Sunday, July 31, 2011

Plants Dying in the Middle of Central Tokyo

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Plants Dying in the Middle of Central Tokyo

Radiation? Who knows. One irony of the radioactive fallout from Fukushima I Nuke Plant is that people in Japan have started to pay much more attention to nature around them. So they may be noticing things that was on-going even before the accident. Or they may not.

These are the pictures taken on the sidewalk on Hakusan Dori in Bunkyo-ku in Tokyo, and uploaded on July 30. The air radiation in Bunkyo-ku has been higher than the official Tokyo number (measured in Shinjuku-ku, western central Tokyo), along with several other eastern "ku" (special wards of Tokyo).

The person who took the pictures says, "About 30% of azaleas on the side walk are completely dead. Ginkgo leaves are browning."

Dead azaleas:

Smart Meter Refusal

Forget Compromise: The Debt Ceiling Is Unconstitutional

Forget Compromise: The Debt Ceiling Is Unconstitutional

  By Ellen Brown

The debt ceiling crisis can be averted by enforcing the Fourteenth Amendment, which mandates the government to pay its debts already incurred, including pensions. That means Social Security, which IS an "entitlement," in the original sense of the word. We're entitled to it because we've paid for it with taxes.

The game of Russian roulette being played with the U.S. federal debt has been called a "grotesque political carnival" and political blackmail. The uproar stems from a statute that is unique to the United States and never did make much sense. First passed in 1917 and revised multiple times since, it imposes a dollar limit on the federal debt. What doesn't make sense is that the same Congress that voted on the statute votes on the budget, which periodically exceeds the limit, requiring the statute to be revised. The debt ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962, 10 of them since 2001. The most recent increase, to $14.294 trillion by H.J.Res. 45, was signed into law on February 12, 2010.

Taxes aren't collected until after th e annual budget is passed, so Congress can't know in advance whether or how much additional borrowing will be required. Inevitably, there will be some years that the budget pushes the debt over the limit, requiring new legislation. And inevitably, now that this tactic has been discovered, there will be a costly battle over the increase, wasting congressional time, destabilizing markets, and rattling faith in the American financial and political systems. There will be continual blackmail, arm-twisting and concessions. The situation is untenable and cries out for a definitive resolution.

Fortunately, there is one. A bevy of legal scholars are recommending that the issue be eliminated altogether by playing the Constitutional trump card. The Fourteenth Amendment provides at Section 4:

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

Where statute and the Constitution collide, the Constitution prevails. Whether the government should pay the bills it has already incurred is not a matter of negotiation. It is a Constitutional mandate. And those are the bills we are talking about here, as President Obama stressed in his remarks on the issue last Friday. He said:

Raising the debt ceiling simply gives our country the ability to pay the bills that Congress has already racked up. I want to emphasize that. The debt ceiling does not determine how much more money we can spend, it simply authorizes us to pay the bills we already have racked up. It gives the United States of America the ability to keep its word.

Ignoring the debt ceiling on Constitutional grounds would not, as Michelle Bachmann declares, make President Obama a "dictator." It would simply mean he is complying with his Constitutional mandate to pay the government's bills on time and in full.

Social Security Is Not Welfare. It Is a Debt Due and Owing.

The President could have a clean resolution of the issue, but he is not jumping at the opportunity. Rather, he appears to be ready to throw Granny under the bus by slashing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, all in the name of "compromise."

The Fourteenth Amendment says debts already incurred shall not be questioned, "including debts incurred for payment of pensions." That includes Social Security, which is an "entitlement" in the true sense of the word: we're entitled to it because we've already paid for it. In fact, the Social Security Act was originally sold to Congress and the nation in 1935 not as a government benefit, but as a retirement savings program. Earlier this year, the Urban Institute published a study evaluating the program in this way, concluding that the average worker who retires today will withdraw from Social Security just about the same amount he put in over the years, with a modest 2% real interest rate (after inflation).

A deal is a deal. We paid for it, we are owed it, and the U.S. government is good for it. To change the terms of the deal ex post facto is both a breach of contract and a violation of the Constitution.

Where to Get the Money: Ron Paul's Creative Plan

A sovereign nation can always find the money to pay debts owed in its own currency. The U.S. could, if it wished, pay its bills using debt-free U.S. Notes or Greenbacks, just as President Lincoln did to avoid a crippling debt during the Civil War. Alternatively, it could eliminate the deficit with Ron Paul's plan, which amounts to the same thing. As Stephen Gandel explains Paul's solution in Time Magazine:

"In the last year or two the Fed has been buying up U.S. Treasury bonds in an effort to lower interest rates and boost the economy. The most recent round of that buying has been dubbed QE2, and has come under a good deal of criticism, though most economists agree that it was a generally helpful policy. The result is that the Fed now holds nearly $1.7 trillion in U.S. debt. But that is really phony debt. The Treasury pays the interest on the debt on behalf of the U.S. government to the Fed, which in turn returns 90 percent of the payments it gets back to the Treasury. Nonetheless, that $1.7 trillion in U.S. bonds that the Fed owns, despite the shell game of payments, is still counted in the debt ceiling number, which caps that amount of total federal debt at $14.3 trillion.

"Paul's plan: Get the Fed and the Treasury to rip up that debt. It's fake debt anyway. And the Fed is legally allowed to return the debt to the Treasury to be destroyed. A trillion and a half dollars is currently about what spending is expected to exceed tax revenue in 2011."

page 1 of 2

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Thursday, July 28, 2011

'Nazi UFO Conspiracy' - Full Length Documentary
'Nazi UFO Conspiracy' - Full Length Documentary


The Looting Of America: The Federal Reserve Made $16 Trillion In Secret Loans To Their Bankster Friends And The Media Is Ignoring The Eye-Popping Corruption That Has Been Uncovered

The Looting Of America: The Federal Reserve Made $16 Trillion In Secret Loans To Their Bankster Friends And The Media Is Ignoring The Eye-Popping Corruption That Has Been Uncovered

A one-time limited GAO audit of the Federal Reserve that was mandated by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act has uncovered some eye-popping corruption at the Fed and the mainstream media is barely even covering it. It turns out that the Federal Reserve made $16.1 trillion in secret loans to their bankster friends during the financial crisis. You can read a copy of the GAO investigation for yourself right here. These loans only went to the "too big to fail" banks and to foreign financial institutions. Not a penny of these loans went to small banks or to ordinary Americans. Not only did the banksters get trillions in nearly interest-free loans, but the Fed actually paid them over 600 million dollars to help run the emergency lending program. The GAO investigation revealed some absolutely stunning conflicts of interest, and yet the mainstream media does not even seem interested. Solid evidence of the looting of America has been put right in front of us, and yet hardly anyone wants to talk about it.

Many Americans have a hard time grasping just how large 16.1 trillion dollars is. It is an amount of money that is almost inconceivable. It is more than the GDP of the United States for an entire year. It is more than the U.S. government has spent over the last four years combined.

The Federal Reserve was just creating gigantic piles of cash out of thin air and throwing them around with wild abandon.

One of the only members of Congress that has wanted to talk about the GAO audit has been U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders. The following is a statement about this audit that was taken from his official website....

"As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the world"

So precisely who got this money?

Well, a recent article on Raw Story named some of the big Wall Street banks that got some of this money....

Out of all borrowers, Citigroup received the most financial assistance from the Fed, at $2.5 trillion. Morgan Stanley came in second with $2.04 trillion, followed by Merill Lynch at $1.9 trillion and Bank of America at $1.3 trillion.

But it just wasn't U.S. banksters that were showered with nearly interest-free loans. It turns out that approximately $3.08 trillion went to foreign financial institutions all over Europe and Asia.

So who in the world gave the Federal Reserve permission to bail out financial institutions all over the world?

Nobody did.

But under our current system the Federal Reserve doesn't have to get permission. They literally get to do whatever they want.

On his website, Senator Sanders expressed his outrage over these foreign loans....

"No agency of the United States government should be allowed to bailout a foreign bank or corporation without the direct approval of Congress and the president"

So should we expect Congress to approve legislation that would reduce the power of the Fed?

Of course not.

We all know that is not going to happen.

The Federal Reserve is run like a dictatorship. They get to do what they want and nobody can stop them.

Not only did the Fed dish out over $16 trillion in secret loans to their friends, but they also paid their bankster friends over 600 million dollars to help them do it.

According to the GAO, the Federal Reserve paid $659.4 million to the very financial institutions which caused the financial crisis to help the Fed manage all of these emergency loans.

Can anyone say "conflict of interest"?

Not only were the banksters raking in trillions in secret loans, they were also paid to help run the lending process.


So why isn't the mainstream media talking about this?

That is a very good question.

But wait, there is more.

It turns out that many Fed officials had very large investments in the financial institutions that were receiving these secret loans.

So what was done about all of the conflict of interest issues that arose?

According to Senator Sanders, "the Fed provided conflict of interest waivers to employees and private contractors so they could keep investments in the same financial institutions and corporations that were given emergency loans."

Oh, everyone was given waivers.

Apparently corruption is okay if we just get everyone to sign a bunch of forms.

The following is one example of a conflict of interest that occurred during this lending program that Senator Sanders noted on his website....

For example, the CEO of JP Morgan Chase served on the New York Fed's board of directors at the same time that his bank received more than $390 billion in financial assistance from the Fed. Moreover, JP Morgan Chase served as one of the clearing banks for the Fed's emergency lending programs.

This is a classic case of the foxes watching the hen house.

It was the banksters that caused the financial crisis. They were the only ones that the Federal Reserve helped. In fact, the Federal Reserve ended up having the banksters basically run the entire emergency lending program as Senator Sanders noted on his site....

The Fed outsourced virtually all of the operations of their emergency lending programs to private contractors like JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo. The same firms also received trillions of dollars in Fed loans at near-zero interest rates.

If you were not outraged by that, then you need to read it again.

What the banksters have been getting away with is absolutely mind blowing.

So will changes be made to make sure that something like this never happens again in the future?

