Archive for the ‘..Ummm... Eugenics’Category
New Canaan, Connecticut Schools Consider Tracking Students With RFID
“Sure why not. Train the little slaves of the future. Insane.” (I can’t even begin to illustrate what I would do if some flunky teacher who tried to hook-in my imaginary kid).
-Fred Face 8/31/10
by Lee Bains
One of the United States’ most affluent cities is debating whether or not, and how, to track its students with RFID tags. School officials in New Canaan, Connecticut have engaged in talks with SecureRF Corporation, which has applied for a $100,000 federal research grant and is hoping to find test partners. Among the potential applications for the radio-frequency identification devices (like those used in mobile payment systems) bandied about were tracking students for the purpose of emergency evacuations, streamlining the bus system and monitoring who’s cutting class. At least one board member, it seems, has some sense, though. “I can perceive parents would have an issue with tracking kids through the school and through town,” Jim Kucharczyk told the New Canaan Advertiser. “There’s a big difference between putting this on the school bus [and] putting it on backpacks or an ID card.”
Fortunately for the students of New Canaan High School, Superintendent Dr. David Abbey has made clear that participation in the experiment would not be mandatory, and that it would require both student and parental permission. Of course, this raises the question: what kind of kid would jump at the opportunity to be tracked? We have a sneaking suspicion that the RFID data would skew towards the library, computer lab and the student crossing guard.
http://www.switched.com/2010/08/24/new-canaan-connecticut-schools-consider-tracking-students-with/2
31
08 2010
Ban TV to protect children’s health, top psychologist tells EU politicians
“Sounds about right.”
-F.F.
TV should be banned for toddlers and severely rationed for other youngsters to protect their health and family life, a leading psychologist will tell MEPs today.
Dr Aric Sigman claims that millions of children spending hours slumped in front of TVs and computers is ‘the greatest unacknowledged health scandal of our time’.
He says it is linked to ills ranging from obesity and heart disease to poor grades and lack of empathy.
Some British children spend as much as seven-and-a-half hours a day in front of a screen - the equivalent of a full year of 24-hour days by the age of seven.
Dr Sigman, an Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society, believes that the youngest children, whose brains are undergoing massive development, should not watch any TV at all.
From the ages of three to 12, boys and girls should be limited to an hour a day, rising to an hour and a half for teenagers.
The psychologist will tell an EU parliamentary working group on the ‘quality of childhood’ that TVs and computers should be kept out of bedrooms until a child is 15.
‘Governments throughout Europe regularly advise their citizens on the most intimate health matters: from daily grams of salt intake and units of alcohol to number of sexual partners,’ he will say.
‘Yet when it comes to children’s main waking activity, politicians are mysteriously lost for words.
‘Irrespective of what our children are watching or doing on the screen, a clear relationship is emerging between daily hours of screen time and negative medical, psychological, behavioural and educational consequences.
‘The more hours per day, the more likely the risk of these negative consequences and the greater their intensity.
‘Most of the damage linked to screen viewing seems to occur beyond exposure of one-and-a-half hours per day, irrespective of the quality of the content. Yet the average child is exposed to three to five times this amount.’
Dr Sigman’s work and studies by other researchers around the world link TV and computer time with problems including obesity, high cholesterol and blood pressure, inattentiveness, declines in maths and reading, sleep disorders and autism.
A recent US study found that many youngsters are so engrossed in surfing the internet, playing computer games and watching TV, that they don’t even notice when their father comes home from work.
France banned TV programmes aimed at under-threes two years ago.
31
08 2010
Gates Foundation Puts Its Money Where Its Mouth Is
Posted by Jill Richardson
Well, well, well. It’s about time. Kind of like when Fox News gave $1 million in campaign contributions to Republicans. It wasn’t exactly a secret before, but now it’s official. The Gates Foundation just bought a whopping 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock.
Now, there’s nothing wrong with buying stock. My parents hold lots of BP stock, and they are hardly guilty of dumping the 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf. But this is one more step in a long line of actions by the Gates Foundation in which it is advocating policies and agricultural technologies that will directly benefit and profit Monsanto while screwing over the most vulnerable people on earth: hungry subsistence farmers in developing countries.
I wrote a piece recently about what happens when American industrial agriculture collides with poor, uneducated subsistence farmers in the developing world and it ain’t pretty. In fact, it’s tragic. It’s criminal. For a corporation to prey upon such a vulnerable population for its own gain, when the result is the starvation, continued impoverishment, or loss of land and lifestyle of the poor.
Perhaps Gates thinks he is doing something good for the world with his advocacy of biotechnology and industrial agriculture. No doubt all of the executives from Monsanto and other biotech and chemical companies tell him that every day. He should instead listen to the 400 scientists who spent 3 years performing the most comprehensive study of agricultural knowledge, science, and technology in the history of the world, the IAASTD report. The report recommends agroecology – what many in the U.S. would refer to as “organics” (even though the term is more nuanced than that).
See the press release from AGRA Watch here.
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/08/26/gates-foundation-puts-its-money-where-its-mouth-is/
30
08 2010
Vaccine Deaths And Injuries Skyrocket As Cover-Up Implodes
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Monday, August 30, 2010
Global revolt against deadly vaccines spreads as cases of debilitating illnesses, soft-kill side-effects and even instant deaths become widespread
Cases of debilitating illnesses, soft-kill side-effects and even instant deaths as a result of vaccinations across the world are skyrocketing as the cover-up of deadly inoculations implodes and more people than ever become suspicious about what they are being injected with by health authorities who have proven they cannot be trusted.
The implosion of the vaccine cover-up is sure to discourage more parents from vaccinating their children in the coming months, with the swine flu shot now being combined with the regular seasonal flu jab. A recent Rasmussen poll found that 52 per cent of Americans were concerned about the safety of vaccines as we approach the start of school and college terms, where many children and teenagers will be “required” to take shots before they can attend.
A global revolt against dangerous vaccines is brewing following a series of cases where children have been killed as a direct result of inoculations.
A measles vaccination program in India was halted after four children died almost immediately after receiving the shot. “Four children died within minutes of receiving a vaccine for measles followed by drops of Vitamin A solution on Saturday,” reports MedGuru.
Indian newspaper reports carried eyewitness accounts of what happened. “The four children were reported to have fainted soon after they were vaccinated and witnesses reported seeing the children’s eyes roll back as they began to have seizures,” reports Blitz.
Furious villagers reacted to the tragedy by going on a rampage, attacking health workers and holding government doctors hostage.
Health professionals and doctors with government ties were also blamed in Finland and Sweden after aH1N1 vaccination program was halted following a 300 per cent increase in cases of the neurological disorder narcolepsy amongst children and young people who had received the shot over the last six months.
According to Kari Lankinen, head physician of the Finnish Medicines Agency, doctors were complicit in hiding the link between the swine flu shot and narcolepsy and did so to advance their careers.
Meanwhile, concerned mothers whose daughters have been injured or killed by the Gardasil vaccine have put together a website that documents the truth about how the vaccine has killed and injured thousands of young girls since it was introduced in 2006. Thousands of teenagers have suffered adverse reactions and at least 71 have died from the vaccine since the HPV program was launched four years ago.
The global vaccine cover-up took a massive blow after it was confirmed that the 2009 swine flu outbreak was, as we predicted from the start, a contrived scam centered around making vast profits for pharmaceutical companies while endangering the health of the public.
As we reported earlier this year, Chair of the Council of Europe’s Sub-committee on Health Wolfgang Wodarg’s investigation into the 2009 swine flu outbreak found that the pandemic was a fake hoax manufactured by pharmaceutical companies in league with the WHO.
Wodarg said that governments were “threatened” by special interest groups within the pharmaceutical industry as well as the WHO to buy the vaccines and inject their populations without any reasonable scientific reason for doing so, and yet in countries like Germany and France only around 6 per cent took the vaccine despite enough being available to cover 90 per cent of the population.
Wodarg said there was “no other explanation” for what happened than the fact that the WHO worked in cahoots with the pharmaceutical industry to manufacture the panic in order to generate vast profits, agreeing with host Alex Jones that the entire farce was a hoax.
He also explained how health authorities were “already waiting for something to happen” before the pandemic started and then exploited the virus for their own purposes.
Professor Ulrich Keil, director of the World Health Organization’s Collaborating Centre for Epidemiology, also slammed the swine flu epidemic as an overblown “angst campaign”, devised in conjunction with major drug companies to boost profits for vaccine manufacturers.
As Natural News’ Mike Adams reported, several members of the Emergency Committee expert panel that advised the World Health Organization (WHO) during the swine flu scare were receiving financial support from pharmaceutical manufacturers either during or prior to the epidemic.
Both H1N1 and seasonal flu shots have been linked with a number of different side-effects across the globe, including Guillain-Barré Syndrome as well as dystonia, a paralyzing neurological disorder.
The seasonal flu vaccine has also been linked with convulsions and fits in under-5′s.
Many batches of the swine flu vaccine included squalene and mercury amongst their ingredients, two substances that have been directly connected with the explosion of autism amongst children as well as other diseases. Individuals within government and the military were privileged to receive additive free shots that did not include these substances. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and government ministers, as well as German soldiers, were amongst those who received access to the so-called “friendly” version of the vaccine.
In order to head off legal claims for side-effects caused by the swine flu vaccination program, the U.S. government provided vaccine makers with blanket legal immunity before the shots began to be dispersed.
Citing concerns over safety, Prime Minister Donald Tusk and Health Minister Ewa Kopacz, with the broad support of the public, ensured that Poland was the only country in the world to completely reject the H1N1 vaccine.
“We are making this decision only in the interest of the Polish patient and the taxpayer,” Tusk said. “We will not take part because it’s not honest and it’s not safe for the patient.”
In a 2008 trial for a bird flu vaccine, three Polish doctors and six nurses faced criminal charges after the vaccine killed 21 homeless people who were participating in the test.
The Czech Republic rejected a swine flu vaccine produced by pharmaceutical manufacturer Baxter after the company was caught shipping vaccines contaminated with deadly live H5N1 avian flu virus to 18 countries by a lab at an Austrian branch of Baxter.
