:
“The whole concept of the band is entertainment,” he told the U.K. music paper Melody Maker. “I don’t see any link between that and ‘karma,’ and yet I’ve seen it written a few times about us, like ‘Yet another incident in Zeppelin’s karma’… It’s a horrible, tasteless thing to say.”
Page has never denied his interest in Aleister Crowley and is believed to be a practicing Thelemite and still affiliated with Crowley’s Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Temple of the East), but he told Guitar World magazine in 2003;
“It’s unfortunate that my studies of mysticism and Eastern and Western traditions of magic and tantricism have all come under the umbrella of Crowley. Yeah, sure, I read a lot of Crowley and was fascinated by his techniques and ideas. But I was reading across the board… It wasn’t unusual [in the sixties] to be interested in comparative religions and magic.”
Long after Led Zeppelin’s demise and entering retirement, Page has had to dispel the scurrilous curse and backward masking libels that arose during the seventies;
“I don’t want to get into too many backlashes from Christian fundamentalist groups,” he was quoted in 1995. “I’ve given those people too much mileage already.”
In 2000 he took legal action against a London magazine that published a story suggesting he had cast Satanic spells over John Bonham as the drummer died; the story was retracted and Page was paid damages, which the millionaire musician and Occultist donated to charity.
Allegations around Led Zeppelin came gradually during the group’s life and into its formidable posthumous influence. But in 1969 the up-and-coming Zeppelin had shared bills in Los Angeles with another act that caused a much greater, if briefer, scandal with a flurry of controversial records and sensational concerts in the early years of the next decade: Alice Cooper.
Initially a collective promoted by the master rock satirist Frank Zappa, the Alice Cooper band fused the raucous teenage energy of electric boogie music - simpler and less expertly played than Led Zeppelin’s - with a ghoulish theatricality that was eventually labeled “shock rock.”
The singer was a young Vincent Furnier, a willing participant in the ploy, who soon became identified as Alice himself; the name, he maintained, was taken from a Ouija board session where he learned he was in fact the reincarnation of a seventeenth-century witch of that appellation.
Alice Cooper, 1972
Cooper wore makeup and women’s clothes on stage, performed with a live boa constrictor, destroyed baby dolls before audiences, appeared to hang and/or decapitate himself in climactic noose and/or guillotine rituals, sang songs titled “Dead Babies,” “Halo of Flies,” “Under My Wheels,” “Only Women Bleed,” “I Love the Dead,” “Black Widow,” “Is It My Body,” and the necrophiliac “Cold Ethyl,” and put out albums called Love It to Death, Killer, Welcome to My Nightmare, and Alice Cooper Goes to Hell.
A persistent folk tale held that Cooper had won an onstage “gross-out” contest with Frank Zappa, which (depending on the storyteller) involved the public production and ingestion of bodily wastes. Parental groups and mainstream commentators were outraged, while the press lapped it up.
In 1971 Albert Goldman, music critic for Life magazine, wrote that “The advance publicity for Alice Cooper almost turned my stomach… It’s a frightening embarrassment… What gets everybody uptight is the sacrifice he makes of shame.” For a few short years, Alice Cooper was the ne plus ultra of rock ’n’ roll ugliness: “We are the group that drove a stake through the heart of the love generation,” he told eager reporters.
Before long, though, Alice Cooper (the individual) began to downplay the shock rock label. He didn’t disown his music or his stage routine, but he made it pretty clear that what he was doing was no more than a gimmick that had caught on with America’s frustrated teenagers and their worried moms and dads.
Cooper hobnobbed with old-time show business figures Groucho Marx and Bob Hope, and was seen competing in very non-shocking celebrity golf tournaments. Behind the scenes, he was not a Satan-crazed drug addict but a minister’s son from Phoenix, Arizona and functioning alcoholic.
Casual observers naturally linked him to the cresting Occult wave, given his garish spectacle and horrific lyrical themes, but insiders knew better. Journalist Bob Greene followed the Cooper band on an American tour and noted how unmoved the vocalist was by his own hype.
“He was aware that much of America took his sick, blood-soaked image very seriously indeed, which made him all the more willing to laugh at himself,” Greene wrote in his 1974 chronicle, Billion Dollar Baby.
“Alice was proud of his intelligence and his sense of irony, and in the studio he did all he could to show that the job of playing the Alice Cooper role was just that, a job...[H]e was always eager to demonstrate once again that he was not mistaking himself for the dangerous wretch named Alice Cooper that was being sold to the public.”
During his reign as the king of shock rock, one of Alice Cooper’s opening acts was the east coast American band Blue Öyster Cult. Unlike the headliner, the Cult did not go for blatant scenes of transvestitism or public execution; they had a similar heavy rock sound but with subtler material that retained some air of mystery.
The group’s lyrical themes were often tongue-in-cheek, as was the slightly ridiculous group name, but they were delivered with an intensity (laser beams and exploding flash pots were onstage staples) that made them a popular draw in the mid-seventies.
Much of this was down to their producer, manager, and co-songwriter Sandy Pearlman, a university graduate and occasional music critic who has been credited as the first to use the term “heavy metal” in describing aggressive guitar-based rock music.
Keyboardist Allen Lanier himself formed a curious link between the crunching stadium rock of Blue Öyster Cult’s genre and the cerebral bohemianism of his one-time partner, punk singer Patti Smith.
Blue Oyster Cult
Following the Led Zeppelin model, BÖC devised a series of unfathomable album covers that implied Occult significance, with the M.C. Escher-esque graphics of their self-titled 1972 debut and the next year’s Tyranny and Mutation, followed by the Luftwaffe jet fighter on 1974’s Secret Treaties, while 1975’s On Your Feet or On Your Knees pictured a sinister black limousine in front of an old church set against a storm-tossed sky.
Each of these tableaux featured a cryptic logo said to stand for the scythe of Cronus, leader of the Titans of Greek mythology, as well as being the alchemical symbol for the heaviest of metals, lead.
Like Jimmy Page’s ZoSo, the BÖC design virtually became an Occult trademark which millions of fans adopted onto their own clothes and other accessories. Use of the umlaut in “Öyster,” pointless though it was, began a long trend of employing the intimidating Germanic accent in other heavy metal group names: Mötley Crüe, Motörhead, and so on.
The band’s songs further suggested a vaguely science-fiction or transgressive aesthetic, including favorite numbers like “Dominance and Submission,” “Subhuman,” “Tattoo Vampire,” “Career of Evil,” “Astronomy,” “I Love the Night,” “Nosferatu,” “Flaming Telepaths,” “ETI [Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence],” and the Tokyo-destroying monster riff of “Godzilla.”
Blue Öyster Cult’s biggest hit record became one of the best-known rock singles of its day, and one of the spookiest.
Composed by guitarist Donald Roeser under his far cooler pseudonym Buck Dharma, “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” was a ghostly minor-key ballad of a lovers’ suicide pact that hinted at the lurking presence of Death himself just outside the curtained window and the candlelit room.
The morbid verses fit perfectly with the whispery arpeggios and remains, like Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven,” an anthem of shadowed passions and Gothic power.
It was quoted in a variety of later cinematic and literary works, including Stephen King’s end-of-the world epic The Stand and a televised version of Norman Mailer’s nonfiction book about murderer Gary Gilmore, The Executioner’s Song.
The album it highlighted, 1976’s Agents of Fortune, again featured the Cronus logo and the arcane imagery of Tarot cards (as well as lyrics contributed by Patti Smith).
For the legions of young rock ’n’ rollers who learned the tunes on their guitars or who played the tracks on their bedroom stereos, “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” and other BÖC works were entries to the world of the Occult: accessible yet indecipherable, catchy yet confounding.
Hard rock and heavy metal bands of the late sixties and throughout the seventies commonly referenced the Occult, either directly in their music or as part of their general demeanor. A little-known British progressive rock group, Black Widow, made songs titled “Attack of the Demon,” “The Conjuration” and “Come to the Sabbat,” while enacting sacrifices of nude females on stage.
In 1969 the Chicago-based psychedelic folk act Coven made their own paeans to witchcraft and the black arts; through either a weird coincidence or the intervention of dark forces, their bassist was one Oz Osborne. Black Widow and Coven were perhaps too committed to their ideals to capture a wide audience, but later outfits appropriated Occult trappings for fun and profit.
Gender-bending glam star David Bowie went through an Aleister Crowley fascination, aggravated by the extreme quantities of cocaine he consumed, and mentioned the Occultist and the Golden Dawn in his 1971 song “Quicksand.”
The costumed quartet Kiss appeared in bizarre makeup as an ensemble of mysterious identities; bassist and vocalist Gene Simmons came as “The Demon” and revived classic theatrical trickery to breathe fire and spit fake blood in concert.
Simmons also claimed to have invented the two-fingered heavy metal salute, which zealots detected as the sign of the devil but which the Demon explained was his way of waving back at his audiences while still gripping his bass guitar pick.
In 1977 the savvy marketers in Kiss lent their names and likenesses to a Marvel comic series which was advertised as being printed in the real blood of the group’s personnel.
Australian rockers AC/DC scored a major hit with their 1979 album Highway to Hell, the cover of which portrayed guitarist Angus Young with horns and a devil’s tail, and singer Bon Scott with the Occult symbol of a pentagram dangling from his necklace.
Kiss’ Marvel Comics Super Special boasted that it was “printed in real Kiss blood.”
These small, offhand gestures of busy and ambitious working musicians, some of them chronically intoxicated, were all it took to inspire fans’ excitement. Such was the size of the rock market in these years that audiences devised their own scary urban legends around players who neither needed much good publicity nor bothered to deny bad.
The name Kiss, disclosed the hardcore, was a secret acronym for the group’s role as Knights In Satan’s Service, while AC/DC stood for Anti-Christ, Down with Christ. The Demon and his fellow knights laughed all the way to the bank. “Complete and utter bullshit,” Kiss guitarist Ace “Spaceman” Frehley wrote of the Satanic allegations in a 2012 memoir, No Regrets.
“I remember some on some of our early tours, there were religious fanatics outside the shows burning our records, saying we were devil worshippers. Give me a fuckin’ break!”
Meanwhile, AC/DC’s Angus Young shrugged, “Just because you call an album ‘Highway to Hell,’ you get all kinds of grief. All we’d done was describe what it’s like to be on the road for four years. When you’re sleeping with the lead singer’s socks three inches from your nose, believe me, that’s pretty close to hell.”
But one rock act of the seventies was more identified with the Occult than any other, and indeed became the prototype for hundreds of Occult-alluding bands that have formed ever since. The English quartet Black Sabbath codified the sound, look, and philosophy of an entire subgenre that could only have arisen during the decade.
It was Black Sabbath that most explicitly introduced topics of mysticism, drug use, and despair into rock ’n’ roll, and it was Black Sabbath who spread the unholy gospel of demonology through the whole pop music scene.
In terms of sheer records and tickets sold, Sabbath were hardly the most successful group of the time, and by the end of the seventies the original lineup had disintegrated in personal acrimony, legal and financial woes, and the inevitable substance issues; they are an obvious target being parodied in the hilarious “mockumentary” This Is Spinal Tap.
But their influence on their own and later generations of rock listeners is unmatched. Neither the Beatles, nor the Rolling Stones, nor Led Zeppelin, nor Alice Cooper, nor Blue Öyster Cult popularized the Occult as much as Black Sabbath.
Black Sabbath, 1970
Sabbath were formed in the decaying English industrial city of Birmingham in 1969. The members - singer Ozzy Osbourne, guitarist Tony Iommi, bassist Terry “Geezer” Butler and drummer Bill Ward - were all barely out of their teens.
Like thousands of artists scuffling around the local club circuits of provincial Britain, they were hopeful semi-professional players of no blinding talent or originality, who needed a career break more than a creative epiphany.
By an amazing chance, they got both at once. Playing and rehearsing fairly derivative electric blues under the name Earth, Iommi brought to the band’s practice session a simple three-note sequence based not on the standard I-IV-V sequence of blues progressions (the chords G, C, and D, for example) but on a dissonant, “wrong” pattern that incorporated a flattened fifth note of the major scale, in this case, G, an octave G, and the errant C-sharp.
In other styles of songwriting, such an interval would have sounded merely off, but the heavily distorted and rhythmic rumble of rock played by Earth (in emulation of prominent bands Cream, the Jimi Hendrix Experience, and Led Zeppelin) made the tonal shift highly effective.
It was compounded in weight by the manner in which Iommi detuned his electric guitar, slackening the strings to accommodate his fretting fingers, the tips of two having been severed in an accident at a sheet metal factory where he had worked. Before any words were put on the music, the fundamental sound of Black Sabbath had been established.
“He came to rehearsal one day,” Ozzy Osbourne remembered of Iommi’s innovation in 2001, “and said, ‘Isn’t it funny how people pay money to watch horror films; why don’t we start playing scary music?’ And then he came up with that ‘Black Sabbath’ riff, which was the scariest riff I’ve ever heard in my life.”
Much has been made of Black Sabbath’s standard device (some called it a formula) of using the flattened fifth note or chord in so many of their songs: the liturgical composers of medieval Europe warned of including this in choral or instrumental works, naming it Diabolus in Musica or the Devil in Music.
The term seems to have had more of a technical rather than religious meaning - a reminder to singers and players that some intervals on the scale produced discord rather than harmony - but in the case of Sabbath the grating tones of their guitar progressions were perfectly suited to the lyrics sung over them.
Ozzy Osbourne (Interesting to note that Osbourne often appears on lists of Illuminati family surnames).
According to one legend, the film that prompted Iommi’s suggestion to play “scary music” was the 1964 Boris Karloff movie Black Sabbath, an Italian-produced anthology of three tales where the aging Frankenstein actor was the chief attraction. But the movie itself was closer to the campy Hammer output of the fifties and sixties than the intensely realistic horror cinema that appeared in the next few years.
The real origins of Sabbath’s Occult leanings lay with Geezer Butler. Butler had received what he later called a “severe Catholic” upbringing and as a young man became interested in sorcery and witchcraft, which he read up on in the British magazine Man, Myth, and Magic, books by Aleister Crowley, and the penny-dreadful novels of British writer Dennis Wheatley, among them The Devil Rides Out and To the Devil a Daughter. Highly imaginative and suggestible, he worked elements of each into the verses he provided for the band.
“I was seeing all kinds of things at the time, and not through drugs,” he explained. “I’d moved into this flat that I’d painted black with inverted crosses everywhere.
Ozzy gave me this sixteenth century book about magic that he’d stolen from somewhere. I put it in the cupboard because I wasn’t sure about it.
Later that night I woke up and saw this black shadow at the end of the bed… I ran to the airing cupboard to throw the book out, but the book had disappeared… It scared me shitless.”
Between 1970’s debut Black Sabbath and the final collection by the original configuration, 1978’s Never Say Die, Sabbath’s music and public image offered a portrayal of demonism and the supernatural unparalleled in their medium. Not all their songs were about the Occult; they also addressed drug abuse, paranoia, loneliness, space travel, and even the rock ’n’ roll staple of young lust.
But a significant portion of Black Sabbath material was openly concerned with cosmic evil that intervened in the affairs of men: terrifying tracks including “Black Sabbath,” “The Wizard,” “NIB,” and “Warning”; the pacifist classics “War Pigs” and “Electric Funeral”; the surprisingly pro-Christian “After Forever”; “Children of the Grave,” the haunting ballad “Changes,” and the humanist “Under the Sun”; “Sabbath Bloody Sabbath,” “Supertzar,” and “Gypsy.”
Later incarnations of the band comprised a parade of different vocalists, keyboardists, and drummers, but they still released “Heaven and Hell,” “Lady Evil,” and “Die Young.”
“It’s a Satanic world,” Geezer Butler was quoted in a dubious Rolling Stone article in 1971.
“The devil’s more in control now. People can’t come together, there’s no equality.”
Visually, the band looked like they meant what they played. Their album covers showed a greenish cloaked woman near an English watermill at dusk (Black Sabbath), a sleeper with dreams infested by demons (Sabbath Bloody Sabbath), and a surreal non-reflective mirror (Sabotage). The inner sleeve of Black Sabbath presented an inverted cross. A winged devil served as the Black Sabbath corporate signature.
Their 1976 compilation album featured only red and white lettering against a black background: We Sold Our Souls For Rock ’n’ Roll. All four original members were photographed together wearing crucifix necklaces, and Iommi customized the usual fretboard dots of his guitars with tiny crosses.
An early TV clip saw them playing their immortal “Paranoid” superimposed against a nightmarish backdrop of an androgynous kohl-eyed face. Promotional pictures showed four unsmiling young men peering out from behind imposing masses of hair.
Critics of the time hated Black Sabbath. Influential American reviewer Lester Bangs wrote them off as a “sub-Zeppelin kozmik behemoth,” the Village Voice’s Robert Christgau called their first album “the worst of the counterculture on a plastic platter,” while Parke Puterbaugh declared that “To attend one of their concerts was about as pleasurable an experience as a Gestapo interrogation.”
Black Sabbath, the cognoscenti said, purveyed cheap “doom rock” to drug-addled teenagers already tripped out on the Occult: very loud, very pretentious, and very dumb. Others reacted with alarm to Sabbath’s overt emphasis on the devil and all his works.
“The church went against us in a big way,” recalled Tony Iommi in 1992. But the band’s admirers may have been more problematic, the guitarist said.
“One night, after finishing a show, we returned to the hotel and found the corridor leading to our rooms completely filled with people wearing black cloaks, sitting on the floor with candles in their hands, chanting, ‘Ahhhhh.’
So we climbed over them to get to our rooms, but we could still hear them chanting… So we synchronized our watches, opened our doors at the same time, blew out the candles and sang ‘Happy Birthday’ to them. Pissed ’em off. You wouldn’t believe some of the letters we’ve received, and some of the people that have turned up.”
On the receiving end of all the condemnation were four working-class Britons whose formal educations had ended well before they became full-time rock musicians in their early twenties. They had found a winning approach that took them to fame and fortune in Britain, Europe, and North America, but they were not out to convert anybody to Satanism; they had not even converted themselves.
Like Alice Cooper with his stage bloodbaths and Kiss with their makeup and platform boots, the allegedly devilish Sabbath players all but conceded that they were only plying a pitch that paid off.
“I’ve done interviews with Christian papers where, if I’m talking about how much I respect Jesus, they’ll say, ‘But you can’t possibly respect Jesus! You wouldn’t be in a rock band if you did!’” Geezer Butler has remembered.
“I mean, yes, we liked the idea of what’s beyond, but as an interest,” Iommi clarified. “Certainly in no way as the practice of such. And that’s as far as it went, really.”
For millions of Sabbath listeners, however, whether or not the group’s members practiced what they seemed to preach was irrelevant. They made the Occult an immediate presence in their headphones, on their t-shirts, and at their concert halls. There was no doubting Black Sabbath.
Occult-oriented acts and music, of course, were not the only trend in the rock ’n’ roll of the sixties and seventies. There were folk and fusion, punk and reggae, the easy listening of Linda Ronstadt and the sexy soul of Donna Summer. But the Rolling Stones’ peak period was roughly between 1968 and 1973, the years of Their Satanic Majesties Request, “Sympathy For the Devil,” and “Dancing With Mr. D.”
Led Zeppelin have sold nearly 300 million records since 1969, and “Stairway to Heaven,” forward or backward, is considered their masterpiece.
From 1972 to 1975 Alice Cooper was an inescapable media presence; ditto Kiss from 1975 to 1979. Blue Öyster Cult’s “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” was a Top Ten U.S. hit in 1976. AC/DC’s Highway to Hell was the long-lived quintet’s first million-selling album.
Over 20 million copies of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band have been purchased around the planet since 1967, representing 20 million thumbnail advertisements for Aleister Crowley received the world over. Black Sabbath were finally inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2006.
The group has sold 75 million albums worldwide. Their 2013 album 13 led off with the single “God Is Dead.” For the vast Baby Boom demographic aged from their early teens to their late twenties, the Occult had been brought to them in their lingua franca of rock music.
Much of its conveyance - by performers themselves young and questing erratically for personal or philosophical answers - had been expedient or accidental.
But its reception - by people to whom rock spoke deep truths their elders had long withheld - transformed the spiritual outlook of a generation.
And when that generation turned at last down their radios and put their records back in their sleeves, they found that the Occult was not only available to them through pop songs, and that their elders too were undergoing a spiritual transformation of their own.
Excerpted from Here’s to My Sweet Satan: How the Occult Haunted Music, Movies and Pop Culture 1966–1980 by George Case, Quill Driver Books, March 2016. Available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and other fine retailers.
Hillary Clinton’s Relationship With The Rothschild / Rockefeller Establishment Is Now On Full Display March 31 2016 | From: TheFreeThoughtProject
Hillary Clinton has been deemed a sure bet for the White House, as it’s widely speculated the inflammatory Donald Trump and socialist-leaning Bernie Sanders stray too far from establishment politics to be truly electable.
Hillary Clinton with Evelyn de Rothschild, Bill Clinton and Lynn Forester
de Rothschild in 2003 at the de Rothschilds party to mark the launch of Hillary's memoirs
Buried in thousands of the former Secretary of State’s emails sent via her personal server, are intimations of her close relationship with the infamous Rothschild banking family and hints for a potential Rockefeller-State partnership.
Lynn Forester de Rothschild wrote an email on April 18, 2010, in which she tells Hillary she would “love to catch up” - and “I remain your loyal adoring pal.” Clinton responds “let’s make that happen,” and signs her response, “Much love, H.”
On September 23, 2010, Clinton emailed Lynn Forester de Rothschild (an email chain marked by heavy redaction) saying, “I was trying to reach you to tell you and Teddy that I asked Tony Blair to go to Israel as part of our full court press on keeping the Middle East negotiations going …”
Rothschild responds, thanking Clinton for “personally reaching out to us,” and adds, “You are the best, and we remain your biggest fans.”
A January 9, 2012, email discusses a conference on the environment set to take place at Jacob Rothschild’s “historic estate, Waddesdon.”
On New Year’s Eve 2012, Lynn Forester de Rothschild sent an email to Clinton “praying for” her speedy recovery. “And, my email box is lighting up with all the PUMA’s and their 18M prayers for Hillary campaign,” states the email, which is signed, “Love, Lynn, Evelyn, Ben and Jake.”
An email to Clinton, dated October 15, 2009, from Melanne Verveer - former director of Pres. Obama’s State Department office for Global Women’s Issues and longtime Clinton family insider - states:
"Speaking at UNESCO Monday with the new director on the unfinished Beijing agenda [REDACTED] called to say she wants to give us several million dollars to subsidize a fund to give an annual award for innovation in empowering women that would be a rockefeller-State [sic] partnership.”
Then, on March 10, 2012, Verveer hints at least at a possible locale for Hillary’s future endeavors:
"I forgot to tell you that Judith Rodin offered you a suite of offices after you leave State for your own use at Rockefeller Fdtn, if you’re interested - with no strings attached. She also said they’d be happy to provide you with a month at their center in Bellagio if you just want to read and write in a beautiful place.”
Though none of the emails The Free Thought Project examined appeared overtly damning - thanks, in part, to sometimes heavy redaction - the evidence of Clinton’s comfort with the establishment lends credence to theories of her being the ‘chosen’ candidate.
Numerous emails evidence Hillary’s staff carefully monitoring - and even manipulating - mainstream news outlets as well. Lynn F. de Rothschild told Hillary in August 2009 about a fluff piece journalist Les Gelb was eager to pen for Parade Magazine.
Other emails show an almost paranoid eye Clinton kept trained on the Tea Party and its journalists and mouthpieces.
To reiterate, nothing particularly damning in itself was found in this admittedly cursory search - but the relationships these emails document, alone, evidence Hillary’s concrete establishment roots.
While Trump infuriates the GOP and Sanders’ popular support lacks translation into delegate votes, perhaps these documents support the popular theory Hillary Clinton will be the next president - no matter what.
Donald J. Trump And The New World Order March 31 2016 | From: NewsWithViews Perhaps the greatest surprise to emerge in the 2016 Presidential campaign is the depth of degradation to which the Republican National Committee (RNC) will go to maintain its power base.
Or perhaps the greatest surprise is the players that have emerged to attack the populist candidate, Donald J. Trump.
Fox News and CNN (not exactly philosophically friendly competitors) are part of the scam. It was no accident that the attack against Trump, sandwiched between two candidates of Cuban heritage during the CNN debate, began just before the Texas primary.
Ask yourself one question: To defeat Trump, what was the most important objective the CNN debate needed to achieve? Remember, it occurred in Houston just hours before the Texas primary.
It was critical that Cruz defeat Trump in his home state. Thus the vicious attack against Trump began there and Cruz, as required, won his home state..
The next critical “Defeat Trump” event the RNC needed to surreptitiously implement to prevent any candidate from getting the required number of delegates to get the nomination on the first ballot was to be effectively attack and disparage Trump before the March 5th primaries and caucuses.
What strategy was used to make anti-establishment populist candidate, Donald Trump, look unelectable? It was a two-pronged attack: First, Mitt Romney and second the Fox debate fix. Fix? You bet!
First, the former losing Presidential candidate from 2012, the Mormon candidate from Utah, Mitt Romney, made his appearance.
I mention Romney’s Mormon religious preference only because most Evangelical Christians call Mormonism a “cult” and they represent a significant number in the conservative movement. How did Romney’s comments impact conservative Evangelical Christians who frequently favor Ted Cruz?
Romney made his televised appearance from the Hinkley Institute at the University of Utah, established in 1965. Hinkley Institute is definitely establishment. Some who have given presentations there include Senator John McCain, political activist Ralph Nader, Karl Rove, former Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and actor/political activist Robert Redford.
Seeing the name "Hinkley Institute" on the blue background behind Mitt Romney gave me the chills. You remember the name Hinkley, don’t you? A young man named John W. Hinkley attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan.
The Hinkley family was a good friend with then-Vice President George H.W. Bush. I can find no data on the Internet that ties Hinkley Institute to John Hinkley's family... and I find nothing that disassociates him, either.
President Ronald Reagan was another “outsider” non-establishment political candidate who was hated by the RNC (which forced George H.W. Bush on him as his vice presidential candidate).
Solving mysteries as they appear before your eyes requires insight into historic events that are tied in some way to current events.
So we have Romney, the guy who did not release his tax returns until six weeks prior to the 2012 election, on national television from the Hinkley Institute demanding that Trump immediately release his tax returns.
Under the circumstances – circumstances based on his own behavior four years ago – was this a reasonable request?
No, it was not. People had been demanding for months that Romney release his tax returns and he was not being audited. He did not have tax lawyer telling him to not release his returns because of that audit as is the case with Donald Trump.
Romney did have numerous rumors of hidden bank accounts in Caribbean offshore island accounts floating around... an issue with which he never dealt. This demand by Romney was not only unreasonable, it was evil and based on lies.
He reminded me of the Wizard of Oz who when the curtains are opened is nothing more than a puppet doing the bidding of his masters.
Romney, the guy whose business experience at Bain Capital includes a 22 percent failure rate on his investments, felt that qualified him to make negative comments about Donald Trump’s skills as a business leader? Please!
Trump, who with his 35 years of investing experience has completed thousands of successful ventures internationally has had only a handful of failed businesses. To mention the failures without mentioning his own failures, without mentioning the thousands of successes, was disingenuous.
His lack of success as a venture capitalist didn’t prevent Mitt Romney from denigrating Trump’s handful of failures. Romney isn’t even qualified to shine Donald Trump’s shoes in the world of venture capital investing.
So why would Mitt Romney go on national television and make statements that make him look like a business idiot who deserved his 22 percent failure rate at Bain Capital?
At the moment when Romney put on his performance at the Hinkley Institute – and it was a performance, complete with television prompters – it became apparent that the RNC was manipulating things behind the scenes to set up a brokered Republican National Convention... a convention in which no candidate has the required 1,237 votes to get the nomination on the first ballot.
After the first ballot, delegates are free to vote for whomever they choose (and the State Republican Parties who are supported by the RNC selects the voting delegates).
Fox News became an accessory to the RNC’s brokered convention strategy at its March 3rd debate in Detroit. First, though Fox News talking heads have been patting themselves on the back for their wonderful performances, this was not a debate. It was a planned dog fight with little difference in the way it was presented and the dog fights for which pro football player Michael Vick got sent to prison.
Look at the way the stage was set up. Look at the “let’s have a dog fight” questions that were asked.
As long as there were five candidates, it made sense for Donald Trump, as the leading candidate, to be in the middle of all participants on stage. When Dr. Ben Carson withdrew from the race, the proper alignment should have been left-to-right: Donald Trump; Ted Cruz; Marco Rubio; and in fourth position, John Kasich. But to make Donald Trump the cheese in a Cruz/Rubio enchilada, Trump had to be placed on stage between the two.
John Kasich said it all in one sentence he uttered: “I’m beginning to feel like the only adult on this stage.” The RNC intended for Kasich to look like the most reasonable, well-informed, calmest and experienced candidate on the debate stage.
Does that mean the RNC favors Kasich? Possibly... we need to bear in mind that when Kasich references being part of the Reagan team, he was also part of then-Vice President George H.W. Bush’s team because Vice President Bush became very active in running the administration after President Ronald Reagan was shot by John W. Hinkley.
So does the adult on the stage represent the ideals of Ronald Reagan? Or does he prefer the ideals of George H.W. Bush? Is he just another establishment shill who supports maintaining the current power base that Donald Trump so threatens? We’ll see. It’s a deep, dark hole.
To solve a mystery, you must be able to find the real motive behind the actions of the perpetrators of the crime or the game being played. It is clear the RNC wants a brokered convention. They want to get Trump at any cost... even the cost of giving the election to Hillary Clinton. They are using Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz to make John Kasich look like the only reasonable alternative.
It is doubtful that Cruz and Rubio are aware of how they are being used, but it certainly appears that is what’s happening. It is also apparent that, at the moment, John Kasich benefits from the antics of Cruz and Rubio, neither of whom the RNC wants as President – though Rubio is more “establishment” than is Cruz (who, as Trump says, is a provable liar).
Keep in mind what happens at a brokered convention... which is the RNC’s core motive. They want a brokered convention. To get it, they must stop Trump whose popularity they sorely miscalculated until, surprise of surprises, Trump was storming towards a victory unforeseen by the RNC and it became desparate.
They discredit Trump via lies and misrepresentations – from Mitt Romney’s pretense of concerned citizen to the Cruz and Rubio attacks. Cruz and Rubio end up looking unqualified to be President because they are not acting presidential. Rather, they are acting like dogs in a dog fight. Kasich appears to benefit from the behavior of the two Latino candidates.
As a result, no one ends up getting the required 1,237 votes at the National Convention on the first ballot. After that first ballot, most candidates are free to vote for whichever candidate they choose – and who knows whose names might be submitted as late comer delegates?
Maybe the name will be Paul Ryan – it could even be Jeb Bush. It can be any name the RNC wants as the Republican candidate.
Please keep all of the above in mind and ask yourself what your objective is. If you want a candidate for President who will upset the political power apple cart in Washington, be prepared for hearing lie after lie about your candidate, Donald Trump.
If you want a candidate for President who is no threat to the establishment power base at the RNC and throughout Congress and our courts, the RNC is ready, willing and able to provide you with that candidate.
News Blast to Cruz and Rubio: Neither of you will be on the RNC list to be their candidate. They are using you just as they used Mitt Romney.
This election is all about is Globalism vs Freedom and independence for America as a sovereign nation. The elite (globalists) wanted Jeb Bush as the GOP candidate and Hillary Clinton as the DNC candidate. Both serve the Globalist Masters aka The New World Order.
Well, then came Donald Trump, he threw a big monkey wrench in their Global Utopia plans.
The reason the establishment doesn't want Trump (regardless of what you think of his personality) is because he can't be bought or controlled. They don't own him.
Tyranny And Free Speech March 30 2016 | From: BreakingViews Do you support free speech? How about free speech for climate change skeptics? For homophobes? For racists? For sexists? For white males? For even Donald Trump?
Those who defend free speech, as did the American Founding Fathers, understand it is not about defending speech you agree with, but defending speech you disagree with. Without free speech, there is no liberty.
The State Department diversity officer, John Robinson, has just warned the staff that they may be penalized for engaging in “microaggressions,” which include jokes or other comments that someone who hears them may find offensive.
In a recent letter, he referred to a definition of microaggressions as:
"Everyday verbal, nonverbal and environmental slights, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory or negative messages to target persons.”
In other words, whatever you hear may be considered a microaggression if you choose to be offended.
Such vague and infinitely elastic laws and regulations are the bread and butter of all totalitarian regimes.
Lavrentiy Beria (Joseph Stalin’s head of the NKVD, a predecessor of the KGB) was quoted as saying to Stalin:
"You name the person and I will find the crime.”
The “crime” of microaggression has already been used to stifle and prosecute speech by those who have contrary views in several left-leaning universities, and now it is coming to the federal government.
The climate change lobbyists have been increasingly aggressive in their attacks on free speech.
They seek to silence their critics, who have committed the “sin” of noting their many failed predictions.
George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla was the lead signatory of the letter sent to the president and attorney general asking them to use RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) laws to prosecute;
"Corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
Mr. Shukla “paid himself and his wife $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work.”
Other prominent global warming fear-mongers, who are on the government teat, have also called for “war crimes trials” and even the “execution” of some critics.
Even Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week she has looked at the possibility of pursuing civil actions against so-called “climate change deniers.”
The message: Don’t look to the Obama administration to protect free speech. Which do you find more offensive, a person advocating socialism or a person telling jokes about one-eyed people?
