Steven Gaal

Is a non Zionist bent. A shocking portrait of Austria's highest selling newspaper 17 December 2003 | by Wetbones (Vienna, Austria) – See all my reviews This is a documentary about the Kronen Zeitung, Austria's most widely read newspaper. There are 8 million people in Austria and over 3 million of them read this newspaper. With such a large readership (in relation to the populace) comes enormous power and the film researches how this power is used or much rather abused. First of all the Kronen Zeitung is extremely racist and pushes this opinion on its readers by portraying all foreigners as criminals and scum that needs to be thrown out of the country. In the film several key writers of the newspaper are interviewed and one of them proudly shows the camera-team his books of speeches by Adolf Hitler and his own paintings which are full of Nazi symbols. The film goes on to examine how this racist newspaper may have helped extreme right-wing populist Jörg Haider on his rise to power. It then goes on to show how every politician in Austria is afraid of the Kronen Zeitung and always checks it first thing in the morning to find out what the editor thinks about certain things. Mr. Dichand, the owner and chief editor of the Kronen Zeitung, comes across as a very powerful (he has regular meetings with the Austrian president) and dangerous man who tries to rule the country through his newspaper. I was very familiar with the Kronen Zeitung and with its political agenda but this film has revealed many things I had not known. It's scarier than most horror films, that's for sure! ################ However FACE BOOK IS BEING USED BY NATIONS AND THEIR INTELL SERVICES TO PROMOTE PROPAGANDA bottom link of article had more photoshop face book https://plus.google.com/photos/103208110742791515693/albums/5788407651473375217#photos/103208110742791515693/albums/5788407651473375217

The "Healthful" Drink that Can Damage Your Health June 05, 2011 ====================== By The Fluoride Action Network According to the U.S. Surgeon General, "there are profound and consequential disparities in the oral health of our citizens..." that have resulted in a "silent epidemic" of dental and oral diseases that disproportionately affects low-income and minority populations1. Unfortunately, not only are these groups afflicted with worse dental health, but are also suffering more extensively from the public health measure carried out under the guise of improving oral health: water fluoridation. The Environmental Injustice of Water Fluoridation One of the goals of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and particularly of its administrator Lisa Jackson, is achieving Environmental Justice for all Americans. According to the EPA (2011): "Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. EPA has this goal for all communities and persons across this Nation. It will be achieved when everyone enjoys the same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards and equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, learn, and work." Unfortunately, the agencies and associations that continue to promote artificial water fluoridation - including the EPA's Office of Water, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Oral Health Division, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the American Dental Association (ADA) - have completely ignored racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic differences when stating that the level of fluoride used is "safe" for all Americans to consume in drinking water - on a daily basis, and over a lifetime. A number of groups are particularly susceptible to fluoride's toxic effects. Fluoridation proponents are finally beginning to acknowledge the susceptibility of infants and children to excessive fluoride intakes, likely because they can no longer deny the obvious effects that fluoride has on the developing teeth, in the form of dental fluorosis. Nearly 41 percent of adolescents aged 12-15 now have some form of dental fluorosis2, an outwardly visible sign of fluoride over-exposure and toxicity. However, also included among those that are disproportionately impacted by fluoride are minorities and low-income families. The refusal by government agencies to consider these groups when determining enforceable safety standards or recommended levels for artificial fluoridation is no doubt a form of discrimination, contradicting any assertions by these agencies that they are working towards Environmental Justice for all. Atlanta Civil Rights leaders Andrew Young and Reverend Dr. Gerald Durley recently requested that Georgia legislators repeal the state's mandatory water fluoridation law, based on the fact that fluoride can disproportionately harm poor citizens and black families. According to a recent press release3 , the leaders "expressed concerns about the fairness, safety, and full disclosure regarding fluoridation in letters to the state's minority and majority legislative leaders." In his letter to the legislators, Rev. Dr. Durley states, "I support the holding of Fluoridegate hearings at the state and national level so we can learn why we haven't been openly told that fluorides build up in the body over time, (and) why our government agencies haven't told the black community openly that fluorides disproportionately harm black Americans…" Minorities Suffer Disproportionate Harm from Fluoridation African American children have been found to consume significantly more total fluids and plain water, and thus receive more fluoride from drinking water, than white children4 . Additionally, African American mothers are less likely to breastfeed than most other racial groups5 . As breast milk contains very low levels of fluoride6 ), babies fed formula made with fluoridated water could receive up to 200 times more fluoride than a breast-fed baby. Thus, African American infants and children have a higher risk of being overexposed to fluoride. In fact, it has been known for many decades that African Americans and Hispanics are at an increased risk of developing dental fluorosis, and have a higher risk of suffering from the more severe forms of this condition7. Data published in CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report in 2005 show that Black and Mexican Americans have significantly higher levels of the worst forms of dental fluorosis than do Whites, as indicated in the following table from Beltrán-Aguilar et al. (2005; Table 23). Table 23. Enamel fluorosis* among persons aged 6-39 years, by selected characteristics - United States, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999-2002. Source: Beltrán-Aguilar et al., 2005. Factors that Influence Fluoride's Toxicity Fluoride's toxicity is exacerbated by: Inadequate nutrition, including lower intakes of iodine and calcium8 Certain racial groups are more likely to be lactose intolerant than others. Included among these are: Central and East Asians (80-100 percent lactose intolerant; de Vrese, 2001) Native Americans (80-100 percent lactose intolerant; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2006) African Americans (75 percent lactose intolerant; de Vrese, 2001), and Southern Indians (70 percent lactose intolerant; de Vrese, 2001) The elevated incidence of lactose intolerance may indicate lower rates of milk consumption, and higher consumption rates of water or other beverages, than whites (21 percent lactose intolerant; Scrimshaw and Murray, 1988). Thus these groups may be more heavily exposed to fluoride in water and other beverages than are Caucasian Americans, and their calcium intakes may be compromised. [*]Kidney dysfunction and diabetes, which are more prevalent among minorities than whites. Hispanics are nearly twice as likely9 , and African Americans nearly four times more likely10 , to develop kidney failure than are Caucasians. Both African Americans and Hispanics are nearly twice as likely to suffer from diabetes than are whites11. [*]Inadequate supplies of vitamin C, vitamin D, magnesium, and selenium may also exacerbate fluoride's detrimental effects12. Inadequate Nutrition Heightens Fluoride's Health Risks (Minority,Gaal ??) Poor nutrition has been found to increase the incidence and severity of: Dental fluorosis13 and Skeletal fluorosis14. The dose of fluoride associated with disturbed endocrine function is also substantially lower if you're deficient in iodine (NRC, 2006). Even modest levels of fluoride in drinking water (0.88 mg/L) have been associated with reduced IQ and increased frequency of hypothyroidism when combined with low iodine, even more so than with iodine deficiency alone (Lin et al., 1991). As poor nutrition frequently occurs among low-income families, poor children and adults are therefore far more susceptible to the detrimental effects of fluoride exposure. Low-income families typically consume substantially less fresh fruits and vegetables, and thus more processed foods, than higher income groups. In addition to generally being less nutritious, processed foods - including those containing mechanically de-boned chicken - can also contain relatively high levels of fluoride. Moreover, the increasing dietary intake of harmful trans fats in the United States, especially among lower income groups, may have negative repercussions in terms of fluoride metabolism. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: "Diets high in fat have been reported to increase deposition of fluoride in bone and, thus, to enhance toxicity" (HHS, 1991). Additionally, as with African Americans, low-income children have been found to consume significantly more total fluids and plain water - and thus receive more fluoride from drinking water - than higher-income children, putting them at greater risk for fluoride's toxic effects. Also of concern is the inability of low-income families living in fluoridated communities to provide low-fluoride or fluoride-free water to reconstitute infant formula. Low-income families are likely not able to afford expensive filtration systems to remove fluoride from tap water, nor are they likely able to afford bottled water containing low or no fluoride. Thus, bottle-fed infants of low-income families are at an increased risk for suffering from over-exposure to fluoride during this very sensitive developmental period. Income Level is Strongest Indicator of Tooth Decay, Regardless of Water Fluoridation According to the American Dental Association (ADA, 2009), "[L]ow income is the single best predictor of high caries [cavity] experience in children. Analysis of data shows that the amount of tooth decay in children is inversely related to income level." In 1988, an editorial published in the Journal of Dental Research (Newbrun, 1988) reported that "About 20 to 25 percent of children are at relatively high risk of caries, despite the declining caries prevalence in the 'fluoride generation'." The high-risk children included the poor. In 1995, it was found that more than 50 percent of U.S. schoolchildren had experienced cavities (Edelstein and Douglass, 1995), when preschoolers and cavities in the primary teeth were considered. According to the authors, "Minority, low-income and underserved groups continue to experience extensive destruction in both primary and permanent teeth." Actually, 42 percent of five-year-olds and almost 60 percent of nine-year-olds had cavities in their primary and permanent teeth, according to National Institutes of Dental Research 1986-1987 data. The most recent oral health statistics (1999-2004) show a direct link with tooth decay and poverty level. For example, the incidence of caries is much higher in children from families with lower income levels (HIW, Undated a-c): % Caries rate for 3-5 year-olds % Caries rate for 6-9 year-olds % Caries rate for 13-15 year-olds Family Income as % Federal Poverty Limit 48 68 62 <100 36 63 60 100-199 28 46 53 200-399 19 44 51 400-499 11 31 34 >500 In 2008, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that the extent of dental disease in children has not decreased, and estimated that 6.5 million children two through 18 years of age on Medicaid suffer with untreated tooth decay (GAO, 2008). In November 2010, the GAO reported "high rates of dental disease and low utilization of dental services by children in low-income families, and the challenge of finding dentists to treat them are long-standing concerns" (GAO, 2010). A study recently published in the Journal of Dental Research15 (also found a significant relationship between tooth loss and state income inequality among adults in the United States, with the risk for tooth loss being about 20 percent greater for those living in economically "disadvantaged" areas. Despite claims to the contrary by promoters of fluoridation, low-income children still have high rates of tooth decay even when their drinking water is artificially fluoridated. For example, in Georgia where fluoridation is state-mandated, 44 percent of 2 to 5-year-old Head Start children have tooth decay16 . And although fluoridation is required in North Dakota, tooth decay is present in 82 percent of Native American third grade children (who are often from very low-income families) compared to 54 percent of white children17 . In New York City - which is 100 percent fluoridated - 56 percent of low-socioeconomic third grade children have tooth decay, compared to 38 percent of high-socioeconomic third grade children18. Likewise, in Kentucky, with a nearly 100 percent t fluoridation rate, nearly 60 percent of third grade children have experienced tooth decay, yet for nearly 35 percent of these children that decay went untreated19. More than 60 Oral Health Care Reports from the 50 States reaffirm that low-income people have the worst dental health. More importantly, these reports present quite an extensive array of data from examinations of school age children, yet all but one of these fail to mention rates of dental fluorosis. This is despite that each and every report strongly advocates water fluoridation20. State Dental Policies Receive Failing Grades State dental policies fail one in five children, according to the Pew Charitable Trust21. Even some highly fluoridated states received a grade of "F" from Pew. Included among these is West Virginia, which is 92 percent fluoridated. West Virginia's tooth decay rate is 66 percent for 15 year-olds. By the time these children graduate from high school, the proportion has increased to 84 percent 22. It is reported that 80 percent of dental caries in children of West Virginia is concentrated in just 25 percent of the child population. West Virginia also ranks first in the U.S. for partial and complete tooth loss among adults23. The most recent national statistics show that the prevalence of dental caries in primary teeth significantly has increased for 2-5 year-olds, from approximately 24 percent to 28 percent between the 1988-1994 and 1999-2004 recording periods, and has increased from 40 percent to 42 percent for all children 2-11 years old24. Meanwhile, fluoridation rates in the United States have continued to increase, from 62 percent in 1992 (CDC, 2008) to over 72 percent in 2008!25 Proponents of fluoridation would have us believe that as fluoridation rates go up, tooth decay rates will go down. But that hasn't happened. Instead, oral health continues to decline among children - especially those from lower income families - and symptoms of fluoride overexposure and toxicity have increased to epidemic proportions, as evidenced by the 41 percent of adolescents aged 12-15 now afflicted with dental fluorosis (Beltrán-Aguilar et al., 2010). The Role of the EPA in Fluoridation EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has declared that achieving Environmental Justice for all Americans is a top priority for her agency. As fluoride has been shown to disproportionately affect poor and minority Americans, the EPA should be giving special consideration to these groups when determining the level of fluoride in drinking water that is safe for all Americans. Unfortunately, the most recent analyses of fluoride by the EPA's Office of Water (EPA, 2010a, 2010b) clearly indicate that the EPA is more concerned with protecting the fluoridation program than protecting the American people. For example, the EPA's newly proposed reference dose for fluoride (the dose of fluoride that is supposedly safe for everyone when taken every day and over a lifetime) was based on the dietary intake of fluoride recommended by the Institute of Medicine nearly 15 years ago (IOM, 1997) to prevent dental caries. Since that time, however, it has been well established - and is now widely accepted - that the primary action of fluoride on teeth is topical, not systemic26. As fluoride is not an essential element (i.e. not necessary for human health), any dietary recommendations for fluoride are therefore illogical and unnecessary. Thus, EPA's newly proposed reference dose was not based on the latest scientific findings concerning the safety of this level of fluoride, but rather on outdated recommendations by those promoting artificial water fluoridation. This reference dose will soon be translated to a new Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for fluoride in drinking water. If EPA were to evaluate the true science behind fluoride toxicity - free from any interference by those promoting fluoridation - the only rational outcome would be an MCLG of ZERO, effectively ending the practice of artificial water fluoridation. What You Can Do TODAY! The Fluoride Action Network has a game plan to END water fluoridation in both Canada and the United States. Our fluoride initiative will primarily focus on Canada since 60 percent of Canada is already non-fluoridated. If we can get Calgary and the rest of Canada to stop fluoridating their water, we believe the U.S. will be forced to follow. Please, join the anti-fluoride movement in Canada and United States by contacting the representative for your area below. Contact Information for Canadian Communities: If you live in Ontario, Canada, please join the ongoing effort by contacting Diane Sprules at diane.sprules@cogeco.ca. The point-of-contact for Toronto, Canada is Aliss Terpstra. You may email her at aliss@nutrimom.ca. Contact Information for American Communities: We're also going to address three US communities: New York City, Austin, and San Diego: New York City, NY: With the recent victory in Calgary, New York City is the next big emphasis. The anti-fluoridation movement has a great champion in New York City councilor Peter Vallone, Jr. who introduced legislation on January 18 "prohibiting the addition of fluoride to the water supply." A victory there could signal the beginning of the end of fluoridation in the U.S. If you live in the New York area I beg you to participate in this effort as your contribution could have a MAJOR difference. Remember that one person can make a difference. The point person for this area is Carol Kopf, at the New York Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF). Email her at NYSCOF@aol.com . Please contact her if you're interested in helping with this effort. Austin, Texas: Join the effort by contacting Rae Nadler-Olenick at either: info@fluoridefreeaustin.com or fluoride.info@yahoo.com, or by regular mail or telephone: POB 7486 Austin, Texas 78713 Phone: (512) 371-3786 San Diego, California: Contact Patty Ducey-Brooks, publisher of the Presidio Sentinel at pbrooks936@aol.com. In addition, you can: Comment on the EPA's docket on the proposed ban (just scroll down a bit). It's open for public comment up to July 5, 2011. They published the proposed ban in the Federal Register and the deadline for comments were extended due to requests from Dow and their allies in the pesticide world (such as American Farm Bureau Federation, National Pest Management Association, North American Millers' Association, and the California Rice Commission). Tell the EPA you expect them to uphold their duty to protect you and your children from this toxic food fumigant. Make a generous tax-deductible donation to the Fluoride Action Network, to help them fight for your rights to fluoride-free food and water. Check out FAN's Action Page, as they are working on multiple fronts to rid our food and water supplies of fluoride. For timely updates, join the Fluoride Action Network Facebook page. REFERENCES: 1 HHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 2000. Oral health in America: a report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health. 2 Beltrán-Aguilar ED, Barker L, Dye B. 2010. Prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis in the United States, 1999-2004. NCHS Data Brief No. 53. U.S. DHHS, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics. 3 Stockin DG, Osmunson B. 2011. Civil Rights Leaders Call for Halt to Water Fluoridation. Press Release: April 14, 2011. http://fluoridealert...se.4-14-11.html 4 Sohn W, Heller KH, Burt BA. 2001. Fluid consumption related to climate among children in the United States. J Pub Health Dent 61(2):99-106. 5 CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2010a. NIS Breastfeeding Data. 6 NRC (National Research Council). 2006. Fluoride in drinking water: a scientific review of EPA's standards. National Academies Press: Washington, DC. 507 pp. 7 Russell, 1962; Butler et al., 1985; Williams and Zwemer, 1990; Beltrán-Aguilar et al., 2005; Martinez-Mier and Soto-Rojas, 2010 8 ATSDR, 1993; NRC, 2006 9 American Diabetes Association. 2010. Latino Programs. 10 U.S. Renal Data System. 2005. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD. 11 American Diabetes Association, 2005 12 ATSDR, 1993; NRC, 2006 13 Pandit et al., 1940; Murray et al., 1948; Littleton et al., 1999 14 Pandit et al., 1940; Marier et al., 1963; Fisher et al., 1989; Teotia et al., 1984; Littleton et al., 1999 15 Bernabé and Marcenes, 2011) 16 Levin E, Kanny D, Duval, T, Koskela, L. 2007. Status of Oral Health in Georgia: Summary of Oral Health Data Collected in Georgia. Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Public Health, November 2007. Publication Number: DPH07.155WH. 17 ND DOH (North Dakota Department of Health). 2006. The Burden of Oral Disease in North Dakota. Oral Health Program. http://www.ndhealth....blications/Oral Health Burden Overview.pdf 18 NY DOH (New York Department of Health). 2010. Oral Health Indicators - New York County 2002-2004. 19 Hardison JD, et al. 2003. Final Results: 2001 Kentucky Children's Oral Health Survey. Division of Dental Public Health, College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY. 20 Connett E. 2010. Teeth: Oral Health Reports from the 50 States and District of Columbia. Fluoride Action Network. 21 PCT (Pew Charitable Trust), Pew Center on the States. 2010. The Cost of Delay: State Dental Policies Fail One in Five Children. 22 WV DHHR (West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources). 2001. 23CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2010b. National Oral Health Surveillance System. 24 CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2007. Trends in Oral Health Status: United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2004. Vital and Health Statistics 11, No. 248. National Center for Health Statistics, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 25 CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2010c. 2008 Water Fluoridation 26 Featherstone, 1999; Limeback, 1999; Clarkson and McLoughlin, 2000; CDC, 2001; Warren and Levy, 2003; Fejerskov, 2004; Hellwig and Lennon, 2004; NRC, 2006; Pizzo et al., 2007; Cheng et al., 2007 ADA (American Dental Association). 2009. Fact Sheet: Children's Dental Disease. Online at http://tinyurl.com/3zpszn7 ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 1993. Toxicological 47 profile for fluorides, hydrogen fluoride, and fluorine. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Online at http://www.atsdr.cdc...p?id=212&tid=38 Beltrán-Aguilar ED, Barker LK, Canto MT, et al. 2005. Surveillance for dental caries, dental sealants, tooth retention, edentulism, and enamel fluorosis - United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2002. CDC, MMWR, Surveillance Summaries, August 26, 2005, vol. 54, No SS-3, pp. 1-44. Bernabé E, Marcenes W. 2011. Income inequality and tooth loss in the United States. J Dent Res. Published online ahead of print April 20, 2011. doi:10.1177/0022034511400081 Butler WJ, Segreto V, Collins E. 1985. Prevalence of dental mottling in school-aged lifetime residents of 16 Texas communities. Am J Pub Health 75(12):1408-12. CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2001. Recommendations for using fluoride to prevent and control dental caries in the United States. MMWR 50(RR-14). CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2008. Fluoridation Growth (1940-2006). Cheng KK, Chalmers I, Sheldon TA. 2007. Adding fluoride to water supplies. B Med J. 335:699-702. Clarkson J, McLoughlin J. 2000. Role of fluoride in oral health promotion. Int Dent J. 50(3):119-28. de Vrese M. 2001. Probiotics: compensation for lactase insufficiency. Am J Clin Nutr. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol. 2008;111:1-66. Edelstein BL, Douglass CW. 1995. Dispelling the myth that 50 percent of U.S. schoolchildren have never had a cavity. Pub Health Reports Sept-Oct, Vol. 110. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2010a. Fluoride: Dose-Response Analysis for Non-Cancer Effects. Office of Science and Technology, Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Office of Water. 820-R-10-019. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2010b. Fluoride: Exposure and Relative Source Contribution Analysis. Office of Science and Technology, Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Office of Water. 820-R-10-015. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2011. Environmental Justice: Policy and Guidance. Featherstone JD. 1999. Prevention and reversal of dental caries: role of low level fluoride. Comm Dent Oral Epid. 27(1):31-40. Fejerskov O. 2004. Changing paradigms in concepts on dental caries: consequences for oral health care. Caries Res. 38(3):182-91. Fisher RL, et al. 1989. Endemic fluorosis with spinal cord compression. A case report and review. Arch Int Med. 149:697-700. GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2008. Medicaid: Extent of dental disease in children has not decreased, and millions are estimated to have untreated tooth decay. GAO-08-1121. GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2010. Oral Health: Efforts Under Way to Improve Children's Access to Dental Services, but Sustained Attention Needed to Address Ongoing Concerns. Report to Congressional Committees. GAO-11-96. Hellwig E, Lennon AM. 2004. Systemic versus topical fluoride. Caries Res. 38:258-62. HIW (Health Indicators Warehouse) a. Undated. Dental caries experience in young children: 3-5 year-olds. U.S. CDC National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD. HIW (Health Indicators Warehouse) b. Undated. Dental caries experience in young children: 6-9 year-olds. U.S. CDC National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD. HIW (Health Indicators Warehouse) c. Undated. Dental caries experience in young children: 13-15 year-olds. U.S. CDC National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD. HHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 1991. Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Fluoride, Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs. IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1997. Dietary reference intakes for calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, vitamin D, and fluoride. National Academies Press: Washington, DC. Pp. 288-313. Limeback, H. 1999. A re-examination of the pre-eruptive and post-eruptive mechanism of the anti-caries effects of fluoride: is there any anti-caries benefit from swallowing fluoride? Comm Dent Oral Epid. 27(1):62-71. Lin FF, Aihaiti HX, Zhao J, et al. 1991. The relationship of a low-iodine and high-fluoride environment to subclinical cretinism in Xinjiang. IDD Newsletter 7(3):24-25. Littleton J. 1999. Paleopathology of skeletal fluorosis. A J Phys Anthropol. 109:465-483. Marier JR, et al. 1963. Accumulation of skeletal fluoride and its implications. Arch Env Health 1963:664-67. Martinez-Mier EA, Soto-Rojas AE. 2010. Differences in exposure and biological markers of fluoride among White and African American children. J Pub Health Dent. 70:234-40. Murray MM, Wilson DC. 1948. Fluorosis and nutrition in Morocco; dental studies in relation to environment. Br Dent J. 84(5):97-100. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. 2006. Lactose Intolerance: Information for Health Care Providers. NIH Publication No. 05-5303B. Newbrun E. 1988. Guest editorial: Uses and abuses of the new release/press conference. J Dent Res 67:1442. Pandit CG, et al. 1940. Endemic fluorosis in South India. Ind J Med Res. 28:533-558. Pizzo G, Piscopo MR, Pizzo I, Giuliana G. 2007. Community water fluoridation and caries prevention: a critical review. Clin Oral Invest. 11(3):189-93. Russell AL. 1962. Dental fluorosis in Grand Rapids during the seventeenth year of fluoridation. J Am Dent Assoc. 65:608-12. Scrimshaw NS, Murray EB. 1988. The acceptability of milk and milk products in populations with a high prevalence of lactose intolerance. Am J Clin Nutr. 48:1079-1159. Teotia SP, et al. 1984. Environmental fluoride and metabolic bone disease: an epidemiological study (fluoride and nutrient interactions). Fluoride 17:14-22. Online at http://www.fluoridea...teotia-1984.pdf Warren JJ, Levy SM. 2003. Current and future role of fluoride in nutrition. Dent Clin N Am. 47:225-43. Williams JE, Zwemer JD. 1990. Community water fluoride levels, preschool dietary patterns, and the occurrence of fluoride enamel opacities. J Pub Health Dent 50(4):276-81. West Virginia Healthy