Well, the GAO has recommended that significant changes should be made.

But as mentioned above, the only one that gets to tell the Federal Reserve what to do is the Federal Reserve.

According to the Washington Post, the Federal Reserve is promising to "strongly consider" the recommendations of the GAO....

The Fed’s general counsel, Scott Alvarez, said in a letter responding to the GAO’s audit that officials will “strongly consider” the recommendations.

Most Americans do not realize that the Federal Reserve is not actually part of the federal government. It is a privately-owned central bank that is not accountable to anyone.

But most Americans still believe that the Fed is a government agency.

The truth is that the Federal Reserve is about as "federal" as Federal Express is.

In another article about the Federal Reserve, I noted that the Federal Reserve has even admitted that it is not an agency of the federal government in court....

In defending itself against a Bloomberg request for information under the Freedom of Information Act, the Federal Reserve objected by declaring that it was "not an agency" of the U.S. government and therefore it was not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

Basically, an unaccountable private monopoly creates our money, sets our interest rates, regulates our banking system and makes secret loans to whoever they want.

The Federal Reserve has more power over our economy than any other institution and nobody can overrule any decisions that they make.

Does that sound very "American" to you?

Since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, it has been systematically destroying the wealth of America through constant and never ending inflation.

The U.S. dollar loses more value every single year.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, what you could buy for $1.00 in 1965 will cost you $7.17 today.

Sadly, the devaluation of our money is actually accelerating. That is one reason why we are seeing precious metals soar right now.

Not only that, but the Federal Reserve was also designed to be a perpetual government debt creation machine.

Do you know how money is created in this country?

Normally, more money is only created when more debt is created.

What this sets up is a never end spiral where the amount of money and the amount of debt are continually increasing.

Most Americans believe that we could solve the government debt problem if we could just control spending.

But that is not the case.

The Federal Reserve system was designed to get the U.S. government into constantly increasing amounts of debt and this is exactly what has happened....

The U.S. government will never fix the national debt problem as long as it participates in the Federal Reserve system.

Founding fathers such as Thomas Jefferson tried to warn us about the danger of central banking.

Jefferson strongly believed that when the federal government borrows money in one generation that must be paid back by future generations it is equivalent to theft....

And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.

Not only that, Thomas Jefferson actually said that if he could add just one more amendment to the U.S. Constitution it would be a complete ban on all government debt....

I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine principles of its Constitution; I mean an additional article, taking from the federal government the power of borrowing.

Of course we did not listen to Thomas Jefferson, did we?

Now we have gotten ourselves into one fine mess.

If the federal government shut down the Federal Reserve system, started issuing debt-free money and established a new system based on sound financial principles we might have a chance of turning this thing around.

But if we continue on the path that we are currently on, we are going to experience a financial disaster of unprecedented magnitude. We have piled up the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world, and a day of reckoning is approaching.

Our founding fathers tried to warn us about this, but we thought that we were so much smarter than them.

Now we get to suffer the consequences of our foolishness.

Why Underground Entombment At

Why Underground Entombment At

Fukushima Daiichi Won't Succeed

By Yoichi Shimatsu

Exclusive to

Copyright 2011 - All Rights Reserved


Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Monday, July 25, 2011

The Federal Reserve ADMITS that Its 12 Banks Are PRIVATE - Not Government - Entities

Much of the tens of trillions in bailout money and "easy" money from quantitative easing went to foreign banks (and see this, this and this).

Indeed, Ron Paul noted recently that one-third of all fed bailout loans - and essentially 100% of loans from the New York Fed - went to foreign banks.

The New York Fed is the most important Fed bank. As Bloomberg pointed out in 2009:

The New York Fed is one of 12 regional Federal Reserve banks and the one charged with monitoring capital markets. It is also managing $1.7 trillion [now up to at least $1.9 trillion] of emergency lending programs [and accepting collateral from the banks in return].

However, the country's most powerful "agency" - the Federal Reserve - is actually no more federal than Federal Express. The Fed itself admitted (via Bloomberg):

While the Fed’s Washington-based Board of Governors is a federal agency subject to the Freedom of Information Act and other government rules, the New York Fed and other regional banks maintain they are separate institutions, owned by their member banks, and not subject to federal restrictions.

For that reason, the New York Fed alleged in the lawsuit brought by Bloomberg to force the Fed to reveal some information about its loans - Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 08-CV-9595, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan) - that it was not subject to Federal Freedom of Information Act. As Bloomberg reported in a separate article:

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York ... runs most of the lending programs. Most documents relevant to [a freedom of information lawsuit filed by Bloomberg news] are at the New York Fed, which isn’t subject to FOIA law, according to the central bank. The Board of Governors has 231 pages of documents, to which it is denying access under an exemption for trade secrets.

As the long-time Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee (Charles McFadden) said on June 10, 1932:

Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies ....

Similarly, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) - often called the "central banks' central bank", as it coordinates transactions between central banks, and which is the entity determining the level of reserves banks are required to keep worldwide - is itself owned by the central banks of the world.

As Spiegel reported in 2009:

The BIS is a closed organization owned by the 55 central banks. The heads of these central banks travel to the Basel headquarters once every two months, and the General Meeting, the BIS's supreme executive body, takes place once a year.

In, other words, the private banks own the Fed (and mos other central banks), and the central banks - in turn - own BIS, the global bank regulator.

Interestingly, Spiegel points out that BIS is largely immune from regulation, oversight or taxes:

Formally registered as a stock corporation, it is recognized as an international organization and, therefore, is not subject to any jurisdiction other than international law.

It does not need to pay tax, and its members and employees enjoy extensive immunity. No other institution regulates the BIS, despite the fact that it manages about 4 percent of the world's total currency reserves, or €217 trillion ($304 trillion), as well as 120 tons of gold...

Central bankers are not elected by the people but are appointed by their governments. Nevertheless, they wield power that exceeds that of many political leaders. Their decisions affect entire economies, and a single word from their lips is capable of moving financial markets. They set interest rates, thereby determining the cost of borrowing and the speed of global financial currents.

Leuren Moret: Fukushima radiation food contamination grows in Japan, US, Canada

Leuren Moret: Fukushima radiation food contamination grows in Japan, US, Canada

Fact Sheet on Dry Cask Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel

Fact Sheet on Dry Cask Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel
The Oslo Attacks - More False Flag Evidence

By Stephen Lendman


The memorable line from Gilbert & Sullivan's HMS Pinafore explains what's so often true, saying:

"Things are seldom as they seem. Skim milk masquerades as cream."

With considerable mass media help, especially America's, misinformation diverts public attention from vital truths, playing their usual gatekeeper role, providing fiction and irrelevancies, not fact.

For example, initial reports cited Islamic militants, naming Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami (aka Helpers of the Global Jihad), though no one knows if the group actually exists.

On July 22, New York Times writers Elisa Mala and J. David Goodman headlined, "At Least 80 Dead in Norway Shooting," claiming with no corroborating evidence:

"There was ample reason for concern that (Islamic) terrorists might be responsible. In 2004 and again in 2008, the No. 2 leader of Al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahri, who took over after the death of Osama bin Laden, threatened Norway because of its support of the American-led NATO military operation in Afghanistan."

In fact, no verifiable evidence confirms it. The claim is based on an alleged April 2003 Al Qaeda tape, urging Muslims to strike US, UK, Australian and Norwegian embassies and commercial interests because of their Afghanistan and/or Iraq involvement.

However, past audio and video tapes were later proved fakes. Perhaps this one also. Nonetheless, America's media, including the New York Times, report them as fact, lying for the interests they represent.

The Times also avoided due diligence on why Norway was attacked, instead expressing surprise about an "assault on the ordinarily peaceful Scandinavian country."

Norway, of course, is a NATO member. It has token forces in Afghanistan, and agreed to be an anti-Gaddafi coalition partner for three months, saying in May it would scale down involvement and pull out entirely by August 1.

As a result, the State Department criticized its government's "lack of commitment," concerned it would influence other NATO states to drop out. On June 10, in fact, the Netherlands announced it would continue enforcing Libya's no-fly zone, but no longer engage in air strikes.

Since July 22, Western media, especially America's, highlighted the lone bomber/gunman story, focusing on right-wing Christian fundamentalist Anders Breivik, claiming he alone managed to do the near impossible - plan and engineer a sophisticated, possible multiple car bomb attack, then head off undetected to Utoeya Island, 19 miles away and singlehandedly kill dozens children.

On July 25, Norway's police revised the death toll down to 68, plus another eight bombing victims.

Breivik's alleged motive reflected his neocon right-wing sympathies, anti-Islamization views, and hostility to multiculturalism. Regardless of how many Breivik types agree, they don't bomb government buildings or mass murder children. On July 22, something entirely different happened. Two previous articles discussed it, accessed through the following links:

The first one asked who gains and loses from every terror incident, certainly not suspects charged, convicted and imprisoned. Geopolitical interests always are key.

The second article suggested an Israeli connection because of Norway's Palestinian sympathies, including its support for independence and de jure UN membership, as well as criticism of Israeli settlements and belligerence.

Notably, Eileen Fleming observed that Friday's attack occurred on the 65th King David Hotel (1946) bombing anniversary, carried out by (pre-Israeli) Irgun terrorists led by future prime minister Menachem Begin.

It massacred 92 Brits, Arabs and Jews, wounded 52 others, and Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion (then Jewish Agency head) approved it.

Preceding the incident to the present, Israel carried out numerous terror attacks, and committed or attempted many thousands of targeted killings. Perhaps Oslo on July 22 was its latest, alone or jointly with its CIA and/or other Western intelligence counterparts.

Analyst Bob Chapman, a frequent Progressive Radio News Hour guest, believes Friday's attack was a false flag, citing two reasons:

-- pulling out of NATO's Libya coalition entirely by August 1; and

-- withholding its $42 million contribution to Greece's bailout, calling it a waste of money, sensibly saying the Papandreou government should default.

