Steven Gaal

GEE ITS LIKE I CONCLUDE ++ ITS A CIA/SHOOTING TEAM USING THE ONI/TSBD PLATFORM. The shooting out of the TSBD is a classic example of covert operation compartmentalization. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SO MANY CHANGING STORIES SEE == http://webcache.goog...n&ct=clnk&gl=us 　 22 November 1963: A Brief Guide to the JFK Assassination .... Campbell says he ran toward a grassy knoll to the west of the building, where he thought the ... ========================= Molina, a TSBD employee, heard shots coming from west of the building. 　 http://www.history-m...6_Dougherty.pdf see page 373 MOLINA Afraid does not want to be involved. HOLMES - Molina connection see Scully post this thread http://educationforu...=20291&p=298381 for 4 below 　 1.FERRIE RECRUITED OSWALD FOR ONI (FERRIE HAD CONTINUED NAVY-ONI CONNECTIONS POST ASSASSINATION) 2.ONI MONITORED ASSASSINATION per GRAVES ONI man (see post # 149 above) 3.ONI wanted cremated OSWALD 4.First of all, Mason Lankford’s father, John Mason Lankford Sr., was an employee of Temco in the early 1950s, suggesting a possible relationship with David Harold Byrd. POST OFFICE HOLMES ONI CONNECTION SEE POST # 88 above // SEE MOLINA SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOR POST # 78 above this thread ONI worked with United fruit since the 1920. (BOOK LINK BELOW) Marguerite ONI connection via Uncle and husband and also the Amon Carter Family. (THESE CONNECTIONS SEE BELOW the triple #### marks) = SEE LINK RUBY ONI http://quixoticjoust...rch-ekdahl.html also see Uncle Marguerite link for UNITED FRUIT ONI connections http://educationforu...=21136&p=286218 ]]]]]]]]]] Marguerite Oswald worked as a receptionist for a Standard Fruit Company law firm.Marguerite Oswald's uncle's law partner did work for United Fruit. Marguerite Oswald's Uncle seems to have gotten Marguerite the receptionists job. Odd for Standard Fruit and United Fruit were until around WWII were at loggerheads against each other. Could Marguerite Oswald been a United Fruit spy ? Marguerite worked in the home of AMON CARTER JR. Carter family connected to ONI via General Dynamics . Amon Carter SR. bio Besides American Airlines, he also was instrumental in General Dynamics and Bell Aircraft Corp. establishing plants near Fort Worth. Amon G. Carter Field was named for him in 1950. == SEE United Fruit / ONI connection below •Anthropological Intelligence: The Deployment and Neglect ... http://educationforu...ic=6017&p=53294) contends that the TSBD had a gun running operation. •Ex Navy man Molina TSBD employee may have been part of this. •Harold Byrd (owner TSBD building) was one of the three major owners of LTV. LTV was trying to develop a sea torpedo to air weapon system.ONI would have been all over any of the LTV owners. •D.H. Byrd's CAP outfit flew from Red Bird === ( see link http://educationforu...=18944&p=301922and CAP seems to have ONI connection ( see link http://educationforu...=20291&p=298381 re FERRIE) •Harold Byrd's LTV and ONI link (see Re ONI and LTV linkage see Henry Wallace Re: Red Bird Airport, Wayne January & LHO. see link https://groups.googl...VY/g-l-7MTSDm0J ) • •Harold Bird sat on the board of Dorchester Gas with Jack Crichton of Empire Trust. Empire Trust's private intelligence service had ONI connections. •POST OFFICE HOLMES ONI CONNECTION SEE POST # 88 above (POST OFFICE WORKED WITH ONI) •ONI worked with United fruit since the 1920. •Marguerite ONI connection via Uncle , husband and also the Amon Carter Family ]]]] It may be that ONI man Holmes is watching/reporting on in real time a CIA assassination operation run out of the ONI/TSBD building. (GAAL) The shooting out of the TSBD is a classic example of covert operation compartmentalization.

PRO VAXXERS = TAKE NOTE THAT TO DO SOMETHING, EVEN WHEN IT IS OBVIOUS TO PROMOTE HEALTH VIA GOVERMENT, BECOMES A HARD THING TO DO. = BECAUSE MONEY TALKS AND PUBLIC HEALTH WALKS !!!!!!!!! = JUST BECAUSE ITS GOVERNMENT POLICY DOES NOT MEAN IT IS PRO HEALTH !!!!!!! ==== FROM THE NY TIMES (IS THAT A LOON SOURCE ??) ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] Energy & Environment The Uphill Battle to Better Regulate Formaldehyde = By ERIC LIPTON and RACHEL ABRAMSMAY 3, 2015 = http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/04/business/energy-environment/the-uphill-battle-to-better-regulate-formaldehyde.html?ref=business&_r=1 ((see link for Diagrams , DOC or PHOTO)) WASHINGTON — A decade after emergency trailers meant to shelter Hurricane Katrina victims instead caused burning eyes, sore throats and other more serious ailments, the Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of regulating the culprit: formaldehyde, a chemical that can be found in commonplace things like clothes and furniture. But an unusual assortment of players, including furniture makers, the Chinese government, Republicans from states with a large base of furniture manufacturing and even some Democrats who championed early regulatory efforts, have questioned the E.P.A. proposal. The sustained opposition has held sway, as the agency is now preparing to ease key testing requirements before it releases the landmark federal health standard. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that can also cause respiratory ailments like asthma, but the potential of long-term exposure to cause cancers like myeloid leukemia is less well understood. The E.P.A.’s decision would be the first time that the federal government has regulated formaldehyde inside most American homes. “The stakes are high for public health,” said Tom Neltner, senior adviser for regulatory affairs at the National Center for Healthy Housing, who has closely monitored the debate over the rules. “What we can’t have here is an outcome that fails to confront the health threat we all know exists.” The proposal would not ban formaldehyde — commonly used as an ingredient in wood glue in furniture and flooring — but it would impose rules that prevent dangerous levels of the chemical’s vapors from those products, and would set testing standards to ensure that products sold in the United States comply with those limits. The debate has sharpened in the face of growing concern about the safety of formaldehyde-treated flooring imported from Asia, especially China. What is certain is that a lot of money is at stake: American companies sell billions of dollars’ worth of wood products each year that contain formaldehyde, and some argue that the proposed regulation would impose unfair costs and restrictions. Determined to block the agency’s rule as proposed, these industry players have turned to the White House, members of Congress and top E.P.A. officials, pressing them to roll back the testing requirements in particular, calling them redundant and too expensive. “There are potentially over a million manufacturing jobs that will be impacted if the proposed rule is finalized without changes,” wrote Bill Perdue, the chief lobbyist at the American Home Furnishings Alliance, a leading critic of the testing requirements in the proposed regulation, in one letter to the E.P.A. Industry opposition helped create an odd alignment of forces working to thwart the rule. The White House moved to strike out key aspects of the proposal. Subsequent appeals for more changes were voiced by players as varied as Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, and Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, as well as furniture industry lobbyists. Continue reading the main story Hurricane Katrina in 2005 helped ignite the public debate over formaldehyde, after the deadly storm destroyed or damaged hundreds of thousands of homes along the Gulf of Mexico, forcing families into temporary trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The displaced storm victims quickly began reporting respiratory problems, burning eyes and other issues, and tests then confirmed high levels of formaldehyde fumes leaking into the air inside the trailers, which in many cases had been hastily constructed. Public health advocates petitioned the E.P.A. to issue limits on formaldehyde in building materials and furniture used in homes, given that limits already existed for exposure in workplaces. But three years after the storm, only California had issued such limits. Industry groups like the American Chemistry Council have repeatedly challenged the science linking formaldehyde to cancer, a position championed by David Vitter, the Republican senator from Louisiana, who is a major recipient of chemical industry campaign contributions, and whom environmental groups have mockingly nicknamed “Senator Formaldehyde.” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DIAGRAM below SEE LINK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Formaldehyde in Laminate Flooring In laminate flooring, formaldehyde is used as a bonding agent in the fiberboard (or other composite wood) core layer and may also be used in glues that bind layers together. Concerns were raised in March when certain laminate flooring imported from China was reported to contain levels of formaldehyde far exceeding the limit permitted by California. ============================================== Typical laminate flooring CLEAR FINISH LAYER Often made of melamine resin PATTERN LAYER Paper printed to resemble wood, ((SEE LINK DIAGRAM)) or a thin wood veneer GLUE Layers may be bound using formaldehyde-based glues CORE LAYER Fiberboard or other composite, formed using formaldehyde-based adhesives BASE LAYER Moisture-resistant vapor barrier == What is formaldehyde? Formaldehyde is a common chemical used in many industrial and household products as an adhesive, bonding agent or preservative. It is classified as a volatile organic compound. The term volatile means that, at room temperature, formaldehyde will vaporize, or become a gas. Products made with formaldehyde tend to release this gas into the air. If breathed in large quantities, it may cause health problems. WHERE IT IS COMMONLY FOUND POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS Pressed-wood and composite wood products Wallpaper and paints Spray foam insulation used in construction Commercial wood floor finishes Crease-resistant fabrics In cigarette smoke, or in the fumes from combustion of other materials, including wood, oil and gasoline. ======================================================================================= Exposure to formaldehyde in sufficient amounts may cause eye, throat or skin irritation, allergic reactions, and respiratory problems like coughing, wheezing or asthma. Long-term exposure to high levels has been associated with cancer in humans and laboratory animals. Exposure to formaldehyde may affect some people more severely than others. === Sources: Consumer Product Safety Commission; Minnesota Department of Health By The New York Times = By 2010, public health advocates and some industry groups secured bipartisan support in Congress for legislation that ordered the E.P.A. to issue federal rules that largely mirrored California’s restrictions. At the time, concerns were rising over the growing number of lower-priced furniture imports from Asia that might include contaminated products, while also hurting sales of American-made products. Maneuvering began almost immediately after the E.P.A. prepared draft rules to formally enact the new standards. White House records show at least five meetings in mid-2012 with industry executives — kitchen cabinet makers, chemical manufacturers, furniture trade associations and their lobbyists, like Brock R. Landry, of the Venable law firm. These parties, along with Senator Vitter’s office, appealed to top administration officials, asking them to intervene to roll back the E.P.A. proposal. The White House Office of Management and Budget, which reviews major federal regulations before they are adopted, apparently agreed. After the White House review, the E.P.A. “redlined” many of the estimates of the monetary benefits that would be gained by reductions in related health ailments, like asthma and fertility issues, documents reviewed by The New York Times show. As a result, the estimated benefit of the proposed rule dropped to $48 million a year, from as much as $278 million a year. The much-reduced amount deeply weakened the agency’s justification for the sometimes costly new testing that would be required under the new rules, a federal official involved in the effort said. “It’s a redlining blood bath,” said Lisa Heinzerling, a Georgetown University Law School professor and a former E.P.A. official, using the Washington phrase to describe when language is stricken from a proposed rule. “Almost the entire discussion of these potential benefits was excised.” Continue reading the main story Senator Vitter’s staff was pleased. “That’s a huge difference,” said Luke Bolar, a spokesman for Mr. Vitter, of the reduced estimated financial benefits, saying the change was “clearly highlighting more mismanagement” at the E.P.A. ==== The review’s outcome galvanized opponents in the furniture industry. They then targeted a provision that mandated new testing of laminated wood, a cheaper alternative to hardwood. (The California standard on which the law was based did not require such testing.) But E.P.A. scientists had concluded that these laminate products — millions of which are sold annually in the United States — posed a particular risk. They said that when thin layers of wood, also known as laminate or veneer, are added to furniture or flooring in the final stages of manufacturing, the resulting product can generate dangerous levels of fumes from often-used formaldehyde-based glues. Industry executives, outraged by what they considered an unnecessary and financially burdensome level of testing, turned every lever within reach to get the requirement removed. It would be particularly onerous, they argued, for small manufacturers that would have to repeatedly interrupt their work to do expensive new testing. The E.P.A. estimated that the expanded requirements for laminate products would cost the furniture industry tens of millions of dollars annually, while the industry said that the proposed rule over all would cost its 7,000 American manufacturing facilities over $200 million each year. “A lot of people don’t seem to appreciate what a lot of these requirements do to a small operation,” said Dick Titus, executive vice president of the Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers Association, whose members are predominantly small businesses. “A 10-person shop, for example, just really isn’t equipped to handle that type of thing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Big industry players also weighed in. Executives from companies including La-Z-Boy, Hooker Furniture and Ashley Furniture all flew to Washington for a series of meetings with the offices of lawmakers including House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and about a dozen other lawmakers, asking several of them to sign a letter prepared by the industry to press the E.P.A. to back down, according to an industry report describing the lobbying visit. Within a matter of weeks, two letters — using nearly identical language — were sent by House and Senate lawmakers to the E.P.A. — with the industry group forwarding copies of the letters to the agency as well, and then posting them on its website. The industry lobbyists also held their own meeting at E.P.A. headquarters, and they urged Jim Jones, who oversaw the rule-making process as the assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, to visit a North Carolina furniture manufacturing plant. According to the trade group, Mr. Jones told them that the visit had “helped the agency shift its thinking” about the rules and how laminated products should be treated. ==== The resistance was particularly intense from lawmakers like Mr. Wicker of Mississippi, whose state is home to major manufacturing plants owned by Ashley Furniture Industries, the world’s largest furniture maker, and who is one of the biggest recipients in Congress of donations from the industry’s trade association. Asked if the political support played a role, a spokesman for Mr. Wicker replied: “Thousands of Mississippians depend on the furniture manufacturing industry for their livelihoods. Senator Wicker is committed to defending all Mississippians from government overreach.” Individual companies like Ikea also intervened, as did the Chinese government, which claimed that the new rule would create a “great barrier” to the import of Chinese products because of higher costs. Perhaps the most surprising objection came from Senator Boxer, of California, a longtime environmental advocate, whose office questioned why the E.P.A.’s rule went further than her home state’s in seeking testing on laminated products. “We did not advocate an outcome, other than safety,” her office said in a statement about why the senator raised concerns. “We said ‘Take a look to see if you have it right.’ ” Safety advocates say that tighter restrictions — like the ones Ms. Boxer and Mr. Wicker, along with Representative Doris Matsui, a California Democrat, have questioned — are necessary, particularly for products coming from China, where items as varied as toys and Christmas lights have been found to violate American safety standards. While Mr. Neltner, the environmental advocate who has been most involved in the review process, has been open to compromise, he has pressed the E.P.A. not to back down entirely, and to maintain a requirement that laminators verify that their products are safe. An episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes” in March brought attention to the issue when it accused Lumber Liquidators, the discount flooring retailer, of selling laminate products with dangerous levels of formaldehyde. The company has disputed the show’s findings and test methods, maintaining that its products are safe. “People think that just because Congress passed the legislation five years ago, the problem has been fixed,” said Becky Gillette, who then lived in coastal Mississippi, in the area hit by Hurricane Katrina, and was among the first to notice a pattern of complaints from people living in the trailers. “Real people’s faces and names come up in front of me when I think of the thousands of people who could get sick if this rule is not done right.” An aide to Ms. Matsui rejected any suggestion that she was bending to industry pressure. == “From the beginning the public health has been our No. 1 concern,” said Kyle J. Victor, an aide to Ms. Matsui. But further changes to the rule are likely, agency officials concede, as they say they are searching for a way to reduce the cost of complying with any final rule while maintaining public health goals. The question is just how radically the agency will revamp the testing requirement for laminated products — if it keeps it at all. “It’s not a secret to anybody that is the most challenging issue,” said Mr. Jones, the E.P.A. official overseeing the process, adding that the health consequences from formaldehyde are real. “We have to reduce those exposures so that people can live healthy lives and not have to worry about being in their homes.” ######################################################################################################################## ######################################################################################################################## A version of this article appears in print on May 4, 2015, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: U.S. to Put Curbs on Formaldehyde.

