Steven Gaal

US Navy sailors disappear as government, doctors bury truth about Fukushima radiation (link)

and on the other side of the castle moat ........

Britain's divided decade: the rich are 64% richer than before the recession, while the poor are 57% poorer (LINK)

If you have not ...please read post # 1 this thread ,thank you Steven Gaal

===================================

American Drone Operators Are Quitting in Record Numbers (link)

========================================

The US drone war across much of the Greater Middle East and parts of Africa is in crisis, and not because civilians are dying or the target list for that war or the right to wage it just about anywhere on the planet are in question in Washington. Something far more basic is at stake: drone pilots are quitting in record numbers.

BBC ,........ puts lie-trash into BRAIN.....controlled SPEECH OUT....

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/human-rights-watch-fail-uses-photo-of.html

Human Rights Watch FAIL: Uses Photo of American Bombing Destruction To Condemn Assad

=

Obama Declares “Oil Rich” Venezuela A Threat To U.S. National Security (LINK)

((((( CUBA SI.....USA NO, RE Venezuela) )))))

DEA Agent: We Were Told Not to Enforce Drug Laws in Rich White Areas (link)

1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,........ect

1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,........ect

1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,........ect

1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,........ect

1984,198.......

Scotland Yard Chief Wants CCTV Cameras in EVERY Home (link)

=

LONDON, UK — The citizens of the United Kingdom are possibly the most surveilled group of people in the history of the world. Forget the NSA’s ever-expanding reach over every form of communication imaginable. We’re talking cameras… everywhere. The City of London is equipped with thousands of them, so is Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham and well, like I said before, pretty much everywhere. In a nation of 64 million residents, there is one CCTV camera for every 11 people in the UK.

Radioactive Iodine from Fukushima Found in California Kelp (link)

=====

I suspect that Oswald broke his contract with the ONI when he returned to the USA with Marina. I suspect that this was why the Navy lowered his discharge status.// Regards,
--Paul Trejo

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

September 13, 1960: LHO is given an "undesirable discharge" from the Marine Corps.

March 17, 1961: LHO attends a trade dance where he meets Marina Prusakova.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I "suspect" you should study the timeline. REGARDS GAAL

THANK YOU // THIS IS THE CORE OF THIS THREAD !!

Nearly At ‘Full Employment’? 10 Reasons Why The Unemployment Numbers Are A Massive Lie (LINK)

Another Conspiracy Theory Becomes Fact: The Entire Oil Collapse Is All About Crushing Russian Control Over Syria

keep it secret ,don't have to talk about it...secrecy > now THATS how to control speech !!!!!!!!!!!!

lets see if this comes out .......

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{

BBC Handed Explosive Evidence of Biggest Political Corruption Scandal In British History

=

Submitted by IWB, on March 7th, 2015

=

http://investmentwatchblog.com/bbc-handed-explosive-evidence-of-biggest-political-corruption-scandal-in-british-history/

Gordon Bowden is an ex RAF officer

who has spent the last 13 years uncovering detailed and forensic evidence of massive corruption within the British establishment that involves Lords, Politicians and the Monarchy.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/bbc-handed-explosive-evidence-of-biggest-political-corruption-scandal-in-british-history/#c29MkohMWhHFoXyL.99

The evidence that he is witnessed and recorded handing into the BBC to do their own full investigation, is set to reveal the biggest political corruption scandal in British history, that included the setup of a colossal 250,000 “shell virtual

image: http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png

oil and gas companies” registered from a few house addresses in Finchley Rd London, and linked to the most prominent people at the core of the British establishment. These companies were deliberately set up to steal and rob BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS of pounds from the public and asset strip the whole country!

http://atrueindependentscotland.com/b…

7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot. // BURTON

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism

=

double standarddon't confront arguments, instead stigmatize.  If someone makes specific complaints, don't even inspect them, just declare that the complaints are motivated by jealousy.rather than using logical arguments, instead using negative labeling, attempting to attach stigmaWhen maverick researchers complain of unfairness or intellectual suppression, pretend that these are "conspiracy theories."Rather than looking for errors or attempting to disprove it, instead trying to STIGMATIZE it by attaching derogatory labels or insinuations.The "Stigmatize and Dismiss" tactic.Immediately leaping to a stance of contemptuous disbelief, then only laterlooking for evidence to support such a position.}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}o0o0o0oxxx0o0o0o0o}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

1. Backwards reasoning: Belief that theories determine which phenomena are genuine and which are not. Initially adopting a prejudiced stance, then being selective of evidence in order to reinforce that initial prejudice.

2. Erecting barriers against new ideas by constantly increasing the requirements for acceptance. (A practice called "moving the goalposts.")

