Like anyone with their eyes open, I recognize the dangerously heated divide among people throughout our country and the world.
I appreciate the high levels of engagement, and at the same time find the lack of open dialogue across worldview, and the outside provocateurs, to be unfortunate components of the recent activism. Nonetheless, I am encouraged by much of what I see happening in the world, and given my awareness of so much of the corruption, I wanted to explain why I feel optimistic.
As people who have seen Thrive or follow Thrive Movement know, I am committed to following assumptions and money upstream, analyzing actions (not rhetoric) and assessing events through a lens of principles, not politics.
In THRIVE we laid out how the U.S. was at risk of being subsumed by a globalist agenda, with individual sovereignty and personal accountability both being annihilated in the name of one-world governance and control.
I continue to watch government land grabs for Agenda 21/2030, ramped up efforts to control the Internet, the move toward Bail-In legislation and the further authorization of the FBI to break into any computer anywhere, and more - all promoted by a media that is more than ever a megaphone for the globalists, the primary promulgators of “fake news.”
I suggest the quickest path to find some sense of inner peace about the controversial Trump administration is to acknowledge and look through the lens we revealed in THRIVE - that a small, elite international cadre of sociopaths is hell-bent on creating a New World Order - a One World Totalitarian State with them in charge. Comment: President Trump is WELL aware if the situation.
The “GDA” has been using the government takeover of Healthcare, Education, the TPP, NAFTA, WTO, the Fed, false flag imperialist wars, unlimited immigration, mandatory vaccines and flu shots, the destruction of the economy, suppression of free energy, promotion of Agenda 21/30,Global warming and global carbon tax, the UN front for a global state with the NATO enforcement arm, the consolidation of dishonest mainstream media fronting for the globalists and much more, to create the conditions to seduce us into their New World Order, one world government, totalitarian police state.
For all his crass, ego-filled tweets and rants, his undermining of women’s right to choose what happens with their own bodies, his support of fracking and nuclear and coal, his inclusion of Goldman Sachs reps and neocons in his cabinet as well his lack of unifying principles for his policies, Donald Trump is nonetheless the only person I know of who could have both been elected and then gone directly after virtually all of the corrupt and lethal deceptions (listed above) upon which the Global Domination Agenda is built and depends.
Comment: There are strategies underway that are something other than what they appear to be. Some things that appear to be negative, are part of a process of change for the better.
Amidst all the divided and conquered hatred and vitriol, this guy has just in his first month confirmed his support for auditing the Fed, busted up the Big Pharma monopoly on U.S. government health insurance drugs, called out the bias and lies of the mainstream news and taken steps to counter toxic vaccines and to eliminate what was poised to be a mandatory vaccine policy nation-wide.
There is increasing evidence that Trump, along with Xi Xinping and Putin, is a dealmaker and not a warmonger - actually looking for ways to strengthen America from the inside out, as opposed to the political tyrants and imperialists that have waged non-stop wars of aggression from Johnson through Obama.
Setting Down the Sabres
And there is real and increasing evidence that the world is waking up. Superpower world war has been avoided in Ukraine, in the South China seas and in Iran.
The same powers that manipulated the U.S. taxpayer to support imperialist wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Libya and Yemen are finally being neutralized.
Syria is stabilizing as the U.S. shadow government war monster has been called out with the whole world watching. This could have been a proxy standoff with both Russia and China that could have easily led to nuclear confrontation and holocaust.
The unfunded death-web of obligations that is NATO - which started out as an alliance of protection against the threat of communism - has become a tool of Western imperialism that obligates all members to participate in any war that is claimed to threaten any of them.
With such a structure, a single false flag or set of propaganda lies could trigger the use of countless missile bases that the U.S. shadow government has been installing around Russia and China.
Here, too, I see Trump helping to weaken the stranglehold of the GDA by unpacking some of the real motives and dismantling many of the risky structures.
International Finance Moving Toward Reality
Another source of optimism is in the international arena where, on the financial side, the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) - especially China - are skillfully and patiently orchestrating a non-violent move toward asset-backed financial systems on a worldwide scale.
Globalist and Trilateral Commission co-founder (with David Rockefeller) Zbigniew Brzezinski, in handbook for world empire, The Grand Chessboard, described the greatest threat to Western dominance to be the possibility of an emerging alliance in the East that would draw in other countries.
Now it is happening, and the emergence of a multi-polar world, based on trade instead of conquest, is a profound move toward peace.
Gold, silver and other commodity backing are moving free market transactions to a real, accountable and common sense basis. This move, along with Bitcoin and other peer-to-peer transactions, undermines the whole basis for globalist, central banking power - the fraudulent and counterfeit monopoly on printing money with no basis in real value.
This means fiat, debt-based money is going away and that fractional reserve lending will decrease and ultimately disappear. Gold exchanges will be for real minerals, not inflated paper supposedly owned by many entities simultaneously. Deals are being done between nations at the multi-billion dollar level through gold rather than the illusionary petrodollar.
The war on cash, intended to create a global cashless society with total financial control in the grips of the bankers, is ramping up, but is also being exposed by alternative media and obsoleted by alternative currencies.
The Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank was launched with $200 billion in gold backing - and countries all over the globe are joining in, despite the U.S.’s attempts to discourage them from participating in this alternative to the IMF and the World Bank.
The Dragon Alliance of Asia is willing to share its vast gold resources with the West to erase the unpayable debts and reboot the global financial system in a healthy manner - if only the so-called “leaders” from the West are willing to cooperate with the rest of the world rather than try to continue to cheat and dominate it.
I am told by representatives of the Asian Dragon Alliance, that, whereas the Obama administration as puppets for the Rockefeller/Rothchild cabal blocked this offer at every turn, Donald Trump is reportedly aligned with potentially the biggest and most important deal in human history. We are watching this closely.
The desperate attempt by the would-be controllers to censor and suppress dissident opinions and information, and especially to cover up their agenda for global domination and the international pedophilia rings which are used as a control mechanism to scare and steer their puppets in positions of power, are finally coming to light.
Drumming up the term “fake news” (replacing the no longer credible smear of “conspiracy theory”) is blowing up in the face of the would-be dominators as it brings to light the countless ways they have been creating their own fake news propaganda to manipulate our behavior.
Readership and profits of the Washington Post and New York Times have plunged into the red as the masses turn to alternative media for any semblance of what the heck is really going on.
The desperation is blatant when the control cabal has to send self-admitted liar-before-congress James Clapper back to congress to tout Internet censorship, and to counter Trump’s calling out of the “blame the election on Russia” ruse.
The attempts to censor and shut down truth-tellers like Alex Jones, Mike Adams and Ben Swann show the desperation of the would-be controllers to keep the truth about conspiracies, banking schemes, toxic pharmaceuticals, pseudo-foods, and pedophilia from coming to light. But it won’t work.
Major exposés of pedophile rings among so-called “leaders” are happening in England, the Netherlands, Indonesia, Canada and are even beginning in the U.S. with “Pizza-gate,” Los Angeles and others.
Exposing their role in pedophilia provides an understandable and acceptable basis on which vast numbers of the psychopathic controllers are being and will continue to be arrested and taken out of positions of power.
Pivot Toward Sovereignty
We are seeing a dramatic global turn by awakening people away from the corrupt rule of increasingly centralized power. It is expressing itself in Brexit, the Trump election, the probable Frexit in France (and we will be seeing more in Europe).
Many do not know what to turn toward, because they do not yet recognize that it is the State itself that creates, condones and constructs the tyranny of the few over everyone else. But even without realizing this, the arc is toward increasing sovereignty.
It’s a turn away from globalism toward nationalism and toward localism that will, if allowed, continue until it finds the true unit of human wholeness - which is the individual, not the abstraction of “the group.”
Meticulously honoring the intrinsic rights of the individual is what leads to true, voluntary community - which in fact best honors the needs of most people.
Kimberly and I are privileged to have met and vetted numerous geniuses with authentic and historic breakthroughs in health, energy, justice, environment, agriculture, economics and more.
This lethal battle is being waged in virtually every Sector, but that too is being exposed and skilled, principled professionals are focusing their efforts on protecting those who are bringing whole system breakthroughs to humanity.
Many of our best healers are in hiding offshore after attempts on their lives, but we are working diligently with others now to create safe, legal systems and models to bring their offerings out.
As the corrupt exoskeleton of the would-be controllers is crumbling, that will be accelerating. As it is, around the world, and finally even in the U.S., awareness and resistance are emerging on GMOs, glyphosates and chemtrails. Monsanto stock is plunging.
End of Empire
We are seeing not only the end of the American Empire but arguably of the whole concept of Empire.
The Clintons, Bushes, Rockefellers and Rothschilds as well as the likes of Kissinger, Cheney, Blair, Sarkozy and Brzezinski are being exposed, some having to limit their travel and fearing their own arrests and incarceration for a myriad of crimes and abuses.
Freedom Rising - Light at the End of the Statist Rabbit Hole
Perhaps most importantly of all, an understanding of the distinctions, history and potential of true liberty and the Non-Aggression Principle is blossoming all over the world. For example, Stefan Molyneux, arguably history’s most advanced philosopher, had over 100 million downloads and views of in-depth material through his website in 2016.
Even the so-called “alt right”, many of whom are still mired in the dogmas of religion and nationalism, but are otherwise devoted to anti-globalism, free speech, free but accountable markets, honest banks and individual sovereignty, is having a vast effect on hundreds of millions of young people worldwide and has a strong influence on the incoming U.S. presidential administration.
Many on both sides of the political divide are feeling shaken and embarrassed by the brazen, anti-free speech violence perpetrated by so-called Antifa and black bloc elements - especially at U.S. universities as happened with the Milo Yiannopoulos event in Berkeley - the birthplace of the free speech movement!
In Brazil, fast growing organizations among the youth are waking others up - through protests, education and clever social media campaigns - to the fact that socialism is dangerous - NOT cool, but protecting equal rights for everyone is what will work.
More and more signs are appearing among the young at protests saying “Less Marx, More Mises!”
Acknowledging some of the significant good that I see Trump doing is not a blanket endorsement of his policies. I see a host of unprincipled violations in addition to the ones mentioned above: ignoring Israel’s treatment of Palestine, allowing water-threatening pipelines without sufficient safeguards, proposing “taking” Iraq’s oil, etc. (Releasing free energy tech will obsolete the whole issue of invading countries to take their oil.)
However, for me, the key to separating out his ethical actions from his immoral policies is the compass of the Non-Aggression Principle - not partisan politics.Comment: Again, Trump is making strategic moves in sequence.
Turning the Light on Secret Societies
More international good news: Secret societies are getting exposed - including the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg group, Roundtable, Royal Institute of international Affairs, Opus Dei, the Masons, Jesuits, Knights Templar, Parushim, Skull and Bones and on and on.
People are waking up to why these powerful societies have to be secretive - that domination of human lives requires covert means, sexual exploitation and fraudulent accumulation of wealth and power.
The light of truth, through the Internet and alternative media, is beginning to cleanse this scourge on humanity and protect countless lives both young and old.
I believe we have dodged a major bullet this election cycle with the still emerging rise of Socialism duping a caring but gullible and uninformed youth movement - seduced once again with the same false promise of free stuff - healthcare, education, housing, welfare etc.- that led thousands into tyranny, torture, starvation, murder, and wars in the Soviet Union, Germany, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Argentina, Venezuela and many more.
Fortunately, I could go on and on about all of the signs that I am seeing that the life force is breaking through the concrete of oppression, speaking truth to power and lifting the veils of illusion that have kept human beings willingly voting for and paying their slave masters for centuries.
This is going to be a year like no other. We could see free energy released, the waters decontaminated and coral reefs beginning to be restored, extraterrestrial contact disclosed, the Fed audited, the mainstream media held to account for their lies, financial systems restored to honest voluntary exchange, a surge in jobs and prosperity, humanitarian projects funded worldwide, cures for cancer, AIDS, ALS, MS, chronic fatigue, Parkinson’s and more supported and unleashed…
Principles of Peace - Science of Love
The power of reason and truth and the evolution of consciousness are ultimately unstoppable. They are who we are, and I feel grounded in my confidence that in my lifetime I will see at least the tipping point toward a global civilization based on integrity, true freedom and unprecedented voluntary collaboration dissolving illusionary boundaries and limitations.
The human family is still deep in strife - but now with the capability to blow ourselves off the face of the Earth. We are having to learn the principles of peace - and they are centered in the Non-Aggression Principle and moving beyond the superstition of having to be ruled.
Sovereignty with accountability is the key to unleashing our suppressed creativity, aligning with natural forces and liberating the already existing solutions in every Sector of human behavior. This is the science of Love applied. This can manifest heaven on Earth - in our lifetimes.
We can look for deeper truths than propaganda and whose team should rule the rest of us. We can choose our loyalties based on eternal and universal natural principles, not on power politics.
This is what fills my outlook with light as I move forward into this new time.
President Trump's Lawyers Plan A White House Legal Attack On Federal Agency Power + Trump Is Challenging The Whole CIA-Media Nexus & JFK Researchers: Trump At Risk For Assassination March 21 2017 | From: Time / JonRappoport / Infowars / Various
White House counsel Don McGahn has assembled a team of elite lawyers with the stated goal of leading Trump Administration efforts to roll back regulatory powers across the U.S. government.
The plan of attack, run from the second floor of the West Wing, is designed to take apart what Trump advisor Stephen Bannon has called "the Administrative State," the collection of federal agencies that exists to carry out laws passed by Congress and authorities granted to the President.
Trump aides argue that these bureaucracies have become an independent federal power sources that sometimes works against the intent of the U.S. Congress and U.S. Constitution.
"Article I is the Congress, Article II is the President. Article III are the courts. And then there's this administrative state, combining all three,” McGahn told TIME in an exclusive interview.
“They make the law, they enforce the law, and then they decide who violates the law, destroying the constitutional separation of powers that was designed to protect individual liberty."
One White House aide described the group of lawyers hired by McGahn as a conservative answer to "Nader's Raiders," a small group of liberal activists organized by Ralph Nader in the 1960s and 1970s, who successfully fought for greater federal regulation of consumer goods like automobiles and food.
McGahn said he had specifically chosen his staff because of their expertise in working inside federal law.
"They understand the regulatory agencies, several are appellate lawyers who have spent their careers fighting regulatory and government overreach, or worked on Capitol Hill conducting oversight,” McGahn said in an interview with TIME.
“A number of people in the office actually have sued the government over regulatory over reach, and have won."
The group, which reports to McGahn, includes Greg Katsas, a deputy White House counsel, who ran the Department of Justice’s Civil Division during the Bush administration and challenged the Affordable Care Act at the Supreme Court while in private practice.
Stacy Cline Amin, an associate counsel, was the Chief Counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Associate Counsel John Bash has argued 10 cases before the Supreme Court, clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia and D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a hero of conservatives in the fight against the regulatory system.
Tim shares about his experience at Trump's inauguration and reveals why we should all be paranoid about our privacy being compromised by the government and other major companies.
Senior Associate Counsel James Burnham successfully argued a challenge to former President Barack Obama’s recess appointees to the National Labor Relations Board. Senior Associate Counsel Uttam Dhillon and Associate Counsel Daniel Epstein are both veterans of several Capitol Hill oversight roles.
McGahn is no stranger to the struggle himself. A former chairman of the Federal Election Commission and an advocate against some campaign financial legislation, he led the charge in trying to rein in federal regulation of campaigns.
"When I hear 'deregulation,' all that means is returning the power to decide policy back to those elected by the people, whether it is the House, the Senate, or the President,” McGahn said.
One priority, McGahn said, will be working toward "giving full life" to the 2012 Supreme Court case Sackett vs. EPA. That case expanded the ability of Americans to challenge regulatory orders in court.
McGahn said the administration would work to support efforts by citizens to object to regulations that affect them.
"We are looking for these various bureaucracies to be a little more fair," McGahn said.
"Too often agencies impose penalties without basic due process. Before imposing a penalty or negative ruling, those accused should get an opportunity to be heard. It is fundamentally unfair to do otherwise."
The larger goal of rolling back agency regulatory powers also played a role in the selection of Supreme Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch, who has proposed abandoning the so-called Chevron doctrine - which grants federal agencies the first crack at interpreting laws that apply to them before the courts.
Emerging from a 1984 Supreme Court ruling, the doctrine stands to be a key flashpoint in his upcoming confirmation hearings. In his responses to a questionnaire from the Senate Judiciary Committee, Gorsuch listed his concurrence in the case, Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch, as the first case when asked for significant decisions he had worked on.
In that decision, Gorsuch said the Chevron doctrine;
"Was more than a little difficult to square with the Constitution of the framers’ design.
My opinion noted that the Administrative Procedure Act vests the courts with the power and duty to interpret statutory provisions, that deferring to an agency's interpretation may be in tension with Congress's statutory directive, and that this practice may raise due process (fair notice) and separation of powers concerns,” Gorsuch wrote to the committee.
In some ways the deregulatory stance of the Trump administration is simply conventional conservative practice, directed more by Republican Party thinking than the president’s beliefs. Trump has spoken only generally about his desire to dismantle “job-killing” regulations, but his team is nothing if not specific.
But the president's top strategist, Bannon, has elevated the issue in recent weeks, including during a recent address to conservative activists.
"The administrative state is the FEC, the FTC, the FCC, FERC, SEC all that alphabet,“ Bannon told TIME in an interview last week.
“All this stuff in environment or EEOC, just on and on and on, coupled with the bureaucracies that do it."
Trump’s first budget, set to be released this week, will include dramatic cuts to non-defense discretionary spending, including major regulatory bodies like the Environmental Protection Agency.
Already the administration has rolled back or delayed scores of Obama-era regulations. Two of the first four bills signed by the presidents rolled back a pair of controversial rules.
Presidential orders swiped away the red tape for the construction of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines. And the White House Counsel’s office and the Justice Department are reviewing pending litigation in regulatory cases to determine whether to reverse the government’s positions.
"It’s early but the efforts there have been serious first steps,” said Philip Wallach a senior fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and an expert on the administrative state.
White House aides acknowledge the work may be messy, and argue Trump believes the shakeup is necessary to meet his economic growth targets.
"It'll be quite controversial, particularly when we get into things like the EPA,” Bannon told TIME.
“But the President believes very strongly you cannot unleash the real animal spirits of the American economy just in tax cuts."
The notion of the administrative state is nothing new. Ronald Reagan sought to rein it in during his eight years, but struggled to do more than just contain its growth.
But the fight against its growth became a crusade during the Obama years, particularly in conservative legal circles as they watched the former president relied on regulatory action to circumvent an obstructionist Congress.
President Trumps Weekly Address: March 19 2017
Trump has yet to nominate or fill hundreds of key posts across the government that will determine if he can bend the bureaucracy to his will. Trump has also delayed in making some selections for independent regulatory agencies.
"It’s very hard to overcome the bureaucratic inertia,” Wallach said. “It will take a lot of professionalism to do a lot of this regulatory work and a lot of effort to deal with the bureaucracy.”
The Trump team retorted: Ridiculous; reminds us of the CIA’s phony assessment of Saddam’s WMDs that led to the disastrous war against Iraq.
Then the CIA’s gloves came off. But there is more to it than that.
All along, Trump has been hammering the mainstream press, calling them biased, idiots, fake, etc. Certainly through his advisor, Steve Bannon, and quite probably through other sources, Trump knows about the CIA-major media connection.
This connection, of course, goes way back to the Mockingbird CIA operation of the early 1950s. Major news outlets have been infested with CIA operatives since that time.
When Trump goes after mainstream news, he’s also going after its shadow brother, the CIA; and vice versa. This is no accident. You can’t put a heavy dent in one without putting a heavy dent in the other.
Donald Trump on 9/11 TRUTH (Aired Sept.11, 2001)
As the mainstream press continues to stir the pot and attack Trump on every possible front, day after day, they strive to impart the impression that the escalating war between Trump and the CIA is a sign that the president’s administration is in a condition of severe imbalance, heading toward the edge of the cliff.
Two points about that: the press is trying to protect its shadow brother, the CIA; and the reason a war between a president and the CIA hasn’t broken out since JFK and the Bay of Pigs is, simply, no president has dared to challenge the CIA openly.
Or to put it another way, every president since Kennedy SHOULD have gone to war with the CIA, but no president did.
Trump, so far, is carrying out his version of a war.
He may stop, he may make peace, he may turn away, he may decide the consequences are too steep, but so far he’s doing, in this respect, what he should be doing, because the CIA has believed, for a long, long time that it is the president, it runs the country, it decides the important issues, it fronts for mega-corporate incursions into foreign nations, it decides foreign policy, it calculates when a regime should be overthrown, it decides how to foment wars that will end up funneling huge chunks of cash to the military-industrial complex…
People with attention spans of less than six seconds think rooting out corruption in high places can be done with the stroke of a pen and an executive order. No. Afraid not.
Digging out, exposing, and getting rid of the rot and corruption inside the CIA is on the order of turning around an oil tanker in a small lake.
That rot and crime wasn’t built to its present level overnight. It has been built since 1948.
The people who constructed it (with Allen Dulles right up there at the head of the line) assumed they could stage a coup. A national coup. They could essentially take over the country. And to a large extent, they did. JFK’s assassination removed a potential obstruction early in the game.
Then, nothing. Until Trump.
Maybe he’ll throw up his hands and forget about going after the CIA. Maybe he’ll focus on other parts of his agenda. Maybe he’ll prove to be completely ineffective and unwilling, as regards the Agency.
But he has sounded an alarm, just as he sounded an alarm about Globalism, the so-called “free trade” treaties, and the brutal theft of jobs in America by those Rockefeller forces who want to torpedo economies, as a step toward exercising greater international control over the lives of billions of people.
The CIA and major media in this country are in lock-step. They feed each other. They produce a picture of reality that is entirely shallow and false. They want compliance, obedience, and silence. They want to make black white and white black. They want to fulfill Orwell’s 1984 prediction.
The best of these little “journalists” are leeches and adoring cowards. They cling to the higher-ups who run the show.
The worst of them are psychologically and spiritually mongrelized sociopaths, for whom sadism is the only way of life. Like their CIA brothers, they believe (or did believe until recently) that no one could remove their entitlements.
Steve Bannon knows - and I’m sure he’s told Trump - that a war against the media is the best way to go right now. On many fronts, the media are the funnels for presenting inside out lies, from the CIA, to the American people.
In other words, if the head of the snake is too hard to cut off at the moment, go for other parts of the body.
JFK Researchers: Trump At Risk For Assassination
President Trump is at more risk of assassination from the Deep State than any president since President John Kennedy.
That was the consensus warning issued by a meeting of top JFK assassination researchers held at the National Press Club on Thursday.
“I’m really worried, whether you like Donald Trump or not – I’m concerned about where this is going,” Lawrence Schnapf, a New York attorney and co-chair of the Citizens Against Political Assassination (CAPA), the group sponsoring the press conference and seminar.
“The Deep State that conspired to assassinate JFK is still in place today,” Schnapf stressed.
“CAPA is going to do everything we can to get the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to make public all the JFK assassination records, even if we have to take legal action.”
“But Donald Trump must understand the threat to his life from enemies within the Deep State is real.”
CAPA sponsored the meeting to urge President Trump to sign an executive order demanding the National Archives make public all remaining JFK assassination documents that are currently scheduled for release on Oct. 26, in final compliance with the JFK Records Act of 1992 as implemented by the Assassinations Record Review Board (AARB).
On Oct. 26, NARA is expected to release some 3,600 documents still held secret, nearly 54 years since JFK was assassinated in Dallas, TX, on Nov. 22, 1963.
In addition, NARA possesses approximately 40,000 that remain heavily-redacted – documents that CAPA is urging President Trump to insist also must be released on Oct. 26, without redactions, to allow the American public to read these documents in complete form, as they were originally written.
An index of the 3,600 still secret documents released by NARA suggests the documents still kept secret by the CIA largely involve the deep and complicated ties the CIA had to Lee Harvey Oswald, the “lone-gun assassin” identified by the Warren Commission.
"We may never know how many documents the CIA destroyed or if the 3,600 documents NARA is planning to release are all secret JFK assassination documents that may exist deep buried within the CIA,” explained Andrew Kreig, J.D., a Justice Integrity Project editor and CAPA member who organized the conference.
“If President Trump would lend his authority to the release of all JFK documents in a not-redacted fashion, the American public would finally get a chance to see how the Warren Commission lied and covered up the extent to which we now understand Lee Harvey Oswald worked as a field operative, for the Deep State that continues today to menace President Trump.”
Famed forensic pathologist and medical school professor Cyril H. Wecht, J.D., M.D., chaired the conference and gave a graphic demonstration why he considered the Warren Commission’s “single bullet theory” nonsense, demonstrating his points by arranging two members of the audience to adjust their chairs to sit as President Kennedy and Governor John Connelly sat in the presidential limousine that fatal day in Dallas.
A diagram showing the ridiculous and physically impossible 'official' claim that one bullet took the above trajectory through two people
Also attending was noted JFK expert James H. Lesar, J.D., the president of the Assassination Archives and Research Center (AARC) headquarted in Washington, D.C.
“What after more than 50 years can be so important to national security that the federal government would want to keep secret from the American public about the assassination of our president on Nov. 22, 1963,” Lesar asked.
He expressed his continuing concern that one provision of the JFK Records Act gives federal agencies the right to request continued postponement of JFK records after 2017, if release would result in “identifiable harm” that outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Lawful And Legal: Why You Need To Know What They Mean + It Is All A Word Game: Why “Persons” Are Not Real March 20 2017 | From: Omnithought
Knowing the difference between the words lawful and legal can one day free your mind and soul from the illusion of the Matrix. The word lawful is related to Natural Law (God’s Law). It is used to communicate things of substance. As for the word legal, it is related to laws created by man and is used to communicate things of form.
In simpler terms, something that is lawful is of substance so it is real. On other hand, something that is legal is of form so it appears to be real. In other words, the word legal deals with fictional things. A fictional thing is not real and therefore it is DEAD.
One of the ways they secretly tell you that you are playing a role of a dead character is the all caps name. Hence, the name in all caps on tombstones. You can find the all caps name on government documents, such as a state-issued ID. For more information about the all caps name, read my empowering article titled The Legal Name Game to Enslave Your Soul.
"If you agree to participate in the legal system, you also agree to be a dead person, and therefore you have no natural rights.
What is legal is of “form”, what is lawful is of “substance”" -
Blacks Law 1st Edition
That which is legal has been formed by man. A legal entity has been formed by man.
That which is lawful is of substance / essence and is a creation of God. A lawful man is of substance / essence.
Natural Person: Any human being who as such is a legal entity
- Amon v. Moreschi, 296 N.Y. 395, 73 N.E.2d 716.” Max Radin, Radin’s Law Dictionary (1955), p. 216
What is legal is of “form”… therefore a “legal entity” is an entity of form.
Since “any human being who as such is a legal entity“, a human being is of form as well.
Human:Of the form and characteristics of man. (From Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary 3rd Edition).
Form:The antithesis of substance; the appearance or superficial aspect rather than the substance or the essence. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary 3rd Edition).
Natural Person = human being = legal entity
Legal entities are a conception of man; they are known in legalese as legal fictions.
The creation of a civil or legal person out of a thing, the investure of a chattel with toga civillis, may be an achievement of the imperial power, but it is beyond the compass of an American congress.
Congress must first emancipate the slave, before it can endow him with the rights of a citizen under the constitution, or impose upon him the responsibilities of a legal person, or compel him to pay money, or part with liberty.
United States v. Amy, 24 Fed.Cas.792, 794 #14,445 (1859)
The creation of a legal person also creates responsibilities and liabilities for this new legal person - esponsibilities and liabilities due to a nation/country, which is also a legal entity.
Legal is defined as”the “undoing of God’s law” (1893 Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, Encyclopedia Britannica, a dictionary of arts, sciences and general literature / The R.S Peale 9th 1893).
James 4:12 "There is one lawgiver, who can save and destroy: who art thou that judgest another."
Ecclesiastes 1:15 That which is crooked cannot be made straight: and that which is wanting cannot be numbered."
A fiction and a lie can never be a reality and a truth. That which is empty cannot be measured or counted.
Comment: There are many non-lawyers now operating in legal circles who have been clever enough to understand how much of our legal system is based upon elements written into the bible.
These practitioners have been having phenomenal success working within the current Admiralty law system that we are still encumbered by. They are succeeding by leveraging the 'cabal' laws by forcing the legal system back on itself - and they have had some excellent wins for the little guy.
It Is All A Word Game: Why “Persons” Are Not Real
And 'We The People' are being enslaved because we aren't told the definitions!
The key to the word game is “Person” and it is everywhere in our government and legal system from the federal level to the local level.
All laws and statutes are written for legal “Persons” not flesh and blood living men and women. The difference between the two is as significant as the difference between life and death . . . it’s everything!
Legal “persons” can’t walk
Legal “persons” can’t talk
Legal “persons” have no gender
Legal “persons” have no race
Legal “persons” cannot reproduce
Legal “persons” don’t occupy space
In legal-land, “PERSONS” AREN’T REAL – THEY ARE FICTIONAL
When the UNITED STATES went bankrupt in the 30s because of the banksters orchestrated “great depression”, so-called “federal” government representatives pledged (hypothecated) the future earnings and productivity of the American people to the banksters as payment of the debt.
1. To pledge (property) as security or collateral without delivery of title or possession.
2. Usage Problem To hypothesize.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) was put in office in 1933 to administer this new system of government/economics. It was called The New Deal and sold both to Congress and the American people as an emergency solution to a national economic nightmare.
The state of emergency declared at the time has been maintained ever since.
The accomplished researcher David Wilcock actually disputes this translation of Novus Ordo Seclorum:
“This passage is indeed quite revealing. What we learn is that "Novus Ordo Seclorum" does not mean "New World Order" as many conspiracy theorists would claim, but actually "A mighty order of ages is born anew."
The hypothecated population’s earnings had to be tracked and taxed, so UNITED STATES citizens were encouraged to sign up for ‘federal’ Social Insurance aka Social Security. Not coincidentally the Social Security Act was also passed in 1935. [Today it is almost impossible to work, open a bank account, or make a doctor’s appointment without presenting a Soc Sec number.]
The Birth Certificate
Fairly soon afterward, the Birth Certificate tracking system was created and mothers were strongly urged to sign a Certificate of Live Birth as soon as they named their newborn infants.
Unbeknownst to the baby’s Mom and Dad, this document creates a brand new fictitious “Person” that is recorded, and tracked through their Social Security number from then on. The “Person” is named JOHN DOE to coincide with the baby’s family-given name John Doe.
President Woodrow Wilson’s private papers exposed this confession of Colonel Edward Mandell House:
“Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging.
By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living.
They will be our Chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions.
Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges.”
Here is proof that our laws/statutes are written for legal fiction “Persons” and corporations – not for flesh and blood living men:
(27) “Person” means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, public corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
Government code Section 1-26
17. “Person” includes any person, firm, association, organization, partnership, limited liability company, business trust, corporation, or company.
(C) “Person” includes an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, and association.
The words “man and woman” do not appear in any of these definitions. None of these legal entities are alive or even real. They are not substance, they are form. Essentially they are all artificial fictional legal constructs.
This is all done by subterfuge via the complicit, perhaps unaware, BAR Association’s army of attorneys. This scam is – and always has been – a fraud against all Americans.
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
In the 50s and 60s the Uniform Commercial Code was installed across America to fine tune and define this new legal system.
This was done, without the knowledge or consent of the American people who still believe the US Constitution (with the Bill of Rights) is the law of the land. They cling to this belief in spite of overwhelming evidence that the opposite is true.
The reality is that they have been tricked into becoming tax and code slaves by the Rothschild international banking cartel and its BAR.
This nefarious system stays in place due to the “presumption” that we are all volunteering to be dead legal fiction “Persons”. According to UCC General Provisions, presumptions remain valid unless evidence is provided to the contrary.
The first step to rebutting the volunteer presumption is to recognize that President Bill Clinton presented us with a remedy in his Executive Order 13132 in 1999:
“(d) The people of the States are free, subject only to restrictions in the Constitution itself or in constitutionally authorized Acts of Congress, to define the moral, political, and legal character of their lives.”
So, we need to create and publish a (rebuttal) notice defining our political and legal characters - for the record.
This entails resurrecting ourselves from the dead (from legal personage) and rebutting the presumption that we volunteered to be federal US citizens obligated under all of the thousands of inane (and many times undisclosed) rules, regulations and statutes passed by federal, state and local corporate governments.
Related: Attorney / researcher Melvin Stamper did a relatively thorough job explaining the entire issue of “Persons” in his book Fruit from a Poisonous Tree. Here is one chapter of that book with invaluable info on this topic: The Magicians
Warning: Whilst the following video provides an accurate general overview - one needs to be extremely careful when embarking on such 'freeman' type measures.
One wong move and the system will decimate you. Winston Shrout is mentioned in the following and he has emerged to be a scheister who spreads disinformation which has resulted in well meaning people becoming incarcerated.
Hunter S. Thompson’s Thought-Provoking Letter On Finding Purpose And Meaning In Life + Where Our Biggest Regrets Come From March 20 2017 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit
“I was not proud of what I had learned, but I never doubted that it was worth knowing.” - Hunter S. Thompson
For most people, life seems like a drudgery that they have to endure until they die. They are not living to their fullest potential and hence can’t make the most out of life. They feel that they have no purpose and that their life lacks meaning. They are semi-living, enduring all the pain that the universe throws on their shoulders.
But how can one savor life? And how can one find meaning and purpose?
In April of 1958, when asked those questions by his friend, Hume Logan, 22-year-old Hunter S. Thompson responded by writing a thought-provoking letter sharing his advice. The letter is short yet profound, and the fact that at the time Thompson was yet to be successful makes it even more important.
Without further ado, here’s Thompson’s monumental letter that will make you reconsider your life, as well as inspire and motivate you to squeeze the juice out of every moment that existence brings on your way.
You ask advice: ah, what a very human and very dangerous thing to do! For to give advice to a man who asks what to do with his life implies something very close to egomania.
To presume to point a man to the right and ultimate goal - to point with a trembling finger in the RIGHT direction is something only a fool would take upon himself.
I am not a fool, but I respect your sincerity in asking my advice. I ask you though, in listening to what I say, to remember that all advice can only be a product of the man who gives it.
What is truth to one may be disaster to another. I do not see life through your eyes, nor you through mine. If I were to attempt to give you specific advice, it would be too much like the blind leading the blind.
“To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles … ” (Shakespeare)
And indeed, that IS the question: whether to float with the tide, or to swim for a goal. It is a choice we must all make consciously or unconsciously at one time in our lives. So few people understand this!
Think of any decision you’ve ever made which had a bearing on your future: I may be wrong, but I don’t see how it could have been anything but a choice however indirect - between the two things I’ve mentioned: the floating or the swimming.
But why not float if you have no goal? That is another question. It is unquestionably better to enjoy the floating than to swim in uncertainty. So how does a man find a goal?
Not a castle in the stars, but a real and tangible thing. How can a man be sure he’s not after the “big rock candy mountain,” the enticing sugar-candy goal that has little taste and no substance?
The answer - and, in a sense, the tragedy of life - is that we seek to understand the goal and not the man. We set up a goal which demands of us certain things: and we do these things.
We adjust to the demands of a concept which CANNOT be valid. When you were young, let us say that you wanted to be a fireman.
I feel reasonably safe in saying that you no longer want to be a fireman. Why? Because your perspective has changed. It’s not the fireman who has changed, but you. Every man is the sum total of his reactions to experience.
As your experiences differ and multiply, you become a different man, and hence your perspective changes. This goes on and on. Every reaction is a learning process; every significant experience alters your perspective.
So it would seem foolish, would it not, to adjust our lives to the demands of a goal we see from a different angle every day? How could we ever hope to accomplish anything other than galloping neurosis?
The answer, then, must not deal with goals at all, or not with tangible goals, anyway. It would take reams of paper to develop this subject to fulfillment. God only knows how many books have been written on “the meaning of man” and that sort of thing, and god only knows how many people have pondered the subject. (I use the term “god only knows” purely as an expression.)
There’s very little sense in my trying to give it up to you in the proverbial nutshell, because I’m the first to admit my absolute lack of qualifications for reducing the meaning of life to one or two paragraphs.
These are merely suggestions. If you’re genuinely satisfied with what you are and what you’re doing, then give those books a wide berth. (Let sleeping dogs lie.) But back to the answer.
As I said, to put our faith in tangible goals would seem to be, at best, unwise. So we do not strive to be firemen, we do not strive to be bankers, nor policemen, nor doctors.WE STRIVE TO BE OURSELVES.
But don’t misunderstand me. I don’t mean that we can’t BE firemen, bankers, or doctors - but that we must make the goal conform to the individual, rather than make the individual conform to the goal.
In every man, heredity and environment have combined to produce a creature of certain abilities and desires - including a deeply ingrained need to function in such a way that his life will be MEANINGFUL. A man has to BE something; he has to matter.
As I see it then, the formula runs something like this: a man must choose a path which will let his ABILITIES function at maximum efficiency toward the gratification of his DESIRES.
In doing this, he is fulfilling a need (giving himself identity by functioning in a set pattern toward a set goal), he avoids frustrating his potential (choosing a path which puts no limit on his self-development), and he avoids the terror of seeing his goal wilt or lose its charm as he draws closer to it (rather than bending himself to meet the demands of that which he seeks, he has bent his goal to conform to his own abilities and desires).
In short, he has not dedicated his life to reaching a pre-defined goal, but he has rather chosen a way of life he KNOWS he will enjoy.