As a result, Chapman said affected banks "are very unhappy with Norway, and I think that (and pulling out of Libya) was the basis for the attack," adding:

Breivik "at the island was probably there to kill (Labour Party) prime minister (Jens Stoltenberg) who (wasn't at Utoeya island) for some reason. The message to Norway is do what we tell you to do or we'll put a bomb in the middle of your city (as) payback from the banks...."

On July 25, another article headlined, "Anders Behring Breivik: Manufacturing a Patsy?" noting two different Facebook profiles (before and after July 22) describing him, saying:

"The first one in Norwegian was deleted minutes after (his) identity became public." A doctored English version replaced it, changing his profile to fit the crime.

His stated "interest in Winston Churchill and (anti-Nazi resistance) leader Max Manus" was deleted. In addition, his Internet postings "characterize himself not as a populist Christian conservative, but as a neo-con" pro-Israeli supporter.

Moreover, the Council of Conservative Citizens said none of his postings "are extreme or hint at a desire to commit violence." He did say he supported "Hans Rustad, a former Jewish left-winger turned neo-conservative."

The doctored Facebook profile turned a "socially liberal, pro-Israeli neo-con (into) a Christian conservative, white supremacist." Friends also contradict the new Breivik characterization, Ulav Andersson telling Russia Today, it's not at all the man he knows, saying his racial antipathies were expressed in "mundane" mild terms, adding:

He wasn't opinionated, and "never came across as some kind of religious fanatic or anything." In fact, he had no defined ideology.

As the old US "To Tell the Truth" TV show used to ask: "Will the real Anders Breivik please stand up?" In fact, he did, but the tape showing it was deleted, replaced by a doctored one, conforming to how Western powers wish to portray him. Perhaps his manifesto was then altered.

Webster Tarpley also claimed a false flag in his July 24 article, accessed through the following link:

He cites the following:

On Friday, a "special (anti-terrorist) police unit had conducted drills or exercises near" Oslo's opera house downtown when the bombing occurred. Advance information about it was concealed.

In 2010, the same unit carried out live bomb detonation drills, similar to what happened on July 22. Notably, similar coincidental or earlier practice exercises often precede or coincide with real attacks, raising obvious false flag suspicions.

US intelligence agencies recruited Norwegian police, (including Oslo's former anti-terror head) for SIMAS Surveillance Detection Units (SDU), "operating outside of" Norwegian government control.

In fact, run out of US embassies, SIMAS surveillance and spying occurs worldwide. According to Norway's Justice Minister Knut Storberget and Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store, "We never knew about it." Secretary of State Clinton lied, saying they were told.

Washington wants to derail Palestinian independence and de jure UN membership, complicit with Israel, perhaps by any means, including intimidation and mass murder.

Also as payback for Norway's planned ending its anti-Gaddafi coalition participation, a warning perhaps not to do it.

Notably, several eyewitnesses saw two shooters. As in similar past cases, "there is credible to overwhelming evidence that (alleged suspects) could not have acted alone."

The Norwegian newpaper Verdens Gang (VG) said:

"Several of the youths who were at (Utoeya) told VG that they are convinced that there must have been more than one perpetrator. Marius Helander Roset believes the same thing," saying:

"I am sure that there was shooting from two different places on the island at the same time."

"Young people interviewed by VG describe an additional perpetrator - who was not wearing a police uniform. (He) had thick dark hair and a Nordic appearance. He had a pistol in his right hand and a rifle on his back. I believe that there were two people who were shooting, says Alexander Stavdal."

On July 23, Oslo police said several shooters could have been involved. An investigation into both incidents is ongoing.

On July 25, The Views and News from Norway web site ( reported that "(s)urvivors of the massacre (said) the shooting went on for nearly two hours," police taking 90 minutes to arrive.

On July 25, the Pakistan News Service (Pak Tribune) headlined, "Analyzing the Oslo attacks: terrorist event or false flag distraction?" saying:

The timing may not be coincidental, occurring "(a)s the sociopolitical tensions in Europe rise, the euro falls, and the debt crisis looms. (It's) another reminder of the ever-present al Qaeda (or in this case neocon Christian fundamentalist) bogeymen (able) to unite the people against an outside enemy."

The Friday attack also occurred after Israeli spies were found operating covertly in New Zealand, stealing identities for "sensitive" missions "like assassinations." In fact, Mossad operates throughout the Middle East, as well as in much of Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia, spying and engaging in other covert activities.

Pak Tribune speculated whether foreign intelligence was involved in Friday's attack "to draw attention away from the Israeli operations abroad, the looming financial crisis, the (planned and imposed) austerity measures, massive swindling of public funds, and the crumbling support for" America's multiple imperial wars.

Whatever final conclusions are drawn, Friday's attacks provide "an apt distraction and talking point for those seeking to continue the farcical war on terror."

A Final Comment

A previous article discussed Operation GLADIO (Latin for double-edged sword), NATO's Secret Armies, accessed through the following link:

Run by European secret services, collaborating with NATO, the CIA, as well as Britain's MI6 and Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), it targeted the political left to prevent it from gaining power. Its clandestine missions included bombings, assassinations, and other belligerent acts, believed still ongoing.

Targeting Oslo on Friday resembled GLADIO, this time perhaps a CIA, Mossad, MI6 or joint operation, using Breivik for plausible deniability as a previous article noted.

It wasn't the first time stooges took a fall for others. Notable previous ones included Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray, the alleged 9/11 perpetrators, and numerous other falsely charged victims - never the treacherous Machiavellian villains.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

And Now..."Radiation Is Good For You." But DOE Cancels Pitch.

July 26, 2011 at 01:00:41

And Now..."Radiation Is Good For You." But DOE Cancels Pitch.

SAVE AS FAVORITEVIEW FAVORITES By Karl Grossman (about the author)

Become a Fan (2 fans) -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

Among the nuttiest theories about radiation is that it is good for you.

Yes, radiation is good for you--it exercises the immune system.

That's what some nuclear scientists claim. They call it the "hormesis radiation" theory. These scientists don't just want to minimize or even flatly deny the deadly impacts of radioactivity--they want people to think it's healthy.

An advocate of the "hormesis radiation" theory was scheduled to peddle the theory tomorrow before the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River Site-Citizens Advisory Board.

The DOE's Savannah River Site is a radioactive mess--310 square miles in South Carolina--that includes the Savannah River National Laboratory and five now closed nuclear reactors. It's been used through the years to produce plutonium and tritium for nuclear weapons, plutonium to power NASA space probes, and now seeks to make plutonium-based MOX fuel for nuclear power plants, among other things nuclear. It is in an area of South Carolina which has a large minority population. It's been designated a high-pollution Superfund site.

But Dr. Clinton R. Wolfe, executive director of Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness, wasn't planning to simply comfort the 25-person advisory board with the "hormesis radiation" theory as regarding the radioactive muddle where they reside.

The topic of his talk was; "A Perspective on Radiation Exposure and the Fukushima Disaster." People in South Carolina--indeed around the world--have become more aware of and concerned about radioactivity because of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex disaster.

Wolfe, like many in his group, is a product of the system of DOE national nuclear laboratories. He was at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where the atomic bomb was developed, specializing in work with plutonium, then worked for Westinghouse, a nuclear industry giant where he led research on nuclear power plant corrosion issues, according to his biography on his group's website, and ended up at the Savannah River National Laboratory. After being deeply involved in nuclear technology--both its military and civilian sides--he took his position at Citizens for Nuclear Technology which, its website says, is committed "to being a credible, consistent voice on behalf of beneficial nuclear technologies and the Savannah River Site." He holds a Ph.D. in chemistry.

Wolfe telegraphed what he intended to talk about tomorrow in an op-ed piece in The State, South Carolina's largest newspaper.

Wolfe began by explaining, "'Hormesis,' a Greek word meaning "impel, urge on,' refers to the phenomenon by which gradually adding a toxic substance to an organism produces an initial beneficial effect".The concept of small doses of radiation having beneficial effects on living organisms fits this model." He said there "are considerable data on laboratory animals and selected populations of humans from epidemiological studies that show beneficial effects of low levels of radiation. "

He continued that "even if you don't believe that some low levels of radiation are good for you, perhaps we can stop the hysteria about low levels causing harm. Based on what we know to date, there's no reason to think that even the most highly irradiated workers at Fukushima will suffer harmful health effects."

A grouping of safe-energy and environmental organizations took issue with Wolfe's plan to pitch "hormesis radiation" to the Savannah River Site-Citizens Advisory Board.

They wrote a letter to the Department of Energy complaining that there would be "no accurate, science-based counterbalancing presentation that radiation at all doses can be harmful," the agency's "allowance for the presentation of a pseudo-scientific presentation to be irresponsible and believe that such a presentation may well give the false impression that hormesis is being endorsed by DOE. "

The letter discussed international and U.S. scientific bodies and reports that have concluded that there is "no threshold" for radiation exposure--that any amount can harm a person--and noted that the DOE itself "also affirms challenges to the hormesis theory."

"Given that the hormesis theory does not comport with DOE policy and that a presentation about it is scheduled without equal time being given to an explanation of the linear no-threshold radiation dose model accepted by the scientific community, we request that you take steps to make sure that a presentation on the rejected hormesis theory does not remain on the Citizen Advisory Board's agenda at its upcoming meeting."

The letter also noted that Wolfe "does not appear to have requisite credentials in the medical or health physics fields."

It was signed by: Tom Clements of Friends of the Earth, Michele Boyd of Physicians for Social Responsibility, Susan Corbett of the South Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club, Glenn Carroll of Nuclear Watch South, Mary Olson of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Bobbie Paul of Georgia Women's Action for New Directions, David Kyle of the Center for a Sustainable Coast, Brett Bursey of the South Carolina Progressive Network and

Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch of New Mexico.

The DOE then cancelled Wolfe's talk.

"The public interest groups interested in the truth stopped the talk from going forward," comments Clements of Friends of the Earth.