============== Barbara A. McNamara was the NSA's Deputy Director from October 1997 until June 2000, prior to becoming NSA's Senior U.S. Liaison Officer in London, ... Deputy Director to Liaison Officer ???? DEMOTION/PROMOTION ANSWER DEMOTION oh yeah but they gave her a metal ..... National Security Agency's Deputy Director Receives Top Intelligence Community Medal National Security Agency (NSA) Deputy Director and Massachusetts native, Barbara McNamara, recently received the highest honor within the United States Intelligence Community for her almost four decades of service to the country. Miss McNamara was presented the National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal by George J. Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, in a ceremony on June 28, 2000. The medal, which is awarded on a very selective basis, recognizes superior achievements of senior intelligence personnel over a sustained period that have contributed significantly to the United States' foreign intelligence mission. BUT GAAL THE BALTIMORE SUN SAYS PROMOTION BUT COLBY THE SUN IS IN THE NSA'S POCKET http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2000-04-28/news/0004290228_1_mcnamara-intelligence-community-deputy-director ============ read second article here http://cryptome.org/nsa-wars.htm ============== NOW IF READ RE McNAMARA above link AND NOW IF YOUR BRAIN IS DEAD YOU BELIEVE PROMOTION.

RELATED Terror in Central Asia: NATO’s Great Game http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2013/03/terror-central-asia-nato%E2%80%99s-great-game

The NYPD Declares Martial Law in Brooklyn http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/the-nypd-declares-martial-law-in-brooklyn On the heels of three nights of protests over the police slaying of 16 year old Kimani Gray, the NYPD has turned the East Flatbush neighborhood of Brooklyn into a State of Exception, claiming emergency powers to suspend the constitutional guarantees of the citizenry.

Doesn't this guy have a 1st and middle name or was he only given two initials? (sorta like J.R. "Johnny" Cash). Where did he supposedly get his degrees from? What is the name of his supposed company? // END COLBY +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ CALL HIM WhitePagesGoesGreen.org - Yellow Pages Goes Green www.yellowpagesgoesgreen.org/whitepages/state/KS/.../Arkansas.../LCached You +1'd this publicly. Undo2 days ago - L ACKERMAN - Cowley, Arkansas City - (ZIP : 67005); Phone : 6204423127; ... L D BROWN - Cowley, Arkansas City - (ZIP : 67005); Phone : 6204426943; ... =================================== BTW http://prorevnews.bl...o-republic.html

Top Banking Analyst: Subsidies to Giant Banks Exceed $780 Billion Dollars Per YEAR March 13, 2013 Source: Washington' Blogs Trillions In Subsidies to the Giant Banks Are Continuing to This Day Chris Whalen is one of America’s top banking analysts. Well-known economist Nouriel Roubini notes: Chris Whalen is one of the leading independent analysts of the US banking and financial system. Whalen notes today that the big American banks get a subsidy in excess of $780 billion dollars per year. Specifically, Whalen estimates the following types of subsidies to the giant banks: $360 billion in Federal Reserve subsidies, by creating an artificial “spread” in interest rates $120 billion in federal deposit insurance (through the FDIC, backed by the Treasury) At least $100 billion in government-guaranteed loans, especially mortgages At least $100 billion in monopolistic advantages in the secondary market for home mortgages. Specifically, the government subsidies the big banks to steal away fees earned from smaller banks, gain on sale into the TBA market and servicing. Whalen quotes a veteran banker explaining: The smaller players lived on the bleeding edge of the mortgage market, but they were also far more efficient lenders than the large banks. Now, care of the Fed, we have a highly inefficient oligopoly in the US mortgage market that is built around the largest banks. More than $100 billion in fees in the over-the-counter (OTC) derivative market. Whalen explains The lack of capital required in these transactions and other special dispensations from the Fed provide the zombie banks with unlimited leverage and almost no public scrutiny. The fact that OTC contracts are exempt from the automatic stay in bankruptcy is a huge subsidy. The bilateral market structure is another. That totals $780 billion per year. But Whalen notes that there are many other subsidies as well: The above points are only a partial list of the subsidies and other flows that allow the members of the banking industry to pretend to be profitable, risk-taking organizations in a free market economy. The bailouts of the big banks amount to trillions of dollars, are never-ending … and continue to this day. (Indeed, the government is arguably paying trillions of dollars more in unnecessary interest payments just to have the banks “create” money, instead of creating it itself … as the Founding Fathers may have envisioned.) Whalen notes that the big banks are not really profitable: [These are] structural subsidies blessed by Congress and the Fed that make large banks look more profitable than they truly are. In fact, the TBTF banks are not really profitable at all. *** The reality, sad to say, is that banks in 21st Century America are government sponsored enterprises …. Indeed, they are government sponsored enterprises where all of the profits are privatized, and all of the losses socialized. And the big banks are not helping – but are rather destroying – the economy. Indeed, failing to break up the big banks– and the malignant, symbiotic relationship between D.C. politicians and the banking giants – is destroying our country.

Lefty Obama ?? U.S. to let spy agencies scour Americans’ finances March 13, 2013 Source: Reuters The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters. The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates. Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of “suspicious customer activity,” such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Read More...