RE RE EDIT added POST # 92 ABOVE Spiders Web link Byrd CAP Red Bird Airport link Harold Byrd's LTV and ONI link via regarding ONI & LTV link ( four months before Henry Marshall's mysterious death on June 3, 1961, when he transferred to the Anaheim, California offices of LTV.328The transfer required a background check by the Navy.) PLEASE NOTE when you see Amon Carter or Harold Byrd you can also say possible ONI connection

Major U.S. Retailers Are Closing More Than 6,000 Stores Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/02/2015 =============================================== If the U.S. economy really is improving, then why are big U.S. retailers permanently shutting down thousands of stores? The “retail apocalypse” that I have written about so frequently appears to be accelerating. As you will see below, major U.S. retailers have announced that they are closing more than 6,000 locations, but economic conditions in this country are still fairly stable. So if this is happening already, what are things going to look like once the next recession strikes? For a long time, I have been pointing to 2015 as a major “turning point” for the U.S. economy, and I still feel that way. And since I started The Economic Collapse Blog at the end of 2009, I have never seen as many indications that we are headed into another major economic downturn as I do right now. If retailers are closing this many stores already, what are our malls and shopping centers going to look like a few years from now? The list below comes from information compiled by About.com, but I have only included major retailers that have announced plans to close at least 10 stores. Most of these closures will take place this year, but in some instances the closures are scheduled to be phased in over a number of years. As you can see, the number of stores that are being permanently shut down is absolutely staggering… 180 Abercrombie & Fitch (by 2015) 75 Aeropostale (through January 2015) 150 American Eagle Outfitters (through 2017) 223 Barnes & Noble (through 2023) 265 Body Central / Body Shop 66 Bottom Dollar Food 25 Build-A-Bear (through 2015) 32 C. Wonder 21 Cache 120 Chico’s (through 2017) 200 Children’s Place (through 2017) 17 Christopher & Banks 70 Coach (fiscal 2015) 70 Coco’s /Carrows 300 Deb Shops 92 Delia’s 340 Dollar Tree/Family Dollar 39 Einstein Bros. Bagels 50 Express (through 2015) 31 Frederick’s of Hollywood 50 Fresh & Easy Grocey Stores 14 Friendly’s 65 Future Shop (Best Buy Canada) 54 Golf Galaxy (by 2016) 50 Guess (through 2015) 26 Gymboree 40 JCPenney 127 Jones New York Outlet 10 Just Baked 28 Kate Spade Saturday & Jack Spade 14 Macy’s 400 Office Depot/Office Max (by 2016) 63 Pep Boys (“in the coming years”) 100 Pier One (by 2017) 20 Pick ’n Save (by 2017) 1,784 Radio Shack 13 Ruby Tuesday 77 Sears 10 SpartanNash Grocery Stores 55 Staples (2015) 133 Target, Canada (bankruptcy) 31 Tiger Direct 200 Walgreens (by 2017) 10 West Marine 338 Wet Seal 80 Wolverine World Wide (2015 – Stride Rite & Keds) So why is this happening? Without a doubt, Internet retailing is taking a huge toll on brick and mortar stores, and this is a trend that is not going to end any time soon. But as Thad Beversdorf has pointed out, we have also seen a stunning decline in true discretionary consumer spending over the past six months… What we find is that over the past 6 months we had a tremendous drop in true discretionary consumer spending. Within the overall downtrend we do see a bit of a rally in February but quite ominously that rally failed and the bottom absolutely fell out. Again the importance is it confirms the fundamental theory that consumer spending is showing the initial signs of a severe pull back. A worrying signal to be certain as we would expect this pull back to begin impacting other areas of consumer spending. The reason is that American consumers typically do not voluntarily pull back like that on spending but do so because they have run out of credit. And if credit is running thin it will surely be felt in all spending. The truth is that middle class U.S. consumers are tapped out. Most families are just scraping by financially from month to month. For most Americans, there simply is not a whole lot of extra money left over to go shopping with these days. In fact, at this point approximately one out of every four Americans spend at least half of their incomes just on rent… More than one in four Americans are spending at least half of their family income on rent – leaving little money left to purchase groceries, buy clothing or put gas in the car, new figures have revealed. A staggering 11.25 million households consume 50 percent or more of their income on housing and utilities, according to an analysis of Census data by nonprofit firm, Enterprise Community Partners. And 1.8 million of these households spend at least 70 percent of their paychecks on rent. The surging cost of rental housing has affected a rising number of families since the Great Recession hit in 2007. Officials define housing costs in excess of 30 percent of income as burdensome. For decades, the U.S. economy was powered by a free spending middle class that had plenty of discretionary income to throw around. But now that the middle class is being systematically destroyed, that paradigm is changing. Americans families simply do not have the same resources that they once did, and that spells big trouble for retailers. As you read this article, the United States still has more retail space per person than any other nation on the planet. But as stores close by the thousands, “space available” signs are going to be popping up everywhere. This is especially going to be true in poor and lower middle class neighborhoods. Especially after what we just witnessed in Baltimore, many retailers are not going to hesitate to shut down underperforming locations in impoverished areas. And remember, the next major economic crisis has not even arrived yet. Once it does, the business environment in this country is going to change dramatically, and a few years from now America is going to look far different than it does right now.

SPEER// Mrs. Donald Baker (Virgie Rackley)(11-25-63 FBI report, CD5 p.66-67) “She was standing across the street immediately in front of the building…She observed President Kennedy’s car pass…and almost immediately thereafter heard three explosions spaced at intervals which she at first thought were firecrackers. It sounded as though these sounds were coming from the direction of the Triple Underpass and looking in that direction after the first shot she saw something bounce from the roadway in front of the Presidential automobile and now presumes it was a bullet bouncing off the pavement.” (3-19-64 statement to the FBI, 22H635) “I recall that moments after the Presidential car passed I heard three loud reports, which I first thought to be a prankster throwing firecrackers.” (7-22-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 7H507-515) “well, after he passed us, then we heard a noise and I thought it was firecrackers, because I saw a shot or something hit the pavement…I thought there were some boys standing down there where he was—where the President’s car was…close to the underpass.” (When asked if she could see the Stemmons Freeway Sign) “No, I couldn’t see the sign because it was angled—we were stepping out into the street then and it was approximately along in here, I presume, the first sign.” (When asked if it was near the first sign) “As I can remember, it was…I thought it was a firecracker. It looked just like you could see the sparks from it and I just thought it was a firecracker and I was thinking that somebody was fixing to get in a lot of trouble and we thought the kids or whoever threw it were down below or standing near the underpass or back up here by the sign” (When asked if it would have been near the underpass or the sign) “It was near the signs” (When asked how close to the opposite curb it was) “It was approximately in the middle of the lane” (When asked where it hit compared to the car) “I thought it was—well—behind it.” (When asked how many shots she heard) “three” (When asked where she believed they came from) “it sounded like it was coming from—there was a railroad track…so I guess it would be by the underpass.” Analysis: Mrs. Baker is another one of those witnesses that LPM theorists and conspiracy theorists alike love to use to demonstrate that there was a first shot miss. A close look at her statements should lead one to question this, however. In the FBI report she merely mentioned seeing something hit the street in front of the limousine. When re-questioned in March, and given a statement to sign, she doesn’t mention a bullet striking the street, only hearing firecrackers. It isn’t until July—eight months after the shooting, that she begins to state she saw sparks or something hit the street behind the limousine. Since she thought the people throwing the firecrackers were in front of the limo, moreover, it's possible she didn't mean behind the limousine on the street, but behind the limousine from her perspective, i.e., in front of the limousine, as she'd previously told the FBI. In any event, even if she saw a first shot miss, and a bullet strike the street behind the limousine, her statements do not support the LPM scenario. She placed the limo down near the first sign—the Thornton Freeway sign--when the first shot rang out. This is past Kennedy's location at frame 160. She also said the bullet or whatever struck the middle of the lane beside the car, behind the car, and that she thought the shots were coming from the underpass. This would indicate that the sparks or whatever she saw exploded along the asphalt in the opposite direction of a shot coming from the sniper’s nest, right in front of Officers Martin and Hargis. Well, why didn’t they or anyone else nearby see this? Not coincidentally, Mrs. Baker was asked during her testimony to put a mark on a photo of Dealey Plaza to indicate where she saw these "sparks" hit the street. This is exhibit 354. Not surprisingly, her mark is a good 70 feet or so further down the road than Kennedy at frame 160. This undoubtedly suggests she did not see the first shot miss proposed by far too many. First shot hit 190-224. =============================== more than one shooter