The goal is absolutely secondary: it is the functioning toward the goal which is important. And it seems almost ridiculous to say that a man MUST function in a pattern of his own choosing; for to let another man define your own goals is to give up one of the most meaningful aspects of life - the definitive act of will which makes a man an individual.
Let’s assume that you think you have a choice of eight paths to follow (all pre-defined paths, of course). And let’s assume that you can’t see any real purpose in any of the eight. THEN - and here is the essence of all I’ve said - you MUST FIND A NINTH PATH.
Naturally, it isn’t as easy as it sounds. You’ve lived a relatively narrow life, a vertical rather than a horizontal existence. So it isn’t any too difficult to understand why you seem to feel the way you do.
But a man who procrastinates in his CHOOSING will inevitably have his choice made for him by circumstance.
So if you now number yourself among the disenchanted, then you have no choice but to accept things as they are, or to seriously seek something else.
But beware of looking for goals: look for a way of life. Decide how you want to live and then see what you can do to make a living WITHIN that way of life. But you say, “I don’t know where to look; I don’t know what to look for.”
And there’s the crux. Is it worth giving up what I have to look for something better? I don’t know - is it? Who can make that decision but you? But even by DECIDING TO LOOK, you go a long way toward making the choice.
If I don’t call this to a halt, I’m going to find myself writing a book. I hope it’s not as confusing as it looks at first glance. Keep in mind, of course, that this is MY WAY of looking at things. I happen to think that it’s pretty generally applicable, but you may not. Each of us has to create our own credo - this merely happens to be mine.
If any part of it doesn’t seem to make sense, by all means call it to my attention. I’m not trying to send you out “on the road” in search of Valhalla, but merely pointing out that it is not necessary to accept the choices handed down to you by life as you know it.
There is more to it than that - no one HAS to do something he doesn’t want to do for the rest of his life.
But then again, if that’s what you wind up doing, by all means convince yourself that you HAD to do it. You’ll have lots of company.
And that’s it for now. Until I hear from you again, I remain,
Where Our Biggest Regrets Come From
Stop for a moment and reflect on how you’ve lived your life up to this moment. Now imagine that you continue living pretty much the same way until you reach the age of 70 and look back upon your life. Would you be content with the way you’ve lived?
When people are young, they usually don’t spend any of their time contemplating on thoughts like this one. They think that life is too long, and that they don’t need to worry about such a hypothetical question. But years pass by quickly and they suddenly find themselves in an old age.
If you could name the things you most regret about, what would they be? I’m sure you could find plenty of things that you’ve done and which had negative consequences in your life and perhaps in the lives of others, and which you would undo if you had the chance to return to the past and live anew. But would any of those things be the ones you regret the most?
If you asked me, I’d say that what we humans regret the most usually aren’t things that we did. Rather, they are things that we didn’t do. Let me explain.
In life’s journey, we all make mistakes, which most of the time help us learn, grow and make better choices later on, by pointing out the bad choices we’ve made in the past, and urging us to change our actions in order to correct them and avoid repeating them in the future.
Mistakes are a necessary and inevitable part of life, and although many people are disappointed by their past mistakes, these usually don’t make it to their Life’s Biggest Regrets list. Why?
For two reasons: Firstly, because they didn’t consciously choose to make them (who would choose to make a mistake, if one knew beforehand that it was a mistake?) and secondly, because they’ve learned something out of their mistakes which helped them mature into wiser individuals.
Therefore, our biggest regrets in life don’t lie in things that we did. Rather, they lie in things that we wanted to do but we never gave a try. When you try to achieve something and you commit a mistake, you at least know that you tried, and that in itself is a very satisfying feeling, because you grabbed the opportunity to give yourself a chance - even if that was tiny - at succeeding.
When, however, you don’t even make an effort to succeed out of fear that you might make mistakes and fail, then that’s a sure-fire way to fill yourself with regrets that will continuously torment your mind. By not having given it a try, you yourself took any chance of succeeding away from your hands by your own decision, and you can’t know what would have happened otherwise.
By not having tried to succeed, you, in a sense, chose to fail, and you’ll most probably forever regret that choice, if what you wanted to achieve was and still is important to you.
The question is, if our biggest regrets don’t come from our failed attempts to succeed, but from not attempting to succeed at all, then why are most people so afraid of encountering failure?
The Fear of Failure
From a very young age most of us have been conditioned to fear failure. You see, we’re living in a very competitive world, where people constantly compare themselves with one another and try their best to outdo one another.
In this world, we’ve been taught that by wining over others (for example, by getting better grades than our classmates at school or receiving a higher salary than our colleagues at work), we’re proving our worth to ourselves and the world, and that those who are better at doing so are the ones who manage to live the “good” life - the rest are just failures whose life is meaningless and not worth-living.
No wonder, therefore, we believe that failure is one of the worst things that can happen to us, and that we should avoid it no matter what.
As a result, many people stop trying out new things in life and don’t set out to achieve their desired goals, even those which mean a lot to them and would contribute to their well-being, lest they make mistakes and encounter failure which they are so afraid of. In order to avoid failure, they’ve given up all their efforts to succeed.
But what is the point of living this way? To not live the way one deep down wants to live, how can one enjoy life and be content? It’s impossible.
Unfortunately, that’s exactly what most of us are doing: living a life we don’t care about. Doing things that don’t matter to us. Things which, instead of lifting up our spirit and helping us spread the wings of our consciousness, are burdening us with all sorts of problems.
And what are we doing about it? Nothing - we just sit and wait, until a moment comes when we can’t do anything, even if we want to, because we don’t have enough energy left anymore.
All we have left is regrets that are torturing our soul and don’t allow us to relax and let go of life with dignity, knowing that we’ve made the most out of it while we could.
Failure is Better than Regret
If you don’t want to end up this way, you need to reconsider your life. Ask yourself in all honesty: “Is the way I’m living serving my happiness?” If not, think of what it would take for you to live in a way that fills your heart with joy. And whatever that is, go for it with all your might.
To do so, you’ll most probably have to endure a lot of adversities and suffering, and you might make a lot of mistakes along your journey. But no matter how painful that is or how many failures you encounter, keep going, being aware that giving up is the only true failure in life.
Of course, be sure to choose your battles carefully. Many people are striving for years upon years to achieve things that won’t and can’t contribute to their well-being.
For example, some are constantly trying to become financially wealthy and acquire as many expensive possessions as they can afford, unable to realize that, although money can fill their pockets, and material objects can fill their houses, none of these can fill their hearts.
Some others, to give another example, are in an endless pursuit of sexual partners to sleep around with, not realizing that sex can’t substitute for the intimacy and loving affection they deep down desire.
So when I am saying “do what brings you joy,” I don’t mean what provides you with superficial, temporary egoistic gratification.
I mean what truly makes you feel fulfilled and turns your life into a celebration. Like engaging yourself in creative work you feel passionate about.
Or forming genuine relationships with like-minded people you enjoy sharing your being with. Or spreading kindness and contributing your gifts to the world for the benefit of all beings on earth.
These are some things that can bring us lasting contentment and peace of mind, but most of us don’t give our attention to.
Life is short, so don’t waste it doing things that don’t put a smile on your face. Focus on doing what allows you to live totally and savor every single moment you’ve been offered by existence.
Will that be easy? Probably not. Will it be worth it? Certainly yes. And, even if you fail at living to your fullest potential, you’ll still gain a lot along your way, for as the saying goes, it’s not the destination that matters, but the journey itself.
The Secretive Bank Of England - Controlling The World's Money Supply + Banking Data Dump March 19 2017 | From: HumansAreFree/ Various
With the enactment of the privately owned central bank, the Bank of England provided the model for the financial enslavement of governments, and their citizens.
Well before the conflict for establishing a National Bank in America or the eventual surrender to the money changers with the betrayal in instituting the Federal Reserve, the history of the Bank of England needs to be studied.
Relying on British historians may seem to invoke a cultural bias; however, the range and wealth of information on this topic comes from an earlier age. Further research will expand this understanding and many of the sources cited can fulfill this objective.
For purposes of a mainstream account, the official site of the Bank of England provides a flowery version about the background and purported success of the scheme proposed by “William Paterson, envisaged a loan of £1,200,000 to the Government, in return for which the subscribers would be incorporated as the "Governor and Company of the Bank of England".
“The goldsmiths evolved to become the original private bankers of the time. Since goldsmiths already had as part of their trade private stores of gold and stout vaults to store them in, entrepreneurs could entrust their own gold to them for safe keeping, for a fee, and receive a paper receipt for the deposit.
“The goldsmiths could then lend monies against these deposits for an additional fee. Mr. Hartley Winters declares that “some ingenious goldsmith conceived the epock-making notion of giving notes…and so founded modern banking.”
Merchants would deposit “their money with the goldsmiths and received from them receipts” that “…were payable on demand, and were transferred from one holder to another in payment of debts.”
“These receipts or notes from the goldsmith bankers, often in the form of a letter, are some of the earliest surviving cheques in England. Given the economic realities of the time, although deposits provided the funds for their business, most of the clients of these goldsmith bankers were usually borrowers rather than depositors.”
From such humble origins, the foundation was laid to invent a central bank that would create money out of thin air and loan it at interest to the government, who lost it sovereignty for making this Faustian bargain.
Secrets of the Bank of England Revealed at Last!
The Charter of the Bank of England (1694) with the Great Seal of William and Mary. The first usury central bank to be incorporated in England.
“In 1696 (very soon after its birth) the Bank experienced a crisis. There was a want of money in England. The clipped silver had been called in, and the new money was not ready.
Even rich people were living on credit, and issued promissory notes. The stock of the Bank of England had gone rapidly down from 110 to 83.
The goldsmiths, who detested the corporation that had broken in on their system of private banking, now tried to destroy the new company.
They plotted, and on the same day they crowded to Grocers' Hall, where the Bank was located from 1694 to 1734, and insisted on immediate payment - one goldsmith alone demanding £30,000.
The directors paid all their honest creditors, but refused to cash the goldsmiths' notes, and left them their remedy in Westminster Hall. The goldsmiths triumphed in scurrilous pasquinades entitled, "The Last Will and Testament," "The Epitaph," "The Inquest on the Bank of England."
It did not take long for the Jewish bankers to set their sights on Paterson’s bank and financers for the English regime.
Note: To be clear, many have blamed historical banking and other NWO atrocities on a "Jewish Conspiracy."
It needs to be made clear that it is the Khazarian Zionist Satanists that hide within Judaism that are the issue:
The Khazarian Zionists use Judaism (a religion - not a race) as an expendable cover for Zionism (the Khazarian Zionist Satanic / Political Sect).
They take solice in being able to throw 'anti-semitism' as a blanket defense, whilst pathetically hiding behind a very twisted history.
The time of the criminal Khazarian Zioinst ruse - has come to an end.
“The new King William III soon got England involved in costly wars against Catholic France which put England deep into debt. Here was the Jewish bankers’ chance to collect.
“So King William, under orders from the Elders of Zion in Amsterdam, persuaded the British Treasury to borrow 1.25 million pounds sterling from the Jewish bankers who had helped him to the throne.
“Since the state’s debts had risen dramatically, the government had no choice but to accept. But there were conditions attached:
The names of the lenders were to be kept secret and that they be granted a Charter to establish a Central Bank of England. Parliament accepted and the Jewish bankers sunk their tentacles into Great Britain.”
This story was re-told recently in a BBC documentary about the creation of money and the Bank of England.
It revolves around the Battle of Waterloo in which Nathan Rothschild used his inside knowledge of the outcome and his faster horses and couriers to play the market by getting the result of the battle before anyone else knew the outcome.
He quickly sold his English bonds and gave all the traders who looked to him for guidance the impression that the French had won at Waterloo.
The other traders all rushed to sell their bonds before the market crashed thinking that they were now worthless and a massive fire-sale occurred as brokers clamered to get rid of their stock.
This massive sell off quickly drove the price of the bonds down to 5% of their original worth.
Once the bottom had dropped out the market Nathan Rothschild then re-bought as many bonds back as he could at hugely discounted prices and in doing so he multiplied his wealth twenty times in 3 days of trading.
At the same time as becoming immensely wealthy he also became the single largest debtor to the English government which ultimately gave him control over the bank of England.”
“As you can see by the 250-year chart of Bank of England stock, the shares showed no real trend during the 1700s, rose in price during the Napoleonic Wars as England left the gold standard and suffered inflation, declined in price from around 1818 to 1845 during the deflation that followed, rose in price for the rest of the 1800s as the Bank gradually increased its dividend, plunged until 1920 as inflation occurred without any compensating rise in the dividend, then gradually rose in price until the Bank was nationalized in 1945.
The behavior of the Bank of England’s stock encapsulates the general behavior of the British stock market over that 250-year period.”
Now for most of its history the privately held, Bank of England was extremely profitable to its owners.
The method for charging interest on the creation of money has been the prime vehicle for driving both public and private debt throughout modern times.
“The Bank of England let the cat out of the bag. In a paper called "Money Creation in the Modern Economy", co-authored by three economists from the Bank's Monetary Analysis Directorate, they stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong, and that the kind of populist, heterodox positions more ordinarily associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street are correct.
“In doing so, they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.”
The entire monitory financial system is based upon charging usury on the creation of national currencies.
Peer Reviewed 'Science' Losing Credibility Due To Fraudulent Research & Manufacturing Consent In Science: The Diabolical Twist March 19 2017 | From: CollectiveEvolution / JonRappoport
Science today, in all fields, is plagued by corruption. Yet, more often than not, attempts to create awareness about scientific fraud - an issue that few journalists have been willing to address - are met with the response, “Well, is it peer-reviewed?”
Although good science should always be reviewed, using this label as a form of credibility can be dangerous, causing people to dismiss new information and research instantaneously if it doesn’t have it, particularly when that information counters long-held beliefs ingrained into human consciousness via mass marketing, education, and more.
If you’re one who commonly points to the “peer-reviewed” label, then you should know that there are many researchers and insiders who have been creating awareness about the problem with this label for years.
Who Says So? And From What Fields?
Many people have spoken up against the corporatization and politicization of science.
For example, Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish climatologist and former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, has voiced his concern that some scientists are, according to an interview given to the Daily Mail, “mixing up their scientific role with that of climate activist.”
He claims that there are multiple indicators for how “science is gradually being influenced by political views.” (Source)
Professor Joanna D. Haigh, a British physicist, professor of atmospheric physics at Imperial College London, co-director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change, and former president of the Royal Meteorological Society, has also spoken up about the politicization of climate science. (Source)
The Australian prime minister’s chief business advisor has done the same, and so have other politicians, like Senator James Inhofe, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. You can read more about that story here.
Unfortunately, the mainstream vilifies such people, and to great effect.
Below is an excellent snippet of a lecture given by Richard Lindzen, one of the world’s top experts in the field and lead author of “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” Chapter 7 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change.
He knows that all climate science we receive is IPCC United Nations science. One of the scientists mentioned on the senator’s list, in this video, he talks about the politics of climate science and the manipulation of data - something that plagues all fields of science today.
Is Science Progressing?
Featuring Richard S. Lindzen, Distinguished Senior Fellow, Center for the Study of Science, Cato Institute; Emeritus Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; moderated by Patrick Michaels, Director, Center for the Study of Science, Cato Institute.
For many fields of science, there is little doubt that the period 1830-1965 was a golden age. There is also little doubt that changes in the support structure for science since the late 60's have powerful elements that serve to inhibit major developments.
Dr. Lindzen will discuss these changes from the personal perspective of a climate scientist, and place them in the historical perspective of other areas of study.
Quantification of the effects of the support structure is complicated. There are a multiplicity of factors involved, including the existence of branches of science that are closely associated with political and social agendas.
Changes in the character of major research centers, including the federalization of major research universities, also plays a major role, independent of the particular area of science. Serious studies of marginal factors such as diminishing returns as funding increases are sorely lacking.
Medical Science / Health Science / Food
In the case of medicine, a lot of information has emerged showing just how much corruption really goes on. The Editors-in-Chiefs of several major medical journals have been quite blunt, with perhaps one of the best examples coming from Dr. Richard Horton, the current Editor-in-Chief of TheLancet, who says;
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.”
Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), also considered one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, alongside The Lancet, has said that:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”
- Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard professor of medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of The New England Medical Journal
As you can see, this has been a problem for quite some time.
A Couple of Examples:
One of the best examples of political influence over scientific publication comes from an episode involving Genetically Modified Maize. Monsanto published a study a few years ago which purported to demonstrate the effects of GMO maize on rats over a 90 day period.
They reported no ill effects on the rodents from this diet. Given the fact that there are no long term studies examining the health risks associated with GMOs, independent researchers then decided to conduct the same study, with one difference:
The study was published in November of 2012, in the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology, and then instantly retracted. After hundreds of scientists condemned the retraction, the U.S. did not publish it. The study was then re-published in multiple peer-reviewed scientific journals (in Europe last year ), like Environmental Sciences Europe.
This fact was also made clear by WikiLeaks documents:
"Resistance to the advent of genetically modified foods has been pronounced across Europe. The continent features some of the strictest regulations governing the use and cultivation of GMO products, and public skepticism about biotech goods is quite high – a fact not lost on American diplomats.
In a lengthy report dating from late 2007 , a cable issued by the State Department outlined its “Biotechnology Outreach Strategy, ‘which, among other things, recognized the European Union’s ‘negative views on biology’ and committed as a national priority to limiting them (O7STATE160639).
Initial attention paid to the State Department’s part in pushing industrial manufactures on its allies obscured the even bigger role it played in assuring a place for genetically modified agricultural products (GMOs) in a region that largely wanted nothing to do with them.
The American campaign promoting biotech products was a worldwide effort. In all, some 1,000 documents from the Cablegate cache address this effort, a significant number of which originate in Europe. U.S. diplomats on the continent gave considerable attention to insuring the interests of American biotech firms in Europe
– Whether through “education” programs, government lobbying, or outright coercion – as well as stripping down European Union regulations designed to act as a bugger against them. Available cables published by WikiLeaks suggest that the United States invests considerable time, effort, and expense in its operations on behalf of the American biotech firms."
In 1996, Steven M. Druker, being a public interest attorney and the Executive Director of the Alliance For Bio-Integrity, initiated a lawsuit in 1998 that forced the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods.
He’s recently published a book on the lawsuit that provides details of his experience. He has also released the documents on his website, showing the significant hazards of genetically engineering foods and the flaws in the FDA’s policy.
Another study published in the British Medical Journal by researchers at the Nordic Cochrane Center in Copenhagen showed that pharmaceutical companies were not disclosing all information regarding the results of their drug trials.
Researchers looked at documents from 70 different double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) and found that the full extent of serious harm in clinical study reports went unreported.
Tamang Sharma, a PhD student at Cochrane and lead author of the study, said:
“We found that a lot of the appendices were often only available upon request to the authorities, and the authorities had never requested them. I’m actually kind of scared about how bad the actual situation would be if we had the complete data.”
Another co-author of the study, Dr. Peter Gotzsche, who co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration (the world’s foremost body in assessing medical evidence), found in a separate analysis that 100,000 people in the United States die each year from the side effects of correctly used prescription drugs, noting that:
“It’s remarkable that nobody raises an eyebrow when we kill so many of our own citizens with drugs.”
He has published many papers arguing that our use of antidepressants is causing more harm than good, and taking into consideration the recent leaks regarding these drugs, it seems he is correct.
Below is a brief video of him elaborating on this problem -
Dr Peter Gøtzsche Exposes Big Pharma as Organized Crime
Peter C. Gøtzsche, MD is a Danish medical researcher, and leader of the Nordic Cochrane Center at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark. He has written numerous reviews within the Cochrane collaboration.
Dr.Gøtzsche has been critical of screening for breast cancer using mammography, arguing that it cannot be justified; His critique stems from a meta-analysis he did on mammography screening studies and published as is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable in The Lancet in 2000. In it he discarded 6 out of 8 studies arguing their randomization was inadequate.
In 2006 a paper by Gøtzsche on mammography screening was electronically published in the European Journal of Cancer ahead of print.
The journal later removed the paper completely from the journal website without any formal retraction. The paper was later published in Danish Medical Bulletin with a short note from the editor, and Gøtzsche and his coauthors commented on the unilateral retraction that the authors were not involved in.
In 2012 his book Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy was published. In 2013 his book Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How Big Pharma has Corrupted Healthcare was published. www.cochrane.org
Vaccines are getting more attention now than ever before. In fact, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Chairman of the World Mercury Project (WMP), recently announced a $100,000 challenge aimed at putting an end to the inclusion of mercury, a neurotoxin that is 100 times more poisonous than lead, in vaccines administered in the U.S and globally.
It’s offered to anybody, including journalists and scientists, who can provide a study showing that it is safe to inject mercury into babies.
Multiple cases of vaccine fraud have been uncovered, but this is something you might not know given the fact that the mainstream media completely ignores these facts, and vaccines are heavily marketed.
For example, Lucija Tomljenovic, who has a PhD in biochemistry and is a senior postdoctoral fellow in UBC’s Faculty of Medicine, as well as a medical investigator, uncovered documents that reveal vaccine manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, and health authorities have known about multiple dangers associated with vaccines but chose to withhold them from the public. - Source
But perhaps one of the biggest revelations in medical history, also unfortunately ignored by mainstream media, came only a couple of years ago and is still making noise, as it should.
However, Dr. Thompson recently admitted that it was “the lowest point” in his career when he “went along with that paper.” He went on to say that he and the other authors “didn’t report significant findings” and that he is “completely ashamed” of what he did. He was “complicit and went along with this,” and regrets that he has “been a part of the problem.” (source)(source)(source)
A study with revised information and no data omitted was published by Dr. Brian Hooker (a contact of Dr. Thompson) in the peer reviewed journal Translational Neurodegeneration, and it found a 340% increased risk of autism in African American boys receiving the Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. The study has since been retracted, around the same time this controversy arose.
You can read the full study here, although, unsurprisingly, it has since been retracted.
Thompson’s attorneys, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Bryan Smith of Morgan & Morgan, also released a statement from Dr. Thompson, which mentioned Hooker:
“I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent.”
he had to invoke whistleblower protection and turned extensive agency files over to Congress. He said that, for the past decade, his superiors have pressured him and his fellow scientists to lie and manipulate data to conceal a causal link between vaccines and brain injuries, including autism.
As you can see, scientific fraud is a big problem across the board, and this article has only provided a few examples. The problem is not just with GMOs and vaccines - it affects cosmetics, food, cleaning supplies, and so much more. How have so many products, which cause so much harm, been approved by the agencies that are tasked to protect us?
There are so many books on this topic, but they don’t get the attention they deserve, since the major mainstream media shareholders are identical to those of the entire health industry. Why would they bash their own products on their own national television networks?
The power of corporate America has taken over almost every aspect of our lives. If you’re wondering what we can do about it, well, I believe the first step is awareness. There is still a plethora of information that the general public is completely unaware of, but if we backtrack to a decade ago, information that used to be considered a conspiracy is now simply fact.
A great example is the corporate takeover of science, as discussed in this article, but another one could be the Snowden Leaks on mass surveillance, or 9/11. Studies are now being published by physicists and engineers regarding that event.
Awareness makes it harder for the elite to manipulate us. Once we become aware of something, we can stop it. For example, look at Genetically Modified Foods and the pesticides that go with them.
As soon as the masses became aware of their dangers, they began to change their shopping habits. Now, most countries around the world have completely banned these foods.
It’s difficult to accept that there are unseen powers, motivated by their own greed and lust for power, that are doing us harm disguised as good. It is only when we become aware of how we are being harmed and change our shopping habits - hurting their bottom line - that they change their tactics.
On the other hand, it’s encouraging to know that once we do come together for a common goal, anything can be accomplished, and we actually do have the potential and power to change our world.
Manufacturing Consent In Science: The Diabolical Twist
“Science plays a larger and larger role in running the world. But much of it is misleading science, slanted, cooked, biased, stepped on, false, and invented out of thin air.” - The Underground, Jon Rappoport
In the famous 1988 Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman book, Manufacturing Consent, the authors explore how media distort the news and employ propaganda, in order to bring about consent in the population.
This is nothing less than the creation of reality.
From so many directions, official science is shaping our future - that’s why it’s vital to understand the manipulations involved.
It’s one thing to say media collaborate to sell a false picture of reality, a picture which is then bought by the masses.
It’s quite another thing to say media collaborate to PRETEND there is ALREADY a consensus of the best professional minds on a given scientific subject - when there ISN’T.
I’ll start with a theoretical example. Let’s say three researchers at a university examine data based on US space shuttle missions, and they conclude that a small set of new conclusions is true. I’ll call this set X.
The researchers publish an article in a journal, and a healthy debate ensues in professional circles. Is X correct? Are there flaws in the research?
However, a powerful public agency decides that X is dangerous. X could lead to inquiries about contractors, investigations into cost overruns, missing money, and, worst of all, flawed engineering of the shuttles. Therefore, this powerful agency goes on an all-out propaganda campaign, tapping its press sources, culminating in a new study that concludes X is entirely false.
The press basically trumpets: “Experts agree X is false. X was the result of shoddy research. The original researchers made numerous amateur mistakes.”
Notice that, in this case, the press isn’t simply distorting the news. It’s announcing that a superior consensus already / suddenly exists among the best scientific minds.
It’s lying about a consensus that doesn’t exist among scientists who, up until that moment, were having a healthy debate. The press is presenting the false consensus as if it were real and widespread, when it isn’t.
But at this point, all relevant scientists get the message: keep quiet, don’t debate for another moment; otherwise grant monies will vanish, demotions will occur, peers will lay on heavy criticism, excommunication from The Club will follow.
So these scientists do keep quiet - and NOW a consensus among them comes into being, by implied threat and coercion.
“The most famous cold fusion claims were made by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann in 1989. After a brief period of interest by the wider scientific community, their reports were called into question by nuclear physicists.”
Not just called into question; defamed, derided, mocked, slammed over the head with a sledgehammer.
A superior consensus was invented, despite the fact that many scientists were intensely interested in the Pons / Fleishmann findings. Some of these scientists tried, in vain, to point out that failed efforts to reproduce those findings resulted because researchers were altering Pons and Fleishman’s methods.
No dice. Cold fusion was labeled a giant error and even a fraud. The official door was closed. THEN a consensus hardened - through coercion and intimidation.
In my research leading up to the publication of my first book, AIDS INC., in 1988, I reviewed the period of the early 1980s, when many researchers were coming at the question of the cause(s) of AIDS from different angles. But then, suddenly, in the spring of 1984, the US government officially announced, at a televised press conference, that a virus called HTLV-III (HIV) was the cause.
The science was shoddy, to put it mildly. It was bad science and no science. There was no single published paper that meticulously laid out proof of HIV as the cause of AIDS. But no matter.
Overnight, all the monies that had gone into discovering what caused AIDS were diverted into the question: How does HIV cause AIDS? Any scientist who failed to see the handwriting on the wall was shoved out into the cold.
The press closed ranks. The consensus (though it was manufactured in the blink of an eye) was trumpeted around the world.
The big news headline wasn’t just false and distorted. It was false-and-distorted about a consensus that, until a few seconds ago, didn’t exist - and only existed now because researchers went silent and accepted dogma and folded up.
Predatory corporations, who spray poisonous pesticides all over the world and cause birth defects, need special protection and cover?
Public health agencies that recommend giving vaccines to pregnant women, and increase the risk of babies born with defects?
Solution: invent, overnight, and broadcast, a consensus that a basically harmless virus is the cause of those tragic birth defects.
I can assure you there are many scientists who don’t, for a second, believe the Zika virus is such an agent of destruction. But they have kept their mouths shut, and have chosen to roll with the tide.
However, that tide is turning, in many arenas of science. Journalists and researchers with no allegiance to official bodies have emerged.
A different species of handwriting is being inscribed on the wall. What can the mainstream press do about it?
They can only deploy the crass tactics I’ve mentioned here. A massive and stunning re-education is taking place among the population. No school is running it. No agency is sponsoring it. It’s happening from the ground up.
It turns out that living as a cipher and a unit in the sticky web of fabricated consensus isn’t nearly as attractive as it once was.
More and more, major media are using the consensus strategy to invent the news - and people are rejecting it.
Without realizing it, the press is committing professional suicide.
An article that was once headlined, “Three dead horses found in a field,” has become, “Scientists agree that the three dead horses were an unconnected coincidence.”
And people are laughing the press out of court.
The ongoing scandal surrounding the film, Vaxxed, is a good example.
Trailer: Vaxxed - From Cover Up to Catastrophe
The press assures the population that pointing out a connection between a vaccine and autism is absurd, because scientific experts agree there is no such connection.
But the film features a long-time researcher at the Centers for Disease Control, who confesses that he and colleagues falsified a 2004 study in order to exonerate such a vaccine, the MMR, which does increase the risk of autism.
One of the film’s subjects is false consensus. And the press can do no better than repeat, over and over: the consensus is real and valid.
The CDC researcher and whistleblower, William Thompson, essentially said: I was part of the fake consensus. Don’t you get it? I was a card-carrying member of the club that invents fake consensus. And now I’m telling you that.
Bottom line: the media are collapsing into their own swamp. The swamp they manufacture.
For decades, the press, government agencies, the UN, and a whole host of think-tank, foundation, university players, and financiers have been fronting for a consensus which they falsely claim is already established: planned societies.
They frame this consensus as technology/science - as if science itself dictates that the future must consist of interlocked organizations which insert citizens into slots. Slots where they live, where they work, where they socialize.
Abstract patterns, imposed on humans.
This has the flavor of science, but on reflection, not the substance. “We can make the top-down organization of society look scientific, as if we’re following physical laws. We can sell this as science.”
Really? Is a chart detailing how thousands of slaves will transport huge blocks of stone to chosen sites, where monuments will be built, scientific? Of course not.
In the modern world, this fakery is called technocracy. Technocracy may employ methods such as technological surveillance, but the overriding plan for organizing society has nothing to do with science. It has to do with control.
And when you see it that way, the supposed consensus falls apart. Who wants to live in an assigned slot “for the greater good?” Up close and personal, who wants to give up his freedom?
Review your understanding of Marxism. “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”
It, too, was sold as a scientific analysis of human society. It was imbued with the flavor of science, as if this Marxian principle had been discovered, just as molecules and atoms had been discovered.
And it too was promoted as an already-existing consensus among the wisest and the best and the brightest.`
New Zealand Government Preparing To Drown Whole Country In Fluorides + New Zealand Grants Human Rights To River March 18 2017 | From: JonRappoport / Infowars/ Various
The issue here is, who is going to decide whether the people of New Zealand are fluoridated? Who will be in charge? Communities, or the federal government?
From The New Zealand Herald, 3/13/16 - my comments are in CAPS:
I also suspect that money is an issue. Somebody close to the federal government is poised to make large profits from selling the chemicals, when the government decides the whole population should be toxified.
"Fluoride makes your body absorb extra aluminium, and where does the aluminium go? Your brain! And what metal shows up alarmingly in the brains of Alzheimer victims? You guessed it."
- Dr William Douglass
For the edification of New Zealand’s feds, who believe “the science is settled” and opposing activists are anti-science, here is a famous bombshell letter, written by the head of the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) union of in-house scientists, William Hirzy.
Quoting from a May 1, 1999, statement -
“Why EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation” - written by William Hirzy, PhD, [Union of Scientists] Senior Vice-President, Chapter 280:
“…our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion.
These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.”
“In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.”
“Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride’s interference with the function of the brain’s pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body’s internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty.
Jennifer Luke has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956…”
“EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water’s chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union’s treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the cancer risk issue.
The judge who heard the lawsuit he [Marcus] brought against EPA over the firing made that finding - that EPA fired him over his fluoride work and not for the phony reason put forward by EPA management at his dismissal. Dr. Marcus won his lawsuit and is again at work at EPA.”
“…data showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey, Washington and Iowa based on their drinking fluoridated water. It was his [Dr. Marcus’] analysis, repeated statements about all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests for an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.”
“Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride’s effectiveness as a caries preventative.
There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows no significant differences (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries [cavities] incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities.
The latest publication on the fifty-year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing.
The only significant difference in dental health between the two communities as a whole is that fluoridated Newburgh, N.Y. shows about twice the incidence of dental fluorosis (the first, visible sign of fluoride chronic toxicity) as seen in non-fluoridated Kingston.”
“John Colquhoun’s publication on this point of efficacy is especially important. Dr. Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, the largest city in New Zealand, and a staunch supporter of fluoridation - until he was given the task of looking at the world-wide data on fluoridation’s effectiveness in preventing cavities.
The paper is titled, ‘Why I changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation.’ In it Colquhoun provides details on how data were manipulated to support fluoridation in English speaking countries, especially the U.S. and New Zealand. This paper explains why an ethical public health professional was compelled to do a 180 degree turn on fluoridation.”
“…mutation studies…show that fluoride can cause gene mutations in mammalian and lower order tissues at fluoride concentrations estimated to be present in the mouth from fluoridated tooth paste. Further, there were tumors of the oral cavity seen in the NTP cancer study…further strengthening concern over the toxicity of topically applied fluoride.”
“So, in addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled - and apparently uncontrollable - exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products…
For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.”
“We have also taken a direct step to protect the [EPA] employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water… the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide un-fluoridated drinking water to its employees.”
“The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear.
Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA’s standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.”
That last sentence lets you know where the fluorides are coming from.
So... an employees’ union of scientists within the EPA has made its position clear. Quite clear.
The New Zealand parliament passed a bill recognizing the Whanganui River as a “living entity” with the same human rights enjoyed by citizens.
“I know the initial inclination of some people will say it’s pretty strange to give a natural resource a legal personality,” said Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson. “But it’s no stranger than family trusts, or companies or incorporated societies.”
Imagine the implications of this if global bodies start granting “human rights” to landmarks and other geographic features in an effort to expand their “global warming” agenda.
This would fall right in line with the “Problem – Reaction – Solution” playbook used by the UN and the EU: declare “global warming” as a threat to the “human rights” of, say, a beach, then declare it an “international humanitarian crisis” that can only be fixed with “solutions” which of course trample national sovereignty.
And if you honestly think politicians care about the “existential threat” of “man-made global warming,” then ask yourself, why do they keep attributing to the problem by flying private jets around the world to give speeches on climate change?
It’s pure hypocrisy – and textbook Machiavelli deception.
But it still works because a large portion of the population are still duped into thinking that government is always benevolent and exists to take care of you, which of course is another deception pushed by politicians who gain power only at the expense of individual rights, and I don’t mean the rights of a river, but of human beings.
“It seems that those who believe in global warming are more likely to trust government,” Zero Hedge once lamented. “What happens when they wake up and discover nothing is as they thought it would be?”
“Meanwhile, the energy output of the sun is dropping faster than anyone expected. Snow has actually begun falling in Tokyo and other parts of eastern Japan.
[In 2016] Tokyo recorded its first November snowfall since 1875 when the government started collecting records. But hey. Now they want to call this climate change and somehow still attribute this to mankind.”
Hidden Agenda of Global Warming Hoax: One-World Government
The global warming establishment and the media are crowing about 2014 being the hottest year on record.
Marc Morano, founder of ClimateDepot.com, explains how bought-and-paid-for scientists are using skewed data to help further the UN agenda of one-world government.
Governments: The Enemy Of Freedom & Globalists Interviewed: They Admitted They Controlled The Government March 18 2017 | From: Sott / JonRappoport / Various
My friends, we're being played for fools. On paper, we may be technically free.
In reality, however, we are only as free as a government official may allow.
"Rights aren't rights if someone can take them away. They're privileges. That's all we've ever had in this country, is a bill of temporary privileges. And if you read the news even badly, you know that every year the list gets shorter and shorter.
Sooner or later, the people in this country are gonna realize the government ... doesn't care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare or your safety... It's interested in its own power.
That's the only thing. Keeping it and expanding it wherever possible."
- George Carlin
We only think we live in a constitutional republic, governed by just laws created for our benefit.
Truth be told, we live in a dictatorship disguised as a democracy where all that we own, all that we earn, all that we say and do - our very lives - depends on the benevolence of government agents and corporate shareholders for whom profit and power will always trump principle.
And now the government is litigating and legislating its way into a new framework where the dictates of petty bureaucrats carry greater weight than the inalienable rights of the citizenry.
This holds true whether you're talking about the right to criticize the government in word or deed, the right to be free from government surveillance, the right to not have your person or your property subjected to warrantless searches by government agents, the right to due process, the right to be safe from soldiers invading your home, the right to be innocent until proven guilty and every other right that once reinforced the founders' belief that this would be "a government of the people, by the people and for the people."
Not only do we no longer have dominion over our bodies, our families, our property and our lives, but the government continues to chip away at what few rights we still have to speak freely and think for ourselves.
If the government can control speech, it can control thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.
The unspoken freedom enshrined in the First Amendment is the right to think freely and openly debate issues without being muzzled or treated like a criminal.
In other words, if we no longer have the right to tell a Census Worker to get off our property, if we no longer have the right to tell a police officer to get a search warrant before they dare to walk through our door, if we no longer have the right to stand in front of the Supreme Court wearing a protest sign or approach an elected representative to share our views, if we no longer have the right to protest unjust laws by voicing our opinions in public or on our clothing or before a legislative body - no matter how misogynistic, hateful, prejudiced, intolerant, misguided or politically incorrect they might be - then we do not have free speech.
What we have instead is regulated, controlled speech, and that's a whole other ballgame.
Protest laws, free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors are conspiring to corrode our core freedoms purportedly for our own good.
For instance, the protest laws being introduced across the country - in 18 states so far - are supposedly in the name of "public safety and limiting economic damage."
Don't fall for it.