Socialism is an ideology that has resulted in governments killing more than 200 million of their own citizens in the last century. It is based on coercion rather than liberty. It demands involuntary servitude. Socialist Bernie Sanders promises “free” stuff to his supporters to be paid for by the involuntary servitude of others - to which there will be no end.
Having spent considerable time in socialist countries and seen the human wreckage that results, I am offended by the ignorance or venality of those who engage in the microaggression of advocating socialism. Several decades ago, I lost an eye, and in the years since I have been told hundreds of “one-eyed” jokes, even by people who do not know me.
Rather than being offended, I have chosen to enjoy them. Offensive speech is totally subjective, and making it a crime is incompatible with a free society.
The Guardian, a left-wing British newspaper, published an article last year by a woman author titled;
"Why do women lie more than men?”
It reported on a new poll that “suggests that women are twice as likely to lie as men.”
The article goes on to say: “It may be irritating to be told, yet again, that women are more morally slippery than men (just as in Genesis).”
The article goes on to cite several reasons why this may be true - including differences “between masculine and feminine brains.”
All of this may or may not be nonsense, but in cases of women complaining about men engaging in “offensive” speech, it is most often assumed, without evidence, that the woman is telling the truth and the man is lying. In fact, men are frequently not allowed to know who their accuser is or what she claimed was said.
One of the most basic protections of liberty is the right of the accuser to know the specific charges against him or her and by whom. As a result, many innocent men are not given a fair hearing by the human resource departments in organizations and even sometimes by the courts.
The late well-regarded feminist, Joan Kennedy Taylor, argued in her book “What to Do When You Don’t Want to Call the Cops: Or a Non-Adversarial Approach to Sexual Harassment” (Cato Institute) that it is important to understand that men and women perceive things quite differently, and that non-legal strategies which she describes can be far more effective and less damaging than legal remedies.
Law professor Catherine Ross has just written an important book, “Lessons in Censorship” (to be discussed at a Cato book forum on March 16), in which she argues that “the failure of schools to respect civil liberties betrays their educational function and threatens democracy.”
The popularity of the verbally crude Donald Trump might, in part, be a reaction to the political correctness of the political class and timid leaders of organizations who have failed to defend freedom of speech.
The Food Industrial Complex March 30 2016 | From: Priceonomics In 2011, during a debate over the nutritional guidelines for school lunches, Congress decided that pizza counts as a vegetable. And not for the first time.
The American government first proposed that an unhealthy food - if it contains trace amounts of a healthy ingredient - could count as a vegetable in 1981. Looking for ways to cut the school lunch budget, the Reagan Administration suggested that cafeterias include ingredients in condiments like pickle relish and ketchup toward nutritional requirements.
This was not good politics. Democrats and the press had a field day saying that Reagan had just classified ketchup as a vegetable.
"This is one of the most ridiculous regulations I ever heard of,” Democratic Senator John Heinz, owner of Heinz, told the press, “and I suppose I need not add that I know something about ketchup and relish."
The Reagan Administration dropped the proposal, but it soon became law anyway. When the Obama Administration directed the Department of Agriculture to revise school lunch policies in 2011, experts took aim at the rulethat allowed the tiny amount of tomato paste in pizza sauce to count toward the vegetable requirements of each meal.
Any changes made by the Department of Agriculture could jeopardize huge contracts for companies that supply food for school children’s lunches, so the food industry responded with a $5.6 million lobbying campaign.
According to Margo Wootan, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, two multibillion dollar companies spent the most: Schwan and ConAgra, which each had large contracts for pizzas and fries used in school lunches.
Before the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) could make any recommendations, Congress ensured that the push for healthier lunches did not hurt the manufacturers of unhealthy foods. Congress passed an agriculture appropriations bill that would deny the USDA funding to enforce any policies that prevented the potatoes in french fries or the tomato paste in pizza from counting as nutritional elements.
The press again enjoyed declaring that Congress had classified pizza as a vegetable.
Cynics shrugged at yet another example of the government prioritizing the bottom line of businesses that manufacture sugary and salty processed foods over public health.
Yet the one-sided nature of the food industry’s lobbying is puzzling. Where were the broccoli, spinach, and carrot lobbies?
Why didn’t a member of Congress take to the floor with a set of talking points provided by the leafy green vegetable lobby? Why can’t American farmers, who enjoy huge government subsidies, stand up to the processed food lobby?
Part of the answer lies in the economics of the food industry: the profit margins and scale of processed food makers gives them a heft that growers of healthy foods can’t match.
But it is also because “Big Ag” is not in the healthy food business. American farms with lobbying power don’t grow brussel sprouts; they grow grains used to make the high fructose corn syrup in Coke, the starches in processed foods, and the oil in deep fryers.
This is somewhat inevitable, but it is also a self-inflicted wound: the result of misguided government policy that subsidizes Big Macs and Big Gulps.
The Poor Margins of Broccoli Farmers
The words “food lobby” have become synonymous with unhealthy food.
In 2015, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, processed food manufacturers spent $32 million on lobbying while the fruit and vegetable industry spent a mere $3.7 million. Moreover, top fruit and vegetable contributors include the National Potato Council, which protects potato farmers’ interests in french fries, and a company that grows tomatoes for fast food chains.
To understand why the food lobby is dominated by companies pushing unhealthy foods, a good place to start is the huge imbalance between the amount of fruits and vegetables we should eat and the relative size of the fruits and vegetables market.
According to nutritional guidelines published by the USDA and the Harvard School of Public Health, fruits and vegetables should make up 50% of a healthy diet. But the financial value of the fruit and vegetable market is nowhere near 50% of the food industry.
In 2015, American farmers earned under $50 billion in revenue from fruits and vegetables. In contrast, processed food manufacturers like ConAgra, General Mills, and Kellogg each make around $15 billion in yearly revenue.
The meat and carb heavy American diet partially explains these disparities. The Department of Agriculture estimates that Americans eat roughly 50% less fruits and vegetables and over 20% more grains and meat than recommended by its nutrition guidelines.
But it is the economics of the food industry that really explain why the food lobby pushes unhealthy fare.
Processed foods have high profit margins that fund advertising campaigns and lobbying budgets. The importance of branding also leads to consolidation that supports special interest lobbying.
We can see this in the case of cereal - one of the earliest processed foods.
When John Harvey Kellogg and Charles Post sold the first modern cereals in the 19th century, they worried about competitors. Their product was simply processed wheat or corn, and its production was cheap and easy to replicate.
Their solution was to use advertising to create brand names. Charles Post claimed his “Grape Nuts” could cure malaria. The Quaker symbol of Quaker Oats became the first nationally recognized cereal brand. As cereal manufacturers fought over the expanding market, they differentiated their fare through shapes and flavors - and added hefty doses of sugar to make it more palatable.
These dynamics apply to many processed foods: cheap foods differentiated - and sold at high margins - thanks to brand names and advertising. And in markets where brand recognition is key, a few businesses come to dominate. In 2015, Kellogg’s, which is currently valued at $26 billion, reported that of every $1 consumers spent on its cereal, it earned 35 cents of gross profit. (The most profitable vegetable farms earn 24 cents per dollar.)
Kellogg’s has a $26 billion market capitalization because it does not just make cereal. It also owns Pringles and manufactures a variety of processed foods from Eggo Waffles to Famous Amos chocolate chip cookies.
The entire processed foods industry is similarly consolidated. If you follow your favorite snack up the food chain, you’ll usually find that it is owned by a multinational company. PepsiCo owns Funyuns, Rold Gold pretzels, and Sun Chips.
Ritz crackers, Oreos, and Wheat Thins sell under the Nabisco label, which is owned by Mondelēz International. So whenever a federal agency supports healthy foods, it picks a fight with a collection of the world’s largest companies.
It is possible to similarly market fruits and vegetables and sell them at a markup. Honeycrisp apples, which were designed for that satisfying crunch, enjoy a price premium two to three times that of other varieties. “Organic” has emerged as a powerful marketing tool, and prices of kale increased 25% over the past 3 years.
Distributors use tactics like selling produce in convenient sizes (such as one snack worth of baby carrots) to differentiate their products.
In general, though, consumers don’t know or care who grew a certain apple or cucumber. The honeycrisp apple is a rarity, and trends like kale-mania benefit the entire market rather than a single company. Companies do market veggies, but brand recognition is low.
Brands need a year-round presence in supermarkets so consumers can purchase it routinely, but produce is seasonal. Efforts to link recognized brands with a certain quality level and a higher price point is hindered by the influence of weather on quality and prices.
Farmers and companies that grow and sell produce do so at the going rate, which is a leaner business. Vegetable farms have had boom years and can make good margins. One USDA census has noted that the largest vegetable farms had annual sales of $500,000 on margins of 24%.
But that’s still tiny compared to PepsiCo or General Mills, and the average farm actually loses value and relies on supplemental, non-farm incomes.
The term processed foods also applies to more than just Oreos and Doritos. When we think of pasta sauce, we normally don’t think of junk food. But as Michael Moss writes in the New York Times Magazine, products like Prego pasta sauce contain huge amounts of salt and sugar, just like potato chips and cereal.
The processed food industry, then, is profitable, politically powerful, and more enormous than we realize. Is it any surprise that the food lobby is synonymous with unhealthy foods?
The McDonaldization of the American Farm
While the economics of processed foods can explain their dominance over fruits, vegetables, and healthier fare, it may still seem surprising.
After all, American farmers receive billions of dollars in annual subsidies, and the American Farm Bureau often spends millions of dollars lobbying Congress to protect those subsidies and farmers’ interests. So why aren’t American farmers as successful in pushing legislation that favors fresh produce and “real food” as they are at winning subsidies?
The answer lies in recognizing that the prototypical American farm does not produce healthy food.
The idyllic farms show in Whole Foods advertisements - farms with a variety of crops and livestock - are not representative of American agriculture. As food journalist Michael Pollan has written, America’s large commercial farms are monocultures, meaning they specialize in a single crop, which is usually a grain. Together, corn and soy account for almost 50% of all American crop revenues.
According to Rosamond Naylor and Walter Falcon of Stanford, America’s corn crop is used to produce half of the sweeteners Americans consume every year in beer and soda. The majority of the crop goes toward feeding cattle (46%) and ethanol production (25%). Corn also provides the starchy base for processed foods and the oil for McDonald’s deep fryers.
The dominance of grains in American agriculture is not unusual. Just four grains - corn, wheat, rice, and soy - account for so much of global agricultural output that economists modelling food prices only look at the market for these grains.
Naylor and Falcon note that countries’ agriculture policy (including that of the United States) has been to increase the yields of these grains. After all, higher yields mean more productive farms, wealthier farmers, more food, and less hunger.
The American government has intervened extensively in agriculture since the Great Depression, and as food writer Michael Pollan notes, its subsidies and programs encouraged large farms that specialized in growing a single grain.
The government promoted the research and production of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and higher yield grains, and the Department of Agriculture encouraged farms to “get big or get out.”
The government did not dole out decades of subsidies indiscriminately; it subsidized the production of corn, soybeans, wheat, and rice at a large scale.
In some ways, these policies have been a great success. American farms are profitable and productive: the average corn belt farmer produces enough crops to feed 140 Americans and makes around $200,000 in income. The average American now enjoys half a pound of meat per day - an amount once considered princely.
But the government's calorie-maximizing policies no longer make sense in a country as troubled by obesity as by hunger. In its push for large monocultures, and in order to buy the peace of specialized vegetable farms, the USDA prohibited farms that receive grain subsidies from growing fruits and vegetables. (An ironic example of vegetable farmers flexing their lobbying muscles.)
This puts the government in the insane position of subsidizing the cost of fast food while actively prohibiting more farms from growing fruits and vegetables.
Even farm animals, which are cheaper to raise when they can be fed with subsidized grain, have a mixed nutrition record. Most nutritionists consider meat part of a healthy diet, but they also believe Americans eat too much meat.
In addition, grain subsidies, as well as the lack of any policy prohibiting the regular use of antibiotics in animal feed, enable farmers to raise animals at scale in confined areas. (The antibiotics keep animals alive in the filthy conditions of small cages.) Cheap meat is a great luxury, but this system makes McDonald’s hamburgers and Kentucky Fried Chicken cheaper than healthier foods.
America’s large, profitable farms spend millions on lobbying each year and enjoy substantial access to lawmakers. The problem is that almost none of these farms provide a counterweight to manufacturers of junk and processed foods. Thanks in part to outdated and politically-expedient agricultural policy, farms’ lobbying power protects french fries, Big Macs, and soda rather than leafy greens.
The Food Pyramid’s Corrupt Foundation
With this understanding of America’s food industry and its lobbying prowess, we can understand a certain mystery behind the food pyramid: why it promoted a diet at odds with the advice of nutritionists for nearly 20 years.
In 1992, the United States Department of Agriculture unveiled the food pyramid, its guide to healthy eating.
Thanks to government efforts to publicize it - pushing it into doctors’ offices and home economics classes - the majority of Americans recognize the food pyramid.
The nutritional guidelines behind the food pyramid also inform policy like school lunches and food stamps, making it the country’s most influential nutrition document.
During its 24-year lifespan, the food pyramid has changed significantly. The base of the original pyramid contained loaves of bread, plates of pasta, and bowls of cereal. But in the ‘food plate’, which replaced the pyramid in 2011, grains only take up 20% of the plate, which is dominated by fruits and vegetables.
The changes do not represent a new understanding of nutrition; the story of the food pyramid is the most highly visible demonstration of the food and agriculture sectors’ lobbying prowess.
Dr. Luise Light is a nutrition expert and led the team at the Department of Agriculture that made the original recommendations for the food pyramid. If you review her original recommendations, they sound similar to dietary advice given by nutritionists today: lots of vegetables, more lean sources of protein like fish and nuts, and less dairy and processed foods.
Those guidelines, according to Dr. Light, did not survive their trip to the office of the Head of the Department of Agriculture.
She has described herself as “shocked” by the changes that were made. Her team placed fruits and vegetables at the base of the pyramid and whole-grain breads and cereals further up.
The new guidelines not only switched carbohydrates to the base of the pyramid, they moved processed foods like crackers and corn flakes, which Dr. Light and her team had placed at the top of the pyramid with chocolate, to the base too. Even with all the edits, the food pyramid was not released for another 12 years.
With an understanding of the food lobby, it’s not hard to understand why. The companies that make processed foods and the large American farms that grow grains wanted to see carb-heavy foods promoted at the base of the pyramid; the tiny leafy greens lobby could not make its voice heard.
As in 1992, every five years, when the Department of Agriculture revisits its nutrition guidelines, the food industry gears up by releasing floods of reports, nominating friendly (and on-salary) researchers to be part of the USDA committee reviewing the policies, and appealing to allies in Congress and the White House.
This means that new policies are always a battle between public-interest organizations pushing for healthier guidelines and a food lobby working to subvert them. The result is that improving our food policy - at best - takes a step backward for every two steps forward.
The American government wields enormous influence over our diet. Federal policy shapes our farm system to a remarkable degree and sets the lunch menu for millions of schoolchildren. As long as food lobbyists overwhelmingly represent the makers of unhealthy food, health advocates will always struggle to push policy in a healthier direction.
To some extent, this is inevitable. The profit margins for making a branded bar of sugar are better than for growing brussel sprouts, which creates more money for lobbying against labelling laws, sugar taxes, and so on. But the current status quo, in which American farms grow crops for unhealthy products like high fructose corn syrup, is the result of outdated agricultural policy.
"Good advice about nutrition conflicts with the interests of many big industries,” Michael Jacobson, co-founder of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, has said, “each of which has more lobbying power than all the public-interest groups combined.”
But the real problem is that manufacturers of unhealthy food are so powerful that those interests groups are always the pushing snack foods rather than fruit.
There’s a lot of money to be made selling obesity foods, and you can’t move America [the world] in a healthier direction without confronting the salty, sugary, finger-licking, just-one-more-chip financial firepower of the food industrial complex.
Putin: Human Evolution Under Big Threat From GMOs, Vaccines
+ Media Struggles To Pin Stupid Label On Well-Educated Vaccine Dissenters March 29 2016 | From: NatrualNews / Sott / Various Those who support vaccine choice and oppose genetically modifying our food chain have an unlikely ally: Russian President Vladimir Putin.
As reported by the Health Freedom Alliance, a report that was prepared by the Russian Security Council (SCRF), a report which is currently circulating within the Kremlin, says that Putin has given orders to protect the Russian people from GMO "food" as well as Western pharmaceuticals "at all costs."
"... some parents may feel uncertain about vaccines partly because they're skeptical of pharmaceutical companies, whose profit motives mix with their vaccine-promotion campaigns.
And while state governments can mandate immunization, this may end up pushing parents away from the public-school system if they feel that regulations are forcing them to make certain decisions about their children's health."
"We as a species have the choice to continue to develop our bodies and brains in a healthy upward trajectory, or we can follow the Western example of recent decades and intentionally poison our population with genetically altered food, pharmaceuticals, vaccinations, and fast food that should be classified as a dangerous, addictive drug," says the report.
"We must fight this. A physically and intellectually disabled population is not in our interests," the report added.
As further reported by the Health Freedom Alliance:
"Describing the average government-controlled Westerner as an 'intensively vaccinated borderline autistic fat man slumped in front of a screen battling a high-fructose corn syrup comedown,' the report states that such tactics used by governments to subjugate their citizens are not only 'dark/evil' but 'counter-productive in the medium to long term.'"
'Largest World Supplier of Healthy, Ecologically Clean and High-Quality food'
Under Putin, who is a billionaire himself, the Russian government has been giving away land for free over the past few years to anyone who is willing to plant and farm organically and sustainably, with the goal of becoming the world's "leading exporter" of non-GMO foods that are based on "ecologically clean" production.
The report comes just a few months after the Kremlin announced that it planned to halt production of all GMO foods, seen by the international organic community as a major step in the fight against multinational GMO pushers like Monsanto and Syngenta.
And Russia is continuing to lead the way in organic, natural food production.
In December, RT.com reported on Putin's intent to become the world's biggest organic food producer.
At the same time, Putin condemned U.S. food manufacturing, as well as food production in other countries, for no longer offering high quality, healthy and ecologically clean food.
"We are not only able to feed ourselves taking into account our lands, water resources – Russia is able to become the largest world supplier of healthy, ecologically clean and high-quality food which the Western producers have long lost, especially given the fact that demand for such products in the world market is steadily growing," the Russian leader said in a speech to Parliament.
Food self-sufficient and GMO free
Putin added that Russia had become a net exporter of food rather than an importer.
"Ten years ago, we imported almost half of the food from abroad, and were dependent on imports. Now Russia is among the exporters.
Last year, Russian exports of agricultural products amounted to almost $20 billion - a quarter more than the revenue from the sale of arms, or one-third the revenue coming from gas exports," he said, noting that the country was on track to becoming completely food-self-sufficient by 2020.
In January, the Russian leader criticized both Western Big Pharma and GMO foods, the Australian National Review reported, a familiar theme:
"Three years ago, the Russian government was considering imposing a ban on the participation of foreign drug producers in the tendering for public procurement of drugs if there are already two similar drugs created by local manufacturers," the Australian site noted.
"The measure was meant to encourage international pharmaceutical producers to localize their production in Russia and to reduce the share of imported drugs in the total procurements, which was estimated at around 85 per cent. The initiative was put forward by Russia's Ministry of Industry and Trade."
Media Struggles To Pin Stupid Label On Well-Educated Vaccine Dissenters
There have been numerous articles in mainstream newspapers and magazines with titles that disparage anyone who questions the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, disagrees (in part or in total) with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) recommended schedule of vaccines, or opposes the idea of forcing people to get vaccinated against their will.
You can be a vaccine skeptic, a complete "anti-vaxxer" or someone who simply doesn't like the government dictating what one should or shouldn't do with one's body. It doesn't matter.
If you choose to reject any part of the current vaccine paradigm, as crafted by the government and the pharmaceutical industry, you will be put on to stupid list, even though, ironically, it is widely acknowledged that people who choose to chart their own way on the issue of vaccines tend to be extremely well-educated and often have advanced degrees.
In 2014, The Huffington Post published an article titled "Anti-Vaxxers Are Stupid and Contagious." That piece was written by the senior editor of The Huffington Post Canada, Joshua Ostroff, so it wasn't just some random person submitting an article to the publication. That same year, the Los Angeles Times published "Rich, educated and stupid parents are driving the vaccination crisis" and the Chicago Tribune published "Anti-vaccine debate proves you can't fix stupid."
Take a Look at this Dtap Vaccine Insert
The Dtap vaccine insert says in plain text that it causes autism, sudden infant death, apnea, seizures up to gran mal, neuropathy AND MORE. Interesting it is that the standard vaccine side effects - triggering allergies and other normal stuff is not even listed and in their own words "what they listed was prioritized for frequency and severity". So it causes Autism and other horrible brain damage so much that the normal stuff vaccines used to be known for is not even listed.
Yep, but it is glyphosate causing autism, look away from thew vaccines, yes, we have it, It is Glyphosate, look the other way please!
In 2015, Australia's The Daily Telegraph published an article titled "Until they come up with a vaccine for stupidity, anti-vaxxers live on." The newspaper followed up earlier this year with "Just when you thought anti-vaxxers couldn't get more stupid."
These are only a handful of the articles you can find with the word "stupid" or a variation of it in the title.
There are countless other articles in the mainstream press with words in the title that convey a similar message. It is unclear what the owners, editors and writers of reputable publications believe they stand to gain from this form of journalism.
Common sense might tell you that it's not such a good a idea to insult a segment of your audience.
Interesting enough, there may be emerging a shift in another direction. Last year, NBC News published an article titled "Don't Call Them Dumb: Experts on Fighting the Anti-Vaccine Movement."
The piece, written by Maggie Fox, suggested that belittling people with regard to vaccines may, in fact, be helping them attract sympathizers because many people don't like to see others being abused, and "some of the criticism on cable television, social media and in mainstream newspapers and magazines is starting to look like bullying."
More recently, Emma Green's article in The Atlantic, is titled "Anti-Vaxers Aren't Stupid." In her piece, Green cites Professor Mark Largent of Michigan State University and author of the book Vaccine: The Debate in Modern America.
According to Green, Prof. Largent, who is an associate professor and director of the Science, Technology, Environment, and Public Policy program at MSU, notes that 40% of parents in the United States have either refused or delayed a vaccine for one of their children.
So why is it that so many parents are having doubts about vaccines and vaccination policy? Apparently, it has nothing to do with their level of intellect, but rather the low degree of trust they have in the federal government and the pharmaceutical industry.
"... some parents may feel uncertain about vaccines partly because they're skeptical of pharmaceutical companies, whose profit motives mix with their vaccine-promotion campaigns.
And while state governments can mandate immunization, this may end up pushing parents away from the public-school system if they feel that regulations are forcing them to make certain decisions about their children's health."
According to Green, Prof. Largent also attributes some of the skepticism toward vaccines on the part of parents to the "monolithic power of science" - the sense that doctors and medical researchers have an overwhelming amount of power and control over what happens to their children, and that that may make parents uncomfortable to the point where they seek to offset that power and control by doing their own research.
"Faced with this imbalance of power and information, who can blame parents for being nervous and striking out on the Internet for a second opinion?"
Still, Prof. Largent's attempt to explain why so many well-educated people refuse to follow the party line on vaccines does not mean that he believes they are right or even offer some valid points.
To the contrary, according to Green, Prof. Largent has said, "Vaccinology has nothing to learn from anti-vaxers." But Prof. Largent at least appears to be open to "engaging" rather than merely insulting those who hold different views. That's something.
Increasingly, professionals within a wide range of health care and science fields are giving interviews and writing articles and books voicing their concerns about vaccine risks, the misrepresentation of the historical role of vaccines in reducing mortality from infectious diseases, the expanding schedule and number of vaccines mandated, or even the basic mechanism theories behind vaccine science.
Predictably, every time you give the name of a contrarian doctor or scientist in response to the 99.9% figure, what you tend to get is, "Eh, well, he's a quack, she's not credible."
Also, you get referred to blogs such as Science-Based Medicine, or Respectful Insolence, or the Skeptical Raptor's Blog.
They're often written by or associated with a guy named David Gorski, MD, who also goes by the alias "Orac." Gorski is a surgical oncologist and an assistant professor of surgery at Wayne State University School of Medicine in Detroit, MI4.
Should you wish to debunk someone, anyone, who dares to disagree with mainstream thinking on vaccines, all you need do is inform Orac, and the good doctor will gladly oblige by writing up a boorish piece, long on insult and short on science. Orac's methods are painfully predictable.
The Amerikan Way – A Study in Psychopathy March 29 2016 | From: ZenGardner Just look at everything Amerika stands for as a whole. Corruption, greed, violence, military aggression, social degradation, scientific insanity and on and on. It’s footprint on the world is nothing but horrific if you view it in the overall context.
Sure there are good people living there and those unwittingly caught up in the mass hysteria, but they’re participating nonetheless. That accountability won’t go away. Unless they stand up to it and fully withdraw their consent and work to reverse the madness they’re clearly part of the problem.
That’s not an easy spot to be in when the very fabric of the sociopolitical and economic support structure is an every day fact of psychopathic driven existence. It breeds acquiescence, apathy and hence continued participation. A pathetic state of affairs.
Looking honestly at this collective insanity is imperative if we’re to draw any kind of enlightening and empowering perspective.
Breaking Down the Nature of the Psychopathic Beast
Scientists researching the common characteristics of psychopathy now use a list of predominant qualities displayed by psychopaths that they’ve meticulously studied. The characteristics are quite telling and perhaps disturbing, as many can recognize these attributes in people around them.
While they estimate only 2 to 4% of the population are psychopaths, Amerika ranking with a high percentile of those they have identified, they clearly understand that these types of non-empathic dehumanizing freaks gravitate towards positions of power.
See how these attributes ingrained in such ideas as manifest destiny and American supremacism match up to the collective American way of life and its effect on the world of today, following the brief introduction:
The Hare Psychopathy Checklist - Revised (PCL-R) is a diagnostic tool used to rate a person’s psychopathic or antisocial tendencies. People who are psychopathic prey ruthlessly on others using charm, deceit, violence or other methods that allow them to get with they want.
The symptoms of psychopathy include: lack of a conscience or sense of guilt, lack of empathy, egocentricity, pathological lying, repeated violations of social norms, disregard for the law, shallow emotions, and a history of victimizing others.
Originally designed to assess people accused or convicted of crimes, the PCL-R consists of a 20-item symptom rating scale that allows qualified examiners to compare a subject’s degree of psychopathy with that of a prototypical psychopath. It is accepted by many in the field as the best method for determining the presence and extent of psychopathy in a person.
The twenty traits assessed by the PCL-R score are:
I’ll let your own imagination extrapolate each of those qualities rather than break it down as I see it. It’s overall quite stunning that a collective entity could be so blatantly psychopathic and to such a degree.
It’s something to be faced head on.
But really it’s nothing new. This is the definition of the behavior of empires and oligarchies throughout history. Humanity beats and flails its arms over and over when these qualities are recognized on so many humanity exploiting, oppressing and destroying levels but it’s generally been to no avail, according to written records and the whirled we’re witnessing before us.We protest and rant to whatever degree but the show goes on.
So what to do?
The Solution – Awakening
Only a mass awakening can shake the foundations of this kind of destructive insanity. These power structures are built on the fearful allegiance to those who make it possible. When we withdraw our support and participation in these types of foisted machinations they cannot continue.
That may sound vague or simplistic to some but it’s extremely practical at the most basic level. If you’re employed in something supporting this paradigm, leave it.
If you’re giving attention and therefore energy to their charade, including the political, media and entertainment sideshow, stop it. If you’re still socializing on shallow levels of energy, or contributing to the fear and scarcity models by your sycophantic hand wringing and repeating of their fear programming, snap out of it.
Have some guts. Take a stand for truth and love while you still can. Don’t wait for affirmation and some comforting collective movement. Be your own being. Leave your participation in what is obviously wrong and lend your energy to what you know is right.
It couldn’t be simpler. If you’re waiting for the right conditions you’re still firmly in their psychopathic pocket.
Get out now. The hour is late. More on Psychopathy in a terrific film here.
And this exclamation mark! – hat tip Dane Wigington:
Are You Awake? Or Just Informed March 28 2016 | From: ZenGardner This is a very interesting question, and perhaps a provocative one. With the information explosion drastically influencing so many lives there appear to be many strata of awakening levels arising.
Once people start connecting the dots of now available facts and formerly unavailable research, whole new paradigms through which to perceive our changing reality emerge.
What we do with this new information, and how far we keep pursing deeper and deeper levels of perception, determines our outlook at any given time.
This is why constant change and continual learning are integral to progressing toward a full on awakening. As we continue to evolve in perception we begin to see that underlying this deluge of surface information there are amazing consistent truths to grasp and implement that will truly transform not only ourselves, but the world around us.
We Are Our Perception
Even quantum physics has confirmed what the sages have taught through the ages. What we perceive and apply our intention to determines our individual reality. That we are in fact fully in charge of how we perceive the world around us is the underlying truth that is being masked from humanity. Completely contrary to the deterministic model we’ve been taught, our very being is not the result of set factors we can do very little about, but the exact opposite.
We literally are a projection of our own consciousness. The rest is up to us as to how much we let the illusory projection laid before us determine our reality.
When we grow to more fully grasp the enormity of the significance of that fact things really start to kick into gear. This will not be taught nor even implied by matrix scientism, the educational and media web of lies, nor blinding, binding religious dogma.
But once this truth is discovered, in fact experienced as it must be, the majesty of existence opens up to such glorious vistas of empowerment and possibility the very grip of any and all external influences and limiting mind conceptions falls away as if it never existed in the first place.
Because it essentially didn’t. It was only real from a deliberately manipulated limited perception that created a feedback loop of illusion, giving the appearance that there were no other possibilities outside that manufactured realm.
Information is a Tool, Not an Answer
Knowing what’s really going on around us is just the beginning. Realizing that in fact this is an imposed psycho-spiritual prison built on deliberate deceit is simply the gateway. We don’t need to spend of the rest of our lives describing how they do what they do and how bad it is in an almost neurotically hysterical state.
That’s simply another level of containment if we don’t keep on progressing towards a full awakening way beyond the confines and influences of their entrapping infectious system.
It’s surpassing those first orbits as we clear the pull of the dense gravitational nucleus we’re born into that things really start to get interesting. And extremely empowering. We cannot begin to know the deep, essential solutions our souls long for by operating within the externally imposed density as we’ll only reinforce the strength of the spider’s web by our futile struggling. The spider is much wiser than we when we operate within its parameters.
We have to first safely transcend and then operate from a clearly distanced perspective.
Until Then…Don’t Be Intimidated or Enthralled by Shadowland
The beautiful so-called secret key to conscious awakening is that you’ll know it when you’ve found it. If you’re still not sure, your not there yet. No worries, that’s the path we all have to take. Seek in sincerity and you will find. Until then all is grist to mill. We gain strength, wisdom, determination and shed the mechanisms that have held us back as they are revealed to us.
It’s all part of the process.
And definitely, at whatever stage of our awakening, we need to keep exposing the trickery and deceit to help others along the way and out of the net, but we mustn’t dwell there or let it get under our skin, even in our sacred anger and outrage. There’s a time for everything, but if we’re going to realize the true solutions for our planet and its inhabitants we need to first get to where we know from whence we are operating, with a crystal clear vision of what needs to be done from a firm foundation in loving truth.
Even more so, we need to rediscover and realize the true spiritual power tools at our disposal. As we do, and is already happening, our weaponry of truth outmatches their foolish artificial 3-D hardware to such an extent they will be exposed to be the imposters they are – nothing but dark shadows trying to usurp the sun.
Absolute futility, and not a game worth getting caught up in.
It’s only our lower levels of perception that give their illusion any form of reality. Once we transcend and live in the realization of who we truly are this lower level projection we can call shadowland has nowhere to cast its illusion…and it is gone.
The truth is indescribable in mental terms. This is why we are so awed by the ideas of nature, fractals, sacred geometry and this magnificent physical design as the handiwork of something we know is much more spectacular that lies behind it.
Left brained science, even when it’s well meaning, cannot begin to fathom this richness as it seeks to contain this living energy in a form of mental and even scientific egoic dominance. As hard as they try to crack the code with these motives they’ll never do it. They may make a mess in the process, which they are, but trying to understand from that limited mind set is like trying to empty the ocean with a spoon.
It’s a complete exercise in futility all based on the reinforcement of self.
Unless there’s some tangible, “provable” answer, some substantive, explainable, logical something they can see, taste, touch, smell and feel they won’t accept it. Again the self-reinforcing feedback loop that will never be broken. To find real truth you have to find it and experience it for yourself, one hungry heart at a time. When you want it bad enough you’ll find it, or at least the next clue to keep you on your way towards greater truth.
Sure there are many types and levels of truth, but the ultimate truth is fundamentally an ongoing interactive experience with our interconnected consciously aware universe within which we are all magnificently woven. It’s that same creative source we can only barely sense at times, but that we see in the magnificent world around us and the fertile imagination of our sentient hearts and intuitive souls.
Truth Can Only Point the Way – Ours Is to Pursue
These are just hints at what lies beneath these layers of illusion, the lowest of which is this synthetic matrix of deceit that has been deliberately laid to ensnare the hearts of humanity.
Even the physical world is an almost crude five sense manifestation of the intricate workings of creation but what a joy to experience! To realize these are barely fleeting glimpses of much more amazing realities is beyond belief…and that’s good, belief is a limiting containment system. Experience is what we’re shooting for.
Just don’t give up. There are plenty of pitfalls on the way as that’s what this learning and growing experience is all about, so get used to it. Just learn from it and keep on. There are many levels of awakening but each one is more amazing than the last.