Socialist leader Costa, best-selling economist Piketty slam austerity = by TPN/ Lusa, in Money ======================================================================= The secretary-general of Portugal’s main opposition group, the Socialist Party, and the star French economist Thomas Piketty, after a meeting in Lisbon this week, both rejected austerity as a model for boosting competitiveness and reducing public debt. Socialist leader Costa, best-selling economist Piketty slam austerity Piketty also laid much of the blame for the ongoing economic and financial crises in southern Europe on the stance taken by the governments of Germany and France. The economist, whose book ‘Capital in the Twenty-First Century’ - examining trends in wealth and income inequality over the decades - has been a best-seller in several major markets, was in Lisbon on Monday to give a talk and for meetings with various left-of-centre politicians. The first of these was with Costa, who seized the chance at a news conference after their meeting to criticise the policies of the current right-of-centre government. “Portugal is indeed an example of the fact that austerity does not resolve the debt problem,” the Socialist leader said. “After four years of austerity, with cuts in salaries and pensions and an increase in the tax burden, the truth is that we today have a debt 30 percentage points [as a share of gross domestic product] above what we had, and we are in a worst condition to be able to pay it off. We need to bring an end to the policy of austerity.” Piketty, for his part, reiterated his criticisms of policy in the European Union, which he said was largely the result of “selfishness” on the part of the two largest EuroZone members in relation to those with the biggest financial problems - Portugal, Spain and Greece. “I think the elections in Portugal and Spain this year could serve to make a difference, reorienting Europe,” the French economist said. “The European Union is making a grave mistake in arguing that one can reduce the high level of debt simply based on more austerity. “When you have a debt of one hundred percent or more of GDP, you must also look to history and to what happened with France and Germany after the Second World War,” he concluded, in a reference to the way debt problems were overcome through economic growth and “some inflation”. That contrasts with the current situation in the Euro Zone, in which unemployment is high and growth anaemic, he noted. The question of equality is, Piketty added, “central to economic development”. Piketty also had meetings with Rui Tavares, a former member of the European Parliament and founder of the Livre party, which plans to stand candidates in the general election due this autumn, and with António Sampaio de Nóvoa, a former rector of University of Lisbon who plans to standing in the presidential election early next year. This comes after the Socialist Party had earlier announced plans to put a swift end to austerity imposed cuts and argued that they would not threaten Portugal’s status as a Euro Zone member. “Contrary to what the government has told us, we do not need to continue with austerity to keep us in the euro while it is also not true what the radical left has been saying that we need to break with the euro in order to abandon austerity” said António Costa, before affirming that ending austerity would actually better enable Portuguese participation in the euro. The Socialist Party leader continued to say that governing was not about dreaming but about making dreams reality and that meant “understanding the conditions available for governing.” Costa stated that he represented an alternative and that the current government had failed by recalling how according to the government’s 2011 forecasts, “Gross Domestic Product in 2015 should now be 7 percent higher than it is, with a debt level of 100 percent and not the current 130 percent and running a budget deficit of 0.5 percent rather than the 2.7 percent forecast.” The Socialist Party leader was speaking to some 700 supporters and said that while he had overseen the drafting of a feasible economic programme to take into the election campaign, the government was still making unspecified cuts in reference to plans to lop another €600 million off the state pension bill. Costa concluded that “this means that the government has not only not learned from its errors but also has nothing new to say and the only thing it knows how to present, are cuts” before promising that his government would harm neither state nor household finances.

Internet 'rationing' needed as UK cannot keep up with demand The Internet is already consuming at least 8 per cent of Britain's power output, equivalent to the output of three nuclear power stations, and demand is soaring, says one academic. By Ben Farmer Internet access may soon need to be rationed or restricted because the UK’s power supply and communications network cannot cope with consumers’ appetite for online video, the Royal Society will hear this week. The Internet is already consuming at least 8 per cent of Britain’s power output, with the energy demand from data transmission and storage as well as smartphones, laptops and televisions. Demand doubles every four years, according to one estimate. At the same time optical cables and switches are set to reach their capacity to carry data by the end of the decade. The Royal Society will hear this week that the country’s communications networks face a “potentially disastrous capacity crunch”, as academics meet to discuss the problem. "The Internet is already consuming at least 8 per cent of Britain's power output, equivalent to the output of three nuclear power stations, and demand is soaring," Andrew Ellis, professor of optical communications at Aston University, told the Sunday Times. “It's the first time we have had to worry about optical fibres actually filling up." He said: "It is growing so fast, currently at an exponential rate, that, in theory, it could be using all the UK power generation by 2035. “We cannot make all that extra power, so we will have to restrict or reduce access, perhaps by metering consumers so they pay for what they use." Laying extra cables to take more data is likely to lead to sharp rises in Internet access costs and also the amount of power needed, he said. New cables could quickly reach their limit too, at the current rate of demand. Prof Ellis said the public had to begin deciding whether they were prepared to pay more for Internet access. Technical advances have already greatly multiplied the amount of data that can be sent down optical fibres, but scientists now fear they are reaching the physical limit of what the cables can take without distorting the signal. Andrew Lord, head of optical access at BT, said: “It's the first time we have had to worry about optical fibres actually filling up. “We could expand the network by laying more cables but the economics of that do not work and it would increase power consumption." He said one solution would be rationing, where Internet users including businesses and housholds would be charged for data usage. "New cables laid now could fill in a year or two of being installed, which is far too short," he said. "If we don't fix this then in 10 years time the Internet could have to cost more."

Why are GPs being told to hand billions-worth of NHS decisions to private health firms and their lobbyists? Tamasin Cave 3 May 2015 https://www.opendemocracy.net/tamasin-cave/why-are-gps-being-told-to-hand-decisions-to-private-health-firms-and-their-lobbyists Whilst all eyes have been on the election, the government has quietly shifted into stage two of NHS privatisation, generating huge potential conflicts of interest. ‘The whole point of our NHS reforms,’ David Cameron said, is ‘to put the power in the hands of local doctors, so that they make decisions based on what is good for their local area.’ But now new information has emerged in the run-up to the election, showing just how far from the truth this claim is. Yes, most of the NHS budget was handed to GPs. But they are now handing it over to private firms. It’s phase two of the privatisation project. It is private firms who will determine how and where the NHS budget will be spent (through a process known in NHS speak as commissioning). Everything from deciding which hospitals stay open, which services are still available on the NHS, and who provides these services, the NHS or the private sector. As the Observer reveals this morning, the list of approved suppliers bidding for this work – the planning and buying of care – has just quietly been released. The list is dominated by management consultancies, outsourcing giant, Capita, and US health insurer, UnitedHealth, the previous employer of NHS CEO, Simon Stevens. Last year, Spinwatch uncovered how UnitedHealth’s lobbyist, Chris Exeter, chaired a discreet forum, the Commissioning Support Industry Group, giving these firms regular privileged access to senior NHS officials overseeing the creation of this new market in ‘commissioning services’. Capita was another member of the group, as were KPMG, PwC, EY (formerly Ernst & Young) and McKinsey. There are nine consortia set up to ‘supply’ local health purchasing decisions. UnitedHealth, Capita, KPMG and PwC are now approved suppliers to two thirds of them. McKinsey and EY are suppliers to half of them. These companies (and others) will supply GP commissioners with key services that have until now been done by the NHS for the NHS: planning services; managing relationships and contracts with healthcare providers, like hospitals; and crucially deciding what the NHS will look like in the future – what NHS England calls ‘transformation and service redesign’. GP groups will be forced to re-procure a lot of these services by April 2016 (apparently in order to comply with EU procurement law). It is thought that, consequently, between £3-5billion of services will be bought through these consortia. The privatisation of commissioning hands the private sector more power, more influence and potentially a lot more of the NHS budget. It also presents potentially huge conflicts of interest, with private companies like United Health bidding to take charge of local health budgets at the same time as it is increasingly looking to provide the healthcare those budgets pay for. UnitedHealth, for example, is bidding for the biggest privatisation in NHS history, Staffordshire’s £1.2bn contract to run cancer and end-of-life care. Are rules in place to prevent any conflicts of interest? The approved list of suppliers also includes a number of commercial lobbying firms working for private healthcare clients seeking to make money out of the NHS. Take commercial lobbying agency Hanover, which is part of a consortia led by UnitedHealth. Hanover’s head of health is lobbyist Andrew Harrison, a former aide to Labour’s privatising health secretary, Alan Milburn and an ex-colleague of the man currently holding the NHS purse-strings, Simon Stevens. Hanover has been UnitedHealth’s lobbying agency for years. Another recent client is HCA, the huge private hospital operator that had to pay $1.7bn in US fraud settlements in 2003. HCA has a few ‘joint ventures’ with the NHS, but wants more. Hanover also bends ministerial ears on behalf of the US pharmaceutical lobby group, the American Pharmaceutical Group. Another long-standing client is Alliance Medical, which paid ‘cash-for-access’ Tory MP Malcolm Rifkind to sit on its board and recently won an £80 million contract to run cancer scans across England (despite a rival NHS group claiming their bid was £7 million cheaper). Hanover, which as an approved supplier is now in line to provide “communications services” to local health bosses, already serves a number of NHS bodies. It provides the NHS Cancer Screening Programmes with ‘reputation management’, and advises on ‘managing relationships with key stakeholders’, for example. Hanover aren’t the only commercial lobbyists on the list faced with potential conflicts of interests. Engine is in another of the private sector consortia, MBED. Engine is actually a group of communications companies, which includes lobbying agency MHP. The firm has long been a favorite of healthcare companies. Until recently, their star turn was Bill Morgan, who was Andrew Lansley’s right-hand man. MHP’s roster of clients contains all the big names in pharmaceuticals, and some drug-funded health charities. Since 1999, Engine has also worked for Bupa, including providing the private health company with ‘business consultancy’ and support for its e-Health programmes (using computers to both collect health data and provide healthcare and monitoring). Global business consultants FTI Consulting are a part of half of the consortia that GP local health bosses will now be encouraged to use. FTI claims to have years of experience creating campaigns to ‘protect clients’ political and policy interests’. Who they lobby for in the UK isn’t known, but in the US clients include the lobby group for the private health insurance industry, America’s Health Insurance Plans; the Biotechnology Industry Organisation; and the health insurer AXA. In Brussels, FTI stands up for private health insurer, Prudential; lots of pharmaceutical companies, plus the European Association for Biotech industries. Then there’s EY, formerly Ernst & Young, another global consultancy firm that is poised to help direct how and where the NHS spends its money. EY are – you guessed it – lobbyists for private health companies. EY has just registered Prudential as a client on the UK’s new register of lobbyists. The Pru is also a US lobbying client, as are Zurich and AIG; Pfizer; and every NHS-leader’s favorite US healthcare firm, Kaiser Permanente. PwC, which is a supplier to most of the consortia, has registered itself on the UK’s register of lobbyists, meaning it lobbies ministers on behalf of (as yet un-named) clients. PwC is looking to increase its position in what it sees as the UK’s growing, commercial market in healthcare. ‘The health industry in the UK offers strong opportunities for growth in the wider economy and for PwC,’ said chair of PwC’s advisory board, former health secretary, Alan Milburn. McKinsey, a supplier to five of the groups on offer to GPs, earns most of its revenue from advising corporations: health insurers, private hospital groups, pharmaceutical companies, tech interests and investors. Emails show that it was sharing its thinking on the implications of the Coalition’s NHS reforms ‘with clients’. Who they are, and what McKinsey does for them, though, is confidential. McKinsey also appears to act as a bridge between the public and private sectors. More documents show the consultants connecting London’s health officials with one of Germany’s largest private hospital chains to discuss ‘potential opportunities’ to take over public hospitals in the capital. McKinsey also advised them how to minimise public resistance to the privatisation of hospitals: start ‘from a mindset [of] one at a time’. Then there’s KPMG, a supplier of services to six of the nine approved groups. Official spending data shows how much work has already been sent KPMG’s way by the NHS-led consortia. From September 2013 to March 2014, it picked up £3.5m from them. One group on the list, the Arden & Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit (GEM) paid KPMG over a quarter of a million pounds a month in the first six months of 2014 for services, including work on a £500k ‘enhanced analytics’ project, and supporting ‘specialised commissioning’. KPMG has itself subcontracted some of this work to UnitedHealth (via another unnamed company), according to a Freedom of Information release. There is no contract between GEM and UnitedHealth. At the same time, KPMG is engaged with the private healthcare sector. Addressing a conference of healthcare companies and investors in New York in 2010, Mark Britnell, head of KPMG’s UK health division, spoke of the private sector opportunities presented by the UK’s health reforms: "The NHS will be shown no mercy and the best time to take advantage of this will be in the next couple of years," he advised the attending companies. Britnell was speaking a year into his job at KPMG, which he joined from the Department of Health where he was director general in charge of commissioning. Britnell was the architect of what we see today: the privatisation of commissioning. Back in 2010, the BBC reported the Coalition’s reforms of the NHS as 'handing funding powers to GPs'. Let’s hope they also report that the power is now passing to profit-seeking corporations.