Wolfe is not the only nuclear scientist pushing the hormesis radiation-is-good-for-you-theory. A leader in promoting it has been Dr. T. D.. Luckey, the author of Hormesis and Ionizing Radiation and Radiation Hormesis. He contends: "We need more, not less, exposure to ionizing radiation. The evidence that ionizing radiation is an essential agent has been reviewed"There is proven benefit."

Luckey, whose Ph.D. is in biochemistry/nutrition, also states: "The trillions of dollars estimated for worldwide nuclear waste management can be reduced to billions to provide safe, low-dose irradiation to improve our health. The direction is obvious; the first step remains to be taken."

Luckey did some of his research as a visiting scientist at another national nuclear laboratory, Argonne National Laboratory.

A medical expert on the impacts of radiation, Dr. Steven Wing of the University of North Carolina School of Public Health, where he is a professor of epidemiology, comments that "Luckey and the others advocating hormesis are without foundation."

Wing's Ph.D. is in epidemiology, defined as the branch of medicine that deals with the study of the causes, distribution and control of diseases in populations.

He declares that the push for "radiation hormesis" is "related to the conflicts of interest" involving these individuals connected to "universities, government agencies, industry and government laboratories that profit from nuclear weapons and the nuclear power industry."


Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is the author of Cover Up: What You Are Not Supposed to Know About Nuclear Power (now available for free download at ) and host of many TV programs on nuclear power that can be seen at no cost at

And Now..."Radiation Is Good For You." But DOE Cancels Pitch.

And Now..."Radiation Is Good For You." But DOE Cancels Pitch.

Become a Fan

SAVE AS FAVORITEVIEW FAVORITES By Karl Grossman (about the author)

Monday, July 25, 2011



By Byron J. Richards, CCN

July 26, 2011

Under the cover of the July 4th holiday, Senator Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) and the FDA launched an unprecedented and coordinated assault on the dietary supplement industry – in essence a direct attack on consumers who rely on dietary supplements to support their health.

Without a massive consumer protest of this abhorrent abuse of regulatory power consumers will be denied access to many dietary supplements they currently take. Furthermore, the cost of dietary supplements will skyrocket due to the unnecessary regulatory burden imposed upon dietary supplement companies, the legal wars that will go on for years, and the reduction in competition that currently keeps prices low.

While there are many political forces in play, it is clear that one of the main goals of this attack is to allow the pharmaceutical companies to take over the dietary supplement industry.

It is very difficult for the typical consumer of dietary supplements to understand why extreme harassment of the dietary supplement industry is taking place. Such attacks are typically launched under the false cover of “consumer safety,” a pretense that plays well for sound bites and is without merit. Thus, it is of great importance to explain this current attack in the historical and political context in which it is occurring.

And it is of even greater importance that every consumer of dietary supplements, who values having them as a health option, takes action now to preserve their access to a wide range of dietary supplements at an affordable price. At the end of this article is a Take Action Now section that explains the steps you should take today.

Politics, Big Pharma, Globalism & Dietary Supplements

The dietary supplement industry has no traditional political party as an ally. Dietary supplements empower people to be in charge of their own health, to improve their mental and physical health, and to be more self-determined in their decision making. This flies in the face of what the globalist, ruling-class elite of both political parties desire.

The elimination of health options is required for the control of a population, while the preservation of health freedom is a leading indicator of the overall freedom within a society. The ruling class knows that the control of health options is as important as the control of food and money. If you can keep a population living in fear of their health problems, worried about their financial future, and concerned about rising food prices/shortages, then you can easily control that population. Understand that much of the chaos now going on in the world is intentional and provoked by the global ruling elite.

Big Pharma and its legendary lobby buy whatever political influence they need to force healthy Americans to pay for the drugs of others, drugs which seldom fix health problems. We recently saw Big Pharma purchase the Obama administration and lock in drug sales at taxpayer expense for years to come, as President Obama needed Big Pharma backing for his health reform legislation. Unbelievably, the popular Democratic initiative of drug re-importation at lower prices, which could have easily passed both the House and Senate when they were under Democratic control, was blocked by the Obama administration as part of pandering to the interests of Big Pharma. Big Pharma influences Democrats by aligning itself with the desire to create a socialist-style health care system that includes the unchecked sales of Big Pharma drugs at taxpayer expense.

It is not an accident that 10% of the U.S. population is on zombie-producing brain medications, helping to make a more pliable herd of sheeple. It was President George W. Bush that opened the door and encouraged massive illegal and off-label marketing of brain drugs to children and the elderly. It is shocking that atypical antipsychotic medication is now the best selling drug in the U.S. by dollar value, with most uses of the drug to control behavior and not for the intended use of the drug – typically at taxpayer expense. Of course, President Bush passed Big Pharma legislation committing taxpayers to a massive unfunded liability of paying for many of the drugs seniors take – drugs that generally do not improve health or fix health problems.

Big Pharma influences Republicans by aligning itself as a corporate conglomerate that is too big to fail, one that should be free of prudent safety regulations or reduction in grotesquely inflated prices. It fights against drug safety at every turn, while at the same time lobbying to pass laws that lock in sales or eliminate its competition. The media plays along, as Big Pharma is a wonderful source of advertising dollars that are in no small part made possible by taxpayer funding of Big Pharma drug sales.

While Big Pharma sees many aspects of the dietary supplement industry as competition, it is also the case that many pharmaceutical companies are in some aspect of the dietary supplement industry, often as raw material suppliers. Big Pharma does not want to see the dietary supplement industry eliminated, it wants to see the small and medium sized independent businesses in the dietary supplement industry eliminated and it wants to own the industry.

Their key strategy to accomplish this at this time is to lobby to pass costly laws and regulations which they can comply to and which other smaller, independent companies cannot. Such a power play to take over an industry will create a pharmaceutical-based, anti free enterprise monopoly that will massively drive up prices to consumers.

Keep in mind that the U.S. problem is part of a global elitist strategy. Similar campaigns are under way in Europe and Canada – and further along. CODEX continues to be a huge threat not only to health freedom in the U.S. but to the very sovereignty of our country. It is an FDA-supported effort to make U.S. companies comply with international laws that make U.S. citizens subservient to the desires of a band of globalist companies, with Big Pharma influences sitting at the head of the table. The FDA, through the FDA Trilateral Cooperation Charter, is also trying to harmonize U.S. citizens to conform to the existing regulations of Canada and Mexico, which are draconian compared to the rights of U.S. citizens. While pretending to be interested in consumer safety, the FDA is actually a police force bully that is using regulation as a tool to help implement a global elitist agenda. In other words, the attacks are methodical, ongoing, and coming from multiple directions.


Support for dietary supplements can come from a small minority of either Republicans or Democrats, based more on the personal beliefs of those individuals and representation of their constituents, not on a broad consensus of party politics. For example, the 1994 DSHEA (Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act) legislation, which is now at the center of the current attack, was a bipartisan effort led by Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Orin Hatch (R-Utah).

While Harkin and Hatch have been steadfast defenders of dietary supplements, they have paid a political price. They are under constant attack for having passed DSHEA from the various forces I have explained. Thus, the rights of consumers granted by DSHEA hang by a thread of support while health freedom for all Americans teeters on a precipice. The only counter balance to the Big Pharma agenda that matters to politicians is the collective voice of individual consumers.

In 1994 it was a massive consumer uprising that enabled the passage of DSHEA. Big Pharma learned their lesson and has sought to take over control of the dietary supplement industry piece by piece, trying to avoid another massive consumer protest. They have taken over major trade groups within the dietary supplement industry, invited expensive FDA regulation of the industry, while sitting back and laughing in their board rooms. They have been able to whittle away at the industry until they got it vulnerable enough for a major attack – which is now underway.

The Global Elitist Senator Durbin Orchestrates Dietary Supplement Attack

Senator Durbin represents the global elitist faction of the far left. He is the #2 Democrat on the Senate side, and is a close advisor to President Obama, sharing many associations in the Illinois political scene as well as being the former co-chair of his presidential campaign. His leadership role in the Council on Foreign Relations and other well-publicized affiliations make him a very controversial figure. His anti-American position on numerous topics is well documented and has recently been reviewed by attorney Jonathan Emord in his article, Dick Durbin, Enemy of the Founding Fathers’ Republic.

Throughout his Senate career Durbin has consistently attacked the dietary supplement industry and food industry, seeking to destroy health freedom, family businesses and small businesses, natural health options, and wholesome food. When questioned about his motives it is always the same old sickening answer – he pretends to be concerned about consumer safety. His actual motives are about ever-increasing regulations in the dietary supplement industry and food industry that favor large multi-national corporations and seek to wipe out their competition – as part of his overall globalist agenda.

This man does nothing to investigate the 100,000 or more Americans who are needlessly killed and the more than a million who are seriously injured by Big Pharma medications every year. Rather, he does everything he can to get more people connected to this failing system of health management. At the same time he aggressively attacks the competition to Big Pharma drugs. He is a total hypocrite. The dietary supplement industry has a sterling safety record. Current FDA regulations already allow for consumer protection – no more laws or regulations are needed.

On June 30, 2011 Durbin launched his latest attempt at a new law to damage the dietary supplement industry. It is called S.1310 “Dietary Supplement Labeling Act of 2011.” It is not often that the entire dietary supplement industry agrees on much. However, the industry as a whole is against this legislation. It is an alarming regulatory nightmare that is trying to treat vitamins as if they are drugs. Durbin and the FDA can’t stand the fact that these compounds are inherently safe and that by law the FDA must prove them unsafe. Rather, they want the supplement industry to prove safety with burdensome and costly regulations when no safety issues exist. Such regulations would run small and medium size companies out of business, reduce consumer access to safe products, drive up costs, and reduce the number of people taking supplements, all of which are Durbin goals. Such unnecessary regulatory efforts create a major opportunity for Big Pharma companies to wipe out the dietary supplement industry as we know it today.

S.1310 has now been referred to the HELP committee (Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions). Thankfully for the dietary supplement industry Tom Harkin is the chairman of the committee and we all hope that he would never let this bill out of committee. However, we can take no chances. It is possible that a last minute back room deal in the middle of the night could attach this bill as an amendment to some other legislation, as part of a tit-for-tat bargain. This means that this disastrous piece of legislation needs to be on the radar screen of every Senator, especially those on the HELP committee. Please write your Senators and tell them NO on S.1310.