3. Belief that fundamental concepts in science rarely change, coupled   with a "herd following" behavior where the individual changes his/her   opinions when colleagues all do, all the while remaining blind to the   fact that any opinions had ever changed.4. Belief that science is guided by consensus beliefs and majority rule,   rather than by evidence.  Indulging in behavior which reinforces the   negative effects of consensus beliefs while minimizing the impact of   any evidence which contradicts those beliefs.5.  Adopting a prejudiced stance against a theory or an observed phenomena    without first investigating the details, then using this as    justification for refusing to investigate the details.6.  Maintaining an unshakable stance of hostile, intolerant disbelief,    and when anyone complains of this, accusing them of paranoid delusion.    Remaining blind to scientists' widespread practice of intellectual    suppression of unorthodox findings, and to the practice of "expulsion    of heretics" through secret, back-room accusations of deviance or    insanity.7. Ignoring the lessons of history, and therefore opening the way to   repeating them again and again.8. *Denial* of the lessons of history.  An inability to admit that     science has made serious mistakes in the past.  Maintaining a belief    that good ideas and discoveries are never accidentally suppressed by    closed-mindedness, then revising history to fit this belief. 9. Using circular arguments to avoid accepting evidence which supports   unusual discoveries, or to prevent publication of this evidence.10. Accusing opponents of delusion, lying, or even financial fraud, where    no evidence for fraud exists other than the supposed impossibility of    evidence being presented.11. Unwarranted confidence that the unknown is in the far distance, not    staring us in the face.12. Belief that certain fields of science are complete, that scientific    revolutions never happen, and that any further progress must occur    only in brushing up the details.13. Excusing the ridicule, trivialization, and the scorn which is directed    at 'maverick' ideas and at anomalous evidence.  Insisting that    sneering and derisive emotional attacks constitute a desirable and    properly scientific natural selection force.14. Justifying any refusal to inspect evidence by claiming a "slippery    slope."  Using the necessary judicious allocation of time and funding    as a weapon to prevent investigation of unusual, novel, or threatening    ideas.15. A blindness to phenomena which do not fit the current belief system,    coupled with a denial that beliefs affect perceptions.16. A belief that all scientific progress is made by small, safe, obvious    steps, that widely-accepted theories are never overturned, and that no    new discoveries come from anomalies observed.17. Hiding any evidence of personal past ridicule of ideas which are later     proved valid.  Profound narcissism; an extreme need to always be     right, a fear of having personal errors revealed, and a habit of    silently covering up past mistakes.18. Belief in the lofty status of modern science but with consequent    blindness to, and denial of, its faults.  A tendency to view shameful    events in the history of modern science as being beneficial, and a    lack of any desire to fix contemporary problems.19. A belief that Business and the Press have no tendency towards close-    mindedness and suppression of novelty, and that their actions are    never are guided by the publicly-expressed judgement of scientists.20. Refusing to be swayed when other researchers find evidence supporting    unconventional phenomena or theories.  If other reputable people    change sides and accept the unorthodox view, this is seen as evidence    of their gullibility or insanity, not as evidence that perhaps the    unconventional view is correct.21. Elevating skepticism to a lofty position, yet indulging in hipocricy    and opening the way to pathological thinking by refusing to ever cast    a critical, SKEPTICAL eye upon the irrational behavior of scoffers.22. Belief that modern scientists as a group lack faults, and therefore    clinging to any slim justifications in order to ignore the arguments    of those who hope to eliminate the flaws in Science.23. Blindness to the widespread existence of the above symptoms.  Belief    that scientists are inherently objective, and rarely fall victim to    these faults.  Excusing the frequent appearance of these symptoms as    being isolated instances which do not comprise an accumulation of    evidence for the common practice of Pathological Skepticism.1. Belief that theories determine phenomena, rather than the reverse.   "The phenomenon you have observed is impossible, crazy stuff.  We know    of no mechanism which could explain your results, so we have grave    suspicions about the accuracy your report.  There is no room for your    results in modern theory, so they simply cannot exist.  You are    obviously the victim of errors, hoaxers, or self-delusion.  We need    not publish your paper, and any attempts at replicating your results    would be a waste of time.  Your requests for funding are misguided,    and should be turned down."2. Erecting barriers against new ideas by constantly altering the   requirements for acceptance.  (A practice called "moving the   goalposts.")   "I'll believe it when 'X' happens"   (but when it does, this immediately     is changed to: "I'll believe it when 'Y' happens.")    Example:     "I won't believe it until major laboratories publish papers in this      field.  They have?  That means nothing!  Major labs have been wrong      before.  I'll believe it when stores sell products which use the      effect.  They do?  That means nothing, after all, stores sell magic      healing pendants and Ouija boards.  I'll believe it when a Nobel      Prize winning researcher gets behind that work.  One has?  Well      that means nothing!  That person is probably old and dotty like      Dr. Pauling and his vitamin-C..."   etc.3. Belief that fundamental concepts in science rarely change, coupled   with a "herd following" behavior where the individual changes his/her   opinions when colleagues all do, all the while remaining blind to the   fact that any opinions had ever changed.     "The study of (space flight, endosymbiosis, drillcore bacteria,      child abuse, cold fusion, etc.) has always been a legitimate      pursuit.  If scientists ever ridiculed the reported evidence or      tried to stop such research, it certainly was not a majority of      scientists.  It must have been just a few misguided souls, and must      have happened in the distant past."4. Belief that science is guided by consensus beliefs and majority rule,   rather than by evidence.  Indulging in behavior which reinforces the   negative effects of consensus beliefs while minimizing the impact of   any evidence which contradicts those beliefs.     "I don't care how good your evidence is, I won't believe it until the      majority of scientists also find it acceptable.  Your evidence      cannot be right, because it would mean that hundreds of textbooks      and thousands of learned experts are wrong.5.  Adopting a prejudiced stance against a theory or an observed phenomena    without first investigating the details, then using this as    justification for refusing to investigate the details.      "Your ideas are obviously garbage.  What, try to replicate your      evidence?  I wouldn't soil my hands.  And besides, it would be      a terrible waste of time and money, since there's no question about      the outcome."6.  Maintaining an unshakable stance of hostile, intolerant skepticism,    and when anyone complains of this, accusing them of paranoid delusion.    Remaining blind to scientists' widespread practice of intellectual    suppression of unorthodox findings, and to the practice of "expulsion    of heretics" through secret, back-room accusations of deviance or    insanity.       "You say that no one will listen to your ideas, and now the funding        for your other projects is cut off for no reason?  And colleagues        are secretly passing around a petition demanding that you be        removed?  If you're thinking along THOSE lines, then you obviously        are delusional and should be seeking professional help."7. Ignoring the lessons of history, and therefore opening the way for   repeating them again and again.     "Scientists of old ridiculed the germ theory, airplanes, space     flight, meteors, etc.  They were certain that science of the time      had everything figured out, and that major new discoveries were no     longer possible.  Isn't it good that we researchers of today are much     more wise, and such things can no longer happen!"8. *Denial* of the lessons of history.  An inability to admit that     science has made serious mistakes in the past.  Maintaining a belief    that good ideas and discoveries are never accidentally suppressed by    closed-mindedness, then revising history to fit this belief.      "Throughout history, the *majority* of scientists never ridiculed      flying machines, spacecraft, television, continental drift, reports      of ball lightning, meteors, sonoluminescence, etc.  These      discoveries are not examples of so-called 'paradigm shifts', they      are obvious examples of the slow, steady, forward progress made by      science!"9. Using circular arguments to avoid accepting evidence which supports   unusual discoveries, or to prevent publication of this evidence.    "I do not have to inspect the evidence because I know it's wrong.     I know it's wrong because I've never seen any positive evidence."    "We will not publish your paper, since these results have not been     replicated by any other researchers.   We will not publish your     paper, since it is merely a replication of work which was done     earlier, by other researchers."10. Accusing opponents of delusion, lying, or even financial fraud, where    no evidence for fraud exists other than the supposed impossibility of    evidence being presented.      "Don't trust researchers who study parapsychology.  They constantly       cheat and lie in order to support their strange worldviews.  Very       few of them have been caught at it, but it's not necessary to do       so, since any fool can see that the positive evidence for psi can       only be created by people who are either disturbed or dishonest.11. Unwarranted confidence that the unknown is in the far distance, not    staring us in the face.     "Your evidence cannot be real because it's not possible that     thousands of researchers could have overlooked it for all these     years.  If your discovery was real, the scientists who work in that     field would already know about it."12. Belief that certain fields of science are complete, that scientific    revolutions never happen, and that any further progress must occur    only in brushing up the details.      "Physics is a mature field.  Future progress can only lie in       increasing the energies of particle accelerators, and in refining       the precision of well-known measurements.  Your discovery cannot       be true, since it would mean we'd have to throw out all our hard-       won knowledge about physics."13. Excusing the ridicule, trivialization, and the scorn which is directed    at 'maverick' ideas and at anomalous evidence.  Insisting that    sneering and derisive emotional attacks constitute a desirable and    properly scientific natural selection force.      "It is right that new discoveries be made to overcome large      barriers.  That way only the good ideas will become accepted.      If some important discoveries are suppressed in this process, well,      that's just the price we have to pay to defend science against the      fast-growing hoards of crackpots who threaten to destroy it."14. Justifying any refusal to inspect evidence by claiming a "slippery    slope."  Using the necessary judicious allocation of time and funding    as a weapon to prevent investigation of unusual, novel, or threatening    ideas.      "If we take your unlikely discovery seriously, all scientists       everywhere will have to accept every other crackpot idea too, and       then we'll waste all of our time checking out crackpot claims."15. A blindness to phenomena which do not fit the current belief system,    coupled with a denial that beliefs affect perceptions.    "Thomas Kuhn's 'paradigm shifts' and sociology's 'cognitive     dissonance' obviously do not apply to average, rational scientists.     Scientists are objective, so they are not prone to the psychological     failings which plague normal humans.  Scientists always welcome any     data which indicates a need to revise their current knowledge.  Their     "beliefs" don't affect their perceptions, scientists don't have     "beliefs", science is not a religion!16. A belief that all scientific progress is made by small, safe, obvious    steps, that widely-accepted theories are never overturned, and that no    new discoveries come from anomalies observed.     "All your observations are obviously mistakes.  They couldn't      possibly be real, because if they were real, it would mean that      major parts of current science are wrong, and we would have to      rewrite large portions of we know about physics.  This never      occurs.  Science proceeds by building on earlier works, never by      tearing them down. Therefore it is right that we reject evidence      which contradicts contemporary theory, and recommend that funding      of such research not be continued."17. Hiding any evidence of personal past ridicule of ideas which are later     proved valid.  Profound narcissism; an extreme need to always be     right, a fear of having personal errors revealed, and a habit of    silently covering up past mistakes.      " X is obviously ridiculous, and its supporters are crack-        pots who are giving us a bad name and should be silenced."    But if X is proved true, the assertion suddenly becomes:        "Since 'X' is obviously true, it follows that..."18. Belief in the lofty status of modern science but with consequent    blindness to, and denial of, its faults.  A tendency to view shameful    events in the history of modern science as being beneficial, and a    lack of any desire to fix contemporary problems.      "It was right that Dr. Wegner's career was wrecked; that he was       treated as a crackpot, ridiculed, and died in shame.  His evidence       for continental drift convinced no one.  And besides, he did not       propose a mechanism to explain the phenomena."19. A belief that Business and the Press have no tendency towards close-    mindedness and suppression of novelty, and that their actions are    never are guided by the publicly-expressed judgement of scientists.     "If the Wright Brothers' claims were true, we would be reading about      it in all the papers, and flying-machine companies would be      springing up left and right.  Neither of these is occurring,      therefor the Wright's claims are obviously a lie and a hoax.20. Refusing to be swayed when other researchers find evidence supporting    unconventional phenomena or theories.  If other reputable people    change sides and accept the unorthodox view, this is seen as evidence    of their gullibility or insanity, not as evidence that perhaps the    unconventional view is correct.      "I'll believe it when someone like Dr. P believes it."       But when Dr. P changes sides, this becomes:       "Dr. P did some great work in his early years, but then he destroyed       his career by getting involved with that irrational crackpot       stuff."21. Elevating skepticism to a lofty position, yet indulging in hipocricy    and opening the way to pathological thinking by refusing to ever cast    a critical, SKEPTICAL eye upon the irrational behavior of scoffers.     "Criticizing skeptics is never beneficial.  It even represents a      danger to science.  One should never criticize science, it just      gives ammunition to the enemy; it aids the irrational, anti-science      hoards who would destroy our fragile edifice."22. Belief that modern scientists as a group lack faults, and therefore    clinging to any slim justifications in order to ignore the arguments    of those who hope to eliminate the flaws in Science.    "I think we can safely ignore Thomas Kuhn's STRUCTURES OF SCIENTIFIC     REVOLUTIONS.  Despite his physics training we can see that Kuhn was     an outsider to science; he obviously doesn't have a good grasp on     real science.  Outsiders never can see things in the proper positive     light, it takes a working scientist to see the real situation.     Also, he stressed his central themes way too much, so I think we can     ignore him as simply being a sensationalist.  And besides, if he's     digging up dirt regarding science, then he must have a hidden agenda.     I bet we'll find that he's a Christian or something, probably a     creationist."23. Blindness to the widespread existence of the above symptoms.  Belief    that scientists are inherently objective, and rarely fall victim to    these faults.  Excusing the frequent appearance of these symptoms as    being isolated instances which do not comprise an accumulation of    evidence for the common practice of Pathological Skepticism.     "This 'Pathological Skepticism' does not exist.  Kooks and       crackpots deserve the hostile mistreatment we give them, but      anyone who does similar things to skeptics is terribly misguided.      Those who criticize skeptics are a danger to Science itself, and we      must stop them."toms of Pathological Skepticism

COLBY WRONG AGAIN

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Exclusive

A series of CIA memos describes how Israeli Mossad agents posed as American spies to recruit members of the terrorist organization Jundallah to fight their covert war against Iran.

