Gun Control And Genocide Go Hand In Hand

Sunday, April 24^th marked the 90^th anniversary of the first genocide of the twentieth century: the Turkish government's slaughter of over a million unarmed Armenians.

 The key word is "unarmed."The Turks got away with it under the cover of wartime. They suffered no greater postwar reprisals for this act of genocide than if they had not conducted mass murder of a peaceful people.

Other governments soon took note of this fact. It seemed like such a convenient international precedent.

Seventy-nine years after that genocide began, Hotel Rwanda opened for business.

The Hutus also got away with it. Ironically, at least a decade before – I wish I could remember the date – Harper's ran an article predicting this genocide for this reason: the Hutus had machine guns. The Tutsis didn't. The article was written as a kind of parable, not a politically specific forecast. I remember reading it at the time and thinking, "If I were a Tutsi, I'd emigrate."

It did not pay to be a civilian in the twentieth century. The odds were against you.

BAD NEWS FOR CIVILIANS

The twentieth century, more than any century in recorded history, was the century of man's inhumanity to man. A memorable phrase, that. But it is misleading. It should be modified: "Governments' inhumanity to unarmed civilians." In the case of genocide, however, this is not easily dismissed as collateral damage on a wartime enemy. It is deliberate extermination.

The twentieth century began officially on January 1, 1901. At that time, one major war was in full swing, so let us begin with it. That was the United States' war against the Philippines, whose citizens had the naïve notion that liberation from Spain did not imply colonization by the United States. 

McKinley and then Roosevelt sent 126,000 troops to the Philippines to teach them a lesson in modern geopolitics. We had bought the Philippines fair and square from Spain for $20 million in December, 1898. The fact that the Philippines had declared independence six months earlier was irrelevant. A deal's a deal. Those being purchased had nothing to say about it.

Back then, we did body counts of enemy combatants. The official estimate was 16,000 dead. Some unofficial estimates place this closer to 20,000. As for civilians, then as now, there were no official U.S.-reported figures. The low-ball estimate is 250,000 dead. The high estimate is one million.

Then World War I opened the floodgates – or, more accurately, the bloodgates.

TURKEY, 1915

The diplomatic game is always verbal. The G-word is verboten. Turks accept – though resent – "tragedy." Hence, all official reports from government-funded sources all over the world – except Armenia – refer to the "Armenian tragedy." This game of diplomacy has been going on since the end of World War I. Reagan was the only President to have used the correct term. President Bush diplomatically used "mass killings" in his a 2003 reference to the event. He also referred to "what many Armenian people have come to call the ‘Great Calamity.'" Many Armenians call it this? Really? Name two. He also said:

I also salute our wise and bold friends from Armenia and Turkey who are coming together in a spirit of reconciliation to consider these events and their significance. I applaud them for rising above bitterness, and taking action to create a better future. I wish them success, building on their recent and significant achievements, as they work together in a spirit of hope and understanding.

Again, name two.

Not being even remotely diplomatic in matters genocidal, I prefer to use the dreaded G-word. The Armenian genocide of 1915 had been preceded by a partial ethnic cleansing, which took two years, 1895 – 97. About 200,000 Armenians were executed.

This event served as the background for Elia Kazan's great movie, America, America (1963), which was nominated for the Oscar in 1964. Kazan tells a fictionalized version of his Greek uncle's emigration to America. Kazan's family followed in 1913. The movie begins with a Greek and an Armenian, friends, who are warned by their former military officer, a Turk, of trouble coming. It comes. Turkish officials lock the Armenian along with other Armenians inside a church. Then they burn it down. The Greek sees this. He vows to get out of the Ottoman Empire and go to America. The movie traces his journey. America was a sanctuary. If ever there was a movie on America, the sanctuary, it's America, America.

The Armenians were easily identifiable. Centuries earlier, the conquering Ottoman Turks had forced them to add the "ian/yan" sound to their last names. They were dispersed throughout the empire, so they did not possess the same kind of geographical concentrations and strongholds that other Christians did in Greece and the Balkans. They never did organize armed resistance forces. That was what led to their destruction. They could not fight back.

They were envied because they were rich and better educated than the ruling society. They were the businessmen of the Ottoman Empire. The same was true in Russia. The same resentment existed in Russia, though not with the intensity of the resentment in Turkey.

Non-Turkish estimates range from 800,000 to 1.5 million Armenians killed. Most of these deaths were low-tech but high efficiency. The army rounded up hundreds or thousands of civilians, drove them into wilderness areas, and waited until they starved to death. 

GENOCIDE? NONSENSE!

It is still the official position of the Turkish government that this was not genocide; it was a relocation for military reasons. You see, there was a revolt being planned by Armenians and Russians in the border region of Van. This was the explanation provided in 1915 by the Turkish Consol General in New York, in a statement published in the October 15, 1915 issue of the New York Times. An autonomous republic was set up in Van, which was run by someone named Aram. (We read it here first.)

Then, somehow, things just got out of hand. The government was powerless. You know: just like all other governments during wartime with respect to the activities of officials in defense of the nation. Helpless. What's a government to do? Therefore, in recent days, a minor official for the Turkish government has apologized.

"We apologize to the Armenians for us and our ancestors not having been able to prevent the Genocide." These are the words of Jashar Arif, representative of the International Exchange Confederation, who is a Turk. He has arrived in Armenia together with several other Turks to take part in the events of the 90^th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

The Turkish government still maintains that the rulers had expected the Armenians to join with Russians to fight Turkey. As recently as April 24, the Philadelphia Enquirer reported that Yasar Yakis, the head of the Turkish Parliament's European Union Affairs Committee, explained the reasons for the relocations. "The Armenians were relocated because they cooperated with the enemy, the Russians, and they . . . killed Ottoman soldiers from behind the lines."

Armenians were systematically killed all over the Empire, not just on the Russian border. Relocation to a camp usually means providing food, shelter, and basic amenities. It doesn't mean letting people starve in the wilderness.

The written text of the government's order is controversial. It was a state secret. One version was smuggled out of Turkey in 1916. It is posted online. As with all such secret orders, it should not be accepted automatically. But it serves as a starting point for full-scale research: open archives openly arrived at.

Our fellow countrymen, the Armenians, who form one of the racial elements of the Ottoman Empire, having taken up, as a result of foreign instigation for many years past, with a lot of false ideas of a nature to disturb the public order; and because of the fact that they brought about bloody happenings and have attempted to destroy the peace and security of the Ottoman state, and the safety and interests of their fellow countrymen, as well as of themselves; and, moreover, as they have now dared to join themselves to the enemy of their existence [i.e., Russia] and to the enemies now at war with our state – our Government is compelled to adopt extraordinary measures and sacrifices, both for the preservation of the order and security of the country and for the welfare and the continuation of the existence of the Armenian community. 

Therefore, as a measure to be applied until the conclusion of the war, the Armenians have to be sent away to places which have been prepared in the interior villages; and a literal obedience to the following orders, in a categorical manner, is accordingly enjoined on all Ottomans: 

First. – All Armenians, with the exception of the sick, are obliged to leave within five days from the date of this proclamation, by villages or quarters, and under the escort of the gendarmerie. 

Second. – Though they are free to carry with them on their journey the articles of their movable property which they desire, they are forbidden to sell their lands and their extra effects, or to leave the latter here and there with other people, because their exile is only temporary and their landed property, and the effects they will be unable to take with them, will be taken care of under the supervision of the Government, and stored in closed and protected buildings. Anyone who sells or attempts to take care of his movable effects or landed property in a manner contrary to this order, shall be sent before the Court Martial. They are free to sell to the Government only the articles which may answer the needs of the Army. 

Third. – Contains a promise of safe conduct. 

Fourth. – A threat against anyone attempting to molest them on the way. 

Fifth. – Since the Armenians are obliged to submit to this decision of the Government, if some of them attempt to use arms against the soldiers or gendarmes, arms shall be employed against them and they shall be taken, dead or alive. In like manner those who, in opposition to the Government's decision, refrain from leaving or seek to hide themselves – if they are sheltered or given food and assistance, the persons who thus shelter or aid them shall be sent before the Court Martial for execution.

What happened subsequently was fully consistent with this order.

The Turkish government said in 1989 that the archives regarding the non-existent genocide were now open. But, as it turned out, they were not open to Armenians studying the non-existent genocide.