GEE THIS IS WHAT ALLOWED OVER INTERNET RE SYRIA Syria: A photoshopped "revolution" http://worldmathaba....pped-revolution

Where exactly did "Dr." Mercola Colby get his medical degree from ? Mercola quotes scientific sources just as reporters do from the WashPo/NYT which you worship. #######################0o0o0o0o##################### Fluoride Study Rife With Conflicts Of Interest By Naomi H. Flack, September 29, 2006 http://www.thecrimso...h-conflicts-of/ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ When I went to Pharmacy School across the street was Harvard Dental School. Our old old small school would sometimes have a class (Pathology) across the street. Well Golly Golly we had a guess talk from Harvard School of Dentistry fellow and one MD from Harvard Public Health School about the need for floridation. I dont remember who it was ,but I wouldnt be shocked to learn it was the linked above dental man. *********************************************** ############################# 18. Manhattan Project Covered Up Effects of Fluoride Toxicity http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/18-manhattan-project-covered-up-effects-of-fluoride-toxicity/ “The fluoride story is a hangover from the Cold War, when the U.S. media would not abrogate `national security.’ They publicized the official line about fluoride, and that was that. The critical role of fluoride in the production of the atomic bomb and in many of the new industrial processes (rocket propellants, fluorocarbons, plastics, etc.) that made America the world’s leader after World War II was never mentioned. The nationwide damage wreaked by industrial fluoride pollution, and the role and motives of the bomb program and U.S. industry in establishing fluoride’s safety, was not mentioned either. “At least a dozen mainstream media outlets here and in the U.K. expressed strong interest in our story, but all later declined. The facts were never in question. The 155 pages of supporting documentation are available for the cost of mailing from Waste Not, Tel: (315) 3799200. For further information, contact Dr. William Hirzy, Senior vice-president, National Treasury Employees Union, EPA Headquarters chapter, Tel: (202) 260-4683; or e-mail: hirzy.john@epa. gov. Also Mike Ewall, Pennsylvania Environmental Network, Tel: (215) 7434884; or e-mail: pen@envirolink.org.” ############################### HOW DOES COLBY POST SO MUCH WHEN HE IS SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON HIS KNEES GENUFLECTING TO THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA ???

from DU 9/11 Where are they now? Ali Muhamed and his FBI handler John Zent, the guy who could have prevented the 9/11 attacks, works for Yahoo! The former FBI agent is now a Security Expert for the telecommunications giant. He was also Ali Muhamed's FBI handler in the early '90s. According to the book 'Triple Cross' he let Ali Muhamed slip through his fingers. Ali Muhamed being one of the masterminds behind the attack and who still has not been sentenced though he is in custody. John Zent was the first person to ever hear the words al Qaeda in relation to a terrorist organization. Fellow FBI agents describe Zent as 'hapless'. FBI agent John Zent actually vouched for Ali Muhamed when Muhamed was in police custody in Canada. Were it not for John Zent's hapless mistakes Ali Muhamed would not have had the freedom to execute the Black Hawk down incident in Somalia or the U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa. It seems that bad decision making is something that John Zent is prone to however as he also vouched for a triple murderer. The murderer just happened to be dating his daughter. Did I mention that the murderer murdered his parents and sister for insurance money and that John Zent's daughter continued dating this murderer after the police investigation started to focus on him? It's been speculated that Zent's daughter actually knew about the plot and was possibly in on it. Rather than distancing himself and his family from the murderer, John Zent embraced him and testified in court for the defendant. Special Agent John Zent was embroiled in this controversy with his daughter while he should have been focused on Ali Muhamed. Way to pick them Yahoo! You got a real upstanding citizen working for you there. (GOLLY INTERNET FREDOM ??,Gaal) 2,752 people died in the September 11th attacks. http://www.spoke.com/info/p9NAA4/JohnZent ###################################################### Note the quote from Zent about bin Laden's army training to overthrow the Saudi monarchy If that doesn't explain why US intelligence had such an interest in protecting al-Qaeda assets and operatives, like Ali Mohamed, nothing does. Of course, there were also the secret wars against the Russians. But, most of all, all eyes on The Prize. See, http://www.historyco...tity=john_ze... John Zent was a participant or observer in the following events: 1992: Ali Mohamed Informs for FBI Again, Never Polygraphed Double agent Ali Mohamed, who became an informant for the FBI in 1990 (see 1990), apparently works as an FBI informant again, obtaining intelligence on some suspects at a San Jose, California, mosque. But he is never polygraphed, even though this is standard procedure. Retired FBI agent Joseph O’Brien will later complain, “One of the most unbelievable aspects of the Ali Mohamed story is that the Bureau could be dealing with this guy and they didn’t” polygraph him. “The first thing you do with any kind of asset or informant is you polygraph him and if the relationship continues, you make him submit to continued polygraphs down the line.” FBI agent John Zent becomes Mohamed’s handler. Apparently Mohamed will be given a polygraph test in 1993 and will fail it (see May 1993). ################################################## ####################################################################### May 1993: Ali Mohamed Gives FBI First Glimpse of Al-Qaeda In the wake of his detention in Canada (see June 16, 1993), double agent Ali Mohamed is interviewed by the FBI and volunteers the earliest publicly known insider description of al-Qaeda. Mohamed is working as an FBI informant on smugglers moving illegal immigrants from Mexico to the US. FBI agent John Zent, Mohamed’s handler, interviews him in the FBI San Francisco office after having helped release him from Canadian custody. Mohamed says that bin Laden is running a group called “al-Qaeda.” Apparently, this is the first known instance of the FBI being told of that name, though it appears the CIA was aware of the name since at least 1991 (see February 1991). Mohamed claims to have met bin Laden and says bin Laden is “building an army” that could be used to overthrow the Saudi Arabian government. He admits that he has trained radical militants at bin Laden’s training camps in Sudan and Afghanistan. He says he taught them intelligence and anti-hijacking techniques. Mohamed apparently is given a polygraph test for the first time, and fails it (see 1992). However, he denies links to any criminal group or act. An FBI investigator later will say, “We always took him seriously. It’s just he only gave us 25 percent of what was out there.” In addition to his Canadian detention, the FBI is also interested in Mohamed because his name had surfaced in connection with the Al-Kifah Refugee Center as part of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing investigation. By the time this interview takes place, investigators looking into the World Trade Center bombing earlier in the year have already determined that top secret US military training manuals found in the possession of assassin El-Sayyid Nosair (see November 5, 1990) must have been stolen by Mohamed from the US army base where he had been stationed (see Spring 1993). Yet Mohamed is not arrested, though he is monitored (see Autumn 1993). New Yorker magazine will later note, “inexplicably, interview never found its way to the FBI investigators in New York.” ##################################### ##################################################### Shortly After May 1993: Ali Mohamed Describes Al-Qaeda Training Camps, Possibly More, to US Military Double agent Ali Mohamed is interviewed by the US military about al-Qaeda, but what exactly is said is uncertain because the interview files are supposedly lost. When Mohamed’s FBI handler John Zent interviewed him in May 1993 (see May 1993), he mentioned al-Qaeda training camps. FBI agent Jack Cloonan, who will later investigate Mohamed, will recall, “John realizes that Ali is talking about all these training camps in Afghanistan. And starts talking about this guy named bin Laden. So John calls the local rep from army intelligence” and arranges for them to interview him. A special team of army investigators shows up from Fort Meade, Virginia, which is the home of the NSA. “They bring maps with them and they bring evidence.… And so they debrief Ali, and he lays out all these training camps.” What else he may reveal is not known. Cloonan is not sure why Mohamed volunteered all this vital al-Qaeda information. Earlier in the year, FBI investigators discovered that Mohamed stole many top secret US military documents and gave them to Islamic militants (see Spring 1993). However, Mohamed faces no trouble from the Defense Department about that. FBI agent Joseph O’Brien will later ask, “Who in the government was running this show? Why didn’t the Bureau bring the hammer down on this guy Mohamed then and there?” Whatever Mohamed says in this interview is not shared with US intelligence agencies, even though it would have obvious relevance for the worldwide manhunt for Ramzi Yousef going on at the time since Yousef trained in some of the camps Mohamed is describing. Several years later, Cloonan will attempt to find the report of Mohamed’s interview with army intelligence but “we were never able to find it. We were told that the report was probably destroyed in a reorganization of intelligence components” in the Defense Department. ########################################################## ####################################################### June 16, 1993: Ali Mohamed Detained in Vancouver; FBI Tells Canadian Authorities He Is an FBI Informant Essam Marzouk. US-al-Qaeda double agent Ali Mohamed is detained by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) in Vancouver, British Columbia, after attempting to pick up a man named Essam Marzouk, who is carrying numerous false passports. They identify Mohamed as a top al-Qaeda operative. Mohamed admits to them that he traveled to Vancouver to help Marzouk sneak into the US and admits working closely with bin Laden. After many hours of questioning, Mohamed tells the Canadian officials to call John Zent, his handler at the FBI. Zent confirms that Mohamed works for the FBI and asks them to release him. They do. Mohamed is accompanied by fellow al-Qaeda operative Khaled Abu el-Dahab (see 1987-1998), who brings $3,000 sent by bin Laden to pay for Marzouk’s bail. Marzouk had run one of bin Laden’s training camps in Afghanistan and was an active member of the al-Qaeda allied group Islamic Jihad at the time. However, Canadian intelligence apparently is not aware of his past. Marzouk will spend almost a year in detention. But then, again with the help of another visit to Canada by Mohamed, Marzouk will be released and allowed to live in Canada (see June 16, 1993-February 1998). He later will help train the bombers of the 1998 African embassy bombings (see 10:35-10:39 a.m., August 7, 1998). Jack Cloonan, an FBI agent who later investigates Mohamed, will later say, “I don’t think you have to be an agent who has worked terrorism all your life to realize something is terribly amiss here. What was the follow up? It just sort of seems like dies.” #################################### ###################################################### I JUST DONT THINK ZENT HAPLESS ,THE FIX IS IN ,SEE BELOW. February 1996-May 1998: CIA’s Bin Laden Unit Asks NSA for Full Transcripts of Al-Qaeda Communications, NSA Refuses Barbara McNamara. [source: National Security Agency]Alec Station, the CIA’s bin Laden unit, and other senior agency officers repeatedly ask the NSA to provide verbatim transcripts of intercepted calls between al-Qaeda members. Alec Station chief Michael Scheuer will explain, “[V]erbatim transcripts are operationally useful, summaries are much less so.” [Atlantic Monthly, 12/2004] According to PBS, Alec Station believes that “only by carefully studying each word will it be possible to understand [Osama] bin Laden’s intentions.” This is because al-Qaeda operatives sometimes talk in a simplistic code (see (October 1993-November 2001)). Scheuer will say: “Over time, if you read enough of these conversations, you first get clued in to the fact that maybe ‘bottle of milk’ doesn’t mean ‘bottle of milk.’ And if you follow it long enough, you develop a sense of what they’re really talking about. But it’s not possible to do unless you have the verbatim transcript.” [PBS, 2/3/2009] Scheuer will also complain that the summaries “are usually not timely.” [Atlantic Monthly, 12/2004] Author James Bamford will say that the summaries are “brief” and come “once a week or something like that.” [Antiwar, 10/22/2008] Alec Station’s desire for verbatim transcripts will intensify when it discovers the NSA is intercepting calls between bin Laden and his operations center in Yemen (see December 1996). However, the NSA constantly rejects its requests. Scheuer will later say: “We went to Fort Meade to ask then the NSA’s deputy director for operations [barbara McNamara] for the transcripts, and she said, ‘We are not going to share that with you.’ And that was the end.” He will add that McNamara “said that the National Security Act of 1947 gave her agency control of ‘raw’ signals intelligence, and that she would not pass such material to CIA.” [Atlantic Monthly, 12/2004; Antiwar, 10/22/2008; PBS, 2/3/2009] McNamara will tell the 9/11 Commission that “She does not recall being personally [asked] to provide… transcripts or raw data” for counterterrorism, but if people wanted raw data, “then NSA would have provided it.” [9/11 Commission, 12/15/2003, pp. 5] ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Now the story is that she (McNanmara ,above ) was demoted to NSA England !!! WHAT !! ??!!! BULL PUCKY. My MOM would have loved to live in England. She would go on and on about England this and England that. Oh lord, TEA TIME at Harrods !! A breaucrate stuck in an ugly building for over twenty years in Maryland gets to go live= shop = tour ENGLAND !! LET THE TERROR ATTACK BEGIN !!!!!!!!!!!!! DEMOTED ??? BALONEY !!!!!!!!! +rSFCLc/TVjip66yulYJUw1cUhNgjooPztqwAZzT1tFQVN65qJjoEVRCGJLXuSdFyNXqBsB6Y4jyZM4yGhzqtzJKnMIiFjqVYASWe4DAjld/Ti5xKXM/RF1wqrbNCTrnLmp0mFJXhHTWuqNFJH1bHDdfZYqajSV9rA7Roefk+M66jy2Xp2ufNazMamohl/lRU6xl+3lHOkAW9O/rvh2m/4rKo6wRVUUcwdQhZiVIPHfbm2GjyW6YsuKlaNAk+0DKI7a6evFzbeAf64bP2i5KGCmOq3B5CDj/yxn0mgwC1QR5Qd0F9jvuVxxMxdFkSpjYqQ4BsOeeG9cUJ0HtV9p2R0pAenr2v3SNCP/vEjIftDyfPc1iy2khrUnlDFTNGoXYEncMewxlWd0jSUZlVIj4e90BvY/v1x19mTD/HOWjffxB/6NhW3ZqVH0FhY8wsOKD/AFsF/hURaEzaZ1IQKG3s3Y4+eursjjgzxhGksaym9mSxuedr/u2PoXrclcnRl8PUsykCQXB2bGUdRUVTU0cFWI4ZpIJPEKRElinfY/nb54D6CgFqMrhp8pM7QES/dVWWxY35Pnb9LfTF5VTQPkHTmZyaZy8Pw0iPIdtCkcKQR9z9cSKypjzHL2hpaYzSPsipFvq+gwzJlVZT9KQ5VLTNFWxTF0U21KCbkfPe+I8fJknkqHnHF6LmnoKpqRpEfL6CWEm7L4fl7f0sx39/rh7JqetZs9osyrI65lSIeOJiVOpSRpvza+K6Cl6mq28GNKGNidTKyGVjffglgBf2xe9I5ZmNBnNWlZIlaZlUS6VCLEAHXiw3sAAbbfXD2gJWN5H1K0Yjy3OjGadCIvGlGpStthcj5Xv9PXFpm1AzCFcnziLLaNLuIkp0kgkv+Li3cixx1mU9PWOyfCIkd7EG3mHuOL4aXpmljZI8sMsQnj1lI2aJD32A2He+OZu28TqSUaG8yaXP6uOal6impY4ECtCkVlPO/YHtzcbY9zKqXW8vxytSQDbQEK3C28o2ubE78cW72UdBQQtLDXiolcHTs3iAetyx/t6YdaOklnXLqWBptaKCzxDSxtudx+7Ybjpyti8lpUuifB09WGhjeCrgl1JfSVZbgj1B3/IYpHpqiO8FTBHrQlHBbi4v3GLDJs7r8ohNFV0ckscMjRxum5Cr6jntzb9MM57UvmFTHPHJLB5lRiI2AWxa5J2BtdTt2vjpUk+iDjXZULAk0BR6RCSDGdLR/MehxE+zWIx/aBQRkEMrSggjcWjbFmAokkVK1/61/mq3v3tjvpCm8H7ScvfUHSRJHVrAf8pr8bY0kBGz4WFhYYQHuuIHqMqhjR5E/wCIW5jFzbS2AqSGpRGkFe3m8qiSLt3wcdZxGbKkQNKpMy7xc8HAeIUikZps1anpKawleW97newuee/HGDdIKR5QCqMz08cVNK0IVpX06QSwJAB23t/fEmlyinWWR6tUnqJDqZWY6Y/b5/6YDc2+0COlzF1oZEnpG0klVANxbe/c/S2+2JmX/aRl9TUJD8IKVb7N4hIN/UW2JPcfrxiDmpMv4pJWHMMbQppjEcMfpGun9f8AbFD1RSzwq9bSMUEqeHNpB39CfXj93xeU8j1lO6xgxyspIeLdlBvYgtcX/wBOMJoYphIr+G4dQsz6hv7Frc/2wWrQlgzS3qV0xxtqtutuMWMlZm9NogY+F4ahQqxg3A74raijqKWoMf8AO8cXMcw2uvscckvJJFIsswkjN3l81wTt+/ljmxx6ZXyX2jzNKoRKZTEPiGuzRhgNe9rgbnnt+xzJmcrR0c1Ovg/Dlruvm3/pJHPf88Q+pJ6jyS1M80lKFbxZBdvDBtZio7Cx7d8QsrrIawO0DiWjgUJI9yFY6t7XA4Fz7beuMk09fIZSUohVWVUAjo81nTRLGryxjUdixZN1HqGWw97/AIQMW9FlTysa2ojYmRTrp5WFiexNhiNWSQUPT9VXVBBUVoKFXuqeZU2vyOfT6c45rOoWrsu0UskaalbVJFYnggEAkW37G+OtaI1aB2uEVLVoj05kZPI5EAO/6e+J3SUdM/V+WPCoSWIzKQEK7GNvcjDFXUVFTBToBFVVTaQxidYgt+Be9rm/AJ/Xa26NqJZeoKMvBMiujXYtqW4Q98OtiyVGlYWFhYwhR9XKDlakymLTKDqF/Q+mMR6xqal8qmij1TssvizkHcKwBja3NgNva3vjautTUjKY/gwpk8db6uLWP+dsAFRJFSeBSZrRqNIYPKp0kpYhDq9LWVh6ixuCLrNfaU43TMLlkYtybYtulslq8/zWCjp4HljLjxm3Col97nttjXKDobovNpJBHETKtiwWU2JIubaSBg1paLJOl6AxUkVPTJY2VFA1H39frhUk0PKTTBjLqpajqY0dLC/gRw2XUu7Cx8y32sSAL+2CZIZBGk1TKKdlNzGjB9vQsR/a31wOREw1zVqNtayM9id+FH77nFb1Nn9ImQl55JJqypLrGCTbSjWbi1hqH1AG++JqdLYcc5JRCuty9axH+FkCSKxZmM2/vffb5WGKuSnaJjqR0jAs/B1/Ig74yKTqCrYKjVErBDcFmvv6/P3xe9IdRVhzqGColWSklsjo5sASbXHuP88SvLtUWl9NirsnfaGs6DLpvOcvjkvOujygH7rN7A7/ADxW5dX/AMQzSX+FosUMEGiQtYI0pICd9zfUb+l/XGiVINPM0lS5SNE3um3rx+97jfEeTJKTKMinlMaRT1TB5NCKui9hYAbXttf1xaKTXscu7oIaKCFMlpaeDxFpKeJRGyqXeQAfeA7A77m9/TETLstoI6mWphFXBK+zLVKpDc72Q8883+WK6rzN3zOphlroIIYiTEkthYi+4v3AH5EemCvJp4c1ylJo7RE7rpF7WOx3G4OHi1KQ0k4x/gLdS07mrhT+G00oFiJJFuWIsw0kkWsQDvf6Y46IeobqCnjmozHpMhL+Jf8AA19uOb98X+cAfFLFVMrxSKFcAfdsdmAJO4Jv8r4oulvFg6zjp5KYx7yrqUtp2VuLj2P54qTZpuFhYWAKUPWLxR5dA04ugqF/EF7N3JwG1lRQ1VLISsrsWHhk3Nj63HBtfg4N+qXZMsBRFcmQCzcHY4C6+CULDGtMge1yV5NyBv8ApjP8dBRV0tK1FKrQTyRC2wQL/cgk/XFipmlt8SdW1hqNjbCFLUKlnpnMhHlA4IxyQXsWjcuv4QpPfHNUimVnsyk08aldCrLH5h28w3397YCepunM1XK4mSCSdRK7xBBdtLqpdQO5DAtb/qNr2wcziGaItNqWK1mF7E+2HMvz2SidaauiFTTTPpMzDyuOL/8Ad6i3uL9il6MeE3HowRkZSQRwbG/bBj9nGRT5tnUDiJ2gpj4zOFOm44Bbjm2NXzCLpiGdZWoKYVRJs0gAKW4O+9sVkWbitkajjoGipydYMDlBdT5XQjnjvt8u+xV0yvllKLpHOYSTv8S1UyiJiI1UndY9Vjc+u7nb3xY9TiHM8vWmRXssiN5UbUy2vx2PHb1xDqx8X4sc8aFHDXK33HGLHpyanrdKVSgVtIRdgf8A9BYgPb33v7g4aO7SOe6dgxFAMwVIpmjjmhNmMyWubWFzfgjf5km+C/ppYqWlipzBLr1BbiO5UgX8zKLW73PqPbEmvyqmqJGlIZWMejy2AFjcYp6XLZ8un8STMTHT3sSildI9TYi/uT88OoSiNLkyjix/qk1aVtCtNG3hmS80nAVN+T2Atc/74hdM5jDXdWU0qSNqkeby6gRbS2k27G1vzxXdTV1VE7uPicxg1sFSnUWawvuSd+3lvY+nGLzoyOarlp81QRmkILoxGlzqU9vrg5JN2xGtUg+wscqQwBHBwsG0TKbq7KKjOsrWmpZlikWZZNTat7X22I9cBJ6M6kMij4tSga5ZZSrEbeoPpjUcLBMZ5F0h1AJNf8SaM6QATOznb8vXCg6N6khDEZzEWK2vqkG/7v8AnjQ8LGMZ+nRueiIK2YxXvqb+e5Fybk7rv359ce/4CqpIgtRXI5Ni3Jta9gLg7bnb3wf4WMYz6HoGvSQq2Z2p/uiNGYBU7DTxxt6b4fHQlQsZT+KzED7gv+RO2/75wdYWMG2CD9JVLwaGqULD7vIH6DESbozMRNFNS1kMUkY2e5v2uPu7j2+WDrCwKRrYM02V52BoqWoXA/Gkjgn6af8APEl8qrTCwDQB/wAPmNv7YvcLDWwAblPSSUWay5pXyLLVzRGExxraIIdyOLsduT+WCNIHJjCIqxLzvYgW2AGJpA1cY6xF8eUrY+WjwAAWAwse4WKUIf/Z