• By Mark Perry<p> Mark Perry is an author and historian. His latest book is Talking to Terrorists.< /p>
• January 13, 2012

Buried deep in the archives of America’s intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush’s administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives — what is commonly referred to as a "false flag" operation.

The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah — a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children.

But while the memos show that the United States had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah, according to both intelligence officers, the same was not true for Israel’s Mossad. The memos also detail CIA field reports saying that Israel’s recruiting activities occurred under the nose of U.S. intelligence officers, most notably in London, the capital of one of Israel’s ostensible allies, where Mossad officers posing as CIA operatives met with Jundallah officials.

The officials did not know whether the Israeli program to recruit and use Jundallah is ongoing. Nevertheless, they were stunned by the brazenness of the Mossad’s efforts.

"It’s amazing what the Israelis thought they could get away with," the intelligence officer said. "Their recruitment activities were nearly in the open. They apparently didn’t give a damn what we thought."

Interviews with six currently serving or recently retired intelligence officers over the last 18 months have helped to fill in the blanks of the Israeli false-flag operation. In addition to the two currently serving U.S. intelligence officers, the existence of the Israeli false-flag operation was confirmed to me by four retired intelligence officers who have served in the CIA or have monitored Israeli intelligence operations from senior positions inside the U.S. government.

The CIA and the White House were both asked for comment on this story. By the time this story went to press, they had not responded. The Israeli intelligence services — the Mossad — were also contacted, in writing and by telephone, but failed to respond. As a policy, Israel does not confirm or deny its involvement in intelligence operations.

There is no denying that there is a covert, bloody, and ongoing campaign aimed at stopping Iran’s nuclear program, though no evidence has emerged connecting recent acts of sabotage and killings inside Iran to Jundallah. Many reports have cited Israel as the architect of this covert campaign, which claimed its latest victim on Jan. 11 when a motorcyclist in Tehran slipped a magnetic explosive device under the car of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a young Iranian nuclear scientist. The explosion killed Roshan, making him the fourth scientist assassinated in the past two years. The United States adamantly denies it is behind these killings.

According to one retired CIA officer, information about the false-flag operation was reported up the U.S. intelligence chain of command. It reached CIA Director of Operations Stephen Kappes, his deputy Michael Sulick, and the head of the Counterintelligence Center. All three of these officials are now retired. The Counterintelligence Center, according to its website, is tasked with investigating "threats posed by foreign intelligence services."

The report then made its way to the White House, according to the currently serving U.S. intelligence officer. The officer said that Bush "went absolutely ballistic" when briefed on its contents.

"The report sparked White House concerns that Israel’s program was putting Americans at risk," the intelligence officer told me. "There’s no question that the U.S. has cooperated with Israel in intelligence-gathering operations against the Iranians, but this was different. No matter what anyone thinks, we’re not in the business of assassinating Iranian officials or killing Iranian civilians."

Israel’s relationship with Jundallah continued to roil the Bush administration until the day it left office, this same intelligence officer noted. Israel’s activities jeopardized the administration’s fragile relationship with Pakistan, which was coming under intense pressure from Iran to crack down on Jundallah. It also undermined U.S. claims that it would never fight terror with terror, and invited attacks in kind on U.S. personnel.

"It’s easy to understand why Bush was so angry," a former intelligence officer said. "After all, it’s hard to engage with a foreign government if they’re convinced you’re killing their people. Once you start doing that, they feel they can do the same."

A senior administration official vowed to "take the gloves off" with Israel, according to a U.S. intelligence officer. But the United States did nothing — a result that the officer attributed to "political and bureaucratic inertia."

"In the end," the officer noted, "it was just easier to do nothing than to, you know, rock the boat." Even so, at least for a short time, this same officer noted, the Mossad operation sparked a divisive debate among Bush’s national security team, pitting those who wondered "just whose side these guys [in Israel] are on" against those who argued that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

The debate over Jundallah was resolved only after Bush left office when, within his first weeks as president, Barack Obama drastically scaled back joint U.S.-Israel intelligence programs targeting Iran, according to multiple serving and retired officers.

The decision was controversial inside the CIA, where officials were forced to shut down "some key intelligence-gathering operations," a recently retired CIA officer confirmed. This action was followed in November 2010 by the State Department’s addition of Jundallah to its list of foreign terrorist organizations — a decision that one former CIA officer called "an absolute no-brainer."

Since Obama’s initial order, U.S. intelligence services have received clearance to cooperate with Israel on a number of classified intelligence-gathering operations focused on Iran’s nuclear program, according to a currently serving officer. These operations are highly technical in nature and do not involve covert actions targeting Iran’s infrastructure or political or military leadership.

"We don’t do bang and boom," a recently retired intelligence officer said. "And we don’t do political assassinations."

Israel regularly proposes conducting covert operations targeting Iranians, but is just as regularly shut down, according to retired and current intelligence officers. "They come into the room and spread out their plans, and we just shake our heads," one highly placed intelligence source said, "and we say to them — ‘Don’t even go there. The answer is no.’"

Unlike the Mujahedin-e Khalq, the controversial exiled Iranian terrorist group that seeks the overthrow of the Tehran regime and is supported by former leading U.S. policymakers, Jundallah is relatively unknown — but just as violent. In May 2009, a Jundallah suicide bomber blew himself up inside a mosque in Zahedan, the capital of Iran’s southeastern Sistan-Baluchistan province bordering Pakistan, during a Shiite religious festival. The bombing killed 25 Iranians and wounded scores of others.

The attack enraged Tehran, which traced the perpetrators to a cell operating in Pakistan. The Iranian government notified the Pakistanis of the Jundallah threat and urged them to break up the movement’s bases along the Iranian-Pakistani border. The Pakistanis reacted sluggishly in the border areas, feeding Tehran’s suspicions that Jundallah was protected by Pakistan’s intelligence services.

The 2009 attack was just one in a long line of terrorist attacks attributed to the organization. In August 2007, Jundallah kidnapped 21 Iranian truck drivers. In December 2008, it captured and executed 16 Iranian border guards — the gruesome killings were filmed, in a stark echo of the decapitation of American businessman Nick Berg in Iraq at the hands of al Qaeda’s Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. In July 2010, Jundallah conducted a twin suicide bombing in Zahedan outside a mosque, killing dozens of people, including members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The State Department aggressively denies that the U.S. government had or has any ties to Jundallah. "We have repeatedly stated, and reiterate again that the United States has not provided support to Jundallah," a spokesman wrote in an email to the Wall Street Journal, following Jundallah’s designation as a terrorist organization. "The United States does not sponsor any form of terrorism. We will continue to work with the international community to curtail support for terrorist organizations and prevent violence against innocent civilians. We have also encouraged other governments to take comparable actions against Jundallah."

A spate of stories in 2007 and 2008, including a report by ABC News and a New Yorker article, suggested that the United States was offering covert support to Jundallah. The issue has now returned to the spotlight with the string of assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and has outraged serving and retired intelligence officers who fear that Israeli operations are endangering American lives.

"This certainly isn’t the first time this has happened, though it’s the worst case I’ve heard of," former Centcom chief and retired Gen. Joe Hoar said of the Israeli operation upon being informed of it. "But while false-flag operations are hardly new, they’re extremely dangerous. You’re basically using your friendship with an ally for your own purposes. Israel is playing with fire. It gets us involved in their covert war, whether we want to be involved or not."

The Israeli operation left a number of recently retired CIA officers sputtering in frustration. "It’s going to be pretty hard for the U.S. to distance itself from an Israeli attack on Iran with this kind of thing going on," one of them told me.

Jundallah head Abdolmalek Rigi was captured by Iran in February 2010. Although initial reports claimed that he was captured by the Iranians after taking a flight from Dubai to Kyrgyzstan, a retired intelligence officer with knowledge of the incident told me that Rigi was detained by Pakistani intelligence officers in Pakistan. The officer said that Rigi was turned over to the Iranians after the Pakistani government informed the United States that it planned to do so. The United States, this officer said, did not raise objections to the Pakistani decision.

Iran, meanwhile, has consistently claimed that Rigi was snatched from under the eyes of the CIA, which it alleges supported him. "It doesn’t matter," the former intelligence officer said of Iran’s charges. "It doesn’t matter what they say. They know the truth."

Rigi was interrogated, tried, and convicted by the Iranians and hanged on June 20, 2010. Prior to his execution, Rigi claimed in an interview with Iranian media — which has to be assumed was under duress — that he had doubts about U.S. sponsorship of Jundallah. He recounted an alleged meeting with "NATO officials" in Morocco in 2007 that raised his suspicions. "When we thought about it we came to the conclusion that they are either Americans acting under NATO cover or Israelis," he said.

While many of the details of Israel’s involvement with Jundallah are now known, many others still remain a mystery — and are likely to remain so. The CIA memos of the incident have been "blue bordered," meaning that they were circulated to senior levels of the broader U.S. intelligence community as well as senior State Department officials.

What has become crystal clear, however, is the level of anger among senior intelligence officials about Israel’s actions. "This was stupid and dangerous," the intelligence official who first told me about the operation said. "Israel is supposed to be working with us, not against us. If they want to shed blood, it would help a lot if it was their blood and not ours. You know, they’re supposed to be a strategic asset. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people now, important people, who just don’t think that’s true."