What the archives prove, according to the Turkish government, is that the Turks were the victims of mass murder by Armenians. Yes, it's hard to believe. But that's what the archives show. We can take the Turkish government's word for this. On April 25, a report appeared on the website of the International Relations and Security Network which is partially funded by the Swiss defense agency. Here, we read:

Armenians say at least 1 million of their ethnic kin died between 1915 – 17 as a result of a deliberate policy of extermination. They say the policy was initiated by the Committee of Union and Progress (Ittihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti), or CUP, which then ruled over the empire. Ankara claims the death toll is grossly inflated and that 300,000 Armenians died during these years.

 It also says the deaths were the result of negligence, interethnic strife, or wartime operations. It says the CUP leaders – also known as the Young Turks – had no intention of wiping out the empire's largest remaining Christian community. While admitting to the massive deportations of 1915 – which followed the massacre of 200,000 Greeks – Turkey's official historiography says the transfers were aimed at preventing Armenians from collaborating with Russia. Tsarist Russia was then at war with the Ottoman Empire and its German ally. Turkey's official historiography also asserts that more than 500,000 Turks died at the hands of Armenians between 1910 – 1922.

On April 25, 2005 – hot off the TurkishPress.com site – we learn of that ruthless counter-genocide.

Turkish Republican People's Party (CHP) deputy leader Onur Oymen said on Monday, "if you must express grief about Armenian casualties, you also have to talk about more than half a million Turks who were killed in the same incidents."

In a written statement, Oymen said that the decision of the U.S. president Bush not to use the term "genocide" represents the reality. We must not be too happy about Mr. Bush's statements, told Oymen. "We know for sure that 513,000 Turks were butchered by Armenians. Don't we have a right to ask for sympathy for the murdered Turks?"

"If you are going to mention these incidents and express grief for the Armenians who lost their lives in those incidents, it is our right to expect a word of sympathy for more than half million Turks in the same incidents."

All right, his story is a bit scrambled. It's now up to 513,000 Turks in 1915 – 17, rather than 500,000 Turks 1912-22. But it's all there. In the archives. We are also assured by a spokesman of the Turkish Ministry of Justice that Turkey has had enough of this genocide nonsense. Quite enough. On April 25, 2005, TurkishPress.com posted this story.

Turkish Minister of Justice and Government Spokesman Cemil Cicek has indicated that, after many years of leaving the issue of so-called genocide to historians, it is now high time for Turkey to start disproving all allegations in various countries.

High time, indeed! Those historians, tied as they are to misleading primary source documents, simply cannot be trusted. They do not pay sufficient attention to primary source documents of official Turkish assurances for 90 years that nothing was happening or had happened, preferring instead to cite unreliable eyewitness accounts of what did happen. Armenian political influence is behind this.

Cicek noted that Armenians influenced the parliaments of the countries in which they are powerful and succeeded in obtaining parliament decisions in their favor in 15 countries.

Ah, yes: the well-known Armenian International Network, which dominates parliaments around the world.

As Turks, we wished that, instead of turning incidents of the past into a topic of hatred and anger, they should be brought to daylight by the historians with an approach looking at the future. . . .

Based on our archives and confidence in our history and culture, we can say that no genocide took place.

THE BLUE BOOK

What has stuck in the craw of the Turkish government for almost 90 years is an official report issued by the British government, The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915–1916. If you don't think governments stick by their official versions of history, consider this April 22, 2005 story in London's Financial Times.

Turkey challenges genocide ‘fraud'

By Vincent Boland in Ankara

Published: April 22 2005

The Turkish parliament was yesterday preparing to ask the UK to repudiate a historical document that is considered to form the basis of the claim that Armenians were victims of genocide by Ottoman Turks during the first world war.

The initiative comes on the eve of Sunday's 90^th anniversary commemorations among Armenians of what they regard as the start of the massacre of up to 1.5m people.

The move is likely to exacerbate the bitter dispute between Turks and Armenians. Supporters of the Armenian cause, particularly in France, are lobbying for the European Union to delay the start of Turkey's accession talks for EU membership until Turkey acknowledges a "systematic extermination" in 1915.

Turkish MPs completed and signed a letter to both houses of the UK parliament arguing that the document was "a fraud based on fabrications, half truths and biased reports and perceptions" of what happened and "a masterpiece of propaganda and tool of deception".

The document, The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915-1916, was written by the British historian Arnold Toynbee and included in a publication known as the Blue Book, by Viscount Bryce, a British diplomat. It was an official Westminster document, which is why the Turkish parliament wants the House of Commons and House of Lords to act.

Turkey rejects the charge of genocide. It insists that the true death toll among Armenians was about 600,000 and that many died from the effects of civil war, starvation and deportation. It says the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Turks at the time are overlooked.

The letter, which was made available yesterday by the Turkish parliament in the original Turkish and in English translation, will be sent to London imminently.

The letter says British propaganda in the first world war aimed to portray the destruction of the Ottoman Empire as a key aim of the war, to "render British colonialism in Anatolia and Mesopotamia palatable", and to encourage the US to join the Allied side. The Ottoman Empire collapsed into many nations after the war. Its Anatolian heartland is now Turkey.

The British embassy in Ankara declined to comment on the letter. Some Turkish historians say the document has stood the test of time; others say Mr Toynbee later distanced himself from its findings, which were based on eyewitness accounts.

The official UK position is that the massacres were "an appalling tragedy" but that the evidence is not "sufficiently unequivocal" to categorise them as genocide under the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide.

The letter says British propaganda in the first world war aimed to portray the destruction of the Ottoman Empire as a key aim of the war, to "render British colonialism in Anatolia and Mesopotamia palatable", and to encourage the US to join the Allied side. The Ottoman Empire collapsed into many nations after the war. Its Anatolian heartland is now Turkey.

The British embassy in Ankara declined to comment on the letter. Some Turkish historians say the document has stood the test of time; others say Mr Toynbee later distanced himself from its findings, which were based on eyewitness accounts.

The official UK position is that the massacres were "an appalling tragedy" but that the evidence is not "sufficiently unequivocal" to categorise them as genocide under the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide.

Viscount James Bryce was a master historian. His book, The American Commonwealth (1888), is still read by American historians as a primary source document regarding educated English opinion about America. He served as Ambassador to the United States from 1907–13.

The name Arnold Toynbee may ring a bell. By the 1950s, he was one of the most prominent historians on earth. His 12-volume study (1934–61) of 26 civilizations is unprecedented in its breadth. The Treatment of Armenians was his first major publication.

Why some Armenian organization has not bought a copy of Adobe Acrobat Pro 7 and scanned in the full volume, with the documents, remains a mystery to me. The book is in the public domain: pre-1923. But Toynbee's summary is online. This section, which appears in Part VI, "The Deportations of 1915: Procedure," is enlightening. Read it carefully. It is the crucial aspect of the entire genocide. The government confiscated their guns.

A decree went forth that all Armenians should be disarmed The Armenians in the Army were drafted out of the fighting ranks, re-formed into special labour battalions, and set to work at throwing up fortifications and constructing roads. The disarming of the civil population was left to the local authorities, and in every administrative centre a reign of terror began. The authorities demanded the production of a definite number of arms.

 Those who could not produce them were tortured, often in fiendish ways; those who procured them for surrender, by purchase from their Moslem neighbours or by other means, were imprisoned for conspiracy against the Government. Few of these were young men, for most of the young had been called up to serve; they were elderly men, men of substance and leaders of the Armenian community, and it became apparent that the inquisition for arms was being used as a cloak to deprive the community of its natural heads. Similar measures had preceded the massacres of 1895 – 6, and a sense of foreboding spread through the Armenian people. "One night in winter" writes a foreign witness of these events," the Government sent officers round the city to all Armenian houses, knocking up the families and demanding that all weapons should be given up. This action was the death-knell to many hearts."

I own a copy of The Treatment of Armenians. Or, rather, my wife does. In it, there are two accounts of events in Van, which is where the Turks say a revolt broke out, thereby justifying the forced relocation. These reports were written by Y. K. Rushdooni (as it is spelled in The Treatment of Armenians), my wife's grandfather. They are extremely detailed: street by street activities. Some might think they are just too detailed.