EDIT Husband Marguerite link corrected.above PLEASE NOTE when you see Amon Carter or Harold Byrd you can also say possible ONI connection

Tuesday, April 7, 2015 Etiology of the Red Bird Getaway Plane Story ==== Researched and written by Linda Minor http://quixoticjoust.blogspot.com/2015_04_01_archive.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- D.H. Byrd's CAP outfit flew from Red Bird. = This post is a sidenote to research I've been doing previously, but it relates only tangentially to the DC-3 plane which Wayne January was selling at the time he was told in advance about the assassination of President Kennedy. January himself had no knowledge of or connection to the group planning the assassination, but the story he revealed to author Matthew Smith sheds light on one small piece in the puzzle as a whole. Possibly the reason so many of us "conspiracy buffs" spend so many years of our lives digging into the 1963 Kennedy assassination is that we can dedicate years of study to it and never solve the puzzle to anyone's satisfaction. It is my opinion that we may be trying to solve the wrong puzzle. We have to broaden our context. The FAA Report to FBI--1967 I began delving into a simple question asked me by a reader about the Wayne January incident, not remembering that Daniel Hopsicker had dealt with one aspect of that question in his book Barry & 'the Boys', originally published in 2001. Daniel has also mentioned what has been referred to as the "getaway plane" at Red Bird Airport at his website, The MadCowNews, under the subheading, "Three men in suits at Redbird Airport," dated November 20, 2013. Keep in mind, however, he was not talking about N-17888, but a different aircraft from the one we have been investigating. Nevertheless, the "getaway plane" was also part of what had been of interest to Matthew Smith in describing events that took place at Red Bird Airport in 1963. Ferrie's mugshot Garrison's New Orleans investigation had zeroed in on David Ferrie, and he sent an employee to Dallas with Ferrie's photograph (possibly his mugshot) to inquire whether anyone at Red Bird Airport had seen him there in November 1963. Louis Gaudin had not seen Ferrie, but he did disclose a separate suspicious incident he witnessed the afternoon of the assassination. Three men in suits boarded a "Comanche-type aircraft" just over an hour after President Kennedy had been gunned down. Gaudin had not called the FBI at the time because by then Lee Harvey Oswald was in custody, with officials claiming he was the "lone" assassin. Why did Gaudin and Bowles wait to contact the FBI until two weeks after Ferrie's dead body had been found on February 22? Daniel Hopsicker tracked down Gaudin, 37 years after the FBI report (dated March 10, 1967), and recounted in his book what the FAA air traffic controller told him: “The FAA had its general aviation headquarters there, said Gaudin. “Howard Hughes had a huge old WWII hanger there, with heavy security. People from Wackenhut all over the place. And there were the Porter planes from General Harry Byrd’s outfit.” General D. Harry Byrd’s links to the Kennedy assassination begin with the fact that he owned the building, the Texas School Book Depository, from which Kennedy was supposedly gunned down. Then, too, he founded an aircraft company that became one of the largest U.S. defense contractors during the Vietnam War, Ling-Temco-Vought (LTV), which also—and perhaps not coincidentally?—tested missiles at the Venice Airport in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. “What had happened was this,” he continued. “I was an air traffic controller working in the tower at Redbird [sic] that day. When I came on shift at 2 PM, we received a bulletin to report any suspicious activity immediately to an FAA Security number. And we kept calling that number all afternoon, but got nothing but a busy signal. And then, after we heard they had caught the ‘lone gunman,’ I guess they called it, we stopped calling, and let the matter drop.” From his perch atop the control tower, Mr. Gaudin, between handling twenty or thirty flights into and out of the airport an hour, had noticed something suspicious about three well-dressed men in business suits standing, along with several suitcase, beside a Comanche painted green-and-white. So suspicious was he, Mr. Gaudin related, that when the plane took off on runway 17, he asked the pilot if he needed any assistance. The pilot said no. Gaudin asked which way the plane was heading. The pilot stated south. Gaudin watched as the plane flew south for two miles, then made a hard left, and then flew north to Love Field. The pilot had lied. Suspicions aroused, Gaudin went over to the control tower’s receiver and listened as the plane made an approach and landed at Love Field, eight miles north of Redbird. An hour later, the plane was back at Redbird. This time only two people were aboard. The third passenger—let’s call him the shooter–had been left at Love Field. And that’s where the matter rested until Garrison’s investigator’s came calling. Then, after Gaudin became alarmed at the death of a man whose picture he had just recently been shown, he called the FBI, and filed the report which, he said, became something of a burden to him for the rest of his life. “There was no Freedom of Information Act back then,” he says today. “That’s what’s created some problems for me.” This would be just a ‘suspicious sighting’ except for something that happened later, which clearly indicated to Gaudin that he was a witness to something he had no business seeing. From the control tower, he says, he was too far away to be able to identify anyone who boarded the plane. But there was one person who could: Merrit Goble, who ran the fixed-wing operation, TexAir, at Redbird Field. “Merrit and I were friends,” Gaudin relates. “So one day, after filing the FBI report, I went down to see if the FBI had been by to visit him as well. They hadn’t, he told me. So I asked him if he had anything, any gas receipts, any record of the fueling of the plane in question. And Merit acted very strangely. He told me, in effect, that it was none of my business. He said, ‘I will only answer questions from a bonafide law enforcement authority.’” “I always thought that was strange: ‘I will only answer questions from a bonafide law enforcement authority.’ Because like I said, we were friends.” Merrit Goble died last year, taking any secrets he possessed about the suspicious plane to his grave. Bowles worked with LBJ's bro-in-law. It is not clear to me from reading Hopsicker's work whether it was Gaudin who told him about Byrd's use of Red Bird for Civil Air Patrol planes, or whether he gleaned that information from another source. "Harry Byrd" usually refers to the Virginia Senator of that name, the brother of Admiral Richard Byrd, Jr., whom D. Harold Byrd claimed as his cousins. I also have to ask whether, before calling the FBI, Bowles may first have contacted his own superior at the FAA, who, by 1967 was the President's brother-in-law, Birge D. Alexander, husband of Lucia Huffman Johnson since 1933. Birge rose to the position of Area Manager for the Southwest Region of the F.A.A. not long after brother-in-law Lyndon was himself "promoted". Bowles and Alexander had been officials together at C.A.A., later F.A.A., for many years. Birge, Lucia and Rebekah (Libby Willis) Birge and his siblings were reared in Sabinal, a tiny town in Uvalde County from 1908 until leaving for college in Austin. Before 1908, home had been at Manchaca Springs, in south Travis County, where Birge's grandfather is buried. Robert Carogoes into more detail. Alexander played center for the Sabinal football squad and was named all-district center in 1929. A few years later Birge was off to the University of Texas to study engineering. Graduating in 1939, he immediately went to work for the Lower Colorado River Authority, a job for which he unquestionably had his brother-in-law, the newly elected Congressman Johnson from the district, to thank. Within a short time, however, Birge transferred to a different government job at the Civil Aeronautics Administration, in charge of building and inspecting airport runways. He would no doubt have come into contact with Bowles, who was in charge of air traffic control--both men with offices in the same building in Fort Worth. Sabinal, coincidentally, where Birge grew up and where his father's siblings all lived, was where John Nance Garner's wife, Mariette "Ettie" Rheiner, was born in 1869. According to Ettie, she was taking a secretarial course in San Antonio when she met Garner on a train. They married as soon as she finished the course in 1895. His story was, with a big wink, that she was running for county judge, opposing him, so he married her to win the election. Was Cactus Jack, as Garner was nicknamed, as prickly as his name implies? Was he just an innocent curmudgeon? Only more research will tell. We do know he had power, but all we ever saw of it was just the tip of an iceberg. What lay beneath that icy peak? -------------------------=================---------------------- also see http://quixoticjoust.blogspot.com/2015_02_01_archive.html and http://quixoticjoust.blogspot.com/2015_03_01_archive.html

Anyone living in the real world knows we are in a recession. The fact that median real household income in 6% lower than it was in 2000 proves we have actually been in a 15 year recession. = Submitted by IWB, on April 30th, 2015 ================================================================ by James Quinn == So the highly paid Ivy League educated Wall Street economist mouthpieces missed the GDP by a country mile. Give them a cigar and a million dollar bonus for keeping the muppets in the market. These worthless pieces of excrement can be replaced by a model. The Atlanta Fed model nailed the 1st quarter GDP two months ago. We all know this number will be revised two more times, because the government is essentially guessing on every item in the calculation. By the time it is final, in 5 years, it will be -2% or worse. Anyone living in the real world knows we are in a recession. The fact that median real household income in 6% lower than it was in 2000 proves we have actually been in a 15 year recession. How much progress has the average American made since 2000? Their standard of living has fallen. They know it. They have attempted to maintain a semblance of their past standard by utilizing debt. The government, corporations, and individuals have all fallen for the false premise that debt can generate wealth. The debt has destroyed economic vitality, innovation, and investment. We’ve had zero interest rates for six years and this is what we’ve got. Digging into the BEA report reveals the horror: •According to the BEA the economy has only grown by 7.3% in the last TWO years. And that is before the government reported inflation of 2.5%. So, even using their own cooked numbers, the real GDP is only up 4.8% in two years. In reality, inflation in the average person’s daily living expenses are up by at least 10% in the last two years. Real GDP is negative. •Personal consumption still makes up 68% of GDP, just as it did in 2008. Therefore, when consumers stop spending money they don’t have, the economy tanks. Consumer spending on goods collapsed in the 1st quarter and is barely above last year’s Polar Vortex first quarter. I thought we had a housing recovery and 10 million new Obama jobs. Why no spending? Think about this for a moment. The government is doling out billions in student loans and the car companies are giving away cars to deadbeats with subprime loans and still spending on goods collapses. •Of course consumer spending on services soared to a new all-time high. Guess why. Obamacare. All that extra money you are paying to insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, and the government is considered a big plus for the GDP. Is it a big plus for you? •The amount companies invested in plants crashed in the first quarter. It is 13% BELOW levels of 2008. How can an economy grow over the long-term if companies do not invest in plant and equipment? The S&P 500 companies are using all of their cash to buy back their own stock at record valuation levels. The foolishness and greed of corporate executives is breathtaking to behold. They are gutting our industrial base. •Exports collapsed, confirming we have a global recession, in case you hadn’t noticed. •The biggest benefit to GDP was a huge increase in inventories. This is a disaster in the making. If consumers aren’t consuming and foreigners aren’t buying our exports, companies will have to purge these inventories at drastically lower prices. The draw down of these inventories will crush the GDP in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. •The only bright spot is that the government has stopped increasing their spending. The Washington gridlock has stopped Obama and his minions from doling out more free xxxx. Government spending is lower than it was in 2012. But it is still 13% higher than it was in 2008. The funniest part of the GDP calculation is that the government doles out hundreds of billions in entitlements which is counted as a plus to GDP and then the recipients spend the entitlement money and it is also included as a positive to GDP. What a wonderful system. So there you have it. The government is telling you we haven’t entered recession yet. Wall Street economists will blame the weather. Do you believe them, or do you believe your wallet? Time to BTFATH. US Economy Grinds To A Halt, Again: Q1 GDP Tumbles Below Expectations, Rises Paltry 0.2% image: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/pictures/picture-5.jpg Tyler Durden's picture Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/29/2015 08:42 -0400 And so the Atlanta Fed, whose “shocking” Q1 GDP image: http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png prediction Zero Hedge first laid out nearly 2 months ago, with its Q1 GDP 0.1% forecast was spot on. Moments ago the BEA reported that Q1 GDP was far worse than almost everyone had expected, and tumbled from a 2.2% annualized growth rate at the end of 2014 to just 0.2%, in a rerun of last year when it too “snowed” in the winter. This was well below the Wall Street consensus of a print above 1.0%. image: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/04/20150429_gdp_0.jpg In other words, in the quarter in which the S&P rose to unseen highs, the economy ground to a near halt. Only this time it wasn’t the snow, as the main reason for the plunge in economic growth was not only personal consumption which was cut by more than 50% from last quarter, tumbling to just 1.31%, but fixed investment, i.e., CapEx, which subtracting 0.40% from the bottom line GDP number, was the lowest print since 2009! image: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/04/20150429_gdp2_0.jpg The fact that trade also subtracted a whopping 1.25% from the final number shows that while one can blame the weather for anything, the reality is that in the start of the year global trade image: http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png did indeed grind to a halt, a picture which is only getting worse with every passing day. The only good news: the massive inventory image: http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png build, the largest since 2010, boosted GDP by nearly 3.0%.Without this epic stockpiling of non-farm inventory which will have to be liquidated at some point (and at a very low price) Q1 GDP would have been -2.5%. Here is the full breakdown of the GDP number: image: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/04/Q1%20GDP%20breakdown_0.jpg And a historical breakdown showing that the Q1 “snow in the winter” curse is alive and well. image: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/04/Q1%20GDP%20historical_0.jpg . Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/anyone-living-in-the-real-world-knows-we-are-in-a-recession-the-fact-that-median-real-household-income-in-6-lower-than-it-was-in-2000-proves-we-have-actually-been-in-a-15-year-recession/#qx1mKekdmcKJqRz9.99

