Friday, August 17, 2012

Are Nazi Gestapo Checkpoints Spread Across America?

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is speading its tendrils across America like a cancerous tumor invading surrounding cells.

Responding to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the federal government launched a misguided attempt to consolidate terrorist information among different intelligence and
law-enforcement agencies by creating a super-agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The gargantuan agency swallowed up the FBI, CIA, and Coast Guard while creating a new bastard child: the Transporatation Security Agency.
What began as an attempt to increase protection has become America’s modern version of the old Nazi Gestapo.

Comparing the Department of Homeland Security to the loathed Nazi security police is not too much of a stretch.

The DHS is preparing to implement plans to track all American citizens. Homeland Security is gearing up to install manned security checkpoints at bus depots and in train stations, sports stadiums, and hotels, and shopping malls.

They also intend to deploy surveillance drones across America’s cities and farmland, and surreptitiously scan motorists on the roads to determine if the drivers and passengers somehow fit terrorist profiles only the unseen “authorities” know.

Test DHS checkpoint at undisclosed mall
Test programs are activating smart cameras using artificial intelligence scripts to scan faces in crowds and determine if an individual is a “person of interest” to the nameless, faceless authorities.
Some in the FBI are now suggesting that even people’s tattoos be registered.
Worse, “mind reading helmets” are being developed to analyze and predict any person who may be suspected of illegal activities by the State. Who are the suspects? Chances are, you’ll be one of them.

Hidden scanners will be everywhere

According to gizmodo.com, “Within the next year or two, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security will instantly know everything about your body, clothes, and luggage with a new laser-based molecular scanner fired from 164 feet (50 meters) away.” [Hidden Government Scanners Will Instantly Know Everything About You From 164 Feet Away]

Car and driver X-ray-portal [TSA]
State security with Superman’s X-ray powers
The Department of Homeland Security. Even the name has a fascist ring to it.
America’s Big Brother government has truly arrived and it’s worse than George Orwell ever imagined.
After the DHS assimilated FEMA, they jointly published a new manual outlining how to contain, detain, and constrain Americans during any type of national emergency that runs the gamut from a nuclear attack to the president stubbing his toe. Download this document [PDF] describing the formation and organization of America’s new “Black Forces Gestapo.”
A TSA VIPR Squad inspects vehicles
bravery under fire
A brave American patriot, Steven L Anderson, took it upon himself to challenge the unConstitutionality of the creeping and expanding powers of Homeland Security that, left unchecked, may do more than swallow up intelligence and law enforcement. It may eventually swallow up most of America and along the way individual liberty.
We’re here to protect you, now bend over
confrontation at checkpoint Able

Robotic goon with heavy accent at checkpoint:
 FOR THE REST OF THE LOOONG STORY PLEASE VISIT:
http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/07/24/nazi-gestapo-checkpoints-sp...

Video Propaganda Pushing Vaccines

'This, ladies and gentlemen, is called a VNR, a Video News release. They are made by large corporations, like in this case big pharma. The CNN logo is slapped on and instantly you think it is a real “news” report. Just remember that the supreme court ruled the mainstream media can lie to you and report it as fact and it isn’t illegal.'

Strange Death Of Jim Morrison



The official story is that Jim Morrison died at the age of 27-years-old in the early morning hours of July 3, 1971, in his bathtub at his apartment in Paris with his girlfriend Pamela Courson. The Doors manager, Bill Siddons, flew in from L.A. but did not see his body. Why not? The only people who apparently did were a few emergency medical personnel and Dr. Max Vassile, who is now deceased. He never gave any interviews only saying that Morrison died of “natural causes” specifically of heart failure which is why there was no autopsy.
 
In this DailyMail article, things have changed quite a bit. Supposedly, Jim Morrison died in the bathroom of a Paris night club and that a singer, Marianne Faithful was sworn to secrecy not to talk about the events that lead to his overdosing of heroin that he bought from dealers for his girlfriend, Pamela Courson.

 Jim Morrison never did heroin in the U.S.A. and he had an intense hatred for the drug and needles as well. What did Marianne Faithful see exactly?
So why would he begin taking heroin in Paris, France?

And if he did overdose why are mysterious people like this singer sworn not to talk about the events that night which led to his death? Wouldn’t these events have come out into the mainstream press several weeks later? So what really did happened to James Douglas Morrison?

And who was the American poet and singer for the rock band, The Doors, and what did he really stand for? This is an excerpt from a 1970 interview with Lizzie James:


He talks about his dislike for drugs with Lizzie James in this 1970 full interview. We are supposed to believe he died of a drug overdose which caused heart failure. But his personal physician, Dr. Derwin gave him a complete physical before he left to France and said to the press, “Jim was in excellent health before leaving to Paris.”
“We walked down to the Garden Spot on La Cienega for dinner. That was the evening we talked about drugs. I told him stories I’d heard of his acid escapades, and he laughed and said, ‘I’m not interested in drugs,’ almost scornfully, and lifted his martini glass towards me, rotating it slightly with a smile that said that this was the ‘Crystal Ship.’

Another time I offered him some speed, pot and once or twice some very superior downers, and he declined always, once with a derisive shake of his head saying, ‘I don’t need any pills.’”
(Jim Morrison did in fact use LSD, marijuana, and other drugs, but towards the last couple of years of his life he mostly used alcohol.)
Members of The Doors (left to right), Ray Manzarek, Jim Morrison, Robbie Krieger, and John Densmore.
The Rolling Stone interview was removed from youtube, so here is another interview with Jim Morrison (audio starts off low quality):


Update 28 Feb 2008:
I have noticed a pattern. After they kill famous and important people, and then they become legends, they have to do something to turn the general population away from them by writing lies like these below:
contactmusic.com morrison was bisexual

Otherwise, people may be inspired to find out why he really died. It’s better to turn the masses away before they start investigating the crimes they have committed and find out some terrible facts.

The remaining three members of the band, his former friends, and many others that knew him said this book, Jim Morrison: Life, Death, Legend, by Stephen Davis, is spreading the lie that he was bisexual or homosexual. They all say without question he was straight.

And he loved one girl in particular, his long time girlfriend, Pamela Courson who died two years and nine months later after Jim Morrison’s death on April 25, 1974 of a heroin overdose — surprise, surprise.

How many rock stars and the people that knew them during the 1960′s and 1970′s died of a “heroin overdose” or other strange deaths? For instance, look at this list of dead rock stars put together by a police-pathologist, Dr. Ed Friedlander. What is going on here?

The book, No One Here Gets Out Alive, by Jerry Hopkins and Danny Sugerman, is described as the first biography of Jim Morrison, but his sister, Anne Morrison, said that “my brother was not in that book.” In other words, she did not consider the book to be a biography of her brother.

 Some people on the Internet have sarcastically referred to this book as Nothing Here but Lies. Ray Manzarek was so disgusted by Oliver Stone’s movie about The Doors which portrayed Jim Morrison as crazy and out-of-control that he directed his own movie The Soft Parade to counteract the Zionist propaganda and lies. And recently a new documentary about Jim Morrison and The Doors, When You’re Strange, has been released to further counteract the propaganda about Morrison and the band.


