Steven Gaal

Fusion center director: We don't spy on Americans, just anti-government Americans March 30, 2013 Print Version Source: Privacy SOS The Arkansas State Fusion Center An official from an Arkansas State Fusion Center recently spoke to the press to clear up what he called "misconceptions" about what his office actually does, with depressingly hilarious results. (For some background on fusion centers, click here.) "The misconceptions are that we are conducting spying operations on US citizens, which is of course not the fact. That is absolutely not what we do," fusion center director Richard Davis told the local press. Fusion center employees are in a tight spot to justify the existence of their operations after multiple congressional reports over the past year took them to task for being poorly run, duplicative of other counterterrorism efforts, privacy violative wastes of money, or some combination of the three. So what does Mr. Davis' fusion center do, then? Why does it exist? The Arkansas fusion center director, after having flatly denied that his office spies on US citizens, told the reporter the following: "I do what I do because of what happened on 9/11," Davis says. "There's this urge and this feeling inside that you want to do something, and this is a perfect opportunity for me." Davis says Arkansas hasn't collected much information about international plots, but they do focus on groups closer to home. "We focus a little more on that, domestic terrorism and certain groups that are anti-government," he says. "We want to kind of take a look at that and receive that information." So the fusion center does in fact spy on US citizens! Among them, "groups that are anti-government." But maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here: perhaps Mr. Davis thinks that people who hold "anti-government" views should not be treated as US citizens? The fact is, in the United States, holding "anti-government" views is protected by the First Amendment. And everyone in the United States, not just its citizens, is protected by the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights. Disliking the government isn't a crime. But that's not stopping many fusion centers from associating dissent with terrorism. Here in Boston we learned that the Boston police intelligence unit spied on anti-war and other activist groups for years, filing "intelligence reports" on activists at its fusion center, the Boston Regional Intelligence Center. Fusion centers in other states have reported on people for high crimes like putting political stickers up in restrooms, or participating in anti-death penalty organizing. Activists in Los Angeles have brought their concernsabout inappropriate political spying straight to the fusion center itself. Perhaps people in Arkansas should tell Mr. Davis how they feel about their tax dollars supporting shadowy surveillance of so-called "anti-government" groups. Then again, they might not want to be listed as "anti-government." If you live in Massachusetts, please take action to ensure that our two fusion centers don't (continue to) spy on people who are protesting the government. The Free Speech Act, now before state legislators, would bar the police from spying on people unless they have reasonable suspicion to believe their targets are involved in criminal activity.

LEFTY OBAMA ?? Expanding Guantanamo Wednesday, 27. March 2013 Obama Exceeds the Worst of Bush Administration Crimes In 2008, candidate Obama promised to close Guantanamo. Straightaway as president, he issued Executive Order titled “Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities.” Sec. 3 states: “Closure of Detention Facilities at Guantanamo. The detention facilities at Guantanamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year from the date of this order.” “If any individuals covered by this order remain, they shall be returned to their home country, released, transferred to a third country, or transferred to another United States detention facility in a manner consistent with law and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.” Obama ordered an “immediate review of all” detainees within 30 days. He halted all proceedings in the “United States Court of Military Commission Review to which charges have been referred but in which no judgment has been rendered.” He mandated “humane standards of confinement” be observed in accordance with international humanitarian laws. He stressed Geneva Common Article 3 provisions. They prohibit: “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; outrages of personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;” carrying out sentences or executions “without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples;” and caring for wounded and sick detainees. In 2008, he said: “From both a moral standpoint and a practical standpoint, torture is wrong. Barack Obama will end the use torture without exception. He also will eliminate the practice of extreme rendition, where we outsource our torture to other countries.” He promised to “eliminate the practice of extreme rendition, where we outsource our torture to other countries.” In August 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder said Washington would seek “assurances from the receiving country” that suspects sent abroad wouldn’t be tortured. He lied. So did Obama. He broke every major promise made. Appalling human rights violations continue on his watch. Torture remains policy. It persists throughout Washington’s gulag. Obama bears full responsibility. Innocent victims remain incarcerated. Some won’t ever be freed. Rule of law principles don’t matter. Obama exceeds the worst of Bush administration policies. Indefinite detentions without charge or trial continue. Illegitimate military commissions are used. They assure guilt by accusation. Guantanamo remains open. The Pentagon’s Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) plans expanding it. It requested $49 million for new prison facilities. They’re for “special” detainees. Other renovations will be made. Congress ordered Guantanamo kept open indefinitely. Pentagon officials requested an estimated $195.7 million overall. Expect overruns to increase costs substantially. SOUTHCOM commander General John Kelly testified before Congress. He estimated $150 – $170 total cost. He excluded a special detainee facility. It wasn’t on the list of construction projects. He mentioned it only in passing, saying: “There’s other projects that I couldn’t talk about here in the open but do have to do with replacing one of the camp facilities where some of the detainees are – special detainees are housed. We could get into that offline if you want.” It’s a proposed Camp 7 replacement. It’s Guantanamo’s most secure facility. In its first two years of use, it was top secret. It’s for “high-value detainees.” Nothing proves it. Pentagon and CIA officials provide no evidence. Torture extracted information lacks credibility. Earlier Supreme Court decisions ruled it constitutionally inadmissible. In Brown v. Mississippi (February 1936), the court held: “The rack and torture chamber may not be substituted for the witness stand.” The ruling cited an earlier Fisher v. State (November 1926) High Court decision, stating: “Coercing the supposed state’s criminals into confessions and using such confessions so coerced from them in trials has been the curse of all countries.” “It was the chief iniquity, the crowing infamy of the Star Chamber (the notorious 15 – 17th century English court), and the Inquisition, and other similar institutions.” “The Constitution recognized the evils that lay behind these practices and prohibited them in this country wherever the court is clearly satisfied such violations exist, (and) it will refuse to sanction such violations and will apply the corrective.” Other requested facilities include $99 million for two barracks, $12 million for a new mess hall, and legal, medical, and communication replacement construction. Kelly acknowledged a “considerable bill.” It’s because “everything that’s built down there is at least twice as expensive.” Why he didn’t explain. He said renovations are needed to keep Guantanamo operating indefinitely. Nothing suggests otherwise. Closure’s not discussed. Detainees cleared for release aren’t freed. They may stay in gulag hell forever. In December 2010, bipartisan congressional legislation blocked transferring them to US prisons. At the time, Obama said ways were being considered to “make sure that we are not simply releasing folks who could do us grievous harm.” Few if any committed crimes. They don’t threaten America. Many are held uncharged. Dozens cleared for release are held indefinitely. Justice is shamelessly denied. Code Pink co-founder Media Benjamin expressed outrage, saying: “Here’s the president – who campaigned on closing Guantánamo Bay – extending and renovating it.” “What he needs to do is renovate his current policy and release the people who’ve been cleared for release, shut down the prison, and bring the rest of the prisoners to the United States for trial.” In January, the ACLU commented on Guantanamo’s 11th anniversary, saying: “Eleven years have passed since the first prisoner arrived in Guantanamo Bay, making it the longest-standing war prison in US history.” “Guantanamo has been a catastrophic failure on every front, and it is long past time for this shameful episode in American history to be brought to a close.” “Almost 800 men have passed through Guantanamo’s cells. Today, 166 remain. Most of them – 86 – have been cleared for release since at least 2009 but remain imprisoned.” “The prison at Guantanamo symbolizes our nation’s failure to adhere to the rule of law and human rights, and this ongoing betrayal of American values undermines our standing around the world and serves as a recruiting tool for our enemies.” “We continue to indefinitely detain without charge or trial terrorism suspects captured far from any theater of war.” “We continue to rely upon unconstitutional and secretive military commissions to try some of the most important cases in our nation’s history, even though the federal courts have proven to be reliable and secure.” “And we continue to allow political posturing to perpetuate the tragedy of indefinite detention for prisoners and their families, including for the 86 who have been cleared for release for years yet remain imprisoned.” Every branch of government shares responsibility for the continued stain that is Guantanamo.” “The Supreme Court has stood by while the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has eviscerated habeas protections for Guantanamo prisoners, rigging the rules in favor of the government and making it almost impossible for prisoners to meaningfully challenge their detention.” “Congress has repeatedly voted to restrict the president’s authority to transfer prisoners – even those cleared for release – from Guantanamo, doing so once again just weeks ago in the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act.” “President Obama threatened to veto that legislation but backed down as he has before. The president must rectify that wrong and undo the damage done by Guantanamo to the rule of law by using existing NDAA certification procedures to repatriate and resettle abroad all prisoners who are not charged with crimes.” “He must also swiftly end the unjust Guantanamo military commissions and work with Congress to ensure fair trials in civilian courts for any prisoner against whom there is sufficient evidence that is untainted by torture.” “For the sake of the rule of law and human rights, American security, and Guantanamo’s many victims, the prison must be closed.” Expansion plans reveal keeping it open indefinitely. Obama and most congressional members support doing so. Guantanamo is one of many US torture prisons. They operate globally. A recent report explained. It’s titled “Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition.” Information considered most sensitive remains classified. On September 16, 2001, Dick Cheney said: “We have to work (on) the dark side….We’ve got to spend time in the shadows in the intelligence world.” “A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if we’re going to be successful.” “That’s the world these folks operate in, and so it’s going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective.” Torture became official policy. Obama continues it. Media scoundrels suppress it. Dozens of countries comprise America’s torture network. Secret prisons operate illegally. Dozens of innocent victims are mistreated. Exact numbers aren’t known. Responsible officials aren’t held accountable. Rule of law principles don’t matter. Obama exceeds the worst of Bush administration crimes. Globalized torture expanded. Indefinite detention without charge or trial is policy. So is guilt by accusation or none at all. Detainees have no rights. Despair got over 100 at Guantanamo to resist their only way. They’re hunger striking for justice. They’ve done so for seven weeks. Abstaining from food this long is life threatening. Coverup is official policy. Information everyone needs to know is suppressed. Gitmo symbolizes injustice. Bush administration crimes continue under Obama. Nothing ahead suggests change. # # # # Stephen Lendman- BFP Contributing Author & Analyst Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. He received a Harvard BA in 1956 and a Wharton MBA in 1960. Since 2005, Mr. Lendman has been writing on vital world and national topics, including war and peace, American imperialism, corporate dominance, political persecutions, and a range of other social, economic and political issues. He hosts The Progressive Radio News Hour on The Progressive Radio Network. Visit Mr. Lendman’s blog site here. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net