edit see above

I have a wedding to attend today of one of the sons of JFK Researcher William Weston. EDIT BELOW ====================================== Steve Cearfoss, on 02 May 2015 - 09:21 AM, said: Steven, is this a follow up to a thread that I missed? I don't know who these people — DeMoh and Wolf — are. Please elucidate. Thanks Its been a long time since I went into this // was on old computer. Im trying to dig it up. (GAAL) ==================================================================== BRUCE ADAMSON == Baker p. 107: cites letter from LBJ to de Mohrenschildt dated April 18, 1963 -- Does not give credit to Adamson who was first to published letter in full -- vol. 5, p. 70, p. 78. Vice-President,LBJ's assistant Walter Jenkins writing to the best friend of Lee Harvey Oswald on April 18th, 1963. This was seven months before the assassination and the letter is being sent to the CIA's trust Republic National Bank Building. This letter is extremely important because it was the General Walker shooting on April 10th, 1963, that helped convict Oswald as the lone assassin of JFK. As far as I know it was first discovered and copyrighted by this author in 1992-93. Courtesy of the LBJ Library. The following day de Mohrenschildt leaves for Washington D.C. while his nieghbor Professor Wolf of SMU died in a house fire. Thre records of his death were destroyed. ################################################################# Lubbock Avalanche-Journal from Lubbock, Texas · Page 68 www.newspapers.com/newspage/13678897/ Apr 10, 1977 - De Mohrenschildt. an internationally traveled petroleum geologist, died March .... 1963, SMU history professor William T. Wolfe died when his duplex at 6618 ... Among De Mohrenschildt's personal effects located at his Dallas ... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ EDIT Its Bruce Adamson vs Bruce Adamson The above of Mr. Adamson was written to make known that he wanted more credit from Russ Baker (Weston could also have made that claim BTW). Burce was mostly out of JFK research when he wrote letter RE Baker. Below what I remember from previous Mr. Adamson's work. ======================================== In older work //ITS APT Wolf has and not house next to DEMoh. In older work // Demoh left for New York City to get monies from Prescott Bush and then Demoh went to DC.

RUBY ONI LINK ADDED ===================================================================== OV CAMPBELL dosent want the TSBD involved. Grassy Knoll Witnesses : The JFK Assassination http://webcache.goog...n&ct=clnk&gl=us 　 22 November 1963: A Brief Guide to the JFK Assassination .... Campbell says he ran toward a grassy knoll to the west of the building, where he thought the ... ========================= Molina, a TSBD employee, heard shots coming from west of the building. 　 http://www.history-m...6_Dougherty.pdf see page 373 MOLINA Afraid does not want to be involved. HOLMES - Molina connection see Scully post this thread http://educationforu...=20291&p=298381 for 4 below 　 1.FERRIE RECRUITED OSWALD FOR ONI (FERRIE HAD CONTINUED NAVY-ONI CONNECTIONS POST ASSASSINATION) 2.ONI MONITORED ASSASSINATION per GRAVES ONI man (see post # 149 above) 3.ONI wanted cremated OSWALD 4.First of all, Mason Lankford’s father, John Mason Lankford Sr., was an employee of Temco in the early 1950s, suggesting a possible relationship with David Harold Byrd. POST OFFICE HOLMES ONI CONNECTION SEE POST # 88 above // SEE MOLINA SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOR POST # 78 above this thread ONI worked with United fruit since the 1920. (BOOK LINK BELOW) Marguerite ONI connection via Uncle and husband and also the Amon Carter Family. (THESE CONNECTIONS SEE BELOW the triple #### marks) = SEE LINK RUBY ONI http://educationforu...=20291&p=298381 re FERRIE) Harold Byrd's LTV and ONI link (see Re ONI and LTV linage see Henry Wallace Re: Red Bird Airport, Wayne January & LHO. see link https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/LTV$20BYRD$20NAVY/alt.assassination.jfk/3wW9bB_B6VY/g-l-7MTSDm0J ) Harold Bird sat on the board of Dorchester Gas with Jack Crichton of Empire Trust. Empire Trust's private intelligence service had ONI connections.POST OFFICE HOLMES ONI CONNECTION SEE POST # 88 above (POST OFFICE WORKED WITH ONI) ONI worked with United fruit since the 1920.Marguerite ONI connection via Uncle , husband and also the Amon Carter Family]]]] It may be that ONI man Holmes is watching/reporting on in real time a CIA assassination operation run out of the ONI/TSBD building. (GAAL) The shooting out of the TSBD is a classic example of covert operation compartmentalization.

OK how about a real jump ?? The family that owned the apt building were DeMoh lived and had Professor Wolf die in a fire a day before DeMoh left for NY is the same family that own this land. I don't think the shooters ever left Dallas alive. Said family owned this land in 1963. ============================================================== https://www.google.com/maps/place/1809+Rock+Island+St,+Dallas,+TX+75207/@32.7598159,-96.7949858,727m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x864e9907545da1d1:0xbc97559b11a9c939

delete

1. But it was not spelling problems that he had when writing the Walker note. From what I have read, it was more problems with sentence structure and improper selection and usage of nouns and verbs. An example of this would be the Monty Python classic "The Life of Brian". Brian is ordered by the Judean People's Front to write "Romans go Home" on a large wall, as a loyalty test. Not knowing Latin very well, Brian ends up writing "The Romans, they go the House". He is caught by Roman guards, is shown the correct phraseology, and ordered by the guards to write it on the wall, 500 times.LHO was diagnosed with dyslexia long after he was dead? And by none less than a WC doctor? Riggghhht....2. If the "while in Russia" letter that Greg Parker produced, and the analysis of it, are true and correct, he was able to write in very good Russian only ten months prior to writing the Walker note. We are supposed to believe he lost his ability to write Russian in the space of ten months?3. And this is significant because.....4. And this is significant because.... // PRUDHOMME ========================================== Oswald was OK with espionage but not assassination so he created a flawed note as not to implicate himself. OSWALD SAID TO HIS COVERT CONTROLLERS "YES I WROTE A WALKER NOTE" espionage is information gathering not killing (GAAL) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Posted 05 January 2015 - 03:50 PM http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2544&p=294393 Worldwatchers Archive A Tribute to Mae Brussell Dialogue: Conspiracy 78-02-26 (CLICK LINK) audio see http://www.worldwatchers.info/shows/dialogue-conspiracy-78-02-26/ Whole Show ================================ Now, the myth is that JFK fired Walker because of his JBS propaganda. That's not true. The truth is that the Join Chiefs of staff fired Walker because of a horrible series of shore-flaps that climaxed on 16 April 1961 (the same day as the Bay of Pigs) when the Overseas Weekly newspaper in Germany slammed Walker with a two-page attack over his allegedly John Birch Society program. But in reality that was only the tip of the iceberg. Actually, the Overseas Weekly had been spying on Walker for 18 months because they were certain that General Edwin Walker was GAY. Walker hated these people, and he even sued the Overseas Weekly in Civil Court and won, but that only made the Overseas Weekly angry. That was why they decided to pull out all the stops and scare the hell out of the Joint Chiefs. The Joint Chiefs (and JFK) could care less about the JBS propaganda (at this point) -- and their real complaint was about a shore-flap in Germany in the middle of the Cold War. The Joint Chiefs booted Walker off of his command the very next day.// TREJO ================================================= Credibility of information of Radio program increases doesnt it ?? (GAAL) ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] credibility BRUSSELL see post # 2 below - http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21659&p=295263

1. But it was not spelling problems that he had when writing the Walker note. From what I have read, it was more problems with sentence structure and improper selection and usage of nouns and verbs. An example of this would be the Monty Python classic "The Life of Brian". Brian is ordered by the Judean People's Front to write "Romans go Home" on a large wall, as a loyalty test. Not knowing Latin very well, Brian ends up writing "The Romans, they go the House". He is caught by Roman guards, is shown the correct phraseology, and ordered by the guards to write it on the wall, 500 times. LHO was diagnosed with dyslexia long after he was dead? And by none less than a WC doctor? Riggghhht.... 2. If the "while in Russia" letter that Greg Parker produced, and the analysis of it, are true and correct, he was able to write in very good Russian only ten months prior to writing the Walker note. We are supposed to believe he lost his ability to write Russian in the space of ten months? 3. And this is significant because..... 4. And this is significant because.... // PRUDHOMME }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}} IF I was OK with espionage but not assassination I would misspell too.

Pesticides alter bees' brains, making them unable to live and reproduce adequately Thursday, April 30, 2015 = http://www.naturalblaze.com/2015/04/pesticides-alter-bees-brains-making.html = New research in The FASEB Journal suggests that the neonicotinoid class of pesticides do not kill bees but impair their brain function to disturb learning, blunt food gathering skills and harm reproduction In research report published in the May 2015 issue of The FASEB Journal, scientists report that a particular class of pesticides called "neonicotinoids" wreaks havoc on the bee populations, ultimately putting some crops that rely on pollination in jeopardy. Specifically, these pesticides kill bee brain cells, rendering them unable to learn, gather food and reproduce. The report, however, also suggests that the effects of these pesticides on bee colonies may be reversible by decreasing or eliminating the use of these pesticides on plants pollenated by bees and increasing the availability of "bee-friendly" plants available to the insects. "Our study shows that the neonicotinoid pesticides are a risk to our bees and we should stop using them on plants that bees visit," said Christopher N. Connolly, Ph.D., a researcher involved in the work from the Medical Research Institute at the Ninewells Medical School at the University of Dundee in Dundee, UK. "Neonicotinoids are just a few examples of hundreds of pesticides we use on our crops and in our gardens. Stop using all pesticides in your garden and see insect damage as a success. You are providing for your native wildlife. Nasty caterpillars grow into beautiful butterflies." To make their discovery, Connolly and colleagues fed bees a sugar solution with very low neonicotinoid pesticide levels typically found in flowers (2.5 parts per billion) and tracked the toxins to the bee brain. They found that pesticide levels in the bees' brains were sufficient to cause the learning cells to run out of energy. Additionally, the brain cells were even vulnerable to this effect at just one tenth of the level present. When the ability of the bee's brain to learn is limited, the bee is unable to master key skills such as recognizing the presence of nectar and pollen from the smell emitted from flowers. In addition, scientists fed bumblebee colonies this same very low level of pesticide in a remote site in the Scottish Highlands where they were unlikely to be exposed to any other pesticides. They found that just a few of the exposed colonies performed well, colonies were smaller, and nests were in poor condition with fungus taking over. This further suggests that bumblebees exposed to this type of pesticide become poor learners, become unable to properly gather food, and become unable to properly nurture the next generation of bees. "It is ironic that neonicotinoids, pesticides developed to preserve the health of plants, ultimately inflict tremendous damage on plant life," said Gerald Weissmann, M.D., Editor-in-Chief of The FASEB Journal. "These chemicals destroy the insect communities required by plants for their own reproduction." == - See more at: http://www.naturalblaze.com/2015/04/pesticides-alter-bees-brains-making.html#sthash.P0Su2c8Y.dpuf

THE SPEECH YOU MAY HEAR .......long live Big Brother !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! __________________________________________________________________________________________ British police spend £36 million per year on propaganda May 1st, 2015  Police forces spend tens of millions on public relations each year, with the Met alone employing over 100 ‘communications’ staff and an operating budget of over £10 million, documents released under Freedom of Information (FoI) show. The investigation, carried out by the Press Gazette, has revealed there are 775 PR staff working across 38 national police forces.Besides the 38 forces that responded, a further four ignored the request, two claimed to be exempt from answering and one did not address the question. The overall figures involved are calculated to be in the region of £36 million per year. The Met’s head of media Ed Steams told Press Gazette the London force’s substantial budget was used for many activities beyond routine PR, such as recruiting and internal communications. Some critics claim the rising number of PR staff and press officers throws up a barrier between public and police, and stops journalists exploring the inner workings of law enforcement. ===== Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie told Press Gazette: “ My sense is that the police hire more and more people in their comms area in order to stop journalists from finding out what is going on. Assault rifle used by UK counter-terror police ‘doesn’t shoot straight’ (DONT WANT THAT OUT GAAL) “ The senior officers hate what appears in papers as they are in the unusual position of having no control. They also hate the public knowing what is going on because it may reveal the police haven’t done or aren’t doing their job properly.” “ Further, they dislike the argument that they have to answer through the journalists to their ultimate paymasters – the public. How are the public supposed to find out what is happening crime wise in their local area without the media? ” The FoI covered the period from 2009/10 and 2014/15, and showed that budgets had actually grown despite simultaneous fiscal austerity. On seeing the figures, senior political figures expressed disappointment that the PR budget had swollen. Green Party London Assembly Member Jenny Jones told Press Gazette: “ I’m sympathetic to the idea that the Met needs a press budget to report good news stories, as well as try to rebut the bad, but at a time of savage cuts it’s disappointing to see growth. ” ========================================================= This piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News with permission or license.