Admiral Morrison,
the attack of the U.S.S. Liberty,
and the Zionist Connection
Morrison’s military awards
According to his military record, Admiral Morrison was awarded the Legion of Merit, the Air Medal with two Gold Stars and the Presidential Unit Citation Ribbon (World War II), the Bronze Star Medal with “V” for valor device (Korean War), and Vietnam Service Medal.
Rear Admiral Morrison also received the American Defense Service Medal, American Campaign Medal, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with three Stars, European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, World War II Victory Medal, National Defense Service Ribbon with Bronze Star, Korean Service Medal, United National Service Medal, and Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Taiwan Straits). He also received the Korean Presidential Unit Citation Medal.
Admiral Morrison, then a captain, with his son, Jim, on the bridge of the U.S.S. Bon Homme Richard, January 1964
Aboard the U.S.S. Hancock off South Korea, December 3, 1968.
Rear Adm. George S. Morrison, commander of Carrier Division Nine, left,
South Korean Prime Minister Chung Il Kwon, center,
and Vice Adm. William F. Bringle, commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet in the Pacific.
As of Nov. 2009, both  the New York Times (here) and the Wikipedia (here) have selected this particular photo of Morrison with a smear on his face.
Is it a coincidence that of all the photos, they selected one with this imperfection?
A British newspaper (here) used the same photo, but without the imperfection.
Jim Morrison came from a military family. His father was a career U.S. Navy officer and a graduate of the Naval Academy. Admiral G.S. Morrison was one of the youngest Navy officers ever selected to become a Rear Admiral at the age of 47-years-old. Then a young Ensign, Admiral Morrison was stationed at Pearl Harbor, and was an eyewitness to the attack on Dec. 7, 1941. He flew fighter aircraft in the South Pacific during the last year of WW II and again during the Korean War.
Jim Morrison and his family were frequently moving during the late 1940′s through the 1960′s to new assignments his father was ordered to report to. While Jim Morrison was in college at UCLA film school, his father was leading a battle carrier group off the coast of South Vietnam in 1964.
You can read his biography here in this article:
signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081128/news_1m28morrison.html
Jim Morrison graduated from film school at UCLA in 1965 and he and Ray Manzarek formed The Doors in June of that year. The Vietnam war was escalating and there was a particular event that many Americans may still not have heard of yet but Admiral Morrison was very vocal about. That is an intelligence gathering ship, the U.S.S. Liberty which was stationed in the Mediterranean Sea near the Sinai Peninsula during the Six day War between Israel and Egypt when it was attacked by Israeli fighter jets on June 8, 1967 killing 34 and wounding 171 crewmembers.
The attack by the Israeli fighter jets lasted for over an hour and the crew of the U.S.S. Liberty being a non-combat ship only had two 0.50 inches caliber guns both fore and aft of the vessel but never got off a shot.
After the Israeli fighter aircraft attack, the U.S.S. Liberty was again attacked by Israeli torpedo boats, which fired five torpedoes, one of which hit the Liberty creating a forty hole and killing 25 sailors. The Israeli torpedo boats also attacked with cannon fire and machine gunned defenseless American sailors in the water and as they were attempting to enter life rafts. The torpedo boats however failed to sink the U.S.S. Liberty.

At this page you can hear audio interviews of Commander James Ennes, U.S. Navy, retired, who was one of the officers on board that day. He tells in graphic detail how the attack happened and how they repeatedly told the Israelis they were an American ship. There is also an interview with a sailor who was on the U.S.S. America.
During the attack, the U.S.S. Liberty was able to get off a message to its flagship the aircraft carrier U.S.S. America and said that they were under attack. The U.S.S. America immediately scrambled F-4 Phantom fighter jets but were recalled by President Lyndon Johnson. What were President Johnson’s motives for doing this?

Meanwhile, after the Israeli torpedo boats murdered American sailors trying to reach the safety of the life rafts, in came some Israeli helicopters with assault troops ready to board the ship and to kill the remaining crew members who had survived both attacks. The helicopters however, did not land on the ship as there was some radio traffic that suggested that U.S. fighter jets were again on their way to engage the Israelis.
You can read about the account of the U.S.S. Liberty here at the Wikipedia. Keep in mind however, that Wikipedia has strong Zionist connections so they are going to try and favor Israel in a positive light. There is another website, gtr5.com from the crew of the U.S.S. Liberty.
The U.S.S. Liberty flew the American flag that day so there was no question that the Israeli fighter jets did not know whose ship it was they were attacking. The Israeli fighter jets used rockets and cannon fire at the ship and many of the sailors that were hit by fragments were unrecognizable because of the damage these weapons do to the human body. Some of the sailors were also incinerated beyond recognition. Clearly, the Israelis were trying to sink this American ship. Although they claimed over the past decades that it was a mistake. Admiral Morrison thought otherwise:

Agenda 21 Propaganda

As a sometimes frequent traveler, I’ve repeatedly been bombarded by mindless propaganda at hotels across the United States lecturing about the use of towels in relation to saving the environment.

 Apart from a few hotels in actual desert regions devoid of water, this is mostly just a public relations stunt to promote a green agenda, with little if any tangible results and plenty of implied guilt to do one’s part.

This is the first time, however, that I’ve seen one overtly linked with the United Nations’ Agenda 21 program, which countless critics have exposed as a plan to stifle development and saddle nations with debt paid directly to the bankers in the name of saving planet earth. (Nevermind the real corporate polluters actually wrecking the globe.) Author Rosa Koire rightly calls it a “green mask” to conceal a far more insidious agenda for total control under United Nations auspices.

As these images from a hotel in Germany show, the flyer which promises to save 1 tree for every 5 towels not used includes a “Planet 21″ logo branding the chain’s participation in “sustainable development,” the unmistakable buzzword for Agenda 21.

The back of the flyer confirms that this is indeed part of the United Nations’ Agenda 21 environmental program (for eco-tyranny).




Germany was the first nation to have a “Green Party” to gain national prominence, dating back to 1980. Now, environmental controls over daily life can be seen everywhere. Soon, they will be as prevalent across the rest of the Western world as these controls are in places like Germany and California.

For instance, my rental car, like all the others, must display a round, green decal known as an “umweltplakette” in the window proving that a carbon tax was paid in order to drive in restricted areas, a.k.a. “Green Zones” as they are termed by the government (see map). Environmentally sensitive roadways are marked by signs as one enters the downtown areas. Those without the sticker can be fined if stopped in unauthorized areas.

Likewise, the zoo here bragged about its participation in a renewable resources program:

America’s Vassal Acts Decisively and Illegally Against Assange: Former UK Ambassador


Global Research, August 16, 2012



I returned to the UK today to be astonished by private confirmation from within the FCO that the UK government has indeed decided – after immense pressure from the Obama administration – to enter the Ecuadorean Embassy and seize Julian Assange.

This will be, beyond any argument, a blatant breach of the Vienna Convention of 1961, to which the UK is one of the original parties and which encodes the centuries – arguably millennia – of practice which have enabled diplomatic relations to function. The Vienna Convention is the most subscribed single international treaty in the world.

The provisions of the Vienna Convention on the status of diplomatic premises are expressed in deliberately absolute terms. There is no modification or qualification elsewhere in the treaty. 

Article 22
1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.
2.The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the mission or impairment of its dignity.
3.The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.
Not even the Chinese government tried to enter the US Embassy to arrest the Chinese dissident Chen Guangchen. Even during the decades of the Cold War, defectors or dissidents were never seized from each other’s embassies.

Murder in Samarkand relates in detail my attempts in the British Embassy to help Uzbek dissidents. This terrible breach of international law will result in British Embassies being subject to raids and harassment worldwide. 

The government’s calculation is that, unlike Ecuador, Britain is a strong enough power to deter such intrusions. This is yet another symptom of the “might is right” principle in international relations, in the era of the neo-conservative abandonment of the idea of the rule of international law.

The British Government bases its argument on domestic British legislation. But the domestic legislation of a country cannot counter its obligations in international law, unless it chooses to withdraw from them. If the government does not wish to follow the obligations imposed on it by the Vienna Convention, it has the right to resile from it – which would leave British diplomats with no protection worldwide. 

I hope to have more information soon on the threats used by the US administration. William Hague had been supporting the move against the concerted advice of his own officials; Ken Clarke has been opposing the move against the advice of his. I gather the decision to act has been taken in Number 10. 

There appears to have been no input of any kind from the Liberal Democrats. That opens a wider question – there appears to be no “liberal” impact now in any question of coalition policy. It is amazing how government salaries and privileges and ministerial limousines are worth far more than any belief to these people. I cannot now conceive how I was a member of that party for over thirty years, deluded into a genuine belief that they had principles.

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.

Can Cannabis Treat Cancer Better Than Toxic Chemo?

he following is an excerpt from Acid Dreams author Martin A. Lee's new book Smoke Signals: A Social History of Marijuana -- Medical, Recreational, and Scientific  (Simon and Schuster, 2012):
Peer-reviewed scientific studies in several countries show THC and other compounds found only in marijuana are effective not only for cancer symptom management (pain, nausea, loss of appetite, fatigue, and so on), but they confer a direct antitumoral effect as well.