Only 30% of Americans Trust Our Government http://www.washingto...trust-our-go... Cheney Admits that He Lied about 9/11 Posted by Orangutan. on Fri, 03/08/2013 - 9:34am Dick Cheney Washington's Blog What Else Did He Lie About? The New York Times’ Maureen Daud writes today: In a documentary soon to appear on Showtime, “The World According to Dick Cheney,” [Cheney said] “I got on the telephone with the president, who was in Florida, and told him not to be at one location where we could both be taken out.” Mr. Cheney kept W. flying aimlessly in the air on 9/11 while he and Lynn left on a helicopter for a secure undisclosed location, leaving Washington in a bleak, scared silence, with no one reassuring the nation in those first terrifying hours. “I gave the instructions that we’d authorize our pilots to take it out,” he says, referring to the jet headed to Washington that crashed in a Pennsylvania field. He adds: “After I’d given the order, it was pretty quiet. Everybody had heard it, and it was obviously a significant moment.” *** When they testified together before the 9/11 Commission, W. and Mr. Cheney kept up a pretense that in a previous call, the president had authorized the vice president to give a shoot-down order if needed. But the commission found “no documentary evidence for this call.” In other words, Cheney pretended that Bush had authorized a shoot-down order, but Cheney now admits that he never did … and Cheney acted as if he was the president on 9/11. Cheney lied about numerous other facts related to 9/11 as well. For example, Cheney: Falsely linked Iraq with 9/11 (indeed, the entire torture program was aimed at establishing such a false linkage; and Cheney is the guy who pushed for torture, pressured the Justice Department lawyers to write memos saying torture was legal, and made the pitch to Congress justifying torture. the former director of the CIA said Cheney of overseeing American torture policies) Falsely claimed that spying on Americans, torture, the Patriot Act, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war and the “war on terror” were all necessitated by 9/11 … when none of it was true Falsely stated that an attack such as 9/11 was unforeseeable, when Al Qaeda flying planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon was something which American military and intelligence services – and our allies – knew could happen Falsely pretended that he was out of the loop during the 9/11 attacks Falsely blamed others for 9/11, when Cheney was in charge of all of America’s counter-terrorism exercises, activities and responses on 9/11. See this Department of State announcement and this CNN article … … And when Cheney was apparently responsible for letting the Pentagon get hit by an airplane (confirmed and here) And was instrumental in squashing a real investigation into 9/11 ======================================== when they were interviewed by the 911 Commission, as that was one of the stipulations Bush and Cheney insisted on also. The stipulations they stuck to were - no oath would be taken - no recordings of the interview would be taken - no transcript would be taken by a stenographer - they would be interviewed together in the oval office and the 911 Commissioners just rolled over and accepted them. http://www.aljazeera...2247192928.html Tony Szamboti on Sun, 03/10/2013 - 11:33am +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ QUI BONO 911 ??????

60 diseases and adverse reactions associated with the hepatitis B vaccination http://www.examiner.com/list/60-diseases-and-adverse-reactions-associated-with-the-hepatitis-b-vaccination

+++++++++++++++++ JUST CANT WAIT TILL HE BUCKS WEST AND TAKES ON ISRAEL ....waiting.waiting,waiting,waiting,waiting,waiting,waiting,waiting waiting,waiting,waiting ......oh yeah he owes everything to WEST.....gone to wait forever on that one !! HITTO PROVES MY POINT (oh BTW TUNISIA Leader same) pattern,pattern that any person with common sense can see......

Gee if a Holocaust denier says so it must be true// COLBY NO HOLOCAUST MENTIONED IN VIDEO. Will have to look up FRANKLIN QUOTE. Only found this garynorth A bogus quote from Franklin on colonial paper money Ellen Brown That quote is not in my 4th edition. I had to restructure the whole chapter to take it out, but I did it, in the interests of accuracy. In fact I had to restructure two whole chapters, a total nightmare; but I did it. I actually think I've spent too much time on details -- I should be writing another book -- but like you, I find it interesting.+++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++ QUOTE CORRECTED 4th ed

An obscenely stupid an offensive twisting of my comment which was obviously in response to the lie that '"Concerned lawmakers and activists across America from all points on the political spectrum..." are concerned about this'. The questions in the letter have been asked and answered repeatedly. +++++++++ GEE I READ THE WORDS REFUSE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS Now, however, at least one member of Congress is proposing to stop funding DHS unless and until it explains the controversial arms buildup, which has sparked widespread suspicion even among Obama’s most devoted supporters. Speaking to We Are Change activist and reporter Luke Rudkowski at the Conservative Political Action Conference this month, liberty-minded Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) said that more than a few of his colleagues were also trying to find out why the administration would be stockpiling so much firepower for use within the “Homeland.” “They have no answer for that question. They refuse to answer to answer that.... They refuse to let us know what is going on, so I don’t really have an answer for that,” Rep. Tim Huelskamp , adding that multiple members of Congress were still trying to find out. “It comes down to: During the budget process, during the appropriations process, are we willing to hold DHS’s feet to the fire? We’re going to find out.... I say we don’t fund them ’til we get an answer. Those types of things really challenge Americans. They’re worried about this administration.”

RUBIN Meanwhile, while President Barack Obama was love-bombing Israel during his visit, U.S. policy was helping to install a Muslim Brotherhood supporter as the putative next leader of Syria. Obama’s strategy is, with appropriate adjustments to the national scene, the same as his disastrous policy in Egypt. The new leader of the opposition coalition is Ghassan Hitto, an obscure figure who has been long-resident in the United States. His actual election contained two hints: He only received 35 votes from 63 members of the Syrian National Coalition. That show of support matches the number of Muslim Brotherhood’s supporters there. Only 48 out of the 63 even cast a ballot at all, showing lack of enthusiasm and possible U.S. pressure on groups to abstain rather than oppose Hitto. During the Cold War, American policy toward Third World countries frequently looked for a “third way” democratic alternative, leaders who were neither Communists nor right-wing authoritarians. Today, however, the Obama Administration doesn’t do the equivalent at all, despite pretenses to the contrary. Rather it seeks leadership from the most seemingly moderate people who represent Islamist groups ..... ++++++++++++++ LIKE WESTERN TOOL MB MAN A Bush supporting Dallas Texas small business man Republican. HITTO

JOHN ,VACCINATION SHOULD BE A INFORMED FREE CHOICE AS ALL MEDICAL DECISIONS SHOULD BE (LIKE BIRTH CONTROL) WE all should agree om this. BTW ,Perez Diaz R, et al, "[Post-vaccinal Pericarditis. Report of 2 Cases]", Rev Cuba Med, 1:49-54, Jul-Aug 1962. THE FDA IS A VERY CORRUPT ORGANIZATION, PLENTY OF INTERNET INFORMATION ON THIS. VACCINE MANUFACTURERS VERY CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS,PLENTY OF INTERNET INFORMATION ON THIS. ########################o0o############ LINK TO MAKE INFORMED VACCINE CHOICE http://thinktwice.com/