 Not so. Y. K. Rushdoony had a photographic memory. Once, his son Haig caught him in his easy chair in front of the fire, head down, eyes closed. "You were sleeping," Haig kidded him. "I was meditating on what I have just read," he replied. "Come on," Haig said. "You were asleep." He handed Haig the book. "Ask me anything about the pages where the book is open to." Haig did. He said that his father began answering each question, word for word, by what was on the page. He went on for two pages. Haig told me this story 50 years later and confirmed it yesterday. "It was the only time I ever challenged him."

 When, in his old age, Y. K. began to lose his eyesight, he memorized dozens of psalms, so that he could read them at family gatherings. If his sons knew, they did not tell him. Haig, a Ph.D. in geography, has a good memory. Rousas John, his older brother, was also generally regarded as no slouch in the memory department – a master of the footnote.

 Ask him a question after one of his lectures, and you might get another lecture. (His dying words, after he had briefly exposited a passage that his son had read to him on his deathbed, were these: "Are there any questions?") But, compared to their father, they both said, they were outclassed.

On her way home in 1915, his pregnant wife came across her father's remains in the street. He had been hacked to death. Y. K. took her, his young child, and a £100 sterling note that had been given to him when he graduated from Edinburgh, and fled across the border into Russia. The boy drowned in the escape. The money – hard currency – got the two of them across Russia to Archangel, and from there they bought passage to the United States. Rousas was born in 1916 in New York City. 

GUN CONTROL

Lenin disarmed the Russians. Stalin committed genocide against the Kulaks in the 1930s. At least six million died.

The model for 1968 Gun Control Act – even the wording was taken from Hitler's legislation of 1938, which was a revision of the 1928 law passed by the Weimar government. A good introduction to this politically incorrect history of American gun control is on jpfo.org: Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.

When Mao's troops took a village, they would kidnap rich people. They would then offer to return the victims in exchange for money. The victims would be released upon payment. Then they would be kidnapped again. This time, the demand was for guns. Then they would be released again. This made the deal look reasonable to the families of the next victims. But once they had the community's guns, the mass arrests and executions began.

The idea that the individual has a right of self-defense is written into the U.S. Constitution: the second amendment. Carroll Quigley, who taught Bill Clinton history at Georgetown, was an expert in the history of weaponry. He wrote a 1,000-page book on medieval weaponry. He argued in Tragedy and Hope (1966) that the American Revolution was successful because the Americans possessed weapons that were comparable to those possessed by British troops. 

This, he said, was why there were a series of revolts against despotic governments in the eighteenth century. When government weapons became superior, the move toward smaller government ceased to be equally successful.

There is a reason why governments are committed to disarming their citizens. They want to maintain the monopoly of violence, no matter what. The idea of an armed citizenry is anathema to most politicians. After all, what's a monopoly for, if not to be used?

CONCLUSION

Genocide happens.

It doesn't happen whenever the would-be targets own guns.

Happy Christmas John Lennon

McDonalds Is Serving Restructured Meat

Well, it's that time of year again when McDonald's rolls out its venerable McRib sandwich. Tens of millions of Americans will purchase one - or, judging by the nation's ever-widening belt line, several - but most will do so without knowing all they should know about this popular sandwich.

Besides high caloric content, there are several other reasons why you should avoid the McRib, a boneless pork product smothered in BBQ sauce that famously resembles a rack of ribs, as much as you avoid most of the other "delicacies" served by this fast-food behemoth. In addition, The Blaze reports, there are several "fun facts" about the sandwich you may not have known:

A sandwich 'built' from scratch?: The McRib is a product of Rene Arend, who came up with the idea and design of the sandwich. That said, Richard Mandigo, a professor from the University of Nebraska, who developed the "restructured meat product" that the McRib is actually made of.

According to Chicago magazine, citing a 1995 article by Mandigo, "restructured meat product" is described thusly:

Restructured meat products are commonly manufactured by using lower-valued meat trimmings reduced in size by comminution (flaking, chunking, grinding, chopping or slicing). The comminuted meat mixture is mixed with salt and water to extract salt-soluble proteins. These extracted proteins are critical to produce a "glue" which binds muscle pieces together. These muscle pieces may then be reformed to produce a "meat log" of specific form or shape.

 The log is then cut into steaks or chops which, when cooked, are similar in appearance and texture to their intact muscle counterparts. ... Such products as tripe, heart, and scalded stomachs are high in protein, completely edible, wholesome, and nutritious, and most are already used in sausage without objection.

Still hungry?

Packed with calories - and ingredients: In a time of labeling, when government entities and the public are pushing for more disclosure, the package for the McRib would have to grow just to list all of its ingredients.

According to the current box labeling, the sandwich consists of just five basic components - a pork patty and BBQ sauce with pickle slices, onions and a sesame bun.

But, as Time magazine points out, a closer examination of McDonald's own list of ingredients reveals that the sandwich contains a total of 70 ingredients, including azodicarbonamide, a flour-bleaching component that is often used to produce foamed plastics (think gym mats and the soles of shoes). In fact, "the compound is banned in Europe and Australia as a food additive," says Time. Other ingredients include ammonium sulfate and polysorbate 80.

Besides, the sandwich itself contains an incredible amount of calories - 500 at least - along with 26 grams of fat, 44 grams of carbohydrates and 980 milligrams of sodium, nearly half the recommended daily amount of about 2,400 milligrams.

Not a good choice for your heart: The ingredients, combined with a dose of 10 mg of saturated fat (nearly half of the recommended daily allowance), make the McRib an enemy of a healthy heart, say the experts.

"Think about that for a second: When you eat a McRib, you're eating the same chemical ingredients and compounds in those disgusting yoga mats at the gym. And that's on top of the fact that it tastes terrible in the first place," writes Rick Paulas, food editor for KCET, a public television network in southern California. "Which means it's time to ask: Why are we still eating this?"

That's a very valid question. In the meantime, that sound you hear is the further tightening of the nation's belt line.

65 Year Old Women Scares Off 5 Armed Men By Shooting Twice

The only gun control EVER should be a steady aim & grip!

Ex CIA Agent Explains How To Delete Elite

Feds and City Of Oakland Mano a Mano Over Largest Marijuana Dispensary

The Feds are at it again. Their relentless attempt to shut down the largest medical marijuana shop in the world, Harborside Health Center, continues. After losing a recent court judgement that said they couldn't evict Harborside under federal forfeiture, the Feds are now making the argument that the state and city cannot stand in their way of seizing the dispensary. Back in July, the federal government filed forfeiture proceedings against the property that Harborside rents. Although Harborside has not violated any state laws, action by the Feds essentially forced the landlords Anna Chretien and Concourse Business Center to file eviction charges with the Feds. On Friday November 30th of this year a superior court ruled that Harborside cannot be evicted from their location simply because their product violates federal law. The granted stay of forfeiture was seen as a huge victory for Harborside and for state sovereignty in a never-ending battle by the Feds. "We are heartened by the robust support provided to Harborside by our elected officials and the California courts," said Harborside's co-founder Steve DeAngelo. "The decision makes it clear that organizations that comply with state law deserve the protection of that law." “For years, in medical cannabis cases, California state courts have followed a principle that cities should not be able to ask a state court to ‘indirectly’ enforce federal controlled substance laws in a way that disadvantages cannabis patients and caregivers," said Harborside's lawyer, Henry Wykowski. "However, this is the first opinion that extends that principle to private actors, such as landlords." However, that small victory for Harborside was short lived. The Feds have now challenged the ruling saying that they have the power over states and cities because they have no ownership in the property being seized, and federal law supersedes state law. In a brief, Justice Department attorney Kathryn Wyer writes: Plaintiff, the City of Oakland, has initiated this separate action in an attempt to halt forfeiture proceedings that the United States has initiated against an Oakland property housing a marijuana dispensary. Plaintiff’s lawsuit was filed after the time to assert a claim in the forfeiture action itself had passed. And in any event, Plaintiff lacks any ownership interest in the property. Plaintiff therefore lacks standing to participate in the forfeiture action The brief further notes that the Controlled Substance Act applies to all states no matter if they have changed their own laws or not: Plaintiff argues that the United States is stopped from seeking forfeiture of the Oakland property because it had adopted a 'policy of nonenforcement' of the CSA against all those in compliance with state law. Even assuming that the marijuana dispensary operating at the Oakland property – which is alleged to be the largest on the planet, with annual gross sales revenue of $20 million – were in compliance with California law, this claim cannot succeed. ...the United States has never misrepresented the fact that marijuana distribution, possession, and cultivation remain illegal under federal law... Wyer even takes a swipe at the state and city for only sticking up for Harborside because "it has received a windfall of millions of dollars in tax and sales revenues through the operation of illegal marijuana dispensaries within its borders." Indeed, Harborside has been a major benefit to the state of California and Oakland, as it's estimated $20 million in annual sales operating as a non-profit have generated over $3 million is local and state taxes. Yet, apparently Wyer thinks that is a bad thing. Clearly the Feds have little respect for state rights, property rights, medical rights, and local sovereignty -- all of which are being tried in this case. Meanwhile, one of the most respected, lawful, and successful medical marijuana treatment centers is facing closure. Learn more about the Harborside Health Center by watching their video: A recent Gallup poll showed that 64% of Americans want the federal government out of state marijuana laws:

GMO's Worst Product Yet This Is Serious Business

Richard Alan Miller

<iframe width="440" height="260" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/brvtcdFnhOs?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Agenda 21: Georgia Governor Names Obama Conspiracy Theorist State Senator To Task Force

Georgia's Republican governor isn't saying why he gave a part-time seat on a state task force to the state senator who organized a four-hour briefing that told Republican lawmakers President Barack Obama and the United Nations are engaging "mind-control" techniques to force a land use agenda.

Gov. Nathan Deal (R) last week named Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock) to a seat on the governor's digital learning task force, formed earlier this year to study ways the state can use digital technology in schools, including digital textbooks. Deal made the appointment before a video surfaced of the meeting Rogers organized last month on Agenda 21, the U.N. sustainability program.

“Senator Rogers has been nationally recognized for his leading efforts in digital learning. I appreciate his willingness to serve as we strive to make Georgia the premier state for incorporating new technology into the learning process,” Deal said in a Senate statement about the Rogers appointment. The task force position is unpaid.

Deal's spokeswoman did not return messages seeking comment about Rogers' appointment, and asking whether the governor agrees with the Agenda 21 lecture, which included a birther activist telling Republican senators that Obama and the U.N. are using mind-control to force through the program. Rogers holds the task force seat in addition to his Senate seat. Rogers could not be reached for comment.

Rogers dropped his bid to seek a third two-year term as Senate majority leader during a Republican caucus meeting on Thursday evening, citing a desire to spend more time with his family. But Better Georgia, the progressive group that taped the Agenda 21 meeting, claimed credit for forcing Rogers out of the majority leader's race.

Bryan Long, the executive director of Better Georgia, told HuffPost that while the Agenda 21 meeting was held in October, the group waited to distribute the video in order to analyze the claims and to affect the majority leader race. Long said the group also didn't want to release the tape in the midst of election coverage. .

"He was fighting going into this week to preserve his leadership role," Long said of Rogers.

Rogers has previously pushed Agenda 21 bans in the state Senate, including an amendment to a land use bill in 2011 that failed by two votes. Agenda 21 was adopted by the U.N. during a 1992 climate change summit in Brazil to promote sustainability. Agenda 21 does not have the force of law in the United States, but has become a favorite target of Tea Party activists in recent years.

Several states have passed laws to ban or oppose the U.N. agenda.
During the Senate GOP caucus briefing, birther activist Field Searcy claimed Agenda 21 would ban rural development, livestock grazing, paved roads, floor and wall tiles, modern hunting, single-family homes, private property, power line construction, sewers, golf courses, scuba diving and synthetic drugs. The presentation also compared Obama's rural agenda with genocide programs by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and Chinese leader Mao Zedong that killed millions.
A full copy of Searcy's presentation can be found here.

The UN Agenda of Agenda 21 & Sustainable Development

... of a different kind — of crows, to be exact.  You may wonder: what’s up with crows? 

Well, it depends on whether you embrace socialism and government control of your every move or whether you prefer freedom to speak, travel and work as you please.



Crows are Clever

Crows are clever birds!  In fact, they are among the smartest birds on Earth. They communicate with each other through a variety of caws (calls) about danger, food and many other things. Crows are quite intelligent; they learn quickly and remember for a long time.

The collective noun for a bunch of them, a "murder of crows" probably relates to their rambunctious group behavior which can create havoc on land and in the air. Crows are highly competitive but also social and caring creatures; you’ll rarely see a lone bird. In any event, when they visit your neighborhood, you can’t escape their noisy calls screaming hell and murder all over. 


Many years ago, a young colleague of mine had befriended a crow.  It was a real treat to see it approach and steal some food from his inner-city roof top hideout when we worked on a joint project. Another memorable impression is the painting by Deborah McCarroll entitled
Contemplative Crows, reproduced here with permission.
Contemplative Crows, by Deborah McCarroll, 2011; acrylic on canvas; reproduced with permission.

Whether you like her painting or not is up to you. Personally I like it as these crows have a decidedly mischievous demeanor while contemplating their next move.


As the Crow Flies

While in the North Country hiking, fishing or hunting, I have often encountered crows (or their northern cousins, ravens) flying well above the tree tops in a straight line for miles without making any call at all. Obviously, those birds meant to get from point A to point B in the shortest time, whatever those points were; I never managed to figure it out. Presumably, that’s where the term "as the crow flies" originates from. 
Of course, the crows fly as they please. But they usually have a purpose. If they did not, they would not be a successful species. That’s one more reason to wonder, what can we learn from them?

Perhaps they have solved the "traveling salesman problem" before Google did? In case you are not familiar with that problem, it refers to the fastest/cheapest way to get to a number of destinations, given one available method of travel, such as by roads, adjusted for length, speed limits and other obstacles. With multiple methods of transportation (e.g., road, train, air), that problem of course becomes much more complex and has yet to be solved.
The crows seem to have figured it out just by themselves, without a supercomputer in their brains. If that observation doesn’t suit you, perhaps you can’t stomach "eating crow."



Eating Crow


Eating crow is another interesting colloquial idiom, apparently unique to North America as it does not seem to have parallels in any other language. Wikipedia defines it as "meaning humiliation by admitting wrongness or having been proved wrong after taking a strong position [to the contrary]. "

Theurban dictionary defines it as "To eat crow implies, at its mildest, an unpleasant action since the flesh of the crow is believed to be unpalatable. As an expression, it denotes the anguish of humiliation at having to admit to wrongdoing or fallibility, usually in the wake of hubristic actions or words. "


I don’t know if crows actually are unpalatable or not - never tried to eat one. Who knows, with the right kind of preparation, they could be a culinary delight! Will have to talk about that with my favored "road kill restaurant maestro de cuisine" (his motto: You kill, we grill).



Eating crow is what is expected from many civil servants when higher politics demand. It happens every day and all over the world; I know it of first hand. Watching the daily news, it is obvious to many observers, even in countries expected and commonly thought to be without fault. Few of the individuals involved are willing to stand up for the truth and face the consequences.

The Crow Collective


If you are a raptor, like hawks and eagles, you’ll likely want to steer clear from crows as much as possible. Though much smaller than most raptors, crows will attack you without mercy until you leave the area. Smaller birds just hide where possible. If you are a human, you ought to be safe, possibly bar Alfred Hitchcock’s 1963 horror movieThe Birds.


Crows don’t need an organization like the United Nations (UN) to help them finding food, a roost for the night, or adjudicate some dispute. They are claimed to "hold court" over offenders. Crows help each other with a repertoire of well over 100 different caws. Crows also have an ability to count and can use some tools; some can even make tools.  No wonder, crows are considered to be among the most intelligent animals on earth. 


Perhaps you might ask then: Are crows smarter than people? If they can figure out how to make a living by working together for the common good, can we humans possibly learn some useful pointers from them? More to the point, does an international organization like the United Nations (UN) and its many offspring and sub-organizations have a crow-like ability to foster the greater benefit for all, possibly even to the detriment of some individual members?
On the face of it, the UN’s Agenda 21 and its Sustainable Development (SD) goals would fit that description. However, are they really as advertised and do you really know what they entail? 



The UN and the Sustainable Development goals of Agenda 21


The Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki-Moon, in addressing the UN’s 67th General Assembly recently under way in New York, urged the adoption of the UN’s program Agenda 21 with its sustainability goals and promises of “green” jobs, economic stability, etc., if adopted.  -  Not many crows listened.