The second part of the Durbin-orchestrated attack is by utilizing the FDA to concoct regulations and retroactively applying them to damage the dietary supplement industry. This diabolical stunt has been planned for some time. Durbin’s Food Safety Modernization Act, another regulatory nightmare attacking small family farms, was signed into law by President Obama on January 4th 2011, after sliding through in the dark hours of the Lame Duck session. Within that bill Durbin had inserted language requiring the FDA to issue guidance within 180 days of the passage of the Food Safety Modernization Act on a section of the 1994 DSHEA law regarding the definition of a New Dietary Ingredient or NDI. It is important to understand that this is a Durbin effort to ruin the dietary supplement industry, using both newly proposed legislation (S.1310) and retroactively redefining the DSHEA law through new FDA regulations to reflect what is being proposed in S.1310 – undermining the clear intent of the DSHEA law. The DSHEA law intended consumers to have wide access to dietary supplements. Durbin is intent upon the opposite.

Twisting the NDI Issue to Wreck the Dietary Supplement Industry

The 1994 DSHEA legislation was by no means perfect. Compromises were made to satisfy the anti-vitamin, pro-pharmaceutical lobby. The language in the law regarding new dietary ingredients was such an undesirable compromise. It was able to grandfather in every dietary supplement in use as of 1994 while offering up a vague description of what a new dietary ingredient may be and requiring its approval before it enters the market. The dietary supplement industry has interpreted the law to mean that if the ingredient existed in food prior to 1994 (or in a dietary supplement), then it was grandfathered in.

The working understanding between the FDA and the dietary supplement industry was that if you were trying to bring something to market as a dietary supplement that was outside this definition then you better get approval of that ingredient as an NDI.

This understanding of NDI, along with a number of other understandings between the FDA and dietary supplement industry based on gray areas of the DSHEA language, has provided a relatively peaceful relationship between the FDA and industry. Prior to 1994 it was a decades-long war. It appears headed back in that direction.


On July 1, 2011, as part of the coordinated Durbin attack, the FDA issued proposed new regulatory guidelines to define NDI and who needed to apply for one. Shockingly, the new definitions far exceed anything written or intended by DSHEA – rather they mirror the opinions of Durbin. These regulations seek to change what was essentially a notification process into a costly approval process. This is a flagrant disregard for the intent of the DSHEA law, for which the FDA is suddenly writing regulations 18 years after the fact.

The net effect of the regulations is to reclassify many nutritional compounds currently on the market as NDI. This would force them off the market until they get NDI approval, which will take months and may never be granted. This will throw the industry into chaos, massively disrupt your access to dietary supplements, drive up your prices, and deny you access to many supplements you have counted on for your health.

The FDA is trying to say that production and extraction methods for dietary supplements could readily reclassify a formerly grandfathered nutrient as an NDI. This means that advances in production technology that have enabled better extracts of nutrients to be produced will now put that nutrient back to ground zero – potentially and likely eliminating it from the market. This is ludicrous.

Furthermore, it will not only be required for the manufacturer of the NDI to get approval, every distributor of the product that wants to use the NDI would need to file a separate NDI application. In other words, a costly approval process has to be undertaken over and over again simply to sell something that was safe in the first place. This is completely illogical, bordering on regulatory insanity.

These regulations are also obsessed with the dosing levels of the NDI, forcing any dosing above the amount in food to have drug-like safety testing. This is a key strategy in the global CODEX campaign to water down the therapeutic benefit of dietary supplements so as to reduce their effectiveness and eliminate competition to Big Pharma sales. This is psychotic paranoia on the topic of public health. The only real threat is to the ongoing sales of Big Pharma drugs that don’t fix health problems and actually injure and kill many.

This is an effort by the FDA and Durbin to force dietary supplement companies to get drug-like or food-additive-like safety approval for all their nutrients under the false premise of a need to demonstrate safety. The current law is that it is up to the FDA to prove that any dietary supplement is not safe. The FDA has the ability and expansive regulatory powers to do this right now so as to protect the safety of the public regarding any issue involving dietary supplements.

Thus, their grand plan is to force a redefinition of what defines an NDI. Then they will retroactively apply this definition to all products currently on the market and try to force them off the market or force them off the market for an undefined period of time while the company goes through extensive and costly NDI approval. If companies don’t comply they will send armed U.S. Marshals to seize their highly effective and safe products as some sort of tainted/adulterated drug. Compliance would likely cost small companies millions of dollars that they cannot possibly afford.

This chess game is being played with a pathetic opening strategy based on imaginary safety problems. The gambit requires an ignorant public for its success. It requires naïve, spineless, and self-serving dietary supplement companies – of which there are many. And it requires dietary supplement trade groups like CRN and NPA to go along with key provisions – which is more likely to happen than you may think.

A 90-day comment period on these proposed guidelines currently exists for consumers and members of the dietary supplement industry to let the FDA know what they think about this. It expires on September 30, 2011.

It is vital that all consumers file a written protest to the FDA explaining your concerns over their rewriting of the intent of the DSHEA law based on their newly proposed regulations. You are especially concerned that products you rely on for your health could be eliminated from the market and/or will cost you significantly more money. Urge them that no matter what guidelines they eventually issue, all dietary supplement products on the market prior to the issuance of their final guidelines should be grandfather in so as not to disrupt the current market and potentially injure the health of Americans.

Members of the dietary supplement industry should also submit comments to preserve their rights to pursue future legal challenges, though such comments need to be written in legal language and will require costly legal advice (just the beginning of burdensome legal expenses for small and medium size dietary supplement companies).

Once this comment period is over then the FDA can take as long as it wants to issue final guidelines. In fact, they don’t have to issue final guidelines if they don’t want to. They can simply begin enforcement based on their current thinking as explained in their draft guidelines and then establish court rulings to foster their position. It is more likely they will issue some type of final ruling. Large dietary supplement companies will weather the storm and bear the expenses, jockeying for their position in the New World Order of dietary supplements. Such large companies, including those aligned with Big Pharma interests and many involved with the largest dietary supplement trade groups (CRN and NPA), would actually like their competition from smaller companies to be eliminated. Yes, it is a greedy dog-eat-dog world.

Smaller companies will do what they can to get ready. It is likely that the FDA will go after 10 – 15 of them, trying to make an example for the rest of the industry. Some companies will buckle immediately; others will stand and fight the David vs. Goliath battle.

The losers are consumers. Consumers will have fewer health options in terms of nutrients that can assist their health. What is left on the market will be far higher in price. Innovation in the industry will be set back to the Dark Ages and all new ingredients will come to the market with Big Pharma dollars. We are witnessing the attempted takeover of an entire industry.

All that stands in the way of this outcome is a massive outcry from outraged consumers. The forces orchestrating this attack have no answer to the power of the consumer joined together on social media and the internet. If you rely on dietary supplements for your health it is time to spread the word.

Take Action Now

1) Pass on this article to everyone you know who values their access to dietary supplements as a safe way to enhance their health.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

2) Write your Senators and tell them to be aware of S.1310 and to vote no on it. Write the FDA and tell them you want all nutrients currently on the market grandfathered in so that none of them need to comply retroactively to new NDI guidelines. Tell them it is vital you have access to all of the nutrients currently on the market and that their regulatory actions will drive up prices, cause nutrients to needlessly disappear from the market, and result in health harm to the American public – not improved safety.

You can find excellent sample letters and specific directions on how to contact your Senators and the FDA on many health freedom websites. One good resource is the National Health Federation website, whose take action page gives you step-by-step instructions and can be accessed by clicking here.

For more information:

1- To read Senate bill S.1310, click here.

2- To see a list of Senators on the HELP committee, which you could also write about S.1310, click here.

3- To read the FDA draft guidance on NDI, click here.

4- To read legal analysis of the FDA draft guidance on new dietary ingredients, click here and here.

5- To better understand why the FDA is such a corrupt and morally bankrupt organization, read my 2006 book, Fight for Your Health, Exposing the FDA’s Betrayal of America.

Amazing food facts: The seed of a peach contains an almond-like nut containing the anti-cancer medicine laetrile

Amazing food facts: The seed of a peach contains an almond-like nut containing the anti-cancer medicine laetrile

Monday, July 25, 2011

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) Peaches, nectarines, plums, apricots and almonds are all closely related fruit trees with very similar pits. In all these fruits, the pit must be broken open to reveal the almond-shaped kernel within. In fact, this is what almonds actually are: the kernel within the pit of the fruit of the almond tree!

The kernels of all these species contain high concentrations of a chemical known as laetrile. It's also known as amygdalin or vitamin B-17. Research has shown that laetrile induces programmed cell death in cancer cells while leaving healthy cells alone. It's sort of like Mother Nature's chemotherapy except that it doesn't make you suffer the way man-made synthetic chemotherapy does.

Laetrile appears to work because the nutrient is actually composed of four separate molecules: two of glucose, one of benzaldyhide and one of cyanide. The latter two chemicals are toxic, but are bound up in a non-bioavailable form. Cancer cells contain an enzyme that healthy cells do not, known as beta-glucosidase. This enzyme actually breaks apart the component pieces of laetrile, and the cell is poisoned by a combination of benzaldyhide and cyanide. Healthy cells do not undergo this effect, which is why they remain unaffected by laetrile.

The medical establishment, learning about this natural "chemotherapy" that killed cancer cells and didn't even require a prescription, quickly began to attack it by spreading lies about the dangers of laetrile. The FDA, long an enemy of healing through nutrition, banned laetrile in 1971. Highly toxic chemotherapy substances, however, remain perfectly legal and continue to kill hundreds of thousands of people every single year. (Most people who "die from cancer" are actually killed by chemotherapy and radiation, not from the cancer itself. "Cancer survivors" are people who miraculously survive chemotherapy.)