What should propel us though is not just the path of wondrous personal discovery, although that’s a big part of it, but to access the resources we need to further dissolve the snare laid for those still unaware of their plight within this lower world of control and deceit.
There’s no greater driving force than the unstoppable power of empathic compassion. We share the pain of all those still trapped and blinded by the the great deception, and by our very connectivity we are love-bound to awaken to our most empowered state possible to help bring about the transformation we are all longing for.
Much love and do keep on, we’re all integral to this process…
Labour Leader Andrew Little Promises Debate On Universal Basic Income March 28 2016 | From: Stuff The Labour Party is considering a universal basic income as part of its Future of Work project.
Leader Andrew Little confirmed his party was exploring the concept during a visit to Trevor Mallard's Hutt South electorate last week.
Little said significant changes to the way New Zealanders worked were unavoidable.
"The possibility of higher structural unemployment is actually what's driving us," he said.
Pure universal basic income (UBI) systems, in theory, would give adults a regular income from the government regardless of their income or assets.
They would replace other forms of welfare, such as pensions, benefits and student allowances.
Although only trialled on small scale overseas, the idea is that a UBI would be set at a level which people could subsist on, but not at a high enough level to serve as a significant disincentive to work.
Little said a UBI would be discussed at Labour's Future of Work conference at the end of March.
"We expect that in the future world of work there will be at least a portion of the workforce that will rapidly move in and out of work," he said.
"The question is whether you have an income support system that means every time you stop work you have to go through the palaver of stand-down periods, more bureaucracy, more form filling at the same time as you're trying to get into your next job."
He said it was time for a debate on a UBI.
"We expect that in the future world of work there will be at least a portion of the workforce that will rapidly move in and out of work," he said.
"The question is whether you have an income support system that means every time you stop work you have to go through the palaver of stand-down periods, more bureaucracy, more form filling at the same time as you're trying to get into your next job."
"We are keen to have that debate about whether the time has arrived for us to have a system that is seamless, easy to pass through, [with a] guaranteed basic income and [where] you can move in and out of work on a regular basis."
Little said advances in technology and changes in personal preferences would affect how people chose to work.
"They're going to move rapidly in and out of multiple jobs over a period of time but there could be some weeks where they get little or no income.
"But they need a basis on which they can go through the down periods as well as enjoy the up periods."
Little said a UBI would make navigating such a work pattern "much easier".
He also exposes how many popular Hollywood celebrities are working with the New World Order (NWO).
Hollywood is one of the Controllers’ favorite tools to use for manipulating and controlling our minds. When you split the word hollywood into two words, it becomes “holly wood“. The word holly is defined as “any of numerous trees or shrubs of the genus Ilex”.
The wood of the holly tree was used by the Druids to make magic wands. The Druids believed that the holly had magical powers, which was why they used its wood to make magic wands. Today, certain magicians (I am not talking about fake magicians) still create magic wands from the wood of holly trees. Hence, the name Hollywood. To this day, the Druids still exist and they still practice real magic.
Do you know now why the most popular entertainment industry in the USA is called Hollywood. It has to do with magic and mind control. The Controllers are using Hollywood to create movies to cast magic spells on people who are not aware of the power of sacred symbols, sound, mnemonics, and words.
If you do not know who Jay Dyler is, he is a writer and researcher of certain topics related to occult knowledge. Here is an excerpt from JaysAnalysis.com about his background:
"I’m a writer and researcher from the Southern US with a B.A. in philosophy, while my graduate work focused on the interplay of literary theory, espionage and philosophy.
My work is here at JaysAnalysis, and is dedicated to investigating the deeper themes and messages found in our globalist pseudo-culture, illustrating the connections between philosophy, metaphysics, secret societies, Hollywood, psychological warfare and comparative religion."
Here is an excerpt from YouTube.com about the video interview below:
"Jay Dyer is on KBS and we get into the esoteric and dark side of Hollywood. We get into the intelligence connections to the film industry, and how the two are closely intertwined.
That launches us into a fast paced conversation that takes a look at the pentagon connection to movies, the secret societies around the industry, the cults, scientology, predictive programming, sex, Kubrick, Sci-Fi,…"
I am aware of most of the information that Jay reveals in the video interview below. If you are new to this type of information, it may be hard for you to accept most of the information as fact. As always, use your intuition and feelings to help you discern the information in the following video.
Dirty Game - Imported Mercenaries March 27 2016 | From: Sott
This is a great resource, providing insight not only into how Syrians see the conflict in which they find themselves, but also into the true nature of Daesh. Aside from the obvious American/Israeli support, these two quotes from the production sum it all up:
"No human being can do such horrible things. No one with human nature commits such savage crimes." - Ashwaq Abbas, Political Sciences Lecturer, Damascus University
And the ones that do have a name: psychopaths.
"These groups commit crimes only against Muslims. Show us what positive measures these groups have taken so far. Have they gone to Palestine?"
- Nabil al-Halbavi, Syrian member of AhlulBayt World Assembly
The fact is, the people most in danger from so-called Islamic terror are Muslims. Daesh has killed far more Muslims in Iraq and Syria than any other group.
Think about that the next time you see someone even slightly "Arab-looking" and feel a bit nervous. And if they're Syrian, not only have they had to deal with barbaric groups like Daesh back at home; they also have to deal with the barbaric bigotry of Westerners who are convinced every Muslim is a potential terrorist.
Statistically speaking, it's an utterly absurd notion.
The Power Elite’s Plans For You March 26 2016 | From: KiwiWatch
Jim Rickards has had the privilege of rubbing shoulders with the elite of financial circles and has been involved in the highest of discussions about economic issues from the Rothschilds & Rockefeller’s down. Now he has shared his views on the agendas the elites have for you and me.
Forget Trump and if you can, forget Clinton although she is simply evil and should already be in prison so I find it hard to put her out of mind. It doesn’t matter who sits in the Oval office at the White House after US elections.
Look how feeble Obama has turned out to be, apart from the Nobel Peace Prize winner being one of the most murderous Presidents of recent years delivering the agenda of the power elites. The people who pull the strings and run the world by in large are not politicians but are almost faceless behind the scenes or in powerful self-appointed positions the President has little say over.
Currently the world watches in amazement the farce that is the American primary elections to select delegates to the national party conferences prior to the end of year Presidential elections. One by one the hopeful candidates are dropping out but this whole parade is nothing more than a disgrace, played out in front of a disbelieving world.
If I was an American I would be embarrassed at this satirical joke consuming the American public (and us) on a daily basis. It has little to do with how the ‘free world’ exercises ‘democracy’.
Regrettably once you dig down a little you find supposedly intelligent people locked in a polarisation that will never deliver to them the hopes and aspirations they hope for similar to the hopes and dreams of those who voted around the time of John F Kennedy.
JFK spoke and lectured about the real meaning of peace and freedom, what it means for every individual and countries; negotiated his way out of a potential nuclear calamity during the ‘Cuba crisis’; and new all to well about the subversive forces that he wanted to confront as that which was likely to erode peace and freedom for individuals.
He wanted to see them broken into ‘a thousand pieces’ so as liberty and freedom is maintained.
That was too much for the elites. President Harry Truman had spoken about this too in his valedictory speech; the corporations, the military industrial complex, the surveillance state, the moneyed elite and that was gathering greater and greater strength in the US.
As we know they took care of JFK; yes I say they shot their own President, blamed a punk called Lee Oswald but more than that they also took out Robert F Kennedy who JFK ordained to complete the task of breaking up the CIA before he became a Presidential threat to them.
Getting shot from behind eliminates the guy they blamed (Sirhan-Sirhan) from being the culprit as he was in front of RFK when he was murdered. But that is history...
So what does Rickards talk about today?
The exceedingly rich don’t necessarily become an elite although being exceedingly rich eliminates one barrier to becoming a Power Elite. Rickards in his March 2016 newsletter discusses the Power Elite’s plan for you and me indeed the entire world.
He says “the agenda of the global power elite is world money, world taxation, world government, a cashless society. The primary long term goal of the power elite is world money.”
He believes that world money will be issued by the shadowy organisation called the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that is supposedly the central bankers central bank. It will set benchmarks for oil prices and other essential goods and services in world trade.
Unelected officials will control money as a means to control societies and social welfare he argues. This will be done he says through Special Drawing Rights (SDR’s) that will be issued not to individuals but to governments.
Close behind world money is world taxation.
"Continual sources of revenue are needed by global elites to enrich themselves and pursue programs to perpetrate their control. The primary path to achieve this is climate change. This explains why the IMF, World Bank, BIS and other ‘financial bodies’ continually speak about climate change.
In order to to impose global solutions (such as taxation) you need global problems (climate Change). Since climate change know no borders it is the perfect vehicle to impose solutions that know no borders.”
"Administration of world money and world taxation will be conducted by world government. Most of this architecture is already in place. The United Nations is mostly a debating club except for the climate change agenda.
The real world government is being conducted through the IMF and G-20 leaders summit.” The G-20 is a de facto ‘board of directors’ for world government. The IMF is a de facto central bank for the world.
“The power elite is also implementing the cashless society. This is needed to in order to impose hidden taxation in the form of negative interest rates. Cash is one way to avoid negative interest rates. With cash at least you preserve the principal but with negative interest rates on bank accounts you don’t.”
It’s like rounding up cows in slaughterhouse pens before killing them! Negative interest rates is a way to confiscate wealth from savers. (Note: it makes a mockery of saving for your retirement).
Club Etiquette and Rules:
He says that although the power elite is not a conspiracy is does function as a club and there are house rules. Violation of the rules results in expulsion from the club. (Where does Trump sit here?)
Rule 1. Elites help elites. A closer example is how CEO’s name other CEO’s to their board of directors
Rule2. Elites never criticise other elites. In this context ‘criticism’ means exposure of the real motives and methods behind the elite game. Election politicking disagreements are allowed but what is not allowed is discussion of the fact that left and right wing elites are in the same club and elections are basically a show to appease citizens.
Rule 3. Silence is rewarded. Elites have access to enormous amounts of ‘inside information’ about policy, plans and back room dynamics. Going onto TV or radio and spilling the beans in some interview or book must be avoided.
Rule 4. Patience pays. Not criticizing your ideological opponents and keeping your mouth shut for decades while difficult has its rewards. Top jobs go to elites, loyalty is recognised.
Who are some of the Power Elite players? A by no means complete list starts with:
Robert Rubin formerly CEO of Goldman Sachs, US Secretary of the Treasury. Look him up he is on the Council of Foreign Relations too
Christine Legarde manging director of the IMF
James A. Johnson, former CEO of Fannie Mae, including director of Goldman Sachs and also on the Council for Foreign Relations
James Wolfensohn former president of the World bank and also on the Council for Foreign Relations
It would pay to look these secretive organisations up. Interesting.. neocon populated and very pro Israel!
Sunscreen Causes Cancer? What You May Not Know About Sunscreen March 26 2016 | From: NaturalNews
Who would think that sunscreen causes cancer?
It has been only a fairly recent development, but it still could cause some serious shock and awe when everyone figures out that conventional sunscreen found in drugstores nationally could be a potential risk factor for skin cancer.
Sunscreens are made to protect and help your body, so why are we finding out that sunscreen causes cancer? It could be simply widespread ignorance, or it could be that the FDA has kept this secret under wraps for at least a decade.
Sunscreen Causes Cancer?
Studies conducted indicate the dangers of certain chemical compounds within sunscreen could be causing a variety of skin damaging ailments, especially when reacting with the sun’s intensive heat.
Though the FDA had supervised and funded the studies showing key ingredients related to vitamin A as carcinogenic, they knowingly prevented the information from being released to the public whatsoever – up until recently.
The synthetic vitamin A compound found in many sunscreen brands contain retinol and retinyl palmitate, both found to react negatively in the sunlight, becoming toxic to the system.
This isn’t to be confused with the health-enhancing vitamin A that is found in many foods – it is a purely synthetic and ultimately useless ingredient. When combined with the extensive use over time, this kind of sunscreen can lead to skin damage in its users.
These aren’t the only things to be worried about when applying your doctor-recommended photocarcinogen, though. Oxybenzone and other vague mystery chemicals are found amongst a wide variety of name brand sunscreens, with many of these having yet to be proven as safe to use at all.
About 8 percent of all sunscreens have been quality tested by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) to be both safe and effective for the intended use, whereas the other 92 percent contain at least one (if not many more) of the ingredients designated as detrimental for human use, further adding to the worry if sunscreen causes cancer.
This means the public not only has been encouraged to buy something that is known to be detrimental for at least a decade, but is only left with a selection that is 8% safe.
Not only that, but the sunscreens widely credited as preventative cures for skin cancer are also the root cause of a widespread vitamin D deficiency – a vitamin shown to slash flu risk and fight cancer. There has also been a connection made between vitamin D and weight loss. Vitamin D production is extremely limited when sunscreen is used to protect the body from natural sunlight.
So, now that there has been some research showing sunscreen causes cancer, the question remains: what will people do about it? On a larger scale, it must be demanded by enough people for the harmful ingredients to be omitted from sunscreens.
Until then, tell the companies using these ingredients that you don’t want their toxic products. Spend your dollar on a safe sunscreen with safe ingredients.
George Soros: A Psychopath’s Psychopath March 25 2016 | From: MacedoniaOnline
According to Soros, Russia’s strategy is to “avoid collapse by making the EU implode first – by exacerbating the migration crisis and stoking Islamophobia”.
On February 11, the Guardian ran an article by George Soros which had run a day earlier here entitled “Putin is a bigger threat to Europe’s existence than Isis.”
After a quick check of my vital signs, I confirmed that I was indeed awake and the article was real and in the Guardian not The Onion. Before I look at the tissue of untruths which make up the substance of Soros’ article, a few general words about psychopaths are in order.
I have met a few psychopaths in my life – a pernicious but small-time example is a real-estate “salesman” in Spain who cost my family a great deal of time and money. The real problem with psychopaths – big-time and small-time – is not primarily that they do bad things, but that we – non-psychopaths – are ill-prepared to deal with the fundamental difference between us and them.
We – people with operational consciences – think (wrongly) that everyone is like us. We are shackled to the assumption that just because we would not do unspeakably evil things – or would be unable to live with ourselves if we did – all other people work the same way.
They do not.
When a psychopath lies, or steals, or manipulates – or does whatever he thinks is required to get what he wants – he has no greater emotional connection with his actions than you or I have with yesterday’s lunch.
We, the non-psychopaths, tell little lies and do little wrongs. But we have a limit beyond which we will not go. For the psychopath, scale makes no difference. Stealing a family’s savings, or crashing an economy, or destroying a country is of no more consequence to the psychopath than deciding not to return ten bucks to a cashier who had made a mistake.
And no matter what evil the psychopath meticulously plotted and practiced against you, to him, what happens is your fault. Always.
Which brings me back to George Soros.
Soros: Putin is no Ally in the Fight Against Islamic State
In the Guardian’s article, then, Soros claims “the US and the EU are making a grievous error in thinking that President Vladimir Putin’s Russia is a potential ally in the fight against Islamic State.”
The assumptions here are based on pure falsehood. My colleague, the diligent and forthright journalist and writer Gearóid Ó Colmáin, laid an axe as sharp as any to the root of the notion that the so-called War on Terror (taken to include Islamic State) serves anything other than the interests of what Ó Colmáin rightly calls a “tiny and particularly tyrannical ruling elite”.
In an interview with RT, Ó Colmáin said:
“There is no War on Terror. There is a war which is being waged using terrorist proxy groups and they are being used against nation states who are resisting US and Israeli hegemony.
And they are also being used as a means of disciplining the work forces in Europe. In a period of mass unemployment and austerity, you now have terrorist attacks being committed by terrorists funded, armed and trained by Western intelligence agencies. There is no such thing as ISIS.
ISIS is a creation of the United States.”
Soros and his ilk created and benefit from what Soros calls “Islamic State,” yet his argument not only disregards that fact, it kicks blame in the direction of the one major power – Russia – which has taken steps to deal with this US creation.
Soros goes on to make a number of other accusations against Russia, failing at any time to note that Russia alone has a mandate from the legitimate government of Syria, or that Russia is seriously engaged in cleaning house in Syria, a job the US was only simulating.
Acknowledgement of Russia’s successes in Syria comes from many quarters, including Seymour Hersh. Hersh is a high-profile American journalist, but one incapable of understanding the reasons for US policy towards Syria, bless him.
Soros: Putin Working Towards Europe’s Demise
Soros’ next point is that “Putin’s aim is to foster the EU’s disintegration, and the best way to do so is to flood Europe with Syrian refugees.”
The truth is that Russia’s natural ally is Germany – and preventing that alliance is the primary aim of the US government – at least according to Stratfor, a US intelligence agency.
Germany’s efficiency and organizational abilities combined with Russia’s raw materials, inventive genius, and good relations with China, is the combination those funding and directing ISIS least want to see. By occupying Germany with an army of aggressive, unskilled, culturally insoluble economic migrants from Africa and elsewhere, the chess-players at the board of realpolitik are attempting to head off that natural outcome.
Soros’ part in destabilizing Europe is well attested. The Daily Mail reported back in November 2015 that Soros was busy telling the EU to take “at least a million” refugees every year.
In the same article, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban is quoted as saying, “This invasion is driven, on the one hand, by people smugglers, and on the other hand by those activists who support everything that weakens the nation-state.” Orban went on, “This Western mindset and this activist network is perhaps best represented by George Soros.”
Soros – described in the article as “a funder of pro-migration groups all over the world” – responded to Orban’s comments by arguing that his beliefs “uphold European values”.
I don’t know what Soros means by “European values,” but I assume it includes lots more immigration for us – unilaterally decided upon by Mr. Soros.
As prime minister of Hungary, Orban is a man with, perhaps, better access than most to the truth about George Soros, a Hungarian Jew who got his first business breaks collaborating with the Nazis in Hungary – the source for which information is his own father’s book Masquerade – Dancing Around Death in Nazi-Occupied Hungary.
Thus, Soros has moved effortlessly from collaborating with the Nazis against his fellow Jews – an occupation (if you will excuse the pun) he makes little effort to hide – to telling indigenous European peoples what the ethnic make-up of their countries should be.
He was also instrumental in the destruction of Ukraine. As reported by New American, Soros “has a giant footprint in Ukraine. Similar to his operations in dozens of other nations, he has, over the past couple of decades, poured tens of millions of dollars into Ukrainian non-governmental organizations (NGOs), ostensibly to assist them in transforming their country into a more ‘open’ and ‘democratic’ society.”
We have good reason to take George Soros seriously.
Soros: Anticipates Russia’s Collapse
Soros’ article downplays Putin’s strategic prowess before going on to anticipate regime change in Russia in 2017 as a result of bankruptcy forced upon it by Western sanctions and crushed oil prices.
He then appears to credit Putin with masterminding a “collapse” in Europe and of anticipating benefits for Russia in the aftermath. He notes, “As Merkel correctly foresaw, the migration crisis has the potential to destroy it.”
If you find yourself asking here: “Why then did she create that crisis?” that is because you are not a psychopath.
Soros’ article begins its descent with metaphysical and social observations, which from someone without billions of dollars behind them would be seen as merely subjective musings, before landing squarely on the runway of identifying Putin’s Russia as the real threat.
This is not simply chutzpah. The traits Soros exhibits are those of textbook psychopathy: blaming others for his own actions and attacking the victim is what the psychopath does.
Here, Soros disregards entirely his own extensive role in creating the problem he purports to seek to solve; meanwhile, he accuses Russia, the only country to man-up to the war on Syria, of being behind the “migration” Soros has spent millions engineering.
Soros is part of a cabal which plans the overthow of countries at dinner. Psychopathy is the baseline requirement for membership.
So if you think conscience will make him and his friends stop at some point before you and your family reach conditions materially identical to those experienced by the inhabitants of the Donbass region – or if you think that Western Europe is beyond the scope of their plans for engineered collapse just because you wouldn’t do something like that – you will find that you are wrong.
When Europe is in tatters, and its men (whom Soros’ money helped turn in one lifetime from actual men into effeminized liberal cultural lemmings) are squawking in disbelief as their pampered delusions are shattered in the “collapse” Soros envisages, Soros will not care.
No matter that this is Europe and it is your life under attack this time, and not that of brown people or Eastern Europeans. It won’t make any difference.
Things You Know That Ain't So - Carbon Dioxide Is A Pollutant March 25 2016 | From: BreakingViewsNZ
According to the US Environmental Protection Agency and many environmental groups and governments around the world carbon dioxide is a pollutant that needs to be regulated because it may endanger public health or welfare.
But is it? To most people, “pollutant" is something that we would be better off without. Carbon dioxide is a trace gas that is essential to life on earth.
If the level falls below about 180 ppm plant growth will suffer and, at lower levels, will cease.
So what happens if the level increases? At the time of the dinosaurs carbon dioxide levels were at least five times higher than they are now. Herds of dinosaurs devoured grasses, trees and other plant life that, under the influence of the high levels of carbon dioxide, was growing at a hugely greater rate than it does now.
The high levels of carbon dioxide didn't cause the world to reach a “tipping point" and burn to a crisp. Instead, the high levels produced a world of plenty that could sustain the voracious appetites of huge numbers of enormous creatures.
So we can conclude that insufficient carbon dioxide would end life on earth and, at five times the present concentration, the ecosystem thrived. How can it be a pollutant?
Confirmation of the agriculturally beneficial effects of high levels of carbon dioxide comes from commercial greenhouses that burn large quantities of natural gas to boost the carbon dioxide levels from the current 400 ppm to 900 ppm. As a result, productivity is increased by about 40% without any increase in the amount of water needed.
There is also ample evidence that the increase in carbon dioxide levels has reduced desertification and benefited agriculture worldwide.
The EPA’s claim that carbon dioxide is a pollutant is based on its belief that it could cause dangerous global warming.
We now know that this is not true because the world has not warmed as predicted over the last 18 years.
According to the climate model predictions that the EPA relied on, the world should be 0.5° hotter than it is now.
Trillions of dollars have been squandered over the last 20 years subsidising wind and solar power, shutting down modern and clean coal-fired stations whose main emissions were water vapour and carbon dioxide, subsidising electric cars and promoting massively fraudulent carbon trading. This has made no detectable difference to the steady increase in carbon dioxide levels.
Their solution is to squander even more money on the same expensive and futile attempts to limit the emissions of an entirely beneficial gas that has made a major contribution to reducing poverty around the world.
The campaign against coal-fired power generation has increased the price of electricity and, in many countries, limited the access of poor people to an adequate and affordable supply of electricity.
To make the whole thing even more crazy, the same people that oppose coal-fired power generation also oppose nuclear power generation which is carbon dioxide free and is the safest form of power generation in the world.
It is the only technology that can make a big reduction in carbon dioxide emissions at little or no additional cost. Are these people in the pay of the renewable energy industry?
Right now, the New Zealand government is contemplating ways of extending our idiotic Emissions Trading Scheme even though it will make no difference to our carbon dioxide emissions and increase the cost of electricity and transport.
It will increase the cost of electricity from the Huntly coal-fired station and, because of the way our electricity market works, all the renewable energy generators will receive windfall profits.
So if they respond to market signals (as they should), they will be rewarded for shutting down hydro power generation so that Huntly continues to burn coal and keeps the price high. You can't get crazier than that!
Brussels Attacks In Belgium: 322 Skull & Bones March 24 2016 | From: BreakingViewsNZ / Various
Illuminati false flag exposed: Another example of the occult black magic at play.
Especially events like these.. All De-ZION-ed ahead of time; Perpetrated by the same Alphabet Soups who perpetrate everything else! Problem-reaction-solution!
On the morning of Tuesday, March 22, 2016, two explosions occurred in the Brussels airport. Subsequently, another report of an explosion soon followed at the Maalbeek metro station - succeeding the explosions at the airport.
Of course, this is all blamed on "suicide bombers." The airport and metro station have been shut down, and all flights to Brussels have been cancelled, as the country is on temporary lockdown.
Now there are some very eerie and undeniable symbolisms and "coincidences" that aren't so coincidental after all:
The event took place on March 22, or "322";
"322" is often associated with the secret society "Skull and Bones"; the same organization corresponding with 911
Kratom is a tree native to Southeast Asia that is widely known as ‘nature’s vicodin’. The leaves of the tree can be chewed, made into a tea, or dried and added to capsules that cure anxiety, depression, migraines and many types of chronic pain.
The plant acts as both a mild sedative when used sparingly; and in large doses, as a stimulant. It can also be used to wean patients off opiate addictions such as heroin and morphine.
The plant is from the same family as the coffee tree, and Thai people have used Kratom leaves as a form of medicine for centuries to treat conditions such as diarrhea, nervousness and opiate withdrawal.
Many long-term users of Kratom claim that it is more effective at managing pain than many powerful painkillers such as morphine and vicodin, and is far less addictive than chemical narcotics.
The DEA has placed Kratom onto their Drugs and Chemicals of Concern list in the past, and it is illegal in Australia, Thailand, Malaysia and Burma. It is available over-the-counter in powder form, dried leaves, capsules and as an extract, and there have been no reported cases of overdose or serious side-effects.
History of Kratom
The first documented cases about Kratom comes from the early 19th century after a Dutch Botanist named Pieter Korthals commented on how the leaves of the tree reminded him of a Bishops mitre and named the tree Mitragyna.
There is not much evidence available on the use of Kratom before Europe’s colonisation of Asia, but it is generally believed that Asian people have used this herb for hundreds of years.
Farmworkers would often chew the leaves as a pick me up in the morning in the same way as many people now rely on coffee. In 1943, the Thai government passed a new law banning the use of kratom citing it as a dangerous drug, although many people believe the move was to protect the government’s investment in the booming opiate business.
Despite the ban, kratom use continues in Thailand even though the government imposes strong penalties on those caught with the herb.
Kratom as a Painkiller
Kratom is perfectly legal in the United States and many advocates of the herb claim it has similar pain relieving properties as marijuana. The web is filled with misinformation about this wonderful herb, and the DEA and many different mainstream news sources try to categorize it with the latest harmful drug trends such as bath salts.
According to its users, taking a small amount of kratom extract everyday will benefit those suffering from all forms of pain including past injuries, nerve damage, headaches and arthritis. Kratom contains two compounds known as mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine which have been found to have mildly sedative effects when used on rats.
Kratom is reported to be mildly psychoactive, and users have noted that they can experience feelings of extreme well being and blissfulness.
As well as pain relief, kratom can be used to combat fatigue, social anxiety, stress and is said to provide sexual enhancement for men. Many people also use it as a substitute for coffee as it provides a more level burst of energy without the inevitable caffeine crash after a few hours.
Possible Side-Effects or Drug Interactions
Due to its sedative effects, kratom should never be mixed with any other type of substance especially alcohol. A study performed at the Department of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences in Malaysia found that giving a mixture of mitragynine and morphine to rats in the laboratory reduced the amount of tolerance the rats built up to the morphine over time.
There needs to be further research performed into the pain-relieving properties of kratom as according to users’ testimonies it could provide a safe and non-addictive alternative to strong pain medication such as morphine, vicodin and oxycontin.
Clinton Email Reveals: Google Sought Overthrow Of Syria's Assad + Robert Kennedy Jr. Just Dropped A Truth Bomb: 'Pipeline War' Is At The Roots Of Syrian Crisis
March 23 2016 | From: WashingtonExaminer / Infowars
Google in 2012 sought to help insurgents overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad, according to State Department emails receiving fresh scrutiny this week.
Messages between former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's team and one of the company's executives detailed the plan for Google to get involved in the region.
A story largely ignored by the corporate media reveals the tech company Google offered to help Secretary of State Clinton overthrow Bashar al-Assad by developing an app to track defections from the Syrian government.
Jared Cohen, the head of what was then the company's "Google Ideas" division, wrote in a July 2012 email to several top Clinton officials.
“Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool... that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from."
"Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition,"Cohen said, adding that the plan was for Google to surreptitiously give the tool to Middle Eastern media.
"Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria," he said.
The message was addressed to deputy secretary of state Bill Burns; Alec Ross, a senior Clinton advisor; and Clinton's deputy chief of staff, Jake Sullivan. Sullivan subsequently forwarded Cohen's proposal to Clinton, describing it as "a pretty cool idea."
Cohen worked as a member of the secretary of state's policy planning staff from 2006 to 2010, when he was hired to lead Google Ideas, but was tied to using social media to incite uprisings even before he left the department.
He once reportedly asked Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to hold off of conducting system maintenance that officials believed could have impeded a brief 2009 uprising in Iran, and Julian Assange, who founded the secret-leaking website WikiLeaks, has for years referred to Cohen as Google's "director of regime change."
In her book No Higher Honor Condoleezza Rice spoke fondly of Cohen, describing him as a “young gun” and said his work in social media;
“Would pay off handsomely… when Twitter and Facebook became accelerants of democratic change in the Middle East.”
Social media played a predominant role in the so-called “Arab Spring,” the concerted effort by the State Department, the Endowment for Democracy, USAID, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House to violently overthrow governments in the Middle East and North Africa.
In addition to Google, Facebook and Twitter were also involved in the effort to undermine governments in the region.
The exchange on Syria was highlighted by Wikileaks on Saturday. Earlier in the week, the site posted more than 30,000 emails that Clinton sent or received during her tenure leading the State Department.
Robert Kennedy Jr. Just Dropped A Truth Bomb: 'Pipeline War' Is At The Roots Of Syrian Crisis
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.
Radio Sputnik discusses the origins of the Syrian crisis with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., attorney and nephew of US President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Kennedy writes that the US decided to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power after he refused to back a Qatari gas pipeline project. Sputnik also touched upon US foreign policy, the refugee crisis and why Donald Trump would be a better president than Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
Stunning Infographic Showing How Heavy Metals End Up In The Food Supply Due To Industrial Pollution March 23 2016 | From: NaturalNews
You've probably heard food companies and nutritional supplement manufacturers claim that high levels of lead found in their products is "naturally occurring." But they're LYING.
The truth is that high levels of toxic heavy metals show up in foods, superfoods and supplements due to industrial pollution... including decades of spraying lead arsenate on croplands.
A new infographic has been released that reveals the cycle of heavy metals in food and the environment
As this infographic and video both reveal, toxic heavy metals enter the food supply from contaminated soils, and soils are contaminated from a multitude of sources, including:
Dental offices (mercury)
Coal power (mercury)
Pesticides (lead and arsenic)
Mining operations (copper, nickel, lead, etc.)
Human waste that's recycled by cities into "biosolids" used on crops
Contaminated municipal water pipes (lead)
Chicken feed that's "medicated" with arsenic
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Get the full story on heavy metals in food in the upcoming book "Food Forensics"
In my new book Food Forensics, I detail the heavy metals composition of over 800 foods. All that data are derived from my laboratory analysis from the Natural News Forensic Food Labs (now named CWC Labs).
The book is available now for pre-sale on Amazon, BN.com and other booksellers. That book is set to take the food industry by storm by revealing the truth about heavy metals in foods, supplements and superfoods.
Nicky Hager’s attention is turning towards Westpac Bank’s handing over of his bank records after watching police smash 213 times a hard drive containing his material.
About 17 months after police raided the Dirty Politics author’s home, Mr Hager and one of his lawyers, Steven Price, watched a hard drive and memory card containing copies of seized data get destroyed in the High Court at Auckland.
The pair also collected a computer and other equipment taken by police during what Mr Hager called a “Rambo” raid, after it was last year ruled unlawful.
Mr Hager fought for two months to get permission for the media to watch the copies being destroyed, without success.
But afterwards, he said it was an “amazing day” and he felt like he was “watching history.”
“We went down to the basement of the High Court building here, into this little narrow room, without lights on, and the police held torches around while one of the detectives, in fact the detective who was in charge of removing stuff from my house was there, while he destroyed the materials they had copied from the house.”
Mr Hager says the detective took to the hard drive 213 times with a hammer, before cutting holes in it with a bolt-colter.
But while he is “absolutely confident” the material was not tampered with while sitting at court, his attention now turns to other areas where he says the police were “tricky.”
Mr Price says there will likely be a further hearing later this year regarding further aspects of the case.
“The main thing that’s going on is the question whether it’s lawful for the police to go to banks and get them to turn over someone’s bank records, as they did with Nicky, without a court order.
That’s something that might affect thousands of people.”
Keith Locke: Hard To Spy Gains From Five Eyes March 22 2016 | From: KeithLocke
This article of mine [Keith Locke - former Green MP] was published in the New Zealand Herald on 15 March 2016. It was in response to the report of Intelligence and Security Agencies Review, released on 9 March.
The intelligence services report by Sir Michael Cullen and Dame Patsy Reddy sheds more light on the GCSB’s work with the Five Eyes network, but it also leaves several questions unanswered. Since the Snowden revelations there has been a concern that our Government Communications Security Bureau is involved in “mass surveillance”. The Government has denied that it is.
Cullen and Reddy describe how the GCSB collects communications from the geo-stationary satellites visible from its station at Waihopai, near Blenheim.
First; the bureau:
"Intercepts a set of communications, most of which will be of no relevance and will be discarded without ever being examined by the [GCSB] analyst. This is the haystack in which the needle must be found.”
“The GCSB filters intercepted material for relevance using search terms.”
These search terms could be subjects or groups and could take in lot of people, some of whom would be New Zealanders.
Although the GCSB is supposed to be targeting “foreign intelligence” it is not illegal for it to retain Waihopai’s intercept intelligence on New Zealanders if it was “incidentally obtained intelligence”, that is, if the New Zealanders weren’t a specific target, and the intelligence was relevant to the GCSB’s security objectives.