No matter how you package these laws, no matter how well-meaning they may sound, no matter how much you may disagree with the protesters or sympathize with the objects of the protest, these proposed laws are aimed at one thing only: discouraging dissent.
In Arizona, police would be permitted to seize the assets of anyone involved in a protest that at some point becomes violent.
In Minnesota, protesters would be forced to pay for the cost of having police on hand to "police" demonstrations.
Oregon lawmakers want to "require public community colleges and universities to expel any student convicted of participating in a violent riot."
A proposed North Dakota law would give drivers the green light to "accidentally" run over protesters who are blocking a public roadway. Florida and Tennessee are entertaining similar laws.
Pushing back against what it refers to as "economic terrorism," Washington wants to increase penalties for protesters who block access to highways and railways.
Anticipating protests over the Keystone Pipeline, South Dakota wants to apply the governor's emergency response authority to potentially destructive protests, create new trespassing penalties and make it a crime to obstruct highways.
In Iowa, protesters who block highways with speeds posted above 55 mph could spend five years in prison, plus a fine of up to $7,500. Obstruct traffic in Mississippi and you could be facing a $10,000 fine and a five-year prison sentence.
A North Carolina law would make it a crime to heckle state officials. Under this law, shouting at a former governor would constitute a crime.
Indiana lawmakers wanted to authorize police to use "any means necessary" to breakup mass gatherings that block traffic. That legislation has since been amended to merely empower police to issue fines for such behavior.
Georgia is proposing harsh penalties and mandatory sentencing laws for those who obstruct public passages or throw bodily fluids on "public safety officers."
Virginia wants to subject protesters who engage in an "unlawful assembly" after "having been lawfully warned to disperse" with up to a year of jail time and a fine of up to $2,500.
Missouri wants to make it illegal for anyone participating in an "unlawful assembly" to intentionally conceal "his or her identity by the means of a robe, mask, or other disguise."
Colorado wants to lock up protesters for up to 18 months who obstruct or tamper with oil and gas equipment and charge them with up to $100,000 in fines.
Oklahoma wants to create a sliding scale for protesters whose actions impact or impede critical infrastructure. The penalties would range from $1,000 and six months in a county jail to $100,000 and up to 10 years in prison. And if you're part of an organization, that fine goes as high as $1,000,000.
Michigan hopes to make it easier for courts to shut down "mass picketing" demonstrations and fine protesters who block entrances to businesses, private residences or roadways up to $1,000 a day. That fine jumps to $10,000 a day for unions or other organizing groups.
Ask yourself: if there are already laws on the books in all of the states that address criminal or illegal behavior such as blocking public roadways or trespassing on private property - because such laws are already on the books - then why does the government need to pass laws criminalizing activities that are already outlawed?
What's really going on here?
No matter what the politicians might say, the government doesn't care about our rights, our welfare or our safety.
How many times will we keep falling for the same tricks?
Every despotic measure used to control us and make us cower and fear and comply with the government's dictates has been packaged as being for our benefit, while in truth benefiting only those who stand to profit, financially or otherwise, from the government's transformation of the citizenry into a criminal class.
Remember, the Patriot Act didn't make us safer. It simply turned American citizens into suspects and, in the process, gave rise to an entire industry - private and governmental - whose profit depends on its ability to undermine our Fourth Amendment rights.
Placing TSA agents in our nation's airports didn't make us safer.
It simply subjected Americans to invasive groping, ogling and bodily searches by government agents.
So, too, these protest laws are not about protecting the economy or private property or public roads. Rather, they are intended to muzzle discontent and discourage anyone from challenging government authority.
These laws are the shot across the bow.
They're intended to send a strong message that in the American police state, you're either a patriot who marches in lockstep with the government's dictates or you're a pariah, a suspect, a criminal, a troublemaker, a terrorist, a radical, a revolutionary.
Yet by muzzling the citizenry, by removing the constitutional steam valves that allow people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world, the government is deliberately stirring the pot, creating a climate in which violence becomes inevitable.
When there is no steam valve - when there is no one to hear what the people have to say, because government representatives have removed themselves so far from their constituents - then frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.
Then again, perhaps that was the government's plan all along.
As John F. Kennedy warned in March 1962, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
The government is making violent revolution inevitable.
How do you lock down a nation?
You sow discontent and fear among the populace. You terrorize the people into believing that radicalized foreigners are preparing to invade.
You teach them to be non-thinkers who passively accept whatever is told them, whether it's delivered by way of the corporate media or a government handler. You brainwash them into believing that everything the government does is for their good and anyone who opposes the government is an enemy.
You acclimate them to a state of martial law, carried out by soldiers disguised as police officers but bearing the weapons of war. You polarize them so that they can never unite and stand united against the government.
Click on the image above to see more detail in a new window
You create a climate in which silence is golden and those who speak up are shouted down. You spread propaganda and lies. You package the police state in the rhetoric of politicians.
And then, when and if the people finally wake up to the fact that the government is not and has never been their friend, when it's too late for peaceful protests and violence is all that remains to them as a recourse against tyranny, you use all of the tools you've been so carefully amassing - the criminal databases and surveillance and identification systems and private prisons and protest laws - and you shut them down for good.
The NSA will continue to collect electronic files on everything we do. More and more Americans are going to face jail time for offenses that prior generations did not concern themselves with.
The government - at all levels - could crack down on virtually anyone at any time.
Martin Luther King saw it coming: both the "spontaneous explosion of anger by various citizen groups" and the ensuing crackdown by the government.
"Police, national guard and other armed bodies are feverously preparing for repression," King wrote shortly before he was assassinated.
"They can be curbed not by unorganized resort to force...but only by a massive wave of militant nonviolence...
It also may be the instrument of our national salvation."
Militant nonviolent resistance.
"A nationwide nonviolent movement is very important," King wrote. "We know from past experience that Congress and the President won't do anything until you develop a movement around which people of goodwill can find a way to put pressure on them...
This means making the movement powerful enough, dramatic enough, morally appealing enough, so that people of goodwill, the churches, laborers, liberals, intellectuals, students, poor people themselves begin to put pressure on congressmen to the point that they can no longer elude our demands.
It must be militant, massive nonviolence," King emphasized.
In other words, besides marches and protests, there would have to be civil disobedience. Civil disobedience forces the government to expend energy in many directions, especially if it is nonviolent, organized and is conducted on a massive scale.
First of all, David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission was born in 1973, in part because the Globalist plan to ensure “free trade” (no tariffs paid by predatory mega-corporations) had run into a glitch.
That glitch was President Richard Nixon. He began laying tariffs on certain goods imported into the US, in order to level the playing field and protect American companies. Nixon, a substantial crook in other respects, went off-script in this case and actually started a movement to reject the Globalist vision.
After Nixon’s ouster from the White House, Gerald Ford became president, and he chose David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller as his vice-president. It was a sign Globalism and free trade were back on track.
But David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, wanted more. They wanted a man in the White House whom they’d created from scratch.
That man was a peanut farmer no one had ever heard of: Jimmy Carter.
Through their media connections, David and Brzezinski vaulted Carter into the spotlight. He won the Democratic nomination (1976), spread a syrupy message of love and coming together after the Watergate debacle, and soon he was ensconced in the Oval Office.
Flash forward to 1978, the second year of Carter’s presidency. An interview took place.
It’s a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment. It’s a through-the-looking-glass secret - in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper.
The interview concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating and controlling US economic and political policy.
The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”
"NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?
COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.
NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?
KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.
COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations [!], and they would resent such coordination [of policy].
NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?
COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.
NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.
COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.
KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.
Source: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.
Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already out in the open, it wasn’t.
Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.
US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission - the Commission had been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.
Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We have lost. And I will quit.”
Lost - because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.
Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.
In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Four years before birthing the Commission with his boss of bosses, David Rockefeller, Brzezinski wrote:
"[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”
Goodbye, separate nations.
Any doubt on the question of Trialteral goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, in his Memoirs (2002):
"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington and Technocracy Rising, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America.
Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration. For example:
Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;
James Jones, National Security Advisor;
Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;
Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.
Here is the payoff. The US Trade Representative (appointed by Obama in 2013), who was responsible for negotiating the Globalist TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) treaty with 11 other nations, was Michael Froman, a former member of the Trilateral Commission.
Don’t let the word “former” fool you. Commission members resign when they take positions in the Executive Branch of government. And when they serve in vital positions, such as US Trade Representative, they aren’t there by accident. They’re operatives with a specific agenda.
Flash forward one more time. Trump, who squashed the Globalist TPP treaty as soon as he was inaugurated, has been busy making staff appointments. Patrick Wood writes (2/6/17):
“According to a White House press release, the first member of the Trilateral Commission has entered the Trump administration as the Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, where he will sit on the National Security Council:
Kenneth I. Juster will serve as Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs. He will coordinate the Administration’s international economic policy and integrate it with national security and foreign policy. He will also be the President’s representative and lead U.S. negotiator (“Sherpa”) for the annual G-7, G-20, and APEC Summits.”
Juster’s duties will take him into the heart of high-level negotiations with foreign governments on economic policy.
Keep your eye on Mr. Juster. Will he take actions in line with Trump’s avowed anti-Globalist stance? Or will Juster work as one more covert Trilateral operative in the center of American decision-making?
If the answer is “covert operative,” does Trump know this? Does he condone what Mr. Juster will do? Or is this a case of secret infiltration, on behalf the most powerful Globalist group in the world, the Trilateral Commission?
Sean Spicer: We Are Confident President Will Be Vindicated On Wiretapping Allegations + MSNBC's "Tax Records" Non-Story: Trump Made $150MM, Paid 25% Tax Rate, More Than Romney, Bernie March 17 2017 | From: TheGatewayPundit / Zerohedge / Infowars
White House spokesman today told reporters that President Trump expects to be vindicated on his wiretapping allegations.
President Trump tweeted about the Obama administration spying on Trump Tower during the election.
Spicer told reporters Trump is extremely confident the facts are on his side.
Sean Spicer:"I think he’s extremely confident. We said this before. I will let the House and Senate and DOJ report this, but as I’ve commented in the past, I think there’s significant reporting about surveillance techniques that have existed throughout the 2016 election.
I’ll leave it to them to issue their report but I think he feels very confident that we will ultimately come to this. It will vindicate him."
Intel Sources: Obama Used British Spies To Tap Trump
Didn't want his fingerprints on surveillance.
Three separate intelligence sources believe that former President Obama veered ‘outside the chain of command’ and employed British surveillance agents to conduct surveillance on Donald Trump’s team prior to the election, according to a legal analyst.
Judge Andrew Napolitano revealed on ‘Fox & Friends’ this morning that the sources spilled the details to him as the controversial case continues to dominate headlines.
“Three intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command,” Napolitano said.
“He didn’t use the NSA, he didn’t use the CIA, he didn’t use the FBI, and he didn’t use the Department of Justice.”
"He used GCHQ.” Napolitano explained.
“What the heck is GCHQ? That’s the initials for the British spying agency. They have 24/7 access to the NSA database.” The Judge explained.
Napolitano noted that this was done to secure plausible deniability. In other words, even if the Obama administration did spy on Trump, there may never be a way to prove it.
“So by simply having two people go to them saying, ‘President Obama needs transcripts of conversations involving candidate Trump, conversations involving president-elect Trump,’ he’s able to get it, and there’s no American fingerprints on this.” Napolitano added.
Napolitano also noted that the sources have informed him that the individual who personally ordered the surveillance, who remains unnamed “[r]esigned three days after Trump was inaugurated.”
The case continues to evolve after the Justice Department requested additional time Monday to gather and present evidence of the alleged surveillance to the House Intelligence Committee. It was granted until March 20th to comply with committee’s request to stump up evidence.
MSNBC's "Tax Records" Non-Story: Trump Made $150MM, Paid 25% Tax Rate, More Than Romney, Bernie
While Rachel Maddow drones on with the coherence of Janet Yellen, losing thousands of viewers by the minute, the MSNBC anchor was promptly scooped not only by the White House which revealed her "secret" one hour in advance, but also by the Daily Beast which reported that its contributor David Cay Johnston had obtained the first two pages of Trump’s 2005 federal income tax return, allegedly receiving them in the mail, and posted his "analysts" on his website, DCReport.org.
According to the documents, Trump and his wife Melania paid $38 million in total income tax, consisting of $5.3 million in regular federal income tax, and an additional $31 million of “alternative minimum tax,” or AMT.
The White House statement confirmed the finding:
“Before being elected President, Mr. Trump was one of the most successful businessmen in the world with a responsibility to his company, his family and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required,” the White House said in a statement.
“That being said, Mr. Trump paid $38 million dollars even after taking into account large scale depreciation for construction, on an income of more than $150 million dollars, as well as paying tens of millions of dollars in other taxes such as sales and excise taxes and employment taxes and this illegally published return proves just that.”
As the Beast notes, 2005 was the year that Trump, then a newly minted reality star, made his last big score as a real-life real estate developer, when he sold two properties, one on Manhattan’s west side and one in San Francisco, to Hong Kong investors, accounting for the lion’s share of his income that year.
“It is totally illegal to steal and publish tax returns,” the White House statement concluded. “The dishonest media can continue to make this part of their agenda, while the President will focus on his, which includes tax reform that will benefit all Americans.”
But the real story here is that there is no story: what MSNBC confirmed is that Trump made more money than some of his critics said he made in the period in question, and more importantly, that he paid a generous effective income tax rate, well above the 14.1% rate paid by Mitt Romney, and even higher than the 13.5% federal tax rate paid by Bernie Sanders in 2014.
Sadly for Maddow, with this attempt at a "blockbuster" story which has quickly backfired, she may well have killed the great distraction that was the trope of Trump's tax returns, and which the rest of the "resistance" press hammered on every now and then.
Our CNN insider had been out of touch with us for several days. We were starting to wonder what was going on, but in our latest communication, our CNN insider did confirm our biggest fears. The CIA is indeed attempting, with all their might, to control the message to the masses!
They are embedded with all of the mainstream media – CNN, NBC, Huffington Post, New York Times, Washington Post, probably Fox, as well.
These are the exact words of our source, “It’s been really bad. We have CIA folks here all the time now.”
Our insider says the CIA are mainly talking to Jake Tapper and Wolf Blitzer and Jeff Zucker. Our source says the CIA tells them what to say, and everyone is “so mad at this Vault 7 Assange person.”
According to our source, Vault 7 “let the cat out of the bag."
Our source also says Tapper is scared of these guys. “He nods his head like a obedient dog, and then yells at us, and curses Assange,” according to our source.
Another interestingtidbit our source mentioned was that Tapper was talking about “droning” Assange.
Our source claims someone in the production crew for Don Lemon was heard saying that the “personalities” here may be exposed by Wikileaks, because the CIA has a very close relationship with all the “glamour folks” here. The CIA runs the machine that creates the message. Folks, its no wonder Jake Tapper is scared. He is about to be exposed as a talking sock puppet for the clandestine services department of the Shadow Government.
News is dead. Let that sink in for a bit… The MSM News is DOA……What we have now is State Propaganda, and an Orwellian version of news. Not only can (and do) the CIA control the message, they can listen in via the delivery system.
The CIA is constitutionally forbidden to spy on Americans. They came out yesterday and swore on their pinkie finger they were not spying on the citizens.
24 hours later, Assange stated that there are 22,000 cases of CIA domestic spying just in the first 3-4 data dumps.
Marine Le Pen Smacks Down Reporter: ‘No One Trusts the Media’
French populist highlights incredible disconnect from reality of establishment press
A fascinating exchange in which French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen informs a reporter that no one trusts the media highlights how incredibly disconnected from reality the establishment press really is.
The reporter tells Le Pen her advice that people “turn away from the traditional media, (and) go and find news on the Internet” is “dangerous”.
Le Pen looks bemused, asking, “why?”
The reporter responds by stating; “On the Internet, you can find conspiracy theories, all types of things, it’s not necessarily verified information.”
“Don’t you think that the traditional media have conspiracy theories?” replied Le Pen, adding, “I’ve read a ton of things about Russia intervening in the presidential campaign and other things like that – I mean there is at least as much fake news in the traditional media as on the Internet!”
The reporter then accuses her of ‘inciting’ people to “find information” on the Internet “about things that weren’t verified”.
“It could never be worse than what you guys are saying or what you write in the traditional newspapers,” responds Le Pen.
The reporter then accuses the National Front leader of acting like Trump in trying to undermine the media as a campaign tool.
“Madame, French people have no confidence in the media whatsoever, are you aware of that, or not?” asks Le Pen.
The exchange once again highlights how the mainstream media is completely out of touch with reality.
These people still think that they have absolute credibility when in reality trust in the establishment press is lower than at any time in recent history.
The latest polls show that Le Pen has pulled ahead of establishment candidate Emmanuel Macron with 26.5% of the vote compared with 25% for Macron.
The first round of the French presidential election takes place on April 23, with the second round to follow on May 7.
Le Pen is almost certain to pass the first stage, although she is widely expected to be defeated in the second round.
Then again, those making this forecast are the same people who got it spectacularly wrong on Brexit and Trump – and the same people who think the mainstream media is still trustworthy.
Mainstream Media Exposed Its Own Cannibalism And More
In their panic to save the mainstream narrative, that all is well in their fantasy world, CNN broadcasted a documentary on ritual cannibalism to contain Wikileaks’ anti-CIA nuclear bomb called Vault7.
How a mainstream broadcast entity could have gone so low as to tackle a subject that has no relevance to the issues of the day and age is beyond comprehension.
For decades, the CNN and allied Rothschild media networks, have been cannibalizing the brains of the Western population and that of the rest of the world, with half-truths and blatant fabrication of narratives.
CNN Is Eating Your Brain Literally and Figuratively: The Reza Aslan Saga
These propaganda outfits have enjoyed the “presumption of regularity” in all their activities, i.e. where people assumes anything that is aired through their elaborately decorated studios to be true. Otherwise, the story must be “fake news.”
The glaring divide among the US electorate is one sad example of the grave effects of a deliberate and systematic dumbing down of the Americans. Some are even willing to fight it out in favor of a candidate who has been living in at least two different realities.
Reza Aslan is showing ashes from a cremated victim spread all over his face. To put it bluntly, the entire Deep State is now in an uncomfortable deep shit that’s been spread around their faces.
But everything they have said all this time is now being exposed as one big lie. For the CNN to project that cannibalism is Hinduism would cost them more than just their own reputation, if they still have it.
The less than a 100-strong Aghori tribe does not represent Hinduism, and is in fact being frowned upon by the latter. A billion-strong Hindus are now moving to boycott CNN for good.
Aslan tastes what was presented to him as cooked human brain tissue. A member of the sect threatened to cut his head off at one point if he asked too many questions
CNN’s Reza Aslan (pictured, right) has been heavily criticized for eating human brain in an episode of his new series called Believer
Work all your life for a headline like this?
It seems that CNN’s Reza Aslan is also a victim of their own cannibalistic enterprise. He could not decipher anymore, which material could add more to the enlightenment of the masses from feeding the appetite of the beasts.
We are told to give the guy a break, as he was through scouring the CNN headquarter for brains, but there was none. Seriously though, we think that there’s something more to the stagecraft, as always.
While journalist, part-time cannibal, Aslan may be doing his own brand of journalism, the Cannibal News Network itself has a more elaborate agenda.
We suspect that aside from diverting the world’s attention from the fallout of Wikileaks’ Vault7 revelations, and sowing divisiveness among Immigrant America, the Deep State conglomerate is also trying to normalize Satanic rituals that’s been implicating the highest ranking public officials of the West, i.e. PedoGate and PizzaGate scandals, in the last few months.
“According to our DHS Insider,
“There is a concerted attack on Sessions due to his zeroing in on the pedophilia scandal called Pedogate.
John McCain and Lindsay Graham are secretly working with Chuck Schumer and members of the clandestine services of both US and Israel to remove Sessions, or at least stop the Pedophilia investigation in its tracks.”
As you probably know, what is now becoming known as “Pedogate” represents not only hundreds of millions of dollars in hush money, but also untold political influence-peddling.
Rince Pribus is also a key player in covering up the scandal, as is Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, John Podesta, Hillary and Bill Clinton, and of course Barack Obama.
When Netanyahu met with Trump, Netanyahu attempted to convince Trump the pedophilia scandal was “a false premise”. Netanyahu is also scared of exposure. Trump became suspicious and has become increasingly aware of how big the pedophile scandal is.
Trump has told several in his inner circle that [quoted by our insider] “the swamp is much more polluted than I expected“. He has spoken to Chris Christie extensively about the Pedophilia ring(s) and it has been determined that branches of the ring spread as far as Asia, and are rooted in the deepest corners of both the US and the UK political system.
Trump was overheard telling his daughter [quoted by our source] “This town is pedophile central…” and “This makes me sick“."
Cannibalism is at the center of Luciferian rituals.
Basically, pedophiles are running the Western world according to a few courageous Western investigative journalists themselves.
Are they now moving in for the kill, that all religions are bad, except Catholicism, so that they could finally establish the One World Religion?
If that’s the case, then Pope Bergoglio’s recent statement that he’s now contemplating of allowing married men to join the Pedophile, Inc. should come as no surprise.
"Pope Francis has indicated that he’s open to the possibility of ordaining married men as a means of dealing with priest shortages facing remote Catholic communities, according to an interview published in Die Zeit.
The pope stressed that removing the celibacy rule was not the answer to the Catholic Church’s priest shortage but expressed a willingness to examine whether married men of proven faith, known as “viri probati,” could be ordained.
“We must consider if viri probati is a possibility. Then we must determine what tasks they can perform, for example, in remote communities,” AP quoted the pontiff as saying.
As far as we could discern it, modern day religions are not just confined to the organized church, but also in many divisive “movements” that they’ve sponsored.
We could not spot any difference in the LGBT movement, or the climate change pseudo-environmentalists club anymore, etc., when compared to the old religions anymore. They all seem to serve the same purpose.
Indeed, they are.
Geopolitically, a kinetic quarrel between Muslim Iran and Hindu India could be useful now to weaken the BRICS Alliance, and sabotage the Eurasian “One Belt One Road” project of China. CNN’s Reza Aslan is identified as an Iranian-born religious scholar.
When will they finally wake up to the reality that they’ve lost the war?
Soros Insider: Banks Ending Cash To Establish World Government & The Real John McCain: “33 POWs Faced Execution For Treason After Vietnam Until Nixon Pardoned All POWs.” McCain Was #1 On The List + Biden Family Drama Has Everything: Sex, Hookers, Debt, Cocaine And A Son Sleeping With His Dead Brothers Wife March 16 2017 | From: Infowars / VeteransToday / DailyCaller
Technocracy: Cashless society to forge deep surveillance state & A look at Soros, McCain and Biden.
Investment guru Jim Rogers, a former colleague of George Soros, has warned governments are seeking to end the use of cash to implement a surveillance state where your every expense is monitored.
Jim Rogers, who co-founded the Quantum Group with globalist billionaire George Soros in 1973, noted that many governments around the world are cutting back on the amount of paper currency in circulation.
“Governments are always looking out for themselves first, and it’s the same old thing that has been going on for hundreds of years,” he said during an interview with the MacroVoices Podcast. “The Indians recently did the same thing. They withdrew 86 percent of the currency in circulation, and they have now made it illegal to spend more than, I think it’s about $4,000 in any cash transaction.”
“In France you cannot use more than, I think it’s a €1,000.”
Spy-Grid Is Part Of World Government Takeover
NSA whistleblower William Binney lays out what the globalists have planned for the NSA and how they will use it to further enslave humanity.
Following the Charlie Hebdo terror attack in 2015, the French government prohibited cash payments of more than €1,000, with then-Finance Minister Michel Sapin arguing it was necessary to “fight against the use of cash and anonymity in the French economy.”
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi withdrew 500- and 1,000-rupee bills as legal tender, removing 86 percent of the country’s currency bills from circulation.
The European Commission recently issued a “road map” to implement severe restrictions and reporting requirements on the use of cash across the European Union, with the final goal of eliminating the use of cash all together.
Rogers warned the trend by governments to eliminate the use of cash for economic transactions is part of a larger effort by those governments to implement a surveillance state by directly monitoring the spending habits of its citizens.
“Many countries are already doing this,” he said. “Some states in the US you cannot make cash transactions above a certain amount. Governments love it.”
“Then they can control you.”
“If you want to go and buy a cup of coffee, they know how many you drink, where you buy them, etc., if they can all put it into electronic formats and they will,” he added. “The world is all going electronic.”
George Soros (Resurfaced 60-Minutes Interview 1998)
"Of all the financial titans and philanthropists of the 20th century, none are more complex or mysterious than George Soros, like Carnegie, JP Morgan and the Rockefellers, he amassed billions through ruthless business decisions, only to turn around and give away most of his fortune to advance his own personal philosophy. He can move world financial markets simply by voicing an opinion or destabilize a government by buying and selling its currency."
Video allegedly found on a university's database with restricted access by a reddit user. Supposedly scrubbed from the internet.
Despite assurances made by governments that the replacement of cash with a digital currency will make economic transactions easier, Rogers warned they are a distraction to cover-up the elimination of basic freedoms.
“When it’s done, the governments are going to be very, very happy they are going to say they’re doing it for our own good, this is not them, this is for our good,” Rogers added. “That they’re doing this, but it’s coming, and it’s going to be a whole different world in which we live.”
“Probably we are not going to have as many freedoms as we have now even though we are already losing our freedoms at a significant pace.”
Infowars Seeks To Overthrow The Globalist Paradigm, Not Become It
The Real John McCain. “33 POWs Faced Execution For Treason After Vietnam Until Nixon Pardoned All POWs.” McCain Was #1 On The List
“Thank you” to all of the Powdered Wig readers who are sending me background material on this topic. It turns out that Donald Trump was spot on in his assessment of John McCain as NOT a war hero. More detail comes streaming in by the hour.
Now it is clear why McCain blocked release of POW records. He didn’t want his own to be public. It also explains why McCain is so eager to abandon this feud with Trump and “move on.” I’m certain John McCain regrets ever bashing Donald Trump.
The Donald has opened McCain’s closet and the contents ain’t pretty! Over the weekend, “the Donald” backed down on his attacks on McCain, calling “Hanoi John” a “war hero.”
However, Donald is not going to be able to close the can of worms he opened. Today, McCain is trying to wrap himself in the POW flag for cover. POWs had never been rock star heroes before, quite the opposite.
These are people who surrendered to the enemy, people suspected of collaboration and worse. With Korea, POWs became the shame of America with many “brainwashed” into following communist doctrines.
American POWs from Vietnam were the bloody flag Richard Nixon wrapped himself in, on the advice of Henry Kissinger, part of a ploy to divert attention from his endless personal failings which included his agreement with North Vietnam that let them keep and later execute hundreds of American POWs.
1,205 American POWs were kept by North Vietnam according to records recovered at the end of the Cold War. President’s Clinton and Yeltsin instituted a search of Russia’s gulags looking for their remains with no success.
In 1993, armed with testimony from a former high ranking Czech security official, I proposed a systematic search of archives in Prague that recorded the fate of 200 missing US POWs from Vietnam but was blocked by Senator John McCain.
33 POWs faced execution for treason after Vietnam until Nixon pardoned all POWs. McCain was on the list of the 33, in fact at the head of it.
Here are the facts as we know them:
According to Colonel Ted Guy, John McCain’s commander as a POW, McCain collaborated with the enemy.
McCain is accused of giving information that led to the downing of 60 US aircraft
McCain is accused of training North Vietnamese air defense personnel
McCain is accused of making over 30 propaganda broadcasts against the US, broadcasts he moved to have classified when he was elected to the senate
These 4 accusations are the only real and supportable accusations against McCain. The evidence for these acts exists and is substantial. What is stranger still is McCain’s longtime war against veterans, other POWs and their families.
US Senator John McCain has met up with jihadist terrorist leaders in Syria.
When John was a bit younger and better capable of looking after himself, he was often both verbally and physically abusive to POW families, POW activists and veterans. We hear nothing of these brutal outbursts of McCain’s though they continue to this day, now taken as the ravings of a mental defective.
The door Donald opened should be kept open. We need to examine the POW phenomenon. After Vietnam, we allowed Nixon to glorify POWs while abandoning hundreds.
The facts came to light during the late 1990s when tapes of conversations between Nixon and Kissinger were made public, for moments, with Kissinger admitting that American POWS held outside North Vietnam, in Laos, Cambodia and the South, were purposefully not included in the agreements, a number Kissinger put at over 200.
These tapes were cleaned from the media and are not available to even researchers, were such interested parties to exist, which they do not. Vietnam was a useless war. I served in Vietnam as a Marine combat infantryman and know the war well close up.
Those of us that served felt abused and exploited and suffered far worse at the hands of Nixon and subsequent leaders who backed away from those of us who served as honorably as possible while engaging in a nutty frenzy of POW worship.
Trump is right, those who surrender are generally not heroes. Some were however, like Ted Guy, a man taken on the ground fighting, killing 4 of his captors.
Guy, however, is only one of many thousands, many many thousands, from Vietnam that should have received some aspect of recognition in a war where many more thousands lived like gods.
Vietnam was a scam, drugs, prostitution, black market, the best food and hottest parties in the world for many who came home from the war with medals on their chests for doing nothing whatsoever.
I might add, the Saigon press club war correspondents were the worst of all, living like kings on little boys and little girls while being occasionally flown for “10 minutes of war” with a general, then back to the clubs and brothels. They all should have been locked in FEMA camps, were such things to exist.
As for the Donald, he should demand that, minimally, the American public be able to hear McCain’s broadcasts and see the records of his debriefing and read the statements made against him by other POWs, including and especially Colonel Ted Guy.
This man, if you wish to call him that, “McCain” has been allowed to destroy America’s security for two generations, along with friends like “light loafer Lindsey” Graham and others.
In one instance alone, the F35, McCain has personally destroyed America’s defense capabilities for 25 years. This is his plane, his project, his monstrosity.
There hasn’t been a defense scam in decades that hasn’t had his hand prints on it. Time for Trump to get serious and show some backbone. McCain is a hard target, time for Trump to stop bashing the easy guys and take this one on.
Biden Family Drama Has Everything: Sex, Hookers, Debt, Cocaine And A Son Sleeping With His Dead Brothers Wife
Who knew that folksy ex-Veep Joe Biden was sitting on a dirty made-for-TV drama?
The news recently splashed across the New York tabloids that Hunter Biden, the surviving son of the ex-VP, is having an affair with Hallie Biden, the widow of Beau Biden, who died last year of brain cancer. She appropriately appears in all the family funeral pictures mourning alongside other family families.
Two months later, Hunter’s now estranged wife, Kathleen, was out. And now, Hallie is in. As reported by NYP‘s Page Six, the divorce filings between Hunter and his estranged wife, Kathleen reveal so much more.
Namely, the family’s got debt because of bad boy Hunter Biden’s questionable spending habits that allegedly involve drugs, hookers, strip clubs, incredible debt and an $80,000 bauble that has disappeared.
In 2015, Hunter denied having a profile on Ashley Madison, the dating site for married people, despite the fact that the account was linked to his name and email.
While Kathleen’s filings reveal a den of filth involving other women, a double mortgage on the family home and unpaid taxes, Hunter Biden’s lawyer released a statement that says:
“Hunter loves and admires Kathleen as a person, a mother and a friend. He hopes their privacy can be respected at this time.”
With five kids involved - three from Hunter’s marriage to Kathleen and two from Hallie and Beau - the family’s hot mess more than pulls at heartstrings. To be fair, divorces are ugly as hell. So likely there are no entirely innocent parties here. But in the meantime, how about those bounced checks to the housekeeper?
Beau Biden died of brain cancer in May 2015. His widow Hallie has since struck up a romance with Beau’s brother Hunter
Earlier, news broke that Biden is openly in a serious relationship with Hallie. The couple even enjoys the blessings of Joe Biden and his wife, Jill.
Every family has a black sheep. At 43, Hunter joined the military only to leave a year later after testing positive for cocaine use, as reported by WSJ. But not every family has a black sheep who takes up with his brother’s wife after he dies.
Biophotons: The Human Body Emits, Communicates With, And Is Made From Light March 16 2017 | From: Omnithought / Various
Increasingly science agrees with the poetry of direct human experience: we are more than the atoms and molecules that make up our bodies, but beings of light as well.
Biophotons are emitted by the human body, can be released through mental intention, and may modulate fundamental processes within cell-to-cell communication and DNA.
Nothing is more amazing than the highly improbable fact that we exist. We often ignore this fact, oblivious to the reality that instead of something there could be nothing at all, i.e. why is there a universe (poignantly aware of itself through us) and not some void completely unconscious of itself?
Consider that from light, air, water, basic minerals within the crust of the earth, and the at least 3 billion year old information contained within the nucleus of one diploid zygote cell, the human body is formed, and within that body a soul capable of at least trying to comprehend its bodily and spiritual origins.
Given the sheer insanity of our existential condition, and bodily incarnation as a whole, and considering that our earthly existence is partially formed from sunlight and requires the continual consumption of condensed sunlight in the form of food, it may not sound so farfetched that our body emits light.
Indeed, the human body emits biophotons, also known as ultraweak photon emissions (UPE), with a visibility 1,000 times lower than the sensitivity of our naked eye. While not visible to us, these particles of light (or waves, depending on how you are measuring them) are part of the visible electromagnetic spectrum (380-780 nm) and are detectable via sophisticated modern instrumentation.
The Physical and “Mental” Eye Emits Light
The eye itself, which is continually exposed to ambient powerful photons that pass through various ocular tissues, emit spontaneous and visible light-induced ultraweak photon emissions. It has even been hypothesized that visible light induces delayed bioluminescence within the exposed eye tissue, providing an explanation for the origin of the negative afterimage.
These light emissions have also been correlated with cerebral energy metabolism and oxidative stress within the mammalian brain.
And yet, biophoton emissions are not necessarily epiphenomenal. Bókkon’s hypothesis suggests that photons released from chemical processes within the brain produce biophysical pictures during visual imagery, and a recent study found that when subjects actively imagined light in a very dark environment their intention produced significant increases in ultraweak photo emissions.
This is consistent with an emerging view that biophotons are not solely cellular metabolic by-products, but rather, because biophoton intensity can be considerably higher inside cells than outside, it is possible for the mind to access this energy gradient to create intrinsic biophysical pictures during visual perception and imagery.
Our Cells and DNA Use Biophotons To Store and Communicate Information
Apparently biophotons are used by the cells of many living organisms to communicate, which facilitates energy/information transfer that is several orders of magnitude faster than chemical diffusion. According to a 2010 study;
“Cell to cell communication by biophotons have been demonstrated in plants, bacteria, animal neutriophil granulocytes and kidney cells.”
Researchers were able to demonstrate that:
“…different spectral light stimulation (infrared, red, yellow, blue, green and white) at one end of the spinal sensory or motor nerve roots resulted in a significant increase in the biophotonic activity at the other end.” Researchers interpreted their finding to suggest that “…light stimulation can generate biophotons that conduct along the neural fibers, probably as neural communication signals.”
Even when we go down to the molecular level of our genome, DNA can be identified to be a source of biophoton emissions as well. One author proposes that DNA is so biophoton dependent that is has excimer laser-like properties, enabling it to exist in a stable state far from thermal equilibrium at threshold.
Technically speaking a biophoton is an elementary particle or quantum of light of non-thermal origin in the visible and ultraviolet spectrum emitted from a biological system. They are generally believed to be produced as a result of energy metabolism within our cells, or more formally as a;
“…by-product of biochemical reactions in which excited molecules are produced from bioenergetic processes that involves active oxygen species,"
The Body’s Circadian Biophoton Output
Because the metabolism of the body changes in a circadian fashion, biophoton emissions also variate along the axis of diurnal time.
Research has mapped out distinct anatomical locations within the body where biophoton emissions are stronger and weaker, depending on the time of the day:
“Generally, the fluctuation in photon counts over the body was lower in the morning than in the afternoon. The thorax-abdomen region emitted lowest and most constantly. The upper extremities and the head region emitted most and increasingly over the day.
Spectral analysis of low, intermediate and high emission from the superior frontal part of the right leg, the forehead and the palms in the sensitivity range of the photomultiplier showed the major spontaneous emission at 470-570 nm.
The central palm area of hand emission showed a larger contribution of the 420-470 nm range in the spectrum of spontaneous emission from the hand in autumn/winter. The spectrum of delayed luminescence from the hand showed major emission in the same range as spontaneous emission.”
The researchers concluded that “The spectral data suggest that measurements might well provide quantitative data on the individual pattern of peroxidative and anti-oxidative processes in vivo.”
Meditation and Herbs Affect Biophoton Output
Research has found an oxidative stress-mediated difference in biophoton emission among mediators versus non-meditators.
Those who meditate regularly tend to have lower ultra-weak photon emission (UPE, biophoton emission), which is believed to result from the lower level of free radical reactions occurring in their bodies.
In one clinical study involving practitioners of transcendental meditation (TM) researchers found:
“The lowest UPE intensities were observed in two subjects who regularly meditate. Spectral analysis of human UPE has suggested that ultra-weak emission is probably, at least in part, a reflection of free radical reactions in a living system.
It has been documented that various physiologic and biochemical shifts follow the long-term practice of meditation and it is inferred that meditation may impact free radical activity.”
Interestingly, an herb well-known for its use in stress reduction (including inducing measurable declines in cortisol), and associated heightened oxidative stress, has been tested clinically in reducing the level of biophotons emitted in human subjects.
Known as rhodiola, a study published in 2009 in the journal Phytotherapeutic Research found that those who took the herb for 1 week has a significant decrease in photon emission in comparison with the placebo group.
Human Skin May Capture Energy and Information from Sunlight
Perhaps most extraordinary of all is the possibility that our bodily surface contains cells capable of efficiently trapping the energy and information from ultraviolet radiation.