G. Edward Griffin wrote a sensational book on this subject called World Without Cancer: The Story of Vitamin B17. It's available on at

More information is also available at

Source: 25 Amazing Facts About Food, authored by Mike Adams and David Guiterrez. This report reveals surprising things about where your food comes from and what's really in it! Download the full report (FREE) by clicking here. Inside, you'll learn 24 more amazing but true facts about foods, beverages and food ingredients. Instant download of the complete PDF. All 25 facts are documented and true.

Sources for this story include:

Learn more:





By Attorney Jonathan Emord

Author of "The Rise of Tyranny" and

"Global Censorship of Health Information"

July 25, 2011

Sunday, July 24, 2011

.Norway Terror Attacks a False Flag: More Than One Shooter on Island; Oslo Bomb Drill Just Concluded; Was It NATO’s Revenge for Norway’s Decision to Stop Bombing Libya?


by Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.

Washington DC, July 24, 2011 – The tragic terror attacks in Norway display a number of the telltale signs of a false flag provocation. It is reported that, although the world media are attempting to focus on Anders Behring Breivik as a lone assassin in the tradition of Lee Harvey Oswald, many eyewitnesses agree that a second shooter was active in the massacre at the Utøya summer youth camp outside of Oslo. It has also come to light that a special police unit had been conducting a drill or exercise in downtown Oslo which involved the detonation of bombs – exactly what caused the bloodshed a few hundred meters away little more than 48 hours later. Further research reveals that United States intelligence agencies had been conducting a large-scale program of recruiting retired Norwegian police officers with the alleged purpose of conducting surveillance inside the country. This program, known as SIMAS Surveillance Detection Units, provided a perfect vehicle for the penetration and subversion of the Norwegian police by NATO.

A motive for the attack is also present: as part of its attempt to mount an independent foreign policy, including the imminent diplomatic recognition of a Palestinian state as part of a general rapprochement with the Arab world, Norway was leading the smaller NATO states in dropping out of the imperialist aggressor coalition currently bombing Libya. Norway was scheduled to stop all bombing and other sorties against the Gaddafi forces as out of August 1 at the latest.

Finally, the CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks has already furnished a prefabricated off-the-shelf case for incompetence and malfeasance against the current Norwegian government that is doing all these things – in the form of a series of real or doctored dispatches which document the alleged negligence of this government in dealing with the terrorist threat, all in the view of US State Department officials.

VG of Oslo: “Several” Eyewitnesses Say there were Two Shooters on the Island

As noted, world press and media of the Anglo-American school have immediately battened onto Breivik as an archetypal lone assassin cast in the mold of Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, and so many others. The problem for the terror mythographs is that , in most of these cases, there is credible to overwhelming evidence that these figures could not have acted alone. Among more recent loan assassins, Breivik could be compared to Major Nidal Hasan of Fort Hood, Texas, whose shooting spree dates back to November 2009. Hasan is accused of having killed seven people. At the time, it was considered remarkable that Hasan had managed to kill so many armed soldiers on the military base. But early reports suggested that there were one or two other shooters in addition to Hasan. As usually happens, these extra shooters were soon expunged from the hegemonic media narrative.1

In the Norwegian case, the evidence that Breivik was not alone in claiming his fearful toll of victims is clear and convincing. Here are some excerpts from a report published by the Oslo newspaper VG:

“Several of the youths who were at the Utøya the shooting drama, told VG that they are convinced that there must have been more than one perpetrator. Marius Helander Røset believes the same thing: – I am sure that there was shooting from two different places on the island at the same time, he said.

Witnesses: – There were two people

Police believe Anders Behring Breivik (32) is the perpetrator who was dressed as a policeman , and have charged him for two terrorist attacks. Young people interviewed by VG describe an additional perpetrator – who was not wearing a police uniform. The person was following them around was 180 centimeters tall, had thick dark hair and a Nordic appearance. He had a pistol in his right hand and a rifle on his back. – I believe that there were two people who were shooting, says Alexander Stavdal (23)….

At the press conference Saturday morning opened the police said that there could have been several perpetrators and emphasized that there is an ongoing investigation.”2

The presence of a second shooter is of course most inconvenient for the lone assassin theory, since it represents incontrovertible evidence of a criminal conspiracy, the very thing which the media coverage is usually anxious to avoid. In the Norwegian case, the reports of a second shooter seemed to be persistent enough 36 hours after the main event so as to hold out some hope that the entire official version can be brought down on this particular.

Police Had Drilled Setting off Bombs in Same Area a Few Days Earlier

Another telltale critical sign of a false flag operation is the holding of drills or exercises –allegedly for counterterrorism purposes — by the police or the military at the same time as the terror attack, or shortly before the real terror attack begins. Sometimes, the terror drills or exercises are scheduled to begin slightly after the time when the actual terror attack occurs. In these cases, it is often discovered that the self-styled anti-terror drill or exercise contains a simulated action or event which strongly resembles the real world terror attack, the one which actually kills people. The media will then refer to an astounding coincidence or a weird happenstance, but the reality is that the terror drill has been taken live or flipped live in the form of real killings. The secret is that the legally sanctioned drill has been used to conduit or bootleg the actual butchery through a government bureaucracy whose resources are required to run the terror but in which there are many officials who cannot be allowed to know what is happening.

The Norway events provide a very clear illustration of this principle. In Oslo, a powerful bomb went off in or near the building which houses the office of the Prime Minister. Exactly as we would expect, special anti-terror police had been drilling setting off bombs in a nearby part of the Norwegian capital little more than 48 hours earlier. The public had not been informed in advance, but found out what was happening when they began hearing bombs on Tuesday and Wednesday, whereas the main bomb went off on Friday. Here is a report from the newspaper Aftenposten:

“Armed police were seen in the area around the opera house in Oslo, and violent explosions could be heard over large parts of the city. No one knew that this was all a matter of practice. The Information Section of the Oslo police deeply regrets that the public was not made aware of the seemingly dramatic exercise….It was the emergency squad, the national police special unit against terrorism, which was conducting a drill in the cordoned off area at Bjørvika pier. According to a press release from the police, nearly a day after the exercise, the drill consisted of training in the controlled detonation of explosive charges….The exercise will continue for the rest of Wednesday night and a few more explosions are expected….The exercise followed a familiar pattern for all anti-terror forces around the world: The men lowered themselves down from the ceiling and into through the window that had just been blown out, while they fired hand their weapons.”3

Peter Power of Visor Consultants told BBC Radio Five in the wake of the London subway bombings of July 7, 2005 that his firm had been conducting an exercise based on explosions going off in substantially the same stations of the London underground at the same times when the real explosions had actually occurred. The Norwegian events exhibit the same kind of strange coincidence.

A Motive: Norway Had Decided to Stop Bombing Libya August 1

The targets of the Norwegian terror attacks are all expressly political, including government offices and a summer youth camp of the ruling Labor Party, and thus point in the direction of politics. The government of Norway is currently a coalition composed of the Labor Party, the Socialist Left Party, and the Center Party. Norway has traditionally attempted to cultivate a pro-Arab foreign policy, as seen in its sponsorship of the Oslo peace accords between Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in the mid-1990s. The current government has announced its intention of granting diplomatic recognition to a Palestinian state in the near future. When the destabilization of Libya began last February, the Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre of the Labor Party warned Norway’s partners in the NATO alliance against getting involved.

But soon after this, Norway gave in to US pressure and agreed to participate in NATO’s bombing of Libya for an initial period of three months, sending six planes which have carried out an estimated 10% of all the bombing raids mounted by the Atlantic alliance. However, as the end of its three-month commitment had passed, Norway had reduced its contingent to four planes during the month of July, and had announced on June 10 that it was planning to withdraw altogether from the NATO bombing coalition no later than August 1.

The Norwegian decision to drop out of the NATO attack coalition was associated with a similar move by the Netherlands, which was announced on that same day of June 10. The Dutch had decided to maintain their contingent of six planes, but will no longer take part in bombing attacks on ground targets. Henceforth, the Dutch are willing only to help enforce the no-fly zone through air interdiction. There was therefore the potential that Norway’s example could trigger a general tendency by the smaller NATO states to quit the bombing coalition, in which their collective presence is highly significant.

Leading figures of the Norwegian government were among the first to undercut the supposed rationale for the NATO bombing, while urging negotiations: ‘”The solution to the problems in Libya are political, they cannot be solved by military means alone,” Norwegian Prime Minister Stoltenberg told reporters gathered for a conference in Oslo on May 13. “We are very much supporting all efforts to find a political solution to the challenges we are facing in Libya,” he added. Norway’s government …pledged to scale down its role in NATO-orchestrated air strikes on Libya after its current three-month commitment ends on June 24.4

This was the policy of the entire Norwegian government: ‘Norway will scale down its fighter jet contribution in Libya from six to four planes and withdraw completely from the NATO-led operation by Aug. 1, the government said Friday…. Defense Minister Grete Faremo said she expects understanding from NATO allies because Norway has a small air force and cannot “maintain a large fighter jet contribution during a long time.” Norway’s air force, meanwhile says its F-16 jets have carried out about 10 percent of the NATO airstrikes in Libya since March 31. The parties in Norway’s center-left coalition government had been at odds over whether to extend the country’s participation, which was scheduled to expire June 24. The most leftist faction in the government, the Socialist Left Party, opposed an extension, but a compromise was reached to stay in the operation until Aug. 1 with fewer planes. “It is wise to end the Norwegian fighter jet contribution. Now Norway should apply its efforts to find a peaceful solution in Libya,” Socialist Left Party lawmaker Baard Vegar Solhjell said.’5

State Department Complained of Norway’s “Lack of Commitment” to Libyan Adventure

The Norwegian decision to stop waging war against Libya, the first of its kind by any member of the Atlantic alliance, has attracted the attention of diplomatic observers, one of whom commented that the current government in Oslo has advocated “a distinctly more peaceful approach to global policies by the Norwegian government…. [despite] recent pressure from the US on Norway to contribute more in Libya military campaign. Norway has been resisting that pressure and pushing for a more peaceful approach to the US-led NATO attacks on Libya and refused to provide weapons to NATO, finally announcing last month that Norway would quit its military role in Libya by August 1. In March, as the US was rallying unilateral support to invade Libya, Norway’s minister of foreign affairs Jonas Gahr Støre was one of the few nations to warn the US against armed intervention in Libya. Norway initially supplied six fighter jets for Libya operations and has carried out about 10% of the Libya strikes since 19 March. However, US officials singled out Norway and Denmark for their ‘lack of commitment’ to the mission to oust Gaddafi… Other Norway-Libya links include Norway’s major oil- and fertilizer-related interests in Libya: the Norwegian state-owned Statoil, which has about 30 employees at its Tripoli offices….[Norway’s] businesses have conducted major business operations in Libya, in co-operation with Qaddafi’s regime.”6

At the present stage of the inquiry, the best estimate of a motive for the Norwegian attacks is to punish the country for its independent and pro-Arab foreign policy in general, and for its repudiation of the NATO bombing coalition arrayed against Libya in particular.