In addition, many New Zealanders can legally be targeted by the GCSB as “foreign persons” if they are active in “foreign organisations”, the definition of which is broad enough to include Greenpeace or the New Zealand subsidiary of a multi-national corporation. Former Prime Minister Jenny Shipley qualifies as a “foreign person” because she is on the board of the China Construction Bank.
The Cullen/Reddy report removes the problem of “mass surveillance” by saying it “suggests a kind of active monitoring of the general population that does not occur”.. [not true].
However, I don’t think any critic of government surveillance has ever envisaged the surveillance going that far [not true].
An over-the-top definition of mass surveillance avoids the reality of a mass collection of communications data at Waihopai and the possibility that the international phone calls or emails of any New Zealander could be caught in the net, accidentally or not. In theory, their communications could be subsequently analysed by a GCSB operative.
The next question is what happens to the “haystack” of communications collected at the Waihopai spy station. The report says that most of these communications “will be of no relevance and will be discarded without ever being examined by an analyst”.
They may be discarded by the analyst, but to what extent are they stored, either here or overseas, for later mining by the GCSB or its Five Eyes partners? We know that the US National Security Agency has access to raw communications from its Five Eyes partners, and that it stores billions of communications for later analysis.
This is relevant to the concern, correctly raised by Cullen and Reddy, that close co-operation with Five Eyes partners “creates a risk of some loss of independence, both operationally and potentially also in relation to our intelligence, defence and foreign policy settings”. Our national interests “do not and cannot exactly coincide with those of any other country”.
The reality is that when New Zealand is sharing raw communications data with other Fives Eyes partners some of the intelligence they glean from it will be used for foreign policy objectives which are not the same as New Zealand’s.
But this seems to be a secondary consideration to the net benefit Cullen and Reddy say New Zealand receives from Five Eyes intelligence sharing. It is hard to judge this as any benefits are largely invisible to the public.
Have any terrorist plots been found? Not as far as we know. Have our trade interests been advanced? No one has pointed out how. Has our diplomacy been assisted? I can’t see any evidence.
Yet the downside of New Zealand’s participation in Five Eyes surveillance is substantial. There was a cool reception in Beijing when the Snowden papers revealed the GCSB’s spying on China. Joining intelligence forces with America against China is hardly the way to optimise our trade with that important country.
New Zealand’s ambassador was called in to the Brazilian foreign ministry when it was revealed the GCSB had been gathering Five Eyes intercept data on Brazilian Roberto Azevedo in an unsuccessful attempt to stop him heading off our Trade Minister Tim Groser to become Director-General of the WTO.
Yes, we need to be concerned about possible terrorist activity. But do we need to be in the Five Eyes to detect any plots? The reality is that the police and intelligence forces of friendly nations share information on terrorism (and other international crime) regardless of who is in or out of the Five Eyes.
I don’t think Cullen and Reddy make much of a case for us to stay in this five-nation spy network.
Not long ago, Chocolate Oligarchs and their fascist gendarmes seized Ukraine’s fertile wheat and barley fields, whilst bankster-funded Islamist rebels took Mosul & the adjacent Kirkuk oilfield – one of the world’s largest – for Exxon Mobil.
BRIC nations saw imperial over-reach and, led by Putin, busied themselves preparing for the slow-motion unraveling of the Anglo-American financial empire.
The Rothschild / Rockefeller / banking / energy / arms / drugs oligopoly that has enslaved humankind and decimated planet earth for the last few centuries is coming apart at the seams. The arrogance and stupidity of the self-proclaimed “illuminated ones”, who operate their matrix from the city of London, is being writ large for all to see.
Their Mideast gendarmes Israel & Saudi Arabia now falter.
A while back, troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) entered Bahrain to help the al-Khalifa petro-monarchy put down pro-democracy protests. This intervention – condoned by Western powers – represented a last-ditch effort at salvaging the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) – the chief neocolonial modus operandi which underwrites the London eurodollar money laundering scheme while propping up both the pound and the dollar.
But heads of monarchs will soon roll. The people of the GCC nations remain restless, particularly in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. It was no coincidence that the unstable House of Saud financed Syrian rebels, sent them to destabilize Iraq, then launched a ruthless bombing campaign in Yemen.
Things on the Saudi domestic front are a bit dicey for the embattled and divided royals. It is important to know how we got here:
The six GCC nations- Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar and Oman- sit atop 42% of the world’s oil.
The single-family monarchies that control them were hand-picked by the British Empire. They work in tandem with Israel to steal crude oil from the Arab people. They, not China or Japan, are the biggest purchasers of US Treasuries. Their interests lie not with their people, but with the City of London and Wall Street.
The bloodline elite of the six GCC nations are heavily invested in Western economies. High volume crude oil production keeps this investment capital flowing to Wall Street and the City of London while allowing the GCC elites to live opulent lifestyles. As Saudi Oil Minister Hisham Nazer put it, “We now have a mutual bond of self-interest and reciprocal security interests.”
As Western dependence on Third World resources has increased, it has become increasingly necessary for the international bankers and their corporations to include local elite cliques in their capital accumulation schemes, making a small group of local people extremely wealthy so that this group will cooperate in selling local resources cheaply to the West.
An example of this utilization of local elites as surrogates can be seen through the case of the richest man in the world. He is Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah- Sultan of Brunei- a tiny oil enclave on the island of Borneo, where Royal Dutch/Shell holds a virtual monopoly over the oil industry and has paid the Sultan well to keep it that way. The Sultan of Brunei is worth over $60 billion and lives in a 1,778-room palace.
These local elite, in turn, hand over their wealth to Western bankers for protection from devaluation and bank failure. This robs their home country of much-needed capital and often precipitates devaluation and debt crises. The US has itself become a debtor nation and owes its debts, in part, to these same Third World elites, who own trillions on deposit at large US banks, while their fellow countrymen live in abject poverty.
Egyptian elites, for example, hold $60 billion in deposits in foreign banks, while the average Egyptian earns $650/year. In the case of the GCC, the amount of recycled petrodollars flowing back into Western investments is truly staggering.
The Saudis have over $600 billion invested abroad. Citigroup owns 33% of the Saudi American Bank but is itself now controlled by members of the House of Saud. In 1993 Saudi Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, owner of Saudi Commercial Bank, plunged $590 million into Citibank.
Bin Talal now owns 17.34% of Citigroup, while Crown Prince Abdullah owns a 5.4% share, making them the bank’s two largest shareholders. Bin Talal is also the 2nd largest shareholder in Rupert Murdoch’s Newscorp, parent of both Fox News and the Wall Street Journal.
The Saudi Citigroup share purchases were facilitated by the Washington-based Carlyle Group, which is 20%-owned by the Mellon family that owned Gulf Oil and now owns a large chunk of Chevron Texaco.
Carlyle is led by former Reagan and Bush Defense Secretary and Reagan NSC Chairman Frank Carlucci. George Bush Sr., James Baker III and former British Prime Minister John Major are senior advisers and board members at Carlyle. Bush Sr. served as Carlyle investment advisor to the bin Laden family until November 2001.
In 1995 Prince bin Talal teamed up with Canadian developer Paul Reichmann, Loews chairman Larry Tisch and Lebanese financier Edmund J. Safra- a close friend of war-criminal Henry Kissinger- to buy London’s Canary Wharf complex for $1.04 billion.
UAE ruling Sheik Zayed runs the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. Much of its money is handled by private investment and equity firms like Carlyle Group and Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette- which is 18% owned by the Saudi Olayan Group. Olayan also owns big chunks of JP Morgan Chase and CS First Boston. The director of the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority serves as Carlyle Group’s Asian adviser.
Bahrain plays a role in this petrodollar recycling, serving as the key unregulated offshore banking center for both the GCC sheiks and their international mega-bank partners. Bahrain is also home to the US Fifth Fleet and a large number of refineries, which process Saudi crude.
Lebanon had been the premier banking center of the Middle East in earlier days, but with Beirut reduced to rubble by Israeli shelling, merchant banking has moved to the duty-free port of Dubai in the UAE, now the biggest gold market on the planet. Investment banking is centered in Kuwait.
But it is Bahrain which is home to the vast multi-billion dollar pool of money market funds derived from GCC/Four Horsemen petrodollar revenues. Most banks in Bahrain are foreign-owned and all US mega-banks have operations there. Many of Bahrain’s banks are owned by GCC elite and serve as a major conduit in the petrodollar recycling process.
The Kuwait Burgan Bank, for example, owns a 28% stake in one of Bahrain’s largest banks- the Middle Eastern Bank.
The most powerful firm in Bahrain is Investcorp, which took big stakes in Saks Fifth Avenue, BAT, Tiffany, Gucci, Color Tile, Carvel Ice Cream, Dellwood Foods, New York Department Store of Puerto Rico, Circle K and Chaumet. Investcorp was co-founded in 1983 by Bahrain ruling family scion Sheik Khalifa bin Sulman al-Khalifa- who also owned a big chunk of the infamous BCCI.
The story of the BCCI was told in the thriller movie 'The International'
A recent Investcorp prospectus lists the Bahrain Minister of Finance as an owner.
Investcorp’s chairman is Abdul-Rahman Al-Ateeqi, former Oil and Finance Minister of Kuwait. Its Vice-President is Ahmed Ali Kanoo of the wealthy Saudi Kanoo family, which is worth an estimated $1.5 billion.
Former Saudi Oil Minister Sheik Yamani was one of Investcorp’s founding shareholders, along with seven members of the Saudi royal family.
Investcorp has its eight-story headquarters in Bahrain, along with a Park Avenue New York office and a Mayfair district office in London.
Sheik al-Khalifa’s partner in launching Investcorp was Nemir Kirdar, the bank’s president who was in charge of Chase Manhattan’s Persian Gulf operations. Numerous Investcorp senior executives are Chase alumni as well.
Many Investcorp purchases turned out to be flops and there is a shady side to the bank.
French jeweler Chaumet executive Charles Lefevre said Investcorp fudged Chaumet numbers to entice shareholders while trying to pawn its shares off at a higher price to other Persian Gulf investors.
Another complaint alleged that Investcorp attempted to loot the Saudi European Bank in Paris.
Investcorp board member Abdullah Taha Bakhsh, a reclusive Saudi billionaire, invested heavily in George W. Bush’s Harken Energy.
So did Bahrain’s ruling Sheik al-Khalifa. Bush and co-owner Dick Cheney morphed their Arbusto Energy into Harken when Bush friend James Bath provided them with $50,000 in seed money.
Bath owned Skyway Aircrafts and was under investigation by the DEA for working with GCC sheiks in flying $100 bills to the Cayman Islands. Since Bath often borrowed money from Saudi Sheiks Khalid bin Mahfouz- BCCI’s largest shareholder- and Mohammed bin Laden, these wealthy Saudis likely provided the $50,000 in seed money to launch what became Harken Energy.
Bin Mahfouz and bin Laden helped Harken sign an exclusive offshore oil drilling agreement just prior to the Gulf War. In January 1990 President Bush Sr. had approved preferential trade status for the Iraqi regime. That very same month Harken Energy was awarded the biggest offshore oil concession ever in the Persian Gulf off the coast of Bahrain.
Other notable Harken investors included the Ft. Worth-based Bass brothers, the South African Rupert family, the Harvard Endowment Fund, and Rothschild lieutenant George Soros.
In 1989 the government of Bahrain abruptly cut off talks with Amoco concerning the same oil concession after Emir al-Khalifa decided to grant it instead to Harken Energy at the urging of Mobil’s Middle East operation’s chief Michael Ameen. Financing for the project was arranged by Bush Jr. friend Jackson Stephens, the Arkansas owner of Worthen Bank who was instrumental in bringing BCCI to the US and who donated $100,000 to the Bush Sr. 1988 Presidential Campaign.
New York attorney Allen Quasha and his father William Quasha of Manila helped swing the Harken deal with Bahrain. In 1961 Bill Quasha helped George Bush Sr. secure rights to drill the first oil well in Kuwait via Zapata Offshore Oil Company. Later Quasha served as legal counsel to the CIA drug laundry Nugan Hand Bank in the Philippines.
His son Allen became the biggest stockholder in Harken The Quasha’s own 21% of a Swiss company controlled by the South African Rupert family, who were major backer’s of that country’s former apartheid regime.
Just one month before Iraq invaded Kuwait, George W. Bush sold 66% of his stake in Harken Energy at a 200% profit. While stock analysts like Charlie Andrews of 13D Research were putting out “buy” recommendations on Harken, on June 22, 1990 Bush cashed in $840,000 in Harken stock, later saying he “sold into good news”. Bush knew that Harken had violated the terms of a loan package and was now on the ropes financially. Five weeks later Harken reported a $23 million loss and its stock price crashed.
Bush didn’t report his timely Harken Energy stock sale until March 1991. This was illegal, but Bush claimed the SEC had misplaced the forms and was never prosecuted. In 1993 Bush stepped down from Harken’s board. With heavy financial backing from Enron, he became Governor of Texas.
Bush was defended during the Harken scam by Baker Botts lawyer Robert Jordan, who was paid back in 2000 with an appointment as US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
The forgiving SEC chief during the Harken debacle was Richard Breeden, one of Bush Sr.’s biggest political supporters.
SEC counsel was James Doty, another Bush supporter who helped George W. buy the Texas Rangers baseball team.
When George W. Bush merged Harken with Spectrum 7 Energy, he brought in Investcorp insider Abdullah Taha Bakhsh, who bought 17.6% of Harken through a Netherlands Antilles holding company.
Some say Baksch was a front man for Sheik Khalid bin Mahfouz. Baksch was a major investor at the Bahrain-based Investcorp, which was launched by former Chase Manhattan executives. In 1988 he looted an Arab bank in London.
Bakhsh was also accused of looting the Al Saudi Banque of Paris when it collapsed in 1988 just ahead of the strikingly similar collapse of BCCI. Bakhsh is a shareholder in First Commercial Financial Group, a Chicago-based commodity futures trading firm which was sanctioned by US regulators for check-kiting and fraud. Just before the Gulf War broke out, Investcorp sold a 25.8% share to an Iraqi company, despite a Bahrain law prohibiting such transactions.
The Saudis and Kuwaitis are the clear leaders in GCC overseas investments. The Kuwaiti Investment Authority has over $250 billion invested abroad and is the biggest foreign investor in Japan and Spain. Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase handle Kuwaiti investments in the US, where the al-Sabah clan owns stock in each of the 70 largest firms listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
Their US holdings include 100% of Occidental Geothermal, 29.8% of Great Western Resources, 100% of the Atlanta Hilton Hotel, 45% of the Phoenician Hotel and 11% of Hogg Robinson.
In Germany they own 14% of Daimler-Chrysler, 25% of Hoechst (the Nazi IG Farben spin-off and the world’s 2nd largest pharmaceutical company), 20% of Metallgesellschaft and part of German retailer Asko. In Italy they own 6.7% of Afil, the Agnelli family holding company which owns Fiat and several other endeavors.
In the UK Kuwait owns St. Martin’s Properties and 5.4% of Sime Darby. In Malaysia their K-10 company owns the biggest newspaper- the New Straits Times Press. In neighboring Singapore, the Kuwaitis own 10.6% of Singapore Petroleum, 37% of Dao Heng Holdings and 49% of the securities firm J. M. Sassoon.
Kuwait Oil Company (KOC), was technically nationalized in the early 1980’s, but remains close to its former parents- Chevron Texaco and BP Amoco- selling these two Horsemen oil at a discount. KOC made wealthy the al-Sabah emirs and the al-Ghanim family, who acted as the company’s agent for decades.
By 1966 KOC bought a Danish subsidiary and became the first Middle Eastern oil company to retail gasoline in Europe.
KOC has been the most aggressive GCC firm in its overseas downstream investments. In 1982 it bought hundreds of Q8 gas stations across Europe. By 1987 it owned over 5,000 gasoline retailers in Europe and South Asia. Just last week KOC was awarded a contract to build oil refineries in South Korea.
The Kuwaitis even bought into one of the Four Horsemen- BP Amoco. As of 1988 they owned a 22% share. They have since reduced their share to 9.85%, still a controlling interest. They purchased the Naples, Italy refining operations of Mobil, own nearly 4% of ARCO (now part of BP Amoco), and 2.39% of Phillips Petroleum (now merged with Conoco). In Spain the Kuwaitis operate the Torras Hostenchchemical firm. In Japan they operate Arabian Oil.
All told GCC investments in Western banks and corporations total in the trillions. The bulk of this is invested in long-term US and Japanese government bonds. The GCC sheiks are crucial to floating the entire house of cards that is the global economy.
Their guaranteed purchases of US debt, which has largely been accrued through defense spending in the Persian Gulf region, keep the US dollar strong and prevent the international financial architecture from crumbling.
The emirs and their elite friends also bankroll CIA covert operations, while re-balancing their trade surpluses with the West through the purchase of US weaponry to protect their oil fiefdoms.
Events in Ukraine and the Middle East have exposed the desperate position of the Rockefeller/Rothschild energy oligopoly.
Putin has just begun playing his extremely good hand of cards.
The GCC puppets remain embattled and circling the wagons. The end of the petroleum standard can only be staved off by permanent war. Strange days indeed.
The Financial System Is A Larger Threat Than Terrorism March 21 2016 | From: PaulCraigRoberts
In the 21st century we have been distracted by the hyper-expensive “war on terror.” Trillions of dollars have been added to the taxpayers’ burden and many billions of dollars in profits to the military/security complex in order to combat insignificant foreign “threats,” such as the Taliban, that remain undefeated after 15 years.
All this time the financial system, working hand-in-hand with policymakers, has done more damage to Americans than terrorists could possibly inflict.
The purpose of the Federal Reserve and US Treasury’s policy of zero interest rates is to support the prices of the over-leveraged and fraudulent financial instruments that unregulated financial systems always create.
If inflation was properly measured, these zero rates would be negative rates, which means not only that retirees have no income from their retirement savings but also that saving is a losing proposition. Instead of earning interest on your savings, you pay interest that shrinks the real value of your saving.
Central banks, neoliberal economists, and the presstitute financial media advocate negative interest rates in order to force people to spend instead of save. The notion is that the economy’s poor economic performance is not due to the failure of economic policy but to people hoarding their money.
Negative interest rates, which have been introduced in some countries such as Switzerland and threatened in other countries, have caused people to avoid the tax on bank deposits by withdrawing their savings from banks in large denomination bills. In Switzerland, for example, demand for the 1,000 franc bill (about $1,000) has increased sharply. These large denomination bills now account for 60% of the Swiss currency in circulation.
The response of depositors to negative interest rates has resulted in neoliberal economists, such as Larry Summers, calling for the elimination of large denomination bank notes in order to make it difficult for people to keep their cash balances outside of banks.
Other neoliberal economists, such as Kenneth Rogoff want to eliminate cash altogether and have only electronic money. Electronic money cannot be removed from bank deposits except by spending it. With electronic money as the only money, financial institutions can use negative interest rates in order to steal the savings of their depositors.
People would attempt to resort to gold, silver, and forms of private money, but other methods of payment and saving would be banned, and government would conduct sting operations in order to suppress evasions of electronic money with stiff penalties.
What this picture shows is that government, economists, and presstitutes are allied against citizens achieving any financial independence from personal saving.
Policymakers have a crackpot economic policy and those with control over your life value their scheme more than they value your welfare.
This is the fate of people in the so-called democracies. Any remaining control that they have over their lives is being taken away. Governments serve a few powerful interest groups whose agendas result in the destruction of the host economies.
The offshoring of middle class jobs transfers income and wealth from the middle class to the executives and owners of the corporation, but it also kills the domestic consumer market for the offshored goods and services. As Michael Hudson writes, it kills the host.
The financialization of the economy also kills the host and the owners of corporations as well. When corporate executives borrow from banks in order to boost share prices and their performance bonuses by buying back the publicly held stock of the corporations, future profits are converted into interest payments to banks.
The future income streams of the corporations are financialized. If the future income streams fail, the companies can be foreclosed, like homeowners, and the banks become the owners of the corporations.
Between the offshoring of jobs and the conversion of more and more income streams into payments to banks, less and less is available to be spent on goods and services. Thus, the economy fails to grow and falls into long-term decline. Today many people can only pay the minimum payment on their credit card balance.
The result is massive growth in a balance that can never be paid off. It is these people who are the least able to service debt who are hit with draconian charges. The way the credit card companies have it now, if you make one late payment or your payment is returned by your bank, you are hit for the next six months with a Penalty Annual Percentage Rate of 29.49%.
In Europe entire countries are being foreclosed. Greece and Portugal have been forced into liquidation of national assets and the social security systems. So many women have been forced into poverty and prostitution that the hourly price of a prostitute has been driven down to $4.12.
Throughout the Western world the financial system has become an exploiter of the people and a deadweight loss on economies. There are only two possible solutions. One is to break the large banks up into smaller and local entities such as existed prior to the concentration that deregulation fostered.
The other is to nationalize them and operate them solely in the interest of the general welfare of the population.
The banks are too powerful currently for either solution to occur. But the greed, fraud, and self-serving behavior of Western financial systems, aided and abeted by governments, could be leading to such a breakdown of economic life that the idea of a private financial system will become as abhorent in the future as Nazism is today.
Helicopter Money: Get Ready To Be Showered March 20 2016 | From: KiwiWatch
Day after day we are insulted by wannabe broadcasters like (in New Zealand) Paul Henry and Mike Hosking, who continue to interview ‘bank economists’ or ‘central bank analysts’ attempting to discover why the global economy is slowing down, what central bankers are doing about it and why our own economy is showing signs of this distress.
Only Luddites would interview the people who are the very cause of the problem hoping to get a glimpse of the solution.
Massive government and private debt that has spiraled hugely since the unresolved 2008 ‘Global Financial Crisis’ is the major cause of the problem. 2008 wasn’t an event with an ending. It’s continuing and just got a whole lot worse in the interim due to massive central bank money printing, zero interest rates (ZIRP), Quantative Easing (QE), now negative interest rates (NIRP) and now a war on cash.
Central bankers are out of time, clueless as to what to do. Everything they try is an experiment, the consequences are unknown. Why bother interviewing the fools causing the problem? Instead why not interview people who can come up with a non bank solution?
Spiraling debt comes from the manner in which banks create money by the Fractional Reserve system that has empowered banks to become the almighty and powerful entities, ‘too large to fail’. That is the cause of the problem along with the now massive deflationary force of an aging baby boomer generation keeping their wallets in the hip pocket, spending less.
Back in the 1970’s a local (N.Z.) politician called Bruce Beetham promoted a political party called Social Credit whose basis was that the government should be the sole creator of credit in a nation disempowering bankers out of this role.
He was maligned as a ‘funny money’ man. In hind sight this solution would have solved the problem of bankers becoming the all powerful and kept our country from being beggars in the global credit markets… controlled by banks.
But maybe, just maybe there are politicians who themselves are going to be attacked and maligned by the powerful bank lobby as ‘nutters’ are thinking about ways governments are going to monetize the debt they can’t repay. Whatever result the lunacy of central bank thinking is past the use by date.
Consumed is a dramatic thriller that explores the complex world of genetically modified food.
The story is anchored by a working-class, single Mother on a hunt to uncover the cause of her son's mysterious illness.
Interwoven are the stories of an Organic farmer, the CEO of a biotechnology corporation, two Scientists on the verge of a major discovery, and an ex-Cop caught in the middle of it all.
Edward Snowden: "Global Warming Is An Invention Of The CIA" March 19 2016 | From: WorldNewsDailyReport
National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, has made a new controversial claim yesterday during an interview, saying that he possesses some classified information proving that the CIA is behind the “theory of Global Warming”.
Mr. Snowden says that the documents proving that the CIA invented the whole thing will be integrally reproduced in his new book, expected to be released in September 2016.
Snowden, who lives as a fugitive in Russia after leaking documents about the NSA’s surveillance programs, has made some previously unreported allegations during an interview with the Moscow Tribune.
Mr. Snowden says the CIA first orchestrated the spread of the “Global Warming scare” in the 1950s, in order to divert the attention of the scientific community, from the dangers of the weapons race and reinforce its control over research institutes.
"I have documents showing that the CIA invented the whole thing,” claims Edward Snowden. “Global Warming was invented to both scare people, and divert their attention from other human-made dangers like nuclear weapons.
The CIA gave millions of dollars to any scientist who would confirm the theory, so many unscrupulous scientists did what they were told in order to get the money. Now, there is so much fake data to confirm that Global Warming “exists”, that they actually convinced everyone that it was real.”
Edward Snowden was hired by an NSA contractor in 2013 after previous employment with Dell and the CIA. In the month of June of the same year, he revealed thousands of classified NSA documents to journalists. He also claims to be in possession of CIA documents, linking the agency to many illegal activities.
The US government filed espionage charges against him shortly after his revelations were made public. He has been living under asylum in Moscow, after fleeing the US for Hong Kong in the wake of the leaks.
On July 28 2015, the White House has rejected a “We the People” petition of nearly 168,000 signatories, to pardon him.
He has since threatened to release other documents in his possession, which he claims would be far more embarrassing for the American government than the ones he has already rendered public.
DARK Act Defeated In U.S. Senate As Lawmakers Receive Tidal Wave Of Calls From Angry Food Consumers Who Are Tired Of Being LIED To About GMO In Their Food March 19 2016 | From: NaturalNews
The DARK Act has been defeated in the U.S. Senate, achieving a massive victory for consumers and also for the Environmental Working Group, which helped organize large-scale opposition to the bill.
The DARK Act would have outlawed state-level GMO labeling laws nationwide, condemning American food consumers to remaining completely in the dark over the genetically engineered content of their food. This outcome is also somewhat of a harbinger for countries in the rest of the world...
Natural News thanks all our readers who took action to help defeat the DARK Act. We are fighting for your right to know what you're eating, and with your help, we really can defeat Monsanto and its minions like Ted Cruz. ("Monsatan's Preacher.")
Tidal Wave of Calls Slammed Senators Nationwide
I spoke to industry insiders this morning who confirmed that the offices of many U.S. Senators were hit hard with a "tidal wave of calls" from concerned Americans. Even many Republican senators are starting to come around on this issue, and GMO labeling continues to gain steam across the country as food consumers increase their demand for honest food labels and overall food transparency.
“In a major win for consumers, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) failed to earn the votes he needed to stop debate on a bill known to opponents as the Deny Americans the Right to Know Act, or DARK Act.
According to EWG, the defeat of the DARK Act offers Congress the opportunity to find a compromise for a national mandatory GMO labeling measure that consumers and industry can support.
Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs, said:
"Consumers have made their voices heard to their elected representatives in the Senate and they said clearly, 'We want the right to know more about our food.' We are pleased that the Senate made the right decision to stop the DARK Act, and we remain hopeful that Congressional leaders can craft a national mandatory compromise that works for consumers and the food industry. We applaud Senators Debbie Stabenow, Jeff Merkley, Jon Tester, Barbara Boxer and Pat Leahy for their efforts to defeat the DARK Act.""
Scott Faber Vindicated After Mini Civil War Inside the Labeling Movement
The defeat of the DARK Act vindicates Scott Faber, who was previously accused by several pro-labeling industry insiders as siphoning money away from state ballot measures (Natural News covered this story and quoted three industry sources). However, it is clear from today's victory that Scott Faber is working hard for labeling at the national level, and he deserves tremendous credit for today's victory, regardless of the previous disagreements among labeling advocates in the "states vs. federal" debate.
It's clear that the Environmental Working Group and the Just Label It campaign are both on the right track so far, and the EWG now tells Natural News that they fully support the Merkley bill created by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore) which creates a national mandatory standard for GMO labeling.
“Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, today praised the introduction of the Biotechnology Food Labeling Uniformity Act. The legislation, sponsored by Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), would create a national standard for GMO labeling and require food manufacturers to label products with GMO ingredients via one of several options on the ingredients list section of the Nutrition Facts Panel.
Another option would give FDA the authority to develop a symbol, in consultation with food manufacturers, which would disclose the presence of GM ingredients on packaging.
Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, said, "This is what real disclosure looks like. This bill finds a way to set a national standard and avoid a patchwork of state labeling laws while still giving consumers the information they want and deserve about what's in their food.
This compromise offers food companies different labeling options and ensures that all consumers – no matter where they are in the country or whether they own a smartphone – have the information they overwhelmingly say they want. We urge Senators to support this proposal as they move forward on GMO labeling legislation."
Merkley's bill comes the day after the Senate Agriculture Committee voted to move forward an anti-consumer bill that would preempt state GMO labeling laws and direct USDA to develop duplicative standards for voluntary labeling and promote biotechnology.
The legislation, which is supported by biotech giants and some of the country's largest food companies, is the latest attempt to block a Vermont law requiring labeling on the package of genetically engineered food sold in the state before it goes in to effect July 1.
Consumers Union is urging consumers to call on their lawmakers to oppose preemption of state GMO labeling laws, and to support meaningful, mandatory on-package labeling for GMO foods, including engineered animals like salmon and engineered produce and processed food. To learn more, visit: ConsumersUnion.org/RightToKnow
Countries Sign The TPPA: Whatever Happened To The 'Debate' We Were Promised Before Signing? March 18 2016 | From: TechDirt
In New Zealand there is a pathetic "Roadshow" PR excercise because of the 30,000 strong protesters that gridlocked Auckland city on the day of the globalists 'signing' of the TPPA - a protest that state-controlledTVNZ news said was only around 1,000 people.
The New Zealand Traitor Prime Sinister John Key is even pushing for the law changes the TPPA would enforce EVEN BEFORE ratification and says the law changes WILL NOT be undone if the TPPA fails ratification.
The stated purpose of this 90 day clock was in order to allow "debate" about the agreement. Remember, the entire agreement was negotiated in secret, with US officials treating the text of the document as if it were a national security secret (unless you were an industry lobbyist, of course).
So as a nod to pretend "transparency" there was a promise that nothing would be signed for 90 days after the text was actually released.
So... uh... what happened to that "debate"? It didn't happen at all. The TPP was barely mentioned at all by the administration in the last 90 days. Even during the State of the Union, Obama breezed past the TPP with a quick comment, even though it's supposedly a defining part of his "legacy."
But there's been no debate. Because there was never any intent for an actual debate. The 90 day clock was just something that was put into the process so that the USTR and the White House could pretend that there was more "transparency" and that they wouldn't sign the agreement until after it had been looked at and understood by the public.
Of course, the signing is a totally meaningless bit of theater. The real fight is over ratification.
The various countries need to ratify the TPP for the agreement to go into effect. Technically, the TPP will enter into force 60 days after all signers ratify it... or, if that doesn't happen, within two years if at least six of the 12 participant countries ratify it and those six countries account for 85% of the combined gross domestic product of the 12 countries.
Got that? In short, this means that if the US doesn't ratify it, the TPP is effectively dead.
The US needs a majority of both houses of Congress to approve it, similar to a typical bill. And that's no sure thing right now. Unfortunately, that's mainly because a group of our elected officials are upset that the TPP doesn't go far enough in helping big businesses block competition, but it's still worth following.
Inevitably, there will be some debate during the ratification process, though there are enough rumors suggesting that no one really wants to do it until after the Presidential election, because people running for President don't want to reveal that they're happy to sell out the public's interest to support a legacy business lobbyist agenda.
But, even that debate will likely be fairly limited and almost certainly will avoid the real issues, and real problems, with the TPP.
Either way, today's symbolic signing should really be an exclamation point on the near total lack of transparency and debate in this process. The 90 day window was a perfect opportunity to have an actual discussion about what's in the TPP and why there are problems with it, but the administration showed absolutely no interest in doing so.
And why should it? It already got the deal it wanted behind closed doors. But, at least it can pretend it used these 90 days to be "transparent."
Researcher Discovers A Huge Pyramid On Antarctica Using Satellite Images March 18 2016 | From: EWAO
According to Vicente Fuentes, a vivid researcher, there is in fact, at least, one pyramid hidden beneath the vast sheet of Ice on Antarctica.
According to Fuentes, the satellite image could prove to be the ultimate evidence of a pyramidal structure located on the main ridge of Antarctica.
This would mean that in the distant past, when Antarctica was much different than it is today, ancient civilizations could have developed on the now-frozen continent, leaving behind marvelous constructions, telling the story of a time, when our planet was inhabited by different civilizations, at a completely different time, omitted by history and mainstream researchers.
In the video, Fuentes (hoping your Spanish is up to scratch) goes through the main characteristics of the Pyramid and other structures that could be located on the vast sheet of ice, making comparisons to the Great Pyramid of Egypt.
Check out the coordinates of the anomalous structure: 79°58’39.25″S / 81°57’32.21″
The idea that there are Pyramids hidden at Antarctica goes back several decades. While Skeptics remain unconfident, suggesting that these structures are mere natural formations, satellite images and accounts of people traveling there tell a much different story.
The idea that these pyramids exist has caused speculation regarding what Antarctica was like in the distant past, some suggest, it wasn’t always as cold as it is today, and interestingly, scientific research seems to prove that Antarctica was very different in the distant past.
According to a research from 2009, scientist studied the icy continent collected samples and came across pollen particles in Antarctica suggesting that the ecosystem of Antarctica was very different in the past, pointing that the summer temperature reached around 20 degrees Celsius at one point.
"Go back 100 million years ago and Antarctica was covered in lush rainforests similar to those that exist in New Zealand today.”
- Dr Vanessa Bowman
In 2012, another team of researchers managed to identify 32 species of bacteria and 2,800-year-old halophile microbes in water samples from Lake Vida in East Antarctica. The permanent surface ice on the lake is the thickest non-glacial ice on earth.