Animal experiments conducted by Manuel Guzmán at Madrid’s Complutense University in the late 1990s revealed that a synthetic cannabinoid injected directly into a malignant brain tumor could eradicate it. Reported in Nature Medicine , this remarkable finding prompted additional studies in Spain and elsewhere that confirmed the anticancer properties of marijuana-derived compounds. Guzmán’s team administered pure THC via a catheter into the tumors of nine hospitalized patients with glioblastoma (an aggressive form of brain cancer) who had failed to respond to standard therapies.

This was the first clinical trial assessing the antitumoral action of cannabinoids on human beings, and the results, published in the British Journal of Cancer , were very promising. THC treatment was associated with significantly reduced tumor cell proliferation in all test subjects.
Guzmán and his colleagues found that THC and its synthetic emulators selectively killed tumor cells while leaving healthy cells unscathed.

 No Big Pharma chemotherapy drugs could induce apoptosis (cell death) in cancer cells without trashing the whole body. Up to 90 percent of advanced cancer patients suffer cognitive dysfunction from “chemo brain,” a common side effect of corporate cancer meds that indiscriminately destroy brain matter, whereas cannabinoids are free-radical scavengers that protect brain tissue and stimulate brain cell growth.

There is mounting evidence that cannabinoids may “represent a new class of anticancer drugs that retard cancer growth, inhibit angiogenesis [the formation of new blood vessels] and the metastatic spreading of cancer cells,” according to the scientific journal Mini-Reviews in Medicinal Chemistry . Studies from scientists around the world have documented the anticancer properties of cannabinoid compounds for various malignancies, including (but not limited to):

• Prostate cancer. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin found that the administration of the synthetic cannabinoid WIN-55,212–2, a CB-1and CB-2 agonist, inhibited prostate cancer cell growth and also induced apoptosis.

•Colon cancer. British researchers demonstrated that THC triggers cell death in tumors of the colon, the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States.

• Pancreatic cancer. Spanish and French scientists determined that cannabinoids selectively increased apoptosis in pancreatic cell lines and reduced the growth of tumor cells in animals, while ignoring normal cells.

• Breast cancer. Scientists at the Pacific Medical Centers in San Francisco found that THC and other plant cannabinoids inhibited human breast cancer cell proliferation and metastasis and shrank breast cancer tumors. 1.3 million women worldwide are diagnosed yearly with breast cancer and a half million succumb to the disease.

• Cervical cancer. German researchers at the University of Rostock reported that THC and a synthetic cannabinoid suppressed the invasion of human cervical carcinoma into surrounding tissues by stimulating the body’s production of TIMP-1, a substance that helps healthy cells resist cancer.

• Leukemia. Investigators at St. George’s University and Bartholomew’s Hospital in London found that THC acts synergistically with conventional antileukemia therapies to enhance the effectiveness of anti-cancer agents in vitro (in a test tube or petri dish). Scientists had previously shown that THC and cannabidiol were both potent inducers of apoptosis in leukemic cell lines.

• Stomach cancer. According to Korean researchers at the Catholic Uni- versity in Seoul, WIN-55,212–2, the synthetic cannabinoid, reduced the proliferation of stomach cancer cells.

US Attorney General Went On Reefer Madness Campaign To Distract From Fast And Furious Gun Running

In late 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder authorized raids against marijuana dispensaries in California, where medicinal marijuana is legal, in an effort to create a distraction from the congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious, a new book set for release Tuesday claims.

“Eric Holder, Obama’s embattled Attorney General, was under mounting pressure from Congress to explain the botched Fast and Furious sting operation, whereby two thousand assault rifles and other firearms were sold to suspected traffickers for the Mexican drug cartels,” Martin A. Lee writes in “Smoke Signals: A Social History of Marijuana – Medical, Recreational and Scientific.”
“It was intended as an intelligence-gathering ploy, but U.S. agents lost track of most of these weapons.”


“On October 7, the same day Holder wrote a detailed letter to Rep. Issa, defending his handling of the Fast and Furious affair, four federal prosecutors in California held a hastily organized press conference in which they threw down the gauntlet and announced the start of a far-ranging crackdown that would nearly decimate the Golden State’s medical marijuana industry.”

“Within ten months, close to half of California’s 1400 dispensaries would shut down as the DEA waged an all-out vendetta against what Proposition 215 had unloosed,” Lee continued.
“The drug police weren’t just going after the bad apples; they were going after every apple in the barrel. Cannabis dispensaries abiding by state law were raided by federal agents. Federal prosecutors threatened to seize property from landlords who rented to medical marijuana facilities. The feds also threatened municipal officials who sought to implement state medical marijuana regulations. Federally insured banks and credit card companies refused to service marijuana-related enterprises.”

Lee questions how Obama — the “Choom Gang kid” who smoked marijuana with his friends in Hawaii as a teenager — could “unleash the dogs of the drug war against a thriving business sector when times were tough economically and jobs were scarce?”

“Team Obama’s decision to crack down on the medical marijuana industry wasn’t motivated by public health concerns,” Lee writes, answering his own question. “The Justice Department green-lit a scorched earth campaign against medicinal cannabis in order to placate law enforcement and control the damage from the Fast and Furious scandal by deflecting attention to other matters.”

In an excerpt obtained and published by the left-wing news and opinion website TruthOut.org, Lee describes the Fast and Furious scandal — including how it led to the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry — and how Holder “stonewalled” Congress for months, “disavowing any knowledge of the caper despite documentation showing that high-level Justice Department officials aided the surveillance mission.”

“The fact that Fast and Furious had its roots in a similar Bush-era ATF operation mattered little to GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, the grandstanding chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, who went so far as to accuse the Obama administration of purposely allowing the guns to escape as part of a liberal plot to impose new gun control laws,” Lee writes. “Issa was not credible; nor was Holder.”

Lee goes on to explain that when calls for special investigations into Fast and Furious and for Holder’s resignation intensified in October 2011, Holder played what Lee calls the “ace up his sleeve.”

“Ever since California voters approved Proposition 215, which legalized marijuana for medical use in 1996, law enforcement lobbyists had been urging the federal government to enforce prohibition and choke off the burgeoning industry,” Lee writes.

Is Mandatory Pediatric Chemo Institutionalized Child Abuse?

Sayer Ji, Contributor
Activist Post

Mandatory chemotherapy for your child. The concept is horrific. But it is not just a concept. It has already happened and is still happening, which is why I am writing this article. We need to sound the alarm about this disturbing trend that, despite recent mainstream media references to a case of court-coerced chemotherapy, is still largely going unnoticed and/or unrecognized for what it really is: a human rights violation of the worst kind.

Moreover, as it involves our children who can not rightly advocate for themselves, we need to speak up and act on their behalf.
 
Court-Ordered Pediatric Chemotherapy Calls Into Question Who Has Parental Authority

Were it not for J.D. Heyes' Aug. 13th article for NaturalNews.com titled "Court forces chemo on eight-year-old Minnesota girl despite family's desire to use alternative medicine," and the CBS Minnesota article from Aug. 8th reporting on the matter, I would probably not be aware of this ongoing parental and human rights atrocity.

As reported by CBS, a Twin Cities family's 8-year-old daughter, Sarah, who had recently had 90 percent of a brain tumor surgically removed and was suffering from typical side effects from follow-up chemotherapy, such as nausea, sore throat, loss of weight and hair, was ordered by her doctors to continue for one more year of chemotherapy. 
 
Her parents, who wished to search out less toxic treatment alternatives, were contacted by child protective services when the child's doctors determined her survival was being compromised each day she went without further chemotherapy treatment.

According to CBS, "The Minnetonka family was ordered to court and was told if they did not work with them on a treatment plan, they would lose custody of Sarah." Subsequently, "The court and Parisian family eventually reached an agreement on a treatment plan which includes some chemotherapy, but "it's going to include a dose that is not going to send her tipping over the edge," Connors said."