A couple of months earlier, the UN’s Rio+20 conference tried to re-invigorate the same ideological agenda known as UN Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is a framework for redistributing individual and collective wealth around the world according to socialistic principles.

Among the 10,000 or so attendees of Rio+20 were some groups of people adorned with colorful bird feathers. As far as I know crows were neither invited nor represented, dead or alive. 
One of the goals of Agenda 21 is the prescriptions for Sustainable Development. The term by itself sounds benign, even desirable.

However, on closer inspection, you may wish to reconsider.  SD intends to reorganize your entire life, rights to property, freedom of speech, and just about anything else you may think of as your natural right. For example, on Oct. 2, 2012, Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations, Jan Eliasson, during a press conference on October at the UN headquarter in New York claimed Free speech is a gift given to us by the [UN’s] Declaration of Human Rights.


Surely, that is preposterous! The UN asserts the right to give to you (hence also to take away) your right to free speech!

Joseph Klein wrote about that as follows:  "Under Deputy Secretary General Eliasson’s logic, the UN Declaration of Human Rights, which gave us the
gift of free speech, can be modified or interpreted in such a way that would restrict its use if people were deemed too provocative or irresponsible in what they express. " . Article 29 of the Declaration puts some real meaning onto that "free gift", where it says: These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

In other words, the UN and its derivatives are sacrosanct and can control your free speech. 


As Tom DeWeese wrote, "Sustainable Development is the process by which America is being reorganized around a central principle of state collectivism using the environment as bait". 

Let’s come back to crows for a moment. Few people like them but fewer can give specific reasons; they just feel like that.

 The same analogy applies to people who think that sustainable development and other euphemisms of that kind are worthwhile goals to pursue. Again, on the face of it, they sound perfectly clear, as well as achievable and desirable. Hardly anyone knows the many crucial details of Agenda 21 and SD, or thinks about any possible drawbacks, such as the potential limitation of your right to free speech, use of your property, or perhaps even the right to own any property at all. Do you really want to make that trade?


The answer is a brief and clear NO!  


Like many other institutions which take their cues from false information or from political or monetary desires, they quickly succumb to “the facts of life.” What I mean by that is that the good intentions originally agreed upon are rapidly being eroded and “redefined”. In the end, exactly the opposite of what was generally thought and hoped for is going to happen. The “free lunch” is going to turn out to be not free at all, perhaps even inedible.


The UN and its myriad of committees and sub-organizations have mostly become a system of self-serving groups, living off the avails of misinformation and deceit. The false claims of the Pacific island nations disappearing in a rising sea, a climate-(change)-driven demise of penguins, or the supposedly drowning polar bears in the Arctic are all myths propagated by the UN and its many offshoots in order to elicit our willingness to submit to the goals of Agenda 21.
I don’t think the crows would go for it; they are too smart to be taken in so easily.


A Murder, YES!  Deceit, NO!

Wa State Farms Block Agenda 21 & UN Agenda 21

The Washington State Farm Bureau just convened its 93rd annual convention.
Started in 1920, The WSFB is a voluntary, grassroots advocacy organization representing the social and economic interests of local farm and ranch families.

Every year the WSFB's volunteer leaders from across the state get together to discuss issues and adopt new policy. The WSFB is unique in that its members, delegates from each of the 25 county Farm Bureaus, adopt the policies, ranging from land use to fiscal issues.

This year’s convention was especially exciting due to the passage of new policy, set to put a barrier against the overreach of the federal government and even foreign ones.

"This year we indeed adopted a policy opposing all aspects of UN Agenda 21 as well as a policy opposing the use of drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) to spy on farms without express permission from the landowner," said John Stuhlmiller, Director of Government Relations.

"As an Okanogan County Farm Bureau member, I am personally very excited about the new policies that were passed. The issues facing Okanogan County today can all be tied back to Agenda 21 at some level - whether it be land acquisitions, wolves, or salmon recovery," said Pamela Leslie.

She also noted that, "Drones are of great concern as well. Drones are being used around the country to spy on farmers and ranchers, as well as average citizens. By adopting these new policies, the Washington State Farm Bureau has sent a strong message that it will aid Okanogan County in our grassroots movement to fight this kind of tyranny."

An Environmental Protection Agency project entitled Landscape Characterization and Change Detection Methods Development Research, says the EPA will use Department of Defense and NASA designed “UAV and satellite based remote sensor data to provide a continuous environmental monitoring capability.”

Many don't buy the government’s claim of using drones to protect the environment, especially after the recently discovered Air Force intelligence brief that states, if drones "accidentally" capture surveillance footage of Americans, the data can be stored and analyzed by the Pentagon for up to 90 days.

Farmers nationwide were upset when it was learned that the EPA was spying on Cattle Ranchers in Iowa and Nebraska. Seattle residents were also up in arms after the Seattle Police Department received a drone.

Alabama made news when they adopted a law protecting due process and private property by prohibiting any government involvement with or participation in Agenda 21. Washington farmers now join the ranks of citizens nationwide moving to protect their constitutional rights.
The text of the policy changes are as follows:

New Policy – Agenda 21 (add to Section VIII – Forestry and Public Lands)
We oppose the United Nations Agenda 21 and the ratification or implementation of any or all of its components.
The UAV policy is:
180 – Right of Entry for Government Agents

The Constitution requires government agents to obtain a search warrant before entering private property. The Constitution further requires that the search warrant contain a specific description of the property to be searched. The Constitution applies to any government agent who enters farms or ranches in order to conduct an inspection.

We believe government agents must ask permission of the owner or the owner’s authorized representative prior to entering a farm or ranch for purposes of conducting an inspection. If permission is denied, the agent should obtain a search warrant that specifies the reason for the inspection.

The agent should inform the owner/agent that they have the legal right to ask that a search warrant be obtained prior to an inspection. Agents should not retaliate against citizens who exercise this Constitutional right.

We believe government agents may enter property without the owner’s permission only if an emergency exists that constitutes an immediate threat to human life.
We oppose the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) to conduct aerial inspections of farms and ranches unless explicit permission has been granted by the landowner. (2002, amended 2012)

Are You Enjoying Fukushima Radiated Food?

Mis-Information, Dis-Information,No Information?

Mayan Elder Explains December 21

Say NO To Agenda 21 In SFO & Your Area

California: Just Say NO to the One Bay Area Plan!

November 10, 2012 by ppjg

 Heather Gass
_______________________________________________________



What MTC (Marxist Transportation Commission) and ABAG (Arrogant Bureaucrats and Goons) are planning for you and your communities …..

Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)–two unelected, unaccountable regional government entities– through allocation of $277B of OUR OWN tax dollars—are going to force new zoning standards on ALL nine counties and 101 cities in the Bay Area.  Those zoning standards, which are being developed with almost no public awareness or consent on the part of the citizenry, will:

-          Remove all ability of local cities and towns to carry out their constitutionally-protected  role of making local planning decisions based on local conditions and doing so responsive to the needs and wishes of the citizens of that city

-          Force virtually all development of commercial and residential projects in the Bay Area FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS into the 4% of the Bay Area land that is designated as “priority development areas” (PDAs) near mass transit

-          Effectively disallow development or redevelopment in the 96% of the land area of the Bay Area that is NOT in those PDAs


-          Require all development in the PDAs to be stack and pack mixed use multi-story apartments or condos on upper floors, and retail or office space on ground floor

-          Require massive subsidies to build all of these developments and redevelopments in the PDAs, as the limited market for stack and pack housing and commercial space in the Bay Area is already saturated due to the use of Redevelopment Agency dollars to build these in recent years—many of which are under-utilized or even completely empty, years after having been built

-          Involve a regulatory taking of property rights in the 96% of the Bay Area outside of those PDAs due to the dramatic reduction in the value of all land that can no longer be developed or redeveloped

-          Require every city and town to build significant quantities of heavily-subsidized low income housing in their town whether the town or city wants to or not

-          The PDA projects will have limited provision for parking spaces, wholly inadequate to the needs of the residents and commercial tenants, in order to “encourage” people to give up their cars
-          Cities/Counties will not be given funding for schools, churches and other services necessary to support the increase population within the PDAs

-          All of the PDA developments will receive CEQA waivers—that is, they will not be subject to environmental review—proving indisputably that this has nothing to do with the environment.  Rather, this has everything to do with control of every aspect of our lives, down to the most minute of details, as well as a loss of our property rights, loss of our freedom to travel, and loss of our freedom to live and work where we choose.  By design.