Given the routinely stated goal on behalf of mega-rich foundations that fund vaccination programs around the world, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, to use vaccines as a way of sterilizing the planet’s population as part of the global eugenics soft-kill assault on humanity, it’s unsurprising that as more people become aware of this agenda, take-up rates of new as well as seasonal vaccines continue to decline.
As Jurriaan Maessen recently documented in his Infowars exclusive, in its 1968 yearly report, the Rockefeller Foundation acknowledged funding the development of so-called “anti-fertility vaccines” and their implementation on a mass-scale.
This program was then launched by a group that was created under auspices of the World Health Organization, World Bank and UN Population Fund entitled “Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation”. In the 1990′s, the WHO was mired in controversy after it distributed a “tetanus vaccine” to poor girls and women in the third world that was contaminated with human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a hormone that induces involuntary abortion.
During a TED conference earlier this year, Bill Gates openly stated that vaccines would be used to lower the earth’s population in the name of combating climate change. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the major funders of vaccine research and production in the third world.
Warning that the global population was heading towards 9 billion, Gates said, “If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services (abortion), we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 per cent.”
Quite how an improvement in health care and vaccines that supposedly save lives would lead to a lowering in global population is an oxymoron, unless Gates was referring to vaccines that sterilize people, which is precisely the same method advocated in White House science advisor John P. Holdren’s 1977 textbook Ecoscience, which calls for a dictatorial “planetary regime” to enforce draconian measures of population reduction via all manner of oppressive techniques, including sterilization.
With people globally becoming increasingly aware of the role of vaccines in the agenda to reduce world population, the cover-up of debilitating diseases, soft kill side-effects, and instant fatalities as a result of vaccinations will continue to implode, until authorities are forced by law to implement vastly more stringent screening procedures and remove the toxic additives from vaccines that are causing these deaths and diseases.
http://www.infowars.com/vaccine-deaths-and-injuries-skyrocket-as-cover-up-implodes/
30
08 2010
Finland Suspends Swine Flu Shots After Vaccine Linked With Neurological Disorder
“Wow a government toying with honestly… wish we had one…”
-F.F.
Minister of Health and Social Services Paula Risikko says it is essential to thoroughly examine suspicions that increased outbreaks of child narcolepsy might be linked to the H1N1 swine flu vaccine.
However, the Minister said the swine flu vaccination programme would continue. In her view, Risikko thought it wise to examine any connection between narcolepsy and swine flu vaccine in other European countries.
The National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) is to determine if vaccine for the H1N1 swine flu could be linked to an increase in cases of narcolepsy among children.
The condition causes excessive daytime sleepiness even after adequate nocturnal sleep.
Although the THL’s Vaccine Department Director Terhi Kilpi does not fear any connection between the H1N1 jab and narcolepsy, she says doubts must be examined.
Experts on both vaccines and narcolepsy met on Wednesday to discuss the issue.
Doubts arose when a Finnish child neurologist noticed an increased level in the number of narcolepsy cases this year. Similar observations have been noticed in Sweden, reports the tabloid Iltalehti.
Medical officials in Sweden are also examining a possible link between the Pandemrix vaccine and narcolepsy, according to the newspaper Svenska Dagbladet. The Swedish news agency TT reports six cases with a possible link to the vaccine.
A patient suffering from narcolepsy may suddenly fall asleep, for example, while, speaking or eating without prior warning. Their muscles may also suddenly weaken, causing them to suddenly collapse. There is no known cure for the disease.
Several Times Normal Rate of Cases
About a dozen Finnish children fell ill with narcolepsy during or after last winter’s swine flu epidemic, far more than the average rate. The THL is trying to determine whether the cases may have been related to the H1N1 vaccine or to the flu itself.
The cases were diagnosed during the spring and early summer. Dr Markku Partinen, a docent in neurology at the University of Helsinki and former president of the World Association of Sleep Medicine, notes that the cases appear to have a chronological link to the H1N1 epidemic.
Doctors began to wonder when an unusually large number of cases of narcolepsy began to appear last spring.
“When it became clear that the symptoms began to appear in December, January and February, we began to consider a link to the swine flu epidemic,” says Partinen.
So far about 12-14 cases have been detected, all with symptoms that began between December and February, says Partinen. The patients are aged 5 to 15.
On average about three cases of the illness are diagnosed in Finland annually.
25
08 2010
If you want to know what tyranny is like, look around.
“None Dare Call It Tyranny.”
By Sheldon Richman
If you want to know what tyranny is like, look around.
The national government — specifically the executive branch — can do pretty much what it wants. It could bomb Iran tomorrow without a declaration of war from Congress. It can — and does — conduct secret wars and covert operations against countries that have done nothing to us. Of course, they are secret only to the ignorant taxpayers who must finance them and perhaps suffer when the provoked retaliation occurs. It can have men behind PlayStation consoles in Nevada fire Hellfire missiles from aerial drones on people in Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere.
This tyrannical government can send any foreigner picked up anywhere in the world to third countries known for torturing prisoners. It can hold people accused of nothing indefinitely in prisons in Cuba and Afghanistan and torture them into making false confessions. It can conduct a war crimes trial in a military kangaroo court for a man, Omar Khadr, held captive for eight years after he was picked up at the age of 15 during a U.S. assault on villagers near Kabul. His torture-induced “confessions” will be admissible. All this is in violation of commitments under the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict not to treat children in war as though they were adults.
It can assassinate even American citizens abroad without a scent of due process.
It is a government that can write its own warrants without judicial review — and call them national security letters — in order to conduct fishing expeditions in anyone’s electronic records. But that isn’t enough power for the present Progressive administration, which wants the freedom to examine our browser histories and email correspondents’ names. The Bill of Rights, like the Geneva Convention, has become “quaint” and obsolete.
Like any self-respecting tyranny, it tries to keep the truth from its subjects. Comforting words camouflage the 50,000 armed and combat-ready troops that will remain in Iraq after “withdrawal.” Their “primary” mission is to train an army whose own general says won’t be ready for years. This gross deception follows on the heralded “surge,” which supposedly turned things around in Iraq. What “worked,” however, was not U.S. military prowess or Gen. David Petraeus’s brilliance, but the spreading of American taxpayers’ cash to buy off Sunni insurgents and the denouement of ethnic cleansing in Baghdad.
And, again, like any self-respecting tyranny, it bridles at leaks of classified documents that tell the people the truth. Solemn administration officials condemn Wikileaks and its sources for supposedly jeopardizing U.S. troops and Afghan collaborators, while adding that nothing new had been revealed. With no sense of irony, the same officials find blood on the hands of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange, ignoring the rivers of blood their policies and weapons have produced in the Middle East and South Central Asia. Without those policies, there would be nothing to leak. Some call for the assassination of Assange, and for all we know he is on President Obama’s kill list. Meanwhile a courageous young soldier, Bradley Manning, who apparently leaked video of American troops committing cold-blooded murder in Baghdad, faces 52 years in prison.
Now we are being softened up for the next war, against Iran. As in 2002 with Iraq’s phantom WMDs, the empire advance men tell us Iran is building nuclear weapons, and Obama and Secretary of State Clinton say “all options are on the table,” which phrase includes hydrogen bombs. Once again a Big Lie is repeated without proof. The reason is simple: all evidence runs the other way. The government’s own intelligence agencies say Iran has no nuclear-weapons program, and the International Atomic Energy Agency is on the scene. But no matter. If it suits the tyrannical administration or its partner in empire, Israel, bombs of some kind will fall. The consequences all around will be horrible.
Can it really be tyranny if we get to vote? Yes. Thomas Jefferson warned of “elective despotism.” How valuable is your one vote when the government manipulates and distorts the flow of information, when Congress capitulates, and when the “adversarial” mainstream media act like government press agents, if not adoring lapdogs. The ugly truth is out there, but you have to want to know it.
25
08 2010
Full-Body Scan Technology Deployed In Street-Roving Vans
by Andy Greenberg
As the privacy controversy around full-body security scans begins tosimmer, it’s worth noting thatcourthouses andairport security checkpoints aren’t the only places where backscatter x-ray vision is being deployed. The same technology, capable of seeing through clothes and walls, has also been rolling out on U.S. streets.
American Science & Engineering, a company based in Billerica, Massachusetts, has sold U.S. and foreign government agencies more than 500 backscatter x-ray scanners mounted in vans that can be driven past neighboring vehicles to see their contents, Joe Reiss, a vice president of marketing at the company told me in an interview. While the biggest buyer of AS&E’s machines over the last seven years has been the Department of Defense operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, Reiss says law enforcement agencies have also deployed the vans to search for vehicle-based bombs in the U.S.
“This product is now the largest selling cargo and vehicle inspection system ever,” says Reiss.
Here’s a video of the vans in action.
The Z Backscatter Vans, or ZBVs, as the company calls them, bounce a narrow stream of x-rays off and through nearby objects, and read which ones come back. Absorbed rays indicate dense material such as steel. Scattered rays indicate less-dense objects that can include explosives, drugs, or human bodies. That capability makes them powerful tools for security, law enforcement, and border control.
It would also seem to make the vans mobile versions of the same scanning technique that’s riled privacy advocates as it’s been deployed in airports around the country. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is currently suing the DHS to stop airport deployments of the backscatter scanners, which can reveal detailed images of human bodies. (Just how much detail became clear last May, when TSA employee Rolando Negrin was charged with assaulting a coworker who made jokes about the size of Negrin’s genitalia after Negrin received a full-body scan.)
“It’s no surprise that goverments and vendors are very enthusiastic about [the vans],” says Marc Rotenberg, executive director of EPIC. “But from a privacy perspective, it’s one of the most intrusive technologies conceivable.”
AS&E’s Reiss counters privacy critics by pointing out that the ZBV scans don’t capture nearly as much detail of human bodies as their airport counterparts. The company’s marketing materials say that its “primary purpose is to image vehicles and their contents,” and that “the system cannot be used to identify an individual, or the race, sex or age of the person.”