According to researchers, during its long history, Antarctica was located farther north and experienced a tropical or temperate climate, meaning that it was covered in forests, and inhabited by various ancient life forms. What does this mean?
Well… given the little we know about the life on our planet in the distant past, it is likely that people lived on this now, icy continent and developed as a society just like people did in Africa, Europe, and Asia. Even though this is something considered as unlikely by mainstream scholars, the only way we will know for sure the secrets hidden beneath the ice is by exploring the continent and allowing society to see the results.
If we go back to Africa, we know that Scholars and Egyptologists have long suspected that the Sphinx is much older than believed, possibly even over 10,000 years old.
These theories are supported by the discovery of water erosion on the gigantic Sphinx, which according to scholars tells the story of extreme climate change in the distant past.
This means that if the climate in Africa and other parts of the world changed drastically, it is possible that the same thing happened in Antarctica in the distant past. If researchers manage to prove that the pyramids of Antarctica are man-made structures, the discovery could cause a major revision of the history of humanity.
But myths and speculation about Terra Australis date back to the antiquity. Around 350 B.C. Aristotle wrote in his book, meteorology, about the Antarctic region. Marinus of Tyre, a Greek geographer, cartographer and mathematician used the name in a world map of the second century A.D.
People believed in the distant past that a landmass called Terra Australis existed; a giant continent located in the southern parts of the planet which was there to provide a “balance” for the northern lands of Europe, Asia, and North Africa. This idea existed since the times of Ptolemy, the first-century A.D.
The Top Of The Pyramid: The Rothschilds, The Vatican And The British Crown Rule World March 17 2016 | From: HumansAreFree
There are two operant Crowns in England, one being Queen Elizabeth II. Although extremely wealthy, the Queen functions largely in a ceremonial capacity and serves to deflect attention away from the other Crown, who issues her marching orders through their control of the English Parliament.
AThis other Crown is comprised of a committee of 12 banks headed by the Bank of England (House of Rothschild). They rule the world from the 677-acre, independent sovereign state know as The City of London, or simply 'The City.'
The City is referred to as the wealthiest square mile on earth and is presided over by a Lord Mayor who is appointed annually.
When the Queen wishes to conduct business within the City, she is met by the Lord Mayor at Temple (Templar) Bar where she requests permission to enter this private, sovereign state. She then proceeds into the City walking several paces behind the Mayor.
Her entourage may not be clothed in anything other than service uniforms.
In the nineteenth century, 90% of the world's trade was carried by British ships controlled by the Crown. The other 10% of ships had to pay commissions to the Crown simply for the privilege of using the world's oceans.
The Crown reaped billions in profits while operating under the protection of the British armed forces. This was not British commerce or British wealth, but the Crown's commerce and the Crown's wealth.
As of 1850, author Frederic Morton estimated the Rothschild fortune to be in excess of $10 billion (today, the combined wealth of the banking dynasties is estimated at around $500 trillion).
"I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets.
The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.
- Nathan Rothschild
Today, the bonded indebtedness of the world is held by the Crown.
The aforementioned Temple Bar is the juristic arm of the Crown and holds an exclusive monopoly on global legal fraud through their Bar Association franchises. The Temple Bar is comprised of four Inns of Court.
They are: the Middle Temple, Inner Temple, Lincoln's Inn and Gray's Inn. The entry point to these closed secret societies is only to be found when one is called to their Bar.
The Bar attorneys in the United States owe their allegiance and pledge their oaths to the Crown. All Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the International Bar Association located at the Inns of Court of the Crown Temple.
The Inner Temple holds the legal system franchise by license that bleeds Canada and Great Britain white, while the Middle Temple has license to steal from America.
To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter 'S,' denotes a legal entity of the Crown.
At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown.
There is no lawful effect when a party signs as both the first and second parties. The Declaration was simply an internal memo circulating among private members of the Crown.
Most Americans believe that they own their own land, but they have merely purchased real estate by contract. Upon fulfillment of the contract, control of the land is transferred by Warranty Deed.
The Warranty Deed is only a 'color of title.' Color of Title is a semblance or appearance of title, but not title in fact or in law. The Warranty Deed cannot stand against the Land Patent.
The Crown was granted Land Patents in North America by the King of England. Colonials rebelled at the usurious Crown taxes, and thus the Declaration of Independence was created to pacify the populace.
Another ruse used to hoodwink natural persons is by enfranchisement. Those cards in your wallet bearing your name spelled in all capital letters means that you have been enfranchised and have the status of a corporation.
A 'juristic personality' has been created, and you have entered into multi-variant agreements that place you in an equity relationship with the Crown.
These invisible contracts include, birth certificates, citizenship records, employment agreements, driver's licenses and bank accounts. It is perhaps helpful to note here that contracts do not now, nor have they ever had to be stated in writing in order to be enforceable by American judges. If it is written down, it is merely a written statement of the contract.
Tax protestors and (the coming) draft resistors trying to renounce the parts of these contracts that they now disagree with will not profit by resorting to tort law (fairness) arguments as justification. Judges will reject these lines of defense as they have no bearing on contract law jurisprudence. Tort law governs grievances where no contract law is in effect.
These private agreements/contracts that bind us will always overrule the broad general clauses of the Constitution and Bill of Rights (the Constitution being essentially a renamed enactment of English common law). The Bill of Rights is viewed by the Crown as a 'bill of benefits,' conferred on us by them in anticipation of reciprocity (taxes).
Protestors and resistors will also lose their cases by boasting of citizenship status. Citizenship is another equity agreement that we have with the Crown. And this is the very juristic contract that Federal judges will use to incarcerate them.
In the words of former Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter,"Equity is brutal, but we are merely enforcing agreements."
"The balance of Title 42, section 1981 of the Civil Rights Code states," citizens shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind"
What we view as citizenship, the Crown views as a juristic enrichment instrumentality. It also should be borne in mind that even cursory circulation or commercial use of Federal Reserve Notes effects an attachment of liability for the payment of the Crown's debt to the FED. This is measured by your taxable income.
And to facilitate future asset-stripping, the end of the 14th amendment includes a state of debt hypothecation of the United States, wherein all enfranchised persons (that's you) can be held personally liable for the Crown's debt.
The Crown views our participation in these contracts of commercial equity as being voluntary and that any gain accrued is taxable, as the gain wouldn't have been possible were in not for the Crown.
They view the system of interstate banks as their own property. Any profit or gain experienced by anyone with a bank account (or loan, mortgage or credit card) carries with it - as an operation of law - the identical same full force and effect as if the Crown had created the gain.
Bank accounts fall outside the umbrella of Fourth Amendment protection because a commercial contract is in effect and the Bill of Rights cannot be held to interfere with the execution of commercial contracts. The Crown also views bank account records as their own private property, pursuant to the bank contract that each of us signed and that none of us ever read.
The rare individual who actually reads the bank contract will find that they agreed to be bound by Title 26 and under section 7202 agreed not to disseminate any fraudulent tax advice. This written contract with the Crown also acknowledges that bank notes are taxable instruments of commerce.
When we initially opened a bank account, another juristic personality was created. It is this personality (income and assets) that IRS agents are excising back to the Crown through taxation.
A lot of ink is being spilled currently over Social Security.
Possession of a Social Security Number is known in the Crown's lex as 'conclusive evidence' of our having accepted federal commercial benefits. This is another example of an equity relationship with the Crown.
Presenting one's Social Security Number to an employer seals our status as taxpayers, and gives rise to liability for a reciprocal quid pro quo payment of taxes to the Crown.
Through the Social Security Number we are accepting future retirement endowment benefits. Social Security is a strange animal. If you die, your spouse gets nothing, but rather, what would have gone to you is divided (forfeited) among other premium payers who haven't died yet.
But the Crown views failure to reciprocate in any of these equity attachments as an act of defilement and will proceed against us with all due prejudice.
For a person to escape the tentacles of the Crown octopus, a thoroughgoing study of American jurisprudence is required. One would have to be deemed a 'stranger to the public trust,' forfeit all enfranchisement benefits and close all bank accounts, among other things.
Citizenship would have to be made null and forfeit and the status of 'denizen' enacted. If there are any persons extant who have passed through this fire, I would certainly appreciate hearing from them.
The USA is, and always has been, a huge corporation ruled from abroad. Its initial name was the Virginia Company and it is owned by the British Crown and the Vatican, who receive their yearly share of the profits.
The US presidents are appointed CEO's (they are not elected by us!), and their allegiance is to the "board of directors," not to the American citizens. We are seen as employees of the company and voting is designed as a distraction meant to offer us the illusion that we have a say in all this.
"In 1606 [King] James set up the Virginia Company which was granted Royal authority to begin settlements in the province of Virginia, named after Elizabeth I, who had been popularly called the Virgin Queen. The Union Jack first flew on American soil at Jamestown in Virginia as a permanent fixture in the spring of 1607...
"The early members of the Virginia Company were aristocrats who supported the Church of England and the Royalist cause. They included Lord Southampton, the Earl of Pembroke, the Earl of Montgomery, the Earl of Salisbury, the Earl of Northampton, and Sir Francis Bacon...
"As chancellor of England, Bacon was able to persuade the king to issue the charters which enabled the new colonies to proliferate in the new world...
"The Virginia Company members who actually settled in America included several members of the Bacon family, and friends of his who were initiates of the Rosy Cross."
"The House of Burgesses was formed in Jamestown in 1619. It was the first representative legislative body in the American Colonies. The House passed measures designed to help the company prosper.
But a serious Indian uprising in Jamestown in 1622 caused the adventurers to lose what little interest they had left. In 1623, King James decided that the company was being managed poorly. He took over the association in 1624 and dissolved the company."
"Its shareholders were Londoners, and it was distinguished from the Plymouth Company, which was chartered at the same time and composed largely of men from Plymouth."
"In 1619 the company established continental America’s first true legislature, the General Assembly, which was organized bicamerally. It consisted of the governor and his council, named by the company in England, and the House of Burgesses, made up of two burgesses from each of the four boroughs and seven plantations."
"...The court ruled against the Virginia Company, which was then dissolved, with the result that Virginia was transformed into a royal colony."
"But the biggest problem that the so-called "elite families" have; is that many of their own offspring, the siblings withing the bloodlines; have had enough. Many have been put through so much for so long that they are working against the overarching directive.
They detest what they were born into. And they want out.
The sick and twisted luciferian (too weak to even own up to acknowledging that they are satanic) rituals continue to be exposed; what has been taking place in London with Saville et al, in Australia with the Kidmans - it will all continue to come out."
"This means that all the rights which applied to the owners of the Virginia Company to the gold, silver, minerals and duties, mined and paid in America, still apply to the British families who own the United States of America and the lands of the united states of America.
"Those same percentages have been paid since ‘independence’ and are still being paid by the American people via their federal officials who are, in fact, officials of the Virginia Company - yes, including the President.
"...But here’s yet another twist. Who owns the assets apparently owned by the Virginia Company? Answer: the Vatican."
"After the original 13 (again!) American colonies won their ‘independence’ and an ‘independent’ country was formed after 1783, the Virginia Company simply changed its name to... the United States of America.
"You see there are two USAs, or rather a USA and a usA. The united states of America with a lower case ‘u’ and ‘s’ are the lands of the various states. These lands, as we have seen, are still owned by the British Crown as the head of the old Virginia Company, although there is something to add about this in a moment.
"Then there is the United States of America, capital ‘U’ and ‘S’, which is the 68 square miles of land west of the Potomac River on which is built the federal capital, Washington DC and the District of Columbia. It also includes the US protectorates of Guam and Puerto Rico.
"The United States of America is not a country, it is a corporation owned by the same Brotherhood reptilian bloodlines who owned the Virginia Company, because the USA is the Virginia Company!"
"In 1604, a group of leading politicians, businessmen, merchants, manufacturers and bankers, met in Greenwich, then in the English county of Kent, and formed a corporation called the Virginia Company in anticipation of the imminent influx of white Europeans, mostly British at first, into the North American continent.
"Its main stockholder was the reptilian, King James I, and the original charter for the company was completed by April 10th 1606. This and later updates to the charter established the following:
"...The Virginia Company comprised of two branches, the London Company and the Plymouth or New England Company...The ‘Pilgrims’ of American historical myth were, in fact, members of the second Virginia Company branch called the New England Company. The Pilgrim Society is still a major elite grouping within the Illuminati..
"The Virginia Company owned most of the land of what we now call the USA, and any lands up to 900 miles offshore. This included Bermuda and most of what is now known as the Caribbean Islands.
"The Virginia Company (the British Crown and the bloodline families) had rights to 50%, yes 50%, of the ore of all gold and silver mined on its lands, plus percentages of other minerals and raw materials, and 5% of all profits from other ventures.
"These rights, the charters detailed, were to be passed on to all heirs of the owners of the Virginia Company and therefore continue to apply... forever!
"The controlling members of the Virginia Company who were to enjoy these rights became known as the Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London.
"After the first 21 years from the formation of the Virginia Company, all ‘duties, imposts, and excises’ paid on trading activities in the colonies had to be paid directly to the British Crown through the Crown treasurer...
"The lands of the Virginia Company were granted to the colonies under a Deed of Trust (on lease) and therefore they could not claim ownership of the land...
"The monarch, through his Council for the Colonies, insisted that members of the colonies impose the Christian religion on all the people, including the Native Americans...
"The criminal courts on the lands of the Virginia Company were to be operated under Admiralty Law, the law of the sea, and the civil courts under common law, the law of the land... Now, get this. All of the above still applies today!"
England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries are led politically by “Prime Ministers” to the Queen. In fact she is the official head of 123 commonwealth countries. America, Russia, and other countries, however, have a “President” and “Vice-President.”
Usually corporations have Presidents and Vice-Presidents. What does this mean? The US Presidents rule from the “White House.” The Russian Presidents also rule from the White House. The Jesuits, a large force behind the Illuminati, have their own White House as well. England is ruled from “Whitehall.”
"The United States government is being ruled from the ‘White House,’ the government of England is being ruled from what is called ‘Whitehall,’ and Whitehall, like our White House, is the symbol of power because the hall is like the Masonic hall, the lodge hall, the union hall.”
"For those who think America controls the roost it would do well to consider that the Queen of England is still the official head of Commonwealth (123 countries) and the official monarch of Australia and Canada along with the United Kingdom... add to that the fact that all Bush Sr. got for his two terms as president of USA is a mere knighthood of the British Empire."
The original 13 colonies were actually called companies. Military units are also called companies. We sing patriotic songs like “the Star-Spangled Banner” but a banner is a corporate advertisement, not a flag.
You surrender with a white flag, no colors. When you get mad you show your true colors. If you just won independence in a bloody revolution with Britain would you choose the same three colors for your new US flag?
Why does “every heart ring true for the red, white, and blue?” What about the gold-fringed flag used by the military, hung at all courts, schools, and government buildings? It all has to do with the British Maritime Admiralty Law of Flags.
Barack Obama is the current CEO of the USA Corporation and the gold-fringed flags in the background stand for "ruled from abroad."
"This is also known as British Maritime (military) Law and this is why the American flag always has a gold fringe when displayed in the courts of the United States. You find the same in government buildings and federally funded schools.
"The gold fringe is a legal symbol indicating that the court is sitting under British Maritime Law and the Uniform Commercial Code - military and merchant law not common or constitutional law, under the Admiralty Law of Flags, the flag displayed gives notice of the law under which the ship (in this case the court) is regulated.
"Anyone entering that ship (court) accepts by doing so that they are submitting to the law indicated by that flag. Judges refuse to replace the flag with one without a fringe when asked by defendants who know the score because that changes the law under which the court is sitting.
"If you appear in a court with a gold fringed flag your constitutional rights are suspended and you are being tried under British Maritime (military /merchant) Law.”
International Maritime Admiralty law, the law of the high seas, began in Sumeria, was perfected in Rome and continues to this day. Jordan Maxwell has explained that the way we trade commerce today is modeled after the Masons’/Templar Knights’ 1,000 year old system.
Notice how regardless of whether you send a product by air, water, or land - you “ship” it. The ship pulls into its “berth” and ties to the “dock.” The Captain has to provide the port authorities with a “certificate of manifest” declaring the products he has brought.
Through a legal loophole the royals have created, US citizens are considered property of the queen under British Maritime law. Since we are born of our mother’s water, from her “birth canal,” we are thereby a maritime product, a “shipped” commodity. Our mothers were delivering a product under maritime law and that’s why we are born in a “delivery room.”
That’s why the “doc” signs your “berth” certificate, your “certificate of manifest.” You’re kept in the Maternity “Ward.” Why a ward? No other hospital areas are called wards. Prisons have wards and wardens.
The United States Corporation came about just after the civil war. The Act of 1871 was passed by congress creating a separate form of government for DC, essentially turning it into a corporation.
It was decided that employees would be called “citizens.” So when you say in court or on paper, that you are a citizen of the United States, you are not a free American, but an employee of US Inc.
When you get a fine, a ticket, a bill, or get sued, you must sign in all capital letters. When you die your Masonic tombstone by law will have all capital letters to show their employee has died.
The entity that is your name in all caps is your maritime admiralty product code. Upper and lower case legally represents you, your body.
"The Uniform Commercial Code was approved by the American Bar Association, which is a franchise, a subordinate branch, of the British legal system and its hierarchy based in London's Temple Bar (named after the Illuminati Knights Templar secret society).
As I have been writing for many years, the power that controls America is based in Britain and Europe because that is where the power is located that owns the United States Corporation. By the way, if you think it is strange that a court on dry land could be administered under Maritime Law, look at US Code, Title 18 B 7.
It says that Admiralty Jurisdiction is applicable in the following locations: (1) the high seas; (2) any American ship; (3) any lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States, and under the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the state.
In other words, mainland America. All this is founded on Roman law because the Illuminati have been playing this same game throughout the centuries wherever they have gone. The major politicians know that this is how things are and so do the government administrators, judges, lawyers and insider 'journalists'.
Those who realize what is happening and ask the court for the name of the true creditor or recipients of the fines imposed by the 'legal system' are always refused this information by the judge.
The true creditors in such cases, and the ultimate recipient of the fines, are the bankers to which the corporation 'country' is bankrupt.”
Lawyers or “barristers” have to take the Bar Association “bar” exam just as alcoholics go to the “bar,” sugar-junkies eat candy “bars,” and gamblers hope to get 3 “bars” on the slot machine. These all derive from the Templar’s turn of the 13th century “Temple Bar” in England.
Originally the Temple Bar was literally just a bar or chain between two posts next to the Temple law courts. This soon became a huge stone gate and there were eventually eight of these gates built so the elites could restrict / control trade within the city of London.
They were taken down during 19th century, but then each stone was numbered and kept in storage until 2004 when they just re-built the Temple Bar in London.
"The United States corporation was created behind the screen of a 'Federal Government' when, after the manufactured 'victory' in the American War of 'Independence', the British colonies exchanged overt dictatorship from London with the far more effective covert dictatorship that has been in place ever since.
In effect, the Virginia Company, the corporation headed by the British Crown that controlled the 'former' colonies, simply changed its name to the United States and other related pseudonyms.
These include the US, USA, United States of America, Washington DC, District of Columbia, Federal Government and 'Feds'. The United States Corporation is based in the District of Columbia and the current president of the corporation is a man called George W. Bush.
He is not the president of the people or the country as they are led to believe, that's just the smokescreen. This means that Bush launched a 'war on terrorism' on behalf of a private corporation to further the goals of that corporation.
It had nothing to do with' America' or 'Americans' because these are very different legal entities. It is the United States Corporation that owns the United States military and everything else that comes under the term 'federal'.
This includes the Federal Reserve, the 'central bank' of the United States, which is, in reality, a private bank owned by controlling stockholders (and controllers of the US Corporation) that are not even American. This is the bank from which the United States Corporation borrows 'money'.”
"If you notice on the bottom of your birth certificate it says Department of Commerce. It is a property of the Department of Commerce because you are nothing more than a piece of commercial material. That’s why if you’re out of work you don’t go to the unemployment office, you go to the Office of Human Resources, because you’re just a human resource.”
The Judge sits on the bench for the bank. Banks are on both sides of a river. A river bank directs the flow of the current/sea - the currency, the cash flow. The current-sea is “deposited” from bank to bank down the river.
We’re just “consumers” to advertise to, just “human resources” to be used up like batteries, and they are the “social engineers,” molding us “useless eaters” into wage slavery.
My personal research and information gathered over the years shows indisputable evidence that he is not only embedded and indoctrinated into "The Club Of Rome", the Cabal and Illuminati but he has been personally involved in:
10. The sale of these farms to his Cabalist buddies fleeing here under the guise of the Syrian refugee crisis by relaxing immigration laws
11. The ability for foreign corporations to sponsor Charter Schools which allows them to invest millions in land purchases
12. Keys coalition alliances with NATO and the USA now being exposed as funders of all terror organizations including ISIS, AL QAEADA, ISIL, IS, DAESH, BOKO HARUN, THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, , AL NUSRA FRONT making him guilty of Treason and violates every section of The NZ Terrorism Suppression Act 2007
This is the intention of this Cabal owned govt and every Cabinet Minister, Labour Party hierarchy, even certain members of 3rd and 4th tier political parties such as Jesuit trained Green Party leader, Russel Norman, a self confessed Communist to Winston Peters, an Oxford University trained and indoctrinated Rhodes Scholar.
Explosive Exposé: The Secret Government, Anti-Gravity Technology And Black Budget Projects March 17 2016 | From: 21stCenturyWire
How much history is missing from the textbooks?
During the Cold War, a number of nefarious activities took place behind the scenes within the U.S. Government.
Dr Steven Greer presents an explosive exposé of a forgotten history, including Operation Paperclip, a program to bring Nazi scientists across the Atlantic and away from the Nuremberg Trials, the potential for an infinite energy source, government acknowledged existence of UFOs and the military industrial complex.
Check out this immense, thought-provoking presentation below - but bare in mind that Dr. Greers knowledge of the various ET groups and their intentions is incomplete and incorrect in that he believes that ALL ET groups are benevolent. This is blatantly not true. I do not believe that he is intentionally misinforming people on this point, but that hae has not had access to the information.
Do you believe the government has been totally corrupted and derailed by clandestine forces?
The New Mind Control: “Subliminal Stimulation”; Controlling People Without Their Knowledge March 16 2016 | From: GlobalResearch
The internet has spawned subtle forms of influence that can flip elections and manipulate everything we say, think and do.
Over the past century, more than a few great writers have expressed concern about humanity’s future. In The Iron Heel (1908), the American writer Jack London pictured a world in which a handful of wealthy corporate titans – the ‘oligarchs’ – kept the masses at bay with a brutal combination of rewards and punishments. Much of humanity lived in virtual slavery, while the fortunate ones were bought off with decent wages that allowed them to live comfortably – but without any real control over their lives.
In We (1924), the brilliant Russian writer Yevgeny Zamyatin, anticipating the excesses of the emerging Soviet Union, envisioned a world in which people were kept in check through pervasive monitoring.
The walls of their homes were made of clear glass, so everything they did could be observed. They were allowed to lower their shades an hour a day to have sex, but both the rendezvous time and the lover had to be registered first with the state.
In Brave New World (1932), the British author Aldous Huxley pictured a near-perfect society in which unhappiness and aggression had been engineered out of humanity through a combination of genetic engineering and psychological conditioning.
And in the much darker novel 1984 (1949), Huxley’s compatriot George Orwell described a society in which thought itself was controlled; in Orwell’s world, children were taught to use a simplified form of English called Newspeak in order to assure that they could never express ideas that were dangerous to society.
These are all fictional tales, to be sure, and in each the leaders who held the power used conspicuous forms of control that at least a few people actively resisted and occasionally overcame.
But in the non-fiction bestseller The Hidden Persuaders (1957) – recently released in a 50th-anniversary edition – the American journalist Vance Packard described a ‘strange and rather exotic’ type of influence that was rapidly emerging in the United States and that was, in a way, more threatening than the fictional types of control pictured in the novels.
According to Packard, US corporate executives and politicians were beginning to use subtle and, in many cases, completely undetectable methods to change people’s thinking, emotions and behaviour based on insights from psychiatry and the social sciences.
Most of us have heard of at least one of these methods: subliminal stimulation, or what Packard called ‘subthreshold effects’ – the presentation of short messages that tell us what to do but that are flashed so briefly we aren’t aware we have seen them.
In 1958, propelled by public concern about a theatre in New Jersey that had supposedly hidden messages in a movie to increase ice cream sales, the National Association of Broadcasters – the association that set standards for US television – amended its code to prohibit the use of subliminal messages in broadcasting.
In 1974, the Federal Communications Commission opined that the use of such messages was ‘contrary to the public interest’.
Legislation to prohibit subliminal messaging was also introduced in the US Congress but never enacted.
Both the UK and Australia have strict laws prohibiting it.
Subliminal stimulation is probably still in wide use in the US – it’s hard to detect, after all, and no one is keeping track of it – but it’s probably not worth worrying about.
Research suggests that it has only a small impact, and that it mainly influences people who are already motivated to follow its dictates; subliminal directives to drink affect people only if they’re already thirsty.
Packard had uncovered a much bigger problem, however – namely that powerful corporations were constantly looking for, and in many cases already applying, a wide variety of techniques for controlling people without their knowledge.
He described a kind of cabal in which marketers worked closely with social scientists to determine, among other things, how to get people to buy things they didn’t need and how to condition young children to be good consumers – inclinations that were explicitly nurtured and trained in Huxley’s Brave New World.
Guided by social science, marketers were quickly learning how to play upon people’s insecurities, frailties, unconscious fears, aggressive feelings and sexual desires to alter their thinking, emotions and behaviour without any awareness that they were being manipulated.
By the early 1950s, Packard said, politicians had got the message and were beginning to merchandise themselves using the same subtle forces being used to sell soap. Packard prefaced his chapter on politics with an unsettling quote from the British economist Kenneth Boulding:
"A world of unseen dictatorship is conceivable, still using the forms of democratic government."
Could this really happen, and, if so, how would it work?
The forces that Packard described have become more pervasive over the decades. The soothing music we all hear overhead in supermarkets causes us to walk more slowly and buy more food, whether we need it or not. Most of the vacuous thoughts and intense feelings our teenagers experience from morning till night are carefully orchestrated by highly skilled marketing professionals working in our fashion and entertainment industries.
Yes, New Zealand has a national chain of supermarkets that are actually called New World... where you can take your New World grocery Order - oh the irony
Politicians work with a wide range of consultants who test every aspect of what the politicians do in order to sway voters: clothing, intonations, facial expressions, makeup, hairstyles and speeches are all optimised, just like the packaging of a breakfast cereal.
Fortunately, all of these sources of influence operate competitively. Some of the persuaders want us to buy or believe one thing, others to buy or believe something else. It is the competitive nature of our society that keeps us, on balance, relatively free.
But what would happen if new sources of control began to emerge that had little or no competition? And what if new means of control were developed that were far more powerful – and far more invisible – than any that have existed in the past? And what if new types of control allowed a handful of people to exert enormous influence not just over the citizens of the US but over most of the people on Earth?
To understand how the new forms of mind control work, we need to start by looking at the search engine – one in particular: the biggest and best of them all, namely Google. The Google search engine is so good and so popular that the company’s name is now a commonly used verb in languages around the world.
To ‘Google’ something is to look it up on the Google search engine, and that, in fact, is how most computer users worldwide get most of their information about just about everything these days.
They Google it.
Google has become the main gateway to virtually all knowledge, mainly because the search engine is so good at giving us exactly the information we are looking for, almost instantly and almost always in the first position of the list it shows us after we launch our search – the list of ‘search results’.
That ordered list is so good, in fact, that about 50 per cent of our clicks go to the top two items, and more than 90 per cent of our clicks go to the 10 items listed on the first page of results; few people look at other results pages, even though they often number in the thousands, which means they probably contain lots of good information.
Google decides which of the billions of web pages it is going to include in our search results, and it also decides how to rank them. How it decides these things is a deep, dark secret – one of the best-kept secrets in the world, like the formula for Coca-Cola.
Because people are far more likely to read and click on higher-ranked items, companies now spend billions of dollars every year trying to trick Google’s search algorithm – the computer program that does the selecting and ranking – into boosting them another notch or two. Moving up a notch can mean the difference between success and failure for a business, and moving into the top slots can be the key to fat profits.
Late in 2012, I began to wonder whether highly ranked search results could be impacting more than consumer choices. Perhaps, I speculated, a top search result could have a small impact on people’s opinions about things. Early in 2013, with my associate Ronald E Robertson of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in Vista, California, I put this idea to a test by conducting an experiment in which 102 people from the San Diego area were randomly assigned to one of three groups.
In one group, people saw search results that favoured one political candidate – that is, results that linked to web pages that made this candidate look better than his or her opponent. In a second group, people saw search rankings that favoured the opposing candidate, and in the third group – the control group – people saw a mix of rankings that favoured neither candidate. The same search results and web pages were used in each group; the only thing that differed for the three groups was the ordering of the search results.
To make our experiment realistic, we used real search results that linked to real web pages. We also used a real election – the 2010 election for the prime minister of Australia. We used a foreign election to make sure that our participants were ‘undecided’. Their lack of familiarity with the candidates assured this. Through advertisements, we also recruited an ethnically diverse group of registered voters over a wide age range in order to match key demographic characteristics of the US voting population.
All participants were first given brief descriptions of the candidates and then asked to rate them in various ways, as well as to indicate which candidate they would vote for; as you might expect, participants initially favoured neither candidate on any of the five measures we used, and the vote was evenly split in all three groups.
Then the participants were given up to 15 minutes in which to conduct an online search using ‘Kadoodle’, our mock search engine, which gave them access to five pages of search results that linked to web pages. People could move freely between search results and web pages, just as we do when using Google. When participants completed their search, we asked them to rate the candidates again, and we also asked them again who they would vote for.
We predicted that the opinions and voting preferences of 2 or 3 per cent of the people in the two bias groups – the groups in which people were seeing rankings favouring one candidate – would shift toward that candidate. What we actually found was astonishing.
The proportion of people favouring the search engine’s top-ranked candidate increased by 48.4 per cent, and all five of our measures shifted toward that candidate. What’s more, 75 per cent of the people in the bias groups seemed to have been completely unaware that they were viewing biased search rankings. In the control group, opinions did not shift significantly.
Google's own by-line was a piss take
This seemed to be a major discovery. The shift we had produced, which we called the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (or SEME, pronounced ‘seem’), appeared to be one of the largest behavioural effects ever discovered. We did not immediately uncork the Champagne bottle, however. For one thing, we had tested only a small number of people, and they were all from the San Diego area.
Over the next year or so, we replicated our findings three more times, and the third time was with a sample of more than 2,000 people from all 50 US states. In that experiment, the shift in voting preferences was 37.1 per cent and even higher in some demographic groups – as high as 80 per cent, in fact.
We also learned in this series of experiments that by reducing the bias just slightly on the first page of search results – specifically, by including one search item that favoured the other candidate in the third or fourth position of the results – we could mask our manipulation so that few or even no people were aware that they were seeing biased rankings. We could still produce dramatic shifts in voting preferences, but we could do so invisibly.
Still no Champagne, though. Our results were strong and consistent, but our experiments all involved a foreign election – that 2010 election in Australia. Could voting preferences be shifted with real voters in the middle of a real campaign? We were skeptical. In real elections, people are bombarded with multiple sources of information, and they also know a lot about the candidates. It seemed unlikely that a single experience on a search engine would have much impact on their voting preferences.
To find out, in early 2014, we went to India just before voting began in the largest democratic election in the world – the Lok Sabha election for prime minister. The three main candidates were Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, and Narendra Modi. Making use of online subject pools and both online and print advertisements, we recruited 2,150 people from 27 of India’s 35 states and territories to participate in our experiment. To take part, they had to be registered voters who had not yet voted and who were still undecided about how they would vote.
Participants were randomly assigned to three search-engine groups, favouring, respectively, Gandhi, Kejriwal or Modi. As one might expect, familiarity levels with the candidates was high – between 7.7 and 8.5 on a scale of 10. We predicted that our manipulation would produce a very small effect, if any, but that’s not what we found.
This prick is all over the place
On average, we were able to shift the proportion of people favouring any given candidate by more than 20 per cent overall and more than 60 per cent in some demographic groups. Even more disturbing, 99.5 per cent of our participants showed no awareness that they were viewing biased search rankings – in other words, that they were being manipulated.
SEME’s near-invisibility is curious indeed. It means that when people – including you and me – are looking at biased search rankings, they look just fine. So if right now you Google ‘US presidential candidates’, the search results you see will probably look fairly random, even if they happen to favour one candidate. Even I have trouble detecting bias in search rankings that I know to be biased (because they were prepared by my staff).
They can't get rid of you Donald
Yet our randomised, controlled experiments tell us over and over again that when higher-ranked items connect with web pages that favour one candidate, this has a dramatic impact on the opinions of undecided voters, in large part for the simple reason that people tend to click only on higher-ranked items.
This is truly scary: like subliminal stimuli, SEME is a force you can’t see; but unlike subliminal stimuli, it has an enormous impact – like Casper the ghost pushing you down a flight of stairs.
We published a detailed report about our first five experiments on SEME in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in August 2015. We had indeed found something important, especially given Google’s dominance over search.
Google has a near-monopoly on internet searches in the US, with 83 per cent of Americans specifying Google as the search engine they use most often, according to the Pew Research Center. So if Google favours one candidate in an election, its impact on undecided voters could easily decide the election’s outcome.
Keep in mind that we had had only one shot at our participants. What would be the impact of favouring one candidate in searches people are conducting over a period of weeks or months before an election? It would almost certainly be much larger than what we were seeing in our experiments.