Ive already posted info on this forum that the government considers CT people to be possible terrorists. (Gaal) Get back to us with a link. // end Colby +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Do You Believe in Conspiracy Theories? You May Be a Terrorist February 3, 2012 in News Public Intelligence A flyer from a series created by the FBI and Department of Justice to promote suspicious activity reporting states that espousing conspiracy theories or anti-US rhetoric should be considered a potential indicator of terrorist activity. The document, part of a collection published yesterday by Public Intelligence, indicates that individuals who discuss “conspiracy theories about Westerners” or display “fury at the West for reasons ranging from personal problems to global policies of the U.S.” are to be considered as potentially engaging in terrorist activity. For an example of the kinds of conspiracy theories that are to be considered suspicious, the flyer specifically lists the belief that the “CIA arranged for 9/11 to legitimize the invasion of foreign lands.” Even if you don’t believe in conspiracy theories, you may still be presenting indicators of potential terrorist activity by espousing “anti-US” rhetoric. Several of the FBI flyers state that “suspicious comments” of an “anti-US” nature should be considered a suspicious activity. Nearly all of the flyers recommend that employees should spy on their customers: “Talk to customers, ask questions, and listen to and observe their responses.” The flyers recommend that employees take notes on “suspicious statements, people, and/or vehicles” and report this information to law enforcement if they feel there is a potential threat. However, with indicators that are so incredibly vague and common, the suspicious person could simply be expressing an unfavorable opinion about U.S. foreign policy or an unusual belief they hold, as is protected by the First Amendment. (GO TO LINK TO SEE DOCUMENT) http://publicintelligence.net/do-you-believe-in-conspiracy-theories-you-may-be-a-terrorist/ #####################################

Well if everything went up over the supposed inflation rate, there something wrong with the inflation rate. // end Colby ++++++++++++++++++ GOLLY Colby thus asserts Goverment statistics are inncorrect .....now if only he could really be smart and extend his same thoughts to NIST !!!!!!!! Now I learned about correlative thinking at 17 when I studied the Zen man Alan Watts. (BTW I met Alan Watts for he did a fund raiser for our Temple . I was a Buddhist monk 18-19yrs. of age) Bureau of LABOR lies = NIST lies +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ FOR PROBABLY THE FORTH TIME , MAY I PRESENT AN ALTERNATIVE TO GOVERMENT STATISTICS Shadow Government Statistics Analysis Behind and Beyond Government Economic Reporting http://www.shadowstats.com/ CV site author Walter J. "John" Williams was born in 1949. He received an A.B. in Economics, cum laude, from Dartmouth College in 1971, and was awarded a M.B.A. from Dartmouth's Amos Tuck School of Business Administration in 1972, where he was named an Edward Tuck Scholar. During his career as a consulting economist, John has worked with individuals as well as Fortune 500 companies. Although I am known formally as Walter J. Williams, my friends call me “John.” For 30 years, I have been a private consulting economist and, out of necessity, had to become a specialist in government economic reporting. One of my early clients was a large manufacturer of commercial airplanes, who had developed an econometric model for predicting revenue passenger miles. The level of revenue passenger miles was their primary sales forecasting tool, and the model was heavily dependent on the GNP (now GDP) as reported by the Department of Commerce. Suddenly, their model stopped working, and they asked me if I could fix it. I realized the GNP numbers were faulty, corrected them for my client (official reporting was similarly revised a couple of years later) and the model worked again, at least for a while, until GNP methodological changes eventually made the underlying data worthless. That began a lengthy process of exploring the history and nature of economic reporting and in interviewing key people involved in the process from the early days of government reporting through the present. For a number of years I conducted surveys among business economists as to the quality of government statistics (the vast majority thought it was pretty bad), and my results led to front page stories in 1989 in the New York Times and Investors Daily (now Investors Business Daily), considerable coverage in the broadcast media and a joint meeting with representatives of all the government's statistical agencies. Nonetheless, the quality of government reporting has deteriorated sharply in the last couple of decades. Reporting problems have included methodological changes to economic reporting that have pushed headline economic and inflation results out of the realm of real-world or common experience. Over the decades, well in excess of 1,000 presentations have been given on the economic outlook, or on approaches to analyzing economic data, to clients—large and small—including talks with members of the business, banking, government, press, academic, brokerage and investment communities. I also have provided testimony before Congress (details here). An old friend—the late-Doug Gillespie—asked me some years back to write a series of articles on the quality of government statistics. The response to those writings (the Primer Series available at the top-center of this page) was so strong that we started ShadowStats.com (Shadow Government Statistics) in 2004. The newsletter is published as part of my economic consulting services. — John Williams