Monsanto Secretly Gave Money to Farmer Caught Contaminating Organic Farms with GMOs Now admits to paying for GMO farmer’s legal defense ========================================================= Christina Sarich by Christina Sarich Posted on April 30, 2015 ======================= http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-secretly-contributes-money-mo-farmer-organic-crops/ =========================================== Natural Society reported on organic farmer Steve Marsh’s dilemma with GMO cross pollination of his organic farms a while back, but some shocking news has recently bubbled to the surface about Monsanto’s involvement. One of the secrets of monopolizing Monsanto is that it contributed big bucks to the defense of the Australian farmer whose GMO canola crop infected Steve Marsh’s organic fields. If you aren’t privy, a ruling by the Supreme Court of Western Australia had no sympathy for Steve Marsh’s plight, and sided in favor of Michael Baxter and Monsanto. “An organic farmer in Western Australia lost his bid to claim damages from a neighbour after genetically modified (GMO) canola seed heads blew on to his property, causing him to lose his licence as an organic grower.” Not only did Steve Marsh lose his organic certification, but he was going against another farmer who he thought someone came up with AUD 800,000 in legal fees on his own. To add insult to injury, the judge even ordered Marsh to pay the GM farmer AUD 800,000. So Marsh not only lost his organic farm, and lost his case, but he then had to pay his neighbor for contaminating his crops with his GM seed. When Marsh appealed the decision, the court ordered Baxter to disclose any financial arrangements with Monsanto and the Pastoralists and Graziers Association, of which Baxter is a member. His lawyer denied that Baxter has received any questionable payments from either entity. Only after a court order did Monsanto reveal that it had provided assistance towards Baxter’s legal defense, refusing to disclose exactly how much the corporation contributed. Of the AUD 800,000 that Baxter magically came up with to win over Marsh in court, how much do you think Monsanto provided? More information will be reported as it becomes available. One thing is for certain though, Monsanto and its dirty secrets will always be exposed. About Christina Sarich: Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest see link for below links Other Popular Stories: 1.Australian Supreme Court Rules Against Organic Farmer in GMO Contamination Case 2.Organic Farmer Steve Marsh to Appeal GMO Contamination Court Decision in Australia 3.Farmers Fight World’s First Landmark GMO Cross-Pollination/Contamination Case 4.Monsanto Caught Pushing GMOs on Independent African Farmers 5.Court of Appeals Sides with Monsanto over Organic Farmers 6.Monsanto Sues Farmers for 16 Straight Years over GMOs, NEVER Loses Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-secretly-contributes-money-mo-farmer-organic-crops/#ixzz3Yuk9eNYT

BURTON And quoting your bible skeptics blog does not change the fact some of your posts could do with a review: (GAAL) ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] What the News Isn’t Saying About Vaccine-Autism Studies ================================================== http://sharylattkisson.com/what-the-news-isnt-saying-about-vaccine-autism-studies/ A new study this week found no link between vaccines and autism. It instantly made headlines on TV news and popular media everywhere. Many billed it as the final word, “once again,” disproving the notion that vaccines could have anything to do with autism. What you didn’t learn on the news was that the study was from a consulting firm that lists major vaccine makers among its clients: The Lewin Group. That potential conflict of interest was not disclosed in the paper published in The New England Journal of Medicine; the study authors simply declare “The Lewin Group operates with editorial independence.” (As an aside, according to OpenSecrets.org, The Lewin Group’s parent company, UnitedHealth Group, is a key government partner in Obamacare. Its subsidiary QSSI was given the contract to build the federal government’s HealthCare.gov website. One of its top executives and his family are top Obama donors.) Conflicts of interest alone do not invalidate a study. But they serve as important context in the relentless effort by pharmaceutical interests and their government partners to discredit the many scientists and studies that have found possible vaccine-autism links. ====== Many Studies Suggest Possible Vaccine-Autism Links === When the popular press, bloggers and medical pundits uncritically promote a study like The Lewin Group’s, it must confound researchers like Lucija Tomljenovic, Catherine DeSoto, Robert Hitlan, Christopher Shaw, Helen Ratajczak, Boyd Haley, Carolyn Gallagher, Melody Goodman, M.I. Kawashti, O.R. Amin, N.G. Rowehy, T. Minami, Laura Hewitson, Brian Lopresti, Carol Stott, Scott Mason, Jaime Tomko, Bernard Rimland, Woody McGinnis, K. Shandley and D.W. Austin. They are just a few of the many scientists whose peer-reviewed, published works have found possible links between vaccines and autism. But unlike The Lewin Group’s study, their research has not been endorsed and promoted by the government and, therefore, has not been widely reported in the media. In fact, news reports, blogs and “medical experts” routinely claim no such studies exist. To be clear: no study to date conclusively proves or disproves a causal link between vaccines and autism and—despite the misreporting—none has claimed to do so. Each typically finds either (a) no association or ( a possible association on a narrow vaccine-autism question. Taken as a whole, the research on both sides serves as a body of evidence. == The Astroturf Propaganda Campaign == It’s theoretically possible that all of the studies supporting a possible link between vaccines and autism are wrong. And, if the propagandists are to be believed, each of the researchers is an incompetent crank, quack, nut or fraud (and, of course, “anti-vaccine” for daring to dabble in research that attempts to solve the autism puzzle and leads to vaccine safety issues). The scientists and their research are “controversial,” simply because the propagandists declare them to be. The disparaged scientists include well-published neurologists, pharmacists, epidemiologists, immunologists, PhD’s, chemists and microbiologists from places like Boston Children’s Hospital, Horizon Molecular Medicine at Georgia State University, University of British Columbia, City College of New York, Columbia University, Stony Brook University Medical Center, University of Northern Iowa, University of Michigan, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Arkansas Children’s Hospital Research Institute, Al Azhar University of Cairo, Kinki University in Japan, the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Swinburne University of Technology in Australia, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology in Poland, Department of Child Health Care, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University in China, Utah State University and many more. Their work is, at best, ignored by the media; at worst, viciously attacked by the predictable flock of self-appointed expert “science” bloggers who often title their blogs with the word “science” or “skeptics” to confer an air of legitimacy. This astroturf movement, in my opinion, includes but is not limited to: LeftBrainRightBrain, ScienceBlogs, NeuroSkeptic, ScienceBasedMedicine, LizDitz, ScienceBasedMedicine, CrooksandLiars, RespectfulInsolence, HealthNewsReview, SkepticalRaptor, Skepticblog, Skeptics.com, Wired, BrianDeer, SethMnookin, Orac, Every Child by Two, the vaccine industry supported American Academy of Pediatrics, and the government/corporate funded American Council on Science and Health (once called “Voodoo Science, Twisted Consumerism” by the watchdog Center for Science in the Public Interest). This circle operates with the moral support of the vaccine industry and its government partners, citing one another’s flawed critiques as supposed proof that each study has been “debunked,” though the studies continue to appear in peer-reviewed, published journals and in the government’s own National Institutes of Health library. “Weak,” “too small,” “haphazard,” “not replicated,” “junk science,” “flawed,” “unrelated,” declare the propagandists, without exception. Just as attackers spent years challenging any study that linked tobacco to lung cancer. They know that reporters who don’t do their homework will conduct an Internet search, run across the blogs with science-y sounding names, and uncritically accept their word as if it’s fact and prevailing thought. CDC claims “no link” between vaccines and autism == A Small Sampling Many of the studies have common themes regarding a subset of susceptible children with immunity issues who, when faced with various vaccine challenges, end up with brain damage described as autism. “Permanent brain damage” is an acknowledged, rare side effect of vaccines; there’s no dispute in that arena. The question is whether the specific form of autism brain injury after vaccination is in any way related to vaccination. ====== So what are a few of these published studies supporting a possible link between vaccines and autism? ===== As far back as 1998, a serology study by the College of Pharmacy at University of Michigan supported the hypothesis that an autoimmune response from the live measles virus in MMR vaccine “may play a causal role in autism.” (Nothing to see here, say the critics, that study is old.) In 2002, a Utah State University study found that “an inappropriate antibody response to MMR [vaccine], specifically the measles component thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism.” (“Flawed and non-replicable,” insist the propagandists.) Also in 2002, the Autism Research Institute in San Diego looked at a combination of vaccine factors. Scientists found the mercury preservative thimerosal used in some vaccines (such as flu shots) could depress a baby’s immunity. That could make him susceptible to chronic measles infection of the gut when he gets MMR vaccine, which contains live measles virus. (The bloggers say it’s an old study, and that other studies contradict it.) In 2006, a team of microbiologists in Cairo, Egypt concluded, “deficient immune response to measles, mumps and rubella vaccine antigens might be associated with autism, as a leading cause or a resulting event.” A 2007 study found statistically significant evidence suggesting that boys who got the triple series Hepatitis B vaccine when it contained thimerosal were “more susceptible to developmental disability” than unvaccinated boys. Similarly, a 5-year study of 79,000 children by the same institution found boys given Hepatitis B vaccine at birth had a three times increased risk for autism than boys vaccinated later or not at all. Nonwhite boys were at greatest risk. (“Weak study,” say the critics.) A 2009 study in The Journal of Child Neurology found a major flaw in a widely-cited study that claimed no link between thimerosal in vaccines and autism. Their analysis found that “the original p value was in error and that a significant relation does exist between the blood levels of mercury and diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder.” The researchers noted, “Like the link between aspirin and heart attack, even a small effect can have major health implications. If there is any link between autism and mercury, it is absolutely crucial that the first reports of the question are not falsely stating that no link occurs.” (Critics: the study is not to be believed.) FDA list of thimerosal-containing vaccines A 2010 rat study by the Polish Academy of Sciences suggested “likely involvement” of thimerosal in vaccines (such as flu shots) “in neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism.” (The critics dismiss rat studies.) In 2010, a pilot study in Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis found that infant monkeys given the 1990’s recommended pediatric vaccine regimen showed important brain changes warranting “additional research into the potential impact of an interaction between the MMR and thimerosal-containing vaccines on brain structure and function.” A study from Japan’s Kinki University in 2010 supported “the possible biological plausibility for how low-dose exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines may be associated with autism.” A 2011 study from Australia’s Swinburne University supported the hypothesis that sensitivity to mercury, such as thimerosal in flu shots, may be a genetic risk factor for autism. (Critics call the study “strange” with “logical hurdles.”) A Journal of Immunotoxicology review in 2011 by a former pharmaceutical company senior scientist concluded autism could result from more than one cause including encephalitis (brain damage) following vaccination. (Critics say she reviewed “debunked and fringe” science.) In 2011, City University of New York correlated autism prevalence with increased childhood vaccine uptake. “Although mercury has been removed from many vaccines, other culprits may link vaccines to autism,” said the study’s lead author. (To critics, it’s “junk science.”) A University of British Columbia study in 2011 that found “the correlation between Aluminum [an adjuvant] in vaccines and [autism] may be causal.” (More “junk science,” say the propagandists.) A 2011 rat study out of Warsaw, Poland found thimerosal in vaccines given at a young age could contribute to neurodevelopmental disorders. (Proves nothing, say critics.) A Chinese study in 2012 suggested that febrile seizures (an acknowledged side effect of some vaccines) and family history of neuropsychiatric disorders correlate with autistic regression. A 2012 study from the Neurochemistry Research Marie Curie Chairs Program in Poland found that newborn exposure to vaccines with thimerosal (such as flu shots) might cause gluten-related brain injuries. In 2013, neurosurgeons at the Methodist Neurological Institute found that children with mild mitochondrial defect may be highly susceptible to toxins like the vaccine preservative thimerosal found in vaccines such as flu shots. (“Too small” of a study, say the critics.) Then, there’s a 2004 Columbia University study presented at the Institute of Medicine. It found that mice predisposed for genetic autoimmune disorder developed autistic-like behavior after receiving mercury-containing vaccines. (Critics say that’s not proof, and the work was not replicable.) There’s Dr. William Thompson, the current CDC senior scientist who has come forward with an extraordinary statement to say that he and his agency have engaged in long term efforts to obscure a study’s significant link between vaccines and autism, heightened in African Americans boys. (The CDC says the data changes made were for legitimate reasons.) There’s the current CDC immunization safety director who acknowledged to me that it’s possible vaccines may rarely trigger autism in children who are biologically or genetically susceptible to vaccine injury. There’s the case of Hannah Poling, in which the government secretly admitted multiple vaccines given in one day triggered her brain injuries, including autism, then paid a multi-million dollar settlement, and had the case sealed from the prying public eyes under a confidentiality order. There was the former head of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Bernadine Healy, who stoked her peers’ ire by publicly stating that the vaccine-autism link was not a “myth” as so many tried to claim. She disclosed that her colleagues at the Institute of Medicine did not wish to investigate the possible link because they feared the impact it would have on the vaccination program. There’s former CDC researcher Poul Thorsen, whose studies dispelled a vaccine autism link. He’s now a “most wanted fugitive” after being charged with 13 counts of wire fraud and nine counts of money laundering for allegedly using CDC grants of tax dollars to buy a house and cars for himself. And there are the former scientists from Merck, maker of the MMR vaccine in question, who have turned into whistleblowers and accuse their company of committing vaccine fraud. ]]]]]]] Read: CDC Vaccine Information Statements (LINK at site) The Spin = If you want to review research and evidence on the other side, a simple Internet search will easily turn up everything you want to know. Those studies always seem to get covered in the news. They somehow turn up first in Google search results, along with the reports and blogs disparaging all opposing science and news reporting. You might run across a February article in the New York Times. It treated the vaccine autism theory as if it comes down to a disagreement between emotionally fragile parents of autistic children and real research: “faith” and “feeling” versus hard science. “Some parents feel certain that vaccines can lead to autism,” stated the article, and “the vaccine-autism link has continued to be accepted on faith by some.” You might run across this network news story that uses Dr. Paul Offit as an expert on vaccine safety. He’s introduced as “director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia” and he “denies a connection with vaccination and autism.” Somehow, it goes unreported that Offit has made millions (he won’t disclose exactly how much) inventing a vaccine for Merck, which makes the MMR vaccine in question. Offit’s rotavirus vaccine has, itself, been the subject of safety concerns. And his employment at Children’s Hospital has been funded in part by $1.5 million given by Merck. In addition, he got caught giving false and disparaging information regarding a report I did exposing his financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry he so vigorously defends. His false statements were corrected by the publication that originally reported them. And Offit and his book publisher settled a libel accusation by a vaccine safety advocate who accused Offit of fabricating a disparaging conversation in his book: Autism’s False Prophets. Offit agreed to apologize, correct the book and make a donation to an autism charity. But to the news: none of that matters. Offit is simply presented as an unbiased expert. = The supposedly best medical experts in the world who deny vaccines have anything to do with autism remain at an utter loss to explain this generation’s epidemic. To declare the science “settled” and the debate “over” is to defy the plain fact that many scientists worldwide are still sorting through it, and millions of people are still debating it. The body of evidence on both sides is open to interpretation. People have every right to disbelieve the studies on one side. But it is disingenuous to pretend they do not exist. ======= = SharylAttkisson.com vaccine reporting see site for links below CDC recommended vaccine schedules Vaccine court injury and claim statistics