Though Reiss admits that the systems “to a large degree will penetrate clothing,” he points to the lack of features in images of humans like the one shown at right, far less detail than is obtained from the airport scans. “From a privacy standpoint, I’m hard-pressed to see what the concern or objection could be,” he says.
But EPIC’s Rotenberg says that the scans, like those in the airport, potentially violate the fourth amendment. “Without a warrant, the government doesn’t have a right to peer beneath your clothes without probable cause,” he says. Even airport scans are typically used only as a secondary security measure, he points out. “If the scans can only be used in exceptional cases in airports, the idea that they can be used routinely on city streets is a very hard argument to make.”
The TSA’s official policy dictates that full-body scans must be viewed in a separate room from any guards dealing directly with subjects of the scans, and that the scanners won’t save any images. Just what sort of safeguards might be in place for AS&E’s scanning vans isn’t clear, given that the company won’t reveal just which law enforcement agencies, organizations within the DHS, or foreign governments have purchased the equipment. Reiss says AS&E has customers on “all continents except Antarctica.”
Reiss adds that the vans do have the capability of storing images. “Sometimes customers need to save images for evidentiary reasons,” he says. “We do what our customers need.”
25
08 2010
Toxic legacy of US assault on Fallujah ‘worse than Hiroshima’
By Patrick Cockburn
Dramatic increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukaemia in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, which was bombarded by US Marines in 2004, exceed those reported by survivors of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, according to a new study.
Iraqi doctors in Fallujah have complained since 2005 of being overwhelmed by the number of babies with serious birth defects, ranging from a girl born with two heads to paralysis of the lower limbs. They said they were also seeing far more cancers than they did before the battle for Fallujah between US troops and insurgents.
Their claims have been supported by a survey showing a four-fold increase in all cancers and a 12-fold increase in childhood cancer in under-14s. Infant mortality in the city is more than four times higher than in neighbouring Jordan and eight times higher than in Kuwait.
Dr Chris Busby, a visiting professor at the University of Ulster and one of the authors of the survey of 4,800 individuals in Fallujah, said it is difficult to pin down the exact cause of the cancers and birth defects. He added that “to produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened”.
US Marines first besieged and bombarded Fallujah, 30 miles west of Baghdad, in April 2004 after four employees of the American security company Blackwater were killed and their bodies burned. After an eight-month stand-off, the Marines stormed the city in November using artillery and aerial bombing against rebel positions. US forces later admitted that they had employed white phosphorus as well as other munitions.
In the assault US commanders largely treated Fallujah as a free-fire zone to try to reduce casualties among their own troops. British officers were appalled by the lack of concern for civilian casualties. “During preparatory operations in the November 2004 Fallujah clearance operation, on one night over 40 155mm artillery rounds were fired into a small sector of the city,” recalled Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, a British commander serving with the American forces in Baghdad.
He added that the US commander who ordered this devastating use of firepower did not consider it significant enough to mention it in his daily report to the US general in command. Dr Busby says that while he cannot identify the type of armaments used by the Marines, the extent of genetic damage suffered by inhabitants suggests the use of uranium in some form. He said: “My guess is that they used a new weapon against buildings to break through walls and kill those inside.”
The survey was carried out by a team of 11 researchers in January and February this year who visited 711 houses in Fallujah. A questionnaire was filled in by householders giving details of cancers, birth outcomes and infant mortality. Hitherto the Iraqi government has been loath to respond to complaints from civilians about damage to their health during military operations.
Researchers were initially regarded with some suspicion by locals, particularly after a Baghdad television station broadcast a report saying a survey was being carried out by terrorists and anybody conducting it or answering questions would be arrested. Those organising the survey subsequently arranged to be accompanied by a person of standing in the community to allay suspicions.
The study, entitled “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009″, is by Dr Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi, and concludes that anecdotal evidence of a sharp rise in cancer and congenital birth defects is correct. Infant mortality was found to be 80 per 1,000 births compared to 19 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan and 9.7 in Kuwait. The report says that the types of cancer are “similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout”.
Researchers found a 38-fold increase in leukaemia, a ten-fold increase in female breast cancer and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumours in adults. At Hiroshima survivors showed a 17-fold increase in leukaemia, but in Fallujah Dr Busby says what is striking is not only the greater prevalence of cancer but the speed with which it was affecting people.
Of particular significance was the finding that the sex ratio between newborn boys and girls had changed. In a normal population this is 1,050 boys born to 1,000 girls, but for those born from 2005 there was an 18 per cent drop in male births, so the ratio was 850 males to 1,000 females. The sex-ratio is an indicator of genetic damage that affects boys more than girls. A similar change in the sex-ratio was discovered after Hiroshima.
The US cut back on its use of firepower in Iraq from 2007 because of the anger it provoked among civilians. But at the same time there has been a decline in healthcare and sanitary conditions in Iraq since 2003. The impact of war on civilians was more severe in Fallujah than anywhere else in Iraq because the city continued to be blockaded and cut off from the rest of the country long after 2004. War damage was only slowly repaired and people from the city were frightened to go to hospitals in Baghdad because of military checkpoints on the road into the capital.
23
08 2010
City receives citation for not fluoridating water
BY: JON CHOWN
The City of Watsonville has been cited by the California Department of Public Health for failure to comply with an order by the state to fluoridate the water supply.
The citation was received by the city Thursday and demands written assurance from the city by Aug. 29 that it will comply, and plan and schedule for fluoridation submitted by Sept. 19.
City Attorney Al Smith said the citation appeared “out of the clear blue.”
“We have been in communication with the Department of Health Services,” he said. “I was surprised … but it is what it is.”
Fluoridation has been an issue ever since the City Council first passed a resolution accepting a grant to fluoridate. In February 2002, Flouridation 2010 Workgroup offered the city $946,000 to fluoridate, but in November of that year, Watsonville residents concerned about the safety of fluoridation passed Measure S, banning all substances from the water not specifically approved by the Food and Drug Administration, which includes fluoride.
But a state law requires cities to fluoridate if given the funding to do so, and Watsonville lost its battle in court to honor the voters’ wishes. However, that case was decided years ago, and the city and the California Dental Association Foundation have been wrangling over a contract ever since as the city tries to make certain the project will cost it nothing. Of specific concern are lawsuits associated with the project.
http://www.register-pajaronian.com/v2_news_articles.php?heading=0&story_id=9337&page=72
23
08 2010
FDA uses massive egg recall to push for egg pasteurization
“problem-reaction-solution.” (textbook stuff).
-F.Egg
(NaturalNews) Amid the massive egg recall currently underway over potential salmonella poisoning, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been working hard to push its pasteurization agenda. The agency recently made an announcement recommending that all grocery stores and restaurants begin stocking pasteurized eggs instead of raw ones.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the number of salmonella cases being reported has been steadily increasing throughout the summer. Rather than the average 50 illnesses reported each week, June and July saw numbers as high as 200 per week, prompting a response from the FDA.
However, in typical FDA fashion, the agency has decided to ignore the actual cause of illness and contamination — filthy, industrialized food production systems — and instead call for all eggs to be cooked before being sold to consumers.
Other recent outbreak scares include both spinach and tomato recalls, after which the FDA made similar recommendations urging produce irradiation as the solution. But this philosophy fails to address the real problem with the current food system.
The industrial food system is both unsustainable and unhealthy. Whether with animals or produce, the methods typically used to raise food commercially are toxic and unsanitary, and are actually responsible for causing food contamination. Animals and produce that are raised organically and naturally, the way nature intended, do not become contaminated withsalmonella.
But none of this phases the nation’s regulatory agencies, which continue to push for killing food rather than trying to clean up the system and fix the problem at the source.
http://www.naturalnews.com/029538_FDA_egg_pasteurization.html
22
08 2010
‘Fructose-Slurping’ Cancer Could Sour the Soda Business
“And they’ve know all along… sweet, sweet Eugenics. The elite globalist religion.”
-Fred Face 8/16/10
Story HERE
16
08 2010
Is an International Financial Conspiracy Driving World Events?
by Richard C. Cook
“They make a desolation and call it peace.” -Tacitus
Was Alan Greenspan really as dumb as he looks in creating the late housing bubble that threatens to bring the entire Western debt-based economy crashing down?
Was something as easy to foresee as this really the trigger for a meltdown that could destroy the world’s financial system? Or was it done, perhaps, “accidentally on purpose”?
And if so, why?
Let’s turn to the U.S. personage that conspiracy theorists most often mention as being at the epicenter of whatever elite plan is reputed to exist. This would be David Rockefeller, the 92-year-old multibillionaire godfather of the world’s financial elite.
The lengthy Wikipedia article on Rockefeller provides the following version of a celebrated statement he allegedly made in an opening speech at the Bilderberg conference in Baden-Baden, Germany, in June 1991:
“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 subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government which will never again know war, but only peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in the past centuries.”
This speech was made 17 years ago. It came at the beginning in the U.S. of the Bill Clinton administration. Rockefeller speaks of an “us.” This “us,” he says, has been having meetings for almost 40 years. If you add the 17 years since he gave the speech it was 57 years ago—two full generations.
Not only has “us” developed a “plan for the world,” but the attempt to “develop” the plan has evidently been successful, at least in Rockefeller’s mind. The ultimate goal of “us” is to create “the supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers.” This will lead, he says, toward a “world government which will never again know war.”
Just as an intellectual exercise, let’s assume that David Rockefeller is as important and powerful a person as he seems to think he is. Let’s give the man some credit and assume that he and “us” have in fact succeeded to a degree. This would mean that the major decisions and events since Rockefeller gave the speech in 1991 have probably also been part of the plan or that they have at least represented its features and intent.
Therefore by examining these decisions and events we can determine whether in fact Rockefeller is being truthful in his assessment that the Utopia he has in mind is on its way or has at least come closer to being realized. In no particular order, some of these decisions and events are as follows:
The implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement by the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations has led to the elimination of millions of U.S. manufacturing jobs as well as the destruction of U.S. family farming in favor of global agribusiness.
Similar free trade agreements, including those under the auspices of the World Trade Organization, have led to export of millions of additional manufacturing jobs to China and elsewhere.