Related Stories

08/03/2015 - RF EMFs produce clear co-carcinogenic properties

You can also download this story as a printable .pdf file

On the same day that the EC's SCENIHR released their long-awaited report [1] that concluded that we should not worry about any adverse health effects of EMF/RF fields, a new well conducted replication study [2] shows that long-term 3G/UMTS microwave exposure can act as a co-carcinogen and statistically significantly increase cancer growth at very low exposure levels, 50-fold below currently permitted levels.

Everyone using a 3G mobile phone or iPad or other tablet will be exposed at higher levels than this (0.04 W/kg). This study flags a big and important "wake up alarm call".

These are levels that many, if not most, of our children are now being being exposed to WiFi at school, when using laptops and tablet PCs. Modern WiFi signals use RF modulation schemes that are similar to UMTS. It is vital that this study is repeated using similar exposure levels with various types and frequencies of WiFi.

We call on the UK Department of Health to authorise funding for this work to be done as soon as possible - especially as their Public Health England organisation's website currently supports schools in their use of WiFi for children of all ages. We have long believed that this is unethical and have repeatedly called for WiFi and health research which, to our knowledge, has not been done by any official organisation.

The team was led by Professor Dr Alexander Lerchl and funded by a grant from the German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS), Salzgitter, Germany. The funding agency defined the principal study design which was further developed with Dr Lerchl. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. In the past Dr Lerchl has been outspoken in his belief that current science had shown that low levels of microwave RF exposure could not be carcinogenic, so publication of this new, well conducted, study that shows the opposite is to his credit.

"Previously published results from a pilot study with carcinogen-treated mice, however, suggested tumor-promoting effects of RF-EMF (Tillmann et al, 2010). We have performed a replication study using higher numbers of animals per group and including two additional exposure levels (0 (sham), 0.04, 0.4 and 2 W/kg SAR)... Numbers of tumors of the lungs and livers in exposed animals were significantly higher than in sham-exposed controls. In addition, lymphomas were also found to be significantly elevated by exposure. A clear dose-response effect is absent. We hypothesize that these tumor promoting effects may be caused by metabolic changes due to exposure."

"Our study confirms and extends the previously published observations of tumor-promoting effects of life-long RF-EMF exposure... Since many of the tumor-promoting effects in our study were seen at low to moderate exposure levels (0.04 and 0.4 W/kg SAR), thus well below exposure limits for the users of mobile phones."

"The fact that both studies found basically the same tumor-promoting effects at levels below the accepted (and in most countries legally defined) exposure limits for humans is worrying. Although animal experiments are generally not easily transferable to the situation in humans, the findings are a very clear indication that - in principal - tumor-promoting effects of life-long RF-EMF exposure may occur at levels supposedly too low to cause thermal effects."

In 2010, Tillmann and colleagues published a study [3] showing tumour-promoting effects of life-long exposure to microwave RF from 3G (UMTS) at moderate exposure levels in mice treated with a carcinogen while in-utero. Those results were potentially influenced by an unexpected infection. Their data showed clear effects of RF-EMF exposure on the incidences of lung and liver tumours. The exposed mice also had double the number of metastasising lung tumours compared with the non-exposed mice. SCENIHR 2015 does mention the Tillmann, et al, study on page 85 and say that a further study "might be informative", but also state that peak exposures were high (5 W/kg), implying that there might be some thermal effect.

Lerchl's team have replicated this study with higher numbers of mice per group in order to clarify whether the previously reported results could be confirmed. In addition, two additional SAR levels of exposure (low and high) were included in this well designed new study in order to investigate possible dose-response relationships.

What they have found are co-carcinogenic promotional effects at all levels of UMTS RF/microwave exposure. In fact, the lowest level of exposure shows the highest, statistically significant, promotional effect. Please see the Figure (above) reproduced from the paper.

The paper is available from the journal's website, linked below. It is a pity that BfS did not fund the Open Access publication of this paper. Most public and Charity funded research now has a stipulated requirement for the results to be published as an Open Access (freely downloadable) paper. This only involves the funders paying a few thousand euros (or USD) to the publishers, which is a small sum compared with the cost of the actual research.

1/. » The 2015 SCENIHR Opinion (PDF download)

2/. » A. Lerchl, M. Klose, K. Grote, A.F.X. Wilhelm, O. Spathmann, T. Fiedler, J.Streckert, V. Hansen, M. Clemens, Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans, Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.02.151

3/. » T. Tillmann, H. Ernst, J. Streckert, et al., Indication of cocarcinogenic potential of chronic UMTS-modulated radiofrequency exposure in an ethylnitrosourea mouse model, Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 86 (2010)

keep it secret ,don't have to talk about it...secrecy > now THATS how to control speech !!!!!!!!!!!!

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{

How Britian covered up the friendship between Hitler & Edward VIII

------------------------------------------------

March 1, 2015 | 7:00amt

=

Adapted from “17 Carnations: The Royals, the Nazis and the Biggest Cover Up in History” by Andrew Morton, to be published by Grand Central on March 10.

Arrested Oswald said he never went to Mexico. The look-a-like (could choose many a word for that phrase) had yellow Mexico shoes. sg

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and ...

=

• Full Text of John Armstrong's 1997 Dallas Conference Speech

  harveyandlee.net/NID97.htm

  • Cached
  • Similar

  The ultimate goal was to switch their identities and send Harvey Oswald into Russia, ...... Shasteen, an Irving city council member, was Lee Oswald's barber. ... Shasteen noticed Oswald's yellow shoes, which Oswald said he had purchased in ...

  }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

  }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

  Oswald seen with 14 year old boy per SHASTEEN

  SHASTEEN TESTIMONY

  http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/shasteen.htm

  -----

  At bottom Greg Parker post that needs to be added as an addendum to Spiders Web.

  The Weston ,To Jake Rubenstein, c/o The Carousel Club, article builds on his Spiders Web article and the Parker post adds to that.
  

  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  POST # 1 this thread

  http://educationforu...ic=6017&p=53294

  Although the activities of the schoolbook operatives often overlapped those of Jack Ruby, the only verifiable link was Lee Harvey Oswald. There were many witnesses testifying to an association between Ruby and Oswald, but the most credible is Daniel T. McGown. On March 31, 1963, McGown accidentally found a letter at the Carousel Club addressed to “Jake Rubinstein” with a return address from “Lee Oswald,” at 1106 Diceman Street in Dallas. McGown later confirmed that “Lee Oswald” was indeed Lee Harvey Oswald. [30]
  