-          Redirect the bulk of gas tax revenues over the next 30 years from maintaining existing roads and bridges to additional subsidies to mass transit.  This will lead to deterioration of existing road infrastructure, more accidents, longer commutes, and worse gas mileage–to which the Oz-like planners from ABAG and MTC will offer us toll lanes and vehicle mileage taxes in their endless pursuit of controlling every aspect of our lives, and charging us for the control grid they are placing us in. 

Plus their plans to add more transit infrastructure when much of Bay Area mass transit is dramatically under-utilized will only have detrimental impacts on our economy, public finances, and the environment.

All this and much more will be coming our way. We MUST oppose these unelected regional bureaucrats now! We want local control! Not a dictatorial body of planners telling the citizens of the Bay Area how and where we will live over the next 30 years!

Just Say NO to the One Bay Area Plan! Get your city and county to stop paying dues to this corrupt agency and cancel their membership.

We must ABOLISH ABAG NOW!!!

In Washington SMOKE 'EM IF YOU GOT 'EM BOYS& GIRLS!

10 Easy Steps To American Serfdom & New Bankster Tricks

The Common Sense Show
November 8, 2012



The United States is quickly descending down the path of serfdom in a 21st century application of modern day feudalism.

A new strategy has appeared in America which threatens to make a real live serf out of nearly every American citizen. The main emphasis of this attack is the ongoing conversion to  Communitarian law and a dramatic departure from our time honored Constitutional law. There are ten steps to implement on the way to your enslavement and incarceration into a feudal society of that only Satan could be proud of.

The erosion of these liberties is not the result of a series of random, unconstitutional acts by power-hungry globalist minions. Instead, the new and emerging system of American justice is bringing forth a sweeping set of reforms which is quickly ending our  experiment with inalienable, individual liberties.

This new system of justice is called Communitarian law and is the antithesis of Constitutional law as it champions community interests at the expense of individual liberties. Terms like sustainability, smart growth, collectivism and sacrificing for the greater good represent some of the buzz words and phrases of Communitarian law.

Americans have come to expect that our individual liberties are granted by God, not by man or by government. We also believe, as Thomas Jefferson wrote, that these rights are inalienable and may not be taken away by government. The United States Constitution prevents not only the implementation of tyrannical practices against it citizens, it also prohibits the will of the majority from abusing the civil liberties of the minority.

Sadly, the United States Constitution is on life support and the patient is nearing the end. So where is this leading the country?

The Supreme Court case of Kelo v. The City of New London, CT. (2005) usurped America’s Fifth Amendment rights with regard to property rights. Government can now seize your property, and for the first time, award your property to a private entity who is presumably a cohort of someone in government.

Some Americans are decrying these acts as unconstitutional. These Americans are correct. However, all of these acts are legal under the Communitarian system of justice because the intent is based on what is in the common good and not on what is constitutionally legal. And who gets to decide what is in the common, or the communist good?

 That would be the people brigning you Communitarian law, the global elite. Don’t forget the old axiom of the Golden Rule. He who has the gold, makes the rules. In the modern day application of this old saying states that he who prints the money gets to steal your home. Please read on for the explanation.

Our abandonment of the U.S. Constitution in favor of Communitarian law allows the Federal Reserve, through QE3, to purchase $40 billion of mortgage based securities and will continue to purchase $40 billion worth of mortgaged properties each and every month until they own every single piece of real estate in the country.

This process began on September 13, 2012 and will continue until all privately owned properties are held by the money changers.    

On the way to the new serfdom in America, a new house stealing strategy has emerged over the past several months. With many homeowners presently underwater, the five megabanks are conducting reappraisals and billing the difference between the loan amount and the current appraised value of the house. When the homeowner cannot find the cash to pay the difference, usually within a 30 day window, the bank forecloses.

If the bail out money from QE1 and QE2 had been applied to the totality of America’s home commercial mortgages, every home and business mortgage would have been paid off in full. Instead, the bail out money went to crooked bankers who broke the law in perpetuating the crises in the first place, which sent our home values plummeting.

The bailouts set the stage for the Federal Reserve to accomplish its two goals of seizing all private property in American and collapsing the dollar as a prelude to the roll out of a new global currency.

Welcome to the new Americana feudal manor and you and I are the serfs. Maybe this is why Homeland Security purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, over the past year,  because the globalists realize that even the most dumbed down American might think that fighting for their home is worth taking on the corrupt federal government.

When one steps back and looks at the brilliant strategy concocted by the global elite, one can only marvel at their cleverness.

First, Wall Street plays the reckless derivative debt game and collapses the world’s economy.

Second, home values dramatically drop.

Third, the banks begin seizing underwater properties with money printed out of thin air by the Federal Reserve.

 Fourth, the economy eventually collapses from printing 40 billion dollars of mortgage backed securities every single month.

Fifth, global currency and global government is ushered in.

Sixth,  Obama adopts the UN gun ban and uses the newly purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition on the dissenters.

 Seventh, with Americans out of their homes, they can be forced into the new stack and pack cities complete with their 200-500 square foot apartments.

 Eighth, Americans will be subject to forced vaccines and real depopulation will begin in earnest.

 Nine, one child limits will be placed on families,

and tenth the 10% who survive this vicious transition will live in humanities darkest days in a hellish nightmare that even George Orwell could not have foreseen.

God help us!

California Is Failing And They Do NOT Want To Be Bailed Out

Warning to anyone outside of California……

This is what is happening in our state.

You MUST not let this happen in yours:

There is a parallel system of govt that has been stealthfully formed around us to overtake our federal/state and local system. This parallel system or shadow goverment consists of mostly state and regional boards, commission and agencies that are unelected and unaccountable to the people.
These boards/commissions and bodies have tremendous power and are now dictating policy


to local counties and cities.  Many of these agencies cannot be audited and are incorporating outside of California to avoid the open meetings act.

Federal and state funding are being given to these bodies bypassing the local municipalities giving them great power to coerce local cities and counties into implementing Agenda21 land use, transportation, climate and other policies.

In addition Public/private partnerships are being formed daily to further dilute the accountability and control within our state. These partnerships allow this shadow govt to hide behind and protect private businesses from lawsuits, environment regulations giving unfair advantage to these corporations thereby killing their true private competitors.

In a few weeks California will have a carbon credit trading scheme foisted upon us that will further kill our economy. This regulation was enacted supposedly to stop the evil corporations from polluting our air and water. However, all of those corporation who are favored by the shadow system, known as Benefit Corporations, will get waivers so the real damage by these regulations will be to the middle class.

In a few short months I predict that California will lose thousands more jobs, our businesses will not be able to compete and our economy will fail.

Please DO NOT come bail this state out!

I believe the rest of the country will be asked to save California because “We are too big to fail!” Do not fall for this. California was meant to fail by design. All the Marxist policies that have been implemented in this state were designed to overrun the system so it would fail and then the govt could come in and take over.

Please do not bail us out.

Use this as a cautionary message to save your own state.
God help us…….. We really need it.

Harvard Confirms Fluoride Reduces Your IQ

NEW YORK, July 24, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Harvard University researchers' review of fluoride/brain studies concludes "our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children's neurodevelopment." It was published online July 20 in Environmental Health Perspectives, a US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences' journal (1), reports the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF)

"The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas," write Choi et al.

Further, the EPA says fluoride is a chemical "with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity."

Fluoride (fluosilicic acid) is added to US water supplies at approximately 1 part per million attempting to reduce tooth decay.

Water was the only fluoride source in the studies reviewed and was based on high water fluoride levels. However, they point out research by Ding (2011) suggested that low water fluoride levels had significant negative associations with children's intelligence.

Choi et al. write, "Although fluoride may cause neurotoxicity in animal models and acute fluoride poisoning causes neurotoxicity in adults, very little is known of its effects on children's neurodevelopment. They recommend more brain/fluoride research on children and at individual-level doses.