Average family income in the U.S. has steadily eroded while the share of the nation’s wealth held by the richest income brackets has soared. Some Wall Street hedge fund managers are making $1 billion a year while the number of homeless, including war veterans, pushes a million.
The housing bubble has led to a huge inflation of real estate prices in the U.S. Millions of homes are falling into the hands of the bankers through foreclosure. The cost of land and rentals has further decimated family agriculture as well as small business. Rising property taxes based on inflated land assessments have forced millions of lower-and middle-income people and elderly out of their homes.
The fact that bankers now control national monetary systems in their entirety, under laws where money is introduced only through lending at interest, has resulted in a massive debt pyramid that is teetering on collapse. This “monetarist” system was pioneered by Rockefeller-family funded economists at the University of Chicago. The rub is that when the pyramid comes down and everyone goes bankrupt the banks which have been creating money “out of thin air” will then be able to seize valuable assets for pennies on the dollar, as J.P. Morgan Chase is preparing to do with the businesses owned by Carlyle Capital. Meaningful regulation of the financial industry has been abandoned by government, and any politician that stands in the way, such as Eliot Spitzer, is destroyed.
The total tax burden on Americans from federal, state, and local governments now exceeds forty percent of income and is rising. Today, with a recession starting, the Democratic-controlled Congress, while supporting the minuscule “stimulus” rebate, is hypocritically raising taxes further, even for middle-income earners. Back taxes, along with student loans, can no longer be eliminated by bankruptcy protection.
Gasoline prices are soaring even as companies like Exxon-Mobil are recording record profits. Other commodity prices are going up steadily, including food prices, with some countries starting to experience near-famine conditions. 40 million people in America are officially classified as “food insecure.”
Corporate control of water and mineral resources has removed much of what is available from the public commons, and the deregulation of energy production has led to huge increases in the costs of electricity in many areas.
The destruction of family farming in the U.S. by NAFTA (along with family farming in Mexico and Canada) has been mirrored by policies toward other nations on the part of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. Around the world, due to pressure from the “Washington consensus,” local food self-sufficiency has been replaced by raising of crops primarily for export. Migration off the land has fed the population of huge slums around the cities of underdeveloped countries.
Since the 1980s the U.S. has been fighting wars throughout the world either directly or by proxy. The former Yugoslavia was dismembered by NATO. Under cover of 9/11 and by utilizing off-the-shelf plans, the U.S. is now engaged in the military conquest and permanent military occupation of the Middle East. A worldwide encirclement of Russia and China by U.S. and NATO forces is underway, and a new push to militarize space has begun. The Western powers are clearly preparing for at least the possibility of another world war.
The expansion of the U.S. military empire abroad is mirrored by the creation of a totalitarian system of surveillance at home, whereby the activities of private citizens are spied upon and tracked by technology and systems which have been put into place under the heading of the “War on Terror.” Human microchip implants for tracking purposes are starting to be used. The military-industrial complex has become the nation’s largest and most successful industry with tens of thousands of planners engaged in devising new and better ways, both overt and covert, to destroy both foreign and domestic “enemies.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. has the largest prison population of any country on earth. Plus everyday life for millions of people is a crushing burden of government, insurance, and financial fees, charges, and paperwork. And the simplest business transactions are burdened by rake-offs for legions of accountants, lawyers, bureaucrats, brokers, speculators, and middlemen.
Finally, the deteriorating conditions of everyday life have given rise to an extraordinary level of stress-related disease, as well as epidemic alcohol and drug addiction. Governments themselves around the world engage in drug trafficking. Instead of working to lower stress levels, public policy is skewed in favor of an enormous prescription drug industry that grows rich off the declining level of health through treatment of symptoms rather than causes. Many of these heavily-advertised medications themselves have devastating side-effects.
This list should at least give us enough to go on in order to ask a hard question. Assuming again that all these things are parts of the elitist plan which Mr. Rockefeller boasts to have been developing, isn’t it a little strange that the means which have been selected to achieve “peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity” involve so much violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft?
In fact it looks to me as though “our plan for the world” is one that is based on genocide, world war, police control of populations, and seizure of the world’s resources by the financial elite and their puppet politicians and military forces.
In particular, could there be a better way to accomplish all this than what appears to be a concentrated plan to remove from people everywhere in the world the ability to raise their own food? After all, genocide by starvation may be slow, but it is very effective. Especially when it can be blamed on “market forces.”
And can it be that the “us” which is doing all these things, including the great David Rockefeller himself, are just criminals who have somehow taken over the seats of power? If so, they are criminals who have done everything they can to watch their backs and cover their tracks, including a chokehold over the educational system and the monopolistic mainstream media.
One thing is certain: The voters of America have never knowingly agreed to any of this.
Richard C. Cook is a former U.S. federal government analyst, whose career included service with the U.S. Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House, NASA, and the U.S. Treasury Department. His articles on economics, politics, and space policy have appeared on numerous websites. His book on monetary reform entitled We Hold These Truths: The Promise of Monetary Reform is in preparation. He is also the author of Challenger Revealed: An Insider’s Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age, called by one reviewer, “the most important spaceflight book of the last twenty years.” His website is at www.richardccook.com
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8450#mce_temp_url#
15
08 2010
America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution
As over-leveraged investment houses began to fail in September 2008, the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties, of major corporations, and opinion leaders stretching from the National Review magazine (and the Wall Street Journal) on the right to the Nation magazine on the left, agreed that spending some $700 billion to buy the investors’ “toxic assets” was the only alternative to the U.S. economy’s “systemic collapse.” In this, President George W. Bush and his would-be Republican successor John McCain agreed with the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. Many, if not most, people around them also agreed upon the eventual commitment of some 10 trillion nonexistent dollars in ways unprecedented in America. They explained neither the difference between the assets’ nominal and real values, nor precisely why letting the market find the latter would collapse America. The public objected immediately, by margins of three or four to one.
When this majority discovered that virtually no one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them, the term “political class” came into use. Then, after those in power changed their plans from buying toxic assets to buying up equity in banks and major industries but refused to explain why, when they reasserted their right to decide ad hoc on these and so many other matters, supposing them to be beyond the general public’s understanding, the American people started referring to those in and around government as the “ruling class.” And in fact Republican and Democratic office holders and their retinues show a similar presumption to dominate and fewer differences in tastes, habits, opinions, and sources of income among one another than between both and the rest of the country. They think, look, and act as a class.
Although after the election of 2008 most Republican office holders argued against the Troubled Asset Relief Program, against the subsequent bailouts of the auto industry, against the several “stimulus” bills and further summary expansions of government power to benefit clients of government at the expense of ordinary citizens, the American people had every reason to believe that many Republican politicians were doing so simply by the logic of partisan opposition. After all, Republicans had been happy enough to approve of similar things under Republican administrations. Differences between Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas are of degree, not kind. Moreover, 2009-10 establishment Republicans sought only to modify the government’s agenda while showing eagerness to join the Democrats in new grand schemes, if only they were allowed to. Sen. Orrin Hatch continued dreaming of being Ted Kennedy, while Lindsey Graham set aside what is true or false about “global warming” for the sake of getting on the right side of history. No prominent Republican challenged the ruling class’s continued claim of superior insight, nor its denigration of the American people as irritable children who must learn their place. The Republican Party did not disparage the ruling class, because most of its officials are or would like to be part of it.
Never has there been so little diversity within America’s upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America’s upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and “bureaucrat” was a dirty word for all. So was “social engineering.” Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday’s upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.
Today’s ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters — speaking the “in” language — serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct. Many began their careers in government and leveraged their way into the private sector. Some, e.g., Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, never held a non-government job. Hence whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America’s ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.
The two classes have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another than did the 19th century’s Northerners and Southerners — nearly all of whom, as Lincoln reminded them, “prayed to the same God.” By contrast, while most Americans pray to the God “who created and doth sustain us,” our ruling class prays to itself as “saviors of the planet” and improvers of humanity. Our classes’ clash is over “whose country” America is, over what way of life will prevail, over who is to defer to whom about what. The gravity of such divisions points us, as it did Lincoln, to Mark’s Gospel: “if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.”
14
08 2010
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Gave Millions to La Raza
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 9, 2010
A 2002 annual report breaking down money doled out by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation reveals the foundation provided a grant to National Council of La Raza. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is arguably the largest “charitable” organization in the world.
Gates gave $6,661,364 to the racist organization for education, according to the foundation’s website. La Raza has also received financial support from the Ford Foundation. For instance, in 1968, the globalist foundation gave La Raza $600,000, according to research conducted by Philip Brennan.
La Raza’s website admits “the organization receives two-thirds of its funding from corporations and foundations, and the rest from the government.” For the period 1992-1996, the total amount of “gifts, grants and contributions” to La Raza was more than $38 million.
The Ford Foundation has also funded the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). According to Mario Obeldo, former head of MALDEF, “California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who does not like it should leave.” In 1998, Obledo was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Clinton.
La Raza’s motto is “For the race everything, outside the race nothing” (“Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada”). La Raza is associated with the radical racist group Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlán (MEChA), an organization that espouses Aztec supremacism and irredentism (specifically advocating the annexation of the American Southwest). Mestizo activists believe they have a legal and primordial right to the land and propose that a new nation be created, a Republica del Norte. The primary vehicle for creating this Aztec nation is La Reconquista, a demographic “revolution” that strives to supplant “gringos” in the Southwest with an influx of illegal Mexican immigrants.
According to La Raza, border control is racist. The organization condemns the “step-up [in] immigration law enforcement significantly along the U.S./Mexico border and in the interior of the country” claiming such activities violate the civil rights of Hispanics.
A recent poll conducted by Fox Newsreveals that most Americans believe the federal government is failing to enforce the country’s immigration laws. In addition, voters are more likely to favor than oppose Arizona’s new immigration law that was blocked by a federal judge last week.
As Kevin Lamb notes, the Gates and Ford foundations, along with the Soros and Rockefeller foundations, have long funded and supported “well-organized ethnic-immigrant lobbies and advocacy groups, which are actively working to transform the U.S. into a borderless society,” a cornerstone of the globalist vision and the end game of world government. La Raza, MEChA, and other so-called Hispanic civil rights organizations calling for an unrestricted flow of illegal immigrants are indispensable for this one-world agenda.