YA KNOW I MADE BOO BOO ,JUST CONCENTRATED ON THE RICHARDSON MATERIAL 3) The U.S. government’s intimate on-going connection to al-Qaeda and a chief 9/11 plotter. In our book, 9/11 and Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, I wrote of Ali Mohamed, the close ally of Osama bin Laden and his mentor Ayman al-Zawahiri.7 It is now generally admitted that Ali Mohamed (known in the al Qaeda camps as Abu Mohamed al Amriki — “Father Mohamed the American”)8 worked for the FBI, the CIA, and U.S. Special Forces. As he later confessed in court, he also aided the terrorist Ayman al-Zawahiri, a co-founder of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and by then an aide to bin Laden, when he visited America to raise money.9 The 9/11 Report mentioned him, and said that the plotters against the U.S. Embassy in Kenya were “led” (their word) by Ali Mohamed.10 That’s the Report’s only reference to him, though it’s not all they heard. Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney who negotiated a plea bargain and confession from Ali Mohamed, said this in testimony to the Commission Ali Mohamed. …. trained most of al Qaeda’s top leadership – including Bin Laden and Zawahiri – and most of al Qaeda’s top trainers. He gave some training to persons who would later carry out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing…. From 1994 until his arrest in 1998, he lived as an American citizen in California, applying for jobs as an FBI translator.11 Patrick Fitzgerald knew Ali Mohamed well. In 1994 he had named him as an unindicted co-conspirator in the New York landmarks case, yet allowed him to remain free. This was because, as Fitzgerald knew, Ali Mohamed was an FBI informant, from at least 1993 and maybe 1989.12 Thus, from 1994 “until his arrest in 1998 [by which time the 9/11 plot was well under way], Mohamed shuttled between California, Afghanistan, Kenya, Somalia and at least a dozen other countries.”13 Shortly after 9/11, Larry C. Johnson, a former State Department and CIA official, faulted the FBI publicly for using Mohamed as an informant, when it should have recognized that the man was a high-ranking terrorist plotting against the United States.14 As I say in our book, in 1993 Ali Mohamed had been detained by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Canada, when he inquired at an airport after an incoming al Qaeda terrorist who turned out to be carrying two forged Saudi passports. Mohamed immediately told the RCMP to make a phone call to the United States, and the call secured his release.15 We’ve since been told that it was Mohamed’s West coast FBI handler, John Zent, “who vouched for Ali and got him released.”16 This release enabled Ali to go on to Kenya, take pictures of the U.S. Embassy, and deliver them to bin Laden for the Embassy bombing plot. In August 2006 there was a National Geographic Special on Ali Mohamed. We can take this as the new official fallback position on Ali Mohamed, because John Cloonan, the FBI agent who worked with Fitzgerald on Mohamed, helped narrate it. I didn’t see the show, but here’s what TV critics said about its contents: Ali Mohamed manipulated the FBI, CIA and U.S. Army on behalf of Osama bin Laden. Mohamed trained terrorists how to hijack airliners, bomb buildings and assassinate rivals. [D]uring much of this time Mohamed was …, an operative for the CIA and FBI, and a member of the U.S. Army.17 …Mohamed turned up in FBI surveillance photos as early as 1989, training radical Muslims who would go on to assassinate Jewish militant Meir Kahane and detonate a truck bomb at the World Trade Center. He not only avoided arrest, but managed to become an FBI informant while writing most of the al Qaeda terrorist manual and helping plan attacks on American troops in Somalia and U.S. embassies in Africa.18 That Mohamed trained al Qaeda in hijacking planes and wrote most of the al Qaeda terrorist manual is confirmed in a new book by Lawrence Wright, who has seen US Government records.19 Let me say this again: one of al-Qaeda’s top trainers in terrorism and how to hijack airplanes was an operative for FBI, CIA, and the Army. Yet this TV show, just before the 9/11 anniversary, was itself another cover-up. It suppressed for example the information given it about Mohamed’s detention and FBI-ordered release in Canada. According to Peter Lance, the principal author for the show, the show suppressed many other sensational facts. Here is Lance’s chief claim: that Fitzgerald and his FBI counterpart on the Bin Laden task force, John Cloonan, learned shortly after 9/11 that Mohamed “knew every twist and turn of”the 9/11 plot.20 Within days of 9/11 Cloonan rushed backed from Yemen and interviewed Ali, whom the Feds had allowed to slip into witness protection, and demanded to know the details of the plot. At that point Ali wrote it all out – including details of how he’d counseled would-be hijackers on how to smuggle box cutters on board aircraft and where to sit, to effect the airline seizures.21 If all these latest revelations about Ali Mohamed are true, then: 1) a key planner of the 9/11 plot, and trainer in hijacking, was simultaneously an informant for the FBI. 2) This operative trained the members for all of the chief Islamist attacks inside the United States – the first WTC bombing, the New York landmarks plot, and finally 9/11, as well as the attacks against Americans in Somalia and Kenya. 3) And yet for four years Mohamed was allowed to move in and out of the country as an unindicted conspirator. Then, unlike his trainees, he was allowed to plea-bargain. To this day he may still not have been sentenced for any crime.22 Peter Lance has charged that Fitzgerald had evidence before 1998 to implicate Mohamed in the Kenya Embassy bombing, yet did nothing and let the bombing happen.23 In fact, the FBI was aware back in 1990 that Mohamed had engaged in terrorist training on Long Island; yet it acted to protect Mohamed from arrest, even after one of his trainees had moved beyond training to an actual assassination.24 Mohamed’s trainees were all members of the Al-Kifah Center in Brooklyn, which served as the main American recruiting center for the Makhtab-al-Khidimat, the “Services Center” network that after the Afghan war became known as al Qaeda.25 The Al-Kifah Center was headed in 1990 by the blind Egyptian Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, who like Ali Mohamed had been admitted to the United States, despite being on a State Department Watch List. 26 As he had done earlier in Egypt, the sheikh “issued a fatwa in America that permitted his followers to rob banks and kill Jews.”27 In November 1990, three of Mohamed’s trainees conspired together to kill Meir Kahane, the racist founder of the Jewish Defense League. The actual killer, El Sayyid Nosair, was caught by accident almost immediately; and by luck the police soon found his two co-conspirators, Mahmoud Abouhalima and Mohammed Salameh, waiting at Nosair’s house. They found much more: There were formulas for bomb making, 1,440 rounds of ammunition, and manuals [supplied by Ali Mohamed] from the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg marked “Top Secret for Training,” along with classified documents belonging to the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. The police found maps and drawings of New York City landmarks like the Statue of Liberty, Times Square – and the World Trade Center. The forty-seven boxes of evidence they collected also included the collected sermons of blind Sheikh Omar, in which he exhorted his followers to “destroy the edifices of capitalism.”28 All three had been trained by Ali Mohamed back in the late 1980s at a rifle range, where the FBI had photographed them, before terminating this surveillance in the fall of 1989.29 The U.S. Government was thus in an excellent position to arrest, indict, and convict all of the terrorists involved, including Mohamed. Yet only hours after the killing, Joseph Borelli, Chief of NYPD detectives, struck a familiar American note and pronounced Nosair a “lone deranged gunman.”30 Some time later, he actually told the pressthat “There was nothing [at Nosair’s house] that would stir your imagination…..Nothing has transpired that changes our opinion that he acted alone.”31 Borelli was not acting alone in this matter. His position was also that of the FBI, who said they too believed “that Mr. Nosair had acted alone in shooting Rabbi Kahane.” “The bottom line is that we can’t connect anyone else to the Kahane shooting,” an F.B.I. agent said.”32 In thus limiting the case, the police and FBI were in effect protecting Nosair’s two Arab co-conspirators in the murder of a U.S. citizen. Both of them were ultimately convicted in connection with the first WTC bombing, along with another Mohamed trainee, Nidal Ayyad. The 9/11 Report, summarizing the convictions of Salameh, Ayyad, Abouhalima, and the blind Sheikh for the WTC bombing and New York landmarks plots, calls it “this superb investigative and prosecutorial effort.”33 It says nothing about the suppressed evidence found in Nosair’s house, including “maps and drawings of New York City landmarks,” which if pursued should have prevented both plots from developing. What explains the 9/11 Report’s gratuitous and undeserved praise for the superb effort of Patrick Fitzgerald and the FBI in the New York landmarks case? How can it be “superb” to know that terrorists intend to blow up buildings, to lie to protect them from arrest, to allow them to bomb the WTC, and only then to arrest and convict them? Lance now alleges that Kenya was allowed to happen as well, before a few of the bombers there were convicted with the aid of the arch-plotter. This pattern of toleration can make for good arrest and conviction records, but at a terrible cost to public security. Did the authors of the 9/11 Report recognize that here was an especially sensitive area, which if properly investigated would lead to past U.S. protection of terrorists? This question returns us to Peter Lance’s charge that Fitzgerald had evidence before 1998 to implicate Mohamed in the Kenya Embassy bombing, yet did nothing and let the bombing happen. Did Fitzgerald have similar advance evidence before the 9/11 attack, and again do nothing as well? Skeptics will need a thorough investigation before they can be reassured that this is not the case. As a first step, all U.S. agencies should release the full documentary record of their dealings with Ali Mohamed, the FBI and CIA informant who allegedly planned the details of the airline seizures. Then and only then will a close interrogation of Fitzgerald satisfy those who accuse members of the U.S. Government of assisting the 9/11 plot, or alternatively of failing to prevent 9/11 from happening.34 Now, what did the 9/11 Commission know about this scandalous situation? I suspect they knew more than they let on. Is it just a coincidence that they selected to write the staff reports about al Qaeda and the 9/11 plot, and conduct the relevant interviews, a man who had a personal stake in preventing the truth about Mohamed from coming out. This man was Dietrich Snell, who had been Fitzgerald’s colleague in the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney’s office. (Thus Snell presumably drafted the praise for the superb effort by his former colleague Patrick Fitzgerald and the FBI). Of the nine people on Snell’s team, all but one had worked for the U.S. Government, and all but two for either the Justice Department or the FBI.35 Keep in mind that what I have said so far is about a government-Mohamed connection and cover-up that goes back to at least 1990, long before the Bush-Cheney administrations. But the 9/11 Commission staff reports went out of their way to cover this up.

2) this involves the House Homeland Security Subcommittee, not the Homeland Security Deparment 3) the subcommittee made no such comments, they were made by a witness // end Colby ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Gee. INFORMATION ALERT !! INFORMATION ALERT !!! committees exist to gather information for governmental action. +++++++++++++++++++++ Golly Ive already posted info on this forum that the government considers CT people to be possible terrorists.

1) You repeatedly have demonstrated difficulty understanding what you read // end Colby post #4 shows per reading comprehension that the proverbial empty Colby can rattles loudest. HOW MUCH FLORIDE GOOD FOR YOU ??? ANSWER ZERO !! (GAAL) New Study on Fluoride Shows No Benefits and Major Safety Issues By Dr. Mercola Fluoride, a neurotoxin that has been linked to reduced IQ, impaired neurobehavioral development and brain damage, among many other serious health problems, is sometimes prescribed in supplement form to children ages 6 months to 16 years who live in areas that have non-fluoridated drinking water. The rationale, which is heavily promoted by government agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) – or rather its Oral Health Division – and bodies like the American Dental Association (ADA), is that this toxic agent helps reduce cavities – and those children who are “unfortunate” enough NOT to have the poison forced upon them in their drinking water should get their daily dose elsewhere (i.e. in supplement form). These recommendations now defy rational logic and common sense on two fronts: 1) even promoters of fluoridation now admit that fluoride’s predominant action is on the surface of the tooth and not from inside the body (CDC, 1999) and 2) there are more than 100 published studies illustrating fluoride's harm to the brain, plus 25 published studies directly linking fluoride exposure to reduced IQ in children! In other words, it doesn’t do much (if any) good to swallow fluoride and doing so could be doing significant harm. Adding insult to injury, new research has further revealed that ingesting fluoride in supplement form does not reduce cavities in primary teeth – and may in fact cause harm. Why You Need to Get Informed Before Allowing Your Child to Take Fluoride Supplements A review of 11 studies involving more than 7,000 children showed that the effect of fluoride supplements on primary teeth could not be determined, with one study showing no cavity-reducing effect. Meanwhile, the study revealed the supplements have only dubious cavity-reducing effects on permanent teeth, and no difference was noted between fluoride supplements or topical fluoride for preventing cavities. Researchers noted: "In the review, no conclusion could be reached about the effectiveness of fluoride supplements in preventing tooth decay in young children (less than 6 years of age) with deciduous teeth. Moreover, insufficient evidence exists to show whether or not using fluoride supplements in young children (less than 6 years of age) could mottle teeth (fluorosis), an effect of chronic ingestion of excessive amounts of fluoride." Adding to the stark lack of supporting evidence, researchers pointed out that 10 out of the 11 trials they reviewed were at "unclear risk of bias," and the 11th was at "high risk of bias" – leading researchers to conclude "therefore the trials provide weak evidence about the efficacy of fluoride supplements." This is not the first time a study has questioned the use of fluoride supplements. In 2008, researchers reviewed 20 reports from 12 trials and similarly concluded: "There is weak and inconsistent evidence that the use of fluoride supplements prevents dental caries in primary teeth … Mild-to-moderate dental fluorosis is a significant side effect. The current recommendations for use of fluoride supplements during the first six years of life should be re-examined." What is so ludicrous about these findings is that fluorosis is associated with the irreversible discoloration of the teeth (yellow and brown spots) – the very aesthetically unappealing symptoms that most people think and are told the fluoride is supposed to prevent! The CDC admitted in 2010 that 41% of American children between the ages of 12-15 had this irreversible staining of their teeth (CDC, 2010) and in 2005 revealed that minority children are disproportionately impacted by this condition (CDC, 2005, Table 23). ADA Recommends Fluoride Supplements Despite Evidence of Serious Risks The truth has always been that fluoride is a toxic agent that is biologically active in the human body where it accumulates in sensitive tissues over time, wreaks havoc with enzymes and produces a number of serious adverse health effects —including neurological and endocrine dysfunctions (NRC, 2006). Nearly 10 years ago, Belgium banned the sale of all non-prescription fluoride supplements citing well-documented research indicating that ingested fluoride has "considerable potential" for physical and neurological harm, with little evidence of cavity prevention. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), meanwhile, has not found fluoride supplements to be safe or effective, according to the National Institute of Health, which lists a laundry list of fluoride's effects, including: Staining of teeth Unusual increase in saliva Weakness Stomach pain and upset stomach Vomiting Diarrhea Rash Salty or soapy taste Tremor Seizures Not to mention, it's known that over time fluoride accumulates in many areas of your body, including areas of your brain that control and alter behavior, particularly your pineal gland, hippocampus and other limbic areas. One particularly striking animal study published in 1995 showed that fluoride ingestion had a profound influence on the animals' brains and altered behavior. Pregnant rats given fluoride produced hyperactive offspring. And animals given fluoride after birth became apathetic, lethargic "couch potatoes." This study was particularly powerful because the effects were measured using objective computerized evaluations of behavior, to rule out subjective bias by the researchers observing the animals. For the past 60 years, pregnant women have ingested fluoridated water and used fluoridated water to reconstitute infant formula for their babies. If the adverse effects associated with fluoride exposure in animals are true for humans as well, we'd expect to see a striking change in human behavior at this point as well. And we most definitely do! One in ten children are now diagnosed with ADHD. While no US agency has funded or attempted to see if this condition has been caused by or exacerbated by fluoride the connection is biologically plausible and worrying. But the attitude of the American health authorities that continue to recklessly promote fluoridation is that the "absence of studies means the absence of harm." Aside from the animal studies that show that fluoride damages the brain, and the 25 studies indicating lowered IQ associated with modest to high exposure to fluoride, mild reduction of thyroid function in pregnant women has been shown to produce significant neurological problems in their offspring as well. Outrageously, there is no mention of the risks or lack of efficacy on the American Dental Association's Fluoride Supplements Web page, other than mild dental fluorosis. Instead they claim the fluoride supplements are "silently at work fighting decay. Safe, convenient, effective..." Dental fluorosis is only caused by fluoride, and is typically due to ingesting too much during your developing years, from birth to about 8 years of age. Dental fluorosis is not a merely cosmetic problem, as it is usually an indication that the rest of your body has been exposed to too much fluoride as well. You Can Opt Out of the Supplements, But it's Much Harder to Get Fluoride Out of Your Drinking Water The only positive side to fluoride in supplement form is that you can make a choice of whether or not to take it. In the case of the fluoride that's added to the water supplies of nearly 75 percent of Americans, you have no choice. It's there whether you like it or not. China, in contrast, does NOT allow water fluoridation because it's too toxic and causes damage, according to their studies. Instead, the waste product from their phosphate fertilizer industry is shipped to the United States, where we add it to our water supply! This is a very important point: the fluoride added to your water is NOT even pharmaceutical grade. It's a toxic industrial waste product, which is also contaminated with lead, arsenic, radionucleotides, aluminum and other industrial contaminants. The story gets even more convoluted, as now declassified files of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic Energy Commission show that the original motivation for promoting fluoride and water fluoridation in the United States was to protect the bomb- and aluminum industries other fluoride polluting industries from liability. In the early days some of the sodium fluoride used to fluoridate water supplies in the U.S. came from Alcoa. A couple of years later, they switched to the even more hazardous waste product hydrofluorosilicic acid from the phosphate fertilizer industry. But none of the studies on fluoride actually used the far more toxic and contaminated hydrofluorosilicic acid that is added to the water supply. Rather, they use pharmaceutical grade fluoride, which while harmful, is not quite as bad as what's being used for water fluoridation. So, the health hazards are likely FAR worse than any study has so far discerned. Some proponents of fluoridation believe that the large dilution of these fluoridating chemicals that takes place when they are added at the public water works ameliorates concerns about the known contaminants. However, one of those contaminants is arsenic, which is a known human carcinogen. For the EPA there is no safe level for a human carcinogen. Inevitably, the addition of contaminated hexafluorosilicic acid to the water supply by definition must increase the cancer rate in the U.S. because of the arsenic it contains. One can argue about how much this cancer risk is increased by, but there is no question that it will be increased. Why would any rational government do that to reduce – at best – a miniscule amount of tooth decay? For people living in areas with fluoridated tap water, fluoride is a part of every glass of water, every bath and shower, and every meal cooked using that water. This makes absolutely no sense considering the significant health risks of this toxin -- and the data published online by the World Health Organization showing that 12-year-olds in countries that do not fluoridate their water have similar if not better tooth decay rates than countries that do. Join the Fight to Get Fluoride Out of Drinking Water In summary it would seem most rational people would conclude you should avoid using fluoride for its "preventive" benefits. You can easily choose not to take fluoride supplements or buy fluoride-free toothpaste and mouthwash. But you're stuck with whatever your community puts in the water, and it's very difficult to filter out of your water once it's added. Many do not have the resources or the knowledge to do so. The only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of water fluoridation. Earlier this year I joined forces with Dr. Paul Connett to help put an END to water fluoridation in the U.S and Canada. The Fluoride Action Network has a game plan to do just that. Our fluoride initiative will primarily focus on Canada since 60 percent of Canada is already non-fluoridated. If we can get Calgary and the rest of Canada to stop fluoridating their water, we believe the U.S. will be forced to follow. I urge you to join the anti-fluoride movement in Canada and United States by contacting the representative for your area below. Contact Information for Canadian Communities: If you live in Ontario, Canada, please join the ongoing effort by contacting Diane Sprules at diane.sprules@cogeco.ca. The point-of-contact for Toronto, Canada is Aliss Terpstra. You may email her at aliss@nutrimom.ca. The point-of-contact for the Peel region in Ontario, Canada is Rob Brewer. You may email him at FluorideFreePeel@ymail.com. Also see Fluoride Free Peel's Facebook page. Contact Information for American Communities: We're also going to address three US communities: New York City, Austin, and San Diego: A victory there could signal the beginning of the end of fluoridation in the U.S. If you live in the New York area I beg you to participate in this effort as your contribution could have a MAJOR difference. Remember that one person can make a difference. The point person for this area is Carol Kopf, at the New York Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF). Email her at NYSCOF@aol.com. Please contact her if you're interested in helping with this effort. New York City, NY: The anti-fluoridation movement has a great champion in New York City councilor Peter Vallone, Jr. who introduced legislation on January 18 "prohibiting the addition of fluoride to the water supply." Austin, Texas: Join the effort by contacting Rae Nadler-Olenick at either: info@fluoridefreeaustin.com or fluoride.info@yahoo.com, or by regular mail or telephone: POB 7486 Austin, Texas 78713 Phone: (512) 371-3786 San Diego, California: Contact Patty Ducey-Brooks, publisher of the Presidio Sentinel at pbrooks936@aol.com. ############################ BEFORE COLBY'S TIME THERE WAS PRESECUTION OF anti- FLORIDE PEOPLE. WHEN THE ESTABLISHMENTS MAKES NOISE < I INTELLIGENTLY LOOK INTO THE ISSUE> Colby seems only to get into the bowing position.