A study published in the Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology in 1993, titled, “Artificial sunlight irradiation induces ultraweak photon emission in human skin fibroblasts,” discovered that when light from an artificial sunlight source was applied to fibroblasts from either normal subjects or with the condition xeroderma pigmentosum, characterized by deficient DNA repair mechanisms, it induced far higher emissions of ultraweak photons (10-20 times) in the xeroderma pigmentosum group.
The researchers concluded from this experiment that “These data suggest that xeroderma pigmentosum cells tend to lose the capacity of efficient storage of ultraweak photons, indicating the existence of an efficient intracellular photon trapping system within human cells.“ More recent research has also identified measurable differences in biophoton emission between normal and melanoma cells.
“Melanin is capable of transforming ultraviolet light energy into heat in a process known as “ultrafast internal conversion”; more than 99.9% of the absorbed UV radiation is transformed from potentially genotoxic (DNA-damaging) ultraviolet light into harmless heat.”
If melanin can convert light into heat, could it not also transform UV radiation into other biologically/metabolically useful forms of energy?
This may not seem so farfetched when one considers that even gamma radiation, which is highly toxic to most forms of life, is a source of sustenance for certain types of fungi and bacteria. More on melanin-mediated energy production here.
Gerald Pollack, PhD, who wrote The 4th Phase of Water has identified water molecules, which constitute 99% of the molecules in our body by number, as capable of storing the energy of sunlight like batteries and driving the majority of processes within our body as a primary, non-ATP-based source of energy.
In fact, the lunisolar tidal force, to which the Sun contributes 30% and the Moon 60 % of the combined gravitational acceleration, has been found to regulate a number of features of plant growth upon Earth.
Intention Is a Living Force of Physiology
Even human intention itself, the so-called ghost in the machine, may have an empirical basis in biophotons.
A recent commentary published in the journal Investigacion clinica titled “Evidence about the power of intention” addressed this connection:
“Intention is defined as a directed thought to perform a determined action. Thoughts targeted to an end can affect inanimate objects and practically all living things from unicellular organisms to human beings.
The emission of light particles (biophotons) seems to be the mechanism through which an intention produces its effects.
All living organisms emit a constant current of photons as a mean to direct instantaneous nonlocal signals from one part of the body to another and to the outside world. Biophotons are stored in the intracellular DNA. When the organism is sick changes in biophotons emissions are produced.
Direct intention manifests itself as an electric and magnetic energy producing an ordered flux of photons. Our intentions seem to operate as highly coherent frequencies capable of changing the molecular structure of matter.
For the intention to be effective it is necessary to choose the appropriate time. In fact, living beings are mutually synchronized and to the earth and its constant changes of magnetic energy. It has been shown that the energy of thought can also alter the environment.
Hypnosis, stigmata phenomena and the placebo effect can also be considered as types of intention, as instructions to the brain during a particular state of consciousness.
Cases of spontaneous cures or of remote healing of extremely ill patients represent instances of an exceedingly great intention to control diseases menacing our lives.
The intention to heal as well as the beliefs of the sick person on the efficacy of the healing influences promote his healing.
In conclusion, studies on thought and consciousness are emerging as fundamental aspects and not as mere epiphenomena that are rapidly leading to a profound change in the paradigms of Biology and Medicine.”
So there you have it. Science increasingly agrees with direct human experience: we are more than the atoms and molecules of which we are composed, but beings that emit, communicate with, and are formed from light.
Inconvenient Reality: Al Gore’s Global Climate Apocalypse Never Took Place - He Now Says It Did But You Just Couldn’t Tell + Hero EPA Administrator Speaks Out Against Junk Science - Denies CO2 Is Primary Contributor To ‘Global Warming’! March 15 2017 | From: NaturalNews / TheGatewayPundit
Environmentalist Al Gore, a.k.a. the climate con man, has a new movie to promote, so he gets to fly on private jets and ride around in gas-guzzling limousines. Maybe he’ll even add a new wing on to his mansion with the profits.
The new movie is called An Inconvenient Sequel, a follow-up to An Inconvenient Truth, which was chock full of doom and gloom about made-made climate change and global warming.
The film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival last month and will go into wide distribution this summer.
Gore’s activism made him a multimillionaire celebrity. The carbon footprint of his wallet expanded further when, in late 2012, he sold his failed TV channel, Current TV, to Big Oil, i.e., to the Al Jazeera network, which is backed by the royal family of the oil-rich country of Qatar. Gore reportedly pocketed $100 million from that transaction.
The “planet has a fever” pundit also won a Nobel Peace Prize, but then again, so did Obama.
As Natural News previously reported, none of the dire climate change predictions from the first film- which won an Academy Award for best documentary - have come to pass. Among other things, the Arctic never melted, and polar bears are still thriving. Mt. Kilimanjaro is still covered with plenty of show.
Extreme weather also has failed to materialized. [RELATED: Read more about the climate change movement at ClimateScienceNews.com]
In the new opus, the former vice president under Bill Clinton tries to justify another weather whopper - that cities all over the world, including Manhattan, are at risk for flooding because of the rise in the sea level combined with storm surges.
It was the “single most criticized scene in that movie,” Gore declares in the trailer below.
“In that clip, Gore then shows ‘Superstorm Sandy’ footage of water flooding lower Manhattan, including the memorial site and a quote from Gov. Andrew Cuomo blaming climate change, to prove true Gore’s claim from 11 years ago.
But his original prediction was not about extenuating circumstances of a storm like Sandy slamming into New York or any ‘storm surge’ at all.
It was about the sea level rise that would be generated as (he predicted) ice melt in Greenland and Antarctica escalated dramatically.
The latest maps show that Greenland still has ice 11 years after Gore’s prediction of catastrophic melt due to global warming.”
Weather Channel founder John Coleman was fundamentally unimpressed with the original Al Gore movie, which he deemed a “scientific monstrosity,” and has raised concerns about the follow up for similar reasons. Coleman has argued in the past that man-made climate change is a scam, a myth, and unsupported by science.
Health Ranger Mike Adams recently pointed out the oft-repeated claim that 97% of scientists agree that man-made climate change is settled science - as if science is ever settled - is a bunch of hot air.
In the new movie, Gore apparently also claims credit for ushering in the superficial Paris climate change agreement that was approved with much hoopla on December 12, 2015.
President Trump said in November that he has an open mind about the Paris deal that Obama signed without input from Congress, although he campaigned on rescinding the U.S. commitment just like he pulled out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership upon taking office.
The president may be constrained at the moment, given the media hysteria about every decision from the White House, however. An ex-aide said in late January that he expects the president to withdraw from the Paris agreement, although the timetable is uncertain.
Hero EPA Administrator Speaks Out Against Junk Science - Denies CO2 Is Primary Contributor To ‘Global Warming’!
Hero of the Day - EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt
The new Trump EPA administrator Scott Pruitt denied that carbon dioxide was a primary contributor to global warming junk science.
Liberal heads exploded over this comment.
Scott Pruitt has been head of the EPA for less than a month.
We should help them sort it out. What Data Is the Government Keeping About You?
The recent revolution in the collection and use of big data is transforming the way people learn, communicate, shop, find mates, consume news, and perform countless other tasks. Both governments and businesses are amassing a wealth of data on citizens, a trend that is expected to continue as technology advances.
However, without a reliable mechanism to ensure that the data is accurate and up-to-date, risks abound. This is particularly concerning in the criminal justice system, where poor quality or outdated data have the potential to affect individual freedoms and employability.
Historically, the only truly accessible criminal justice system data were arrest records or trial verdicts. However, advances in information technology mean that law enforcement agencies are building datasets that can go much further.
Notes from officers’ or detectives’ interactions with citizens - for example, when they interview them related to incidents where they might be a suspect, a victim, or a witness - are now often captured in computer systems rather than on paper, and therefore are kept longer and shared more widely than before.
Social media and online communication data provide a picture of individuals’ social and familial interactions. When accurate inferences can be drawn from such data to deter, prevent, and prosecute crime, society benefits.
However, when such data is inaccurate, outdated, or shared with other agencies or private third parties, it can lead to undesirable outcomes.
Such errors have already had an impact. In a recent piece in the Washington Post, a reporter recounted how his search for an apartment was almost derailed when a series of criminal convictions erroneously showed up on a report from a private company to his potential landlord.
In that case, the reporter knew how to figure out what had happened and resolved the situation, but other citizens - most lacking the skills of an investigative reporter - probably wouldn’t. And if decisions based on inaccurate data are made “behind the scenes” - by an algorithm that assesses how much risk a person poses, or their likelihood of committing future crimes - the citizen may never know what happened.
Accuracy can mean more than data just being objectively correct, it may require enough context about how data was collected so that people - or algorithms - understand what it means.
For example, if a law-abiding person is stopped by the police while heading to the store with a relative or friend who happens to be a gang member, and that encounter is recorded in a police database, the person might be wrongly flagged as connected to the gang.
In a database that connects citizens to criminal gangs, how much context should have to be retained so a future investigator would know that it was just based on one trip to the store?
How long should that flag be retained? How will it be translated when transmitted to other jurisdictions? If this person continues to be law abiding, but is stopped for a traffic infraction 10 years later in another jurisdiction, what will that officer see?
Will the traffic stop be handled differently as a result? Should it be? To maintain fair treatment, when should the system be programmed to “forget” that this individual went to the store with a gang member? Five years? Ten? Twenty?
During a recent workshop we held with court and criminal justice system experts, the increasing volume of data was identified as a high priority problem.
Data is increasingly being used to make the justice system work better, but as the amount and the sources of that data proliferate, mechanisms should be developed to ensure errors are not being tolerated.
Unlike in other spheres where data drive consequential decisions about citizens - notably in the credit reporting and scoring system - the criminal justice system has no legally required processes that enable citizens to review data about themselves and challenge inaccuracies.
And the broad sharing of justice system data both within and outside the legal system, makes it difficult to correct errors even when they are discovered.
There are no simple solutions for these problems. Our workshop participants wrestled with these issues and identified areas for additional research. One idea was the use of a data “expiration date” - a date at which data must be deleted based on its quality with more unsure or error prone data forgotten faster than verified information.
The U.S. criminal justice system is currently integrating and adapting to the myriad data and analytic technologies that are transforming the rest of society.
However, in this race to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the system, the rights of citizens to be treated fairly, based on accurate and timely data and information, should be made a high priority. A failure to do so would be corrosive to the faith and trust Americans place in the system.
Dulani Woods is a quantitative analyst and Brian A. Jackson is a senior physical scientist at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation and a professor at the Pardee RAND Graduate School. This commentary originally appeared on Inside Sources on February 28, 2017.
What this RAND Corp. article really wants to hammer down beside telling us the inconvenient truth is to show that they are above everything else, and they can do whatever they want. Don’t do anything stupid against them on the net, or you will suffer the consequences.
Worse than RFID Implant! A Tech Device Under Production for Mass Release
How Amazon.com Spies On Your Most Private Thoughts, Fetishes And Conversations
Amazon.com isn’t merely a massive retailer; it’s also a dangerous spy machine that collects detailed profiles of your most private thoughts, fetishes and conversations.
Every Amazon.com device you use is actually a surveillance collection interface that’s translating your thoughts, beliefs and conversations into a “psychological profile” database at Amazon.com servers. For example:
Amazon ECHO devices constantly listen to your most private conversations and process your voice by uploading segments of audio to Amazon.com servers. Law enforcement agencies have already sought to use audio recordings from ECHO devices to incriminate individuals for words they uttered in their own private homes. Owning an Amazon ECHO device is like planting a law enforcement bug in your own home… that YOU pay for!
Kindle devices record what books and authors you read, including which text passages you highlight in those books. This can be used to expand a psychological profile of your beliefs, preferences and even fetishes.
Amazon FIRE devices can hear your voice and upload recordings to Amazon servers. They also track and record all your preferences in films, television shows, viewing times and title ratings.
The Amazon.com website builds a psychological profile of your interests and demographics based on your purchase history. This is used to promote “suggested” products while a psychological profile of you is accumulated on Amazon’s servers.
Every Amazon service is collecting data about your likes and dislikes, including Amazon MUSIC. It is the combination of all these data sets that is astoundingly dangerous because it “profiles” your mind without your consent.
A majority of 64 percent of respondents said they think Trump can successfully repeal the Affordable Health Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, with 62 percent believing Trump can replace it.
A majority of 56 percent believe Trump will indeed pass a federal tax overhaul, while a majority of 62 percent think he can pass an infrastructure spending bill.
The major issue which Americans believe Trump will struggle to implement is his promise to build the proposed Wall on the Southern border.
Close to half, 46 percent, said that they see it as very or somewhat likely that a wall will be agreed upon this year. However, most respondents, close to three quarters, think it likely that the Trump administration will deliver on reducing the number of immigrants allowed into the United States.
“We polled voters on ten of Trump’s biggest stated priorities. For all of those agenda items except one - the border wall - a majority believe they will be accomplished in the first year,” Morning Consult Chief Research Officer and Cofounder Kyle Dropp said, adding “Those are high expectations.”
The survey also noted that more voters feel “excited” or “satisfied” about the successful implementation of the outlined 10 proposals than those who would be “disappointed” or “upset.”
The most enthusiasm was reserved for the creation of new jobs, with 42 percent saying they are “excited” to see that happen, and a further 40 percent adding they would be “satisfied.”
The findings come in the wake of news that the U.S. created 298,000 new jobs after Trump’s first full month in office, shattering expectations by a margin of over 100,000.
The poll also found that only 41 percent believe Russian meddling had any impact on the US election. 42 percent said they do not believe Russia affected the result at all.
Fifty-six percent support appointing a special prosecutor to investigate alleged ties between Trump staff and the Russian government. However, most who advocate such a move are Democratic supporters, while Republicans and Independents are less supportive.
The astounding list of achievements: [The controlled Cabal-owned Mainstream Media conveniently avoid reporting the positive progress being made by Trumpand the Alliance that is taking the 'establishment' down in real time.]
With Donald Trump approaching his first 50 days in office and with today’s news that the U.S. has added 235,000 new jobs, it’s truly astounding to consider what Trump has achieved in just the short time he has been president.
Trump is already beginning to fulfil his promise of being the best jobs president ever.
U.S. employers added jobs beyond expectations in both January (238,000) and February (235,000), with the unemployment rate falling to 4.7% and wages growing 2.8%. According to Bloomberg, America’s labor market is getting better “by any measure”.
Trump has cut the U.S. debt burden by $68 billion dollars.
Since the day of his inauguration, Trump has wiped $68 billion off the national debt, which had ballooned to $19,947 billion under Obama.
Manufacturing is at its most robust since 1984.
The Philly Fed Index, a survey of how well manufacturers are doing, hit its highest level since 1984.
Small and medium businesses are confident about the future.
The NFIB Small Business Optimism Index is at its highest level since 2004. Economic confidence is surging.
The stock market keeps topping record highs.
The Dow closed above 20,000 for the first time ever days after Trump’s inauguration and hasn’t stopped rising since. The Dow has surged more than 2500 points since Trump was elected – a 12 per cent spike.
Samsung is moving jobs back to the U.S. as a result of Trump’s election.
The technology giant will invest $300 million in expanding U.S. production facilities, creating around 500 jobs.
Exxon moving jobs back to the U.S. as a result of Trump’s election.
Exxon will spend $20 billion over 10 years on 11 plants along the Gulf Coast, creating a whopping 45,000 jobs for American workers.
Trump saved the Carrier plant in Indiana.
Trump stopped the Indianapolis air conditioning plant from relocating to Mexico, saving hundreds of jobs.
Fiat will invest $1 billion in two U.S. factories
Fiat Chrysler is set to invest $1 billion in two factories in Toledo and Detroit, an expansion that will create 2,000 jobs.
Hasbro is to start making play-doh in the U.S. again.
U.S. Hasbro, Inc. is returning to the U.S. and will make the beloved children’s modeling clay in a Massachusetts factory rather than in China or Turkey.
Trump signed an executive order ending Obama’s onerous regulations on the coal industry.
Obama tried to bankrupt the coal industry, Trump is revitalizing it.
Trump killed the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal.
This would have handed yet more power over to unelected globalists, creating a global regulatory structure detrimental to all Americans.
Illegal immigration from Mexico is down 40 per cent in Trump’s first month.
Border crossings have already dropped by 40 per cent, according to the DHS as Trump moves forward with his campaign promise to build a wall.
Trump issued an executive order to end “sanctuary cities”.
Trump has ordered the DOJ and Homeland Security to withhold federal funds from cities that harbor criminal illegal aliens.
Trump began the repeal and replacement of Obamacare.
Although Speaker Ryan’s Obamacare replacement is being rightly condemned, Trump has at least set in motion the repeal of this disastrous policy which has seen premiums skyrocket and choice diminished.
Trump selected Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court.
Gorsuch is a strict constitutionalist and will defend fundamental freedoms, protecting Americans from the scourge of judicial activism.
Trump approved the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Keystone Pipeline.
The long awaited approval of these projects will create jobs and reduce gas prices for all Americans.
Trump cut funding for international abortions.
American taxpayers are no longer paying for babies to be aborted by international non-governmental agencies.
Trump returned the power to make decisions on “transgender bathrooms” to the states
The president ordered the DOJ to “withdraw a motion filed by former President Barack Obama seeking to allow transgender students in public schools to use the restroom with which they identify.”
Trump and his team have accomplished all of this in just under 50 days, despite the best efforts of the Democrats and the deep state to sabotage his embryonic administration at every stage.
This list would be a phenomenal achievement for a president who is entering office with momentum, political capital and fair media treatment, but Trump has accomplished it all even in the face of total resistance, sabotage and dirty tricks from the left and the establishment media.
Trump Supports Rand Paul Healthcare Plan: Weekly Address 3-10-17
Dear Bloggers: Thousands of published studies you cite and praise are wrong, useless, irrelevant, deceptive - and the medical journals know it, and they’re doing nothing useful about it.
The issue? Cell lines. These cells are crucial for lab research on the toxicity of medical drugs, and the production of proteins. Knowing exactly which cell lines are being studied is absolutely necessary.
“Recent estimates suggest that between 20 percent and 36 percent of cell lines scientists use are contaminated or misidentified - passing off as human tissue cells that in fact come from pigs, rats, or mice, or in which the desired human cell is tainted with unknown others.
But despite knowing about the issue for at least 35 years, the vast majority of journals have yet to put any kind of disclaimer on the thousands of studies affected.”
“One cell line involved are the so-called HeLa cells. These cancerous cervical cells - named for Henrietta Lacks, from whom they were first cultured in the early 1950s - are ubiquitous in labs, proliferate wildly - and, it turns out, contaminate all manner of cells with which they come into contact.
Two other lines in particular, HEp-2 and INT 407, are now known to have been contaminated with HeLa cells, meaning scientists who thought they were working on HEp-2 and INT 407 were in fact likely experimenting on HeLa cells.”
“Christopher Korch, a geneticist at the University of Colorado, has studied the issue. According to Korch, nearly 5,800 articles in 1,182 journals may have confused HeLa for HEp-2; another 1,336 articles in 271 journals may have mixed up HeLa with INT 407. Together, the 7,000-plus papers have been cited roughly 214,000 times, Science reported last year.”
“And that’s just two cell lines. All told, more than 400 cell lines either lack evidence of origin or have become cross-contaminated with human or other animal cells at some point in their laboratory lineage. Cell lines are often chosen for their ability to reproduce and be bred for long periods of time, so they’re hardy buggers that can move around a lab if they end up on a researcher’s gloves, for example.
‘It’s astonishingly easy for cell lines to become contaminated,’ wrote Amanda Capes-Davis, chair of the International Cell Line Authentication Committee, in a guest post for Retraction Watch.
‘When cells are first placed into culture, they usually pass through a period of time when there is little or no growth, before a cell line emerges. A single cell introduced from elsewhere during that time can outgrow the original culture without anyone being aware of the change in identity’.”
Getting the picture?
HUGE numbers of published studies are based on knowing which cells are being used and tested. And much of the time, the researchers don’t know. They pretend they do, but they don’t.
Their work is completely unreliable. Everyone involved (for decades) looks the other way. It’s the secret no one wants to talk about.
“Why do they call it 'alternative medicine' when it is the original medicine that huans have been using for thousands of years? Chemical medications were discovered about a hundred years ago!"
Thousands and thousands and thousands of medical studies are useless, and their conclusions are unfounded, and turn out to be random.
This is like saying;
“Well, we built all those buildings in the city, but the concrete we used was probably cardboard. Let’s not talk about it. Let’s just wait and see what happens.”
Millions of patients who are taking drugs are guinea pigs. Researchers originally tested the toxicity of drugs on cells they assumed were relevant, but they were wrong. They said the drugs were safe, but they were working with cells that had no bearing on safety.
This is one reason why, on July 26, 2000, Dr. Barbara Starfield, a highly respected public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, could conclude, in the Journal of the American Association, that FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans every year - which becomes a MILLION deaths per decade.
The original researchers on those drugs pretended they knew what they were doing.
Pretended. Everything I’m describing and citing in this article?
The FDA knows about it. The CDC knows about it. The World Health Organization knows. National health departments all over the world know. Medical schools know.
Many doctors know. Many, many researchers know. Many hospital executives know. All pharmaceutical executives know.
Many mainstream medical reporters know. All medical journals know. But they continue to promote life-destroying fake news.
Medical-Drug Destruction Of Life, By The Numbers
I continue to expose the medical holocaust. I continue to present the conclusions of mainstream researchers and analysts, to prove the point.
It’s more effective to show that these researchers are not in the so-called fringe.
The statistics I’m quoting today reveal a problem on the level of a tsunami sweeping across the whole of America and Europe - while somehow, people carry on with their lives as if nothing is happening.
But the truth is, huge numbers of people do know what is happening, and they have their own personal horror stories - but those stories are not seeing the light of day.
Owing to the captive status of the mainstream press (beholden to the pharmaceutical juggernaut for advertising dollars), the tsunami is not receiving extensive coverage.
To make things worse, the political Left views modern medicine as unassailable science - they love all official science, no matter how deep the fraud goes. And they adore the “humanitarian ideal” of helping others.
What could support that ideal more beautifully than the vague sentiment, “medical care for all”? No need to dig below the surface. No need to examine details. No need to look at facts. Just stay with the syrupy “share and care.”
The political Right views the medical cartel as “successful business,” and no one has a right to tamper with economic success. If a business is winning, it’s good and right and true.
All right. Let’s go to the numbers. I’ll give you the horrific quotes now and discuss the source afterwards:
“…Appropriately prescribed prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death… About 330,000 patients die each year from prescription drugs in the US and Europe.”
“They [the drugs] cause an epidemic of about [6.6 million per year] hospitalizations, as well as falls, road accidents, and about 80 million [per year] medically minor problems such as pains, discomforts, and dysfunctions that hobble productivity or the ability to care for others.”
In other words, the 330,000 deaths per year, the 6.6 million hospitalizations per year, and the 80 million “medically minor” problems per year… all of this stems from CORRECTLY PRESCRIBED medicines.
The quotes come from the ASA [American Sociological Association] publication called Footnotes, in its November 2014 issue. The article is “The Epidemic of Sickness and Death from Prescription Drugs.” The author of the article is Donald W Light.
Donald W Light is a professor of medical and economic sociology. He is a founding fellow of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2013, he was a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. He is a Lokey Visiting Professor at Stanford University.
Again, it’s been my policy to quote medical analysts who have mainstream credentials, when it comes to adding up the results of medical destruction.
I do this to show that, in refusing to fix the holocaust, the federal government, medical schools, pharmaceutical companies, medical journals, hospitals, and doctors can’t claim a) their critics and detractors are “fringe researchers” or b) there really isn’t a problem.
Believe me, the officials who should have been fixing the enormous tragedy for at least the past 15 years are intent on hiding it. When you stop and think about the meaning of these numbers, one of the things you realize is: this massive destruction of life envelops whole countries.
It not only maims and kills, it brings emotional turmoil and loss to the families, friends, co-workers, and colleagues of those who are killed and maimed: the 330,000 who are killed and the 6.6 million who are hospitalized and the 80 million whose productivity is hobbled or whose ability to care for others is significantly diminished.
If you consciously set out to bring a nation to its knees, to kill it, to disable it, to make it unable to function at any reasonable level, you would be hard pressed to find a more effective long-term method than exposing the population to the US/European medical-drug cartel.
Donald Light is the editor of a book that ought to be studied at every college and medical school in the world: The Risks of Prescription Drugs (Columbia University Press). The basic research that led to his conclusions, cited above, come from that book. His website is PharmaMyths.net.
If you approached mainstream news outlets, mainstream and independent blogs and websites, and told them, “I have the cause of 330,000 deaths, 6.6 million hospitalizations, and 80 million minor but troubling and disruptive problems per year, in the US and Europe, they might, if they believed you, become interested - but how many of these news operations would publish the numbers, once they realized you were talking about correctly prescribed medical drugs as the sole cause?
How many of these news operations would back away, turn a blind eye, change the subject, and move on to other stories?
Herd Immunity Used For Fear And Guilt
Hail to the herd! The herd is all!
The concept of herd immunity (protection for the population) is often used by vaccine addicts as a way to push guilt at people who don’t line up their children for shots.
“Your unvaccinated child is a danger to my vaccinated child!”
Excuse me? Protecting children who are already vaccinated? Really?
Little Jimmy, whose parents have decided not to vaccinate him, will pass diseases on to kids who are already vaccinated? What?
Oh, you mean those immunized kids aren’t really safe? Then why did you vaccinate them in the first place?
What actually protects people against disease, or enables them to recover from disease with no lasting ill-effects, is the strength of their immune systems.
If a person has a chronically weak immune system, he will get sick again and again, and it doesn’t matter how many people around him are vaccinated against how many diseases.
The health of populations has everything to do with good nutrition, adequate sanitation, and an absence of toxic elements in the environment.
There are many doctors who know this, but they refuse to speak out, because they know they’ll suffer consequences.
Vaccination, as a propaganda strategy, is used to medicalize the population - to assert that good health is fundamentally a medical matter.
It isn’t. If tomorrow, two things happened, they would change the face of health in any industrialized country:
One, millions more people buying healthy food and/or growing their own food, in yards; and in inner cities, growing food in community gardens;
And two, the courts delivering justice in the form of billion-dollar fines and long, long prison sentences to corporate employees (including CEOs) for severe and real pollution.
Note: That justice would eliminate GMO crops which rely on toxic pesticide use.
I’m not spinning rainbows. I’m just pointing out that, with these two changes alone, hospitals and clinics and doctors’ offices would empty out, and the medical cartel would finally experience vast comeuppance.
Health and life are not medical functions.
Any science that claims they are medical functions is false science, and the people who make those claims are liars or morons or criminals, or some combination of all three.
“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization.
In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.”
Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977
Host resistance = strong immune system.
Go to any poverty-stricken Third World country, and you will find: contaminated water supplies, starvation, lack of basic sanitation, over- crowded living conditions, stolen farm land—and large vaccine programs. The outcome? Chronic illness.
It doesn’t matter which disease labels are placed on this illness; it persists. And it will persist until these factors are remedied.
Take a wealthy community like Beverly Hills. How many doctors would dare tell a parent;
“Look, your child needs fresh air, sunlight, exercise, and he needs to stop eating junk food and playing video games ten hours a day. Until that happens, there’s nothing anyone can do for him.”
A doctor insisting on non-medical solutions? Forget it.
The basic elements that promote a healthy and strong immune system undercut vaccination and other medical interventions. People can rail against that fact; they can attack it; but they can’t change it.
Naturally strong immune system = you don’t get sick, or if you do, you recover without lasting ill-effects.
Weak immune system = you get sick from many possible causes.
So, soccer moms, try applying a little common sense and intelligence to the situation. What should you be doing to strengthen your child’s immune system, and why are you so worried that unvaccinated kids are a danger to your vaccinated child, if he is protected?
Face it, you’re acting as a dupe for the gigantic socialization strategy called vaccination.
New NRA Commercial Destroys Liberal New York Times & Google Censorship Of Natural News March 13 2017 | From: TheGatewayPundit / NaturalNews / Various
“Truth Doesn’t Matter to The New York Times”
The NRA quickly created a new commercial in response to the commercial that the New York Times ran during the Academy Awards where the Times claims “The truth is more important now than ever.”
The NRA responded by blasting the Times with a commerical that says “The trut is that the truth didn’t matter to The New York Times then as much as now -because as long as liberals were “progressing,” the truth was depressing.
Google Censorship Of Natural News
After six days of being blacklisted by Google, the NaturalNews.com website has been restored to Google’s search results. The action by Google follows the largest and most vocal backlash against Google’s de-listing of any website in the history of the company, and it has sparked many new discussions and debates about search engines, censorship and free speech.
All of us at Natural News - as well as our many millions of fans - are grateful for Google’s decision to restore the NaturalNews.com website, but we are also deeply troubled by the unjustified blacklisting of Natural News and what it means for free speech across the ‘net.
For the record, there was never any allegation or evidence that Natural News had intentionally violated Google’s webmaster guidelines.
While Google said we were being flagged for a so-called “sneaky mobile redirect” on a very small number of pages in a subdomain (blogs.naturalnews.com) which were created by outside bloggers, Google went to the extraordinary step of banning the entire NaturalNews.com root domain and all its subdomains - a step that would never have been applied to CNN, Huffington Post or other popular news websites.
In fact, a Natural News investigation showed that violations identified involving websites like HuffPo, Forbes and CNN did not result in the same kind of blacklisting that was applied to Natural News.
Furthermore, while Google did make an effort to provide us with one URL that they said flagged this mobile redirect, to date there hasn’t been a single SEO expert or engineer who could reproduce the supposed redirect issue.
Even more disturbingly, when we went to the Google product webmaster forum to ask for help identifying this issue, we were insulted, mocked and accused of lying by Google’s supporters who behaved like a pack of jackals rather than search engine professionals.
No Evidence, No Charges But You’re “Guilty” Because They Say You Are
Through this entire process, Natural News was constantly being called a liar for failing to remove something that Google flatly refused to identify. In essence, we were charged with a “crime” by Google, yet Google refused to provide any details of the crime, nor any evidence of the crime, nor any tool whereby we could reproduce Google’s claimed “redirect.”
To call this process extremely frustrating for webmasters is an understatement. I continue to believe that Natural News was targeted by Google due to the content of our speech which supports President Trump… and that the “sneaky mobile redirects” issue was merely the justification used by Google to de-list the entire NaturalNews.com website.
Google no doubt disagrees with this assessment and says it was just a technical issue, yet we are not aware of any other situation in which a minor technical issue on a subdomain resulted in Google blacklisting the entire ROOT domain of a major publisher, with 140,000+ pages of quality content.
Natural News appears to be the only website of its size that has ever been subjected to this extreme censorship for such a minor technical issue on pages posted years ago by bloggers on a subdomain.
Also for the record, there is absolutely no evidence or even any accusation of Natural News deliberately engaging in any “black hat” SEO techniques, or malicious linking strategies, or any other tricks that might be used by unscrupulous internet spammers.
Natural News focuses on quality content and well-constructed titles, leaving the ranking algorithms up to Google.
While our content is obviously controversial - telling the truth is always a revolutionary act in an era of great deceit - it is of great interest to millions of readers and produced with the intention of helping humanity. See our list of 10 timeless principles that drive the Natural News mission.
The Power to Censor is the Power to Destroy
Because Google is such an integral part of the internet ecosystem, with its dominant influence determining website traffic, e-commerce product sales and online reputations, Google’s power to censor is the power to destroy.
At the flick of a switch, Google can destroy an entire family business… the business model of an online store… or the reputation of a truly good person.
There are many who argue at this very moment that Google is a private company and can therefore “do whatever it wants” without justifying anything. In arguing for this, they are supporting a totalitarian monopoly by a search engine that has the power to destroy without cause or justification.
Yet we live in a society where the entire media and popular culture was outraged when a bakery in Oregon said it would not bake a cake for a lesbian couple. The media uproar demanded the bakery be vilified for refusing to provide services to that customer, and it was later fined $135,000 by the state of Oregon for causing “emotional damage” to the plaintiffs.
Clearly, in that case, society said the bakery did not have the right to blacklist a lesbian couple, yet many of the same Leftists who decried the Oregon bakery are now saying Google has the right to blacklist Natural News.
Is that only allowable in their minds because I’m not gay? What if Natural News had been run by a transgender? The outrage against Google across the LGBT community if Google had blacklisted a popular LGBT news website would be deafening.
Indeed, I believe Google proceeded with blacklisting Natural News precisely because I’m not gay, I’m not transgender and I’m not a liberal. We were discriminated against, I believe, because we are not part of the “protected” classes of citizens in the progressive worldview where Google operates.
Had Natural News been a pro-Clinton, “progressive” website, I believe a minor technical glitch on some subdomain blog pages from years ago would have been given a pass.
After all, the final decision to blacklist Google was a human decision - called a “Manual Action” by Google - which means someone at Google decided to penalize Natural News for something that was not flagged by any Google algorithm.
The Need to Regulate Google, Facebook, Twitter and Other Internet Giants
Given the monopoly position of Google in the marketplace, Google must be prevented from granting special protections to certain “progressive” websites (such as the Huffington Post) while targeting “conservative” websites for extreme punitive action.
Specifically, a process must be put in place where Google is required to produce the evidence they claim to have against a website and provide at minimum three working days for webmasters to resolve the named issues.
Google has an obligation to tell websites why they are about to be blacklisted and provide a reasonable means of recourse so that webmasters can take steps to comply with Google’s ever-changing, mysterious “black box” rules.
Furthermore, Google must be required to apply its relevancy algorithms fairly, across all sites, without singling out certain publishers for special penalties decided by biased humans who simply disagree with the content of a particular site.
I believe that, given Google’s monopoly position of dominance over the internet ecosystem, it’s time for Congress to pass a law that would apply these bare minimum regulations to Google operations to prevent politically motivated censorship. Call it the “Online Speech Protection Act.”
It would not prevent Google from blacklisting websites that truly abuse dark hat SEO tactics, but it would require that Google provide advanced notice, produce the evidence against the site, and provide a reasonable means by which webmasters could resolve the issues in question, especially for those website that are obviously attempting to comply with Google’s rules (which even SEO experts admit are almost impossible to navigate).
How Google Enables Hat Speech Against the Very Websites it is Censoring
As Natural News was being censored by Google, we were also being assaulted and called liars by the same left-wing media that routinely attacks Donald Trump.
By censoring Natural News, Google empowered a massive wave of defamation articles that deliberately sought to exploit the absence of Natural News in the rankings to spread knowingly false lies and hatred about Natural News and myself in particular.
In essence, Google just enabled one of the most vile hate campaigns ever witnessed on the ‘net, all while denying Natural News any ability to defend itself against such hate-based smears and malicious lies.
It is the electronic equivalent of binding your hands, slapping duct tape over your mouth, and throwing you to the lions. All this from a company that once claimed to “do no evil.”
In effect, Google censored us, then allowed others to smear us, then hosted a webmaster forum which attacked us and called us liars, then refused to provide us with any evidence of wrongdoing, all while silencing our ability to defend ourselves in the public space.
There’s no question in my mind that none of this would have ever happened if Natural News had been a Clinton-supporting website.
There’s no question in my mind that Natural News was discriminated against because we were a convenient political target that could be silenced as part of an elaborate smear campaign to drag our reputation through the mud, scare away future visitors and harm our revenue-generating traffic as a form of economic sabotage.
The conclusion here is that Google has now become a weaponized search engine of censorship and hate, deployed by politically biased operators who are so filled with anger at Trump’s victory that they justify blacklisting entire website they don’t like.
Is there any doubt that some of these young, intolerant Leftists work inside Google right now, using their power of censorship to silence the websites they hate? How are we to trust Google to make sure the power to blacklist websites is not abused inside Google itself?
Alex Jones discusses how leftists are devolving into zombies as their minds are infected with identity and victimhood politics.
Sadly today, much of the political Left has become a hate group. As a hate group, they truly believe they alone have the unique right to censor others, to defame others, even to violently attack and murder others whose speech they don’t like. This is now evident everywhere throughout Leftist culture, including in Hollywood and the Oscars.
With Google clearly being run by Leftists, and Facebook run by Leftists, and most of the internet gatekeepers dominated by intolerant Leftists, the shocking realization is that none of us are safe from the hatred, intolerance and censorship of the techno-liberals who tell themselves “the ends justify the means” to silence Trump supporters and defame those who support Trump.
First They Came for Me… Will Google Come for You Next?
Truly, this is a sad era for America, a sad era for the internet and a sad realization of what Google has come to because Google has not taken any action to state they won’t repeat the same censorship again at any time, without notice.
What Google asserts right now, to all websites, is that we are all at the mercy of Google, the new “Ministry of Truth,” which can condemn you without explanation, silence you without producing a shred of evidence, and arrange for you to be slandered and defamed without recourse.
While Natural News had a large enough audience to initiate a widespread backlash of outrage against Google, the sad truth is that most websites are too small to mount any sort of effective defense against the Ministry of Google. When the small (but important) voices are silenced by Google for political reasons, who will speak for them?
Who will speak up for the minority voices that are all part of the diversity of public debate and dialogue in a free society? Google asserts that it has the right to blacklist any site at any time for any reason without explanation… and that it can all be decided by a human being at Google, a left-leaning organization that no doubt employs a large number of intolerant, biased Leftists who despise free speech while actively seeking to silence those with whom they disagree.
Is this really acceptable in a free society? Do website now have to calculate their odds of being de-listed by Google with every new article they publish that doesn’t celebrate the twisted narratives of the political Left?