  #############################################################

  below Diceman article by Weston

  ##############################################################

  To Jake Rubenstein, c/o The Carousel Club
  
  William Weston
  October 2001
  
  On October 31, 1976, a government agent greeted a gray-haired gentleman who, on his own initiative, came into the FBI office in Memphis, Tennessee. He had a secret about the Kennedy assassination, he said, and he wanted to disclose it. [1]
  The distinguished-looking visitor did not appear to be the type who would know something about the world of spies, pimps, drug dealers, con artists, and other disreputable denizens inhabiting the murky milieu of assassination intrigue. Daniel T. McGown, by anyone's standards, was a pillar of the community, a successful businessman with an honorable career in a prestigious profession. Born in 1908 in Brownwood, Texas, his family moved to Memphis prior to his graduation from high school. After receiving a degree from the School of Architecture at Georgia Tech, he went to work for Schulz & Norton, an architectural and engineering firm in Memphis. In 1941, he married Irma Lee Beasley, a daughter from one of Tennesee's more respectable families. During the course of their marriage, the couple had two children. In 1948, he started his own architectural firm, which over the years grew and prospered. He became president of the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects and was a member of the Calvary Episcopal Church. [2] Family man, businessman, church member, community server, Mr. McGown lived a life that was largely indistinguishable from thousands of other men of his class who lived around the country. However, in that fateful year of 1963, a strange twist of fate had placed within his hands a hitherto unknown secret regarding a connection between Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby.
  The incident occurred during a business trip to Texas in March 1963. McGown had flown to Austin, in order to check over the plans for a new building that was to be constructed on the campus of the University of Texas. When he had completed his survey, he rented a car and drove north to the city of Brownwood, where he spent a day with some relatives. He then drove to Fort Worth, where he visited his first cousin, a prominent attorney in that city. Late in the evening, he used his cousin's telephone to call his wife Irma. He wished her a happy birthday and said that he would see her the next day, when his plane arrived in Memphis. Irma's birthday was March 28.
  McGown left his cousin's house and drove east to Dallas. It was almost midnight when he checked in at the Adolphus Hotel on Commerce Street. After getting settled into his room, he felt like having a nightcap before going to bed. He left his room, went down the elevator to the lobby, and went outside. The brightly lit sign of the Carousel Club beckoned from across the street. He walked over to the club entrance door and opened it. Behind the door was a staircase, leading up to the second floor. When he reached the top of the stairs, he was stopped by a heavy-set man. The club was closing up, the man said, who then complained about city regulations that prevented him from keeping the place open after midnight. [3] Rebuffed by the manager of the club, McGown went back to his room.
  The following morning, McGown decided to do a little sightseeing, since he had a few hours to kill before his plane departed from Dallas. As he was walking down Commerce Street, he paused at the Carousel Club. Near the entrance was a showcase display featuring pictures of female performers. As he was gazing at the pictures, another man who was walking down the street crowded into the entryway to look at them too. It was an awkward moment for McGown as he tried to make room for the other man while at the same time trying to keep a favorable point of view for himself. Presently, the other man turned to leave. As he did so, he brushed by an overstuffed mailbox that hung on the entrance door. A few large pieces of mail, two magazines, and three letters spilled on the ground. The man continued on his way without stopping.
  McGown proceeded to pick up the envelopes and magazines and stuff them back into the box. He noticed that the three letters were written by women and were addressed to "Jake Rubenstein, c/o The Carousel Club." Rubenstein must have been the heavy-set man whom McGown met the previous night. He was probably also the one who hired women to be performers in the club. Perhaps the senders of the three letters were prospective applicants for employment. McGown looked at the envelopes again. Two of the women lived in Fort Worth, and one lived in Dallas. The name on the Dallas letter caught his attention, for he happened to have a friend who had the same last name. [4] After making a mental note of the address, he put the letters back in the box with the rest of the mail. The woman he was planning to visit was "Lee Oswald."
  Using a city map as a guide, McGown drove toward Miss Oswald's place. As he was approaching her street, he looked at the houses in the neighborhood. Expecting to see lower class housing, he was surprised to find upper middle class or upper class residences. McGown wondered about this. Why would anyone living in such an area have any dealings with a strip joint?
  When he arrived at his destination, he stopped the car and looked at it. It was a two-story apartment building, constructed in the cheap, boxy style that was becoming the prevailing fashion at that time. It had an outside stairway that led up to a balcony walk on the second floor. It was a new building, perhaps two or three years old at the most. For the convenience of the postman, there was a mailbox with individual compartments that stood facing the street next to the curb. In order to find the unit that Miss Oswald was renting, McGown got out of his car and looked over the names of the tenants posted on the compartment doors. When he found Oswald's name, he realized that he had made a mistake. The middle name of Lee Harvey Oswald showed that this person was not a woman. Without further ado, McGown got back into his car and drove away.
  Eight months later, when the names of Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby were being broadcasted on radio and television, the details of this episode came vividly back to his memory. Should he tell the authorities what he knew, or should he not? His reputation might suffer if this embarrassing incident ever became widely known. He hoped that the authorities would find out about Oswald's connection to Jack Ruby without his help. When the Warren Report was published, he bought a copy and read it from cover to cover. There was nothing in it to indicate that the government knew what he knew. Furthermore he read that the commission could find no "credible evidence" of an association between Oswald and Ruby. After the death of Jack Ruby in January 1967, McGown wondered if he was the only one left who still had the "credible evidence" that eluded the Warren Commission. Finally, nine years later, he told his wife about it. She encouraged him to go to the FBI. After all, his story might make a difference in the new, upcoming investigation into the JFK assassination that Congress was preparing to launch. Such were the circumstances that led Daniel T. McGown to the local office of the FBI in 1976.
  The FBI of course wanted to know where the apartment was. McGown could not remember its exact location, but he drew a diagram depicting the apartment in relation to the mailbox out front, as well as in relation to a nearby apartment that faced another street. He remembered that the address had four digits and sounded something like "Diceland." A Dallas city map showed that there were was no street with the name of "Diceland," but there were two with the name of "Diceman." One was Diceman Drive, and the other was Diceman Avenue.
  Dallas FBI agent Robert Gemberling drove out to Diceman Drive to see if there were any apartments matching McGown's diagram and description. Diceman Drive had single-family houses but no apartments. A few inquiries among the residents showed that no apartment had ever existed on that street.
  Next stop was Diceman Avenue. Gemberling looked from one end of the avenue to the other, and the only dwellings that he could see were single-family homes - with one exception. At the point where Diceman ran into Cedar Crest Boulevard was a two-story building made of brick. It was the Cedar Crest Heights Apartment. It had a second floor balcony walk with an iron railing just as McGown described it. Next to the curb was a large mailbox with sixteen key-locked compartments with tenant nametags. Adjacent to the building was another apartment facing Birdsong Street. The apartment at 1106 Diceman Avenue must be the place that McGown had visited in 1963. There was no other possibility. Still, Gemberling was not satisfied. He noticed that all the buildings in the neighborhood were rundown, dilapidated, and occupied entirely by lower-class blacks. This was not the upper class neighborhood that McGown claimed to have seen.
  Gemberling looked for the manager. He found him at a nearby office at 2514 Birdsong Avenue. The manager told him that the apartment was owned by a company called General Rental. It was built around 1959 or 1960, and it was the only apartment that had ever been on that street. The mailbox seen out front had been there since the apartment was first constructed. So far these extra details provided additional confirmation for McGown's story. Gemberling wanted to see the tenant records for 1963, but the manager told them that they no longer existed. They were destroyed with all the other tenant records in a fire that occurred in April 1968. Gemberling asked the manager if he knew anything about Oswald living in the apartment in 1963. Although the manager acknowledged that he had only been working for General Rental since 1969, he was nevertheless positive that Oswald could not have lived in the apartment in 1963. In an all-black neighborhood, people would have certainly remembered Oswald as the only white man living among them, and such was not the case.
  Apparently the manager's statement was enough to convince Gemberling that the 1106 Diceman lead was a dead end. No further inquiries were made, as far as the available records show. (There are however some "postponed in full" documents from the Memphis office of the FBI regarding a "Daniel McGowen" that are now in the National Archives.) To find out more about the apartment, I checked the 1963 Dallas criss-cross directory and found a former tenant by the name of Orlean Dorsey. I located Dorsey in Lufkin, Texas and called him up. Contrary to what the General Rental manager told Gemberling, Dorsey, who is black, said it was not an all-black apartment in 1963. Both white and black people lived there. Furthermore, the apartment was indeed located in a prestigious area. About a mile south of the apartment was the Lakeview Golf Course, where Dorsey worked as a landscape and maintenance man. Among the celebrities who played golf there were such baseball legends as Mickey Mantle and "Dizzy" Dean. At that time, the golf course was racially segregated. Whites played there during the day and blacks played at night.
  Not just anyone could live at the Cedar Crest Apartment. A prospective tenant had to have a very good background and excellent references. Dorsey was able to get his unit because he knew the manager, a black named Denny Blair, who often played golf at Lakeview. Blair was an employee of Bailey Rental, a white-owned company that had title to the Diceman apartment. (Bailey Rental was later renamed General Rental.)
  The Cedar Crest Apartment was an expensive place to live. It took all of Dorsey's wages to pay the rent. He was making $1.25 per hour and the rent was about $210 per month. The only way he could afford to live there was by working a lot of overtime on the weekends. By way of comparison, Oswald was making $1.35 per hour at Jaggers Chiles Stovall during the month of March 1963, and he was paying $72.68 a month for a one-bedroom flat at the Neely Street house. [5]
  Dorsey and his family moved into the apartment in November 1962. Because of his long working hours and because he was going to plumbing school at the same time, he did not get to know the other tenants. His wife and children also did not do much socializing. Thus he was unable to confirm or deny whether Oswald lived there. Dorsey and his family moved to another apartment in October 1963.
  The transition from an affluent, mainly white neighborhood to black lower class ghetto occurred during the mid-1960's, according to Dorsey who would come back to visit his former apartment from time to time. The quality of the building and the surrounding area deteriorated as a result of vandalism and neglect. When I called the General Rental office in 1995, I found out that the apartment was still owned by the Bailey family. I also learned that rent was only $50 per week - a real bargain for anyone brave enough to live there.
  Did Oswald live at the Cedar Crest Apartment? Considering the high cost of rent in 1963, it is unlikely he would have chosen to live there. A more reasonable possibility is that he used the address simply to receive his mail. As a man astute in the ways of intelligence, he no doubt realized that a mailbox at the post office was under surveillance. A second mailbox in another area would be highly useful for receiving mail from more sensitive sources. This line of reasoning is supported by the fact that most of the units at 1106 Diceman were listed as "vacant" in the criss-cross directories of 1962 and 1963. In 1962 only five of the sixteen units available were occupied. This ratio dropped to only four occupied units the following year. An apartment manager with a 75% vacancy rate might let someone temporarily use an unused mailbox for a small fee.
  It is interesting to note that on March 29, the day that McGown was at the Diceman apartment, Oswald was seen at a barbershop in Sparta, Wisconsin. Oswald told John Abbott, the barber, that he got his money by blackmailing a Texas nightclub operator, for whom he had previously worked. Each time he made a contact with this man, he would get fifty dollars. The money he obtained would be used to cover his travelling expenses. (He never gave the name of the nightclub operator.) Perhaps the Oswald letter that McGown saw was another demand for more money.
  McGown's story lends credence to the story of a connection between Ruby and Oswald in the May 17 edition of the National Enquirer. It said: "After a sniper shot at but missed General Walker in Dallas, April 10, 1963, Dallas police suspected that Oswald was the sniper and Ruby was the payoff man. The cops were set to arrest the pair. But they never got the chance, because of heavy pressure brought to bear by the Justice Dept. and so Oswald and Ruby were to remain free." The article also said that a top secret document, signed by a high official of the Justice Dept., was sent in April 1963 to Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry requesting the police not to arrest Oswald and Ruby. This document was reportedly in the hands of the Warren Commission.
  Given the potentially explosive implications of the above story, it is no wonder that the Warren Commission chose to discount all witnesses to a connection between Oswald and Ruby, including Wilburn Litchfield, Joe Franklin, and Bill DeMar. McGown's story is not only important in rehabilitating the credibility of these undeservedly maligned witnesses, but it also provides a glimpse into the covert ways by which Oswald and Ruby communicated with one another.
  