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct
In addition to striving to eliminate borders and destroy the national sovereignty of the United States, Bill Gates has worked tirelessly as a eugenicist dedicated to reduce world population, another key objective of the elite. “First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent,” Gates said during an invitation-only conference held in Long Beach, California, earlier this year.
“In plain English, one of the most powerful men in the world states clearly that he expects vaccines to be used to reduce population growth. When Bill Gates speaks about vaccines, he speaks with authority,” writes F. William Engdahl.
La Raza and MEChA need to take note. The globalist foundations are not primarily concerned with the civil liberties of people in the third world, including Mexico, but are rather determined to exploit them in order to further their one-world and ultimately eugenics depopulation agenda.
http://www.infowars.com/bill-melinda-gates-foundation-gave-millions-to-la-raza/
09
08 2010
S510 – Illegal To Grow, Share, Trade, Sell Homegrown Food SB S510 Will Allow Government To Put You In Jail ….
rense.com
By Steve Green
8-6-10
S510 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US.
“If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.” It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food.” ~ Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower.
Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create without judicial review if it passes.
S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food AND FARMING.
History
In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton’s HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization “WTO”) meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP.
In 2008, Hillary Clinton, urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller*, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband’s firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510.
S 510 fails on moral, social, economic, political, constitutional, and human survival grounds.
1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency. It resembles the Kissinger Plan.
2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO, thus threatening national security. It would end the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994, which put US sovereignty and US law under perfect protection. Instead, S 510 says:
COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.
3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.” Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, “entry of food into the US” covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and “entering into” it by virtue of being produced.
4. It imposes Codex Alimentarius on the US, a global system of control over food. It allows the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the WTO to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements. Its bizarre history and its expected impact in limiting access to adequate nutrition (while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc.) threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, since the world knows now it needs vitamins to survive, not just to treat illnesses.
5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security. See Seeds How to criminalize them, for more details.
6. It includes NAIS, an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically engineered animals on which corporations hold patents. Animal diseases can be falsely declared. S 510 includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite its corrupt involvement in the H1N1 scandal, which is now said to have been concocted by the corporations.
7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production put it in corporate hands and worsen food safety.
8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy. It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economies, out of the hands of the citizenry, and puts them under the total control of multinational corporations influencing the UN, WHO, FAO and WTO, with HHS, and CDC, acting as agents, with Homeland Security as the enforcer. The chance to rebuild the economy based on farming, ranching, gardens, food production, natural health, and all the jobs, tools and connected occupations would be eliminated.
9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs. This would industrialize every farm in the US, eliminate local organic farming, greatly increase global warming from increased use of oil- based products and long-distance delivery of foods, and make food even more unsafe. The five items listed the Five Pillars of Food Safety are precisely the items in the food supply which are the primary source of its danger.
10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control. The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postpones defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied. It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country, making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review.
For further information, watch these videos
Food Laws Forcing people to globalize?
Corporate Rule?
Reclaiming Economies?
http://poorrichards-blog.blogspot.com/2010/08/s510-illegal-to-grow-share-trade-sell.html
09
08 2010
CNN Guest Promotes Chemical BPA as Good
Matt Ryan
Infowars.com
August 8, 2010
Dr. Whelan, during an interview on CNN, states there are misconceptions about chemicals. One such misconception is that no cases (to her knowledge) exist where a single child or adult has been harmed from trace chemicals in products. She goes on to say that claims of such are absurd, citing the long-term existence of BPA (Bisphenol A) as an example of a harmless trace chemical. Her primary source of reference in declaring BPA safe is the FDA.
Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, countered by stating that there is strong evidence that trace chemicals have indeed caused health risks and that BPA has been listed as a substance that is being reviewed as potentially harmful by multiple review boards including the Environmental Protection Agency. While the FDA may deem something safe, the same was once said for lead paint and cigarettes.
While Dr. Whelan may not have heard of any such cases where trace chemicals like BPA have caused health issues, the evidence is overwhelming that the risk is present. The Los Angeles Times published a report indicating concerns rooted in the fact that BPA penetrates several layers of skin on contact and may enter the bloodstream at toxic levels. The Guardian also published an article linking BPA in plastic bottles to lower sperm counts in men. Mercury News even covered the effects of low amounts of BPA on lab animals.
http://www.infowars.com/cnn-guest-promotes-chemical-bpa-as-good/
09
08 2010
The Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime: extravagant and out of touch with the American people
What the great French historian Alexis de Tocqueville would make of today’s Obama administration were he alive today is anyone’s guess. But I would wager that the author of L’Ancien Régime and Democracy in America would be less than impressed with the extravagance and arrogance on display among the White House elites that rule America as though they had been handed some divine right to govern with impunity.
It is the kind of impunity that has been highlighted on the world stage this week by Michelle Obama’s hugely costly trip to Spain, which has prompted a New York Post columnist Andrea Tantaros to dub the First Lady a contemporary Marie Antoinette. As The Telegraph reports, while the Obamas are covering their own vacation expenses such as accommodation, the trip may cost US taxpayers as much as $375,000 in terms of secret service security and flight costs on Air Force Two.
The timing of this lavish European vacation could not have come at a worse moment, when unemployment in America stands at 10 percent, and large numbers of Americans are fighting to survive financially in the wake of the global economic downturn. It sends a message of indifference, even contempt, for the millions of Americans who are struggling just to feed their families on a daily basis and pay the mortgage, while the size of the national debt balloons to Greek-style proportions.
While the liberal-dominated US mainstream media have largely ignored the story, it is all over the blogosphere and talk radio, and will undoubtedly add to the President’s free falling poll ratings. As much as the media establishment turn a blind eye to stories like this, which are major news in the international media, the American public is increasingly turning to alternative news sources, including the British press, which has a far less deferential approach towards the White House.
The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Marbella and the complete disregard for public opinion and concerns over excessive government spending is symbolic of a far wider problem with the Obama presidency – the overarching disdain for the principles of limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise that have built the United States over the course of nearly two and a half centuries into the most powerful and free nation on earth.
It is epitomised above all by the President’s relentless drive towards big government against the will of the American people, and the dramatic increases in government spending and borrowing, which threaten to leave the US hugely in debt for generations. It is also showcased by Barack Obama’s drive towards a socialised health care system, which, as I’ve noted before, is “a thinly disguised vanity project for a president who is committed to transforming the United States from the world’s most successful large-scale free enterprise economy, to a highly interventionist society with a massive role for centralized government.”
There is however a political revolution fast approaching Washington that is driven not by mob rule but by the power of ideas and principles, based upon the ideals of the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution. It is a distinctly conservative revolution that is sweeping America and is reflected in almost every poll ahead of this November’s mid-terms. It is based on a belief in individual liberty, limited government, and above all, political accountability from the ruling elites. The Obama administration’s mantra may well be “let them eat cake”, as it continues to gorge itself on taxpayers’ money, but it will be looking nervously over its shoulder as public unease mounts.
09
08 2010
Bartering your baby’s blood
“Another “conspiracy” theory gone mainstream. Yes, the pentagon has been taking samples of your babies blood. Every baby born in the US in the last 36 years has had their natural rights violated. What their going to do with it… who the fuck knows. Minority Report kinda shit.”
-Fred Face 8/8/10
AUSTIN (KXAN) – When Andrea Beleno gave birth to her son last year, she knew she’d do whatever it took to protect him.
But she never dreamed she’d be taking on the State of Texas to safeguard her son’s most private information.
And now, revelations are surfacing that not only did the state store that blood without parents’ knowledge – but they also actually bartered it for goods and services to for-profit companies, without the knowledge of parents or of state lawmakers.
Beleno and several other Texas families sued the State Department of Health Services after they learned the agency had been storing and using newborn blood samples, or blood spots, that were leftover after testing for the Newborn Screening Program.
The families weren’t suing for money. They were suing for the right to decide what happens to their babies’ blood specimens – and the information contained in them.
The suit prompted the Texas Legislature to step in and pass a new law giving parents the right to opt out of allowing the state to keep the samples leftover after screening.
Parents can direct Texas to destroy their child’s blood samples by submitting this form .
In December 2009, the Texas Department of State Health Services settled the lawsuit with Beleno and the families. As part of the settlement terms , the state agreed to destroy the nearly 5 million blood samples it had retained without consent and disclose how the spots had been used.
The state posted the list of research projects using the blood spots on its website. The list gives a brief description of the 24 research projects that used just over 8,800 blood spots.
However, the number of research projects disclosed on its website didn’t match testimony by a DSHS official before the House Public Health Committee in March 2009.
Chairwoman Lois Kohlkorst asked DSHS lab director Susan Tanksley about the research and whether there had been any breakthroughs.
Tanksley said that there hadn’t been many – only 4 projects had been completed.
Texas Rep. John Davis asked whether the spots had been used for any criminal investigation purposes.
Tanksley denied any spots were used for that purpose.
But records obtained from DSHS show that’s not true.
In 2003 and in 2007, the state provided samples collected under the Newborn Screening Program for a project sponsored by the Department of Justice and conducted by the Armed Forces Institute for Pathology .
The samples were to help expand the DNA database for law enforcement purposes.
This was news that stunned parent Andrea Beleno.
“I think it’s a breach of public trust,” said Beleno.
Parents were kept in the dark about how the leftover spots were used and so were lawmakers. During extensive hearings about the Newborn Screening Program, there was no mention of how the vast majority of spots were used.
It took several requests, but KXAN finally obtained records that show that the state has been using the spots to barter with for-profit corporations for lab supplies, test kits and maintenance contracts.
Among those deals was a five year agreement in which the State provided 228,000 blood spots in exchange for $456,000 worth of lab supplies and maintenance services.
In another deal, the state provided at least 3600 spots in exchange for HIV test kits .
How much to charge and how to handle the billing was a source of internal discussions at DSHS.