Other types of influence during an election campaign are balanced by competing sources of influence – a wide variety of newspapers, radio shows and television networks, for example – but Google, for all intents and purposes, has no competition, and people trust its search results implicitly, assuming that the company’s mysterious search algorithm is entirely objective and unbiased.
This high level of trust, combined with the lack of competition, puts Google in a unique position to impact elections. Even more disturbing, the search-ranking business is entirely unregulated, so Google could favour any candidate it likes without violating any laws. Some courts have even ruled that Google’s right to rank-order search results as it pleases is protected as a form of free speech.
Does the company ever favour particular candidates? In the 2012 US presidential election, Google and its top executives donated more than $800,000 to President Barack Obama and just $37,000 to his opponent, Mitt Romney.
And in 2015, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and elsewhere showed that Google’s search results routinely favoured Democratic candidates.
Are Google’s search rankings really biased? An internal report issued by the US Federal Trade Commission in 2012 concluded that Google’s search rankings routinely put Google’s financial interests ahead of those of their competitors, and anti-trust actions currently under way against Google in both the European Union and India are based on similar findings.
In most countries, 90 per cent of online search is conducted on Google, which gives the company even more power to flip elections than it has in the US and, with internet penetration increasing rapidly worldwide, this power is growing.
In our PNAS article, Robertson and I calculated that Google now has the power to flip upwards of 25 per cent of the national elections in the world with no one knowing this is occurring.
In fact, we estimate that, with or without deliberate planning on the part of company executives, Google’s search rankings have been impacting elections for years, with growing impact each year. And because search rankings are ephemeral, they leave no paper trail, which gives the company complete deniability.
Power on this scale and with this level of invisibility is unprecedented in human history. But it turns out that our discovery about SEME was just the tip of a very large iceberg.
Recent reports suggest that the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is making heavy use of social media to try to generate support – Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Snapchat and Facebook, for starters. At this writing, she has 5.4 million followers on Twitter, and her staff is tweeting several times an hour during waking hours. The Republican frontrunner, Donald Trump, has 5.9 million Twitter followers and is tweeting just as frequently.
Is social media as big a threat to democracy as search rankings appear to be?
When new technologies are used competitively, they present no threat. Even through the platforms are new, they are generally being used the same way as billboards and television commercials have been used for decades: you put a billboard on one side of the street; I put one on the other. I might have the money to erect more billboards than you, but the process is still competitive.
What happens, though, if such technologies are misused by the companies that own them? A study by Robert M Bond, now a political science professor at Ohio State University, and others published in Nature in 2012 described an ethically questionable experiment in which, on election day in 2010, Facebook sent ‘go out and vote’ reminders to more than 60 million of its users.
The reminders caused about 340,000 people to vote who otherwise would not have. Writing in the New Republic in 2014, Jonathan Zittrain, professor of international law at Harvard University, pointed out that, given the massive amount of information it has collected about its users, Facebook could easily send such messages only to people who support one particular party or candidate, and that doing so could easily flip a close election – with no one knowing that this has occurred. And because advertisements, like search rankings, are ephemeral, manipulating an election in this way would leave no paper trail.
Are there laws prohibiting Facebook from sending out ads selectively to certain users?
Absolutely not; in fact, targeted advertising is how Facebook makes its money.
Is Facebook currently manipulating elections in this way? No one knows, but in my view it would be foolish and possibly even improper for Facebook not to do so. Some candidates are better for a company than others, and Facebook’s executives have a fiduciary responsibility to the company’s stockholders to promote the company’s interests.
The Bond study was largely ignored, but another Facebook experiment, published in 2014 in PNAS, prompted protests around the world. In this study, for a period of a week, 689,000 Facebook users were sent news feeds that contained either an excess of positive terms, an excess of negative terms, or neither.
Those in the first group subsequently used slightly more positive terms in their communications, while those in the second group used slightly more negative terms in their communications. This was said to show that people’s ‘emotional states’ could be deliberately manipulated on a massive scale by a social media company, an idea that many people found disturbing. People were also upset that a large-scale experiment on emotion had been conducted without the explicit consent of any of the participants.
Facebook’s consumer profiles are undoubtedly massive, but they pale in comparison with those maintained by Google, which is collecting information about people 24/7, using more than 60 different observation platforms – the search engine, of course, but also Google Wallet, Google Maps, Google Adwords, Google Analytics, Chrome, Google Docs, Android, YouTube, and on and on.
Certainly, if Google set about to fix an election, it could first dip into its massive database of personal information to identify just those voters who are undecided. Then it could, day after day, send customised rankings favouring one candidate to just those people. One advantage of this approach is that it would make Google’s manipulation extremely difficult for investigators to detect.
Extreme forms of monitoring, whether by the KGB in the Soviet Union, the Stasi in East Germany, or Big Brother in 1984, are essential elements of all tyrannies, and technology is making both monitoring and the consolidation of surveillance data easier than ever.
By 2020, China will have put in place the most ambitious government monitoring system ever created – a single database called the Social Credit System, in which multiple ratings and records for all of its 1.3 billion citizens are recorded for easy access by officials and bureaucrats. At a glance, they will know whether someone has plagiarised schoolwork, was tardy in paying bills, urinated in public, or blogged inappropriately online.
As Edward Snowden’s revelations made clear, we are rapidly moving toward a world in which both governments and corporations – sometimes working together – are collecting massive amounts of data about every one of us every day, with few or no laws in place that restrict how those data can be used.
When you combine the data collection with the desire to control or manipulate, the possibilities are endless, but perhaps the most frightening possibility is the one expressed in Boulding’s assertion that an ‘unseen dictatorship’ was possible ‘using the forms of democratic government’.
Since Robertson and I submitted our initial report on SEME to PNAS early in 2015, we have completed a sophisticated series of experiments that have greatly enhanced our understanding of this phenomenon, and other experiments will be completed in the coming months. We have a much better sense now of why SEME is so powerful and how, to some extent, it can be suppressed.
We have also learned something very disturbing – that search engines are influencing far more than what people buy and whom they vote for. We now have evidence suggesting that on virtually all issues where people are initially undecided, search rankings are impacting almost every decision that people make.
They are having an impact on the opinions, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of internet users worldwide – entirely without people’s knowledge that this is occurring.
This is happening with or without deliberate intervention by company officials; even so-called ‘organic’ search processes regularly generate search results that favour one point of view, and that in turn has the potential to tip the opinions of millions of people who are undecided on an issue. In one of our recent experiments, biased search results shifted people’s opinions about the value of fracking by 33.9 per cent.
Perhaps even more disturbing is that the handful of people who do show awareness that they are viewing biased search rankings shift even further in the predicted direction; simply knowing that a list is biased doesn’t necessarily protect you from SEME’s power.
Remember what the search algorithm is doing: in response to your query, it is selecting a handful of webpages from among the billions that are available, and it is ordering those webpages using secret criteria.
Seconds later, the decision you make or the opinion you form – about the best toothpaste to use, whether fracking is safe, where you should go on your next vacation, who would make the best president, or whether global warming is real – is determined by that short list you are shown, even though you have no idea how the list was generated.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, a consolidation of search engines has been quietly taking place, so that more people are using the dominant search engine even when they think they are not. Because Google is the best search engine, and because crawling the rapidly expanding internet has become prohibitively expensive, more and more search engines are drawing their information from the leader rather than generating it themselves.
Looking ahead to the November 2016 US presidential election, I see clear signs that Google is backing Hillary Clinton. In April 2015, Clinton hired Stephanie Hannon away from Google to be her chief technology officer and, a few months ago, Eric Schmidt, chairman of the holding company that controls Google, set up a semi-secret company – The Groundwork – for the specific purpose of putting Clinton in office. The formation of The Groundwork prompted Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, to dub Google Clinton’s ‘secret weapon’ in her quest for the US presidency.
We now estimate that Hannon’s old friends have the power to drive between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Clinton on election day with no one knowing that this is occurring and without leaving a paper trail. They can also help her win the nomination, of course, by influencing undecided voters during the primaries. Swing voters have always been the key to winning elections, and there has never been a more powerful, efficient or inexpensive way to sway them than SEME.
We are living in a world in which a handful of high-tech companies, sometimes working hand-in-hand with governments, are not only monitoring much of our activity, but are also invisibly controlling more and more of what we think, feel, do and say.
The technology that now surrounds us is not just a harmless toy; it has also made possible undetectable and untraceable manipulations of entire populations – manipulations that have no precedent in human history and that are currently well beyond the scope of existing regulations and laws. The new hidden persuaders are bigger, bolder and badder than anything Vance Packard ever envisioned. If we choose to ignore this, we do so at our peril.
Blockchain Payment System - How The Financial World Can Be Saved March 16 2016 | From: TheDailyBlog
Payment revolution: Long ago, people bought and sold things face-to-face. A pair of shoes was bought from the shoe shop, paid for by cash and later by plastic card. Then came the online retailer, making it possible to buy things from far way without knowing the seller.
As technology advanced this method has changed. Today, you can buy something from China without ever knowing the seller, which opened the door for fraud. For example when you buy a stock, how do you know the seller actually owns the stock? How do you know he won’t take your money and run? And how does he know you’ll actually pay for the stock?
Today’s financial transactional system is not as strong as people think it is, as these transactions undergo a clearing procedure. Blockchain can replace this procedure, which makes transactions faster, cheaper, and more secure.
This blockchain payment system is the closest thing to digital cash; blockchain is the technology behind bitcoin. Bitcoin might fail but the blockchain is here to stay, as blockchain is not bitcoin. – Unlike bitcoin, blockchain is not a currency, and it’s not money.
It’s a technology that’s going to change the way people buys and sells things. It’s more secured, cheaper, and far more reliable than any system of payment system that exists today – including cash, checks, and credit cards.
Soon, people will use blockchain to buy a car, TV-set, stocks, bonds, or real estate. Blockchain is an “open ledger.” It keeps track of transactions, just like an old-fashioned ledger on a clerk store’s worktop. But his ledger is only for him to see, but not by the paying customer, in other words not equally secure for both transaction partners.
An open ledger is different. It’s visible to everyone involved in a transaction. Buyers, sellers, regulators, and anyone granted access could see the ledger. Plus, everyone involved in the transaction has their own copy of the ledger on their computer, and all copies must agree. This prevents stealing or fraud.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
As an example when a pair of shoes is bought by using blockchain, both buyer and seller “transmit” the transaction over the Internet. Everyone updates his or her copy of the ledger for this transaction, and then all parties compare ledgers.
When there’s disagreement about the content, the most shared ledger is accepted as the “truth,” and the transaction becomes permanent. The ledger record cannot be changed unless all parties in the transaction agree to it; this whole process would take less than a minute.
Decentralised Payment System:
Blockchain is a decentralised payment system, because it takes the power out of the hands of a ‘single’ institution like banks. And it puts thepower in the hands of the people doing the transaction.
With blockchain, no central authority or group can manage or manipulate a transaction. And no one can steal things that are secured by blockchain. Not thieves, hackers, or even the government. This blockchain system is incredible secure, which makes it so remarkable.
In 2013, the U.S. government tried to seize over 600,000 Bitcoins worth over $100 million. The Department of Justice claimed the owner of these Bitcoins was breaking the law. However, because Bitcoins are built on blockchain technology, the Bitcoins were worthless to the U.S. government. Only the owner could sell or spend them. If he didn’t agree to the transaction, they could not be sold or spent.
To recapitulate; a blockchain is a public ledger of all transactions that have ever been executed. It is constantly growing as ‘completed’ blocks are added to it with a new set of recordings. The blocks are added to the blockchain in a linear, chronological order.
Each computer connected to the network using a client that performs the task of validating and relaying transactions gets a copy of the blockchain, which gets downloaded automatically upon joining the network. The blockchain has complete information about the addresses and their balances right from the origin of a block to the most recently completed block.
A block is the ‘current’ part of a blockchain, which records some or all of the recent transactions, and once completed goes into the blockchain as permanent database. Each time a block gets completed, a new block is generated. There are a countless number of such blocks in the blockchain.
The blocks are not randomly placed in a blockchain; they are linked to each other – like a chain – in proper linear, chronological order with every block containing a ‘hash’ of the previous block. – The blockchain is a public; transparent ledger that provides a chain of transactions, which is secure and reliable.
Difference with Conventional System:
In analogy with conventional banking, the blockchain is like a full history of banking transactions.Transactions are entered chronologically in ablockchain just the way bank transactions are.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Blocks, meanwhile, are like individual bank statements. All participants in the system share the blockchain database. The full copy of the blockchain has records of every transaction ever executed. It can thus provide insight about facts like how much of something belonged a particular address at any point in the past. Because a block can only reference one previous block, it is impossible for two chains to merge.
Various institutes are considering and studying this technology for final application. So has the Commonwealth Bank of Australia joined a consortium of global banks that have already tested a blockchain to transfer value between each other.
"It is clearly, in very clear terms, faster, cheaper and more transparent than some of the existing practices we have today,” says CBA’s chief-information officer David Whiteing.
"Every now and then, something comes along that might just change everything. And this is one of those moments,” says ASX chief executive Elmer Funke Kupper.
The potential cost savings from blockchain have been noted at the very highest levels of Australian finance.
Bitcoin Might Fail But the Blockchain is Here to Stay:
Bitcoin could end up being the MySpace of crypto currency, but the underlying technology powering new payment methods is here to stay.
Here the use of cases explained in this video, by Brock Pierce in the first 5 min.
Unleashing GCSB To Spy On Kiwis One More Step On Road To Police State March 15 2016 | From: TheDailyBlog
The Anti-Bases Campaign is appalled by the recommendations made in the newly-released Intelligence Agencies review.
The authors have proposed overthrowing a basic tenet of spy operations in this country and paved the way for a massive expansion in surveillance of NZ citizens.
This is just another retrograde step on the road to a police state.
Previous restrictions on domestic spying by the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) are to be removed; the basic democratic protection against the spies turning their cutting edge mass surveillance machinery on domestic life is to be eliminated.
The report justifies the increasing power of the agencies by proposing more transparency and oversight.
Ironically, Sir Michael Cullen, the key author of the report, is the man who exemplifies the inadequacy of trying to monitor these organisations as he was the person who, when he was in Government, continually gave false assurances denying illegal activity in the past.
The glaring deficiency in the review is the complete lack of consideration of the activities of the Five Eyes system which are the major part of the GCSB activities.
The super-secret group carries out operations designed to give Washington the means to manipulate political, economic and diplomatic activities around the world.
NZ’s part in this is despicable and reprehensible.
Any suggestion that oversight by a handful of Kiwi commissioners will reveal the truth about the operations being carried out by Five Eyes is laughable.
New Zealand, instead, needs to follow the example of Canada, one of our four Big Brothers in Five Eyes. Canada has suspended sharing Canadians’ metadata with its Five Eyes partners until it is satisfied about safeguards.
NZ can only restore its reputation in the world by closing down the Waihopai spy base and pulling out of the Five Eyes system.
Plus it needs to close down the SIS and transfer its functions to the Police who (theoretically at least) have to justify their actions in a court of law.
Oliver Stone Reveals Clandestine Meetings With Edward Snowden, NSA Worries March 15 2016 | From: HollywoodReporter “We moved to Germany, because we did not feel comfortable in the U.S.,” the director says about his upcoming movie about government whistle-blower Edward Snowden, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt.
Fears of interference by the National Security Agency led Oliver Stone to shoot Snowden, his upcoming movie about government whistle-blower Edward Snowden, outside the United States.
"We moved to Germany, because we did not feel comfortable in the U.S.,” Stone said on March 6, speaking before an audience at the Sun Valley Film Festival in Idaho, in a Q&A moderated by The Hollywood Reporter’s Stephen Galloway.
"We felt like we were at risk here. We didn’t know what the NSA might do, so we ended up in Munich, which was a beautiful experience.”
Even there, problems arose with companies that had connections to the U.S., he said: “The American subsidiary says, ‘You can’t get involved with this; we don’t want our name on it.’ So BMW couldn’t even help us in any way in Germany.”
While in Sun Valley, the three-time Oscar winner held a private screening of Snowden for an invited audience of around two dozen. Those who attended the screening, at the former home of Ernest Hemingway, included actress Melissa Leo, who plays documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras.
Guests were required to sign non-disclosure agreements, but that did not prevent three of them from speaking to this reporter. All praised the work-in-progress. “What he did that’s so brilliant is, he gave this kid’s whole back story, so you really like him,” said one audience member.
When Stone (whose films include Platoon, Born on the Fourth of July and Wall Street) was first approached to make the movie, he hesitated. He had been working on another controversial subject, about the last few years in the life of Martin Luther King Jr., and did not immediately wish to tackle something that incendiary again.
“Glenn Greenwald [the journalist who worked with Poitras to break the Snowden story] asked me some advice and I just wanted to stay away from controversy,” he said.
“I didn’t want this. Be that as it may, a couple of months later, the Russian lawyer for Snowden contacts me via my producer. The Russian lawyer told me to come to Russia and wanted me to meet him. One thing led to another, and basically I got hooked.”
In Moscow, Stone met multiple times with Snowden, who has been living in exile in Russia since evading the U.S. government’s attempts to arrest him for espionage.
“He’s articulate, smart, very much the same,” he said. “I’ve been seeing him off and on for a year - actually, more than that. I saw him last week or two weeks ago to show him the final film.”
He added: “He is consistent: he believes so thoroughly in reform of the Internet that he has devoted himself to this cause… Because of the Russian hours, he stays up all night. He’s a night owl, and he’s always in touch [with the outside world], and he’s working on some kind of constitution for the Internet with other people. So he’s very busy.
And he stays in that 70-percent-computer world. He’s on another planet that way. His sense of humor has gotten bigger, his tolerance. He’s not really in Russia in his mind - he’s in some planetary position up there. And Lindsay Mills, the woman he’s loved for 10 years - really, it’s a serious affair - has moved there to be with him.”
Spending time with Snowden, and researching what happened to him, Stone said, “It’s an amazing story. Here’s a young man, 30 years old at that time, and he does something that’s so powerful. Who at 30 years old would do that, sacrificing his life in that way? We met with him many times in Moscow, and we did a lot more research, and we went ahead.” He added, “I think he’s a historical figure of great consequence.”
Despite the director’s involvement in the movie, which stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Snowden and Shailene Woodley as Mills, “No studio would support it,” he said.
“It was extremely difficult to finance, extremely difficult to cast. We were doing another one of these numbers I had done before, where preproduction is paid for by essentially the producer and myself, where you’re living on a credit card.”
Eventually, financing came through from France and Germany. “The contracts were signed, like eight days before we started,” he noted.
“It’s a very strange thing to do [a story about] an American man, and not be able to finance this movie in America. And that’s very disturbing, if you think about its implications on any subject that is not overtly pro-American.
They say we have freedom of expression; but thought is financed, and thought is controlled, and the media is controlled. This country is very tight on that, and there’s no criticism allowed at a certain level. You can make movies about civil rights leaders who are dead, but it’s not easy to make one about a current man.”
Snowden opens in the U.S. on September 16.
Why Are These 25 Carcinogens Still Being Sold? March 15 2016 | From: Sott
The FDA is a killer organization. So superior are they, and so very post-modern, that it seems they've transcended meaning, analysis, and the law of cause and effect.
Given their exalted status, should it really surprise that they've not noticed the myriad ways they've advanced the march of carcinogens? After all, it's not like they run studies, check results, or have some sort of mandate to protect, right?
With this in mind, let's examine a few of the carcinogens approved, ignored, and/or excused by the FDA; whose motto really ought to be, "move along, there's nothing to see, here".
1. Baby Powder. The talc in this powder is linked to ovarian cancer. The FDA's response? Too much money at stake to investigate. Very nihilistic, FDA! Nietzsche would approve.
2. Cosmetics. It's a beautiful thing that the cosmetics industry uses industrial factory cleaners to pulchrify womankind, don't you think? No regulation needed here, folks. Even though said chemicals have been found to cause cancer, disrupt hormones, and presage early puberty. I mean, the FDA is really busy. You can't expect them to examine everything, can you?
3. Birth control. The estrogen and progesterone within birth control have been found to "lead to cancer". But since there's no "smoking gun", why "rock the boat"? After all, "the show must go on". "It's just business". And an investigation might just "kill profit margins". Priorities, folks. Priorities.
4. Fluoride. Harvard scientists have found that boys in their 6th, 7th, and 8th years, are highly susceptible to osteosarcomas related to fluoride. Add to this the fact that fluoride is a mutagen, which means it alters DNA, and a neurotoxin, and it becomes quite clear the FDA is right to be unconcerned about allowing fluoride in our drinking water. Good job, old sport. Keep earning our trust.
5. Pesticides. Roughly 60% of pesticides lead directly to cancer. But the EPA seems rather bored with this statistic. Now, there has been "some news lately", about a "new standard", that's "less deadly". Whatever. It's the circle of life. We have to put toxins on our crops that will kill us, so that the food we reap can keep us alive till we die. Can't you people understand this?!
6. Sugar. A large part of the Standard American Diet (S.A.D.), sugar makes America go! Oh, did I mention sugar exponentially increases the growth of cancer cells? Well, too bad. We have to have it, cells or no. Whether it's in soda, candy, or children's cereal (aka sugar), the FDA is right to sleep on this one. Otherwise, how could people stay awake during the endless forty-hour work week?
7. Aspartame. This sweetener/carcinogen was rescued from oblivion by Monsanto, who bought out the agency that was challenging it's production. Listed as "toxic poison" by those in the know, Aspartame causes so many disorders it would take a separate article to cover to them all. Suffice it to say, the FDA and Monsanto are class acts, that obviously care deeply about human life. You stay classy, San Diego.
8. Ersatz Sugar and Diet Cola. Aspartame, Aspartame, Aspartame. People reason taking this toxic carcinogen (which many KNOW is such) makes more sense than consuming real sugar, which might cause them to put on weight. At least I think that's why they do it. After all, who in their right mind would choose Aspartame for its flavor? To summarize, many otherwise bright individuals voluntarily put a foul tasting chemical into their bodies, that might kill them, to (potentially) keep trim. Ironically, Aspartame may just be making Americans a lot fatter.
9. Smoking. Fifteen different types of cancer are caused by cigarettes, which contain six-hundred "ingredients", that when burned, turn into seven-thousand chemicals, sixty-nine of which cause cancer. Too bad you can't smoke Aspartame, eh, Phillip Morris?
10. Cell Phones. The WHO believes cell phones are "possibly carcinogenic", and French researchers have found there is a threefold added risk of brain tumor growth in cell users with 900 plus hours exposure. Swedish researchers have concluded there is a similar risk for those who've used them twenty-five years or more. The main stream governmental and scientific community's response to this? "Yeah, right! Nobody messes with progress." It's business before pleasure, and by pleasure, I mean human life.
11. Soy. Eating soy "may" turn on genes linked to cancer growth. And right now, I "may" be thinking of sarcastic things to say about our regulatory agencies. But I digress.
12. BPA. According to Forbes, BPA is not harmful. (Thanks, guys; clearly there's no conflict of interest.) Now, on to what real scientists are saying. Apparently BPA disrupts genes that defend against cancer. So, okay, maybe it doesn't CAUSE cancer, but it helps the things that cause cancer cause cancer. So please be sure not to touch or eat from plastic containers anymore, or handle glossy receipts. (Oh, wait, that's impossible.) Now, moving on to more things Forbes probably isn't worried about.
14. Statins. Speaking of drugs that effect the blood, several statins have been found to be carcinogenic. Now if that doesn't raise your pressure, nothing will.
15. GMOs.A major study found recently that GMO maize caused cancer in lab rats. Surprisingly, the study was tabled. They say money doesn't grow on trees, but the way Monsanto and the GMO crowd create organic anomalies, I'm starting to wonder. And where was the FDA in all of this? Oh, right! Drinking cocktails with Hillary Clinton at O'Malley's Irish Pub. Clearly there's something wrong with you if you don't favor crossing human genes with corn, or corn with the hepatitis virus. That's just progress. I mean, how could such things go wrong?
16. Pollution. File this one under "part of the cost of doing business". Seems we can't create profits without creating poison, or create poison without turning it into food.
17. Microwave ovens.Swiss researcher Hans Hertel has concluded that when we eat microwaved food, our cells form emergency anaerobic environments in response, the exact condition which leads to cancer cell growth. But don't worry, the internetz is full of edumacational articles saying the opposite.
18. Lead. Did you know that lead in lipstick may cause cancer? Why is lead in lipstick, anyway? Who was the first person who thought that would be a good idea? Perhaps it's inspired by Hamlet's famous quip, "Here's metal more attractive". Yes, that must be it.
19. Processed meats. These include hot dogs, ham, bacon, sausage, and some deli meats, which have been "treated" to "improve the flavor". Yummy.
20. Gardasil. This vaccine increases the risk of precancerous legions by 44.6%, if the person has already been exposed to HPV 16 or 18, before injection.
21. Research shows LED bulbs have tiny cracks in them that release UV rays, which burn skin cells, causing melanoma. (Too bad you can't find the old bulbs anymore.)
22. High fructose corn syrup. How many hundreds of products is this little monster hiding in? It's ubiquity doesn't erase the fact that it's known to cause pancreatic cancer.
23. McDonald's McRib Sandwich. First of all, the entire fast food industry is a disgrace. It puts things in food that just boggle the mind (such as azodicarbonamide, an ingredient Subway once put in their breads. By the way, it's also found in yoga mats.) But the disgusting McRib takes the cake. Chemicals used in soil fertilizer are found in it, as well as the aforementioned Subway chemical. Plus the pickles are carcinogenic. And the FDA just stands there, hands in its pockets, with a stupid expression, looking like Napoleon Dynamite. Can't you just hear them saying, "Tina you fat lard, come get dinner. Tina! Eat the FOOD!"?
24. Monsanto. Due to this wonderful organization's role in saving Aspartame from destruction, mass-producing GMO's, and filling the world with deadly toxins, I feel Monsanto deserves a special place on this list of carcinogens. Bravo. And props to the FDA for defending us from this monster. You guys are the best.
25. The Standard American Diet (S.A.D.). Let's add things up from the list. Processed meats? Check. Total sugar overload? Check. Aspartame? Check. GMO's, fake cheese, fake juice and brominated bread? Check, check, check, check. Put it in the microwave, and double down on the fun. Or you could just cook a frozen dinner. Everything is encouraged by our friends at the FDA, except cooking organic food, in a natural oven, with real butter and raw milk. In fact, if you produce raw milk, you might just get raided by the FBI.
Why in the world are these twenty-five carcinogens still being sold? And why is proffering poison so fashionable, while pure products are priced out of reach?
Our world is now suffused with corporately created carcinogens, which build up the bodies of abstract entities, but give living beings the shaft. And all Washington seems concerned with is running Trump vs. Hillary, and bombing the tar out of Syria. Meanwhile, the SAD American diet clearly leads to cancer, and the health machine's one response is to use toxic poison to "help solve the problem".
All sarcasm aside, the FDA, EPA, and the myriad agencies responsible for monitoring food, health, and beauty, are doing such a terrible job, I think it not outlandish to question whether the whole system isn't corrupt, and designed for a tragic end?
Cosmetics, sugar, technology, and fast food: these attractive items are like the glistening fibers of a spider's web. "How could this lovely thing be dangerous", thinks the fly. Little does he know, his appetite for attractive objects is well known to the spider.
The food we're eating is eating us. Our medicine bites, and its oversight sucks. Meanwhile, where has the spider gone? He's hiding behind the Board, looking respectably bespectacled. The last people you would expect to be monsters seem to be the first to profit from human misery.
Let's face it, either they really are monsters, or they're so incompetent, they ought to be placed on a short bus. You tell me which alternative makes more sense?
The good news is that, even though the FDA is just awful, we can make lists like this of products to avoid. We don't have to eat ourselves to death by imbibing the likes of Aspartame. And perhaps, with enough awareness, we can put these companies out of business. Viva la revolucion!
Comment: FDA approved additives in our food that are banned in other countries
You have to ask why the United States still allows proven carcinogens to be added to our foods. Why they allow arsenic in chicken feed, and why it allows companies to lure in children with bright attractive packaging when they know those kids are going to be guzzling flame retardants...
There are literally dozens of additives that are banned around the world that still find their way legally into the foods eaten in the United States.
It amazes me that a government that considers itself able to police the world, who thinks they have the right to interfere in the lives of millions globally cannot ensure that it's own citizens are able to consume everyday foods in the sure knowledge that they are not being poisoned.
Vampire Technocrats Fly To Jekyll Island To Stop Trump March 14 2016 | From: JonRappoport
It’s such a secret place, only heavy hitters and big shots can fly in, from private airports - which, by the way, have no TSA security. So they could have been packing heat for all we know. Or bags of blood for nighttime drink fests.
Sea Island is where they met. It’s in the same Georgia gaggle as the infamous Jekyll Island, where the Federal Reserve was born many moons ago. But now the goal was narrow: stop the crazy cowboy; stop Trump.
Were secret effigy-burning rituals held? Hard to say. Did one of the tech giants unveil a new algorithm that would suddenly direct all Trump remarks to a new Hitler Facebook page?
"Apple CEO Tim Cook, Google co-founder Larry Page, Napster creator and Facebook investor Sean Parker, and Tesla Motors and SpaceX honcho Elon Musk all attended.
So did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), political guru Karl Rove, House Speaker Paul Ryan, GOP Sens. Tom Cotton (Ark.), Cory Gardner (Colo.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Rob Portman (Ohio) and Ben Sasse (Neb.), who recently made news by saying he ‘cannot support Donald Trump.’
“Along with Ryan, the House was represented by Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton (Mich.), Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas) and almost-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), sources said, along with leadership figure Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.), Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.), Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) and Diane Black (Tenn.).
“Philp Anschutz, the billionaire GOP donor whose company owns a stake in Sea Island, was also there, along with Democratic Rep. John Delaney, who represents Maryland. Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, was there, too, a Times spokeswoman confirmed.”
Quite a collection. And they all have hernias and a major case of red-ass about the crazy cowboy running for President.
At the confab, Karl Rove, the old grubby prince of darkness, opined that stopping Trump was a matter of emphasizing how un-Presidential he is. Karl’s come a long way down since his glory days with George W. I’m told he’s about to launch his own Daily Racing Form.
Henry Miller, the American writer who, in his time, in his own way, was as reviled and infamous as Trump is now, once wrote (paraphrasing): People say America needs a President who will restore sanity to the country. That’s wrong. What America needs is a President who’ll drive everybody crazy.
Well, here he is. Trump. The gilded, self-inflating hustler who’s never met a success story (of his own) he didn’t love. Trump. The master of off-the-cuff. The ham-fisted swaggering hair stylist’s nightmare who pushes open the swinging doors to The Secret Club bar and strides in, bat-shit angry, to lecture snooty tight-ass titans on how to make America great again.
"I was telling my wife the other day I should buy Alaska. And by the way, we’re going to dump Common Core, and vaccines cause autism.”
What’s the algorithm that stops that?
Regardless of what happens from this point on, Trump’s major contribution to Presidential elections is smashing standard political rhetoric; and that’s no small accomplishment. Next to him, Hillary and Obama and Mitt and Marco are 100% pharmaceutical-grade Thorazine on a slow Sunday afternoon.
But here’s the thing, Donald. You haven’t gone far enough.
To destroy the walking-dead politicians of our time, you need to get a lot crazier - on your own live-streaming webcasts, night and day, to five million, 10 million, 20 million people around the world. From your car, by your fireplace in Trump Tower, in a Burger King, in the men’s room at the Pierre Hotel, in a homeless encampment in San Diego, on a lonely snowy street in Cleveland at 3 in the morning. Ramp it up.
You’re standing in the field of a family farm in the Midwest with a hollow-faced man whose life has been blown away by Monsanto, with its GMO crops and cancer-causing Roundup. There you are talking to him, the farmer, destitute, his family destitute, near a giant acre of weeds eight feet high that resisted Roundup and didn’t die. His crop yield shrank.
His expenses, courtesy of Monsanto, grew. He went down. Talk to the man. Listen to his story. Beam it out to 20 million people. Tell him how you’re going to help him put himself back together. Lay out a plan to resurrect the small farmer in America.
Stand inside a building in Chicago where people have built their own urban farm and grow vegetables for the local poor community, for themselves. Show what a success it is. Listen to these people. Tell them how you’re going help them build 5000 of these urban farms in poverty-stricken inner cities across America. People are going to rise up.
They’re not going to be a permanent underclass eating government cheese for the rest of their lives.
Sit in a homeless camp with veterans of wars and listen to their stories, listen to how the VA threw them in the garbage heap, after they served their time. Get busy, Donald. These vets are all over America. They have something to say. Don’t hold back. Tell them what’s happened in Iraq and Afghanistan since they were there. Some of them already know. Let them tell you how those countries have gone down the toilet. Raise hell.
In a trailer park, talk to a few former members of the American middle-class, who were shoved down into debt and unemployment by the fanatic Globalist export of jobs to faraway hell holes where workers slave for 3 cents an hour. In fact, under heavy guard, visit a few of those overseas hell holes and expose what they look like and feel like and are. Go the distance.
Travel the southern border of America. Live-stream what’s happening. Talk to US border personnel. Listen to their stories. Emphasize that the US already has 60 million immigrants living here, which makes it the most generous country, per capita, in the world. Talk to Mexican corn farmers coming up into America. Let them describe how 1.5 million of them were put into bankruptcy, because the NAFTA trade treaty allowed US companies to flood Mexico with cheap corn.