Demographic Nightmare; Recession Through Recovery in Pictures http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/03/recession-through-recovery-employment.html

Homeland Security Links 9/11 Truthers to Taliban By Barbara Peterson (about the author) Permalink (Page 1 of 1 pages) General News 11/14/2007 at 13:06:59 http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_barbara__071114_homeland_security_li.htm

The Unemployment Crisis in America: Staring “Economic Armageddon” In The Face While Hiding It With Official Lies http://www.globalres...al-lies/5326492 ==================================== The US Economy in Crisis: Recovery is an Illusion http://www.globalres...llusion/5321394 ===================================== 20 Signs That The U.S. Economy Is Heading For Big Trouble In The Months Ahead By Michael, on February 20th, 2013 http://theeconomicco...he-months-ahead ######################################## Investor Profit from the Inflation Deflation Reality 2013 Jan 04, 2013 - 12:56 PM GMT By: DeepCaster_LLC “There is no practical way that QE can cease here or in Euroland without a total and final collapse of the financial system.” 8]“The Federal Reserve Really Has No Practical Option To End QE” 8]Jim Sinclair, jsmineset.com, 1/3/2013 The five year chart of the CRB Index (a Broad Measure of Commodities Prices) shows three descending tops, which is suggestive of Deflation. But to conclude that Deflation is likely to be The Ruling Force in the Economy in 2013 would be a Dangerous Error. Indeed, it is critically important for Investors to understand whether or not we are in an Inflation or Deflation, or both (we later explain how this is possible). Failure to understand The Reality about Deflation and Inflation is likely lead to poor or even lethal Investment decisions. Here we explain The Inflation/Deflation Reality and indicate how to Profit. Indeed, Contrary Anecdotal Evidence from Increasing Food and Energy prices which many of us have encountered in recent years suggests we are in a serious Inflation. But how do we reconcile that fact with the CRB chart above which shows a series of lower lows in recent months and the 5-year Chart of Dr. Copper, the Premier Indicator of Economic activity, which also appears to be Topping and apparently ready to “Deflate.” But if one takes a look at the very recent CCI numbers or at Inflation since, say, 1930 (immediately pre-Depression) one gets a very Different view. They indicate ongoing Price Inflation. The Solution to the Inflation/Deflation Conundrum is to consider whether there is Inflation or Deflation on a Sector by Sector basis. When one does this, one finds some Sectors are clearly Inflating and others Deflating, but that the overall Net Effect is Inflation (see below). “Check out the chart of the Continuous Commodity Index or CCI and note that it has managed to put in a weekly close above the 38.2% Fibonacci Retracement Level of the move lower from its all time recent high made last year. If the market pysche remains the same, look for this index to now make an eventual run back towards the 597-600 level. We can look at these charts as subjects of interest to us as traders/investors but what this particular stock represents is increasing pain for consumers and the hard-pressed middle class in one of the worst, if not the worst "recovery" since the Great Depression. Think of this as increased frustration at the grocery store, at the gas pump, at the hardware store, at the local restaurant, etc. While some of this rally is the result of the drought and I will of course not lay that at the feet of the Fed, it is a simple fact that the breakout on this chart today, is the DIRECT RESULT of Mr. Bernanke's insistence on implying that another round of bond buying is on the way. When you pull into the gas station and fill up your car or truck, and are sent reeling at the cost, you can lay some of the blame right at his feet and the feet of his elitists on the FOMC who insist on pacifying Wall Street instead of having concerns how their policies are destroying Main Street.” 8]“More Pain for the Middle Class courtesy of Bernanke” Dan Norcini, traderdannorcini.com, 8/31/2012 It is not just the skyrocketing prices we pay for Food and Energy as reflected in the CCI, that demonstrate the Price-Inflationary effect of The Fed’s (and ECB’s) ongoing Monetary Inflation. But it is the prices for most of what we buy that have skyrocketed as a result of The Fed’s decades-long Monetary Inflation. Consider the following chart comparing the 1930’s cost in the U.S. for common goods and services, with today’s costs in Purchasing-Power-Degraded Dollars. Insiders Strategic Review, 8/26/2012 And, regarding Inflation Prospects, perhaps most significant of all is the recent statement by the CEO of Cargill, the Giant Grain Trader. “…Greg Page, chief executive of global grains trading giant Cargill Inc, joined a chorus of critics of biofuels by urging the U.S. government to temporarily curb its quotas to produce corn-based ethanol fuel. Page said on CNBC that the U.S. biofuel mandate ‘needs to be addressed’ through existing policy tools. Otherwise, the spike in U.S. corn and soybean prices to record highs will ‘ration’ demand in ways that will hurt food production too much. “If all that is only on livestock or food consumers, it really makes the burden disproportionate. What we see are 3 or 4 percent declines in supply lead to 40 to 50 percent increases in prices, and I think the mandates are what drives that,” he said. In 2011, almost 40 percent of the giant U.S. corn crop went into making ethanol, and the United States still exported more than half of all corn shipments worldwide…. On Monday, U.S. livestock groups appealed to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to curb or suspend the mandate, warning against the ruinous impact of soaring feed costs. Corn and soybean meal make up basic animal feedstuffs….” 8]“Drought deepens worries about food supplies, prices” , 8]Bob Burgdorfer, reutersreprints.com , 8/1/2012 Clearly, the Food Sector has been, is and will likely continue to exhibit increasing Inflation. So The Answer to the General Question: Which is it, Inflation or Deflation? is “That Depends on the Sector”. Most important, however, is the net, which, weighing Inflating Sectors against Deflating Sectors, is Inflationary. Indeed, John Williams’ (shadowstats.com) Real Numbers (as opposed to the Bogus Official Statistics) confirm the foregoing (net) ongoing Inflation. Bogus Official Numbers vs. Real Numbers (per Shadowstats.com) Annual U.S. Consumer Price Inflation reported December 14, 2012 1.76% 9.41% U.S. Unemployment reported December 7, 2012 7.7% 22.9% U.S. GDP Annual Growth/Decline reported December 20, 2012 2.60% -2.10% U.S. M3 reported December 19, 2012 (Month of November, Y.O.Y.) No Official Report 3.59% The Reality is we are entering into a period of rapidly increasing prices in many Sectors, but in a contracting Economy with a NEGATIVE GDP of 2.10%. That is, we are in Stagflation, and if Williams is correct, and in our view he is, soon to move into a Hyperstagflation. It is most important to emphasize the Net Effect of Inflation in some Sectors and Deflation in others is that we are already Threshold Hyperinflationary overall at 9.41%. Thus proper Sector by Sector Evaluation and Selection is Critical when Investing in 2013 and beyond. Indeed, The Key for Investors is to play the Inflation Sectors to Inflate and the Deflating Sector to Deflate, and, generally, to Invest for Inflation overall. It is also important to see that much that is claimed about Deflation is a myth. Certainly consumer debt is not decreasing overall, as we demonstrated in an earlier Article. And the debt of most (already overindebted) Sovereigns is still increasing, except for that of Greece. And the ECB’s and Fed’s recently announced, de facto, QE to Infinity programs (with Japan likely to follow soon) are not deflationary, but rather quite inflationary and they will surely continue (see below). The increase in the Money Supply morphs into Price Increases as we are already seeing in Food and Energy and are likely to see in other Sectors in the coming months. Of course, The Fed claims they adopted QE to Infinity to get unemployment down to 6.5%. In fact, QE does not create jobs, as Graham Summers points out but rather, as he notes The Fed’s Action was intended to address the following: The US economy is nose-diving again and the Fed is acting preemptively. The Fed is trying to provide increased liquidity going into the fiscal cliff. The Fed is funding the US’s Government massive deficits. “The Real Reasons the Fed Announced QE 4” Graham Summers, Phoenix Capital Research, 12/23/2012 Summers points out that the motivation regarding #1 is that the Economy is contracting again as the November ISM report shows. And the Big Banks are still not lending to Small Businesses which account for over 70% of jobs in the USA. Importantly, what Summers implies, but does not expressly state, is The Fed’s (and ECB’s) Main Motivation, that QE is aimed mainly at maintaining the Profits of the Mega-Banks, several of which are shareholders of the private for-profit Fed. In light of the foregoing, and especially The Fed’s and ECB’s and (probably) the BOJ’s QE to Infinity, the Mega-Trend is that we will likely see periods of intensifying Asset Price Inflation, in 2013 and beyond. But this Price Inflation will not necessarily reflect Value Inflation, because Price will be reflected in value-degraded (i.e. Purchasing Power Degraded) Fiat Currencies. Regarding Specific Recommendations aimed at Profiting and Protecting from Intensifying Inflation see Notes 1, 2, and 3 below. In this respect (but not others), Evans-Pritchard’s analysis of Major Sovereigns and Central Banks’ Actions is correct. “[They] …are actively driving down their currencies or imposing caps. …embracing the new creed of nominal GDP targeting… The side-effects of this currency warfare -- or "beggar-thy-neighbour’ policy as it was known in the 1930s -- is an escalating leakage of monetary stimulus into the global system. So don’t fight the Fed, and never fight the world’s central banks on multiple fronts. …so let me hazzard that the S&P 500 index of stocks will break through its all time high of 1565 in early 2013 -- mindful though I am of flagging volume and a wicked 12-year triple top. The Shanghai Composite will continue its explosive rally as China loosens the spigot again. The Politburo is reverting to its bad old ways of easy credit for state behemoths, and an infrastructure blitz, with $60bn of fiscal stimulus as well for good measure. Reform can wait. Yes, we all know that China has added $14 trillion in extra credit since 2009… The more that investors come to think another cycle of global growth is safely under way, the riskier it will be to hold corporate bonds, $8 trillion in the US alone. With yields priced for deflation, that bubble is dangerous to own on 10-year maturities. The money will rotate into equities and bullion, with China’s central bank driving gold through $2,000 at last. As a polar bear, I doubt that such a happy cycle is upon us. We merely have a rally within a structural trade depression. The headwinds of deleveraging will return with gale force. The glut of excess global savings that lay behind the great crisis of 2008-2009 -- and that has kept us stuck in the Long Slump ever since -- is still getting worse. The international trading system remains badly out of kilter. There is chronic overcapacity across global industry and not enough demand to carry a full cycle of economic expansion, or to reach "escape velocity" as they say these days. Until that changes, every global rebound is doomed to disappoint within a few quarters, and that includes the cyclical upswing of 2013. Japan’s new premier Shenzo Abe is sweeping into office like Roosevelt in 1933, commanding the central bank to do whatever it takes to defeat deflation, deliver 3pc NGDP growth, and drive the dollar-yen rate to 90. The Fed is no slouch either. It is printing $1 trillion in 2013, even though the money supply is already catching fire. It is has cooked up a jobless target of 6.5pc, meaning anything it wants. If this caps the dollar in the process -- and safeguards America’s shale-driven manufacturing revival… And the poll that matters most is the rising support for the Front National’s Marine Le Pen, champion of the French franc, already pulling even with Gaulliste rivals. The anomaly is why the Left -- in Spain, and across Europe -- continues to back a reactionary EMU agenda that sets policy in the interest of creditors and drives youth unemployment rise to 55pc. La trahison des clercs.” 8]“Stocks to soar as world money catches fire, Valvinst Europe left behind” 8]Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, The Telegraph, 1/1/2013 Yes, the Eurozone is already suffering from Stagnation and incipient Inflation. And with the U.S. recently increasing Taxes but not cutting Spending, the U.S. is headed in that direction as well. Agora Financial Guru Bill Bonner sums up the effect of “the Cliff” Resolution well: “Neither the debt ceiling nor serious long-term spending cuts were addressed. …the problems in 2013 are the same as those in 2012. Nothing has been done to solve them.” 8]“New Year; Old Problems” 8]Bill Bonner, 1/2/2013 The Key Takeaway from all the foregoing is that it is essential to identify which Sectors are Inflating and which Deflating and to realize that the net effect is Inflationary. And, make no mistake, the Fed, ECB, BOJ, and others will continue QE for the foreseeable future. Consider Jim Sinclair’s sound reasoning in response to some Fed Governors opinions they may stop QE in 2013. “The implication of stopping QE is so dire to the economy that it is in a practical sense impossible. When gold was being sold by central banks during the 1970s market announcements were made constantly with the bias to depress metals. There is no practical way that QE can cease here or in Euroland without a total and final collapse of the financial system. Just go back to the IMF report on OTC derivatives I posted this morning. If QE ceases, the US bond market collapses and the Fed must debt monetize all required debt, which means if QE stops, it starts up again immediately and in a crisis mode. The statement that QE can stop is simply MOPE. QE cannot stop or the world ends as you know it.” 8]Sinclair, ibid Indeed Jeff Clark (Agora Short Report) correctly characterizes these Fed Governors comments, “That’s Funny.” Yes, “Funny” as in ludicrous.