What guarantees do any of us have that Google won’t target us on any given day, for whatever reason of their choosing, and silence us forever?
As currently run, Google is a danger to free expression and an enabler of hate speech. Its actions smack of the kind of totalitarian rule we’ve seen before throughout history under cruel, genocidal rulers like Mao and Stalin.
When speech is selectively suppressed by a monopolistic, politically-connected entity that sees itself as the sole arbiter of what speech is “allowable” in society, we are already on the path toward info-totalitarianism… and the outcome can only be less freedom and more human suffering, as history has proven again and again, without fail.
This must change. Google must be subjected to reasonable regulations that protect the rights of citizens to engage in free speech in a free society. We must not let Google march us down the path of totalitarianism and the silencing of dissent.
Let us hope that Congress will pursue reasonable regulations against Google, Facebook and Twitter that will rein in their monopolistic practices and discriminatory censorship that harms America and suppresses human freedom around the globe.
We’ve launched a new site to cover censorship on the internet. Visit Censorship.news to stay informed.
Troubles In Australia: PM-Of-The-Day Pushes Vaccination Agenda, Fascist Biometrics + More March 13 2017 | From: TheGuardian / ActivistPost / MSN
Malcolm Turnbull pushes for ban on unvaccinated children at childcare centres.
PM to take ‘no jab, no play’ policy that would also ban unvaccinated children from preschools to Coag meeting.
Unvaccinated children would be banned from childcare centres and preschools across the country under a push by the federal government.
The prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has written to state and territory leaders in a move towards introducing nationally consistent laws to protect children across Australia. He says he will take the policy to the next Council of Australian Governments (Coag) meeting.
Under the proposal the immunisation rates of all preschools and daycare centres would be made publicly available to parents and the right to make a formal objection would also end.
In the letter to state and territory leaders he writes:
“At our next Coag meeting I propose we agree that all jurisdictions implement legislation that excludes children who are not vaccinated from attending childcare or preschool, unless they have a medical exemption.
Vaccination objection is not a valid exemption. We must give parents the confidence that their children will be safe when they attend childcare and preschool.
Parents must understand that if their child is not vaccinated they will be refused attendance or enrolment.”
Turnbull told News Corp: “If you don’t vaccinate your child you are not just putting their own life at risk but you are putting everyone else’s children at risk.”
The federal health minister, Greg Hunt, said the government’s “no jab, no pay” policy of withholding family payments to parents of unvaccinated children was being supplemented by an “equally tough” policy of “no jab, no play”.
“We want to work with all of the states and I’m very confident that they’ll come on board,” he told the Seven Network. “Ultimately it’s about protecting kids against horrendous illnesses that are agonising and potentially in some cases tragic.”
The senior Labor MP Mark Butler said the opposition was willing to sit down and talk constructively with the government on the issue.
“The AMA says that, next to clean water, this is probably the most important public health measure that a country can have,” Butler told ABC television. “We’ve said that we think there is also some need for consideration of a public advertising campaign at a national level, just to reinforce that public health message that the AMA is talking about.”
Hanson was criticised by the Australian Medical Association and others for giving the impression that vaccines were not safe.
She told the ABC’s Insiders program that successive governments had “blackmailed” people into having their children vaccinated because of the policy of withholding childcare fee rebates and welfare payments from parents who don’t have their children fully immunised.
Her comments were denounced by both the Coalition and Labor, with Hunt saying: “The clear and categorical advice from experts including the chief medical officer, based on decades of research and evidence, is that vaccinations save lives.”
Australia Aims To Be The First Country To Process Air Travelers Via Biometrics Nationwide
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has announced a plan that could make Australia the world’s first country to implement a nationwide “contactless” system for processing its air travelers.
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection has sought technology that would abolish incoming passenger cards, remove the need for most passengers to show their passports and replace manned desks with electronic stations and automatic triage.
Officials are looking to use existing databases coupled with iris scans, facial recognition and fingerprint scans as the final phase of a five-year project called “Seamless Traveller” that is slated for completion by 2020.
Head of Australia’s border security, John Coyne, highlighted the rapid acceleration of biometric technology, as well as government access to the massive processing power of Big Data which he noted “is increasing exponentially.” Furthermore, he flatly stated that such access is global.
The innovation was possible because of the massive amount of passenger data – including ticket information, travel history and criminal records – sourced globally and analysed in the back room, Dr Coyne said. [emphasis added]
Similar to other “smart traveler” initiatives, the first appeal is made to convenience. Anyone familiar with increasingly long lines and intrusive human security checks might welcome the project’s vision to enable travelers to literally walk into an airport and out the other side without a single interference. While that might be the focus message to the consumer, Coyne reveals the true heart of the mission.
Dr Coyne said it was all about “selective permeability”, or using intelligence to determine in advance which types of passengers posed a risk – and getting everyone else through more efficiently.
“All of this is about risk,”he said. “I think in Australia we’re doing exceptionally well.”
Given the fact that biometric security itself has trickled down from use in war zones like Afghanistan to catalog potential terrorists, this would have to be the priority. Moreover, wherever these systems have popped up, abuses have been recorded.
As it turns out, the problem in the U.S. is much greater than that. The FBI has been actively trying to exempt from privacy protections a massive national biometrics database called the Next Generation Identification (NGI) System.
And this is only what we know about - in a country that has constitutional protections for its citizens.
As disparate biometrics systems from security to banking to travel and even to your home computer all begin to link up and cross communicate, globally, the possibility of widespread privacy violations increases exponentially.
For additional details about Australia’s plan for biometric processing for air travelers, please see the video below.
Australia To Replace Passports In Favour Of Biometric Scanning
Stay-At-Home Mums Are Under Attack, Yet Again. But Where Are The Dads?
Women who stay at home to raise children are a problem for Australia’s economy, according to a major new study.
A report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) claims stay-at-home mums and women who work short part-time hours are creating “potentially large losses to the economy”.
Part-time workers and women with children are the “greatest untapped potential in the Australian labour force”, the study states. The authors say more “prime aged” women (25-54) could enter the workforce and further efforts are needed to encourage mothers with young children into work.
The idea is that paid work is “important for women’s personal well-being and perceptions of their overall quality of life’’, the study states. These are familiar motherhood battle lines, where women are told to choose a side in what’s presented as a black and white situation.
The Parenthood‘s Principal Campaign Manager, Nicole Lessio, says she’s angry that women are demonised for choices they’re sometimes “forced to make”.
"Stay-at-home mums should ignore the horrible headlines,” says Ms Lessio.
“As mums we’re either cold, ambitious and leaving our children to go to work or we’re a drain on the economy if we stay at home – we just can’t win."
“All mums should choose what is right for them in their circumstances but have the support and childcare options to make working choices easier.”
The daily accomplishments of brushing teeth, timing a nap, orchestrating siblings or negotiating a tantrum should not to be overlooked.
The selflessness of motherhood and caring for a child is completely under-rated as a purpose or vocation. Parenting doesn't match the maternity leave time span. It doesn't end when you are due back at work. It's also not something you can do later.
So what's the solution?
"Childcare accessibility and affordability is a huge challenge that disproportionately affects women returning to work, so more affordable childcare is needed," says Ms Lessio.
"But we also need to focus on creating more flexible and supportive workplaces so women and men can better balance work and home responsibilities," she added.
Obviously, mothers and families are as varied as the babies they bring into the world. Some want to stay at home, some don't. Where are the dads in this equation? Would longer paternity leave mean they could contribute at home more and balance the employment gap?
For mothers who want to return to work and are searching for a balanced work-life balance there are real challenges for finding child-friendly part-time roles.
It's offensive to think that women who are giving their all to raising our little people could be thought of as a drain to the economy. Life for me was messy after giving birth - not much went to plan. It is a new way of life, where a little boy is considered in the decisions I make.
The study highlights what we already know - the women who stay at home are a talented bunch of women and an incredible asset to Australia.
Women don't lose those their skills when they stay home - they re-apply them and work gruelling hours for their families.
Stay-at-home mothers are already doing the country's most undervalued job.
Yesterday’s Conspiracy Theory Is Today’s News + Spies Tell Lies, Spying Is Lying & Wikileaks Says Less Than 1% Of Vault 7 Released March 12 2017 | From: Infowars / JonRappoport / RT / Various
For those of us who pay attention to these issues and don’t get our “news” from the discredited mainstream corporate fake news syndicate, the Wikileaks Vault 7 revelations that the U.S. government can use our devices to watch us and listen to us is old, but real news.
Is there a Pulitzer Prize nomination forthcoming? An apology for mocking this bombshell of truth as a paranoid conspiracy theory? Of course not! As it becomes increasingly clear that yesterday’s conspiracy theories are today’s real news, the call to kill the messengers just gets more shrill and hysterical.
The attacks on free speech with high-tech censorship campaigns and old-fashioned hit pieces are massive and concerted.
The book burners are starting so many fires it’s impossible to stamp them all out. What are the horrible thought crimes committed by Infowars? Infowars has consistently exposed the lies and crimes of our corrupt and broken institutions. Infowars passionately and convincingly made the case that The Patriot Act literally reversed the gains to human liberty codified in The Bill of Rights.
Infowars dismantled the lies that were presented as the pretexts to the invasion of Iraq. (The same lies aggressively promoted by Hillary Clinton and The New York Times)
Infowars was interviewing NSA whistleblowers who were accurately describing how the U.S. government was illegally spying on its citizens and retaining our data, and how these whistleblowers were being persecuted by their own government for coming forward and refusing to break the law.
This was years before anyone heard of Edward Snowden.
Amazingly, there was very little interest in these bombshell allegations in the mainstream press.
It’s hard to believe now, but in those days, people who claimed the government was surveilling innocent citizens were dismissed as paranoid by the self-proclaimed arbiters of truth at the NYT and CNN.
Infowars detailed a decade ago how police forces all over America were becoming militarized and predicted that this dangerous trend would lead to racially charged conflict on the streets of the nation. What kooks! Infowars has railed against; torture, needless wars, police brutality, government corruption, the two-party duopoly, the criminality of the banksters and the end of privacy.
Now the very same mainstream media hacks who promoted the lies that lead to war in Iraq and Syria and mindlessly regurgitate whichever talking point is uploaded onto their teleprompter are gleefully assassinating Infowars using edited tape and misleading hit-pieces.
While these discredited war cheerleaders lie about why our sons and daughters are sent to die, Infowars bravely exposes the fraudulent casus belli they traitorously and disgracefully promote.
While these corporate spokespeople work for the interests of the oil and drug companies and political forces that pay their salaries, Infowars risks everything to expose the crimes and scams of these same broken institutions.
Infowars has been consistently committed to the causes of non-intervention and freedom. It’s hard to quantify, but I know my career has suffered from my association with Infowars. Judging by social media posts, over 90 percent of my colleagues despise Infowarriors. Writing this piece will probably hurt my reputation among potential clients and not help me. I have heard Infowarriors called white-supremacists, racists, Neo-Nazis and worse.
These disgraceful, unsubstantiated smears and slanders have also been directed at yours truly and my friends and I don’t f-ing appreciate it! If I have to endure one more supercilious rant on social media consisting of regurgitated talking points I am going to throw up.
It’s interesting to me that the people calling Infowars paranoid and hysterical are the same people who post pieces claiming that Russia controls our country and that Trump is literally Hitler.
These are two of the most ridiculous and paranoid mass delusions in the history of conspiracy theories, yet the Hillary camp passionately embraces and defends these fantasies. Their hypocrisy is exposed on numerous fronts, but the fact that most of them voted for Mrs. Clinton automatically knocks them off their high-horses in my book.
In your defense, you probably were not aware of the extent of her corruption since the mainstream news sources you worship were colluding with the DNC and Clinton campaign to hide them from you while Infowars was exposing the truth.
I think Infowars has a done a great public service by exposing the deceptive, psychological methods used by the ruling elite to warp historical narratives, manipulate patriotism and manufacture consent.
By helping us to recognize and suspend our belief in propaganda and therefore our own complicity in it, Infowars is helping to create a public awareness to the tactics our enemies use to keep us divided, steal our rights and slaughter countless innocents all over the world.
I know it’s fun and easy to call us tin-foil-hat wearers, or whatever pejorative has been chosen for you today, but let’s be clear about whose dirty work you are doing.
Infowars is in direct competition with the mainstream media for revenue and the MSM want to control the information we are exposed to.
They are waging a concerted demonization campaign aimed at destroying one of the dominant platforms exposing the lies and crimes of their corporate and deep-state masters and many of you are helping them do it.
The MSM is an enemy of the truth and of the people. Do we have the will and power to destroy our enemy?
All this is SOP for the CIA and intelligence agencies around the world. Spies tell lies. A day without lying is a day without joy. Spies play chess.
"Well, when we leak THIS information to the press, they’ll emphasize the source of the leak (of course we know it’s a fake source we’ve chosen). But when we leak THAT information, the press will emphasize the content of the leak - which is what we want them to do in that case.”
Naïve people are shocked that the CIA could have fabricated the whole “Russia hacked the US election” story. But this is what the CIA does. This is another day at the office.
On the other hand, Russian intelligence could have hacked (influenced) the US election. And to put a further twist on it, Russia could have made that move, anticipating that US intelligence would discover it and go public with it. And then Russia would covertly launch a planned campaign to ridicule the CIA for claiming such an “absurdity.”
During the Cold War, several important KGB spies defected to the US. The CIA then proceeded to vet them, to find out whether they were genuine, or were sent here to seed the CIA with disinformation. As you can imagine, the whole business developed severe problems.
"All right, yes, the KGB sent me to America to confuse you. But now I’m telling you the truth. I’m giving you actual secrets. And I want to stay here. I don’t want to go home. If I go home, the KGB will vet me to see whether I actually gave you real secrets…”
CIA: “Maybe we can triple this Russian. He’s now on our side, we think. So we send him back, claiming we couldn’t get anything useful out of him. But now he’s ours. So we give him a bunch of lies to tell his bosses about us, the CIA…”
In the end, nobody on either side knows what’s going on. But they play the game anyway.
The CIA is a reality-creator and a reality-destroyer. They pick and choose what to do in each situation. But it would be folly to imagine Agency people always do brilliant work. They mis-estimate blowback. They fail to handle blowback.
They try to pick an outside scapegoat on whom to blame the blowback. They try to limit the blowback by defaming, discrediting, blackmailing, or killing people.
They rewrite history. They change sequences of events. They invent events that never happened. They blame people who don’t even exist. They present themselves as bumblers, to hide their more intelligent operations.
They hold forums designed to show their work as superficial information-gathering, as if they were little more than a think-tank. They pretend to cooperate with Congress, while they spy on Congress.
Meanwhile, the press pretends to hold an innocent and respectful view of the CIA, dutifully reporting every piece of information that comes their way from the Agency. “Today, the CIA disclosed…” Disclosed? Or fabricated?
The CIA is perhaps the biggest fake news operation in the world. It exhales fake news as matter of course.
So naturally, it attracts men and women who have a bias in favor of fabricating. “Do you dream about lying with impunity? Contact our personnel office for employment opportunities.”
If a lie serves a greater truth, release the lie. If a truth serves a greater lie, tell the truth. The old dictum, “garbage in, garbage out,” doesn’t apply to the Agency. The CIA is the Garbage Man for the known universe.
It’s rather astonishing, at this late date, that more people don’t get the con.
The CIA is a hustler operating a shell-game on a streetcorner. Except, lo and behold, all sorts of rubes are trying to jostle their way forward, to pay homage. And the cops are never going to show up to sweep the hustler away. The hustler is the cops.
"I was born to lie. But I always tell the truth. Trust me.”
Wikileaks Says Less Than 1% Of Vault 7 Released
Just 24 hours after the release of ‘Vault 7, Zero Day’, Wikileaks has claimed that less than 1% of Vault 7 has been released ‘so far’.
This is surely to generate not only excitement amongst security analysts, researchers, software engineers and hackers alike, but considerable dread within the intelligence community.
Wikileaks ‘dump’ of Vault 7 has already caused a flurry not only within the mainstream media but noticeable reactions of companies mentioned within ‘Zero Day’ cache such as Apple, Google, Telegram, Signal, Samsung, and Microsoft, whom back in February called for a ‘Digital Geneva Convention’.
WikiLeaks’ data dump on Tuesday accounted for less than one percent of ‘Vault 7’, a collection of leaked CIA documents which revealed the extent of its hacking capabilities, the whistleblowing organization has claimed on Twitter.
The CIA would not confirm the authenticity of the leak. “We do not comment on the authenticity or content of purported intelligence documents.” Jonathan Liu, a spokesman for the CIA, is cited as saying in The Washington Post.
WikiLeaks claims the leak originated from within the CIA before being “lost” and circulated amongst “former U.S. government hackers and contractors.” From there the classified information was passed to WikiLeaks.
End-to-end encryption used by applications such as WhatsApp was revealed to be futile against the CIA’s hacking techniques, dubbed ‘zero days’, which were capable of accessing messages before encryption was applied.
The leak also revealed the CIA’s ability to hide its own hacking fingerprint and attribute it to others, including Russia.
An archive of fingerprints – digital traces which give a clue about the hacker’s identity – was collected by the CIA and left behind to make others appear responsible.
Note that there are often revisions to official data, leading to some changes to reported data for past years.
Ownership of overseas companies by New Zealand residents has not grown as fast over that period (over five and a half times) so net foreign direct investment has grown over eight times from a net liability of $8.8 billion to $72.8 billion, and as a percentage of GDP multiplied over two times from 13% of GDP to 29%.
Foreign Direct Investment from International Investment Position, National Accounts, Statistics New Zealand, InfoShare series IIP088AA. GDP from National Accounts, Statistics New Zealand, InfoShare series SNE038AA.
Foreign owners controlled 36% of the share market in 2016. In 1989, the figure was 19% and it was estimated to be below 5% in 1986.
At March 2015, they owned an estimated 35% of all equity (shareholdings) and 47% of privately owned equity, including shares not listed on the stock exchange.
Foreign investors owned 28% (or $386 billion) of wealth in New Zealand whose commercial net value totalled $1.4 trillion at March 2016.
This comprised housing, land, other property, plant, equipment and financial assets owned directly or indirectly by households, government and foreign investors. New Zealand residents owned a further $227 billion of investments abroad. (These totals exclude wealth held by non-profit organisations, shared natural wealth such as rivers, and human and social capital.)
In 2016, the Overseas Investment Office (OIO) approved foreign investment totalling $8.9 billion. The average for the decade 2007-2016 was $8.4 billion.
Of the $8.9 billion in 2016, $4.5 billion was sales from one overseas company to another (all but $2.2 billion was sales from one to another on average over the decade). Only company takeovers involving $100 million or more need OIO approval, except those involving land or fishing quotas.
For private Australian investors the threshold is $501 million in 2017, and is adjusted upwards each year for inflation. Until 1999, the threshold was $10 million, it then became $50 million, and from August 2005 the government increased it to $100 million.
Overseas Investment Commission and Overseas Investment Office
In 2016, the OIO approved the sale of 362,132 hectares of freehold rural land and 103,731 hectares of leases and other interests in land to foreigners. This is a large increase on previous years: in 2015 the areas were 75,008 and 4,889 respectively.
About 337,000 hectares of the freehold land and 89,000 hectares of the leases and other interests in land were from one foreign investor to another. In the decade 2007 to 2016, the average was 131,012 hectares of freehold and 51,177 hectares of leases and other interests in land approved for sale.
Statistics on sales of land to overseas interests are poorly recorded and incomplete. Our best estimate is that in 2011 at least 8.7 percent of New Zealand farmland including forestry, or 1.3 million hectares, was foreign-owned or controlled and it could have reached 10 percent.
Overseas Investment Commission and Overseas Investment Office
"Overseas Ownership Of Land: Far Greater Than The 1% The PM Claims", by Bill Rosenberg (www.converge.org.nz)
Statistics NZ figures, as of March 2016, list the biggest foreign owners of New Zealand companies as being from, in decreasing order: Australia, US, Singapore, Hong Kong, UK, Japan, Canada, Netherlands, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, China, Switzerland, Luxembourg, France and Ireland (though the investments from some countries have been suppressed).
All had over $60m in foreign direct investment in New Zealand. These accounted for 95% of foreign direct investment in New Zealand and Australia alone accounts for 51%. Luxembourg, British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands are tax havens, and Ireland and the Netherlands have been used to avoid tax.
A Statistics New Zealand study showed that in 2010, large proportions of the foreign direct investment from the Netherlands, Singapore, Hong Kong and tax havens was in fact from other countries, led by the UK, US, Germany and Canada.
In 2016, other tax havens with investments in New Zealand companies include Vanuatu, Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Bermuda and the Bahamas, but the value of their holdings has been suppressed as “confidential”.
Bermuda showed a negative investment in New Zealand companies between 2009 and 2011 and data released in 2015 showed it was negative up to 2015 (negative $1.8 billion in 2015), but all values since 2012 have now been suppressed. Germany has also showed negative investment since 2013.
Negative investment suggests that the companies may have been loaded with debt to their parents or are technically insolvent.
International Investment Position, Statistics New Zealand: Directional basis stock of direct investment by country (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series IIP081AA.
Note that these statistics are compiled on a different basis from those also from Statistics New Zealand above, so the total, $97.4b, does not match. These are compiled on a "directional" basis, based on ultimate nationality of ownership; the above are on a "balance sheet" basis, based on residency of the company. Industry statistics below are also compiled on a directional basis.
Mallika Kelkar. (2011). "The ultimate sources of foreign direct investment (p. 19). Presented at the New Zealand Association of Economists (NZAE) Conference, Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved from: www.stats.govt.nz
The Financial and insurance services sector, which includes the four big Australian owned banks, accounted for by far the biggest part of foreign ownership of New Zealand companies by industry in March 2016, with $34.0 billion.
Next was Manufacturing at $14.4 billion. Other industries having more than $1 billion of foreign investment were in decreasing size, Agriculture, forestry, and fishing; Retail trade; Wholesale trade; Rental, hiring and real estate services; Information media and telecommunications; Electricity, gas, water and waste services; Professional, scientific and technical services; and Mining. $16.6 billion was unable to be allocated to an industry because of the way foreign direct investment is estimated, or was suppressed as being confidential.
Source: International Investment Position, Directional basis stock of direct investment by industry (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series IIP080AA - Statistics New Zealand. See note regarding country statistics.
Transnational corporations (TNCs) make massive profits out of New Zealand. These can truly be called New Zealand's biggest invisible export. In the year to March 2016, they were $8.3 billion. Over the last decade they have averaged more than the combined exports of seafood and milk powder.
In the decade 2007-2016, TNCs made $78.6 billion in profits from New Zealand. They made an average rate of profit on their shareholdings of 12.0% (10.6% in the year to March 2016).
Only 22% was reinvested (only 20% in the year to March 2016). Profits have averaged two and a half times the increase in foreign direct investment holdings each year.
Balance of Payments: Current account primary income (Annual-Mar), InfoShare Series BOP058AA; Current account investment income by sector (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series BOP059AA; and Balance of payments major components (Annual-Mar), InfoShare series BOP055AA – Statistics New Zealand.
Another $8.0 billion left New Zealand in the year to March 2016 made up of investment income from debt and smaller shareholdings (portfolio investment), making a total $16.3 billion.
Over the last decade this has averaged more than the combined dairy and forest product exports. More than two out of every five dollars of the $16.3 billion went to the owners of New Zealand’s banking sector: $6.8 billion.
The investment income from overseas ownership of the banking sector (“Deposit taking corporations”) after taking account of its small investment income from abroad, accounted for four out of every five dollars of New Zealand’s current account deficit in the year to March 2016: $6.3 billion compared to $7.8 billion.
The investment income deficit (income on New Zealand investment overseas less income on foreign investment in New Zealand) has been greater than the current account deficit for all but two years since 1989, which further increases New Zealand’s foreign liabilities.
Foreign ownership has not improved New Zealand's foreign debt problem. In 1989, total private and public foreign debt stood at $47.5 billion, equivalent to about two-thirds of New Zealand’s Gross Domestic Product.
As of March 2016, it was $257.1 billion (or $294.6 billion including derivatives), equivalent to 102% of New Zealand's Gross Domestic Product despite all of the asset sales and takeovers.
Source: Statistics New Zealand as follows: International investment position (IIP) (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP088AA; External lending and debt by sector and relationship (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP078AA; International non-equity financial instruments by sector (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP074AA;
New Zealand's A&L - Level 3 Components (Discontinued March 2000) (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series IIP007AA; GDP(P), Nominal, Actual, Total (Annual-Mar) – InfoShare series SNE038AA.
* Non-official estimates provided by Statistics New Zealand with the following caveats:
Sector estimates are based on current available data sources Annual Enterprise Survey (AES) uses specific line-codes which are not normally released at this level Non-household sector equity estimates have not been fully analysed - therefore we expect some revisions when this is completed Extended savings data from the Household Economic Survey (HES) - Household Net Worth Survey due to be released next year will be confronted with current estimates and may result in revisions.
Value is calculated by the author by removing double counting due to enterprises themselves owning shares, and this can be approximate only.
Graphs to accompany the Key Facts information shown below are available to download in Microsoft PowerPoint (.PPT) or Adobe Acrobat (.PDF) format.
Each page of the Adobe Acrobat version has a small square in the top left corner. Hovering the mouse over this square shows the source of the information in more detail.
Western Food Science Is Broken & We’re All Guinea Pigs In A Failed Decades-Long Diet Experiment March 11 2017 | From: Gizmodo / Vice / Various
There could be a future where we eat incredible, sustainable, engineered foods - 3D-printed or lab-grown meals, chemically optimized to unleash the perfect combination of flavor and nutrients to fit our bodies and our tastes.
Better tasting hot dogs with harmful fats removed! Healthier snacks with accurate expiration dates! Or, we can continue on our present path, and Americans will keep eating the same foods we always have, including foods that make us sick and obese.
If the United States would like a say in the future of food, the government and the people need to start paying attention to our food scientists.
Take Karen Schaich, a Rutgers food science professor who studies the very nature of how food ages. Schaich observes how common foods like tortilla chips and peanut butter go rancid, and believes she’s found processes that cause food to spoil faster than we think. But she struggles to get this important research funded.
"Fiber is a terrible name - by definition its name says that we don’t know what it is. That’s crazy!”
She’s not the only one - American food science itself is struggling, and for more reasons than funding alone. We have food science programs, but some of the food scientists that I spoke with find it difficult to attract the funding needed to innovate and come up with novel solutions to food science and nutrition issues through basic research.
Others left publicly-funded food science for greener pastures in private industry.
Not all American food science is suffering, E. Allen Foegeding, professor at the North Carolina State Department of Food, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, told Gizmodo - he noted that the fields of sustainability, microbiology and food safety have seen lots of attention.
Instead, what’s lagging is what some of the folks I spoke with called food innovation, or interdisciplinary research combining the fields of physics, chemistry and engineering to understand food down to its molecules to create solutions for the future.
For example: cows emit greenhouse gases, so let’s lab-grow a replacement beef. Consumers don’t want to eat trans fat, so let’s engineer a healthier alternative that has the same physical properties.
Right now, the alphabet soup of federal agencies (NIH, NSF, and USDA through NIFA) and private funding sources supporting food science research in the United States don’t have a shared stated goal or direction. And while many startups are trying to be innovative, private innovation prevents the spread of knowledge for other scientists to build on.
"The situation in the US is sad,”said Alejandro Marangoni, professor in food science at the University of Guelph in Canada.
Marangoni should know - his Canadian lab innovates with the structure of fats and oils, replacing unhealthy fats with oil and cellulose-based gels in products like hot dogs, or imaging milk fat using high-powered microscopes.
Sure, the United States has scientists doing work like Marangoni’s, but it doesn’t seem to him and scientists like him that American food research has a central, forward-looking goal.
"We need more of that type of conversation at the country level and decide where we need to be putting our money to help society move forward,” said Foegeding.
Today, food science funding is patched together. Federal funding - your taxpayer mon - goes mainly to nutritional, agricultural and food safety research, leaving a void for those interested in innovation.
Scientists start looking for funding through the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture, said John Coupland, professor at Penn State and president of the Institute of Food Technologists, but “the hit rates for these grants are not good,” he added.
NIFA grants typically go for several hundred thousand dollars a piece, enough to take on a few Ph.D students and pay for travel, but mostly relate to agriculture in some way, as opposed to, say, discovering all of the biological components of milk. Nutrition studies, meanwhile, might receive National Institute of Health grants, also for a few hundred thousand dollars.
"The NIH doesn’t consider pure food research in their domain unless you’re doing something clinical,” that is, the research must act as a cure to some disease, said Marangoni. “The NSF doesn’t want to see food research because that’s USDA stuff.”
I contacted NIFA asking where someone interested in researching food after it’s already been picked from the soil, for reasons other than nutrition, might apply for public funding. The agency has not yet responded to the inquiry.
If you check out nutrition papers, you’ll typically find large-scale studies where scientists ask a lot of people to check what they remember eating off of a list.
Few, though an increasing number of studies, break food down to its individual chemicals and observe how those molecules interact with our guts, or with with the bacteria living inside them.
Right now, what we know about food chemistry, individual molecules and how to harness them is limited and lagging.
“What does an apple truly look like as it moves through you?” asked professor David Mills from the University of California, Davis’ Food Science and Technology department.
“All the complex sugar structures aren’t known. Fiber is a terrible name,” since there are far more diverse molecules than the name alone implies.
“By definition its name says that we don’t know what it is. That’s crazy!”
“You can procure funding, but need to sneak it through. You’ll hide what you’re actually researching inside a proposal for research you’re not really going after.”
The NSF does offer grants for food scientists interested in starting a business: The Small Business Innovation Research’s (SBIR) Biological Technologies program gives $225,000 in seed funding to researchers interested in creating a new food-based technology.
Such grants have been used to fund mainly food safety or agricultural technology startups, said Ruth Shuman, SBIR program director, but there’s no reason that folks interested in using technology to find a new process to alter food and its chemistry can’t apply, she said: “If people started sending ideas for developing new foods, I would be happy to review those proposals.”
But most basic science doesn’t progress with a marketable product in mind. When scientists are trying to make a cookie that’s better than all cookies, that’s healthier on a molecular level, tastier, and cheaper all at the same time, sometimes they want to do it for the better of all of us people and society, rather than personal gain.
Of course, a scientist can enter a field with the eventual goal of making a ton of money on an end product, but for most basic research, there’s years of lab work shared with and reviewed by other scientists before a product hits the market. Still, industry is exactly where scientists head for funding help.
Since NIFA funding alone just isn’t enough to generate what universities like to see, Coupland said, “you look around for other sources. It might be a straight out industry contract.”
By doing research for the industry, researchers can use the extra money to buy shiny new equipment and keep their lab up-to-date.
The researchers I spoke to have considered or used money from companies like General Mills or Nabisco to buy new lab equipment like centrifuges and high-performance liquid chromatography systems for their university research.
“That leaves you in a position where you can procure that funding but need to sneak it through,” said Irwin Adam Eydelnant, a biomedical engineer who has since started his own privately-funded company, the Future Food Studio. “You’ll hide what you’re actually researching inside a proposal for research you’re not really going after.”
Even those industry contacts don’t always make ends meet. Schaich’s food science lab at Rutgers University in New Jersey has long relied on industry arrangements to study the way that fats and oils change over time.
Today, her lab is aging, and not like a high-end sharp cheddar. Yellowing letters taped to the wall show dates from thirty years ago. The machinery looks straight out of a 1980s video arcade. Even a bag of potato chips labeled for research purposes only displays an outdated Lays’ logo.
As food scientists express their frustration procuring funds for basic research, this broken system is having a tangible impact on America’s international standing - we don’t seem to be keeping up.
In 2016, American institutions published 85 articles out of 177 submitted to the fairly well-cited journal Food Chemistry, compared to China’s 430 published, 1754 submitted, Spain’s 148 published, 338 submitted, and Italy’s 125 published, 254 submitted, according to documents obtained by Gizmodo.
A similar pattern pops up in a moderate-impact journal Food Research International: the United States published 26 out of 77 submitted articles, compared to China’s 33 out of 662, Brazil’s 73 out of 378, and Spain’s 43 out of 235. Statistical analyses weren’t provided.
Of course, food scientists don’t just publish in food science journals,” said Coupland. “Many food scientists work on food as their primary job but are plugged into other fields… where they’re using the same techniques and the same language,” like genetics or alternative fuel sources.
Still, the American scientists interviewed for this article almost all spoke jealously of Marangoni’s large lipid lab, or of Wageningen University, the Netherlands’ food science Mecca.
How did things get to be this way? When Schaich began as a food scientist over 40 years ago, the industry-university relationship felt like a partnership.
She suspects a combination of many of the pitfalls of capitalism brought a sea change - for instance, large tobacco companies like Philip Morris and R. J. Reynolds buying or merging with food companies in the 1980s, or Reagan-era trickle down economics.
She noticed the General Foods research center close in the 1990s, and thought the takeovers and changing economic policies encouraged these companies to focus on profit over innovation.
“I have former students working at Mondelez,” once owned by Phillip Morris, “and what was basic research that brought development of a lot of the low fat cookies, Cool Whip and a lot of things we take for granted are not being done at all,” she said. “They’re just monitoring existing product.”
Now, lots of food companies rely on small entrepreneurs to innovate, and then buy up the new products, she said.
Eydelnant and others thought that the startup model could actually put America at the forefront of food innovation. Memphis Meats, for example, is a Bay Area startup trying to grow meat in a lab to prevent animal slaughter.
Private funding allows a product to hit the shelves faster and allows the company to stay nimble said Uma Valeti, Memphis Meat’s CEO and cofounder. Taxpayer-funded research lays the groundwork, while private industry can provide new ideas. He thinks things are working better that way, too.
“Currently, we feel that private funding is the best option for producing high-quality research that leads to better food for everyone,” he said to Gizmodo in an email.
But as previously noted,startups need to make money. Privately-funded research won’t necessarily better society or expand the general knowledge base, as companies patent their products or maintain industry recipe and formulation secrets like Coca Cola’s flavor or KFC’s spice combination.
Some researchers think America needs something akin to a food moonsh - a major reprioritization of our country’s food science money to focus on actually understanding all of the chemicals in food, how we taste them, and how they interact with our bodies.
This could lead to food innovations that actually prevent disease.
“When you consider the negative impact food can have on our health, how can this not be an national priority?” asked Mills.
Why, he asked, do doctors prescribe Lipitor to lower bad cholesterol, when there’s the potential to simply personalize and alter our diets so cholesterol isn’t high in the first place?
And, imagine if private companies shared their food science secrets with the world? We might have a true understanding about how our own bodies work and how to eat delicious, affordable, optimized food.
Many companies are trying to do that, but that doesn’t seem to be stopping us from trashing our bodies or being spoon-fed politically and industry-motivated nutritional recommendations, taking on shady fad diets or stuffing ourselves with vitamins that don’t work.
Ultimately, we probably all need to change our mindset about food science.
“There’s a sense that food should be natural and anything that makes food not natural, and physics and chemistry don’t sound natural, that’s a bad thing to do,” speculated Coupland.
“Food technology” as I discuss here “won’t attract attention from big-name journals like Science, Nature or even The Journal of Food Science.”
Coupland would at least like to find ways to get universities to value this type of forward-looking research more.
“And more money would be nice.”
We’re All Guinea Pigs In A Failed Decades-Long Diet Experiment
"The change in dietary advice to promote low-fat foods is perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history."
Let's say you want to lose some weight. Which of these foods would you choose: A skim-milk latte, or the same drink with whole milk? A low-cal breakfast bar or steak and eggs? A salad tossed in light dressing or the same salad doused with butter milk ranch?
If you're like most people, you either aren't sure how to answer, or you're very sure - but very wrong. And it's not your fault. It's the fault, experts say, of decades of flawed or misleading nutrition advice - advice that was never based on solid science.
The US Department of Agriculture, along with the agency that is now called Health and Human Services, first released a set of national dietary guidelines back in 1980. That 20-page booklet trained its focus primarily on three health villains: fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol.
"The science that these guidelines were based on was wrong," Robert Lustig, a neuro-endocrinologist at the University of California, San Francisco, told Tonic. In particular, the idea that cutting fat from a person's diet would offer some health benefit was never backed by hard evidence, Lustig said.
Just this week, some of Lustig's colleagues at UCSF released an incendiary report revealing that in the 1960s, sugar industry lobbyists funded research that linked heart disease to fat and cholesterol while downplaying evidence that sugar was the real killer.
Nina Teicholz, a science journalist and author of the The Big Fat Surprise, said a lot of the early anti-fat push came from the American Heart Association (AHA), which based its anti-fat stance on the fact that fat is roughly twice as calorie-dense as protein and carbohydrates.
"This advice to avoid fat allowed the food industry to go hog-wild promoting low-fat, carb-heavy foods as 'light' or 'healthy,' and that's been a disaster for public health," Lustig said.
"They had no clinical data to show that a low-fat diet alone would help with obesity or heart disease," Teicholz told Tonic.
But because fat was high in calories, they adopted this anti-fat position, and the government followed their lead. Surely the 1960s research rigged by the Sugar Association, which was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, added to our collective fat fears.
By the 1990s, when Teicholz says the epidemiological data started piling up to show that a low-fat, high-carb diet did not help with weight loss or heart disease - calories be damned - much of the damage was already done.
The US public was deep in what nutrition experts sometimes call the "Snackwell phenomenon" - a devotion to low-fat and low-calorie processed snack foods, which people pounded by the bagful because they believed them to be healthy.
The stats back him up. Since the US government first published a set of national nutrition guidelines in 1980, rates of obesity and related diseases like diabetes have more than doubled.