  
  ENDNOTES
  
  1. Sources for this article were FBI reports in Memphis and Dallas. Also referred to were ten pages of McGown's hand-written account that was photocopied by the FBI.
  2. Engagement announcement, Sept. 14, 1941; wedding announcement, Dec. 3, 1941, and obituary of Daniel T. McGown, March 5, 1985, in the Memphis newspaper, The Commercial Appeal.
  3. According to Jack Ruby's bartender, Andrew Armstrong, clean up started at midnight on weeknights and at 1:00 am on Saturday and Sunday. All bottles and glasses had to be cleared off the tables by 12:15. If a vice squad police officer saw anyone drinking after 12:15, he could slap a five-day suspension on the club (Vol. 13 of the Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits, p. 325).
  4. Actually the friend's surname had a slightly different spelling. Felix Oswalt, a member of the Board of Education in Memphis, was the friend McGown was talking about.
  5. Warren Report, p. 743.
  
  ____________________________________________________________

  (Gaal comments below on above article)
  A professional man is traveling alone and
  sees an opportunity to meet strippers.
  
  Eight months later, when the names of Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby were being broadcasted on radio and television, the details of this episode came vividly back to his memory. Should he tell the authorities what he knew, or should he not? His reputation might suffer if this embarrassing incident ever became widely known. He hoped that the authorities would find out about Oswald's connection to Jack Ruby without his help. When the Warren Report was published, he bought a copy and read it from cover to cover. There was nothing in it to indicate that the government knew what he knew. Furthermore he read that the commission could find no "credible evidence" of an association between Oswald and Ruby. After the death of Jack Ruby in January 1967, McGown wondered if he was the only one left who still had the "credible evidence" that eluded the Warren Commission. Finally, nine years later, he told his wife about it. She encouraged him to go to the FBI. After all, his story might make a difference in the new, upcoming investigation into the JFK assassination that Congress was preparing to launch. Such were the circumstances that led Daniel T. McGown to the local office of the FBI in 1976.
  **********************************************

  (Gaal)
  PAUSE AND REFLECT
  PAUSE AND REFLECT
  PAUSE AND REFLECT ...............
  What would motivate a professional married man to contact the FBI (in the early 1960s timeframe) and say he ," improperly looked at US Mail and wanted to 'hunt' down a stripper." ????
  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  Answer ZERO . No motivation to make up this story.

  ############
  ############
  ############

  Greg Parker

  Posted 06 September 2012 - 12:40 AM

  Back in 2001, I made the following post to a news group:
  
  
  

  Quote

  Quote

  DPD Criminal Intel Report on narcotics filed on Boxing Day,
  1963 in summary states:
  
  From confidential source:
  Everett Edward Burnett DPD# 31924 and Robert Ray Jordon DPD#
  30119 recently robbed an unknown Mexican from San Antonio,
  Texas of 2.5 ounces of heroin.
  Source further stated that these two men have also been
  committing drug store burglaries.
  They live in an apartment house on Gaston Ave. Exact address
  unknown.
  Informant further stated that Everett Edward Burnett is a
  homosexual and has had unnatural sex relations with Jack
  Leon Ruby.
  
  

  
  http://jfk.ci.dallas...39/3936-001.gif
  
  On pages 4 and 5 of this doc, the FBI has Pike saying that Ruby liked to "surround himself with clean-cut, well-dressed "Hollywood-type" men to make himself feel important.
  http://www.maryferre...717&relPageId=5
  
  What immediately struck me about that was at least one of Ruby's prison psych's put in his report that Ruby thought Oswald looked like Paul Newman,
  
  It's also mentioned here:
  http://www.maryferre...bsPageId=367099

  ================================================ also add

  http://spartacus-edu...JFKcheramie.htm

  Rose Cheramie

  　

  Rose Cheramie (Cherami) was found unconsciousness by the side of the road at Eunice, Louisiana, on 20th November, 1963. Lieutenant Francis Frugé of the Louisiana State Police took her to the state hospital. On the journey Cheramie said that she had been thrown out of a car by two gangsters who worked for Jack Ruby. She claimed that the men were involved in a plot to kill John F. Kennedy. Cheramie added that Kennedy would be killed in Dallas within a few days. Later she told the same story to doctors and nurses who treated her. As she appeared to be under the influence of drugs her story was ignored.

  Following the assassination, Cheramie was interviewed by the police. She claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald had visited Ruby's night club. In fact, she believed the two men were having a homosexual relationship.

  #################

  #################

  http://educationforu...ic=5074&p=41488 ( part of HOMOSEXUAL THREAD)

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Was Oswald an Intelligence Agent? yes recruited by homosexual blackmail as a young boy. > Ruby thought Oswald looked like Paul Newman <

Breakthrough in energy harvesting could power life on Mars

=================================================

Mar 05, 2015

http://phys.org/news/2015-03-breakthrough-energy-harvesting-power-life.html

• US and Venezuela: Decades of Defeats and Destabilization
• 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Design in the Universe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4CgCtV4ixk

Post in large font because it means its important! /Burton

OH Mr. Burton wants something important !!

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

thousands of rabbis omit Isaiah 53 now THAT !! is coinspiracy !!
----------------------oooo---------------------oooo--------------------------
Jewish people ASK ?????

------o------
Posted in judaism by hearthappy45 2010-10-26
------------------------------------
Has Isaiah 53 been removed from the Synagogue liturgy?
I have heard several rumors (I doubt they are true) that Isaiah 53 is not a part of the Synagogue rotation of Bible reading. That doesn't seem right to me, but I picked up a Jewish commentary in Borders and couldn't find a commentary for Isaiah 53. It went straight up to Isaiah 52 and then 54 after skipping 53. Is there a reason that the synagogues do not include the 53rd chapter of Isaiah in their rotation of reading through the Bible?
===================oooooooo=========================================
Why don't the Jews recognize the Messiah in Isaiah 53? Why don't they see that Jesus is portrayed there? Such questions are often asked by Christians who cannot understand how the Jews fail to recognize Messiah when they read this astounding and glorious prophecy. Here are some of the reasons:
The majority of Jews are not acquainted with this prophecy of Isaiah 53, because it is carefully avoided in the synagogue. True, portions of Isaiah are read on Sabbath days, but this particular chapter is meticulously avoided in order not to provoke embarrassing questions and inquiries.