Are SIMAS Surveillance Detection Units the New Gladio for Norway?

US and NATO intelligence have been shown to possess extraordinary capabilities inside Norway, many of which may be operating outside of the control of the Norwegian government. In early November 2010, the Oslo television channel TV2 exposed the existence of an extensive network of paid assets and informants of US intelligence recruited from the ranks of retired police and other officials. The ostensible goal of this program was the surveillance of Norwegians who were taking part in demonstrations and other activities critical of the United States and its policies. One of the Norwegians recruited was the former chief of the anti-terror section of the Oslo police.7 Although the goal was supposedly merely surveillance, it is possible to imagine some other and far more sinister activities that could be carried out by such a network of retired cops, including the identification and subversion of rotten apples on the active-duty police force. Some of the capabilities of a network of this type would not be totally alien to the sort of events that have just occurred in Norway.

The official name for the type of espionage cell which the United States was creating in Norway is Surveillance Detection Unit (SDU). The SDUs in turn operate within the framework of the Security Incident Management Analysis System (SIMAS). SIMAS is known to be used for spying and surveillance by US Embassies not just in the Nordic bloc of Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, but worldwide. The terror events also raise the question of whether SIMAS has an operational dimension. Could this apparatus represents a modern version of the Cold War stay behind networks set up in all NATO countries and best-known under the name of the Italian branch, Gladio?

The Norwegian government needs to find out. Thus far Norwegian ministers have asserted that they never approved the SIMAS network of SDUs. “We never knew about it,” claimed Norway’s Justice Minister Knut Storberget and Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre in chorus. Hillary Clinton stated instead that the Norwegians had been informed.

CIA’s Wikileaks Limited Hangout Has Rationale for Toppling Norway’s Government

Thanks to document dumps by the CIA limited hangout subsidiary generally known as Wikileaks, an obvious path for using the Norwegian terror attacks as a rationale for overthrowing the current government has already been provided. Real or doctored State Department cables obligingly made available by Wikileaks portray the Norwegian government which NATO hates as a collection of bunglers and misfits, unable to take effective measures to safeguard the national security of the country.

Some of these tables have been published in the immediate wake of the terror attacks by the London Daily Telegraph, a newspaper reputedly close to NATO intelligence circles. According to this article, while ‘talking about an attempt by the Police Security Service (PST) to track one particular suspected Al Qaeda terror cell, a cable written by the US Ambassador to Norway, Barry White, describes [how Norwegian authorities] … refused the help of the UK authorities to put surveillance on a potential suspect and adds: “Not only will they not put their own resources on him…but they also just turned down the visiting UK intel service’s offer of two twelve-person surveillance teams.” The cable goes on to say the UK and US intelligence services analyzed coded conversation between terror suspects and decided it warranted surveillance. But, says the cable, “PST instead found a way to interpret the same translated coded conversation in a rosier, less threatening light, an interpretation which makes little sense to the US or UK.”’ A catalog of even the most recent failures and fiascos of the FBI and the CIA in the so-called Global War on Terror would help to put these hypocritical judgments into proper perspective, but it would also be too voluminous to be appended here.

Another damaging particular appears made to order for an attempt to blame the alleged bungling of the Norwegian government for the Oslo bomb attack: ‘The memo also reveals how, despite apparently having surveillance on the suspect, the PST lost track of bomb-making equipment which was being stored in an apartment after it was apparently removed without investigators’ noticing. The PST then failed to track one suspect for 14 days because the investigator assigned to him was called away on another job. The memo concludes: “The PST is in over its head…it simply cannot keep up.”’

Another State Department memo dished up by Wikileaks, supposedly written in 2007… adds: “The official police (PST) threat evaluation…states that international terror organizations are not a direct threat against Norway. A memo written in 2008 shows how the US felt that Norway was not awake to the possibility of a potential terrorist attack. The cable reads: “We repeatedly press Norwegian authorities to take terrorism seriously. We will seek to build on this momentum to fight the still-prevalent feeling that terrorism happens elsewhere, not in peaceful Norway.” And a cable written just last year adds: “The PST still viewed Denmark as more of a target than Norway, for reasons very specific to the cartoon controversy.” 8

The government of Norway needs to go on the offensive and establish the whole truth of what has just occurred. Otherwise, that government is likely to succumb to the internationally orchestrated campaign which the Wikileaks documents so clearly foreshadow.



2 See RIA Novosti, July 23, 2011,; – From the VG website: “Flere av ungdommene som var på Utøya under skytedramaet forteller til VG at de er overbevist om at det må ha vært mer enn én gjerningsmann. Det mener også Marius Helander Røset.” “Jeg har overbevist om at det var to personer som skjøt, sier Aleksander Stavdal (23).” “Vedkommende var i følge dem rundt 180 centimeter høy, hadde tykt mørkt hår og så nordisk ut. Han hadde en pistol i høyrehånden og et gevær på ryggen.”

3 “Politiet glemte å informere om øvelse: Anti-terrorpolitiet avfyrte sprengladninger under en øvelse midt i Oslo, to hundre meter fra Operaen, men glemte å gi beskjed til publikum,” Aftenposten, c. July 20, 2011,

4 “Libya solution more political than military-Norway,” Reuters, 13 May 2011,

5 “Norway to quit Libya operation by August,” AP, June 10, 2011,

6 Tragic Irony Surrounds Oslo Bombing, Phuket Word, July 23, 2011,

7 Thomas Borchert, “US-Geheimdienst mit Nordfiliale: USA lassen Norweger überwachen,” Deutsche Presse-Agentur, November 4, 2010.

8 Mark Hughes, “WikiLeaks files show Norway unprepared for terror attack: Norway’s intelligence service had previously been criticized for its failure to keep track of suspected terror cells and the country was felt to be complacent about the prospect of a terror attack, secret cables from the WikiLeaks files reveal,” London Daily Telegraph, July 22, 2011.

Print / Share

Tarpley: Norway Terror Attacks a False Flag

Tarpley: Norway Terror Attacks a False Flag

More Than One Shooter on Island; Oslo Bomb Drill Just Concluded; Was It NATO’s Revenge for Norway’s Decision to Stop Bombing Libya?

Webster G. Tarpley


July 24, 2011

Saturday, July 23, 2011

'Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business'

'Burzynski: Cancer is Serious Business'

Full-Length Documentary


.A Candid Interview With Beelzebub T. McGlobalist Friday, 22 July 2011 01:41 Brandon Smith

.A Candid Interview With Beelzebub T. McGlobalist Friday, 22 July 2011 01:41 Brandon Smith

Special Note: This is a parody…obviously, though the attitudes and responses portrayed are unfortunately based on expressions of common real-life gobalists. Enjoy…

The following is a very special interview with Beelzebub T. McGlobalist, the foremost representative of the incorporated organization of global bankers, political frontmen, and think-tank propagandists that make up such popular and exclusive clubs as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, and the G20. With financial centralization and subsequent iron fisted autocracy on the rise, we thought it would be fun and possibly even titillating for our readers to hear straight from the horse’s mouth what lies in store for us, the lowly peon pond scum of the Earth, in the near future. Numerous alternative analysts have calculated likely outcomes of social and economic destabilization in the wake of engineered collapse, however, we thought it best to go directly to the source, and ask those who actually created the framework for catastrophe that waits ahead. This is a no-holds-barred look at globalization. Won’t you join us…?

Alt-Market: Good day, Mr. McGlobalist. Thank you for agreeing to this interview on such short notice.

McGlobalist: Yes, we sometimes feel it necessary to put in a little face time with “cannon fodder” like you, even though I personally find the very idea of your existence rather distasteful…

Alt-Market: Ok…….Is it alright if I call you T-Bub?

McGlobalist: Sure, that’s what Kissinger calls me…that, or “Sugar Pants”…

Alt-Market: Umm, let’s stick with T-Bub.

McGlobalist: Very well…

Alt-Market: T-Bub, it has been openly admitted by you and your associates in the IMF that your ultimate goal is the dissolution of sovereign state economies and political frameworks. You also admittedly desire to restructure those economies and governments into a single centralized financial system and a single supranational governing body. Is it just a coincidence that the ongoing global debt crisis and the subsequent devaluation of the Dollar and the Euro are pushing us towards that exact scenario, or did you “help things along”?

McGlobalist: Are you kidding?! Of course we helped things along! You think that international banks like Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan could possibly participate in a massive securities fraud like that of the derivatives bubble WITHOUT the complicity of Central Banks around the world, not to mention regulatory agencies like the SEC? I mean, we created such levels of bad debt it’s mathematically unfeasible to calculate it! You can’t hide that much financial toxicity for years on end unless ratings agencies, government oversight institutions, and the Federal Reserve itself, allow you to do so. Luckily, the average American wants to believe its all some “crazy mistake” or the “stupidity of politicians”. It’s easier for people to believe in random coincidence than to believe their world has been turned upside down on purpose. How do you think global elitists like myself have survived for so long?