"Childhood diabetes was basically unheard of, and now it's an epidemic," Lustig said.
Overseas, national health authorities followed America's lead on fat. The results have been similarly grim. Earlier this year, a UK nonprofit called the National ObesityForum (NOF) published a blistering condemnation of its government's diet and nutrition policies.
In its report, the NOF argues that advice to cut back on fat and cholesterol is "the root cause" of Britain's skyrocketing rates of obesity and diabetes. Speaking shortly after the report's publication, Aseem Malhotra, a British cardiologist who consulted on the NOF report, said;
"The change in dietary advice to promote low-fat foods is perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history.
Along with ripping its government's "failed policies," the NOF report called for a"complete overhaul of dietary advice and public health messaging."
In a recent editorial appearing in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, researcher Zoe Harcombe from the University of the West of Scotland explains that obesity rates among British men and women rose from 2.7 percent in 1972 to 23 percent and 26 percent, respectively, by 1999.
"There are only three macronutrients," Harcombe told Tonic, "protein, fat, and carbohydrates."
Nearly everything you eat or drink contains one or more of these. And if you followed the government's advice to eat less fat, it's inevitable that your carb consumption would shoot up, she said. That's just what happened at a population level during the 1980s and 90s.
A whole generation of health professionals accepted - and passed on to their patients - the government's guidance to avoid fat and cholesterol. Many still do.
To give credit where credit is due: The latest iteration of the US government's dietary guidelines no longer makes a point of capping total fat and cholesterol intakes. But this omission is more a furtive walking back of bad advice than a public acknowledgment of error, Teicholz said. Worse:
"When you look at the actual nutritional modeling that the government uses to inform its feeding programs, such as the National School Lunch program, they are all still low in fat," she said.
Another example of the government's persistent crusade against fat: The 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans still push low-fat dairy over full fat - a recommendation the latest research doesn't support.
"Studies have not shown benefits of low-fat dairy over full-fat for weight loss, especially if the fat calories are replaced with sugar," Walter Willett, chair of nutrition at Harvard School of Public Health, told Tonic.
"If anything, the evidence goes the other way."
Willett is quick to point out that he doesn't consider whole milk and full-fat cheese "health foods."
Nuts, for example, are a healthier source of fat, he said. But if you're going to sip some milk or eat some yogurt, the evidence suggests your waistline may be better off with the full-fat stuff - probably because it's more filling and so curbs excessive eating.
Teicholz said it's hard to overstate the effect of national health authorities' pro-carb, anti-fat stance. A whole generation of health professionals accepted - and passed on to their patients - the government's guidance to avoid fat and cholesterol. Many still do.
"Both professional and institutional credibility are at stake," she said when asked why more doctors and policymakers aren't making noise about the harms caused by the government's dietary guidance.
She also mentioned food industry interests, the potential for "massive class-action lawsuits," and the shame of copping to nearly a half-century of bad diet advice as deterrents for USDA and other health authorities when it comes to admitting they were wrong.
In the United Kingdom, the disconnect between nutrition science and government dietary policy has opened rifts within the public health community. Since its report's publication, the National Obesity Forum has lost four of its senior members, and the fallout has sparked a national debate among doctors, nutrition scientists, and policy makers over what sorts of food truly belong in a healthy diet.
"Our previous reports had garnered little interest, so we had no way of knowing this one would go interplanetary," David Haslam, chair of the National Obesity Forum and a professor of obesity sciences at Robert Gordon University, told Tonic.
Repeating the advice put forward in his organization's report, Haslam said he firmly believes public health would be greatly improved if we all just ate fewer refined carbohydra - stuff like baked goods, chips, breakfast cereals, and other packaged goods - and instead ate more "natural foods" regardless of their macronutrient content.
This last point - that we should all pay less attention to a food's nutrient makeup - is an important one. Harvard's Willett said focusing only on a food's specific macro and micronutrient content is confusing, and not a good way to evaluate an item's health impacts.
Jenny Knight, 30, is a speech therapist and mother of two in Norman, Oklahoma. "I've struggled with my weight since I was eight years old," Knight told VICE. At 5-foot-9 and close to 250 pounds, she's obese by any definition.
Like many heavy Americans, Knight has experimented with a hundred different diets that, when you boil them down, all advocate for cutting fat or calories in order to lose weight. Sooner or later, all of them failed her.
"Even when they were working, it was all about willpower," she said. "I'd be so hungry I'd be shaking, and eventually I wouldn't be able to keep that up anymore, and I'd gain all the weight back."
But since February, Knight has been on a fat-centric diet championed by David Ludwig, a professor of nutrition at Harvard.
Speaking to Tonic, Ludwig said that cutting fat from your diet in favor of processed carbs can trigger a cascade of unhealthy metabolic shifts that fuel diseases like diabetes and cause your body's fat cells to lock in - rather than dump - their energy.
All this results in "out-of-control" hunger, he said. Cutting more calories from your diet just adds fuel to that fire.
His plan, which he lays out in his book Always Hungry?, champions a shift away from carb-heavy processed food in favor of a diet heavy in fats from nuts, full-fat dairy, natural oils, and other whole foods.
So far, Knight has lost 32 pounds on Ludwig's plan. But it's not just the lost weight that has her feeling optimistic.
"This is the only diet I've ever tried that feels effortless - just no willpower required," she said. "It honestly feels decadent to eat things like dark chocolate or peanut butter or coconut milk, and I'm not hungry like I used to be."
Ludwig's diet may or may not be the answer to all our weight-loss prayers.
But one thing is clear: Dietary fat was never the boogeyman health authorities made it out to be.
"I think most of us would be 90 percent of the way to a really healthy diet if we just cut out processed foods," UCSF's Lustig said. "We wouldn't need diet guidelines if we ate real food."
Ontario Pulls Plug On 36,000 Rural ‘Smart’ Meters: Is Big Energy Imploding?
& This Former Techie Owes His Fortune To Electronic Devices - Now He Thinks They're Dangerous March 11 2017 | From: CollectiveEvolution / MotherJones / Various
Last night I watched The Big Short - maybe the most important Hollywood film in years. This true story is a powerful and eloquent invitation to wake up to the sheer depravity at the core of the system of commerce.
The fact that the film got nominated for 5 Oscars including Best Picture is a huge sign that there are way more people waking up than we ever thought. The wrongs may not be getting righted as quickly as we’d like, but it is happening.
The reality of this shift is clearly evidenced by this news last week from Ontario. After years of obvious problems, Hydro One finally admitted that rural ‘smart’ meters do not work, and has decided to pull the plug on 36,000 of them - to start. We will see more utilities begin to do likewise.
[UPDATE: BC Hydro just announced plans to remove 88,000 meters suspected of failure.]
Costing ratepayers billions, smart meters are actually designed to unlawfully harvest detailed data of the in-home activities of occupants without their knowledge or consent.
"“Astonishing,” was the reaction from Lanark-area MPP Randy Hillier, who has been deluged with complaints about Hydro One billing and smart-meter suspicions.
I’ve been banging my head against the wall for the last five years, saying we’ve got problems with smart meters in rural Ontario.”
Since first being elected in 2007, no single issue has attracted as much attention in his riding, he said.
For the purpose of clarification: at this time Hydro One is not planning to uninstall smart meters and replace with analogs - but rather to manually read rural customers’ meters quarterly, and estimate the months in between, because the wireless reporting is simply not working.
More than 10,000 billing complaints have been filed with the Ontario Ombudsman, and the Auditor General of Ontario released a scathing report, calling out the smart metering program as a total flop.
Hydro One was the first major utility in Canada to deploy so-called ‘smart’ meters upon an unsuspecting customer base. The price tag for rollout, paid for by the people of Ontario, was $2 billion - which was $900M over budget.
Go Green, or Go Greed?
For those new to this topic, here’s the skinny. Smart utility meters are being deployed worldwide under the banner of climate action.
But they typically increase energy usage, and a high-level industry executive has admitted that the data collected by the surreptitious devices will be worth “a lot more” than the electricity itself.
Portland State University recently published a brilliant report on the morally-bankrupt surveillance agenda behind smart meters. The industry-gutting report is titled “The Neoliberal Politics of ‘Smart’: Electricity Consumption, Household Monitoring, and the Enterprise Form,” and excerpts can be read at Smart Grid Awareness here.
Customers are not being informed how their constitutional rights are being violated for the purposes of a for-profit home surveillance network. Nor how this technology has caused thousands of fires which have resulted in several deaths. Nor how our bodies are being affected by pulsed microwave radiation exponentially stronger than cell phones, as shown in Take Back Your Power.
If there wasn’t an avalanche of facts to back all of this up, it might sound too unbelievable to be true. But we live in strange times.
We Can Handle The Truth
Just like the banking system, the energy system has likewise become rotten to the core. To change both will require a complete overhaul and the embrace of a challenge to our comfort zone.
It is both harrowing and exciting for one to discover that there are major societal programs which are simply manufactured lies fueled by the idea of lack. That there’s not enough energy, food, resources, money. In reality, there is enough for all life to survive - and to thrive. It is provable fact that these truths have been suppressed.
There is a war on energy. When we understand the level of corruption involved, the implications are enormous. And we must act to solve this problem.
I believe that the suppression of solutions is a dam ready to burst. And I’m optimistic of our passing through this dark night successfully, as we are learning to connect and serve the higher good. There is really no other choice.
This Former Techie Owes His Fortune To Electronic Devices - Now He Thinks They're Dangerous
Silicon Valley isn't the best place to be hypersensitive to electromagnetic fields.
Peter Sullivan and I are driving around Palo Alto, California, in his black Tesla Roadster when the clicking begins. The $2,500 German-made instrument resting in my lap is picking up electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from a nearby cell tower.
As we follow a procession of BMWs and Priuses into the parking lot of Henry M. Gunn High School, the clicking crescendos into a roar of static. "I can feel it right here," Sullivan says, wincing as he massages his forehead. The last time he visited the tower, he tells me, it took him three days to recover.
Sullivan is among the estimated 3 percent of people in California who claim they are highly sensitive to EMFs, the electromagnetic radiation emitted by wireless routers, cellphones, and countless other modern accouterments.
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome - famously suffered by the brother of Jimmie McGill, the lead character on AMC's Better Call Saul - is not a formally recognized medical condition in most countries and it has little basis in mainstream science. Dozens of peer-reviewed studies have essentially concluded that the problem is in peoples' heads.
That's what Sullivan used to think, too. A Stanford computer science major who has worked as a software designer for Excite, Silicon Graphics, and Netflix, he paid little mind to EMFs, which he once viewed as harmless and inevitable. His wife joined Google early on and now serves as its chief culture officer - founder Sergey Brin sometimes drops by the couple's home sporting Google Glass.
"I thought that anybody that talked about the health effects of EMFs was a complete idiot. I thought that they just were not science-y," Sullivan recalls. But then he got sick.
Around 2005, Sullivan started having trouble sleeping. He lost weight precipitously and struggled to maintain focus. After his top-flight Stanford doctors failed to figure out what was wrong with him, he tried every alternative remedy on the books, from cutting out gluten to taking chelating agents to purge his body of heavy metals.
Nothing really worked. He noticed, however, that he felt weird after talking on a cellphone or plugging into a laptop charger. So like any good health hacker, he kept debugging.
A feng shui consultant in Silicon Valley knew a guy in Los Angeles who called himself a "building biologist" and had reputedly worked wonders for Richard Gere.
Sullivan flew the guy up to his $6 million home in a leafy Los Altos neighborhood and watched with interest as the man probed the baseboards of Sullivan's newly renovated bedrooms, bulky instruments flashing and buzzing.
The consultant's verdict: Sullivan's house was an EMF disaster zone. The wifi and cordless phones would have to go. He'd need to rip out the walls and change everything.
This was a bit like asking a winemaker to quit drinking or advising an auto exec to commute on a fixie. Sullivan took things slow at first, installing some metal shielding around the electrical conduits in his downtown Los Altos office to block a portion of the radiation.
He subsequently found that a 30-minute catnap in his office left him more replenished than a whole night's sleep at home, so he began napping there regularly. One day when he felt like the EMFs in his home were really messing with him, he drove up to a hiking trail in the Los Altos hills and slept in the parking lot.
By the time I met Sullivan in person, one bright day this past spring, he had regained the lost weight and was feeling good. A former Navy pilot who used to land fighter jets on aircraft carriers, Sullivan still has a military crispness in his posture and elocution.
Having recently retired from tech at age 40, he now devotes most of his time to exposing the hazards of EMFs. He has even brought up the matter with a few high-ranking friends at Google.
"This is the new smoking," he recalls telling them. "It's just like the beginning days, when the evidence is there and people aren't catching on."
Many controlled studies do, in fact, show that people who claim to suffer from electromagnetic hypersensitivity experience symptoms when exposed to electromagnetic fields.
But if those same people are unaware that the EMFs are present, the correlation between the symptoms and the exposure evaporates.
The leading explanation is what's known as the "nocebo" effect - people feel sick when exposed to something they believe is bad for them.
Case in point: In 2010, residents of the town of Fourways, South Africa, successfully petitioned for a cellphone tower to be removed due to a rash of illness in the area. It was later revealed that the tower wasn't operational during the period of the complaints.
A $25 million study released in May by the National Toxicology Program found that male rats exposed to radio-frequency radiation, the kind emitted by cellphones, were more likely to develop two forms of cancer - although the findings were controversial.
Joel Moskowitz, the director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California-Berkeley and a believer in electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome, argues that the wireless industry has used its financial clout to suppress essential health research.
"This is very much like tobacco back in the 1950s," he concurs. "The industry has co-opted many researchers and has stopped funding many people who were finding evidence of harm."
Sullivan, who majored in psychology as an undergraduate, refuses to believe that he's just being neurotic. Through his foundation, Clear Light Ventures, he has given about $1 million to anti-EMF advocacy groups and researchers that the wireless industry won't touch.
They include retired Washington State University biochemistry professor Martin Pall, who has proposed a biological mechanism for EHS, and Harvard neurology professor Martha Herbert, who has suggested there could be links between EMFs and autism.
Laura Torres, who worked with Sullivan in the early 1990s as a product manager at Silicon Graphics, remembers him as a guy who "totally thinks outside the box."
He created software to log customer service calls, then a novel invention and a big-time saver for the company's tech support team. "He really takes a creative approach to solving problems, which I think is what he is doing with this EMF thing," she says.
Sullivan says his anti-EMF advocacy should not be viewed as an affront to his fellow techies:
"We are hoping that the industry, instead of being like tobacco and going through denial, will be more like the automotive industry and say, 'Okay, we are just going to keep improving safety. We will sell you more stuff that is safer and lower power.' And it will be a win for everybody."
During my visit, Sullivan walks me through his home's $100,000 worth of EMF-proofing. In his wood-paneled home office he points out a $1,000 Alan Maher technical ground, a device that helps channel electrical noise away from power outlets, and a plug-in Stetzer filter, which makes "a nice clean sine wave in your electricity," as my host puts it.
He flips a desktop switch to cut off power to his MacBook - he rarely works on it while it's charging. He made an exception last night after the battery died and says he ended up feeling wired and jittery as a result.
We step outside and through a gate, crunching over groundcover to the shingled exterior of his first-floor bedroom. Sheets of black mesh hang from a nearby fence to block a neighbor's wifi signal. A nearby power line is wrapped in a material that dissipates certain electrical frequencies as friction, like a string dampener on a tennis racquet.
Sullivan has installed a switch by his bed that lets him shut off his home's electricity while he sleeps.
"Our bedroom is like camping!" he says proudly. "We have all the luxury of being inside, but none of the EMFs."
Indoors on a kitchen stool his wife, Stacy, is hunched over a laptop plugged into an ethernet cable. "She's in wireless jail," Sullivan jokes.
"I used to be able to just do this wherever I wanted to work," she responds wistfully. "But it's okay."
In terms of protection, this residence doesn't even compare with another one Sullivan owns in the Los Altos hills. We hop in his Tesla (modified to shield him from its EMFs) and drive there. Originally built in the early 1900s as a hunting lodge, it had been renovated into a shrine to modernism by an HP executive.
Sullivan bought it a few years ago and converted it into what he calls a "model healthy home." He's hoping its shielded environment will help me to understand what sudden exposure to EMFs feels like.
In an empty upstairs bedroom that Sullivan sometimes uses as an office, a graphite paint called WiShield coats the walls. Clear, EMF-blocking films cover the windows. Conductive tape on the floor carries any electrical current to a high-frequency ground in the closet. Sullivan switches on his EMF meter: zero. "I thrive on it!" he says. "I get my best work done here."
He hands me a bottle of oxygenated water and instructs me to down it. This will supposedly unclump my blood, heightening my EMF sensitivity. Rummaging through the closet, he emerges with an air pump from his son's aquarium. He has discovered that this pump maxes out his instruments, producing "a fucking nightmare magnetic field."
He holds it a couple of feet away from me and switches it on. I feel a small cramp in my stomach.
Maybe Sullivan was onto something. After all, birds and sea turtles use Earth's magnetic fields to navigate, and foxes seem able to rely on them to detect prey.
Then again, maybe all I'd felt was the nocebo effect. Sullivan suggested that I get to the bottom of it by spending a night at the shielded house. I didn't feel the need, I told him, but I understood why he might.
"When I wake up, it just feels like you can do anything," he'd assured me. "You just feel completely different, like your world has changed."
Vault 7 Bombshell Just Vindicated Every Conspiracy Theorist: The CIA Can Spy On Anyone Through TVs, iPhones, Smart Phones And Windows PCs + Former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino Set To Release New Info On Obama: “It’s Going To Blow Wide Open This Week” & Clinton Campaign Manager Robby Mook Confirms He Knew About Wiretaps March 10 2017 | From: NaturalNews / TheDaily Sheeple / Various
“Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized “zero day” exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation.
This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive."
““Year Zero” introduces the scope and direction of the CIA’s global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of “zero day” weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, include Apple’s iPhone, Google’s Android and Microsoft’s Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones."
Smart Phones, Smart TVs and iPhones Can All be Turned Into Surveillance Microphones
In essence, the CIA developed malware exploits that could defeat almost any mobile devices (iPhones, Android, Blackberry, etc.) or personal computer (Apple, Windows and Google devices).
Mobile devices can be turned into remote surveillance microphones that listen to everything you say and upload the audio to the CIA.
“The CIA’s Mobile Devices Branch (MDB) developed numerous attacks to remotely hack and control popular smart phones. Infected phones can be instructed to send the CIA the user’s geolocation, audio and text communications as well as covertly activate the phone’s camera and microphone,” explains WikiLeaks.
Samsung smart TVs can also be transformed into spy microphones, even when they appear to be turned off. This is accomplished by a CIA exploit known as “Weeping Angel.” As WikiLeaks explains:
“Weeping Angel places the target TV in a ‘Fake-Off’ mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In ‘Fake-Off’ mode the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server.".
In essence, the Vault 7 document dump just proved every “conspiracy theorist” to be correct about government spying through TVs and other devices.
Seizing Control Over Vehicles to Carry Out “Undetectable Assassinations” of Vehicle Occupants
In addition to hacking computers and mobile devices, the CIA was also working on ways to remotely control targeted vehicles, turning them into “assassination machines” which could be directed to kill the occupants by driving into obstacles at high speed, for example. As WikiLeaks explains:
“As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks. The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations."
Encryption Apps Rendered Obsolete by CIA “Zero Day” Exploits
In what will surely be a shock to nearly everyone, the CIA also developed 24 “weaponized” exploits for Android devices that allow it to completely bypass the encryption of popular apps:
“These techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the “smart” phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied."
In addition, the Vault 7 documents contained over 22,000 routable IP addresses in the United States that were redacted before final release. These IP addresses are believed to correspond to CIA targets, CIA listening post servers and test systems.
Former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino Set To Release New Info On Obama: “It’s Going To Blow Wide Open This Week”
Former Obama Secret Service agent Dan Bongino suggests there’s a lot more to the story when it comes to ObamaGate and wiretapping.
Having been on the Presidential Protection Detail, Bongino is intimately familiar with how Presidents (he worked for George W. Bush and Barack Obama) handle their daily business. He has been in the room and heard it all.
“Today Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager told Fox he had knowledge of wiretaps being used during the campaign but he suggested they were targeted at Russian officials, not directly at Trump Tower.”
It’s funny to watch Democrats split hairs as they try to dance around the wiretapping scandal.
It’s hard to believe that Mook really thought the wiretaps were meant for Russian officials when the entire reason for the wiretaps was to take down Trump – the man running against his boss, Hillary.
Or perhaps Mook is telling the truth since he believes Trump is a secret agent working on behalf of the Russian government which would make him technically a Russian official. See what I did there?
Newly Published Retrospective Study Nails Aluminum In Vaccines As Unsafe
+ Mercury In Vaccines May Be Up To 50 Times More Toxic To The Brain Than Mercury In Fish March 10 2017 | From: ActivistPost / NaturalNews / Various
Neil Z Miller is a medical research journalist, who’s been researching vaccines and vaccinology science for 25 years.
Recently, Neil had his retrospective study about aluminum, aka aluminium, “Aluminum in Childhood Vaccines Is Unsafe” published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons,Volume 21, Number 4.
Neil emailed me a pdf file of that outstanding paper, which I think everyone who is disturbed about vaccines, especially in the current climate of ‘science denial’ and ‘science off the rails’ needs to know:
Aluminum is a debilitating neurotoxin. Research going back decades has pointed out aluminum’s health harms, plus the need to do something about removing it from medicine, but to no avail.
Neil points out in the retrospective study paper (p. 115):
“In the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, published in the Federal Register, aluminum toxicity levels are revealed:
WARNING: This product contains aluminum that may be toxic...
Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates, who receive [injections] of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 mcg per kilogram of body weight per day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates.
This means that for a 6-pound baby with impaired kidney function, 11-14 mcg of injected aluminum would be toxic. The hepatitis B vaccine given at birth contains 250 mcg of aluminum - 20 times higher than safety levels indicated for premies.
Babies weigh around 12 pounds at two months of age when they are injected with 1,225 mcg of aluminum from their CDC-recommended vaccines - 50 times higher than safety levels for premies."
Two serious health suggestions jump out of the above paragraphs:
Premature birth babies (Premies) should not be vaccinated!
Aluminum toxicity is a foregone conclusion due to the amounts of aluminum infants and toddlers receive as per the CDC’s unwise vaccine schedule!
I’d like to add a third: Pretest all prospective vaccinees, regardless of age, for mitochondrial DNA proclivities/changes and kidney function in order to avoid vaccine reactions. That’s the least the medical profession can do if it’s going to keep pushing vaccines.
Not all human bodies can tolerate CDC/FDA’s “one size fits all” regimen of toxic chemical vaccines, something no one in Big Pharma, CDC and FDA apparently wants to consider and factor into mandatory vaccination schedules or individual state’s vaccination laws, e.g., California’s SB277.
According to Figure 2 on page 110, the “Age-Specific and Cumulative Aluminum Exposure by 18 Months of Age” in micrograms is as follows:
At Birth 250 mcg
2 Months 1225 mcg
4 Months 975 mcg
6 Months 1000 mcg
12 Months 600 mcg
15 Months 625 mcg
18 Months 250 mcg
Grand Total of 4,925 mcg of aluminum by 18 months of age.
“Those amounts were taken from vaccine manufacturer’s product inserts and the CDC’s 2016 childhood vaccine schedule, per Neil Miller."
The above does not include the CDC’s recommended vaccines for pregnant women (Tdap vaccine), which also contains aluminum!
“Studies show that aluminum crosses the placenta and accumulates in fetal tissue.
Thus, millions of babies in utero, infants, and young children were injected with, and continue to receive, unnaturally high doses of neurotoxic substances - mercury and aluminum - long after unsuspecting parents were led to believe that vaccines were purified and made safe." Pg. 109
Probably the vaccine(s) with the most egregious amounts of aluminum are the HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccines given to pre-pubescent boys and girls. “Each dose in the three-dose series contains 500 mcg of aluminum,” [Pg. 110] making a total of 1500 mcg of aluminum for the three-shot series over six months!
One of the ‘scientific sleight-of-hand tricks’ HPV vaccine makers pulled off in safety trails was “(Vaccine safety trials for the HPV vaccine did not provide the control group with an inert substance or true placebo; the ‘control’ group was injected with aluminum.)” [Pg. 112]
Isn’t that FRAUDULENT scientific activity? Shouldn’t that be reason enough to remove that HPV vaccine from the market?
Regarding autism, Miller states;
“There is evidence that aluminum in vaccines may be linked to autism.
For example, the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry published data showing a highly significant positive linear correlation between the amount of aluminum infants receive from their vaccines and the rates of autism in several developed nations. (Pearson r = 0.89-0.94)” Pg. 112
Miller drives home an obvious scientific given regarding aluminum or any heavy/toxic metal, regarding absorption.
“Moreover, vaccines with aluminum adjuvants are injected into the body, bypassing protective barriers of the gastrointestinal tract and skin.
Absorption of aluminum by this mode is more efficient than through ingestion, increasing the likelihood of a toxic outcome.
The authors summarized their findings: ‘Evidence has now emerged showing that autism may in part result from early-life immune insults induced by environmental xenobiotics.
One of the most common xenobiotic with immune-stimulating as well as neurotoxic properties to which infants under two years of age are routinely exposed worldwide is the aluminum vaccine adjuvant’. Pg. 112
Further illustrating the above, Miller cites what Dr Martin Myers, director of the National Vaccine Program Office and host of the HHS-sponsored Workshop on Aluminum admitted:
“Perhaps the most important thing that I took away from the last meeting was that those of us who deal with vaccines have really very little applicable background with metals and toxicological research.” Pg. 113
If that be the case, then why do CDC and FDA monkey around with allowing ethylmercury and aluminum in any of four solutions into vaccines given to newborns, infants and toddlers, plus pregnant females? In essence, they admit they don’t know what they are doing!
But here’s the irony of ironies, in my opinion: Dr John Clements of the World Health Organization’s Expanded Programme on Immunization, had the chutzpah to proclaim;
“There are not easy and obvious substitutes to aluminum adjuvants….
The existing vaccines, if they change the adjuvant for any reason, would need to be resubmitted for clinical trials for safety and efficacy and it would take a great deal of time to do that.”
“Aluminum is not perceived, I believe, by the public as a dangerous metal. Therefore, we are in a much more comfortable wicket in terms of defending its presence in vaccines." p 64
Doesn’t that sound like arrogance probably combined with ignorance?
In the meantime, innocent children and families are made to pay the price of suffering vaccine adverse reactions!
Shouldn’t such a callous remark legally validate any parent’s refusal to have their darling babies harmed by vaccines?
Basically, what the World Health Organization representative, at least, seems to care about is clinical trials and time - not health safety issues!
If the Auto Industry Operated Like the Vaccine Industry...
This animation reveals the absurdity of the vaccine industry's legacy of harmful products and absolute legal immunity from liability.
There is a wealth of documentation Miller cites regarding aluminum, so I encourage readers to take the time and read his extremely well-written paper, plus save it. However, I think the following ought to impress upon parents the FDA’s double standards regarding science and aluminum:
“…FDA has known for many years that aluminum can be dangerous. For example, some infants require parenteral nourishment (administered by intravenous injection). All parenteral nutrition formulas contain aluminum.
According to the FDA, ‘when medication and nutrition are administered orally, the gastrointestinal tract acts as an efficient barrier to the absorption of aluminum, and relatively little ingested aluminum actually reaches body tissues.
However, parenterally administered drug products containing aluminum bypass the protective mechanism of the gastrointestinal tract and aluminum circulates and is deposited in human tissues’. Pg. 115
The above underscored information published in the 2006 Federal Register should be enough evidence, one would think, for Congress to act with regard to rescinding the 1986 “get out of jail free” card for vaccine makers and also for the U.S. Attorney General to prosecute those in the CDC and FDA at all levels of management for scientific fraud relative to vaccines and for establishing what amounts to mandatory chemical child abuse – the incomprehensible number of health-damaging neurotoxic vaccines and mandated vaccinations!
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.
It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.
The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."
- David Rockefeller, 1991 Bilderberg Meeting, Baden, Germany
Mercury In Vaccines May Be Up To 50 Times More Toxic To The Brain Than Mercury In Fish
The vaccine debate has been raging for decades now, with strongly held viewpoints on both sides of the spectrum. President Trump’s establishment of a commission to evaluate the science on vaccines, in conjunction with the gauntlet thrown down by Robert De Niro and Robert Kennedy Jr., who have offered $100,000 to anyone able to conclusively prove the safety of mercury (as thimerosal) in vaccines, has brought the issue into the spotlight once more.
The fact that mercury is a potent neurodevelopmental poison is not under dispute; scientists can all agree on that. In fact, though mercury had been used in vaccines for decades, in the mid-1990s, it was removed from most vaccines, after scientists recognized that even low exposure to organic mercury could result in severe harm to fetuses and young infants.
It was also around this time that the voices of parents’ whose children had been harmed by these vaccines really began to be heard. (Learn more about what concerned these parents at Vaccines.news)
Nonetheless, the vaccine industry and its mouthpiece, the CDC, continue to assert that it has been scientifically proven that “trace amounts” of mercury in vaccines in the form of thimerosal cannot cause harm.
Their argument is that while the mercury you would find in fish (methylmercury) is very dangerous, the mercury in thimerosal (ethylmercury) is entirely different, and can safely be jabbed into your kids multiple times.
A 2013 study by scientists from the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Brazil, published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology, investigated the toxicity of of ethylmercury vs. methylmercury. Though they stated that more research was needed into the subject, their findings were still interesting. (Keep up-to-date with the latest on mercury in vaccines at Thimerosal.news)
They noted that although methylmercury is considered dangerous in even tiny amounts, the World Health Organization (WHO) approves small doses of thimerosal in multiple vaccines taken repetitively during pregnancy and childhood.
With this in mind, they compared the toxicity and potential harm of both etHg (ethylmercury) and meHg (methylmercury).
Their study abstract states:
“In vitro studies comparing etHg with meHg demonstrate equivalent measured outcomes for cardiovascular, neural, and immune cells.”
And then it gets really interesting, because they note that since the two types of mercury have different toxicity profiles, in vivo testing indicated that, “in real-life scenarios, a simultaneous exposure to both etHg and meHg might result in enhanced neurotoxic effects in developing mammals.”
So, not only are both types of mercury equally bad, but exposure to both would compound their toxic effects. That means, for example, that exposure to ethylmercury in a vaccine, combined with exposure to methylmercury in a tuna fish sandwich, would result in even greater harm.
Lisa Sykes, writing for Trace Amounts, raises some additional concerns about the mercury in vaccines. She notes that as bad as consuming mercury in fish is, that mercury is passing through the body’s digestive system, meaning that you end up absorbing far less of it.
On the other hand, the mercury in vaccines is injected directly into the body, entering the bloodstream, and from there quickly passing directly into the tissue. The body is left defenseless against this direct attack.
Babies in their mothers’ wombs are even more vulnerable, since mercury passes the placental barrier straight to the fetus. The baby is therefore exposed to huge amounts of mercury at a time of critical neurological development.
Vaxxed Producer - We Are Killing Our Children
Sykes also points out that unused vaccines that contain thimerosal are considered hazardous waste, and must by law be disposed of in steel drums.
No such stipulation applies to fish, even fish with high mercury content. That alone indicates clearly that the mercury in vaccines is by no means harmless.
And just how much mercury is there in vaccines? The vaccine industry always references “trace” amounts, downplaying the issue to make any concerns seem trivial.
The reality, however, as reported by TruthWiki, is that while fish like whitefish or tuna only contains about 250 to 500 parts per billion (ppb) of mercury, just one flu shot contains 51,000 ppb.
The simple fact that the CDC and the vaccine industry insist on saying that these vaccines pose “no harm” in spite of the clear scientific evidence to the contrary is a clear indication that both are involved in a massive cover-up.
The fact is that vaccines are a $30 billion dollar a year industry, and those who benefit from it are going to do whatever they can to protect their own interests.
WikiLeaks’ Vault 7 Shows How CIA Spies On Your TV, Phone, PC, Mac, And More + Napolitano: Trump First President To Confront Deep State March 9 2017 | From: TheFreeThoughtProject / Infowars / Various
Only hours ago, WikiLeaks released what it claims to be the largest ever release of confidential documents on the CIA.
It involves a massive cache of data ranging from the years 2013-2016.
Inside this data, according to WikiLeaks, are the tools the CIA has been using for years to wreak digital havoc on the world. According to the release:
“Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized “zero day” exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation.
This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA.
The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive."
WikiLeaks notes that this is only the first part of a series they are calling “Year Zero,” which is comprised of 8,761 documents and files from an isolation high-security network situated inside the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Virgina.
“Year Zero,” according to WikiLeaks, introduces the scope and direction of the CIA’s global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of “zero day” weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, include Apple’s iPhone, Google’s Android and Microsoft’s Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.
This leak exposes the massive hacking powerhouse the CIA has become in the last decade - surpassing even that of the NSA.
“Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).
The CIA found itself building not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of covert, globe-spanning force - its own substantial fleet of hackers.
The agency’s hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA’s hacking capacities."
What is also notable about this leak is the fact that it reveals another Snowden-type whistleblower within the massive spying apparatus. This time, however, knowing how the US treats whistleblowers, the source has chosen to remain anonymous.
“The source details policy questions that they say urgently need to be debated in public, including whether the CIA’s hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the problem of public oversight of the agency.
The source wishes to initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use, proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.”
Cyber weapons pose a massive threat to the entire world’s infrastructure as they can be used by anyone from rival states, cyber mafias, and even teenage hackers.
According to Julian Assange;
“There is an extreme proliferation risk in the development of cyber ‘weapons’. Comparisons can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of such ‘weapons’, which results from the inability to contain them combined with their high market value, and the global arms trade.
But the significance of ‘Year Zero’ goes well beyond the choice between cyberwar and cyberpeace. The disclosure is also exceptional from a political, legal and forensic perspective.”
Noting the severe implications of releasing these hacking tools publicly, WikiLeaks will avoid distributing the ‘armed’ version of the cyber weapons “until a consensus emerges on the technical and political nature of the CIA’s program and how such ‘weapons’ should analyzed, disarmed and published.”
To quantify the sheer size and scope of Vault 7, WikiLeaks notes that just part 1:
“Already eclipses the total number of pages published over the first three years of the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.”
One of the most ominous techniques profiled by WikiLeaks in Vault 7 is “Weeping Angel,” developed by the CIA’s Embedded Devices Branch (EDB) - a cyber weapon that infests smart TV’s and transforms them into microphones.
As WikiLeaks reports, after infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a ‘Fake-Off’ mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on.
In ‘Fake-Off’ mode the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server.
Upon news of ‘Weeping Angel,’ Kim Dotcom chimed in, noting that it is not just TV’s the CIA can control to spy on you.
CIA’s arsenal includes numerous local and remote “zero days” developed by CIA or obtained from GCHQ, NSA, FBI or purchased from cyber arms contractors such as Baitshop. The disproportionate focus on iOS may be explained by the popularity of the iPhone among social, political, diplomatic and business elites.
These techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the “smart” phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied.
Many of these infection efforts are pulled together by the CIA’s Automated Implant Branch (AIB), which has developed several attack systems for automated infestation and control of CIA malware, such as “Assassin” and “Medusa”.
WikiLeaks put the world on notice with the news of the encrypted torrent file Vault 7 last night, and, at 8:06 am EST, they tweeted out the key to unlock it.
Assange was planning a press conference to go over the data dump this morning. However, shortly before it was supposed to begin, they announced the Facebook and Periscope streams were under attack.
As for why WikiLeaks chose to release this information now, they explain:
"WikiLeaks published as soon as its verification and analysis were ready.
In Febuary the Trump administration has issued an Executive Order calling for a “Cyberwar” review to be prepared within 30 days.
While the review increases the timeliness and relevance of the publication it did not play a role in setting the publication date."
Finally, WikiLeaks leaves the rest of the data mining up to the public.
"WikiLeaks has intentionally not written up hundreds of impactful stories to encourage others to find them and so create expertise in the area for subsequent parts in the series.
They’re there. Look. Those who demonstrate journalistic excellence may be considered for early access to future parts."
The Free Thought Project is one of those outlets that will be bringing you our analysis of important information we find within these leaks. We will keep you updated as this, the largest leak in US history, unfolds.
In an appearance with Lou Dobbs, Napolitano laid out what the deep state is for the general public, and dropped bombshell after bombshell about its power to influence the behavior of presidents, obtain all manner of information about the general public and steer the direction of the country – regardless of which political group is supposedly in charge.
“Really, it’s been around since 1947: the deep state – the part of the government that never charges, regardless of which party controls Congress and which party is in the White House,” he explained.
“There are many, many aspects of the deep state; we’re talking about the intelligence community deep state – people in the intelligence community that have access to so much information about everyone."
“They can manipulate the President of the United States, and if they don’t like what he says, they can embarrass him, and if they want to control his thought patterns and decision making, they’ll keep information away from him.”
“Donald Trump has fallen victim to that, and he knows it, and he knows he has to stop it,” he concluded.
Napolitano asserted that Trump’s call for a congressional investigation into possible wiretapping and illegal surveillance of his campaign headquarters at Trump Tower is a nightmare for the deep state and their enablers in the federal government.
“[It is] the last thing his enemies in the intelligence community want, because if the American public learns that they have access to everything we type and everything we say, they will be repulsed by the power that this deep state group has that Congress gave them – they didn’t create this on their own,” he said.
“Congress enacted three pieces of legislation, which, with perverse interpretations of this legislation before a secret court, let’s them gather everything we say in real-time.”