But What If Chemotherapy Is Not "Therapeutic" At All?

There is a disturbing subtext to this story that will likely never get addressed by any mainstream media outlet, which, incidentally, is why the alternative media is so important. As the saying goes, a text without a context is a pretext. The problem is that conventional treatment with chemotherapy and radiation, and not the cancer to which it is being applied, is often the primary cause of the accelerated death of the patient.*

I often look up commonly used chemoagents by their material data safety sheet (MSDS) to ascertain just how toxic they are, and what I invariably find is quite disturbing. These MSDSs are federally mandated to be provided to the public by the manufacturers of chemicals and drugs to which the public will be exposed, either by accident or intention, e.g. prescribed chemicals. 
They contain toxicological risk assessments based on acute lethality in an animal model that reveal how dangerous these chemicals actually are. We know from these studies that chemotherapy drugs are acutely lethal to humans in the sub-gram dosage range and are often classified as carcinogenic.

Tamoxifen, for instance, a first-line treatment for breast cancer for well over 40 years, is classified by the World Health Organization and American Cancer Society as a human carcinogen. Or, 5-fluorauracil, one of the world's best-selling oncology drugs is so toxic that, based on its MSDS LD50 (lethal dose for 50% of test animals) rating, when administered at a dosage equivalent to the weight of 3 pennies (approximately 7.5 grams), is deadly enough to kill 50% of the adult humans given it, within one dose.

Children As Canaries in the Chemical Coal Mine

Children are already uniquely susceptible to the genotoxicity of synthetic chemicals because of the relatively faster rate at which their cells replicate in the normal course of their fast-paced bodily development, as well as their less developed detoxification systems. Indeed, in a groundbreaking report released by the President's Cancer Panel in 2010, in which our government agencies were indicted for "failing to carry out their responsibilities," childhood cancers overall, especially childhood leukemia and brain cancer, were found to be increasing at an alarming rate relative to most types of cancers in adult populations.

Chemical and radiation exposures are likely the primary reason for this observed discrepancy. This is why the use of conventional chemotherapy agents in children is so disturbing, since the very mechanism of action of most of these agents is to target cells that replicate faster, irrespective of whether they are malignant or benign. The collateral damage, in other words, is usually devastating, and cancer recurrence virtually guaranteed in a large number of cases not in spite of, but because of the treatment given.

Keep in mind that tens of thousands of children diagnosed with cancer each year are being pressured into being "treated" with chemotherapy as their only alternative. It is one thing to be falsely marketed to, or having the science misrepresented, or being told by a doctor that if you do not choose to take this chemical you will die much sooner. It is another to be told that your very own flesh and blood – your children, for God's sake – can be taken from you, because you did not want to see them poisoned to death for a condition like cancer, which is often caused by lifetime cumulative exposures to chemicals/poisons.

If You Don't Know How Your Chemicals Work It's A Human Experiment

This is why we have the medical ethical principle of informed consent. This is why human experimentation after the Second World War, and the horrors of the Nazi death camps, was explicitly rejected in the adoption of a medical ethical code that required voluntary consent before being subject to experimental drugs.

Mind you, most oncologists and the manufacturers that peddle them have no idea what the chemotherapy agents they use are actually doing to their patient's bodies -- which is the very definition of experimental medicine, making informed consent impossible.

In fact, much of the research available on the true nature of cancer, especially research on cancer stem cells, indicates that chemotherapy and radiation are not only are a miserable failure, but actually make the cancer far more malignant. Pediatric cancer stem cells have recently been characterized as a key factor in chemoresistance and radioresistance, especially in brain cancers, the #1 form of childhood cancer.

Who Owns Your Body, Your Child's Body Really?

Furthermore, who has, or should have, the ultimate authority in making these decisions about your child's body? If it is not you – the parent – and it is the State, or a privatized medical establishment which is seamlessly intertwined with it, or multinational corporations who defraud the government and the medical institutions with checkbook science for their patented, highly toxic nostrums, then are we not saying that our bodies, or our children's bodies are not self-possessed? That they are property, merely chattel, as would be the technical definition of the bodies of slaves?

Mandatory chemotherapy, from a human rights perspective, is no different from mandatory vaccination. The same pathological thinking, and denial of bodily self-possession is at play. What we are talking about here is a medical establishment that has far more to do with control of the populace than service to it.

If any treatment becomes compulsory, and that treatment by its very nature violates every natural law within the human body, i.e. using poisonous chemicals to suppress symptoms of chemical poisoning, then we have entered a truly Orwellian phase where being sick is required of us, as well as to maintain our parental rights, or even to be a parent, lest the State tear our children away from us.

I reject this implied reality. I encourage you to do the same. Coercing or forcing conventional chemotherapy on a child is abuse – nothing less. Until the profound density of evidence supporting natural treatments for cancer become mainstream knowledge, the pseudo-scientific medical dictatorship will continue to poison people to death while at the same moment claiming to save their lives. If this sounds radical or revolutionary, I assure you it is really simply a matter of observing and telling the truth.

Mothers To Regulators We Will NOT Comply ~ Serving Raw Milk & Lemonade At US Capitol





Risking Jail to Defend Peaceful Voluntary Exchange

August 16, 2012-Washington, DC (Business Wire)—On August 18, 2012 a group of mothers and others, members of the advocacy groups, the Raw Milk Freedom Riders and Lemonade Freedom Day, will take their raw milk and lemonade to the lawn of the US Capitol to celebrate their right to “voluntary exchange.”

By offering raw milk and lemonade for sale or barter, which is illegal in many places including Washington DC, these mothers and other activists risk criminal charges, and possibly jail. Last August, in a similar protest, three people were arrested for selling 10-cent cups of lemonade.

The lemonade stands and raw milk tasting booths will be set up on the mall at 12:00 noon on the lawn of the Capitol reflecting pool. The approximate location is around 3rd Street Southwest between Maryland and Jefferson in Washington DC.

“The law has turned ordinary people into criminals for engaging in normal human behavior,” says Liz Reitzig, one of the event’s organizers. “I am proud to stand with others as we peacefully do not comply with these laws.”

National Lemonade Freedom Day founder, Robert Fernandes, began his annual event after seeing news reports about children’s lemonade stands being shut down because they did not comply with regulations. “The government has overstepped its boundaries by trying to regulate kids’ lemonade stands and farmers who are feeding their communities. We have the right to engage in voluntary exchange and peacefully obtain the food of our choice from the producer of our choice whether that’s raw milk from a local farmer or lemonade from the children next door without input from regulators.”

Joining the group will be Kristin Canty, director of the critically acclaimed documentary Farmageddon — The Unseen War on American Family Farms. “It is so sad that the Government is abusing its power by conducting armed raids on small farms. They are criminalizing farmers for feeding their communities and criminalizing mothers for trying to feed their families healthy food,” Canty says

Medicial Benefits Of Cannabis

Medical Benefits of Cannabis

Trying to list all of the medicinal and medical benefits of marijuana is like trying to name and list all of the stars in the sky; there are just so many of them! Americans, and people all across the rest of the planet, are standing up for their rights to incorporate holistic, natural medicines in order to remedy their ailments. We cannot be forced into taking in the toxic substances released as medicines from multibillion-dollar pharmaceutical companies. And with the help of modern technologies, the many medicinal benefits of marijuana are ever-increasingly becoming integrated into the very fabric of worldwide societies everywhere.

Isn't it strange that the United States government, the same government that denies its people the legal right to use medical marijuana, holds patents on the medicinal attributes of weed's usage? That's right, the US government holds patents for the medicinal usage of cannabis because of its neuroprotectant and antioxidant properties.

CannabisSearch.com is proud to help educate the masses about the nearly unlimited abilities of marijuana to help reduce stress, thwart depression and battle the effects of an astounding number of diseases and other adverse health conditions. The medical benefits of marijuana are far too numerous to present in one inclusive list. However, below you'll find some of the most remarkable, clinically-proven medicinal marijuana benefits.