We obtained one email sent by Barbara Kelly-King, who works in the Revenue Management Unit of DSHS.
In February 2006, Kelly-King responded to staff questions about how to bill for spots being provided to bioMerieux.
She wrote: “Originally this was to be handled through a contract but the Health and Safety Code 12.0122 entitled Sale of Laboratory Services does not allow for a contract. The lab is now asking bioMerieux to issue a $2.00 credit for every dried blood spot sent.”
A month later, on March 6, 2006, Lab Director Susan Tanksley’s email to staff says:
“We do not have a contract with bioMerieux but essentially an understanding that we will provide DBS [Dried Blood Spots] to them and they will in turn provide HIV reagents. Originally, we wanted a contract for $2/specimen, but we cannot provide this ‘laboratory service’ to them as they are a for-profit organization. Our attorney’s opinion was that it was acceptable to receive reagents in return for the DBS.”
See that whole email chain here.
By October of 2008, DSHS decided it could skip the bartering and charge a fee for providing spots to for-profit corporations. It charged MP Biomedicals $1,600 for 400 spots .
The same week, the State charged Avoiq $2,400 for 600 blood spots.
In another deal, a pending two-year contract with Avioq, DSHS agreed to provide a regular supply of blood spots at $4 each which would bring in $28,800 to the agency.
Carrie Williams, Acting Press Officer for the Texas Department Of State Health Services, said the charges were a nominal handling fee used to recoup taxpayer dollars.
nternal DSHS emails detail the processfor billing.
One dated August 26, 2008 asks how the income should be allocated: “What I’m looking for is this: which pot of moneywill it benefit us to book this under.”
In all, the State receives about 800,000 blood cards per year from babies born in Texas. By 2009, the number of stored spots had grown to about 5 million specimens.
When older spots were needed and were pulled from the A & M storage room supply, the university charged $15 for each specimen . All of those spots have since been destroyed as part of the settlement of the lawsuit filed by Andrea Beleno and the other parents.
Beleno said they were open to hearing options for preserving the spots for important research, but the state’s own actions have caused public distrust.
“I think the way they’ve behaved is unethical in the way that they’ve handled the disclosure of what they are actually doing,” said Beleno, “And I think it makes it really difficult for people to trust that they are in fact using those samples for public good rather than to make money.”
Williams says the agency is strengthening its process for reviewing and approving requests to use the spots. “The process will be more defined and will include more layers of review,” said Williams. She said the state was not selling the spots in any way shape or form. “Any benefit received from providing the bloodspots went directly back into the program or to the agency’s overall public health mission,” said Williams.
Any changes in the Newborn Screening Program will be up to the Legislature. The House Public Health Committee will be holding a hearing on May 17th to discuss the program and decide whether to recommend any changes to the program for the upcoming Legislative Session.
KXAN will be live streaming the hearing.
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/in_depth/bartering-your-babys-blood
08
08 2010
China Surpasses US in Energy Consumption, While The Malthusian Crackpots of The Obama Regime Fiddle with Cap and Trad
Webster G. Tarpley
TARPLEY.net
July 22, 2010
Harry Reid says he is dropping the insane cap and trade carbon tax legislation, but beware of an attempt to pass this favorite bill of rich elitists and Malthusian fanatics. The attempt to bootleg cap and trade into law may come during the November-December lame duck session, with the votes of 30-40 dead souls, not of Gogol but of defeated Democrats. Politicians who have lost their seats will be looking to Wall Street for jobs or to Obama for patronage, and they will vote for anything. In the meantime, the world’s first Renewable Energy Ministerial Conference took place in Washington earlier this week. This was the usual Malthusian litany of gimmicks — solar, wind, batteries, and the like. This conference of 24 nations admitted that the world needed 500 new power plants, but decided they should not be built; only windmills and solar cells should be considered, in their grotesque view. This means there will be no development, and only genocide, for Africa and south Asia. The conference was attended by “stakeholders,” in reality rent seekers. The problem with their wind and solar gadgets is that they are uneconomical and require onerous government subsidies unless the price of oil rises far above the current level. (Maybe the idea of an attack on Iran and the closing of Hormuz, which would get oil to $500 per barrel, was discussed during the closed session of the first day — like the Bilderbergers at Saltsjobaden in 1973, when they discussed a 400% increase in the oil price, which arrived soon after.) The big news at the conference was that, for the first time ever, China has surpassed the United States in energy consumption. Ten years ago China consumed half the US total, and now they are ahead by 4% as of 2009. This signals the looming energy decadence and the thermodynamic decline of the US. China is also about to surpass the US in manufacturing, with the US losing the top spot it has occupied since passing Britain in this department in the 1890s. The Chinese will build 1,000 gigawatts of electric generating capacity by 2025, an amount equal to the current total US production. This includes 21 modern nuclear plants; the US is still building none. A rational US government would respond to this emergency by commencing the construction of 100 ultra-modern HTR reactors to replace the aging US reactors. But the US delegation was led by Energy Secretary Cho, who has embraced the crackpot idea of painting roads and roofs white to promote cooling. Such schemes are no substitute for US energy modernization after 30-plus years of stagnation and decay. Obama’s energy czarina Carol Browner, an expert profiteer and lobbyist, was also on hand. The insane ban on offshore drilling is an example of her handiwork. Nor should we forget Obama science adviser John Holdren, a quackademic and charlatan whose tenure in this post is a national scandal. These Malthusian bureaucrats hate real energy production, and want the price of energy to be as high as possible. As long as these sociopaths run US energy policy, it can be assumed that the US will continue to fall behind China, since without modern energy production there can be no recovery from the current depression.
http://tarpley.net/2010/07/22/china-surpasses-us-in-energy-consumption/
08
08 2010
Fluoride water ’causes cancer’
“Naaaw?”
-F.F.
Fluoride in tap water can cause bone cancer in boys, a disturbing new study indicates, although there is no evidence of a link for girls.
New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma – bone cancer – bet-ween the ages of 10 and 19.
In the UK, fluoride is added to tap water on the advice of bodies such as the British Dental Association. The Department of Health maintains that it is a cost-effective public health measure that helps prevent tooth decay in children.
About 10 per cent of the population, six million people, receive fluoridated water, mainly in the Midlands and north-east, and the government plans to extend this, with Manchester expected to be next. About 170 million Americans live in areas with fluoridated water.
The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child’s development and the age of onset of bone cancer.
Although osteosarcoma is rare, accounting for only about 3 per cent of childhood cancers, it is especially dangerous. The mortality rate in the first five years is about 50 per cent, and nearly all survivors have limbs amputated, usually legs.
The research has been made available by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a respected Washington-based research organisation. The group reports that it has assembled a ’strong body of peer-reviewed evidence’ and has asked that fluoride in tap water be added to the US government’s classified list of substances known or anticipated to cause cancer in humans.
‘This is a very specific cancer in a defined population of children,’ said Richard Wiles, the group’s co-founder. ‘When you focus in and look for the incidence of tumours, you see the increase.
‘We recognise the potential benefits of fluoride to dental health,’ added Wiles, ‘but I’ve spent 20 years in public health, trying to protect kids from toxic exposure. Even with DDT, you don’t have the consistently strong data that the compound can cause cancer as you now have with fluoride.’
Half of all fluoride ingested is stored in the body, accumulating in calcifying tissue such as teeth and bones and in the pineal gland in the brain, although more than 90 per cent is taken into the bones.
MPs who have recently voted against fluoridation proposals in Parliament include Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, and Michael Howard, the Conservative leader.
Anti-fluoride campaigners argue that the whole issue has become highly politically sensitive. If health scares about fluoride were to be recognised in the courts, the litigation, especially in the US, could be expected to run for decades. Consequently, scientists have been inhibited from publicising any adverse findings.
The new evidence only emerged by a circuitous process. It was contained in a Harvard dissertation by Dr Elise Bassin at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine. The dissertation, completed in April 2001, obviously had merit because Bassin was awarded her doctorate.
However it has not been published. Environmental organisations were repeatedly denied access to it, and even bodies such as the US National Academy of Sciences could not get hold of a copy. Eventually two researchers from the Fluoride Action Network were allowed to read it in the rare books and special collections room at Harvard medical library.
Bassin told The Observer her work was still going through the peer-review process, and she hopes that it will then be published.
Dr Vyvyan Howard, senior lecturer in toxico-pathology at the University of Liverpool, has studied the new material.
‘At these ages the bones of boys are developing rapidly,’ he said, ’so if the bones are being put together abnormally because fluoride is altering the bone structure, they’re more likely to get cancer. It’s biologically plausible, and the epidemiological evidence seems pretty strong – it looks as if there’s a definite effect.’
There is at present no understanding as to why males should be affected rather than females.
A Department of Health spokesman said that the latest evaluation of research in the UK had identified no ill effects of fluoride.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/jun/12/medicineandhealth.genderissues
07
08 2010
Globalists Race To Enforce Criminal Carbon Tax
“This miserable, miserable old twat of a man…”
-F.F.
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, August 6, 2010
$100 Billion A Year Levy Is About Bankrolling Global Government And Lining The Pockets Of Con Artist Oil Men Soros, Strong and Gore, Has Nothing To Do With Saving The Environment
Despite the failure of last year’s Copenhagen climate summit, the United Nations is pushing ahead for a global carbon tax that will bankroll the expansion of world government as globalists attempt to make Americans pay for the evisceration of their own sovereinty and future prosperity.
“Carbon taxes, add-ons to international air fares and a levy on cross-border money movements are among ways being considered by a panel of the world’s leading economists to raise a staggering $100 billion a year to fight climate change,” reports the Associated Press.
British economist Nicholas Stern called for government regulations to pave the way for a “new industrial revolution….to move the world away from fossil fuels to low carbon growth.”
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct
The panel will present its final proposals to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in October, a month before the next climate conference meets in Cancun, Mexico.
As was revealed during the Copenhagen negotiations, the global tax that the elite are pushing for will not even go to the UN to fight carbon dioxide, the evil life-giving gas that humans exhale and plants breathe. A leaked document obtained by the London Guardian during the summit exposed the fact that the tax will do directly to the coffers of the World Bank, and this revelation led to poorer countries refusing to sign a properly binding resolution on CO2 emissions.