Oh – I forgot to answer your question regarding the double blind trials. First off, you obviously just read what you wanted to, because the questions was answered: http://skeptics.stac...-regarding-effi ++++++++++++++++ HUH ?? GUESS YOU DIDNT READ BOTTOM OF LINK (Gaal) That's not a study. It doesn't even contain the keywords study or peer-review – user1043 Mar 24 '11 at 18:48 1 @Daniel, it's a summary of the polio vaccine and does discuss the studies used to validate it. – Russell Steen Mar 24 '11 at 19:50 It doesn't reference any of the claims it makes. It isn't peer-reviewed. It doesn't contain any data. Some points for being published by a museum, I guess, but the OP asks for actual gold-standard studies. – Oddthinking Jul 25 '11 at 18:01 and point 2 IF THE FDA STUDIES IT ,IT DOESNT MEAN ITS PEER REVIEWED. OR EVEN HONEST ,THE FDA VERY VERY CORRUPT.(Gaal) +++++++++++++++++++ POINT 3 Amy Tuteur, MD Dr. Amy Tuteur is an obstetrician gynecologist. She received her undergraduate degree from Harvard College in 1979 and her medical degree from Boston University School of Medicine in 1984. Dr. Tuteur is a former clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School. She left the practice of medicine to raise her four children. Her book, How Your Baby Is Born, an illustrated guide to pregnancy, labor and delivery was published by Ziff-Davis Press in 1994. She can be reached at DrAmy5 at aol dot com. GOLLY NOT VIRIOLOGIST ,THUS NOT QUAILFIED TO SPEAK ON ISSUE (PER COLBY ARGUMENTS) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ LOL,Sorry Charlie (per Colby)

########################## What a dishonestly generous interpretation of your response. The thrust of your statement is so few people are internet savey, "If we expand that throughout Australia, and factor in areas where internet access is just a government promise, I think it would be fair to say that at least 10-15% of Australians would not "fall prey" to the surveillance you claim is so pervasive."(BURTON),they dont fall prey to surveillance. No disproval of monitoring emails, "I don't really have a problem with most forms of surveillance"(Burton). There is no caveat re monitoring for security purposes. ITS ALL EMAILS. MOMITORING EMAILS , ITS ALL GOOD PER BURTON !!!! Gaal

LINK BELOW WORLD BANK AND WALL STREET SUPPORT LAND GRABBING IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES GRAIN Media Advisory | 20 April 2012 Farmers demand the World Bank and Wall Street stop grabbing their lands, at opening of the Bank’s annual conference in Washington, DC. The World Bank is playing a leading role in a global…

you leap wildly to the conclusion that I want governments to read all e-mails. // BURTON +++++++++++++++++ NO, YOU SAID ITS OK IN ANOTHER THREAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ============= Likewise, because I deal with facts and not fantasy, I become a dictator. //Burton =================== No because you said you wanted "to start shoving facts and reality into your world.(Burton) " PLEASE Mr. Burton dont shove what you have towards me.(Gaal) AND I GAVE YOU FACTS FROM POST #138 above (below) OOPS !!!!! EVEN SKEPTICS CANT FIND PEER REVIEW STUDIES !!!!! AT SKEPTIC WEBSITE ONE BRAVE SOUL ASKS A QUESTION THAT SHOVES THE MIND INTO ACTION I can not even find one Peer-Reviewed Double Blind Study of any vaccine. Can you point out some studies for me, if they are available ======= RESULT ================= SKEPTICS FORUM WEB MEMBERS FOUND NONE NO PEER REVIEW SCIENCE ARTICLE OF VACCINES , because I deal with facts and not fantasy // Burton Gee I showed you no peer reviewed studies.....its Burton who lives in fantasy +++++++++++++++++++++++ NOW BACK TO THE AUTHORITARIAN VIEWPOINT OF MODERATOR BURTON WE ALL LOSE, I guess this is what you want. All Australian’s now under surveillance (Gaal) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ BURTON First off, I don't really have a problem with most forms of surveillance when it comes to security. I know many people disagree with me and that is their right. Secondly, your above statement is misleading, if not incorrect. I come from a family of five children, and two of them have no internet / e-mail access whatesoever. They pay bills in person and one doesn't even have a credit card! The other two do use the internet, one for songs and the other for Facebook (which I refuse to be a part of). That is my family. Of my three best friends, two have no internet access whatsoever (which I find almost like being Luddites!). So if we look at my immediate circle of eight people, four have no internet connection whatsoever. If we expand that throughout Australia, and factor in areas where internet access is just a government promise, I think it would be fair to say that at least 10-15% of Australians would not "fall prey" to the surveillance you claim is so pervasive. END BURTON ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ There is no caveat re monitoring for security purposes. ITS ALL EMAILS. MOMITOR EMAILS , ITS ALL GOOD PER BURTON !!!! Gaal How ironic that authoritarian viewpoints are the grease on the wheels that will allow Depopulation to occur. Breakfast at the Burtons

Benefit cuts: Monday will be the day that defines this government Those on low incomes, after all the vicious talk dismissing them as cheats and idlers, will be hit by an avalanche of cuts Polly Toynbee The Guardian, Thursday 28 March 2013 16.51 EDT ===================================================== 'The Guardian has revealed how jobcentre staff are under orders to find any sanction to knock people off benefits.' Photograph: Christopher Thomond for the Guardian Not many know what is about to happen on Monday: neither those about to be knocked down nor those sailing too high above them to notice. But historians will see it as the day that defines the Cameron government. An avalanche of benefit cuts will hit the same households over and over, with no official assessment of how far this £18bn reduction will send those who are already poor into beggary. In his 2009 Hugo Young lecture, David Cameron spoke with apparent passion of the damage done by inequality: "We all know, in our hearts, that as long as there is deep poverty living systematically side by side with great riches, we all remain the poorer for it." The wise saw the wolf beneath the sheepskin: sure enough, once in power, the language he and his ministers used to blame the poor for their plight was cruder and fiercer than in Thatcher's day. You need to go back to Edwardian times to find ministers and commentators so viciously dismissing all on low incomes as cheats, idlers and drunks. On BBC news, Iain Duncan Smith, confronted with irrefutable cases of hardship, said: "It's about trying to get as many people as possible out of the welfare trap and into lives they can control themselves." As the economist JK Galbraith observed: "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy: that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." So far, public opinion seems alarmingly content with these cuts – but before we despair of human kindness, many can plead ignorance. The government relies on destitution staying silent and unseen, isolated in families with no collective voice. Dear Guardian reader, you know what's happening because we report on the social security calamity almost daily, as you would expect. Readers of the Mirror have been briefed this week, and the Independent covered the bedroom tax on its front page. But look back through this week's Times, Telegraph, Mail and Sun to see how their readers are told nothing. They know a lot about immigrants. Sun readers were told the welfare bill is soaring out of control. They read a freak story of a woman refusing to take well-paid jobs to keep her children's free university places. Times readers learned at length of Tanni Grey-Thompson's ordeal of hauling herself up 12 floors when her lift broke down, but only a very short story on her admirable campaign against cuts leaving disabled people £4,600 poorer. Telegraph readers were told "benefit claimants should be forced to seek extra work", with a battery of stories against unfair budget treatment of stay-at-home mums suffering a "traditional families penalty". The Bishop of Exeter pleaded their cause for tax relief, although surely he should be raising hell about the cuts? People may read these papers to be protected from inconvenient facts about growing inequality and the catastrophic falling behind of the poor. The Brookings Institution reports that ever-worsening inequality will be "permanent" from now on. Most people would be alarmed at a never-ending widening of the gulf, if they knew. Most people want to believe the equal opportunities myth, but are easily comforted when told the poor are bad and the well-off deserving, so social justice prevails in this best of all possible worlds. Here's an interesting brief story in the Telegraph: a report that young children moving home three or more times suffer serious behaviour problems. Unfortunately, the Telegraph made no mention of the many families about to be uprooted and sent far from relatives, jobs and schools, into temporary accommodation and B&Bs, then moved on each time their rents rise. With virtually no takers for Cameron's parenting class vouchers, it's the government that needs lessons in child development. No amount of IDS newspeak can turn the bedroom tax into a "spare bedroom subsidy". Frank Field calls for social landlords to knock down walls or brick up rooms so people can keep their homes: it's all a fraud, since IDS knows that 660,000 tenants with a spare room can never be found smaller properties, they will pay the extra or fall into debt and arrears until they are evicted. From Monday, most of the poorest get a new bill of an average £138 for council tax. Landlords expect mayhem when tenants are paid rent directly every month: pilots show many fall into debt. Now add in these: disability living allowance starts converting into personal independence payment with a target to remove 500,000 people in new Atos medical tests. The Guardian has revealed how jobcentre staff are under orders to find any sanction to knock people off benefits. New obstacles are strewn in their path: people must apply for their benefits online from computers they don't possess; many of these claimants are semi-literate. When in dire straits, there will be no more crisis loans, only a card for buying food, with not a penny for bus fares. Trussell Trust food banks expect a great surge of the hungry, so they ask everyone to donate the price of an Easter egg. Here is the final wicked twist: legal aid has been removed for advice on benefits, housing, divorce, debt, education and employment. On Monday the budget of Citizens Advice for such cases falls from £22m to £3m. The few emergency cases still covered – families facing instant eviction – can only use a phone service, not face-to-face legal help. Law centres will close. There will be no help on school exclusions, landlord or employer harassment, or failure to pay wages. Every new benefit system starts out with a high error rate: everyone knows the complex universal credit will leave millions with incorrect or no payments – and now, nowhere to go for help. Courts and tribunals expect chaos as people try to make their own cases without any help. Try to imagine the plight of people in debt because of the non-arrival of payments, with no credit on their phones to call and inquire, no crisis loan to buy phone credit, no internet access – and now no advice service either. I refuse to believe most people would not be shocked if they knew, if they saw and if they understood. Even some of the 30% who always vote Tory might be appalled if they weren't so well deceived by their ministers, MPs and newspapers, who lie knowingly and deliberately. People should know that historians will record the earthquake of social destruction that happened in their name, while they read of nothing but "scroungers" and the "soaring benefit bill". ==============================<p> Related 27 Mar 2013 The reconfiguration of London is akin to social cleansing 21 Mar 2013 The bedroom tax is an intrusion into the most private family space 21 Mar 2013 New childcare policy excludes nearly 1m of UK's poorest families 19 Mar 2013 Childcare deal: who are the winners and losers?