Crack the egg of slumber in the Big Cocoon. With your live webcasts, pull in more viewers than NCIS and CSI. Drive your former employer, NBC, crazy.
Talk to truckers and limo drivers and shoe salesmen and working wives and newly minted PhDs who can’t find work. Talk to people on the street, people in bars, people coming out churches and strip clubs and malls. Tear down the walls between politicians and people.
You’re starting to sound a bit mainstream these days. You’re not going to “work with Congress.” Congress isn’t going to work with you. Get off that horse. Okay, you want to sound like a “unifier” who “likes people”? Do that for a day. But then get back to doing what you were before. Mangling politicians and media buffoons.
People talk like robots because they are robots. That’s your opening, Donald. Keep pressing it. Destroy political-speak. Rake it over the coals. Offend more human androids. Your numbers will keep rising. Improvise.
It intrudes on so much business-as-usual political life in America. I really want to drive home this point. People, so many people, are so timid and scared and provincial and tight - and they think that the usual parade of ghouls who run for office in this country is acceptable because the candidates mouth empty dead words.
People expect the walking smiling dead to run for office. Big grins, empty words. That’s considered safe, despite the fact that these hideous creatures are perfectly ready and willing to send planes anywhere to drop bombs on populations for no goddamn good reason. But as long as the candidate has a wan shit-eating grin, and as long as says he’s caring, it’s all right.
Then Trump comes along and he’s suddenly the Dangerous One. He’s suddenly a threat.
You mean all those other ghouls weren’t?
He’s Hitler, and they were messiahs? Are you kidding? All of a sudden we have a dangerous Presidential candidate where there were none before? REALLY? People are getting so worked up about the first dangerous candidate in recent memory? REALLY?
I see. Building a wall is the worst idea ever to occur in America? Nothing like it? Ever? What about Vietnam? 1.4 million dead bodies, countless wounded, and even more suffering cancers and birth defects from Agent Orange. That was nothing compared to the suggestion of building a wall on the southern border?
What about bombing Libya, ripping that country to shreds? Might have been a mistake, but it was nothing compared with the suggestion to build a wall? Putting in economic sanctions between the two wars in Iraq and thereby killing 500,000 children? Sad, but nothing compared to the suggestion of building a wall?
The White House funding, backing, creating, arming ISIS in conjunction with US allies? Yes, perhaps a regrettable error in judgment, but nothing compared to the suggestion of building a wall?
Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, Obama? Angels from heaven.
Trump? The anti-Christ.
Well, that settles that.
Get busy, Donald, push harder. Do a webcast to 20 million people from a bar off Wall Street, where you chat with an ex-broker about the giant ongoing con called investment banking, the astonishing ripoffs, the real details of the bailout.
Visit a half-deserted town where a factory closed and went to Asia to make their products on the cheap. Talk to the people of that town as they sit and wait for something to happen that’s never going to happen.
Assemble a group of media people who were drummed out of their profession for speaking the truth about vital scandals and let them talk. Have a conversation about what lies under the surface of American life, about the themes the stuffed media shirts who still have their jobs are concealing, as they attack you around the clock. Break open the whole stinking mess and show it to the American people, and reveal what their robot-talking politicians have been doing to them.
For a long, long time.
Coda - I realize I’m branching out into an area where the actual Donald Trump doesn’t exist. The disruptive force that he is may have, behind it all, severe limits. He may only want to upset a few apple carts. He’s only a moon rising, and never goes full. On the other hand, we’ve never seen a politician who is what he should be. And we need to flesh out a better idea about who that is, as an intensely disruptive radical force, in the best and original sense of that word.
“Radical” equals “root.” Politics as it never was. But could be.
Not the skunk-ridden Leftist hideous mask of “we care,” behind which commissars try to drive us all into a shit heap of senseless lowest-common-denominator equality.
Not the Rightest pork-fat scumbags pushing predatory corporations to make more weapons and take over more countries in the name of fatuous democracy. Not the Centrists who work both sides against the middle.
No. Instead, radical. The root.
The place where the individual has a vision and follows it. The place where such individuals come together and make futures of freedom.
And this is what the establishment are afraid of:
And well they should be...
Secret Societies Are No Longer A Secret March 13 2016 | From: AlexJones
The New World Order is no longer hiding in the shadows. They are utilising their total domination of civilization [in an ongoing failing attempt] to bring your morality into a new dark age. Whether it's the United Nations / David Rockefeller / Lucius Trust roll out of demoralisation courtesy of Alice Bailey's 10 point plan.
The $USD5,000,000 injections are all that are keeping these abominations breathing.
Or the Ongoing force feeding of illuminati symbolism through entertainment. As Hollywood's romance with occultism has finally percolated to the surface. Hollywood, A shell of its former creative glory, where real talent and culture have been sacrificed on the altar of Luciferian progress. Offering performances by illuminati slaves akin to Kesha, for example, adorned with satanic regalia channeling Lucifer on the Today Show no less.
But now, the powerful political elite. That have gradually lost the shield provided by a disintegrating public trust, can no longer hide from their mountains of crimes against humanity.
Whether it's the crimes they committed under oath or the ones hidden in the shadows revolving around the child kidnapping rings that for decades have been fed their unrelenting hunger for power.
As in the words of one of the NWO's chief engineers, former U.S. National security advisor Zbignew Brezinski said "History is much more the product of chaos than of conspiracy”.
The Queen 'Backs Brexit' [UK Exit Of From The European Union]
+ Who Controls The Central Banks? March 12 2016 | From: DailyMail / GlobalResearch
Buckingham Palace moved to deny extraordinary claims the Queen is backing a Brexit in the forthcoming referendum on EU membership
"Her Majesty" [rorting farce] reported to have revealed Eurosceptic views to former Deputy PM Nick Clegg at lunch during last parliament
Buckingham Palace has moved to deny claims the Queen is backing Brexit Monarch, 89, said to have aired Eurosceptic views to Nick Clegg at a lunch
Source told The Sun pro-EU then deputy PM was reprimanded by Queen
Mr Clegg last night said he had ‘no recollection’ of such a conversation
For more of the latest on the Queen visit www.dailymail.co.uk/thequeen
Buckingham Palace last night moved to deny extraordinary claims that the Queen backs Brexit in the EU referendum.
She is said to have told former Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg during a lunch at Windsor Castle that she thought Europe was going in the wrong direction, according to The Sun.
A source told the paper the pro-EU then deputy PM was reprimanded by the Queen – who is politically neutral in public – for ‘quite a while’ over the issue of Europe.
Mr Clegg last night said he had ‘no recollection’ of such a conversation and branded the story ‘nonsense’ but did not offer an outright denial. The paper does not specify exactly when the meeting took place, other than it was in 2011.
According to official Court Circular records, Mr Clegg was a guest at Windsor Castle for a Council with the Queen on April 7 that year.
"The Queen remains politically neutral, as she has for 63 years. We would never comment on spurious, anonymously-sourced claims. The referendum will be a matter for the British people."
However, the suggestion that the Queen is sympathetic to Euroscepticism will intrigue many people. Her intervention during the Scottish independence referendum in September 2014 proved explosive.
She warned well-wishers after a Sunday church service that voters should ‘think very carefully’ before making a decision on whether to become independent.
With the EU referendum taking place on June 23, her every word is likely to be pored over for clues about her feelings towards a possible split.
According to The Sun, the Queen told Mr Clegg she thought Europe was going the wrong way. However, from the report, it was not clear that the paper’s source actually heard the conversation.
"People who heard their conversation were left in no doubt at all about the Queen’s views on European integration,’ the unnamed source told the newspaper.
"It was really something, and it went on for quite a while. The EU is clearly something Her Majesty feels passionately about."
The 89-year-old monarch is said to have told Nick Clegg during a lunch at Windsor Castle that she thought Europe was going in the wrong direction.
On another occasion, according to the paper, a Parliamentarian asked the Queen what her thoughts on Brussels, to which she replied: ‘I don’t understand Europe.’
A parliamentary source said: ‘It was said with quite some venom and emotion. I shall never forget it.’
Last night Mr Clegg told The Sun: ‘I have absolutely no recollection of it. I don’t have a photographic memory. But I would have remembered something as stark or significant as you have made it out to be.
‘No doubt you’ll speak to someone else and they’ll say, “I was there, I heard it”. Fine. But I really can’t remember it at all.
‘Anyway, without sounding pompous, I find it rather distasteful to reveal conversations with the Queen.’
Last night Mr Clegg tweeted: ‘As I told the journalist this is nonsense. I’ve no recollection of this happening and it’s not the sort of thing I would forget.’
Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg told the paper: ‘I’d be delighted if this was true and Her Majesty is a Brexiter. The reason we all sing God Save The Queen so heartily is we believe she is there to protect us from European encroachment.’
The Palace had no choice but to stop short of an outright public denial that the Queen was in favour of Brexit because of her constitutional political neutrality.
Whoever reported her alleged comments will be deemed to have broken the convention that private conversations with the Queen are not publicly reported.
Who Controls The Central Banks? Mark Carney, Governor Of The…
"Bank Of Goldman Sachs"
In the event of a vote in favour of Brexit, The Governor of the Bank of England Dr. Mark Carney reassured the British public: “we will do everything in our power to discharge our responsibility to achieve monetary stability and financial stability…”
Carney intimated that “financial instability” and “poor economic outcomes” are associated with the Brexit process: a rather unsubtle message to investors, brokers as well as speculators. He also warned MPs that Brexit could lead to an exodus of banks and financial institutions from the City of London.
“[There is no] blanket assurance that there would not be issues in the short term with respect to financial stability and that potential reduction in financial stability could be associated – and normally would be associated – with poor economic outcomes, as we have seen in the past”.
The governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney is a former official of Goldman Sachs, the World’s foremost “institutional speculator”. He spent thirteen years with Goldman before heading the Bank of Canada.
At the time of his 2013 appointment to the Bank of England, he was not a citizen of the United Kingdom: Mark Carney was the first foreigner to occupy that position since the founding of the Governor and Company of the Bank of England in 1694.
The Mark Carney mince
Were there powerful interests involved in the recruitment of the Governor of the BoE? Who was behind Carney’s candidacy? At the time of his appointment, the issue of U.K. “sovereignty” and Carney’s citizenship were hushed up by the British media.
Brexit and Financial Instability
Carney was fully aware that an “authoritative statement” pertaining to “financial stability” would have an immediate impact on financial markets. On whose behalf was he acting when he made those statements?
Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg has accused Mark Carney, of “speculative statements”:
“It is speculative and beneath the dignity of the Bank of England. To be making speculative pro-EU comments.”
The Goldman Sachs Report
In February, Goldman Sachs warned that in the case of Brexit, the pound sterling “could lose 20 per cent of its value” Mark Carney’s statements at the House of Commons not only point in the same direction, they also provide legitimacy and “credibility” to Goldman’s assessment.
As an institutional speculator, Goldman’s intent is to influence expectations regarding financial markets (backed by authoritative statements from the Bank of England).
“However, given the substantial unpredictability regarding the UK’s post-Brexit trading and regulatory arrangements, quite how damaging Brexit would be in the long term is subject to a great deal of uncertainty. Arguably of more immediate concern is the effect that the uncertainty itself would have on UK growth.
The EU Treaty sets out a two-year timeframe for departure. During this period, the UK government would have to negotiate the terms upon which it could continue to trade with EU countries…
Some of these trade negotiations and many of the regulatory/legal decisions would be relatively straightforward. But many would not…
During this period, UK-based businesses would face considerable uncertainty: exporting companies would not know the terms on which they would be able to supply export markets abroad once Brexit is complete; importing companies would not know the terms on which they would be able to import; and all companies would be confronted with increased regulatory/legal uncertainty." (Excerpts of report)
Carney dismissed the claims of Goldman in early February. But now he supports them. Where do Mark Carney’s statements originate, from the Bank of England or from Goldman Sachs, his former employer?
Goldman is known to be the World’s foremost “institutional speculator”. Foreknowledge of statements and decisions by central banks are often used by financial institutions in speculative operations. Inside knowledge and connections are part of this process, they are the “bread and butter” of the “institutional speculator”.
The important question which the British media has not addressed: what is the relationship between Mark Carney and Goldman Sachs.
The Goldman Trojan Horse
Is there a Trojan Horse within the Bank of England with Goldman Sachs sitting on the inside? While Carney was appointed by Her Majesty, unofficially, he still has “links” to Goldman Sachs.
Is he in conflict of interest?
“Next time there’s a financial meltdown, your money could be rescuing Goldman Sachs.
Yes, thanks to a new deal struck by Mark Carney, the former Goldman man now running the Bank of England, the US investment bank could end up enjoying the next round of British taxpayer bailout money." (The Independent, 20 August 2015)
Moreover, several key senior positions within the Bank of England are held by former Goldman officials. Mark Carney was appointed in 2013. The following year (2014), Dr. Ben Broadbent, a Senior Economist for Goldman Sachs was appointed Deputy Governor in charge of Monetary Policy.
“Bankers from Goldman are strewn across key policy-making arenas across the world like no other financial institution.
As well as the Governor of the Bank of England, his deputy Ben Broadbent is ex Goldman, as were two previous Monetary Policy Committee members, David Walton and Sushil Wadhwani.
Across the Channel, European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi is a Goldman man, while in the US, Goldmanites make up a quarter of the Federal Reserve system’s regional presidents." (Ibid).
Central Banks are complicit in the manipulation of financial markets including stock markets, commodities, gold and currency markets, not to mention the oil and energy markets which have been the object of a carefully engineered “pump and dump” speculative onslaught.
Who controls the central banks? Monetary policy does not serve the public interest.
Tens of thousands of workers are missing millions of dollars from their KiwiSaver accounts because their employers have failed to either pass on payments docked from their pay, or pay their own employer contributions.
Figures obtained by RNZ News show Inland Revenue is chasing thousands of employers for $29.3 million in outstanding payments and penalties that have accumulated since the retirement savings scheme was launched in 2007.
Related: NZ Super Fund's $200m Loss
At the end of June 2015, 1663 employers had failed to pass on $15.3m in KiwiSaver payments deducted from their employees' own salaries to the IRD. These deductions were government guaranteed so workers would eventually get the money.
But since 2007, 2210 employers had failed to pay $10.6m in KiwiSaver contributions to 46,154 employees.
Businesses are legally required to pay 3 percent of an employee's gross salary towards their KiwiSaver.
IRD collections manager David Udy said the vast majority of the businesses that had failed to pay were small and employed between three and five staff. He said in some cases the businesses had simply gone bust and were unable to pay, but the department was doing all it could to collect the debt from others.
Last year, the IRD collected $4m in outstanding debt, reducing the total to $29.3m. David Udy said the IRD was making progress.
"It has a priority with us however, one needs to realise there's many reasons employers get into difficulty and obviously if the business doesn't have funds then we are unable to obtain those."
Mr Udy said some of the employers who owed money were repeat offenders but he could not say how many there were.
He said IRD was doing all it could to recover any money and slow paying employers were notified of any missed payments within a month.
Mr Udy said the IRD tried to work with them to recover the money and legal action was only used as a last resort.
Tax consultant Terry Baucher said the IRD was often too slow to act and it needed to do more to educate small businesses about their obligations to pass on, and pay their own, KiwiSaver contributions.
"There's a lot of employers and people slip through the cracks. We have seen instances where five or six years have passed without Inland Revenue taking any action," he said.
While employees' KiwiSaver deductions were guaranteed by the government, employers' contributions were not.
Labour's finance spokesperson Grant Robertson said that might need to change.
"I am prepared to look at the idea of a guarantee because I think the workers who enrol in KiwiSaver deserve to know they'll get all the benefits of being part of the scheme."
But he said it first needed to be worked out whether IRD was doing all it could to try and recover the missing money.
IRD said any workers who were missing KiwiSaver payments should first talk to their employer or contact them for advice.
Warning: New Zealand Government And Big Banks In Collusion For Farm Land Grab: The Same Scam As Run In The United States And Australia March 11 2016 | From: WakeUpKiwi / Various
Possibly the most painful part of this will be watching all of the big bank / corporate sponsored 'experts' in the filthy corrupt media & Government try and explain it all away in terms of "interest rates" and "market forces". Farmers are enticed into taking out loans at low interest rates which are then intentionally later raised, in a blatantly criminal plan to seize land. It worked in the US. Copy and paste in Australia. And now copy and paste in New Zealand.
New Zealand company Fonterra is the worlds largest dairy exporter, exporting products to over 100 countries
The truth is, it is an agenda planned even before the inception of Fonterra, specifically for this end goal - the 'Globalization' of our land and all of our natural resources - using rigged (Libor) interest rates, market manipulations, fake printed debt and various other financial frauds.
Say good bye to 95% of your farm land Kiwis - thanks to the filthy inbred banking mafia and their army of soulless, bribed, sexual pervert CEO's and senior management. Unfortunately, the average Kiwi farmer is far too dumbed down with the All Blacks & Sky / Heaven TV financial news to figure any of this out. They are about as sophisticated as the cattle sitting outside their offices awaiting slaughter. You are what you eat. Chattel.
The Farmer Claim Program - Discuses how a class action lawsuit brought about in the early 1990's lead to the creation of NESARA, the National Economic Security and Reformation Act which will ultimately tear apart the New World Order and bankers plans right out from under their feet.
Oz Farm Foreclosures: ANZ Behaving Badly:
Farmers whose properties were foreclosed on by the ANZ bank since 2010 have made explosive claims about the devastation suffered by those who defaulted.
Two have given evidence at a parliamentary inquiry hearing, in Sydney, into the banking industry's practice involving loans.
Rod Culleton, of Williams in Western Australia, and Margaret Menzel, representing sugar cane farmers, gave evidence. Mr Culleton was a cereal and sheep farmer until he lost the farm in 2013 and has been fighting the ANZ in the courts and in the media ever since.
He said ANZ had admitted to overcharging in fees incurred during the transition [from Landmark to ANZ] and "is giving a lot of that back".
In answers to the committee, Mr Culleton said he, and others in positions of default to ANZ, were "held at gunpoint" after receivers were sent in.
"That's reality," Mr Culleton said.
"Ten [police] came to my place that day [the receivers came in 2013].
At Bruce Dixon's it was caught on TV. There were four police with their pistols on us and there were SWAT teams up in the bush, and we were held at gunpoint that day, quite horrific really.
"We went there to support Bruce Dixon," Mr Culleton said.
He also claimed another defaulter with ANZ was "victimised that much by receivers and police"… tipped 15 litres of petrol over his head and set himself on fire".
According to Mr Culleton he was in a coma for six months. During the hearing, Mr Culleton asked Brett Fallon of the Whitsunday region to stand to demonstrate his maimed and burnt hands, after his self-immolation.
He submitted the story of Mr Fallon to the inquiry, describing him as a Queensland cane and cattle farmer who had a Landmark loan of $3.5 million and ANZ demanded it be repaid in 2010.
"Over the next three years Brett Fallon sold assets and all the proceeds [$3.7 million] were paid to the ANZ.
Mr Fallon then attended the Ingham branch of the ANZ in May 2013 and was told his outstanding loan was $4 million, and his cattle and crops belonged to [someone else, name withheld]."
Mr Fallon claimed outside the hearing that a lot of people could not attend because they had taken their own lives.
He echoed calls for a Royal Commission into banking practice and the establishment of a nationalised Rural Development Bank, to give a break to farmers who had seen their land devalued.
ANZ's (Australia and New Zealand Banking Group) Takeover of Landmark's Loan Book
Before the advent of “Big Pharma” early in the 20th century, these statistics just did not exist but now we have to deal with so many needless deaths from toxins that are entering the body through prescribed medications. One thing people can do is to make a more informed decision in what they allow to be put in their bodies.
Every pharmaceutical company that has an “approved” drug on the world market has to disclose a list of information good and bad about each drug it produces in publication called, “package insert”. Being “approved” doesn’t mean it is safe or non-toxic in your body as you will see from their own publications!
What is in the Package Insert?
The package insert is a very detailed publication and filled with information provided by the drug manufacturer and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Each country or region has its own agency that regulates drugs and provides the information that consumers receive with their prescriptions.
In India, it is the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), which is commonly referred to as the Drugs Controller General (DCG). In Europe, it is the European Medicines Agency (EMA), where the package insert is known as the patient information leaflet (PIL).
Package inserts (also known as Prescribing Information or drug labels) are available for all prescription medications approved by the FDA. Similar information is available for nonprescription medicines and for some herbal medicines and dietary supplements as well.
The package insert can usually be found online on the drug manufacturer's web site and also available in a reference book called the Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR).
The information in a package insert is in technical language. It is usually very long and can be difficult to understand. It is a good idea to look through it, because it lists important information about the drug. The package insert follows a standard format for every drug. After some identifying information such as the drug's brand name, generic name, and initial year of FDA approval, the following sections appear:
1. Highlights of Prescribing Information
2. Indications and Usage
3. Dosage and Administration
4. Dosage Forms and Strengths
Note: Pay special attention to these bolded sections.
6. Warnings and Precautions
7. Adverse Reactions
8. Drug Interactions
9. Use in Specific Populations
10. Over dosage
12. Clinical Pharmacology
13. Nonclinical Toxicology
14. Clinical Studies
16. How Supplied/Storage and Handling
17. Patient Counseling Information
A woman here in Colombia whom we are giving “sacramental guidance” has been telling me about the symptoms she has been having the past few years from certain drugs. She is taking a drug called, “atenolol”. Below, is a list of the “Adverse Reactions” in the package insert from the Drug company.
Allergic: Fever, combined with aching and sore throat, laryngospasm, and respiratory distress.
Central Nervous System: Reversible mental depression progressing to catatonia; an acute reversible syndrome characterized by disorientation of time and place; short-term memory loss; emotional lability with slightly clouded sensorium; and, decreased performance on neuropsychometrics.
The woman we are guiding with our health sacraments decided to stop taking this medication which she had been taking for years. Her doctor had never shown her this information or told her it existed! It is not a good business practice to show how dangerous and toxic the product you are trying to sell to a patient is before they begin to take it, right?
I’m being facetious in case you didn’t notice. They, (the drug company), doesn’t want you to know this information, because you probably would not take the drug.
Many of the symptoms that the drug itself was causing her are disappearing after a week! Also, she has begun with the Starting Procedure and working her way up to Protocol 2000 while she is with us for a month. This will detox any residual amount of this drug that has accumulated in the body over the years as well as pathogens to “restore her to health”.
Below are the top 25 Prescribed drugs in the U.S. See if what you are being prescribed to take is on the list. If so, read the information in the package insert. I included a link. YOU decide if the doctor that prescribe it for you made the right choice for you!
The Most Popular Drugs in the United States - Primary Use
NOTE: You will notice that there are different package inserts from different drug companies producing the same drug so check out the company package insert of the drug you are taking and compare to the other companies to see if they agree.
I have written this newsletter so people that are considering taking a certain drug can make an “informed” decision. You will notice that the drug companies tell you to ask your doctor if a certain drug is “good” for you. That would be like asking a used car salesman if this car is good for me.
99% of the time he will say, yes of course it is because he wants to sell you the car. He makes money off the car! I believe that the person being asked or told to take a certain drug, should do his or her “due diligence” and see what the drug companies say about the drug they are producing.
They are telling the world what drugs they are making and what results they are seeing from the people taking them. You need to listen to what they are putting in print! Now, if you decide that a certain drug being prescribed for you is “not good” for your health then you should have every right to deny taking it!
The Genesis II Church of Health and Healing has sacraments that can protect our “temple” the body, from 99% of the things that can hurt it, i.e. toxins and pathogens. Each one of us personally needs to take responsibility for what enters our temples. I hope everyone will research what has been written to warn us all of the dangers of many pharmaceutical products whether they are in the form of pills, vaccines, intravenously or any other manner of entering the body!
MMS Products Are Not Medicines or Drugs
MMS is used to make chlorine dioxide, a proven pathogen killing mineral used extensively in the hygiene and water treatment industries to destroy bacteria, viruses, pathogens and other harmful organisms in water.
The human body is 60 - 70% water.
MMS products are used in the sacraments of the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing.
The Genesis II Church of Health and Healing is non-religious; and believes that taking control of our own health is a 'God given right' to be viewed as a 'sacrament' or 'sacred right' that each of us must freely enjoy.
Restoring Health is like a journey, and the length of your journey will depend upon the particular ailment being dealt with, and other life style factors that may have an impact on your health.
Gwen Olsen spent fifteen years as a sales rep in the pharmaceutical industry working for health care giants including Johnson & Johnson, Syntex Labs, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Abbott Laboratories and Forest Laboratories.
"In Confessions of an Rx Drug Pusher, Gwen Olsen brings together the knowledge of an “insider” trained to sell doctors on the merits of pills; the personal experience of having taken psychiatric medications and seen how they altered her life; and the deep grief of having lost her niece - following her treatment with psychiatric medications - to suicide.
This book has both an intellectual and emotional punch that readers will long remember."
- Robert Whitaker, Author of “Anatomy of an Epidemic”
Everyone is at risk of a prescription drug tragedy: Gwen offers an insider’s knowledge of dangers from the pharmaceutical industry.
Her poignant autobiographical journey through the darkness of mental illness and the catastrophic consequences that lurk in medicine cabinets around the country offers an honest glimpse into alarming statistics and a health care system ranked last among nineteen industrialized nations worldwide.
As a former sales rep for Pharma, Gwen learned firsthand how an unprecedented number of lethal drugs are unleashed onto an unsuspecting public.
"It is easy to disregard prescription drug deaths, medical errors, and U.S. health care crisis statistics as just numbers. However, they are not. In a well researched, impeccably documented, finely written manner Gwen Olsen has given us account of the gripping details of real people hurt by the failures of modern health care.
A former pharmaceutical representative herself, the information is as credible as it is compelling. It is vital for those currently taking prescription medication to read and understand this book."
- Dr. Ben Lerner, chiropractor and New York Times best selling author of “Body by God”
As a mental health activist, Gwen has testified before the Food and Drug Administration’s Psycho-pharmacology committee, as well as many legislative committees, and has led rallies and marches in protest against psychiatric abuse.
Gwen’s message is a call to action and a plea for each of us to step up and do our part to help create a medical system that serves all and does harm to none!
"When you realize what is being sold to you as a “remedy” you will realize how you are playing Russian Roulette with yours and your children’s lives. This book is a MUST read for every American and every parent in the country."
- Meria Heller, Producer/Host–The Meria Heller Show
Rothschild Bank Now Under Criminal Investigation After Baron David de Rothschild Indictment March 10 2016 | From: ActivistPost
Last year, Baron David de Rothschild was indicted by the French government after he was accused of fraud in a scheme that allegedly embezzled large sums of money from British pensioners.
It has taken many years to bring this case against Rothschild and his company the Rothschild Financial Services Group, which trapped hundreds of pensioners in a bogus loan scheme between the years of 2005 and 2008.
One by one the pensioners lost their money and pressed charges against the notorious banker, beginning a case that would take many years to get even an indictment.
In June, Paris-based liaison judge Javier Gómez Bermudez ruled that Rothschild must face a trial for his crimes, and ordered local police to seek him out in his various mansions that are spread throughout the country.
“It is a good step in the right direction. The courts are now in agreement with us that there is enough evidence to interrogate Baron Rothschild. The first thing they will have to do is find him. Once they have done that they can begin to question him. It is a real breakthrough moment for everyone involved,” lawyer Antonio Flores of Lawbird told the Olive Press after the ruling.
“In short, independently of what happened to the investment, Rothschild advertised a loan aimed at reducing inheritance tax, which is a breach of tax law,” he added.
While news of a single Rothschild being indicted is certainly noteworthy, a particularly important announcement was made this Friday.
The French government announced that it has launched an investigation into the entire Swiss branch of the Rothschild’s banking empire.
“The Swiss unit of Edmond de Rothschild said it’s the subject of a French probe regarding a former business relationship managed by a former employee.
“Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) SA is actively participating in the criminal investigation under way,” the Geneva-based bank said in an e-mailed statement on Friday. “The bank denies all the allegations that have been made against it.”
Edmond de Rothschild, a private banking and asset management firm established in Paris in 1953, oversees about 150 billion euros ($164 billion) and is led today by Baron Benjamin de Rothschild and his wife Ariane. The Swiss unit traces its roots to the acquisition of Banque Privee in Geneva in 1965.
The company has no further comment at this time, according to the statement. Officials in Geneva weren’t immediately available to respond to a telephone call from Bloomberg News on Friday."
The Rothschild empire has been instrumental in helping move the global elite’s wealth from traditional tax havens like the Bahamas, Switzerland and the British Virgin Islands to the U.S.
Last month, the Free Thought Project reported on the above the law tax haven established inside the United States by the Rothschilds.
After opening a trust company in Reno, Nev., Rothschild & Co. began ushering the massive fortunes of the world’s most wealthy individuals out of typical tax havens, and into the Rothschild run U.S. trusts, which are exempt from the international reporting requirements.
Jacob Rothschild. At least Evelyn de Rothschild has a sense of humour.. Remember the catnip meeting Evelyn? Haha... [Keenan]
The Rothschild banking dynasty is a family line that has been accused of pulling the political strings of many different governments through their control of various economic systems throughout the world.
Historically, there is ample evidence to show that the family has used insider trading to bilk money from both private and public funds.
During the Battle of Waterloo in the Napoleonic wars, Nathan Rothschild was responsible for one of the oldest cases of “insider trading,” which led to the Rothschild family robbing a whole nation blind. In 1815 when the battle of Waterloo took place, there were no quick methods of communication like we have today so messengers were used for communication in times of war.
The Rothschilds invented the concept of the courier - little wonder that they control FedEx, which ironically is about as federal as the Federal Reserve
The Rothschild’s took advantage of this by having spies on the frontlines of the battle who would return information to the family faster than the messengers used by the military.
When the British won the war, Nathan Rothschild, was of course, the first to know, and he immediately went to the stock exchange and started selling stocks while putting out the rumor that the French had won the war. This created a panic on the floor of the stock exchange and investors all over England began frantically selling their stocks.
With the price of all stocks plummeting Rothschild was able to buy out the whole English market for a fraction of its cost. When word returned that the English had actually been victorious, the value of the market soared, and overnight Nathan Rothschild expanded his family’s wealth, and cemented their position as one of the richest families in the world.
U.S. Military Spending Millions To Make Cyborgs A Reality March 10 2016 | From: CNN
The U.S. military is spending millions on an advanced implant that would allow a human brain to communicate directly with computers.
If it succeeds, cyborgs will be a reality. The Pentagon's research arm, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), hopes the implant will allow humans to directly interface with computers, which could benefit people with aural and visual disabilities, such as veterans injured in combat.
The goal of the proposed implant is to "open the channel between the human brain and modern electronics" according to DARPA's program manager, Phillip Alvelda.
In January, DARPA announced it plans to spend up to $62 million on the project, which is part of its Neural Engineering System Design program. The implant would be small -- no larger than one cubic centimeter, or roughly the size of two stacked nickels -- according to DARPA.
The implantable device aims to convert neurons in the brain into electronic signals and provide unprecedented "data-transfer bandwidth between the human brain and the digital world," according to a DARPA statement announcing the new project.
DARPA sees the implant as providing a foundation for new therapies that could help people with deficits in sight or hearing by "feeding digital auditory or visual information into the brain."
A spokesman for DARPA told CNN that the program is not intended for military applications.
But some experts see such an implant as having the potential for numerous applications, including military ones, in the field of wearable robotics -- which aims to augment and restore human performance.
Conor Walsh, a professor of mechanical and biomedical engineering at Harvard University, told CNN that the implant would "change the game," adding that "in the future, wearable robotic devices will be controlled by implants."
Walsh sees the potential for wearable robotic devices or exoskeletons in everything from helping a medical patient recover from a stroke to enhancing soldiers' capabilities in combat.
Yep, they're doing Terminators too. And they aren't all so camp
The U.S. military is currently developing a battery-powered exoskeleton, the Tactical Assault Light Operator Suit, to provide superior protection from enemy fire and in-helmet technologies that boost the user's communications ability and vision.
The suits' development is being overseen by U.S. Special Operations Command.
In theory, the proposed neural implant would allow the military member operating the suit to more effectively control the armored exoskeleton while deployed in combat.
However, Steven Pinker, a cognitive scientist and professor of psychology at Harvard, was skeptical of the proposed innovation, calling the idea a "bunch of hype with no results." He told CNN, "We have little to no idea how exactly the brain codes complex information" and cited the problems from foreign objects triggering brain inflammation that can cause serious neurological issues.
And this weird shit - a Terminator cow?
Pinker described "neural enhancement" for healthy brains as being a "boondoggle," but he suggested that there could be some benefit for people suffering from brain-related diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease.
In its announcement, DARPA acknowledged that an implant is still a long ways away, with breakthroughs in neuroscience, synthetic biology, low-power electronics, photonics and medical-device manufacturing needed before the device could be used.
DARPA plans to recruit a diverse set of experts in an attempt to accelerate the project's development, according to its statement announcing the project.
Pinker remained skeptical, however, telling CNN: "My guess is that it's a waste of taxpayer dollars."
World’s Poorest President Urges Public To Kick The Wealthy Out Of Politics March 9 2016 | From: YourNewsWire
The Uruguayan President Jose “Pepe” Mujica, known as the world’s poorest President, has urged members of the public worldwide to kick out rich people from politics.
Mujica, often described as the “world’s most humble president”, retired from office in 2015 with an approval rating of 70 percent.
In an interview with CNN en Español this week the former Uruguay leader criticised world leaders for not truly representing the people.
“We invented this thing called representative democracy, where we say the majority is who decides,” Mujica told CNN.
“So it seems to me that we [heads of state] should live like the majority and not like the minority.”