Big Brother is Here - Zakharova Warns of Orwellian US Media
Have a listen to what Zakharova has to say in relation to "fake news". Is there a deliberate campaign to undermine trust in all traditional media, so that the public can no longer form an opinion?
The institution of the media, which was once revered and trusted for its journalistic standards, has now sunk so low that the average person is unable to accept it.
This can be dangerous, as it drives people to a new source - the internet. While alternative media, for the most part, is grassroots in protest to the mainstream media - many sources online are also false and it can difficult to determine an article's validity.
The media was once the fourth estate, whose role in a 'free and fair' democracy was to check, balance and scrutinise the actions of the state.
Today, the media is PR for the state - there is no lie they won't propagate, irrespective of the repercussions it has.
Napolitano referenced the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as the “secret court” which reviews and approves virtually all requests by the federal government to spy on foreign individuals present in the United States and intercept all of their communications, but these same requests – which are rarely denied – are being used to spy on Americans in shocking fashion.
“One of the FISA court warrants that I saw was, ‘for every customer of Verizon in the United States,’” revealed Napolitano.
“That’s 113 million people – including most of the federal government.”
Dobbs and Napolitano discussed the depth to which the inter-agency spying occurs, noting that even Congress, high-ranking military officers, and Supreme Court justices are intimately monitored.
“If they will surveil journalists, if they will spy on U.S. senators, why would they hesitate to spy on a presidential candidate?” concluded Dobbs.
Just weeks ago, Senator Charles Schumer lobbed a hardly-veiled threat at President Trump on behalf of the deep state, after Trump revealed that rogue elements of the intelligence community were leaking classified information about his conversations and meetings to the fifth column media and politicians.
“You take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” said Schumer with a smile.
Chuck Schumer Says CIA is Plotting Revenge Against President Trump
Jim Hanson, vice president of the Center for Security Policy, told Fox News that his sources believe Obama administration operatives could be facing jail time if a proper investigation is carried out into illegal surveillance of Donald Trump and his campaign.
“Does anybody on earth with an above-room-temperature IQ believe [Obama] didn’t know about it and approve it? Of course he did,” Hanson said. “I’ve heard from inside the administration there may be people going to jail.”
ExtremeTech Explains: All About The Dark Web, And How To Use It + How To Start Browsing The Web Anonymously March 9 2017 | From: ExtremeTech / Digg
If you’ve paid any attention to online marketplaces for illegal goods like the now-defunct Silk Road or the FBI’s investigations into criminal in cyberspace, chances are you’ve heard the term “dark web.” Curious about what it means? You’ve come to the right place
The dark web is sometimes called onionland because of its content accessible only using services like Tor.
The rest of the internet is simply referred to as the clearweb, since it isn’t generally encrypted.
How Does the Dark Web Work?
The dark web works just about the same as the regular internet: it uses the same TCP/IP framework to transmit HTTP and FTP traffic within and between networks, over the same phone, cable or FiOS lines that carry regular internet traffic.
Content on the dark web consists of HTML webpages and their assets, just like it does on the rest of the web. In fact, under the hood, the dark web is the same as the regular web, with two important exceptions that also distinguish the dark web from the deep web.
First: the dark web isn’t indexed by search engines. Second, content on the dark web can’t be accessed with regular web browsing software alone; additional software is required to make the networks talk to one another.
This is because content on the dark web is hosted on overlay networks, which are physically connected to the internet but aren’t accessible to web crawlers.
That relative inaccessibility is because the dark web uses a complete, but fundamentally different, network addressing system than the web addresses most of us know and use.
Browsers like Chrome and Firefox are programmed to access website files using the DNS index, which turns a file’s unique address on its unique server into a string of text that you can type into your address bar.
Sites indexed by the DNS registry are accessible via top-level domains like .com and .org, among others.
After ICANN opened up the suffixing system to other strings of text, we started to see web addresses that look like home.cern and bit.ly - but you can still type those into your address bar and get to a website, because they’re in the official DNS registry.
Dark websites don’t participate in the DNS system, and web crawlers don’t have the software to get onto the dark web, so the dark web and the clearweb don’t really cross-pollinate.
How the Mysterious Dark Net is Going Mainstream
Content obscured in this way can still be accessed, but you need the right software. It’s a bit like a Wi-Fi network that doesn’t broadcast its SSID: you can only get access if you already know exactly how to find it.
Some content accessible only through Tor is hosted at a .onion pseudo-top-level domain, which means that in the right software, you might type in foobar.onion and get to the Foobar dark website.
Such software, including the Tor browser bundle, is capable of bridging the differences in network behavior between the dark web and the clearweb. But that only works when you’re using a compatible browser and have the right encryption.
Tor, Freenet and I2P are the most commonly cited examples of software capable of accessing the dark web. Typing a .onion address into your Chrome address bar won’t get you anywhere.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Furthermore, many if not most .onion sites are generated sixteen-character “non-mnemonic” alphanumeric strings, rather than being composed of words like most clearweb URLs.
There also exists a difference in the path web traffic takes on the clearnet versus the dark web. Tor is valuable because it sends your own web traffic through multiple different network nodes, masking its origin and destination.
There’s significant overlap between VPNs and the dark web; both services use encryption and multiple network nodes to anonymize traffic. But VPNs deal with clearweb sites that participate in the DNS system, while dark web browsers deal with domains not recognized by ICANN.
What Is The Dark Web Used For?
The structure of the dark web makes it anonymizing, which means that first and foremost, it’s used for anonymous communication and web browsing. This accounts for the vast majority of network traffic through Tor.
Why seek out anonymity? To read and write about things that might get you in trouble, like political dissent or whistleblowing. The same technology that enables Tor is capable of tunneling out from behind the Great Firewall of China, and the US government contributes to the development of such software.
Anonymity also brings out those who wish to do illegal things. A 2014 study found that of the different kinds of sites on the dark net, there are more markets devoted to drugs and guns than any other kind of dark site, including forums, bitcoin laundering, hacking, fraud, whistleblowing and even regular old porn.
To paraphrase Jim Jeffries, if you want to murder someone, you can’t just walk up to Pier 31 and shout “GUNS, WHO WANTS TO SELL ME SOME GUNS!?” But with a website like an evil eBay that lists weapons and other contraband for sale, all of a sudden you don’t have to know someone with “black market connections.” You just have to be able to install some software.
Tor hidden services are the other thing the dark web does, and they’re what gives the dark web its shady reputation. Hidden services refers to dark sites where both the host and the visitor are anonymous to one another. That technology enables dark web sites that host illegal content to persist.
Hidden services account for only 1.5% of the Tor network volume. But the overwhelming majority of resources requested over Tor hidden services - fully 80% of that traffic - were requests from child abuse sites.
Outgoing traffic from the dark web flowed mainly between botnets and their hidden control servers. More detail on Tor’s traffic patterns and how much of its total bandwidth is used for illegal activities is available in a blog post by the Tor project.
The dark web is notoriously dodgy territory for both buyers and sellers. Law enforcement has been chipping away at the nominal anonymity afforded by software like Tor, and anything of interest on the dark web is as likely to be a scam as it is to be a honeypot.
Between social engineering and software vulnerabilities, it is a realm best accessed while wielding some trustworthy anti-malware.
For a long time, the Silk Road was the biggest game in darknet commerce. It allowed users to sell a great many illegal things, and inspired a number of similarly designed copycat markets.
Transactions there were conducted in bitcoins and other virtual currency, and then goods were shipped through the mail. But a high-profile bust and ensuing court case put several Silk Road admins in jail.
The media spotlight has impinged on the Silk Road’s relative obscurity, reducing its value as a black marketplace.
While Uncle Sam contributes to the development of Tor and similar anonymity resources, the government is also known to take more of a proprietary approach, considering even the dark web to be within American jurisdiction when site hosting is in question.
The dark net is an excellent example of how difficult it is to prevent criminals from using anonymizing services designed to protect honest dissenters. Tor’s anonymizing functions are critically important to people who rely on it to discuss sensitive topics without fear of reprisal.
The debate over how much light should be shone into the dark web is an ongoing topic of discussion. How much illegal activity should be allowed to maintain Tor’s positive benefits, and is there a way to unmask child molesters and other illicit activity without compromising the security that makes the dark web work?
Mathematician breaks down how to defend against quantum computing attacks.
The simplest way to look at anonymous internet browsing is a three-pronged approach. You need to make sure all of your accounts are secure. You need to hide your internet traffic. And you need to encrypt your communications with other.
Secure Your Accounts
Even if everything you do and say on the web is entirely anonymous, that's all moot if someone can still duck into your email or bank account. So, before you start thinking about masking your online activities, check and make sure what's already on the web is accessible only to you.
The best way to do that is to make sure each and every one of your accounts has two-factor authentication. Two-factor authentication, as the name implies, requires two things to log into an account.
The first is a password. The second is an external verification method such as a text message or an external verification app like Google Authenticator.
With two-factor authentication, someone could have your password but they can't log into your account without your phone where the text messages and authenticator apps live. It's kinda like using a key to get into your house and then being greeted by a very large man who, politely but firmly, asks you to recite a 6-digit number that's magically just popped into your head.
Sounds pretty awesome, right? The all-important caveat, however, is that not all websites have two-factor authentication implemented. Which is bad, because like chains, your account security is only as strong as the weakest link.
Anyone with your password and motivated enough could just log into a non-two-factor-protected account, dig around for some personal info and then social engineer their way into a two-factor protected account.
So yeah, you're going to want to make sure everything is doubly-secure.
You could dig around in the settings pages of the dozens or so web services you use to find if they do in fact offer two-factor authentication. That would be practicing a respectable amount of diligence on your part and we respect you for that.
But you could also just head to two-factor-auth.org and browse their handy list of services that use the security measure.1 And if you're unsure just how many internet accounts you have lying around, a good starting point is checking our your saved passwords in your browser of choice.
Hide Your Traffic
Shoring up account security is arguably the hardest part of this whole endeavor. The more technically complex process of encrypting your internet traffic is, practically-speaking, much easier.
Which: You have two choices, slow and free or fast and, erm, not-free.
The slow and free option is the Tor browser. Running on a modified version of the Firefox browser, Tor - which is short for The Onion Router - uses something called "onion routing" model to hide your traffic. Simply put, it works, but it can be slow as heck.
Normally, internet traffic works like passing a note in class. You write who the note is to so everyone else knows who to eventually pass it to, you write who it's from so the recipient can pass a note back, and it's also full of that hot gossip people want.
What Tor does is take that note and wrap it in a bunch of different notes that only certain people can open.
So a note that you want to eventually sent to Jenny is wrapped in three other notes that first goes off to Carl who opens the note and is instructed to pass that note to Terry who is then instructed to pass the note to Amy who is then instructed to finally to Jenny.
Ideally, there are so many notes being passed around that even the most watchful observer has no idea where one starts and the other ends.
A virtual private network (VPN), on the other hand, is much faster since you're just connecting to another network somewhere else on the globe. As the name suggest, it is like you're walking into another office somewhere else on the planet and (virtually) plugging an ethernet cable into your computer.
To the outside observer it just looks like some server in Switzerland is accessing Netflix.com. And if you choose a VPN that encrypts and does not log your traffic, it's impossible for anyone to see your web activities.
To draw on the passing-notes-in-class metaphor again, a VPN is like getting the principal to come to your classroom, pull Jenny out of the room and ask her if she likes you.
That said, it does come at a price. For a VPN that is fast and secure expect to pay somewhere around $10 a month. And although we do not endorse this practice, one of the added benefits of using a VPN is that you can access region locked content on various streaming services.
Keep Your Private Conversations Private
It's rude enough for a stranger to even eavesdrop on your conversations in a place as public as a park. So opting to use messaging services with end-to-end encryption doesn't make you some sort of criminal or tin foil hat-wearing nut.
Whether you mind or not, there are organizations out there that are just scooping up every chat (Hello NSA!) you send out over the internet.
No one is actively looking at them, or might ever look at them, but they're listening so you might as well turn some music on or something.
It's sort of like taping over your webcam or looking both ways before you cross the street - it's such an easy and painless thing to do that it far outweighs the consequences of not doing that thing.
What you're looking for is chat with end-to-end encryption - where only you can the recipient can decrypt the messages.
To, again, reuse the passing-a-note-in-class analogy, you and your friend both have a unique way to confirm you are who you say you are - in real life, handwriting; on the internet, a public key.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
The note is then encrypted using a randomly-generated cipher, which then is then also encrypted and can only be decrypted with the receiver's private key.
Admittedly, the analogy kinda breaks down here, but the end result is that this system ensures that messages sent to a single person can only be read by that person.
That said, trying to convince all your contacts to download yet another messaging app is not the easiest thing in the world. Luckily, popular messaging apps like iMessage, Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp all employ end-to-end encryption.
Keeping your accounts secure, and encrypting your traffic and communications will bring you 95 percent of the way towards keeping the snoops out. That said, there are a few considerations here and there you might want to keep in mind.
Most importantly is to keep in mind how you connect to the internet and who you're sharing that connection with.
It's like using someone else's phone to call your friend. They now have your friends number, and in a more dated-reference, on a landline they have the option of picking up the phone in another room to eavesdrop.
Second is determining the physical location of the cloud services you use. It's a bit of a doomsday scenario, but if the government comes knocking for your data, it's much easier for a company who has servers overseas to deny that request.
So, for instance, in terms of usability Dropbox is a good cloud storage solution. However, all of their servers are based in the US, so if a subpoena drops for your data, you're kinda SOL. Clowdwards.net - a service that'll help you navigate the various VPN and cloud storage services - recommends Sync as an alternative.
Again, we want to stress that doing any of this will not make you some kind of a trenchcoat-wearing kook.
But really, even in a society where there's zero threat of someone peeking in on our online activities, there's no solid reason to just kinda leave this stuff hanging out in the breeze.
You tear up your credit card offers and bills, right? So, make sure your internet activities are anonymized.
DeepStateGate: Trump Ends The Wiretapping Innuendo Game By Dealing Himself In & Incompetent And A Criminal: Obama’s Wiretapping Of President Trump Icing On The Cake Of Worst President Ever March 8 2017 | From: Breitbart / TheGatewayPundit / Various
The White House statement on “DeepStateGate” - President Donald Trump’s allegations that former President Barack Obama ordered surveillance on him during his 2016 presidential campaign - has the feel of cards and chips thumping down on the table.
The White House is placing a substantial bet on what Congress will uncover. Don’t expect those cards to be dealt swiftly because such investigations take time.
The Trump administration can distinguish itself by cooperating energetically with this one and helping it move forward quickly. Rest assured that no matter how long it takes, the media will never consider it “old news” as long as there remains any chance for anyone connected with the Trump 2016 campaign to get in trouble over contacts with the Russians.
It’s possible one reason Trump issued his explosive tweets on surveillance was to make everyone put up or shut up.
That might already be working, as some of the more aggressive dealers in unsubstantiated innuendo are suddenly admitting they don’t have any actual evidence. There can’tbe any hard evidence if Trump is super-duper wrong about Obama administration surveillance:
Until now, Democrats and their media have been pleased to create the impression that all kindsof wiretapping operations were conducted against the Trump campaign, uncovering many scandalous, possibly illegal connections.
Only by reading those articles carefully does one discover the sources are highly speculative and the evidence is thin at best.
The much-discussed New York Times piece from January 19 is a perfect example of this.
It begins by matter-of-factly confirming the existence of the wiretaps everyone in Obamaworld is now swearing are a figment of Donald Trump’s imagination.
Mountains of innuendo about connections between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence have been spun out of what these abruptly non-existent intercepts contained, according to the anonymous leakers who currently drive almost 100 percent of mainstream media coverage.
But if you read that New York Times article carefully, it admits the communications intercepts may not exist, and if they do, no one can confirm what they actually say (emphasis added):
“American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said.
The continuing counterintelligence investigation means that Mr. Trump will take the oath of office on Friday with his associates under investigation and after the intelligence agencies concluded that the Russian government had worked to help elect him.
As president, Mr. Trump will oversee those agencies and have the authority to redirect or stop at least some of these efforts.
It is not clear whether the intercepted communications had anything to do with Mr. Trump’s campaign, or Mr. Trump himself. It is also unclear whether the inquiry has anything to do with an investigation into the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computers and other attempts to disrupt the elections in November.
The American government has concluded that the Russian government was responsible for a broad computer hacking campaign, including the operation against the D.N.C."
Whatever President Trump’s intentions were in using Twitter to touch off this firestorm, one of the immediate effects has been letting the gas out of all those speculative Trump stories.
The Democratic media is now furiously working to prove all of its own previous coverage of the Trump-Russia allegations was little more than idle speculation, every bit as lacking in hard evidence as Trump’s accusation that Obama was tapping his phones.
After months of unfounded allegations and badly sourced speculation intended to cripple his administration, maybe Trump wanted to prove that only one side of the partisan divide is permitted to make “wild allegations.”
Obama’s plants in the Deep State can leak whatever they please, law and truth be damned.
They can get an avalanche of hostile coverage moving with a few phone calls or emails. The media feels no contrition when the story turns out to be exaggerated or completely false, eagerly turning to the same Obama holdovers as sources for the next big phony scoop.
No one on Trump’s team, including the president himself, is allowed to reciprocate in kind. We are meant to feel bottomless outrage that Trump would level unsubstantiated allegations against Obama, but apparently, Obama’s minions can launch a constant barrage of unsubstantiated allegations against Trump.
Intentionally or accidentally, Trump just forced the press to admit how weak the bulk of those allegations were. The wiretapping timeline that has drawn so much attention since Saturday night was largely based on mainstream media reporting.
The media is effectively saying;
“Hey, wait, we were just blowing smoke. We didn’t think anyone would take those reports seriously and build a case that Obama was wiretapping Trump.
We just wanted to make Trump look bad by pumping up vague rumors that he and his campaign might have been under observation!”
Amazingly, the same media that just went through 48 hours of convulsions over a bogus “perjury” charge against Attorney General Jeff Sessions is happy to cite an actual, admitted perjurer, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, as an unimpeachable source on the exact issue he lied about to Congress.
"All of this was part of a coordinated planned campaign by people that are linked to Barrack Obama."
There are still senior people in jobs at the Director of National Intelligence office, the office of the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency that ought to be fired, Larry Johnson, retired CIA and State Department official, told RT.
They also expect the American people to trust former Obama adviser Ben Rhodes, who openly bragged of his ability to mislead credulous reporters and construct phony narratives to sell the Iran nuclear deal.
The Obama administration’s enthusiasm for surveillance and using government power against its political enemies is a matter of shameful record. The no-holds-barred “Resistance” mindset among Democrats is painfully obvious. If they are running a “silent coup” against Trump, it’s the loudest silent coup in history. You can scarcely sleep at night over the racket this silent coup makes.
Sorry, DNC Media, no sale. In the absence of hard evidence one way or the other, Team Obama is not going to win a credibility shootout with Team Trump.
McCarthy’s Sunday post on the matter is well worth reading in full. His key point is that some highly unusual FISA requests for surveillance on the Trump campaign weremade and were denied by the court, as very few such requests are.
The Obama administration was persistent and eventually obtained the authorization it wanted, but there is reason to suspect it was not entirely candid with the FISA court on its final, successful request.
McCarthy points out that if Obama believed half of what the Democrats tout as sacred truth about the Russians working with Trump’s campaign, he would have been negligent notto authorize the kind of surveillance Trump is angry about, and there is “a less than zero chance” surveillance could have been imposed “without consultation between the Justice Department and the White House.”
Robert Barnes at LawNewz also explores the idea of the FISA court approving a warrant that was submitted without Trump’s name but “which Obama then misused to spy on Trump and many connected to Trump.”
He suggests the most serious legal jeopardy that might be facing the people involved in such an effort would be perjury for lying to the FISA court and the dissemination of collected intelligence that should have been kept tightly classified. Instead, he cites reports that Obama acted to reduce the restrictions on sharing this information and to preserve material that should have been destroyed.
What McCarthy and Barnes are describing is plausible and consistent with the behavior of the Obama administration over many years. That doesn’t mean it’s automatically true, but it shouldbe investigated, every bit as thoroughly as Russian activity in the 2016 election cycle.
Trump’s weekend tweets may have finally put an end to speculative reporting, strategic leaking, and innuendo. Perhaps the only way to end that game was for Trump to deal himself in.
“Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"
He next tweeted:
“Is it legal for a sitting President to be “wire tapping” a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!"
Next the President tweeted:
“I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!"
The final for four tweets concerning the wire tapping:
“How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!"
Not surprising after the shock of what was presented by the current President to the public, the left wing media, their Democrat allies and the few #NeverTrump Republicans who align in their opposition to President Trump went all in for former President Obama.
Their responses no longer surprise America.
Americans would be shocked if they criticized former President Obama. As a result of the recent Presidential campaign, Americans are used to seeing the corrupt media and Democrats (including #NeverTrumpers) react as they do.
Now America is supposed to believe that the narcissist President Obama was looking out for America when he tapped President Trump at Trump Tower during the election?
This former President who chose not to investigate his former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, for known abuses with foreign entities in her Clinton Foundation, felt the need to wire tap her competitor during the election for no known reason?
Based on his deceiving track record, it is clear that President Obama wanted to gain information against future President Trump that he could use against him.
This is Obamagate. Hopefully, the final chapter in Obama’s failed Presidency.
Unlike the media that is still cheerleading for serial liar Obama, most Americans stand by the side of their current President Trump, and rightly so.
See the Following for More Reasons Why Obama is the ‘Worst. President. Ever’:
EU nationalists are paving the way for a “new” Europe, she said. She added:
“I am thrilled to see that Europeans are speaking out against the Union, and calling for a Europe of nations. We will build a better Europe, whether Mrs Merkel and Mr Schulz like it or not.”
The presidential hopeful - who is more or less guaranteed a place in the final round of the spring election – said if elected president she would renegotiate, if not scrap, EU treaties as an initial step towards creating a Europe of nations.
Trump Versus Deep State: Full-Scale Information War Revealed March 7 2017 | From: Intellihub / Various
Shitstorm to sweep D.C. - It appears that the Deep State’s push to oust President Trump and close associates may have backfired to some extent after President Trump revealed on Twitter that outgoing president Barack Obama had previously requested that Trump Tower be wiretapped.
However, make no mistake, the powers-that-be have no intentions of stopping now and are in fact suiting up for battle - this is a literal information war and it has gone full-scale.
According to Andrew McCarthy in a piece he authored for National Review titled The Obama Camp’s Disingenuous Denials on FISA Surveillance of Trump, the Obama Administration filed two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) applications with the court in 2016 which requested the surveillance of Donald Trump and associates over their ‘possible ties’ to Russian operatives and/or financial institutions.
Although the first request filed by the Obama Admin “prior to June” was turned down by the court, a second and more broadly worded request was resubmitted to the court in October at which point it was approved.
President Barack Obama listens to Senior Advisor Dan Pfeiffer, with David Simas, Director of Political Strategy and Outreach and Jason Furman, Chair, Council of Economic Advisers, right, in the Oval Office, Jan. 30, 2015
“It is unknown whether that surveillance is still underway, but the New York Times has identified – again, based on illegal leaks of classified information – at least three of its targets: Paul Manafort (the former Trump campaign chairman who was ousted in August), and two others whose connection to the Trump campaign was loose at best, Manafort’s former political-consulting business partner Roger Stone, and investor Carter Page.
The Times report (from mid-January) includes a lot of heavy breathing about potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia; but it ultimately concedes that the government’s FISA investigation may have nothing to do with Trump, the campaign, or alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the U.S. election by hacking e-mail accounts,” McCarthy reported.
Paul Manfort, Carter Page and Roger Stone - all targets?! And it gets worse.
Mark Levin Breaks Down Obama’s Wiretapping of President Trump
While the media claims President Trump has “no evidence” for accusing his predecessor of wiretapping, radio host and former constitutional attorney Mark Levin breaks down evidence showing the Obama administration indeed spied on the Trump campaign, backing up his claims with various mainstream media reports.
Who did they spy on and what was the extent of it?
In early December Intellihub’s Alex Thomas reported how the corporate media, possibly under deep state orders, called for the U.S. government to investigate “Intellihub and other alternative media outlets for espionage” after a shady group listed 200 online agencies as “Russian propaganda.”
They are trying to create a trail of fake news which they can later use to target popular independent news sources which they’ve already deemed to be ‘enemy combatants’ under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). In fact, deep state lingo injected into the 2017 NDAA offers provisions for drone strikes on such targets.
“That’s right, with their inclusion of Intellihub on “The List”, PropOrNot is directly calling for Intellihub’s founder Shepard Ambellas as well as writers such as myself to be investigated by the FBI and DOJ one can only imagine it is in retaliation for years of direct assault on the global elite (Especially for our Guardian featured reporting on Bilderberg in 2012),” Thomas wrote.
“Our enemies are using foreign propaganda and disinformation against us and our allies, and so far the U.S. government has been asleep at the wheel […] But today, the United States has taken a critical step towards confronting the extensive, and destabilizing, foreign propaganda and disinformation operations being waged against us by our enemies overseas.
With this bill now law, we are finally signaling that enough is enough; the United States will no longer sit on the sidelines. We are going to confront this threat head-on. I am confident that, with the help of this bipartisan bill, the disinformation and propaganda used against us, our allies, and our interests will fail.”
U.S. Senator Rob Portman speaking at the 2015 Defending the American Dream Summit at the Greater Columbus Convention Center in Columbus, Ohio
Portman’s accomplice, Senator Chris Murphy, followed up and expanded on Portman’s statement by saying:
“The use of propaganda to undermine democracy has hit a new low. But now we are finally in a position to confront this threat head on and get out the truth.
By building up independent, objective journalism in places like eastern Europe, we can start to fight back by exposing these fake narratives and empowering local communities to protect themselves. […]
I’m proud that our bill was signed into law, and I look forward to working with Senator Portman to make sure these tools and new resources are effectively used to get out the truth.”
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT)
In other words, the stage was set.
Around the same time, in a roundabout blackmail attempt, intelligence officials told Trump that the Russians “claim to have compromising personal and financial information” about him.
A January 12 article authored by CNN’s Evan Perez, Jim Sciutto, Jake Tapper and Carl Bernstein rubs in what intel officials told Trump.
“The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible.
The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.
These senior intelligence officials also included the synopsis to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats.
This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton’s candidacy and help Trump’s, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials."
The synopsis served as a veiled threat to Trump at the time and was later followed up with General Flynn’s forced resignation and Attorney General Jeff Sessions recuse from the investigation.
It’s sad to say, but it’s a control war. It’s all about maintaining full control of the helm at all times. It’s a simple as that. That’s all it’s ever been about and that’s all it ever will be about. That’s just how it works.
The system was designed a certain way - it can be used or abused and powerful forces have learned how to manipulate it.
The “UNITED STATES” is a corporation and the president is the duly-elected C.E.O. in charge of the corporation who can only serve for a term of four-years and never to exceed two terms as specified in the 22nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Washington D.C. - The Lincoln Memorial
Nonetheless, somewhere along the way powerful forces withing the emerging Deep State eventually found a ways to circumvent the 22nd Amendment and have since managed to pass the proverbial baton (full control of the helm) back-and-forth between the corporation’s C.E.O.s.
All they are doing is giving the general public the illusion of a democratic balance when in reality both parties are merely two heads of the same snake - the Deep State.
For decades, through a legacy, the corrupt global elite at the top of the food chain (i.e. the Rothschilds, Rockefelllers, Soros and others) and their prized deep state controllers (i.e. Barack & Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton & Hillary Clinton and others) have salted their most valuable players (i.e. John Podesta, John McCain, Anderson Cooper and others) into every nook and cranny of government and media.
Their job is to manage and pull the strings of their M.V.P.s to create a desired narrative just as the man behind the curtain did in the 1939 fantasy adventure film the Wizard of Oz.
Elite billionaire George Soros
Withal, it’s safe to say that President Donald J. Trump has found himself in a quite precarious situation after deep state controllers failed to forecast his fatal swoop of electoral votes which propelled the business tycoon and reality show star into the White house on January 20 against all odds.
Trump’s victory was a barn burner. Thus far Donald Trump has played nearly a perfect hand which has cost the elite a good portion of their power and control. They were blindsided.
They were so arrogant with their fake news reports and their fake polls leading up to the election that they didn’t even see it coming. They lost - and now they are pissed.
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Gen. Raymond A. “Tony” Thomas, U.S. Special Operations Command Commander, at MacDill, AFB, FL, Feb. 6, 2017. Flynn is in MacDill to join the President who’s visiting senior military leaders and service members of Central Command and Special Operations Command
It’s was at this point when the president realized he was treading muddy waters and may have bit off more than he can chew.
It was radio talk show host Howard Stern that first mentioned publicly to Donald Trump that he ‘didn’t need the hardships that the presidency would bring him.’ It’s as if Stern read into the situation with remarkable foresight.
But be as it may, Trump didn’t listen and has now found himself standing in the belly of the beast that’s currently digesting him.
“The torch is now in our hands. And we will use it to light up the world.”
- President Donald J. Trump
Earlier this week, President Donald J. Trump stood in front of America and introduced a new chapter of American greatness; one full of prosperity, safety, and innovation.
Building on his successful first 40 days in office, President Trump laid out bold plans to improve infrastructure, bolster national security, and ensure all Americans can achieve the American dream.
President Trump’s speech resonated with legislators and Americans alike:
“Tonight, an optimistic President shared a bold agenda to get America back on track and restore the American dream for everyone.” – Congressman Kenny Marchant (TX-24)
“President Trump campaigned on a promise of making America great again, and tonight he offered a bold, uplifting vision for how to reach that goal – one that every American can share in.” – Congresswoman Diane Black (TN-06)
“President Trump is taking action to fulfill the commitments he made to the American people.” – Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO)
“Genuinely one of the most powerful moments I can remember from a presidential speech.” – Charlie Sykes, MSNBC
Tens of thousands of Americans gave us input before the President addressed the Nation. We listened because we want to hear directly from Americans like you. Please take just a few seconds and let us know your opinions on President Trump’s speech and vision for the future.”
Lt Col Tony Shaffer: “We Are Talking About The Potential Of Indictments Of A Former Sitting President And His Staff” & Spygate: Obama Administration Colluded With Intelligence Agencies To Frame Trump March 7 2017 | From: InvestmentWatchBlog / TheMilleniumReport
Trump Tower Tapped? - President Trump Tweets Obama Behind Wiretapping - Lt Col Tony Shaffer.
Lt. Col. Tony Schaffer: Potential Obama Wiretapping Is “Soviet-Level Wrongdoing.”
"This is huge! I mean, dare I say this is Soviet level wrongdoing...
The Obama Administration was taking on the form using their version of the FSB, or the KGB, to go and target a candidate.
Let me be very clear on this for your audience, simply because you don’t like someone does not give you the right as the sitting President to do something like this..."
Schaffer went on to say that this is completely 'insidious' and the order of the /magnitude of watergate.'
This is turning out to be another illegal action of the corrupt Deocrat Obama Administration [ on behalf of the flailing deep state]:
Much bigger than Watergate. Nixon did not have MSM on his side like Obama. If they help Obama somehow wiggle out of this one… We are talkin coup with a necessary civil war, complete with Never Trumpers and Soros backed, loyal Obama backers… who are willing to die for that Anti-christ sonofabitch!
Spygate: Obama Administration Colluded With Intelligence Agencies To Frame Trump
Sedition: Treasonous Agents of Deep State Used Assets of the U.S. Federal Government and British Contractors to Sabotage the 2016 Trump Campaign, Obama Loyalists and Intelligence Officials Continue Attempts to Overthrow the POTUS
The evidence is clear: Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Clinton, Podesta, Morrell and others conspired to prevent a Trump victory and now conspire to commit sedition.
Finally, the Obama Administration and the C.I.A. have been caught with their pants down.
The Trump Administration now possesses the hard evidence that proves conclusively that several of the highest authorities within the U.S. Intelligence Community colluded to utilize their offices and government resources to prevent Donald J. Trump from winning the 2016 presidential election.
"This thing is so BIG it’s not funny. Kennedy was right: either the spooks are with you or against you.
Spying and surveillance, sedition and treason, law-breaking and subversion, assassinations and false flag attacks, color revolutions and civil wars are all the stock-in-trade of the CIA.
It’s all they know how to do. And they are rarely, if ever, caught... until now!”
- Veteran Intelligence Analyst
What makes “this thing” even more serious is that there was (and is) highly coordinated collusion among and between key members of Obama’s inner circle and the highest echelons of the U.S. intelligence community.
Never in American history has such a serious charge been leveled by the President of the United States at the previous president. Not only are these allegations by Trump the most radioactive ever publicly proclaimed by a sitting POTUS, they constitute the necessary gravity to finally dissolve the C.I.A. as it should be.
They can do stuff in the United Kingdom that they cannot do here in the states - legally, that is.
Likewise, the US intelligence community routinely farms out extremely sensitive intelligence-gathering projects to the GHCQ, not only because of its highest classification of secrecy, but also because it is patently unlawful to conduct such operations on U.S. soil.
I don’t think there can be any doubt of that. I think it’s worth noting that the head of the National Security Agency, an Admiral [Michael] Rogers, made a journey to the Trump Tower shortly after Trump had won. And in the immediate aftermath of his visit, Jim Clapper and others in the intelligence community called for him to be fired.
Why did Rodgers go to Trump Tower?
My understanding is that it was to cover himself, because he was aware that the NSA authorities had been misused and abused with respect to Donald Trump.
POTUS Barack Obama, DNI James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan
Both the Director of National Intelligence and C.I.A. Director under President Obama made it clear that they did not support a Trump presidency. Never in U.S. history has such a public war been waged between an elected POTUS and the heads of the national intelligence apparatus.
Yes, John F. Kennedy had his epic war with CIA Director Allen Dulles, but after Dulles was fired, all the battles went underground until JFK was assassinated.
That’s exactly where this is currently going with President Trump, unless he completely shuts down the C.I.A. post haste. The same can be said of the MSM (mainstream media) as fake news 24/7 needs to be terminated asap for the good of the Republic.
Trump will be under massive assault each and every day of his first term until he dispatches all of these seditious and criminally insane psychopaths to the intelligence waterless region.
CIA Director John O. Brennan has already proven himself guilty of high treason after he, Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in coordination with British MI6, Israel’s MOSSAD, and Saudi Arabia’s GID created, supported and armed ISIS, ISIL and the Islamic State, respectively.
As a Muslim convert, it really appears that Brennan was the integral player in Obama’s game plan to overthrow the American Republic, just as the C.I.A did with the Arab Spring throughout the Middle East.
The resulting Obamanation stateside could never have gotten so far unless The Company (also known as the Central Intelligence Agency) was totally on board with Obama’s treasonous enterprise.
Similarly, the Northern Levant was transformed into a dystopian, post-apocalyptic wasteland via CIA-directed color revolutions.
Seditious Agents of Deep State Still Trying to Overthrow President Trump
What is most remarkable about this ongoing Soros-funded Purple Revolution against the American Republic is that the perpetrators have doubled their efforts since being found out. They know that they all now face existential threats of the highest order. It doesn’t get worse than high treason and sedition, and they haven’t quite figured out when they are Trump’s bad side.
Here we are today on Sunday, March 5th, and the many Soros-backed NGOs are marching together in lockstep to force Trump from the White House.
That they are also executing their seditious insurrection together with purple revolutionaries like Barack and Michelle Obama, as well as Hillary and Bill Clinton, is even more outrageous given the direct participation of those two past US presidents.
As a matter of fact, this accelerating soft coup has seen numerous leaders throughout the treacherous Democratic Party coordinate together like clockwork to remove Trump from the Oval Office. The entire party has actually morphed into a full-blown insurgency.
What is quite extraordinary about this rapidly devolving state of affairs is that the Bolshevik elements on the Left have clearly indicated via various news reports that they will resort to any form of violence if necessary.
They really don’t care how they are perceived by the general public at this point.
All they want is to preserve their Obamanation at all costs. They will not give up one inch of their Sodom and Gomorrah no matter what. The following stunning video expresses just how determined the purple revolutionaries have become.
They all know that there is a quickly closing window of opportunity that they must act within lest their chances of political survival be greatly diminished, if not terminated altogether.
That window of opportunity for insurrection by the agents of Deep State is defined by the period that it takes the Trump Administration to fill all the key positions within the U.S. Armed Forces and the national law enforcement apparatus, as well as other key departments and bureaus.
“The bottom line here folks is that we are entering an extraordinary period of tumult and volatility. The previously mentioned 120-day window of insurrection opportunity for Deep State is perhaps the most dangerous since the American Revolutionary War. Yes, it’s that precarious a quagmire which both sides are acutely aware of.”
This is also why so many movie stars and famous singers and pro athletes are being enlisted to recruit more PR cannon fodder among their adoring masses.
Some of these former stars (former because their light has been dimmed considerably as they foolishly ventured into politics) have gone so far off the rails in their disgraceful attempts to bring down President Trump that they will never enjoy the same stature again within American society. Some of them have lost forever perhaps half of their fan base.
There are actually a variety of ways to drain the swamp and take down the many monsters that have swarmed all over our nation’s capital for years. Perhaps the most effective way is to thoroughly investigate and aggressively prosecute the countless Pizzagate perps.
There are also those government officials who were directly and indirectly responsible for the false flag attacks on September 11, 2001 and/or their cover-up.
The US government-coordinated Oklahoma City bombing provides another opportunity to grab a bunch of swamp monsters, as do the many false flag operations carried out over 8 years under Obama’s disastrous presidency.
Because the same traitors are also guilty of conspiring to assassinate of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Malcolm X, the current Attorney General can even reopen any of these unsolved capital murder cases that involved America’s most influential and beloved VIPs.