I contend MB part of West's Geopolitical operartions. The King of Jordon Agrees. How exactly does this support 'your thesis that the Syrian revolution is an EoZ/NWO plot'? // Colby Jordan’s King Warns Obama; America Backs Muslim Brotherhood Agent as Syria’s Next Ruler Details Published on Thursday, 28 March 2013 05:57 Written by Barry Rubin +++++++++++++++++++o0o+++++++++++++++++++++++ ”Don’t scare anyone. But once you gain ground then move ahead. You must utilize as many people as possible who may be of use to us.” –Joseph Stalin to future Communist dictator of Hungary Mattyas Rakosi, December 5, 1944. It really isn’t too hard to understand what is happening in the Middle East if you watch the facts. Jordan’s King Abdallah, who President Barack Obama just visited, is clearly telling us what’s going wrong: that the Muslim Brotherhood is dangerous and so why is the United States supporting it? Presumably, this is what Abdallah told Obama. U.S. policy is now escalating support for a Muslim Brotherhood regime in Syria and the Syrian rebels increasingly have open Brotherhood leadership. Repression is gradually escalating in Egypt with arrests of moderates, Islamists being sent to the military academy, and many more measures. Regarding Jordan, Jeffrey Goldberg’s has done an extremely valuable profile of Abdullah. The Jordanian monarch is telling Western visitors that their countries are making a big mistake by supporting the Islamists. He complains that the U.S. State Department is ignoring his complaints and that U.S. officials are telling him, “The only way you can have democracy is through the Muslim Brotherhood.” He responds that the Brotherhood wants to impose anti-American reactionary governments and that his “major fight” is to stop them. No margin may be left for relative moderate and pro-American states between a Sunni Islamist alliance led by Egypt and including Turkey versus a Shia Islamist alliance led by Iran says Abdallah and he’s right. The only difference, Abdallah explains, between the Turkish and Egyptian regimes are their timetables for installing dictatorships. Egypt’s new president, says the king, is obsessed with a hostile view of Israel. Meanwhile, while President Barack Obama was love-bombing Israel during his visit, U.S. policy was helping to install a Muslim Brotherhood supporter as the putative next leader of Syria. Obama’s strategy is, with appropriate adjustments to the national scene, the same as his disastrous policy in Egypt. The new leader of the opposition coalition is Ghassan Hitto, an obscure figure who has been long-resident in the United States. His actual election contained two hints: He only received 35 votes from 63 members of the Syrian National Coalition. That show of support matches the number of Muslim Brotherhood’s supporters there. Only 48 out of the 63 even cast a ballot at all, showing lack of enthusiasm and possible U.S. pressure on groups to abstain rather than oppose Hitto. During the Cold War, American policy toward Third World countries frequently looked for a “third way” democratic alternative, leaders who were neither Communists nor right-wing authoritarians. Today, however, the Obama Administration doesn’t do the equivalent at all, despite pretenses to the contrary. Rather it seeks leadership from the most seemingly moderate people who represent Islamist groups. Of course, this moderation is largely deceptive. That was the pattern in Egypt; now it is the same failed strategy in Syria. Hitto is a typical example of such a person. He has lived in the United States and went to university there, so presumably knows America and has become more moderate by living there. He is involved in hi-tech enterprises so supposedly he is a modern type of guy. Remember how now-dictator of Syria Bashar al-Assad was lavishly praised because he studied and lived in London and was supposedly interested in Internet? In addition, nobody has (yet) come up with an outrageous Hitto statement. His ties to the Brotherhood are not so blatant—even though they are obvious—that the Obama Administration and the mass media cannot deny and ignore them. Yet the connections between Hitto and the Muslim Brotherhood—and those are only the ones documented quickly following his election—are extensive. He is founder of the Muslim Legal Fund of America, largely directed by Muslim Brotherhood people.. He was a secretary-treasurer of the American Middle Eastern League for Palestine (AMELP), which is closely linked to the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), which supports Hamas and terrorism against Israel. Hitto was vice president of the CAIR Dallas/Fort Worth chapter and director of the Muslim American Society (MAS) Youth Center of Dallas which was a Muslim Brotherhood front group. The list goes on and on. As if to sum up the situation, Hassan Hassan of the United Arab Emirates newspaper The National, published an article entitled “How the Muslim Brotherhood Hijacked Syria’s Revolution.” -- Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal, and a featured columnist forPajamasMedia. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan)