Cannabis sativa has been used as a holistically effective medicinal agent on every continent, by all types of people, for thousands and thousands of years. As powerful international pharmaceutical companies continue to break down under the scrutiny and anger of world citizens, natural, holistic preventatives and cures, like marijuana, continue to resurface as sensible health solutions. There's no need to worry about a long list of possible side effects, many of which are more detrimental than the conditions being treated in the first place. And whether or not governmental agencies want to give in to widespread medicinal marijuana usage, in short time, they will have to

US Government Holds Medical Cannabis Patent

Twice as many patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) that were prescribed cannabis reported relief from muscle stiffness over the placebo while cannabis also provided better relief of body pain, muscle spasms, and sleep disturbances. In the MS study published online on July 12 in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. Dr. Zajicek states that overall, progression of disease in this group ... was less than expected... In other words, cannabis appears to have slowed the progression of the disease also. This is the strongest evidence behind using cannabinoids for symptom relief in MS so far.

Oddly enough, the US government holds patents on the medicinal attributes of marijuana's usage. This is the same government that denies its citizens the legal right to use medical marijuana.

It seems logical to conclude that if our government now owns the rights to a "natural substance" through patenting that the U.S. government knows that marijuana has valid medicinal properties. So why is the U.S. government so adamant in outlawing medical marijuana and unwilling to admit that marijuana has valid medicinal properties? Some 60 percent of Americans in our "democratic" society believe that doctors should be allowed to prescribe marijuana and yet the man with the gun and handcuffs says "NO." That's not democracy!

The patent
U.S. Patent 6630507 titled "Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants" is assigned to The United States of America, and claims - "Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of a wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants. For example, in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia."

A patent is granted by the government and used to protect the right of the inventor. NEWSFLASH The U.S. government did not invent cannabis! By definition, you should not be able to patent something that grows naturally. But the U.S. government has a patent to control the use of cannabis.

Marijuana is cancer protective?
But the benefits of cannabinoids don't stop with MS: One study (listed in cancer.gov) suggested that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of certain types of tumors. During this two-year study, a dose-related decrease in the incidence of hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma was observed along with decreased incidences of benign tumors in other organs. In another study (again listed in cancer.gov), cannabis was found to inhibit the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells along with other tumors. Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells without harming the non-transformed cells.

A Costa Rican study found that chronic marijuana smokers who were also cigarette smokers were less likely to develop cancer than cigarette smokers who didn't use marijuana. Cannabis dilates the alveoli (tiny air sacks in the lungs), allowing toxins to be more easily eliminated. Nicotine conversely constricts the alveoli while cannabis neutralizes the constriction.

Freedom from tyranny
Our country was forged out of the struggle against outside tyranny but is falling quickly into the hands of even worse evils than our forefathers strove against - inside complacency and ignorance. But the biggest evils occur when men and women choose to sit by and let tyranny seep in and take control. Our freedoms are quickly running out in the USA.

"The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant." Maximilien Robespierre

It is high time that the majority once again rules - If our country's leaders refuse to listen, then it's time to vote them out. Your life may depend upon it!


Does Federal Meat Hoarding Mean Shortages For You?

At least two-thirds of the U.S. is currently suffering through varying degrees of drought, with the U.S. Drought Monitor reporting as of August 14 that 63 percent of hay, 72 percent of cattle, 85 percent of soybean crops, and 87 percent of corn crops are not getting the water they need to survive. And in response, the federal government has announced that it plans to buy up $170 million worth of pork, lamb, chicken, and catfish to help out these farmers -- but what does this mean for the rest of us?

Insufficient rains have already damaged a significant portion of the nation's feed crops, much of which are used to raise conventional cattle for meat production. As a result, feed prices have steadily increased while stocks have dwindled, putting many farmers in a difficult situation economically. So to help them along, the White House has pledged to stock up on extra meat and poultry, which it says it will distribute through federal food "nutrition" programs.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the agency will snatch up an additional $100 million worth of pork products, $50 million worth of chicken products, $10 millions worth of lamb products, and $10 million worth of catfish products. And whatever cannot be distributed through these federal programs will be stocked and frozen for future use, according to the White House.

Will federal government meat hoarding initiative cause food shortages across America?
This massive meat buy-up; however, could cause problems for the average meat-eating American, as meat products will be become less plentiful and thus, more expensive. Though the initial effects of the drought were expected to cause a slight dip in meat prices as farmers bring their cattle to slaughter sooner than they normally would to avoid the high feed costs, the federal government's obstruction of the free market could cause a meat shortage in the long term for everyone else.

Both the USDA and the Department of Defense (DOD) purchase bulk meat stocks every year to serve to government employees, military servicemen, and of course welfare recipients via federal food programs. But the amount the two agencies are being permitted to buy this year is much higher than normal. The federal government did the same thing in 2009 when hog producers saw a sharp decrease in pork prices following the H1N1 hysteria.

It has also been announced that the U.S. will send a near-record shipment of domestic corn to Mexico during the 2012-2013 marketing year, according to Mexico's The News. While the U.S. hobbles its way through a potential famine situation, the federal government has, for some reason, decided to send a whopping 1.5 million tons of corn to Mexico, the fourth largest sale of corn to a foreign country in U.S. history.


Boycott Natural Brands That Betray Consumers With GMO Labels

It's time to defeat evil in the food industry and stop the vicious betrayal of consumers by so-called "natural" brands. They're all conspiring right now to funnel millions of dollars into a disinformation campaign to try to defeat ballot measure 37, the "GMO labeling" initiative in California (http://www.naturalnews.com/036833_GMO_labeling_YES_on_37_California.h...).

Effective immediately, NaturalNews is issuing a global boycott on the following brands:

• Kashi (owned by Kellogg, which has contributed $612,000 to defeat Proposition 37) - Kashi cereals contain GMOs!

• Silk soymilk (owned by the nation's largest dairy, Dean Foods, which has contributed $253,000 to the effort to kill Proposition 37)

• Larabar (owned by General Mills, which has contributed $520,000 to defeat proposition 37)

• R.W. Knudsen (owned by Smucker, which has contributed $387,000 to defeat proposition 37)

• Santa Cruz Organic (also owned by Smucker, which has contributed $387,000 to defeat proposition 37)

• Cascadian Farm (owned by General Mills, which has contributed $520,000 to defeat proposition 37)

• Muir Glen (also owned by General Mills, which has contributed $520,000 to defeat proposition 37)

Boycott these brands -- the BETRAYORS of the food industry. Help make sure their betrayal of consumers costs them huge market share. Remember: When it comes to evil food companies, if you ignore them (by not buying their toxic products) they will go away.

This is all detailed in a release just issued by the Cornucopia Institute:

Agribusinesses Owning Natural / Organic Brands Betray Customers: Fund Attack on GMO Labeling Proposal in California
Proposition 37, a citizen's initiative on the ballot on November 6 in California, would mandate clear labeling of genetically engineered (GE) ingredients on food packages. It has become a battleground pitting consumer and farmer advocates against multi-billion-dollar agribusiness corporations.

Recent polling indicates almost 70% of citizens support informational labeling. And a flood of new contributions to fight the measure has rolled in from the biotechnology industry and food manufacturers, totaling over $23 million, according to the California Secretary of State. This dwarfs the approximately $3 million contributed by proponents of GE labeling.

"Consumers might be surprised to find out that brands hiding under 'natural' façades are in fact owned by multi-billion-dollar corporations that are contributing bushel baskets of cash to defeating Proposition 37," says Charlotte Vallaeys, Director of Farm and Food Policy at The Cornucopia Institute. (www.cornucopia.org)

Mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food in California is viewed as a watershed event by many industry observers, as many companies will find it logistically or economically difficult to produce foods with labels identifying GE for California while producing a different product line of foods for the rest of the country.

"Just as we've observed in Europe, where labeling of food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is mandatory, we fully expect that when given a choice, consumers will choose organic or non-GMO products," said Mark A. Kastel, Codirector of Wisconsin-based Cornucopia. "And the industrial food lobby is fully cognizant of this -- that's why they're fighting like hell against this grassroots effort."