"It's senseless to keep subjecting our children to this ongoing fluoridation experiment to satisfy the political agenda of special-interest groups," says attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President.  "Even if fluoridation reduced cavities, is tooth health more important than brain health? It's time to put politics aside and stop artificial fluoridation everywhere," says Beeber.
After reviewing fluoride toxicological data, the NRC reported in 2006, "It's apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain."

Choi's team writes, "Fluoride readily crosses the placenta. Fluoride exposure to the developing brain, which is much more susceptible to injury caused by toxicants than is the mature brain, may possibly lead to damage of a permanent nature."

Fluoride accumulates in the body. Even low doses are harmful to babies, the thyroid, kidney patients and heavy water-drinkers. There are even doubts about fluoridation's effectiveness (2). New York City Legislation is pending to stop fluoridation. Many communities have already stopped.

Infant formula when mixed with fluoridated water delivers 100-200 times more fluoride than breastmilk. (3)

More information on fluoride's impact on the brain is here.
Contact: Paul Beeber, JD, 516-433-8882 nyscof@aol.com
http://www.fluoridation.webs.com

California Voter Fraud On Prop 37? Will The Truth Prevail?

“So look, there are fifteen million votes out there we haven’t counted yet. What do you want to do?”

“How long have the polls been closed?”

“Let’s see. Two hours.”

“The hell with it. Let’s call it a defeat for Prop 37.”

“Okay.”

This isn’t over.

We’re not just looking at how many votes in California are still uncounted. We’re not just guessing how it’ll turn out and making little projections. That’s a sucker’s game.

We’re looking at real symptoms of fraud. And fraud has tentacles and arms. You see one piece of fraud, you keep digging for other pieces. You usually find them.

Start with the incredibly early projections made by media outlets on election night. Those projections sank Prop 37.

When you’re in the middle of a football game and the outcome is still in doubt, if somebody suddenly posts the final score on the scoreboard, that’s called a lie.

It isn’t an estimate or a guess or a prediction. It’s a lie.

There was once a day in American politics when news networks would wait for conclusive election results. They weren’t greedily bent on reporting projections soon and sooner and soonest.

So let’s get that projection-brainwashing out of our heads, all right?

The whole business of making early and earlier predictions on election night is a sham. And it has the effect of inducing people to tune out.

“Okay, Jones won. That’s that. What percentage of the votes have been counted? One half of one percent? Zero percent? Gee, I guess these prediction guys really know what they’re doing. They must have some fabulous computer models, honey. Let’s watch a CSI rerun…”

Here is what happened on election night in California. With many millions of votes still not counted, television stations up and down the state sealed the fate of Prop 37, by saying it had lost.

Many of those California votes are still uncounted. Yesterday, by consulting four of the 57 county registrars in the state, I found 1.6 million votes still unprocessed. That was chicken feed.

An updated report, as of noon today, November 9, posted at the California Secretary of State’s website, indicates that, for all of California, a boggling 3.3 million votes remain uncounted.

So who called the shots? Who made the early and grossly premature projection on election night? Who told all the media outlets that Prop 37 had been defeated?

I suspected it was Edison Media Research, an outfit that works for the National Election Pool (NEP). NEP is a media consortium that supplies election-night information to the press. This morning I spoke with a representative of Edison, who told me they didn’t make the projection on Prop 37.

If true, that leaves Associated Press (AP) as the leading suspect. AP is part of the National Election Pool as well. AP has awesome resources.

I spoke with Erin Madigan White, media relations manager at AP. I asked her whether AP had made the projections for Prop 37 to media outlets.

She emailed me the following tidbit. It was not quite an answer to my question, but it was illuminating:

“To clarify: AP does not make ‘projections,’ but bases our reporting on counting real votes from every precinct. As our story notes specifically, ‘With all the state’s precincts reporting, Proposition 37 failed 53.1 percent to 46.9 percent.’”

When someone gives you this kind of sleight-of-hand maneuver, it’s called a clue. Let’s start with this phrase: “With all the state’s precincts reporting.” The precincts were all reporting PARTIAL results. Even today, there are 3.3 million votes in CA still to be counted.

This tells you that AP was lying. That’s right. Let’s call it what it was. They were lying about “all precincts.” It was an intentional con.

And what does the phrase “bases our reporting on counting real votes” mean? It certainly means “calling the result of an election.” Because that’s exactly what AP did with Prop 37, based on partial results, on Nov.8. That’s a projection. They say they don’t make projections, but they do. That’s another lie.

On election night, I believe AP must have been the entity who passed voting information on Prop 37 to media outlets throughout California.

AP will not speak about their business relationships with media outlets. They will not name those outlets. They claim “client confidentiality” on this matter. Why?

I believe the answer is obvious. AP, the giant wire service, doesn’t want people to know how much influence they have on what media outlets report. AP doesn’t want the public to know how much of the news, everywhere, comes from AP. And media outlets don’t want their own customers to know how much of what they report is really flat-out or recycled AP material.

This powerful AP influence certainly would extend to election-night reporting.

Knowing how the National Election Pool basically works, I see no other entity who could have played that information-provider role for all the networks, TV stations, radio stations, websites, and newspapers in California…and in the country, on this past election night, with respect to Prop 37.

With millions of votes outstanding and uncounted, I conclude it was AP who provided the data to the networks, who then made the early calls against Prop 37 and sank it.

After I wrote the original article yesterday, which exposed the big lie about Prop 37 early projections, I received many emails. You can read that article here:

http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/did-peop-37-really-lose-or-was-it-vote-fraud/

Most of the emailers stated they were glad to get the information. A few people questioned my report. They said, “Well, a hundred percent of voting precincts have already sent their vote-counts to the Secretary of State of California.”

Wrong. A hundred percent of precincts have sent PARTIAL vote-counts to the Secretary of State.

A few people said, “Well, the counties in California, who are in charge of counting all votes in their districts, have several weeks to wrap up the count. That happens in every election. Nothing new there.”

I know that. My attack is leveled at the early call against Prop 37 given to the media, on election night, when so many votes were still uncounted, when there was no way to know the final outcome.

A few people said, “Well, of the votes that remain to be counted in California, about two-thirds would have to go YES ON 37 to swing 37 over into victory. That won’t happen.”

Let’s leave that question to the actual vote-count. But we’re not only talking about the odds of getting a victory through counting the rest of the votes. With these horrendous early projections, we’re looking at a symptom of huge fraud here. The smoke in front of the fire:

Who can guarantee that the votes already tallied in California were done faithfully and honestly? Who can guarantee that the voting machines were accurately recording votes?

Given AP’s replies to me, and their policy of secrecy about their media clients, who wants to trust that news giant?

Concerning machine vote-fraud, wake up and smell the coffee. See Bev Harris’ work at blackboxvoting.org and also Victoria Collier’s important articles on this subject. Read up on the 2000 Bush-Gore fiasco and the 2004 Bush-Kerry voting nightmare (especially in Ohio).

Many people have emailed me to ask, “What can we do now?” First of all, the YES ON 37 people have to forget about their concession of defeat. They need to get busy and look into vote fraud.

They have to come back to the playing field.

To return to the football analogy, if you’re in the middle of the game and somebody suddenly posts the final score on the scoreboard, do you hang your head and walk off and accept the loss? Is that what you do?

Do you bow down to the system, because you’re afraid that, if you object, people will label you “sour grapes” and crazy? Or do you become more relentless?

YES ON 37 needs to demand to look at the voting machines, the software used in the vote-count. YES ON 37 needs to probe, with all they have, into what AP did on election night. And that’s just for starters. Bring on the lawyers. Make some real waves. Shake people up.

Think about this as well. Why was Prop 37 launched in California? Why not Arkansas or Louisiana?

Because it’s well-known that California, historically and presently, is the core of the natural health movement in America. CA is where it really took hold and spread. CA is where everybody and his brother want gluten-free bicycles and organic streetlamps and raw unpasteurized sunglasses and GMO-free underwear.

The sentiment for Prop 37 was overwhelming a couple of months ago. Then, boom. Everything went the other way. It wasn’t just the NO ON 37 ads. It wasn’t just the massive spending by the NO ON 37 forces.

The real specter of vote fraud is here, whether you like it or not.

If, indeed, AP made the early reports or projections or suggestions or advices of defeat for 37 to media outlets, let’s see their data and their models of interpretation. Did they do exit polls? I’ve never heard of AP conducting exit polls.