I HAVE CONTENDED THAT: CYBER ATTACK IS PERFECT FOR FALSE FLAG, CANT TELL WHO DOES ATTACK (SEEMS IM RIGHT see below #1 and # 2) STRONGER INTERNET CENSORSHIP WOULD COME AFTER FALSE FLAG CYBER ATTACK ON USA AND A POSSIBLE CIVIL WAR OCCUR IF BANK ACCOUNT OF USA CITIZENS REMOVED PART #1 South Korea misidentifies China as cyberattack origin ###################### PART #2 V’s Cyber Attack Alert: You are not facing a financial haircut but financial decapitation Posted on March 29, 2013 by Smilardog Steve Quayle Alerts Ten months ago a massive powerful bank hack hit over 206 banks worldwide simultaneously siphoning billions from customer accounts. It went under-reported and unnoticed by main stream media. Six months ago NatWest/RBS online banking and ATM went offline. Millions had trouble accessing their funds. A few months later online banking and ATMs from some of the biggest names in banking in the US started to receive DNS error messages and were knocked offline completely or were limping along,causing millions a hassle and head ache to get their funds. Two weeks ago Chase had an “issue” with their online banking computers as well as their mainframe servers were hit by some “problems” that caused thousands of their customers bank accounts to read $0.00 as their balance. Millions of others had issues accessing funds and ATM’S from the house of Morgan. Last week the entire banking network of South Korea went down for hours, millions of customers were not able to access their funds, use ATMs or even check their balance. This week the entire Internet teetered on the brink of collapse as SpamHaus was hit by over 300 billion bits of information per second. That is what we are led to believe and that this attack was led by a rival company Cyberbunker. Whether this story is true or not, it does highlight the sensitivity of the internet. The overpowering pattern and factor here is that wherever you look in the world there are issues with the internet, networks and servers and it all centers around banking. For some time I have emphatically stated that there will be a bank hack or cyber attack as the global economy is pushed to the brink of collapse. From top level sources I can confirm to you what you are seeing is an emerging pattern of various beta-tests using Stuxnet like algorithms to affect the banking networks the world over. I can tell you though that the primary target is the US. Look you can not have a bank hack a few months ago that siphoned over $2 billion and hitting over 200 banks by some mere hacking group. In order pull something off like this I stated in a prior alert that this is something that can only be done by an Intelligence Agency working in close collusion with a Central Bank. After all you need to understand that various money and wire networks through which currency flows. Who but a Central Bank can give you the access and the backdoor for this to occur? How can so many bank and ATM networks like NYCE, PULSE, PLUS, INTERAC, CIRRUS, BACNET, NOVUS all be affected? This is truly something of a very sophisticated nature. Something that is very large in scope and very ominous in action. Folks it is without a shadow of a doubt that these are all beta-tests. I have said it before this will be a financial false flag. The frequency of banking network failures has gotten to be very acute to the point that I am convinced that we are edging closer to the one major event that will set everything in motion. The take down of the economy is close at hand and the major cyber attack will be on it’s way. These emerging patterns are a clear picture of an malevolent power play that will be done to bring the system crashing to it’s knees. Things have gotten to the point of ‘Critical Mass’!. Maybe that is why some of the top economist are right now panicking like never before. Get your cash out, keep what you need to pay the bills. Otherwise what you will be getting is not a 40% haircut, It will be a financial decapitation. Be Prepared Mar 29, 2013 http://www.stevequayle.com/index.php?s=33&d=334 ################################################ ################################################ It Can Happen Here The Confiscation Scheme Planned for US and UK Depositors by ELLEN BROWN Confiscating the customer deposits in Cyprus banks, it seems, was not a one-off, desperate idea of a few Eurozone “troika” officials scrambling to salvage their balance sheets. A joint paper by the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Bank of England dated December 10, 2012, shows that these plans have been long in the making; that they originated with the G20 Financial Stability Board in Basel, Switzerland (discussed earlier here); and that the result will be to deliver clear title to the banks of depositor funds. New Zealand has a similar directive, discussed in my last article here, indicating that this isn’t just an emergency measure for troubled Eurozone countries. New Zealand’s Voxy reported on March 19th: The National Government [is] pushing a Cyprus-style solution to bank failure in New Zealand which will see small depositors lose some of their savings to fund big bank bailouts . . . . Open Bank Resolution (OBR) is Finance Minister Bill English’s favoured option dealing with a major bank failure. If a bank fails under OBR, all depositors will have their savings reduced overnight to fund the bank’s bail out. Can They Do That? Although few depositors realize it, legally the bank owns the depositor’s funds as soon as they are put in the bank. Our money becomes the bank’s, and we become unsecured creditors holding IOUs or promises to pay. (See here and here.) But until now the bank has been obligated to pay the money back on demand in the form of cash. Under the FDIC-BOE plan, our IOUs will be converted into “bank equity.” The bank will get the money and we will get stock in the bank. With any luck we may be able to sell the stock to someone else, but when and at what price? Most people keep a deposit account so they can have ready cash to pay the bills. The 15-page FDIC-BOE document is called “Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions.” It begins by explaining that the 2008 banking crisis has made it clear that some other way besides taxpayer bailouts is needed to maintain “financial stability.” Evidently anticipating that the next financial collapse will be on a grander scale than either the taxpayers or Congress is willing to underwrite, the authors state: An efficient path for returning the sound operations of the G-SIFI to the private sector would be provided by exchanging or converting a sufficient amount of the unsecured debt from the original creditors of the failed company [meaning the depositors] into equity [or stock]. In the U.S., the new equity would become capital in one or more newly formed operating entities. In the U.K., the same approach could be used, or the equity could be used to recapitalize the failing financial company itself—thus, the highest layer of surviving bailed-in creditors would become the owners of the resolved firm. In either country, the new equity holders would take on the corresponding risk of being shareholders in a financial institution. No exception is indicated for “insured deposits” in the U.S., meaning those under $250,000, the deposits we thought were protected by FDIC insurance. This can hardly be an oversight, since it is the FDIC that is issuing the directive. The FDIC is an insurance company funded by premiums paid by private banks. The directive is called a “resolution process,” defined elsewhere as a plan that “would be triggered in the event of the failure of an insurer . . . .” The only mention of “insured deposits” is in connection with existing UK legislation, which the FDIC-BOE directive goes on to say is inadequate, implying that it needs to be modified or overridden. An Imminent Risk If our IOUs are converted to bank stock, they will no longer be subject to insurance protection but will be “at risk” and vulnerable to being wiped out, just as the Lehman Brothers shareholders were in 2008. That this dire scenario could actually materialize was underscored by Yves Smith in a March 19th post titled When You Weren’t Looking, Democrat Bank Stooges Launch Bills to Permit Bailouts, Deregulate Derivatives. She writes: In the US, depositors have actually been put in a worse position than Cyprus deposit-holders, at least if they are at the big banks that play in the derivatives casino. The regulators have turned a blind eye as banks use their depositaries to fund derivatives exposures. And as bad as that is, the depositors, unlike their Cypriot confreres, aren’t even senior creditors. Remember Lehman? When the investment bank failed, unsecured creditors (and remember, depositors are unsecured creditors) got eight cents on the dollar. One big reason was that derivatives counterparties require collateral for any exposures, meaning they are secured creditors. The 2005 bankruptcy reforms made derivatives counterparties senior to unsecured lenders. One might wonder why the posting of collateral by a derivative counterparty, at some percentage of full exposure, makes the creditor “secured,” while the depositor who puts up 100 cents on the dollar is “unsecured.” But moving on – Smith writes: Lehman had only two itty bitty banking subsidiaries, and to my knowledge, was not gathering retail deposits. But as readers may recall, Bank of America moved most of its derivatives from its Merrill Lynch operation [to] its depositary in late 2011. Its “depositary” is the arm of the bank that takes deposits; and at B of A, that means lots and lots of deposits. The deposits are now subject to being wiped out by a major derivatives loss. How bad could that be? Smith quotes Bloomberg: . . . Bank of America’s holding company . . . held almost $75 trillion of derivatives at the end of June . . . . That compares with JPMorgan’s deposit-taking entity, JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, which contained 99 percent of the New York-based firm’s $79 trillion of notional derivatives, the OCC data show. $75 trillion and $79 trillion in derivatives! These two mega-banks alone hold more in notional derivatives each than the entire global GDP (at $70 trillion). The “notional value” of derivatives is not the same as cash at risk, but according to a cross-post on Smith’s site: By at least one estimate, in 2010 there was a total of $12 trillion in cash tied up (at risk) in derivatives . . . . $12 trillion is close to the US GDP. Smith goes on: . . . Remember the effect of the 2005 bankruptcy law revisions: derivatives counterparties are first in line, they get to grab assets first and leave everyone else to scramble for crumbs. . . . Lehman failed over a weekend after JP Morgan grabbed collateral. But it’s even worse than that. During the savings & loan crisis, the FDIC did not have enough in deposit insurance receipts to pay for the Resolution Trust Corporation wind-down vehicle. It had to get more funding from Congress. This move paves the way for another TARP-style shakedown of taxpayers, this time to save depositors. Perhaps, but Congress has already been burned and is liable to balk a second time. Section 716 of the Dodd-Frank Act specifically prohibits public support for speculative derivatives activities. And in the Eurozone, while the European Stability Mechanism committed Eurozone countries to bail out failed banks, they are apparently having second thoughts there as well. On March 25th, Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem, who played a leading role in imposing the deposit confiscation plan on Cyprus, told reporters that it would be the template for any future bank bailouts, and that “the aim is for the ESM never to have to be used.” That explains the need for the FDIC-BOE resolution. If the anticipated enabling legislation is passed, the FDIC will no longer need to protect depositor funds; it can just confiscate them. Worse Than a Tax An FDIC confiscation of deposits to recapitalize the banks is far different from a simple tax on taxpayers to pay government expenses. The government’s debt is at least arguably the people’s debt, since the government is there to provide services for the people. But when the banks get into trouble with their derivative schemes, they are not serving depositors, who are not getting a cut of the profits. Taking depositor funds is simply theft. What should be done is to raise FDIC insurance premiums and make the banks pay to keep their depositors whole, but premiums are already high; and the FDIC, like other government regulatory agencies, is subject to regulatory capture. Deposit insurance has failed, and so has the private banking system that has depended on it for the trust that makes banking work. The Cyprus haircut on depositors was called a “wealth tax” and was written off by commentators as “deserved,” because much of the money in Cypriot accounts belongs to foreign oligarchs, tax dodgers and money launderers. But if that template is applied in the US, it will be a tax on the poor and middle class. Wealthy Americans don’t keep most of their money in bank accounts. They keep it in the stock market, in real estate, in over-the-counter derivatives, in gold and silver, and so forth. Are you safe, then, if your money is in gold and silver? Apparently not – if it’s stored in a safety deposit box in the bank. Homeland Security has reportedly told banks that it has authority to seize the contents of safety deposit boxes without a warrant when it’s a matter of “national security,” which a major bank crisis no doubt will be. The Swedish Alternative: Nationalize the Banks Another alternative was considered but rejected by President Obama in 2009: nationalize mega-banks that fail. In a February 2009 article titled “Are Uninsured Bank Depositors in Danger?“, Felix Salmon discussed a newsletter by Asia-based investment strategist Christopher Wood, in which Wood wrote: It is . . . amazing that Obama does not understand the political appeal of the nationalization option. . . . [D]espite this latest setback nationalization of the banks is coming sooner or later because the realities of the situation will demand it. The result will be shareholders wiped out and bondholders forced to take debt-for-equity swaps, if not hopefully depositors. On whether depositors could indeed be forced to become equity holders, Salmon commented: It’s worth remembering that depositors are unsecured creditors of any bank; usually, indeed, they’re by far the largest class of unsecured creditors. President Obama acknowledged that bank nationalization had worked in Sweden, and that the course pursued by the US Fed had not worked in Japan, which wound up instead in a “lost decade.” But Obama opted for the Japanese approach because, according to Ed Harrison, “Americans will not tolerate nationalization.” But that was four years ago. When Americans realize that the alternative is to have their ready cash transformed into “bank stock” of questionable marketability, moving failed mega-banks into the public sector may start to have more appeal. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ELLEN BROWN is an attorney and president of the Public Banking Institute. In Web of Debt, her latest of eleven books, she shows how a private banking oligarchy has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her websites are http://WebofDebt.com, http://EllenBrown.com, and http://PublicBankingInstitute.org.