What allegiances, obligations, and benefits would have resulted from such ties? What would the implications have been of "maintaining" such ties and allegiances until 1998 when Mohamed played a key role in the African embassy bombings? Lance applies none of his normal investigative zeal to Mohamed's CIA role, and this makes for a serious black hole in Triple Cross. =============================== that al Zawahiri would "need $50 million to rule Egypt." At the time, al-Zawahiri interpreted this assertion as a hint that Washington would tolerate his rise to power if he could raise the money . . . The islamist leaders are convinced that in November 1997, Abu-Umar al-Amriki was speaking for the CIA — that is the uppermost echelons of the Clinton administration . . . There is no doubt that the November 1997 meeting between Abu-Umar al-Amriki took place. 2"If true," Ahmed writes, "Bodansky's report suggests that throughout the 1990s until the 1998 embassy bombing, Mohammed was working for the CIA." And Mohamed would not have been a run-of-the-mill asset: he had incomparable combined skills as a soldier, as a spy, as a linguist, and as an undercover deal-maker — a terrorist diplomat. This diplomatic acumen, as Bodansky describes, corresponds to an extraordinary story Lance relates wherein Ali Mohamed in 1993 had "brokered an historic meeting" between the Shiite terrorist Imaz Fayez Mugniyah and (Sunni/Wahabi) Osama bin Laden. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ After (and before) the African Embassy bombing the USG should have started rolling up AQ. The reason they didnt ??? Elements within the USG needed a new enemy to replace Soviet Union and AQ/war on terror hit the spot. The implications ???????????????? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

US, Brazil lead Google's Top 10 censorship list; China off the chart (Gaal,datum link headline) majority of requests were court orders due to defamation." // end Colby OH.......Oh !! Defamation and Brazil ,now I get you. BTW THERE SHOULD BE ZERO political internet censorship...not any, nada,file 13,round file , null set,empty set ,......none.

fluoride ?? There are mistakes in providing floridation from time to time in water supplies. Floride is found in CAN foods and I dont believe the WHO took that into consideration. Yes natural waters have geographic variations on floride level. I have met national leaders of the anti-floride movement at the Cancer Control Sociey Convention Ive attended several times. I can state as a matter of fact that I am fairly well read on this issue. Not as innocuous an issue as you seem to contend. Sources of Fluoride "Estimation of the amount of fluoride ingested from all environmental and dietary sources is important so that rational and scientifically sound decisions can be made when guidelines for the use of fluorides are reviewed periodically and modified." (Journal of Dental Research 1992) OVERVIEW When fluoride was first added to water in the 1940s as a means of preventing tooth decay, not a single dental product contained fluoride: no fluoride toothpastes, no fluoride mouthrinses, no fluoride varnishes, and no fluoride gels. In the past 60 years, as one fluoride product after another entered the market, exposure to fluoride increased considerably, particularly among children. Exposure from other sources has increased as well. Other sources include processed foods made with fluoridated water, fluoride-containing pesticides, bottled teas, fluorinated pharmaceuticals, teflon pans, and mechanically deboned chicken. Taken together, the glut of fluoride sources in the modern diet has created a toxic cocktail, one that has caused a dramatic increase in dental fluorosis (a tooth defect caused by excess fluoride intake) over the past 60 years. The problem with fluoride, therefore, is not that children are receiving too little, but that they are receiving too much. Even advocates of fluoridation advocates have begun to recognize this problem. In January 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) announced its recommendation that water fluoridation programs (which generally add 1 ppm fluoride to water) should lower the levels added to 0.7 ppm. This reduction, however, does little to solve the problem, as many children will continue to ingest more fluoride than is recommended, or safe. Sources of Fluoride Dental Products: Many dental products now contain fluoride, including over 95% of toothpaste. Studies show that a significant number of children swallow more fluoride from toothpaste alone than is recommended as a total daily ingestion. Processed Beverages & Foods: Even if you don’t live in a community that adds fluoride to its water supply, you will still be exposed to fluoridated drinking water. This is because once fluoride is added en masse to water it winds in almost all processed beverages and foods. In the U.S., studies have shown that sodas, juices, sports drinks, beers, and many other processed foods, including infant foods, now have elevated fluoride levels. Pesticides: Due its toxicity, fluoride is used in some pesticides to kill insects and other pests. As a result of fluoride pesticide use, some food products–particularly grape products, dried fruit, dried beans, cocoa powder, and walnuts–have high levels of fluoride. Read more. Tea Drinks:Tea plants absorb fluoride from the soil. As a result, tea leaves–particularly old tea leaves–contain high levels of fluoride. Brewed black tea averages about 3 to 4 parts ppm fluoride, while commercial iced tea drinks contain between 1 and 4 ppm. As a result of these elevated levels, numerous studies have linked excessive tea consumption to a bone disease (skeletal fluorosis) caused by too much fluoride intake. Fluorinated Pharmaceuticals:Many pharmaceuticals are fluorinated, meaning they contain a carbon-fluorine bond. fluorine.” Although the carbon-fluoride bond in most drugs is strong enough to resist breaking down into fluoride within the body, this is not always the case as research has found that some fluorinated drugs, including cipro, do break down into fluoride and can thus be a major source of fluoride exposure for some individuals. Mechanically Deboned Meat: Foods made with mechanically separated meat (e.g., chicken fingers, nuggets, etc), contain elevated levels of fluoride due to the contamination from bone particles that occurs during the mechanical deboning processed. Mechanically processed chicken meats have the highest levels, with chicken sticks containing an average of 3.6 ppm. Read more Teflon Pans: Cooking food, or boiling water, in teflon pans may increase the fluoride content of food. In one study, it was found that boiling water in a teflon pan for just 15 minutes added an additional 2 ppm of fluoride to the water, thus bringing the final concentration to 3 ppm. Read more (Full & Parkins 1975). Workplace Exposure: Fluoride is a common air contaminant in industrial workplaces. As a result, workers in many heavy industries — including the aluminum, fertilizer, iron, oil refining, semi-conductor, and steel industries — can be routinely exposed to high levels of fluoride exposure. In addition to being a significant risk factor for respiratory disease; airborne fluorides can be a huge daily source fluoride intake. What Doesn’t Contain Fluoride? The mass fluoridation of water, and the resulting contamination of processed foods, can make it seem like everything has elevated levels of fluoride. The good news, however, is that most fresh foods and fresh water contains very little fluoride. As a general rule, therefore, one will receive very little fluoride when drinking spring water and eating unprocessed fruit, vegetables, grains, eggs, milk, and meat. While there are some exceptions to this rule (e.g., seafood, tea, water from deep wells, and fresh fruit/vegetables sprayed with fluoride pesticides), it is a good rule of thumb to go by if you wish to reduce your fluoride exposure. To learn more, click here. How to Reduce Your Fluoride Exposure Top 10 Ways to Reduce Fluoride Exposure FAN’s Grocery Store Guide: 7 Ways to Avoid Fluoride in Beverages and Food Top 5 Ways to Reduce Fluoride Exposure from Infant Formula

US, Brazil lead Google's Top 10 censorship list; China off the chart After government's criticized Google for disclosing too much private information, the company released country-by-country data on the number of government requests for user information and data removal. By Stephen Kurczy, Correspondent / April 21, 2010 http://www.csmonitor...a-off-the-chart