Most importantly, there is the D.C. scandal known as Pizzagate, as well as the much bigger global scandal - Pedogate.
The invaluable gift and supremely powerful weapon for the present administration is, of course, Pizzagate. This is precisely why it was first blown wide open just before the 2016 election.
He and his globalist ilk know full well that We the People have reached our breaking point with regard to the New World Order agenda. Just as the ruling elites knew that Brexit would be successful in the UK, as will Frexit and Nexit eventually be in France and The Netherlands respectively.
The final point here is that the patriotic Trump Movement is on the right side of history.
The Manchurian Candidate Barack Obama has been permanently outed as the imposter that he really is, just as Hillary Clinton was exposed as a globalist stooge and warmonger and thusly defeated. Hence, it’s high time to “drain the swamp” so that all of these swamp monsters can be eradicated from across the land, once and for all. There is no other way!
This saddening reality is made worse when it is acknowledged that modern methods of ‘treating’ the disease are often ineffective and only make the symptoms of the disease worse. In fact, according to one Berkeley doctor, chemotherapy doesn’t work 97% of the time.
In the eye-opening video above, Dr. Hardin B. Jones, a former professor of medical physics and physiology at the University of California, Berkeley, discusses how ‘leading edge’ cancer treatment is a sham.
He has personally studied the life expectancy of patients for more than 25 years and has come to the conclusion that chemotherapy does more harm than good. The bone-chilling realization prompted Dr. Jones to speak out against the billion-dollar cancer industry.
“People who refused chemotherapy treatment live on average 12 and a half years longer than people who are undergoing chemotherapy,” said Dr. Jones of his study, which was published in the New York Academy of Science.
"People who accepted chemotherapy die within three years of diagnosis, a large number dies immediately after a few weeks.”
According to the physician, the only reason doctors prescribe chemotherapy is because they make money from it. Such an accusation doesn’t seem unreasonable, as cancer treatment runs, on average, between $300,000 – $1,000,000 per treatment.
"Patients with breast cancer who reject conventional therapy live four times longer than those who follow the system. So this is something that you will not hear in the mass media, which will continue to carry the myth that the best chemotherapy drug in the fight against cancer!”
Despite the fact that the United States spends more on healthcare than any other high-income nation in the world, diseases of affluence continue to increase in prevalence, resulting in a shorter life expectancy.
Perhaps this is because mainstream media and the allopathic healthcare system don’t teach about the importance of preventative medicine. Eating a healthy diet, engaging in exercise, thinking positive thoughts, reducing stress, and enjoying the company of others – or habits that bring joy – are all proven to improve longevity and happiness.
As it is, there is no money in a healthy population, which is why fast food joints and pharmaceutical industries thrive in America. Hopefully, Dr. Jones’ efforts will inspire people to seek out alternative options if they or someone they know develops the debilitating disease.
In 2004, the Journal of Clinical Oncology published a study about chemotherapy’s success rates when looking at how many cancer patients were still alive after 5 years. It states:
RESULTS: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA.
CONCLUSION: As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.
You’d be hard pressed to find anything still being touted as your best shot at a cure with an average success rate of just over 2 percent, which chemotherapy has, if it wasn’t for the fact that big profits were driving the recommendation. For stage 4 cancers the rate is less than half of one percent.
Fundamentally, chemotherapy rarely works. Worse, some drug treatments also promote the spread of cancer. But somehow the rationale to avoid these agents because they might promote cancer does not apply when it comes to drugs. –
A Cancer Journal for the Clinician article concludes by stating:
“Pending the publication of suitable trials, clinicians must be guided by existing data in the context of a fundamental principle of medicine, "Primum non nocere." (First do no harm.)"
And yet, conventional cancer treatments can in no way, shape or form ever be considered harmless.
"As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good."
Alan C Nixon, PhD, former president of the American Chemical Society
Cancer Researchers Discover How High-Dose Vitamin Kills Cancer Cells
Vitamin C has a patchy history as a cancer therapy, but researchers at the University of Iowa believe that is because it has often been used in a way that guarantees failure.
Most vitamin C therapies involve taking the substance orally. However, the UI scientists have shown that giving vitamin C intravenously - and bypassing normal gut metabolism and excretion pathways - creates blood levels that are 100 - 500 times higher than levels seen with oral ingestion.
It is this super-high concentration in the blood that is crucial to vitamin C's ability to attack cancer cells.
Earlier work by UI redox biology expert Garry Buettner found that at these extremely high levels (in the millimolar range), vitamin C selectively kills cancer cells but not normal cells in the test tube and in mice.
Physicians at UI Hospitals and Clinics are now testing the approach in clinical trials for pancreatic cancer and lung cancer that combine high-dose, intravenous vitamin C with standard chemotherapy or radiation.
Earlier phase 1 trials indicated this treatment is safe and well-tolerated and hinted that the therapy improves patient outcomes. The current, larger trials aim to determine if the treatment improves survival.
In a new study, published recently in the December issue of the journal Redox Biology, Buettner and his colleagues have homed in on the biological details of how high-dose vitamin C (also known as ascorbate) kills cancer cells.
The study shows that vitamin C breaks down easily, generating hydrogen peroxide, a so-called reactive oxygen species that can damage tissue and DNA. The study also shows that tumor cells are much less capable of removing the damaging hydrogen peroxide than normal cells.
"In this paper we demonstrate that cancer cells are much less efficient in removing hydrogen peroxide than normal cells. Thus, cancer cells are much more prone to damage and death from a high amount of hydrogen peroxide," says Buettner, a professor of radiation oncology and a member of Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Iowa.
"This explains how the very, very high levels of vitamin C used in our clinical trials do not affect normal tissue, but can be damaging to tumor tissue."
Normal cells have several ways to remove hydrogen peroxide, keeping it at very low levels so it does not cause damage. The new study shows that an enzyme called catalase is the central route for removing hydrogen peroxide generated by decomposing vitamin C.
The researchers discovered that cells with lower amounts of catalase activity were more susceptible to damage and death when they were exposed to high amounts of vitamin C.
Buettner says this fundamental information might help determine which cancers and which therapies could be improved by inclusion of high-dose ascorbate in the treatment.
"Our results suggest that cancers with low levels of catalase are likely to be the most responsive to high-dose vitamin C therapy, whereas cancers with relatively high levels of catalase may be the least responsive," he explains.
A future goal of the research is to develop methods to measure catalase levels in tumors.
Comment: Intravenous vitamin C does more than just kill cancer cells. It boosts immunity and can stimulate collagen formation to help the body wall off the tumor. It inhibits hyaluronidase, an enzyme that tumors use to metastasize and invade other organs throughout the body and corrects the almost universal scurvy in cancer patients.
Pedogate: UK Opens Massive Child Sex Slavery Inquiry + Ivanka Trump: Dad Is Destroying Washington DC Pedo Network March 5 2017 | From: NeonNettle / YourNewsWire
A massive inquiry has just launched in the United Kingdom into historic cases of children being sent to other countries where they faced a life of "torture, rape, and slavery" at the hands of pedophile and child sex trafficking rings.
The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse opened by investigating as far back as the decades following the second world war looking at schemes that were set up to give vulnerable children a "new life".
Thousands of children were sent to other counties in the Commonwealth, mainly Canada and Australia, with many being lost in the system and ending up child sex slavery.
One of the witnesses, David Hill, was sent to Australia as a child and broke down ads he described the "endemic" sexual abuse he suffered at the hands of a pedophile ring;
"I hope this inquiry can promote an understanding of the long-term consequences and suffering of those who were sexually abused." "
Many never recover and are permanently afflicted with guilt, shame, diminished self-confidence, low self-esteem, fear, and trauma."
Yahoo reports: The British Empire sent some 150,000 children abroad over 350 years, according to a 1998 parliamentary study, although the probe started Monday by looking at abuse of the practice after World War II.
It was justified as a means of slashing the costs of caring for lone children and providing disadvantaged young people with a fresh start while meeting labor shortages in the Commonwealth and populating colonial-era lands with white British settlers.
Between 1945 and 1970, youngsters were sent mainly to Australia, but also Canada, New Zealand and what is now Zimbabwe -- often without the consent of their families.
But the promise of a good upbringing and an exciting new life in the sun was often, in reality, a world of forced labor, brutal treatment and sexual assault in remote institutions run by churches and charities.
"They sent us to a place that was a living hell," victim Clifford Walsh told the BBC.
Oliver Cosgrove was sent to Australia in 1941, one of an estimated 5,000 to 6,000 children shipped there from 1922 to 1967. "Those who were abused tried in vain to tell others, who they hoped and believed might assist them. But they didn't," his representative told the inquiry.
"This was a systematic and institutional problem." - 'Unacceptable depravity' - Aswini Weereratne, of the Child Migrants Trust which supports victims, said there was good evidence that Britain knew of the poor standards of care in Australian institutions but failed to respond.
"Some of what was done there was of quite unacceptable depravity. Terms like sexual abuse are too weak to convey it," she said.
"This was not about truly voluntary migration, but forced or coerced deportation."
Some children were said to have suffered "torture, rape, and slavery," she added.
Professor Stephen Constantine told the hearings that royal visits to such institutions legitimized them for people who saw the photographs, believing if it was good enough for the royal family, "it is good enough for us".
The hearings are being held at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in London. The opening phase dealing with Australia is expected to last 10 days.
The inquiry was established following the death of TV star Jimmy Savile in 2011, when it emerged he had been one of Britain's worst serial pedophiles, carrying out abuse unchecked in a range of public institutions.
Ivanka Trump: Dad Is Destroying Washington DC Pedo Network
Ivanka Trump has vowed that her father, President Trump, will do everything within his power, using the “full force and weight” of his administration, to drive the elite pedophiles out of the corridors of power in Washington D.C.
Brave Ivanka posted a photo to Twitter of herself in the Oval Office with President Trump and NGOs tasked with eradicating the stench of human trafficking and pedophilia from not just Washington D.C. but the whole country.
It has emerged that Ivanka Trump was responsible for the sudden Trump administration attention to pedophilia epidemic, with the president’s daughter urging her father to hold a listening session last week on domestic and international human trafficking and pedophilia.
President Trump Meeting with Anti-Human Trafficking Experts
By doing so, Ivanka Trump, an influential West Wing force despite her decision not to take an official title at first, will one day be viewed by history as the person who was brave enough to tip over the first “domino” that eventually led to the whole house being bought down – and the garbage being cleared away.
Usually First Ladies and families of presidents focus on “healthy eating” or “better education for women”, whoop-de-doo things that only serve to keep them busy and looking good in front of the camera.
Families of the president never usually focus on anything gritty involving real human hardship. But not the Trumps. They don’t pretend everything is rosy.
They tell it how it is and are unafraid to rock the boat, regardless of what the establishment throws at them.
Ivanka Trump with her father, the President, promising to rid Washington DC of pedophiles once and for all
It’s not just the POTUS who is going for the jugular on the issues that count, it’s his family too.
‘Beginning Of The End’: Leaked Secret Recordings Expose Truth About CNN & The CIA Is One Of The Main Peddlers Of Fake News: Newly-Declassified Documents March 5 2017 | From: AnonHQ / GlobalResearch
As promised five days ago on the Sean Hannity radio show, James O’Keefe and his team at Project Veritas just released covertly captured, previously unheard audio footage from within the CNN newsroom.
But unlike his usual undercover sting operations, this footage was allegedly sourced from a CNN insider who apparently grew frustrated with the perpetually biased reporting of the “fake news” media outlet.
Per O’Keefe’s website, today’s release includes 119 hours of secretly recorded raw footage from an inside source at CNN with another 100 hours of footage still to be released.
Given the volume of footage to be released, O’Keefe is asking for help to transcribe and investigate the recordings and encourages users to provide tips on interesting discoveries here.
“The audio was secretly recorded in 2009 by an anonymous source inside CNN’s Atlanta headquarters who we are identifying as Miss X. The tapes contain soundbites from current and previous CNN employees Joe Sterling, Arthur Brice, and Nicky Robertson, as well as numerous others.
“In order to expose media malfeasance within CNN, we need your help transcribing, investigating and connecting the dots on these 200+ hours of audio. Leave comments, upload transcriptions or contact us with your tips below.”
Among other things, the audio recordings reveal CNN attempting to misrepresent polling data...
Miss X: “I read a CNN poll that was taken on June 26 and 28th, and I know that the hearing for the case, the fire fighters case was on the 29th, so the poll was done right before it, and those are still the poll results we’re reporting, so I asked someone in DC who does the poll results about why we hadn’t updated it, and said there were a few newer polls from last week and the week before and there’s CBS news polls and a Rasmussen poll, and he said we don’t use Rasmussen, and I said does CNN plan to do another poll if we’re only using that.
He said we’re not going to be doing another poll, those are the results we’ll be using. So I don’t see how that’s reporting all sides because that poll said hold for release until Friday the 10th.”
Arthur Brice: “Who did you talk with?”
Miss X: “Paul [CNN’s Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser].”
Arthur Brice: “Yeah, he’s your director. Yeah, he’s pretty high up in the food chain. I agree. I think it’s dishonest to use outdated information if new information shows something that is in variance with what you’re reporting. It’s just, it’s dishonest.”
…and again with polling data related to Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor:
Miss X: “This wasn’t released until two weeks after. So can we say a newly released poll?”
Joe Sterling: “No, you can’t say that. You can’t say that at all. This isn’t a newly released.”
Miss X: “But it says newly released on Friday.”
Joe Sterling: “I know, how did we write about this? Did we write a wire about this? “I don’t think we stand to change how people think of her [Sotomayor]. Geez, I mean if someone picked this up it’s not going to change – it’s not going to change anybody’s opinion.”
And, admitting what we all knew already, here is CNN’s former News Desk Editor, Joe Sterling, revealing his clear bias for Obama.
With that brief intro, here is O’Keefe’s latest work.
#CNNLeaks: Project Veritas Releases Over 100 Hours of Audio From Inside CNN
Project Veritas released 119 hours of raw audio in a WikiLeaks style dump, with over 100 more hours still yet to be released. The audio was secretly recorded in 2009 by an anonymous source inside CNN’s Atlanta headquarters who we are identifying as Miss X.
The tapes contain soundbites from current and previous CNN employees Joe Sterling, Arthur Brice, and Nicky Robertson, as well as numerous others. Project Veritas is also offering a $10,000 award for content that exposes media malfeasance.
The full 119 hours of audio footage will eventually be available here, but for now PV’s servers seem to be having a difficult time keeping up with the overwhelming demand from supporters eager to hear first-hand accounts of CNN’s bias.
Meanwhile, noting that this is just the “beginning of the end for the MSM,” O’Keefe also announced that he will pay a $10,000 award to anyone who comes forward with legally obtained audio or video footage exposing media malfeasance.
Snowden on Fake News
The CIA Is One Of The Main Peddlers Of Fake News: Newly-Declassified Documents
"After 1953, the network was overseen by Allen W. Dulles, director of the CIA. By this time, Operation Mockingbird had a major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. The usual methodology was placing reports developed from intelligence provided by the CIA to witting or unwitting reporters.
Those reports would then be repeated or cited by the preceding reporters which in turn would then be cited throughout the media wire services.
The Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) was funded by siphoning off funds intended for the Marshall Plan [i.e. the rebuilding of Europe by the U.S. after WWII]. Some of this money was used to bribe journalists and publishers."
"During the early years of the cold war, [prominent writers and artists, from Arthur Schlesinger Jr. to Jackson Pollock] were supported, sometimes lavishly, always secretly, by the C.I.A. as part of its propaganda war against the Soviet Union. It was perhaps the most successful use of “soft power” in American history."
A CIA operative told Washington Post owner Philip Graham … in a conversation about the willingness of journalists to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories:
"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month."
Famed Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein wrote in 1977:
"More than 400 American journalists … in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters."
"In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations."
"Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were [the heads of CBS, Time, the New York Times, the Louisville Courier‑Journal, and Copley News Service.
Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include [ABC, NBC, AP, UPI, Reuters], Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune."
"There is ample evidence that America’s leading publishers and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. “Let’s not pick on some poor reporters, for God’s sake,” William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee’s investigators. “Let’s go to the managements."
"The CIA even ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were “taught to make noises like reporters,” explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management."
"Once a year during the 1950s and early 1960s, CBS correspondents joined the CIA hierarchy for private dinners and briefings."
"Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the late Henry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience."
"In the 1950s and early 1960s, Time magazine’s foreign correspondents attended CIA “briefing” dinners similar to those the CIA held for CBS."
"When Newsweek was purchased by the Washington Post Company, publisher Philip L. Graham was informed by Agency officials that the CIA occasionally used the magazine for cover purposes, according to CIA sources. “It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from,” said a former deputy director of the Agency. “Frank Wisner dealt with him.”
Wisner, deputy director of the CIA from 1950 until shortly before his suicide in 1965, was the Agency’s premier orchestrator of “black” operations, including many in which journalists were involved. Wisner liked to boast of his “mighty Wurlitzer,” a wondrous propaganda instrument he built, and played, with help from the press.)"
"In November 1973, after [the CIA claimed to have ended the program], Colby told reporters and editors from the New York Times and the Washington Star that the Agency had “some three dozen” American newsmen “on the CIA payroll,” including five who worked for “general‑circulation news organizations.”
Yet even while the Senate Intelligence Committee was holding its hearings in 1976, according to high‑level CIA sources, the CIA continued to maintain ties with seventy‑five to ninety journalists of every description - executives, reporters, stringers, photographers, columnists, bureau clerks and members of broadcast technical crews.
More than half of these had been moved off CIA contracts and payrolls but they were still bound by other secret agreements with the Agency.
According to an unpublished report by the House Select Committee on Intelligence, chaired by Representative Otis Pike, at least fifteen news organizations were still providing cover for CIA operatives as of 1976."
"Those officials most knowledgeable about the subject say that a figure of 400 American journalists is on the low side …."
"There were a lot of representations that if this stuff got out some of the biggest names in journalism would get smeared."
A 4-part BBC documentary called the “Century of the Self” shows that an American - Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays - created the modern field of manipulation of public perceptions, and the U.S. government has extensively used his techniques.
John Pilger is a highly-regarded journalist (the BBC’s world affairs editor John Simpson remarked, “A country that does not have a John Pilger in its journalism is a very feeble place indeed”). Pilger said in 2007:
"We now know that the BBC and other British media were used by the British secret intelligence service MI-6. In what they called Operation Mass Appeal, MI-6 agents planted stories about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, such as weapons hidden in his palaces and in secret underground bunkers. All of these stories were fake."
"One of my favorite stories about the Cold War concerns a group of Russian journalists who were touring the United States. On the final day of their visit, they were asked by the host for their impressions.
“I have to tell you,” said the spokesman, “that we were astonished to find after reading all the newspapers and watching TV day after day that all the opinions on all the vital issues are the same.
To get that result in our country we send journalists to the gulag. We even tear out their fingernails. Here you don’t have to do any of that. What is the secret?”
"For the first time in human history, there is a concerted strategy to manipulate global perception. And the mass media are operating as its compliant assistants, failing both to resist it and to expose it.
The sheer ease with which this machinery has been able to do its work reflects a creeping structural weakness which now afflicts the production of our news. I’ve spent the last two years researching a book about falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media.
The “Zarqawi letter” which made it on to the front page of The New York Times in February 2004 was one of a sequence of highly suspect documents which were said to have been written either by or to Zarqawi and which were fed into news media.
This material is being generated, in part, by intelligence agencies who continue to work without effective oversight; and also by a new and essentially benign structure of “strategic communications” which was originally designed by doves in the Pentagon and Nato who wanted to use subtle and non-violent tactics to deal with Islamist terrorism but whose efforts are poorly regulated and badly supervised with the result that some of its practitioners are breaking loose and engaging in the black arts of propaganda."
"The Pentagon has now designated “information operations” as its fifth “core competency” alongside land, sea, air and special forces. Since October 2006, every brigade, division and corps in the US military has had its own “psyop” element producing output for local media. This military activity is linked to the State Department’s campaign of “public diplomacy” which includes funding radio stations and news websites.
In Britain, the Directorate of Targeting and Information Operations in the Ministry of Defence works with specialists from 15 UK psyops, based at the Defence Intelligence and Security School at Chicksands in Bedfordshire.
In the case of British intelligence, you can see this combination of reckless propaganda and failure of oversight at work in the case of Operation Mass Appeal.
This was exposed by the former UN arms inspector Scott Ritter, who describes in his book, Iraq Confidential, how, in London in June 1998, he was introduced to two “black propaganda specialists” from MI6 who wanted him to give them material which they could spread through “editors and writers who work with us from time to time”.
The government is still paying off reporters to spread disinformation. And the corporate media are acting like virtual “escort services” for the moneyed elites, selling access – for a price – to powerful government officials, instead of actually investigating and reporting on what those officials are doing.
One of the ways that the U.S. government spreads propaganda is by making sure that it gets its version out first. For example, the head of the U.S. Information Agency’s television and film division – Alvin A. Snyder – wrote in his book Warriors of Disinformation: How Lies, Videotape, and the USIA Won the Cold War:
"All governments, including our own, lie when it suits their purposes. The key is to lie first."
"Another casualty, always war’s first, was the truth. The story of [the accidental Russian shootdown of a Korean airliner] will be remembered pretty much the way we told it in 1983, not the way it really happened."
In 2013, the American Congress repealed the formal ban against the deployment of propaganda against U.S. citizens living on American soil. So there’s even less to constrain propaganda than before.
One of the most common uses of propaganda is to sell unnecessary and counter-productive wars.
Parry notes that many of the same people that led Reagan’s domestic propaganda effort in the 1980’s are in power today:
"While the older generation that pioneered these domestic propaganda techniques has passed from the scene, many of their protégés are still around along with some of the same organizations.
The National Endowment for Democracy, which was formed in 1983 at the urging of CIA Director Casey and under the supervision of Walter Raymond’s NSC operation, is still run by the same neocon, Carl Gershman, and has an even bigger budget, now exceeding $100 million a year.
Gershman and his NED played important behind-the-scenes roles in instigating the Ukraine crisis by financing activists, journalists and other operatives who supported the coup against elected President Yanukovych. The NED-backed Freedom House also beat the propaganda drums. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “A Shadow Foreign Policy.”]
Two other Reagan-era veterans, Elliott Abrams and Robert Kagan, have both provided important intellectual support for continuing U.S. interventionism around the world.
Earlier this year, Kagan’s article for The New Republic, entitled “Superpowers Don’t Get to Retire,” touched such a raw nerve with President Obama that he hosted Kagan at a White House lunch and crafted the presidential commencement speech at West Point to deflect some of Kagan’s criticism of Obama’s hesitancy to use military force."
Rupert Murdoch’s media empire is bigger than ever ….
Another key to American propaganda is the constant repetition of propaganda. As Business Insider reported in 2013:
In context, Colonel Leap is implying we ought to change the law to enable Public Affairs officers to influence American public opinion when they deem it necessary to “protect a key friendly center of gravity, to wit US national will.”
The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 appears to serve this purpose by allowing for the American public to be a target audience of U.S. government-funded information campaigns.
Davis also quotes Brigadier General Ralph O. Baker - the Pentagon officer responsible for the Department of Defense’s Joint Force Development - who defines Information Operations (IO) as activities undertaken to “shape the essential narrative of a conflict or situation and thus affect the attitudes and behaviors of the targeted audience.”
Brig. Gen. Baker goes on to equate descriptions of combat operations with the standard marketing strategy of repeating something until it is accepted:
For years, commercial advertisers have based their advertisement strategies on the premise that there is a positive correlation between the number of times a consumer is exposed to product advertisement and that consumer’s inclination to sample the new product. The very same principle applies to how we influence our target audiences when we conduct COIN.
And those “thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs” appear to serve Baker’s strategy, which states: “Repetition is a key tenet of IO execution, and the failure to constantly drive home a consistent message dilutes the impact on the target audiences.”
Government Massively Manipulates the Web, Social Media and Other Forms of Communication
Of course, the Web and social media have become a huge media platform, and the Pentagon and other government agencies are massivelymanipulatingboth.
Sometimes, the government plants disinformation in American media in order to mislead foreigners. For example, an official government summary of America’s overthrow of the democratically-elected president of Iran in the 1950's states,
“In cooperation with the Department of State, CIA had several articles planted in major American newspapers and magazines which, when reproduced in Iran, had the desired psychological effect in Iran and contributed to the war of nerves against Mossadeq” (page x).
For example, after Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges, journalist Naomi Wolf, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg and others sued the government to enjoin the NDAA’s allowance of the indefinite detention of Americans – the judge asked the government attorneys 5 times whether journalists like Hedges could be indefinitely detained simply for interviewing and then writing about bad guys. The government refusedto promise that journalists like Hedges won’t be thrown in a dungeon for the rest of their lives without any right to talk to a judge
In an effort to protect Bank of America from the threatened Wikileaks expose of the bank’s wrongdoing, the Department of Justice told Bank of America to a hire a specific hardball-playing law firm to assemble a team to take down WikiLeaks (and see this)
The interview was related to the recent Travel Ban that was put in place by the Trump Administration that blocks immigrants from entering the country from seven nations that have significant ties to Islamic terrorism.
Weighing in on one of the most contentious issues in American politics - the danger posed to host countries by the 4.8 million people who have fled from Syria’s civil war - Syrian President Bashar Assad told Yahoo News that some of the refugees are “definitely” terrorists.
In an exclusive interview with Yahoo News at a presidential office in Damascus, Assad said President Trump’s freeze on admitting refugees from his country - part of an executive order that has drawn widespread protests and is being challenged in federal court - “is an American issue” on which he would not take sides.
But asked if some of those who fled are “aligned with terrorists,” Assad quickly replied, “Definitely.”
"You can find it on the Net,” Assad went on: “Those terrorists in Syria, holding the machine gun or killing people, they [appear as] peaceful refugees in Europe or in the West.”
He said he couldn’t estimate how many there might be, but he added that “you don’t need a significant number to commit atrocities.”
He noted that the 9/11 attacks were pulled off by fewer than 20 terrorists “out of maybe millions of immigrants in the United States. So it’s not about the number, it’s about the quality, it’s about the intentions.”
As for the future of Syria’s 4.8 million refugees, Assad said, “For me, the priority is to bring those citizens to their country, not to help them immigrate.”
Assad went on to point out that you can see some of these terrorists that are holding guns and fighting alongside ISIS in pictures as “peaceful” refugees that are headed towards Europe or the west.
Russian MP Says Terrorists' Days Are Numbered In Syria After Palmyra's Liberation
Russia’s Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu reported earlier that the Syrian government troops had completed their operation to seize Palmyra with the support of the Russian air task force.
Terrorists’ days in Syria are numbered after the operation to retake Palmyra, the city will not return under militants’ control for a second time, a senior parliamentarian from the State Duma lower house of parliament said on Thursday.
"We can say definitely now that with the fall of such a city as Palmyra, days of the terrorist organizations on the long-suffering territory of the Syrian Arab Republic are numbered," first deputy of the Duma defense committee Andrei Krasov told TASS.
Russia’s Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu reported to President Vladimir Putin earlier in the day that the Syrian government troops had completed their operation to seize Palmyra with the support of the Russian air task force.
"Terrorists are fleeing the Syrian territory en masse, trying to dissolve, conceal their bloody deeds". "As to when a turning point in the operation came, this is of course when the Syrian troops jointly with the Russian Aerospace Forces seized Aleppo," Krasov said.
"As for Palmyra, it is a city of cultural and historical value, having a global significance," he stressed.
"This success of the Syrian Armed Forces and the Russian Aerospace Troops can hardly be overestimated," the politician said.
"Yet another city is freed from the ‘back death’ that has spread across the Middle East," he added.
Militants of the Islamic State terrorist grouping (outlawed in Russia) seized Palmyra in May 2015 and in late March 2016 the Syrian government troops liberated the city with the support of the Russian air task force. In December last year, Palmyra was recaptured by extremists.
United States In Deep Turmoil As Trump Confronts The Establishment + Trump To Release Hidden Technology? - Disruptive Technology And Free Energy Under Donald Trump? March 4 2017 | From: JournalNeo / SitsShow
With the departure of the Trump’s national security adviser, political crisis in the US has only depended and is likely to exacerbate into a full-fledged struggle for power and control between Trump and what some call ‘deep-state.’
Comment: This article come across as a bit negative. Bare in mind that to most, the existence of the Alliance that is working to take down the Cabal - and that supports Trump - is working terelessly behind the scenes. Major movements are taking place behind the scenes that very few are yet aware of. While the mainstream media are lying whores and cabal propagandists (whether they knoe it or not), many independent media commentators are plain and simply just out of the loop.
The Conservative Tribune reports, President Donald Trump was elected on the promise that he would “drain the swamp” of corruption in Washington and that he would appoint to his Cabinet only people who would help him do it.
While Donald Trump is an elected president of the United States of America, he doesn’t seem to be able to exercise power in actual terms. This is evident from the way a so-called ‘pro-Russian’ adviser has been forced to resign.
Following this resignation an intense debate has emerged in the US, leading a considerable number of people, 48 per cent according to a recent poll, reject the way Trump has performed in the first month of his presidency. Already Trump has retracted on Crimea.
Accordingly, he is in no hurry to engage Russia in Syria nor does he consider NATO to be “obsolete.” In the same vain, his U-turn towards China is something that nobody could foresee during his election campaign.
As of now, a great deal of Trump’s election rhetoric is dead and lies buried deep inside the rubric of deep structures of power, marking the very first instance of its sort when an American president has found himself deeply at odds with the system. And, there is no certainty that he can or may overcome this tussle and emerge as the American ‘knight in a shining armour.’
While this may or may not happen, a lot of questions about Trump’s ability to steer the course of American foreign and domestic policies have emerged following Flynn’s resignation and with it the so-called crisis of legitimacy has deepened, leaving minimum to no space for Trump to freely determine the course of American policy making.
How does Donald Trump win against the evil trying to stop his Administration? Financial expert Catherine Austin Fitts contends, “Trump wins by staying focused on the real issues. The U.S. economy needs a variety of things, including turning the federal budget around.
The reality is the federal budget has a negative return to taxpayers. It’s got to be turned positive. That comes down to tax reform, infrastructure and it comes down to Obama Care. Trump is the Titanic Turner, and he needs to stick to the big issues. He has to make sure the shriek-o-meter does not destroy his top lieutenants and put space between him and them. Otherwise, the pigs are going to step in and run things.”
In closing, Fitts says, “What’s killing this economy is corruption and lawlessness. That’s what’s killing the economy. We need to deal with these problems.”
The crisis, or the power struggle, has depend to an extent where an American elected president has been forced to publicly blame American intelligence agencies for feeding media with information against him and claimed that today`s America was `just like Russia`.
The Russophobia campaign is, indeed, being fed to the American public and the declining support for Trump is a direct result of this spread of false information than an outcome of an actual ‘bad performance.’
The media leaks have already led to Michael Flynn`s resignation. The Washington Post has recently reported that Flynn had “discussed sanctions” with a Russian official during the transition period, although Flynn had assured Vice President Mike Pence that this did not happen.
In turn, The New York Times noted on February 14, 2017, that other officials of the Trump administration and his election campaign have had contacts with Russian intelligence agents as well.
The media`s propagandist claims has certainly irked Trump who went to his favourite medium of communication Twitter to fire off a series of tweets, attacking the media as well as the intelligence agencies. In at least two tweets, Trump named the agencies the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and National Security Agency (NSA) that he said were `running a campaign against him`.
`The real scandal here is that classified information is illegally given out by `intelligence` like candy. ‘Very un-American’, he tweeted. `Information is being illegally given to the failing New York Times and Washington Post by the intelligence community.
The crisis that has thus ensued and which is being fanned out by the mainstream US media is asking for changes in the policies, particularly towards Russia about Crimea and co-operation in Syria, that Trump had advocated during his election campaign.
We have already seen that some of it has already changed. What this retraction implies, in political terms, is that the establishment has also shown that it has the ability and the grit to undermine Trump if he were to deviate from their script - a script that is premised on the existence of an enemy (Russia) and which the establishment and the deep-state can use to protect, enhance and materialize its own political and economic interests in both domestic and global political and economic arenas.
The “Russophobia” based containment of Donald Trump is, however, not going to remain exclusive to the US’ domestic political circles.
On the contrary, it is likely, and already has, to expand into international political arena and is going to define and shape Trump’s relations with the US’ European allies, who in turn are neither comfortable with Trump’s foreign policy nor are going to allow him to retract the US-NATO security system (read: NATO is no longer “obsolete”).
Interestingly enough, this ‘trans-Atlantic Russophobia’ is being transformed into a new Cold War. The NATO defence ministers have been recently been discusing the presence of their fleets in the Black Sea in a closed summit in Bruselrs.
Clearly, the western bloc on the whole loathes Trump, creating an unprecedented disequilibrium within the Western alliance wherein Trump leads the alliance, but the partners do not know how far he is to be taken seriously due to his inability to control things (read: establishment’s course of action is more appealing to the NATO allies for its anti-Russia, pro-sanctions commitments).
The Trump administration has lost, by losing Flynn, its authority and the ability to guide the American public to its vision.
On the contrary, the media-establishment nexus has hijacked Donal Trump’s own vision, forcing him to forget his election rhetoric promises and come out in the open to fight for his political survival through social media.
Just as Trump’s confrontation with the American establishment is causing unease in the domestic and European political arena, Trump’s fight with the establishment is being equally fought in both domestic and European arenas.
Whereas Trump has resorted to twitter to fight back a sustained media campaign, in the European arena he has hit back by re-casting doubts over the US’ commitment to NATO.
That is to say, while he no doubt has willy-nilly accepted NATO as the “bedrock” of American security, Mattis’ remarks at NATO defence ministers’ meeting show that the crisis is not yet over and that it will remain unsettled unless the dust of the tussle between Trump and American establishment remains in the air - something that may not happen overnight - and unless the all-powerful American establishment succeeds in modifying Trump into a typical Neo-Con hawk.
President Trump Addresses the Joint Session of Congress
Copyright, Intellectual Property And The Extradition Saga Of Kim Dotcom March 4 2017 | From: GlobalResearch The hunger with which US officials pursue copyright or general intellectual property violations is insatiably manic. The degree of that hunger is expressed by the now suspended, and most likely defunct Trans-Pacific Partnership, an attempt to further globalise the policing of IP laws in favour of corporate and copyright control.
Then come the vigilantes and those singing different, discordant tunes suggesting another alternative.
One such figure was Kim Dotcom, founder of Megaupload and on the US Department of Justice wanted list for some years, along with company co-founders Mathias Ortmann, Bram van der Kolk and Finn Batato.
His case is doing the torturous rounds in New Zealand, where the German-born defendant remains based, still seeing whether he can elude US authorities on the subject of inventive alleged violations.
It has become one of the largest criminal copyright cases in history, beginning after Dotcom’s dramatic arrest in 2012 at his New Zealand mansion at the hands of dozens of agents, both NZ and US, along with two helicopters.
The New Zealand court decided at the start of this week that the 2015 decision of the lower court favouring the extradition of Kim Dotcom and his co-defendants be upheld.
Justice Murray Gilbert of the High Court seemed rather tricky with his reasoning. For one, he admitted
"That online communication of copyright protected works to the public is not a criminal offence in New Zealand under s. 131 of the Copyright Act.”
Dotcom and his legal team would have felt rather thrilled with that. The prosecution plank had collapsed. Case closed. Except, of course, that it hadn’t. Justice Gilbert proceeded to assume a mighty pulpit and preach despite the absence of a NZ copyright offence in this case.
Much of this lay in the prosecutorial effort to expand the range of offences, a tactic the Dotcom team termed “massaging”. In widening the net, acts amounting to internet piracy were suggested, including racketeering, money laundering, to name but a few charges additional to the issue of copyright infringement.
Many coalesced around the issue of conspiracy, a favourite, catch-all provision US prosecutors have loved to employ.
The Crimes Act, in other words, had loomed into judicial consideration with its full force, its “general criminal law fraud provisions” doing their bit to undermine the case of the appellants, despite Dotcom’s assertion that this was purely a copyright matter.
Read along with s. 101B of the Extradition Act itself, the judge agreed “that the appellants are eligible for extradition on all counts for which their surrender is sought.”
That wilful infringement supposedly committed by Dotcom did something devastating to the copyright holder: deprive it “of something to which it may be entitled.” (The amount alleged is staggering: $500 million worth. Dotcom is alleged to have netted $175 million in criminal proceeds.) It followed that the alleged conduct on count 2 constituted “the offence of conspiracy to defraud in terms of art II.16.”
Article II, paragraph 16 of the extradition treaty between the US and NZ outlines the grounds for extradition:
"Obtaining property, money or valuable securities by false pretences or by conspiracy to defraud the public or any person by deceit or falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether such deceit or falsehood or any fraudulent means would or would not amount to a false pretense.”
Digital activists have a brat element to them, an impetuousness that follows the crooked over the straight. They are often necessary boons excavating to find deficiencies in existing systems, rather than spotty criminals to be potted.
In Dotcom’s case, a cloud storage provider is being prosecuted, an aspect that has grave implications in the broader internet domain. For one, it suggests a self-policing dimension to the operations of such an enterprise.
Dotcom’s claims there, rather reasonably, are that policing the behaviour of 50 million daily users of a site is hardly credible, though efforts were made to detect copyright infringements. For all that, the US DOJ would still claim that there was a mere “veneer of legality” to such operations.
As Dotcom’s barrister, Ron Mansfield, said after Justice Gilbert had down his judgment;
"The High Court has accepted that Parliament made a clear and deliberate decision not to criminalise this type of alleged conduct by internet service providers, making them not responsible for the acts of their users.”