You really are dangerous // BURTON Golly its you who want to let the government look at all emails. I just want vaccine choice.GAAL , expect me to start shoving facts and reality into your world. // Burton GOLLY, IMHO BURTON WOULD MAKE A WONDERFUL COMMUNIST COMMISSAR ,Gaal OOPS !!!!! EVEN SKEPTICS CANT FIND PEER REVIEW STUDIES !!!!! AT SKEPTIC WEBSITE ONE BRAVE SOUL ASKS A QUESTION THAT SHOVES THE MIND INTO ACTION I can not even find one Peer-Reviewed Double Blind Study of any vaccine. Can you point out some studies for me, if they are available ======================== NONE FOUND

The Militarization of American Life March 27, 2013 Source: Justin Raimondo, Antiwar As the American Empire transforms itself from a constitutional republic into a social democratic monstrosity – where everyone is "equal," and no one is free – egalitarianism is the fuel that runs the engine of imperialism. A perfect example is the recent announcement that the US military is getting with the times and allowing women in combat. What’s pretty disheartening is that not even the woman’s-place-is-in-the-home Neanderthals of the "traditionalist" camp even bothered to oppose this: for them, a more efficient war machine is much more important than any attachment to such "archaic" ideas as the men do the fighting while the women wait at home. This innovation was followed up pretty quickly by a new proposal: that as long as we allow gays in the military we ought to allow transsexuals in, too. After all, the usual objections to women in combat don’t apply to them: they have the genetic makeup of men, and the sexual equipment of women (or as close as surgical science can conjure) – so why not? In America, everyone has the "equal right" to kill, torture, maim, and otherwise abuse those who dare defy the wishes of our wise and benevolent rulers. This is what happens when egalitarianism displaces liberty at the core of the American psyche. Women, gays, transsexuals, and presumably dwarves afflicted with Tourette’s Syndrome – all have an "equal right" to commit mass murder. Did the leftists who brought this Political Correctness down on our heads ever dream of the uses to which it would be put? And now that they’ve "grown up" and made their peace with the Empire, do they even care? Of course they don’t. All they care about is the great god Equality, on whose altar every value they every pretended to hold is being slaughtered. It isn’t just them, however: militarism is a disease that spreads without effort, once it’s implanted in the body politic. It quite naturally infects the sciences, what with the diversion of scientific and technical talent that might have gone into productive civilian projects, and I’m not just talking about the hard sciences. Witness the co-opting of the "soft" science of anthropology by the same people who brought us the war in Afghanistan and the "COIN" strategy that was supposed to give us victory. These folks have created the so-called Human Terrain System, which seeks to utilize anthropology as a weapon in counterinsurgency warfare. Billions are being poured into "scientific research" on how best to subdue recalcitrant natives out in the colonies: when you’re talking about the military-industrial complex, it isn’t just Lockheed-Martin and Boeing. The marriage of science and militarism is nothing new, but there are some resistors. As Inside Higher Education reports: "The eminent University of Chicago anthropologist Marshall Sahlins resigned from the National Academy of Sciences on Friday, citing his objections to its military partnerships and to its electing as a member Napoleon Chagnon, a long-controversial anthropologist who is back in the news thanks to the publication of his new book, Noble Savages." [Hat tip: Jordan Bloom at The American Conservative] You don’t have to be an anthropologist to get in on the action: yes, you too can access via live webcast the April 3 Pentagon/NAS "workshop," "New Directions in Assessing Individuals and Groups,"and hear the keynote address by Frederick Vollrath, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness and Force Management. I’ll bet those anthropologists are making out like bandits! As for Napoleon Chagnon – could a novelist have gotten away with such a name? – he is an extremely dubious character who apparently believes violence is not only genetically encoded in humans, but that there is an evolutionary bias in favor of homicidal homo sapiens. Instead of an atavistic trait surviving from pre-civilized man, wars of aggression – according to the Chagnonite version of biological determinism – are the mark of high civilization. It is a Bizarro World perspective on the nature of human progress, one that owes much to that great anthropologist, the Marquis de Sade. Chagnon dismisses his critics as "left-wing anthropologists" and "anti-Darwinian romantics": he and his claque present themselves as true "scientists," and treat the study of anthropology – that is, of human nature – as if it were one of the "hard" sciences, like chemistry. Armed with "scientific" certitude, their one-dimensional view of life – "impoverished," as one critic remarked – is the perfect instrument of the modern Warfare State: bloodless, dogmatic, and cruel. Chagnon’s elevation to the NAS – which used to be a prestigious organization – is an absolute disgrace, and Prof. Sahlins was right to render his resignation in protest. Citing his own objections to Chagnon’s research methods – see here – Sahlins went on to explain the core reason for his resignation. Because of "the toll" that military action overseas "has taken on the blood, treasure, and happiness of American people, and the suffering it has imposed on other peoples,” Sahlins said, “the NAS, if it involves itself at all in related research, should be studying how to promote peace, not how to make war." In this age of Empire, militarism pervades American culture like a poisonous fog, hypnotizing a complacent population with narratives that valorize and justify a foreign policy of perpetual war. It reaches into every corner of everyday life, from the war propaganda spewed forth by the "mainstream" media to the movies we watch and what we learn in "science" class. Once this kind of cultural rot sets in, it is hard to root out: this is the true meaning of decadence, of a society suffering the latter stages of a fatal hubris. Yet root it out we must. The battle for peace must be waged on the cultural and scientific front, as well as in the day to day world of the pundits and the Washington policy wonks. Indeed, victory on the battlefield of the culture necessarily precedes success on the political front, as we should have learned back in the 1960s. Read More...

Part 2 - irrelevant to this thread. // end Colby Syria part of geopolitical chess board of Banks ......Today you FIRST have to ask is this war started for BANKING ELITE, and then look for other reasons for the war. You're stretching more than Richard Simmons. // Colby