To make it easier for shoppers to identify and support organic brands whose corporate owners support Proposition 37, and avoid buying brands owned by companies that financially contributed to opposing the "Right to Know" campaign, The Cornucopia Institute has developed a guide for consumers. (http://www.cornucopia.org/2012/08/prop37/)

"If the food and biotech industries are so proud of their pervasive genetically manipulated crops, why are they so afraid, and so desperately opposed to labeling it?" asked Arran Stephens, founder of Nature's Path, North America's largest certified organic cereal and granola brand with manufacturing plants in the US and Canada.

Besides Nature's Path, those who have contributed in support of Proposition 37 include venerable organic manufacturers such as Dr. Bronner's, Nutiva and Lundberg rice. These companies are all independently-owned businesses that avoid GMOs and are committed to supporting organic agriculture.

"Food companies are required by law to label 'contains peanuts' if included in their product. People deserve the same for GMOs. Our customers want to know if any product contains GMOs," says John Roulac, founder and CEO of Nutiva, an organic food company.

On the other side, joining Monsanto and the giant food lobby group Grocery Manufacturers of America (GMA) in donating money to the effort to defeat the ballot initiative, are multi-billion-dollar, multi-national companies including General Mills, Dean Foods, Kellogg and Pepsico. These companies own brands that are misrepresented to consumers as independent, value-driven businesses.

Biotechnology corporations and corporate agribusinesses have collectively donated millions of dollars to defeat Proposition 37. Monsanto alone has donated $4.2 million, while food giants Pepsico and Coca Cola have each donated more than $1 million.

"Consumers are increasingly interested in 'voting with their forks,' and many want to support companies that share their values," says Vallaeys. "But consumers may not realize that many organic and 'natural' brands are owned by the very same corporations that are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars each, or even millions, in an effort to scuttle Proposition 37 in California," she adds.

For example, Kashi is owned by Kellogg, which has contributed $612,000 to defeating Proposition 37. Last year, The Cornucopia Institute published a study, Cereal Crimes (http://www.cornucopia.org/2011/10/natural-vs-organic-cereal/), which revealed that the popular, "natural" Kashi GoLean cereal brand, unbeknownst to its customers, contains genetically engineered ingredients.

In what The Cornucopia Institute characterizes as "creating a façade," nowhere on the Kashi website or packaging is it disclosed that the company is owned by Kellogg, rather than the "small band of passionate people" featured on the Kashi website.

Another example is Silk soymilk, which carries the "Non-GMO Project Verified" seal on its products but is owned by the nation's largest dairy, Dean Foods, which has contributed $253,000 to the effort to kill Prop. 37. Dean Foods also owns the Horizon Organic brand. Both Silk and Horizon profess to consumers that the brands oppose GMOs.

"Talk is cheap," adds Vallaeys. "Consumers should not only know whether there are GMOs in their food, but also whether their hard-earned dollars are supporting companies that then turn around and invest those profits in the effort to sell-out their right to know."

The Cornucopia Institute, which developed the funding guide (http://www.cornucopia.org/2012/08/prop37/), stresses that the organization is not against corporate involvement in organics.

"We welcome corporate involvement in the organic food industry, but only when the parent company subscribes to the values that the organic food movement is based on," says Kastel. "We have a problem with the duplicity of corporations that hide under a 'holier-than-thou' marketing brand and then undermine the very values of the organic movement."

"For example, when Kellogg donates money to the Organic Trade Association, the Kashi brand appears on the OTA website. But when the same company donates to the effort to defeat Proposition 37, Kellogg will do everything in its power to make sure that its Kashi customers, who seek wholesome and natural foods, do not associate the Kashi brand with a corporate contributor to the effort to kill Proposition 37," adds Kastel.

The same is true for the R.W. Knudsen and Santa Cruz Organic brands, owned by Smucker, and the Cascadian Farm, Larabar and Muir Glen brands, owned by General Mills. These corporate brand owners have donated $387,000 and $520,000, respectively, to defeating Proposition 37.

By using Cornucopia's Proposition 37 funding guide, consumers can invest their food dollars in organic and non-GMO companies that are truly committed to supporting sustainable agriculture.

"Hiding the truth about our food is pervasive, unethical, and only done for money," says Michael Potter, CEO of Eden Foods, an organic food manufacturer that financially contributed to support Proposition 37. "Let this [Prop. 37] be the beginning of an end to it."

Who is supporting GMO labeling?
For the record, those contributing funds to help pass proposition 37 include Nature's Path (my No. 1 favorite cereal company), Dr. Bronner's, Nutiva and Lundberg rice. In the info realm, supporters include Dr. Mercola, the Organic Consumers Association, NaturalNews (through numerous contributions to the IRT), and many others.

Wheat Belly FAQ'S

If you’re wondering what the heck this whole Wheat Belly thing is all about, here’s a good place to start.

Is wheat really that bad? I thought that whole grains were good for you?
First of all, it ain’t wheat. It’s the product of 40 years of genetics research aimed at increasing yield-per-acre. The result is a genetically-unique plant that stands 2 feet tall, not the 4 1/2-foot tall “amber waves of grain” we all remember. The genetic distance modern wheat has drifted exceeds the difference between chimpanzees and humans. If you caught your son dating a chimpanzee, could you tell the difference? Of course you can! What a difference 1% can make. But that’s more than modern wheat is removed from its ancestors.

Why do you make the claim that removing all wheat from the diet results in weight loss? ?
Because I’ve seen it happen–over and over and over again. It’s lost from the deep visceral fat that resides within the abdomen, what can be represented on the surface as “love handles,” “muffin top,” or a darned good imitation of a near-term baby, what I call a “wheat belly.”

Typically, people who say goodbye to wheat lose a pound a day for the first 10 days. Weight loss then slows to yield 25-30 pounds over the subsequent 3-6 months (differing depending on body size, quality of diet at the start, male vs. female, etc.). When you remove wheat from the diet, you’ve removed a food that leads to fat deposition in the abdomen. Factor in that the gliadin protein unique to wheat that is degraded to a morphine-like compound that stimulates appetite; remove it and appetite shrinks. The average daily calorie intake drops 400 calories per day–with less hunger, less cravings and food is more satisfying. This all occurs without imposing calorie limits, cutting fat grams, or limiting portion size. It all happens just by eliminating this thing called wheat.

When you examine food labels in the grocery store, you see that wheat is in nearly everything. Is it really practical to remove all wheat from the diet??
Yes, it is. It means a return to real food from the produce aisle, fish and meat department, nuts, eggs, olives, and oils.

It raises a crucial question: Just why is wheat such a ubiquitous ingredient in so many foods, from ice cream to French fries? That’s easy: Because it tastes good and it stimulates appetite. You want more wheat, you want more of everything else to the tune of 400 or more calories per day. More calories, more food, more revenue for Big Food. Wheat is not in cucumbers, green peppers, salmon, or walnuts. But it’s in over 90% of the foods on supermarket shelves, all there to stimulate your appetite center to consume more . . . and more and more.

It also means being equipped with recipes that allow you to recreate familiar recipes that you might miss, like cheesecake, cookies, and biscotti–without wheat, with little to no sugar or carbohydrate exposure, yet healthy. That’s what I’ve done in Wheat Belly.

So does it mean going gluten-free??
Yes, but do not eat gluten-free foods! Let me explain.

Wheat raises blood sugar higher than nearly all other foods, including table sugar and many candy bars. The few foods that increase blood sugar higher than even wheat include figs, dates, and other dried fruits, and rice starch, cornstarch, tapioca starch, and potato starch–the most common ingredients used in gluten-free foods. A gluten-free whole grain bread, for instance, is usually made with a combination of brown rice, potato, and tapioca starches. These dried pulverized starches are packed with highly-digestible high-glycemic index carbohydrates and thereby send blood sugar through the roof. This contributes to diabetes, cataracts, arthritis, heart disease and growing belly fat. This is why many celiac patients who forego wheat and resort to gluten-free foods become fat and diabetic. Gluten-free foods as they are currently manufactured are very poor substitutes for wheat flour.

Anyone who consumes gluten-free foods, like gluten-free muffins, should regard them as an occasional indulgence, no different than eating a bag of jelly beans.