Key witness in Boston Bombing case vanishes Submitted by IWB, on April 30th, 2015 ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] A Russian immigrant who knew the Boston Marathon bombers and was expected to testify in Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s death penalty trial has gone missing, a defense attorney has revealed. The mystery involves Mogomed Dolakov, an immigrant from the Russian Caucasus region who got to know the Tsarnaev brothers while they all lived in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He was interviewed several times by FBI agents after the April 15, 2013 attack, telling them he met Tamerlan Tsarnaev at a mosque and recognized right away that he was a “radical” Muslim. Dolakov recalled chatting with the elder Tsarnaev about a suicide bomber who had killed a police officer, and told the agents that Tamerlan had said he considered the killing acceptable because the cop was an infidel, according to FBI reports read to the jury Tuesday. Three days before the bombing, Dolakov told the agents, he went to a gym with the brothers, and noticed that several items in their car were covered by a white sheet, according to the reports. After they finished working out, they went to Tsarnaev’s house, where Dolakov said he and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev chatted. Dolakov told the agents that the younger brother said he “wanted to visit Russia and was tired of America.” ==== http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/boston-bombing-trial/lawyers-boston-bombing-trial-reveal-witness-disappearance-n350426 . Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/key-witness-in-boston-bombing-case-vanishes/#lGadxpYilVBQQGrI.99