The majority of Egyptians support the MB, // COLBY OH REALLY ?? // Gaal Is a Second Egyptian Revolution on the Way? People walk away from tear gas fired by riot police during clashes with protesters on Qasr el-Nil bridge, in Cairo, Jan. 29, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Asmaa Waguih) Read more: http://www.al-monito...l#ixzz2OwRcx8nV By: Mustafa al-Labbad Translated from As-Safir (Lebanon). اقرا المقال الأصلي باللغة العربية On the second anniversary of its heroic popular revolution, Egypt returned to the forefront of the regional and international scene with demonstrations that swept major cities. The revolution was able to bring down the head of the former regime, but not its social and economic discrepancies. Confrontations between the protesters and the security forces have intensified and inflicted dozens of casualties. The image promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood — as the country’s largest political force enjoying the Egyptians’ confidence and with an insignificant political opposition — has been shaken. The question now is: What are the implications of these events on the Egyptian political scene? We try to analyze the new Egyptian landscape and predict how the Muslim Brotherhood will try to contain the situation. About This Article Summary : It seems that the Muslim Brotherhood has overreached and may experience a revolution similar to the one that overthrew Hosni Mubarak, but only if the opposition organizes in a more effective way, argues Mustafa al-Labbad. Publisher: As-Safir (Lebanon) Original Title: Egypt in 2013: The Muslim Brotherhood and their New Political Tricks Author: Mustafa al-Labbad First Published: January 28, 2013 Posted on: January 29 2013 Translated by: Rani Geha Categories : Egypt A failed transition Egypt’s post-revolutionary transition has failed. Various political, economic, social and security powers struggled to maintain their power or participate in the new order, resulting in a highly chaotic scene. The transition started when the army pressed President Hosni Mubarak to step down in order to maintain order and prevent the demonstrations from evolving into a popular revolution that would topple the entire regime and replace it with another. There was a convergence of interests between the military and the Muslim Brotherhood. The two sides agreed on a roadmap that would reverse the revolution’s gains in return for the Muslim Brotherhood's reaching power. Throughout the year 2011 and in spite of ongoing demonstrations, that roadmap was proceeding apace, supported by regional and international powers. The request to write a new constitution was rejected in favor of patching up Mubarak’s constitution and opening the way for parliamentary elections within six months, whereby the highly-organized and well-funded Muslim Brotherhood will come out victorious in exchange for them promising to preserve the economic and foreign policies of the former regime. So in 2011, the Muslim Brotherhood formed an alliance with the remnants of the former regime. The two sides revised the constitution, installed the Brotherhood’s Essam Sharaf as prime minister, who also belonged to Mubarak’s policy committee, and allowed the military to retain its full privileges. Parliamentary elections were held in 2011. The Muslim Brotherhood won 45% of the vote because of the above factors and because the party skillfully recast the main battle between the forces of revolution and the forces of tyranny into a battle between Islam and secularism in a way that served the Brotherhood’s interests. The Brotherhood did not use normal political means. They used the mosques to mobilize the masses against the secularists. However, the Muslim Brotherhood’s tendency to control all aspects of the state caused them to clash with some of the former regime’s power centers, which had previously allied with them. Other forces decided to stand on the sidelines after having secured their economic interests. Some have mistakenly thought that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) was wrestling with the Islamists. But the truth was eventually revealed when the secret deal between the two sides came to light. In the deal, SCAF would hand over political power to the Brotherhood and allow Mohammed Morsi to become president (a president with no constitution, no parliament and unprecedented presidential powers) in exchange for granting SCAF’s leaders safe exit and allowing the military establishment to keep all its economic privileges. The erosion of the Muslim Brotherhood’s legitimacy Morsi was elected president by a slim majority when, in the second electoral round, the Egyptians were given a choice between a Muslim Brotherhood candidate and Mubarak’s last prime minister. But the situation did not stabilize. Morsi’s pronouncements have failed to legitimize a non-representative and unconstitutional constituent assembly or convince the Egyptians to support a hastily-written constitution that would set the foundations for a Sunni-style Velayat-e faqih. The attractive religious slogans failed to alleviate the dire economic situation facing tens of millions of Egyptians nor to “Brotherhoodize” the state institutions and transform the popular uprising — at whose start the Brotherhood did not participate — into a Brotherhood revolution to unconstitutionally occupy state institutions and install Brotherhood members throughout the government bureaucracy. The credibility of this hypothesis is strengthened by the fact that the ruling party, according to its representative at the presidential palace, is still an illegal group that is not registered and with absolutely no supervision on its funding or activities, unlike Egypt’s other parties or political currents. But despite that, Brotherhood members are being installed throughout the government structure. In short, two years after the popular uprising, the Muslim Brotherhood’s legitimacy is eroding to the point where it can be likened to that of the former president. But does that mean that it is all over for the Muslim Brotherhood? The answer is not yet. The Salvation Front and its structural problems The opposition’s Salvation Front is suffering from structural problems related to its inability to translate the demonstrations against Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood into political victories. That is because of the Front’s loose structure: The Front is made of liberal, leftist, and nationalist currents, as well as parties such as Amr Moussa’s, and that diversity is hindering agreement on what specific steps to take. The Front includes committed forces as well as currents that have joined only to serve a temporary interest. The Front does participate in demonstrations but never leads them. Case in point is the emergence of the “ultras” football enthusiasts at the forefront of the scene. We know from the court ruling on the Port Said incident (in which 72 Al-Ahly fans were killed in Port Said Stadium last year at the conclusion of a football match between Al-Masry and Al-Ahly clubs) that last Saturday’s massive demonstration was not caused by the harsh court ruling against those accused in the incident. In Cairo, there were sporadic clashes but no violent demonstrations. In Port Said on the other hand, violent clashes killed at least 30 Egyptians. The government is expected to ask the army to control the unrest because the police do not have the political backing for such an operation. In short, the Salvation Front opposition alliance has until now been unable to lead or direct million-man demonstrations, which means that the Front cannot translate the Brotherhood’s dropping popularity into political gains. Since the government’s legitimacy is eroding and the Front is unable to translate that into political pressure, the Brotherhood will try to split the opposition, buy some time, and try to dilute the essence of the quarrel. The expected political maneuvers There will probably soon be calls for a so-called “national dialogue,” which Morsi has exploited in the past months to pretend that he was open to other political forces but without him providing any guarantees that the dialogue will succeed. It was simply a photo-op with the opposition while Morsi maintained the same policies. In effect, he had cornered the opposition: If the opposition refuses to engage in dialogue, the president would appear as seeking consensus while the opposition is being obstructionist. If on the other hand the opposition agrees to engage in dialogue, the dialogue will be used to dilute the opposition’s support among the masses and the revolutionary forces. Now, after the demonstrations have intensified and gotten out of control through traditional police methods, especially in Port Said, the “national dialogue” trick may not succeed in deceiving the Egyptians once again (past dialogue sessions were among publishers, journalists, and lawyers who are in the Islamist orbit). Therefore it is more likely that the president would seek a “national unity government” that would include some Salvation Front members and that this government would oversee the upcoming parliamentary elections and manage the faltering government operations in preparation for the parliamentary elections, which are not guaranteed to be free and fair, and whose purpose would only be used by the Brotherhood to reclaim its eroding popular support. It is likely that the Muslim Brotherhood’s deteriorating support would spur the Obama administration, which is the Egyptian government’s sponsor, to expand the Egyptian ruling coalition (made up of the Brotherhood, the military establishment, and the economic nerve center of the old regime) whereby it would include parties and movements currently in the Salvation Front, specifically some businessmen. That may help reduce the political tensions and get the Brotherhood off the hook, at least temporarily.(watching with bated breath,GAAL) Therefore, the second revolution can produce political gains for the opposition only if the latter is committed and is restructured in such a way as to allow the revolutionary forces inside of the Salvation Front to effectively fight the Brotherhood government, which has betrayed the revolution, and accomplish the as yet unrealized revolutionary objectives. Read more: http://www.al-monito...l#ixzz2OwRWMNb6

The majority of Egyptians support the MB, // COLBY ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Golly I dont know that ; I do know that Britian seems supportive of the MB government in Egypt. I do know (because of a recent resignation) the true head of the Syrian opposition is A Bush supporting Dallas Texas small business man Republican. AND I DO KNOW YOU INSIST THE MB ARE NOT PART OF THE WEST'S GEOPOLITICAL GAMEPLAN. I do know I question your common sense. Egypt: It's the politics, stupid | The Economist www.economist.com/.../21574495-economy-faces-collapse-broader-...Cached You +1'd this publicly. Undo 51 mins ago – A broader-based government is needed to take tough decisions ... Terrified that its already falling popularity will plunge further, the government has ... Egypt needs a government that can take some difficult decisions swiftly. ################################# CAUSE I CUT AND PASTED IT 53 minutes ago as of this posting.