Mujica reportedly donates 90 percent of his salary to charity. Mujica’s example offers a strong contrast to the United States, where in politics the median member of Congress is worth more than $1 millionand corporations have many of the same rights as individuals when it comes to donating to political campaigns.
“The red carpet, people who play - those things,” Mujica said, mimicking a person playing a cornet.
“All those things are feudal leftovers. And the staff that surrounds the president are like the old court.”
Mujica explained that he didn’t have anything against rich people, per se, but he doesn’t think they do a good job representing the interests of the majority of people who aren’t rich.
“I’m not against people who have money, who like money, who go crazy for money,” Mujica said.
“But in politics we have to separate them. We have to run people who love money too much out of politics, they’re a danger in politics… People who love money should dedicate themselves to industry, to commerce, to multiply wealth. But politics is the struggle for the happiness of all.”
Asked why rich people make bad representatives of poor people, Mujica said:
“They tend to view the world through their perspective, which is the perspective of money. Even when operating with good intentions, the perspective they have of the world, of life, of their decisions, is informed by wealth. If we live in a world where the majority is supposed to govern, we have to try to root our perspective in that of the majority, not the minority.”
Mujica has become well known for rejecting the symbols of wealth. In an interview in May, he lashed out against neckties in comments on Spanish television that went viral.
“The tie is a useless rag that constrains your neck,” Mujica said during the interview.
“I’m an enemy of consumerism. Because of this hyperconsumerism, we’re forgetting about fundamental things and wasting human strength on frivolities that have little to do with human happiness.”
He lives on a small farm on the outskirts of the capital of Montevideo with his wife, Uruguayan Sen. Lucia Topolansky and their three-legged dog Manuela. He says he rejects materialism because it would rob him of the time he uses to enjoy his passions, like tending to his flower farm and working outside.
“I don’t have the hands of a president,” Mujica told CNN. “They’re kind of mangled.”
The Complete History Of Monsanto, The World’s Most Evil Corporation March 9 2016 | From: WakingTimes
Of all the mega-corps running amok, Monsanto has consistently outperformed its rivals, earning the crown as “most evil corporation on Earth!”
Not content to simply rest upon its throne of death, atop a mountain of rotting corpses, it remains focused on newer, more scientifically innovative ways to harm the planet and its people.
As true champions of evil, they won’t stop until… well, until they’re stopped! But what is Monsanto and how did they get to be so obscenely evil in the first place? I think that’s the best place to start this journey, so grab a few non-GMO snacks or beverages and let’s go for a ride into the deep, murky sewers of their dark past.
1901: The company is founded by John Francis Queeny, a member of the Knights of Malta, ((SMOM), which historically has been the military arm of the Vatican) a thirty year pharmaceutical veteran married to Olga Mendez Monsanto, for which Monsanto Chemical Works is named.
The company’s first product is chemical saccharin, sold to Coca-Cola as an artificial sweetener.
Even then, the government knew saccharin was poisonous and sued to stop its manufacture but lost in court, thus opening the Monsanto Pandora’s Box to begin poisoning the world through the soft drink.
1920's: Monsanto expands into industrial chemicals and drugs, becoming the world’s largest maker of aspirin, acetylsalicyclic acid, (toxic of course). This is also the time when things began to go horribly wrong for the planet in a hurry with the introduction of their polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
“PCBs were considered an industrial wonder chemical, an oil that wouldn’t burn, impervious to degradation and had almost limitless applications. Today PCBs are considered one of the gravest chemical threats on the planet.
Widely used as lubricants, hydraulic fluids, cutting oils, waterproof coatings and liquid sealants, are potent carcinogens and have been implicated in reproductive, developmental and immune system disorders. The world’s center of PCB manufacturing was Monsanto’s plant on the outskirts of East St. Louis, Illinois, which has the highest rate of fetal death and immature births in the state.”
Even though PCBs were eventually banned after fifty years for causing such devastation, it is still present in just about all animal and human blood and tissue cells across the globe.
Documents introduced in court later showed Monsanto was fully aware of the deadly effects, but criminally hid them from the public to keep the PCB gravy-train going full speed!
1930's: Created its first hybrid seed corn and expands into detergents, soaps, industrial cleaning products, synthetic rubbers and plastics. Oh yes, all toxic of course!
1940's: They begin research on uranium to be used for the Manhattan Project’s first atomic bomb, which would later be dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese, Korean and US Military servicemen and poisoning millions more.
The company continues its unabated killing spree by creating pesticides for agriculture containing deadly dioxin, which poisons the food and water supplies.
It was later discovered Monsanto failed to disclose that dioxin was used in a wide range of their products because doing so would force them to acknowledge that it had created an environmental Hell on Earth.
1950's: Closely aligned with The Walt Disney Company, Monsanto creates several attractions at Disney’s Tomorrowland, espousing the glories of chemicals and plastics. Their “House of the Future” is constructed entirely of toxic plastic that is not biodegradable as they had asserted. What, Monsanto lied? I’m shocked!
“After attracting a total of 20 million visitors from 1957 to 1967, Disney finally tore the house down, but discovered it would not go down without a fight.
According to Monsanto Magazine, wrecking balls literally bounced off the glass-fiber, reinforced polyester material. Torches, jackhammers, chain saws and shovels did not work. Finally, choker cables were used to squeeze off parts of the house bit by bit to be trucked away.”
Monsanto’s Disneyfied vision of the future:
1960's: Monsanto, along with chemical partner-in-crime DOW Chemical, produces dioxin-laced Agent Orange for use in the U.S.’s Vietnam invasion.
The results? Over 3 million people contaminated, a half-million Vietnamese civilians dead, a half-million Vietnamese babies born with birth defects and thousands of U.S. military veterans suffering or dying from its effects to this day!
Monsanto is hauled into court again and internal memos show they knew the deadly effects of dioxin in Agent Orange when they sold it to the government.
Outrageously though, Monsanto is allowed to present their own “research” that concluded dioxin was safe and posed no negative health concerns whatsoever.
Satisfied, the bought and paid for courts side with Monsanto and throw the case out. Afterwards, it comes to light that Monsanto lied about the findings and their real research concluded that dioxin kills very effectively.
A later internal memo released in a 2002 trial admitted:
“That the evidence proving the persistence of these compounds and their universal presence as residues in the environment is beyond question…
the public and legal pressures to eliminate them to prevent global contamination are inevitable. The subject is snowballing. Where do we go from here?
The alternatives: go out of business; sell the hell out of them as long as we can and do nothing else; try to stay in business; have alternative products.”
Monsanto partners with I.G. Farben, makers of toxic Bayer aspirin and Hitler’s go-to chemical manufacturer that exterminated millions with it Zyklon-B gas during World War II.
Together, the companies use their collective expertise in genocide to introduce aspartame, another extremely deadly neurotoxin, into the food supply. When questions surface regarding the toxicity of saccharin, Monsanto exploits this opportunity to introduce yet another of its deadly poisons onto an unsuspecting public.
1970's:Monsanto partner, G.D. Searle, produces over a hundred faked internal studies which claim aspartame to be safe, while the FDA’s own scientific research clearly reveals that aspartame causes tumors and massive holes in the brains of rats, before killing them.
The FDA initiates a grand jury investigation into G.D. Searle for “knowingly misrepresenting findings and concealing material facts and making false statements” in regard to aspartame safety.
During this time, Searle strategically taps prominent Washington insider Donald Rumsfeld, who served as Secretary of Defense during the Gerald Ford and George W. Bush presidencies, to become CEO.
The corporation’s primary goal is to have Rumsfeld utilize his political influence and vast experience in the killing business to grease the FDA to play ball with them.
A few months later, Samuel Skinner receives “an offer he can’t refuse,”withdraws from the investigation and resigns his post at the U.S. Attorney’s Office to go work for Searle’s law firm. This mob tactic stalls the case just long enough for the statute of limitation to run out and the grand jury investigation is abruptly and conveniently dropped.
1980's: Amid indisputable research that reveals the toxic effects of aspartame and as then FDA commissioner Dr. Jere Goyan was about to sign a petition into law keeping it off the market, Donald Rumsfeld calls Ronald Reagan for a favour the day after he takes office.
Reagan fires the uncooperative Goyan and appoints Dr. Arthur Hayes Hull to head the FDA, who then quickly tips the scales in Searle’s favor and NutraSweet is approved for human consumption in dried products.
This becomes sadly ironic since Reagan, a known jelly bean and candy enthusiast, later suffers from Alzheimers during his second term, one of the many horrific effects of aspartame consumption.
Searle’s real goal though was to have aspartame approved as a soft drink sweetener since exhaustive studies revealed that at temperatures exceeding 85 degrees Fahrenheit, it “breaks down into known toxins Diketopiperazines (DKP), methyl (wood) alcohol, and formaldehyde.”,becoming many times deadlier than its powdered form!
The National Soft Drink Association (NSDA) is initially in an uproar, fearing future lawsuits from consumers permanently injured or killed by drinking the poison.
When Searle is able to show that liquid aspartame, though incredibly deadly, is much more addictive than crack cocaine, the NSDA is convinced that skyrocketing profits from the sale of soft drinks laced with aspartame would easily offset any future liability.
With that, corporate greed wins and the unsuspecting soft drink consumers pay for it with damaged health.
Coke leads the way once again (remember saccharin?) and begins poisoning Diet Coke drinkers with aspartame in 1983.
As expected, sales skyrocket as millions become hopelessly addicted and sickened by the sweet poison served in a can. The rest of the soft drink industry likes what it sees and quickly follows suit, conveniently forgetting all about their initial reservations that aspartame is a deadly chemical. There’s money to be made, lots of it and that’s all that really matters to them anyway!
In 1985, undaunted by the swirl of corruption and multiple accusations of fraudulent research undertaken by Searle, Monsanto purchases the company and forms a new aspartame subsidiary called NutraSweet Company.
When multitudes of independent scientists and researchers continue to warn about aspartame’s toxic effects, Monsanto goes on the offensive, bribing the National Cancer Institute and providing their own fraudulent papers to get the NCI to claim that formaldehyde does not cause cancer so that aspartame can stay on the market.
Further, 80% of complaints made to the FDA regarding food additives are about aspartame, which is now in over 5,000 products including diet and non-diet sodas and sports drinks, mints, chewing gum, frozen desserts, cookies, cakes, vitamins, pharmaceuticals, milk drinks, instant teas, coffees, yogurt, baby food and many, many more!
Read labels closely and do not buy anything that contains this horrific killer!
Amidst all the death and disease, FDA stooge Arthur Hull resigns under a cloud of corruption and is immediately hired by Searle’s public relations firm as a senior scientific consultant. No, that’s not a joke!
Monsanto, the FDA and many government health regulatory agencies have become one and the same! It seems the only prerequisite for becoming an FDA commissioner is that they spend time at either Monsanto or one of the pharmaceutical cartel’s organized crime corps.
Related: New Study Could Spell The End For Diet Soda And Aspartame
1990's: Monsanto spends millions defeating state and federal legislation that disallows the corporation of evil from continuing to dump dioxins, pesticides and other cancer-causing poisons into drinking water systems. Regardless, they are sued countless times for causing disease in their plant workers, the people in surrounding areas and birth defects in babies.
With their coffins full from the massive billions profits, the $100 million dollar settlements are considered the low cost of doing business and thanks to the FDA, Congress and White House, business remains very good. So good that Monsanto is sued for giving radioactive iron to 829 pregnant women for a study to see what would happen to them.
In 1994, the FDA once again criminally approves Monsanto’s latest monstrosity, the Synthetic Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), produced from a genetically modified E. coli bacteria, despite obvious outrage from the scientific community of its dangers.
Of course, Monsanto claims that diseased pus milk, full of antibiotics and hormones is not only safe, but actually good for you!
Worse yet, dairy companies who refuse to use this toxic cow pus and label their products as“rBGH-free" are sued by Monsanto, claiming it gives them an unfair advantage over competitors that did. In essence, what Monsanto was saying is “yeah, we know rBGH makes people sick, but it’s not alright that you advertise it’s not in your products.”
The following year, the diabolical company begins producing GMO crops that are tolerant to their toxic herbicide Roundup.
Roundup-ready canola oil (rapeseed), soybeans, corn and BT cotton begin hitting the market, advertised as being safer, healthier alternatives to their organic non-GMO rivals. Apparently, the propaganda worked as today over 80% of canola on the market is their GMO variety.
A few things you definitely want to avoid in your diet are GMO soy, corn, wheat and canola oil, despite the fact that many “natural” health experts claim the latter to be a healthy oil. It’s not, but you’ll find it polluting many products on grocery store shelves.
Because these GM crops have been engineered to ‘self-pollinate,’ they do not need nature or bees to do that for them.
It’s like having sex with yourself to make a baby. Yes, Monsanto wants to take the fun out of that too.
But all kidding aside, there is a very dark side agenda to this and that is to wipe out the world’s bee population.
Monsanto knows that birds and especially bees, throw a wrench into their monopoly due to their ability to pollinate plants, thus naturally creating foods outside of the company’s “full domination control agenda.” When bees attempt to pollinate a GM plant or flower, it gets poisoned and dies.
In fact, the bee colony collapse was recognized and has been going on since GM crops were first introduced.
To counter the accusations that they deliberately caused this ongoing genocide of bees, Monsanto devilishly buys out Beeologics, the largest bee research firm that was dedicated to studying the colony collapse phenomenon and whose extensive research named the monster as the primary culprit! After that, it’s “bees, what bees? Everything’s just dandy!” Again, I did not make this up, but wish I had!
During the mid-90s, they decide to reinvent their evil company as one focused on controlling the world’s food supply through artificial, biotechnology means to preserve the Roundup cash-cow from losing market-share in the face of competing, less-toxic herbicides.
You see, Roundup is so toxic that it wipes out non-GMO crops, insects, animals, human health and the environment at the same time. How very efficient!
Because Roundup-ready crops are engineered to be toxic pesticides masquerading as food, they have been banned in the EU, but not in America! Is there any connection between that and the fact that Americans, despite the high cost and availability of healthcare, are collectively the sickest people in the world? Of course not!
As was Monsanto’s plan from the beginning, all non-Monsanto crops would be destroyed, forcing farmers the world over to use only its toxic terminator seeds.
And Monsanto made sure farmers who refused to come into the fold were driven out of business or sued when windblown terminator seeds poisoned organic farms.
This gave the company a virtual monopoly as terminator seed crops and Roundup worked hand in glove with each other as GMO crops could not survive in a non-chemical environment so farmers were forced to buy both.
Their next step was to spend billions globally buying up as many seed companies as possible and transitioning them into terminator seed companies in an effort to wipe out any rivals and eliminate organic foods off the face of the earth.
In Monsanto’s view, all foods must be under their full control and genetically modified or they are not safe to eat!
They pretend to be shocked that their critics in the scientific community question whether crops genetically modified with the genes of diseased pigs, cows, spiders, monkeys, fish, vaccines and viruses are healthy to eat. The answer to that question is obviously a very big “no way!”
You’d think the company would be so proud of their GMO foods that they’d serve them to their employees, but they don’t.
Monsanto lamely responded “we believe in choice.” What they really means is “we don’t want to kill the help.”
It’s quite okay though to force-feed poor nations and Americans these modified monstrosities as a means to end starvation since dead people don’t need to eat! I’ll bet the thought on most peoples’ minds these days is that Monsanto is clearly focused on eugenics and genocide, as opposed to providing foods that will sustain the world.
As in Monsanto partner Disney’s Sleeping Beauty, the wicked witch gives the people the poisoned GMO apple that puts them to sleep forever.
2000's: By this time Monsanto controls the largest share of the global GMO market. In turn, the US government spends hundreds of millions to fund aerial spraying of Roundup, causing massive environmental devastation.
Fish and animals by the thousands die within days of spraying as respiratory ailments and cancer deaths in humans spike tremendously. But this is all considered an unusual coincidence so the spraying continues. If you thought Monsanto and the FDA were one and the same, well you can add the gov’t to that sorry list now.
The monster grows bigger: Monsanto merges with Pharmacia & Upjohn, then separates from its chemical business and rebrands itself as an agricultural company.
Yes, that’s right, a chemical company whose products have devastated the environment, killed millions of people and wildlife over the years now wants us to believe they produce safe and nutritious foods that won’t kill people any longer.
That’s an extremely hard-sell, which is why they continue to grow bigger through mergers and secret partnerships.
Because rival DuPont is too large a corporation to be allowed to merge with, they instead form a stealth partnership where each agrees to drop existing patent lawsuits against one another and begin sharing GMO technologies for mutual benefit.
In layman’s terms, together they would be far too powerful and politically connected for anything to stop them from owning a virtual monopoly on agriculture; “control the food supply & you control the people!”
Not all is rosy as the monster is repeatedly sued for $100s of millions for causing illness, infant deformities and death by illegally dumping all manner of PCBs into ground water, and continually lying about products safety – you know, business as usual.
Not only do these horrendous seeds destroy the organic farmers’ crops, the lawsuits drive them into bankruptcy, while the Supreme Court overturns lower court rulings and sides with Monsanto each time.
At the same time, the monster begins filing patents on breeding techniques for pigs, claiming animals bred any way remotely similar to their patent would grant them ownership. So loose was this patent filing that it became obvious they wanted to claim all pigs bred throughout the world would infringe upon their patent.
The global terrorism spreads to India as over 100,000 farmers who are bankrupted by GMO crop failure, commit suicide by drinking Roundup so their families will be eligible for death insurance payments.
In response, the monster takes advantage of the situation by alerting the media to a new project to assist small Indian farmers by donating the very things that caused crop failures in the country in the first place! Forbes then names Monsanto "company of the year." Sickening, but true.
More troubling is that Whole Foods, the corporation that brands itself as organic, natural and eco-friendly is proven to be anything but. They refuse to support Proposition 37, California’s GMO-labeling measure that Monsanto and its GMO-brethren eventually helped to defeat.
Why? Because Whole Foods has been in bed with Monsanto for a long time, secretly stuffing its shelves with overpriced, fraudulently advertized “natural & organic” crap loaded with GMOs, pesticides, rBGH, hormones and antibiotics.
So, of course they don’t want mandatory labelling as that would expose them as the Whole Frauds and Whore Foods that they really are!
However, when over twenty biotech-friendly companies including WalMart, Pepsico and ConAgra recently met with FDA in favor of mandatory labelling laws, this after fighting tooth and nail to defeat Prop 37, Whole Foods sees an opportunity to save face and becomes the first grocery chain to announce mandatory labelling of their GMO products…in 2018! Uh, thanks for nothing, Whore.
And if you think its peers have suddenly grown a conscience, think again. They are simply reacting to the public’s outcry over the defeat of Prop 37 by crafting deceptive GMO-labelling laws to circumvent any real change, thus keeping the status quo intact.
This criminal “act” gives the corporate factory farms a virtual monopoly to police and control all foods grown anywhere, including one’s own backyard, and provides harsh penalties and jail sentences for those who do not use chemicals and fertilizers.
President Obama decided this sounded reasonable and gave his approval.
With this Act, Monsanto claims that only GM foods are safe and organic or homegrown foods potentially spread disease, therefore must be regulated out of existence for the safety of the world. If eating GM pesticide balls is their idea of safe food, I would like to think the rest of the world is smart enough to pass.
This law states that no matter how harmful Monsanto’s GMO crops are and no matter how much devastation they wreak upon the country, U.S. federal courts cannot stop them from continuing to plant them anywhere they choose.
Yes, Obama signed a provision that makes Monsanto above any laws and makes them more powerful than the government itself. We have to wonder who’s really in charge of the country because it’s certainly not him!
There comes a tipping point though when a corporation becomes too evil and the world pushes back… hard! Many countries continue to convict Monsanto of crimes against humanity and have banned them altogether, telling them to “get the f#<k out and stay out!”
The world has begun to awaken to the fact that the monster does not want control over the global production of food simply for profit’s sake. No, it’s become clear by over a century of death & destruction that the primary goal is to destroy human health and the environment, turning the world into a Mon-Satanic Hell on Earth!
Research into the name itself reveals it to be latin, meaning “my saint,” which may explain why critics often refer to it as “Mon-Satan.”
Know that all is not lost. Evil always loses in the end once it is widely exposed to the light of truth as is occurring now. The fact that the Monsanto-led government finds it necessary to enact desperate legislation to protect its true leader proves this point. Being evicted elsewhere, the United States is Monsanto’s last stand so to speak.
Yet, even here many have begun striking back by protesting against and rejecting GMO monstrosities, choosing to grow their own foods and shop at local farmers markets instead of the Monsanto-supported corporate grocery chains.
The awakening people are also beginning to see they have been misled by corporate tricksters and federal government criminals poisoned by too much power, control and greed, which has resulted in the creation of the monstrous, out-of-control beast.
And as the people vote against that by choosing not to buy GMO poisons, Monsatan’s limbs continue to get hacked away slowly but surely, driving it to its knees for the final organic sword thrust into its blackened heart.
What They Want You To Fear Versus The Real Threats We Face March 8 2016 | From: WakingTimes
The uniting global culture of the 21st Century does have risks that it needs to address as it moves into a new era that can finally be classed as a civilized society. Yet, any report that identifies the threats to our species needs to be holistic and progressive in its approach; otherwise it is just fear propaganda manufactured to elicit our blind consent.
Allegedly, the three biggest threats to the world are:
3. Nuclear North Korea
As stated in the second paragraph:
“US National Intelligence Director James Clapper and other officials warned an attack by Islamic State on US soil was imminent, that North Korea now had the capability to produce up to 100 nuclear bombs and that Russian and Chinese hackers could dismantle critical defence, supply and information networks and were in fact already starting to do this.”
We can see straight away the fear they’re trying to push: there are no internal threats; the big bad entities of the East are who we all need to be worried about. This would be hilarious if it wasn’t so dangerous, because as per design, it aims to keep the mainstream herd of breaking free from the false narratives which unfortunately characterize living in this day and age.
As the post-mainstream community has long understood, the primary threat that we collectively face is the shadow power structure which has bought out our financial, informational, political, medicinal and educational systems.
The way in which money and resources are controlled in our society, as well as what information the matrix-media provides, is determined by this oligarchy which has long infiltrated western governments and the minds of the masses.
Therefore, we all need to be concerned that we no longer have a representative government. Abraham Lincoln’s famous quote is regrettably being transformed for the worse: a government of the people, by the people, for the people, is perishing from the earth.
As part of this agenda, Islamic State (IS) is a proxy army of this global cabal. IS is made up of Sunni radical extremists, and was directly massaged into a well-equipped army by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Sunni-dominated Middle Eastern states. Weaponry and other equipment were also directly and indirectly supplied to them by Western nations.
The rise of terrorism has been a well planned ingredient to this recipe, officially beginning in 2001. In orchestrated stride, the ‘war-on-terror’ continued to escalate in 2015 with supposed terror attacks being carried out in dozens of areas across the Middle East and Africa, as well as the well-known ‘Paris Attacks’ and San Bernardino shootings later in the year.
Of course, many of these incidents might well be false-flag operations carried out by these ruling elite, who are hell-bent on uniting the world under their impenetrable rule.
Because there has been a war in the Middle East between the Sunni’s and Shiites for centuries, the Israeli/US elites have picked a side to meet their own ideological and geopolitical goals.
Syria and Iran are primarily Shiites, whilst Turkey and Saudi Arabia are Sunni nations that have been allies of the U.S for decades. Turkey is also a part of NATO, so they were always going to choose this particular side.
It appears that Russia is the unplanned wildcard. They have allied with Iran and Syria because they have their own ideological, economical and geopolitical agendas.
For this end, they have absolutely pumped the Sunni radical extremists since mid to late last year, which is why Saudi Arabia and their alliance have organized up to 350 thousand ground troops in early February to potentially enter Syria in a ground invasion.
They of course will say this is to fight IS, but that’s just pure deception; the real aim would be to ensure that they don’t lose the battle for supremacy that they’ve invested so much time, energy and pride in.
Furthermore, Russia and China, among other nations, have collaborated to build new economic institutions for the future, including the BRICS bank and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). As noted in this Global Research article in February 2016:
“China and Russia are investing in neighboring economies on terms that cement Eurasian integration on the basis of financing in their own currencies and favoring their own exports. They also have created the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as an alternative military alliance to NATO.
And the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) threatens to replace the IMF and World Bank tandem in which the United States holds unique veto power.”
As stated, this is in direct opposition to the oligarchical-controlled IMF and World Bank, although it must be noted that originally there was some endorsement by these institutions. In any case, as noted in an article by former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts:
“The basis of US foreign policy is the commitment to prevent the rise of powers capable of constraining Washington’s unilateral action. The ability of Russia and China to do this makes them both a target.
Washington is not opposed to terrorism. Washington has been purposely creating terrorism for many years. Terrorism is a weapon that Washington intends to use to destabilize Russia and China by exporting it to the Muslim populations in Russia and China.”
In other words, Washington and the gullibility of its European vassals have put humanity in a very dangerous situation, as the only choices left to Russia and China are to accept American vassalage or to prepare for war.
Based on this analysis, Russia and China are only threats because the US (and Israel) oligarchy has made them into exactly that.
The majority of people do not want further war, so the question then begs, will they stand up against this authoritarian agenda or will a well-orchestrated false flag convince the masses that it’s the only way forward to protect their freedoms?
Note: for those who vehemently say NO TO WAR, please see this initiative led by the infamous war veteran Ken O’Keefe.
The Real Threats We Face
As discussed, there is a shadow order that has taken control of the way that we organize and economize our societies. They use their corporate monopolies to enact their agenda. If we don’t do something to stop this tyranny then the “11 Toxic Realities Society is Finally Waking Up About” will continue its carnage across our collective minds and hearts.
In addition, the global economy is tanking due to a saturation of debt and near worthless global currency. How this plays out in the coming months and years is hard to predict, yet the potential destruction of our current way of life, as well as massive social unrest, is very real. This is something we all need to hedge our bets against; hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
Yet, there’s something even more powerful that if we don’t do something about, then nothing will change for the better. That threat is the ignorance of the masses. If the majority of people actually understood the issues, and were prepared to stand up and be counted in ensuring humanity’s next phase of evolution comes to fruition, then no matter how much money and resources are at the disposal of the despots, people power would inevitably reign supreme.
The Military - Industrial - Media - Politico - Banking Complex Increase their Power and Continue their Pillage Across the World:
Pharmaceutical monopolies amplifying the drugging of society, as well as keeping many of us sick so that they maximize their profits;
Movements rise up only to be vilified and disassembled, such as the Occupy Movement;
Science turned into a corporate institution, as well as further hijacked by an inaccurate and small-minded philosophy of reality;
Wars purposely created with millions of people dying for the whims of the shadow empire;
Radical extremists massaged into proxy armies to do dirty work for the collapsing power structure;
Air, medicine, food and water becoming purposely more toxic;
Governmental policy increasingly being determined by corporate/elite interests;
Police being militarized all around the globe;
The education model struggling to become less of an indoctrination system; and
The agenda of global governance becoming closer to fruition.
Once the tipping point occurs and the masses wake up to these and other realities that threaten the future of our species, the paradigm shift will be in full swing. To do so, apathy will need to be transcended so that the awareness of the dysfunctions leads to effective and sustained action and the transformation of our social systems.
The goal? Design them so that we can truly say they are for the benefit of not just all of our fellow man, but our natural systems too.
The original article cited above uses fear to sedate the masses. It claims that one of the biggest threats are attacks on US and European soil. Of course known false flags like 911, and suspected ones like the 2015 Paris attacks, are insider moves on the geopolitical chess board, so when the masses are warned that one might occur, its only natural for the indoctrinated to automatically believe that it was whoever the presstitute media says it is.
Therefore, we must be vigilant when it comes to any significant events which arise. To do so, just stay tuned into the alternative media because there are many independent truth-seekers and social commentators who are disproving the false narratives to ensure the truth really is out there.
“There’s escalating conflict all across the planet. The global economy is deflating from a decades-old debt bubble. Ignorance, apathy, ill-health and suffering are commonplace.
Politics has sold-out. Money rules the rules. Then of course the consolidation of power has been very successful by the oligarchs, who have taken primary control of how money and information is circulated throughout society.”
There is a bigger picture though. It is important to understand what we’re dealing with in all its forms, because if we align ourselves to it then we can co-create with it, no matter if it’s of positive or negative charge. Yet regardless of the exact details of all these realities, this is all part of a deeper energetic shift which is not only organic, but being fueled by individual and community action.
Ultimately, the potential for it to get worse before it gets better is something that we need to accept. Think smart, act smart. Do it for yourself and your loved ones, but also for the community that you call your home.
Because after all, we’re all on the same team; help those around you to realise it so that you can begin to build the future that you dream of in your own backyard, to the best of your ability.
Much love and strength to you all.
The Real Reasons Behind Negative Interest Rates And Banning Cash March 8 2016 | From: EpochTimes
It's another [planned] bank bailout and it won't end well.
Indeed, the orchestrated support from the usual suspects among the mainstream media, pundits, think tanks, banks, and governments around the world is astounding.
Both editorial boards of Bloomberg and The New York Times wrote two pieces in favor of banning cash. Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and European Central Bank President Mario Draghi voiced their support for the elimination of large currency notes. Only The Wall Street Journal didn’t exactly endorse the idea.
Willem Buiter, the chief economist of Citigroup, summed up the benefits - at least from the government’s point of view: All financial transactions can be taxed by the government or charged a fee by the banks, and bank runs are eliminated because there is nothing in the bank that’s worth making a run for.
“Something is going to go wrong is what I’m saying."
- James Grant
Germany wants to introduce an initiative in the European Union to ban the 500 euro note and also ban all transactions above 5,000 euros in cash.
All of the proponents know that negative interest rates, a key element in central banks’ objective to achieve meaningful inflation, needed to reduce the debt burden of overextended speculators and businesses, won’t happen unless they also ban cash. That’s why the two ideas often go hand-in-hand in public discussion.
“They will try negative rates to some extent. I think it’s going to be hard to push the Fed Funds rate below negative 1.
That’s going to be difficult. People can basically take out cash and put it in a vault and they get a zero return on it,”said Joseph Gagnon, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former associate director at the Federal Reserve board.
Buiter and Gagnon are honest and cut straight to the chase of the economics involved. Banning cash and imposing negative rates allow one to tax and charge consumers even more than today, forcing them to either spend more in the process or invest in more speculative arenas, such as the stock market.
"'There is an alternative to saving which is called investment or speculation. It involves much greater risk.
A negative interest rate is not only a tax on saving, it is the destruction of saving,”said Grant.
If I have $1,000 in the bank, the next year I will only have $990 because the bank takes the other $10. In fact, this policy is another bank bailout. Most other proponents of a ban on cash say the measure would reduce money laundering, crime, and terrorism.
While this is essentially true, it is somewhat odd that the same people didn’t think about this 10, 20, or 30 years ago, as crime, money laundering, and terrorism unfortunately have been around since at least then. Instead, it took them until now:
Conventional and unconventional monetary tools have reached their limit, and negative interest rates seem to be the only choice left.
“Radical monetary policy begets more of the same, that has been the rule. What doesn’t work… there’s more of it,” said Grant.
What is not astounding, however, is the way the general public meets the two ideas with wholesale skepticism. To illustrate Mr. Gagnon’s point, the sales of safes are booming in Japan, one of the countries further along in the quest to pass negative interest rates to the public.
In fact, there are many indicators that pushing negative interest rates on to consumers - many institutions are happily paying them in the form of negative yields on government bonds - will not be a linear move from 1 to 0 to -1. The system may break crossing the magical number zero.
According to a survey undertaken by Dutch bank ING, 77 percent of respondents said they would take their money out of the bank if interest rates went negative, precisely the bank run that Buiter would like to avoid and precisely the reason negative interest rates would have to go hand-in-hand with a ban on cash.
In addition, lower rates don’t mean savers will spend more; instead, it seems to have the opposite effect. Data compiled by Bank of America shows that in countries with very low or negative deposit rates, savers tend to save more, not spend more.
Related: Why The Powers That Be Are Pushing A Cashless Society
In Switzerland, for example, as the deposit rate moved from a bit less than 1 percent in 2008 to close to 0 percent in 2015, the savings rate increased from 21 percent to 24 percent. The same move can be seen in Denmark and Sweden in more recent years. The motto: If I am getting a lower return on my savings, which lowers my total savings goal, I just have to save more to achieve my target.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
“So negative interest rates are a conceit of the academic economists who run the monetary institutions of the world. I think the theory is dubious and the practice, as we have seen it so far, is equally doubtful,” said Grant.
“I think this is a terrifically bullish moment for gold. I think it’s a very sad moment for the institution of fiat money. But fiat money has never worked out well in the very long run. Maybe we’re in the very long run,” he added.
Even if all cash were banned and people were forced to accept negative rates on their bank deposits, it may well not lead to more consumption, but merely bid up the prices or other stores of value, like gold.
People may even prefer to own heavy pieces of machinery, art, diamonds, and musical instruments, which preserve purchasing power relatively better than a negative rate on banking deposits. People usually chose those methods to preserve purchasing power during times of hyperinflation, like in the Weimar Republic.
And while stocks and real estate will certainly get a boost, most studies show that real, inflation-adjusted returns are often negative because wrong incentives distort the pricing mechanism. Capital is misallocated, and transactions slow down if people are trading goods and services in gold ingots rather than wire transfers.
In short, the push for negative interest rates and a ban on cash has nothing to do with terrorists or money laundering. It has everything to do with bailing out the banks and trying to remedy central bank policy that didn’t work in the past. As James Grant put it: “Something is going to go wrong is what I’m saying.”