The UN panel’s members include billionaire globalist George Soros, who has been calling for a carbon tax for years. Soros has $811 million of his own money invested in Petrobras, the Brazilian oil company.
The fact that Soros plays both sides of the rigged game emphasizes once again the fact that the carbon tax has nothing to do with saving the environment from the mythical threat of global warming and everything to do with industrialists who own the carbon trading systems getting filthy rich while crucifying U.S. sovereignty at the altar of global government.
With electricity and gas prices set to soar following the introduction of a carbon tax, people like Soros and Al Gore, who are heavily invested in energy companies and also own huge chunks of the carbon trading market, are set to make obscene profits.
The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has direct ties to both Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offset opportunities, is the largest shareholder of CCX.
Maurice Strong, who is regularly credited as founding father of the modern environmental movement, serves on the board of directors of CCX. Strong was a leading initiate of the Earth Summit in the early 90s, where the theory of global warming caused by CO2 generated by human activity was most notably advanced.
Both Strong and Gore come from the Club of Rome clique, who in their 1991 Report, “The First Global Revolution” openly admitted how they were planning to exploit the contrived hoax of global warming in order to further their agenda.
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.,” they wrote.
Massive oil companies like British Petroleum, were amongst the founding members of the carbon trade lobby. BP has supported the Kerry-Lieberman climate bill and other so-called “green” initiatives every step of the way because, far from acting as a punishment for big polluters, they represent a financial windfall.
Transnational oil companies like British Petroleum and Exxon Mobil have been amongst the biggest promoters of man-made global warming because they are headed up by globalists who understand that the carbon tax will do nothing to help the environment but will be used to bankroll the implementation of global government while swallowing up whatever deposable income impoverished Americans have left.
The elite are still desperate to impose a consumption tax on Americans as part of the move towards a “post-industrial revolution” and the kind of nightmare “green economy” that has left Spain with a 20 per cent unemployment rate. In a so-called green economy, over 2.2 jobs are lost for every “green job” created.
A carbon tax would impact almost every aspect of Americans’ lives, from higher gas prices, to soaring utility bills, to exorbitant excesses related to the “energy efficiency” of their homes. It would be enforced by an army of environmental regulators and green police poking their noses into the private affairs of citizens.
The “green economy” is nothing more than a euphemism for an organized effort on behalf of big business and global elite to completely eviscerate the middle class and introduce levies and regulation into every area of our lives.
http://www.infowars.com/globalists-race-to-enforce-criminal-carbon-tax/
06
08 2010
Naked Body Scanners: Monumental Cover Up Exposed
Feds admit they lied over storing images, why trust them over safety, functionality and efficiency of radiation-firing machines?
The proof comes in the form of a letter (PDF), obtained by The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), in which William Bordley, an associate general counsel with the Marshals Service, admits that “approximately 35,314 images…have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine” used in the Orlando, Fla. federal courthouse.
Full Story HERE
05
08 2010
40 US billionaires pledge half of wealth to charity
“Be very… very wary?? Especially of Opie there. Or are they just worried about the worker bees tearing them to shreds & picking their teeth with their bones??? (When the people wake up to their evil, evil, evil eugenics programs that have been going on for decades and are still going strong & about to go into overdrive)”
-Fred Face 8/4/10
Forty of America’s billionaires and their families pledged Wednesday to give more than half of their fortune to charity in a drive organized by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.
The group includes CNN founder Ted Turner, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison and Hollywood director George Lucas, as well as Microsoft mogul Gates and investment guru Buffett.
The idea, which was announced just six weeks ago as “The Giving Pledge,” is to convince billionaires across the country to give up most of their money — 50 percent or more — to charity.
“The pledge is a moral commitment to give, not a legal contract,” a statement released Wednesday said by givingpledge.org, a drive spearheaded by Buffett and Gates.
“We’ve really just started, but already we’ve had a terrific response,” Buffett, the chief executive of the investment firm Berkshire Hathaway, said.
“At its core, the Giving Pledge is about asking wealthy families to have important conversations about their wealth and how it will be used.”
http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0804/40-billionaires-pledge-wealth-charity/
04
08 2010
Army’s Vaccine Plan: Inject Troops With Gas-Propelled, Electro-Charged DNA
The Army’s got a one-two punch to perfect vaccinations and offer scientists the ability to quickly develop inoculations that stave off new dangers. First, they’ll shoot troops up using a “gene gun,” that’s filled with DNA-based vaccines. Then they’ll follow it up with “short electrical pulses to the delivery site.”
The Pentagon’s still after a comprehensive way to inoculate troops and civilians against existing illnesses, rapidly respond to emerging threats, and even predict pathogenic mutations before they happen. To that end, the military’s already funding a handful of projects, from plant-based vaccine production to genetic signatures for ultra-early diagnosis.
In a small business solicitation released last week, the Army put out a call for “Multiagent Synthetic DNA Vaccines Delivered by Noninvasive Electroporation.” The program would start by transforming conventional development methods, like standard egg-based vaccines.
The old-school methods are slow, don’t allow for readily combined vaccines, and can pose sterility risks. DNA-based vaccines, on the other hand, would be quick to engineer and offer reliable immunity — provided the DNA can enter host cells to trigger the production of immunity proteins.
Right now, DNA-based vaccines are injected into muscles, meaning a genetically engineered plasmid is delivered to “intracellular spaces,” and “is not efficiently taken up by the host cells.” So the Army would instead like to shoot people. Seriously.
In its solicitation, the Army says it wants DNA vaccines that are painted onto microscopic beads, then “deposited into skin cells by gas propulsion.” And since that method can only inject a small dose of DNA, they want researchers to combine the approach with intramuscular electroporation, which “involves injecting the DNA then quickly applying short electrical pulses.” The electric charge creates pores in cell membranes, making it easier for DNA to enter targeted cells.
Sounds great, except that current approaches to intramuscular electroporation are invasive, and, obviously, they hurt. One study in rats also noted the “possibility of low and transient tissue damage induced by electroporation.” The Army wants a gadget that doesn’t rely on jamming needles and electrical pulses into muscle, and instead are after “injection and noninvasive electroporation [that] can be performed using a single integrated device.”
DNA-based vaccines are also still in their infancy: in 2005, the first-ever DNA vaccine for horses was approved, but human trials have yet to generate stellar results. And speaking of invasive: the Army’s delivery method of choice, gene guns, use helium gas to blast DNA into cells and often require surgically exposed muscle tissue to get the job done.
In other words, the Army’s asking for a non-invasive way to do what’s not yet possible, even using surgical methods. If researchers do come up with a device that meets the lofty criteria, though, it’d be just what the Pentagon’s looking for: a reliable way to engineer and deliver combination vaccines — not to mention a quick way to fight back against “unknown, emerging, or genetically engineered pathogens.”
04
08 2010
Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images
“Sorry to say, we told you so.”
-F.F.
For the last few years, federal agencies have defended body scanning by insisting that all images will be discarded as soon as they’re viewed. The Transportation Security Administration claimed last summer, for instance, that “scanned images cannot be stored or recorded.”
Now it turns out that some police agencies are storing the controversial images after all. The U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had surreptitiously saved tens of thousands of images recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single Florida courthouse.
This follows an earlier disclosure (PDF) by the TSA that it requires all airport body scanners it purchases to be able to store and transmit images for “testing, training, and evaluation purposes.” The agency says, however, that those capabilities are not normally activated when the devices are installed at airports.
Body scanners penetrate clothing to provide a highly detailed image so accurate that critics have likened it to a virtual strip search. Technologies vary, with millimeter wave systems capturing fuzzier images, and backscatter X-ray machines able to show precise anatomical detail. The U.S. government likes the idea because body scanners can detect concealed weapons better than traditional magnetometers.
This privacy debate, which has been simmering since the days of the Bush administration, came to a boil two weeks ago when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that scanners would soon appear at virtually every major airport. The updated list includes airports in New York City, Dallas, Washington, Miami, San Francisco, Seattle, and Philadelphia.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, has filed a lawsuitasking a federal judge to grant an immediate injunction pulling the plug on TSA’s body scanning program. In a separate lawsuit, EPIC obtained a letter (PDF) from the Marshals Service, part of the Justice Department, and released it on Tuesday afternoon.
These “devices are designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded, which is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing,” EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg told CNET. “We think it’s significant.”
William Bordley, an associate general counsel with the Marshals Service, acknowledged in the letter that “approximately 35,314 images…have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine” used in the Orlando, Fla. federal courthouse. In addition, Bordley wrote, a Millivision machine was tested in the Washington, D.C. federal courthouse but it was sent back to the manufacturer, which now apparently possesses the image database.
The Gen 2 machine, manufactured by Brijot of Lake Mary, Fla., uses a millimeter wave radiometer and accompanying video camera to store up to 40,000 images and records. Brijot boasts that it can even be operated remotely: “The Gen 2 detection engine capability eliminates the need for constant user observation and local operation for effective monitoring. Using our APIs, instantly connect to your units from a remote location via the Brijot Client interface.”
This trickle of disclosures about the true capabilities of body scanners–and how they’re being used in practice–is probably what alarms privacy advocates more than anything else.
A 70-page document (PDF) showing the TSA’s procurement specifications, classified as “sensitive security information,” says that in some modes the scanner must “allow exporting of image data in real time” and provide a mechanism for “high-speed transfer of image data” over the network. (It also says that image filters will “protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger.”)
“TSA is not being straightforward with the public about the capabilities of these devices,” Rotenberg said. “This is the Department of Homeland Security subjecting every U.S. traveler to an intrusive search that can be recorded without any suspicion–I think it’s outrageous.” EPIC’s lawsuit says that the TSA should have announced formal regulations, and argues that the body scanners violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits “unreasonable” searches.
TSA spokeswoman Sari Koshetz told CNET on Wednesday that the agency’s scanners are delivered to airports with the image recording functions turned off. “We’re not recording them,” she said. “I’m reiterating that to the public. We are not ever activating those capabilities at the airport.”