What can you eat on the diet you advocate? ?
Eat real, natural foods such as eggs, raw nuts, plenty of vegetables, and fish, fowl, and meats. Use healthy oils like olive, walnut, and coconut liberally. Eat occasional fruit and plenty of avocado, olives, and use herbs and spices freely. Eat raw or least cooked whenever possible and certainly do not frequent fast food, processed snacks, or junk foods. While it may sound restrictive, a return to non-grain foods is incredibly rich and varied. Many people’s eyes have been closed to the great variety of foods available to us minus the wheat.

Recall that people who are wheat-free consume, on average, 400 calories less per day and are not driven by the 90-120 minute cycle of hunger that is common to wheat. It means you eat when you are hungry and you eat less. It means a breakfast of 3 eggs with green peppers and sundried tomatoes, olive oil, and mozzarella cheese for breakfast at 7 am and you’re not hungry until 1 pm. That’s an entirely different experience than the shredded wheat cereal in skim milk at 7 am, hungry for a snack at 9 am, hungry again at 11 am, counting the minutes until lunch. Eat lunch at noon, sleepy by 2 pm, etc. All of this goes away by banning wheat from the diet, provided the lost calories are replaced with real healthy foods.

What exactly is in wheat that makes it so bad??
Gluten is only one of the reasons to fear wheat, since it triggers a host of immune diseases like celiac, rheumatoid arthritis, and gluten encephalopathy (dementia from wheat).

The protein unique to wheat, gliadin, a component of gluten proteins, is odd in that it is degraded in the human gastrointestinal tract to polypeptides (small proteins) that have the ability to cross into the brain and bind to morphine receptors. These polypeptides have been labeled gluteomorphin or exorphins (exogenous morphine-like compounds) by National Institutes of Health researchers. Wheat exorphins cause a subtle euphoria in some people. This may be part of the reason wheat products increase appetite and cause addiction-like behaviors in susceptible people. It also explains why a drug company has made application to the FDA for the drug naltrexone, an oral opiate-blocking drug ordinarily used to keep heroine addicts drug-free, for weight loss. Block the brain morphine receptor and weight loss (about 22 pounds over 6 months) results. But there’s only one food that yields substantial morphine-like compounds: yes, wheat.

The complex carbohydrate unique to wheat, amylopectin A, is another problem source. The branching structure of wheat’s amylopectin A is more digestible than the amylopectins B and C from rice, beans, and other starches (i.e., in their natural states, not the gluten-free dried pulverized starches). This explains why two slices of whole wheat bread increase blood sugar higher than table sugar, higher than a bowl of brown rice, higher than many candy bars. Having high blood sugars repeatedly is not good for health. It leads to accumulated visceral fat–a “wheat belly,” diabetes and pre-diabetes (defined, of course, as having higher blood sugars), not to mention cataracts, arthritis, and heart disease.

As if that wasn’t enough, there are even other components of wheat that are harmful, such as the lectins in wheat. Lectins are glycoproteins that have the curious ability to “unlock” the proteins lining the human intestinal tract that determine what substances can enter the blood or lymphatic system and what substances cannot. The intestinal tract must be selective in what is allowed to enter the human body else all manner of diseases can be triggered, especially autoimmune diseases. Wheat lectins disable these proteins. This is the suspected explanation for why wheat consumption has been linked to rheumatoid arthritis, skin diseases like dermatitis herpetiformis, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, and a variety of other inflammatory diseases.

Beyond gluten, there are over 1000 other proteins in wheat that also have potential for odd or unexpected responses. You might say that wheat is a perfectly crafted Frankengrain that almost appears like it was created to exert maximum health damage in the most desirable, irresistible form possible. I really don’t believe that this monster was created on purpose to hurt people. But the astounding collection of adverse effects, all packed into one food, pushed on us by the U.S. government and other “official” health agencies, explains why this one thing has exerted more harm on us than any foreign terrorist group can inflict on us.

If I go wheat-free, is there any harm in having an occasional bagel or cupcake?
It depends. It depends on your individual susceptibility to the effects of wheat.

If you have celiac disease or any of the long list of inflammatory or autoimmune diseases associated with wheat (rheumatoid arthritis, cerebellar ataxia, peripheral neuropathy, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, dermatitis herpetiformis, etc.), then wheat and gluten avoidance should be complete and meticulous. There’s now way around this and compromises can be disastrous.

If you have an addictive relationship with wheat, e.g. one pretzel makes you want to eat the whole bag, then complete avoidance is also advisable. Because wheat consumption in the 30% of people with this problem cannot stop themselves once it starts, it is best to avoid wheat-containing foods altogether.

Yet another odd observation: Many, though not all, people who have removed wheat from their diet for at least several months have what I call “wheat re-exposure reactions” usually experienced as abdominal cramps, gas, and diarrhea (just like food poisoning); asthma attacks in the susceptible; joint swelling and pain; and emotional effects such as anxiety in women and rage in men. I’ve witnessed many people go wheat-free, feel great, lose 30 pounds, then have an emotional blowup at a birthday party after indulging in just a small piece of birthday cake, then spending the next 24 hours on the toilet with diarrhea.

There are indeed a percentage (20-30%?) of people who can get away with occasional indulgences. Sometimes it’s a matter of running a little test yourself to gauge your reaction. Anyone with a history of autoimmune or inflammatory diseases, or having had celiac markers like an anti-gliadin antibody test positive, however, should not even try this.


If I stop consuming wheat, won’t I develop deficiencies of fiber and B vitamins or other nutrients?
Absolutely not–provided the lost calories are replaced by real, healthy foods. If you replace lost wheat calories with Twinkies, Hohos, and corn chips, then deficiencies can indeed develop. So it’s important to replace lost calories with healthy foods.

If the calories formerly dominated by wheat are replaced with vegetables, raw nuts, cheeses, meats, avocados, healthy oils and other healthy foods, then no deficiency develops. Fiber intake is easily the same or greater than a wheat-containing diet. No deficiency of any nutrient develops: no deficiency of riboflavin, folate, selenium, thiamine, etc. All nutrients are provided in adequate quantities just by returning to real, unprocessed and healthy foods–not a bagel or ciabatta in sight.

Wheat Has Higher Glycemic Index Than A Snickers Bar?

Wheat belly is a term that describes what is otherwise known as visceral fat. Who gets wheat belly? Well, certainly those who eat wheat. (1) And what exactly is wheat belly? Wheat belly is another way of saying “beer belly” or belly fat.

Essentially, it is a special kind of fat tissue that wraps around the organs in the abdominal cavity, like the kidneys, the intestines, the liver… you get the idea. What makes this fat tissue so interesting is that wheat belly fat, or visceral fat, is an endocrine organ all on its own.
Wheat Belly Fat Releases Hormone Signals

A lot of science has done the work to show that visceral fat, the fat surrounding organs in the abdominal cavity, is very much like any other gland in the endocrine system.

This means that visceral fat produces it own hormones and messages.
Other organs that release hormone signals are glands such as the ovaries, testes, pancreas, the adrenals, and the pituitary gland in the brain.
Visceral fat is not the same as subcutaneous fat, which sits just beneath the skin.

The messages and signals released from fat tissue are pathogenic. Which means that many of the messages promote disease.

So, not only is visceral fat cumbersome, it is also dangerous! We now know that visceral fat:

Can’t get rid of that extra belly fat no matter how hard you try? It may be caused by wheat belly, pro-inflammatory visceral fat that promotes disease!

Controls signaling related to appetite.
Generates insulin resistance, which is a prerequisite to Type II Diabetes. (2)(3)
Increases sensitivity to pain. (4)
Inhibits muscle growth. (5)
Releases pro-inflammatory messages.