I can see asking questions about this are conservative Republicans // Colby You have a problem with Republicans ?? What should we do with them (?),put them in camps and tell them ,'work will set them free', and how shall we fumigate to remove their lice (?), if you cut them do they not bleed ??? To me its not wrong to ask questions ,but I can see how a quisling to authoritative power might question questioning. LETTER per your request http://cdn.freedomoutpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/doug-lamalfa-DHS-buyingAMMO-1.pdf

You expect people to believe an anti-vaccination website on vaccination issues? A website that pushes "natural" cures and methods? I'm sure you can show that vaccines don't work, right? // BURTON GEE, HOW ODD IS IT FOR A PERSON WHO THINKS ITS OK FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO READ ALL EMAILS (BURTON) AND DOSENT READ HIMSELF ????????????????????????????????????? FROM POST # 138 above NOW VACCINES WORK BY GETTING IMMUNE REACTION . Now if your immune system is to weak , then vaccine doesnt work. OR If immune system reaction is too strong you get auto-immune reaction like Guillain Barre syndrome. (John why not look up vaccines AND auto immune system). So there is a subset of people who benefit from vaccines ,but like above example of fluoride, the health cost/benefit ratio to vaccinate all may not be in the positive account of the ledger.

http://articles.merc...ectiveness.aspx Merck Accused of Lying about Vaccine Effectiveness July 10, 2012 Even More Bad News: U.S. Varicella Vaccination Program a Total Flop In related news, a recent review of the varicella (chickenpox) vaccination program in the U.S. concluded that the vaccine has: Not proven to be cost-effective Increased the incidence of shingles Failed to provide long-term protection from the disease it targets―chicken pox―and Is less effective than the natural immunity that existed in the general population before the vaccine Here, vaccine efficacy was found to have declined well below 80 percent by of 2002. This damning news was published in May in the journal Vaccinex. The information was gathered from a review of chicken pox and shingles statistics in the years since the vaccine was introduced. The researchers point out that although statistics showed shingles rates increased after the vaccine, "CDC authorities still claimed" that no increase had occurred. The authors also state that the CDC not only ignored the natural boost in immunity to the community that occurred with wild chickenpox, as opposed to the vaccine, but also ignored the "rare serious events following varicella vaccination" as well as the increasing rates of shingles among adults: "In the prelicensure era, 95% of adults experienced natural chickenpox (usually as children)—these cases were usually benign and resulted in long-term immunity. Varicella vaccination is less effective than the natural immunity that existed in prevaccine communities. Universal varicella vaccination has not proven to be cost-effective as increased herpes zoster [shingles] morbidity has disproportionately offset cost savings associated with reductions in varicella disease. Universal varicella vaccination has failed to provide long-term protection from VZV disease."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Hi John ,lets get international in our understanding of vaccination. Europe/Japan/China all are less agressive in vaccination programs compared to that exceptional country UUUSA !!!!! WHY ?? Strapped for cash ,NO. They know vaccines less a answer to good public health than the vaccine industry promotes. In Japan they are much less aggressive younger than 2 years of age,RE:vaccination. Why UUUSA !!!! most vaccinated country ?? $P$O$L$I$T$I$C$S$ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Try this analogy Fluoridation is pursued to achieve a reduction in cavities in children. It is most effective for children ages 5 -9. The question is whether it is a good practice to medicate the entire population regardless of contraindications or need. Fluoride possesses the potential to cause many adverse effects. These effects overlap many modern complaints such as fibromyalgia, low thyroid, diabetes, arthritis and dementia. Additionally, much public water is utilized for purposed other than consumption. This water is ultimately released into the environment laden with a toxin that was purposefully added. In consideration of the many demonstrated and potential dangers, this policy should not continue. (DOCUMENTED @ POST # 26 The Plan (Washington,D.C.)) So fluoride is only good for a small portion of the population and if you have read THE PLAN and THE DEPOPULATION THREADS ,then you know large downside to fluoride. The schools/state governments could provide fluoridated toothpaste to 5 to 9 year children. That would be enough to get maximum fluoride benefit with little downside. John why dont you investigate Europe/China/Japan fluoridation policies. EYES MAY BECOME OPEN. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ LETS ANALOGIZE NOW VACCINES WORK BY GETTING IMMUNE REACTION . Now if your immune system is to weak , then vaccine doesnt work. OR If immune system reaction is too strong you get auto-immune reaction like Guillain Barre syndrome. (John why not look up vaccines AND auto immune system). So there is a subset of people who benefit from vaccines ,but like above example of fluoride, the health cost/benefit ratio to vaccinate all may not be in the positive account of the ledger. ++++++++++++++++ OOPS !!!!! EVEN SKEPTICS CANT FIND PEER REVIEW STUDIES !!!!! I can not even find one Peer-Reviewed Double Blind Study of any vaccine. Can you point out some studies for me, if they are available locked by Jun 9 '12 at 0:26 This question exists because it has historical significance, but it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site, so please do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here. This question and its answers are frozen and cannot be changed. More info: FAQ. 3 Answers Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a 13-valent-pneumococcal conjugate vaccine administered at 2, 4, and 12 months of age: a double-blind randomized active-controlled trial. Immunogenicity of bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Efficacy of pentavalent rotavirus vaccine against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis in infants in developing countries in Asia: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial That are just a few results from a quick search, there are studies done for every approved vaccine. I'm using the US system as an example, but it will be similar in other countries. In the US the FDA has to approve vaccines: Pre-marketing (pre-licensure) vaccine clinical trials are typically done in three phases, as is the case for any drug or biologic. Initial human studies, referred to as Phase 1, are safety and immunogenicity studies performed in a small number of closely monitored subjects. Phase 2 studies are dose-ranging studies and may enroll hundreds of subjects. Finally, Phase 3 trials typically enroll thousands of individuals and provide the critical documentation of effectiveness and important additional safety data required for licensing. At any stage of the clinical or animal studies, if data raise significant concerns about either safety or effectiveness, FDA may request additional information or studies, or may halt ongoing clinical studies. So any vaccine will have to be shown safe and effective in clinical trials to get approved. They also continue to investigate the safety of the vaccines: The FDA continues to oversee the production of vaccines after the vaccine and the manufacturing processes are approved, in order to ensure continuing safety. share edited Mar 24 '11 at 20:09 answered Mar 24 '11 at 19:02 14.7k566119 thanks.......... – user1043 Mar 24 '11 at 20:42 down vote The answer to your question is "yes". Via PubMed: Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of a Vero-cell-culture-derived trivalent influenza vaccine: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Amplified antigen-specific immune responses in HIV-1 infected individuals in a double blind DNA immunization and therapy interruption trial. Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in African adults infected with human immunodeficient virus: double blind, randomized clinical trial of efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety. Safety, immunogenicity and duration of protection of the RTS,S/AS02(D) malaria vaccine: one year follow-up of a randomized controlled phase I/IIb trial. share answered Mar 24 '11 at 23:36 555310 <a class="vote-up-off" jquery1710700664506994421="12" title="This answer is useful (click again to undo)">up vote 4 http://www.accessexc...EC/CC/polio.php share answered Mar 24 '11 at 18:24 Russell Steen 7,0652869 That's not a study. It doesn't even contain the keywords study or peer-review – user1043 Mar 24 '11 at 18:48 1 @Daniel, it's a summary of the polio vaccine and does discuss the studies used to validate it. – Russell Steen Mar 24 '11 at 19:50 It doesn't reference any of the claims it makes. It isn't peer-reviewed. It doesn't contain any data. Some points for being published by a museum, I guess, but the OP asks for actual gold-standard studies. – Oddthinking Jul 25 '11 at 18:01 I can not even find one Peer-Reviewed Double Blind Study of any vaccine. Can you point out some studies for me, if they are available? medical-science vaccines safety share edited Mar 24 '11 at 19:10 14.7k566119 asked Mar 24 '11 at 18:19 user1043 4 Search on Google for Polio. EVERY vaccine has peer-reviewed studies done before it is approved, then more come after. Vote to close (subjective and argumentative). – Ustice Mar 24 '11 at 18:22 1 @Daniel I suggest you run a quick search on PubMed before you make such a bold statement. – rjstelling Mar 24 '11 at 18:24 Please formulate this as a question, not as a statement. In this form the question is likely to be closed. You're just stating your conclusion (that vaccines don't work) already in your question, this is not a forum, you're supposed to ask questions, not just declare your opinion. – Fabian♦ Mar 24 '11 at 18:45 I said Peer-Reviewed Double Blind Study. There is a huge difference. – user1043 Mar 24 '11 at 18:51 11 Demanding that a double blind study be performed would be an unethical practice. You realize that it would intentionally expose subjects who were getting the non-effective vaccine to potentially deadly diseases. Of course, since when have ethical standards ever applied to anti-vaxers? – Larian LeQuella♦ Mar 25 '11 at 1:44 show 1 more comment ###################################### OOPS !!!! ####################################### Authorities often claim that "anti-vaccine" websites do not provide valid documentation. We provide hundreds of peer-reviewed studies from scientific and medical journals. Many of these studies link vaccines to the onset of new diseases. SEE under STUDIES AT http://thinktwice.com/ sSEEee uthAuthorities often claim that "anti-vaccine" websites do not provide valid documentation. We provide hundreds of peer-reviewed studies from scientific and medical journals. Many of these studies link vaccines to the onset of new diseases.orities often claim that "anti-vaccine" websites do not provide valid documentation. We provide hundreds of peer-reviewed studies from scientific and medical journals. Many of these studies link vaccines to the onset of new diseases.