######################## #####################
### ANSWER ############ ### ANSWER #########
--------------------------------------------------------
The Jewish people consider Isaiah to be their greatest prophet. Although they read many of his chapters in the synagogue, Chapter 53 is not one of them. They do read a portion of Chapter 52.
Those who are familiar with synagogue liturgy know that the Five Books of Moses are read in their entirety during the year. In addition, specified scriptures that relate to the chapters are included after certain portions. For example, Isaiah 47, 54 and 40 are read in that order at the completion of the first, second and third weekly portions of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. After readings from Deuteronomy, which is a review of the other four books, they read eight chapters from Isaiah during a period of eleven weeks.
==================== posted in fair use
Isaiah 53
By The Late Rev. Sam Stern
--------------------------------------
Comments on Isaiah 53 with regard to the question, “Does this chapter refer to Israel delivering the Gentiles from sin or to a person who is the saviour?”
Who hath believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground; he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way: and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth.
He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bore the sins of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.*
* All Scriptures are KJV
The Jewish people consider Isaiah to be their greatest prophet. Although they read many of his chapters in the synagogue, Chapter 53 is not one of them. They do read a portion of Chapter 52.
Those who are familiar with synagogue liturgy know that the Five Books of Moses are read in their entirety during the year. In addition, specified scriptures that relate to the chapters are included after certain portions. For example, Isaiah 47, 54 and 40 are read in that order at the completion of the first, second and third weekly portions of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. After readings from Deuteronomy, which is a review of the other four books, they read eight chapters from Isaiah during a period of eleven weeks.
Rabbinical Opinion
The most widely accepted rabbinical opinion on the meaning of Isaiah 53 is that the "he" referred to is the nation of Israel whom God chose to suffer for the sins of the Gentiles. This view is hard to comprehend because the Word of God never mentioned elsewhere that Israel would suffer for the sins of the Gentiles, either by Israel’s own volition or by God’s will. If this teaching were true, it would necessarily appear somewhere else in the Chumash (Five Books of Moses).
On the contrary, God warned the nation of Israel that it was for their own sins that they would suffer — i.e., if they did not obey Him (Leviticus 26:14-41, Isaiah 17:10-14).
The Bible disclosed that Israel will go through a purging of her sins against God and against His word:
Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble: but he [Jacob] shall be saved out of it (Jeremiah 30:7).
Why criest thou for thine affliction? thy sorrow is incurable for the multitude of thine iniquity: because thy sins were increased, I have done these things unto thee (Jeremiah 30:15).
On the other hand, God will judge the Gentile nations according to how they treated Israel. Isaiah deals with the subject of God’s judgment of the nations (the Gentiles) in Chapters 13 and 24. In addition, Jeremiah warns:
Therefore all they that devour thee shall be devoured; and all thine adversaries, every one of them, shall go into captivity; and they that spoil thee shall be a spoil, and all that prey upon thee will I give for a prey (Jeremiah 30:16).
God commanded Israel to believe that He is the only God and to testify of that fact to the nations:
Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me (Isaiah 43:10).
Although God called them to be His witnesses, they disobeyed Him and failed in their mission. They were to obey God as a holy nation and to preach to the Gentiles. God never called on Israel to suffer for the nations, but only to suffer for their own sins. Isaiah 53 speaks plainly, not about a nation, but about a Messiah who would voluntarily give his life for the sake of humanity.
Another important point to consider is that the rabbis usually interpret the Bible literally. The Talmudic rule of interpretation is as follows:
No scripture can be changed from the simple meaning.
If one says a certain expression means something else regarding the Word, he is wrong.
The Bible means what it says. It is not allowed to change its meaning.
The Rambam (Maimonides) said in his thirteen tenets, which are included in the Siddur (prayerbook):
I believe in the words of the prophets. They are the truth.
I believe that the Bible was given to Moses.
I believe that the Bible cannot be changed.
In dealing with Isaiah 53, however, most Jewish interpreters depart from their literal view of the Bible and from the above-mentioned rules. Instead they consider this chapter as an allegory, metaphor or some other figure of speech in which Israel suffers for the sins of the Gentiles.
Kimchi, Beuer Hainian and Joseph Caro, for example, follow this line of thought.
On the other hand, the Talmudic book Sota, page 14b, interprets that Isaiah 53 means Moses, while Eben Ezra suggests that it could mean Jeremiah. These Jewish sages refuse to interpret Isaiah 53 as an allusion to the Messiah.
In addition, some Jewish Bible expositors maintain that Isaiah 53 is a continuation of Chapter 52. They claim that the "he" of Isaiah 53 refers to the person mentioned in Chapter 52, but stop short of accepting that "he" is the Messiah.
Further, some of these rabbis believe that there is no way to tell who the Messiah will be before he comes and that the Jewish people will have to wait until he rules in Jerusalem before they accept him. In this way, as we shall see, they negate the Biblical passages that God gave through His prophets. However, God revealed in His Word knowledge regarding the Messiah so that we would recognize him. He did not want us to rely on the philosophy that "Seeing is believing," but left us a whole body of Messianic Prophecy in His Word.
Some of the messianic references follow:
From the Tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10)
A Prophet Like Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15)
A Descendant of King David (Jeremiah 23:5)
Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2)
Born of a Virgin (Isaiah 7:14)
To Die by Crucifixion (Psalm 22:14)
To be Resurrected (Psalm 16:10)
Regarding the relationship between Chapter 52 and 53 of Isaiah, Sota 14b also cites Isaiah 53:12 in its comment on 52:14, which reads as follows:
Rabbi Simlai preached, Why did Moses want to enter the land of Israel? Did he want to eat the fruit of the land? Or satisfy himself with the bounty? But so said Moses, Many laws were given to Israel which can be done in Israel only. I will go to the land in order to fulfill the laws.
The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him, Only to receive the rewards? I ascribe it to thee as if you did it. As it is written, Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death; and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors [Isaiah 53:12].
Here the Talmud ascribes Isaiah 52:14 to the person of Moses. It relates the verse to 53:12, which it attributes to the fact that when God threatened to destroy the Israelites for building the golden calf, Moses pleaded:
Yet now if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written [Exodus 32:32].
If we accept that the preceding comment in Sotah 14b speaks about a person and that it relates to Chapter 53, why can’t we accept that Chapter 53 describes a person? We must ask ourselves why Isaiah could not have written Chapter 53 to describe a person rather than the nation of Israel — more specifically the suffering Messiah who was to die for the sins of the world.
Original Language and Grammar
Further, we cannot dismiss the crucial roles that the original language and grammar play in our understanding of the true meaning of Isaiah 53. On these counts, the rabbis’ interpretation that Israel would suffer for the Gentiles breaks down. We must pay special attention to the pronouns used in this chapter of Isaiah. For example, the prophet speaks about the "him" in the third person when he says in verse 6:
All we [Jews] like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all [emphasis added].
Isaiah is Israel’s greatest prophet. Since he wrote as a Jew, he would not suddenly write as a Gentile. The "we" (anachnoo) refers to the Jews: We Jews have gone astray. The LORD, therefore, has laid on "him" (oto) the iniquity of us all. If the Bible means that the nation of Israel was to suffer for the Gentiles, the verse would read: The LORD has laid on us (the Jews) the iniquity of them all.
The original Hebrew of Isaiah 53:4 reads as follows:
Ochain chalooyenu hu nasah, which literally translated means:
Therefore our grief he carried.
oomachoveinoo sevalom, which literally translated means:
And our sorrow he suffered.
Vaanachnu chashavnoo nogua mookeh Elohim umooneh, which literally translated means:
And we esteemed him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.
The next verse, Isaiah 53:5, reads as follows in the Hebrew:
Veehu mecholul meepshaenoo, which literally translated means:
And he was wounded for our sins.
Medooka meavonoteinoo, which literally translated means:
bruised for our transgression.
moosar shlomeinoo alloy, which literally translated means:
The chastisement of our peace was upon him.
Ooyachavoorato neerpa lahnoo, which literally translated means:
and with his stripes we are healed.
Since Isaiah was a Jew, the "we" referred to in his Chapter 53 means the Jews. The distinction is made between "we" (us, our) the Jews, and "he" who bore our sins. The "he" is an individual, someone other than the Jewish nation as a whole.
Further, Isaiah 53:12 reads in part:
ha-erah lamavet nafshaw, which literally translated means:
he poured to death his soul.
The above verse refers to the death of Jesus on the cross. These numerous passages show that the most consistent and convincing interpretation is that "he" is a person, the Messiah, who suffered and died for the sins of Israel and of the world.
Why Did The Jewish People Suffer?
The comment of Radak (David Kimchi) typifies the rabbis’ attempt to get around the above interpretation regarding the Messiah:
…Why then did the Jews suffer? It was not for their sin because they had the right religion, and we Gentiles who had a false religion did not live a good life of peace, so the Jews suffered the pain the Gentiles were supposed to suffer, so that with the suffering of the Jews, we Gentiles are healed and our sin is forgiven. The Jews became our kaporah [sin-forgiver]. Israel suffered not for their sins, but for our sins…
Kimchi insists that Israel did not sin, although the Bible teaches that Israel did sin and that God would punish her for her transgressions. The commentators’ attitude of neither admitting Israel's sins nor repenting of them leads to an incorrect interpretation of this chapter. In advancing the idea that following the right religion makes a person righteous, Kimchi neglects to point out that the Jews did not follow their religion righteously and that the Word of God itself is replete with God’s warnings of the consequences to Israel of her sins.
Another Jewish rabbi, Eben Ezra, comments on Isaiah 53:3, emphasizing the suffering of the Jews at the hands of the Gentiles:
He is despised and rejected of men. The Jews are despised and rejected of men, Gentiles. A man of sorrow and acquainted with grief. The Jews are suffering from the Gentiles. And we hid as it were our faces from him. The Gentiles don’t want to look as the Jews are being persecuted; they hide their faces. They hate the Jews even when they [the Jews] suffer.
Eben Ezra seems to take into account only the suffering of the Jews at the hand of the Gentiles and sees no further teaching in Isaiah 53. Similarly, Beuer Hainian, in his comment on Isaiah 53:5, says that the sin of the Gentiles is to cause the Jews to suffer. Both commentators, Eben Ezra and Beuer Hainian, avoid the issue of Israel’s sins.
The Jewish commentators in general insisted that Israel was a righteous nation that suffered for the sins of the Gentiles, an idea typified by the following comment made by Joseph Caro on Isaiah 53:5:
God created a righteous nation to carry the sins of the world so that the world could exist.
In other words, some of the rabbis believe that the Jews suffer for the healing of the nations. Perhaps a nation that is pure could purge the idolatrous nations. But the nation of Israel itself failed to keep God’s commandments. Hence, the most plausible view is that God sent the only One who could save the world: the Messiah.
The learned rabbis know their own rule that the writing of prophecy can refer to the past, present or future. A Biblical prophet may speak in the past tense, but the pronouncement can apply also to the future. Isaiah 53 is just this kind of pronouncement about the future—a prophecy by Israel’s greatest prophet of the coming of the Messiah to suffer and die for the sins of the world.
Commentators See More Truth in Isaiah 52
Biblical commentaries on Isaiah 52 come closer to the truth than those applying to Isaiah 53; some even mention the Messiah:
Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.
As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: (Isaiah 52:13, 14).
The Targum interprets Isaiah 52:13, quoted above, as follows:
Behold my servant will succeed. The Messiah will be lifted up and very strong.
Here the Targum calls the servant the Messiah, not the nation of Israel, not Moses, not any Jewish king!
On the very same verse, Eben Ezra, taking controversy into consideration, presents two contradictory views:
Behold my servant…This passage is very difficult. Some of our adversaries say that this speaks of their God. They interpret that "my servant" means the body, but this is not right because the body has no wisdom even when he is alive. My servant is Israel. Every Jew who lives among the Gentiles is God’s servant.
Eben Ezra continues his comment on Isaiah 52:13, giving the contradictory view that "my servant" means Messiah:
However, most of the rabbis say that "my servant" means the Messiah. Our forefathers, blessed be their memory, said that in the same day when the Holy Temple was destroyed, the Messiah was born.
On the other hand, Rabbi Joseph Caro does not identify the servant as the Messiah referred to in Isaiah 52:13, 14 when he makes the following comment:
My servant Israel will be lifted up. Our rabbis in the Medrash say, He will be higher than Abraham …greater than Moses…greater than the angels.
Who else can be higher than Abraham, Moses and the angels, but the Messiah, who in the person of Jesus was despised and rejected of men?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
oops !!!!!!!!!!! oops !!!!!!!!!!!
#######################oooooooo######################
also see http://www.thebookwu...om/isaiah53.htm
and http://jewsforjesus....s/13_6/isaiah53