If as AP claims, they don’t do projections, are we supposed to believe they sent out nothing more than raw-vote counts to a few thousand media outlets in California, and each and every one of those outlets decided, on their own, through their own analysis, that Prop 37 was a lost cause early on election night?

Don’t believe that for a second. These local TV stations and newspapers aren’t independent enough to do that kind of projecting on their own. They were taking advice from somewhere. They were all falling into line. They were merely mouthpieces for someone’s projection.

This should trouble you. It should trouble you greatly. Unless you’re so enamored of projections and computer modeling and data interpretation and honest and honorable vote machines that you’re sure everything is just fine and dandy.

Early dismissive projections on election night are part and parcel of the Big Con. They are wands waved that put people to sleep and elections to bed.

So, no, Virginia. No. Everything is not okay.

Jon Rappoport
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

Educate Yourself About The Agenda 21 Game Plan For You

US No Longer In Top 10 Prosperous Nations

Will You Be Forced To Live In A Stack N Pack Building?

Obama’s plans for a second-term plans includes an initiative to systematically redistribute the wealth of America’s suburbs and rural areas to the inner cities. It’s a transformative communist idea  and it is one that is already underway as these words are being written.

Electing or unelecting Obama would have made no difference to the implementation of this plan. Obama is merely a teleprompter reading sock puppet and Romney would have done this deed just as efficiently.



The real brains behind the coming Agenda 21-inspired mass migration from the suburbs to the inner cities is Mike Krulig and his new group of community advisors, Building One America. Their secretive agenda has been mostly achieved by Obama’s appointment of like-minded community activists to his staff. In fact, Krulig was one of Obama’s original community 
organizing mentors from the President’s Chicago Southside days.

 The word stealth applies because a damning photo depicting Krulig and Obama meeting at the Whitehouse in 2011 which appeared on the Building One America website. (The photo is displayed above).  However, this type of publicity would not have been good for the swing voters living in America’s suburbs.

Obama’s people had the video scrubbed as well as the search engine links. However, the Breitbart people retained a copy of the picture. This begs the question, if the Building One America plan is so good for America, why would the Obama people conceal his affiliation with Krulig and his group of Agenda 21 social engineers?

Kruglik’s Agenda 21 friendly group, Building One America, proposes the creation of a  regional tax-base sharing revenues in which suburban tax money is directly redistributed to nearby cities and economically depressed concentric zones of inner-ring suburbs. Building One America also seeks to move the poor out of cities by imposing mandatory low-income-housing quotas for middle-class suburban developments.

Krulig’s group also seeks to export the controversial regional tax-base sharing scheme currently in place in the Minneapolis–St. Paul area to the rest of the country. Under this program, a portion of suburban tax money flows into a common regional pot, which is then effectively redistributed to urban, and a few less well-off “inner-ring” suburban, municipalities.

The Minneapolis-St. Paul area regional government is run by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who are out of control. It is critical to know that removing the election process from this endeavor was deliberate for reasons that will become obvious as the reader will discover.
Kruglik’s group also favors a variety of policies designed to force people out of their cars and force suburbanites, robbed of their own tax money, to relocate into densely populated stack and  pack cities.

Among Kruglick’s strategies to separate people from their cars is the Vehicle Mileage Tax (VMT). Road pricing for the VMT would be implemented to force drivers out their cars. This will impact all drivers except for the Obama inspired exemption of low income drivers.
The VMT is designed to give favored status to certain groups. These groups represent organizations that want to transfer wealth through the heavy hand of regional government interfering in the housing, transportation and land use market place.

This tyranny is also being beta tested in the Bay area in a project entitled One Bay Area Plan. One Bay Area Plan is a 25 year plan which combines housing, transportation, and Agenda 21 land use policies. The public cover story is that the project is designed to save the planet by reducing Green House Gasses. The generated revenue, estimated at $15 million/day, would be used to fund further Agenda 21 transportation schemes such as buses, trollies and light rail which only a few people presently ride.

This plan also calls for Upzoning which would expland the plan to even more areas in the Bay. This would mean even more requirements for high density housing in cities that do not have their “fair share” of low income people. This will result in more 200 square foot apartments being constructed near public transit lines.

This Bay Area Agenda 21 plan also contains a concept referred to as tthe Communities of Concern (read low income and communities of color) would receive funds from these windfall profits that the region would receive.  (is Obama trying to provoke a race war?). Additionally, development fees would be eliminated for affordable housing developments, while subsidies would be used for favored activities such as the creation of more micro apartments and the construction of low income housing in the suburbs.

Most people mistakenly believe that the reality of the megacities concept in which we are all herded into the stack and pack cities is decades down the road. On the contrary, as you have seen, the program is being beta tested in two large metropolitian areas. These schemes will soon be coming to a neighborhood near you.

Museum Of Modern Art Elitist Want You To Live In Stack & Pack Ghettos

80 Reasons To Use Honey

Everyone knows honey tastes sweet and is delicious mixed with tea and lemon; but chances are you never realized how many health-related uses this versatile food possesses. It makes a wonderful DIY home remedy that helps to cure many conditions that ail you.

The best honey is one that is totally raw, organic and contains the honeycomb in the jar. It should include royal jelly, propolis and bee pollen for maximum health benefits.

Medicinal Uses

~ Moisturize skin with a mixture of honey, eggs and flour

~ Honey is antibacterial and makes a powerful antiseptic to cleanse and heal wounds and prevent scabs from sticking to bandages

~ Kills viruses and bacterial infections when mixed and eaten with raw, minced garlic

~ Boosts energy, reduces fatigue, stimulates mental alertness, strengthens immunity, provides minerals, vitamins, antioxidants

~ Restores eyesight, relieves a sore throat, makes an effective cough syrup

~ Prevents heart disease by improving blood flow and prevents damage to capillaries

~ Regulates the bowels; cures colitis and IBS

~ Soothes burns, disinfects wounds, reduces inflammation and pain, promotes faster healing

~ Reduces anxiety and acts as a sedative; creating calm and restful sleep, alkalizes body's pH

~ Anti-cancer agents protect against the formation of tumors

~ Relieves indigestion and acid reflux, heals peptic ulcers

~ Makes a great lip balm and refreshing herbal wash or lotion

~ Destroys bacteria causing acne, prevents scarring

~ Flushes parasites from liver and colon

~ Heal diabetic ulcers with topical applications

~ Mix with powdered herbs for topical applications or to reduce bitterness when taken internally

~ Smooths and exfoliates facial skin, reduces surface lines, softens dry skin on elbows and heels

~ Add to green coconut water for supercharged athletic drinks

~ Relieve hangovers by eating honey the morning after

~ Protect hair from split ends with a honey conditioner; honey rinse promotes shiny hair

~ Soften hard water by adding honey to bath water

~ Speeds metabolism to stimulate weight loss

~ Improves digestion with natural enzymes

~ Mix honey and lemon with warm water first thing in the morning for an effective cleanse

~ Anti-fungal properties cure vaginal yeast infections and athlete's foot

~ Relieve hay fever by chewing on honeycomb

~ Protects topically and internally against pathogens such as Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and MRSA

~ Builds immunity to hay fever allergens by mixing honey and bee pollen and take early in season

~ Quenches thirst and relieves heat stroke; stops hiccups

~ Lessens the effects of poisons and toxins

~ Has mild laxative properties

~ Relieves asthma when mixed with black pepper and ginger

~ Controls blood pressure when mixed with fresh garlic juice

Honey and Cinnamon

~ Mixing honey, cinnamon and hot water in varying amounts relieves arthritis, bladder infections and abdominal gas; lowers LDL cholesterol, and improves digestion. Additionally, it kills the flu and other viruses, slows the aging process, restores hearing and relieves bad breath.
~ Applying honey, cinnamon and hot olive oil topically prevents hair loss as well as stops a toothache

Honey as food

~ Make salad dressing using honey
~ Sweeten baked goods with honey instead of sugar
~ Smear honey on toast for a mid-afternoon energy snack
~ Preserve fruit by adding honey to water and pouring over fresh fruit in canning jars
~ Make fresh fruit jams with honey instead of sugar
~ Use for making honey wines and beers

Warning

Never give honey to babies under the age of one due to the risk of botulism. Honey caries botulism spores and babies don't have enough immunity for proper protection.