Alt-Market: So then, if you already have your greasy hands wrapped around most of these institutions, why deliberately cause them to collapse?

McGlobalist: Psychology, my boy. Psychology. It’s not enough to force people to accept centralization, or even to trick them into believing it doesn’t exist. Eventually, you have to make them ASK for centralization. They have to believe that it was their decision all along to relinquish their sovereignty. Nation states have served their purpose. Now, we feel its time to shed them like so much dead skin and move on. Think about it! We create a problem, then, we offer a predetermined solution which the peasants automatically cling to because most of them are too apathetic to help their own situation. When they finally realize how much they have lost in the process, the only culprits they have left to single out for blame are themselves. In the meantime, we can sit back and relax in relative obscurity. Elitists have been playing this game for centuries. I’m amazed that you people haven’t caught on yet. It’s the freaken’ digital age for crying out loud!

Alt-Market: Good point. But, what about those who say your plans are not for the good of the citizenry but actually a brazenly insane attempt to satisfy your own hubris?

McGlobalist: I just ordered a huge plate of barbequed ribs, you want any…?

Alt-Market: ……….No. Could you answer the question please?

McGlobalist: You’re pushier than the ATF at a Branch Davidian compound! Look, you know that feeling you get when you drown your first potato sack full of puppies…?

Alt-Market: I can’t say that I follow you……

McGlobalist: Ok, let’s see… about when you were interned at one of our fine public education facilities as a little whelp? You remember the “special needs” kids on the short yellow bus?

Alt-Market: Is this going somewhere, T-Bub?

McGlobalist: Did you associate with those children?

Alt-Market: No, not really.

McGlobalist: Did the teachers let them run wild unsupervised?

Alt-Market: No.

McGlobalist: Well, that’s how we look at you and those like you. You can’t be left to your own devices. Who knows what would happen! Some kids just eat paste, but some set their own heads on fire! We’re doing what we do for your protection. Civilization would self destruct without our guidance.

Alt-Market: What does that have to do with killing puppies?

McGlobalist: Yes, well, imagine that the puppies are retarded….

Alt-Market: Maybe we should move on. You claim that collectivist efforts like globalization are the “wave of the future”, and that concepts such as America’s Constitutional Republic are “old and outdated”. However, isn’t it true that political sovereignty and liberty are actually very new ideas in the grand scheme of history? And, isn’t it also true that globalization is just a rehashing of mercantile feudalism which has been going on for thousands of years?

McGlobalist: Yes, but, have you ever seen a GLOBAL feudalistic empire? Now that’s something new! The Constitution is just an anomaly. It’s an embarrassing document for us, and it’s caused a lot of frustration among my associates. Thankfully, our federalized school system has all but abandoned teaching even the basics of Constitutional law and the Revolutionary War. There are plenty of Americans out there today who have no clue what their legal rights are, or why they have the country that they have. Some of them even spread propaganda undermining Constitutional understanding for us! It’s fantastic! The best possible advantage for an autocracy is when a considerable portion of the public goes out of their way to help us enslave them.

Alt-Market: Many members of your “exclusive club” have expressed philosophical positions that lean towards eugenics, and forced population reduction. Where do you stand on this subject?

McGlobalist: The world is obviously overpopulated, though I have no specific scientific data to back this position. The last time I went to the economic summits in Davos, my limo was stuck in traffic. Can you believe that?! That’s proof enough for me. I frankly couldn’t care less about the environment. I hold considerable shares in the Monsanto Corporation, which violates the environment and the laws of nature on a daily basis. The thing is, watching you people breed like mice is upsetting to my stomach.

Alt-Market: So your support of cap and trade, and international carbon taxes, is a farce?

McGlobalist: (Laughs) You want to know why the Earth gets hot sometimes? Try the sun! Carbon is harmless! It has nothing to do with global warming. In fact, our climate change labs at East Anglia and NASA never release the source data for their so called experiments through FOIA, even though they are sued constantly. So, we can say anything we want about global warming, and no one is able to check our numbers to see if we are lying. They can suspect, but they can’t prove it, unless someone floods the internet with our private emails and fraudulent computer models. Damn hackers….

Alt-Market: What about globalist support for the World Wildlife Fund, and the increased powers of the EPA? What is that all about?

McGlobalist: Ah, we’re big fans of “sustainable development”. For those who are not familiar with that idea, it means essentially that I can take your house, and your land, whenever I want, and turn it into a forest preserve, or a condo, depending on my mood. The EPA and the WWF are tools that we use to assert sustainability disinformation and utilize eminent domain outside of its original parameters. The point is, you are a parasite, and mother earth needs to be deloused.

Alt-Market: Even if you were correct in your claim that overpopulation is a problem today, who ultimately gets to decide who lives and who dies in your “sustainable world”?

McGlobalist: That job should be left to the immutable laws of the scientific method.

Alt-Market: And who gets to interpret what those “immutable laws” say?

McGlobalist: The smartest people on the planet, of course.

Alt-Market: And who decides who is the “smartest”. Isn’t that in part a subjective determination?

McGlobalist: No. The smartest people are the smartest people. Sheesh! What kind of interview is this? We elites have already proven ourselves the most intelligent, so such decisions should be left to us. It’s evolution, plain and simple…

Alt-Market: You don’t seem that intelligent to me…

McGlobalist: Well, you’ve only known me for twenty minutes. Trust me, I’m like, soooo good at Algebra….

Alt-Market: It has become incredibly clear over the past decade that a movement supporting decentralization, Constitutional liberties, and sound anti-Keynesian economic principles, has taken shape. The Liberty Movement is growing steadily stronger, and is quite aware of the strategies of globalization. Does this concern you?

McGlobalist: Decentralization? What the hell is that?

Alt-Market: It’s where we don’t let you do whatever you want.

McGlobalist: That’s crazy talk! My dump truck sized ego prevents me from even fathoming a future in which I am not King of New York A-Number One! I need to call my friend Mark Potok at the Southern Poverty Law Center and ask him to look into this “Liberty Movement”. If anything, we’ll just falsely associate them with racists and terrorists. Always draw indirect connections between your opponents and the designated villains of the society you wish to control. That’s how you marginalize so called “truth seekers”; paint them as monsters to frighten the oblivious public.

Alt-Market: Speaking of which, the DSM-IV mainstream psychiatry manual has recently been edited to include something called “Oppositional Defiant Disorder”. Basically, the establishment controlled psychiatric community (who I see as drug dealers with degrees), is now labeling anyone who shows disobedient or hostile behavior towards “authority figures” as clinically insane. The DSM has a long history of promoting establishment propaganda in its pages. Is this not just another case of marginalization through junk science?

McGlobalist: People who defy authority are indeed dangerous, and should be given the psychological help they require in order to assimilate into society.

Alt-Market: But who determines what “authority” is? If I show hostility to a lying scumbag in sweatpants and a wife-beater, then I’m “normal”. But if you give that same dirtball a badge and a uniform, then suddenly I’m “crazy” for disliking him? It makes no sense. Authority is an arbitrary label doled out by governments or stolen by governments. You can’t base a psychological diagnosis on the dislike of an arbitrary label, it’s completely unscientific.

McGlobalist: Ok, look, just between you and me, we’ve been pulling this gag for a long time. Its classic! Categorizing any person or group that opposes you as “crazy” is a tried and true strategy. Crazy people are ignored, even if they are right. That’s the beauty of it! That’s why we’ve been conditioning Americans with the use of the term “conspiracy theorist”. Someone hears “conspiracy theorist”, they automatically and unconsciously think “crazy person”. Why not make up a clinically recognized disorder associated with very natural aversions to the abuse of power and then label almost everyone as mentally ill? Also, diagnosing a person with anything makes it much harder for that person to obtain a firearm. Slaves should be unarmed and docile, and…..they should laugh at all my jokes.

Alt-Market: Speaking of firearms, this past month whistleblowers within the ATF have exposed a false flag operation in which the U.S. government actually smuggled firearms to drug cartels across the Mexican border, then tried to blame the surge of American guns in criminal hands on innocent gun dealers and on our 2nd Amendment rights in general. Do you believe this subversive activity on the part of the ATF and the U.S. government will damage your ability to undermine the 2nd Amendment?

McGlobalist: These little slip-ups are unfortunate, but not a setback by any means. We ran the same game back in the 80’s in what was later called the “Iran Contra Scandal”. Who was punished back then? I mean really punished? That’s right, nobody. The public investigation barely even touched on all the cocaine we were running through the same operations. Man, the 80’s were great! You would not believe all the drugs and prostitutes that were being passed around between me and my CIA buddies and the wild parties in D.C. with Congressmen just begging to get in the door! I felt like a modern day Caligula! There was this one time when my best friend brought in this donkey, and he gave it too many pills, and….

Alt-Market: Let’s stay on topic Mr. McGlobalist. Besides, you’re obviously describing the movie ‘Bachelor Party’ with Tom Hanks…

McGlobalist: Oh, really? Well, anyway, the exposure of the ATF “Fast And Furious” program is frustrating, but we’ll just ignore it like we always do. The Mainstream media will gloss it over. And within a couple of months, the majority of Americans will have forgotten about it completely. Pretty slick, eh…

Alt-Market: I suppose, but I’m going to have to ask you to take your hand off my leg…

McGlobalist: Ah, I just came back from Bohemian Grove. Sometimes I forget where I am. Are you a gun owner…?

Alt-Market: Yes.

McGlobalist: God damn it! Give me your guns!

Alt-Market: Uh, no…

McGlobalist: What if I give you coupons for groceries? Mmmm, food in your tummy…

Alt-Market: I think it’s about time to wrap up our interview…

McGlobalist: But I didn’t get to talk about all my hobbies, my dabbling in the occult, and you never asked me my favorite cuss word! I want James Lipton, now! (Turns to worshipful male aid) Get me James Lipton, or Regis! We’re redoing this thing! Doing it over! All over! And I want spring water served by little Tanzanian children who speak Swahili and dance! Bring me my skull goblet!

Interview ends abruptly.