Saturday, January 6 2007 - Resources and Materials Book Review: Peter Lance Indicts FBI/DoJ, but Leaves CIA as Unindicted Co-conspirator by Michael Richardson Most of the journalistic foundation for the 9/11 truth movement is a vast mosaic of articles, each containing one or more significant fragments, and most have been written by journalists who had no particular dedication or greater awareness of 9/11. Those who have written in depth about 9/11 have used this mosaic (and of course have been aided considerably by resources like Paul Thompson's Complete 9/11 Timeline), but few actually do on-the-ground journalism. Peter Lance is one of the few investigative journalists who has dedicated himself to the historical thicket of 9/11. In addition to using the mosaic, he travels to interview people, develops contacts inside the key agencies, gets his hands on damning FBI 302 documents, and bothers people who deserve to be bothered. For the last four years, he has obsessed on 9/11 and many of its deep-political tendrils, producing the equivalent of dozens of rich, original articles. Lance's implied theory of 9/11 — that the 9/11 hijacking plot basically slipped past the greasy fingers of a corrupt and egotistical DOJ/FBI — no doubt irritates many in the movement for truth about 9/11 for whom the "inside job" theory is creed, yet he has unearthed some of the most important gems in the struggle to bring real truth and justice to 9/11. Most importantly, he has shown how the efforts of the Southern New York division of the Justice Department, since the early 90s, have been half-baked, ridiculously negligent, and at times blantantly criminal. His work has been instrumental in fleshing out the continuum between the New York cell of the Blind Sheikh (proto-al Qaeda) in the early 1990s and the crimes of September 11, 2001, tracking the FBI all along in its failures and refusals to expose, arrest, and convict. In Triple Cross, a whole chapter is given to a New Jersey check cashing store which, had the FBI used common sense and monitored the place once they knew, early on, that it was a hub of al Qaeda activity, they probably would have snuffed out the 9/11 plot before Clinton had left office. Lance has also definitively fingered Dietrich Snell as the 9/11 Commission staff member who forged the Commission's official timeline into a deception by claiming that the 9/11 plot was conceived in 1998 — two years after Snell's DOJ office had known of a planes-as-missiles plot from interrogations of Abdul Hakim Murad. Ali Mohamed is a neglected rosetta stone for understanding al Qaeda, and with Triple Cross, Lance has created the most expansive and detailed account of this "master spy" to date. He also shows how Mohamed's U.S. exploits were interwoven with key people and events covered in Lance's two previous books (1000 Years for Revenge and Cover Up), as Mohamed had trained the Blind Sheikh's followers in New York in the early 1990s during the time Mohamed was stationed at Fort Bragg. The re-telling of earlier narratives makes this book Lance's definitive oeuvre on 9/11, but Triple Cross still reads like a new book; first because most of us would need a refresher on the sprawling material, but also because Lance has unearthed quite a few more fascinating nuggets. For example, he further solidifies the case that Ramzi Yousef, from his New York jail cell in 1996, orchestrated the timed bombing of TWA Flight 800. After the publication of his last book, Sibel Edmonds put him in touch with a "recently retired NSA staffer" who saw a translation of an NSA intercept originally spoken in Baluchi (Yousef's native tongue) which read, "Flight 800 . . . what had to be done has been done." This intercept had also been mysteriously, temporarily removed from the normal translation stream long enough to exclude it from the FBI's Flight 800 investigation. Ali Mohamed was involved with most of the major al Qaeda attacks against U.S. interests: the assassination of Rabbi Meier Kahane in 1990, the 1993 WTC bombing, the African Embassy bombings in 1998 and, even though he was arrested in late 1998, Lance proposes that he also helped train some of the 9/11 hijackers in hijacking techniques. Astoundingly, Mohamed participated in these operations while also being a U.S. citizen, being enlisted in the U.S. military (serving at Fort Bragg on two occasions), and being an FBI informant in California. Importantly (and much more on this below), he also had ties to the CIA. Lance shows Mohamed moving snake-like between U.S. agencies and military postings, often flaunting his activities with al Qaeda at a time when the FBI certainly knew what this meant. Importantly, in the early 90s, Mohamed was debriefed about Bin Laden and al Qaeda by FBI and NSA counter-terrorism officers, but all records of this interview — which would prove that the government was aware of Bin Laden's anti-U.S. intentions years earlier than it has claimed — have been "lost." Lance has a serious, longstanding bone to pick with the Southern New York division of the DoJ and the FBI, and has followed them for years, tracking their mindboggling misjudgments and fits of corruption. Patrick Fitzgerald was in charge of bringing bin Laden to justice prior to 9/11, and while he convicted some members of al Qaeda, he also botched the tracking of the remnants of al Qaeda after 2000, and allowed Ali Mohamed to plea bargain his way to, it seems, eventual release. The title-concept of the book, "Triple Cross," is for Lance mainly hyperbole, a kind of mega-double-crossing, a masterful fleecing and betrayal of U.S. agencies, for Lance views Mohamed as, at his core, an al Qaeda spy who was fundamentally allied to Ayman al Zawahiri and al Qaeda, even as he was a U.S. citizen and served in the U.S. Army. As Lance tells it, Mohamed basically tied together the shoelaces of the U.S. team as it also struggled with information walls, corrupt agents, and bureaucratic in-fighting. The characterization of Ali Mohamed as a triple spy or triple agent (as opposed to a double agent) is also for Lance hyperbole, because he describes Mohamed as a connection between two major parties — the U.S. and al Qaeda. Yet there are clues in Triple Cross that "triple agent" could be more literal. Mohamed as "triple agent" makes more sense when one considers whether Mohamed's role with the CIA was at odds with the basic missions of the U.S. military and the FBI. Lance's principal FBI source, Jack Cloonan, relays a story told to him by someone at CIA: In 1984, Mohamed "walked into the CIA station in Cairo" to volunteer as an asset, and was assigned to penetrate a Hamburg, Germany mosque. Mohamed then, according to this story, "gave up the operation," and was supposedly, thereafter, dropped or "spurned" by the CIA. (A very similar story is also told by Lawrence Wright in The Looming Tower, but is unattributed.) But there is reason to doubt this story because, in 1985, according to one press account Lance cites, Ali's ability to travel freely into the U.S. "was the result of an action initiated by Langley". (Wright describes this as a "visa waiver program" — making it sound more routine.) Lance also speculates that the CIA "may have run interference for Ali as he sought entry to the United States and a position of influence at Fort Bragg." The CIA was apparently using Mohamed, along with the rest of the nascent al Qaeda network, as an asset in the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Lance asks: "Did Ali Mohamed . . . maintain his ties to the CIA? Did he get a leg up with his visa and help slipping past the watch list?" Lance's questions about Mohamed's ties to the CIA end rather precipitously here, though he does reveal a clear pattern of support coming from the CIA (or, one could theorize, the DIA). He quotes a Boston Globe story from 1995, that "Ali's 1985 entry into the United States 'was the result of an action initiated by Langley'." A California associate of Mohamed is quoted as saying, "Everyone in the community knew he was working as a liaison between the CIA and the Afghan cause." But Lance's references to CIA are only an implicit raising of questions. Clearly, other questions need to be asked more explicitly: What was Mohamed's relationship to the CIA? What allegiances, obligations, and benefits would have resulted from such ties? What would the implications have been of "maintaining" such ties and allegiances until 1998 when Mohamed played a key role in the African embassy bombings? Lance applies none of his normal investigative zeal to Mohamed's CIA role, and this makes for a serious black hole in Triple Cross. Importantly, Ali Mohamed may have worked for the CIA before 1984, when he was still an officer in the Egyptian army. On the first page of Triple Cross, Lance describes a crestfallen Mohamed speaking before a federal judge in 2000: "In short but deliberate sentences, Mohamed peeled back the top layer of the secret life he'd led since 1981, when radical members of his Egyptian army unit gunned down Nobel Prize winner Anwar Sadat." Later, Lance describes how, during the actual assassination, Mohamed had been at Fort Bragg (in North Carolina) on an officer exchange program, and that this had "shielded him from the Sadat murder indictment." This involvement with the Sadat assassination is an important piece of the puzzle because, according to other sources, the CIA was to some degree responsible for Sadat's killing. Joseph Trento, in his 2005 book, "Prelude to Terror," interviewed former high-ranking CIA agents about this period in Egypt, and one of Trento's fragments puts a new lens over Ali Mohamed. Trento describes how protecting Sadat had actually been a task assigned to the CIA: Orchestrating much of what was going on in Egypt was a CIA agent named William Buckley . . . Operating out of Cairo Station, Buckley supervised a vast array of spies within Sadat's regime. In 1980, Buckley was put in charge of training Sadat's personal bodyguards after the CIA took over the contract from J.J. Cappucci and Associates.... Neil Livingstone, who by this time was involved in J.J. Cappucci, described the operation. "We did the training of Sadat's praetorian guard to protect Sadat. And then the contract was taken away from us and [given] back to the Agency, and he got killed. We never would have permitted the kind of security that was evident at the time Sadat was killed," Livingstone said. 1 Trento also reports that Sadat's vice president Hosni Mubarak had been on the CIA payroll in the late 70s, and that he had been having his palms greased by a weapons delivery company called EATSCO — a CIA front/side company run by the notorious Edwin P. Wilson. According to Trento, Anwar Sadat had, by 1980, started an investigation into Mubarak's corrupt involvement with EATSCO. Both the CIA and Mubarak had motives to have Sadat dead. The CIA of course, having the contract to protect Sadat, possessed the means, at least to leave a critical security door open. As a "master spy" who spoke four languages, as an officer in the very unit that assassinated Sadat, and as someone who at the very time of Sadat's assassination in 1981 had been part of a U.S.-Egypt officer exchange program to Fort Bragg (the seat of U.S. Special Forces), it is not a stretch to infer that Ali Mohamed had been among CIA station chief Buckley's "vast array of spies within Sadat's Regime". Mohamed's (apparent) extremist leanings, and his status as an officer raise the possibility that he knew about the assassination plot while also being a "liason" to the CIA. Throughout his career, Lance shows, Mohamed would often play the role of "emissary" or "liason". Where the CIA and Sadat's assassination are concerned, with the hypothesis that Mohamed could have played such a role, a more descriptive term would be "block cut-out", or someone whose apparent ideology and behavior (in this case as a member of Egyptian Islamic Jihad) made him into a trusted inside member of a criminal/terrorist cell, but who was actually taking orders from, and/or passing information to, another party, in this case, the CIA. Nafeez Ahmed, in The War on Truth, addresses Mohamed's connections to the CIA in some depth. One rather eye-popping account that Ahmed relates is that of Yossef Bodansky, a former U.S. intelligence official. According to Bodansky: In the first half of 1997, Ayman al-Zawahiri . . . met a man called Abu-Umar al-Amiki [a likely alias for Ali Mohamed] at a camp near Peshawar on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. High level Islamist leaders insist that in this meeting, Abu-Umar al-Amriki made Zawahiri an offer: The US will not interfere with nor intervene to prevent Islamists' rise to power in Egypt if the Islamist Mujahedin currently in Bosnia-Herzegovina refrain from attacking the US forces. Moreover, Abu-Umar el-Amriki promised a donation of $50 million (from undefined sources) to Islamist charities in Egypt and elsewhere. This was not the first meeting between Abu Umar al-Amriki and al Zawahiri. Back in the 1980s, Abu Umar al-Amriki was openly acting at an emissary for the CIA with various Arab Islammist militant/terrorist movements then operating under the wings of the Afghan jihad. In the late 1980s, in one of his meetings with al-Zawahiri, Abu-Umar el-Amriki suggested that al Zawahiri would "need $50 million to rule Egypt." At the time, al-Zawahiri interpreted this assertion as a hint that Washington would tolerate his rise to power if he could raise the money . . . The islamist leaders are convinced that in November 1997, Abu-Umar al-Amriki was speaking for the CIA — that is the uppermost echelons of the Clinton administration . . . There is no doubt that the November 1997 meeting between Abu-Umar al-Amriki took place. 2 "If true," Ahmed writes, "Bodansky's report suggests that throughout the 1990s until the 1998 embassy bombing, Mohammed was working for the CIA." And Mohamed would not have been a run-of-the-mill asset: he had incomparable combined skills as a soldier, as a spy, as a linguist, and as an undercover deal-maker — a terrorist diplomat. This diplomatic acumen, as Bodansky describes, corresponds to an extraordinary story Lance relates wherein Ali Mohamed in 1993 had "brokered an historic meeting" between the Shiite terrorist Imaz Fayez Mugniyah and (Sunni/Wahabi) Osama bin Laden. (Mugniyah in 1984 had kidnapped CIA officer William Buckley in Beirut, and Buckley was tortured for 444 days before being killed.) If "Abu-Umar al-Amriki" was indeed the same person as Ali Mohamed, this would mean that he was trusted enough by the CIA to represent the U.S. in a very dicey foreign policy maneuver. So the story of a loose-lipped Ali Mohamed being let go by the CIA in 1984 is a highly questionable "official story". A more rational explanation for the existence of this story might be that it is a fabrication — or at least a half-truth — meant to distance the CIA from a man who, especially after the 1998 African embassy bombings, was becoming a major liability. Very dark and sticky questions bubble up with the notion that Ali Mohamed has been continually a highly valued and trusted CIA operative. One can draw no conclusions, but a cascade of questions exist. What information did the CIA have about Mohamed training the Blind Sheikh's NY cell in the early 1990s? To what degree did the CIA have oversight and command over Ali Mohamed's activities as he facilitated the two embassy bombings in Africa? Was the CIA running an expert terrorist asset in the U.S.? Lance describes Mohamed, after his arrest, breaking down and finally admitting to Fitzgerald and the Federal Judge, Leonard B. Sand, that he was involved in planning the embassy bombings. This came after Mohamed had been offered an "exit strategy" – some form of plea bargain according to which Mohammed would provide information about al Qaeda and testify against terrorist suspects. Says Lance: The details of Ali Mohamed's deal remain secret to this day. But at least one knowledgable attorney . . . has concluded that his arrangement with the feds was clearly in Ali's favor. 'Mohammed has made some kind of deal with the government,' [the attorney] believes, 'that will surely have him out of prison on some date certain that he knows about.' (my emphasis) Of course, one of the crucial witnesses against Osama bin Laden (tried in absentia), in Patrick Fitzgerald's 2000 embassy bombing trial should have been Ali Mohamed, who had already admitted to having helped plan the bombings, and had admitted to working for al Qaeda. But, even after the unprecedented plea bargain was given to Mohammed, Fitzgerald did not call him as a witness. It is not that Mohamed refused: Fitzgerald did not call him as a witness. This to me is the most incredible and insanely jaw-dropping moment of this book, and it's what earns Fitzgerald his position on the cover of Triple Cross, lodged between bin Laden and Ali Mohamed. Here is the court transcript after Ali Mohamed's conviction for conspiracy in the 1998 bombings (which is in Triple Cross on p. 360): THE COURT: Your offer is to plead guilty to five counts charging you with conspiracy to kill nationals of the United States, conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim at places outside the United States, conspiracy to murder, conspiracy to destroy buildings and property of the United States, and conspiracy to destroy national-defense utilities of the United States. Do you understand that pursuant to the relevant statutes, conviction on those five counts would subject you to a total maximum sentence of incarceration of life inprisonment plus any term of years. Do you understand that you would be subject to that potential sentence? MOHAMED: Yes, your honor. THE COURT: Do you understand that in addition to that, you would be subject to a term of supervised release of five years on Counts One, Two Three and Five and three years' supervised release on Count Six? Do you understand that? MOHAMED: Yes, your honor. Amazingly here, even before sentencing, the judge has spelled out the terms of Mohamed's release pretty clearly. Lance writes, "As this investigation has revealed for the first time, almost six years after entering that guilty plea, Ali Mohamed has yet to be sentenced . . . Yet we can say for certain that even today . . . he remains in witness protection somewhere in the New York area." Lance is convinced that it was the FBI's collective, and Fitzgerald's individual, fear of being exposed which led to this extraordinary judicial situation: [Fitzgerald's] motivation in hiding Ali from public view may have been similar to that of his cocounsel Andrew McCarthy, who had sought to keep Mohamed off the stand in the Day of Terror trial. "Mohamed would have been opened up by defense lawyers and told the whole sad tale of how he'd used the Bureau and the CIA and the DIA for years," says retired special agent Joseph F. O'Brien. "The Bureau wouldn't risk that kind of embarrasment." As for Fitzgerald's personal motive, Lance adds: ...despite multiple wiretaps monitoring conversations and faxes to the Nairobi cell right up to the day of the bombings on August 7, 1998, and despite evidence from Squad I-49's search of El-Hage's house a year earlier that Mohamed was involved with the plot, Fitzgerald and the agents of his elite unit had been unable to stop it. That's not a story that Fitzgerald would have wanted to see exposed by defense lawyers during United States vs. bin Laden. Lance has obviously nailed something very important here, but it doesn't completely make sense. With other conspirators who have similar status, who have admitted guilt, and who have equally embarrassing tales to tell — Ramzi Yousef, Greg Scarpa Jr., and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — the rule has been to lock these people up in solitary confinement, pretty much indefinitely, and, more recently, to torture them. Ali Mohamed, clearly, is a different animal altogether. Lance's case truly begins to rattle loose when one looks closer at Mohamed's role in the CIA. Had Mohamed actually been a highly-placed CIA operative, it would explain in much clearer terms why the federal government hid him for months after his arrest, booked him as"John Doe" to keep his name secret, kept him in legal suspended animation, refused to call him as a witness and, critically, actually allowed this accomplished terrorist a plea bargain wherein his eventual release was assured. Lance's explanation falls apart when one considers the supreme embarrassment the FBI and Fitzgerald would suffer were Mohamed to be released, or to escape, and then commit another enormous and heinous terrorist act — something we can all assume he is capable of. Somehow, they are assured that such a crime would not occur. In the above quote, a "retired special agent" Joseph F. O'Brien says that Mohamed "used . . . the CIA and the DIA". There is very little evidence presented here that Mohamed "used" the CIA. That he was granted visas repeatedly, despite being on a watch list most directly points to the idea that the CIA had an interest and a purpose in allowing Mohamed passage. Other explanations — that he was somehow lucky, or slipped off the radar, or benefited from a mindless bureaucratic snafu — are indirect and less rational, but these are the default explanations by writers like Lance and Wright. I am not saying that Lance is wrong, per se, because the FBI did indeed have plenty to hide. Admirably, Lance's modus operandi as a journalist is similar to that of a Federal prosecutor. Like a good attorney, for the strict purpose of getting a guilty verdict, he has narrowed his focus on the defendants sitting in the courtroom — Patrick Fitzgerald, Dietrich Snell, Valerie Caproni, and other DOJ officials. The CIA has been left in the nebulous position of an "unindicted co-conspirator." Perhaps Lance felt that introducing evidence against the CIA in this "trial" would complicate matters, confused the jury, or lead to conclusions that were too dark to be believable. Or perhaps he felt that there simply wasn't enough evidence. These are indeed the shared prerogatives of journalists and attorneys. Patrick Fitzgerald and his team did indeed fail to stop the bombings of the two embassies in Africa, and they bear some responsibility for not stopping the 9/11 plot. Fitzgerald — not only in his dealings with Ali Mohamed, but possibly also in the way he has handled the Valerie Plame case — has capitulated to a pattern of preserving the basic framework of high level corruption while creating the false impression of justice being served. Lance has truly indicted and convicted these FBI and DOJ figures on these counts. Despite its black hole, anyone serious about understanding the big picture of 9/11 should read "Triple Cross". Lance signs off with this: "I sincerely hope this is my last 9/11 book. I don't want to have to write another one." I have heard that he is working on a book about the CIA — a hopeful sign with respect to the story of Ali Mohamed because I doubt Lance would let an interesting or implicating lead go unexamined. footnotes 1. Trento, Joseph, "Prelude to Terror", Carrol and Graf, New York, 2005, page 247. This book is a fragmented read, but well worth it, as it shows how far back the corruption of the CIA runs — especially through Bush family veins, but also how the CIA has been a revolving door nightmare with oil industry executives, weapons dealers, and crooks in general. 2. Your knowledge about 9/11 will remain incomplete until you have read all of Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's The War on Truth (Olive Branch Press, Northampton, MA), and especially, in this context, Chapter 2, titled "Terrorism and Statecraft Part 1". This quote is from page 51. Bodansky's entire paper can be read here: http://www.freeman.o...98/bodansky.htm.

proving once again he does not bother to read the links he posts here. // end COLBY Proving once again Colby doesnt read the material presented. Top article in question with scientific citations bottom of article PLUS scientific citations in majority of redden words in said article. Golly Colby on purpose proving himself a fool ?????? I will cut and paste scientific refs at bottom top article and those who want to see complete fool Colby is go to article link and read scientic citations of reddened words. Here are the male studies Jeannett A Izquierdo-Vega, Manuel Sánchez-Gutiérrez, Luz María Del Razo. Decreased in vitro fertility in male rats exposed to fluoride-induced oxidative stress damage and mitochondrial transmembrane potential loss. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2008 Aug 1 ;230(3):352-7. Epub 2008 Mar 28. PMID: 18455746 Zilong Sun, Ruiyan Niu, Bin Wang, Zhibin Jiao, Jinming Wang, Jianhai Zhang, Shaolin Wang, Jundong Wang. Fluoride-induced apoptosis and gene expression profiling in mice sperm in vivo. Arch Toxicol. 2011 Nov ;85(11):1441-52. Epub 2011 Feb 22. PMID: 21340527 N J Chinoy, M V Rao, M V Narayana, E Neelakanta. Microdose vasal injection of sodium fluoride in the rat. Reprod Toxicol. 1991 ;5(6):505-12. PMID: 1839778 R S Gupta, T I Khan, D Agrawal, J B S Kachhawa. The toxic effects of sodium fluoride on the reproductive system of male rats. Toxicol Ind Health. 2007 Oct;23(9):507-13. PMID:18681235 P Sreedhar Reddy, T Pushpalatha, P Sreenivasula Reddy. Suppression of male reproduction in rats after exposure to sodium fluoride during early stages of development.Naturwissenschaften. 2007 Jul;94(7):607-11. Epub 2007 Feb 22. PMID: 17318612 Here are the female studies Yongjiang Zhou, Hailing Zhang, Junlin He, Xuemei Chen, Yubing Ding, Yingxiong Wang Xueqing Liu. Effects of sodium fluoride on reproductive function in female rats. Food Chem Toxicol. 2013 Feb 28. Epub 2013 Feb 28. PMID: 23459146 H H Messer, W D Armstrong, L Singer. Fertility impairment in mice on a low fluoride intake. Science. 1972 Sep 8 ;177(4052):893-4. PMID: 5054644 ############ LINK (see reddened words) http://www.activistpost.com/2013/03/fertility-destroying-chemical-added-to.html