http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-torture-and-rendition/5446294 ============================= CIA Torture and Rendition By The Bureau of Investigative Journalism Global Research, April 30, 2015 The Bureau and The Rendition Project =========================================================== The Real American Exceptionalism: From Torture to Drone Assassination How Washington Gave Itself a Global Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card ======================================= By Alfred W. McCoy Global Research, February 25, 2015 “The sovereign is he who decides on the exception,” said conservative thinker Carl Schmitt in 1922, meaning that a nation’s leader can defy the law to serve the greater good. Though Schmitt’s service as Nazi Germany’s chief jurist and his unwavering support for Hitler from the night of the long knives to Kristallnacht and beyond damaged his reputation for decades, today his ideas have achieved unimagined influence. They have, in fact, shaped the neo-conservative view of presidential power that has become broadly bipartisan since 9/11. Indeed, Schmitt has influenced American politics directly through his intellectual protégé Leo Strauss who, as an émigré professor at the University of Chicago, trained Bush administration architects of the Iraq war Paul Wolfowitz and Abram Shulsky. All that should be impressive enough for a discredited, long dead authoritarian thinker. But Schmitt’s dictum also became a philosophical foundation for the exercise of American global power in the quarter century that followed the end of the Cold War. Washington, more than any other power, created the modern international community of laws and treaties, yet it now reserves the right to defy those same laws with impunity. A sovereign ruler should, said Schmitt, discard laws in times of national emergency. So the United States, as the planet’s last superpower or, in Schmitt’s terms, its global sovereign, has in these years repeatedly ignored international law, following instead its own unwritten rules of the road for the exercise of world power. Just as Schmitt’s sovereign preferred to rule in a state of endless exception without a constitution for his Reich, so Washington is now well into the second decade of an endless War on Terror that seems the sum of its exceptions to international law: endless incarceration, extrajudicial killing, pervasive surveillance, drone strikes in defiance of national boundaries, torture on demand, and immunity for all of the above on the grounds of state secrecy. Yet these many American exceptions are just surface manifestations of the ever-expanding clandestine dimension of the American state. Created at the cost of more than a trillion dollars since 9/11, the purpose of this vast apparatus is to control a covert domain that is fast becoming the main arena for geopolitical contestation in the twenty-first century. This should be (but seldom is considered) a jarring, disconcerting path for a country that, more than any other, nurtured the idea of, and wrote the rules for, an international community of nations governed by the rule of law. At the First Hague Peace Conference in 1899, the U.S. delegate, Andrew Dickson White, the founder of Cornell University, pushed for the creation of a Permanent Court of Arbitration and persuaded Andrew Carnegie to build the monumental Peace Palace at The Hague as its home. At the Second Hague Conference in 1907, Secretary of State Elihu Root urged that future international conflicts be resolved by a court of professional jurists, an idea realized when the Permanent Court of International Justice was established in 1920. After World War II, the U.S. used its triumph to help create the United Nations, push for the adoption of its Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and ratify the Geneva Conventions for humanitarian treatment in war. If you throw in other American-backed initiatives like the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organization, and the World Bank, you pretty much have the entire infrastructure of what we now casually call “the international community.” Breaking the Rules Not only did the U.S. play a crucial role in writing the new rules for that community, but it almost immediately began breaking them. After all, despite the rise of the other superpower, the Soviet Union, Washington was by then the world sovereign and so could decide which should be the exceptions to its own rules, particularly to the foundational principle for all this global governance: sovereignty. As it struggled to dominate the hundred new nations that started appearing right after the war, each one invested with an inviolable sovereignty, Washington needed a new means of projecting power beyond conventional diplomacy or military force. As a result, CIA covert operations became its way of intervening within a new world order where you couldn’t or at least shouldn’t intervene openly. All of the exceptions that really matter spring from America’s decision to join what former spy John Le Carré called that “squalid procession of vain fools, traitors… sadists, and drunkards,” and embrace espionage in a big way after World War II. Until the creation of the CIA in 1947, the United States had been an innocent abroad in the world of intelligence. When General John J. Pershing led two million American troops to Europe during World War I, the U.S. had the only army on either side of the battle lines without an intelligence service. Even though Washington built a substantial security apparatus during that war, it was quickly scaled back by Republican conservatives during the 1920s. For decades, the impulse to cut or constrain such secret agencies remained robustly bipartisan, as when President Harry Truman abolished the CIA’s predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), right after World War II or when President Jimmy Carter fired 800 CIA covert operatives after the Vietnam War. Yet by fits and starts, the covert domain inside the U.S. government has grown stealthily from the early twentieth century to this moment. It began with the formation of the FBI in 1908 and Military Intelligence in 1917. The Central Intelligence Agency followed after World War II along with most of the alphabet agencies that make up the present U.S. Intelligence Community, including the National Security Agency (NSA), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and last but hardly least, in 2004, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Make no mistake: there is a clear correlation between state secrecy and the rule of law — as one grows, the other surely shrinks. World Sovereign America’s irrevocable entry into this covert netherworld came when President Truman deployed his new CIA to contain Soviet subversion in Europe. This was a continent then thick with spies of every stripe: failed fascists, aspirant communists, and everything in between. Introduced to spycraft by its British “cousins,” the CIA soon mastered it in part by establishing sub rosa ties to networks of ex-Nazi spies, Italian fascist operatives, and dozens of continental secret services. As the world’s new sovereign, Washington used the CIA to enforce its chosen exceptions to the international rule of law, particularly to the core principle of sovereignty. During his two terms, President Dwight Eisenhower authorized104 covert operations on four continents, focused largely on controlling the many new nations then emerging from centuries of colonialism. Eisenhower’s exceptions included blatant transgressions of national sovereignty such as turning northern Burma into an unwilling springboard for abortive invasions of China, arming regional revolts to partition Indonesia, and overthrowing elected governments in Guatemala and Iran. By the time Eisenhower left office in 1961, covert ops had acquired such a powerful mystique in Washington that President John F. Kennedy would authorize 163 of them in the three years that preceded his assassination. As a senior CIA official posted to the Near East in the early 1950s put it, the Agency then saw every Muslim leader who was not pro-American as “a target legally authorized by statute for CIA political action.” Applied on a global scale and not just to Muslims, this policy helped produce a distinct “reverse wave” in the global trend towards democracy from 1958 to 1975, as coups — most of them U.S.-sanctioned — allowed military men to seize power in more than three-dozen nations, representing a quarter of the world’s sovereign states. The White House’s “exceptions” also produced a deeply contradictory U.S. attitude toward torture from the early years of the Cold War onward. Publicly, Washington’s opposition to torture was manifest in its advocacy of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and the Geneva Conventions in 1949. Simultaneously and secretly, however, the CIA began developing ingenious new torture techniques in contravention of those same international conventions. After a decade of mind-control research, the CIA actually codified its new method of psychological torture in a secret instructional handbook, the “KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation” manual, which it then disseminated within the U.S. Intelligence Community and to allied security services worldwide. Much of the torture that became synonymous with the era of authoritarian rule in Asia and Latin America during the 1960s and 1970s seems to have originated in U.S. training programs that provided sophisticated techniques, up-to-date equipment, and moral legitimacy for the practice. From 1962 to 1974, the CIA worked through the Office of Public Safety (OPS), a division of the U.S. Agency for International Development that sent American police advisers to developing nations. Established by President Kennedy in 1962, in just six years OPS grew into a global anti-communist operation with over 400 U.S. police advisers. By 1971, it had trained more than a million policemen in 47 nations, including 85,000 in South Vietnam and 100,000 in Brazil. Concealed within this larger OPS effort, CIA interrogation training became synonymous with serious human rights abuses, particularly in Iran, the Philippines, South Vietnam, Brazil, and Uruguay. Amnesty International documented widespread torture, usually by local police, in 24 of the 49 nations that had hosted OPS police-training teams. In tracking torturers across the globe, Amnesty seemed to be following the trail of CIA training programs. Significantly, torture began to recede when America again turned resolutely against the practice at the end of the Cold War. The War on Terror Although the CIA’s authority for assassination, covert intervention, surveillance, and torture was curtailed at the close of the Cold War, the terror attacks of September 2001 sparked an unprecedented expansion in the scale of the intelligence community and a corresponding resurgence in executive exceptions. The War on Terror’s voracious appetite for information produced, in its first decade, what the Washington Post branded a veritable “fourth branch” of the U.S. federal government with 854,000 vetted security officials, 263 security organizations, over 3,000 private and public intelligence agencies, and 33 new security complexes — all pumping out a total of 50,000 classified intelligence reports annually by 2010. By that time, one of the newest members of the Intelligence Community, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, already had 16,000 employees, a $5 billion budget, and a massive nearly $2 billion headquarters at Fort Belvoir, Maryland — all aimed at coordinating the flood of surveillance data pouring in from drones, U-2 spy planes, Google Earth, and orbiting satellites. According to documents whistleblower Edward Snowden leaked to the Washington Post, the U.S. spent $500 billion on its intelligence agencies in the dozen years after the 9/11 attacks, including annual appropriations in 2012 of $11 billion for the National Security Agency (NSA) and $15 billion for the CIA. If we add the $790 billion expended on the Department of Homeland Security to that $500 billion for overseas intelligence, then Washington had spent nearly $1.3 trillion to build a secret state-within-the-state of absolutely unprecedented size and power. As this secret state swelled, the world’s sovereign decided that some extraordinary exceptions to civil liberties at home and sovereignty abroad were in order. The most glaring came with the CIA’s now-notorious renewed use of torture on suspected terrorists and its setting up of its own global network of private prisons, or “black sites,” beyond the reach of any court or legal authority. Along with piracy and slavery, the abolition of torture had long been a signature issue when it came to the international rule of law. So strong was this principle that the U.N. General Assembly voted unanimously in 1984 to adopt the Convention Against Torture. When it came to ratifying it, however, Washington dithered on the subject until the end of the Cold War when it finally resumed its advocacy of international justice, participating in the World Conference on Human Rights at Vienna in 1993 and, a year later, ratifying the U.N. Convention Against Torture. Even then, the sovereign decided to reserve some exceptions for his country alone. Only a year after President Bill Clinton signed the U.N. Convention, CIA agents started snatching terror suspects in the Balkans, some of them Egyptian nationals, and sending them to Cairo, where a torture-friendly autocracy could do whatever it wanted to them in its prisons. Former CIA director George Tenet later testified that, in the years before 9/11, the CIA shipped some 70 individuals to foreign countries without formal extradition — a process dubbed “extraordinary rendition” that had been explicitly banned under Article 3 of the U.N. Convention. Right after his public address to a shaken nation on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush gave his staff wide-ranging secret orders to use torture, adding (in a vernacular version of Schmitt’s dictum),“I don’t care what the international lawyers say, we are going to kick some ass.” In this spirit, the White House authorized the CIA to develop that global matrix of secret prisons, as well as an armada of planes for spiriting kidnapped terror suspects to them, and a network of allies who could help seize those suspects from sovereign states and levitate them into a supranational gulag of eight agency black sites from Thailand to Poland or into the crown jewel of the system, Guantánamo, thus eluding laws and treaties that remained grounded in territorially based concepts of sovereignty. Once the CIA closed the black sites in 2008-2009, its collaborators in this global gulag began to feel the force of law for their crimes against humanity. Under pressure from the Council of Europe, Poland started an ongoing criminal investigation in 2008 into its security officers who had facilitated the CIA’s secret prison in the country’s northeast. In September 2012, Italy’s supreme court confirmed the convictions of 22 CIA agents for the illegal rendition of Egyptian exile Abu Omar from Milan to Cairo, and ordered a trial for Italy’s military intelligence chief on charges that sentenced him to 10 years in prison. In 2012, Scotland Yard opened a criminal investigation into MI6 agents who rendered Libyan dissidents to Colonel Gaddafi’s prisons for torture, and two years later the Court of Appeal allowed some of those Libyans to file a civil suit against MI6 for kidnapping and torture. But not the CIA. Even after the Senate’s 2014 Torture Report documented the Agency’s abusive tortures in painstaking detail, there was no move for either criminal or civil sanctions against those who had ordered torture or those who had carried it out. In a strong editorial on December 21, 2014, the New York Times asked “whether the nation will stand by and allow the perpetrators of torture to have perpetual immunity.” The answer, of course, was yes. Immunity for hirelings is one of the sovereign’s most important exceptions. As President Bush finished his second term in 2008, an inquiry by the International Commission of Jurists found that the CIA’s mobilization of allied security agencies worldwide had done serious damage to the international rule of law. “The executive… should under no circumstance invoke a situation of crisis to deprive victims of human rights violations… of their… access to justice,” the Commission recommended after documenting the degradation of civil liberties in some 40 countries. “State secrecy and similar restrictions must not impede the right to an effective remedy for human rights violations.” The Bush years also brought Washington’s most blatant repudiation of the rule of law. Once the newly established International Criminal Court (ICC) convened at The Hague in 2002, the Bush White House “un-signed” or “de-signed” the U.N. agreement creating the court and then mounted a sustained diplomatic effort to immunize U.S. military operations from its writ. This was an extraordinary abdication for the nation that had breathed the concept of an international tribunal into being. The Sovereign’s Unbounded Domains While Presidents Eisenhower and Bush decided on exceptions that violated national boundaries and international treaties, President Obama is exercising his exceptional prerogatives in the unbounded domains of aerospace and cyberspace. Both are new, unregulated realms of military conflict beyond the rubric of international law and Washington believes it can use them as Archimedean levers for global dominion. Just as Britain once ruled from the seas and postwar America exercised its global reach via airpower, so Washington now sees aerospace and cyberspace as special realms for domination in the twenty-first century. Under Obama, drones have grown from a tactical Band-Aid in Afghanistan into a strategic weapon for the exercise of global power. From 2009 to 2015, the CIA and the U.S. Air Force deployed a drone armada of over 200 Predators and Reapers, launching 413 strikes in Pakistan alone, killing as many as 3,800 people. Every Tuesday inside the White House Situation Room, as the New York Times reported in 2012, President Obama reviews a CIA drone “kill list” and stares at the faces of those who are targeted for possible assassination from the air. He then decides, without any legal procedure, who will live and who will die, even in the case of American citizens. Unlike other world leaders, this sovereign applies the ultimate exception across the Greater Middle East, parts of Africa, and elsewhere if he chooses. This lethal success is the cutting edge of a top-secret Pentagon project that will, by 2020, deploy a triple-canopy space “shield” from stratosphere to exosphere, patrolled by Global Hawk and X-37B drones armed with agile missiles. As Washington seeks to police a restless globe from sky and space, the world might well ask: How high is any nation’s sovereignty? After the successive failures of the Paris flight conference of 1910, the Hague Rules of Aerial Warfare of 1923, and Geneva’s Protocol I of 1977 to establish the extent of sovereign airspace or restrain aerial warfare, some puckish Pentagon lawyer might reply: only as high as you can enforce it. President Obama has also adopted the NSA’s vast surveillance system as a permanent weapon for the exercise of global power. At the broadest level, such surveillance complements Obama’s overall defense strategy, announced in 2012, of cutting conventional forces while preserving U.S. global power through a capacity for “a combined arms campaign across all domains: land, air, maritime, space, and cyberspace.” In addition, it should be no surprise that, having pioneered the war-making possibilities of cyberspace, the president did not hesitate to launch the first cyberwar in history against Iran. By the end of Obama’s first term, the NSA could sweep up billions of messages worldwide through its agile surveillance architecture. This included hundreds of access points for penetration of the Worldwide Web’s fiber optic cables; ancillary intercepts through special protocols and “backdoor” software flaws; supercomputers to crack the encryption of this digital torrent; and a massive data farm in Bluffdale, Utah, built at a cost of $2 billion to store yottabytes of purloined data. Even after angry Silicon Valley executives protested that the NSA’s “backdoor” software surveillance threatened their multi-trillion-dollar industry, Obama called the combination of Internet information and supercomputers “a powerful tool.” He insisted that, as “the world’s only superpower,” the United States “cannot unilaterally disarm our intelligence agencies.” In other words, the sovereign cannot sanction any exceptions to his panoply of exceptions. Revelations from Edward Snowden’s cache of leaked documents in late 2013 indicate that the NSA has conducted surveillance of leaders in some 122 nations worldwide, 35 of them closely, including Brazil’s president Dilma Rousseff, former Mexican president Felipe Calderón, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. After her forceful protest, Obama agreed to exempt Merkel’s phone from future NSA surveillance, but reserved the right, as he put it, to continue to “gather information about the intentions of governments… around the world.” The sovereign declined to say which world leaders might be exempted from his omniscient gaze. Can there be any question that, in the decades to come, Washington will continue to violate national sovereignty through old-style covert as well as open interventions, even as it insists on rejecting any international conventions that restrain its use of aerospace or cyberspace for unchecked force projection, anywhere, anytime? Extant laws or conventions that in any way check this power will be violated when the sovereign so decides. These are now the unwritten rules of the road for our planet. They represent the real American exceptionalism. ============================ Alfred W. McCoy is professor of history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. A TomDispatch regular, he is the author of Torture & Impunity: The U.S. Doctrine of Coercive Interrogation, among other works.

That's the way to go, Steven: use big font size and colours. It shows you are more credible; after all, who needs facts when you can shout... right? // Burton ======================================== "[M]ercury, including and especially ethylmercury in vaccines, caused the environmental, manmade, iatrogenic autism epidemic," wrote Dan Olmsted from Age of Autism following the publishing of an earlier Harvard University study that came to similar conclusions about mercury exposure and autism. Researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health observed elevated risks of autism associated with exposure to air pollution containing mercury compounds, which is typically released from diesel trucks and coal-fired power plants. The first of its kind to investigate a possible link between mercury exposure and autism, the Harvard study furthers the case against mercury-containing vaccines. "A large body of research has concluded autism is a type of genetic damage that is caused by mercury exposure," reads a research paper on the subject written by Mark Reman Hamilton, Esq., as posted in the comment section at Age of Autism. "Besides autism, many types of neurological problems are caused by mercury. The long list includes: depression, anxiety, attention deficit disorder (ADD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)." ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] Sources for this article include: http://www.dailymail.co.uk http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org http://www.ageofautism.com http://science.naturalnews.com http://science.naturalnews.com ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] You don't have facts counter to : MERCURY STILL IN VACCINES , MERCURY CAUSES AUTISM. SOURCE (see above) Harvard School of Public Health . There is no higher establishment source than Harvard School of Public Health. ================================================================================= big fonts ?? Color ...golly Im hoping someone will pay notice and not cause a child to become mentally disabled. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Salt and Light …15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16"Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.