What is interesting about pro-inflammatory messages that are produced by visceral fat is that they take part in what is known as a viscous cycle. In other words, inflammation that originates in visceral fat tells the body to make more fat! (6) (7)
How Modern Wheat Differs from Traditional Wheat

As Dr. William Davis points out in his book, Wheat Belly, the grain of our ancestors is not the same stuff that you will find on any supermarket shelf. Even specialty stores would be hard-pressed to carry anything made with the grain that commercial modern wheat originally came from. Dr. Davis explains that the wheat of today:

Is actually a mixture of a grain called einkorn and wild grasses.
Is the result of human genetic modification, which in 50 years produced 25,000 varieties of wheat.
Is nothing like the wheat that has been used historically.

What makes the wheat of today so doughy, elastic, and sturdy a crop are years of genetic hybridization bent on increasing crop yield, cutting expenses, and resolving world hunger. It is important to note that today’s wheat is only sturdy when cultivated with fertilizer and under human supervision. In the wild, this wheat would not survive. (8) It is also important to get the gist of Dr. Davis’ message:

Today’s wheat is largely responsible for what we call the obesity epidemic and several other degenerative diseases related to visceral fat, such as high blood sugar, heart disease, and dementia.
Signs of aging, skin disorders like acne and rashes, arthritis, bouts of depression and anxiety, seizures, and gut disorders, including celiac disease, can all be attributed to modern day wheat.
A serving of whole wheat bread has a higher glycemic index than table sugar.

Newsflash: Whole wheat has a higher glycemic index than a Snickers bar.

The fact that wheat has such an incredibly high glycemic index pretty much turns the whole USDA Food Pyramid upside-down. It means that you won’t get complex carbs that slowly release sugar from pasta or a slice of bread. Let’s break this down:

Table sugar is made of simple sugars, and these are easily absorbed.
Wheat, on the other hand, even whole grain wheat, is modern day wheat. Which mean it has been engineered over the last 50 years.
All modern day wheat may indeed be classified as a complex carb.
But the complex carbohydrates in wheat are mostly amylopectin A.
Amylopectin A is highly digestible.
In fact, digestion of amylopectin A begins in the mouth with the enzyme amylase, which accounts for the incredibly high glycemic index of wheat.

Sometimes removing wheat isn’t enough to lose the wheat belly.

Gut dysbiosis plays a key role in the inflammatory cascade and in poor health. It is important to understand the delicate balance of microflora in the gut.

Understanding modern wheat and the role it plays in degenerative disease is clearly an important piece of the puzzle.
We must educate ourselves about why all forms of wheat, even whole grain and organic, are inherently dangerous.
Wheat belly, or visceral fat, is a sign of inflammation often related to a number of other health conditions.
Controlling visceral fat and inflammation is a unique process.

Take the steps and the time to balance your inner ecosystem with foods that heal the gut and that decrease the inflammatory cascade. The Body Ecology Core Program was developed after 30 years of research in order to combat the health issues caused by impaired digestion.
What to Remember Most About This Article:

Wheat belly is otherwise known as a beer belly or visceral belly fat. This visceral fat surrounds the organs in the abdominal cavity and is similar to any other gland in the endocrine system. Wheat belly produces its own hormones and messages that are pathogenic and promote disease.

Modern day wheat that has been genetically modified contributes to this belly fat. Believe it or not, whole wheat has a higher glycemic index than a Snickers bar! But eliminating wheat from the diet may not be enough to get rid of wheat belly. It begins with balancing your inner ecosystem to heal the gut and prevent inflammation caused by belly fat.

Wheat Belly 101

Wheat today is not what it used to be. It is more of a hybrid version of 19th century and earlier versions of wheat our ancestors relied on for their daily bread. The same is true for a few other grains.

Today's wheat is a genetic modification of horticultural or agricultural specie combining. This genetic modification is different than laboratory GMO gene splicing. Nevertheless, the amount of 20th century agricultural genetic modification has outpaced the human digestive system's ability to adapt.

The result is that even if you are not a celiac disease sufferer or gluten sensitive, you still could be suffering from the ill effects of wheat and other grains. Even organic whole wheat has a high glycemic index (GI), which over time may increase your glycemic load and create diabetes II.

So although whole wheat grains are considered complex carbohydrates, modern day wheat contains amylopectin A, which is a rapidly absorbed carbohydrate that spikes your blood sugar, but more. The other grains that can contribute to wheat belly include: Barley, rye, triticale (a cross between wheat and rye), bulgur, farina, kamut, seminola, durum flour, and spelt. Bummer, eh?

There are safer grain options, however. Buckwheat, which is not actually wheat, amaranth, rice, hominy, sorghum, tapioca, arrowroot, quinoa, and einkorn are okay. Uncommon einkorn is the ancient traditional wheat our ancestors enjoyed. Oats are controversial. Some argue that oats are contaminated by wheat.

The downside of wheat and some other grains
Beer belly is actually wheat or grain belly, according to Body Ecology. It is visceral fat, or fat that has accumulated around body cavity organs, such as the liver, stomach, or intestines. Subcutaneous fat is just under the skin. It is the flabby, flesh of any part of your body.

Obese folks have both visceral and subcutaneous fat issues. A beer or wheat belly most likely indicates visceral fat. In addition to the obvious potential of diabetes II from obesity, there is another ominous aspect of visceral fat.

Visceral fat acts as a gland, secreting hormones that make the immune system react. This produces more fat to store and protect pathogens from invading our organs. It's the proverbial vicious cycle, and it also produces low level chronic inflammation that can result in various autoimmune diseases.

Cardiologist William Davis, MD, warns against the gluten free diet for losing a wheat belly. The wheat substitutes such as potato flour have high glycemic index issues also, and they can increase your GI load to cause the obesity you're trying to avoid.

Five wheat belly indicators in addition to a bloated belly
1) High blood sugar
2) Skin problems, rashes, acne, and eczema
3) Bouts of anxiety and depression - low energy
4) Gut disorders - yeast infections
5) Early aging disorders that include dementia

Beyond this lies celiac disease, which can be determined by a blood test and/or gut biopsy.

Sprouted grain bread options
Weston A. Price Foundation founders Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD, researched sprouted grains and determined they had a lower GI than grains not sprouted.

The sprouts still contain some gluten, but sprouted grain enzymes break down a good deal of the grains' normally harmful ingredients. They are more nutritious than merely whole grains.

There are the Ezekiel sprouted grain breads. Some bakeries make sprouted wheat and other sprouted grain breads. Whole Food bakeries provide a sourdough, sprouted wheat bread without bromide, a harmful ingredient used by most bakeries.

You might be able to get away with some of the options mentioned in this article instead of being forced into a strict Paleolithic (Paleo) or hunter/gatherer diet to avoid wheat belly.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Afghan Massacre

Woman Faces $600 Daily Fine For Feeding Needy Kids


FOX News  A Pennsylvania woman who offers free lunch every day to low-income children in her neighborhood faces a $600-a-day fine next summer if she continues because she did not clear the food giveaway with township officials.
Angela Prattis donates her time to distribute the meals — supplied by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia — and adheres to strict paperwork, like filling out weekly reports and being visited bi-weekly from a state worker, MyFoxPhilly.com reports.


Philadelphia News, Weather and Sports from WTXF FOX 29 “Angela saw it as a way to contribute to the community in a positive way,” Anne Ayella, a member of the archdiocese, said. “There was nothing in it for her.”
Prattis laughed and said, “I don’t make a dime.”
 
 Link To Video:
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/video?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=7608305
Prattis lived in the township for three years. She reportedly distributes the meals to the 60 or so children at a gazebo on her property during the summer months, when children are home from school.

The Delaware County Times reports that another resident alerted the council about the distribution a few weeks ago. The council investigated and ruled that the practice is not permitted without a variance, the paper reported.

“You have houses here, the roofs are falling in, and they could be focused on a lot of more serious issues than me feeding children,” she said.
Chester Township, which has a per capita income of $19,000 a year, says Prattis lives in a residential zone, hence handing out food to children is not allowed.

The township says she needs to go before a zoning board to ask for a variance, which would cost her up to $1,000 in administrative fees.

“I don’t think it’s my responsibility to go to her to say, ‘why don’t you come to talk to me to see if there’s something that we can do to help your program,’” William Pisarek, the Chester Township business manager, said.

Prattis told The Delaware County Times that she is not going to stop feeding the children in the area.