6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same. // BURTON
}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

again and again Burton wrong !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LINKS BELOW

Fukushima - World’s Radiation Nightmare

35,000 West Coast Sea Lions Dead - Extinction Next

71% Fukushima Residents Angry With Plant Status

NYT - Nuclear Power - Worst Form Of Energy Ever

US Fish Same High Rad As Fish 100 Mi From Fukushima

6. Vaccines will overwhelm kids’ undeveloped immune systems

The concept of “too many too soon” was recently examined in a detailed analysis of the US childhood immunisation schedule by The Institute of Medicine. Experts specifically looked for evidence that vaccination was linked to “autoimmune diseases, asthma, hypersensitivity, seizures, child developmental disorders, learning or developmental disorders, or attention deficit or disruptive disorders”, including autism. The researchers confirmed that the childhood vaccination schedule was safe.

The amount of immune challenges that children fight every day (between 2,000 to 6,000) in the environment is significantly greater than the number of antigens or reactive particles in all their vaccinations combined (about 150 for the entire vaccination schedule).

So the next time you hear these myths about vaccination, hopefully you’ll have some evidence up your sleeve to debunk them. // BURTON

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}0o0o0}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

again and again Burton wrong !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GEE POST # 289 above answers you...

= and=

Same Mercury Used in Vaccines Conclusively Linked to Causing Autoimmune Disorders

A new study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives provides fresh insight into why millions of people living in the developed world today suffer from severe autoimmune disorders that were virtually unheard of before the advent of vaccines.

Researchers from the University of Michigan Medical and Public Health Schools in Ann Arbor found that mercury, like the kind added to vaccines as a preservative, is a major trigger of autoimmunity in women of childbearing age.

Dr. Emily Somers, Ph.D., and her colleagues looked at government data on women between the ages of 16 and 49, comparing their respective levels of mercury exposure to antinuclear antibody positivity, an indicator of autoimmune activity.

Autoimmunity, as you may already know, is essentially an abnormal immune response in which errant antibodies attack the human body, causing systemic inflammation. The result is a variety of illnesses, often debilitating, that leave a person weak and unable to function normally.

In women with high levels of mercury exposure, autoantibodies, or the antibodies responsible for triggering autoimmunity, were found to be more prevalent. A direct correlation between the two was observed, leading researchers to conclude that mercury is a major risk factor in autoimmunity.

Mercury found to be “main risk factor” for autoimmune disease

Based on the team’s findings, Dr. Somers concluded that exposure to mercury is actually the main risk factor for autoimmunity, which would explain why so many children who had been vaccinated according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines now suffer from various autoimmune diseases.

“In our study, exposure to mercury stood out as the main risk factor for autoimmunity,” stated Somers, adding in her study’s conclusion that exposure to mercury “at low levels generally considered safe” can still lead to subclinical autoimmunity among reproductive-age females.

“Autoantibodies may predate clinical disease by years, thus methylmercury exposure may be relevant to future autoimmune disease risk,” the team added.

What this means is that exposure to mercury can cause long-term health problems that may or may not show symptoms in the short term. So a vaccinated child, for instance, could appear healthy and normal in the days, weeks or even months following vaccination, but several years down the road develop an autoimmune condition as a result of the vaccines.

Multi-dose flu shots and other vaccines still contain mercury, which can trigger autoimmunity

The way this critical study is being presented in the media, though (if it’s even being covered at all), only warns childbearing-age women to avoid things like tuna fish that are widely known to contain mercury. Nothing about avoiding vaccines like Novartis’ Fluvirin and Sanofi Pasteur’s Fluzone that still contain added mercury is anywhere to be found in the media reports.

This is perhaps due to the fact that much of the mainstream media is currently in irrational denial of the fact that mercury is still being used in vaccines. The specious claim that “vaccines don’t contain mercury!” is patently false, and yet nearly every major news outlet is right now making this claim to deter free-thinking parents from making an educated decision against vaccines.

“Mercury is a known neuro-toxin which can cross the placenta and blood brain barrier and concentrate in the blood and brain but can also affect the immune system, kidneys and lungs,” explains the National Vaccine Information Center. “Some autistic children have been found to have high levels of mercury in their hair as well as heavy metals, such as aluminum and lead,” that are also in vaccines.

Sources :

http://www.empr.com

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov^[PDF]

https://www.rheumatology.org

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.nvic.org

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

The concept of “too many too soon” was recently examined in a detailed analysis of the US childhood immunisation schedule by The Institute of Medicine. Experts specifically looked for evidence that vaccination was linked to “autoimmune diseases, asthma, hypersensitivity, seizures, child developmental disorders, learning or developmental disorders, or attention deficit or disruptive disorders”, including autism. The researchers confirmed that the childhood vaccination schedule was safe. // BURTON

again and again Burton wrong !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

===============

The Institute of Medicine ???????????????

The Institute of Medicine ???????????????

The Institute of Medicine ??????????????? BIG PHARMA HACKS = BURTON'S SOURCE

The Institute of Medicine ???????????????

The Institute of Medicine ???????????????

The Institute of Medicine ???????????????

The Institute of Medicine ???????????????

=

NaturalNews exposes secret vaccine industry ties and military

www.naturalnews.com/033455_institute_of_medicine_vaccines.html

• Cached

Aug 29, 2011 - For starters, the IoM receives funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which is, of course, a total front for vaccines and Big Pharma.

• Institute of Medicine adverse reactions report admits MMR ...

  www.naturalnews.com/033447_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html

  • Cached
  • Similar

  Aug 28, 2011 - Remember, Big Pharma is a huge financial supporter of the IoM. ... the U.S. government and its various "medical" front groups (NIH, IoM, CDC, ...
• Action Alert: Is the Institute of Medicine in Bed with Big ...

  www.anh-usa.org/action-alert-is-the-institute-of-medicine-in-bed-with-bi...

  • Cached
  • Similar

  Dec 7, 2010 - Action Alert: Vitamin D Report Panelist Has Ties to Big Pharma. ... pharma As we reported last week, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) new and ...
• Psycho-Pharma Front Groups - CCHR International

  www.cchrint.org/issues/psycho-pharmaceutical-front-groups/

  • Cached
  • Similar

  Big Pharma admits it gets more bang for its buck from funding these front groups .... Also of note: The Child Mind Institute is a psychiatric research and treatment ...
• TMAP: The Psycho-Pharma Front Business | CCHR ...

  www.cchrint.org/issues/psycho-pharmaceutical-front-groups/tmap/

  • Cached
  • Similar

  The Texas Medication Algorithm (flow chart) Project (TMAP) was developed in ... of the collusion between drug companies, psychiatrists, psycho-pharma front .... Institute on Drug Abuse [NIDA], and the National Institute on Alcoholism and ...
• Big Pharma's Victor Dzau to Head the Institute of Medicine

  articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/.../03/.../victor-dzau-iom-president.aspx

  • Cached
  • Similar

  Mar 5, 2014 - The Institute of Medicine (IOM) was established in 1970 as the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences, which was originally chartered ...
• Pharmaceutical industry - SourceWatch

  www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Pharmaceutical_industry

  • Cached
  • Similar

  Americans spent roughly 200 billion dollars on prescription drugs in 2002, ... 9.6 Pharmaceutical lobbies & front groups; 9.7 Medical research groups; 9.8 Drug ..... At a workshop on polio vaccines sponsored by the Institute of Medicine and the ...
• Is the Institute of Medicine in bed with Big Pharma?

  naturespathways.com › Herb Blurb › January 2011

  • Cached

  Jan 27, 2011 - I admit my bias in writing this article right up front. The Institute of Medicine's Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) just released a report that raises...

  ================

  ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

  ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

  5. Vaccines contain toxins (NO) // Burton

  again and again Burton wrong !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  =

  Mercury In Vaccines Was Replaced With Something Even MORE Toxic

  January 27, 2009 | 204,532 views

  
  

  The short, eye-opening eBook linked below is titled Aluminum in Vaccines -- a Neurological Gamble, by Neil Miller, director of the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute. It documents the hazards associated with aluminum-laden vaccines. Children are receiving high concentrations of aluminum in their shots. This well-documented neurotoxin may be more dangerous than mercury.
  
  Vaccines containing high concentrations of neurotoxic aluminum were added to the child immunization schedule when several vaccines containing mercury were removed. Two-month old babies now receive 1,225 mcg of aluminum from their vaccines -- 50 times higher than safety levels! Although the FDA, CDC and World Health Organization are aware of the dangers, they expect parents to play Russian roulette with their children.