The TSA maintains that body scanning is perfectly constitutional: “The program is designed to respect individual sensibilities regarding privacy, modesty and personal autonomy to the maximum extent possible, while still performing its crucial function of protecting all members of the public from potentially catastrophic events.”
04
08 2010
Prop C passes overwhelmingly
“Good. States know what’s better for them, than criminal federal government.”
-F.F.
BY TONY MESSENGER
ST. LOUIS • Missouri voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a federal mandate to purchase health insurance, rebuking President Barack Obama’s administration and giving Republicans their first political victory in a national campaign to overturn the controversial health care law passed by Congress in March.
“The citizens of the Show-Me State don’t want Washington involved in their health care decisions,” said Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, one of the sponsors of the legislation that put Proposition C on the August ballot. She credited a grass-roots campaign involving Tea Party and patriot groups with building support for the anti-Washington proposition.
With most of the vote counted, Proposition C was winning by a ratio of nearly 3 to 1. The measure, which seeks to exempt Missouri from the insurance mandate in the new health care law, includes a provision that would change how insurance companies that go out of business in Missouri liquidate their assets.
“I’ve never seen anything like it,” Cunningham said at a campaign gathering at a private home in Town and Country. “Citizens wanted their voices to be heard.”
About 30 Proposition C supporters whooped it up loudly at 9 p.m. when the returns flashed on the television showing the measure passing with more than 70 percent of the vote.
“It’s the vote heard ’round the world,” said Dwight Janson, 53, from Glendale, clad in an American flag-patterned shirt. Janson said he went to one of the first Tea Party gatherings last year and hopped on the Proposition C bandwagon because he wanted to make a difference.
“I was tired of sitting on the sidelines bouncing my gums,” he said.
Missouri was the first of four states to seek to opt out of the insurance purchase mandate portion of the health care law that had been pushed by Obama. And while many legal scholars question whether the vote will be binding, the overwhelming approval gives the national GOP momentum as Arizona, Florida and Oklahoma hold similar votes during midterm elections in November.
“It’s a big number,” state Sen. Jim Lembke, R-Lemay, said of the vote. “I expected a victory, but not of this magnitude. This is going to propel the issue and several other issues about the proper role of the federal government.”
From almost the moment the Democratic-controlled Congress passed the health care law — which aims to increase the number of Americans with health insurance — Republicans have vowed to try to repeal it. Their primary argument is that they believe the federal government should not be involved in mandating health care decisions at the local level.
While repeal might seem an unlikely strategy, the effort to send a message state by state that voters don’t approve of being told they have to buy insurance could gain momentum.
That’s what Republicans are counting on at least, hoping that the Missouri vote will give the national movement momentum.
“It’s like a domino, and Missouri is the first one to fall,” Cunningham said. “Missouri’s vote will greatly influence the debate in the other states.”
Proposition C faced little organized opposition, although the Missouri Hospital Association mounted a mailer campaign opposing the ballot issue in the last couple of weeks. The hospital association, which spent more than $300,000 in the losing effort, said that without the new federal law, those who don’t have insurance will cause health care providers and other taxpayers to have higher costs.
“The only way to get to the cost problem in health care is to expand the insurance pool,” said hospital association spokesman Dave Dillon. He said the hospital association didn’t plan to sue over the law, but he expected it would be challenged.
“I think there is going to be no shortage of people who want to use the courts to resolve this issue,” he said.
Democrats also generally opposed Proposition C, though they didn’t spend much time or money talking about it.
In the closing days of the campaign, many politicians ’sidled up” to Proposition C, Cunningham said, seeing the momentum the issue had gained.
Among them was U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt, who won the Republican primary for U.S. Senate on Tuesday night. Late last week, Blunt announced his support of Proposition C.
On Monday, Blunt said he hoped Missouri voters would send a “ballot box message” to the Obama’s administration by overwhelmingly passing the measure.
The question now is whether the administration will respond by suing the state to block passage of the law, much as it did in Arizona recently over illegal immigration.
The issue in both is the same: When state laws conflict with federal laws, the courts have generally ruled in favor of the federal government, because of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Richard Reuben, a law professor at the University of Missouri School of Law, said that if the federal government sues on the issue, it would likely win. Several other Missouri legal and political scholars agreed.
But Cunningham is undaunted. She’s got her own experts, and they’re ready to do battle in court.
“Constitutional experts disagree,” she said. “There is substantial legal status to this thing.”
04
08 2010
Cancer cells feed on fructose, study finds
04
08 2010
In 2006 Article White House Science Czar Still Talks Population Reduction and a “Substantial Carbon Tax”
“The lazy boy axis of evil.”
-F.F.
Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
August 2, 2010
As recently as 2006, White House science czar repeated his call for curbing human population for the sake of the environment and “substantial carbon taxes”.
In the article titled “The Energy Innovation imperative: Addressing Oil Dependence, Climate Change, and Other 21st Century Energy Challenges“, Holdren admits (among other things) that notions such as “notably improving health care, reproductive rights, and educational opportunities for women” are, although “attractive in their own right”, only measures by which reduced population growth can be achieved. In regards to population-issues Holden writes (page 15):
“Lower is better for many reasons. If world population were 8 billion in 2100 rather than the midrange UN forecast of about 10 billion, holding down the carbon emissions from the energy to make everybody prosperous would be that much easier. Fortunately, reduced population growth can be achieved by measures that are attractive in their own right (notably improving health care, reproductive rights, and educational opportunities for women).”
Holdren not only makes clear he isn’t satisfied by the UN-target of 10 billion by the year 2100 (he would prefer cutting that number by 2 billion), he readily admits that improving health, reproductive rights and educational opportunities for women are means to that end.
In the same year Holdren published his essay, professor of medical demography of the London school of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, John Cleland, admitted to- and rejected- the fact that the scientific and political communities use coded language when speaking of population control. Speaking in front of representatives of the UN Population fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation, European Commission, World Bank and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Cleland stated (page 33):
“No more shrouding our statements in code. Because code just confuses people.(…) It does this cause no service at all to continue to shroud family planning in the obfuscating phrase “sexual and reproductive health”. People don’t really know what it means. If we mean family planning or contraception, we must say it. If we are worried about population growth, we must say it. We must use proper, straightforward language. I am fed up with the political correctness that daren’t say the name population stabilization, hardly dares to mention family planning or contraception out of fear that somebody is going to get offended. It is pathetic!”
In the mid-seventies, the current White House science czar had no problem using straightforward language, no problem at all, when he argued for a wide range of measures to cut population size to an “acceptable” level. In the much-debated textbook Ecoscience, Holdren was not hindered by political correctness when he proposed a number of gruesome measures to lower worldwide fertility-levels:
“Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”
In the 2006 article mentioned before, John Holdren also touched upon the possibility of a carbon-tax:
“Perhaps most importantly in the context of the character of energy challenges as elaborated in this article, companies are likely to continue to under-invest in developing and deploying low- and no-carbon energy options until there is a stronger marketplace incentive for such action, either in the form of a substantial carbon tax or its practical equivalent in the form of economy-wide emissions caps implemented through tradable permits.”
It’s becoming clear that the aim of reducing the world’s population was still firmly on John P. Holdren’s mind in 2006, just as it was in 1977 when he co-authored Ecoscience. What has changed is the language he chooses to use.
03
08 2010
Jab that could put a stop to stress without slowing us down
“To many of you strong people are waking up and getting angry about the realities of the worlds political & economic systems… and how you are being robed of your amazing human potential (body & mind). So the establishments got something to snuff that……..
(Once again we are under a scientific dictatorship… and we won’t be for long if more people do what’s right… begin to admit it… then fight it).
-Fred Face 8/3/10
The future: The cure for stress could be converted into a vaccine and mean big changes for society.
Forget the age-old remedies of yoga, meditation or popping pills. Relieving chronic stress could soon be as simple as having an injection, according to scientists.
Academics say they are close to developing the first vaccine for stress – a single jab that would help us relax without slowing down.
After 30 years of research into cures for stress, Dr Robert Sapolsky, professor of neuroscience at Stanford University in California, believes it is possible to alter brain chemistry to create a state of ‘focused calm’.
Professor Sapolsky claims he is on the path to a genetically engineered formula that would remove the need for relaxation therapies or prescription drugs.
Chronic stress, as opposed to everyday worries, is linked to illnesses ranging from diabetes to heart attacks. Professor Sapolsky, who first observed the damage caused by stress on animals in Kenya, has been studying hormones called glucocorticoids, which are part of the body’s immune system and help fight cancer and inflammation.
All mammals produce these hormones, which help them deal with a threat - often by running away.
But Professor Sapolsky has observed that, while a zebra will turn off the stress chemicals after escaping from a lion, modern man not only produces too many glucocorticoids in response to everyday alarms but cannot turn them off afterwards.
He says the hormone becomes toxic both biologically, by destroying brain cells and weakening the immune system, and socially, when people continue to snap at their friends or family hours after the original cause of tension has vanished.
After early setbacks, the Stanford team has adapted a herpes virus to carry engineered ‘neuroprotective’ genes deep into the brain to neutralise the rogue hormones before they can cause damage. The virus is now shown to work on rats.
‘To be honest, I’m still amazed that it works,’ Professor Sapolsky told Wired magazine recently.
He warned that human trials are years away, but added: ‘We have proved that it’s possible. We can reduce the neural damage caused by stress.’
Last week, a Stanford University colleague, who called the potential vaccine ‘the Sapolsky shot’, said: ‘In humans this engineered virus would short-circuit the neural feedback caused by stress, that lingering feeling of tension after a crisis has passed.
‘It would leave you fresher and ready to deal with another threat, so you can maintain your drive, but with more focused calm rather than bad temper and digestion.
‘This could change society.’ Professor Sapolsky’s preparatory work was published last October by the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
Of course, until the vaccine has been completed, those feeling overstretched will have to resort to more tried and tested methods.
Last week, Professor Sapolsky left Stanford to take his own ‘proven medicine’ for stress: He turned off his email and is spending August with his family.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1299540/Jab-stop-stress-slowing-down.html